All posts by Guest Contributor

BY MATTHEW JOHNSON AND ZACH SHANER

Washington’s annual statewide commuter incentive campaign, Wheel Options, kicks off today.  The prizes this year are particularly generous, with many $100 gift cards, several hotel packages, and a grand prize trip to the lush, linguistically unique, and (to put it mildly) independently-minded Basque region of Spain.  All participants who log at least 6 non-driving trips in October will qualify for all prizes and will automatically receive a coupon for a free companion fare on Amtrak Cascades.

As its name suggests, RideshareOnline (RSO) has traditionally focused on matching commuters whose needs aren’t met by fixed-route transit, including carpoolers, vanpoolers, etc.  Those who are already dedicated transit commuters — likely most of our readership — may have had little use for RSO in the past.  But it has been expanding its reach and is now the primary tool through which incentive campaigns are implemented in our region.  Given the easy qualifying threshold for Wheel Options and the growing number of other incentive campaigns (such as Metro’s Rideshare Rewards), it is well worth your time to familiarize yourself with both Wheel Options and RideshareOnline.

If you already have an RSO account, you will use the same login and password for Wheel Options.  Registering as a new user through Wheel Options will also cross-register you in RSO, and for future campaigns you will be able to use the same login credentials.

UPDATE: According to Wheel Options’ Facebook page, high site traffic has temporarily disabled their calendaring features.  Stay tuned. 

UPDATE 2: Wheel Options’ calendar is up and running again. While they do not anticipate any further issues, technical support is available at wheeloptions@wsro.net.

Disclaimer:  The authors are involved with Wheel Options as part of their employment.

by JAKE VANDERPLAS and MATT FEWINS

This blog has often covered transit-accessible hikes that can be accomplished in a day. But many of the most beautiful areas of Washington are out-of-reach of the day-hiker — even one who relies on a personal vehicle to get them to the trailhead. This summer, two of us set out to see if we could use transit to reach some of these more remote destinations. The result was an eight-day excursion that brought us from downtown Seattle past our State’s capitol, through the heart of Olympic National Park, over international waters to Victoria BC, and home, relying entirely on public transportation and our own feet.

The trip started with a five-leg transit journey from Seattle to Lake Quinault Lodge, on the south-west edge of Olympic National Park. The following is a weekday itinerary: the trip is possible on a weekend, but transfers don’t work out quite as well.

Leg 1: Ballard – Downtown Seattle	18E (King County Metro)	6:20am – 6:47am	$2.50 (Orca accepted)
Leg 2: Seattle – Tacoma	Sounder train (Sound Transit: ST bus 594 is an alternative)	6:50am – 7:48am	$4.75 (Orca accepted)
Leg 3: Tacoma – Olympia	603 (Intercity Transit)	8:12am – 9:12am	$2.50
Leg 4: Olympia – Aberdeen	40 (Grays Harbor Transit)	9:30am – 11:00am	$3.00 (request transfer when paying)
Leg 5: Aberdeen – Lake Quinault Lodge	60 (Grays Harbor Transit)	11:30am – 12:35pm	$1.00 (free with transfer)

Continue reading “Transit Hike: Through the Olympic Mountains”

by KEVIN DESMOND, King County Metro General Manager

Adam’s Aug. 31 post about the C and D line and RapidRide program expressed disappointment that our launch at the end of the month will not include ORCA readers and the real time signs that are standard at major RapidRide stops. Both of these features require communications backbones and downtown Seattle is a complex environment to lay fiber. We are taking advantage of a planned, Seattle funded project to install the fiber next year, and by doing so we are stretching very limited public dollars as far as we can.

We have a vision for our transit service downtown which includes RapidRide. We applied for and received two federal grants, in partnership with Seattle, to enhance the transit environment downtown, especially on Third Avenue. The grants, along with existing RapidRide funding, will allow Metro to install ORCA readers, real time signs and develop other off-board payment/ticketing devices.

Staff from both Metro and the city of Seattle worked shoulder to shoulder for many months in order to deliver the C and D lines to downtown Seattle – on time and on budget. They’ve problem-solved literally thousands of details as we count down to the Sept. 29 launch. We admit not every feature will be fully operational – but at launch what people will get is better connections, service that’s more reliable, less wait time to catch a bus, transit signal priority at many intersections, real-time arrival information at stations, well-lit shelters and great new Wi-Fi coaches.

