DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 4 — Service

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 4 — Service ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¡ ¨ ¦ ¢ © ¦ © SERVICE Ensuring delivery of high-quality transit service is of paramount interest to the City of Seattle. Transit service in Seattle is largely funded and operated by King County Metro Transit and Sound Transit, but the City has established a role in funding transit service, mostly in the form of subsi- dizing additional runs on overcrowded bus routes. Given Metro’s large service area and %nancial challenges, the City should prepare to play an increasingly active role in funding service over the next 20 years. The City's primary transit service objective is to ensure mobility in Seattle. In times of economic recession, the City may need to focus on maintaining current service levels on high ridership routes. In better times, resources should be dedicated to expanding the Frequent Transit Network. Achievement of TMP goals will require continued work between SDOT and its transit agency partners, exempli%ed by recent partnerships that have shaped the RapidRide program, operation of Seattle Streetcar, stop consolidation on Metro routes operating in Seattle, and simpli%cation of downtown transit pathways. SEATTLE TRANSIT both bus and rail technologies. Whether an FTN corridor is to be served by bus or rail, the network should be developed SERVICE PRIORITIES to provide a consistently high standard of capacity, reliability, frequency, and customer service amenities. Seattle must Transit service in Seattle is largely funded and operated by continue to work with King County Metro to deliver the FTN King County Metro Transit and Sound Transit. The Seattle vision and realize its value by fostering supportive land use Department of Transportation (SDOT) manages local streets development and high-quality pedestrian access. and transportation facilities and is best positioned to improve transit service by making capital investments that speed buses, The FTN represents the service element of the Complete improve reliability, and improve access to transit stops and Transit System and provides a guide for the City in: stations. However, ensuring delivery of high-quality service is • Mobility Corridor Development: Guides where the a priority for the City of Seattle, and the City has established a City should make coordinated transit, access, and land role in funding transit service by subsidizing additional service use investments (as described in the Mobility Corridors on high ridership or overcrowded bus routes. Given Metro’s section of Chapter 5 on page 5-22). These corridors are large service area and %nancial challenges, the City should the primary connections—and carry the most travelers— prepare to play an increasingly active role in funding service between key destinations and neighborhoods in Seattle. over the next 20 years. • Intersection and Signal Management: Guides how • The City’s primary transit service objective is to ensure signals and rights-of-way are managed in FTN corridors. mobility in Seattle. During periods when transit revenues Since these corridors carry the highest volume of transit are in decline, the City may need to focus on maintaining riders and have the greatest potential to capture more service on high ridership routes. In better economic times, non-auto users, signal management at intersections resources should be dedicated to expanding the Frequent should favor transit vehicles; on-street parking uses Transit Network (FTN). should be reduced in the interest of moving full, high- • The second City objective is to develop and expand the capacity buses through congested commercial districts; FTN to provide high-quality, high-frequency service and integrated solutions should be sought to allow transit between urban villages and urban centers for at least 18 and bicycles to safely coexist. hours per day and to reinforce walking, biking, and riding transit as the preferred modes of travel for in-city trips. • Service Investment: Guides where the City should invest limited operating funds. FTN corridors were • A third City service objective is to develop the local tran- developed through an extensive evaluation of travel sit network to e.ectively feed and support the FTN and patterns, for all trip types, within and to and from the City to take advantage of high capacity rail and bus services. of Seattle. This work is summarized in the Transit Master Local service should not run in parallel to FTN routes for Plan Brie%ng Book, Chapter 2. Arguably, the urban village long distances, unless those services are part of route connections made by the FTN are the most important combinations that provide FTN service and/or there are travel connections for all modes. topographical or other barriers that impact access. Service Design Principles for the E.ective partnerships with Metro and Sound Transit must be Frequent Transit Network in place at the