Saving our communal storm sewer, Puget Sound
Annals of Nathan Myhrvold and the many fathers of invention, by Malcolm Gladwell
Seattle Mariners »An international search for a Gates Foundation CEO ends on the Microsoft campus
Science / Environment »In just decades, a Lake Washington fish evolved to survive without pollution
Food »Ah, about that Copper River salmon: not such a good 'carbon footprint'
Port of Seattle »As a reformist port commission gets sea legs, there is push-back from the staff
Politics / Government »A review of public disclosure exemptions rouses the constituencies behind them
Seattle goes gah-gah over choo-choos
The city's own series of tubes
Fast times and loads of fun, despite expensive gas
The Northwest's real fairy tales
Spin the bottle: The climate-action mayor misses the point on drinking water
A city of scolds
(23 comments)
Seattle goes gah-gah over choo-choos
(9 comments)
Responding to her readers on paid family leave
(6 comments)
Why Hillary Clinton should stay in the race
(6 comments)
The city's own series of tubes
(5 comments)
Puget Sound on Prozac
(4 comments)
Fast times and loads of fun, despite expensive gas
(3 comments)
Hillary Clinton, will you please go now!
(3 comments)
Memo to the owners of the Mariners
(3 comments)
Strange figure sighted at the City Council
(3 comments)
Cascadia wants to grab the Eastside rail line that might otherwise be torn up for a walking trail and make it into a Snohomish-to-Renton commuter rail line. (Cheap, but the line does not really go where the cities are.) The institute wants to solve the Alaskan Way Viaduct problem by boring a tunnel under Second Avenue, deflecting the through traffic so the waterfront only needs a modest surface boulevard. (Expensive, and needing a private partner, which alarms public-sector Democrats.) And now, a network of foot ferries on Puget Sound.
Not so fast. While we are enjoying a binge of nostalgia for old-fashioned transit, such as streetcars, this is an idea with more problems than charm. First, let's hear the pitch, from Agnew's column in the Sunday Focus section of the Sunday Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
The Port Townsend-Seattle holiday season run illuminated a tantalizing past-as-prologue notion. Passenger-only vessels should still be crisscrossing the Salish Sea, breaching political boundaries in Puget Sound and someday British Columbia, as they did when Native American and First Nation tribes used these waterways for trading and socializing. Later in our pre-interstate highway history, the ubiquitous "Mosquito Fleet" foot ferries carried people and goods from Victoria to Olympia.
Regional leaders increasingly get that foot ferries using our abundant waterways can establish new and direct city-to-city connections, plus temporarily substitute for dry-docked car ferries, and provide crucial emergency transportation if a major earthquake destroys our bridges and highways — as San Francisco tragically experienced in 1989.
Pie in the sky, I say, with some regret. Among the problems, which have long bedeviled such attempts at revival, are these. Ferries take large parking lots, which are devilishly hard to shoehorn into existing cities. They move very small numbers of people, mostly tourists and some executive commuters, for quite high costs (including fuel). Since they are mostly for tourists, they don't work in our long rainy season. They require cross-jurisdictional agreements that are notoriously hard to execute in our Balkanized politics. They have to slow down in some critical places, lest their wakes disturb shorelines. And they siphon off money from the car-and-passenger ferries, which badly need the funds.
An illustration of these points is the Vashon Island ferry, where for reasons of cost the state had to get out of the foot ferry business to downtown Seattle. Of course, there are ferries to West Seattle where, if you could ever convince Metro to run lots of coordinated buses from the terminal to downtown, you could effectively have an autoless service, saving millions of dollars. Hasn't happened. Not Metro's problem.
I rest my case.
You point to the fact that Metro doesn't offer good transportation service now as a reason why it won't offer it in the future. We now have a strong and compelling need to fix the regional transportation problems and passenger ferries are a potential part of a viable system. Yes, Metro has been shackled by a moronic operating agreement that forces it to provide lousy service where it has riders and good service where no one uses it. Yes, we have never had a coordinated transit system, and we have never had the leadership to create something, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. These are small, simple fixes that any competent administrator could implement (as the Kitsap County Transit authority already has done), and you hold that up as a reason for throwing out a perfectly decent solution.
We've heard some negative comments about foot ferries, so just for balance let's hear from the other side. The first thing we have to accept about ferries - be they foot or auto - is that they will always require public funding for operational and capital expenses. In that regard they are no different from roads, buses, bike paths, passenger rail and all other forms of public transportation. That being said, there is room for public/private partnerships and I'm convinced it is only through a public/private partnership that foot ferries will ever be feasible. There are workable models in the SF Bay area and in New York. Second, it is a myth that large parking lots are needed to serve foot ferries. Multiple small lots served by frequent shuttle service worked brilliantly when WSF and Kitsap Transit operated foot ferries. The other big advantage of foot ferries is that they reduce the need for large terminals and large road systems designed to handle ridership peaks associated with the large boats WSF now operates. Currently, WSF pushes a huge mass of cars and people through its terminals four to six times a day. The facilites and connecting roads are, and must be, designed (at great cost) to handle these periodic massive surges. And despite the effort to design for these surges, the facilities are overwhelmed during peak commute times. It's like trying to push a pig through a snake. The rest of the time the facilities and roads are underutilized. Smaller, faster, more frequent foot ferries, combined with frequent landside shuttle service would minimize the surges and the need to continually invest in terminals and roads to serve them. In addition, there's no need to repave the water - ever. Nor is there a need to buy right-of-way - it's already publicly owned. The only real obstacle to effective foot ferry service is the same obstacle faced by all public transportation - the growing percentage of the populace that is unwilling to pay for something that they don't personally use. As long as this attitude prevails, public transportation will remain a political quagmire.
Report a violationPosted by: bh88keys on Feb 11, 2008 1:58 AM