Cascadia Report

Category: Transportation

  • How Cascadia can gain from the coming train boom

    Train projects across the U.S. have new life thanks to the priorities of "Amtrak Joe" and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. To benefit, Cascadia needs an aggressive plan to build better rail service instead of a massive new airport to replace Sea-Tac.

    high speed rail Cascadia via shutterstockImproved rail will help accommodate future population growth from Vancouver to Eugene without destroying the environment. The alternative is the status quo: continued runaway sprawl helped by more roads — all supercharged by plans for a new airport somewhere in Western Washington. This can't happen if we care about climate change. 

    The Biden administration's enthusiasm for trains is the latest step in development of Cascadia's transportation connections. Now the region needs to resolve the scope, routing, and cost of trains, and kill the idea of a new airport once and for all.

    Faster trains or much faster trains

    Conventional Amtrak Cascades service, which maxes out at 79 miles per hour, has gradually become faster and more frequent, but it still takes 4-4.5 hours between Seattle and Vancouver or Portland. Washington's 2006 rail plan called for $6.5 billion in improvements to rails, signals, stations, and other infrastructure by 2023 to get much better service: 13 daily round-trip trains between Seattle and Portland in 2:30, and four daily roundtrips between Seattle and Vancouver in 2:37. Unfortunately the timeline has been extended repeatedly; the target is now 2040, according to the state's latest noncommittal update. 

    More recently, Microsoft and governments across the region promoted true high-speed rail (HSR) — around 250 miles per hour — between Seattle, Vancouver, and Portland. But issues include whether getting between the cities in an hour is even necessary. The Ultra High Speed Ground Transportation Framework insists there will be demand, though exploring maglev and hyperloop technology seems unserious.

    Cost estimates range from $24 to $42 billion, depending on technology, routing, and the location of the terminal stations. Some early analysis was done in 2017 by Seattle Transit Blog, arguing for HSR between Vancouver's waterfront and Seattle's King Street Station. It would be cheaper to terminate in Surrey, with last-mile connections to downtown and other points in the Lower Mainland such as YVR.

    A better option is upgrading conventional service, including with new, more direct track in sections. For example, use I-5 right of way where possible rather than slowly snaking along Puget Sound. It's not clear that the route can't be straighter without completely starting over as necessary to get to 250 mph. Current technology seems less risky and could concentrates growth in existing cores like Bellingham, Burlington, Everett, Centralia, and Kelso.

    Kill the new airport

    The idea of a new airport to replace Sea-Tac goes back at least to the early 1990s, with planning for a third runway. The airport is still constricted by small land area.

    Washington created a commission that is supposed to recommend a location for a brand-new major airport by the end of this year. Already it narrowed the options to six existing airports: Arlington, Bremerton, Paine Field, Shelton, Gig Harbor, and South Lewis County Airport. All have problems and would encounter opposition to major expansion, not to mention disastrous environmental impacts.

    Much of the need could be relieved if trains tied directly into transit and connected to Sea-Tac, similar to how DB trains connect to Frankfurt airport.

    Most of Sea-Tac's traffic is small planes and, before the pandemic around 10% of daily flights were to two places: PDX and YVR. In 2019, there were 450,487 total operations (averaging 1,200 a day, or 68 an hour assuming an 18-hour day). In 2019, there were an average of 96 flights per day between SEA and PDX, and 24 per day SEA to YVR, according to Kayak.com.

    According to the FAA, Sea-Tac's capacity is 56-99 flights/hour depending on weather. Shifting PDX and YVR flights to rail opens an entire hour of capacity. Much of the rest could be accommodated by up-gauging planes. By comparison, Narita airport handled most of Japan’s commerce for decades with a single runway with fewer large planes on each route. A new airport in Washington seems like another megaproject in search of a purpose.

    The key is integrating planning for ground and air transportation. A $24-$42 billion rail program isn’t prohibitive if it eliminates the need for new airport. It's an investment to spur development of transit, density, and less car-intensive cities for a fraction of the cost of freeway expansion.

    More from the Cascadia Report archives:

  • After a year of COVID-19, ready for a cruise

    Cruises may soon resume between Alaska and Washington, boosting tourism in both states but cutting out British Columbia.

    Alaska cruises typically stop in B.C. because U.S. law prohibits foreign-flagged vessels – most of the industry – from transporting passengers directly between two American ports. In 2019, Victoria and Vancouver had a combined total of 553 ship visits.

    COVID-19 cruise to alaska from seattle skip vancouver and victoria

    After Ottawa extended its ban on cruises until Feb. 2022 – saying these sailing petri dishes potentially tax the healthcare system – Alaska’s U.S. senators announced plans for an exemption that would allow cruises to skip Canada.

