Cascadia plan for the Puget Sound after the failure of Prop 1

Transportation Action Plan For Puget Sound

By: Cascadia Staff
Cascadia Center
November 15, 2007


Transportation Action Plan for Puget Sound
Cascadia Center For Regional Development
November 15, 2007

ON NOVEMBER 6, 2007, Puget Sound voters rejected Proposition One, a "roads and transit" ballot measure that many argued cost too much for too long and delivered too little. In the wake of what some view as a dramatic setback, however, we see the opposite: The failed ballot measure is an opportunity for the region to begin to confront and solve our transportation challenges once and for all. These challenges in recent years have been shaped not only by population and economic growth in Puget Sound, but also by climate change and growing U.S. dependence on foreign oil. More than ever before, what we do here at home in Washington state to boost mobility while protecting the environment will be influenced by - and will necessarily influence - our nation and world. We must embrace this opportunity.

Central Puget Sound and the state of Washington must begin by squarely embracing innovation. Transportation finance, decision-making, technology and environmental protection must be viewed through the lens of the future that is already upon us - one in which relying primarily on big-ticket ballot measures (and public resources only) has become as dubious as the entire roads versus transit debate. As our region's population swells a projected 52 percent during the next 30 years, we will need to spend billions on both roads and transit. We must ensure projects really serve their highest and best uses: providing reliable mobility of people and goods, and helping to stimulate economic development.

We must repair and dramatically alter the way transportation is addressed in the region, especially in our urban areas. Two important oversight panels, appointed by two separate governors, concluded that our multiple, overlapping local and regional transportation agencies have hurt, not helped, accountability and effectiveness. The conclusions reached by the Regional Transportation Commission and the Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation, appointed by Governors Gregoire and Locke, respectively, should be reexamined.

But the steps we take next are not just about our region. Smart choices we make on transportation fuels can help change the world around us. Today, the price of oil, which was $23 a barrel five years ago, is approaching $100 a barrel. Drivers in Washington state now pay 65 cents per gallon more than they did only one year ago. Our addiction to oil, which fuels 97 percent of our transportation needs, is not only bad for the environment, but is a clear national security risk. As James Woolsey, director of the CIA during President Clinton's administration, says, we are in effect financing both sides of the war on terror. Flexible fuel, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles would dramatically cut greenhouse gas emissions from transportation and cut our addiction to foreign oil. The Pacific Northwest, steeped in innovation, should be the first U.S. region to embrace this technology.

Each major part of a regional transportation strategy - finance, leadership, technology and environmental protection - must support the whole. The Western Washington and Central Puget Sound regions must take a comprehensive approach to designing our transportation future. Starting no later than January 2008, we recommend that our region's leaders begin engineering sweeping changes in transportation. To meet the bracing challenges ahead, political and business leaders must unify around a shared and truly progressive vision. Further discussions are needed, but we believe the key elements of the right plan are here, in our Transportation Action Plan for Puget Sound.

THE WAY FORWARD: TRANSPORTATION ACTION PLAN FOR PUGET SOUND

SR 520, ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT AND I-5 REBUILD - USING TOLLING & PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PENSION FUND PARTNERSHIPS

TOLLING

# Legislature authorizes a toll on the SR 520 Bridge in 2009 and (for our proposed) Alaskan Way Viaduct bypass tunnel. Small portion of tolls earmarked for high capacity transit on the 520 corridor and surface transit enhancements on Seattle's Waterfront.


# Expand tolling in 2010 to the express lanes only on Interstates 5 and 90 initially. Treat these as HOT (high occupancy-toll) "premium lanes."


# Reconfigure express lanes within existing I-5 footprint to three bi-directional express HOT lanes allowing two-way flows and eliminating major bottlenecks at Northgate and the I-5/I-90 interchange when directions are reversed.


# On I-90, tolling can pay for expanded Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service rather than light rail, and cross-subsidize the 520 corridor. New passenger ferry routes in the King County Ferry District Plan should also be factored in the cross-lake non-SOV strategy.


PENSION FUND PARTNERSHIPS

# Change state law to authorize "alliance contracting" and project cost-sharing between WSDOT and public employee and building trade union pension funds for SR 520, Alaska Way Viaduct bypass tunnel replacement and I-5 rebuild.


# We recommend, wherever possible, using union and public employee pension funds as primary partners for major public highway/transit projects - with foreign or private equity investors as partners only as necessary, and only under carefully-structured terms.