sta. and executive level to ensure these objec- tives are achieved. These partnerships will support successful The following service principles were used to guide transit inter-agency collaboration, exempli%ed by recent e.orts that investment priorities for the Transit Master Plan (TMP): have shaped the RapidRide program, operation of Seattle • Demand Driven: Invest in transit where overall travel Streetcar, stop consolidation on Metro routes operating in market demand is high Seattle, and simpli%cation of downtown transit pathways. • Direct: Provide direct connections between urban THE FREQUENT TRANSIT villages and centers • Connected: Develop a frequent service grid and create NETWORK high-quality places for people where lines intersect What is the Frequent Transit Network? • Simple: Design for transparency and ease of use The Frequent Transit Network (FTN) guides service priorities In conjunction with the corridor evaluation process (see in Seattle and gives direction for where capital investment discussion in Chapter 3), these principles were used to design would provide the greatest community bene%t. The FTN the network of corridors recommended for capital investment, should o.er frequent, reliable service on designated corridors service investment, and restructuring. connecting urban villages and urban centers throughout the day, every day. Figure 4-1 illustrates the FTN that is in place today, with additional elements envisioned by 2030. The FTN will be developed with Appendix C provides background on development of the FTN map and the classi%cation of the FTN corridors. 4-2 Chapter 4 — Service FIGURE 678 FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK NE 145TH ST Frequent Transit Network (March 2016) 30TH AVE Link Light Rail 130th St Station (every 10 min) NE 125TH ST GREENWOOD AVE Lake City Very Frequent 5 SAND POINT (every 10 min or better peak/ Bitter Lake NORTHGATE every 12 min or better midday) Northgate Northgate Frequent Transit (every 15 min or better all day) Center North Beach HOLMAN RD NW Recommended Future NW 85TH ST Funded Future FTN Service Levels Link LRT Crown Hill 35TH AVE Frequent and Greenwood Maple Leaf Wedgwood Priority Upgrade to 15TH AVE NW Green 24TH AVE NW Very Frequent Lake 25TH AVE NE 65TH ST Ballard Green NW MARKET ST Priority Upgrade to PHINNEY Lake University Frequent AURORA N AVE ROOSEVELT N 45TH ST 15TH AVE District N 45TH ST Wallingford Magnolia BOSTON 15TH AVE W Queen Anne 10TH AVE 23TH AVE E TAYLOR Capitol MERCER Hill MADISON ST 1ST 15TH THOMAS DENNY AURORA FAIRVIEW PIKE Central MLK MADISON ST Lake District 34TH CHERRY Washington JEFFERSON Elliott Bay S JACKSON ST 23TH AVE E RAINIER AVE S 90 12TH S AVE Harbor Island Mt. Baker Transit Center WEST SEATTLE BR West Mount Baker Seattle 5 BEACON AVE S Beacon Hill Columbia City RAINIER AVE S 4TH AVE DELRIDGE WAY SW Graham St CALIFORNIA AVE SW Georgetown Station Rainier Valley OTHELLO 35TH AVE SW South Park Rainier Beach SW BARTON ST Rainier Beach HENDERSON Transit Center White Center SW ROXBURY ST Not to Scale Data Sources: City of Seattle, King County Seattle Transit Master Plan 4-3 The diagrams in Figure 4-2 illustrate three basic concepts in recommends that strong consideration be given to routing transit network design: a point-to-point, a grid, and a radial these services to not use an SR 99 approach, but rather to use (aka “hub-and-spoke”) model. a pathway on 4th Avenue (some segments of 1st may need to be used as well to allow bi-directional access to Spokane). While a point-to-point model may provide the most direct Although speed and reliability challenges need to be resolved, connections between the most destinations, in a radial or grid a focus of Chapter 3 (Corridors), this routing decision allows model, fewer lines are required. Fewer vehicles and opera- for the development of a high-quality connection between tors are needed, allowing providers to deliver more frequent 4th Avenue, the E-3 Busway, and SODO stations. It recognizes service on some or all routes and overall trips that are shorter, the diverse demand patterns of residents; most trips (of all even factoring in transfers. types, not just transit trips) made by southeast and southwest While in practice, most transit systems combine di.erent residents do not go downtown, but rather are oriented to models, the radial pattern predominates in Seattle. Radial bus other south Seattle neighborhoods and to Burien, Tukwila, and rail routes are overlaid with a number of point-to-point Renton, and other southern neighboring cities (see Figure 4-3). type services. Long radial routes have the best frequency and highest ridership but not always because people want to Performance Characteristics of the travel to the Center City. Crosstown routes, such as Metro’s Frequent Transit Network Route 48 (see sidebar), also have very strong ridership. The To meet City goals to increase transit mode share, the TMP proposes service restructuring that moves Seattle transit Frequent Transit Network must be: toward a more grid-oriented design. This is best illustrated by the proposed FTN investments that link services between • Fast and Reliable: Operate transit on arterial streets/ the Rainier Valley and the University District and between transit priority streets where it will be most rapid and Beacon Hill, Capitol Hill, and the University District.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Central Link Initial Segment and Airport Link Before & After Study
