Friday Roundtable: New Train Day!

74 Replies to “Friday Roundtable: New Train Day!”

1. The Airo times are messed up in two of the “am”/”pm” designations.

   Train 503 should arrive at “1:30 pm”. Train 519 should depart at “4:45 pm”.

   Otherwise, “Good article.”,

   1. Thanks for catching that. I’ll correct the article.

   2. Are the two trains (503 & 519) in reality the same trainset that gets turned around for the return trip. I’m thinking of a (long) day trip but know delays are to expected and I’m hoping that doesn’t strand me in Eugene overnight and then have to take one of the cattle cars home the next day.

      1. The Airo trains will run daily round trips between Seattle – Eugene and Seattle – Vancouver, BC. The same trainset will be used on 503 and 508. Likewise, the same train will be used on 516 and 519.

2. Quick question, when will the speeches and ribbon cutting take place for Pinehurst Station?

3. The recent route restructures were steps forward, but more remains to be done.

   Pinehurst needs a more serious route restructure, in which neither route 67 nor route 75 do a u-turn back to Northgate.

   STX 510’s duplication of Link service between Lynnwood and downtown Seattle is living on borrowed time. It is time for STX 510 and 512 to be replaced by an all-day express route between Lynnwood and Everett Stations that does not do the time-consuming loop-de-loop stop at Ash Way.

   It is also a good time to do another Capitol Hill /First Hill route restructure, now that Capitol Hill Station trains are coming every 4-5 minute, at least on paper, during the day. Having route 49 turn to head to Westlake is a disappointing waste. Why not have route 49 continue down Broadway, filling in the gaps between streetcars, and then either head over to Swedish Cherry Hill or down Rainier to Mt Baker Station? The hospitals need 24/7 bus service, not peak-only expresses for the bosses. A lot of hours could be found by retiring routes 193, 303, 322, and 630.

   1. “It is time for STX 510 and 512 to be replaced by an all-day express route between Lynnwood and Everett Stations that does not do the time-consuming loop-de-loop stop at Ash Way.”

      I kind of wish there was just ONE express bus from Lynnwood north to Everett that stops at Ash Way and Mariner along the way and uses double decker buses. Maybe the bus could even extend past Everett north to Smokey Point (but definitely not Stanwood) if Community Transit is willing to pay for that part stopping near the outlet mall.

      1. The 201/202 is pretty fast going through North Everett, and somewhat slow through Marysville. I have a friend in Marysville who gets a Lyft to Lynnwood when they come down to Seattle. The 905 flyer stop is not safe for them, and too infrequent. The Ash Way loop-de-loop adds too much time to the trip for them to tolerate taking the 201/202 or transferring to the 512. They hate the Ash Way loop-de-loop.

         The 904/905/201/202/512 mess needs some consolidation. The Gold Swift Line will help, if it gets bus lanes in Marysville, making the 905 mostly useless.

         There is need for local service among Lynnwood Station, Ash Way, Mariner, South Everett, and Everett Station. But without a real all-day express between Lynnwood and Everett Stations, a lot of ridership is being left on the table.

         1. “The Gold Swift Line will help, if it gets bus lanes in Marysville, making the 905 mostly useless.”

            You’re basically saying Federal Way Link is useless because of the A Line.

         2. “The 201/202 is pretty fast going through North Everett, and somewhat slow through Marysville.”

            This is why that and the 150 (another similar route) are getting the BRT upgrade.

            “The 904/905/201/202/512 mess needs some consolidation. ”

            Hey, I’m not the only one thinking this.

         3. Federal Way Link comes 6 times as often as the 905, and has useful connections to local buses.

   2. Idk what is faster, being stuck on 164th at peak or just spending that time picking up recent developments on Ash Way and Mariner P&R.

      1. I just looked on Google Maps and the Ash Way to Mariner P&R to I-5 routing is only 2 minutes slower when there is no traffic which is slower but still 2 minutes isn’t much and the trade off is increased ridership and more connections especially that developments are coming up along Ash Way.

         It’s still faster than closing the SODO Busway and rerouting the South King/Pierce buses on 4th Ave S.

   3. Oh yeah not to mention that there’s a queue jump on 128th for buses. That would save a lot of time and allow it to move ahead of general traffic.

