Public Transit That "Works"

An earlier post urged Republican legislators require Sound Transit be audited to resolve whether they “misled” legislature and voters regarding what ST3 “Prop 1 and Beyond” light rail extensions would cost residents; whether the operating costs for the extensions would create a financial “black hole”; and more important, whether the extensions would reduce congestion.   This post suggests that, rather than use ST3 funds for light rail extensions they should be used to add parking with access to BRT routes, and how best to do so. 

The ST3 problem is light rail routed through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) prevents extending light rail beyond Northgate (or Angel Lake) from adding any capacity. That Sound Transit neglects to add the parking needed to use even its limited capacity.  That, as a result Sound Transit will likely use the extension capacity to replace bus routes into the city; apparently not recognizing that congestion on I-5 and I-90 corridors is not the result of too many buses.

Lacking additional highway lanes, the only way to reduce congestion is to attract more commuters to public transit. One way to do so is, rather than making parking free and paying for transit, have commuters pay for parking, but ride free.  Commuters would pay a monthly or yearly fee to reserve parking at a “Pay-to-Park” P&R.  Those doing so would be guaranteed parking and have access to frequent free bus service during peak commute hours with less service during off-peak hours

Those within walking distance, who can carpool to the P&R, or who can be dropped off, would also ride free. The goal being to reduce congestion by adding riders at minimal cost.  The loss in fare revenue for a rider would be trivial compared to the cost of providing a parking stall for his car.  

Each Pay-to-Park lot would nominally provide 1000 stalls. Current P&Rs would continue to provide free parking and bus fares with routes to either Pay-to-Park lots for free BRT routes or directly into Seattle.  Parking fees could be based on bus operating costs and route lengths.  Sound Transit’s 2017 budget assessed bus-operating costs as ~$10.00 per mile.  The 17 miles from Lynnwood Transit Center to 4^th and Madison would cost approximately $350 for a round trip. 

With pay-to-ride, 100 commuters, each paying a $3.50 toll, would cover the entire bus round trip cost.   (While 70-ft articulated buses are rated as having 119 sitting and standing riders they would probably cost more to operate.)  With “Pay-to-Park,” Sound Transit could charge $10.00 per day.  While more than the $7.00 round-trip fares, commuters would likely leap at the chance for an assured parking stall,  access to bus, and avoiding driving expenses (~$17.00 @$0.50 a mile) and downtown parking fees. (Their employers may pay the fees to avoid providing employee parking.)

The $10 charge would generate $10,000 for a 1000-stall “Pay-to-Park” lot, enough to pay for 28 round trips.  However, Sound Transit fare-box revenues typically cover less than 35% of operating costs.  A 35% recovery requirement would allow Sound Transit to provide 81 round trips into and out of Seattle.  Again assuming capacity for 100 riders per bus, the 1000 “Pay-to-Park” commuters would add capacity for 4000 riders each morning and afternoon. 

Those paying for parking would be polled to establish schedule and have priority access to buses.   While most routes will be during peak commute, 40 daily round trips each morning and afternoon would allow frequent service throughout day.  Again, existing P&Rs and current bus routes would continue operating.

The 24-mile route from South Everett into Seattle would cost $480 per round trip.  Sound Transit could likely charge $15.00 for a stall there.  (Again cheaper than $24.00 round trip driving cost @ $0.50 per mile.)  The $15,000 could provide 89 round trips; again assuming 35% operating cost recovery.   The 44 morning and afternoon round trips would provide capacity for 4400 riders.

Over the next three to four years Sound Transit could divert light rail funds to create 3 Pay-to-Park lots near Lynnwood and 2 near Everett, allowing 20,000 more commuters to use public transit each day.  Additional Pay-to-Park lots could be added as needed.  Meanwhile, the light rail extension from Northgate to Everett will never add any transit capacity.  While some residents may object to living near Pay-to-Park lots, many will be attracted by the prospect of free commutes.  They would also tend to attract more density within walking distance, reducing urban sprawl.     

Each Pay-to-Park lot would have its own direct bus route into and out of Seattle.   Limiting HOV lanes to buses and +3HOV during peak commute and eliminating intermediate stops would reduce transit times.  Each route would have one or two designated drop-off and pick-up points at an elongated T/C along 4^th Ave in Seattle.  Avoiding the need to pay fares at either end would facilitate egress and access at those locations. 

Pay-to-Park commuters would not only have shorter commute times, Sound Transit operating deficits would be far less.  They budget ~$25.00 per mile operating cost for light rail cars.  The 25-mile extension from Northgate to Everett adds nearly $5000 for a 4-car light rail train round trip. 

While Pay-to-Park bus schedules would be set by local demand, light rail train schedules would likely be set by transit demand from UW or Northgate or across I-90 Bridge to Bellevue.  Most if not all of the trains would have to go to Everett since scheduling the return routes of those trains with those only going to Lynnwood would be “problematic”. 

Assuming 200 trains are required, the extension to Everett will add $1 million to the daily operating costs.  (The 5 Pay-to-Park lots would increase Sound Transit operating costs by ~$110,000.)  Again, the extensions do nothing to increase capacity.  The riders they add, at least during peak commute, would displace those from Northgate and other stations nearer Seattle.  While fares from Lynnwood and Everett would be higher, the increased revenue would do little to reduce operating deficit.  

Pay-to-Park lots would have similar transit capacity and cost advantages for Sound Transit extensions beyond Angel Lake to Tacoma.  However, having only half the number of trains would reduce the daily deficits. 

The East Link extension won’t increase transit capacity, but the shorter route lengths with riders in both directions would reduce operating costs shortfalls.  However, Sound Transit’s confiscation of the I-90 Bridge center roadway for East Link’s limited capacity will create gridlock on bridge outer roadways.  Pay-to-Park lots with BRT access to center roadway is the best way to avoid it.

The bottom line is ST3 will not only fail to reduce congestion, it will create a financial black hole.  Sound Transit needs to be "persuaded" with an audit.  While it's probably too late to stop East Link, it would expose its failure to reduce I-90 congestion.  However, there is still time to replace the ST3 extensions beyond Northgate to Everett and Angel Lake to Tacoma with public transit that "works". 

P.S.  Seattle residents especially would benefit since current Central Link riders would no longer be crowded-out by extension riders and light rail funds could be used to expedite extensions to West Seattle and Ballard.