All posts by Martin H. Duke

I’m sure you’re all sitting there with your ballots waiting for STB to tell you what to do. Well, never fear: the editorial board is currently figuring it out. We’re shooting for Wednesday but it’ll definitely be out by Friday.

If there are any downballot races or candidates we should take notice of, let us know in the comments.

The Sound Transit board on Thursday officially selected an alignment for East Link, which services the South Bellevue Park and Ride, and also tunnels under downtown Bellevue. The line will be entirely grade-separated from the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel to Hospital Station in Bellevue.

There are still some gates to pass through before we can be sure that this alignment will happen. The City of Bellevue and Sound Transit have to sign a final, binding agreement. Bellevue has to actually produce the $160m they’ve committed to the tunnel, and Sound Transit has to find about $150m.

The uncertainty about how ST will fund its share prompted the two no votes in the 15-2 decision, King County Councilman Larry Phillips and Mayor Mike McGinn. One possibility brought up in the meeting is to find funds in the North King (Seattle/Shoreline) subarea, where tax revenue is bouncing back strong and projects have come in under budget.

I’m hearing murmurs that some Seattleites are outraged. There are two questions here: what are the impacts on North King projects, and what are the legal and “justice” issues of using North King money to pay for East King projects? In short, the answer to the first question is probably “not much, but be careful;” to the second, “none at all.”

In terms of project impact, it’s really impossible to say at this stage. To state some principles: Northgate to Downtown is the biggest slam dunk transportation project in the state and ST should not compromise there on scope or schedule. Taking money obviously increases risk, but there’s lots of project to cut before Northgate is threatened even if things go terribly. Cleaning out North King’s petty cash may eliminate consideration of Seattle’s desired add-ons, like a $30m Aloha extension to the First Hill streetcar.

As for the justice of it all, I’m entirely unmoved. There’s a lot of ambiguity over what is an “East King” or a “North King” project, and typically that ambiguity has favored North King because East has the money and North has the demand. For instance, East King is paying (for now) for the entire East Link project, starting at the DSTT and including the Rainier/I-90 station. Similarly, spokesman Geoff Patrick confirms all Eastside ST buses – 540, 542, 545, 550, 554, 555, 556 – are paid for entirely by East King, even though Seattle residents definitely get more than zero benefit out of them.

We complete our weary journey through Seattle’s High Capacity Transit study by looking at the First Avenue Streetcar. There was no BRT option evaluated here. Although a streetcar has 24 times more capital expense than an enhanced bus, it has triple the number of new riders and runs near capacity throughout the day. In fact, the First Avenue Streetcar ranks third according to my favorite efficiency metric, ANC/NR, behind the 4th/5th streetcar couplet and Eastlake BRT, at $2.59. The bus is considerably worse at $3.14.

To wrap things up, here’s a handy summary chart of the 11 options with some of the key metrics:

In spite of what some commenters seem to think, I’ve actively refrained from endorsing any particular mode or corridor in this survey. What’s best really depends on what you value most and the external financial situation. Politics matters, too: even if these projects are more cost-effective than those out in other neighborhoods, the plan is going to have to spread some love out to the other priority corridors to win a citywide ballot.

• Investigator finds no conflict of interest in Kevin Wallace’s dealings.
• Bellevue City Council “encouraged by recent progress” on East Link.
• When buying locomotives, Amtrak has its priorities wrong.
• Federal budget cuts could wipe out what the $20 tab fee would get us.
• Take Seattle’s Comprehensive Plan survey.
• Metro is looking at eliminating the 2nd and Columbia bus stop to improve traffic flow. Comment here.
• Community Transit’s system reorganization process grinds on. Of course, the option I like best is least popular with survey respondents.
• Seattle’s Walk/Bike/Ride challenge has loads of prizes this summer.
• Photos from the Burien CRC meeting.
• Redmond’s doing a transportation master plan too.
• Seattle Council chatters about asking for less than the full $100 tab fee.
• People resent losing their free parking subsidy.
• Bellingham coal terminal plan could mess up Amtrak Cascades.
• Federal Way looking at legal options because light rail might not get there.
• Crosscut’s Kent Kammerer writes 1,000 words about the forces behind Roosevelt upzoning, doesn’t manage to use the word “environmentalist” once. The environmental argument for density is dismissed in one throwaway clause as a fix leaf for developer profits.
• Environmentalists suing PSRC over greenhouse gases lose.
• “If You Shop at Bellevue Square, You Contribute” to Tim Eyman.
• America’s lack of transportation investment is hurting Al Qaeda.

This is an open thread.

Eastlake is a very strong corridor for high-capacity transit that has both high, long-distance ridership and good efficiency metrics. The proposed route would begin at Roosevelt station, absorb and improve the SLU streetcar (if rail), and use a 4th/5th Avenue couplet to complete its run through downtown. Routes 70 and 66 would be eliminated. These operating savings help give the Eastlake streetcar the lowest net operating cost per new rider, at 65 cents per head.