Come Sept. 29, we will have readers at 16 stations on the C Line and 21 at stations on the D Line. So there will be a clear benefit at many heavy boarding locations.

Contrary to Adam’s transportation vision, we will never be able to mimic the exclusive, separated right-of-way rail enjoys. RapidRide is designed to operate on compact urban streets – and that’s the beauty of our bus rapid transit program.

We don’t have to guess if these new lines will meet the need of more riders. We already know.  Since the A Line between Federal Way and Tukwila was launched in 2010, ridership has increased nearly 50 percent, meeting our five year goal after just two years. It’s the same story on the B Line serving Redmond and Bellevue – ridership up 15 percent since launching last year.  On these already high ridership corridors in Seattle, we know RapidRide and Metro’s complementary routes will need to evolve over time to manage and respond to peak demand. Continue reading “Op-Ed: RapidRide will be Popular with Riders”

For various reasons this didn’t make this morning’s endorsement post, but STB endorses Greg Nickels for Secretary of State.

While the office of Secretary of State is not typically involved in transit decisions, Nickels has a track record of going above and beyond in office in ways that benefit transit. He is one of the truly special pro-transit leaders of this generation, and we are excited about his possible leap to statewide office.

Mr. Nickels understands the influence of a few rich donors hijacking the initiative process to produce ill-considered ballot measures that cripple transportation financing, and threaten valuable long-term projects at their weakest point. In Olympia, he would propose a statewide discussion of how to change our initiative process to bring it back to the people. He would also help prevent statewide initiative attacks on local transit funding.

by BERNIE HAYDEN

The Bel-Red area, Segment D in East Link speak, has been highly touted by the planning community. To realize this vision City of Bellevue and Redmond worked out the BROTS Interlocal Agreement with the Spring District as the center piece. But this whole segment, which includes two stations and a new P&R have been eclipsed recently in the Collaborative Design Process discussions. I think it’s important to highlight a few of the issues which can have a huge effect on the future landscape of this area.

Little in the way of cost savings have surfaced through the Collaborative Design Process, but there are opportunities for a fuller street grid and improved pedestrian access if Bellevue and ST work together on the new 15th/16th street corridor.

Use of “low impact design elements” and existing stream beds to channel runoff contribute perhaps $2M in savings, but these elements can be abused if not bird-dogged by citizens. The 130th St. P&R is shown with Goff Creek left buried. Let the promised daylighting of Kelsey Creek stand as a reminder of what can happen.

As far as development goes, a recent Seattle Times article notes Wright Runstad may break ground in the Spring District next year and is already selling off parcels for residential development. The multi-developer rather than single developer model is what Group Health switched to in Overlake to accelerate construction. However, the city council has not fully funded the infrastructure projects in the Bel-Red corridor.

Also much angst has been expressed over some low traffic crossings being at grade; SE 4th for example. Yet there is no similar concern over crossing NE 20th St at grade just prior to transitioning to elevated along SR-520. NE 20th carries 23,000 vehicles every weekday. That’s the same volume as Bellevue Way going through downtown.

Of course the real heavy lifting is going on in Bellevue’s Budget One process. Staff and the City Council are in effect accelerating project plans where concurrency with East Link is required. It’s a “messy job” finding the right balance between studying design alternatives, making compromises and then committing to one idea. But it’s important to remember that the vision that prevails today will determine what Bel-Red looks like in twenty years.

by BERNIE HAYDEN

A Bellevue City Council Study Session was held Monday June 11th to discuss which cost savings alternatives to move forward pursuant to the the City Contingency of up to $60m. The steering committee, comprised of Bellevue and Sound Transit staff, presented the options it felt warranted further study. The Bellevue half of the Leadership Committee, made up Bellevue council members Wallace, Robertson and Stokes summarized the results of their recommendations, which were pretty much in line with the Steering Committee. The full City Council will vote next Monday, June 18th on what options to move forward and the ST board will do the same on June 28th.

In South Bellevue the option preferred for the Winters House was to shift Bellevue Way west and add a southbound center HOV lane. This would save an estimated $6-10m over a retained cut to preserve access to the Winters house. It has the side benefit of reducing impacts on the wetland buffer. It would involve cutting back into the hillside which has Surrey Downs residents concerned. Moving the Winters house was thought to be too risky and there were questions over excavation for the retained cut possibly causing structural damage to the historic home.