    Given  a year of COVID-19, a cruise may not be on everyone’s to-do list. Yet the industry is a driver of Cascadia’s previously booming tourism sector, even if the environmental impacts are severe and the economic benefits are probably overstated.

    The ships are floating cities, burning dirty fuel and bringing a city’s worth of sewage. Canada should use the current hiatus as an opportunity to ban dumping raw waste and cut emissions, notes a recent report. (Luckily Victoria's Mr. Floatie isn't fully retired yet.)

    The biggest economic benefit goes to home ports, which get the flights, hotel stays, restaurant visits and shopping before and after sailings. Vancouver had the Alaska cruise market to itself until 1999, when Seattle's terminal opened and faster ships made it attractive, especially for American passengers. In 20 years, Seattle's business grew to 1.2 million annual passengers, generating $900 million and 5,500 jobs in 2019, according to the Port of Seattle. Despite the competition, Vancouver still had 800,000 passengers in the last year before the pandemic.

    The growth wasn't a straight line. For example, in 2006 Cascadia Report wrote about Seattle losing a cruise line to Vancouver. That turned out to be a blip.

    Surely cruises will be back eventually. Now is a chance for some towns to take Sitka's example and reorient toward independent travel and for the region to rethink blind investment given the pros and cons of the industry.

  • Cutting Amtrak at exactly the wrong time

    It looks like the Canadian national bureaucracy is STILL dragging its feet on adding needed rail service between Vancouver and Seattle. Meanwhile in Washington, legislators are planning to cut improvements that would make Amtrak faster and more reliable, while allowing more trains in the future.

    Every dollar is important in tough budgetary times like these. So why are improvements to I-5 going ahead – even without tolling mechanisms to lower the implicit subsidy for roads and private automobiles? We should be adding tolls in areas with "freeway" improvements while investing to make rail travel more competitive.

    Instead travel options are limited. Canada wants U.S. taxpayers to cover the cost of a Canadian customs agent, despite the expected financial windfall a second daily train would bring to B.C.  For now it looks like a second train will cross the border each day during the winter Olympics — but not after.

  • Argument against another Seattle airport

    Sea-Tac's third runway just opened , after two decades and a billion dollars. Now some say the Seattle area needs another airport.

    But we're better off encouraging a single major airport (especially if it's conveniently connected to high-speed rail for Vancouver-Portland travelers). Consider Heathrow and this letter from the Economist:

    SIR – The Economist noted that since 1990 the route network at Heathrow has decreased, while transfer traffic has increased (“The right side of the argument”, November 8th). However, the subsequent claim that transfer passengers are of limited economic value is incorrect. It is in fact evidence of the market forces caused by a capacity-constrained airport.

    Slots at Heathrow trade for up to £25m ($37m), clear evidence that given new capacity, the network would grow. Until Heathrow is permitted additional capacity, airlines will understandably make the rational, economic decision to focus the limited slots available to them on the most profitable routes. This is tenable in the short term, but over the long term Britain’s economy will suffer from not being able to offer direct links to cities in the growing economies of India and China. Around two-thirds of routes at Heathrow are supported by transfer passengers who make up 25-40% of the people who fly on them. Without these passengers, major business destinations such as Bangalore, Chennai and Seattle would all disappear.

    It is naive to think transfer passengers do not offer any wider economic benefits—the direct, global links that these passengers support are Britain’s gateway to the world economy. Heathrow is Britain’s only hub airport and a vital economic asset. If Heathrow is to stay in the global league, then a third runway is vital to keep it, and by extension Britain, competitive.

  • Extend the streetcar line now

    I stopped by a forum on the proposed extensions of Seattle’s streetcar yesterday afternoon — and heard more objections to the idea of a citywide network than vision to make such a system work.

    At question is the idea of extending Seattle’s stunted 1.3-mile line to actually go somewhere. It could be a viable transportation system that would encourage development and make owning and driving a car in the city less essential.

    Financing and design are legitimate obstacles that can be solved. Public support will follow — just as in Toronto and countless other cities where streetcars are commonplace.

    What we shouldn’t do is talk this issue to death at endless public forums. I didn’t hear one concern that couldn’t be met. Losing parking on local streets? More people will take streetcars and walk. Cannibalizing bus service? We need to invest in more, better bus service too. One man talked about efficient express bus service in Vancouver as an example of what we should do. Fine, but that and streetcars aren’t mutually exclusive.

    By all means, get citizen input on the route and design. Then let’s build it.

