DOCSLIB.ORG

Summary of Previous Studies and Plans

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Summary of Previous Studies and Plans Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Summary This memorandum summarizes the findings of prior transportation studies that are relevant to the West Seattle and Ballard LRT Extension (WSBLE) Project, including those prepared by Sound Transit, the city of Seattle, King County, and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). This memorandum primarily identifies findings related to transportation conditions within the study area, past study recommendations and how they were incorporated into the representative project, and policy directives of relevance in local and regional planning documents. Page i | AE 0036-17 | Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose of report ................................................................................................ 1 2 CITY AND REGIONAL PLANS AND STUDIES ...................................................................... 3 2.1 Policies and legislative actions ............................................................................ 4 2.1.1 State of Washington Growth Management Act ........................................ 4 2.1.2 Regional Growth Strategy ....................................................................... 4 2.2 Regional plans and studies ................................................................................. 4 2.2.1 Sound Transit Regional Transit Long-Range Plan (2014) ........................ 4 2.2.2 ST3 System Plan (2016) ......................................................................... 4 2.2.3 Puget Sound Regional Council Transportation 2040 (2014) .................... 5 2.2.4 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (Fiscal Year 2017 to 2020) ....................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Local and County plans and studies ..................................................................10 2.3.1 City of Seattle Comprehensive Plan (2017) ............................................10 2.3.2 City of Seattle Transit Master Plan (2016) ..............................................11 2.3.3 King County Metro Strategic Plan for Public Transportation (2015) ........13 2.3.4 King County MetroConnects Plan (2017)................................................13 2.4 Related corridor transportation plans .................................................................13 2.4.1 Seattle Monorail Project (1997 to 2005) .................................................13 2.4.2 Ballard to Downtown Seattle Transit Expansion Study (2014) ................14 2.4.3 South King County High Capacity Transit Corridor Study (2014) ............14 3 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................... 15 4 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 16 Figures Figure 1-1 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions ........................................................... 2 Figure 2-1 ST3 Regional Rail Access Plan ........................................................................... 6 Figure 2-2 ST3 System Plan ................................................................................................ 7 Figure 2-3 City of Seattle Transit Master Plan High-Capacity Transit Vision .......................12 Tables Table 2-1 Summary of previous studies .............................................................................. 3 Page ii | AE 0036-17 | Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Table 2-2 Programmed transportation improvement projects, FY 2017 to 2020 .................. 9 Appendices Appendix A Index of Previous Studies Page iii | AE 0036-17 | Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Acronyms and Abbreviations BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe DPD Department of Planning and Development DSTT Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel EIS Environmental Impact Statement ETC Elevated Transportation Company FY Fiscal Year HALA Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda HCT High Capacity Transit M/IC Manufacturing and Industrial Center MTS Metropolitan Transportation System RTLP Regional Transit Long-Range Plan PSRC Puget Sound Regional Council SIG Seattle International Gateway SODO South of Downtown Neighborhood SMART Sustainable, Multimodal, Accessible, Reliable, and Technology Corridors ST2 Sound Transit 2 System Plan ST3 Sound Transit 3 System Plan TOD Transit-Oriented Development TIP Transportation Improvement Program TMP City of Seattle Transit Master Plan WSBLE West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Page iv | AE 0036-17 | Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview Sound Transit is advancing the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions (WSBLE) Project through the Alternatives Development Phase. During Alternatives Development, Sound Transit will assess the representative project included in the Sound Transit 3 Plan (ST3) and further refine the specific route, station locations and other project elements based on additional public engagement and technical analysis. The representative project itself is the result of extensive, years-long planning and public involvement work, including high-capacity transit studies, the process to update the agency’s long-range plan, and the work that developed the ST3 Plan approved by voters in 2016. Sound Transit will engage