ST Board System Expansion Committee Incompetence Continues

The Seattle Times August 19^th, Traffic Lab article “More delays for light rail to Bellevue, Redmond, Federal Way, Lynnwood” reports on this year’s problem, the results of the Sound Transit Board System Expansion Committee’s August 18^th meeting.  Last year’s problem wasn’t these extensions, but the inability to borrow the funds needed for further extensions. That problem led to Sound Transit delaying those extensions as part of a “Realignment”. 

The August meeting reported light rail service to Bellevue was delayed because of flawed concrete track supports and “unstable soil conditions” on delayed Federal Way route.  There were only minor delays due to four-month strike by concrete-truck drivers for the Lynnwood and downtown Redmond extensions.  

Yet the same System Expansion Committee in a June 9^th meeting adopted the following resolution:

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. 

One of the resolution’s “Key Features” was the following:

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. 

Clearly the June 9^th System Expansion Committee anticipated the Lynnwood Link revenue service would be delayed beyond Q2 2026.  Previous posts have raised obvious questions for the committee concerning the resolution. Why construct a light rail station a mile away from the nearest parking at Northgate?  Why had the station’s cost increased by $204 million and how do they expect a $10 million annual budget increase to fund the additional funding?  Even more important what precipitated the anticipated revenue service delay.  Yet, the committee asked no questions, and the resolution was unanimously approved.

Again, the same committee members, on August 18^th, sat through a presentation showing the Lynnwood extension was a “Minor project risk” due to 4-month concrete truck drivers’ strike.  The committee didn’t ask questions and the 2-year “anticipated” delay disappeared.  Apparently the $240 million station implementation is continuing apace without any parking for access.

It typifies a decade of a Sound Transit Board willing to “rubber stamp” anything they are presented.  It’s the result of board members chosen to represent different districts rather than knowing what constitutes effective public transit.  They’ve never understood 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity to reduce multilane freeway congestion.  That commuters need access to light rail by living near stations, parking near stations, or parking near bus routes to stations.  Instead, they’ve ignored the Northgate results that first demonstrated the problems.

A competent transit board would’ve recognized the problem with East Link is not the delay, it’s that they should never have confiscated I-90 Bridge center roadway for light rail.  Doing so precluded 2-way BRT on bridge with 10 times light rail capacity, 10 years sooner, at 1/10^th the cost.  That the eastside didn’t have the number of commuters living near light rail stations or parking near stations to justify the cost of construction and operation of the 14-mile East Link extension. 

Sound Transit compounded the problem by choosing to extend the route through DSTT to UW, halving the number of trains to SeaTac.  That routing the East Link 4-car light rail trains to Northgate and beyond will increase operating costs, but without added access, the added capacity won’t increase ridership.   

The bottom line is a competent transit board would use the delay to terminate East Link at the International District/Chinatown station.  Commuters could transfer to Central Link if needed but eliminating un-needed train routes to Northgate.  It would allow East Link to operate with number of cars per train and frequency to meet demand for commuters from Seattle and those with access along route through Bellevue.  

Doing so would minimize operating costs and maintain current routes to SeaTac and beyond. I-90 corridor buses could bypass Mercer Island, avoiding forcing commuters to transfer to light rail for the commute into and out of Seattle.

Instead, Sound Transit has a System Expansion Committee that approves without question increasing funding from $34 million to $240 million for a light rail station with no access for parking. In June okays a two-year delay for Lynnwood extension that disappears in August, again without any questions.  

Sound Transit continues to refuse to release a quarterly Service Provided Performance Report showing ridership added by light rail stations and bus routes.  It would have indicated the futility of routing East Link to UW and beyond.  That incompetence is likely to continue.

 

 

Will Seattle Times Continue Enabling ST Incompetence?

 

Again, my campaign is over, but this blog continues detailing a decade of Seattle Times allowing Sound Transit to perpetrate one of the biggest public works boondoggles in history.  They did so by refusing to urge legislature require a performance audit of Sound Transit’s Prop 1 extensions. 

