Seattle Times Abets Link Lynnwood Debacle.

The Seattle Times May 25^th B2 page Traffic Lab article, “Cost estimate up again for Link Lynnwood extension” typifies their approach to the extension.   The Lynnwood extension was originally approved and supposedly funded by voters in 2008 as part of Prop 1, extending Central Link all the way to Mill Creek.  At the time, Sound Transit officials hailed it as “A gift to our grandchildren”.   Sound Transit initially used the “slow economy” to justify no longer going to Mill Creek.  Now they're using the area’s “hot economy” to question whether they can even get to Lynnwood. 

The Sound Transit Board’s unanimous approval of the $3.2 billion budge means even if they manage to get $1.1 billion in federal money local tax payers will still be on the hook for $2.1 billion.  The question is “what will they get for their money?”  The Transit Lab article cites Sound Transit claims Link Lynnwood “would add 68,500 daily passengers to the light-rail network”. 

Yet less than a year ago, a 6/19/17 Times Traffic Lab, front-page article, “Here’s why I-5 is such a mess” was far less “optimistic”. It not only identified the problem,  “increased daily vehicle volume”, it concluded the following regarding the benefits of Link Lynnwood;

 Sound Transit 3’s light-rail system, as it expands over the next 25 years, will do little to ease I-5 traffic, but it will give some commuters an escape hatch to avoid it”.

Thus in less than a year the Times Traffic Lab has gone from Link Lynnwood  “doing little to ease I-5 traffic” to giving credence to Sound Transit’s claim it would “add 68,500 daily passengers to the light-rail network”.   They apparently “forgot” Link Lynnwood was routed through a Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) concluded in 2004 limited total ridership to 8880 riders per hour in each direction.

Accommodating 68,500 daily riders through the DSTT would take nearly 4 hours every morning and afternoon, eliminating access to those currently using Central Link’s University extension as well as the additional 15,000 daily riders Sound Transit “expects” for Northgate extension.   (The additional 37,000 daily riders Sound Transit promised voters to justify spending ST3 funds extending light rail to Everett further reduces access.)

However, it’s “unlikely” the Lynnwood and Everett extensions will ever have more than a fraction of the promised ridership.   Sound Transit recently reported the combined express bus routes from Everett and Lynnwood (510-513) averaged 8461 daily riders during 2018 1^st Quarter.   While 2040 is a long ways away, some 50,000 commuters are going to have to decide to live within walking distance of the light rail stations since Sound Transit makes very little provision for parking needed for access.  (And when they do those currently riding will no longer have access for much of the day.)                                                     

In the meantime, the 8-mile extension will significantly increase light rail operating costs.   Sound Transit budgets light-rail-operating cost at about $25 per mile.   Thus the 8-mile extension will add ~$1600 to a round trip.  Assuming 180 round trips a day (4 minute headways for 8 hours with 8 minute headways for 8) the Link Lynnwood will $288,000 to daily operating costs, approximately $90 million annually,  dwarfing potential fare box revenue for years.

Rather than spending $2.1 (or $3.2 billion) on the Link Lynnwood extension over the next 6 years Sound Transit could spend $350 million over the next 3-4 years creating five 1000-stall parking lots between Lynnwood and Everett with access to I-5 bus service to Seattle.  Commuters could pay a monthly or yearly parking fee to assure access to a stall and bus route to cover operating costs, allowing others to ride free. The 12/03/17 post detailed how the parking fees would provide capacity for 20,000 more commuters each day. 

If 20,000 commuters, who previously drove cars during the 2-hour morning and afternoon peak commutes, rode buses, the five Pay-to-Park lots could reduce traffic volume by up to 10,000 vehicles per hour; equivalent to adding 5 lanes of freeway.  With Link Lynnwood the likely result would be those currently riding buses will be transferred to trains, doing nothing to reduce congestion.  

A debacle the Seattle Times abets.

Today’s Seattle Times Doesn’t Get It

The Sunday Seattle Times front page article “How to buy a home in the Seattle area” exemplifies their inept response to Seattle’s high cost for homes.   The bar chart on the front page shows how the price of homes varies inversely with commute times.  One would think “maybe” the way to make homes more affordable would be to reduce demand by making the surrounding communities more attractive by reducing commute times into Seattle.   Instead the article provides “A Homebuying Survival Guide” to a “successful” purchase.   