the public and agencies in an intensive external engagement process that will lead to the Sound Transit Board identifying a Preferred Alternative, as well as other alternatives to evaluate in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The WSBLE Project would provide fast, reliable light rail connections to dense residential and job centers throughout the region and add a new downtown Seattle light rail tunnel to provide efficient operating capacity for the entire regional system. The extension to West Seattle would operate on a 4.7-mile elevated guideway from downtown Seattle to West Seattle’s Alaska Junction neighborhood and include a new rail-only fixed span bridge across the Duwamish River. The West Seattle extension would serve one at-grade station in the stadium area and four elevated stations in the SODO, Delridge, Avalon and Alaska Junction areas. The Ballard extension would operate 7.1 miles from downtown Seattle to Ballard’s Market Street area and include a new 3.3-mile rail-only tunnel from the International District/Chinatown to South Lake Union and Seattle Center/Uptown. The representative project includes an elevated guideway along 15th Avenue West and Elliott Avenue West and a rail-only movable bridge over Salmon Bay. The Ballard extension would serve three elevated stations in Ballard, Interbay and near Smith Cove, and six tunnel stations at Seattle Center, South Lake Union, Denny, Westlake, midtown and International District/Chinatown areas. A map of both extensions is shown on Figure 1-1 (West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions). 1.2 Purpose of report The primary objective of this report is to identify aspects of prior work that are of interest to the WSBLE Project, including findings related to transportation conditions within the study area, past study recommendations and how they were incorporated into the representative project, and policy directives of relevance in local and regional planning documents. Page 1 | AE 0036-17 | Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Figure 1-1 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Page 2 | AE 0036-17 | Summary of Previous Studies and Plans February 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions 2 CITY AND REGIONAL PLANS AND STUDIES Several transportation plans and studies since the late 1960s and early 1970s, beginning with the Forward Thrust Plan, have included components of the WSBLE Project. Major investments in the regional transit system did not take place until the mid-1990s with the passage of Sound Move, and later the Sound Transit 2 (ST2) Plan of 2008. Sound Move, adopted by the voters of the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit District (Sound Transit) in 1996, identified West Seattle, Fauntleroy, Burien, and Renton as candidates for regional express bus service. Sound Transit’s updated Regional Transit Long-Range Plan (2005) (RTLP) outlined the goals and objectives for HCT. Since its original adoption, the RTLP has included an HCT linkage between Ballard and Downtown Seattle, and the plan has also recommended the West Seattle-to- Downtown Seattle route for express bus service along with the monorail that was proposed by the Elevated Transportation Company (or Seattle Monorail Project) at that time. The ST2 Plan, adopted by the voters in 2008, provided additional funding and expanded the original Sound Move transportation package. The plan designated the downtown Seattle-West Seattle-Burien and Burien-Renton corridors as candidates for specific HCT studies. The ST2 Plan served as the fiscally-constrained plan specifying capital projects and the investment strategy to further implementation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for Rapidride C Line Improvements
    Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for RapidRide C Line Improvements Meeting: Date: Type of action: Staff contact: System Expansion Committee 11/12/2020 Recommend to Board Don Billen, Executive Director, Board 11/19/2020 Final action PEPD Cathal Ridge, Executive Corridor Director- Central Corridor Chris Rule, HCT Project Manager – Central Corridor Proposed action Authorizes the chief executive officer to execute an agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to reimburse the City of Seattle for $1,730,000 and King County Metro for $2,800,000 to provide a total funding contribution of $4,530,000 for bus speed and reliability improvements to the RapidRide C Line serving West Seattle to South Lake Union. Key features summary • This action authorizes Sound Transit to enter into an inter-local agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to reimburse the City and County for costs of up to $4.53 million for speed and reliability improvements to the RapidRide C Line. • The Sound Transit 3 (ST3) System Plan includes a capped capital contribution of $65 million for bus capital enhancements to design and construct transit priority improvements that improve speed and reliability for the Madison BRT project and the RapidRide C and D Lines. • In 2018 the Sound Transit Board established the RapidRide C and D Improvements project and approved an initial study of potential improvements performed by the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions project team. • In September the Board of Directors moved that staff bring forward an agreement for a limited near- term authorization for RapidRide C Line improvements pending a more comprehensive program realignment.