   4. Yes. RossB has made a good suggestion regarding Route 67; it could be broken from Route 65; it could be consolidated with the north-south part of Route 348; neither routes 67 or 348 need to spiral into Northgate any longer; the connections formerly provided exclusively at the NTC are not provided at most Link stations; there is not enough frequency on Mapleleaf. Route 77 was a weak answer to the difficult timing of ST 2 Line translake service and Pinehurst station openings; it is a poor pairing of the crosstown service and filling in for routes 522 and 312 along SR-522 in Seattle. As RossB has pointed out, routes 65 and 75 are set up well to be crosstown services between Lake City and Shoreline CC; Route 75 could serve Pinehurst; Route 65 could serve South Shoreline; both serve the existing Lake City hub. There should be several routes serving Pinehurst station; to Route 75, let’s add routes 346, the Four Freedoms service, and Route 5.

      Yes, your suggestions on Capitol and First hills are solid. There are other good candidates. Use the ETB overhead.

      1. “it could be consolidated with the north-south part of Route 348; neither routes 67 or 348 need to spiral into Northgate any longer;”

         The point is for a Link connection at Northgate which is soon to become an urban center. Merging the 67 with the 348 would make it very long, so I suggest make a MLT to Northgate route scooping up 15th Ave (a corridor that was studied to be the Lynnwood Link route). That would be ideal given that the corridor didn’t get light rail, instead getting a bus to Link.

         Instead merge the 67 with RapidRide J.

         1. I think Metro blundered into a better outcome when it did not have the money to extend the J Line to Roosevelt Station. Serving U-District Station instead of missing it by a couple blocks makes more sense.

         2. “Serving U-District Station instead of missing it by a couple blocks makes more sense.”

            What do you mean? It’s redundant with Link.

         3. It’s redundant with Link.

            Remind me, where are the Link stations in Eastlake and SLU?

         4. “Remind me, where are the Link stations in Eastlake and SLU?”

            That’s right, nowhere. Well going from U District to Downtown, it is redundant with Link. Perhaps giving them some difference (the J stopping a few blocks away) would help. At least the J would stop at Northgate, Roosevelt, a walk from U District, and the DSTT stations.

         5. It’s not redundant for transit riders in Eastlake and SLU who are trying to get to Link, though. Moving the J Line away from U-District Station is objectively worse for them.

            Sure, the trade-off for a northward extension of the J Line might be worth it, but there’s still a cost.

         6. Remember, a local bus route is primarily about the middle of the route, not end to end. If you’re going end to end and it’s a long route, an express alternative would probably be better. So the primary purpose of the J is SLU and Eastlake. The primary purpose of the E is for endpoints between 80th and 185th. The primary purpose of the 67 is north Roosevelt.

      2. Now for not typo

   5. I would still keep the stop at Ash Way, since it is an important park and ride stop, and there are probably quite a few transfers from local Community Transit busses. It becomes much less of a viable alternative if half the busses stop serving the stop. Swift Orange is pretty quick compared to local routes, but not expressway with HOV ramps quick, and in and of itself it is not as frequent as the combination of all those express busses.

      As mentioned in another comment, using the Lynnwood – Seattle bus hours for Everett to Smokey Point, serving the Tulalip outlets and the casinos and retailers (hundreds of retail, entertainment, and restaurant/bar workers) would be good, even if it runs only half hourly, but I don’t see how Sound Transit does it, because it is outside of the tax district.

      1. “but I don’t see how Sound Transit does it, because it is outside of the tax district.”

         Explain the 595.

         1. Pierce Transit pays for the 595 between Gig Harbor and Tacoma Community College. From there, the Pierce ST subarea pays for the 595.

            The 592 used to go all the way to Olympia, paid for by a temporary state grant. A stop east of Olympia at Hawks Prarie P&R ruined the route, chasing away riders Ash-Way-style.

         2. “The 592 used to go all the way to Olympia, paid for by a temporary state grant.”

            I thought it was paid by Intercity Transit because that’s what the 2016 schedule book said.

      2. “Swift Orange is pretty quick compared to local routes”

         For me it’s just quick in how much time it takes to get to the stop. It’s as bad as the local routes when it comes to upgrades along the route. There’s a lack of BAT lates (and they were added on 196th east of 48th where they weren’t needed), lack of signal priority, and no queue jump at 196th & 99. Worst of all, bus bunching has been common ever since on the Orange.