Any competent performance audit would have confirmed a 2004 PSRC study, funded by Sound Transit, that light rail trains were limited to 4 cars and that safe operation required a minimum of 4 minutes between trains.  That Sound Transit had concluded the 74-seat light rail cars could accommodate 148 riders, limiting capacity to 8880 riders per hour in each direction. 

Light rail extensions do nothing to increase that capacity. Thus, light rail extensions and 4-car light rail trains won’t have the capacity needed to reduce peak hour congestion on multilane freeways.  Yet the Times has enabled Sound Transit to ignore the PSRC light rail capacity limits. 

Since 2018 they’ve published yearly Financial Plan & Adopted Budget Long Range Plans with “Ridership by Mode 2017-2041” charts.  They show Sound Transit claims the extensions will increase ridership from 48 million in 2022 to 162 million in 2041.  The budgets also reported the $54B the voters approved in 2016 for from 2017 to 2041 has increased in 2022 to $142B from 2017 to 2046 to fund the extensions.

A competent transit performance audit would also have reported Sound Transit needed to increase access to light rail with parking near stations or near bus routes to stations.  A Seattle Times November 2016 article reported the 51 existing park and ride facilities next to express bus or train stations in Snohomish, King, and Pierce County were already 95% full of 19,948cars.

Yet the Times has enabled Sound Transit to “manage access” by “maximizing efficient use of available transit parking resources”.  Planning to spend nearly $300 million on an 85^th St NE transit station along I-405 and a 130th St Infill Station on I-5.  The “infill’ station’s costs have increased this year from $34 million to $270 million and neither has parking for access. 

Rather than add access Sound Transit is attempting to force those currently using parking for bus routes to transfer to the Northgate Link for the commute into and out of Seattle. It doesn’t take an audit to recognize replacing bus routes with trains does nothing to increase public transit ridership or decrease congestion into the city.

Again, a competent performance audit would also have exposed the folly of extending light rail beyond UW station. That light rail extended beyond UW to Northgate won’t have the capacity needed to reduce I-5 congestion into Seattle. The original Central Link plan was to terminate light rail at the UW stadium, using the T/C as an interface between 520 BRT and light rail into the city.  The original plan had included a second Montlake Cut Bridge to facilitate access for thousands of commuters from both sides of the lake.

The lack of the audit allowed Sound Transit to use the Northgate website to predict the Link would add 41,000 to 49,000 riders by 2022.  The Seattle Times concurred heralding the debut as “Transit Transformed” with the 3 Northgate Stations adding 42,000 to 49,000 riders.  Last year’s October 2^nd Northgate Link debut was the first actual demonstration of the benefits from Sound Transit Prop 1 extensions.  

Yet, since the debut, Sound Transit has refused to release a quarterly “Service Delivery Performance Report”.  It would have detailed how many commuters were added by the Links three stations, what it cost to add the riders, and how many chose to ride bus routes into Seattle rather than transfer to light rail.  The Seattle Times Traffic Lab project that “digs into” transportation issues continues to abide Sound Transit “opacity”. 

The problems with Northgate Link “opacity” will be dwarfed by those with the East Link debut.  Again, a competent audit would have concluded 4-car light rail trains didn’t have the capacity to justify confiscating the I-90 Bridge center roadway.  That it also precluded two-way BRT with 10 times the capacity, 10 years sooner, at 1/10^th the cost.  

As with the Northgate Link, Sound Transit decision to use East Link to replace I-90 Bridge buses does nothing to increase the transit ridership needed to reduce congestion.  Those living within walking distance or parking near East Link stations will be a fraction of what's needed for Sound Transit's claim for 50,000 daily riders.

Sound Transit’s August 5^th release of their June Agency Progress Report included the following regarding East Link debut:

 ST is currently working to determine a new target Revenue Date

Whenever it happens the question remains whether the Seattle Times Traffic Lab will “dig into” the results or continue enabling Sound Transit incompetence.

 

 

ST Can’t Hide Link Line 2 Operating Cost Debacle

                                    

My “campaign” for U.S. Senator ended August 2^nd. As with all my previous candidacies, it’d never been for votes but to use the Voters’ Pamphlet Statement to inform residents.  Those in the Sound Transit service area who read the statement are aware of my concerns that the Sound Transit Board and CEO don’t understand the basics of what constitutes effective public transit.  