Along 112th the idea of closing SE 4th and extending SE 8th was deemed dead on arrival. The Leadership Committee is committed to looking at alternative neighborhood access and eliminating the retained cut under SE 4th with the eye on saving $5-9m. That seems counter to the new proposal, which is currently thought to be cost neutral, of using a 5′ deep retained cut and building an overpass for 112th Ave SE rather than the flyover for East Link. Both the refinement at the Winters House and along 112th improve light rail operations by minimizing elevation changes.

Downtown, the recommendation was to advance the stacked tunnel over the no mezzanine design and to advance the open air station on NE 6th. The cost savings for the stacked tunnel were double the range given for the no mezzanine; $8-13m vs $4-7m. It was also thought to reduce construction impact and result in station entrances less disruptive to traffic on 110th Ave NE. Personally, I thought the traffic calming feature of the reconfigured 110th were a plus for the no mezzanine design. Nobody mentioned the extra time it will take in vertical distance to access the lower platform or operational cost and unreliability of the extra sets of escalators. In contrast, a center platform would seem to be a large cost savings and improve operations.

The open air station on NE 6th was also recommended for further study. The cost savings could be $10-18m, but one has to question spending $320m on a tunnel and then moving the station outside and closer to the freeway. The other incentive is no traffic impact to 110th and less disruption than building an underground station. Keeping the East Main Station mitigates some of the lost walkshed of losing the station entrance south of NE 4th but at the expense of everyone in the Bellefield/Wilburton area. Other issues with the station on NE 6th are impacts to police operations and visitors parking. It also limits development of the Metro site at NE 6th and 112th Ave NE, which has been mentioned as a possible location for a new fire station. Hopefully the full Council will put this recommendation to bed next week before any more money is wasted on studies and engineering.

by BERNIE HAYDEN

At the Sound Transit (ST) open house in Bellevue on June 5th (materials here) ST handed a packet outlining the progress made to date toward final design. ST and the City classified the cost savings into three categories. The first and least controversial are deemed “Cost Savings Ideas Advanced for Further Engineering Review.” These generally will not affect the alignment or have any operational impact. While not “sexy” it’s useful in “keeping score” toward the $60 million City Contingency agreed to in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and ST.

Tunnel design and Station Optimization yielded three cost saving ideas. Utilizing a load bearing center wall can save $3m by reducing the roof structure requirements. Eliminating the Waterproofing Membrane System and allowing for routine drainage saves $2m. But I question the long term structural effects on porous concrete and structural steel. Reducing the mezzanine and platform size saves $3m. Presumably this item is moot since eliminating the mezzanine entirely seems to have the most traction and biggest savings.

Elevated guideway design elements total $16M in potential savings. Changing the Aerial Guideway Super-Structure to Precast Girder or Cast-In Place Box saves $8m. I’m not sure why this wasn’t the default and why the SR 520 segment is different. Geotechnical recommendations to optimize structural elements provides the other $8m in potential savings.

Replacing drainage structures with “low-impact development design elements” scores $2m in cost savings. I believe this comes from the Bellevue Transportation Commission and City staff design work on NE 15/16th which narrowed the street cross section from five lanes to two and made extensive use of drainage swales and pervious surfaces in lieu of the standard storm drains and retention ponds.

Perhaps not all of the ideas are totally without controversy. Expediting tunnel construction through additional road closures generates $13m in potential cost savings. Nobody is happy when their road gets closed but “living the dream” with all the current closures for 520 and the Bellevue Braids I cast my vote for more closures over a shorter period of time. Just get it over with already!

So, the score card for the category “Advanced for Further Engineering Review” adds up to $36m, not counting the $3m for reducing the mezzanine. The Executive Summary points out that engineering is still very preliminary, but even conservatively this amounts to at least $20m in savings. Still, I’m optimistic that through the Collaborative Design Process the tunnel is a done deal and there may even be money left for some “nice to have” elements.

by WAYNE WATANABE and MARK HALLENBECK*

There has been considerable concern expressed about the declining reliability of bus arrival information provided by OneBusAway (OBA) over the past seven months. As the managers on both ends of the data stream, we’d like to provide a little more insight into why those errors are happening and what is being done.

