Looking Back on 2023

2023 was another year of WSDOT and Sound Transit demonstrating a failure to effectively respond to the area’s roadway congestion.  The WSDOT continued with plans to implement 2 HOT lanes from Lynnwood to Renton that’s more about raising revenue than reducing congestion. 

They could implement HOT to one lane with tolls raised to limit traffic to the 2000 vehicles per hour needed to assure 45mph. The resulting additional GP lane would reduce congestion on remaining lanes, reducing the incentive to pay the tolls, and WSDOT revenue.

2023 was also the first full year of Sound Transit ‘s light rail spine operation, the extension beyond UW to Northgate.  Rather than add parking for access they used the link to replace bus routes. They had predicted 41,000 to 49,000 riders would use the three stations daily.  Yet they spent the year refusing to release the Quarterly Service Provided Report that would have reported the lack of access limited ridership to far less than predicted.  

 

However, the expectation had been that the lack of data was mitigated by Sound Transit plans for East Link revenue service in June would demonstrate public transit problems dwarfing Northgate’s.  Thus, the most consequential Sound Transit 2023 event was the final decision to delay the Link debut from June 30, 2023, until 2025 to redo the rail attachments.  It delayed demonstrating the folly of confiscating the I-90 bridge center roadway for light rail to replace bus routes; precluding two-way BRT only with 10 times the capacity, 10 years sooner, at 1/10^th the cost and using light rail to replace buses.

 

It also delayed demonstrating the folly of Sound Transit choosing to route the East Link trains through DSTT rather than terminating them at CID station. Eastside riders needing to go beyond CID could transfer to trains through DSTT.  Terminating East Link at CID would end limiting it to half the DSTT train capacity and operation could be scheduled to meet I-90 bridge public transit demand.  Terminating it and West Seattle Link at CID would also end the need for a second tunnel.

 

The bottom line is 2023 was a year of delay in demonstrating Sound Transit’s plan for a light rail spine won’t reduce congestion into Seattle.  They spent much of  2022 trying to find a CEO willing to implement “Voter Approved” extensions and ended  2023 with the need to find someone else willing to do so.

 

 

A Likely Reason Why ST CEO Timms is Leaving

Two December 16th Traffic Lab articles exemplify Sound Transit  Board incompetence and the Seattle Times abiding that incompetence. One was the Board approving flat fares for 2024.  

The flat fare decision was the result of the Board choosing to direct Sound Transit to “study” flat fares.  Purportedly in response to concerns with distance-based fares for those failing to tap off would pay to the end of the route.  Yet their own data showed only 3.6 % paid fees over $3.00 suggesting failing to tap off was not a significant problem. 

The  flat fare decision will result in 86.5% of commuters paying more in fare, raising fares for the 25% of commuters currently paying $2.25 to $3.00.  Riders from Capitol Hill to Westlake or Stadium to CID with less than a mile commute will be required to pay the increased fare. Yet, commuters riding the 17-mile Lynnwood Link route to Westlake, who currently pay $3.25, will also pay only $3.00. A fare that will allow them to go beyond Westlake to SeaTac. 

It's not clear what Community Transit riders, who currently pay $4.25 for the commute into and out of Seattle will pay when required to transfer to Lynnwood Link.  One option could be they’ll continue to pay the $4.25 fare into Seattle but only $3.00 for the return. 

Whatever that decision, requiring 86.5% of commuters to pay more and the remainder less because some fail to tap off belies any claim for equity; fares based on the cost of providing that service. The Traffic Lab article abided the inequity.

 The second example was the article indicated a failure to recognize a likely reason Timms decided to leave now.  She recognized the 2024 East Link Starter Line and Lynnwood Link debuts will demonstrate Sound Transit’s failed approach to public transit. 

That the Starter Line’s lack of access and the need to transfer from light rail to and from buses at South Bellevue to commute into and out of Seattle will limit ridership to a fraction of projections.  That the cost of operating 2-car trains every 10 minutes for 16 hours a day will dwarf any fare box revenue. 

The Lynnwood Link debut will demonstrate extending light rail tracks does nothing to increase train capacity.  That 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity to reduce multilane freeway peak hour congestion and cost too much to operate off peak.  Using that capacity to replace bus routes reduces transit capacity into Seattle and access for current riders.

Even Sound Transit recognizes the resultant “crowding” with vague plans to continue some bus routes into Seattle. The likely result will be commuters dissuaded from public transit by the need to transfer for the route into Seattle and the chaos at tunnel stations for the return trip during peak operation.  Again the high 4-car train costs during off-peak operation will dwarf daily fare box revenue.

The bottom line is the Traffic Lab articles provide two reasons CEO Timms is leaving.  The first is her objection to the Board insisting on a fare structure requiring Capitol Hill riders pay the same fare as Lynnwood riders, especially since those riders will reduce access at Capitol Hill.  

 

However, the more “likely” reason is she no longer wants to be the captain of a “sinking ship”.  That next year’s Starter Link and Lynnwood Link debut will demonstrate the Sound Transit Board’s flawed approach to public transit.   The December 16^th Traffic Lab article detailing the huge payment she’s getting indicates neither the Board nor Traffic Lab recognize that probability.

