Easy Fixes Not Deployed for 3rd Ave

Battery St bus lane (3rd to Denny)
Photo Courtesy SDOT / flickr

The Seattle Department of Transportation and King County Metro recently announced several useful measures they will take to improve bus priority on 3rd Ave.

3rd Ave has the densest collection of bus routes in the state, and is pretty much totally packed with buses maneuvering around each other during peak hours. Every measure taken to speed up this armada pays for itself many times over in savings for Metro and the ability to redeploy the saved service hours. Indeed, saving service hours on 3rd Ave is about the only way Metro can add more service while waiting for an eighth base to open. Metro had to turn down some service-hour funding from the City in part because of this practical ceiling on deployable service.

The clearest solution for 3rd Ave remains red paint, designating a ban on non-permitted vehicles 24/7/365. However, various downtown blocks still have parking garage entrances, loading dock entrances, two-spot parking cutouts, or a whole lane of parking. Nevertheless, many blocks have little reason for cars to be there beyond driving straight through without stopping. These blocks ought to be able to be painted red, without political pushback:

Northbound blocks without parking/loading: Continue reading “Easy Fixes Not Deployed for 3rd Ave”

| 29 comments

Upzone the ‘Burbs

New apartments just steps away from the future downtown Redmond light rail station.
Credit: Lizz Giordano

Mike Rosenberg has another excellent piece in the Seattle Times, examining why housing construction in suburban King County has slowed while Seattle remains red-hot.

Overall, Seattle housing construction has grown 130 percent this decade compared to the average over the prior three decades, while housing development in the suburbs has dropped 43 percent from its historical average.

Add it all up and the county as a whole is actually on pace for a slight decline in the overall number of homes going up here this decade, despite Seattle’s building frenzy.

King County doesn’t have many large developable tracts of land left for single-family development, so developers have pushed into Snohomish and Pierce. But there’s plenty of opportunity for multifamily infill development.

As we’ve noted, some suburban cities are enacting development moratoria as they rewrite their zoning codes in the face of renewed growth. On the other end of the spectrum, Kenmore and Bothell are growing along the future 522 BRT corridor. Redmond is adding tons of new apartments in anticipation of light rail.

Despite all that growth, King County’s suburban cities still aren’t building nearly as much multifamily housing as they were in the 1980s and 1990s, according to the article.  As we’ve covered, growth is centralizing in Seattle and Bellevue, despite the PSRC’s plans to put more people and jobs in farther-flung suburbs.

With greenfield land running out, the next step – short of expanding the urban growth boundary – is to figure out how to do missing middle-style infill in the inner-ring suburbs.  That’s no small challenge given the preponderance of cul-de-sacs, lack of sidewalks, and infrequent transit service.  Fortunately light rail is coming, along with improved bus service, and there is no shortage of ideas on how to retrofit suburbia.

Suburban retrofits, however, require political will and currently there’s no political appetite for increasing density in single-family neighborhoods among Eastside electeds (there’s barely appetite for it in Seattle!). Nonetheless, more infill in the suburbs would be a huge win for regional equity. Adding housing capacity in these amenity-rich single-family neighborhoods (where zoning typically maxes out at just 3-5 units per acre) will make them more attractive to a new generation that wants more transportation options than the Eastside’s strip mall-centric built environment can currently provide, while relieving development pressures on lower-income neighborhoods in places like Seattle.

64 comments

News Roundup: It’s Legal

Bellevue Tunnel north portal

This is an open thread.

65 comments

We’re Number One

In any major city, a popular hobby is to bash the local transit agency. Think of a city you envy, and its residents despise a system that you can scarcely dream of. King County Metro is no exception. We all have our gripes.

As a reality check, the American Public Transit Association named our very own bus operator the best North American transit agency of 2018, based on its performance over the past three years. Ridership has shot up in a national context of stagnant or declining ridership, which one can explain by a booming and densifying city. But Metro’s electric bus, ORCA Lift, and Commute Reduction programs have also served as national examples.

Although Metro hasn’t done every route restructure nerds like us would like, the Northeast Seattle restructure inspired by U-Link follows all the main principles that optimize for all-day ridership. Metro must have an operational culture, that does the same thing the same way every day, but has managed to cross that with innovation.

Regrettably, for all its virtues, Metro isn’t in a position to solve the most pressing problems of urban dwellers. While it can make the rider experience better at the margins, the biggest problem is that transit vehicles are stuck in traffic. To solve that problem, riders are reliant on Sound Transit, which serves many stakeholders besides its riders, and Seattle DOT, which is having trouble executing on big capital projects at all.

24 comments

Rogoff: Sound Transit faces headwinds for on time and on cost project delivery

Sound Transit CEO Peter Rogoff. Credit: Atomic Taco

The big news from the July 26 Sound Transit Board meeting was that the Federal Way Link extension will cost about $460m more than originally planned. It may not be the last project to cost more than expected: at the meeting, CEO Peter Rogoff briefed the board about mounting challenges in delivering capital projects on time and on cost.

