West Seattle snow aftermath: Bus-problem postmortem plans

(12/18/08 photo by Raymond Overgaard)
This morning, we published a reminder about this week’s reduced Metro service – planned long before Snowmare ’08 – and additional information from a Metro spokesperson regarding why the online “bus tracker” didn’t work reliably during the peak of the snow/ice woes. Since Metro is a county-provided service, your elected county leaders are the people in a position to hold the agency’s leadership accountable – and one of them, West Seattle’s County Councilmember Dow Constantine, who chairs the council’s Transportation Committee, posted this comment below that post:

I hear you. I, and plenty of others here at the King County Council, am very focused on fixing the problems that plagued transit riders during the recent snowfall. Because of the condition of the roads, Metro managers had to leave most of our articulated buses out of service during most snow days, which meant that the system was operating at only about 50 percent capacity.

I salute Metro’s employees for their diligent work under extremely adverse conditions. However, I was also dismayed by the serious communications failures I learned of from the media, my constituents, and my bus-riding employees. I wrote to Metro General Manager Kevin Desmond two days before Christmas outlining my concerns with the goal of meeting with him personally in the first week of January and arranging a County Council briefing shortly thereafter. The issues I raised in my letter included Metro’s phone and website communications, the difficulty of getting information on modified (snow) routes to bus riders, bus frequency to popular destinations, and the general issue of areas which were completely unserved by transit during the snowfall.

Although the Seattle area rarely gets a snowfall of this size or duration, we need to learn from both mistakes and successes and to improve performance under adverse weather and other emergency conditions.

One more Metro-related note: The agency spokesperson who has proactively worked to get us information about some of the system’s issues during the past few weeks, Linda Thielke, did come up with a page that includes more details on the upcoming technology upgrades to make Metro buses more trackable (she had mentioned earlier that GPS location would be in place by 2010) – read about the “smart bus” plans here; online references we found independently say it’s a $25 million project.

23 Replies to "West Seattle snow aftermath: Bus-problem postmortem plans"

  • Biil L K. December 29, 2008 (10:10 pm)

    WSB – You keep saying this reduced schedule was planmed for sometime. I have never read that this was going to be the plan. The partial holiday was listed in all the buses as the day after xmas and day after new years…not the whole week. Where are you getting this info. I also noticed this morning all the rider alerts had been changed to include this week. Please tell me where you read this because METRO is just dropping the ball. This was never planned or at least they communicated with you, not me…agh! I’m so frustrated with METRO. Dow…FIX IT! An organization that is soo damn top heavy should not have made this many mistakes. WSB I also heard there was a new emergency plan that was formed since 9/11, I heard that KC did not activate/follow it…it would be interesting what they didn’t follow and if Metro is listed. As one person said, bus service should not descrease during snow, only increase! And c’mon cancel routes after the snow? People haven’t left their homes for 2weeks! Ok, I’m done.

  • RobertSeattle December 29, 2008 (10:20 pm)

    Hey Metro – ever heard of Twitter?… :-) If we could all get our bus drivers to twitter whenever there is a change of schedule but that would just be too easy.

  • WSB December 29, 2008 (10:23 pm)

    BLK – direct quote from Linda Thielke at Metro, in this item we published last Wednesday:
    https://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=13089
    Her quote there is directly cut-and-pasted from e-mail she sent us – we had previously been exchanging e-mail discussing the daily bus status and questions that WSB’ers had – then last Wednesday she sent me this note flagging the upcoming schedule changes. I have no knowledge of what Metro was saying to riders BEFORE then – we were focusing our coverage on what was, and wasn’t, happening each individual day of the storm. But on 12/24, she called our attention to the upcoming schedule change and said it had been in the works since before the snowstorm. – TR

  • Biil L K. December 29, 2008 (10:27 pm)

    thanks, WSB is doing great…it’s too bad we get more info from you then our government, but that’s the beauty of your site. Great work!

  • WSB December 29, 2008 (10:45 pm)

    RobertS – That’s similar to our suggestion in a rare “editorial”-type item we wrote over the weekend, second half of this post:
    https://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=13143
    So often in the corporate and government world (we’ve worked in the former and extensively covered the latter), the “solutions” tend toward institutional and expensive … but there are so many simple, out-of-the-box, scalable technologies available that could be implemented for a lot less.
    At the HQ level, several local agencies are experimenting with Twitter – WSDOT most successfully (@wsdot) — SDOT tried it for a week during the storm (@sdotsnow).
    I know how these things go when they start – “I can’t do that TOO” – it happened in TV, when we told reporters/writers they had to file their stories to the Web as well as write them for air – but you just.get.used.to.it. when you have to. Or – write a program to somehow translate a radio transmission or location beacon or (?) into a “tweet” so it’s not added workload beyond the technowhiz who writes said program!

