All posts by Martin H. Duke

• Toll lanes successful ($) in providing a congestion-free commute; it turns out people value their time, and transit benefits. So of course some legislators want to repeal them, partly because almost 25,000 people have signed a petition to end the tolls and restore HOV 3+ to HOV 2+.
• Growth advocates accuse Mike O’Brien of introducing a neighborhood veto into upzones of the existing HALA bargain, at least allowing them to change the upzones from “zone-wide” to something more uneven.
• SDOT rolls out project list to get South Lake Union ready for the C Line.
• The Urbanist wants to move the Green Line down to Denny St.
• Uber and Lyft drivers can unionize in Seattle, pending inevitable lawsuits. Legislation passes 8-0 (Bagshaw absent), Mayoral signature both irrelevant and not forthcoming.
• Shoreline City Council discusses Metro’s long range plan for the city (video starts at 59:00).
• Mercer Island does the right thing, rejects ban on dividing lots ($).
• Uncharacteristically informative Seattle Times editorial ($) asks questions about the Convention Place deal: is it a good one financially for Metro?
• The Everett Herald argues forcefully for Link to Paine Field.

This is an open thread.

In this morning’s First Hill post, I inadvertently placed the Green Line Westlake station one block too far to the East compared to Sound Transit’s preliminary concept for the station . Oran has corrected the images in the original post, and I’ve revised the numbers accordingly. The numbers change a bit but the analysis doesn’t change qualitatively.

The Green Line subway that Sound Transit seems certain to propose next year has one stop between Westlake and International District/Chinatown, on Madison Street. Falling between two existing DSTT stations, it would greatly improve integration of Madison BRT into the rail system.

The Sound Transit concept places the stop at about Madison & 5th Avenue, right in front of the Central Library and a block from the I-5 trench. But what if we could use this opportunity to correct one of the most regrettable outcomes of Sound Transit 1, the deletion of First Hill Station?

Moving a station away from 5th takes the line away from the region’s tallest buildings, but these buildings are well-served by existing Link Stations. Nudging the line up to Madison and 8th Avenue has negligible impact on tunnel length (0.05 0.09 miles according to Oran’s software)*, and places all three hospitals within easy walking distance of Link (see walkshed map below).  Reaching Boren would be much harder, adding a quarter mile and in practice forcing transfers for many Green Line riders headed downtown,  but locates the station very near the hospitals and credibly serves Seattle University and the entirety of First Hill.

Although the 8th Avenue option isn’t a huge change in linear feet, the surface of 8th Avenue is 65 feet above 5th, and Boren is another 52 feet above that. That implies either an even steeper climb for the trains (before dropping down again to Westlake), a more expensive deep station, or both. And it involves tunneling under I-5 twice.

When I asked ST spokesman Geoff Patrick about these possibilities, he didn’t dismiss them, but I got the impression that the question was definitely outside the box. However, “it would be a board policy decision,” so if local officials understand that is feasible, desired, and very much needed, they can bring it onto the agenda. It’s certainly worth a look from ST planners.

* If tunneling costs $600m/mile, that’d be $30m $54m in additional expenditure on a multibillion dollar project.

In the latest ST3 study concept, with a one-seat ride from Ballard to the Rainier Valley, there are a total of 14 sensible transfers in Seattle: two at Sodo, between West Seattle and Rainier Valley; four at International District/Chinatown, between Redmond and either West Seattle or Rainier Valley; two at Westlake, between Ballard and Everett; and six equally appropriate at two or more of those stations, because the direction of travel through downtown is the same. In a discussion with ST spokesman Geoff Patrick and other ST staff, STB learned about some preliminary concepts for how these transfers might work.

Of course, these concepts are very preliminary. The Board hasn’t even committed to a second tunnel, much less accepted detailed transfer concepts. But they do indicate a staff thinking hard about how to avoid the transfer mistakes of the past.

At International District, Sound Transit would excavate a cut-and-cover station under 5th Ave S, directly east of the current station (see the figure at right). The new station mezzanine would connect directly with the northbound platform in the existing stop. From the existing southbound platform, riders would climb to the surface, decline to the northbound platform, and then work over to the Green Line mezzanine without having to cross the street.

This concept is miles ahead of past station designs, and significantly reduces the frustration of Sound Transit’s refusal to consider a center platform at the current ID station. Direct street access to the Green Line Mezzanine would be a nice addition. But then Oran developed a far better concept, with a tweak from me, shown at right. The beauty of this configuration is that it maximizes the ease of the most important transfers at International District, which are between East Link and either West Seattle or the Rainier Valley. I imagine a setup like this would be a substantially more complicated project, probably more expensive and with more service disruptions during construction, and I suspect Sound Transit will find a reason not to do it. But it’s worthwhile to put the optimal configuration on the record.

