Mercer island Should Sue to Block Sound Transit Reserved Parking

The announcement “Sound Transit to Launch Permit parking Option on December 2” continues their apparent disdain for Mercer Island residents and commuters.  Prior to the Prop 1 vote Sound Transit assured islanders they would retain SOV access to I-90 Bridge outer roadway HOV to make up for the loss of the bridge center roadway.  That ended with Sound Transit promises of millions for “loss of mobility”.  It’s still not clear how much or where those funds were spent.

Sound Transit later decided to use Mercer Island as a terminus for I-90 corridor bus routes into Seattle.  That will result in the island light rail station being inundated with thousands of bus riders forced to transfer to and from light rail for commutes into and out of Seattle.  Those transferring at the station will reduce access for islanders with both likely having problems finding access during peak commute because of trains will be full before they ever reach island.

The latest example of Sound Transit ‘s Mercer Island disdain is their decision to inform residents on November 26 about plans to launch permit parking on the island.  They intend to do so with online sales beginning at 7:00 am Dec 2 on a first-come first-served basis.  The permits will be used to reserve half the stalls, cost $120 a month, and become active on Jan 2 2020.   

This is apparently the Mercer Island version of what was initially detailed in a December 7, 2017 Seattle Times article nearly two years ago.  

Reserved parking: Sound Transit looking at expanding paid parking permits to solo drivers

It was a follow-up to Sound Transit previously allowing carpools to reserve parking.  The carpool permits cost $5 a month.   Beginning in 2018, up to 50% of parking was to be permitted with fees projected to cost up to $90 a month based on the market-rate average of pay lots near the permitted stations.

Any revenue from the program beyond administrative cost coverage would fund access improvements in the communities where the money was collected.  Commuters would be required to use the parking 12 times a month to remain eligible.

At the time they were considering implementing the permits at nine different locations, none of which were on Mercer Island.  Sound Transit waited for nearly 2 years before giving Mercer Island one week’s notice their P&R would be “permitted”.

Again, the permits will be used to reserve half the stalls, cost $120 a month, and become active on Jan 2 2020. Sound Transit justified the $120 using “comparable costs” in Seattle rather than “where permitted”.  Meanwhile Issaquah fees will be $60 a month.  Sound Transit’s explanation is they base prices on proximity to Seattle.  Only Sound Transit would think those commuting the 5.5 miles from Mercer Island should pay for parking twice what those commuting the 15 miles from Issaquah were paying.

However, the most perverse example of Sound Transit antipathy is their decision to make the sale of the Mercer Island permits first-come, first serve.  Other I-90 corridor commuters have other parking options prior to Mercer Island.  Islanders have no other alternatives.  Thus they surely deserve to have priority for the permitted parking.  Sound Transit claims they can’t do so. 

The bottom line is it's way past time for the Mercer City council to end their feckless response to Sound Transit's mistreatments of residents and commuters.   They should sue to force Sound Transit to explain how they intend to spend the revenue to improve access to transit on the island.  That they justify the lack of advance notice, the higher permit fees, and their refusal to give islanders priority for permits. 

While it’s likely to be too late to stop Sound Transit from issuing the permits the suit can still stop them from using them to assure parking.  Islanders surely deserve it.

ST CEO Rigoff’s I-405 BRT Incompetence Continues,

The previous post opined the WSDOT decision to implement HOT on 2 lanes between Bothell and Bellevue increased congestion on the remaining 3 GP lanes to where more drivers were willing to pay for HOT than the lane could accommodate and still achieve 45 mph.  That WSDOT plans to implement HOT on 2 of 4 lanes between Bellevue and Renton will surely have a similar problem.  That travel times for both HOT and GP lanes can be reduced by raising fees to limit traffic on one of the HOV lanes to assure 45 mph and use the second lane to add the capacity needed to reduce GP congestion and travel times.

This post opines the best way to take advantage of the HOT velocities and travel times is to use it to attract thousands of additional transit riders.  A 70-ft articulated bus can accommodate up to 119 sitting and standing riders.  BRT routes employing 100 such buses an hour could accommodate more than 10,000 riders, the equivalent of 5 additional freeway lanes.    The only limitation being providing commuters with access to the bus routes with added parking or local bus routes to existing transit stations. 

Instead we have a Sound Transit whose CEO Peter Rogoff continues to demonstrate a failure to understand the basics of public transit.  His plans for I-405 BRT in the 2016 ST3 funding package included spending $812-$869 million on a 38-mile, 11-station route between Lynnwood and Burien in 2024.   When completed in 2024, I-405 BRT is projected to attract between 15,000 to 18,000 daily riders.  That he intends to do so with BRT service that consists on one bus every ten minutes. 

