Legislators Should Reject WSDOT I-405 2-HOT Lane FONSI

(As always I referred this post to the House and Senate Transportation committee members)

The April 12^th notice by the WSDOT and FHWA “Finding of No Significant Impact” (FONSI) for the I-405, Tukwila to I-90 Vicinity Express Toll Lanes Project shows neither understands the devastating impact of WSDOT plans for 2 HOT lanes on I-405 travel times.  The FONSI is a sales pitch for legislative approval for 2 HOT lanes on I-405 that ignores the reality of HOT benefits and should be rejected.

The “conventional” benefit from HOT is they increase HOV lane velocity by raising tolls to limit traffic; typically 2000 vehicles per hour (vph) will assure 45 mph velocities.  HOT fees avoid the HOV lane slowdown when more the 2000 carpoolers an hour use the lane. HOT also benefits public transit because the assured 45 mph velocity enhances bus ridership.  However using HOT fees to reduce traffic on HOV lanes increases traffic and congestion on GP lanes.

The WSDOT bases its plans for 2 HOT lanes on the presumption HOT fees increase HOV lane capacity.  The project director claims, “toll lanes often carry 35 percent more cars per hour than general lanes. That’s because rising prices prevent toll lanes from being clogged.  Express toll lanes flow better while GP lanes will be clogged from the start”. 

The FONSI uses this rationale to make the following claims for I-405 commuter benefits from 2 HOT lanes.

• Provides a reliable trip choice for I-405 users
• Increases vehicle capacity and person throughput
• Improves access for I-405 users
• Improves reliability for transit
• Reduces project-wide congestion

The FONSI “substantiates” these claims with the following excerpts:

Because this project adds a new lane in each direction, all travel lanes on I-405 would operate with faster, more reliable trips and would accommodate more vehicles than without the project.

With the project, average travel times during the morning and afternoon peak periods would improve in both the general purpose and express toll lanes.

Adding a new lane will increase I-405 capacity.  However using the new lane for HOT limits capacity and implementing HOT on the existing HOV lane will force 2-person carpools to use GP lanes.   It currently takes up to 90 minutes during peak commute on the GP lane and up to 50 minutes on the HOV lane for the 23-mile commute between Federal Way to Bellevue.  Using HOT to reduce HOV traffic to what’s required to achieve 45 mph will add to GP traffic and further increase travel time.

The increased GP lane congestion will convince more commuters to pay for HOT, increasing HOV lane congestion and travel time.  Travel time between Lynnwood and Bellevue exemplify the problem with current HOT fees with HOV travel times  up to 30 minutes and GP lanes taking nearly twice as long.  Implementing HOT on 2 of 4 lanes between Bellevue and Renton rather than on 2 of 5 lanes will likely exacerbate the problem. 

The bottom line is with 2 HOT lanes on I-405 the WSDOT has to choose between raising HOT fees to reduce HOV traffic, exacerbating GP lane congestion or accepting longer commute times for those willing to pay with less increase in GP congestion. However, the slower HOV lanes also ends one of the WSDOT's HOT purported benefits:

The project is essential to provide speed for Sound Transit’s new I-405 Bus Rapid Transit line from Lynnwood to Burien, scheduled to open in 2024.

The WSDOT could reduce GP travel times and assure 45 mph HOV lane velocity by implementing HOV on one lane with fees raised to whatever was required to achieve 45 mph.  Doing so would assure 45 mph for those willing to pay and for BRT routes.  The additional GP lane would reduce congestion for those unwilling or unable to pay and lower the fees for those willing to pay.  

The WSDOT proposal for 2 HOT lanes on I-405 is more about raising revenue than for reducing congestion.  They need to be "persuaded" to accept the lower revenue from a single HOT lane.  The legislature should do so by rejecting the FONSI for 2 HOT lanes.