Last summer, OBA and the other tracking applications appeared to be working reasonably well. But, users probably weren’t aware of how much work it took behind the scenes to make that happen. Metro and University of Washington researchers led by Dr. Dan Dailey had 15 years of data debugging invested in the stream going out to developers like Brian Ferris, who created OBA. On the receiving end, Brian was making adjustments to the data and code to make OBA present the most accurate predicted-arrival information possible.

The data and its presentation in the tracking programs has never been 100 percent accurate, but the errors coming from Metro’s legacy system using Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) were well understood, allowing for better correction and filtering by both Metro and the app developers.

Then, last October several things happened: Continue reading “Tracking the Bus Tracker Problems”

by MIKE ORR

The King County transportation committee held a public hearing last Monday on Metro’s proposed September 2012 service changes. Around thirty-five people spoke. Metro first proposed these changes last year, and in two rounds of public feedback it withdrew some proposals and adjusted others. STB reported on the evolution of these proposals, most recently on April 3rd.

The final list of proposed bus route changes, and how they differ from previous rounds, is in the Neighborhood information sheets at Metro’s Have Your Say website.

Interestingly, less than half of the speakers even mentioned the bus route changes. The rest spoke out against ending the Ride Free Area, and they said even more people would have signed up to speak about the RFA but they left when the registration lady told them it would be off-topic for this hearing. Two other people spoke about their dissatisfaction with ORCA cards.

I asked the Council to pass the package of changes, and to tell Metro it expects to see more extensive reorganizations next year. I praised the 18 and 50, which provide new crosstown service between Ballard and Fremont, and across West Seattle and Rainier Valley. I lamented the failure of the Queen Anne reorganization, which would have made the 13 frequent. I said that Metro needs the Council’s support for reorganizations, because when people speak up for the status quo, they’re often thinking only of themselves, while the people who would benefit from the reorganization often don’t realize it until it’s in operation, so they don’t know to speak up beforehand. I said the VA hospital driveway detour should be eliminated. However, I said the Fremont and Yesler-Jackson changes had less obvious benefit than the others, so it’s not as big an issue that they were withdrawn. Continue reading “September Service Change Hearing Report”

by DAVID SEATER

On Wednesday Sound Transit hosted the Roosevelt Station 60% Design public meeting at Roosevelt High School. The purpose of the meeting was to show the updated plans for Roosevelt station, present the concepts for the exterior and interior art programs, and get feedback from the community. For those who aren’t familiar with Roosevelt Station, it is part of the North Link project, scheduled to open in 2021 and add 62,000 daily boardings to Link in 2030 (of which 8,000 are expected at Roosevelt).

The station design has undergone significant changes since the initial 30% design concept, which was presented at the first open house. The large glass structures from that design have been scaled back significantly to much more modest forms, though there is still a significant emphasis on the use of glass to promote natural light. Rather than the large lobbies seen in the early concepts, there are now smaller lobbies with covered “porch” areas just outside the entrances. These areas will include bike racks for riders who prefer not to use the lockers or bike cage that will be provided in the bike storage area just off of 66th Street.

Another significant change to the design is the increase in size of the plaza on the corner of 66th Street and 12th Avenue NE. This space was created by shifting the escalators in the North Entry further to the north. The plaza will include some “informal seating” on small walls and blocks, and is adjacent to the bike storage area as well as a covered waiting area (the curb in this area will be a 3 minute loading zone). Parking along 12th Ave was also removed and replaced with a “green edge” and wider sidewalks. The sidewalks meander slightly, which the architect says helps to lessen the slope of the hill along the station to improve ADA access. Continue reading “Roosevelt 60% Design Open House”

by MIKE ORR

Sound Transit is deciding where to put light rail stations between Northgate and Lynnwood and held a series of open houses on the subject this month. Although many here were upset that ST chose I-5 rather than Aurora for the line, we need to make sure it’s the best I-5 line possible, and each station has different potential for serving people and improving mobility.

