New Light Rail Hall of Shame Members

The Seattle Times editorials prior to and after the Prop 1 vote are just the latest indication they haven’t a clue (or don’t care) as to what constitutes effective mass transit.  Their pre-vote editorial, which undoubtedly played a role in Prop 1 rejection, used the following rationale to justify their opposition:

County officials should have released the revised list of service cuts a month earlier — that’s when they learned that revenue projections had improved to offset part of the 600,000 hours in service cuts they said would be necessary if voters didn’t pony up new taxes. Instead, county officials and proponents of the ballot measure knowingly circulated a list of cuts that was outdated.

And

Only under pressure did officials do the work to revise the list, representing 550,000 hours in service cuts, and to release it.

In essence, the Times opposed Metro funding they had earlier urged the legislature to enact because Metro was “tardy” in updating the service cuts if Prop 1 was rejected.  Yet this same Times editorial board has had no problem supporting Sound Transit’s light rail program whose Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) have been sheer “fantasy”.   

For example the Times surely knows (or should know) the Seattle tunnel limits and simple mathematics belies EIS claims East Link light rail can accommodate  “up to 24,000 riders per hour (RPH) the equivalent of up to 10 lanes of freeway to cross-lake capacity” (4/01/14 post).  As a result it’s clear East Link will never have the promised capacity for the 20,000 eastside bus riders ST intends to "force" onto light rail for their weekday commute into and out of Seattle.  It’s also clear a 2004 FHWA document ST helped write (9/14/13 post) refutes claims the 4^th lanes they plan to add to the I-90 Bridge outer roadways (R-8A configuration) will add sufficient capacity for cross-lake vehicles when they close center roadway for light rail. 

The potential gridlock from ST confiscation of the I-90 Bridge center roadway in 2016 will change cross-lake commuting forever, dwarfing the impact of the Prop1 rejection. Yet the Times has no problem with ST refusal to even demonstrate the modified outer roadway has needed capacity.

The Times editorials also criticized Metro for “years of lax management of operations and labor contracts” and “high bus operating costs”.  (A significant part of Metro’s high operating costs is due to their ill-conceived "Rapid Ride" program the Times supported, see 3/21/14 post.)  Yet they have no problem with an ST Everett Sounder Train operation whose combination of high operating costs and limited ridership has required an annual subsidy of $20,000 per rider for years (6/12/12 post).  Even that management “oversight” pales in comparison to the fact ST intends to spend nearly $20 billion (2007$) on Prop 1 (2008 version) light rail extensions that will do absolutely nothing to reduce the area’s congestion. 

The Times apparently doesn’t recognize Metro’s “high bus operating costs” are still less than the operating costs for light rail cars. (~$10 per mile for buses vs. ~$25 per mile per train car)  In addition, any capacity advantage light rail cars have is far outweighed by the ability to easily adjust bus service to meet local demand.   For example, express bus routes from Lynnwood into Seattle are an infinitely better match with their mass transit needs than the ST plans for light rail service with twice as many trains as the entire east side.  Federal Way ridership cannot possibly justify sending all the Central Link trains there.  The fact that express buses can skip intermediate stops and shorten commute times makes light rail ridership even more problematic.  

The limited ridership and high operating costs means the billions ST spends on the Lynnwood and Federal Way extensions will result in light rail train operating costs that dwarf fare-box revenue.   It’s incomprehensible the Times should be so concerned about Metro’s upcoming labor contracts but ignores the financial “black hole” that awaits the area’s transportation funds if ST is allowed to proceed with their Prop 1 extensions.