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents
    DOWNTOWN ACCESS STRATEGY PHASE 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 II. Review of Existing Plans, Projects, and Programs ......................................... 2 III. Potential Construction Concerns and Opportunities .................................. 3 A. Existing Construction Planning Tools 3 B. SDOT’s Construction Hub Coordination Program 4 C. Construction Mitigation Strategies Used by Other Cities 7 D. Potential Construction Conflicts and Opportunities 10 IV. Future Transportation Network Opportunities ......................................... 12 A. North Downtown 12 B. Denny Triangle / Westlake Hub 14 C. Pioneer Square / Chinatown-ID 15 D. Downtown Core and Waterfront 16 V. Future Phases of Downtown Access Strategy ............................................. 18 A. Framework for Phase 2 (2014 through 2016) 18 B. Framework for Phase 3 (Beyond 2016) 19 - i - September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years I. INTRODUCTION Many important and long planned transportation and development projects are scheduled for con- struction in Downtown Seattle in the coming years. While these investments are essential to support economic development and job growth and to enhance Downtown’s stature as the region’s premier location to live, work, shop and play, in the short-term they present complicated challenges for con- venient and reliable access to and through Downtown. The Downtown Seattle Association (DSA) and its partners, Historic South Downtown (HSD) and the Seat- tle Department of Transportation (SDOT), seek to ensure that Downtown Seattle survives and prospers during the extraordinarily high level of construction activity that will occur in the coming years.
    [Show full text]
  • Metrorail/Coconut Grove Connection Study Phase II Technical
    METRORAILICOCONUT GROVE CONNECTION STUDY DRAFT BACKGROUND RESEARCH Technical Memorandum Number 2 & TECHNICAL DATA DEVELOPMENT Technical Memorandum Number 3 Prepared for Prepared by IIStB Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Inc. 6161 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 200 Miami, Florida 33126 December 2004 METRORAIUCOCONUT GROVE CONNECTION STUDY DRAFT BACKGROUND RESEARCH Technical Memorandum Number 2 Prepared for Prepared by BS'R Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Inc. 6161 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 200 Miami, Florida 33126 December 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 2.0 STUDY DESCRiPTION ........................................................................................ 1 3.0 TRANSIT MODES DESCRIPTION ...................................................................... 4 3.1 ENHANCED BUS SERViCES ................................................................... 4 3.2 BUS RAPID TRANSIT .............................................................................. 5 3.3 TROLLEY BUS SERVICES ...................................................................... 6 3.4 SUSPENDED/CABLEWAY TRANSIT ...................................................... 7 3.5 AUTOMATED GUIDEWAY TRANSiT ....................................................... 7 3.6 LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT .............................................................................. 8 3.7 HEAVY RAIL ............................................................................................. 8 3.8 MONORAIL
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study LPA Report
    The Seattle Department of Transportation Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) R e port Executive Summary August 2014 in association with: URS Shiels Obletz Johnsen CH2MHill Natalie Quick Consulting John Parker Consulting BERK Consulting VIA Architecture Alta Planning + Design DKS Associates I | LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE REPORT ― EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LTK Cover image from SDOT Seattle Center City Connector Transit Study Executive Summary Volume I: LPA Report 1. Project Overview 2. Purpose and Need 3. Evaluation Framework 4. Evaluation of Alternatives 5. Summary of Tier 1 Screening and Tier 2 Evaluation Results and Public Input 6. Recommended Locally Preferred Alternative 7. Next Steps Volume I Appendix A: Project Purpose and Need Volume II: Detailed Evaluation Report 1. Project Overview 2. Evaluation Framework and Public Outreach 3. Initial Screening of Alternatives (Purpose and Need) 4. Summary of Tier 1 Alternatives and Evaluation Results 5. East-West Connection Assessment 6. Description of Tier 2 Alternatives 7. Tier 2 Evaluation Results 8. Tier 2 Public Outreach Summary 9. Tier 2 Recommendation Volume II Technical Appendices (Methodology and Detailed Results) Appendix A: Ridership Projections Appendix B: Additional Ridership Markets: Visitors and Special Events Appendix C: Operating and Maintenance Cost Methodology and Estimates Appendix D: Loading Analysis Appendix E: Capital Cost Methodology and Estimates Appendix F: Utility Impacts Assessment Appendix G: Traffic Analysis Appendix H Evaluation
