BCC Response to South Bellevue P&R Closure

I presented the following to the Bellevue City Council at their Sept 12^th meeting.  I’m posting it since they may chose to ignore it.

Dear Bellevue City Council

My name is Bill Hirt and I live at 2615 170^th SE.  I’m here tonight to tell the council you’re “amazing”.  It’s not a compliment.   A Feb 9^th 2015 Sound Transit presentation to the council detailed their plans to close the South Bellevue P&R in March of this year to construct the new P&R.  It went into considerable detail about the large number of commuters who used it to access transit.  However, they were, to put it mildly, vague about their plans to accommodate those commuters. 

The council subsequently signed an MOU with Sound Transit requiring they do the following:

At least 60 days prior to the closure Sound Transit will identify and implement alternate parking and transit access for the commuters who utilize the existing park and ride

Rather than doing so Sound Transit simply delayed the closure until after the vote this fall.  They knew the closure would not only limit transit access at South Bellevue, every eastside P&R would likely be full well before many commuters arrived.  They were concerned those who lost transit access would respond by rejecting ST3

What’s “amazing” is the council’s response.  Instead of requiring Sound Transit satisfy the MOU the Sept 8 East Link update to the council was dedicated to making sure none of the affected commuters could park on the nearby streets.  The council’s concern was how big to make the restricted parking zone or RPZ and how to enforce it making it impossible for commuters to walk to the station. 

You owe it to your constituents to publicize Sound Transit’s failure to meet the MOU.  That, as a result, any commuter who uses an eastside P&R to access transit will likely find it full when they arrive.  You need to do so before the vote this fall.

In closing I notice your agenda tonight includes a discussion as to whether the council should recommend voters approve ST3.   What’s “amazing” is you even have to discuss doing so.  Of course the council members have an obligation to publicly recommend voters approve or reject ST3 and why.  Refusing to do so would be absurd.