         We need to fix the Orange!

         1. When I have ridden the Orange lately, it goes straight north from Lynnwood Station, then straight east to the mall, avoiding the worst traffic congestion.

         2. “When I have ridden the Orange lately, it goes straight north from Lynnwood Station, then straight east to the mall, avoiding the worst traffic congestion.”

            Well you’ve been lucky. Now the Orange has been rerouted from Lynnwood Station to the mall because of Poplar Way bridge construction.

      3. Right now, 8 buses per hour per direction going between Lynnwood and Everett serve the Ash Way loop-de-loop that adds close to 10 minutes to each trip. That seems excessive to me.

         Four ought to do, with a 201/202 coming every 15 minutes.

         Four 512 trips expressing each direction per hour between Lynnwood and Everett ought to be enough.

         If either route has enough ridership demand for more, CT or ST could add a trip per hour per direction, to get scheduled headway on that route down to 12 minutes, or eventually 10 minutes.

         1. With Ash Way P&R serving as an extension of the Link network, 10-minute frequency is what you really need. A 15-minute feeder at Ash Way is just as problematic as a 15-minute feeder at 185th, 145th, or the route 48 transfers at 23rd. The transfer wait becomes a significant part of the trip, and a deterrent in making the trip. Ash Way P&R may be a transfer too, as in my friend in north Lynnwood making 119+connector+Link trips.

         2. “With Ash Way P&R serving as an extension of the Link network, 10-minute frequency is what you really need.”

            Yes, not to mention that the demand between Ash Way and Lynnwood is very high given with the Swift Orange/112/166/201/202/512/513. Nearly every Ash Way bus goes to Lynnwood!

            I would also suggest rerouting the 103 via Jefferson Way, Ash Way P&R, and I-5. That would make the 513 almost look useless and combine 15 minute frequencies with the 119 from 148th/52nd to Lynnwood City Center Station.

            Once Lynnwood Link comes, people originally on the 103 from Mukilteo to Alderwood Mall or Lynnwood will enjoy a connection to Link at Ash Way (with the Ash Way connection restored to Mukilteo) and people’s travel can increase with this change.

         3. A bus starting every 15 minutes from a train coming every 10 minutes (e.g. Federal Way) is a schedule planning failure.

            A bus coming every 7.5 minutes from a train coming every 5 minutes isn’t any better.

            But a bus coming every 15 minutes from a train coming every 5 minutes makes perfect sense, if a bus for every 3 trains amply handles the ridership of the bus route.

            Adding 10 minutes to every trip between Lynnwood and Federal Way erases the time advantage of timing the buses to the trains.

         4. “But a bus coming every 15 minutes from a train coming every 5 minutes makes perfect sense, if a bus for every 3 trains amply handles the ridership of the bus route.”

            The goal is not to fill buses but to have transfers that meet passengers’ needs. 15 minutes is a minimum if we can’t do anything better, but feeder buses really should really be every, especially for major trunk corridors like Ash Way P&R. That way the average wait time is 4 or 5 minutes, and the worst-case scenario is 10 minutes (or 15 minutes if the bus is late). Every minute makes a difference if you have a 3+ seat ride, a travel time over 40 minutes, or you do it several days a week. These are the passenger-eyes’ details the governments tend to overlook.

         5. If CT can front-end frequency investment to get the 201/202 up to 10-minute headway, that would be ideal, but expensive.

            Then the 512 could spend the savings from eliminating the 510 and the 10-minute Ash Way loop-de-loop stop to also get to 10-minute scheduled headway. I hope ST does not wait for CT before making the Everett-Lynnwood trip more tolerable for riders who have to make that commute. That’s basically everyone from Everett going to any of the stations north of Westlake. And vice versa.

         6. Another option is to extend the routes that currently terminate at Ash Way P&R to Lynnwood instead, like the 109, 119, and 121. This would also provide the benefit of eliminating a transfer for the riders on these buses.

            This would provide a combined 5 buses per hour during weekday peak, 4 buses per hour mid-day, and 3 per hour evenings/weekends.

         7. “Another option is to extend the routes that currently terminate at Ash Way P&R to Lynnwood instead, like the 109, 119, and 121.”