# In any such partnerships, the public sector should retain control of transportation assets and toll rates to protect system users and ensure the tolls also benefit transit. (Union pension funds were used previously in construction of the Pacific Place garage.)


# British Columbia offers a remarkable example of how private equity capital was leveraged with public resources to finish major infrastructure projects like expansion of Sea to Sky Highway before the 2010 Olympic Games


HOT LANE/BUS RAPID TRANSIT/LIGHT RAIL NETWORK (KING/PIERCE/SNOHOMISH COUNTIES)

# Voters approved the "Rapid Ride" BRT enhancements in King County last year. Why not expand it to the three counties through partnerships with Sound Transit and its successful ST EXPRESS bus service? Funding could come through a portion of our proposed regional HOT lane tolls, as well as potential sales and MVET taxes levied at regional level.


# Amend I-405/SR 167 master plans to extend 167 to Port of Tacoma and construct one additional HOT lane (rather than two new general purpose lanes) from Renton to Bellevue on I-405. They would be twinned with existing HOV lane to provide two continuous HOT/HOV lanes adjacent to non-tolled, general-purpose lanes from Lynnwood to Tacoma. Operationally, they would fit well with the state's current billion dollar investments in I-405 and SR 167.


# By 2020, central Puget Sound would be ringed by a complete HOT/BRT system with expanded park and ride lots serving as major transportation gateways.


# Sound Transit should complete light rail to Northgate per the 1996 Sound Move plan. (Note: Portland's Tri-Met partnered with Bechtel to extend the rail line to Portland International Airport.)


SR 520/I-405: TRANSIT HUB, CORRIDOR AND GATEWAY

BRT AND UPGRADED PARK AND RIDES

# Bus Rapid Transit should get a new look on the East-West State Route 520 corridor. Examine potential funding partnerships with union/public employee pension funds, private developers and major employers.


# Link the Microsoft Connector, and other private and public transit choices to greatly expand Park and Ride lots such as South Kirkland. Include electrification for plug-in hybrid vehicle recharge, use development fees and provide concierge services.


I-405 CORRIDOR: SAVE EASTSIDE RAIL

# In the adjoining I-405 north-south corridor, regional leaders should ensure that lightweight, biofuel-burning, bike-toting Diesel Multiple Unit self-powered rail cars ply the BNSF eastside rail line - adjacent to a string of upgraded park and ride lots modeled after the South Kirkland facility. The enhanced park-and-rides and DMU rail service would complement the planned bike and walking trail paralleling the rail line.


# Given the electoral meltdown of Prop. 1 and its hallmark extension of light rail to the north, south and east, it seems unbelievable to us that public agencies would agree to the ripping up of 31 miles of useable north-south rail track from Renton to Snohomish for a recreational trail with a vague promise to reconsider multi-billion dollar "high capacity transit" in 20 years-plus. Once the rail is ripped out it will never return. This is the result of a signed Memorandum Of Understanding between the Port of Seattle and King County.


# Cascadia has hired respected BNSF retired operations executives to walk the entire 42-mile corridor (the 11-mile Woodinville-Snohomish section would remain in use for freight rail) to see how much it would cost to upgrade the track for Diesel Multiple Unit trains going 40 miles per hour. Private sector developers would contribute to station development.


# Sound Transit has ample current funding to contract for train and BRT service between East King and Snohomish counties. Commuters from Snohomish County and South King County could transfer at the Park and Ride from the north-south rail and trail corridor to the East-West 520 BRT corridor. But saving the Eastside rail corridor will require quick action.


FREIGHT RAIL INVESTMENT TO BOOST I-5 COMMUTER RAIL CAPACITY

# State-recommended investments in Stampede Pass would allow faster movement of freight between the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma and the eastern U.S. This would also allow for expansion of Sound Transit's Sounder commuter rail between Everett and Tacoma by freeing up north-south track capacity. The proposed Eastside DMU rail line along I-405 (see above) would connect via existing track to the more westerly and parallel Everett to Tacoma line.


REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNTABILITY

# For five years, Cascadia and others have pushed for a consolidation of the myriad of transportation agencies in the region under a single unified board of directors, citing the successes in Vancouver, BC, Portland, San Diego and Denver in passing major regional transportation investment programs. We are always told by the establishment, "we don't have a leadership problem, we have a funding problem." Now, following Prop. 1's defeat, we have a political problem; elected leaders going in different directions.


