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Revising the existing Link Noise Mitigation Policy (Motion No. M2004-08) is appropriate because it is out of date, applies only to Link light rail noise and can be improved to reflect lessons learned from implementing Sound Move and ST2 projects.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It's not clear what makes the commitment to  M2004-08 "out of date" or "can be improved".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 Again, it's not clear what makes the commitment to  M2004-08 "out of date" or "can be improved".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.