Tip of the Iceberg

The recent article in the Seattle Times concerning my candidacy was a welcome surprise.  However, its comments about my opposition to East Link are only the “Tip of the Iceberg” when it comes to why I’m a candidate, (for the 8^th time.) 

The article fails to detail why East Link will be regarded as “one of the “biggest boondoggles in transportation history”. That anyone with a modicum of competence would have recognized East Link’s share of light rail routed through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) wouldn’t have the capacity needed to reduce I-90 bridge congestion.

That Sound Transit’s 2008 East Link DEIS was “mendacious” with claims it was the equivalent of up to ten lanes of freeway. They were “incompetent” when they failed to consider two-way BRT on I-90 Bridge center roadway as the “no-build” alternative.

That doing so violated the Revised Code of Washington RCW 81.104.100 requiring high capacity transit planning consider, “a do nothing option and a low capital option that maximizes the current system”.  Even a cursory review would have shown 2-way BRT on I-90 Bridge center roadway could have provided 10 times light rail capacity at a fraction of the cost

That the WSDOT was malfeasant when it allowed Sound Transit to confiscate the center roadway for East Link.  They should have recognized East Link didn’t have the transit capacity needed to reduce congestion.  They also ignored a 2004 FHA conclusion adding 4^th lanes to the I-90 Bridge center roadway would not make up for the loss of the two center roadway lanes. The fact it currently often takes more than 40 minutes during peak commute for the 15.5-mile commute from Issaquah to Seattle confirms the FHA assessment.

Even worse, when East Link begins operation, Sound Transit’s “bus intercept” agreement to use light rail to replace I-90 Bridge buses will transform East Link from being "merely" a boondoggle to “a disaster for the entire Eastside”.   Again, Sound Transit’s confiscation of the I-90 Bridge center roadway has already increased outer roadway congestion. 

East Link was sold as a way to reduce that congestion, with DEIS promises “to increase person moving capacity across Lake Washington on I-90 by up to 60 percent”.  However, rather than adding transit commuters Sound Transit’s "bus intercept" uses East Link to replace I-90 bus routes.  Not only does ending cross-lake bus routes limit transit capacity to half the DSTT capacity, a far cry from the promised 60% increase, removing buses does little to reduce congestion on I-90 Bridge HOV lane and nothing on GP lanes.

Worse, the "bus intercept" plan has resulted in Sound Transit and King County Metro agreeing to half the current number of I-90 corridor buses.  Thus East Link operation will halve current transit capacity along the entire I-90 corridor. Thousands of vehicles will be added to the already heavy congestion along the entire I-90 corridor.

Those able to use remaining buses will be faced with the hassle of transferring to and from light rail on Mercer Island every morning and afternoon, a disincentive to even use transit.  Addition transit commuters will be dissuaded by the likely chaos in the two DSTT stations with thousands of commuters attempting to find access for their return trips.  Both will add to I-90 congestion and the East Link disaster.

That’s why the Seattle Times article, while welcome, was only the “tip of the iceberg" regarding billions spent on East Link.