King County Council 6th District Candidacy Announcement.

It’s March and current office holders and challengers are announcing their decisions to file for this year's election.  Thus it’s time for me to announce my decision to file for the 8^th time;  this time for the 6^th District King County Council.   As with my previous 7 candidacies I have no expectations or desire of winning and will not ask for nor accept any financial support.   I’ll email the following to area newspapers and have posted it since they will likely ignore it. 

King County Council 6th District Candidacy Announcement

I’m filing as a candidate for Metropolitan King County Council 6th District to attract viewers to my blog http://stopeastlinknow.blogspot.com.

A few of the more than 500 posts have detailed my responses to current issues.   For example, posts have detailed the futility of advocating reducing the state’s carbon emissions when the entire country’s emissions are less than 30% of the total.   Or that Bellevue should not be a “relief valve” for Seattle’s failure to recognize that even compassion has its limits regarding homeless.  That the State Labor Councils mandated $60.09 prevailing wage for King County carpenters plays a major role in the high price of new homes

However the vast majority of posts detail the monumental failure of the Sound Transit Board's transit policies to reduce the area’s congestion.  The Prop 1 extensions, which Sound Transit officials called a “gift to our grand children” will go down as one of the greatest boondoggles in history.  They should have never been allowed to proceed.     

The Sound Transit Board simply ignored a 2004 PSRC Technical Workbook, "High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment”.  It was a comprehensive evaluation of the transit capacity of 7 different HCT modes. Not only did Sound Transit fund the study, four of the participants, were Sound Transit Staff members.  It concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd).  

Central Link routed through the DSTT could have effectively used this limited capacity to provide additional transit capacity into downtown Seattle from UW and SeaTac; and could have been extended to West Seattle. However it made no sense to spend billions on Prop 1 extensions to Northgate when Sound Transit could have added that capacity with 100 additional high-capacity bus routes an hour.  Instead Sound Transit spent billions and years on Prop 1 extensions routed through the DSTT that will do nothing to increase light rail capacity into the city.   Any riders added by the extensions will only reduce capacity for current riders.

The East Link extension is particularly egregious since it halves Central Link capacity to SeaTac and confiscates the I-90 Bridge center roadway, inevitably leading to gridlock on bridge outer roadways. (In this case 50 additional buses an hour could have sufficed.)  The 6^th District has already paid a heavy price for East Link.  They've temporarily lost P&R's ending access to transit for many commuters and had the route into Bellevue devastated, ending its persona as the “City in the park”. 

Ten years ago Sound Transit could have added their 4^th lanes to the I-90 Bridge outer roadways for non-transit HOV and implemented two-way BRT on center roadway with 10 times East Link capacity at one 10^th the price. Instead congestion, which years of Bellevue surveys have shown was their primary concern, 67% last year, is only going to increase.

The read absurdity is the Sound Transit Board intends to use East Link to replace all cross-lake buses.  (The also intend to replace most if not all of I-5 corridor buses.) They apparently don’t recognize I-90 Bridge HOV congestion is not due to too many buses.  Thousands of east side cross-lake bus commuters will face the hassle of transferring to light rail in the morning and the chaos in the tunnel stations for the return trip. 

Not only will Sound Transit Board’s East Link increase congestion for the vast majority of 6^th District commuters, all residents will continue to be forced to pay hundreds if not thousands annually to fund Prop 1 extensions to Everett and Tacoma. They will do nothing to reduce congestion along I-5 but will require a huge subsidy to cover the extensions added operating cost. 

Not only have posts detailed the Sound Transit’s inability to recognize the limitations of light rail routed through the DSTT, they also detail the board’s failure to increase bus transit ridership. Sound Transit has spent 10 years refusing to increase bus revenue miles or add parking despite the fact existing parking with access to I-5 or I-90 have been full for years.

Residents throughout the entire Sound Transit service area should recognize the years and billions wasted on Prop 1 extensions are only a down payment to CEO Peter Rogoff's 2019 long-term budget plans.  It details his intent to spend $96 billion over the next 20 years on what he proudly proclaims is the “Most ambitious transit system expansion in the country”.  The fact it does nothing to increase transit capacity into Seattle and continues their decade-long refusal to increase bus transit typifies Sound Transit Board incompetence.