# A Regional Transportation Commission was appointed by the legislature and Gov. Gregoire, and chaired by John Stanton and Norm Rice. Its strong and well-reasoned recommendation for a unified regional transportation board of directors in Puget Sound passed the state senate in 2007 but was blocked in the House. The Stanton-Rice report should be the basis for reforming central Puget Sound transportation leadership. We need a unified, single board of directors with powers to plan, fund and prioritize projects and consolidate agencies (similar to Vancouver and Portland).


# A regional transportation board of directors should:

1) Consolidate current regional transportation agencies;
2) Consist of elected and appointed members;
3) Include an advisory council;
4) Propose transportation projects and funding voters will approve
5) Maintain oversight and accountability on current projects, while continuing to plan for the future.


# County borders are increasingly irrelevant. Alter MPO/RTPO statutes to establish regional transportation decision-making bodies for Central Puget Sound (King, Pierce, Snohomish, Kitsap, Thurston), North Puget Sound (Snohomish, Skagit, Whatcom, Island, San Juan), and Southwest Washington - for the purpose of multi-county transportation project planning and funding. Snohomish could be part of two different regional groups, if it so chooses.


# The three regional transportation decision-making bodies would be tasked to coordinate and pool resources with WSDOT for these programs: I-5 enhancements (including cross-Columbia River bridge), freight and passenger rail improvements (coordinated with British Columbia and Oregon), multi-county and special needs transit, and corridor-based technology improvements (i.e. truck parking, diesel emission reduction and alternative fuel/plug-in stations at I-5 highway rest areas.


FLEX FUEL, PLUG-IN HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES

# Cascadia Center serves on the Governor's Climate Action Team, and recommends that state and local government fleet purchases of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles should be encouraged and expanded. Either through legislative action or executive order, Washington's state government should commit to purchasing plug-ins when they become available.


# We recommend that funding be made available for state and local governments to convert standard hybrids to plug-ins. These vehicles should work with the grid, and funding would be necessary to assure they are compliant.


# Another objective should be to establish an alternative fuels infrastructure at park and ride lots, interstate truck stops, and passenger vehicle rest areas.


PASSENGER FERRIES

# The legislature should enable a Sound-wide passenger-only ferry inter-local agreement among ports, transit districts, local governments, private operators, and the state ferries to pool resources for passenger-only ferries and coordinate regional routes. The PSRC study in progress will further articulate how a regional passenger-only ferry system can best be facilitated.


# King County has formed a passenger-only ferry district and Pierce, Skagit and Whatcom also operate ferries. All would benefit from coordination at the Sound level while allowing local communities to custom design their passenger-only ferry service and encourage public-private partnerships.


# In addition to providing direct non-SOV connections between growing cities in Puget Sound (Return of the Mosquito Fleet), new technology passenger ferries could provide more boat building jobs to our urban and maritime industries and - as in the Bay Area - an emergency transportation network in case of an earthquake.


TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION

# More than 400 transportation projects have been funded by the 2003 and 2005 state gas tax increases, but some are clearly recognized to be proving not feasible due to a range of factors. The legislature should identify those projects and redirect the money to regional traffic signal synchronization projects, which will help reduce traffic congestion in the sort term. The Puget Sound Regional Council's new Traffic Operations Committee has an excellent framework for action, including test results from recent corridor coordination efforts.


Direct comments to Bruce Agnew (bagnew@discovery.org), Steve Marshall (smarshall@discovery.org), Mike Wussow (mikew@discovery.org), and Matt Rosenberg (mattr@discovery.org).

Bus Rapid Transit - Fewer Bus Routes, More Frequency

Fewer Bus Routes, More Frequency
Matt Rosenberg 5/21/07

On days when telecommuting won't work, I park my car on a side street in West Seattle and take the bus downtown. After one or two round trips per week for four months, I'm not on the verge of driving instead, but I'm pretty unimpressed with King County Metro's on-time performance. The #54 is regularly five to ten minutes late getting to its Alaska Street stops on the way downtown, and two days in a row last week, between 2:30 and 4:00 p.m., the #55 bus from downtown back to West Seattle was running at least ten minutes late. The first time, when it finally did arrive, we sat through a green light while the driver finished up a personal cell phone call. The next day, more than 10 minutes after the #55 was to have left a stop two blocks north of where I was waiting on First Avenue, it still hadn't showed, and I boarded another bus headed near enough to where my car was parked.

