Lynnwood Link’s 2-Year Service Delay?

A previous blog post detailed Sound Transit’s June 9^th System Expansion Committee approval of the NE 130^th St Infill Station on I-5 and a NE 85^th St  Bus Rapid Transit station along I-405, continued Sound Transit’s decision to ignore the light rail spine’s need for “motorized access.  That the nearest parking to 130th station was more than a mile away.  

This post details how the two meetings not only approved spending $204 million more on the station than what Sound Transit's June 7th April Agency Progress Report, they also included charts showing the Lynnwood Link debut had been delayed by at least two years from that shown in the Progress Report.  Both meeting agendas included the following Business Item:

Resolution No. R2022-17: Adopting the NE 130th Street Infill   Station project baseline schedule and budget by (a) increasing the authorized project allocation by $203,738,000 from $36,417,000 to $240,155,000, (b) increasing the annual project budget by $9,833,027 from $6,584,030 to $16,417,057, and (c) establishing an open for service date of Q2 2026. 

Yet the April Agency Progress Report’s Link Light Rail Program Overview for NE 130^th Street Infill Station included the Estimated Final Cost (EFC) of $36.4 Million. What prompted the $204 million increase?  It's also not clear how an annual $10 million increase will fund the added $204 million cost.

Even more “questionable” was the need for the station’s Q2 2026 Service Date.  Both meeting included Resolution 2022-17 with the following Key Features Summary: 

This action advances timely construction of station superstructure and platform work to be completed prior to activation of the Lynnwood Link Extension overhead catenary system. Completing this work earlier reduces construction risks, single tracking, and shutdowns of revenue operations for Lynnwood Link that may otherwise be necessary when working adjacent to a live system. 

One would have thought a 2-year delay in Lynnwood Link service was worthy of some "public notification".   Instead, the only mention of the delay in the June 9th meeting was a “star” in a chart for 130^th St, "Baseline Project Schedule" with the following:

 Lynnwood Link Revenue Service                                                                                     (original plan, subject to change)

Yet Sound Transit’s April Agency Progress Report showed the Lynnwood Link revenue service date as July 2024. That 64.3% of the major construction contracts had been completed.  The report's Link Project Schedule showed all the task completion dates were consistent with the July 2024 service dateRail Program.   

Apparently between a June 7^th Agency Progress Report and a June 9^th System Expansion Committee meeting  Sound Transit decided to delay the Lynnwood Link debut for at least 2 years.  The obvious question is "Why?  Whatever the reason  the result will be a two-year delay in Lynnwood Link demonstrating Prop 1 extensions ability to reduce congestion. 

It may be Sound Transit finally recognized the results of the October 2^nd Northgate Link debut. That 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity to reduce multi-lane freeway peak hour congestion and cost too much to operate during off-peak commutes. Sound Transit has yet to release a quarterly Service Provided Report for Q4-2021. It would’ve provided the riders added by each of the 3 Northgate Link stations as well as the cost for adding those riders   

The best indication of Northgate Link ridership was the 8000 daily increase in total link riders between September 2021 and January 2021, a fraction of Sound Transit's predicted 41,000 to 49,000.   The “likely” reason the lack of added “motorized access” along the I-5 to the three Northgate Link stations.  

The Lynnwood Link plans call for adding 500 stalls at the 148th and 185th Shoreline station by Q3 2023.  Presumably those commuters will have access to ST 511-513 routes to Northgate station and Link.  When Lynnwood Link does debut  it will only change where these riders access light rail, doing little to increase transit ridership.  

The bottom line is Lynnwood Link does nothing to increase capacity, little to increase access for new riders, reduces access for current riders, and doubles the operating cost.  Delaying that demonstration allows them to continue spending additional billions for another two years on fatally flawed extensions  

They should be forced to justify the delay.  Yet the Sound Transit Board asked no questions and unanimously approved the 130th St station budget and 2 year Lynnwood Link delay.  Typical of Seattle Times, their Traffic Lab, who previously hailed the Northgate Link debut as "Transit Transformed" has ignored both the increased spending on a station without motorized access and the Lynnwood Link delay.  

My candidacy for U.S Senate is an attempt to expose both.

The WSDOT Needs New Secretary

The Sound Transit Board has included the Washington State Secretary of Transportation to provide guidance to a board of elected officials chosen to represent their constituents transit concerns but with “limited” experience regarding public transit issues.   Yet, Roger Millar, the current WSDOT secretary, and his processor, Lynn Peterson, have abetted a Board whose actions reflect a failure to understand what constitutes effective public transit.  That public transit requires providing commuters with access to the transit capacity to and from their desired destinations.