One way to reduce commute times is to reduce congestion by attracting more riders to public transit.  The Times clearly understands the importance of public transit in Seattle, lamenting in an April 26^th Traffic Lab front-page article, ”Bus Agency can’t keep up with Seattle’s burgeoning ridership”; “Drivers can’t be hired, trained fast enough; no space for new buses”.   

More than two years ago a 4/03/16 editorial “Questions on Transit Need Clear Answers” opined “Sound Transit options should include bus rapid transit (BRT) in combination with added P&R capacity as a way of dramatically increasing transit capacity into the city without spending billions on light rail.”  Yet Sound Transit’s quarterly bus trips only increased from 115,163 in 2012 4^th quarter to 120,400 in the 2017 4^th quarter.  That comparable total average express-bus-weekday boarding only increased from 54,345 to 61,526 during the five years; hardly a “dramatic increase”.

Yet the Times continued to support Sound Transit despite a 11/04/16 article’s answer to the question “Would ST3 reduce congestion?” was “It would not”.  Even “leading proponents don’t promise that traffic will improve”.   The best they could say was the plan “offers an escape from traffic misery for people who can reach the stations on foot, on a feeder bus, or via park-and-ride”. 

Later, their 6/19/17 edition front-page article “Here’s why I-5 is such a messl” identifies the problem; the increased “daily vehicle volume”.  Again, the best they could say was:

 Sound Transit 3’s light-rail system, as it expands over the next 25 years, will do little to ease I-5 traffic, but it will give some commuters an escape hatch to avoid it”.

Again, one would think, a newspaper would question the efficacy of Sound Transit spending $54 billion on a transportation system that won’t reduce congestion, something they could easily have done by urging they be audited.

Instead of urging Sound Transit be audited their 6/19/17 Times article, ”Can’t state ease I-5 traffic? Fixes exist, but most of them are pricey”, concludes:

The most obvious way to reduce traffic on I-5 is to reduce the number of cars on the road.  The most obvious way to do that is to make it more expensive for them to be there.

They follow their 6/19/17 I-5 “solution” with a 6/26/17 edition headline “Time to pay?  Tolling doesn’t get much love, but it eases gridlock”, presumably urging tolls on all the major roadways.  

Today’s Times apparently simply doesn’t recognize the “way to reduce the number of cars on the road” is not to "make it more expensive” but to offer them an alternative; access to public transit.  Without an alternative the only thing tolls do is increase the cost of commuting, a sure way of increasing demand for, and costs of, Seattle homes. 

The bottom line is they’ve abandoned their more than two-year old demand “Sound Transit consider bus rapid transit (BRT) in combination with added P&R capacity as a way of dramatically increasing transit capacity into the city without spending billions on light rail.” 

The entire are will pay a very heavy price if they continue to do so.

Voters' Pamphlet Submission

I submitted the following “Candidate’s Statement” and “Experience” to the Secretary of State’s Office for the Primary Election Voters’ Pamphlet for the 48^th District Senate.   However, they decided the 100 words I submitted for the Biography as “Experience” describing why my  own experiences as commuter "deserved more" wasn’t suitable for the pamphlet.

Candidate’s Statement

I’ve decided to once again file as a candidate to use the Voters’ Pamphlet to attract readers to my blog http://stopeastlinknow.blogspot.com.  I do so with no desire to win and will not ask for nor accept any financial support.   Rather than asking for votes I urge residents “view” some of the 400+ posts on my blog concerning the failure of their legislators and city councils (and media) to respond to Sound Transit and WSDOT incompetence.

Bellevue and Redmond city councils, who could have disallowed permits Sound Transit needed for East Link, instead promoted a light rail extension that will devastate the route into Bellevue and increase, not decrease, I-90 cross-lake and corridor congestion.

That access for 48^th District commuters will be limited to two stations, far from where most live.  That all but a tiny fraction of their huge increase in ST3 taxes will be spent extending Central Link to Everett and Tacoma.

That legislation is needed to limit the WSDOT I-405 HOT to a single lane where fees are raised to what’s required to maintain 45 mph with everyone allowed access to 2^nd lane. 

48^th District residents should demand “more” from those responsible.      

