Dow Constantine’s Inept Sound Transit Leadership

My candidacy for King County Executive is the likely end of an eight-year attempt to raise concerns about Sound Transit approach to using light rail to reduce congestion on I-5 and 1-90 corridors.  It began as a realization confiscating the I-90 bridge center roadway for East Link’s share of light rail routed through the tunnel would inevitably result in gridlock for I-90 commuters.  It later became clear spending billions extending Central Link beyond UW and SeaTac will do little to reduce congestion along I-5. 

What began as three years of failed attempts to convince the Bellevue City Council to use the permitting process to stop East Link has continued with 6 candidacies using the “Voters’ Pamphlet” attract attention to this blog; garnering 95,000 page views and nearly 50,000 votes on both my Governor and County Executive primaries.

Meanwhile, during those same eight years Dow Constantine has, according the Seattle Weekly, been credited with the following:

Dow Constantine has led King County to a place that is more transit-friendly.

As chair of the Sound Transit board, he led the fight to pass ST3, possibly the single most important transportation project this region has ever undertaken.

 

Constantine’s “vision” for light rail in the area is typified by his response to the 2015 legislation enabling the ST3 vote.

“What we can do is create light rail to take you where you want to go, when you want to go, on time, every time, for work, for play, for school”  

During a “State of the County” presentation he opined

 “There is simply no other option than light rail that can add the kind of capacity we need to our transportation system”.

In 2015 Constantine, claimed that $1 billion in newly issued bonds were environmentally “Green” with the following:

“They need look no further than these green bonds, which will fund transportation projects that increase commuters' mobility while reducing reliance on cars.”

Constantine may be a fine county executive in other respects but he’s totally inept at dealing with transportation policies.  One has to wonder why any paper would consider King County to be “more transit friendly” after 8 years of Constantine.  A 2015 PSRC “Stuck in Traffic” report concluded HOV delays on all the major roadways have increased dramatically over the last few years.

ST3 passage truly is “possibly the most important transportation project this region has ever undertaken”.  However, far from being a “plus,” the vast majority of its funds will be spent on a light rail spine that will do absolutely nothing to increase transit capacity, creating a financial black hole for operating costs, and making it far more difficult to fund projects that could reduce congestion.

The Constantine “vision” of what light rail can do in our area is a clear indication he doesn’t understand the cost of constructing and operating light rail extensions can only be justified when they provide sufficient numbers of commuters with access to added capacity with routes to where they wish to go.  He’s ignored the need to add the tens of thousands of parking stalls needed for access and the “Prop 1 and beyond” light rail extensions will do nothing to increase Seattle transit capacity.  Any riders added will simply displace those nearer Seattle. 

His claim “there is no other option than light rail that can add the type of capacity” shows a profound ignorance of bus rapid transit.  Fifty buses an hour on inbound and outbound BRT lanes on I-90 Bridge center roadway could provide the same cross-lake capacity as East Link at a tiny fraction of the cost.  An additional 100 buses an hour along a restricted I-5 HOV lane could provide 10,000 riders each hour with transit access to Seattle.   The only limitation being providing them with sufficient parking for access. 

Constantine’s claim the Prop 1 and beyond light rail extensions are “green” is belied by Sound Transit spending millions to shield properties hundreds of feet away from East Link train noise.  (Meanwhile getting FHWA and FTA approval by claiming the noise will have no impact on Mercer Slough Park.)   It’s “unlikely” the inevitable gridlock on I-90 Bridge outer roadway will be “green”.   That “reducing reliance on cars” requires increasing transit ridership by adding parking with access to adequate transit capacity, both missing from current ST3 plans

Fortunately the hundreds of millions Constantine’s Sound Transit has wasted each year are only a precursor to the billions planned over the next 25 years.  My candidacy’s goal is to do what I can to prevent his past “ineptness” from continuing. 

Seattle Times “Traffic Lab” Incompetence

I’m back from a two-week hiatus for travel, what I consider the “spice of life”; in this case a tour of “America’s Great National Parks”.  What I initially thought of as another “bucket list” item far surpassed my expectations.  It also was a two week break from watching any news, reading any emails, or doing anything regarding this blog.  When I returned the last paper prior to my stopping delivery prompted the following post.

Seattle Times “Traffic Lab” Incompetence

The August 10^th Seattle Times headline “Daily parking fees reduce solo car commuting” typifies their incompetence in dealing with the congestion on the roadways leading into the city.    For a paper that prides itself as the “Winner of 10 Pulitzer Prices” they’re totally oblivious to the Sound Transit “Prop 1 and Beyond” light rail extension debacle.

It’s something I first experienced in 2012 when I filed as a candidate for 48^th District Representative.  My “candidates interview" was “cut short” because they showed absolutely no interest in my concerns that Sound Transit’s claims for the benefits of confiscating the I-90 bridge center roadway for light rail were sheer fantasy. 

