Seattle Should Protest Lynnwood Link Grant

The Nov 20^th front-page Seattle Times Traffic Lab article, “Feds OK $1.2B for light rail heading to Lynnwood” heralding Sound Transit’s success should be cause for concern rather than a reason to cheer.  First, Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s claim the Lynnwood Link would attract 68,500 indicates he’s either incompetent or mendacious.  Second, it indicates the Times Traffic Lab, still abides Rogoff’s inept leadership.

The FTA approved the Lynnwood Link grant because they believed Rogoff's claim it would add 68,500 daily riders.   Yet Sound Transit’s 2018, 3rd quarter ridership reported express bus routes between Everett and Seattle, 510, 511, & 513, combined averaged 9270 daily riders.  Similar reports from earlier years showed riders from route 511, which started in Ashway P&R, made up about half the total.  Thus current transit ridership from Lynnwood is probably less than 5000, a tiny fraction of projected Lynnwood Link ridership. 

That raises the question,  “Where are all the “new” Lynnwood Link riders coming from?’” All the P&R lots with access to Lynnwood Link are full and Sound Transit ST3 only adds 1500 new parking stalls at the stations.  They will likely use the link to replace all the current Everett-to-Seattle bus routes.   (Switching current commuters from buses to light rail does little to reduce HOV lane congestion and nothing to reduce GP congestion.)    The Traffic Lab abiding Rogoff’s ridership claim ignores the reality that even with the former bus commuters, it’s unlikely more than a fraction of the commuters needed to live within walking distance of stations will choose to do so. 

Of even more concern the article indicates the Traffic Lab doesn’t recognize any riders added by Lynnwood Link will reduce access for current riders.   Sound Transit’s decision to make it an extension of Central Link routed through the DSTT limits its ability to accommodate them.    A 2004 PSRC concluded station lengths limited trains to four cars, that safe operation required a minimum of 4 minutes between trains, and that 148 passengers could ride in their 74-seat cars.  Thus light rail capacity in Seattle is limited to 8880 riders per hour in each direction.

Some of that capacity is already in use.   Sound Transit’s 3^rd quarter 2018 ridership reported nearly 18,000 daily rode the University Link into and out of downtown Seattle.   Sound Transit could have used a T/C at the UW as an interface with 520 BRT that would’ve added thousand of riders from both sides of Lake Washington without spending a dime on light rail extensions.   Instead they’re spending over $2 billion on a Northgate extension they’ve anticipated will add 15,000 daily riders.   Thus, when Northgate Link begins operation in 2021 it will take more than 3½ hours for the DSTT capacity to accommodate riders into and out of downtown Seattle.   Whatever riders Lynnwood Link adds will, at least during peak commute, severely restrict if not end access at Northgate and University Link stations.

What should really be of concern is the Nov 20^th article heralding the Lynnwood Link grant implies the Traffic Lab is willing to abide Rogoff’s October 2019 proposed budget.    In it he describes 2019 as “a year of record ridership, heavy construction, and intense planning work as we continue building the most ambitious transit system expansion plan in the country”.   The reality is it’s another year of spending more billions expanding a transit system that will, not only do nothing to reduce congestion, it will reduce access for current riders.  That the operating costs of the expanded transportation system will be a perpetual drain on the area's transportation funds.  

When Sound Transit’s East Link begins operation commuters south of Seattle will loose half their current Central Link capacity.    Thus the Lynnwood Link is not the first of Sound Transit’s ST3 spine extensions that will reduce access for current riders.   The Traffic Lab article also abides their Long Range 2017 to 2041 Financial Plan that increased the cost of implementing ST3 from $54 billion in 2016 to $96 billion in 2018.   That most of the increase will come from estimated tax revenue that increased from $33 billion in 2016 to $64 billion in 2018.

Rogoff’s claim for Lynnwood Link ridership pales in comparison to his 2019 long-term budget claim light rail ridership will increase from 22 million in 2017 to 162 million in 2041: ~ 500,000 each week day.  It would take 28 hours each “day” for light rail limited by the DSTT to 8880 riders per hour in each direction to accommodate that number of riders.  Rogoff clearly has his own way of calculating capacity. 

Meanwhile his long-term budget extends a decade long failure to increase bus transit capacity for the next 23 years.  The Times Traffic Lab, apparently no longer believes an April 2016 Times editorial advocating more bus transit.