For several years, riders on some Metro routes have been able to use certain cell phones or handheld Internet devices to tell when their buses are really expected to arrive. Now, a research project underway at the University of Washington is examining improvements in bus tracking via wireless Internet and global positioning system technologies. More and better information will be helpful, but, knowing the bus is running late doesn't get it there on time.

We may need to really re-think how our region's bus system is arranged. Quite possibly, what's needed are fewer routes, more greatly concentrated along selected major corridors, running to and from designated transit hubs with increased frequency. Add to this a greater reliance on paratransit options for the last few miles.

Punctuality is a minimum baseline expectation in the world of business and education. Managers and elected officials need to ensure their public transit systems conform to that expectation, and convey added value through speedier service delivery.

Microsoft launches its own hi-tech Bus Rapid Transit service

Paul Joseph Brown / P-I

Aaron Edwards, above, is general manager for MV Transportation, the company that will operate the 14 buses in the system.
9/7/07

Microsoft giving workers free ride -- with its own bus service

Wi-Fi-enabled system will debut this month

Windows, Office, Xbox, Zune -- and now, a regional bus system.

That's the surprise addition Microsoft Corp. made to its portfolio Thursday, announcing its own bus service -- complete with on-board wireless Internet access -- to shuttle its employees from their neighborhoods around the region to Redmond and back home again.

The 14-bus Microsoft "Connector" system, to debut later this month, was announced as the company unveiled plans to open new offices in Seattle's South Lake Union and Pioneer Square neighborhoods.

At launch, the bus system will handle no more than 1,000 employees a day. That's only a slice of Microsoft's more than 35,000 employees in the region.

But the fact that Microsoft would find it necessary to take such a step added new fuel to the debate over comprehensive regional transportation reform.

"This is something that the county bus system should be doing and they're not," said Stephen Gerritson, executive director for Commuter Challenge, a Seattle non-profit. "To some extent, Metro is dropping the ball here."

Even as bus systems struggle to add routes and companies expand their van pools, the regional transportation system is maxed out, said state Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle.

The region faces two major obstacles, said Murray, vice chairman of the Senate transportation committee. First: "Our population has grown so much and our employment base has grown so much that our transit system has not kept up with it."

Second: Roads and bridges are failing and aging, he said.

Microsoft drew praise from commuter groups Thursday.

"It is a great corporate decision to take a look at where the transportation system isn't meeting the needs of your commuters and fill in the gaps," said John Resha, general manager of the Urban Mobility Group, a partnership between King County, the city of Seattle and the Downtown Seattle Association. "The system we've got can't evolve quickly enough."

Will it catch on?

Microsoft isn't the first company to offer free bus service to its employees. Google offers about 150 bus runs daily across the San Francisco Bay Area, to and from its Mountain View, Calif., campus, spokeswoman Sunny Gettinger said.

"Part of the reason that we do it is because we really want people to have the opportunity to be able to work at Google in Mountain View and not feel like they're contributing to environmental issues by commuting," she said.

Gettinger, who uses the Google bus service, said it can end up being another place for employees to meet face-to-face. She has been able to resolve work-related issues just by running into the right person on the bus. Google has offices in Seattle and Kirkland but doesn't offer bus service in the Seattle area.

"I hope it will catch on. It's a fantastic idea. (Microsoft is) taking personal responsibility for the traffic that their company is generating," said Elaine Somers, a Seattle environmental protection specialist with the Environmental Protection Agency.

But others said that Microsoft probably will remain among the very few.

"This is not cheap what they're doing," said Kevin Desmond, general manager at King County Metro Transit. "Microsoft employees enjoy good benefits that many employers would give their right arm to be able to provide."

Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, acknowledged it is expensive but declined to say how much the company is spending.

The pilot program will include 14 buses, including seven large coaches with bike storage, and electrical outlets at each seat, in addition to Wi-Fi. Seven midsize coaches will be used for neighborhood pickups. There will be multiple runs in the morning and afternoon, Smith said.

Running one bus for one hour costs the Metro system about $110, which includes the driver, mechanic and fuel, Desmond said. At that rate, it would cost $9,240 per day to run 14 buses for six hours, or $2.4 million per year, not including weekends, the cost of new buses or Wi-Fi service.

Transit reform

Smith took the opportunity to voice the company's support for Proposition 1, the road and transit package on the November ballot. Microsoft's rapid growth has contributed significantly to clogged roadways, particularly on such arteries as the Evergreen Point Bridge.

