By Frank on February 14, 2008
I’m a pretty firm believer in alternative energy research, but it sure would be a shame if a mandate to use only renewables ends up derailing the entire California High-Speed Rail project.
Granted, a $40K study is miniscule in the context of a $40B project, and even a study doesn’t commit anyone to anything, so there’s little harm. The danger is that these projects get larded up with everyone else’s pet desires, and the whole thing collapses under its own weight.
Posted in lightrail
By Frank on February 5, 2008
The successor to the TGV launches:
The new AGV trains are set to travel 1,000km (600 miles) in three hours, which is “a new stage in the competition with the airlines”, said Alstom’s Executive Chairman, Patrick Kron, at the ceremony.
With a motor under each carriage, the AGV – which translates as “high-speed railcar” – is unlike the TGV, which has motors only at the back and front.
Via Charles Mudede, who dreams of a 200 mph train to Portland. Keep dreaming, Chuck! I’d settle for running the Talgos at their 124 mph max speed.
Posted in lightrail, transportation finance
By Frank on December 29, 2007
Little Bavaria is getting an Amtrak stop:
Leavenworth, about 20 miles west of Wenatchee on U.S. Route 2, has raised more than $700,000 in local, state and federal funds to build the Icicle Station train stop, said City Councilman and Mayor-elect Rob Eaton, who has championed the project for at least five years.
The federal dollars are a relatively small amount of money that will “have a significant impact on our community and an economic impact on the entire valley,”
Posted in lightrail, tacoma
By Frank on December 23, 2007
The Seattle Times is making sense:
Those pesky rails. Do they stay or go? Did the defeat of Proposition 1, the mondo transportation plan, stir a pulse in Sound Transit to look at the corridor for high-speed transit? All the dismissed questions are in play again.
One element must be unchanged: dual use. Save a rare, north-south route to move people in the future. Protecting transit options does not preclude recreational options.
Posted in HOV Lanes, kcmetro, lightrail
By Frank on December 18, 2007
King County has approved the deal to let the Port of Seattle buy the eastside rail corridor. The County’s approval was important, since they were the ones who had the first rights to buy it.
While there’s nothing final on Boeing Field, the memorandum does say that the Port and the County “shall develop a consultative process for considering major capital improvements at King County International Airport that would substantially affect the Airport’s regional impact.”
The County’s going to move to buy two segments of the trail, but I’m not clear on which segments those are. The P-I’s (and the Times‘) description would seem to correspond roughly with segments A and D of the PSRC’s study (above). But the memo istelf seems to imply that the “Southern Portion” (A+B) will be converted to a trail, while the “Northern Portion” (C+D) will be retained for freight use.
Posted in HOV Lanes, i405, kcmetro, lightrail, monorail
By Frank on December 13, 2007
It’s a day of nostalgia, apparently.
David Brewster interviews Seattle civic legend Jim Ellis, who worked on the 1968 “Forward Thrust” bond package:
The Forward Thrust package in 1968 would have given the area a system of amazing scope. It would have been completed in 1985 and fully paid off in 2008. It would have been heavy rail, largely in subways, with two prongs north, two prongs south, and two prongs on the Eastside. Unlike Portland’s system, which is largely on the street, this system would have been separated from traffic and much faster. It probably would have done a fair amount toward shaping dense neighborhoods and concentrating urban growth. All this at one quarter the local cost of a completed (much smaller and slower) Sound Transit system.
Elsewhere, Seattle Metblogs reminds us that the Green Line — the first line of the monorail system, was set to open December 15, 2007, otherwise known as this Saturday
IIRC, the Monorail folks eventually punted on that start date, saying that htey’d have a starter line open by then, but that it would take a couple more years to get all the way to West Seattle and Ballard.
But that’s all water under the (crumbling) bridge.
Posted in boeingfield, lightrail
By Frank on December 11, 2007
The Port and the County have until the end of the year to buy the Eastside rail line from BNSF. Apparently they’re making good enough progress that Ron Sims has backed down on his ultimatum. Either that, or he’s realized he’s run out of cards.