The bottom line is the Nov 20^th Traffic Lab article heralding the $1.2 billion Lynnwood Link grant indicates they abide not only Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s Lynnwood Link claims, but his plans for the next 23 years.  Both need to be “persuaded” the only way to reduce congestion is to add tens of thousands of parking spaces with access to express bus routes along restricted highway lanes to an elongated T/C on 4^th Ave.  That doing so could be done for a fraction of Rogoff's ST3 costs and time.

The irony is there would be no ST3 if not for the 70% approval from Seattle area voters.  Earlier posts have urged Seattle residents to oppose East Link because its operation will halve Central Link capacity south of International District.   Riders added by extensions beyond SeaTac will exacerbate the problem.  University Link riders will loose some access when Northgate begins operation.   Even a fraction of the 68,500 daily riders the FTA grant helps will end peak commute access for University link riders.  Rogoff's ST3 plan for extensions to Everett only exacerbate the problem. 

Seattle needs to protest. Urge the Seattle Times to recognize Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s incompetent (or mendacious) leadership and end the Traffic Lab’s willingness to abide that incompetence.  Urge your legislators to demand Sound Transit be audited.  Also contact Senators Murray and Cantwell urging they reject the FTA grant sending a signal to both Sound Transit and Times. 

Sooner or later "everyone" will recognize the debacle of Rogoff's ST3.  Obviously the sooner the better.  

Traffic Lab Abides Sound Transit Financial Plan

The previous post detailed how the Seattle Times Traffic Lab Nov 10^th “Shoulder Lane” article continued their decade long willingness to, if not actively support, abet Sound Transit’s failure to deal with the area’s congestion.   That Sound Transit not only ignored “conventional” methods for calculating transit capacity, they failed to add parking for access to light rail for commutes into the city and platform space in stations for their return.

This post opines the Traffic Lab also continues to abide Sound Transit's claims the extensions will now cost and how they will be funded. The initial estimates for funding were included in an April 4^th 2015 Seattle Times “Special to the Times” editorial by Sound Transit Board members, Strickland, Roberts, and Marchione,  “How to get Puget Sound Traffic moving:  Allow a vote on a package to fully fund light rail”. 

It included the following excerpts

The case for expanding our region’s mass-transit infrastructure cannot be overstated. 

The public vote can’t happen without action by the legislature.

We urge lawmakers grant full taxing authority of $15 billion so Sound Transit can put a measure before voters in November 2016.

The title “suggested” the board did not intend to include increased bus transit as part of “expanding our regions mass-transit infrastructure”. That’s consistent with their refusal to increase bus transit capacity since Prop 1 passed.

The Seattle Times urged legislators in 2015 to enact legislation enabling ST3 vote.  Their support and Sound Transit’s agreement to contribute $518 million to the state’s general fund undoubtedly played a major role in persuading legislatures to allow the vote  

However, the Sound Transit Board quickly concluded an additional $15 billion wasn’t sufficient.  They used the legislation to extend proposed taxes to where Sound Transit 3 evolved into plans to spend $54 billion and 25 years extending light rail 62 miles.  The Sound Transit 3 budget included estimates $36 billion would come from taxes. 

The Sound Transit ballot resolution left it to the discretion of future boards as to whether the ST3 taxes would be extended beyond the 25 years. This prompted a Times Oct 28 ^th, 2016 editorial urging voters reject ST3, forcing Sound Transit return with a measure specifying which taxes would be terminated and when.  Yet Sound Transit Board retained discretion to extend taxes. 

A Nov 4^th 2016 front-page Traffic Lab article concluded ST3 “would not reduce congestion”.  The best they could say was it “offers an escape from traffic misery for people who can reach the stations”.  (They neglected to mention any riders added by the extensions would reduce access for current riders.)   Despite these concerns the Times neglected to include auditing Sound Transit finances in their list of 10 priorities for the legislature. 

The Seattle Times apparent lack of concern about Sound Transit finances is exemplified by a lack of response to their October 2019 Proposed Budget.  What Sound Transit told voters in 2016 would cost $54 billion over 25 years will now cost $96 billion.  That most of the increase will come from estimated tax revenue that increased from $36 billion for ST3 in 2016 to $64 billion in 2018.  (Traffic Lab concern over extending taxes apparently doesn’t apply to increased taxes before 2041.)

An additional $6 billion will come from Sound Transit claim estimated 25-year fare revenue will increase from $1.5 billion in 2016 ST3 budget to $7.5 billion in 2019 budget.  Projected bus ridership and fare revenue didn’t increase, and light rail fares for the 2016 revenue were presumably similar to those in the 2019 budget.  The only rationale for the five-fold increase in revenue is a similar increase in projected ridership between 2016 and 2018.