  • Wanted at Sea-Tac: Pride of place

    How does Seattle greet visitors? If they get off a flight at Sea-Tac’s gate N-15, the answer is with a dingy jetway that has a severely waterstained ceiling, discolored walls and wet wood between the floor joints.

    sea-tac crowd; komotv.comThe dark and crowded North Satellite terminal was a jarring change after my recent flight from the airy, modern facility in Toronto. Luckily flights from Canada clear U.S. customs before they take off so at least those passengers can avoid Sea-Tac’s 70s-era international arrivals area in the South Satellite.

    Sea-Tac’s embarrassment is about more than aesthetics. With its new facilities, Vancouver is wooing Seattle fliers and more business because airlines prefer its new terminal. Each flight means thousands of dollars in economic benefit on the ground.

    There’s a comprehensive plan to remodel Sea-Tac — eventually. There also are examples of how to use the space more efficiently. It wouldn’t hurt to start with basics.

  • Deal to boost Seattle-Vancouver rail service

    A second daily Amtrak train between Seattle and Vancouver will be added next year, thanks to a breakthrough deal that should build support for more service along the route.

    British Columbia will help pay for a passing track in Delta, which should help relieve a major bottleneck. Currently the 30 miles north of the border accounts for nearly half of the four-hour trip between Seattle and Vancouver. Shortening the travel time from downtown to downtown will make the train far more competitive with driving or flying, especially ahead of the 2010 Olympics.

    Adding a second train will make it possible to do a round trip from Vancouver in a single day. B.C. said it expects another 50,000 visitors to visit Vancouver in first year of the additional train.

    Separately, Amtrak said ridership on the Cascades service between Eugene and Vancouver is up, with revenue rising 18 percent in the last four months. Additional traffic should build public support for further improvements along the corridor.

  • Incentives lure nonstop connection to Paris

    Air France will launch the first nonstop flights from Seattle to Paris, a sign that that a package of incentives designed to lure international flights may be paying off.

    air france a330; spottersblog.comA nonstop to Paris has been under discussion for years — I remember reading that it was imminent in a Seattle Weekly article at least a decade ago. Meanwhile Seattle has steadily lost international air connections to Hong Kong, China, Mexico and elsewhere, despite the region’s growth as a travel market and even as Vancouver and Portland added flights.

    Under a plan approved last week by the Port of Seattle, landing fees for new international air service will be waived during their first year and 75 percent of the fees the following year, according to the Seattle P-I. Facilities charges will be cut 75 percent for each of the first two years, and the Port will contribute $250,000 the first year, $160,000 the second year and $45,000 the third year to a marketing program for the route.

    Oregon used a similar marketing program to lure nonstop routes to Mexico, Japan and Germany. Portland beat Seattle to lure Germany flights and has since restored several domestic nonstops. Compared to some of the other financial deals ports do, these incentives are practically a bargain.

  • Portland restores more nonstop flights

    Alaska Airlines is starting its first transcontinental flights from Portland, restoring business-friendly service the city lost years ago.

    The flights from Portland to Boston and Orlando will be the first such nonstops since Delta dismantled its Portland hub in the 1990s. Before deregulation of trans-Pacific flights, Delta operated daily nonstops from Portland to at least six cities in Asia and major cities in the U.S. It dropped almost all of those when it was allowed to shift the flights to Los Angeles and Atlanta.

    The flights are another win for PDX, which has gradually wooed airlines to restore nonstop service — a key amenity for area businesses. Incentives are behind Lufthansa’s nonstops to Frankfurt and Northwest’s to Tokyo. Presumably Alaska also sees potential profit in restoring nonstops.

  • What’s lost in Sea-Tac’s Christmas tree fiasco

    The controversy over Christmas trees at Sea-Tac Airport has deflected criticism from an issue that could use more scrutiny: whether the airport is doing its job.

    Christmas tree at Japan's Narita Airport; photo courtesy Narita City, JapanBy now the story is known worldwide: after a rabbi threatened legal action to install a menorah next to Christmas trees in the arrivals lobby, airport staff panicked and had workers remove the trees in the dead of night. Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, which owns the airport, were consulted before the trees were removed and then spent days doing media interviews. Then late Monday, after a barrage of criticism, the Port decided to reinstall the “holiday trees” after all.

    It’s tempting to see this as an example of the larger inefficiencies at the airport, which could have used the last few days’ management time and attention to boost its efficiency. The airport spokeswoman said they decided to remove the trees because they were too busy with the crush of December travelers to handle the vexing decision of what to do about the menorah. But the rabbi first brought up the idea in October and was rebuffed until he threated a lawsuit. Meanwhile Sea-Tac continues to lose business.

    The trees issue may get even more attention at the Port Commission’s Tuesday afternoon meeting, where the agenda includes mundane tasks such as vetting about $18 million in contracts.