It's "unfortunate" the Times chose to write editorials and articles about Metro’s $75 million shortfall while ignoring ST "investing" ~$2-3 billion ST over the last 5 years on fatally flawed light rail extensions.  During those years they've ignored countless emails, many referring them to posts on this blog detailing ST Prop 1 problems.  However, they still have an opportunity to avoid the debacle from ST 2016 closure of the I-90 Bridge center roadway and “ballooning” “investments in Central Link extensions  

Doing so will require a significant “reassessment” by those responsible for the papers editorial policy on mass transit.   If they do nothing, those most responsible, Dow Constantine, the Sound Transit Board, and others (to be named later) can continue believing no one will know this debacle could have been avoided.  Thus, it's only fitting the Times editorial board members are the newest inductees into the Seattle Light Rail Hall of Shame in hopes of "shaming" their "awakening".

Kate Riley,

Frank A. Blethen,

Ryan Blethen,

Sharon Pian Chan,

Lance Dickie,

Jonathan Martin,

Erik Smith,

 Thanh Tan,

Sound Transit Board Can Atone for Past Mistakes

In some ways it’s unfair to induct all the Sound Transit Board members into the “Hall of Shame”.  They're all obviously well respected as leaders in the “communities” that elected them.  However, with the exception of Lynn Peterson the head of the WSDOT and Claudia Balducci, the chair of Regional Transportation Board, many apparently don’t have the background to effectively “guide” Sound Transit policies.  My hope is their "membership" will persuade them to take a “second” look at some of the transit concerns in my blog.   They also have a real opportunity to atone for past mistakes.

Sound Transit currently plans to shut down the I-90 Bridge center roadway in 2016 to begin installing light rail.  They are able to do so because they convinced a federal judge that adding 4th lanes to the bridge outer roadways (R8-A configuration) would eliminate the need to use the center roadway for vehicles.  Sound Transit is “assuming” the modified outer roadways will provide adequate capacity for all cross-lake vehicles for the 7 years required to create East Link.  When light rail is finally completed the outer roadway capacity will still be needed since East Link will likely accommodate only a fraction of the “up to 24,000 riders per hour” promised. (The 2/20/14 post explains why East Link operation may exacerbate outer roadway congestion.)  Of course if the added lanes don’t have needed capacity, cross-lake commuting will be a nightmare for everyone.

The Sound Transit Board has been remiss for years in not requiring some sort of demonstration of modified outer roadways' capacity prior to shutting down center roadway.  Particularly since a 2004 FHWA study concluded the center roadway was needed for vehicles even with the added outer roadway lanes.   Expediting the restriping of the outer roadways to add the 4th lanes and shutting down the center roadway for a week could easily do it. (Cross-lake commuters from both sides of the lake have already endured years of increased congestion because of ST “reluctance” to add the lanes earlier.) 

The Sound Transit Board should recognize confirming the modified outer roadways will have adequate capacity before 2016 surely has a higher priority than allowing Sound Transit to continue spending millions creating extensive engineering drawings depicting details of light rail stations some 7-8 years before they need to begin construction.  (Of course they could still stop the Central Link extensions and avoid that financial debacle.)  

Obviously, the sooner the better!  Allowing ST to continue current plan delaying the 4^th lanes until they close the center roadway in 2016 will be an abdication of their responsibility to constituents that surely justifies their induction into the "Hall of Shame".  

Light Rail Hall of Shame

(I took a week off to visit Disneyland with the grand daughters)
This post is the first of several I intend to add to this blog over the next few weeks identifying those most responsible for allowing Sound Transit to proceed with the Prop 1 light rail extension debacle.

Light Rail Hall of Shame,

Sound Transit has spent $2-4 billion over the last five years as a “down payment” tor the $18.7 billion (2007$) Prop 1 light rail extensions to Central Link voters approved Prop 1 in 2008.  If allowed to continue over the next ten years the result will set a new standard for mass transit mismanagement.  The East Link extension will never have sufficient capacity to meet cross-lake commuter needs at the same time the capacity of the Central Link extensions to Lynnwood and Federal Way will dwarf any rational ridership prediction. 

East Link confiscation of the I-90 bridge center roadway will result in inevitable gridlock on the bridge outer roadways. Central Link operation will not only create a huge debt for construction and start-up costs, its operating deficits will result in a perpetual “black hole” for the area’s transportation funds.   