BRT works best when it’s restricted to direct routes from one or two pick up locations along a restricted access roadway to one or two drop off locations.  Rogoff’s BRT include 5 stops between Lynnwood and Bellevue and 4 stops between Bellevue and Burien, with much of the route on GP lanes.  It adds a total of 1300 parking stalls, instead makes the “assumption” 20 to 85% will come from non-motorized riders; live within walking distance to stations.    

However the latest example of Rogoff's continued incompetence is the 2020 budget showing he intends to proceed with the "In-line station" at NE 85th St near Kirkland.  The budget depicts it as a huge I-405 overpass of 85th with no visible station or access from parking or nearby residents.  Rogoff apparently intends to proceed with spending $300 million on the station despite Kirkland's decision not to implement the two bus-only lanes on 85th from downtown that presumably provided most of the riders.

Anyone with a modicum of transit competence would recognize that even if it worked as planned Rogoff’s BRT would have a miniscule effect on I-405 congestion.   If 80% of the 15,000 to 18,000 riders did so during the three-hour morning and afternoon commutes each of the 36 buses would have to accommodate between 333 to 400 riders a trip. 

Again, even if they could accommodate the riders, splitting the 2000 to 2400 hourly ridership between the route from Lynnwood and the route from Burien, the additional 1000 to 1200 transit riders an hour would have a miniscule effect on I-405 congestion.   Especially since I-5 corridor commuters from north of Lynnwood and south of South Center won’t even have access to the BRT routes.

The bottom line is the WSDOT decision to assure 45 mph on HOT lanes will do little to reduce I-405 congestion unless Sound Transit uses the assured velocity to attract thousands of additional transit riders.  However there is no need for a BRT route from Lynnwood to Burien or from Burien to Lynnwood.  What’s needed are direct bus routes from all the park and rides on I-5 from north of Lynnwood to Everett and south of South Center to Federal Way as well as along I-405 to Bellevue or Overlake.  That access to all the routes could be increased with added parking or local bus routes to existing parking.  And they could begin doing so in 2 years not 5.

ST CEO Rogoff needs to be convinced or replaced.

The I-405 Debacle Continues,

A Dec 25, 2017 Seattle Times article “I-405 express toll lanes between Renton and Bellevue are on their way” included the following:

In 2019, work crews on Interstate 405 will start building a new lane in each direction between Renton and Bellevue, as part of a series of changes that aim to improve traffic flow on what officials call Washington’s worst corridor for congestion.

Then, five years later, the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) will open the new lanes, and an existing one each way, to traffic as express toll lanes, extending the interstate’s current tolling system between Lynnwood and Bellevue that opened in 2015.

WSDOT will spend $1.22 billion on the upcoming project, funded by the statewide gas-tax increase approved by the Legislature in 2015.

Clearly nearly two years ago money had been allocated to begin implementing the 2 HOT lanes on I-405 between Renton and Bellevue. WSDOT said the upcoming I-405 project would cut driving time in the general-purpose lanes by about 30 percent

Yet nearly 18 months later a May 9^th 2019 Seattle Times editorial proclaimed, “the Legislature wisely addressed Eastside commuters’ daily I-405 logjam through a widening project”.  It’s not clear what the legislature did since funding was already available.

Apparently the WSDOT still didn’t get the message since 6 months later nothing has been done and congestion on “Washington’s worst corridor” continues to increase.  And the “current tolling system between Lynnwood and Bellevue that opened in 2015.” hasn’t reduced travel times.  

The WSDOT Nov 18^th, 7:45 am travel time for the 16.2 miles was 54 minutes on GP lanes and 44 minutes on HOT lanes.  Clearly 2 HOT lanes between Bothell and Bellevue hasn’t reduced GP travel times. Those willing to pay the tolls saved ten minutes.  However their average velocity over the route was only 22 mph, while better than the 18 mph GP velocity, was far short of the 45 mph the WSDOT had promised for HOT velocities for 90% of the peak commute. 

The “standard” premise for HOT is the fees can be raised on an HOV lane to limit traffic to what’s required to meet desired velocity, typically limiting traffic to 2000 vehicles per hour (vph) assures 45 mph.  The WSDOT apparently believes tolling increases that capacity, choosing to do so on two HOT lanes. That limits GP traffic to three lanes, increasing congestion to where more than 2000 vph were willing to pay the tolls on the two lanes.  Yet the GP lane traffic still slowed to 18 mph and HOT lane velocity to 22 mph.

Clearly increasing HOT fees on one HOV lane to limit traffic and allowing GP traffic on the second HOV lane to reduce GP congestion would raise both velocities.   Assuring 45 mph on HOV lane would also make BRT routes more attractive if Sound Transit would ever agree to add the 100 bus routes an hour needed to reduce congestion. 

