I have been hearing a lot of concern from Capitol Hill residents that King County may be considering “getting rid” of electric trolleys. I too am a big fan of our electric trolleys as a clean, quiet technology that works well in Seattle’s hilly urban neighborhoods and am glad to hear strong support for maintaining our electric trolley system.
However, I want to clear up some misconceptions about what King County is considering. As you likely know, Metro Transit’s trolley buses are reaching the end of their useful life and will soon need to be replaced. Before making a large investment with the public’s transit dollars to replace the trolleys, our county auditor recommended that Metro study the bus technologies available and evaluate their costs and benefits. The study will be taking place in 2011, and I made sure the study will look beyond a simple cost comparison to evaluate other criteria such as environmental benefits and noise impacts. The study must also include opportunities for the public to provide input. I am a strong proponent of maintaining our successful electric trolley system, but I also look forward to the results of the study, as it may present opportunities to upgrade our system and address some of the issues with our trolleys, like the problems running them when snow or construction impacts their routes. I will, however, strongly resist any attempt to replace our electric trolleys with hybrid diesel buses simply to save money, and I hope I can count on your support next year to let other King County leaders know how popular our electric trolleys are.
I want to draw your attention to another alarming issue facing our transit system—Metro Transit is facing a severe funding gap due to this Great Recession. We are projected to have to cut 600,000 annual service hours—17% of the system—by 2015 to balance the shortfall. In Seattle alone, we would have to completely cut the equivalent of 14 major routes like Metro Route 10 in order to bridge this gap. We have explored every opportunity to avoid service cuts—including implementing efficiencies identified by an audit of Metro, raising fares, reducing capital spending, spending down reserves, enacting a property tax for transit authorized by the 2009 legislature, and deferring some service investments approved by voters in 2006. We are now nearly out of tools to save our system and may need additional funding authority from the state legislature to avoid cuts.
I helped create a Regional Transit Task Force of community leaders who will be making recommendations this September about the future of our transit system. If you are concerned about the potential for losing bus service, you may want to share your perspective with the Task Force as well as your other elected leaders.
I have talked to them about finding ways to be part of the site when they have messages for the community. I was happy to find that they took me up on the offer tonight.
this is the first time i have seen an elected utilize a neighborhood blog to communicate and i love it! way to go phillips (and your staff who probably posted this :)
I’m ecstatic to see the government-public conversation move beyond press releases and open meetings.
Temporarily living in Munich, I find myself newly impassioned about holistic transit services. My voice will be added to the growing call for shifting investment from 20th century infrastructure optimized for moving automobiles around to transit systems better suited for moving *people* through the city.
Thanks for clearing that up. I admit, I immediately got all heated at the noise about losing our trolleys. But, it makes sense to study all the options available before making such a huge investment.
Good luck to the Task Force. I hope we can find a strategy to avoid making such large cuts to our system.
“As you likely know, Metro Transit’s trolley buses are reaching the end of their useful life and will soon need to be replaced.”
I disagree.
According to the (highly flawed) audit that statement is true. According to reality – the conclusion has simply been pulld out of thin air.
There has been no consideration (that we consumers have seen anyway) to the idea that SOME of the trollebuses (namely the Bredas – which should never have been pressed into service in this configuration to begin with) need replacing. Others – namely the newer Gilligs – are doing just fine, and could continue on for at least another decade.
This idea that the ENTIRE FLEET needs to be replaced based on something as arbitrary as age only sounds more like a mid-life crisis than responsible policy.
End of Days for Trolleybuses (Again?)
http://pstransitoperators.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/end-of-da
http://world.nycsubway.org/us/seattle/seattletc.html
I want to second the idea that the electric trolleys must stay. What I find strange is the notion that there has been a loss of revenue when my observation is that rider-ship is up.
As a frequent rider of the #10, I an now beyond surprised by the number of people who don’t pay. One is the simple excuse of not being able to, or they forgot their pass. The other is to enter the bus and sitting down with out paying under the pretense they are looking for their transfer. Out comes a pile of transfers, choosing one that looks like the same color as being used that day, then flashing it at the driver. If everyone had to use a Orca card, Metro would be back in the black.
I too am upset by all of the free rides that people seem to get. The biggest problem are the ones who get on downtown in the free ride area and just walk off the bus when they get to their destination stop. What’s a driver supposed to do? Nothing. They are not allowed to intervene in anything, just drive, observe and report.
I really like the electric trolleys and hope that Metro keeps them on the wires. When I lived on the hill I took the #14 to and from work and I loved how quiet and efficient it was. I’m in another neighborhood now but I try to take an electric route when I can.
I’m curious what it means for a bus to reach the end of its useful life. I would expect that buses could be maintained by refurbishing or replacing parts as they wear out until their bodies and frames deteriorate.
As far as saving Seattle’s trolley buses are concerned, I’m all for it. A few suggestions:
-Buy 25-33% more articulated trolleys that what already exists (totalling 75-90 buses) for complete and total electrification of route 36 (no more half-diesel-half-trolley nonsense here!)
-Consider putting new “emergency turnbacks” on route 44 at N 45th St & Stone Way N and at NW Market St & 17th Ave NW.
-Consider putting an emergency loop on route 70 at Virginia St & Boren Ave.
Electric busses are how we insulate Metro from gas prices, plain and simple. We learned this the hard way in the 1970’s, and we should NOT have to repeat history. Please, noise and pollution are real issues too, but I think that hillclimbing ability and the relatively stable price of electricity should more than convince the key folks here. Don’t be poundfoolish. Don’t insist that we live by the ebb and flow of fossil fuel.
Yes, people cheating the system are frustrating, and there are things I would love to see Metro do (including continuing to increase ORCA usage, although it’s not without flaw itself given the crazy 24-hour delay for e-purse deposits to be recorded by the system) to decrease fare evasion.
But even at $3 million/year, give or take, you’re talking a tiny fraction of Metro’s overall budget hole. “Back in the black” is wishful thinking, I’m afraid.
*Do* remember that if gas prices spike or carbon taxation goes in, trolleybuses will suddenly turn out to be much, much cheaper to operate. Don’t make false “savings” which turn out to cost more later.
Trolly buses are quieter, don’t spew gas exhaust, and are more pleasant to ride than diesel buses. Let’s not waste more money studying that simple fact.
Perhaps if more streets were dedicated to public transport, and driving and parking were made more difficult, the ridership of buses, trollies, et al, would increase.
Could the buses be repaired? Is that too antiquated a concept? There used to be people called mechanics that fixed buses and trollies. Investing in people to maintain the current fleet only helps our local economy.
King County needs to preserve what trolleys are left. Yes, the 10 is useful but in the eyes of the deficit, it could be cut without too much problem. Trolleys are part of Seattle’s more recent history; they are clean, have agile tork, and last longer while running smoother and much quieter than diesel and hybrid busses. Seattle must keep what electric lines are available and possibly restore and add sections of them (when the economy picks up). When the audit comes out, politicians and citizens should push strongly for more electric busses because it means a cleaner, quieter King County, plus the busses would last longer.
Oops, I mean buses, not busses.
If you want to save electric bus service in King County, and you’re on Facebook, please join our group at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=133395816688760
Thanks!