He noted that the bus system builds on the company's existing efforts with bus passes for employees, car pooling, hybrid cross-campus shuttles and other initiatives.

"Microsoft has many short-term solutions, like the Connector, for transportation issues that our employees face," Smith said. "But our region needs a long-term solution for the transportation bottleneck that the entire region faces."

Under a 1991 Washington state law, employers with more than 100 workers are required to provide some sort of transportation program and must encourage alternatives to one-person cars.

The state offers tax incentives to businesses that provide ride sharing and public-transportation passes.

King County Metro works with hundreds of companies, said Desmond, who applauded Microsoft's system. For example, in a couple of weeks, Metro will beef up bus service to Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center -- an option partially funded by the hospital. Also, most of its monthly passes are sold through employers, who then give them to employees as benefits.

Microsoft worked with King County Metro Transit and Sound Transit on its new idea, Desmond said.

"We talked with them directly about how we route buses to meet their bus needs," he said. "There were elements of some of their route ideas which would have had a competitive nature with us."

Metro also works closely with The Boeing Co., which adds 70,000 commuters here each day. "We share data with Metro and Snohomish County," said John Hendricks, who manages commuting issues for Boeing nationally. "We run demographic data on where people live and what time they start to try to build better routes."

Boeing employees are avid users of van pools, though that system is suffering from a shortage of vehicles, Hendricks said. But the company would not consider a private bus system because of liability and the varying needs of employees, he said.

Employee needs

Besides reducing traffic congestion and minimizing air pollution, keeping employees out of bumper-to-bumper traffic also keeps them happy.

Microsoft's bus system coincides with a broader effort, spearheaded by human resources chief Lisa Brummel, to better recruit and retain employees amid stiff competition for talent against Google and others.

Smith said the idea for the bus system grew out of employee suggestions in response to an internal blog maintained by Chris Owens, Microsoft's general manager of real estate and facilities.

The wireless routers to be used for Internet access in the Microsoft buses are manufactured by Seattle-based Junxion Inc. They receive Internet signals through cellular data networks. They're also used by companies including Google and Yahoo and transit agencies such as King County Metro.

Microsoft employees will be able to reserve seats and track buses online.

"If demand grows, we'll listen to our employees -- they're really the ones who came up with this idea -- and we'll invest more," Smith said.

A century of Puget Sound transportation history in one page

Interurban Rail Transit in King County and the Puget Sound Region -- A Snapshot
HistoryLink.org Essay 2667
1/1/07


Electric interurban railways played a major part in defining early twentieth century transportation routes and growth patterns in King County. Early roads were primitive and before the development of the first inter-city rail service in 1899, most shippers and commuters on Puget Sound relied on water transport and "Mosquito Fleet" steamers for mobility. By 1912, private interurban lines connected Tacoma, Seattle, and Everett, but modern highways would soon offer fatal competition. Seattle-Tacoma service ended in 1928 with the opening of Highway 99, and Seattle-Everett service ended 11 years later (Seattle ripped up its streetcar lines in 1941). After the rejection of previous rail rapid transit proposals, regional voters approved a Sound Transit system in 1996. In September 2000, Sound Transit inaugurated commuter rail service between Seattle and Tacoma.

The Advent of Electric Traction

In 1887, Frank J. Sprague demonstrated the first electric streetcar in Richmond, Virginia. His invention, dubbed electric traction, offered a new, cleaner, and more efficient way to move people which, combined with the safety elevator, would permit much denser urban development. It also created one of the first commercially profitable uses for electricity, preceding the spread of electric lighting, industrial machinery, and domestic appliances.

Two years later, local entrepreneur Frank Osgood (1852-1934), converted his existing horse-drawn streetcar lines in downtown Seattle to electricity. Despite fears that the line would magnetize pocket watches and zap pedestrians with runaway bolts of electricity, the line's debut on March 30, 1889 went flawlessly -- and the cars kept running through the Great Seattle Fire of the following June.

That same year, Fred Sander launched construction of an electric line to the southern municipality of Georgetown, which was completed in 1893. J. K. Edmiston began construction of an electric railway to Renton (later the Seattle, Renton & Southern Railway) in 1889 and completed it seven years later. In 1890, L. H. Griffith extended his existing Seattle streetcar line to the City of Ballard. Although Georgetown and Ballard later annexed to Seattle, these lines constitute King County's first "interurban" systems.