FTA Abets ST CEO Rogoff Delusion

(I submitted the following to Senator Cantwell)

The April 11^th Seattle Times Traffic Lab B1 page article “Light rail to Federal Way gets OK” heralds Sound Transit CEO Peter Rogoff’s ability to get federal funds for the light rail extensions.  The FTA approval allows “Sound Transit to seek $790 million in federal funds, a quarter of the project’s total cost”.  (It follows last fall’s agreement to provide “”$1.2 billion for Sound Transit’s extension to Lynnwood”.) 

Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray both called the Federal Way extension a “critical investment”.  Rogoff, who served as administrator during the Obama administration, apparently still has credibility with the FTA.  The $790 million funding was presumably based on Sound Transit's claims for “36,500 daily riders by 2035”.  (Sound Transit claimed the Lynnwood extension would add 68,500 daily riders)

However, a 2004 PSRC study funded by Sound Transit concluded light rail routed through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) was limited to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd).    Since the Federal Way extension is limited to half the DSTT capacity, Rogoff’s claim for Federal Way ridership dwarfs light rail capacity. (As does the Lynnwood ridership claim)

Sound Transit also fails to provide commuters with access to even its limited capacity.  Commuters need to live within or have access to parking within walking distance of light rail stations.   However all the parking with possible access to light rail stations has been full for years with those riding buses.    Yet Sound Transit waits until 2024 to begin adding 8560 stalls over the next 17 years; a fraction of what’s needed for ridership claims. 

Rather than adding local bus routes to provide commuters access to light rail stations Sound Transit plans to use light rail capacity to replace bus routes into Seattle; forcing many commuters to transfer to and from light rail every morning and afternoon.  (In order to fill East Link trains they recently made an agreement with Mercer Island to halve existing I-90 bus routes in exchange for being allowed to terminate buses at island light rail station.)  

Spending billions to replace bus routes does little to reduce congestion into Seattle.   Riders transferring from buses to light rail along I-5 corridor also reduce access for those who currently use Central Link.
   
The bottom line is Rogoff’s claims for Federal Way and Lynnwood extension ridership are delusional.  The FTA funds are only a tiny fraction of the $96 billion Rogoff’s 2019 budget projects will be needed to implement the ST3 extensions. Rather than a “critical investment” they only abet his delusions, adding billions to the billions already spent on Northgate and East Link extensions that will inevitably be considered as two of the biggest boondoggles in public transit history.   

ST/MI "Connivance" Ends I-90 Bus Routes

This blog started because 3 years of presentations and emails to the Bellevue City Council failed to convince them to disallow permits Sound Transit needed for East Link.  That East Link was part of Sound Transit Prop 1 extensions that will eventually be regarded as one of the biggest boondoggles in history.  Sound Transit made a fatal blunder when they ignored the capacity limits imposed by routing the Prop 1 extensions through the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT). 

They compounded that problem by refusing to add parking for access to even its limited capacity, choosing instead to use it to replace current bus routes, despite the reality reducing the number of buses on HOV lanes will do little to reduce congestion.  Even worse, any riders the extensions add will simply reduce access for current riders.  I’ve filed as a candidate seven times to use the Voters Pamphlet to attract viewers to the blog detailing these problems and intend to file again for King County Council 6^th District. 

East Link is a particularly egregious example.  Sound Transit should have never been allowed to divert half the limited capacity of light rail routed through the DSTT across the I-90 Bridge center roadway. They’ve already devastated the route into Bellevue and the loss of the two center roadway lanes will inevitably result in gridlock on outer bridge roadways.

Again they decided to use East Link to replace I-90 Bridge bus routes. Sound Transit recognized they needed commuters to transfer from buses to East Link since the number of commuters living within walking distance or with parking near light rail stations wasn’t sufficient to fill even East Link’s share of DSTT capacity. (4440 riders per hour (per PSRC)).  

Their solution was to force those riding I-90 buses to transfer to East Link at South Bellevue or Mercer Island light rail stations.   Again not recognizing closing off the I-90 Bridge center roadway and spending $2.8B to replace cross-lake buses will do little to reduce HOV lane congestion.