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Monorail Project the New Plan
    Seattle Monorail Project The New Plan Overview of the Monorail Ballot Measures In September 2005, the Seattle Popular Monorail Authority (Seattle Monorail Project or SMP) Board of Directors approved placing two ballot measures before the voters this November. The first measure (Proposition 1) would modify the 2002 Seattle Popular Monorail Plan, authorizing an initial monorail phase of 10 miles and 12 stations. Phasing would save over $330 million from the original plan, resulting in an estimated project cost of $1.7 billion. The second measure (Proposition 2) would provide for a majority of the Board to be elected rather than appointed. These materials have been prepared to inform the general public about factual issues relevant to these propositions. They are not intended to influence voters to support or oppose either measure. Proposition 1 - Phased Construction Proposition 1 asks voters for authorization to construct an initial 10-mile, 12-station monorail line. If approved by the voters, SMP will initially construct a rapid transit system that links Dravus Station (Interbay) and Alaska Junction Station (West Seattle) to Downtown. With connections to light rail, streetcar and buses, the initial line will serve an expected 42,200 riders per day at start-up in 2010 and 57,000 riders per day in 2030. Stations will serve major activity centers and Downtown, with trains departing every six minutes during the commute hours from all stations. The remainder of the 14-mile Green Line will be completed if the City approves construction permits following review of SMP’s Finance Plan. Project costs have been reduced by over $330 million to an estimated $1.7 billion.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Meeting Presentation 130826.Pptx
    Proposed Long-Term Streetcar Network Study Overview/Purpose § Examine the feasibility of streetcar service in Saint Paul § Determine where it would work best § Determine where to start 2 What is Streetcar Service? Consists of many elements: Vehicles Stops Right-of-Way Short Stop Spacing Fare Payment New Development Streetcar Vehicles • Modern, vintage, or replica of vintage streetcar • Usually single vehicle Modern Streetcar, Toronto Modern Streetcar, Portland Modern Streetcar, Seattle Modern Streetcar, Tacoma Vintage Streetcar, Memphis Historic Replica Streetcar, New Orleans Streetcars in the Street • Usually operate in mixed-traffic • But can also operate in exclusive rights-of-way Portland Streetcar Seattle Streetcar Tucson Streetcar (Planned) San Francisco F-Line Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Route Length & Stop Spacing • Short lengths; focus on shorter more local trips • Frequent stops; approximately every two blocks 2.8 miles 2.1miles Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Stops Smaller scale/less elaborate than LRT stations Portland Streetcar Stop Seattle Streetcar Stop Toronto Streetcar Stop Future Westgate Light Rail Station, St. Paul Economic Development Patterns Streetcar Light Rail • Linear economic development • Nodal economic development South Lake Union Streetcar, Seattle The Lyric near the future Raymond Ave Station, St. Paul Construction Impacts Streetcar Light Rail • Lower impact • Greater impact • Faster construction • Longer construction First Hill Streetcar construction,
    [Show full text]
  • CPC's RESPONSE to COURT's ORDER to SHOW CAUSE (No. 2:12-Cv-01282-JLR) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
    Case 2:12-cv-01282-JLR Document 531 Filed 02/20/19 Page 1 of 46 1 THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ROBART 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 2:12-cv-01282-JLR 10 11 Plaintiff, COMMUNITY POLICE COMMISSION’S RESPONSE TO 12 v. COURT’S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 CITY OF SEATTLE, 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CPC’S RESPONSE TO COURT’S ORDER Perkins Coie LLP TO SHOW CAUSE 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 (No. 2:12-cv-01282-JLR) Phone: 206.359.8000 143373394.2 Fax: 206.359.9000 Case 2:12-cv-01282-JLR Document 531 Filed 02/20/19 Page 2 of 46 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2 3 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 4 II. ISSUES PRESENTED....................................................................................................... 