The Seattle Times Traffic Lab, whose purported objective is to “dig into problems,” needs to query Sound Transit as to why the ST3 proposal voters approved in 2016 to fund the $54 billion, 25-year plan for “Prop 1 and beyond” light rail extensions, should cost $96 billion in 2018.  Why tax revenue needed has increased from $15 billion in 2015 to $36 billion in 2016 and $64 billion in 2018.  And why projected fare revenue increased so dramatically between the two years.

Instead they'll likely continue to abide Sound Transit fantasy.

Traffic Lab Continues to Enable Sound Transit Fantasy

The previous post opined the October, Sound Transit 2019 budget for 2017 to 2041 should have been a “wake-up” call for those concerned with the area’s congestion problem.  It also concluded the Seattle Times had played a major role in enabling Sound Transit since Prop 1 passed,  spending billions on light rail extensions that have done nothing to ease that congestion.  The Nov. 10^th Seattle Times Traffic Lab B1 page article, “Snohomish County bus drivers get I-5 shoulder lane access” exemplifies the Traffic Lab continuing to ignore that reality.   

The article describes the shoulder lanes as, “The first Sound Transit 3 project completed since voters approved the massive rail and bus expansion program in 2016”.  The Traffic Lab is apparently unaware Sound Transit’s 2019 budget shows they continue their decade long failure to increase bus revenue hours by refusing to increase bus ridership between 2017 and 2041.

They abet Sound Transit CEO Rogoff claim the shoulder lanes are “one way we’re able to reduce travel time for I-5 bus commuters”.   A 2015 PSRC report showed 2014 HOV travel times during morning commute averaged 75 minutes between Everett and Seattle.   Since travel times have presumably increased it’s unlikely any purported 4-5 minutes faster will make much difference.

The abide Rogoff's blatantly absurd claim the shoulder lane will “make a difference for people who travel our congested roads every day”. The Traffic Lab apparently doesn’t recognize reducing commute times only reduces congestion if they attract more transit riders.  All the P&R lots with access to I-5 have been full for years.  Yet Sound Transit has refused to add any parking, waiting until 2024 to begin adding a measly 8560 stalls over the next 17 years.   Again, they’ve also refused to increase the number of bus routes for ten years and their 2019 budget continues doing so until 2041.

The Traffic Lab article calls the shoulder lanes “an early deliverable that will ease commuting pain until rail expansion completion ends years and decades of congestion”.   Again it’s bad enough they concur with Rogoff claim shoulder lanes will “ease commuting pain”.  Their claim “rail expansion completion” will “end years and decades of congestion” is presumably based on Sound Transit’s 2019 budget.   It showed they intend to spend $96 billion implementing Rogoff’s new mission statement: “Connecting more people to more places".  That annual light rail ridership will increase from 20 million in 2017 to 162 million in 2041;  ~60,000 weekday average in 2017 to ~500,000 weekday average in 2041.

The previous post detailed how a 2004 PSRC study concluded Sound Transit decision to route Central Link through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited its total capacity to 8880 riders per hour (rph) in each direction, or 17760 rph total capacity.  Whatever part of the $96 billion is spent extending light rail will do nothing to increase the DSTT capacity.  It will take 28 hours for light rail to accommodate the 500,000 “daily" riders through the DSTT with PSRC estimate.  

Clearly Sound Transit, apparently with Traffic Lab concurrence, has a “unique” way to calculate transit system capacity.  Sound Transit plans and Traffic Lab’s apparent concurrence with plans to limit additional parking also “suggests” they have their own way of providing access to this capacity.  That only a fraction of light rail riders will attempt to use the two limited-size stations in the DSTT for egress from, and access to, light rail. 

The bottom line is Sound Transit has been allowed to spend billions and years on light rail extensions that will do nothing to increase transit capacity.   Their budget summary for 2019 calls it “a year of record ridership, heavy construction, and intense planning work as we continue building the most ambitious transit system expansion plan in the nation”.  The reality is the $2.1 billion they intend to spend in 2019 reflects more billions and another year of failure to reduce the area’s congestion. Sound Transit’s plans to spend $96 billion may be the most “ambitious transit system expansion” in the country.   It’s way past time to recognize the "expansion" will do nothing to reduce congestion.

