i've seen this photo a hundred times, but never put it in the context of sounder crossing pacific.  when morgan posted it, it cracked me up.  duh.  of course.  what's old is new again, i suppose.  always thought it was a cool pic, but in the context of sounder crossing pacific, it's suddenly menacing.

also: somehow, it has the quality -- and commentary -- of an rr anderson sketch.

The were so many points brought up at the meeting last night that I can't recall all of them. Here's a few though:

It was stated that there are about 63 yellow flags (post it notes, really) in the City of Tacoma's Comprehensive Plan that raise questions about how Sound Transit is proceeding.

Because the Sounder is a train, the line to Lakewood is being built to a very heavy grade. This also makes the line attractive to Amtrak and Tacoma Rail, among others - these would be the heavy users (pardon the pun).

It is the assumption of Sound Transit that the line to Lakewood needs to be heavy rail. If a streetcar were used, it could easily make the incline that a bridge over Pacific would require. The end result would be a more flexible and neighborhood friendly system.

With Amtrak, Tacoma Rail, and others off the main line, Burlington Northern could then ramp up staging and freight traffic through the Thea Foss waterway, the waterfront, Old Town, and Ruston. Freight traffic and noise would then impact not just downtown but the entire North End.

This is a citywide issue.

morgan wrote:

The were so many points brought up at the meeting last night that I can't recall all of them. Here's a few though:

It was stated that there are about 63 yellow flags (post it notes, really) in the City of Tacoma's Comprehensive Plan that raise questions about how Sound Transit is proceeding.

Because the Sounder is a train, the line to Lakewood is being built to a very heavy grade. This also makes the line attractive to Amtrak and Tacoma Rail, among others - these would be the heavy users (pardon the pun).

It is the assumption of Sound Transit that the line to Lakewood needs to be heavy rail. If a streetcar were used, it could easily make the incline that a bridge over Pacific would require. The end result would be a more flexible and neighborhood friendly system.

With Amtrak, Tacoma Rail, and others off the main line, Burlington Northern could then ramp up staging and freight traffic through the Thea Foss waterway, the waterfront, Old Town, and Ruston. Freight traffic and noise would then impact not just downtown but the entire North End.

This is a citywide issue.

The proposed Sound Transit route is pretty well recognized as a big mistake that will severe downtown and be very detrimental for the city.  Many groups and professionals, especially architects are realizing what a mistake this is.

Our leading architects in Tacoma are telling us that the current Sound Transit proposal would be a big mistake and I tend to believe them.

Is it better to have the Sound Transit line delayed rather than have it sever downtown as currently planned.

Below is the North End Neighborhood's objection to the current route sent Wednesday, September 12, 2007.








North End Neighborhood Council

To: Mayor Baarsma and Tacoma City Council

Re: Sound Transit rail plans

The North End Neighborhood Council voted to send this advisory letter in support of revisiting the current Sound Transit rail plans that most noticeably affect the Dome District; Although the Dome District does not fall within the boundaries of the North End, the changes in rail traffic will almost certainly affect Old Town, which is a neighborhood business district in the North End.

Additionally, the rail plan is being billed as a hundred-year plan, but it does not take into account several features of Tacoma's own comprehensive plan. If the current rail plan goes into effect and negatively affects the city's livability, every neighborhood area will suffer.

We would like to see an independent assessment made of the current rail plans and of the other available options before the city council approves or supports any Sound Transit route. This will either inform the city of Tacoma how it can live with the current plans successfully or how Sound Transit can change the plans to accommodate the neighborhoods and people of this city.

Respectfully,

Kyle C. Price, NENC Recording Secretary on behalf of the NENC

Last edited by Erik (2007-09-14 05:31:36)

teflon801: You come and stay at my place for one night and then tell me how increased freight traffic sounds.

If there's going to be heavy rail traffic on this proposed line then perhaps they need to make a wise investment and route it around/over/under Pacific Ave.  The sort of traffic that Amtrak brings to mind seems too heavy for going across Pacific.  Also what about the Cascades train which uses the existing freight line?

You have to admit, there is something terribly romantic about a train running right through the middle of downtown...

what happen to the idea that would hide it away down in back of everything?  Seemed like that would have been a good idea........

The fight against Sound Transits Plans is looking ever more plausible and the poor design of the proposed route looking even more apparent.

Dan Voepel again writes about Tacoma's "Jedis" opposing sound Transit.

However, this time, they are gathering many allies on council

Good guys slow speeding train

In all the best adventure stories, just when the good guys look doomed, an unexpected twist inspires them to muster the grit and gumption to save the day.

...

It shouldn’t have worked. For years the council has accepted whatever Sound Transit wanted to do.

Not this time.