Instead the WSDOT is more interested in increasing toll revenue than in reducing travel times.  Despite the fact the toll revenue only covers the system operating costs and does nothing to recoup the millions spent to implement it.  Until they limit HOT to one lane future traffic growth is only going to exacerbate the problem between Lynnwood and Bellevue.  

The “widening project” heralded by the May 9^th editorial does nothing to address the Lynnwood to Bellevue congestion, instead extending the two HOT lanes from Bellevue to Renton.    The Nov 18^th, 7:45 am travel times for the 10.9 miles were 47 minutes on GP lane and 19 minutes on HOV lane.  Yet rather than using new lane to reduce GP congestion they add two-person carpoolers to GP traffic.

The resulting congestion will again result in more than 2000 vph willing to pay the tolls on each of the two HOT lanes.  Limiting GP lanes to two of four lanes will likely result in even slower velocities on both GP and HOT lanes between Renton and Bellevue.  Again the obvious solution is to implement HOT on one HOV lane with fees raised to assure 45 mph and allow GP to use additional lane.  Again enabling the expanded BRT routes needed to reduce congestion.

The I-405 debacle will continue until the WSDOT recognizes that reality.

Next Year it’s for Governor

Again the votes are in and to no one's surprise I lost.   My candidacy attracted more than 11,000 votes despite the fact I had no desire to win and had not spent a dime campaigning. The Bellevue Reporter ignored my candidacy and the votes I received.   The Seattle Times opined one had to be a nihilist to vote for a perennial losing candidate opposed to Sound Transit.

During the campaign this blog also attracted more than 15,000 page views, “spreading the word about the Sound Transit debacle”.  I’m already looking forward to “spreading the word” beyond the King County 6^th district by filing for governor in 2020. 

The “word” for Seattle is their 70% approval for ST3 funding is enabling Sound Transit to spend billions on light rail extensions attracting riders that will reduce their access to light rail.  Seattle’s ST3 taxes should be spent expediting a Ballard-to-West Seattle light rail link that will reduce congestion rather than a light rail spine that won’t.

The “word” for King County is about Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s delusions regarding light rail benefits and his failure to recognize the benefits of BRT.   It's also about the stupidity of the WSDOT plan for 2 HOT lanes on I-405 between Lynnwood and Renton.  They should limit HOT to one lane with fees raised to assure 45 mph and use the 2nd lane for GP vehicles/

The “word” for Pierce and Snohomish counties is CEO Rogoff’s ridership claims for their light rail commuters are delusional.  That Sound Transit’s light rail spine won’t reduce congestion for their commutes into and out of Seattle and Bellevue.  Both would be better off if they dropped out of Sound Transit.

The “word” for the entire state is the futility of attempting to reduce the state’s CO2 emissions when the IPCC agreement allows China, which already exceeds U.S. emissions, to increase emissions until 2030.  I look forward to “challenging” Governor Inslee on the ability of higher gas and energy prices in Washington to combat “climate change”.

Sooner or later the entire area will recognize the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) will limit Sound Transit’s light rail spine to a fraction of the capacity needed to reduce I-5 and I-90 congestion.  That using light rail to replace bus routes will only hasten the lack of access for current Central Link riders in the city.  That, even with light rail's limited capacity, any commuter attempting to use light rail for the return route during peak commute will face utter chaos in the two DSTT stations.

That 100 additional BRT routes an hour into the city could add the equivalent of 5 lanes of capacity to I-5 and I-90 benefitting all three counties. And more could be added. The bus routes could be facilitated with +3HOV on both roadways during peak commute and an elongated T/C on 4^th Ave for egress and access in Seattle.  The only limitation is the need to provide access with added P&Rs or local bus routes from near where commuters live to existing T/Cs. 

Again I intend to use my candidacy for governor to attract viewers to this blog.  Sooner or later everyone will recognize the inability of Sound Transit’s light rail spine and WSDOT’s 2 HOT lanes on I-405 to reduce congestion and the futility of reducing our state’s CO2 emission to alleviate climate change.  

The Seattle Times and the state’s legislators have spent a decade ignoring the need for an audit that would have exposed Sound Transit incompetence.   Until they do it’s just another year of billions wasted, more congestion, and increased cost for gas and energy.   My candidacy for governor is another attempt to stop it.

A.G. Ferguson Will Again Block Lower Car Tab Fees

The news in the Seattle Times Nov 8^th article about Seattle and King County seeking an injunction against I-976 is no surprise.   What should really alarm those who supported the initiative is the news the person defending it is State Attorney General Ferguson. 