I's "possible" the Traffic Lab was not aware of Sound Transit's October 2019 budget plans for 2017 to 2041 when they wrote the Nov. 10th article.  That potential "delinquency" doesn't change the conclusion the article's support for shoulder lanes indicates they are going to continue enabling Sound Transit's ST3 funded fantasy.

 Unfortunately they’re not alone.  More on that later.

Sound Transit 2019 Budget “Fantasy”

The 2017-2041 plan in Sound Transit’s Proposed 2019 Budget should be a “wake-up” call for those who believe Sound Transit’s ST3 “Prop 1 and beyond” light rail extensions will reduce congestion on the area’s roadways.  It’s just the latest indication Sound Transit CEO Rogoff plans to spend $96 billion over the next 23 years continuing Dow Constantine’s Sound Transit Board decade of refusing to recognize the reality of effective public transit.  That what Rogoff calls their new mission statement,  “We are connecting more people to more places,” is instead sheer fantasy.

For example Sound Transit apparently has its own approach to calculating transit system capacity.  The “conventional” way is to multiply the number of vehicles per hour times the number of riders each vehicle can accommodate.  The previous post detailed how a bus-only lane or an HOT lane with fees set to limit number of vehicles to achieve 45 mph could accommodate a large number of buses. (e.g. 900 buses an hour use a single lane to Manhattan). 

A 70-ft articulated bus can accommodate 119 sitting and standing riders so additional bus service could easily provide capacity far beyond what’s needed to meet future transit demand.  Yet Sound Transit’s 2019 budget plans for 2017 to 2041, like those for the previous decade, ignore the potential capacity increase from buses.   

Instead their 2019 budget “connecting more people” does so claiming light rail average daily ridership will increase from 59,118 in 2017 to 500,000 in 2041.  A 2004 PSRC study concluded Sound Transit’s decision to route Central Link through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited its capacity to 8880 riders per hour (rph) in each direction.  They presumably based that capacity on the more “conventional” approach where the number of vehicles per hour is based on the assumption DSTT station lengths limit light rail trains to 4 cars, that safe operation requires 4 minutes between trains, and that 148 riders can be accommodated in each 74-seat “vehicle”.

Again, Sound Transit apparently has its own way of calculating capacity since it would take 28 hours for the PSRC’s 17,760 total hourly capacity based on "conventional" methods to accommodate their 500,000 daily riders. The reality is Sound Transit light rail ridership will be a fraction of the 2019 budget projections and that any riders added by the extensions simply reduce capacity for current riders. 

Sound Transit also apparently has its own approach for providing access to whatever capacity light rail has.  Transit commuters need to either live within walking distance of light rail stations, be able to be dropped off, or drive to, or carpool with others to parking within walking distance.    

Since all the P&R's with access to transit have been full for years the previous post proposed local bus routes to provide access.  A local bus route connecting commuters from near where they live to a T/C was preferable to spending more than $50,000 for a space to park their cars. 

Sound Transit doesn't add any local bus routes and instead waits until 2024 to begin adding 8560 parking spots over the next 17 years; making their 2041 ridership projections even more absurd. 

Sound Transit follows its failure to provide access and capacity for commuting into Seattle with failure to provide access to light rail out of the city for return commutes.  The previous post detailed how 4^th Ave could be converted into an elongated T/C, each bus route having one or two dedicated drop off and pick up locations for commuter egress from and access to transit. 

Presumably the vast majority of light rail commuters will want to use the two stations in the DSTT.  It's "unlikely" stations that limit the length of light rail trains to 4 cars will ever have the platform space needed to accommodate more than a fraction of Sound Transit’s projected 500,000 daily ridership.

The bottom line is Sound Transit’s 2019 Budget 2017-2041 plans for light rail extensions show CEO Rogoff and the Sound Transit Board still don’t recognize the realities of effective public transit.  They've spent the last decade and billions on light rail rather than increasing transit capacity with more parking and bus routes.  Those billions and years wasted are only a precursor to their spending $96 billion over the next 23 years on a mission “to connect more people to more places” that is sheer fantasy. 

The choice is clear between Sound Transit's 2017-2041 plan and that in the previous post "A transit System That Works".  Unfortunately, the Seattle Times, which played a major role in passing ST3, and is presumably aware of the budget, hasn't raised any concerns.  Thus it's doubtful their Traffic Lab, which for years has, if not actively supported has abetted Sound Transit's light rail plans, will advocate for changes.  They need to be persuaded.