Jake Fey, Tom Stenger, Bill Evans and Bill Baarsma – members of the council’s Environment and Public Works Committee – voted to hire an independent expert for two primary duties.

• Investigate whether Sound Transit’s preferred route would violate one or more provisions of the city’s planning and zoning policies.

• Look for a preferable alternative route connecting Tacoma and Lakewood that preserves the economic development potential of the Dome District.

Baarsma got most fired up over how Sound Transit off-handedly rejected an alternative train route around the fringe of the district – proposed by local architects and popular with business groups – that would leave the area’s development potential intact.

“They said it was impossible† financially, Baarsma said, and left Tacoma with the “least objectionable† of a handful of objectionable options.

Evans declared that Tacoma had evolved in the 11 years since voters approved the creation of Sound Transit – and the new Tacoma deserves a transit strategy more befitting a renaissance city than an Industrial Age one.

“I’m getting upset here about our treatment, Stenger added. “How do get we Sound Transit’s attention? I feel snubbed.

Them’s fightin’ words. Finally.

They came as Tom Smith, chairman of the planning commission, and David Boe, vice chairman, argued that Sound Transit’s chosen route might violate multiple provisions of Tacoma’s planning policies...

“Where is your passion? Where is your stewardship for the future? And what kind of legacy do you want to have for the southern end of our downtown?


http://www.thenewstribune.com/business/ … 59436.html

Last edited by Erik (2007-09-20 02:13:08)

Erik wrote:

The train you show in the picture has only 5 or so sections.  The trains they run these days have a zillion.

If they ran freight over Pacific there'd be "a zillion;" some of the freight trains are over a mile long.

However, in the current one engine configuration, The Sounder cannot carry more than 7 cars. The Amtrak trains tend to be only slightly longer; and with the additional engines they use moving quicker (although, I'm sure there'd be a speed restriction on the crossing).

In reference to the picture of Mercer Ave in Seattle going under HWY 99, I don't see how this severs down town? Severs it from what? McCabe's?

The section of Mercer Ave that overpass runs through is about the same distance as from McCabe's to S 25th Street. The most highly impacted businesses being MLB tires, the King's Inn and Pink Elephant... 1 or 2 of which would have to be demolished for the rail line to go through. My only other concern would be access from Pacific Ave to South Tacoma Way, not that I use that interchange very often, but it would be an impact.

As far as the offer to come spend the night in the north end and hear the freight noise, I invite them to come spend the night at my house (Up the Hill at S 25th and Yakima) There's nothing like being lulled to sleep by the sound of the Freight Horn at A-street and humping train cars all night long.

And in the craziest complaint of all (not that I'm really complaining) but the dinner train returning at 10:30 and blowing it's horn to Cross East C Street is worse than the freight trains at A Street.

Last edited by Joel413 (2007-09-20 23:57:12)

Tacoma Planning Commissioner David Boe sketched his concern for Tacoma City Councilmembers today. He's concerned that the Sounder train extension through SoDo will cause problems that could "have a lasting impact on the viability of future development for all of Tacoma".


Dome District Before Before Sound Transit Route



Dome District Before Before Sound Transit Route



(These images are not very legible here.  Look to Kevins site for larger views)

http://www.kevinfreitas.net/journal/dav … rspective/

Last edited by Erik (2007-09-27 02:06:04)

Reading more into this mounting battle, being the historian that I am, I find this situation, ironically, filled with close parallels to events that took place exactly 101 years ago, with a twist. 

I'll elaborate.  According to the Holter and Mcabee book "Rails to Paradise," a history of the Tacoma Eastern Railroad,  when the Milwaukee Road (Railway) was purchasing property for their eventual terminus in Tacoma, they filed a request for right-of-way vacation of all bisecting city streets between East A street and Portland Avenue.  At a city council meeting on September 19, 1906, a Tacoma Eastern R.R.  lawyer,  John Shackelford, spoke against the request: "It would be a serious detriment to that end of the city if you allow them to be closed."  Sound familiar?  The Council did vacate all of the streets with the exception of East A, C and D streets.  Ironic!  However, the protest was voiced mostly by the Tacoma Eastern Railroad.  Why?  Because they wanted to dispel rumors that the Milwaukee Road was actually in control of their railroad, which they were!  They also wanted to keep A, C and D streets open without leading on to the two railroad's connection (those streets benefited the Tacoma Eastern North/South yard).  It was a ruse tactic! 