The current proposal at right shows six potential stations, two with wiggle room: 125th-130th, 145th-155th, 185th, Mountlake Terrace Transit Center, 220th SW, and Lynnwood Transit Center. Last year’s Alternatives Analysis had only 145th, 185th, Mountlake Terrace, and Lynnwood. The other two locations have been added based on citizen feedback. (Documents and maps are in the extensive North Corridor library.)

At March 17th open house in Edmonds, ST reps Roger Iwata and Matt Sheldon said that ST has no fixed number of stations in mind; it depends on whether all the stations are cost-effective. 130th and 145th are rather close for two stations but 125th and 185th are probably too far apart. This means a 125th or 130th station could push the 145th station north to 155th. The budget at this point is elastic enough to support all six stations if necessary, though further engineering may show otherwise. If the cost estimates indicate ST can’t afford all the worthwhile stations, it may have to defer one without abandoning it entirely.

Each King County station is 1/2 mile from either Aurora Ave N or 15th Ave NE (whichever is closer), and 3/4 mile from the other avenue. Here are some thoughts about each station, based on my walking and bus tour of the station areas: Continue reading “Link North Corridor Stations”

by RENEE STATON with the STB Editorial Board

Wednesday night at the Link Northgate station meeting, Ron Endlich of Sound Transit told the audience that they plan to weigh all the options to mitigate lost parking during and after construction at Northgate station. I, others who live in the Northgate area, and the Seattle Transit Blog editorial board urge Sound Transit to invest in a pedestrian bridge over I-5 and in increased local transit service – not a new parking garage in the middle of a Seattle urban center.

Currently, there are 1,522 Park and Ride stalls at Northgate.  428 of these stalls will be displaced during station construction, but the new station will permanently eliminate only 117 stalls. Sound Transit is currently bound by the Federal Transit Administration to replace those 117 spaces. Sound Transit could seek an exemption from the FTA – with abundant private parking and the potential for Metro to re-purpose much of their Northgate-Downtown service to feed into the station, we don’t feel forging ahead with parking replacement is a good use of transit dollars.

Instead of a parking garage, Sound Transit has other options on the table:

1. A pedestrian and bike bridge over I-5 between the station area and North Seattle Community College (NSCC). This would provide station access for students, open up further parking options, and bring Licton Springs residents to the station. It is our preferred choice.
2. Temporary or permanent bus service improvements, which could help guide Metro’s service hours once the station opens.
3. Leasing additional Park and Ride stalls from adjacent property owners.

Northgate is an urban center.  While it has been auto-oriented in the past, its future can be brighter.  The Northgate Stakeholders Group and other discussions about the future of Northgate have focused on increasing the walkability and bikeabilty of the urban center.

Northgate neighbors have long asked for a bridge over I-5 connecting the transit center with NSCC and Licton Springs. King County Metro research has shown that many Licton Springs neighbors choose to drive to the Park and Ride rather than walk, as the distance around I-5 is long and transit connections are poor. Simply adding a bridge will decrease the number of residents driving to the station and increase transportation options to NSCC. In addition, at $16-20 million, the bridge should be cheaper than a parking garage, freeing up money to improve sidewalks around the station.

Scarce transit dollars would be better spent on pedestrian access that connects the Northgate community and that promotes active modes of transportation. With new parks, better sidewalks and crossings, library and community center investments, improvements to zoning and ironically, removal of parking minimums, we have already started down the right path. Building a parking garage on scarce station-adjacent land commits Northgate to a continued focus on cars and takes away space to grow an urban center.  We can do better for Northgate, and we can do better for our investment in mass transit in Seattle.

by JONATHON MORRISON WINTERS

Last week, Puget Sound Regional Council released the draft of their 2012 Land Use Forecast. It contains predictions of population, household, and employment growth up to 2040 across the Central Puget Sound region. These numbers are important, because they have implications for transportation investments and other resource allocations. In addition to direct funding from PSRC, cities and neighborhoods that are growing rapidly are more likely to be the focus of city investments in infrastructure, including new sidewalks and parks.

While there is a lot of data to dig through in the report, I immediately gravitated to the forecast for my neighborhood, Lake City. So what will Lake City look like in 30 years? According to the forecast, the Lake City area (which follows census tract boundaries, rather than neighborhood boundaries) will have 1,466 new housing units and 8,254 new people, which is a population growth rate of 30%. The employment numbers are even more impressive. Lake City will be supporting 5,237 new jobs in 2040 – that’s 85% growth!