Experience

I’m a retired Boeing engineer who, with my wife of 53 years, has lived in our current home since 1967, where we raised two daughters.   A lot’s changed since then with very little of it good.  I can no longer catch a bus near my home and the Eastgate T/C is full well before I’d like to ride into Seattle.   Longer lines to get on I-90 are followed by increasing congestion on I-90 and I-405.  Meanwhile local roads are congested for much of the day because Microsoft is not required to provide off-campus parking for employees.  We deserve better.

48th District Should Demand "More"

I’ve once again decided to file as a candidate, this time for the 48^th District’s Senate position.   I do so because I believe residents in our district deserve better than what they’re getting from their legislators, their city councils, and the WSDOT.  As with my previous 6 candidacies, I have no expectation or desire to win, but hope to use the Voters’ Pamphlet to attract viewers to this blog detailing why they and the entire east side should demand "more" from those responsible.   I do so as an “Independent”, again not wanting to win, because both parties are complicit in what’s happening to our area. 

The district’s legislators have, if not actively supported, enabled a Sound Transit East Link light rail extension that will forever limit the I-90 Bridge center roadway capacity to a fraction of what’s needed to meet east side cross-lake transit requirements.  They could have demanded an audit that would’ve quickly concluded Sound Transit failed to comply with RCW 81.104.100 requiring they consider two-way bus only lanes on the center roadway as the “low cost” alternative. 

As a result Sound Transit is spending billions on an East Link light rail extension that will devastate the route into Bellevue and increase, not decrease, cross-lake congestion.   Instead they could have added 50 buses an hour, providing East Link transit capacity for a fraction of the cost.  The additional bus service, along with existing routes, could’ve been facilitated by converting I-90 Bridge center roadway into two-way, bus-only lanes with growth capacity far exceeding future public transit needs.

Sound Transit intends to use East Link to replace existing cross-lake bus routes, apparently not recognizing reducing the number of buses on the HOV lane will do little to reduce I-90 congestion.  They refuse to add the parking and increased bus service needed to provide I-90 corridor commuters with the option of additional public transit.   As a result Sound Transit daily ridership across I-90 Bridge from Bellevue and Issaquah into and out of Seattle has only increased from 11,870 to 13, 440 between 2012 and 2017 4th quarters. 

Rather than dealing with these obvious problems 48^th District legislators helped enable Sound Transit ask for and receive authorization to further increase their taxes with ST3.   Most district commuters wanting access to light rail will be limited to two light rail stations far from where they live.   Residents will be forced to pay hundreds if not thousands of additional dollars annually, with nearly all of it going to extend Central Link to Everett and Tacoma. 

The 48^th District has also been poorly served by their city councils. Bellevue and Redmond city councils could have disallowed the permits Sound Transit needed for East Link.  Instead they’ve actively promoted East Link.  Bellevue allowed Sound Transit to make a mockery of federal environmental law claiming East Link noise would have no impact on Mercer Slough Park despite conceding the need to spend millions shielding properties hundreds of feet away and across a major roadway.    Meanwhile Sound Transit’s Bel-Red extension plans include very little if any noise abatement features.

They allowed Sound Transit to ignore a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) committing them to provide alternate parking and bus routes needed with closure of South Bellevue and Overlake P&Rs .  Sound Transit could have expanded their far more centrally locating existing maintenance facility in south Seattle.   Instead the Bellevue council allowed them to locate their Operation Maintenance Facility (OMF) in our district.  Apparently believing Sound Transit claim it will attract “Transit Oriented Development” (TOD); purportedly adding “1.1 million square feet of housing, office, and retail space.”

The OMF is scheduled to “come online” in 2020.  Presumably soon afterwards, many if not most of what will eventually become more than 200 light rail cars will be “cleaned every night and regularly pulled out of service to perform routine maintenance” at the facility.  It’s “doubtful” those living adjacent to the facility or along the route through Bellevue will appreciate the idea of more than fifty 3 and 4-car trains trundling into the area after midnight and leaving before 5:00 am. 

On a completely different agenda, the Bellevue council is currently in the process of deciding where in our district to locate a homeless shelter without explaining how they intend to keep it from attracting more homeless to our area or from being a “relief valve” for Seattle’s homeless.  (Especially since the whole country now knows about Seattle's plans for funding homeless support.) They’ve also provided few details for how they intend to occupy shelter residents during the day.