As it turned out, when the Milwaukee did take over the Tacoma Eastern, they utilized their old (1906) Arts and Crafts Depot by relocating it facing east-west adjacent to East A. st. and between E. 25'th and E. 26th.  Ironically, the "golden spike" (or last driven spike) for the Milwaukee Road took place, LITERALLY, in the East D street crossing, effectively completing the only northern transcontinental railroad to build its own line between Chicago and the Pacific.  It was even rumored that (to the hopes of most Tacomans) the Milwaukee would build a grand station right off 25'th and Pacific.  This never happened, probably because the Northern Pacific, for the first time sensing the competition, beat them to the punch and built Union Station in 1911 (Note: Look up "Villard's Depot" for more information on the subject).






Below, I have linked three Sanborn fire insurance maps from the mid 1920's
showing this area between Pacific Ave. and East D. St. (the links should work!).   
Map #1
Map#2
Map#3

If you take a look, at D St., there were four tracks that branched off and crossed at this intersection (storage, platform, and mainline tracks).  The McKinley Hill streetcar also ran up D street and crossed the tracks at this intersection as well.  At C street there was a six track crossing. The  A street crossing was closed during this era, as the main platform tracks and Railway Express Agency building were located here.  The platform tracks extended almost to Pacific, about where the Elephant Car Wash is today.  This same set up existed, in service, until about 1954, when the Milwaukee built a new (shack like) Depot on the Tideflats.  The old depot was sold in the late sixties and, along with the platform tracks, were demolished in 1972.

From all the accounts that I have read, the "Dome district" back during this period, when it was the Hawthorne/Mckinley Hill neighborhoods, was a rather friendly, walkable area.   According to the Tacoma Metro Parks website, kids would often slide down McKinley Park hillside on cardboard, picking hazelnuts from the trees.  South 30'th St. (now the I-5 downtown off ramp) used to be a "lovers lane" and the illuminated rocks spelling McKinley Park were visible at night from below. 

What, literally, demolished this area, and severed my neck of the woods from downtown, was the creation of I-5, the Tacoma Dome, and I-705 between the 60's and 80's.  This process relocated over 600 families, severed South/East 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th streets from east to west, and severed South A, East C, E, F, K, M and N streets from their North/South connections, as well as closing off East G, McKinley, I and J streets from the streets that looped 360 around McKinley Park. 

I also find it ironic (I mentioned this in a previous post) that the locally preferred routing for the Sounder connection (behind Brown and Haley, under A st and Pacific, etc..) actually had an industrial rail spur that closely followed this same path; to service Commerce St. businesses (check Map#1 above).  However, it crossed, at grade level, C st., A st., Pacific, Delin, South Tacoma Way and 25'th streets. 

Okay, If you've read this far, my history lesson is done for today.  You get a cookie!

Last edited by TheGulag (2007-09-27 11:22:50)

In Pierce County, we can achieve more traffic relief by extending light rail within Tacoma to the University of Puget Sound and Pacific Lutheran University."

Exactly. We need to build up our infrastructure and ridership in order to support extending the a regional system down here. But more to the point, by creating a more robust rail-based transit system in Tacoma we can focus on creating more livable dense neighborhoods with employment centers so people won't have to commute to Seattle in the first place.

Re: Proposition #1:

Below is next Tuesday's City Council Agenda.

http://131.191.130.69/cityclerk/Files/C … 100207.pdf

Very interesting and odd.

Item #11548 is a request to support Proposition #1 for more sales and vehicle taxes for transit funding.  This is expected.

In an odd twist, item No. 11549 before the council the same night is a proposed resolution against proposition #1.

I have never seen that before. The council has supported state policies before but I have never seen them have an option to oppose the same measure as well.  The council could just decline to support proposition #1.  Yet, there is an affirmative proposal to vote to oppose the measure.

I would be interested how opposing measures got on the agenda.

Should be very lively.

I assume there are council members who have asked that a measure supporting and opposing proposition #1 be on the agenda.

As Jake notes,King County Executive Ron Sims in populous King County has come out against proposition #1:

"Rail ridership from Seattle to downtown Bellevue and Overlake would be "lackluster," he writes in a Seattle Times op-ed piece published this morning. And he says a proposed line through Federal Way to Tacoma would duplicate express-bus service that is being added by King County Metro Transit. The plan's long 20-year construction period and an absence of highway tolls to try to reduce congestion make the plan inadequate, Sims writes."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/n … ms28m.html

Ron Sims is the King County executive in populous King County.  The Seattle Press is giving him alot of play on his opposition to it.  As noted above, the Sierra Club is opposing the measure.

Here's what the Stranger is reporting:

But despite the environmentalists' efforts, the measure failed to win endorsement—

Why would the liberal 36th reject a proposal that indisputably would change Seattle's transit picture for the better? Because that rail expansion comes saddled with hundreds of new miles of pavement . . .

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=401517

Should Sound Transit press ahead with this measure or put forth another transportation package that is more focused on transit?

Last edited by Erik (2007-09-28 08:13:10)