An Electric Octopus

At this time, streetcar services and most other utilities were privately financed and owned, although their performance was subject to charters or "franchises" granted by cities and other local governments. The rapid multiplication of uncoordinated streetcar and interurban lines in the late nineteenth century begged for consolidation.

This was initially achieved by the giant Stone & Webster Management Company, founded in Boston by engineer-entrepreneurs Charles A. Stone and Edwin S. Webster. They attracted significant capital for acquisition and/or development of urban utilities and transportation systems across the nation.

In 1898, Stone & Webster representatives visited King County for the first time. The company soon acquired the region's first hydroelectric plant at Snoqualmie Falls and retained local banker Jacob Furth (1840-1914) as its local agent for taking control of Seattle-area utilities and street railways. Furth did his job well, and Stone & Webster's subsidiary Seattle Electric Company owned the city's 22 streetcar lines within one year.

The concentration of so much control of vital urban systems in private hands alarmed local reformers and progressives, who won approval of a restrictive streetcar franchise (including nickel fares) in 1902. That same year, Seattle voters approved bonds allowing construction of a municipal hydroelectric plant on the Cedar River, which led to creation of Seattle City Light and a long "power struggle" between public and private utilities.

An Interurban Empire

Stone & Webster and its backers wielded control through an array of interlocking holding and operating companies. One of the first local combines was called the Puget Sound International Railway & Power Company, whose name expressed its financiers' vision of an interurban transportation and utility system extending from Olympia, Washington, to Vancouver, British Columbia. The primary local corporate instrument, however, was the Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Company, which succeeded the Seattle Electric Company and various interurban lines, and later evolved into Puget Power and today's Washington Energy.

The private utility's first major step was acquisition of an incomplete interurban railway from Seattle to Tacoma, which had been launched by Henry Bucey in 1901. Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power completed the line, which it called the Puget Sound Electric Railway, and inaugurated service on September 25, 1902.

Development of a comparable line to Seattle's major northern neighbor, Everett, proved more daunting. Fred Sander began work on such a system in 1900 but it took him six years to cover six miles from Ballard to Hall's Lake in north Seattle. Stone & Webster took over the enterprise in 1908 and inaugurated its first Everett-Seattle service on April 30, 1910.

That same year, work began on a link between Mount Vernon and Bellingham. In 1912, Stone & Webster created a new subsidiary, Pacific Northwest Traction Company, and commenced construction of the missing link between Everett and Mount Vernon. This was never completed.

Back in Seattle

Public grievances with Stone & Webster's aging streetcars and increasingly erratic service boiled over on March 7, 1911, when voters approved municipal purchase of the existing Rainier Avenue interurban line to Renton. The owners reneged on the original sales price, and Seattle ended up spending the bonds to build a new streetcar line to Ballard.

Stone & Webster found its streetcar finances hobbled by franchise-mandated fares and growing labor unrest, despite the ridership generated by World War I defense workers. In a controversial move, Seattle Mayor Ole Hanson (1874-1940) negotiated a $15 million purchase of the entire city streetcar system, which voters approved on November 5, 1918.

The high price (three times market value) and resulting debt crippled municipal streetcar operations for the rest of their existence. Various refinance schemes failed and the city converted to buses and "trackless trolleys" in 1940. The old streetcar rails were torn up and sold to Japan for scrap.

End of the Line?

Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power retained ownership of its interurban lines, but progress on Highway 99 and the post-war explosion of private trucks and automobiles ultimately doomed the system. Seattle-Tacoma interurban rail service ended on December 30, 1928. By then, the company was already offering interurban bus service on its North Coast Lines, but it remained committed to the Seattle-Everett route and built a handsome bus-rail depot at 9th Avenue and Stewart Street in Seattle (now the Greyhound Terminal).

The independent Seattle & Rainier Valley Railway (the Renton interurban) struggled to survive under incompetent management. Weary of accidents and unsafe tracks, the City of Seattle revoked its franchise and the line folded on January 1, 1937.

Federal anti-trust regulators pulled the plug on Stone & Webster's national utility cartel in 1934, and the firm reorganized under a local board of directors. In a sign of changing attitudes, Highway 99's new Aurora Bridge opened in 1932 without provision for interurban rails. Anticipating Seattle's removal of local streetcar tracks, the company finally abandoned the Seattle-Everett railway on February 20, 1939.