Next Years Starter Line and Lynnwood Link Results

The October release of the Sound Transit 2024 Financial Plan and Proposed Budget includes the following excerpt in introduction:

Sound Transit’s $3 billion proposed 2024 budget highlights the agency in the early stages of an historic era, as our mission to connect more people to more places across the Puget Sound 

Yet Sound Transit’s 2024 plan will do nothing to “connect more people to more places”.  Connecting more people requires providing more riders with access.  Yet Sound Transit’s Northgate Link October 2021 demonstrated the lack of access limited ridership to a fraction of their 41,000 to 49,000 predictions. Many if not most of those riders previously rode buses, so don’t qualify as “more people”.  (They no longer release the quarterly service provided reports that would have detailed the result)  

 

Starter Line access, except for parking at Redmond T/C and Bel-Red/130^th station, is limited to those within walking distance of 5 stations along route, far less than what’s currently available with Rapid Ride B and ST550. Again, many if not most previously rode those routes into Bellevue and beyond to Seattle. Very few of the Starter Line of Sound Transit’s projected 7000 riders will be “more people”.

 

Like Starter Line most Lynnwood Link riders won’t be “more people”.  Sound Transit reduced its 2016 prediction of 35,000 to 57,000 added riders, to 25,300 to 34,200.  Yet, many if not most Link riders will be those who previously rode ST 510-513 and Community Transit 400 routes into Seattle.

 

The budget introduction also included the following:

Our work and our major achievements throughout 2023 set the stage for our ambitious 2024 roll-out and for our continued expansion under the voter-approved ST3 plan, the largest mass transit expansion in the country. 

The budget included a Summary by Mode with the following plan for Link Light Rail:

The first phase of the new 2-Line, providing services on the Eastside, including 8 new stations, is expected to open in Spring 2024; along with the extension of the 1-Line to Lynnwood, including 4 new stations expected to open in Fall 2024, both of which will increase the existing track alignment to over 40 miles. 

Yet Sound Transit’s Development Plan 2023-2028 includes the following for 2024.

 

Evaluate routing for Routes 510, 511, 512 ,513: -  Supports expansion of 1 Line

 

That by 2028 Sound Transit plans to “Evaluate” 22 ST Express Bus Routes.  The 2024 budget’s chart “System expansion and current service” describes future ST Express bus routes as “re-evaluated annually.”  

 

The bottom line is, while Sound Transit is creating the country’s largest light rail transit system expansion, the extensions do nothing to increase light rail capacity.  Thus, using the extensions to replace bus routes will reduce transit capacity, the more the lost bus routes, the more the lost ability to move people.  

 

Next year’s Starter Line and Lynnwood operations will be the next demonstration of the folly of Sound Transit’s approach to implementing “voter approved” light rail extensions without adding access.

 

Seattle Times Traffic Lab Priorities

The Seattle Times describes its Traffic Lab as a “Project that digs into region’s thorny transportation issues, spotlights promising approaches, helps readers find the best ways to get around.”  

 

The November 27^th edition headline “Sound Transit fare ambassadors checking if you paid, but nicely” typifies their approach.  Quotes the board’s dubious expectation that a “friendlier, non-threatening collections system” will increase the number of those willing to pay. 

 

The article reports “fare revenue accounts for roughly 7% of total budget”.  Yet,  Sound Transit’s 2024 Financial Plan and Proposed Budget pie charts “Revenues and Other Financing Sources” anticipates Passenger Fare Revenue will make up only 2% of total revenue in 2024 and 4%  from 2017 to 2046.  However, the 2019 budget, prior to the falloff in those willing to pay, anticipated fare revenue would make up only 4% of budget revenue in 2019 and 7% through 2041.

 

Thus, the Traffic Lab apparently considers the loss in fare revenue due to the 2-3% of budget lost from those unwilling to pay fares worthy of “digging into” and a front- page headline.  Yet they fail to mention that Sound Transit has decided their version of “equitable fares” requires riders from Capitol Hill to Westlake pay the same fare as someone riding from Lynnwood to SeaTac. 

 

That Sound Transit is willing to pay more than $13B and 6-10 years disrupting downtown Seattle boring a second tunnel and implementing 5 new stations for access.  All to allow East Link and West Seattle commuters  ride to Lynnwood and beyond and those from Ballard ride to Federal Way and beyond without changing trains. 

 

That Sound Transit’s 2024 budget’s Long Range financial plan will result in a $27.5 in Principal Balance on Tax Based Debt in 2046 while ST3 taxes voters approved voters in 2016 to pay the debt will end in 2041.

 

The bottom line is the Seattle Times Traffic Lab “digging into” Sound Transit’s financial concerns needs to go way beyond detailing attempts to increase those paying the fares.

An Equitable Sound Transit Fare Structure.

The November 15^th meeting video of the Sound Transit and Board continued with what had been presented earlier to the Executive Board on November 2^nd.  It followed a “Public Hearing on Proposed Link Fare Structure” where a question was raised about using “zone-based” fares.  The response being, “they had not been considered out of direction by the board to consider flat fares”.  

 

The afternoon briefing was a recap of fare-related work in 2023 and details of the staff recommendation on fare structure.  That their fare guiding framework was:

 

We serve passengers with a fare structure that is regionally integrated to encourage transit ridership through equitable and simple pricing, and financial stewardship.

 

That a key takeaway was:

 

No other agency in the region uses a distance-based fare structure.”  

 

That flat fare considerations included:

 

All trips would be the same fare.

 

Passengers would no longer have to tap off when completing their trip.

 

That the initial staff recommendation for the December 15^th Board was:

 

Staff will recommend a flat fare structure on Link.