For the rail option, weekday ridership is strong (25,000 a day in 2030, only 1,000 less than Ballard) and the $253m capital cost is substantially lower than Ballard. Using my preferred cost-effectiveness metric, Annualized Net Cost per New Rider, BRT is the second most effective corridor/mode combination in the study at $2.28. Rail is fourth overall (behind the First Ave streetcar) at $2.73, while “enhanced bus” has the worst ratio in the entire study at $5.83.

In general, there is not exclusive right-of-way for this corridor, except for downtown and perhaps Fairview/Eastlake.

It’s become clear from comments that there’s some confusion about what the streetcar and BRT modes in the TMP actually mean. It is not, in general, the service quality of the South Lake Union Streetcar. You have to dig into the pamphlets to which each post links to understand what treatments the streetcar (or BRT bus) would receive.

In the case of the 4th/5th couplet, there are two options. The best one, presented at right, has a dedicated transit lane in both directions. The other alternative would do so only on 5th.

For cost reasons, in that project we’re likely stuck with the current configuration through SLU, unless one of the other lines is built.

As for Ballard/Fremont, the plan envisions dedicated transit lanes in the Ballard/Leary couplet, on Westlake between Valley and Nickerson, and on one or both avenues downtown as above. Elsewhere, it would operate in mixed traffic, although it would get other priority treatments like queue jumps and signal priority.

I’m not sure why July 26th is the official day for good transportation events, but the City of Bellevue is hosting a bike ride of the Eastgate corridor, so that cyclists can provide suggestions to planners on how to make the corridor bike-friendly. Meet at 5:30 at Enatai Beach Park.

This is a great opportunity to help plan for the future of the Eastgate Corridor. Join representatives from the Mountains to Sound Greenway and City of Bellevue for a loop ride from Enatai to the Sunset Trailhead and back. You’ll be able to learn more about Greenway Trail options that are being explored, and provide your input to transportation planners on how to make this important corridor more bike-friendly. We’ll be back to Enatai Beach Park around 6:45 p.m. Please RSVP at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/eastgateI-90corridorbikeride.

Of the all possible High Capacity Transit corridor projects in Seattle’s Transit Master Plan, nothing carries more riders than a fast streetcar from downtown to Loyal Heights via Ballard and Fremont. Up to 26,000 riders per day could use this line in 2030, which would run a train train every 8 minutes at the peak, 15 minutes evenings and weekends, and 10 minutes the rest of the time and save the average traveler about 8 minutes over the current situation.

On the other hand, the 7-mile rail corridor would cost $327m in capital, well out of range for Seattle without outside assistance. It also would run less frequently than the BRT option, which costs $111m, draws 21,000 riders and is cheaper overall per new rider ($3.11 vs. $4.53). Enhanced bus takes up the rear at $4.74.

No matter what you do, nothing is big enough to handle the demand in this corridor. Even running every 5 minutes, BRT simply doesn’t; only coupled streetcars come close.

But if you can’t afford it, you can’t afford it. On the other hand, if you build the streetcar here you get the SLU/First Hill connector for free.

Nelson/Nygaard looked at constructing a ship canal crossing. They estimated the cost at $50-70m, but judged it to not meet cost/benefit considerations.

There are many metrics that Nelson/Nygaard used to evaluate each mode in Seattle’s future High Capacity Transit corridors. Unfortunately, the one I really wanted to see wasn’t included: Annualized Net Cost per New Rider. Let’s break that down.

The cost is annualized because it breaks down the upfront capital cost over a 30-year period to combine it with operating cost; net because it subtracts savings from bus operations made redundant; and “new riders” because it only counts the trips added to the system. It captures what the city would have to outlay to put another fanny in the seats every day. And as luck would have it, one can compute ANC/NR it using the metrics that the consultant provided.

This metric doesn’t capture everything that matters; it’s subject to the assumptions that went into the inputs. Moreover, it ignores trip length, greenhouse gas emissions, rider speed and comfort, what you can get people to vote for, and what capital costs the federal government or private investors might defray. Nevertheless, the winner by this metric is the “CC2” South Lake Union-Downtown streetcar, which connects the SLU and First Hill streetcars. Its ANC/NR comes in at $1.71, 47 cents below its nearest competitor.

The 1.1 mile Corridor_CC2 would run in a couplet down 4th and 5th Avenues. The streetcar would run every 10 minutes during the day and every 15 minutes evenings, and carry about 11,500 people a day in 2030. Most riders throughout the day in 2030 would be standing. At $74m, it’s also one of the cheapest capital projects on the menu; it’s also a down payment on longer potential lines up Eastlake or to Ballard.

Due to the unique nature of this project, there were no analogous bus projects for this corridor. Bus service would remain unchanged.