The previous post opined how Sound
Transit’s ST3 plans for the east side exemplified their competence. This post details how their ST3 plans
for light rail to Everett are, at least from a cost/benefit approach, even
worse.
Sound Transit’s purported ST3
plans for a second tunnel and set of light rail tracks to Everett reflect a
valid concern for the lack of capacity of their Central Link extension. The current tunnel limits Central Link
to one 4-car train every 8 minutes.
While ST claims each 74-seat car can accommodate 200 riders or 12,000
riders per hour in each direction (rphpd) the PSRC concluded a more realistic
maximum is an average of 146 riders or 8880 rphpd.
Even the more optimistic number is
barely able to meet current peak transit demand of more than 33,000 riders
during the peak 3 hour morning and afternoon commutes (per Oct 2014 Seattle
Times article). Thus additional high capacity transit (HCT) is needed for the
corridor. The second tunnel could
be designed to accommodate up to 10-car trains similar to BART with 2 1/2 times
Central Link capacity. It could be
routed directly to Northgate avoiding all the stops to UW and University
Link.
With the second tunnel ST could
terminate Central Link at a T/C at the UW light rail station and avoid spending
$2.1 billion on a tunnel for their Northgate extension scheduled to begin
service in 2021. That’s what they
could have done. Instead ST has
apparently decided to also design the second tunnel to Everett for 4-car trains.
That conclusion is based on ST
presentations asking ST3 inputs from people whether they preferred, “Light rail
with 12,000 rphpd or 700 cars per hour on a gridlocked roadway.” (Needless to say what they
answered.) Again presumably the
12,000 rphpd assumes 4-car trains.
Thus rather than terminating Central Link at UW and boring a second
tunnel capable of accommodating 10 light rail cars, ST is going to construct
two light rail lines operating 4-car trains to Everett. (The Associated Builders and
Contractors of Western Washington (ABCWW) must love ST).
The reality is neither the Prop 1
nor ST3 light rail extensions to Everett will have any significant affect on
I-5 congestion. Travel times on
I-5 HOV lanes between Everett and Seattle have increased to nearly 75 minutes
according to a PSRC “Stuck in Traffic: 2015” report; The obvious problem being
too many vehicles on the two lanes.
In 2021 when the Northgate
extension begins operation, ST will likely use its limited capacity to replace most
of the Metro 41 and other I-5 transit bus routes for the Northgate to Seattle
portion of the commute. However, doing
so will have no effect on I-5 congestion beyond Northgate and a miniscule
effect on the congestion into Seattle because of the reduced number of
“vehicles”.
Any rational cost/benefit analysis
would quickly conclude it makes no sense to spend more than $2 billion on a
Prop 1 Northgate extension to reduce the number of buses into Seattle. The fact light rail travel times will
“likely” increase because of the several intermediate stops along the route
into Seattle makes if even less “beneficial”. Extending Central Link beyond Northgate adds billions to the
cost, does nothing to increase transit capacity, or have a significant effect
on I-5 congestion.
The ST3 extension doubles I-5 light
rail capacity. However, it does
nothing to increase the number of transit riders with access to light rail. The fact there are less than 5000
parking spaces in all the P&R lots along the corridor indicates most of the
more than 33,000 2014 transit riders live within walking distance of bus
routes. It’s unlikely the
“walk-ons” along the routes will increase significantly in the future.
Thus, the only way to take
advantage of the billions spent adding ST3 capacity is to spend a billion more
adding the 30,000 parking spaces with bus connections to light rail stations. Yet ST could achieve the increased 9-12
thousand per hour transit capacity along I-5 without spending the billions on
ST3 by routing the 100-120 buses required directly into Seattle rather than to
light rail stations.
The additional buses would have a
miniscule effect on HOV lane congestion if one of the two HOV lanes was
restricted to buses during peak commute.
The increased bus traffic could be accommodated in Seattle by converting
4th Ave into a two-way, bus-only, elongated T/C with designated
drop-off and pick-up locations on both sides to facilitate egress and access
for each route.
With ST3 they’ll still have to add
the 30,000 spaces and connecting bus routes. Rather than
spending billions on Central Link extensions ST should begin adding the P&R
next year. Ask all those who
commute into Seattle where they would like to leave their car. I’m sure many would like to do so near
where they live rather than near where they work. Use the results to prioritize adding 5000 parking spaces
each year for the next six years.
By 2023, rather than simply moving existing transit commuters to light
rail they will have added parking allowing 30,000 more commuters to use transit, reducing congestion for everyone.
Rather than let ST3 perpetuate the Prop 1 I-5 fiasco, adding the parking would end the need for ST3 and
save billions in the process.
No comments:
Post a Comment