A.G. Ferguson has been one of the most prominent enablers for all of Sound Transit Prop 1 light rail extensions.  For example there would be no East Link if Fergusons attorneys hadn’t “misled” a federal judge in the Freeman light rail lawsuit objecting to Sound Transit confiscation of I-90 Bridge center roadway. 

Ferguson’s lawyers claimed the center roadway could be used for light rail because their addition of a 4^th lane (Alternative R-8A) on the outer roadway would make the center roadway unneeded for vehicles.  They supported that claim by referring to several studies, one of which was documented in  "I-90 Two-Way Transit and HOY Operations FEIS [(Final Environmental Impact Statement)] and ROD [(Record of Decision)]”.   Yet the ROD concluded the center roadway was still needed for vehicles with the added lane on outer roadways.

Ferguson’s lawyers allowed Sound Transit to make a mockery of Federal Transportation environmental laws regarding the need to protect the Mercer Slough Natural Park.  Sound Transit told the FHA and FTA that light rail “would not impact noise levels in the park”.  Yet Sound Transit agreed with Bellevue city council to spend millions shielding properties hundreds of feet away and across a major roadway.

Ferguson’s office allowed Sound Transit to ignore RCW 81.104.100 regarding the need to consider “no build” or low cost options (such as increased BRT) for any HCT.  Sound Transit’s response to that failure was to claim

Your presumption that this was due to the requirement in RCW 81.104.100(2)(b) is not correct. As indicated above, this statutory requirement applies to system-wide plans, not project level reviews.

Ferguson’s office response when asked whether it concurred with Sound Transit not complying included the following:

Our office does not advise or represent regional transit authorities, nor does our office have the role of supervising or correcting the activities of such authorities.

Clearly A.G. Ferguson’s office has shown a willingness to allow Sound Transit to do whatever it chooses.  Sound Transit’s mendacity regarding what the tabs would cost, the impact of the loss on light rail extensions, or the legal justification for using the value of one’s car to determine how much they pay for light rail will have no import.  Far more important, those who funded the I-976 opposition “may” be likely to contribute to his future campaign for Attorney General or Governor. 

Thus Ferguson’s claim defending I-976 is a “responsibility my office takes very seriously” is “likely” going to end up the same as his “defense of the Eyman initiative in 2016”.  Sound Transit will  be allowed to proceed, unabated, implementing Prop 1 light rail extensions that will inevitably be regarding as one of the biggest boondoggles in history.

Seattle and King County Should Sue Sound Transit

The Nov 7^th Seattle Times front page article, “Seattle, King county to sue over I-976” exemplifies their continued failure to recognize Sound Transit mendacity regarding Prop 1 and beyond” ST3 light rail extensions. Neither apparently recognizes Sound Transit “misled” voters with their 7/08/16 post claiming “An adult owning the median value motor vehicle would pay an additional $43 per year in MVET if ST3 were passed.”  

Yet they chose to respond to objections to the higher taxes in an April 2017 post headlined “Sound Transit 3 car tab rollback threatens light rail to Everett” claiming, “During the campaign, Sound Transit was completely transparent about the taxes.”   A Joel Connelly June 8^th, 2017 Seattle PI article concluded that mendacity enabled ST3 since it would get “only 37% support were voters given a do-over”.   

Prior to the I-976 vote Sound Transit also “misled” voters claiming it would require an addition 20 years to complete the ST3 extensions. That the $6.5 billion car tab loss would also add $20 billion to the $96 billion Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s 2019 budget for ST3 extensions.   I-976 would have “likely” had even more support without Sound Transit mendacity concerning its impact. 

If Seattle and King County want to take legal action to benefit not only commuters but all residents they should sue Sound Transit for its blatant mendacity regarding the benefits of the Prop 1 and beyond ST3.  Sound Transit’s decision to route the Prop 1 light rail extensions through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel limited light rail capacity to a fraction of what’s needed to reduce congestion. 

Sound Transit’s plans to use the extensions to Lynnwood and beyond, to Federal Way and beyond, and to Bellevue and beyond to replace buses will do absolutely nothing to increase transit capacity into the city.  Any riders added by the extensions will reduce access for current riders.  The only thing the extensions do is increase the number of expensive train cars required and the costs of operating the trains over the longer routes.

The bottom line is not only would Seattle and King County have problems defending Sound Transit mendacity they would “likely” have difficulty convincing the court that the amount residents have to pay to fund light rail extensions should be based on the value of their car.

Instead Seattle should sue to force Sound Transit expedite the Ballard to West Seattle link and King County should sue to insist they divert light rail extension funds to more buses into and out of Seattle and Bellevue.  They could easily do so even with the loss of the car tab revenue.

Sound Transit’s failure to comply with RCW 81.104.100 regarding high capacity transit planning should make it a relatively easy case to win.  

And the whole area would benefit.