Although the all-surface transfer at Sodo is much more straightforward, switching Central Link to the Green Line and a new tunnel will require significant work in the busway corridor. As Geoff Patrick put it:

Subject to refinement during the environmental review and design processes, the existing tracks north of Massachusetts would be reconfigured to connect with a new alignment proceeding north to the vicinity of the current location of Stadium Station where it transitions into a new tunnel. The existing Stadium Station would be relocated to the west side of the E3 Busway and would serve the West Seattle to Everett line through the existing Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel. All of the specifics will be subject to close review during the preliminary design and environmental review process, during which alternatives will be developed in consultation with the public, impacts will be evaluated and mitigation will be identified.

At Westlake, the Green Line will be traveling (roughly) North towards South Lake Union while the Blue and Red lines travel (roughly) East towards Capitol Hill.  As you can see in the figure below, the green line tunnel would pass to the  and below of the existing station. Stairs or escalators would connect the (mined) new mezzanine with either platform of the existing station. A transfer of this quality is crucial, as a decent Westlake transfer in this context fulfills the longtime wonk dream of a congestion-free transit connection between Lower Queen Anne, South Lake Union, and Capitol Hill, the informally discussed “Metro 8 Subway.”

• Judkins Park Station plan wins national award.
• Tacoma Link design concepts.
• Metro rolling out TripPool program to organize carpools to park-and-rides.
• Your guide to the new federal transportation bill.
• Seattle Times shows precinct maps for Seattle’s last election.
• City of Tuwkila has a new survey out on transit improvements.
• Community Transit approves a 2016 budget.
• Seattle gives “preliminary approval” to 58 stories at Rainier Square.
• 250 units in Roosevelt to go before Design Review.
• Because Frank jinxed it, mudslides close down North Sounder.
• Pedestrians die in collision with Metro bus near Northgate, in Auburn vs. Sounder train.
• Portland Streetcar tries closing stops to speed things up.
• WSDOT cancels ferry runs due to maintenance.
• Bertha may start up this month.

This is an open thread.

Sound Transit staff presented a financial analysis at Friday’s workshop in support of ST3 planning. Perhaps in response to Seattle Subway’s ST Complete proposal, or the general desire to fund more projects than the new revenue authority allows in 15 years, the analysis explores breaking the rule of thumb (from the 2007 and 2008 votes) that 15-year packages are more politically palatable.*

As someone interested in the ultimate shape of ST3, there are three things you should take away from this analysis:

1) Don’t confuse different types of dollars. This is probably the most boring of the points but also the most important. This mistake will result in lots of unworkable projects and lots of misleading talking points for the no campaign.

All of the corridor study cost estimates are in 2014 dollars. All revenue figures are in Year of Expenditure (YOE) dollars.

We all know what 2014 dollars are. A YOE dollar’s true value varies over time, and is worth less than a current one. Thus a $15 billion revenue package sums up numbers in different units, and doesn’t actually communicate much. But it’s much easier to compute for the boffins, because fewer assumptions are built into the model.

So how we turn 2014 dollars into YOE? The short answer is, you can’t. You’d have to understand the phasing of various projects, how cash flow varies over those phases, and then apply the correct inflation rate over those years. Last year, I very roughly took some historical ST1 phasing information, and made a guess that $3 in YOE dollars buys you about $2 in 2014 dollars. That’s a bit better than a wild guess, and in any case only valid for a 15-year time frame. ST will have to do some detailed staff work to work out the translation.

2) 20 years buys a bit more, 25 years a lot more.

The headline figure in the legislature last session was $15 billion. That figure referred to total (YOE) collections over 15 years. Because ST will also sell bonds, apply for federal grants, collect fares, and so on, any amount of collection enables a larger amount of capital spending. A 15-year revenue cycle using all three taxes (sales, MVET, property) provides about $26 billion (YOE) for projects, which may involve tough choices and/or some value engineering.

Another five years, as one might expect, gets you 33% more taxes. But due to bonding limitations and so forth, the total budget goes up to only $30 billion (YOE), which may be about enough to build the Board’s apparent highest priorities. But give it another 5 years (through 2041) and ST1 and ST2 bonds start retiring, restoring ST’s bonding capacity and raising the total budget to as much as $48 billion (YOE). Of course, that far out the actual purchasing power of those dollars is likely quite a bit diminished from today. That should be enough to build everything the Board seems to prioritize, and a several additional projects (Ballard-UW, anyone?) to boot.

3) Subarea Equity may not mean what we think it means.