    Central Link Initial Segment and Airport Link Before & After Study Final Report February 2014 (this page left blank intentionally) Initial Segment and Airport Link Before and After Study – Final Report (Feb 2014) Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 Before and After Study Requirement and Purposes ................................................................................................... 1 Project Characteristics ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Milestones .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Data Collection in the Fall .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Organization of the Report ........................................................................................................................................ 2 History of Project Planning and Development ....................................................................................................... 2 Characteristic 1 - Project Scope .............................................................................................................................. 6 Characteristic
    [Show full text]
  • The Growing Transit Communities Strategy
    The Growing Transit Communities Strategy October 2013 Puget Sound Regional Council PSRC The Growing Transit Communities Partnership is funded by the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Additional funding for this document provided in part by member jurisdictions, grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration and Washington State Department of Transportation. The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under an award with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government. PSRC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information, or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, see http://www.psrc.org/about/public/titlevi or call 206-464-4819. American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information: Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations may request written materials in alternate formats, sign language interpreters, physical accessibility accommodations, or other reasonable accommodations by contacting the ADA Coordinator, Thu Le, at 206.464.6175, with two weeks’ advance notice. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may contact the ADA Coordinator, Thu Le, through TTY relay 711. Servicios de Traducción Disponible 206-971-3052, Diana Martinez. Có dịch vụ thông dịch sang tiếng Việt.
    [Show full text]
  • FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER 31621 23Rd Ave S., Federal Way, WA 98003
    FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER 31621 23rd Ave S., Federal Way, WA 98003 4,655 Average weekday boardings 1,190 Parking spaces • Owned by Sound Transit • Served by Sound Transit, Pierce Transit, and King County Metro The Federal Way Transit Center is located just west of I-5 and just east of SR 99 in what is considered the City Center of Federal Way. The Federal Way Transit Center is served by eight King County Metro routes (including the RapidRide A Line), three Pierce Transit routes, and three Sound Transit Express bus routes. The Federal Way Transit Center sits on the northern boundary of the PSRC- designated regional growth center. The Federal Way Transit Center has 1,190 parking spaces, which are typically fully utilized by 7:30 am. Figure 1: 3-Mile Context Map TRANSIT ACCESS ASSESSMENT: DRAFT FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER 1 Figure 2 provides a closer look at the area surrounding the Federal Way Transit Center. There are large parcels primarily made up of retail shopping surrounded by large surface parking lots. The superblock structure limits through connections and makes traveling on foot difficult. The Transit Center’s bus bays are located on the interior segment of a large parcel further removing it from the street network. The City of Federal Way owns several pieces of land in the vicinity of the Federal Way Transit Center with ambitious development plans (described on the following page). In addition, light rail will eventually extend to the Federal Way Transit Center. Figure 2: Half-Mile Context Map 2 FEDERAL WAY TRANSIT CENTER TRANSIT ACCESS ASSESSMENT: DRAFT LAND USE, POPULATION, AND EMPLOYMENT The area in the immediate vicinity of the Federal Way Transit Center is primarily made up of commercial land uses, with some multi-family housing just to the north and a small amount of single-family housing on the edges of Figure 3 below.
