Sound Transit & Board Ignore No-2nd-Tunnel Option

I used the “Meeting Comments” to email the Board’s System Expansion Committee May 8^th meeting my “4/29/23 post “Existing DSTT Can Accommodate Light Rail Riders”.  It opined the DSTT could accommodate those needing to beyond CID and Westlake stations if Sound Transit terminated East Link and West Seattle extensions at existing CID stations and terminated Ballard extension at existing Westlake station. 

 

Doing so would avoid the cost of boring a 2^nd tunnel, new stations at SODO, either 4^th Ave CID stations or North and South of CID, and Westlake. Terminating East Link and West Seattle at CID would avoid limiting Line 1 Link capacity to SeaTac and beyond.  Terminating the Ballard extension at existing Westlake Station would avoid waiting for 2nd tunnel to begin operation. (It's current 2039 "Target Date" is two years after the  16.3 mile Everett Link Extension "Target Date".)

The existing DSTT and CID could provide the “once in a lifetime opportunity to create a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak".  The operating schedules and the number of cars in each train for all three extensions could be matched to local demand saving millions in costs.  

 

Typical of the Board, the System Expansion Committee ignored the “Comments”. The March 23^rd Board meeting had requested an additional 2 months of study to consider the 4^th Ave CID access to second light rail tunnel as well as Sound Transit’s “Preferred Alternative” for North and South of CID station.  

 

The May 1 release of the March “Agency Progress Report” included the following Sound Transit response:

 

The Board also directed that the CID 4th Avenue Shallower option be 

carried forward for additional environmental review.                                  

 

The board was told in the May 25^th meeting Sound Transit needed “additional environment review” of the 4^th Ave CID station, delaying the Ballard Link Final EIS. It’s unlikely any delay will affect the West Seattle and Ballard Link DEIS and March Agency Progress Report’s 2039 “target date”.   A competent transit board would use the added time to demand “additional environmental review” of a “no second tunnel option” that could shorten the wait and billions in costs.

Voters’ Pamphlet Candidate Statement

 

It’s May 19^th, and Candidates Filing has closed.  This year I filed for Bellevue City Council Position No 7, again with no desire to win but to use Voters’ Pamphlet to attract views to this blog.  A blog that began because the Bellevue City Council, beginning in 2008, had ignored my efforts to convince them to disallow the building permits Sound Transit needed for East Link.  A blog that continued attempting to expose the Seattle Times Traffic Lab abetting Sound Transit incompetence. This year it’s to use Voters’ Pamphlet to tell Bellevue residents what they can expect as a result.

 

Voters' Pamphlet Candidate Statement 

My candidacy is an attempt to attract voters to my blog http://stopeastlinknow.blogspot.com detailing what Bellevue residents can expect from Sound Transit.  

 

Next year the ST Starter Line will replace ST550 to South Bellevue P&R.  Access will be limited to those within walking distance of Bellevue T/C and East Main station. Riders will be required to transfer from light rail to and from buses at the South Bellevue P&R for the commute into and out of Seattle.

 

In 2025 ST’s East Link debut will end ST550 and force all I-90 bus riders transfer to light rail on Mercer Island for the commute into and out of Seattle.  It’s the “eastside” version of the ST plan to use “voter approved” extensions to replace buses into Seattle; reducing transit capacity into the city and nothing to reduce congestion. 

 

ST will use eastside taxes to help fund a 2^nd tunnel rather than use the existing DSTT for those wanting to go beyond CID.  The tunnel ends easy access to SeaTac and beyond, spending more than $12B and 6-10 years disrupting Seattle.  Part of the reason why the $54B ST3 funding voters approved in 2016 has grown to $160B and continues to grow.

Questions A Transit Board Should Ask

 

The March 23 Sound Transit Board meeting agenda included approving Motion No M2023-18 confirming Sound Transit's 2nd tunnel's Preferred Alternative Light Rail route for the Ballard Link extension and their North and South of CID stations. The result of the discussion was that the 4^th Ave CID location provided a “once in a lifetime opportunity to create a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak". That more study was needed before the decision was made to give up that option, so a motion for an additional 2 months of study for the CID station was unanimously approved.