“Sound Transit has the financial strength,” Rogoff said, “to withstand increased project costs, or lower than anticipated federal funding or tax revenues, or a recession, but a combination of any two or more of these factors would put considerable stress on the agency’s ability to deliver projects on schedule.

Sound Transit can’t make any difference in a competitive labor market, or the increasing cost of real estate, or prevent a recession, but it is able to exercise control over design, alignment, and the like:

“We have already discussed that, first and foremost, controlling our work to reduce project costs will be critical for delivering our projects,” Rogoff said. “This includes the discipline to not expand the scope of projects.

Notably, agency-perceived expanded scope is one of the reasons First Hill station didn’t make it through the ongoing ST3 planning process, although cost-increasing alternatives in West Seattle and Ballard did advance.

Meanwhile, the federal funding picture is completely opaque. The Trump administration, like most Republican administrations, is hostile to transit projects. Trump transportation officials are doing their best to kill off projects that were thought to have the go ahead. In Albuquerque, for example, local officials constructed a BRT line under the assumption that they had $75 million in Federal Transit Authority (FTA) funds on the way. As of July 18, the administration hadn’t ponied up.

Continue reading “Rogoff: Sound Transit faces headwinds for on time and on cost project delivery”

| 34 comments

What Seattle’s Transpo Advisory Boards Want From a New SDOT Director

wikimedia

Below is a joint letter from Seattle’s Transportation Advisory Boards, which was sent to Mayor Durkan last month.  As the search for a new SDOT director stretches on, we thought our readers would be interested in what the advisory boards want to see from the department going forward. – ed. 

As members of the Seattle Pedestrian Advisory Board (SPAB), Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board (SBAB), Seattle Transit Advisory Board (STAB), and the Seattle Freight Advisory Board (SFAB) we would like to congratulate you on your election as mayor and anticipate many positive and challenging transitions for Seattle in the years to come.

A new director of the Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) will have a significant impact on the modes of transportation that we each represent and as such we hope to weigh in on the nationwide search. We hope you will consider our positions and concerns in choosing the next SDOT director. These advisory boards decided it would be more beneficial for you to receive a collaborative letter, as we are not simply modal silos, but passionate Seattle residents who desire a safe and efficient city that accommodates and embraces all modes of transportation.

We have compiled a list of key values and experience that we would like see reflected in the new SDOT director. Many of the values listed below drive our own commitment as volunteer stewards of the city’s alternative transportation and freight transportation advisory groups. Webring a diversity of skills, backgrounds, and expertise, and reflect the diverse community of people trying to move safely and easily around Seattle.

All four boards have highlighted a desire for a new director with experience in:

  • Equitable and data-driven decision-making,
  • Coalition building, and
  • Thorough and efficient implementation of safe streets policies.

Thank you for your consideration and please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions.

Sincerely,

Seattle Pedestrian Advisory Board (SPAB)
Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board (SBAB)
Seattle Transit Advisory Board (STAB)
Seattle Freight Advisory Board (SFAB)

Continue reading “What Seattle’s Transpo Advisory Boards Want From a New SDOT Director”

| 14 comments

Raise the Showbox Several Floors

Update: Erica Barnett at The C is for Crank has a rundown of what Councilmember Sawant’s proposed ordinance would do (putting severe restrictions on a lot more property than the Showbox) and rapid timeline for approval.

The movement to save the Showbox has grown quickly, and attracted some wanting an opportunity to proverbially punch a developer in the face, or to stop more housing from being built, for which the Showbox has provided a convenient excuse.

There is no actual item related to the Showbox on today’s 2:00 City Council Agenda yet. There are, however, ordinances proposed by Councilmember Mike O’Brien on the introductions calendar to get all for-profit employers with over 20 employees in the City to offer pre-tax commuter benefits beyond car-cost reimbursements, and to provide guiding principles on reorganizing the Move Seattle bond Levy package.

Much of today’s affordable housing was once someone’s “luxury housing”. Some of the largest shelters downtown, such as the Morrison Hotel and the Bus(c)h Motel were once state-of-the-art luxury housing. The apartment complex where I live looks very much like it was once a hotel. A lot of the “naturally affordable housing” targeted for purchase by the City is older single-family homes. In short, there is a lot of truth to the adage that today’s luxury housing is tomorrow’s affordable housing.

The Hotel Morrison, as depicted on a 1942 post card
courtesy historicseattle.org

The Showbox is a victim, not of crass developer capitalism, but of our failure to recognize the housing supply problem before it became a crisis. Josh Feit has a lot more to say on the topic, over at The C Is For Crank. I would just add that having a performance space of similar quality to the Showbox can happen on-site, most likely on the top floor. Lift the height limit in exchange for building such a performance space, and more income-limited units. Then, everyone should be happy except the historic preservationists, housing opponents, and height opponents.

53 comments