Meanwhile the Redmond City Council has also been a consistent supporter of East Link and ST3 funding.  While their commuters will have “first access” to East Link’s limited capacity in the morning they’ll find their return trips will be a “struggle” with all the I-90 corridor commuters attempting to find access to its limited capacity.   They could be far better served with BRT service across SR 520 than East Link’s multi-stop route through Bellevue and across I-90.  Yet Sound Transit refuses to provide added parking and bus routes along 520.   Again demonstrated by their ST 545, weekday ridership between Redmond and Seattle only increasing from 7480 in 4^th 2012 4^th quarter to 8361 in 2017, despite the large increase in commuters.  

The Redmond council, in February, also cheered Microsoft’s plans to expand their Redmond campus, adding 8000 more to their 47,000 employees.   Yet all the major north/south roads in the district already have long lines of vehicles for much of the day, mostly Microsoft employees.   The Redmond City Council surely has an obligation to residents to use the building permit process to limit campus parking.  Require Microsoft provide off-campus parking with access to increased “Connector” bus service and dramatically expand its current van routes from where employees live to Redmond campus.   The off-campus parking would likely be less expensive and buses and vans could include ability to use Wi-Fi during commute. 

48^th District commuters using I-405 also deserve better than what they’re getting from WSDOT's implementing HOT on two of the five lanes between Bothell and Bellevue.   During peak commute residents have a choice between heavy congestion on GP lanes or paying $10 HOT fees and still face slow traffic.   The WSDOT doesn’t recognize the basic premise of HOT is to raise rates to whatever is required to limit the number of vehicles per hour to what’s required to meet the target velocity; e.g. 2000 for 45 mph.   The other HOT advantage is it assures public transit buses have access to fast reliable routes to their destination. 

During peak commute, the congestion from the WSDOT decision to limit GP traffic to three lanes results in more drivers willing to pay the $10 limit than what the two HOT lanes can accommodate and still achieve the 45 mph.   The WSDOT proposed solution is to increase the fees on the two HOT lanes.  Their avarice doesn’t allow them to consider raising fees on just one HOT lane to what’s required to achieve the 45 mph and allow GP use of the 2^nd lane.   Especially since the additional GP lane would reduce congestion and the incentive to use HOT, resulting in lower fees and less revenue.  

48th District commuters could also benefit from HOT if Sound Transit added thousands of parking stalls with access to added bus routes along I-405 to take advantage of the reliable route times.  Instead Sound Transit’s tepid approach to BRT is to add 400 new parking stalls along the entire 38 mile route by 2024.   Whatever BRT service they do add will, during peak commute, face HOT lane congestion from WSDOT limiting GP to three lanes from Bothell to Bellevue and even worse for their plans to limit GP to two lanes from Bellevue to Renton.

Again the bottom line is 48^th District residents and the entire area should demand more from their legislators, city councils, and WSDOT.

Accommodate Tunnel Closure with 4th Ave T/C

(Several of my previous posts suggesting a 4th Ave T/C have been ignored by the Times.    I decided to post my latest attempt)

Accommodate Tunnel Closure with 4^th Ave T/C

The May 8^th front page Traffic Lab article, “Preparations for closure of transit tunnel lag” neglects to include an option that would not only accommodate the buses displaced by the Washington State Convention Center expansion but also accommodate the additional bus service needed to increase public transit capacity into Seattle. 

That option is to convert 4^th Ave into an elongated T/C for buses only in both directions.   A 4th Ave T/C provides good access to downtown Seattle.  Depending on the route into the city, buses could drop off riders on one side and pick them up on the other.  During peak commute each bus route would have two designated locations in both directions similar to what’s available in the tunnel.   Minimizing the number of stops would reduce transit time and allows T/C to provide designated egress and access locations for more bus routes.

During off-peak commute buses could revert to more “on-demand” stops and more designated pick-up locations along the T/C.

Rep. Clibborn Enables I-405 HOT Debacle

The April 27^th Bellevue Reporter front page article “Proposed expansions on 405 toll lanes” is the latest example of WSDOT arrogance when it comes to dealing with I-405 congestion.   They were allowed to do so because, as reported in the January 27^th edition, “Vows to end I-405 tolls: Was it all just campaign talk”, the state legislators refused to recognize the failure of the 2-year “pilot program” to reduce congestion.  (Like their failure to roll-back car tab fees.)  