 

The May 1 release of the March “Agency Progress Report” included the following Sound Transit response:

 

    Board identifies alternative for Ballard Link Extension 

The preferred alternative includes stations South and North of the Chinatown-International District (CID) and shifts the Midtown Station to the location North of CID. The Board also directed that the CID 4th Avenue Shallower option be carried forward for additional environmental review. 

It raises the question as to whether a “once in a lifetime opportunity” should merit more than an “additional environmental review".  The other “news” in the progress report was the Ballard Link “target date” which had slid previously from 2035 to 2037 had slid to 2039. That raises the question as to why not terminate the Ballard Link at the existing Westlake Station with a far earlier “target date”. Especially since most of the Ballard Link riders would exit the 2^nd tunnel at its Westlake station to avoid having to go to North of CID station for egress and access. 

The Agency Progress Reports also continues Sound Transit plan to route East Link as part of Line 2 Link through DSTT to Northgate and beyond to Mariner P&R near Everett.  Why not terminate East Link at the existing CID and avoid diverting half of the DSTT trains across I-90 Bridge.  It would allow East Link operation to be matched with eastside demand and allow better access to Line 1 Link south.

The progress report also continues plan to route the West Seattle link to a 2^ndSODO station where it also initially shares Line 1 Link capacity into and out of Seattle.  Why not avoid the need to share Line 1 Link capacity and the need for a second SODO station by routing it alongside Line 1.  Terminating the Link at the CID station would allow its operation to be matched with West Seattle demand, not that of half the route to Everett.

Terminating East Link and West Seattle at existing CID would also provide the “once in a lifetime opportunity to create a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak". It would do so at a fraction of the cost, delay, and disruption associated with implementing the 2^nd Tunnel.

The bottom line is rather than choosing were to locate 2^nd tunnel stations, the Board needs to ask Sound Transit why not terminate the Ballard Link at existing Westlake station, the East Link and West Seattle extensions at the existing CID station. Use the existing Line 1 Link on DSTT rather than  2nd tunnel for those needing to go further. (It’s something a Seattle Times Traffic Lab should “dig into” but hasn’t)

The recent delay could be used to terminate East Link at CID and terminating Ballard and West Seattle would allow earlier "target dates",  The question is “why not”.

 

 

Existing DSTT Can Accommodate Light Rail Commuters

 Several posts on this blog have questioned the need for a 2^nd Seattle Transit Tunnel.  Still, the March 23^rd Sound Transit Board meeting continued to insist the 2nd tunnel was needed,  That the North of CID station at Pioneer Square was the “preferred alternative”, for access.  However, they directed Sound Transit spend an additional 2 months considering the 4^th Ave CID station location.

This post opines a competent Sound Transit would quickly recognize the existing DSTT has the capacity to accommodate all those needing to go beyond existing CID station from the south and beyond existing Westlake station from the north.

 

 A 2004 PSRC study, funded by Sound Transit, concluded the DSTT could accommodate fifteen 4-car light rail trains an hour. Each 74-seat, light rail car could accommodate 148 sitting and standing riders, so capacity was limited to 8880 riders per hour in each direction.  

 

The “Voter approved” extensions do nothing to increase that capacity.  Thus, the existing DSTT can already accommodate all the capacity of the light rail spine into Seattle.  The 2^nd tunnel was included in the ST3 vote to accommodate the West Seattle and Ballard Links.  

 

The West Seattle link is scheduled for service in 2030 because it isn’t routed through the 2^nd tunnel.  That when completed it will share the light rail capacity with Line 1 Link from  the SODO station into Seattle.  Rather than increase transit capacity into Seattle, the link will reduce Line 1 Link capacity to SeaTac and beyond.   