Sound Transit initially proposed replacing buses to the Mercer Island City Council with a January 21, 2014 Integrated Transit System (ITS) presentation.  It detailed how 40,000 of East Link’s 50,000 daily riders would come from terminating I-90 corridor buses at either South Bellevue or Mercer Island light rail stations. 

However, a Sound Transit presentation to Mercer Island residents, “Completion of final design-- Open House” claimed only 4500 boarders daily would use station.  A subsequent (Nov 19^th) Mercer Island presentation went into considerable details about ITS.  Their preferred approach was for buses to exit I-90 on WB HOV off ramp to a 200 ft drop off and pick-up area on the 80^th Ave overpass before returning to I-90 on EB HOV on ramp.  Sound Transit predicted 84 buses per hour would make the circuit during peak commute.

Mercer Island residents objected to their light rail station being inundated with thousands of transferees every morning and afternoon.  Sound Transit’s response then was they were “up in the air” about terminating bus routes on the island.  However, a year later an October 2015 depiction of East Link showed 3-car trains on the bridge center roadway and a Sound Transit bus on the east bound I-90 bridge outer roadway.  Also, all five of Sound Transit proposals for terminating buses on the island were deemed “no longer under consideration”.

However the March 13, 2019 MI Weekly included notice of a March 19^th Sound Transit presentation of the results of a Mercer Island Transit Interchange Operational and Configuration Study to the City Council.  The study was funded by Sound Transit to:

Explore ways to implement bus/rail integration consistent with the Settlement Agreement between the City of Mercer Island and Sound Transit for the East Link Project.

It’s not clear what was in the 2017 Settlement Agreement but the study title “suggested” the City of Mercer Island had agreed to terminating I-90 bus routes on the island.  What is clear is the study results show the extent to which Sound Transit will go, apparently with Mercer Island concurrence to make up for the lack of commuter access to East Link stations by forcing bus riders to transfer to light rail.  

Again all the initial Sound Transit ITS configurations showed during peak commute 84 buses an hour would use the 80^th Ave overpass to drop off and pick up commuters.  The 84 buses per hour apparently reflected anticipated future growth since currently only 45 buses an hour were routed across I-90 Bridge.  

The Mercer Island Transit Interchange moved the drop-off and pick-up areas from the 80^th Avenue to 77th Avenue SE.  However, rather than the 84 buses per hour as they had originally proposed or even the 45 buses per hour that currently cross I-90 bridge, the Mercer Island Transit Interchange will result in “a 50% reduction in bus volumes relative to existing condition”. 

The bottom line is Sound Transit was so desperate to use bus transit riders to fill East Link trains they’ve agreed to slash current bus routes to appease Mercer Island City Council.  The council allowed Sound Transit to terminate cross-lake buses on the island despite objections from residents.  

There would be no East Link if the Mercer Island City Council (and Bellevue and Redmond councils) had not approved the permits Sound Transit needed.  The I-90 Bridge center roadway would have never been closed, avoiding the inevitable gridlock on I-90 Bridge outer roadways.  However, the Mercer Island City Council could have sued Sound Transit to at least prevent them from inundating the island with thousands of bus transferees each morning and afternoon.  Instead the Mercer Island Transit Interchange agreement limits I-90 Bridge transit capacity to East Link's share of DSTT capacity, the equivalent of about 50 high capacity buses an hour.  Thus, the current agreement with Sound Transit to halve I-90 bus routes simply hastens that reality. 

The entire east side will pay a heavy price for their "connivance".

Seattle Times Abets ST CEO Rogoff's Delusions?

Previous posts have detailed Seattle Times decade of failing to inform readers about the inability of Sound Transit Board and WSDOT to reduce area’s congestion.  Thus the Seattle Times March 24^th editorial, “Sound Transit performance audit is welcome” suggested they finally recognized the problem.   It included the following excerpts:

State Auditor Pat McCarthy is conducting a performance audit of Sound Transit.

Performance audits are done to ensure that tax dollars are spent as cost-effectively as possible.

They are especially needed for an agency that missed cost estimates by nearly $1 billion over the last two years.