Instead, as the earlier article reported Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, chairwoman of the House Transportation Committee said, “We’re not going to look at them” (ending tolls).  She refused to even allow a vote to convert one of the two HOT lanes from Bothell to Bellevue to full-time general-purpose (GP) use claiming it “would likely sabotage the whole program”.  Her concern being, “It will be the only unallocated source of revenue generated in the state”.  

Clibborn has already played a major role in allowing Sound Transit allocate nearly $4 billion on an East Link light rail extension that will devastate the route into Bellevue and increase, not decrease, I-90 bridge congestion.   She also supported WSDOT spending $484 million on the “Pilot I-405, 2-year test program”.  It limited one of the three lanes between Lynnwood and Bothell, and two of the five lanes between Bothell and Bellevue, to +3 HOV and HOT fees.  

A PSRC, “Stuck in Traffic: 2015 Report” detailing the area’s major roadway congestion showed that, prior to HOT implementation, I-405 had little if any delay until Bothell on the route from Lynnwood to Tukwila or after Bothell between Tukwila and Lynnwood.   Restricting the HOV lane to +3HOV and HOT has significantly increased GP lane congestion there; not exactly a success for those commuters. 

Even the purported success on the Bothell-to-Bellevue portion benefitted from an additional lane in each direction over much of the route.  The WSDOT also claimed “success” because average velocities met the 45 mph requirement 89% during the peak commute.  However, their definition for peak commute began at 5:00 am, well before many commuters or any significant congestion.  A more “meaningful” basis for proceeding would be requiring some percentage of commuters average 45 mph. It’s likely far lower than 89% and will only decrease with future growth.

However Clibborn still wants to make the HOT there permanent claiming, “The state would then be in a position to sell bonds and use the stream of toll revenue to cover the long-term debt payments required for major congestion-easing projects eyed in the 17-mile corridor”.   Apparently ready to spend an additional $1.22 billion eventually implementing 2 HOT lanes between Lynnwood and Renton.

While Rep. Clibborn is undoubtedly a fine person in many respects, the position as chair of the House Transportation Committee requires an abundance of competency as well as character.   Her 41^st District constituents, as well as all the other I-90 corridor commuters, will pay a heavy price for her failure to recognize East Link’s share of the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) capacity is only a fraction of what’s needed to meet cross-lake transit requirements. 

I-405 corridor commuters will also pay a heavy price if her support allows WSDOT to implement 2 HOT lanes between Lynnwood and Renton.  The rationale for implementing HOT on HOV lanes is the fees can be set to limit the number of vehicles to meet a specified speed.  For example limiting traffic flow to 2000 vehicles per hour (vph) normally allows 45 mph lane velocities.  The WSDOT perverts that rationale by setting the fees to where more than 2000 drivers are willing to pay the HOT fees.  They use the increased congestion to justify a second HOT lane.

The problem is the additional congestion from the loss of a GP lane increases the number of those willing to pay the fees to where even the two HOT lanes don’t meet the 45 mph target.   The WSDOT, apparently with Clibborn’s concurrence, exemplifies their quest for additional revenue by asking for even higher HOT fees for the two lanes.  They refuse to recognize that, while higher fees are the answer, they need to be applied to only one lane. 

The WSDOT and Rep. Clibborn need to be “persuaded” to impose HOT fees on only one lane, adjusting them to whatever is required to achieve the 45 mph target during the entire day.  That allowing GP use of an additional lane along the entire route will reduce congestion for the vast majority of commuters; likely reducing the incentive to use HOT. 

One of the potential benefits of maintaining the 45 mph on the HOT lane is it can also provide fast, reliable public transit.  Allowing more commuters to leave their cars near where they live rather than where they work is a sure recipe for reduced congestion.   Unfortunately Sound Transit refuses to add the parking with access to increased bus service needed to increase transit capacity. 

Rep Clibborn has apparently decided to retire.  One can only hope her successor will recognize the folly of allowing the WSDOT to proceed with their “2-lane HOT” approach for I-405 and to use the House Transportation Chair to “persuade” Sound Transit of the need to dramatically increase I-405 transit capacity.