3 5 III. ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 5 A. The Court’s understanding of the Shepherd incident is accurate, 6 and the events preceding the use of force provide additional cause 7 for concern. ............................................................................................................ 5 8 1. How Officer Shepherd’s case was reviewed on appeal ............................. 8 2. The appeals process under the Accountability Ordinance 9 would have differed in important ways and under the CBAs will be even less consistent with the Consent Decree’s goal 10 of public trust and confidence .................................................................... 9 11 B. The SPOG and SPMA CBAs are barriers to sustained reform. ........................... 14 12 1. The SPOG CBA purports to supersede or nullify any other City law or policy that, implicitly or explicitly, conflicts 13 with its terms ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Different Kind of Gentrification: Seattle and Its Relationship with Industrial Land
    A Different Kind of Gentrification: Seattle and its Relationship with Industrial Land David Tomporowski A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban Planning University of Washington 2019 Committee: Edward McCormack Christine Bae Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Urban Design and Planning College of Built Environments ©Copyright 2019 David Tomporowski University of Washington Abstract A Different Kind of Gentrification: Seattle and its Relationship with Industrial Land David Tomporowski Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Edward McCormack Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering / Department of Urban Design and Planning Industry in Seattle often talks about how they are facing their own kind of gentrification. Rising property values, encroaching pressure for different land uses, and choking transportation all loom as reasons for industrial businesses to relocate out of the city. This research explores this phenomenon of industrial gentrification through a case study of Seattle’s most prominent industrial area: the SODO (“South Of Downtown”) neighborhood. My primary research question asks what the perception and reality of the state of industrial land designation and industrial land use gentrification in Seattle is. Secondary research questions involve asking how industrial land designation and industrial land use can be defined in Seattle, what percentage of land is zoned industrial in the SODO neighborhood, and what percentage of the land use is considered industrial in the SODO neighborhood. Finally, subsequent effects on freight transportation and goods movement will be considered. By surveying actual industrial land use compared to i industrially-zoned land, one can conclude whether industry’s complaints are accurate and whether attempts to protect industrial land uses are working.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Scoping Summary Report
    Early Scoping Summary Report April 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Summary Purpose Sound Transit conducted early scoping for the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions (WSBLE) Project in Seattle, Washington, from February 2 through March 5, 2018. The early scoping started the public planning and environmental processes for the project. This report describes how Sound Transit conducted early scoping and summarizes the comments received from local and regulatory agencies, tribes, and the public during the early scoping period. This information will be considered by Sound Transit as it identifies and studies alternatives for the WSBLE Project. The Early Scoping Process Sound Transit published an early scoping notice in the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) register on February 2, 2018, which initiated early scoping and started the 30-day comment period. Additional public notification was provided with mailed postcards, print and online advertisements, and social media notices. Three public open houses and an agency meeting were held during this comment period, as well as an online open house from February 12 to March 5, 2018. Sound Transit requested comments on the purpose and need, the Representative Project, other potential alternatives, and potential community benefits and impacts. Comments were accepted by mail, email, online comment forms, and on comment boards and maps at the open houses (both in person and online). Agency Early Scoping Thirty-four federal, state, regional, and local agencies received
    [Show full text]
  • Juicing the “Seattle Squeeze” Lessons Learned from Seattle’S SR-99 Closure