If these numbers are true, one thing seems pretty certain: All of these residents and employees will require more space, which means that less space will be available for huge parking lots and drive-throughs. Lake City’s auto-centric development patterns are a thing of the past.

Continue reading “Carfree Living – in Lake City?”

by B NOURISH

King County Metro has been a hive of activity this week. Without further ado, here’s the news:

Contrary to widespread reports, the status of Route 2 has not changed. Yesterday, in widely-circulated emails and reports on Capitol Hill Seattle and Central District News (presumably from the same source), it was claimed that the current proposal of splitting Route 2 had been taken off the table. This is simply false. All options for Route 2 remain on the table, including the current proposal, a return to current conditions throughout the Queen Anne-Madrona corridor, or some possible alternative that maintains the current alignment of the 2S while still streamlining service in the rest of the corridor. (Since the publication of this post, Metro has released a statement saying that the Route 2 changes have, indeed, been taken off the table. We regret the error.)

Feedback from Ballard, West Seattle and Delridge. In an effort to get a sense of what non-STBers think of these changes and promote STB to a wider audience, I attended Metro’s open houses this week. Of the attendees in the Ballard, many seemed to be from North Beach, Blue Ridge and West Magnolia, areas where all-day service is being cut or restructured to (effectively) require a transfer to get downtown. West Seattle was relatively quiet, with the excellent suggestion of scheduling the 128 and 20 to provide a timed transfer for Admiral District riders losing the 55 being all that stands out in my mind.

Weak sauce in Delridge. At the Delridge open house, local transit advocates complained vigorously — and, in my view, absolutely correctly — that North Delridge has been shorted in the Fall restructure proposals, with most of the new service proposed for their neighborhood abandoned in favor of maintaining service in much less productive areas, on top of the 125 being cut on weekends. Delridge is a growing, top-performing corridor with lots of transit-dependent riders; in a rational transit planning universe, it would have been the southwest Seattle RapidRide route. Instead, that area will arguably be worse off after the Fall 2012 restructure than today.

More after the jump. Continue reading “Metro News Roundup: Route 2, Delridge and More”

by STEPHEN FESLER

I recently bent my $3.50 PugetPass ORCA accidentally near the chip in the corner and it caused my card to become non-functional whenever I tried to tap. I have another card linked to my ORCA account, so I called Metro Transit to see if I could transfer my PugetPass to my working reserve ORCA.

The Metro tele-agent explained that the transfer of the PugetPass to my working reserve ORCA was possible, but that in order for the PugetPass to transfer, staff would have to receive approval from managers and that the queue was so long that it would take 6-8 days. To move faster, I could just go to one of the Metro sales offices in Seattle. I told the agent to go ahead and cancel the non-functional card and put in the request for the transfer despite not fancying the one-week wait.

The following day I rang up Pierce Transit to see if I could get a different outcome, preferably an expedited transfer. No such luck, same one-week plus response. I then tried Metro a second time, but interestingly, the tele-agent said that my PugetPass ORCA was still active and no request had been filed. The agent also gave the same one-week plus response.

I hitched a ride to Metro’s King Street Center—this is where things start getting interesting and murky. The sales agent said that Metro had no such policy/ability to transfer a PugetPass from one card to another under a linked account. This could only be done by issuing a new ORCA altogether. (The same would go for moving E-purse funds as I found out.) The agent also explained that all of the tele-agents were wrong and that they have routinely made promises that are not possible with the ORCA system.

What this meant for me is bruised patience and forfeiting $5 more for a new ORCA card and 3 hours of my time just to get my PugetPass back.

Here are my takeaways:

• The waters are still murky on who is right about fare product transfer on same account registered cards from a damaged one to a reserve card.
• The inconsistency is incredibly trying and disenchanting to the patron because a lack of confidence quickly builds up.
• If the type of transfer as described above is in fact possible, there is little reason why a transfer cannot be done over the phone considerably faster. It should be within 24 hours, not a week or more; otherwise, what is the point of having a monthly PugetPass?
• The ORCA website should be amended to accommodate such fare product transfers to be processed without having to issue new cards. Patrons do not need to have more ORCAs; card proliferation is cumbersome and a needless expense in time and money.

by STEPHEN FESLER

On Thursday, November 17, the City of Redmond is hosting a final community meeting to receive input on its Transportation Master Plan (TMP) update dubbed Transportation Redmond 2030. Redmond staff will be presenting a list of potential transportation projects for the first time. The TMP meeting is the best opportunity for the public to weigh in on how the community will invest in pedestrian, cycle, transit, and roads in the near- and long-term. You may wish to read a summary of Redmond 2030 compiled from the previous events to get an idea of the brainstorming that went on earlier in the process.