The public eagerly awaits what should be the most thorough and expansive performance audit of Sound Transit to date.

The fact the Times was finally heralding an audit could have been “welcome news”.   Prior to the ST3 vote in 2016 they’d conceded in a Nov 4^th article ST3 would not reduce congestion.  Even that recognition wasn’t sufficient for the Times to include auditing Sound Transit as one of the top ten 2017 legislative priorities. Again, the March 24^th Times editorial “welcoming an audit” could have been good news for the entire area.

However the Times proposed the audit be used to answer the following:

Is Sound Transit effectively planning, designing and managing Link Light Rail to minimize all costs associated with the project, minimize unnecessary change orders and delays that increase costs, and ensure the project most closely resembles the project approved by voters?

Unfortunately those questions “suggest” they still don’t recognize the fundamental problem with Sound Transit’s Prop 1 extensions.  It’s not that they cost too much, it’s that they should have never been approved in 2008. 

Sound Transit Prop 1 clearly violated RCW 81.104.00 (2) (b) by ignoring the requirement to consider the lower cost HCT option of added bus service.  That capacity limits on Prop 1 light rail extensions will inevitably result in their being regarded as one of the biggest boondoggles in history. 

The “boondoggle” began when the Sound Transit Board simply ignored conclusions of a PSRC study they had funded in 2004.  The PSRC compared the ability of seven different HCT modes to meet the area’s public transit needs.   Four Sound Transit staff members participated in the study.  The results were published in an August 2004, PSRC 168-page Technical Workbook, “High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment”.

It concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd).   That capacity allowed Central Link routed through the DSTT to increase transit ridership into downtown Seattle from UW and from SeaTac. The UW station could have provided an interface between 520 BRT and light rail benefitting commuters from both sides of the lake.  

Central Link could have been extended to benefit West Seattle commuters.  Instead Sound Transit wasted billions and years extending Central Link beyond UW and SeaTac.  Sound Transit intends to boost light rail ridership by using the extensions to replace current bus routes.  They will do nothing to increase I-5 transit capacity into Seattle and any riders added will reduce access for existing Central Link riders.

The billions spent on East Link are even more egregious as it halves transit capacity from SeaTac further reducing efficacy of extensions to Angel Lake and beyond.  Again Sound Transit boosts East Link ridership by using it to replace I-90 bus routes.  Its confiscation of the I-90 Bridge center roadway will inevitably lead to gridlock on bridge outer roadways.

A competent auditor would also “likely” conclude Sound Transit’s decade-long refusal to increase bus ridership has played a major role in the area’s increasing congestion.  Since Prop 1 passed, annual ST express bus revenue miles haven’t increased and they have failed to add any parking with access to I-5 or I-90 bus routes despite the fact existing P&R lots have been full for years. 

However, the past decade of Sound Transit incompetence pales in comparison to what Sound Transit CEO Rogoff is proposing for the next twenty-two years. His 2019 Budget details Sound Transits plans to spend $96 billion over those years implementing additional ST3 light rail extensions and nothing to increase bus ridership.

Any competent auditor would “likely” conclude Rogoff’s 2019 budget claims for light rail ridership in 2041 were delusional and his failure to increase bus transit ridership totally incompetent.  Clearly any audit needs to go way beyond “missed cost estimates”. 

The Times assumes McCarthy, a former chair of Sound Transit, harbors no loyalty and her insight into the agency’s organization and culture could make the audit even stronger.  Yet it’s “highly unlikely” she will recognize that Sound Transit’s real problem is exemplified by a CEO she presumably helped hire.

The Seattle Times heralding a McCarthy audit “suggests” they continue to abet Rogoff proceeding with his "delusions" and incompetence.

King County Council 6th District Candidacy Announcement.

It’s March and current office holders and challengers are announcing their decisions to file for this year's election.  Thus it’s time for me to announce my decision to file for the 8^th time;  this time for the 6^th District King County Council.   As with my previous 7 candidacies I have no expectations or desire of winning and will not ask for nor accept any financial support.   I’ll email the following to area newspapers and have posted it since they will likely ignore it. 