 

Thus, Sound Transit’s version of” “equitable and simple” is charging someone traveling from Capital Hill to Westlake the same as a rider from Lynnwood. While a flat fare is “simple”, most would believe “equitable” fares should be based on the cost of providing that service. Especially for what Sound Transit proudly proclaims as the "largest transit system expansion in the country". 

 

While other cities use flat fares based on routes into the city, Sound Transit exacerbates the distance problem with fares for routes through the city.  The rider from Lynnwood could continue to SeaTac with no increase in fare.  Thus, Sound Transit’s choice for flat fares is apparently due to concern that with a “distance-based fare” the Lynnwood commuter wouldn’t tap off at Westgate.

 

Sound Transit could avoid the tap-off problem with an equitable combination of flat fares and distance-based fares.  A flat fare could be used along routes from UW, Mercer Island, SeaTac and eventually Ballard and West Seattle into the DSTT.   The fare would reflect the cost of both into and out of DSTT with no fares collected in tunnel, avoiding the need to  identify and pay to reach their return destination.  

 

Commuters outside that “flat fare” region would pay a fare based on the distance into the city.  Each Link station having a posted fare reflecting the cost of the route to and from the DSTT.  Doing so avoids the “inequity” of those traveling from Northgate having to pay the same fare as those from Lynnwood or beyond.  Again, a result of Sound Transit’s largest transit system expansion in country.

 

Flat-fare area commuters wanting to go beyond UW, Mercer Island, or SeaTac would pay fares on the return trip to reflect the cost from and to DSTT.  Distance-based commuters wanting to go beyond DSTT to SeaTac or Bellevue would pay fares to reflect cost of to and from on their return.  

 

The bottom line is Sound Transit needs to recognize that an “equitable” fare structure in the "largest transit system expansion" in the country requires a combination of flat fares and distance-based fares. The two fare structures avoid the “inequity” of the flat fare payers having to subsidize the distance-based commuters. Especially since ST3 would have never been approved without the 70% support from those in the flat fee area. 

More Sound Transit Board Incompetence

A previous post detailed reasons why the October 26^th Sound Transit Board’s approval of the 2024 Rail Service Plan demonstrated they didn’t “get it”.  That the board didn’t recognize neither the East Link Starter Line nor the Lynnwood extension will increase the transit ridership needed to reduce congestion into the city.  A precursor to similar results from Board approval of future Sound Transit “voter approved” extensions.

 

This post details another example of Board approving transit system incompetence. The Sound Transit failure to recognize the folly of routing East Link and West Seattle Links to Northgate and beyond and routing Ballard Link to SeaTac and beyond.  That terminating Ballard Link at existing Westlake station and terminating East Link and West Seattle extensions at the existing CID station would end the need to spend up to 10 years and $13B boring a second tunnel and 5 stations for access.  

 

Again, the Board could save the billions and years by modifying the existing CID and Westlake stations to accommodate terminating the Links.  The modified CID station could provide what the Board had called, “a once in a lifetime for a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrack”.  Satisfying a year of nearly unanimous public comment at board meetings expressing desire for a “near CID” station.  Instead, the Board abided Sound Transit ignoring the request for additional study of the “near CID 4^th Ave location.   

 

Terminating East Link and West Seattle at CID would allow operations to meet local demand rather than sharing what’s needed for the route to Northgate.  Ending the loss of half of DSTT trains diverted across I-90 Bridge.  Also ending the difficulty in merging the return routes for safe passage of the two trains through DSTT.  

 

East side commuters could easily transfer at CID to Line 1 trains to SeaTac or UW and beyond.  Terminating West Seattle Link at CID will end those commuters accessing at SODO, further reducing Line 1capacity to and from SeaTac.

 

Terminating Ballard Link at existing Westlake station would allow the Link to be expedited rather than wait for the second tunnel.  Riders would not have to use “new Westlake station” to transfer to existing Westlake station for access to downtown Seattle.

 

The bottom line is an earlier post opined the Board doesn’t recognize using “voter approved” light rail extensions to replace bus routes into Seattle reduces transit capacity and nothing to reduce congestion.  Their decision to proceed with boring the second tunnel just needlessly adds $13B and 6-10 years of disrupting  downtown Seattle to the debacle.

A Rational Approach to Link Fares

The November 2^nd Executive Board meeting included a 30-minute discussion on existing fare structure and rate and the rationale for a fare change now as the last Link fare change occurred in 2015.  That current fares are based on the distance from where you tap your ORCA card to get on and tap again to get off.  If you don’t tap when you get off, you are charged for the fare to the end of the line.  

 

However, the ST2 system extensions have resulted in large distance-based table and more fare rates that would be even more complicated with future extensions.  The result was to consider a single ”flat” fare for all trips as shown on a chart comparing fares used by “peer transit” agencies,  with some having a peak hour or airport surcharge.  

 

The presentation concluded flat fares benefited from being “simpler to understand and budget for” and required passengers to only tap on. Sound Transit surveys had shown riders were split with 52% preferring distance-based fare and 48% preferring flat rate.  The rider preference presumably reflected the distance of their commute. 

The subsequent discussion about “Next steps” resulted in a "12/15: Board for potential action on Link fare". The board should consider a fairer approach for both commuters would be to set fares based on distance from where riders got on buses or trains to either CID or Westlake stations. 

No fares would be collected at either CID or Westlake. Inbound fares would include the cost of the return commute to deal with the ambiguity to the return destination.  Commuters going beyond CID or Westlake to SeaTac, east side, or UW would pay the fares covering those costs on their return.  

It shouldn't be that difficult.