The TMP is important because it will inform the City of Redmond’s Comprehensive Plan and be a key guide for other transportation policy documents. These in turn guide how funding is allocated, the process of the investments, the kind of services the community can expect, and directly impact land use decisions.

If you want to see Redmond become a more vibrant, sustainable, and diverse place, you should make yourself heard at the event.

The event will be held Thursday, November 17 from 6pm to 8pm at:

Redmond City Hall
15670 NE 85 Street
Redmond, Washington 98073

Routes to City Hall: ST 545 & 542 and MT RapidRide B & 232 all stop within two blocks of City Hall; most other routes pass through Redmond Transit Center about five blocks away.

If you have any questions or have any comments, please contact Lei Wu, Project Manager for the TMP update, at 425.556.2749 or lwu@redmond.gov. While not required, it is encouraged that you RSVP to Patrick McGrath at 425.556.2870 or pmcgrath@redmond.gov.

The author is a planning intern with the Redmond Department of Planning and Urban Development.

by TIM BURGESS

I took a different route to work Wednesday morning. Instead of the Metro #3 or #4, I hustled down to lower Queen Anne and hopped on the #8 bound for Capitol Hill.

I chose this route because the Queen Anne-to-Capitol Hill-to Rainier Valley route will receive significant improvements if the voters approve Proposition 1 next week.

I caught the 7:38a.m. trip at the corner of Queen Anne Avenue North and Mercer Street, just a minute after OneBusAway told me it would arrive. Of course, with Prop 1, instead of relying on a bus app (as great as it is), riders could just look to the real-time information signs that display when the next bus is coming.

Efficiency improvements from Prop 1 include transit priority traffic signals and curb bulbs at stops so buses can pick-up and drop-off without having to pull to the curb. Metro reports that the average speed of a bus in Seattle is between 6 and 8 miles per hour. The improvements will help increase these speeds to 10 to 12 miles per hour, a significant difference if you’re trying to get to work, home or school.

One of the first differences I noticed as we traveled east on Denny Way toward Capitol Hill was the age of my fellow riders; much younger than my regular transit experience to and from work. Most looked like students on their way to Seattle Central Community College or Seattle U. We had the usual collection of office workers, too.

What if this bus had a little device that would change the traffic signals for our benefit and turn them green to keep buses moving faster? That would help a lot along a congested street like Denny Way. Proposition 1 will make that investment, improving travel times for all riders. More after the jump. Continue reading “A Different Route”

by SALLY BAGSHAW

As Chair of the Parks and Seattle Center Committee, I regularly take the bus to community centers and Parks meetings. I want to experience for myself how long it takes to get to a neighborhood on the bus and see what the ride is like.

The problem with taking the bus from downtown Seattle, where I live and work, is that it’s relatively easy to get OUT of town after work, but substantially more difficult to get back INTO town after a late evening meeting. On a dark or rainy night, I admit this makes my decision to take the bus more challenging.

Monday evening I took the bus to Interlaken Park at the north end of Capitol Hill. Hopping on the Metro Route 12 at 5:06 p.m., I jumped off at the end of the route on 19th Avenue E and E Galer Street about 25 minutes later. (For you walkers and joggers, Interlaken Park is a 51.7-acre park, a densely wooded haven on the north end of Capitol Hill. It’s a gem.)

Route 12 is an electric trolley bus with frequent service to Capitol Hill – roughly every 10 minutes during commute hours, every 15 minutes during the day and every 30 minutes later in the evening.

Route 12 was standing-room-only this evening. Two darling children dressed for Halloween crowded into one seat across from me with their mother; a young man in a strap t-shirt offered me his seat when I got on. I appreciated his kindness. More after the jump.