 Yet during their tenures as WSDOT Secretary, Sound Transit Board failed to add parking for access to transit or to recognize the limited capacity of 4-car light rail trains.  They ignored the light rail spine’s need for “motorized access” and made delusional ridership claims to garner ST3 “voter approved” extensions in 2016.  The result’s been billions spent on light rail extensions that when completed won’t have the access or capacity needed to reduce congestion on multilane freeways during peak congestion, will reduce access for current riders, and will cost too much to operate during off-peak commute.  

 

Their WSDOT leadership for I-405 has been even more “problematic”.  They spent to $484 million implementing HOT between Lynnwood and Bellevue.  The "standard" premise for HOT being fees can be set to reduce HOV traffic from those in carpools to the 2000 vehicles per hour (VPH)) needed to assure 45 mph.   Between Bothell and Bellevue, the WSDOT attempted to get more revenue by implementing HOT on 2 HOV lanes but limited fees to $10.00.    

 

Using the second lane for HOT increased congestion on remaining GP lanes to where during peak commute more than 2000 drivers an hour were willing to pay the the fees on the two HOV lanes.  The result was  many of those paying the fees didn’t achieve the 45 mph travel times and the loss of the GP lane further increased congestion on remaining lanes

 

A Dec 25, 2017, Seattle Times article indicated WSDOT had similar plans for reducing I-405 travel times between Renton and Bellevue: 

  

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. 

 

Thus, as of Dec 2017, the WSDOT had the funds for adding a 4^th I-405 lane between Bellevue and Renton.  Again, the WSDOT persisted with plans for 2 HOT lanes with an April 12, 2019, WSDOT and FHWA notice announcing a “Finding of No Significant Impact” (FONSI) for the I-405, Tukwila to I-90 Vicinity Express Toll Lanes Project.  The WSDOT apparently not recognizing implementing HOT on 2 of 4 lanes would exacerbate Bothell-to-Bellevue problem. 

 

The bottom line is WSDOT Secretary Millar has abetted years of Sound Transit Board incompetence, 2 HOT lanes on I-405 that increase I-405 revenue, but don’t reduce travel times. He's failed to proceed with plans to “improve traffic flow on what officials call Washington’s worst corridor for congestion."  

Both Sound Transit and WSDOT need new leaders. The WSDOT's decision to no longer provide a 2 page listing of  current travel times for all the major routes in the area or an update on the Oct-Dec 2016 Park and Ride Inventory  just add to the reason.   

 

 

ST Doesn’t Recognize the Need for " Motorized Access"

The video of the June 9^th Sound Transit System Expansion Committee planning to implement the NE 130^th Street Infill Station exemplifies Sound Transit failure to understand the need for “motorized access”.  That the ST3 Map of “Voter Approved” extensions included the proviso 60-85% of riders would need “motorized access” from either parking near stations or access to bus routes to stations.  

 

However, a November 2016 Seattle Times article reported the 51 existing park and ride facilities next to express bus or trains stations in Snohomish, King, and Pierce County were already 95% full with 19,448 cars.   Sound Transit continues to ignore the Northgate Link debut showing the lack of “motorized access” limited ridership to a fraction of their website predictions.  (Sound Transit has stopped releasing the quarterly Service Delivery Reports, the Q4-2021 that would have detailed the ridership added at each of the 3 Link stations) 

 

Instead, a May 5^th video showed Sound Transit’s System Policy was to “maximize efficient use of available transit parking resources”.  The June 9^th video depicted the latest result, approving the NE 130^th Street Infill Station.  The Project Timeline detailed that spending $240 million on the station toward a Q2 2026 delivery was consistent with the “Affordable Schedule”.  Yet a map of the area shows the nearest parking was at Northgate, more than a mile away.  Still the proposal was unanimously approved without any of the board members asking how many commuters were expected to use the station for access or egress to and from light rail.

 

An April 28^th Board of Directors meeting approved giving WSDOT $141 million to implement “in-line” stations near Canyon Park and Brickyard P&R’s on I-405 into Bellevue. Again, no parking was added. An earlier example was a video of a January 27^th Sound Transit Board of Directors. It detailed plans for NE 85^th St Stride Bus Rapid Transit station along I-405 into Bellevue. It included a Funding Amount chart authorizing WSDOT “an amount not to exceed $287,260,000” for construction of the station, but nothing for parking.  