 

 

ST 2024 Plan Approval Demonstrates Board Doesn’t “Get It”

The October 26^th Sound Transit Board meeting again exemplified a Sound Transit Board of Directors who don’t recognize “voter approved” extensions won’t reduce area’s congestion. In this case it’s their response to a Sound Transit Staff draft of the 2024 Rail Service Plan and a request the Board approve 2024 major rail service changes. 

 

The service plan began with a chart “Riders continue to return to transit” claiming new light rail openings will drive ridership growth in 2024”.  That ridership had increased to 80% of 2019 levels. An earlier quarterly service provided performance report for showed 80,780 daily 2019 Q4 Link riders.  So current ridership was approximately 64,000. 

 

Yet the current ridership included the Northgate Link debut in 2021.  Sound Transit had projected it would add 41,000 to 49,000 riders.  Thus, the 64,000 current ridership was far short of Sound Transit projections.  Yet the Board didn’t comment, apparently not recognizing either the Northgate Link was far short of projections or the Line 1 Link to UW station was far short of recovery.  

 

The ridership chart also showed the 2024 East Link Starter Line and Lynnwood Link debuts would increase ridership to100% of 2019 levels or add approximately 16,000 daily riders.  Yet Sound Transit, who initially claimed the Lynnwood Link would add 37,000 to 57,000 riders, recently lowered projected ridership to 25,300-34,200.  

 

They’d also projected the Starter Line would add 7000 daily riders. Thus, Sound Transit projection for 16,000 riders added by Starter Line and Lynnwood trains in 2024 are far less than earlier projections.  Again, the Board didn’t comment, apparently not recognizing the shortfall.

 

The 2024 service plan began with the East Link Starter Line.  The Board had previously approved spending $46M to fund the debut.  It includes 8 stations with 2 car trains every 10 minutes for 16 hours between Redmond Technology and South Bellevue.  Yet, except for parking at Redmond Technology and 130th station access will be limited to those within walking distance of stations.  Riders will also be dissuaded  by the need to transfer to and from buses at South Bellevue.  Yet the Board didn’t question the ridership projections. 

 

The “1 line extension to Lynnwood” will add 4 new stations, with a combination of 3 or 4-car trains, 8-10-minute peak headways and 15 minutes during early morning and late evening.  The concern was “Likely crowding between Northgate and West Lake”.  The reason being Sound Transit and Snohomish Community Transit would use Lynnwood Link to replace 400 and 500 routes into Seattle.

 

The Board apparently didn’t’ recognize forcing bus riders to transfer to and from trains and the hassle of accessing light rail in DSTT for the return might dissuade commuters from using transit.  Instead, they were told Sound Transit would address the crowding by spending $2.5M to add two Sounder trains that added 300 to 350 rider capacity and consider implementing ST Express routes to downtown Seattle.  

 

The Board should recognize that the ST Express route from Northgate to Lynnwood and back costs one tenth that of a 4-car light rail train. The more the bus routes the greater the savings.  Yet their use will likely be limited to peak hour operation to make up for light rail train's lack of capacity.

 

The bottom line is the Board's approval of 2024 Rail Service Plan is another indication they don’t recognize their goal should be to reduce congestion into Seattle by attracting more riders to public transit.   The lack of access and need to transfer will severely limit Starter Line ridership. That using “voter approved” extensions to replace bus routes doesn’t increase transit ridership, they only restrict access for current riders and exacerbate the farebox revenue recovery shortfall. 

 

The Board's approval is just another example they still don’t “get it”.

WSDOT Compounds I-405 2-HOT Lane Debacle

As expected, the Seattle Times Oct 18^th Traffic Lab article, “State panel clears way for hikes in tolls for fast lanes” detailed the response to the request in an earlier Traffic Lab article.  That the WSDOT intended to eventually implement two toll lanes on I-405 between Lynnwood and Renton.  The problem is neither article acknowledges that the WSDOT plan to implement tolls on two lanes is more about increasing revenue than in reducing travel times.  

 

Tolls reduce multilane freeway travel times by maximizing the number of vehicles per hour (VPH) on one of the lanes they reduce traffic and travel times on the remaining lanes.  Studies have shown adjusting tolls to maintain 2000 VPH hour will maximize  traffic and assures 45 mph HOV lane speeds, minimizing GP lane congestion and travel time. 

 

Tolls avoid the problem when the number of carpoolers exceeds the 2000 VPH, slowing the HOV lanes. That off-peak operation limiting HOV to carpoolers wastes capacity that could be used to reduce GP lane congestion and travel time. During peak commute the WSDOT could raise tolls on one lane to whatever it takes to maintain 2000 VPH.  During off-peak they could lower tolls to attract more riders to maintain 2000 VPH and reduce congestion and travel times for all the freeway lanes.  

 

The WSDOT approach has been to use tolls to provide revenue.  For years they've imposed tolls on a second lane between Bothell and Bellevue that's increased congestion and travel times on the remaining  three GP lanes.  Then used the increased traffic and resulting congestion to justify cost of the tolls. Their plan to impose HOT on a second of four lanes for the rest of the route, taking away one of three GP lanes, is especially egregious.  Again, the  limited number of commuters willing to pay the fees reduces traffic on both HOT lanes below the 2000 VPH optimum; wasting capacity that could’ve been used to reduce GP lane traffic, congestion and travel time.  

 

The result has been less traffic raised HOV lane speeds higher than 45 mph but increased congestion and travel times on GP lanes.   The higher the tolls, the fewer those paying, the greater the GP congestion, and the longer their commute. 