Again, as with all my candidacies, my goal is not to replace the incumbent, as she may be a fine council member in many respects. While she played a prominent role in getting the Bellevue council to approve the permits Sound Transit needed for East Link, replacing her on the King County Council will do little to stop Sound Transit from proceeding.  The impact of her past support for Sound Transit’s failed policies on Bellevue City Council and PSRC Transportation Policy Board pales in comparison to that of the Seattle Times, the WSDOT, and the House and Senate Transportation committee members.  There would be no Prop 1 extensions if they had not abided, if not abetted, Sound Transit Board incompetence.   

It's exposing those problems is why I run.

What Mercer Island Should Do

(I submitted the following to the Mercer Island City Council in response to Sound Transit's plan to terminate King County Metro buses at the MI light rail station.)

What Mercer Island Council Should Do

The March 13^th MI News article “Mercer Island Transit Interchange” is just another attempt of Sound Transit to convince Mercer Island City Council to go along with attempts to increase East Link ridership.  It began more than 4 years ago with a January 21, 2014 Sound Transit presentation to the council about Integrated Transit System (ITS) proposal. 

That presentation detailed how 40,000 of East Link’s 50,000 daily riders would come from terminating I-90 corridor buses at either South Bellevue or Mercer Island light rail stations.  They claimed:

 The light rail stations at South Bellevue and Mercer Island will:

   Smooth bus-rail transfers

   Help improve efficiency and cost-savings

   Provide more reliable and frequent service

   Enhance rider experience

   Help optimize transit operations

The reality is it’s “unlikely” forcing bus commuters to transfer to and from light rail trains at either South Bellevue or Mercer Island will provide any of the purported benefits.  The Mercer Island city council rightly rejected all four of Sound Transit’s “Scenarios” for accommodating up to 84 buses an hour at the Mercer Island light rail station.   And Sound Transit agreed not to terminate Sound Transit buses at the Mercer Island station.

However Sound Transit still intends to use East Link to replace all cross-lake buses.  Sound Transit route 550 will be eliminated and 554 will be terminated at the South Bellevue light rail station.  As a result, Mercer Island commuters will loose all access to Seattle via bus.

Sound Transit’s latest attempt to boost East Link ridership is to convince Mercer Island City Council to go along with a plan to use East Link to replace King County Metro I-90 bus routes.  Metro buses that currently don’t stop on the island will be terminated at the Mercer Island station. 

This proposal was the result of Sound Transit commissioning a Mercer Island Transit Interchange Operational and Configuration Study to evaluate how Metro buses will integrate with the light rail station.  It resulted in the following purported benefits:

The future transit interchange achieves the key tenets of the Settlement Agreement:

·       A roundabout at North Mercer Way & 77th Avenue SE, and no substantial bus operations/layovers along 80th Avenue

·       Future bus volumes less than existing bus volumes

·       No routing of regional buses through MI Town Center

·       Limited occurrences of long bus layovers

·       No bus idling

Typical of Sound Transit, they apparently believe the Mercer Island City Council, that didn’t want Sound Transit buses terminated on the island, would accept King County Buses.  Even if they did it’s unlikely King County Metro will go along with forcing riders to transfer to and from light rail at Mercer Island station.

The Mercer Island City Council should use the meeting to insist Sound Transit 554 continue to be routed to MI station and across I-90 Bridge into Seattle when East Link begins operation.  They should join with Issaquah City Council to insist Issaquah commuters not be forced to transfer to and from light rail at the South Bellevue P&R and islanders should be given the option of commuting by bus, especially during peak commute when East Link trains could be full.  (Terminating Metro buses there  adds to the problem.) That Sound Transit should reserve 50% of the MI P&R for those willing to pay for stalls with islanders given priority to assure access.

The bottom line is Sound Transit ridership projections for all their Prop 1 and beyond light rail extensions are based on using light rail to replace bus routes.  They refuse to acknowledge that congestion on the area’s HOV lanes is not due to too many buses.  Their attempt to replace I-90 King County Metro bus routes with trains is just the latest example and should be rejected.

Ending a Decade of Sound Transit Board Failure.

