The Downside of Agglomeration Effects

This post originally appeared on Orphan Road.

Agglomeration effects are generally good things for cities: people move to a city because other people live there, and so on.  Neighborhoods thrive on agglomeration effects: you open a bar in a neighborhood with other bars, because that neighborhood’s a “destination,” where people go when they want to go out carousing or what have you.

But agglomeration effects can have downsides.  Too many bars and sports stadia in Pioneer Square can make the neighborhood feel overrun to some people.  Too many hospitals on First Hill means that parts of the neighborhood can feel like a ghost town at night.  And so forth.

I think a similar dynamic is unfolding with this debate on where to put the Downtown Emergency Services Center’s new Crisis Solutions Center:

“The City of Seattle was unlikely to use the facility if it were located in Tukwila,” said Hobson, because SPD and Medic One personnel may not have the time and resources to make the trip. The Jackson Place location is ideal, he said, because it has good access to Swedish and Harborview hospitals and is centrally located between the SPD precincts and both I-5 and I-90. Of the 7-8 properties they looked at in the area, the one on Lane Street was the best fit, he said.

When it’s time to build the next DESC facility, certainly the same neighborhood will be a front-runner.  After all, it’s so close to the Crisis Solutions Center! And so on, and so on.

Now, I don’t live too far from this area, and I have seen the ways in which large institutions — Seattle U, Swedish, the Polyclinic — create long shadows that seem to overwhelm everything around them.  To be clear, I don’t personally oppose this new project, I just think the phenomenon is interesting.

0 comments

RapidRide Survey: Fares and ORCA

Banner at Tukwila International Boulevard Station promoting the ORCA Card

One of the more striking results from Metro’s RapidRide A Line customer survey is the ORCA usage rate and why people do not use ORCA to pay fares (page 30). 55 percent of those surveyed don’t use ORCA. Of the top reasons for not using ORCA, 32 percent don’t know where to obtain the card, 32 percent say it’s not convenient to obtain an ORCA card, 14 percent don’t know what an ORCA card is, and 7 percent can’t afford to buy one.

I’m surprised to see Metro not promote ORCA more prominently along with RapidRide’s launch. If customers only knew that they could conveniently purchase and reload an ORCA card at RapidRide’s northern terminus, the Tukwila International Boulevard Link station, we wouldn’t have the results we see above.

Tukwila has four self-service fare vending machines (TVMs) that take cash and cards, and speak in three languages. What Metro could do is produce a banner or two (or use existing ones), some in-bus placards and maybe record a message to be played periodically on the bus promoting ORCA (like on Sounder). That alone could eliminate 78 percent of the reasons people don’t use ORCA. Metro does have a brochure explaining how to pay on RapidRide in seven languages but it doesn’t explain what ORCA is or where to get it.

Without TVMs at every stop, RapidRide greatly depends on ORCA and multiple doors to speed up boarding. One less cash payer equals many seconds less dwell time at each stop. Multiply that over each person and each stop and many minutes are saved. ORCA readers at every door would also help.

The good news is when people do use ORCA, 69 percent use the off-board reader at stops (not every stop has a reader). On the proof-of-payment (POP) system, 84 percent said they were checked for proof of payment by a fare enforcement officer and 58 percent thought the number of inspections was appropriate. I hope this means positive encouragement for continuing and extending POP.

For comparison, 44 percent of Swift riders pay fares with ORCA. So Metro, don’t feel too bad. The upcoming B Line also has an ORCA vending machine at the Bellevue TC terminus. The rest of the RapidRide lines do too. And Metro didn’t have to spend a dime for those machines. So please take full advantage of them!

216 comments

Metro Fixes Scheduling Mistake

No more bus bunching on purpose

King County Metro silently fixed a major scheduling mistake for routes 71, 72, and 73 in the February 2011 service change. Those routes together provide frequent service between Downtown Seattle and NE 65th St in Roosevelt via the University District. Buses are supposed to arrive at evenly spaced intervals (headways), about every 7.5-10 minutes during most of the day and at least every 15 minutes from 5 am to midnight. However, the combined schedule for those routes in the past six months had buses arriving at irregular intervals, leading to bunching and long gaps in service. The new schedule restores the even spacing (actually more regular than the Feb 2009 schedule) on weekdays. For some reason, the combined timetable is not available online but the new blue timetables are already out (photo excerpts: weekday 1, weekday 2, Saturday).

For example, people had to wait 18 minutes in the middle of the morning rush hour for a 72 and 73 to arrive simultaneously. If they missed those two, then they had to wait another 12 minutes, then another 5 minutes, and so on. This is a service that’s supposed to always arrive every 7-8 minutes during that period. Another frustrating case was having the last non-owl trip of the night arrive one minute after the trip before it, leaving people waiting an hour for the owl bus. That pair is now 15 minutes apart like the other late night trips.