 

The bottom line is adjusting the tolls to achieve the 2000 VPH on an HOV lane during both peak and off-peak operation is  an effective way to reduce GP lane congestion.  The WSDOT will rarely achieve that level if they impose HOT on two lanes, wasting that capacity. The Seattle Times Traffic Lab needs to recognize WSDOT plan to increase the tolls on the two lanes only compounds the debacle by reducing those willing to pay, increasing HOV velocity and GP lane travel time.

Kate Riley Still Doesn’t Get It

The 10/12/23 Seattle Times Opinion Page Editorial calling me “a perennial candidate whose fixation with Sound Transit makes him unfit to serve a community whose needs go far beyond public transit” exemplifies more than a decade of an editor, Kate Riley, who simply “doesn’t get it”.  

My candidacies have been “perennial” because for more than a decade they’ve been an attempt to make up for the Seattle Times obsequious support for Sound Transit. They’ve never been attempts to win but to use the Voters’ Pamphlet to reach the widest area possible that year, from Bellevue City Council to U.S Senate.

 

That my “fixation” with Sound Transit is due to Kate Riley’s refusal to recognize Sound Transit’s failed approach to public transit. It began in 2012 when I filed for 48^th District after three years of presentations to Bellevue City Council failed to convince them to disallow 10 permits Sound Transit needed to route light rail through Bellevue. 

 

My “candidate interview” with Kate Riley did not go well as she cut it short when I persisted with claims 48^th district residents were more concerned with the area's congestion  than the McCleary school funding issue.  She’s declined to interview me during my 10 subsequent candidacies.

 

She doesn’t "get it" that my “fixation” with Sound Transit is due to it having a Board of elected officials who have no idea of what constitutes effective public transit.  That public transit’s goal should be to provide the transit needed for those who don’t want to drive and to reduce the congestion for those who do drive. Yet the Sound Transit Board plan is to implement “Voter Approved”  extensions that won't do either.  They don’t increase the capacity of the trains or add to the parking needed for access; they only increase the operating cost.  

 

She doesn’t get it that lack of capacity and access belies any claim the extensions will reduce multilane freeway peak hour congestion.  That off-peak operating costs will dwarf any fare-box revenue. Using light rail to replace bus routes into Seattle reduces transit capacity into the city and nothing to reduce freeway GP lane congestion.   That former bus riders added by the extensions will reduce access for current light rail riders.

 

She has ignored years of attempts to persuade Seattle Times to include an outside audit of Sound Transit policies that would have verified or refuted the concerns. Instead, Sound Transit has been allowed to confiscate the I-90 Bridge center roadway precluding two-way BRT with 10 times the capacity, ten years sooner at 1/10^th the cost. They've compounded that failure by using the $3.6B East Link to replace I-90 bridge bus routes. Forcing bus riders to transfer on Mercer Island to and from light rail for the commute into and out of Seattle will likely dissuade many current transit commuters 

 

She has abided Sound Transit’s decision to no longer release quarterly Service Provided Performance Reports.  They would have detailed the results of the October 2021 Northgate Link debut.   That the lack of access limited ridership to a fraction of Seattle Times claims for it being “transit transformed” with 42,000 to 49,000 riders added by Link’s three stations.  The need to replace track attachments has delayed East Link demonstrating similar results and what can be expected with future “voter approved” extensions.  Thus, next year's East Link Starter Line and Lynnwood debuts will be the next to demonstrate the result.

 

Her “Opinion Page” has abided Sound Transit  continuing with plans to spend $13B boring a second tunnel under Seattle with 5 new stations for access.  Sound Transit's plan to locate 2 of those stations north and south of existing CID station ignores more than a year of public requests to locate a station near CID. 

 

An Opinion Page editorial initially supported the “near” CID station.  Yet they haven't asked Sound Transit to consider modifying the existing CID for use as a terminus for East Link and West Seattle extensions and existing Westlake station for Ballard Link terminus.  Use the existing DSTT for those who need to go beyond CID and Westlake. Saving billions and years of disruption in Seattle as a result.  

 

Kate Riley’s opinion page has also abided Sound Transit using the ST3 approval to spend $54B from 2017 to 2041 to justify spending $150B from 2017 to 2046.  That their 2023 Financial Plan & Adopted Budget ends 2046, $24B in debt, $1B in debt service payments, $3.8B in “expenditures”; and ST3 taxes that voters approved ending in 2041.  Yet obligating them to pay for far into the future without any vote.

 

The bottom line is she still doesn't recognize the results of a decade of Sound Transit approach to public transit with an incompetent board of directors.  A competent transit board would have routed light rail to West Seattle rather than across I-90 Bridge, terminated Central Link light rail at SeaTac and UW stadium, and expedited light rail to Ballard.   Instead, the board insists on spending billions and years on a second tunnel to allow eastside and West Seattle commuters to transit directly to Everett and Ballard commuters to SeaTac. 

 

A competent transit board would have opted for implementing BRT routes along limited access I-90 and I-5 lanes to dedicated stops on an elongated bus-only 4^thAve T/C.  SR520 commuters would benefit from using a UW Stadium T/C as interface for BRT routes in both directions.  

 

Sound Transit has already been allowed to spend billions and years on voter approved extensions that will do nothing to reduce area congestion and leave the area with huge operating costs.  Those billions and years are only a down payment on future Sound Transit plans to spend $150B on the “largest transit system expansion in the country”. 