King County Council 6th District Candidacy Announcement

I’m filing as a candidate for Metropolitan King County Council 6th District to attract viewers to my blog http://stopeastlinknow.blogspot.com.

A few of the more than 500 posts have detailed my responses to current issues.   For example, posts have detailed the futility of advocating reducing the state’s carbon emissions when the entire country’s emissions are less than 30% of the total.   Or that Bellevue should not be a “relief valve” for Seattle’s failure to recognize that even compassion has its limits regarding homeless.  That the State Labor Councils mandated $60.09 prevailing wage for King County carpenters plays a major role in the high price of new homes

However the vast majority of posts detail the monumental failure of the Sound Transit Board's transit policies to reduce the area’s congestion.  The Prop 1 extensions, which Sound Transit officials called a “gift to our grand children” will go down as one of the greatest boondoggles in history.  They should have never been allowed to proceed.     

The Sound Transit Board simply ignored a 2004 PSRC Technical Workbook, "High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment”.  It was a comprehensive evaluation of the transit capacity of 7 different HCT modes. Not only did Sound Transit fund the study, four of the participants, were Sound Transit Staff members.  It concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd).  

Central Link routed through the DSTT could have effectively used this limited capacity to provide additional transit capacity into downtown Seattle from UW and SeaTac; and could have been extended to West Seattle. However it made no sense to spend billions on Prop 1 extensions to Northgate when Sound Transit could have added that capacity with 100 additional high-capacity bus routes an hour.  Instead Sound Transit spent billions and years on Prop 1 extensions routed through the DSTT that will do nothing to increase light rail capacity into the city.   Any riders added by the extensions will only reduce capacity for current riders.

The East Link extension is particularly egregious since it halves Central Link capacity to SeaTac and confiscates the I-90 Bridge center roadway, inevitably leading to gridlock on bridge outer roadways. (In this case 50 additional buses an hour could have sufficed.)  The 6^th District has already paid a heavy price for East Link.  They've temporarily lost P&R's ending access to transit for many commuters and had the route into Bellevue devastated, ending its persona as the “City in the park”. 

Ten years ago Sound Transit could have added their 4^th lanes to the I-90 Bridge outer roadways for non-transit HOV and implemented two-way BRT on center roadway with 10 times East Link capacity at one 10^th the price. Instead congestion, which years of Bellevue surveys have shown was their primary concern, 67% last year, is only going to increase.

The read absurdity is the Sound Transit Board intends to use East Link to replace all cross-lake buses.  (The also intend to replace most if not all of I-5 corridor buses.) They apparently don’t recognize I-90 Bridge HOV congestion is not due to too many buses.  Thousands of east side cross-lake bus commuters will face the hassle of transferring to light rail in the morning and the chaos in the tunnel stations for the return trip. 

Not only will Sound Transit Board’s East Link increase congestion for the vast majority of 6^th District commuters, all residents will continue to be forced to pay hundreds if not thousands annually to fund Prop 1 extensions to Everett and Tacoma. They will do nothing to reduce congestion along I-5 but will require a huge subsidy to cover the extensions added operating cost. 

Not only have posts detailed the Sound Transit’s inability to recognize the limitations of light rail routed through the DSTT, they also detail the board’s failure to increase bus transit ridership. Sound Transit has spent 10 years refusing to increase bus revenue miles or add parking despite the fact existing parking with access to I-5 or I-90 have been full for years.

Residents throughout the entire Sound Transit service area should recognize the years and billions wasted on Prop 1 extensions are only a down payment to CEO Peter Rogoff's 2019 long-term budget plans.  It details his intent to spend $96 billion over the next 20 years on what he proudly proclaims is the “Most ambitious transit system expansion in the country”.  The fact it does nothing to increase transit capacity into Seattle and continues their decade-long refusal to increase bus transit typifies Sound Transit Board incompetence.