            That would be ideal. All this is working around the fact that the 119 doesn’t go to Lynnwood station.

   6. “Why not have route 49 continue down Broadway, filling in the gaps between streetcars, and then either head over to Swedish Cherry Hill or down Rainier to Mt Baker Station?”

      if Pike-Pine gets something more than just losing the 49.

      1. Which segment of Pike/Pine?

         1. Downtown to 15th at least, so the corridor isn’t split. Metro wants to increase the 11, which would turn at Bellevue Ave. That would be something, but it wouldn’t help trips that are partly west of Bellevue and partly east. Turning at Broadway like the 49 does now is better, but it doesn’t help trips that are partly west and partly east of Broadway. Ideally I’d like the 12 increased, so that there’s a continuous Pine-Madison route. But getting more continuous service between 3rd and 15th would be second best.

         2. If you want that level of frequency, you might have to move to Ash Way P&R.

      2. I see a lot of disparagement of the 49 on STB. Seems like agreement the northern part is good. I think there’s still a lot of value though from CHS to Westlake, that isn’t fully duplicated by the 10, 12 or 11. The 10 & 12 don’t get to CHS. The 11 does, but then doesn’t cover that stretch of Broadway to Pine, and Pine to Bellevue. I know the distances to the other lines aren’t that far, but it’s a pretty densely populated (both people & commercial) area, and the coverage is helpful. I haven’t specifically tracked it when I ride, but my impression is that segment gets a lot of use.

         But, if you were going to reroute it somewhere, and this part kinda goes against my comment above, I’d wonder about running it down 12th Avenue instead. It could run to 12th & Jackson, or maybe to Beacon Hill station. An obvious downside is it wouldn’t quite connect to CHS. But from CHS it would also be a way better trip to 12th and Jackson than the horribly-slow 60 and streetcar options. And if you were starting somewhere on 12th and wanting to go southbound, it would give you a good connection to Beacon Hill station.

         Maybe this isn’t the right re-route, but I really think 12th Ave could use some bus service.

         1. Just to add, I was confusing the 49’s approach to CHS with the 11/43 which come down Olive. Of course the 49 heads down 10th Ave E., so there’d be no need with a re-route to miss CHS. It could turn left on John or Pine then right on 12th.

         2. You’re correct that 12th Avenue is much quicker than Broadway and runs straight into Beacon Hill. That said, the streetcar needs some “backup” to fulfill its mission as a “last mile” between the hospitals and Link. It doesn’t run often enough.

         3. 12th has an elevation difference from Broadway. Broadway is where most of the destinations are that people are going to. 12th can have a bus route, but not at the expense of not having a full north-south route on Broadway or not a frequent one.

      3. It’s hard to fathom, but the restructuring for U Link opening was a decade ago. Capitol Hill Station was still not open when the current bus structure was discussed and approved for the areas just east of Downtown. Metro riders were thus used to taking Link only if they were headed south of Downtown, especially SeaTac. Metro could not convince many transit riders to lose direct service because they just weren’t familiar with Link transfers and watered down the 2016 changes.

         Transit looks much different today. It really is time to reexamine the route structure . Link has two lines now so waits are minimal. Judkins Park and RapidRide G are open with frequent service.

         Bus routes in that area are so intertwined that making changes to one will result in discussing changes to other ones.

         It’s time to update the route structures in this area generally. Besides, now that Metro has restructured most of the rest of the system outside of Seattle, they are now free to revisit Seattle’s route structure.

         1. The Capitol Hill restructure was bold compared to the ones after it. Metro got into an unprecedentedly bold period from 2012 to 2016. Then in 2020 it got timid again.

            The Capitol Hill restructure reduced the 43 to peak only, and moved the 10 to John. At the same time Metro eliminated the 71/72/72X in north Seattle, years before people thought it would.

      4. There’s wiring in place to run the 49 on Broadway to Jackson and then to a terminal in Pioneer Square. Earlier in the year I proposed running the FH Streetcar and 49 at 20-minute headways on Broadway as a cost-neutral way to serve Broadway better; but both routes really should be running at 15-minute headways, and that would require some extra service hours for the 49.