  • alki_2008 December 29, 2008 (11:00 pm)

    I’m not too familiar with Twitter, but understand that it’ll only be useful to folks that have access to read/receive such messages.

    Could you communicate to Metro higher-ups that they also need to communicate schedule changes in a low-tech way too. The latest bus schedules (orange) and the info kiosks at the bus stops didn’t have any indication that this week is “partial holiday”. Those schedules only indicated 12/26, 1/2, 11/26, and MLK day. I had to check this blog to see that today was “H” and to stop waiting for a bus that wasn’t coming. What about all the folks that don’t check the blog?

    What’s worse…when I got on a different route and asked the driver about the “H” schedule, he didn’t have a clue about “partial holiday” schedules. Ugh! I hope increased training is included in their post-mortem plans to get a user’s view of how to improve service to customers.

    Thanks for all the time your staff spends getting us info that we should be receiving from the respective agencies themselves.

  • Daddy Warbucks December 29, 2008 (11:13 pm)

    twitter? really? it’s against the law to text while driving and you want out bus drivers putting out twitter updates in while navigating the snow? Twitter is about the lamest thing I’ve ever seen. We got GPS on the way, I doubt this will happen again before that. But if it does, yeah…use twitter…it’s gonna be relevant for at least another 2 months.

  • carraig na splinkeen December 30, 2008 (7:07 am)

    My favorite part of Constantine’s piece is: “…my bus-riding employees”

  • Jack Loblaw December 30, 2008 (8:00 am)

    Does anyone know if light rail or a monorail would have been able to operate during Snow-mageddon 2008 ?

  • Bob December 30, 2008 (8:06 am)

    Dow,

    Are you going to stand up and oppose the transportation-crippling 80/20 rule?

    Here’s what Metro claims that the new computerized boxes will do: “Ensures that future transportation services are provided when and where they are needed most,” because of counting passengers at the farebox in a more electronic-bleeping manner.

    They already know where service is needed most. And they will not put services where they are needed most, for political reasons. They already count the bleeps at the farebox. This new gizmo is only a technological reshuffling on top of the County Council’s ongoing, underlying bad transportation planning.

    Service is needed most on routes like the 3/4 to Harborview and Swedish Cherry Hill. They’re packed so tight that people can’t get on them at the bus stops, even on good days.

    Meanwhile, 80% of all new Metro service hours have been going, for many years now, to rural King County. Service is getting worse where it’s needed most. The political management of Metro’s planning and budgets is a an ongoing travesty. This 80% waste of new service is the elephant in the room.

    The enormous deficit in Metro’s Seattle service needs to be corrected by a 100% allocation of new hours to Seattle core service, for the next 20 years, to catch up to where we should be now.

    And still, with all this new bleeping gadgetry, Metro’s most needed improvements will continue to get almost nothing from the King County Council. That means you. What are you going to do about it?

  • carraig na splinkeen December 30, 2008 (8:11 am)

    The Puget Sound Regional Council is currently updating the region’s long-range transportation plan. You can make comments or even help shape its outcome. Such things as the 40/40/20 subarea equity policy (which it is more commonly referred to as) is something that can be measured against the alternatives that are currently being weighed.
    Go to: http://psrc.org/projects/mtp/index.htm

  • KT December 30, 2008 (9:16 am)

    Glad to see someone finally bringing up the complete failure of Metro to provide the services it is being funded to provide as a mass transit system. But the storm has beaten me down and I doubt anything will change there or at City Hall. Actions speak louder than words.

  • Bob December 30, 2008 (9:22 am)

    Carraig,

    Most of the members of the King County Council represent the other geographical areas outside of our transit-stressed urban core. The money for new service is being allocated on that basis. 80% for the areas represented by the County Council’s other geographical districts. And 20% for the densely bus-riding areas.

    Metro is not an independent agency that can do honest planning for itself. It’s beholden to the County Council’s political system where the Council’s geographically-elected members overwhelmingly allocate that new service money for their own home districts.

    What you so apparatchik-ly call the “subarea equity plan,” I call political porky corruption of what should be a much more honest look at where the service money should go.

    Where is Nickels in this? Where is the City Council? Dow is on the PSRC. Get some City allies together, and get Ron Sims to stick his neck out in favor of making Metro more independent of your pork barrel colleagues and much more able to make its own decisions about where to put buses.