 

Again, all my candidacies' “fixation on Sound Transit” have been to use the Voters’ Pamphlet to inform the area about that future.  Kate Riley’s failure to “get it” seems to be a major reason the Seattle Times continues abetting it.  It's time she considers Sound Transit worthy of scrutiny.  The Starter Line and Lynnwood extension debuts next year will be the next demonstration of that need. 

 

ST August Agency Progress Report Starter Line Debacle Details

Sound Transit uses monthly Agency Progress Reports to summarize projects and major contracts status, risk, and performance of capital projects. The front page of the Oct 4^th release of the August report heralded "The Sound Transit Board approves Spring 2024 opening of the East Link Starter Line”. The report’s Executive Summary included the following:

Sound Transit Board approves Spring 2024 opening for eight 2 Line Stations 

At its August meeting, the Sound Transit Board approved opening the Link 2 Line with passenger service on an initial eight- station segment between South Bellevue and Redmond Technology stations in the Spring of 2024. 

As proposed, and opening prior to the full 10-Station 2 Line which connects Seattle and the Eastside with track running on the I-90 floating bridge, the East Link Starter Line will run with two-car trains every 10 minutes, 16 hours a day. The final service level will be approved by the Sound Transit Board as part of the 2024 Service Plan. This action is expected in October. 

The Board’s action included provisions to meet ridership demand on the 1 Line, including maximizing peak-hour service, adding bus service in Snohomish County and support for Lynnwood passengers until the opening of the full East Link Extension. 

Existing ST Express and King County Metro routes including Route 550, B Line, and other local routes are anticipated to continue operating on their current routes until the full 2 Line opens in 2025. 

The Sound Transit Board authorized up to $43 million from the existing East Link Extension $3.68 billion budget to fund the activities necessary to open the East Link Starter Line in Spring 2024. 

The East Link Starter Line began with an August 30^th, 2022, Seattle Times Opinion by Claudia Balducci, Sound Transit System Expansion Committee chair, "Don't delay opening of the Bellevue-to-Redmond light rail starter line”.   Sound Transit CEO Julie Timm’s December 8^th post, “East Link opening timeframe update” provided details and schedule.

 

The August  report raises several concerns.   For example, the decision to attract ridership with a schedule of 2-car trains every 10 minutes for 16 hours a day will add a substantial cost. Sound Transit budgets light rail car operating costs as ~$30 per mile. Each 2-car-train round trip on the 7-mile extension will cost $840.   The operating schedule requires 96 round trips or $80,640 a day.  

 

Another concern is, except for parking at Redmond T/C and Bel-Red/130^th station, access to the Starter Line is limited to those within walking distance of the “eight-station segment”.  A deterrent for many potential transit riders. Especially since the report confirms CEO Timm’s blog statement "Existing bus routes will continue" operating on their current routes until the full 2-Line opens in 2025.  

Those riders will still have access to multiple stops within walking distance of where they live along the entire 7-mile link. All providing access at a tiny fraction of the cost of a single light rail station. They also benefit from not having to transfer to and from route 550 at South Bellevue for the commute into and out of Seattle. 

 

However, the Executive Summary report indicates that access will end when the “full 2 Line opens in 2025“.  It’s unclear when in 2025 since the Progress Report’s "Link Light Rail Program Overview" for the East Link Extension includes a Recovery Plan Float to RSD that extends to the end of the year.  A Risk Management issue that may impact schedule is “significant contractor claims on E130 and E750” dealing with replacing track attachments and installing power lines for trains.  Whatever the date, the lack of access with dissuade many commuters.

 

The Progress Report announcement, “The Sound Transit Board has authorized $43 million to fund the activities necessary to open the East Link Starter Line” reflects a “substantial” increase from an earlier $6 million cost estimate. Those “opening activities” must really be something. 

 

The bottom line is Sound Transit’s August Agency Progress Report is a recipe for Starter Line “opening festivities” whose cost and subsequent daily operating costs will dwarf the farebox revenue from ridership limited by the option commuters have to use existing buses.  It’s when they lose that option, they and all the other I-90 corridor commuters will experience the folly of allowing Sound Transit to confiscate I-90 Bridge center roadway for East Link and use it to replace bus routes into Seattle.

 

Limited Benefits of TAG and Consultant Advice

The September 14, 2023, Sound Transit Board’s System Expansion Committee agenda included an update on their response to recommendations from a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and private consultant at the March 2^nd Executive Committee Meeting.  The recommendations had included the need for better relations between staff and board, allow lower-level decision making, align key procedures with industry best practices, strengthen and enforce an agency betterment policy, and engage the FTA as a delivery partner. 

The ST Staff’s update included a pie chart with the status of 22 actions in response to the recommendations.   Two were complete, four hadn’t started, seven needed board guidance and the rest were in progress.  All the actions dealt with how to improve the process for implementing the product, voter approved extensions. No one questioned whether the voter approved extensions would reduce congestion into Seattle.  Instead, the Board decided to continue funding the TAG and private consultant next year.

 

 A competent transit TAG and consultant would recognize the problems with the voter approved extensions.  For example, the October 2021 Northgate Link debut demonstrated the lack of access limited the ridership added by the Link's three stations.  While Sound Transit refuses to release quarterly “Service Provided Performance Report” they still don’t “get it” that lack of access limited riders added by Link to a fraction of 41,000 to 49,000 they’d projected.  The East Link debut, which would have confirmed the problem, has been delayed by the need to redo track attachments.   