 

Sound Transit would also fund improvements to NE 85^th St to facilitate access but no bus routes from downtown Kirkland. That the board needed action today to authorize contract to avoid the “likely push delivery into 2027".  In both meetings the board asked no questions and unanimously approved project.

 

The bottom line is the Sound Transit Board doesn’t seem to recognize commuters need “motorized access” to both light rail and bus stations.  At this point, the costs of ending Sound Transits decade-long failure by adding parking far exceed any benefits.  (e.g. the $167,000 cost for each of the 500 stalls in Puyallup garage.)  

Thus, the only way to provide “motorized access” is local bus routes through areas where commuters live to existing light rail and bus stations.  Sound Transit should divert the nearly $700M for new stations toward funding those bus routes to existing stations. That the stations have access to BRT into Seattle to avoid having riders limiting access for current commuters on the route.

New ST CEO Could Expedite Light Rail “Spine” Demise.

The June 4^th Seattle Times Traffic Lab article, “Sound Transit names its nominee for CEO”, could be good news for the area.  The CEO Selection Committee has gone from replacing a CEO able to construct light rail extensions but had no idea of what constituted effective public transit with a CEO who has little experience in extending a light rail system but hopefully understands what constitutes effective public transit. 

 

The result may be Sound Transit inadvertently selected a CEO with the modicum of transit competence needed to recognize the futility of attempting to use a “light rail spine” to reduce congestion into Seattle. That effective public transit on multi-lane freeways requires a transit system with the ability to adjust capacity from what’s required to attract the riders needed to reduce peak hour congestion to what’s needed to meet off-peak demand.  That 4-car light rail trains don’t have the needed peak hour capacity and cost too much to operate during off-peak commute.  

 

Thus, her lack of experience in constructing light rail is of little import if she recognizes the futility of extending light rail lines beyond Northgate and Angle Lake.  That her experience in directing a bus transit system could provide the background for implementing a bus transit system with schedules to meet both peak and off-peak multi-lane freeway capacity demands.  Something CEO Rogoff has refused to do, extending a decade of the Sound Transit Board failure to add bus routes through 2041.  

 

The results been Sound Transit projected bus ridership remains relatively flat over the entire period with current 20,000 daily ST Express Bus Boardings eventually replaced with Stride Rapid Transit Boardings along I-405.  Her success in implementing the Richmond, Virginia’s bus routes 30,000 daily passengers, 50% more than Sound Transit’s, bode promise for avoiding that future.  

 

The ST3 Map ridership projections CEO Rogoff used to promote 2016 vote for the light rail spine extensions reflected his failure to understand extending light rail did nothing to increase capacity, it only increased operating costs. He ignored the ST3 Map "details" that 65-80% of the riders would need “motorized access” with parking near light rail stations or with access to bus routes to stations.  Instead, choosing to manage parking demand on the routes by “maximizing efficient use of available transit parking resources”.

 

That lack of access resulted in Northgate Link ridership “likely” a fraction of what Seattle Times Traffic Lab had heralded as “Transit Transformed” with 42,000 to 49,000 riders added by the links’ three stations. (It’s “likely” because Sound Transit has yet to release what used to be a  Service Delivery Performance Report for 2021-Q4 with the ridership added by each of the stations.)  

 

The lack of "motorized" access to all the "voter approved" light rail spine extensions portends similar results. A CEO with bus transit experience could recognize bus routes through areas where residents live could provide the access needed at a fraction of the cost of additional parking.  

 

The bottom line is the new CEO may or may not recognize the futility of attempting to use 4-car trains to reduce peak congestion on multi-lane freeways.  That reducing congestion on I-5 and I-90 into Seattle requires providing commuters with local bus routes to transit stations with access to BRT routes into Seattle.  A new Sound Transit CEO could expedite that recognition and the demise of the light rail spine. 

 

U.S. Senate Voters' Pamphlet Statement

Bill Hirt

 

(425) 747-4185

wjhirt2014@gmail.com

http://stopeastlinknow.blogspot.com

Elected Experience

Elected as president of class of twenty-five 1957 Armstrong Iowa High School graduates

Other Professional Experience
Boeing Engineer 1962 to 1998

Education
BS in 1961 and MS in 1962 in Aerospace Engineering from Iowa State Engineering 

Community Service
No Information Submitted

Statement

This year's candidacy marks a decade of not trying to win but to use the Voters' Pamphlet to attract viewers to the posts on my blog http://stopeastlinknnow.blogspot.com. It began in response to the Seattle Times failure to recognize Sound Transit had a board of elected officials and a CEO that didn't understand the basics of public transportation.