When you design a high frequency trunk line created from less-frequent branches, it is important to have evenly spaced service to minimize wait time and bunching on the trunk. With this irregular schedule, buses are both bunched on purpose (by schedule) and unintentionally (by delays), leading to a reduction in usable capacity by having overcrowded buses trailed by relatively empty buses. This cannot be called “efficiency”, if that was the original intent. Intentional or not, Metro realized its mistake and fixed it, likely after a bunch of customer and operator complaints.

94 comments

How to boost employment in Seattle in 2 years

This post originally appeared on Orphan Road.

Upzone.

One of the arguments that comes up when debating Seattle’s zoning laws is that we’re in a recession, and nobody’s going to build no matter what we do right now.  I’d argue the opposite: if we upzone we can get people to build right now despite the fact that we’re in a recession.

Housing prices have dropped in Seattle recently (as with everywhere else), but they’re still well above surrounding areas and dwarf suburban prices.  Why hasn’t development in Seattle continued if there’s such a market?  Because of zoning.  There’s some profit in tearing down a one story business and building a 3-on-1 mixed use structure (to take a common example), but that’s offset by the loss in value of tearing down that one story business that the developer has just bought.  You get the new value of 3 stories of new homes, but you had to pay the construction price of 4 stories plus land.  Unless housing values are very high, a developer won’t make money on this deal.

Now consider an upzone.  If we raise the legal height for that parcel to 6 stories, then you have the value of 5 stories of new homes for the construction cost of 6 stories plus land value.  That’s two extra stories worth of profit and will push many projects from being losers to being winners.

Another benefit of upzoning in a weak market is that change happens more slowly.  The clear winning projects will be done right away, and the less profitable projects will become more profitable as the market recovers.  This will tend to make neighborhoods change slowly, which is more comfortable for neighbors.

There are a whole lot of unemployed architects, engineers, and contractors out there right now.  Upzoning can make a large dent in those numbers almost immediately.

2 comments

News Roundup: Vote by Feb. 8th

Photo by Atomic Taco

This is an open thread.

131 comments

Editorial: A Transportation Deal

Sen. Haugen

Reports last year explained that Senate Transportation Chair Mary Margaret Haugen (D-Camano Island) singlehandedly killed the 2010 transit funding bill in order to keep transit advocates at the table for a 2011 package that would also address highway funding shortfalls.

The parallels to 2007 are strong. STB was founded for the purpose of advocating for the roads and transit package. Some writers thought the road projects were largely HOV lanes and therefore positive; in all cases, we saw that much light rail as a game-changer, essential to move forward at all costs. In the end, that wasn’t enough, as a coalition of environmental groups allied with rail opponents drove the measure to defeat.

In the end, voters (and leaders like Greg Nickels) vindicated the anti position by getting ST2 to the ballot in 2008 and passing it. Some people took away the lesson that compromise of this sort is never necessary. Personally, I think the composition of the electorate in 2008 was an under-appreciated cause of victory. I’d be sorely tempted by another game changer, like a large ST3 package, in exchange for roads.

Unfortunately, there’s little hope of anything so transcendent. Far more likely is a band-aid for Metro’s funding problems. And under those circumstances, there isn’t a lot of road for which transit advocates like me are prepared to vote. Since many highway supporters will also vote against any tax increase, the legislature will need the vote of moderate transit supporters, and should consider certain environmentally friendly features, in rough order of importance:

  • a complete solution to the funding woes of transit agencies around the state;
  • extreme emphasis on HOV and maintenance projects as opposed to general purpose capacity, particularly in areas where transit options are robust;
  • for the highway and ferry portion, near-total reliance on gasoline tax, which helps to correctly price the negative externalities of driving and constitutionally can’t be used for anything else anyway.
  • full funding authority for the transit portion of the deep-bore tunnel plan;
  • accelerated improvements to Amtrak Cascades; and
  • new local funding options for bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Here’s to hoping the urban legislators in Olympia are making clear that these elements are important.

31 comments

Correction: Clarifying the Bel-Red Design Options

A new design being considered by the council is far more walkable than the previous 177' option.

Monday’s notice about Bellevue’s open house for the future NE 15/16th Street arterial in the Bel-Red corridor didn’t go unnoticed by Bellevue planners, who’ve asked me to clarify the design options on the table for the arterial.  I’ve been a bit mouthy about one of the options, a 177-foot wide cross-section along NE 16th where Link would run along the center of the arterial in what is referred to as Zone 4 (PDF).  According to Rick Logwood of the Bellevue DOT, that option is no longer being considered, after recent council discussions.  Instead, a much narrower street is being considered, and one that I think is much more successfully scaled to pedestrians (see above).