Since then I’ve referred them to hundreds of blog posts concerning the stupidity of spending billions devastating the route into Bellevue and inevitably grid locking bridge outer roadways.  All for light rail that will forever limit the capacity of the center bridge roadway to about 50 buses an hour, a fraction of the transit capacity needed to attract the ridership to reduce I-90 bridge congestion.  The vast majority of  I-90 commuters won’t even have access to East Link leaving them the choice between paying very high HOT fees on HOV lanes or facing gridlock on GP lanes. 

The posts have all been ignored as have attempts in subsequent “candidate interviews” to raise concerns not only about East Link but the stupidity of spending billions extending light rail routed through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel to Lynnwood and beyond in the North and to Federal Way and beyond in the South.  The extensions will do absolutely nothing to increase transit capacity into Seattle.  Any riders attracted will only reduce light rail access at stations nearer Seattle.  The increased operating costs with the longer routes without increasing capacity will either necessitate a huge increase in fares over what bus riders are currently paying or a huge increase in subsidies to cover the shortfall. 

None of the extensions would have been possible without the Times support.  They were a primary sponsor of the legislation enabling ST3.  They allowed Sound Transit to ignore demands they consider added bus service as an alternative to light rail.  They allowed them to claim ST3 extension riderships that were more than 10 times current transit ridership.  They continue to support spending $54 billion on ST3 extensions despite conceding they will do little to reduce congestion.  They refused to raise concerns about Sound Transit’s blatant mendacity regarding car tab taxes.  

The “Traffic Lab” article is another example of the Times “not seeing the forest for the trees”.  The claim paying daily fees reduces solo car commuting seems a lot like their claim forcing drivers to pay tolls reduces congestion.  They support their conclusion showing the percentage of commuters at big companies in King County including Seattle, who drove alone to work, declined from 57.3% to 51.1% from 2008 to 2016. 

They neglect to show how the percentage of “drive alone commuters” from outside Seattle has changed with “daily fares”.   A PSRC “Stuck in Traffic: 2015 Report” did conclude drive-alone commuters were 73.6% of all King County commuters in 2013, a small decrease from 74.4% in 2010 though that may have preceded any fare change.  

However it’s “doubtful” the more than 70% of county commuters choice to "drive alone" is affected by whether they pay daily or monthly parking fees.  The reason they continue to endure the long delays in the PSRC "Stuck in Traffic" report is, “They don’t have any choice”! 

  

These are the commuters Sound Transit was supposedly created to serve.  Yet all of the P&R lots with access to the area’s major roadways have been filled for years. Even with ST3, Sound Transit waits until 2024 to begin spending $698 million on a measly 8560 parking spaces by 2041.  Consistent with their approach to parking, they haven’t significantly increased bus service for years.  That’s what a “Pulitzer Prize” winning paper would expose. 

Instead they have a “Traffic Lab” that either fails to recognize or simply ignores the stupidity of spending countless billions on light rail extensions that will do nothing to reduce congestion.  The fact that the Times "Traffic Lab", which supposedly "digs into the region's thorny transportation issues" seems oblivious to the reality of Sound Transit's light rail spine reflects either incompetence or worse.  The real tragedy is the billions wasted constructing the spine along with the huge operating subsidies the extensions will require will make it far more difficult to fund the added highway lanes needed to address the area's current and future congestion.

Needless to say, if they ever give me a "candidate interview" (so far they've ignored my candidacy despite the fact I received nearly 50,000 votes)  I don't expect a favorable result!

County Executive “Hobson’s Choice”

(My last post before I spend the next 15 days on a long  planned trip through national parks)

First I want to thank those whose support has allowed my candidacy for King County Executive to continue to the general election this fall.  When I filed in May I had no idea I’d be Dow Constantine’s opponent.  As it is, the voters this fall will have a “Hobson’s choice” between one whose only “qualification” is a willingness to pay the $2266.55 filing fee to use the Voter’s Pamphlet to warn voters Sound Transit is planning to spend $54B on "Prop 1 and Beyond" light rail extensions that will do absolutely nothing to reduce the area’s roadway congestion.

The other choice is the current County Executive who has failed in his principle responsibility: to provide a Sound Transit board capable of implementing an effective public transportation system.   Their light rail spine will do absolutely nothing to increase transit capacity into Seattle on I-5 and their confiscation of the I-90 Bridge center roadway will inevitably lead to gridlock on bridge outer roadway lanes. 

It's a choice between a candidate who has spent six years (and six candidacies) attracting nearly 100,000 views of over 420 posts on this blog, most of which attempted to expose Sound Transit's  failure to effectively address the area''s roadway congestion.  And an incumbent who has spent those years lying about what light rail would cost (e.g. car tab tax) and making totally absurd claims about expected ridership.

Even a fraction of Sound Transit’s promised ST3 extension ridership will fill the "spine's" capacity before the trains ever reach UW or SeaTac; effectively ending access for those currently riding.  The vast majority of I-90 corridor commuters won’t have access to East Link, inevitably making their commute into Seattle a choice between very expensive HOT fares or gridlock on GP lanes. The entire area will face a financial “black hole” from the huge increases in operating costs for the longer routes with no increase in capacity and fare box revenue. 