That 4-car light rail trains don't have the capacity to reduce peak-hour congestion on multi-lane freeways and cost too much to operate during off-peak commute. That the billions already spent on Prop 1 extensions will do nothing to reduce freeway congestion.  They're only a down payment on ST3 "voter approved" extensions whose costs have increased from the $54B voters approved in 2016 to $135B in 2922; yet don't increase capacity but add to operating cost.

The Times has abided Sound Transit no longer releasing quarterly service reports that would have shown Northgate Link ridership was ~8000, a fraction of the 42,000-49,000 the paper had heralded as "Transit Transformed". Portending even worse debacles for the "voter approved" ST3 extensions; my goal to expose.

This year it will also allow state residents to vote for someone who doesn't believe the country is systemically racist, believes teaching CRT doesn't benefit students, and that sex education should be age appropriate.  That Gov. Inslee should explain the benefits of EVs whose batteries are charged by fossil fueled generators and whose owners don't pay gas taxes to fund roads.  Who questions its efficacy with a 2019 NAS paper conclusion:

CO2 warming effect decreases with concentration. CO2 has less and less effect with increased concentration.  CO2 can go to 1000 to 2000 to 5000ppm and it won't warm the earth

 

Sound Transit Doesn’t Need 2nd Seattle DowntownTunnel

The June 1^st Seattle Times Traffic Lab front page article “Chinatown says not so fast to building second light rail station in neighborhood” exemplifies a decade of the Seattle Times abetting Sound Transit Board incompetence.   The problem,  

 

“A second station is part of the ST3 ballot measure voters from King Snohomish and Pierce counties passed in 2016, to help anchor what’s currently a $13 billion corridor linking downtown to West Seattle and Ballard”

 

The reason

 

To provide a new tunnel and greater capacity for the whole region to traverse downtown Seattle

 

It continues the Sound Transit approach to public transit is to create 3 light rail lines to “traverse downtown Seattle.” The 1 Line will use the new tunnel to “traverse downtown Seattle” from Ballard to Tacoma.  The 2 Line light rail route will “traverse Seattle” from Redmond to Mariner through DSTT and the extension to Everett. It will share the route with the 3 Line route through  DSTT to “traverse Seattle” from West Seattle to Everett.  

 

Sound Transit seemingly doesn’t recognize its goal should be to provide transit ridership into and out of downtown Seattle, not traverse the city.   Ballard commuters have very little reason to “traverse downtown Seattle” to Tacoma.  Sound Transit should use a tunnel that terminates the link at Westlake and avoid the cost and disruption of creating a tunnel that traverses Seattle.  Terminating the Ballard Link at Westlake would avoid operating schedules set by the need for capacity to and from Tacoma. Those wanting to go further could transfer to trains at the station.

 

East side commuters also have little need to traverse downtown Seattle to reach Mariner, and vice versa.  Sound Transit should terminate the 2 Line at the International District/Chinatown Station.  It would allow schedules needed to meet east side demand rather than limited to half of the DSTT light rail trains.  Line 1 routes to and from Tacoma would have access to full DSTT capacity that could be shared by Line 3 from West Seattle into downtown Seattle.  Again, east side commuters could transfer at the International District/Chinatown station to go further. 

 

The bottom line is Sound Transit doesn’t need a $13 billion “tricky path through Chinatown International District” that wrecks years of havoc on the area as well as along 4^th and 5^th Avenues.  What it needs is a light rail route system that reflects the need is to get commuters into and out of downtown Seattle not to traverse through.  Terminating the routes from Ballard and Redmond  at Westlake and International District/Chinatown will allow schedules that reflect their need for public transit capacity.  

What it also needs as a transportation system is one that recognizes Line 1 doesn’t need to be extended beyond SeaTac or Line 2 and Line 3 beyond Northgate. 4-car light rail trains on those routes don’t have the capacity to reduce peak hour multi-lane freeway congestion into Seattle.  That requires using BRT routes along limited access lanes to an elongated bus only 4^th Ave T/C.

 Something neither Sound Transit nor Seattle Times Traffic Lab recognize.