Sound Transit policies over the last 10 years reflect what happens when a “Board of Directors” of a public transit organization fails to provide effective “direction”.   Board members of most companies are selected because they have demonstrated a level of expertise needed to help direct company policy.   Those owning stock in the company can vote to replace them if not satisfied.

The Sound Transit Board actions during the past decade show they lacked the competency to provide effective public transit system “direction”.   Yet little can be done to replace them.  They were selected by County Executive, Dow Constantine, because they concurred with his “pie in the sky” 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”    

A competent Sound Transit board would have been aware of a 2004 PSRC Technical Workbook, High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment”. Sound Transit funded the study and 4 of those participating were Sound Transit Staff members. The 168-page Technical Workbook provided the results of a comprehensive comparison of the ability of 7 different high capacity transit modes to meet the area’s future transit needs.

It concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd).  It doesn’t take much public transit competency to recognize 8880 rphpd is only a fraction of what’s needed to meet area’s transit needs. That it made no sense spending billions extending light rail beyond UW to Northgate and beyond, and even less splitting that capacity between extensions across I-90 Bridge or beyond SeaTac.

The board compounded their decade of incompetency regarding light rail with a decade spent neglecting to increase Sound Transit bus transit capacity.  Annual bus revenue hours in 2008, 10,290,367, only increased to 11,991,374 in 2017.  They also neglected to add parking despite the fact all the P&R’s with access to bus service have been full for years. 

Instead the board demonstrated more incompetence approving a proposal to “manage access to transit” as a way to overcome “crowded early buses and empty buses later”.  Rather than increasing either bus service or parking they approved allowing commuters pay to reserve 50% of parking stalls in existing P&Rs for late arrivals; ending access for 50% of early commuters.

The latest example of Sound Transit Board incompetence is their approval of CEO Peter Rogoff’s 2019 budget.  It details why the past decade of billions wasted on light rail extensions is only a down payment for Rogoff’s long-term plans.  That between 2017 and 2041 Rogoff plans to spend $96 billion implementing what he proudly proclaims is the “most ambitious transit system expansion in the country”.  That the budget continues Sound Transit’s decade-long refusal to increase access to bus transit and makes claims for future light rail ridership that dwarf DSTT capacity.

Any competent transit board would’ve used Rogoff’s 2019 budget as grounds for termination.  The Sound Transit Board chose to reward him with a big raise and extended his contract for another three years.

The board needs to "re-direct" Sound Transit.  It needs to be transformed from a light rail construction company into one that facilitates increased bus ridership.  Rather than overseeing the planning and construction of light rail extensions Sound Transit should  survey workers in Seattle, Bellevue, and Overlake.  Find out where they live and when they need to commute to and from their workplace. 

Use the data to decide how best to provide commuters with access to transit.  Is it be better to fund a new or expanded existing P&R or a local bus route from near where they live to an existing P&R?  Use the survey data to determine when and where to route both the local buses to and from the P&R and from the P&R, to and from work.

Purchase additional smaller buses for the local routes and more high-capacity buses for direct routes from and to P&R.  Facilitate egress and access in Seattle with an elongated T/C with designated stations for each route to drop-off commuters on one side and pick up on the other.  The costs and time required would likely pale in comparison to the billions and years the Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s 2019 budget proposes. 

The bottom line is the Sound Transit Board failure a decade ago to recognize the DSTT limits on light rail capacity has already resulted in needless billions and years wasted on light rail extensions.  They need to recognize those billions and years wasted pale in comparison with the cost and years wasted if CEO Rogoff is allowed to proceed with his 2019 budget long term plans.  That Sound Transit needs to be transformed from a light rail construction company into an organization that facilitates increased bus transit ridership. 

A decade of Sound Transit Board incompetence is enough!

Seattle Times Decade of Failure

The Seattle Times March 2^nd A2-page article, “Traffic Lab Turns 2 and our Team is ready to steer you through the jams” epitomizes a decade of Seattle Times failure to deal with the area’s transportation problems.  The paper describes Traffic Lab as a “Seattle Times project that digs into the region’s thorny transportation issues, spotlights promising approaches to easing gridlock and helps readers find the best ways to get around.” 

The reality is it also marks the end of a decade of Seattle Times failure to inform readers about Sound Transit and WSDOT’s incompetent response to the area’s transportation problems.  For example, ten yeas ago the Times should have told voters about a PSRC, August 2004 Technical Workbook, “High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment”. 