Again, as with all my candidacies, my goal is not to replace the incumbent, as she may be a fine council member in many respects. While she played a prominent role in getting the Bellevue council to approve the permits Sound Transit needed for East Link, replacing her on the King County Council will do little to stop Sound Transit from proceeding.  The impact of her past support for Sound Transit’s failed policies on Bellevue City Council and PSRC Transportation Policy Board pales in comparison to that of the Seattle Times, the WSDOT, and the House and Senate Transportation committee members.  There would be no Prop 1 extensions if they had not abided, if not abetted, Sound Transit Board incompetence.   

It's exposing those problems is why I run.

What Mercer Island Should Do

(I submitted the following to the Mercer Island City Council in response to Sound Transit's plan to terminate King County Metro buses at the MI light rail station.)

What Mercer Island Council Should Do

The March 13^th MI News article “Mercer Island Transit Interchange” is just another attempt of Sound Transit to convince Mercer Island City Council to go along with attempts to increase East Link ridership.  It began more than 4 years ago with a January 21, 2014 Sound Transit presentation to the council about Integrated Transit System (ITS) proposal. 

That presentation detailed how 40,000 of East Link’s 50,000 daily riders would come from terminating I-90 corridor buses at either South Bellevue or Mercer Island light rail stations.  They claimed:

 The light rail stations at South Bellevue and Mercer Island will:

   Smooth bus-rail transfers

   Help improve efficiency and cost-savings

   Provide more reliable and frequent service

   Enhance rider experience

   Help optimize transit operations

The reality is it’s “unlikely” forcing bus commuters to transfer to and from light rail trains at either South Bellevue or Mercer Island will provide any of the purported benefits.  The Mercer Island city council rightly rejected all four of Sound Transit’s “Scenarios” for accommodating up to 84 buses an hour at the Mercer Island light rail station.   And Sound Transit agreed not to terminate Sound Transit buses at the Mercer Island station.

However Sound Transit still intends to use East Link to replace all cross-lake buses.  Sound Transit route 550 will be eliminated and 554 will be terminated at the South Bellevue light rail station.  As a result, Mercer Island commuters will loose all access to Seattle via bus.

Sound Transit’s latest attempt to boost East Link ridership is to convince Mercer Island City Council to go along with a plan to use East Link to replace King County Metro I-90 bus routes.  Metro buses that currently don’t stop on the island will be terminated at the Mercer Island station. 

This proposal was the result of Sound Transit commissioning a Mercer Island Transit Interchange Operational and Configuration Study to evaluate how Metro buses will integrate with the light rail station.  It resulted in the following purported benefits:

The future transit interchange achieves the key tenets of the Settlement Agreement:

·       A roundabout at North Mercer Way & 77th Avenue SE, and no substantial bus operations/layovers along 80th Avenue

·       Future bus volumes less than existing bus volumes

·       No routing of regional buses through MI Town Center

·       Limited occurrences of long bus layovers

·       No bus idling

Typical of Sound Transit, they apparently believe the Mercer Island City Council, that didn’t want Sound Transit buses terminated on the island, would accept King County Buses.  Even if they did it’s unlikely King County Metro will go along with forcing riders to transfer to and from light rail at Mercer Island station.

The Mercer Island City Council should use the meeting to insist Sound Transit 554 continue to be routed to MI station and across I-90 Bridge into Seattle when East Link begins operation.  They should join with Issaquah City Council to insist Issaquah commuters not be forced to transfer to and from light rail at the South Bellevue P&R and islanders should be given the option of commuting by bus, especially during peak commute when East Link trains could be full.  (Terminating Metro buses there  adds to the problem.) That Sound Transit should reserve 50% of the MI P&R for those willing to pay for stalls with islanders given priority to assure access.

The bottom line is Sound Transit ridership projections for all their Prop 1 and beyond light rail extensions are based on using light rail to replace bus routes.  They refuse to acknowledge that congestion on the area’s HOV lanes is not due to too many buses.  Their attempt to replace I-90 King County Metro bus routes with trains is just the latest example and should be rejected.

Ending a Decade of Sound Transit Board Failure.