What is truly “remarkable” is “everyone” is obsessed with the need to do something about Metro’s current need for an additional $75 million annually to avoid large cuts in service.  At the same time no one seems concerned with ST plans to spend nearly $20 billion over the next ten years on light rail extensions that will do absolutely nothing to reduce the area’s congestion, purported to be the 4^th worst in the country.  

This debacle can still be stopped.  Two-way bus only lanes could be operational on the I-90 Bridge center roadway in less than two years at a fraction of light rail cost with bus routes that could easily meet cross-lake transit capacity needs and reduce congestion throughout east side.   Central Link could be limited to light rail between a T/C at the University and SeaTac with improved access to the Tukwila station.    

Doing so would create a cost-effective “trunk line” that would fully utilize the limited capacity of light rail in Seattle (i.e. a 4-car train every 4 minutes).   The Lynnwood and Federal Way extensions would be replaced with less expensive bus routes with shorter commute times than light rail and schedules easily adjusted to meet local demand.  (It would also avoid the obvious insanity of Lynnwood having twice the number of trains as the entire eastside.)

Unfortunately that’s not likely to happen since “everyone” seems perfectly willing to go along with if not actively support ST current plans.   Thus “everyone” will “share” the blame freeing those primarily responsible for the ultimate debacle of any real rebuke.  This post is intended to clearly identify those most culpable for the debacle that awaits the area.  I call it the “Seattle Light Rail Hall of Shame”.  

It’s not as if the “inductees” aren’t aware of the concerns.  But, as the saying goes “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink”.    All have been “led to the water” countless times by emails referring them to nearly all of the posts on the blog.  The result has varied from 100-400 views a week totaling over 17,000 since the blog began.   The large number of page views suggests the blog’s “audience”, largely limited to those having an impact on transportation issues, knew or should have known of Prop I problems.  The fact they chose to “ignore the problems” rather than use their position to “speak out about them” surely qualifies them for the “Hall of Shame”. 

The first “inductee” is the one person most directly responsible for the current Sound Transit operation, Dow Constantine, the King County Executive.  He appoints the Sound Transit Board members tasked with providing guidance to those responsible for  ST current operations and for the implementation of new transportation projects. The “public” has very little influence over how the board members approve plans to spend the 10% of the areas sales tax they get each year along with funds from other sources.  Also the board is apparently under no constraint to have expenditures match revenue. (Contrary to King County Metro)

It’s not clear what Constantine requires in terms of qualifications for the appointees.  Any board member surely has a responsibility to understand the basics of the operation they are “directing”. Transportation board members should understand the basics of what is required to meet transportation goals such as capacity and operating costs.  The issues are not that complex or difficult to understand.  Like board members in countless publicly held companies they also have an obligation to represent the best interests of those owning stock in the company.  When “stockholders” (i.e constituents) raise concerns they have a responsibility to respond.

For nearly 2 years the Sound Transit Board members have failed to respond to countless emails concerning problems with the Sound Transit Prop 1 extensions detailed in other posts on this blog.  Its only fitting they “join” Dow Constantine as initial “inductees” in the Sound Transit Hall of Shame.  They are:

Paul Roberts, Councilmember, City Of Everett

Marilyn Strickland, Mayor, City of Tacome

Claudia Balducci, Mayor, City of Bellevue

Fred Butler, Mayor City of Issaquah

Dave Earling, Mayor, City of Edmonds

Dave Enslow, Mayor City of Sumner,

John Lovick, Snohomish County Executive

John Marchione, Mayor, City of Redmond

Pat McCarthy, Pierce County Executive

Joe McDermott, King County Councilmember

Mary Moss, Councilmember, City of Lakewood

Ed Murray, Mayor, City of Seattle

Mike O’Brien, Councilmember, City of Seattle

Lynn Peterson, Secretary of WSDOT

Larry Phillips, King County Councilmember

Dave Upthegrove,  King County Councilmember

Pete von Reichbauer,  King County Councilmember

All of the board members, except for Lynn Peterson are leaders in the various communities that elected them. Their collective failure to represent their constituent’s best interests when it comes to overseeing Sound Transits mass transit plans is unconscionable.