  • iggy December 30, 2008 (9:57 am)

    I rode the 22, 54X, 12 and 2 buses yesterday for a round trip to Polyclinic from Morgan Junction and a bit of shopping in between. I think many people took the week off because the buses were all on time and virtually empty. The buses all had paper signs posted inside about the Holiday Partial Closures. Well, I have an advanced degree and am used to reading bureaucratic tomes, but the notices were totally incomprehensible. All sorts of verbage about how some buses were on partial holiday schedules or not operating on certain dates. Then, they launched into a discussion about the dates. Seems that IF your bus is on holiday or partial holiday schedule on, for example, December 26th, then it MAY be on a truncated schedule on other days between Christmas and New Years. Bottom line: Told me NOTHING about my bus. Hope Metro can find someone who can write basic English for future communications. At a minimum, they should test the signs out on a few people on buses to see if they are understandable to Joe and Jane Public. Just my two cents.

  • chas redmond December 30, 2008 (10:19 am)

    Here’s another thought: The new RapidRide buses are articulated and supposed to operate on 10-15 minute intervals for a minimum of 18 hours a day. How would these buses have fared in this storm? If they would have fared poorly, perhaps it’s time we took another look at the specifications prior to actually putting any of them in service – though I understand we’ve already purchased at least 18 of them.

  • carraig na splinkeen December 30, 2008 (12:36 pm)

    Bob
    not in anyway defending the 40/40/20. I work in the field so know the issues but if folks don’t speak out those who do are the ones who get their voices listened to.

  • Dow Constantine December 30, 2008 (1:33 pm)

    The 40/40/20 policy for allocating new transit service in King County was imposed in 2002 through Metro’s Six-Year Transit Development Plan. It was approved by the County Council after bitter debate, with all Seattle and Shoreline members (six Democrats) voting “no,” and all suburban members (six Republicans and one Democrat) voting “yes.” New bus service is now distributed by the following formula: 40 percent to the East subarea, 40 percent to the South subarea, and 20 percent to the West subarea, which is comprised of the cities of Seattle and Shoreline. There are now only nine members on the Council, but suburban districts still outnumber Seattle/Shoreline districts by a five-to-four margin.

    The argument for the 40/40/20 policy was that the West subarea received the lion’s share of bus service hours—about 60 percent in 2002. The idea was to diminish this imbalance as new service was brought on line. It will even out further once service from the 2006 Transit Now ballot issue is implemented, although almost one-quarter of the Transit Now hours are provided through partnerships with cities and businesses and are exempt from the 40/40/20 policy.

    Although I was on the losing side of the 40/40/20 debate, it is incorrect to characterize that vote as anything other than democracy at work. Members representing a majority of the county’s residents (who pay a majority of the taxes) voted to change the way future service additions were distributed (but, notably, not to reallocate existing service). I continue to disagree with the decision, and continue to work toward finding a different way to treat all taxpayers fairly while allocating new bus hours where they can have the greatest impact.

    I am told that the communications issues Metro faced during the recent snow storms had several causes. First, Metro’s computer servers simply weren’t large enough to handle all the traffic trying to access the online bus tracking system. Also, Metro’s current tracking system uses onboard transponders that send signals to receivers located along the bus route—a system which doesn’t function when buses are off route. This system will be replaced by 2010 with a GPS-based system that will be able to track buses even when they are off their normal routes.

    I have a meeting with Metro director Kevin Desmond next week where I will be asking a lot of the questions WSB readers have been asking, and we will be calling Metro before the Council—likely in the second week of the year.

  • Bob December 30, 2008 (3:19 pm)

    Dow,

    It’s not treating taxpayers fairly, even those in the other council districts, to so badly clog up the center areas of a system that is so dependent on routes going through downtown Seattle to get anywhere else.

    People moving around downtown have to extensively use even the buses from outlying county areas as local on-off hoppers throughout the downtown core, simply because not enough other in-city service exists. Often it takes me just as long to get from Jackson St. to downtown as it does to travel many miles in from outide of town up to Jackson St.

    Democracy or not, people coming in from outside the city are not well served by making every bus into a very slow local as soon as it gets to Jackson St.

    Please ask Kevin Desmond to have the West Seattle surface street buses turn right around at Jackson St. and immediately go back out on their southbound runs to West Seattle and environs.

    Then have extremely frequent shuttle buses, as in one every minute or less, to circulate up and down the main avenues, and stop at every stop in the downtown core, from Jackson to Lenora.

    The much better turnaround time with this routing pattern should translate into considerably more frequent runs to and from WS on those routes that now get stuck in lengthy delays downtown.

    The shuttles would be unscheduled and run as fast or as slow as conditions permit, up and down the main avenues. This is where a whole lot of the variability and lateness comes from, as well as being a big limiting factor on increasing the frequency of WS runs.