Sound Transit policies over the last 10 years reflect what happens when a “Board of Directors” of a public transit organization fails to provide effective “direction”.   Board members of most companies are selected because they have demonstrated a level of expertise needed to help direct company policy.   Those owning stock in the company can vote to replace them if not satisfied.

The Sound Transit Board actions during the past decade show they lacked the competency to provide effective public transit system “direction”.   Yet little can be done to replace them.  They were selected by County Executive, Dow Constantine, because they concurred with his “pie in the sky” response to the 2015 legislation enabling the ST3 vote:  

“What we can do is create light rail to take you where you want to go, when you want to go, on time, every time, for work, for play, for school”    

A competent Sound Transit board would have been aware of a 2004 PSRC Technical Workbook, High Capacity Transit Corridor Assessment”. Sound Transit funded the study and 4 of those participating were Sound Transit Staff members. The 168-page Technical Workbook provided the results of a comprehensive comparison of the ability of 7 different high capacity transit modes to meet the area’s future transit needs.

It concluded the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT) limited light rail capacity to 8880 riders per hour per direction (rphpd).  It doesn’t take much public transit competency to recognize 8880 rphpd is only a fraction of what’s needed to meet area’s transit needs. That it made no sense spending billions extending light rail beyond UW to Northgate and beyond, and even less splitting that capacity between extensions across I-90 Bridge or beyond SeaTac.

The board compounded their decade of incompetency regarding light rail with a decade spent neglecting to increase Sound Transit bus transit capacity.  Annual bus revenue hours in 2008, 10,290,367, only increased to 11,991,374 in 2017.  They also neglected to add parking despite the fact all the P&R’s with access to bus service have been full for years. 

Instead the board demonstrated more incompetence approving a proposal to “manage access to transit” as a way to overcome “crowded early buses and empty buses later”.  Rather than increasing either bus service or parking they approved allowing commuters pay to reserve 50% of parking stalls in existing P&Rs for late arrivals; ending access for 50% of early commuters.

The latest example of Sound Transit Board incompetence is their approval of CEO Peter Rogoff’s 2019 budget.  It details why the past decade of billions wasted on light rail extensions is only a down payment for Rogoff’s long-term plans.  That between 2017 and 2041 Rogoff plans to spend $96 billion implementing what he proudly proclaims is the “most ambitious transit system expansion in the country”.  That the budget continues Sound Transit’s decade-long refusal to increase access to bus transit and makes claims for future light rail ridership that dwarf DSTT capacity.

Any competent transit board would’ve used Rogoff’s 2019 budget as grounds for termination.  The Sound Transit Board chose to reward him with a big raise and extended his contract for another three years.

The board needs to "re-direct" Sound Transit.  It needs to be transformed from a light rail construction company into one that facilitates increased bus ridership.  Rather than overseeing the planning and construction of light rail extensions Sound Transit should  survey workers in Seattle, Bellevue, and Overlake.  Find out where they live and when they need to commute to and from their workplace. 

Use the data to decide how best to provide commuters with access to transit.  Is it be better to fund a new or expanded existing P&R or a local bus route from near where they live to an existing P&R?  Use the survey data to determine when and where to route both the local buses to and from the P&R and from the P&R, to and from work.

Purchase additional smaller buses for the local routes and more high-capacity buses for direct routes from and to P&R.  Facilitate egress and access in Seattle with an elongated T/C with designated stations for each route to drop-off commuters on one side and pick up on the other.  The costs and time required would likely pale in comparison to the billions and years the Sound Transit CEO Rogoff’s 2019 budget proposes. 

The bottom line is the Sound Transit Board failure a decade ago to recognize the DSTT limits on light rail capacity has already resulted in needless billions and years wasted on light rail extensions.  They need to recognize those billions and years wasted pale in comparison with the cost and years wasted if CEO Rogoff is allowed to proceed with his 2019 budget long term plans.  That Sound Transit needs to be transformed from a light rail construction company into an organization that facilitates increased bus transit ridership. 

A decade of Sound Transit Board incompetence is enough!