It was funded by Sound Transit to compare different approaches to increasing area’s transit capacity.  Yet Sound Transit ignored the workbook’s conclusion light rail, routed through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT), was limited to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd). 

The Times should have told readers about light rails capacity limits and that Sound Transit could have provided the 8880 rphpd with 100 additional high capacity buses an hour.  That it made no sense spending billions extending light rail from the University Station to Northgate and beyond.  That any riders added by the extensions would, at least during peak commute, displace those currently riding Central Link.

The Times also abided Sound Transit ignoring RCW 81.104.100(2)(b) requiring any high-capacity transit planning consider lower cost options.  There’s no indication Sound Transit ever considered adding bus service despite the fact it was far less expensive and available within months rather than years.

The Times failure to inform readers about Sound Transit’s East Link impact was also egregious.  It diverted half the DSTT trains across the I-90 Bridge, halving any transit benefits of light rail south of Seattle.  That 50 additional bus routes an hour could have provided the 4440 rphpd without East Link.  And they could have done so years ago. 

There was no need to confiscate the I-90 Bridge center roadway or end forever Bellevue’s persona as the “city in the park” and the quiet solitude of the Mercer Slough Park.  All for an East Link extension that will forever limit I-90 Bridge center roadway to a fraction of the transit capacity needed to reduce cross-lake congestion.

Sound Transit’s rationale for East Link was it could replace cross-lake bus routes.  Again, it won’t have the capacity needed and whatever buses it does replace will have little effect on I-90 Bridge HOV lane congestion. Most I-90 corridor commuters won’t even be able to access East Link. 

The Seattle Times also ignored a Sept. 2004 FHA Record of Decision regarding I-90 Bridge transit options.  It concluded adding 4^th lanes to the bridge outer roadway would not make up for the loss of the center roadway lanes, inevitably leading to future gridlock on bridge outer roadways.  Thus the bottom line is the billions spent, the years wasted, and all the devastation will result in increased I-90 Bridge congestion and no relief for I-90 corridor commuters.

More recently the Times was presumably aware of a PSRC Stuck in Traffic: 2015 Report showing how HOV lane travel times had increased.  It included a “pie chart” showing in 2013, 9.8% rode transit, 10.3 % used HOV lanes and 73.6% drove alone.  It shouldn’t have taken much “digging into this “thorny transportation issue” to recognize the HOV travel times were due to more people riding in 2-person carpools than in buses. 

They should have recognized a “promising approach to ease gridlock” would have been to provide those in 2-person car pools or driving alone with access to increased bus transit capacity. A Seattle Times 4/03/16 editorial “Questions on Transit Need Clear Answers” did urge Sound Transit consider additional bus service for ST3.  (Their annual bus revenue hours in 2008, 10,290,367, only increased to 11,991,374 in 2017.)  

Sound Transit’s failure to do so presumably led to a Seattle Times Nov 4^th, 2016 edition conceding ST3 would not reduce congestion. The best they could say was the light rail extensions “offers an escape from traffic misery for people who can reach the stations on foot, on a feeder bus, or via park-and-ride”. 

Yet the Times continues to abet Sound Transit’s approach of spending billions on light rail extensions to replace existing buses on HOV lanes rather than adding bus service.  Sound Transit plans to spend $96 billion between 2017 and 2041 implementing what Rogoff proudly calls “the most ambition transit system expansion in the country”.  Rogoff’s “transit system expansion” also continues Sound Transit’s refusal to increase bus ridership for the next 20 years. 

Instead the Times abides Sound Transit 2019 budget claims ST3 will increase light rail daily ridership from 60,000 in 2017 to 500,000 in 2041.  It will take more than a 28-hour “day” to accommodate that number of riders through the DSTT with the PSRC 8880 rphpd capacity.

The bottom line is Traffic Lab, rather than digging into thorny transportation issues and spotlighting promising approaches to easing gridlock has continued the Seattle Times decade of failure to inform readers about Sound Transit incompetence.  Future posts will provide even more examples of failure.  

