Mercer Island Continues Abetting Sound Transit Bus Intercept Debacle

(This post details how MI continues attempts to implement bus intercept rather than stop it)

Anyone who attended, or viewed the video of the July 16^th, 2019 Mercer Island City Council Meeting would have concluded Mercer Island residents were adamantly opposed to Sound Transit’s bus intercept plan.  Their objections were followed by a WSDOT claim:

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.

Despite islander objections the WSDOT claim nothing could be done to stop Sound Transit led to the council response to set up a “Working Group” to assess the bus intercept configurations based on: 

• Concerns about loss of intersection capacity,

• Concerns about pedestrian volume, pedestrian safety, and the volume    of crossings on North Mercer Way.

• Bicycle safety,

• Landscaping, and

• Addressing public safety and concerns about crime.

To assist with this assessment, the City retained Modern Traffic Consultants (“MTC”) to review existing technical documentation and provide independent evaluation regarding the Mercer Island Bus Intercept facility. The City also retained KPG to assist with engineering review and drafting conceptual figures.  The Working Group met four times to review and discuss potential options for the bus intercept.

However nothing was done to assess the validity of the WSDOT claim Sound Transit could insist on bus intercept. Chapter RCW 81.104.100 details the code requirement for high capacity transit system planning.  It requires planning include the development of a do-nothing and low-capital option that maximizes the current system.

Yet there was no indication Sound Transit ever considered adding fourth lanes to the I-90 Bridge outer roadways for non-transit HOV and implementing two-way BRT on bridge center roadway.  It could have provided 10 times East Link capacity, 10 years sooner, at I/10^th the cost.

Sound Transit’s response to an earlier query about its failure to comply included the following:

Your assertion that Sound Transit’s failure to consider bus rapid transit (BRT) use of the center roadway failed to meet the statutory requirement outlined in 81.104.100(2](b) is misplaced. As noted above, the cited statute does not apply to project level reviews. 

Clearly Mercer Island council should legally challenge Sound Transit’s claim East Link is not required to comply with RCW 81.104.100.  That failure to comply would supercede any chapter 81.112 RCW authority.  Especially since any attempt to implement bus intercept will be a disaster for the entire I-90 corridor.

The above “Working Group” concerns ignore the most odious aspect of bus intercept, its lack of public transit capacity.  It limits I-90 corridor transit capacity to 30 buses an hour, half of current transit capacity and a fraction of what’s required to reduce I-90 corridor congestion into Seattle. 

Instead its primary goal was to evaluate an alternative to Sound Transit/King County Metro plan to use 77^th Ave to drop off and pick-up bus riders.  The concern being 75 or more bus riders attempting to cross 77^th Ave every 2 minutes to reach light rail station.   The KPG and MTC configuration avoided that problem by using roundabouts on 80^th St Overpass to drop off and pick up riders. 

However ST/KCM concluded the proposed turning movement on 80^th Ave roundabout into the drop-off area was too tight/narrow for their buses and did not meet minimum pedestrian space requirements near the station entrance.   They insisted on adding a roundabout on 77^th Ave.   It wasn’t clear where buses would stop to drop off or pick-up riders with the added roundabout.  

Those details will presumably be addressed when Staff and the City’s consultants (MTC & KPG) provide conceptual drawings for the proposed options and 77th Ave SE modifications at the August 20 Council meeting. (It’s not clear why the 80^th St options will still be presented) The Working Group is soliciting feedback from the Council regarding the proposed alternatives and seeking direction on where to focus improvements regarding the future bus intercept configuration.

The bottom line is the council's "Working Group" failed to find a bus intercept configuration that addresses their concerns.  It's "unlikely" any council "feedback" will allow them to do so.   It's time the council showed more concern about the disaster awaiting Mercer Island and the entire I-90 corridor from bus intercept.  They need to stop abetting Sound Transit and take legal action to stop them.  Failure to comply with RCW seems a viable way to do so.