 

However the  Line 1 Link will already have lost half of the DSTT capacity when East Link begins service in 2025.    Thus, if half of that limited capacity is diverted to West Seattle, SeaTac and beyond could lose up to 75% of its current capacity until the 2nd tunnel is routed to SODO. 

The  2nd tunnel and Ballard Link, scheduled for service in 2035, does add light rail capacity into Seattle.  However, most of the riders will chose to egress and access at the new Westlake station rather than continue in tunnel to Pioneer Sq station.  The Ballard Link could be terminated at existing Westlake Station rather than routed through 2nd tunnel.

 

Prior to the 2016 vote, Sound Transit used an ST3 map of the Ballard-to-tunnel-to West Seattle that included the following projected costs.

 

The 5.4 Mile Ballard-to-Tunnel Link would cost $2,383-$2,550 (2014$M) 

The 1.7 Mile 2^nd tunnel would cost $1,638-$1,752 (2014 $M)   The 4.7 Mile Tunnel-to-West Seattle Link would cost $1,431-$1,531 (2014 $M) Thus, what voters were told the tunnel would coast, was $5,452-$5,833 (2014 $M).  

 

The Sound Transit Expansion Committee was told at the March 9^th meeting the Ballard through 2^nd tunnel and West Seattle Link would cost $12B, more than twice what voters were told.  The Board’s decision to continue to study the 4^th Ave CID station was widely applauded during the April 27^th Board meeting.  Yet the board refuses to appease their concerns by considering using  existing CID station and DSTT

 

The bottom line is the existing DSTT can accommodate all the light rail spine train capacity into Seattle.  Sound Transit plan to to share part of that capacity with West Seattle link does nothing to increase that capacity.  The existing DSTT can easily accommodate Ballard Link needing to go beyond existing Westlake station. 

Sound Transit Board needs to recognize the existing DSTT has the capacity needed to accommodate all those wishing to go beyond existing CID and Westlake stations.  Saving billions and years of delay and disruption required for 2nd tunnel.

 

SeattleTimes Ignores East Link’s Real Problem,

The April 15^th Seattle Times Traffic Lab column, “Flawed light-rail ties on I-90 span can’t be fixed, must be rebuilt”, ignores the most onerous result of delaying the  East Link  Revenue Service Date. The delay from June 2023 to 1Q 2025 of another demonstration, “voter approved” light rail spine extensions, like East Link, won’t reduce congestion into Seattle 

Since 2021 Q1, Sound Transit has refused to release the “Service Delivery Quarterly Service Reports” showing the three Northgate Link stations added a fraction of the 41,000-49,000 predicted.  The June 2023 East Link Revenue Service Date would’ve demonstrated a similar lack of ridership, its failure to reduce  I-90 corridor congestion, and its impact on Line 1 Link operation.

 

Again, East Link ridership will be a fraction of the 50,000 daily riders Sound Transit projected.  Only a fraction of that number live within walking distance of light rail stations or have access to parking near stations. Since 2014 Sound Transit has decided to provide riders by forcing commuters using parking for access to bus routes transfer to East Link for the ride into and out of Seattle.  

 

Thus, even before Sound Transit began East Link construction, they were willing to spend $3.5B to replace I-90 bus routes into Seattle and little to reduce bridge congestion.  The result was a “bus intercept” agreement with Mercer Island to terminate King County Metro and Sound Transit I-90 corridor buses at the island’s light rail station. 

 

The June 2023 Revenue Service Date would've demonstrated many commuters would rather drive into Seattle than endure bus routes requiring they transfer to and from light rail. That islanders disliked being inundated with those transferring and having to share access to light rail at the last east side station.  

It would've also demonstrated Sound Transit’s decision to route East Link trains through DSTT, eventually to Mariner Station near Everett, halved the number of Line 1 Link trains to SeaTac and beyond until they completed the 2^nd tunnel.

 

The bottom line is the East Link delay has allowed Sound Transit to delay demonstrating problems dwarfing those of Northgate Link. They could use the delay to “reconsider” routing East Link trains beyond Chinatown Station.  End the need to halve Line 1 Link trains and reduce the need for a 2^nd tunnel.  Limit East Link operation to meet demand from those living along route through Bellevue to Redmond. Allow I-90 corridor bus routes to continue into Seattle rather than terminate on Mercer Island. 