The bottom line is that the Port wants to buy the corridor, and they have the money and the votes to do so. The point of contention among the commissioners is what to do with the tracks. But here’s soemthing that should give everyone pause:
When the three-way agreement among the port, the county and BNSF Railway was made public Nov. 2, the deal’s announcement included the stipulation that BNSF would remove the single track from a little-used section of line between Woodinville and Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park in Renton. That section would be leased to the county, which would lay the trail on top of the rail bed after BNSF had cleaned up any contaminated soil.
You can see why Sims doesn’t want to keep the tracks in place. Having the County on the hook for any soil contamination would not be fun for anyone (assuming there is actually contamination). Better to let BNSF clean it up before the public takes ownership, even if that means taking out the tracks.
Finally, I think you have trust the transit agencies here. If they don’t think there’s the ridership to support transit, they’re probably right, and it’s going to be an uphill battle to do it without their support. There are just too many moving parts (literally!). Remember the last time some folks tried to do an end-run around the transit planners?
Update: Link fixed.
Posted in HOV Lanes, kcmetro, lightrail, monorail, RTID
By Frank on November 30, 2007
One more thing about the P-I article I referenced earlier. They should not be using quotes like this without context:
It is possible to have passenger trains and pedestrians both use the corridor at a much lower cost, said Bruce Agnew, the director of the Cascadia Center at Discovery Institute, which just commissioned a study that found it would be possible to modernize the 42 miles of track to accommodate small diesel commuter trains for $37 million.
“We need to look very closely and not make hasty decisions, like ripping out 31 miles of perfectly usable track,” Agnew said.
$37M is just the cost of upgrading all the track. You might ask Mr. Agnew why, if the track is “perfectly usable,” it will cost $37M to “modernize” it. And indeed, if you read the Cascadia Center’s report, it advocates “ripping out” nearly all of the track and replacing it:
Costs were preliminarily estimated by Fay as follows: tie and rail replacement, $33.6 million ($800,000 per mile X 42 miles); bridge replacement, $3.42 million(1,140 feet of bridge at $3,000 per foot). Other costs are yet to be determined, including stations; equipment plus storage and repair facilities; project EIS and engineering.
The PSRC estimates it will cost $300M to do a proper rail line, including stations and, you know, actual trains. That’s the number the P-I should be using.
Posted in HOV Lanes, kcmetro, lightrail
By Frank on November 30, 2007
Ron Sims will take his ball and go home if the Port doesn’t commit to ripping out the tracks. But it sounds like the port has the votes on the commission to buy it anyway, even if Sims won’t lease it for a trail.
There’s a lot of posturing going on here, and so it’s hard to know what people’s real motives are. The Port does not want the corridor for freight use. If it was a viable freight corridor, BNSF wouldn’t be selling it. Remember, this whole thing got started because of King County Airport (Boeing Field). The Port’s ultimate, ultimate goal is to keep King County from building a passenger terminal at Boeing Field and luring away Alaska and Southwest Airlines.
Earlier this month, I praised Sims for getting such a good deal out of the port, since he’d get to keep the airport and get cheap use of the corridor. Now it turns out that the deal may be too good to be true. Sims hasn’t left himself many cards to play here, assuming the Port is willing to buy the right-of-way with or without him. His ace-in-the-hole is the airport. With the Port’s decision expected soon, I expect we’ll be hearing more about how Boeing Field fits into this in the next few weeks.
Photo of the Wilburton Trestle by Wikipedia user brianhe. Do you really want to jog or bike across that thing? Not me!
Posted in HOV Lanes, kcmetro, lightrail, monorail
By Frank on November 22, 2007
See here:
Contrary to popular opinion, since the mid 1990s, we have seen an explosion in rail demand and service, primarily focused among commuter and short to medium intercity routes. From 1995 to 2005, commuter rail usage grew over 20 percent, from 352 to 423 million passenger trips. Over the same period, 421 miles of new commuter and light rail track has been built.
And yet, here in the Northwest, many continue to view rail as some kind of exotic boondoggle, despite the fact that the rest of America is interested in building more and more of it. Buses are not an acceptable alternative.
The article goes on to argue for a dedicated national rail funding source, and the dismantling of Amtrak’s long-distance coastal routes in favor of targeted investment in high-speed 100- to 500-mile routes, something I’ve long favored.
Posted in lightrail
Sound Transit Latest News
Recent Comments