It’s also the choice between a candidate whose 2^nd place in the August primary has been ignored by the Seattle Times and Bellevue Reporter despite receiving 49,330 (as of 8/07) votes without spending a “dime” campaigning, and an incumbent whose campaign spent $820,000 of  $1.200,000 in contributions; much of which “may be” from construction companies and their labor unions in anticipation of lucrative light rail construction contracts. 

It’s a choice between one who recognizes the folly of routing the light rail spine through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT).  A PSRC 2004 “Technical Workbook, Central Puget Sound Region, High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment” evaluated several alternate ways to meet the area's transit needs.  It concluded (Page 57) the DSTT limited Light Rail “capacities to be at a maximum of 8,880 riders per hour in each direction”.    The $54 billion spent on ST3 “Prop 1 and Beyond” light rail extensions will do nothing to increase that capacity into Seattle, making a mockery of any rational cost/benefit analysis.  Any riders attracted will simply displace riders nearer Seattle. 

The incumbent’s Sound Transit cited this study in the 2008 East Link DEIS preface; “the cross-lake corridor connecting the urban centers of Seattle, Bellevue Overlake and Redmond had the highest potential for near-term development of high-capacity transit (HCT)”.  Yet a recent “Google Search” for the study got the following response “We did not find results for: ‘Technical Workbook, Central Puget Sound Region, High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment’”.    I’ll leave it to others to conclude if the incumbent was involved in that "disappearance".

It’s a choice between a candidate who also recognizes the folly of spending $3.6B confiscating the I-90 Bridge center roadway for light rail with half the DSTT capacity.   That a Sept 2004 FHWA Record of Decision stipulated the I-90 Bridge center roadway was still needed for vehicles with the R-8A configuration which added the HOV lane to bridge outer roadways.  

Again, the vast majority of I-90 corridor commuters, who will never have access to East Link, will be forced to choose between very expensive HOT fares on HOV lanes or gridlock on GP lanes that will surely worsen with future growth.   That East Link also eliminates the only viable way to meet cross-lake transit demand; inbound and outbound bus-only lanes on center roadway (or another bridge). 

Meanwhile the incumbent’s Sound Transit never considered that option, violating the Revised Code of Washington regarding lower cost HCT options.   They claim they'll be able to use East Link to replace cross-lake buses, reducing cross-lake congestion.   Current cross-lake bus routes will be terminated at South Bellevue or Mercer Island light rail stations.  (The 2008 DEIS claimed East Link would increase cross-lake transit capacity by 60%.)  However during peak commute East Link will have the capacity to accommodate riders from about 50 buses an hour, and that’s only if the trains arrive empty at the stations.  Any HOV improvements because of fewer I-90 buses will be minuscule at best.  

Again, the incumbent’s Sound Transit Board has already closed two east side P&R lots, ending transit access to hundreds of east side commuters, disrupted those who live or commute along route into Bellevue and closed the I-90 Bridge center roadway, extending the current miles-long I-90 corridor congestion across the bridge outer roadways. 

It should have never gotten this far.  Any competent transportation journalist should have recognized the DSTT limitations on light rail spine capacity.  Yet the Seattle Times cheered ST3 despite conceding it will do little to reduce congestion, arguing the way to reduce congestion was to make travel more expensive by imposing tolls.   

The WSDOT and FHWA could have prevented Sound Transit from closing I-90 Bridge center roadway, inevitably leading to gridlock on an interstate highway bridge outer roadway lanes.  Instead the WSDOT has already indicated their solution will be to impose HOT fares on outer roadway HOV lanes.

The State’s Attorney General could have stopped the "Prop 1 and Beyond” light rail extensions because they clearly violated the RCW 81.104.100 requiring any high capacity transit (HCT) system planning consider lower costs options.  Sound Transit refused to consider inbound and outbound BRT lanes costing a fraction of light rail for the I-90 Bridge center roadway.

The Mercer Island City Council had more than ample reasons to use the permitting process to stop East Link.  Instead they acquiesced to Sound Transit effectively ending Islander access to reasonable commutes into Seattle.

The Bellevue City Council had even more reason to use permitting process to stop East Link.  They could have used it to insist Sound Transit consider two-way BRT on I-90 Bridge center roadway; effectively ending East Link.  Doing so would have avoided the closure of two P&R lots ending access to transit for many commuters.  They would have avoided the 6 years of disruption for those who live or commute along the route into Bellevue; ending forever the quiet solitude of the Mercer Slough Park.    And, most important, they could've prevented the Sound Transit debacle of spending $3.6 billion for a light rail system with the capacity of about 50 buses an hour, the vast majority of cross-lake commuters will never have access to.

Again, the vote the fall will be a "Hobson's Choice" between someone who is "never" going to win and an incumbent whose policies will waste billions on a fatally flawed transit system.  It's bad enough Sound Transit got this far.  Allowing them to precede when the current roadways are in such dire need of additional capacity requiring billions for added lanes gives a whole new meaning to "unconscionable".