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Transit Transit Development Plan 2013-2018 and 2012 Annual Report
    Transit Development Plan 2013-2018 and 2012 Annual Report Public Hearing Held: July 11, 2013 Operations and Administration Committee Referral to Board: July 18, 2013 Board of Directors Approval for Submittal: July 25, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................2 I: ORGANIZATION .....................................................................................................................2 II: PHYSICAL PLANT ................................................................................................................5 III: SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS ...........................................................................................6 IV: SERVICE CONNECTIONS ................................................................................................. 10 V: ACTIVITIES IN 2012 ............................................................................................................ 12 VI: PLANNED ACTION STRATEGIES, 2012 – 2018 .............................................................. 19 VII: PLANNED ACTIVITIES, 2012 – 2018 ............................................................................... 20 VIII: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, 2012 – 2018 ..................................................... 23 IX: OPERATING DATA, 2012 – 2018 ...................................................................................... 23 X: ANNUAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES, 2012 – 2018 .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Suggested Route Changes for Fall 2012
    Suggested route changes for fall 2012 C Line – New Map of suggested change Suggested change • The new RapidRide C Line would connect Westwood Village and downtown Seattle via Fauntleroy, Morgan Junction, and Alaska Junction, replacing Route 54 and Route 54 Express (current map). Learn more about the C Line. Reason for change • Service investment. Metro is making a service investment in the C Line, its third RapidRide line. New service hours and facilities are expected to speed service and make it more reliable, attracting higher ridership. • More network connections. The C Line would provide a frequent, direct, all-day connection between Westwood Village and downtown Seattle via Fauntleroy, Morgan Junction, and Alaska Junction. It would offer connection opportunities to many frequent routes. • Simplify service. RapidRide service has features that make it easier to use, including real-time information signs and frequent service throughout the day. Alternative service • The C Line would use the same routing as routes 54 through Fauntleroy, Morgan Junction, and Alaska Junction. Service frequency Route Minutes between buses Weekday Saturday Sunday Peak Non-Peak Night C 10 15 30-60 15 15 www.kingcounty.gov/metro/HaveASay 1 King County Metro Transit | Suggested route changes for fall 2012 D Line – New Map of suggested change Suggested change • The New RapidRide D Line would connect Crown Hill and downtown Seattle via Ballard, Interbay, and Uptown (learn more). The D Line would replace Route 15 (both local and express) (current map). Reason for change • Service investment. Metro is making a service investment in the D Line, its fourth RapidRide line.
    [Show full text]
  • F Line: Burien to Renton Boulevard Station
    Fare Payment on RapidRide Where to Buy and Revalue ORCA F Line WEEKDAY/Entre semana F Line WEEKDAY/Entre semana Help keep RapidRide moving by following Cards Along the F Line To THE LANDING ➜ To BURIEN ➜ Burien Tuk Int’l Bl Tukwila Renton Renton Tukwila Tuk Int’l Bl Burien these fare payment procedures: Buy a new card, load a pass or add e-purse TC Sta, Bay 2 Southctr Sta, Bay 2 TC The The TC Sta, Bay 1 Southctr Sta, Bay 3 Transit Bay 6 Link Bay 2 Sounder Bay 2 Landing Landing Bay 3 Sounder Bay 3 Link Center Cash and Tickets – Always board through value to your existing ORCA card at ORCA Transit Southctr Andover L’acres S 2nd St N 10th St N 10th St S 2nd St L’acres Andover Southctr Transit the front door and pay at the farebox. The vending machines located at the Burien Rdway & Blvd & Pk W & Wy & & & Garden & Garden & Wy & Pk W & Blvd & Rdway & SW 148th St* Int’l Blvd* Baker Blvd* Acc Rd* Burnett Av S* Av N* Av N* Burnett Av S* Acc Rd* Baker Blvd* Int’l Blvd* SW 148th* driver will give you a paper transfer which Transit Center, Sounder Tukwila Station Stop #52306 Stop #60922 Stop #59310 Stop #59882 Stop #46477 Stop #46505 Stop #46505 Stop #46478 Stop #59881 Stop #59314 Stop #60923 Stop #52304 is your receipt for proof of payment. Be and Link Light Rail Tukwila International 4:45 4:56 5:04 5:10 5:25 5:33 5:23 5:29 5:45 5:50 5:58 6:10 Blvd Station.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Standards Manual October, 2009 King County Metro Graphic Standards and Guidelines