    On the northern half of those routes that serve both WS and some northern area, please also have the northern half of the route turn around at Lenora and go back immediately to Ballard or wherever.

    There’s much, much more that could be done. Metro needs to listen a lot harder to its passengers. Personally I haven’t ever seen Kevin Desmond and all of his top people on the buses themselves, listening first hand to what people need.

    Thank you for your forthright and thoughtful comments here. I’d vote for you for Mayor.

  • Bob December 30, 2008 (5:39 pm)

    So, a lot of routes wouldn’t have to even enter downtown and get slowed to molasses there, in order to offer passengers widespread transfer opportunities like we now have only in the middle of downtown.

    Basically, this would shift much of the pick up / drop off interchange that now happens at 3rd and Pike, both northbound and southbound, to two added north and south pick up / drop off equivalents of the same kind of interchange. Doing so much of it at 3rd and Pike makes less sense as downtown congestion gets worse, because of the time and schedule irregularity needed for each route to penetrate to the center of the mess in order to accomplish generalized route transfers.

    And there could be some very desirable schedule reliability benefits of decoupling the north and south halves of many of the routes that now have to wade through downtown.

  • Bob December 30, 2008 (5:44 pm)

    Hm. The first part got cut off when I pasted it.

    —–
    Forgot to mention that there would also have to be a very frequent direct no-stops shuttle from the south plaza at Jackson to the north plaza at Lenora or wherever, and vice versa. This could speed up everyone who has to go through downtown to get somewhere else, because it could always go from one to the other by the fastest and least congested route available, since no stops allows instant routing freedom. The go-go shuttle, if you will.

    Then the stop-stop shuttles could circulate something like this.
    Route 3-1 — Up 3rd, down 1st
    Route 3-5 — Up 3rd, down 5th
    Route 1-3 — Up 1st, down 3rd
    Route 1-4 — Up 4th, down 3rd

    There could be a few east-west circulators, too.

    Currently the Metro map shows “Frequent Routes to Help You Get Around Downtown Seattle” and lists 26 miscellaneous routes, all different. I couldn’t quickly explain all the various quirks of each route’s path to anyone from memory.

    So, a lot of routes wouldn’t have to even enter downtown and get slowed to molasses there, in order to offer passengers widespread transfer opportunities like we now have only in the middle of downtown.

    Basically, this would shift much of the pick up / drop off interchange that now happens at 3rd and Pike, both northbound and southbound, to two added north and south pick up / drop off equivalents of the same kind of interchange. Doing so much of it at 3rd and Pike makes less sense as downtown congestion gets worse, because of the time and schedule irregularity needed for each route to penetrate to the center of the mess in order to accomplish generalized route transfers.

    And there could be some very desirable schedule reliability benefits of decoupling the north and south halves of many of the routes that now have to wade through downtown.

  • D December 30, 2008 (7:18 pm)

    Maybe I missed it but was there ever an explanation as to why buses were out without chains on the first day of service after the first snow? Or why the metro webpage was often flat out wrong about what buses were running or what the alternate routes were? I also don’t understand why the tracking system would be designed so that the buses had to be on their correct routes for it to work. It seems like the highest usage for the system would come under adverse conditions when the buses weren’t on their routes. The fact that if a checkpoint is missed then the bus can be lost in the system is pretty sad.

  • payton December 31, 2008 (1:12 pm)

    Thanks, WSB. I want to echo comment #1. Linda Thielke of Metro wrote this:

    “I’m concerned that your readers aren’t realizing that before this bad weather hit Metro was already planning for holiday schedules between Dec. 25-Jan. 2. Also, we’ve added a few more next week on historically low-ridership days to give us some recovery/repair time for the buses.”

    The second sentence suggests that at least some of the reductions were not planned prior to the storm. We know that reductions Dec. 25, 26; Jan. 1, 2 were planned. I want to know the real reason for the level of reductions Dec. 29-31. I also want to know if any of those were planned before the storm. If so, did Metro provide this information to anyone and how did they do it? I was upset with the lack of communication regarding the Dec. 29-31 reductions even under the assumption that they were unplanned. If they were planned, I’m even more baffled!

    Keep up the good work, WSB!

  • WSB December 31, 2008 (1:21 pm)

    I will ask that question – not sure if my contact’s in today but i’ll try. I do find this evidence on the county website that as of December 15th, they were only talking about the “partial holiday” schedules on Dec. 26 and Jan. 2.
    http://www.kingcounty.gov/transportation/kcdot/NewsCenter/TransportationToday/2008/tt121508_wintertravel.aspx

Sorry, comment time is over.