Anti-trust regulators intervened again in the late 1940s, forcing Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power to sell off its remaining interurban bus services. In 1950, Seattle voters narrowly authorized City Light to acquire the private firm's remaining assets and services within the city limits, ending nearly a half-century of political and economic competition.

Back on Track

Following World War II, local urban planners and reformers made repeated attempts to recreate a regional rail transit system to counteract suburban sprawl and growing traffic congestion. King County voters were not convinced and rejected various mass transit plans in 1958, 1962, 1968, and 1970.

Attitudes began to shift in 1972, when voters did approve Metro Transit, an all-bus system now operated by King County. A two-to-one majority of King County voters endorsed a 1988 advisory ballot for accelerated development of a rail system, and the 1990 Growth Management Act and related state legislation authorized serious planning.

In 1995, voters in King, Snohomish, and Pierce Counties rejected a $6.7 billion Regional Transit Authority (RTA) proposal for light rail, standard-gauge commuter rail, and express buses. A scaled-back "Sound Transit" plan, valued at $3.9 billion, won approval on November 5, 1996.

On September 18, 2000, the first Sound Transit "Sounder" commuter trains rolled between Seattle and Tacoma almost 98 years to the day after interurban cars linked the two cities. Sounder runs are to be extended south to the Tacoma suburb of Lakewood and north to Everett, virtually retracing the region's original interurban rail system six decades later.

Snohomish County - About Community Transit

12/31/07Community Transit is the main public transit authority of Snohomish County, Washington. It operates buses within Snohomish County and to downtown Seattle, the University of Washington, and Seattle's Eastside suburbs in King County.

History
Community Transit service began October 4, 1976. The original member cities were Lynnwood, Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace, Brier, Woodway, Marysville, and Snohomish. Monroe and Lake Stevens joined the system in 1977, and two years later they were joined by Stanwood, Granite Falls, Mukilteo, and Sultan. Arlington joined in 1980, and was followed by Gold Bar, Index, and Startup in 1981. Oso and Darrington joined in 1982, Mill Creek joined in 1983. The most recent to join was Bothell, in 1992. The only city in the county that maintains its own transit system is Everett, the county seat (Everett Transit), though Community Transit does run some buses there. Transit Services A Community Transit bus located in Lynnwood, WA Community Transit currently operates local bus service, commuter bus service, vanpools, and paratransit services. Local Bus Service Community Transit currently operates 33 (as of 2007) routes in Snohomish County[1]. These routes, covering a service area of 3,367 square kilometers (1,300 square miles)[1] serve most communities within the county, with the exception of certain smaller communities on U.S. Highway 2 east of Gold Bar.

The vast majority of routes operate from the early morning hours until the evening, with reduced schedules on weekends and holidays. Certain routes, such as routes that travel to Boeing's Everett facility, operate only in a peak direction and/or only at certain times (to Boeing in the morning, away from Boeing in the afternoon), while other routes can have variations depending on the time of day. Usually, but not always, these 'alternate' routes have a distinct route number to help commuters differentiate (e.g., the 200/201/202 route, which takes one of three paths at different times of day). However, some routes, like the 280 route which serves Granite Falls, simply add on extra sections at various times of day without changing the route number. This is usually the case when the additional routing would not otherwise interfere with the normal route.

Commuter Bus Service

In addition to local service, Community Transit also operates 31 commuter routes in conjunction with Sound Transit[1]. Most of these routes operate in a peak-flow capacity, taking passengers from various communities to Seattle, Bellevue, Redmond, or the University District in the morning hours and bringing them back in the afternoon and evening. A few routes, under the direction of Sound Transit, provide round trip service throughout the day to major destinations in the county, such as Everett or Lynnwood. Most commuter buses serve one of the 20 park and ride lots within the county as well as limited stops within the communities they originate from.

Vanpool Services

Community Transit also provides vanpool service. These allow for more flexibility than traditional fixed-bus routes in that the riders--who also take turns driving the van--decide their own routing, thus allowing non-traditional commuters, including those without access to fixed routes or those whose transport needs are not met by fixed routes, to still utilize transit services. In exchange for a monthly fee that varies depending on mileage and size of van, Community Transit provides the vehicle, maintenance, fuel, insurance, and other miscellaneous needs. With 333 vans as of August 2007, the vanpool service is the third largest in the United States.