    Design Standards Manual October, 2009 King County Metro Graphic Standards and Guidelines Contents Introduction to the RapidRide Brand....................................................................1-1 RapidRide Brand Identity Trademark...................................................................................................1-3 Color Palette ...............................................................................................1-4 Proportions.................................................................................................1-5 Clear Space.................................................................................................1-6 Color ..........................................................................................................1-7 Reversed.....................................................................................................1-8 Incorrect Usage...........................................................................................1-9 In Conjunction with the King County Metro Logo .......................................1-11 Print and Electronic Applications System Brochure Cover................................................................................2-1 System Map Style........................................................................................2-2 Line Map Style ............................................................................................2-3 Metro System Map with RapidRide Lines......................................................2-5
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2022 Transit Development Plan
    (This page intentionally left blank.) Table of Contents Section 1 – Organization 3 Section 2 – Physical Plant 7 Section 3 – Service Characteristics 11 Section 4 – Service Connections 27 Section 5 – Notable Activities in 2016 31 Section 6 – Proposed Action Strategies: 2017 – 2022 51 Section 7 – Capital Improvement Program: 2017 – 2022 61 Section 8 – Operating Revenues and Expenditures: 2017 - 2022 65 Appendices Appendix A – Six-Year Financial Plan: 2017 - 2022 Appendix B – Operating Data 2016 Appendix C – Unfunded and Unprogrammed Projects Appendix D – Inventories: Rolling Stock Appendix E – Inventories: Equipment and Facilities 1 Transit Development Plan 2017 – 2022 (This page intentionally left blank.) 2 Transit Development Plan 2017 – 2022 Section 1 - Organization Governance and Structure Pierce Transit is a Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (PTBA) incorporated under authority of Chapter 36.57A of the Revised Code of Washington. In 1979 voters passed a 0.3 percent sales tax to fund public transportation, which also formed the PTBA. Pierce Transit is currently funded through a combination of sales tax revenues, fares and grants, as further detailed in Section 9: Operating Revenues and Expenditures. Pierce Transit provides public transport services in the urbanized portions of Pierce County, as illustrated in Figure 1-1. This is an area covering 292 square miles that generally conforms to the county’s growth management boundary and contains an estimated 70 percent of the county population. The service area includes the incorporated cities and towns of Auburn, Edgewood, Fife, Fircrest, Gig Harbor, Lakewood, Milton, Pacific, Puyallup, Ruston, Steilacoom, Tacoma, and University Place. It also includes multiple population centers within unincorporated Pierce County.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preemptive Analysis of Preliminary Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Design in King County, Washington
    Incorporating Social Equity in Transit Service and Capital Planning: A Preemptive Analysis of Preliminary Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Design in King County, Washington Ian Kowalski A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban Planning University of Washington 2019 Committee: Jan Whittington Joaquín Herranz, Jr. Qing Shen Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Urban Design and Planning © Copyright 2019 Ian Kowalski University of Washington Abstract Incorporating Social Equity in Transit Service and Capital Planning: A Preemptive Analysis of Preliminary Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Design in King County, Washington Ian Kowalski Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Jan Whittington, Associate Professor Department of Urban Design and Planning Co-Chair of the Supervisory Committee Joaquín Herranz, Jr., Associate Professor Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance Co-Chair of the Supervisory Committee Qing Shen, Professor Department of Urban Design and Planning This study presents an approach for the evaluation of the equity of transportation investments in King County, Washington, with attention to upgrades of existing routes to new “bus rapid transit” service. A review of philosophical and economic literature provides a theoretical foundation, while existing policy and law establishes a regulatory and practical framework that bounds this work. The author is particularly concerned with the extent to which service and capital investments for bus rapid transit expansion in southern King County can be integrated and evaluated across socioeconomic user groups. This study attempts to answer this question by employing a series of quantitative models that include network analysis, transportation gap analysis, and life-cycle cost analysis to evaluate transit equity in southern King County, and specifically along the proposed RapidRide I Line bus rapid transit corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • November/December 2010