    Juicing the “Seattle Squeeze” Lessons Learned from Seattle’s SR-99 Closure APTA Sustainability & Multimodal Operations Planning Workshop BenjaminDepartment Smith of Transportation July 29, 2019 Presentation overview • Seattle transit overview • The “Seattle Squeeze” • SR-99 Closure • Preparation for closure • Coordination during closure • Lessons learned Department of Transportation Seattle transit overview • King County Metro • Local and commuter bus • RapidRide BRT and electric trolleybus • Water taxi • Sound Transit • Link light rail • ST Express regional bus • Sounder commuter rail • City of Seattle • Seattle Center Monorail • Seattle Streetcar Department of Transportation The “Seattle Squeeze” • One of fastest growing cities in U.S. • ~250K employment in greater downtown (HQ1) • Transit ridership investment and growth • Infrastructure and development projects Department of Transportation The “Seattle Squeeze” - Timeline • • • • D2 Roadway • SR-99 Tunnel •• CenterAlaskan City Way open Convention Center Madison East Link, closes open Connectorto buses open RapidRide Lynnwood and • • Convention • Alaskan Way • mayConnect open 2020 Northgate Link G Line Federal Way (on hold) Center Viaduct (currentlyconstruction on hold) open open Link open • • construction demolition • Alaskan Way open North Portal Alaskan Way open begins • Alaskan Way to buses* streets open to traffic • construction Seattle Arena begins renovation • DSTT buses shift complete to surface • SR-520 “Rest of the West” project begins SR-99 Closure activities Department of
    [Show full text]
  • Rapidride? D Line
    D Line WEEKDAY/Entre semana D Line WEEKDAY/Entre semana SNOW/EMERGENCY SERVICE ➜ NW 100th Pl To DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ➜ To CROWN HILL 7th Ave NW SERVICIO DE EMERGENCIA/NIEVE Downtown Downtown Seattle Uptown Ballard Crown Hill Crown Hill Ballard Uptown Seattle 3rd Ave NW During most snow conditions this route NW 100th Pl 15th Ave NW Queen Anne 3rd Ave Terrace St Prefontaine 3rd Ave Mercer St & 15th Ave NW NW 100th Pl CROWN HILL Holman Rd NW will operate via its regular route shown at & & Ave N & & & Pl S & & Queen Anne & & Mary Ave NW 7th Ave NW* NW Market St* W Mercer St* Pike St* 5th Ave* Yesler Wy* Pike St* Ave N* NW Market St* 7th Ave NW* left. In the rare event that Metro declares Stop #28680 Stop #13271 Stop #2672 Stop #431 Stop #1710 Stop #1610 Stop #578 Stop #2370 Stop #14230 Stop #28680 NW 85th St an emergency, this route will continue 4:57 5:06 5:18 5:27 5:35 4:05 4:10 4:20 4:31 4:40 5:13 5:22 5:34 5:43 5:51 4:55 5:00 5:10 5:21 5:30 NW 80th St to operate as a designated Emergency 5:25 5:34 5:46 5:55 6:03 5:20 5:25 5:35 5:46 5:55 Service Network route. During such an 5:35 5:44 5:56 6:05 6:13 5:40 5:45 5:55 6:07 6:16 15th Ave NW NW 75th St 5:43 5:52 6:04 6:14 6:22 6:00 6:05 6:15 6:27 6:36 event, it is expected to operate with the 5:51 6:00 6:13 6:23 6:31 6:10 6:15 6:25 6:37 6:46 5:59 6:09 6:22 6:32 6:40 6:20 6:25 6:35 6:47 6:56 NW 70th St same route number and follow the same 6:07 6:17 6:30 6:40 6:48 6:28 6:33 6:43 6:55 7:04 Ballard High School routing as shown in this timetable.
    [Show full text]
  • SEATTLE STREETCAR Operations Report
    Seattle Department of Transportation SEATTLE STREETCAR Operations Report July 2019 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................4 1.1. South Lake Union Streetcar.....................................................................4 1.2. First Hill Streetcar ...................................................................................6 1.3. Center City Connector .............................................................................6 2. OPERATIONS HIGHLIGHTS ..................................................................................7 2.1. Governance Structure and Budget Overview ..........................................7 2.2. Status of Negotiations on New Streetcar ILA..........................................8 2.3. Safety & Security Update .........................................................................9 3. FINANCIAL METRICS .........................................................................................10 3.1. South Lake Union Streetcar...................................................................10 3.2. First Hill Streetcar .................................................................................13 3.3. Investment in Streetcar Operations ......................................................15 4. PERFORMANCE METRICS ..................................................................................17 4.1. Ridership ................................................................................................17
    [Show full text]