Paratransit Services

Community Transit also provides paratransit services for those who live within a three-quarters of a mile of a local fixed-bus route. This service, called DART or Dial-A-Ride Transit, provides those with conditions that prevent normal bus usage to reach their destinations

SWIFT BRT

Main article: SWIFT Bus Rapid Transit Community Transit is currently planning a Bus Rapid Transit line along Highway 99 between Aurora Village Transit Center and Everett. It is currently scheduled to open in 2008. The "Double Tall" Community Transit Alexander Dennis Enviro 500 Community Transit put a double-decker bus into service on August 1, 2007. An Enviro 500 manufactured by Alexander Dennis Limited, it will be used on commuter routes between Seattle and various points in Snohomish County during its first year in operation. Citizens Area Transit is one of three transit agencies that operate double-decker buses in the United States for non-sightseeing purposes, the others being Unitrans of Davis, California and Citizens Area Transit of Las Vegas, Nevada (which operates the "Deuce") [9]

Public Schools

Community Transit and Edmonds Woodway High School of Edmonds

have an arrangement for all students to take the public buses instead of the traditional school buses. Students receive free bus passes at the beginning of the year, and schools buses are only used for athletes and other extracurricular activities.

Sims wants to use SR 520 tolls to pay for transit

Pay for transit as part of tolls package for 520 bridge

By RON SIMS
GUEST COLUMNIST

Not too long ago policymakers believed talk of highway tolling was taboo; they thought the public wasn't ready to consider tolling. However, a survey of 500 King County residents shows the public is way ahead of policymakers. The poll found 89 percent of people rate congestion relief as urgent or extremely urgent. The poll also found resounding support for variable tolling on state Route 520 as one solution.

We have worked the congestion issue with the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Puget Sound Regional Council and received a $127 million federal Urban Partnership Grant to fund new tolling technology and to pay for 35 additional buses in the 520 corridor. The grant, which will put 1 million new bus passenger trips on the corridor each year, requires variable tolling on state Route 520 by September 2009.

Understanding that variable tolling is the best means to reduce congestion and replace the 520 bridge without new taxes, Gov. Chris Gregoire proposed her 520 finance plan in January. I applaud the governor for her leadership. The House has already taken the first step toward this goal when it passed the 520 tolling policy and finance bills. What is needed now is specific language to finance transit as part of the package.

Variable tolling is market driven. Tolls would be lower when fewer people are on the road and higher during peak traffic hours, much like the way movie theaters charge less for matinees when fewer people come to the theater. Because half the drivers on the road during peak times are not commuting to work, variable tolling reduces congestion by giving drivers more options and encouraging people to combine trips, drive more at off-peak times, car pool or use improved transit.

The poll showed nearly two-thirds of county residents think the Legislature should support a 520 package that includes tolling, and 82 percent support early tolling to pay for a new bridge. The poll also shows:

# 82 percent support tolling over increased gas and excise taxes.

# 84 percent support tolling over general tax increases.

# 63 percent agree both 520 and the I-90 bridge should be tolled to prevent drivers from diverting to I-90 to avoid the tolls and to generate money for I-90 maintenance and more transit.

# Experience in San Diego shows even low-income residents support variable tolling over taxes because it gives them choices and is less burdensome.

King County residents seek choice. They want the opportunity to choose to pay the toll, travel at a different time or take transit. In order for that choice to be meaningful, we need enhanced transit in the 520 corridor. Support for variable tolling on both bridges drops 20 points when transit investments are not included. The good news here is that people see transit as a reliable option and are getting on the bus across the county in record numbers. Metro Transit's January 2008 ridership is up a record 18.7 percent compared with January 2005.

We've made a good first step; let's not stop here. Let's listen. Let's pass a 520 finance package this session that funds enhanced transit giving us all real choice. If we don't, we'll be missing a historic opportunity to reduce congestion.
Ron Sims is King County executive.

KingCo Metro fires 8 guards with criminal records

KingCo Metro fires 8 guards with criminal records

King County Metro fired eight private security guards for the Seattle bus tunnel after the sheriff's office discovered they had criminal records.

The records came to light after one guard filed a police report in which she was the victim.

King County sheriff's spokesman John Urquhart (URK'-hart) says that turned up an arrest warrant on a drug offense, prompting the broader review. Another guard was wanted for domestic violence and six others had misdemeanor convictions.

The sheriff's office runs a transit police unit, which has two commissioned officers in the tunnel. Metro also hires two private guards for each bus tunnel station.

Private security guards are allowed to work 60 days on a temporary permit while their background is checked.

___

holders 6

labels