    In Transit November/December 2010 A Newsletter for King County Metro Transit Employees From the desk of the General Manager Preparation paid off After nearly two years of hard work, we We learned got the opportunity to test our new snow from our plan in the days before Thanksgiving. experiences with snow and We learned some hard lessons about ice in the winter extreme winter weather two years ago. of 2008-2009. Those experiences led us to create and improve our plan for responding to a major snow event, including how we communicate with our customers. We’ve been hearing that this year’s strong La Niña weather pattern would mean Getting ready for snow a colder, wetter winter in the Pacific orecasters have predicted a cold, wet winter for the Pacific Northwest, and Northwest. Over the past six months we put a major focus on getting ready for Fwe’ve already seen snow and below-freezing temperatures in King County. the possibility of a rough winter. I’d like to Fortunately, we’ve been working hard to make sure we are ready—both to keep thank every one of you who contributed providing service and to keep our customers informed. to these efforts. For more information about our preparations, see the main We updated the snow operations and customer communications plan we story on this page. developed in 2009. The plan defines snow routing for each bus route as well as a system for determining whether a route is following its regular or snow route. On Monday, Nov. 22, a winter storm The plan also identifies an emergency service network of core service that Metro, rolled in, dumping snow on our streets in partnership with local jurisdictions, will establish and maintain along main and freezing it to ice that stayed around for three days.
    [Show full text]
  • King County Metro Rapidride Performance Evaluation Report
    King County Metro RapidRide Performance Evaluation Report Prepared for Prepared by December 2014 King County Metro RapidRide Performance Evaluation Report | 2 King County Metro CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................................................................................4 Performance Evaluation ................................................................................................5 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Performance Evaluation Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 Comparison to other National BRT Service ..................................................................20 Performance Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 21 Cost Effectiveness of Capital Expenditures .................................................................22 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Cost Effectiveness Performance Summary .......................................................................................................... 22 Cost Effectiveness of Operating Costs ..........................................................................32
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Three Transportation
    CHAPTER THREE TRANSPORTATION 3.0 Introduction ________________________________________________ 1 3.1 Policy Background __________________________________________ 2 State Policies ___________________________________________________ 2 Regional Policies _______________________________________________ 2 3.2 The Transportation Concept __________________________________ 3 How Do People Travel? _________________________________________ 5 3.3 Transportation Vision and Goals _____________________________ 7 3.4 Existing Conditions ________________________________________ 15 Street and Highway System _____________________________________ 15 Non-Motorized ________________________________________________ 27 Transit _______________________________________________________ 31 Freight and Goods _____________________________________________ 36 Transportation System Management (TSM) ______________________ 37 3.5 Future Transportation Vision ________________________________ 41 Introduction to the Layered Network ____________________________ 42 Future Travel __________________________________________________ 42 Transportation Level of Service _________________________________ 44 Project Prioritization ___________________________________________ 44 Modal Networks ______________________________________________ 46 Regional Growth Center Mode Share Goal _______________________ 50 High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) ________________________________ 50 Non-Motorized ________________________________________________ 50 Transit _______________________________________________________
    [Show full text]