 

The Lynnwood Link debut in late 2024 will demonstrate 4-car light rail trains on the "voter approved" extension lacked both the access and capacity needed to replace bus routes into Seattle.  They don’t have the capacity to accommodate the number of transit riders needed to reduce multilane freeway peak hour congestion and cost too much to operate off peak.  Replacing bus routes reduces transit capacity into Seattle and nothing to reduce I-5 congestion.  

 

Riders the extensions do add during peak commute will severely limit, potentially end access for current riders. Costs during off-peak operation will necessitate an increase in tolls or costs that dwarf farebox revenue.

 

The bottom line is, whatever improvements in the process of implementing the voter approved extension to Lynnwood will be dwarfed by the fact ridership was far less than predicted, costs were far higher, current riders lost access, and I-5 congestion into Seattle wasn’t reduced.

East Link EIS Noise Mitigation Requirements

 

A previous post detailed Sound Transit Board’s latest approach to mitigating light rail noise was to pass the following resolution:

 

 R2023-15: Adopting a Noise and Vibration policy and superseding Motion. No. M2004-08.  The resolution included the following excerpts:

 

Revising the existing Link Noise Mitigation Policy (Motion No. M2004-08) is appropriate because it is out of date, applies only to Link light rail noise and can be improved to reflect lessons learned from implementing Sound Move and ST2 projects.

 

The chief executive officer (CEO) has discretion to assess and mitigate impacts to new development that are built after this date. 

Key policy points in the existing policy have been retained, such as the need for mitigation to be reasonable and feasible. 

 

It's not clear what makes the commitment to  M2004-08 "out of date" or "can be improved". The post also pointed out the motion did not include any mention of “the need for mitigation to be reasonable and feasible”.  Sound Transit committed to Link light rail noise mitigation in Chapter 4 in the July 2011 East Link Project Final EIS, “Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences.”

 

Section 4.7.5 Potential Mitigation Measures included subsection 4.7.5.1 “Noise Mitigation During Operation” with the following excerpts regarding limiting light rail noise and noise mitigation:

 

Sound Transit is committed to minimizing noise levels at the source. 

 

It included details as how they will limit the noise with “state of the art vehicles”, maintenance program” and “operator training”.  However, it also included the following commitment: 

 

For all noise impacts that still exist after these source noise treatments, noise mitigation measures would be provided that are consistent with Sound Transit’s Light Rail Noise Mitigation Policy (Motion No M2004-08)

 

 Again, it's not clear what makes the commitment to  M2004-08 "out of date" or "can be improved". Subsection “Transit Noise Mitigation" included the options for mitigating the noise:  

 

The potential mitigation options available for noise from transit operations on the East Link Project are primarily sound walls, special trackwork lubricated curves, and residential building sound insulation.

 

Sound Transit chose to use “residential building sound insulation” to mitigate noise levels along Central Link route in Seattle.  They chose to use sound walls along route into Bellevue to shield homes from East Link train noise. 

However, they’ve made no attempt to shield those along the light rail route from Bellevue to Redmond.  Thus, to comply with the 60dB limit in Bellevue Commercial Noise Code and Chapter 4 in East Link Project EIS Sound Transit is required to “minimize noise levels at the source”.

 

Light rail noise is do irregularities on the wheel and rail surface that excite the rail and cause it to vibrate.  Small flat spots (1-2mm) on wheels and small gaps (7mm) between rails with steps (1-3mm) or dips (5-10 mm) cause up and and down wheel movements that vibrate the rail. Rounding the ends of the flat spots and limited rail roughness "softens" the up and down movement, vibration, and noise. Vibration and Noise levels increase with the number of wheels, weight on the wheels, and the train velocity.  

 

It's unlikely anything can be done about wheel flat spots, joints between rails, number of wheels or weight.  The only viable way for Sound Transit to comply with East Link Project Final EIS Noise Level is to limit light rail train velocity. Thus, the Sound Transit CEO shall be required to include as “Operator Training” the limiting of Starter Line velocity to meet 60dB noise level as “Reasonable and Feasible” in R2023-15.  

Lynnwood Link Debut Will Change ST 2024-2029 Development Plan

The Transit Development Plan 2023-2028 details Sound Transit plans to use light rail extension to replace Express Bus Routes into Seattle.  Section 7. “Planned Operating Changes” detail how Line 1, Line 2 extension and Stride BRT S1, S2, and S3 service will replace the routes.

For example, their plans for 2024 to extend light rail from Northgate to Lynnwood include the following:

Evaluate routing for Routes 510, 511, 512 ,513  -  Supports expansion of 1 Line

For 2025 the 2 Line service from Redmond to Lynnwood results in the following: 

Evaluate routing for Routes 522, 542, 544, 545, 550, 554, 556, - Supports expansion of 2 Line.

 For 2026 the 1 Line from Angle Lake to Federal Way results in

Evaluate routing for Routes 574, 577, 580, 592, 595 - Supports expansion of 1 Line.

For 2027 the Stride BRT service on I-405 between Burien and Bellevue and Between Bothell and Shoreline results in

Evaluate routing for Routes 522, 560, 566, 567 - Supports expansion of S1 & S3 Line

For 2028 the Stride BRT service between Lynnwood and Bellevue results in

Evaluate routes for Routes 532, 535 - Supports expansion of S2 Line.

Thus by 2028 Sound Transit plans to “evaluate” 22 ST Express Bus Routes presumable meaning either ending the route or terminating it at Line 1, Line 2, or S route stations. Snohomish Community Transit intends to end SCT 400 routes into Seattle when Lynnwood Link debuts.  King County Metro will terminate all I-90 corridor bus routes at Mercer Island when East Link debuts and presumably route all their buses to Line 1 when Federal Way debuts.

