The previous post opined Sound Transits failure to comply with
RCW 81.104.100(b) should be grounds for legal action to stop Sound Transit and
Mercer Island from implementing their bus intercept plan. This post
details how and why Seattle officials should use Sound Transit’s failure to
comply with the RCW to block Sound Transit plans to spend billions on Central Link extensions to Everett
and Tacoma.
Again the “how” is based on RCW 81.104.100 (b) detailing the HCT
planning requirements:
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. Several higher capital options that
consider a range of capital expenditures for several candidate technologies
shall be developed.
Sound Transit’s response to
my complaint to the Attorney General’s office regarding the East Link failure
to comply included the following:
As you noted in your complaint, Chapter
81.104 RCW requires development of a high
capacity transportation system plan, and RCW 81.104.100
specifically sets forth the requirements that must be included
in that system-wide plan. Sound Transit developed draft and
final system plans that complied with these requirements and
included extensive public outreach from 2005 to 2008. Draft and final
supplemental environmental impact statements (EISs) on the
updated system-wide plan were prepared in 2004 and 2005 respectively.
Sound Transit went from claiming they didn’t need to comply with
RCW regarding East Link to claiming they had complied with the “system wide
plan” for Prop 1 extensions along I-5 corridor.
It’s not clear what system-wide plan they were talking about in
2004 and 2005. There’s no
indication Sound Transit planning ever considered the lower cost option of
using buses to increase transit capacity into Seattle by adding more bus routes
along I-5. Failure to comply with RCW would seem to be a rationale for “how” legal action can block the I-5 extensions.
Seattle has ample reason for “why” they should do so. A 2004 PSRC study, funded by Sound
Transit, concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light
rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour (rph) in each direction; a fraction of
the transit capacity needed to reduce I-5 corridor
congestion. Especially south of Seattle since half the DSTT capacity
will be diverted across I-90 Bridge.
The Central Link extensions beyond the UW north or SeaTac south
do nothing to increase that capacity. Even a fraction of Sound
Transit’s delusional 2016 ridership projections for ST3 extensions to Everett and Tacoma
would, at least during peak commute, end access for current Central Link
riders. Protecting current riders is surely ample reason to sue to
block extensions.
Even more reason, as with East Link, Sound Transit intends to
implement “bus intercept” along the I-5 corridor to boost extension
ridership. The reason being current bus riders are the only ones who
live within or can park within walking distance of light rail stations. (Sound
Transit refuses to add parking despite the fact all the parking with access to
stations is “fully in use”).
Clearly reducing the number off buses on I-5 will do little to
reduce corridor congestion and any riders added will reduce access for current
riders. The entire area will be burdened with paying for the
extensions and the shortfall between increased operating costs for the
extensions and fare-box revenue.
The bottom line is Sound Transit is currently proceeding with CEO
Peter Rogoff’s 2019 budget plan to spend
$96 billion over the next two decades implementing ST3 light rail
extensions. Most of that money
will be spent on I-5 corridor extensions that will reduce access for Seattle
commuters and increase operating cost subsidies for
everyone. Seattle officials have ample reason to take legal
action to stop them. “Encourage” Sound Transit to divert I-5 extension
funding towards expediting light rail from Ballard through 2nd tunnel
to West Seattle. Doing so will increase Seattleites access to transit not decrease it
There would be no ST3 without Seattle’s 70%
approval. They and the entire area deserve better. Sue
Sound Transit!
entire area deserve better. Sue Sound Transit!
No comments:
Post a Comment