Current Seattle Times Board Doesn’t “Get It”

 The Tuesday Traffic Lab front page article, “Lynnwood light rail might just be too popular for its own good” typifies a Seattle Times that doesn’t “get it”.  The paper has spent more than decade abiding Sound Transit spending billions on light rail extensions beyond UW stadium, across I-90 Bridge, and beyond SeaTac that will do absolutely nothing to reduce the area’s congestion.

In this case claiming, “Every one of the garages connected to light rail stations in the region is out of room during the morning commute” attests to its success.  Failing to recognize filling the 3633 parking stalls added by the link provided a fraction of Sound Transits latest  25,300 to 34,200 projected riders. (substantially less than an earlier 37,000 to 57,000 prediction). That plans to charge $2.00 (that could grow) to reserve a stall for morning commuters does nothing to increase capacity. That those arriving after 2:00 pm won’t have to pay is of little solace as it’s “unlikely” they’ll find an open stall.

The paper has never recognized Sound Transit’s real problem is a Sound Transit Board that doesn’t understand what constitutes effective public transit.  (Despite each member getting ~ $200,000 in compensation).  That a transit system’s goal should be providing sufficient commuters who can’t or don’t want to drive to reduce the congestion for those that do. 

The Board either does not recognize or chooses to ignore the fact 4-car light rail trains don’t have the capacity needed.  The problem being safe operation requires 4 minutes between trains, whether they be Line 1 or Line 2 trains.  

The article claims “Ridership hasn’t been too much of an issue, for either Sound Transit or Snohomish Community Transit, now that its bus service better connects its passengers to the Lynnwood station".  Apparently not recognizing that using light rail trains to replace bus routes into Seattle reduces transit capacity, does nothing to reduce I-5 GP lane congestion, and the former bus riders reduce access for current link riders.

When queried about ridership, Sound Transit claimed, “numbers were taking longer to ‘vet and release’ due to the changes related to expansion.” The Traffic Lab apparently unaware Sound Transit’s initial October Ridership—Ridership website had included boardings at each of the four link stations that totaled 8395; again a fraction of the 25,300 to 34,200 predictions.  (Sound Transit’s later releases deleted both August and September boardings.)  

The bottom line is the September 28^th Sound Transit Board meeting heralded the success of the Lynnwood Link debut claiming “71,000 rode the system just on opening weekend”.  However, neither the October 10^th System Expansion Committee nor the October 24^th Sound Transit Board Meeting mentioned the subsequent weekday operating boardings.

That an October 19^th, 2016, Seattle Times editorial made the following recommendation:

Reject Sound Transit 3 and demand a better plan

Apparently concerned about giving Sound Transit authority to spend $54 billion funding ST3 from 2017 to 2041 suggesting:

Voters in the Puget Sound region should say no to Sound Transit 3 and ask Sound Transit to provide a more reasonable plan with more accountability.

It’s time the current Seattle Times editorial board takes note.