         Someone posted the idea of running the 10 and 12 on the same path between downtown and Kaiser. Then the 12 would run on Thomas to 19th Ave. E. where a new switch would be needed to complete the run to Interlaken Park. I think that’s a great idea and installing the switch at Thomas & 19th would likely save money compared to the work needed to fill in the 12’s missing wire on Pike St.

         1. The 10, 11, 12, and 49 are all 20 minutes daytime, 30 minutes evening. Before the G restructure they were 15 minutes daytime (except the 11 on Sundays).

            Yes, the 49 could switch to Broadway-Jackson with only a few more service hours. It should be increased, but they should all be increased.

            It was Ross who suggested rerouting the 12 to Pine-15th-Thomas, so that the 12 would follow the 10 to Thomas. I would like to see it continue being a Pine-Madison route (I would really like the original 11 to be reinstated), but this would provide combined service to 15th & John (Kaiser Permanente), which Ross has been concerned about. And it would give 15th & John 10-minute service to downtown even if the 11 is rerouted out of downtown (to a Denny-Madison route).

   7. Indeed, the 49 does need a change. It’s great at connecting 10th Ave E to/from U-Dist and Cap Hill. But the portion between Broadway and downtown is duplicated by the 10 & 12.

      I always though the 60 and FH Streetcar can do the job of connecting Cap and First Hills to/from Jackson St. Judging by the ridership of the 9X, I’m not sure if there’s a strong demand for all-day Rainier to Cap/First Hill service.

      I’m in favor of restoring the 43 to all day by having the 43 & 49 interline at Cap Hill Station. The only sucky thing about that is a double-bridge trouble and Huskies football traffic.

      1. Jack has suggested restoring the 43 and creating a “reverse 43” (John-south 23rd) to replace the 48.

         1. “Jack has suggested restoring the 43 and creating a “reverse 43” (John-south 23rd) to replace the 48.”

            Not a bad idea. I’ve mused deleting the 43 and instead rerouting the 8 along 23rd, grabbing the higher ridership area and skipping the low ridership MLK stops. That’s similar to my idea I guess, and also makes 23rd Ave electrification easier if you were to split the corridor at John and force everyone into Capitol Hill.

            But if we’re gonna do that, delete the 43 tail from Capitol Hill to First Hill and truncate the 49 at Capitol Hill and have people use the FHSC down Broadway, or Link/the 11 if they wanna head Downtown. The 10/12 is also another alternative if they’re going from Broadway/Pine to Downtown.

            Ambitious love for the First Hill Streetcar! It’s secretly been telling us “we tried getting you light rail but we couldn’t and instead got you this”. Let’s be grateful and take advantage of the wonderful things we’ve been given.

         2. Take a few rides on the 48 to observe its ridership patterns and then try floating the idea of the “reverse 43.” The 48 was created specifically to connect the CD and Rainier Valley with the UW. The demographics along the 48 pathway have changed somewhat since the 1970s, but the 48 still does a great job of fulfilling its original mission. Any idea that splits the 48 is simply DOA.

4. Very excited for the new Airos and your impressions of them. I take the train down to Portland once or twice a year and while the current Cascades stock isn’t bad by any means it’s definitely showing its age.

5. There was a small debate hosted on the transit levy renewal:
   

   It’s very bizarre listening to someone like Charles who is seemingly well informed on transit policy in our region and yet is so skeptical (I don’t think he’s explicitly against it). It’s a slam dunk levy and yet there’s always something to complain about.

   1. Charles is speaking for the Washington Policy Center, which has been reliably opposed to public transit.

      1. Interesting. In the video he says that they haven’t taken a formal stance on this particular levy. But it’s pretty clear which way they lean

         1. As a think tank, they can disparage. But their tax status might prevent them from saying “Vote No”.

   2. “It doubles the cost from 2020”: But it restores the 2020 cut relative to 2014. The 2020 cut was based on the extraordinary situation and uncertainty of the pandemic.

6. Any idea if the Airo trainsets will have upgraded bike stowage? Most trains in the Amtrak system limit bike tire width to 2”, which is pretty narrow by modern standards.

   1. Good! E-Motos and fat-tire E-“bikes” are a pestilence.

      1. Some fully analog bikes have > 2” tires. I agree that unlicensed e-motos are a minor problem, but e-bikes are reasonably regulated and make low-impact transportation much more accessible. They compliment transit well as a last-mile solution for many people.

