They credit
Balducci with having “shepherded Bellevue through a contentious planning
process for Sound Transit’s East Link expansion” and “set aside contentious partisanship
on the Bellevue City Council to hammer out the Sound Transit deal.”
The reality is Balducci
has used her position on Bellevue City Council, her chairmanship of the PSRC
Transportation Policy Board, and Sound Transit Board membership to push through an
East Link light rail extension that will be a disaster for the east side. Her efforts in the council largely
consisted of convincing the other members to accede to Sound Transit
demands.
The Times
criticizes Janet Hague for not “questioning” a Metro levy last fall but has no
objections to Sound Transit (and Balducci) plans to spend $3.6B on an East
Link extension that will reduce I-90 peak transit capacity by 50%, gridlock
vehicles on the bridge outer roadway, devastate those living along the route
into Bellevue, and end the quiet solitude of the Mercer Slough Park.
They credit
Balducci for having “proven to be a leader with intellectual honesty”. One has to question the "intellect" of both the Times and Balducci since neither paid any attention to more than 6 years of my attempts to
point out the following:
1) Sound Transit made a monumental blunder when they selected
light rail rather than two-way bus only lanes on the I-90 center roadway for
cross-lake transit. The bus lanes
would have allowed BRT service with 10 times light rail capacity, 10 years
sooner, and for less than a 1/10th of the cost. The increased capacity could've provided direct
access into Seattle from every eastside P&R, easing congestion throughout
area. By contrast, East Link
access for I-90 corridor commuters will be limited to light rail stations at
South Bellevue and Mercer Island
2) Sound Transit could have added 4th lanes to the
I-90 Bridge outer roadways 15 years ago.
Commuters from both sides of the lake would have benefited, but particularly
“reverse” commuters.
3) Sound Transit refused to recognize the R-8A configuration
the FHA approved in Sept 2004 ROD “I-90 Two-way Transit and HOV Operations
Project” required “maintaining existing reversible operation on the center
roadway”. Instead they told a
federal judge the center roadway wasn’t needed for vehicles.
4) Sound Transit refuses to recognize their scheduled East
Link service, one 4-car train every 8 minutes, will never have the capacity to
meet I-90 transit needs. Their
plans to force all transit riders to switch to light rail for their commute
into and out of Seattle will reduce peak transit capacity by nearly 50%.
5) Sound Transit refusal to recognize the combination of the
increased congestion on the outer roadway because of center roadway closure and
the large number of former bus riders forced to “drive” rather than “ride” by
the lack of light rail capacity will inevitably lead to gridlock on outer
roadways.
As far as “honesty”
is concerned, it’s clear she and the rest of the council approved the East Link
Shoreline permit knowing (or should have known) Sound Transit had made a
mockery of the environmental review process with claims light rail noise
requiring millions to shield properties hundreds of feet away form the tracks
would have no impact on the Mercer Slough Park. This clear violation of federal environment law will end
forever the quiet solitude of the park.
In conclusion, as far as commuters are concerned, Balducci has already been in the Bellevue City Council for far too long. Her endorsement by the
Times appears largely based on her steadfast support of
Sound Transit policies the Times supports. Cross-lake commuters, who have already endured years of
increased congestion because of these policies, will face ever-increasing congestion
during light rail construction, and inevitable gridlock when East Link begins
service. If allowed to proceed, Balducci
and the Times bear a major responsibility for the devastating consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment