How Mercer Island Can Stop “ST Bus Intercept”

The video of the July 16^th Mercer Island City Council meeting exemplified the frustration of islanders with Sound Transit and King County Metro decision to terminate all cross lake buses on the island when East Link begins operation in 2023.  They clearly recognized the ST “Bus Intercept” would be a disaster for islands ambience. 

Yet the meeting ending with the council being told the following:

Once East Link is operational, Sound Transit will no longer provide regional bus service between Mercer Island and Seattle

ST is a regional transit authority—responsible for providing high capacity transportation system for Central Puget Sound under chapter 81.112 RCW

Mercer Island saying No will likely not stop ST from implementing a bus intercept unilaterally.  Sound Transit has statutory authority to provide regional transportation and to implement and operate high capacity transportation systems, including ST3 plans.

According to ST, the bus/rail integration is a necessary component of ST2 transportation system.  Note, operations will continue to evolve with additional station openings during implementation of ST3 system.

Sound Transit bases their authority on Chapter 81.112 RCW.  However, the Revised Code of Washington RCW 81.104.100 details the code requirement for high capacity transit system planning.  RCW 81.104.00 (2) and section (b) are shown below:

(2) High capacity transportation system planning is the detailed evaluation of a range of high capacity transportation system options, including: Do nothing, low capital, and ranges of higher capital facilities.  High capacity transportation system planning shall proceed as follows:

(b) Development of options. Options to be studied shall be developed to ensure an appropriate range of technologies and service policies can be evaluated. A do-nothing option and a low capital option that maximizes the current system shall be developed. 

Sound Transit’s 2008 Draft Environment Impact Statement DEIS included a “no build” option for their East Link light rail proposal, presumably their response for a “Do nothing, low capital option”.  It included adding 4^th lanes to the I-90 Bridge outer roadways and maintaining current procedure, reversing the two center roadways for morning and afternoon commutes. 

They apparently never considered initiating permanent inbound and outbound bus rapid transit (BRT) only lanes on the center roadway.  Doing so would have provided “low capital” cross-lake capacity far exceeding light rail.

Clearly Sound Transit’s failure to consider two-way bus routes on I-90 Bridge Center roadway violates RCW 81.104.100 voiding any legal justification for Bus Intercept.