Sound Transit and WSDOT Incompetence to BDA

(I submitted the following to the Bellevue Reporter)

Letters,
The transit official comments in the March 1, Bellevue Reporter article, “Transit Officials talk current future projects at BDA event” exemplifies the failure of Sound Transit and WSDOT to deal with I-405 congestion.  While they identify the problem, 52,000 new residents in King and Snohomish counties between April 2017 and April 2018, their proposed solutions will do absolutely nothing to reduce either current or future congestion.

For example Sound Transit plans for I-405 bus rapid transit (BRT).  When it  begins operation in 2024, Sound Transit describes it as “a bus system with the speed of a light rail system, faster than a conventional bus system by using fewer stops, higher speeds, off-vehicle fare collection, dedicated lanes and priority at traffic signals. 

First there’s no reason for Sound Transit to wait until 2024 to implement I-405 BRT.  When I-405 BRT does begin operation, it will be nothing like what Sound Transit promises.  The ST 3 plans for I-405 BRT calls for spending $812--$869 million on a 38 mile route with 11 stops between Lynnwood and Burien. There’s no reason to believe BRT will be faster than a “conventional” bus.  

ST3 adds 3 new stations (additional stops!) with $300 million spent on a NE 85^th St Station near Kirkland that has no parking for access.   ST3 does nothing to provide BRT access for I-405 commuters from north of Lynnwood or from south of South Center.  When operation begins in 2024, ST3 I-405 BRT will consist of one bus every 10 minutes, a fraction of what’s needed to reduce congestion.

Rather than a “dedicated lane”, Sound Transit I-405 BRT will use HOT lanes. The number 1 "Risk" in the Sound Transit 3 map  for I-405 is "It relies on WSDOT to maintain adequate speed and reliability of I-405 express toll lane system".  Yet, the 16-mile commute between Lynnwood and Bellevue on HOT lanes took 33 minutes (per WSDOT Jan 23 7:55 am Traffic Report).  Clearly WSDOT 2 HOT lanes don't assure 45 mph on I-405 during peak commute.  The 7 bus stops would presumably add 10 or more minutes to the commutes.   (ST3 BRT on I-405 from Burien to Bellevue would likely have similar delays).

Clearly ST3 I-405 BRT is not what the BDA was told they were getting.  I-405 BRT should consist of express bus routes from each P&R, not only those along I-405, but along I-5 north of Lynnwood and south of South Center to either Bellevue or Overlake T/C.   Rather than buying just 34 buses, Sound Transit should spend ST3 funds adding whatever buses are required to implement BRT routes as needed to meet individual station demands. 

I-405 BRT doesn’t need “dedicated lanes,” just HOT implemented on a single HOV lane with fees raised to limit the number of drivers willing to pay to where traffic is limited to the 2000 vehicles per hour needed to assure 45 mph.  The increased HOT fees would assure BRT commute times and the added GP lane would reduce congestion for those unwilling or unable to pay the tolls. The reduced travel times from the lack of intermediate stops and 45 mph commute would attract thousands of riders, the only way to reduce I-405 congestion.   

The bottom line is the claim, “WSDOT projects that the improvements along with bus rapid transit will vastly improve traffic congestion along I-405 by 2025” is patently absurd. Rather than waiting until 2024 for I-405 BRT, Sound Transit should use the $300 million they plan to spend on a Kirkland T/C (with no access to parking) to buy additional buses.  Use some of the buses to route commuters from near where they live to  P&Rs.  Use the remaining buses to implement BRT direct routes on an HOT lane from P&R lots to Bellevue or Overlake T/C. 

The WSDOT approach to tolls is equally absurd.  The 2 HOT lanes they've implemented on I-405 between Lynnwood and Bothell have failed to provide the 45 mph for many commuters.  The problem being the second HOT lane increases congestion on the remaining 3 GP lanes to where more drivers are willing to pay the tolls than the lane can accommodate  for 45 mph.   WSDOT plans to limit GP  traffic to two lanes between Bellevue and Renton along with future traffic growth will surely exacerbate the problems on both GP and HOT lanes along the entire route.

The "WSDOT is only waiting for the state legislature to fully authorize the express toll lane project before beginning the construction phase."  Area commuters can only hope that never happens.  That instead the legislature should mandate WSDOT limit I-405 HOT to one lane.

Bill Hirt
Bellevue