Some members rate higher on the “Shame List”.  For example Lynn Peterson’s position as the Secretary of WSDOT surely makes her most responsible for providing guidance about the basics of what makes an effective transportation system.  While she is a relatively new member, her willingness to go along with Dow Constantine is worthy of special mention.

Claudia Balducci and Fred Butler, the Bellevue and Issaquah mayors  are also worthy of special mention for their willingness to go along with an East Link light rail system that will result in perpetual gridlock for their constituents who are cross-lake commuters.  Balducci’s position as chair of the Transportation Policy Board that advises the Puget Sound Regional Council Executive Board on “key transportation issues” makes her even more culpable.

The four county council members are also extra “shameful”.  They recently asked voters to approve another burdensome tax and fee increase primarily to provide the $75 million Metro needs to avoid drastic service cuts.  However, they apparently have no objections to ST spending $20 billion over the next ten years on Prop 1 extensions that will do absolutely nothing to relieve congestion.  One would have thought Ed Murray, the new Seattle Mayor would have similar concerns.

In conclusion, the consequences of the board’s past failure to “guide” ST policies pales in comparison to the debacle that awaits the area if ST proceeds with the current plan.  All it takes to stop it is for a single board member to play the role of the little girl in the fable “The Emperor’s New Clothes” who alerts the “village” about the “weavers” and the “wise men” who went along with them.  The entire area would be in their debt.

Sound Transit's Prop 1 Debacle

I sent the following to the Times in response to Sunday’s editorial page letters on the pros and cons of the Metro funding increase. I posted it since they were unlikely to "print" it.

Dear Seattle Times,

The Sunday Times editorial page “Opinions” on the pros and cons of the providing additional funding for Metro prompted me to submit the following Special to the Times.   The problems associated with the purported $75 million Metro shortfall are dwarfed by the debacle the area faces if Sound Transit is allowed to proceed with their Prop 1 extensions.  I hope you will consider it for your editorial pages. 

Special to the Times, 

Sound Transits Prop 1 Debacle

The “public” has no idea of the devastating affects of Sound Transit’s $18.7 billion (2007$) Prop 1 extensions on the area’s commuters.  The ST East Link plan to confiscate the I-90 Bridge center roadway and attempt to use light rail trains to replace all cross-lake bus routes will gridlock the outer bridge roadways.  Their Central Link extensions to Federal Way and Lynnwood will result in billions spent on a light rail system far too expensive to operate for any rational predicted ridership.

Sound Transit made a major blunder by failing to recognize the only way to meet future cross-lake transit requirements was to convert the I-90 Bridge center roadway to two-way, bus-only operation.  They apparently didn’t realize the impact of the Seattle tunnel on light rail capacity.   Any light rail system here is limited to one track in each direction through the tunnel.   The existing station lengths there restrict each train to only four 148-passenger cars. 

Puget Sound Regional Council guidelines require 4-minute intervals (headways) between trains giving a maximum capacity of 8880 riders per hour (RPH) in each direction.  If half of that capacity is used for cross-lake commuters, East Link light rail service will consist of, at best, a 4-car train every 8 minutes or 4440 RPH in each direction. 

ST promoted East Link with claims of up to 12,000 RPH in each direction with plans to replace all I-90 bus routes with light rail trains. 40,000 of their projected 50,000 daily riders would come from terminating existing I-90 buses.  Since nearly all of the bus riders are eastside commuters, 20,000 will presumably need to commute in to and out of Seattle every weekday on East Link.  However its clear East Link won’t have sufficient capacity since doing so would take 4½ hours.  The end result will undoubtedly be most 1-90 buses will still be routed across the bridge adding to congestion on the outer roadway.