That reducing congestion on I-5 and I-90 requires attracting more riders to public transit.  Yet Sound Transit has spent billions on light rail extensions for 4-car trains that don’t have the capacity to attract the number of transit riders needed to reduce peak hour multilane freeway congestion and cost too much to operate during off peak commute.  

Attracting riders requires offering commuters access by living near stations, parking near stations, or have access to routes to the transit stations.  A November 2016 Seattle Times article reported the 51 existing park and ride facilities next to express bus or train stations in Snohomish, King and Pierce County were already 95% full with 19,948 cars.  

Yet Sound Transit plans for increasing access are to “manage parking demand” by maximizing efficient use of available transit parking resources”. Choosing instead to spend nearly $300 million on an 85^th NE transit stations along I-405 and a 130^th St Infill Station on I-5, whose costs have increased this year from $34 million to $270 million; both with no parking for access.  

The Northgate Link debut demonstrated the results of Sound Transit decade long failure to add parking for access. Yet they refuse to release the Service Delivered Performance Report 2022 Q1.  That doing so allows them to hide how many of their predicted 41,000 to 49,000 commuters were added by the Link.

Also, how many chose to ride ST510 into and out of Seattle rather than on routes that terminated at light rail station.  That knowing the number of riders along with the additional $110,000 daily operating costs for the 108, 4.2-mile extension, 4-car round trips could be used to establish how much each added rider cost.

Sound Transit will have a far greater problem “hiding” the results when 10-station. 14-mile East Link debuts.  It’s unclear when that will occur. The August 5^th release of the June, Agency Progress Report included the following:

ST is currently working to determine a new target Revenue Date

Whenever it does, Sound Transit won’t be able to hide the results.  First, is the problem of lack of access.  Sound Transit recognized the 9 east side East Link stations didn’t provide the access needed to justify the cost of the 14-mile light rail extension and operating costs. 

 That led to a January 21, 2014, presentation to Mercer Island city council claiming 40,000 of the 50,000 East Link riders would come from terminating I-90 corridor bus routes at South Bellevue and Mercer Island parking.  Sound Transit will use the Link to replace ST550 route from the 1500-stall South Bellevue and 474-stall Mercer Island P&R.

However, the parking at the P&Rs along I-90 corridor east of 1-405 is limited to 1614 at Eastgate, 874 at Issaquah, and 1000 at Issaquah Highlands. Thus, riders added by terminating the I-90 corridor bus routes and those added at South Bellevue and Mercer Island will be a fraction of Sound Transit 40,000 prediction.

The Link’s 14-mile extension adds 112 vehicle revenue miles for the 4-car light rail train round trip from Redmond Technology Center into and out of Seattle.  Sound Transit budgets light rail car costs as ~$30.00 per revenue mile, so that portion of the trip adds $3360.  Assuming the Link's schedule matches the current Northgate Link schedule, 10 minutes between trains for 16 hours and 20 minutes for 4 hours.  The operating costs for the resultant 108 round trips to Redmond Technology Center and back is $360,000 daily.   

However, as part of 2 Line the 4-car East Link trains continue through DSTT eventually to Mariner P&R near Everett.  That portion of the 18.5-mile trip from International District/Chinatown through the DSTT to Northgate and in 2024 to Lynnwood and back adds 37 miles and 148 revenue vehicle miles for 4-car trains. The $4440 per trip and $475,200 daily for the 108, Link 2-Line trips will do little to add riders since those with access to transit were already riding Link Line 1. (ST's decision to delay Lynnwood Link "hides" that result for two years.)

The bottom line is Sound Transit doesn’t provide the access needed to justify routing Link Line 2 4-car trains from the Redmond Town Center to Lynnwood (and beyond to Mariner P&R) and back.  They could save $475,000 daily by terminating East Link at the International District/Chinatown station.  

They could also reduce the $360,000 East Link operating costs by limiting trains to size and frequency to meet demand on route to Redmond Town Center and use bus routes into Seattle for I-90 corridor commuters. 

If not, they won’t be able to hide the Link Line 2 operating cost debacle.