Continue reading “Sally Bagshaw’s Bus Trip”

by MIKE O’BRIEN

I want to share my recent experience as I rode Metro’s Route 5 north to the Greenwood neighborhood and how this corridor would be different if Prop 1 passes. I ride transit throughout the city, but I frequent routes 5, 44 and 358 the most because they all serve my neighborhood. Route 5 stands to benefit significantly if Proposition 1 passes next week. The route connects the major job centers and transit hubs of Downtown and Northgate, the neighborhood business districts of Phinney Ridge and Greenwood, Shoreline Community College, and significant residential populations along the route.

The Phinney Ridge/Greenwood/Broadview corridor is called out in the city’s Transit Master Plan (TMP) for speed and reliability investments which Prop 1 would fund. So, what exactly does that mean? It means investing in a series of infrastructure investments along a transit corridor to make the bus service operate much more efficiently. Here is a undown of some of the investments slated for this corridor:

• Bus Bulbs: Bus bulbs are a brilliant low cost/high return investment. There are 35 locations identified in the TMP where bus bulbs would be installed along Route 5. The benefit of bus bulbs is easily illustrated.Anyone who rides the bus is familiar with this experience. When the bus pulls out of traffic to pick up or drop off a passenger, it only takes a few seconds, but often the bus is trapped by passing traffic, forcing the bus to wait up to 30 seconds or more before there is an opening to re-enter the travel lane. This happened on my trip north, but could be a thing of the past if Prop 1 passes. Bus bulbs extend the sidewalk or passenger platform out to the travel lane, allowing buses to quickly drop or pick up passengers while remaining in the travel lane. Then the bus can be on its way without waiting for traffic to clear.

  

  On average, each bus bulb can save up to 8 seconds for a bus. With 18 bulbs in one direction, that’s 2.5 minutes off of each trip, every day, indefinitely into the future. These minutes alone add up to a regular commuter, but they also bring significant savings to the system. Route 5 makes about 75 trips in each direction on a weekday. The minutes saved add up to over 1,600 service hours for this route. Those 1,600 service hours saved can be re-deployed to add more service to the system every single year, without us having to pay for additional service hours year after year.Aside from providing a travel time benefit, when bus bulbs are paired with crosswalks, they serve to narrow the crossing distance of arterials, making it safer for pedestrians.

• Transit Signal Priority. The TMP calls out 14 traffic lights to be modified for transit priority in this corridor. Buses are given priority at a light when an approaching bus signals to the traffic light, causing the light to stay green if it is currently green until the bus passes, or switching to green earlier if the light is red. It is estimated that these changes will save up to 10% of wait time at each signal. This means more time saved for bus riders, and more service hours for the system. Continue reading “Mike O’Brien’s Commute”

by TOM RASMUSSEN

Editor’s Note: This is the first in a series of City Councilmembers writing about bus trips in advance of the Proposition 1 vote.

On Wednesday morning, I took the 54 to get to City Hall. I wanted to see how folks were switching to transit and adapting from their normal commute during the closure of the Alaskan Way Viaduct. Riding the 54 was also important because I wanted to write about how the route will change both with RapidRide and with the improvements to the route if Seattle’s Prop 1 passes.

The 54 is one of Metro’s workhorse routes. It goes from White Center along Roxbury to the Fauntleroy Ferry Terminal then along California Ave SW to the Alaska Junction. It then heads down the hill on Avalon and onto the West Seattle Bridge and into downtown via 4th Avenue. Along with the 120 bus that runs on Delridge, the 54 carries most of West Seattle’s daily bus passengers.

Next fall, most of the 54 will be converted into Metro’s RapidRide C line. Today the route runs at about 15 minute intervals during the peak commute hours. RapidRide will bring more frequent bus service throughout the day, but it won’t make a difference if those buses are stuck in traffic. That’s where Prop 1 comes in.

Prop 1 will build on improvements already funded through Bridging the Gap, including more queue jumps that allow buses to get a head start at busy intersections and bus only lanes through stretches of the route where buses typically get backed up. Bus bulbs will be added to allow buses to more quickly load passengers and get moving again without having to merge in and out of traffic.

If Prop 1 passes, the combined SDOT investments in this corridor will reduce the time it takes to get downtown by 16% and will provide a level of reliability that makes it dramatically easier to plan your commute. More after the jump.

Continue reading “Tom Rasmussen’s Commute”