Its ironic Sound Transits other major blunder, their decision to extend Central Link to Lynnwood and Federal Way results in exactly the opposite problem: capacity that dwarfs any rational predicted ridership.  While both extensions have excess capacity, the Lynnwood extension is particularly “problematic” since presumably both East Link and Central Link trains will be routed there.   ST could have avoided the overcapacity problem by terminating Central Link at a T/C near the University Station, improving access to Tukwila station to attract more riders, and eliminating extensions past SeaTac.  Doing so would save close to $20 billion in construction and start-up costs.

The cost benefits from avoiding the construction and start-up of the extensions pale in comparison to the savings from avoiding the long-term costs of operating them.  The 12.8-mile Lynnwood extension, in combination with current light-rail operating costs of nearly $23.00 per mile per car (excluding depreciation) would add  $2350 to a round trip for an East Link 4-car train. 

With 8-minute headways, the Lynnwood portion of the East Link route would add over $17,650 per hour of operation.  If Central Link trains to Lynnwood from Federal Way were limited to 2-cars, the total added operating costs for the extension would be nearly $26,500 per hour.  Assuming 6 hrs per day at peak frequencies and 8 hrs at half that level the daily operating costs would be $265,000 per day. 

ST projections for an additional 15,000 riders using the extension assume they “persuade” Metro to cancel their current competing bus routes.  Even this “optimistic” assumption results in operating costs per rider nearly 3 times current light rail costs.  Even more absurd, a more realistic assumption for ridership would probably double or triple that cost since light rail commute times will be longer than competing bus routes if commuters were given that option.  

ST could reduce the daily operating costs to by limiting East Link to 2-car trains (ST used 2-car trains in last years test confirming the I-90 bridge could support light rail trains).  However, the costs would still be prohibitive and the loss of half of an already inadequate light rail capacity would create even more gridlock on the I-90 Bridge.  (Obviously ST attempts to reduce I-90 congestion with more frequent trains would exacerbate Lynnwood operating cost problem)

The Federal Way extension operating costs are less due to shorter length (9.2 miles) and presumably only 2-cars per train ($423 per round trip or $31,700 for 75 trips a day).  However, the cost per rider will likely be similar to Lynnwood extension because of fewer riders since light rail commutes will take 25-30 minutes longer than the current bus routes between Federal Way T/C and 4^th and Union in Seattle. 

The bottom line is ST is on a path to do something truly “remarkable”. In an area with purportedly the  “4^th worst congestion in the country”, they plan to spend nearly $20 billion over the next ten years on Prop 1 extensions that will do absolutely nothing to reduce the problem. 

Their $2.8 billion East Link extension will not only devastate a beautiful part of Bellevue and violate federal environmental law, its confiscation of the I-90 Bridge center roadway will inevitable lead to gridlock on the bridge outer roadways.  While the $15-20 billion Central Link extensions to Federal Way and Lynnwood won’t increase congestion, they will do very little to reduce it since both extensions have longer commute times than existing or easily available bus routes.   

If allowed to proceed ST will spend billions they don’t have on construction and start-up costs for Central Link extensions with very expensive capacity that dwarfs any rational predictions for added commuters.  The combination of the limited ridership along with high light rail train operating costs will create a huge “black hole” for the areas transportation funds.

There is still time to stop this debacle.  ST needs to be “persuaded” to implement two-way bus-only lanes on the I-90 bridge center roadway instead of light rail trains.  The bus lanes could provide direct bus rapid transit (BRT) connections from every eastside P&R easing congestion throughout the area at a fraction of light rail cost.  

ST also needs to be “persuaded” to terminate Central Link at a T/C at the University Station and to improve access to the Tukwila T/C.  The University T/C would provide thousands of 520 commuters from both sides of the lake with easy connections to light rail. 

The U/W T/C terminus, in combination with ending Central Link at SeaTac will shorten trip lengths to where 4-car trains could be efficiently used to meet peak commute demands.  Doing so will truly transform light rail from a “pig's ear” into a “silk purse” for the areas commuters.  The sooner the better!