Most observers probably learned something when ST CFO Brian McCartan explained the true origins of the policy that taxes collected in one subarea must (roughly speaking) be spent in that subarea. As it turns out, the statute only requires that the proposition ”identifies the degree to which revenues generated within each county will benefit the residents of that county.” The restrictions on spending are a matter of board policy, and the board can change it.

Josh Feit’s report quotes several board members expressing sentiments that a project’s physical location has little to do with who really benefits. That’s a good thing, as subarea accounting is a futile exercise only necessary due to excessive parochialism.

In Sound Transit 1, Subarea Equity was generally understood to advantage the suburbs over Seattle. Around the time of Sound Transit 2, I was one of the people arguing that Link reaching the city line meant the valence had reversed. Today, I’m not sure what to believe. Mayor Murray certainly believes the case for Seattle projects is convincing.

Moreover, the corridor studies suggest that the most productive system would involve shipping at least some dollars from East King County to Snohomish County, leaving the traditional Seattle/suburb rivalry entirely out of it. As always, the board will have to balance regionwide merit against electoral feasibility, and the outcome is unclear.

* It is debatable, to say the least, that package length had any impact on differing outcomes in those years.

• The cost of zoning.
• “…the increase in [housing] supply is slowing down rent growth.” Supply and demand has not been repealed.
• Sound Transit seeking bids on $400m contract to build Lynnwood Link from Northgate to N. 200th St.
• Portland Streetcar circulates infographic showing how great it is.
• The latest iteration of the plan for the Mount Baker station area. It all looks great except there is too much plaza space. More buildings please!
• One triplex per block ($) would meet over half of Seattle’s housing goals.
• ST Board finalizes Tacoma Link plan, still seeking funding.
• Dan Savage calls for $1-a-day bus passes — for everyone.
• Reports from the Cross Kirkland Corridor public meeting are not good.
• Financial supporters of the successful Community Transit measure.
• Tuesday’s Link service interruption was caused by a man trapped underneath the train. The man ultimately survived, and it’s unclear if he was merely inattentive or attempted suicide-by-train.
• American driving higher than ever.
• New app tries to give transit directions to local trailheads.
• SDOT seeking to avoid improperly parked vehicles on First Hill Streetcar route.
• Capitol Hill Station gets its mural.
• Minor transit and pedestrian improvements around Southcenter.
• Pennsylvania grad student has a survey about real-time transit information.
• Self-driving cars may be a disaster.
• Rider falls asleep, wakes up in bus barn.

This is an open thread.

The Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA), a Mayor-Murray inspired “grand compromise” between for-profit developer and affordable housing interests, started to take legal shape in the last few weeks with a series of new council bills.

The first item, approved September 28th, was a work plan to address the HALA recommendations (with the notable exception of allowing duplexes and triplexes in some single-family zones). Broadly speaking, the Council plans to enact various affordable housing programs in the near term, with the upzones happening in 2017. According to Sarra Tekola of Mike O’Brien’s office, “The upzones in 2017 are not delayed, with the environmental review, DPD and public process this will take a year.”

There are a total of 15 separate pieces of legislation in the plan, a number of reports, and two additional bills may be required.

In 2015, the Council planned passed “framework legislation” for the Commercial Linkage Fee on November 9th 9-0. It also renewed and revised on September 28th the Multifamily Property Tax Exemption (MFTE), a tax break to encourage inexpensive housing construction. These items do not come into effect until the upzones do in 2017. Still to come, the council will also adopt an agreement with regional partners to set up a revolving loan fund for transit oriented development.

In the first half of 2016, the Council would pass legislation authorizing a much larger Housing Levy on the ballot and authrorize a “credit enhancement program” for Yesler Terrace. New laws would also remove barriers to housing for people with criminal records, strengthen Tenant Relocation Assistance if a report calls for it, and reform both Design Review and Historic Preservation Review.

Later next year, the Council would amend the standards to encourage construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and regulate the “short term rental” (e.g. AirBnB) market, based on a report earlier in the year. It would outlaw discrimination against renters based on source of income. It may also create a formal program to preserve existing affordable housing, based on the outcome of a staff report.

2017 is when the best stuff comes: upzones and changes to development standards linked to the Commercial Linkage Fee and MFTE in the deal, as well as reduced or eliminated minimum parking requirements  in urban centers, urban villages, and frequent transit corridors.

Throughout the whole period the Council will seek to transfer public property for development via specific legislation, where possible. Missing, of course, is course is the bulk of the HALA committee’s recommendations on single-family zones, withdrawn soon after the proposal, despite it being the best tool to accommodate larger families in Seattle.