      2. So you want Ebikes blocking the pathways instead of being on the bike rack?
         Also regular mountain bikes (the kind people would be inclined to take out to Bellingham which is really popular for MTB) easily get over 2″ wheels.

         1. Nobody is going to carry a bike onto the coaches of these trains. You have to carry it up 4 feet worth of stairs and get it around the tight curve at the top of the stairs to get it into the car.

            It’s going to still be a baggage car item only, just like they do today.

            There’s nothing on the current web site indicating there is a limit on tire width.
            https://amtrakcascades.com/riders-guide/bring-your-bike/
            How do they handle extra-width tires now?

         2. There is checked baggage on Amtrak for a reason. Use it.

            Let’s have no special pleading for the rude jerks who make almost every trail worth walking a crash-dummy test zone, thank you very much. Until America gets separated bike and pedestrian paths as in The Netherlands adult bikers should stay off pedestrian paths. How the bike is propelled is not really germane.

         3. And, believe it or not, I ride a bicycle for errands that fit and are longer than practical to walk. Bikes are great, but they mix much better with residential street traffic than with pedestrians.

   2. From Ryan Packer on Bsky
      https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:6vatl6lhsv3ninhf7n4ssria/bafkreif3bwv57h3qxetf5ucjemwo5i2jzmxy7hmxj4bgssxav44x5oni2y

      It looks like they can hold wider tires now but hard to tell

      1. Sweet, ability to load your own bike onto the coach will be a big quality of life upgrade.

         1. An upgrade for you, but a downgrade for everybody else.

         2. I don’t think the realities of assigning cars designed for 4 foot high platforms to corridors where building them isn’t physically possible have set in yet.

            People really struggle to get up those stairs with regular luggage, even without carrying a bike up them.

            I really don’t see anything like a majority of bike riders trying to do this.

   3. I would argue that skinny tire bikes are the pest, and I commuted on one for many years. They were originally derived from track/racing bikes, and don’t really have any more place on our roads anymore than a formula F1 race car. If someone tried to drive a F1 car on our roads and destroyed their car or was injured, I don’t think anyone on this forum would have sympathy. If you are just riding for exercise or fun, buy a fat tire bike and you don’t need to ride as far or as fast to get your exercise. If you are commuting, buy a fat tire ebike. Either way, you will be much safer and no rail crossing will ever bother you. My current ebike has 4 inch knobbies, and go over anything my dual sport motorcycle can. The rider, not so much anymore ..

      1. When I was a child in the early 1970s all adult bikes had skinny tires and drop handlebars. My kid’s bike didn’t but it was also unusual in other ways: you pedaled backward to stop. I never felt safe with drop handlebars and not being able to reach the ground with my feet, and those skinny tires looked like they’d turn sideways over the smallest pebble, so I didn’t ride them.

         In the 80s mountain bikes with wide tires and flat handlebars became a thing, and those I would ride. I never rode off-road, just around the city and on trails. Eventually cross bikes and commuter bikes appeared that were a hybrid between mountain bike and road bike, with wide tires but not so wide, and they weren’t so big and heavy. That was my kind of bike.

         I had bikes like that from 1989 when I lived in the U-District and Ballard, until 2004 when I moved to First Hill and it was a steep hill down to everything. I commuted from the northern U-District to my job at Harborview (Eastlake, 8th Ave), to the ferry terminal to visit my dad, to Costco in SODO, for shopping trips, to nightclubs. To a software store in Redmond on the Burke-Gilman and Sammamish River trails (2 hours each way). Once around the lake to Bellevue, but I was nonplussed at the hour-long trip from Kenmore through Juanita and Kirkland to Bellevue. I had a recreational loop going west around north Greenlake and the small streets to Golden Gardens, and along the shore and downtown waterfront, to either Costco or Alki. This was before any of the bike lanes or cycletacks besides the Burke-Gilman trail. The one place I felt unsafe was 4th Ave downtown because car traffic was so thick; at the same time, 4th was the most direct street to use.

         1. I would be in favor of the state specifying a minimum tire width for bicycles on public roads. The lycra set would still ride their race bikes, but without legal status their lawsuits would probably get thrown out. All other vehicles have strict tire regulations, and it is always illegal to use off road tires on public highways.

Comments are closed.