The result being Everett commuters will no longer have bus routes into Seattle or Bellevue.  I-90 corridor and Bellevue commuters won’t have bus routes into Seattle or South to SeaTac.  South end commuters won’t have access to Bellevue.

The bottom line is the Transit Development Plan continues Sound Transit’s refusal to recognize the folly of using light rail trains to replace bus routes into Seattle.  What was initially demonstrated in 2021 with the Northgate Link debut and would have been confirmed this year if East Link had not been delayed will now be demonstrated by the Lynnwood Link debut in 2024.  

That, as a result Sound Transit’s Transit Development Plan 2024-2029 will "likely" look much different.

More on Bus Base North

  

Previous posts have questioned what gave the Sound Transit System Expansion Committee and subsequently approved by Board the authority to approve on a Bus Base North that wasn’t included in ST3 funding.  In particular, their approval of Resolution No. R2023-17 with the following:

Proposed action:

Adopts the Bus Base North Stride Bus Rapid Transit project baseline schedule and budget by (a) increasing the authorized project allocation to-date by $216,463,500 from $283,036,500 to $499,500,000.

Again the $283,036,500 was not authorized by ST3 so where did they get the “authority”?  The 2019 Financial Plan and Adopted Budget included the following regarding Bus Base North:

Additionally, construct a bus operations and maintenance facility to support both the I-405 Bus Rapid Transit and the SR 522/NE 145th St. Bus Rapid Transit projects. 

It was a 2019 TIP that “authorized spending $243,443 thousand on 44^th Interchange and property acquisition for Bus Base North. Again, despite ST3 Map PDF specifically listing Bus Maintenance Facility as “Not Included.” 

Apparently, the authorized Bus Base North funding  increased to $283,036,500 in R2023-17 as EFC in Sound Transit's June Agency Progress Report  The July report and 2023 Financial Plan and Adopted Budget included the following addition:

 Project Cost Summary

As part of the Sound Transit Board approval the Baseline budget, the Authorized Project Allocation has been increased by $216.5M. 

A significant increase over a short period time without any board comment. The budget included the financing detail in System Expansion T500070 BRT Maintenance Base “Financial Plan Project Estimate (2022 $000s)

Voter-approved Cost Estimate.  $231,478

Again, despite the fact the ST3 package voters approved in 2016 did not include funding for maintenance facility. 

Even more absurd Sound Transit decreed East King County would provide $215,391,000 of the $283,036,000.  That Snohomish would pay $9,340,000 despite the fact the base was in Snohomish County and that far more of the facilities 120-bus capacity would be used by SCT buses than the 44 buses needed for I-405 BRT and Stride routes.

Does anyone doubt how Sound Transit will fund the additional $216M they’ve budgeted for the base?

More On No Need for 2nd Downtown Tunnel.

The August 29^th Seattle Times article “Light-rail ideas add years, cost to planning” detailing concerns with Sound Transit plan for a 2^nd light rain tunnel” continues the paper’s Traffic Lab approach to Sound Transit incompetence.    They continue to abide Sound Transit plans to spend $11.1B on a second tunnel, with their “Preferred Alternative” route and station locations North and South of existing CID station.

        

The Board has simply ignored “Public Comment” periods during meetings for nearly a year urging new station be located near CID. A March 23^rd Sound Transit Board meeting had concluded their “Preferred Alternative” was stations North and South of the existing CID station. However, they also concluded a new CID station was a “once in lifetime opportunity" to create a "space for people to transfer from light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak” and approved an additional 2 months of study of that option.    

 

The apparent result was Board Member Claudia Balducci' response in the August 29^th article that the near CID station (“Union Station Hub option) cost an additional $800 million due to need to demolish and rebuild the six-lane Fourth Avenue South viaduct. She questioned “Is there a way to make a cheaper and doable?” 

 

The answer is there “Is a way to make the “Near CID” station  "cheaper and doable”, Modify the current CID station to terminate both East Link and West Seattle Links there.  Riders on both links needing to go further can use existing Line 1 Link trains through DSTT.   On the north end, terminate Ballard Link at existing Westlake station, again using DSTT Line 1 Link for those needing to go further. 

 

The Sound Transit Board should recognize light rail trains primary goal should be to get people into and out of Seattle.  Again, those riding East Link or West Seattle trains to get to Everett or those riding Ballard Link trains to get to SeaTac can use existing DSTT.

 

Terminating the trains at the existing CID and Westlake stations will end the need for the $11.1B second tunnel.  The operating schedules for all three links could be adjusted to meet local demand.  Terminating East Link at existing CID would facilitate those going south to Boeing or SeaTac and end its operation diverting half of the DSTT train routes across I-90 Bridge.  

 

Routing West Seattle Link to existing CID rather than SODO would also end those trains taking DSTT capacity from routes to SeaTac and beyond until second tunnel is built. Terminating Ballard at existing Westlake could allow operation before the second tunnel debuts and end the need for riders to transfer from new Westlake Station to existing station for egress and access to downtown.

 

The bottom line is there is a way to have a “once in a lifetime” opportunity for a  "cheaper and doable" station location.  That doing so saves $11.1B. and avoids 5-10 years of disruption boring a tunnel and building 5 new stations.  

 

It should be an easy decision for even the Sound Transit Board and Seattle Times Traffic Lab.