Logwood also says that outside of the segment with center-running light rail,  the cross-sections are much narrower since Link will run off the street to the north:

Elsewhere, the typical section is much narrower.  The graphic shown has 177’ at the widest point in the entire corridor.  Where we are today in discussion is more on the order of 128’ – that is a significant difference – and will change public opinion.

The two perspectives (Alternatives: A, B) that do not show the LRT station are located between 120th and 124th Avenues NE.  As you can see the width is much less than what has been portrayed – where LRT is in fact in a different alignment.  The third is where the station is located, but reflects where the Bellevue City Council discussed reducing the number of travel lanes east of 124th Avenue NE to one through lane in each direction.

The other urban district in the corridor where light rail runs off to the north is referred to as Zone 2 (PDF) (the Spring District)– NE 15th Street between 120th and 124th Aves NE.  The two perspectives that Logwood mention show cross-sections with 4 travel lanes, 1 turn lane, and 1 parking lane.  The only difference between the two options is the addition of a cycletrack in Alternative B.

As far as the design options in Zone 2 go, their conduciveness to walkability can be debated.  Personally, I would like to see one travel lane in each direction for the entire corridor, but that wish usually never works out politically.

10 comments

Testing in Progress for RapidRide Arrival Times

Next bus times a reality for RapidRide but not for Link
Next bus times a reality for RapidRide but not for Link

Up to the minute bus arrival times have been appearing on many of the message signs at RapidRide A Line stations with caveat message “Testing is in Progress”. The displays show times for the A Line and any other Metro route serving that stop, though other routes may not be accurate because they aren’t equipped with GPS yet.

I was watching the sign at S 176th St/SeaTac station. I arrived at the station seeing 5 minutes to the next bus and about 5 minutes later the bus arrived. The sign changed from “1min” to “due” as the bus became visible in the distance. It’s quite accurate, with buses arriving within 1-2 min of the predictions, though some stations showed an arriving bus as 2 minutes away. There was one case where it predicted around 3-4 minutes and the bus arrived 8 minutes after the previous one. I’m not expecting clockwork here, just a general idea of how long the wait is. One Bus Away seems to be using the tracking data as well.

So when will Link get better real-time information? The answer ranges from probably not in a long time to as soon as possible.

16 comments

Mta.me

This post originally appeared on Orphan Road.

Neat site, which uses a map of the NYC subway to turn “the New York subway system into an interactive string instrument. Using the MTA’s actual subway schedule, the piece begins in realtime by spawning trains which departed in the last minute, then continues accelerating through a 24 hour loop. The visuals are based on Massimo Vignelli’s 1972 diagram.”

(via Subtraction)

0 comments

Legislative Bills to Track

This started as a short post but obviously isn’t any more. For those unfamiliar with reading bills, like me a few weeks ago, the “Bill Digest” gives you an very simple overview of the legislation, and the “Bill Analysis” or “Bill Report” gives you a more detailed description if available. “Fiscal Notes” tells you what kind of financial impact a bill would have.

Important Bills:

SB 5416 –  This bill would limit the use of toll revenue in the same way that gas taxes are through the 18th Amendment. Senator Haugen, who is the Chair of the Transportation Committee is a sponsor of this legislation. If there is any bill you should fight it is this bill. It will set the exact opposite precedence that needs to be set. Tolls and transit are the keystone our transportation future and they must be integrated, not segregated.

HB 1536 – A temporary $30 dollar car tab tax we previously wrote about. This bill certainly is good but the timing of the bill has been troublesome for Pierce Transit’s Proposition 1. Agencies certainly need more money but there are so many morally imperatives needs this year in Olympia any new taxing authority is going to be hard to get.

HB 1382 – Moves forward with the implementation of High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes on I-405. The end goal of this bill is a continuous one or two lane managed corridor on SR-167 and I-405 from Puyallup to Lynnwood. The bill essentially moves forward a two phase “Option 4”. Phase 1 converts the HOV lanes on I-405 north of Bellevue into HOT lanes in addition to one general purpose lane (existing and new and already funded by existing revenue) between Bellevue and SR-522 in Bothell. Phase 2 is a high capital, unfunded phase and fills in the gap between SR-167 and Bellevue with a two lane HOT system and direct flyover ramps between SR-167 and I-405.

Lots more after the jump. Continue reading “Legislative Bills to Track”

| 25 comments