 

The Seattle Times Traffic Lab needs to "dig into" the real result of the delay and advocate for using the delay to mitigate those problems.

Sound Transit’s Fare Strategy?

The April 6^th Sound Transit Executive Committee meeting typifies the council’s failure to address the transit system’s real problems.  In this case it's their approach to the meeting agenda, “Reports to the Committee,”

        “Fare Strategy Briefing-Future of Fare Structures:

 

Sound Transit's approach was a "“Fare Strategy” presentation with a “fare guiding framework” goal:

 

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

 

That “Upcoming needed Board Actions” included:   

 

“Adopt an equitable and accountable fare compliance policy and expand reduced fare programs

 

It wasn’t clear what constituted “equitable” fares and why the need to expand “reduced fare programs”.  Rather than simply pay a fare to get into the city, the 40-minute, 25-chart presentation included tables of fares based on distance you traveled from where you got on to where you got off. Riders needed to tap-off when they exited to avoid paying fares to the end of the route. A chart showed most Orca payers paid less than $2.75 of the $2.25-$3.50 fare range. 

Other charts showed "peer transit light rail agencies" used flat fares with peak surcharge or Zone-bases fares.  Sound Transit's approach to decide was detailed in a “Fare policy update” chart, “Key criteria for analysis of flat vs distance-based fares".

 

         Simplicity  

         Racial equity 

         Financial impact to passengers and Sound Transit 

         Ridership impacts

The flat fare approach would seem to be simpler and its unclear how the other criteria affect the decision. The presentation concluded with plans to continue their  "Comprehensive fares strategy"  until Fall 2023/Winter 2024”. Again, the entire presentation and the Board’s response to spend a year on “Fare Strategy” to  decide typifies their approach to issues. 

Whatever the decision questions remain. What is the fare strategy for those who transfer from buses to light rail?.  Especially those transferring from King County Metro and Snohomish Community Transit.   Any “fare strategy” should also consider what’s required to meet recovery of operating costs. Sound Transit’s budget predicts Link 14% recover in 2023, a fraction of their 35% target.  

 

That level presumably reflects the costs added by the 4.2-mile Northgate Link doubling the cost of the route from UW into Westlake.  Especially during off-peak operation with mostly empty 4-car trains with operating cost 10 times that of a bus.  Any fare strategy should also consider the additional 8.5 miles added by Lynnwood extensions doubles the Northgate Link costs to Westlake. Allowing Sound Transit to set fares that reduce farebox recovery, especially for longer routes and higher costs, risks unfairly burdening public.

 

More important, both Sound Transit and the Executive Committee were apparently unaware Sound Transit’s 2023 “Financial Plan and Proposed Budget”. It included 28,317,035 Link riders would pay $33,568,717 in fares in 2023, $1.185 fare per boarder,  

 

Any "Fare Structure Strategy" to establish the fares is of little value until they get riders to pay them..

 

Dear ST Board Members Harrel and Balducci

Your comments at the March 23^rd Sound Transit Board meeting prompted this post. The meeting agenda included approving the following “Business Item”

Motion No. M2023-18: Confirming or modifying the preferred alternative light rail route and station locations for the Ballard Link Extension for additional environmental review, including preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Statement -- Materials Forthcoming”

 

The discussion concluded with board members Mayor Harrel and Claudia Balducci objecting to having to choose between the 4^th Ave CID and  Pioneer Square stations. That the CID station provided a “once in a lifetime opportunity to create a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak".   That more study was needed before the decision was made to give up that opportunity and proceed with the Pioneer Square station.

 

The result was a decision to replace M2023-18 with a motion calling the Pioneer Square Station the “Preferred Alternative" but requiring additional study of the 4^th Ave CID station. While no written version of the motion was available, Balducci’s version for an additional 2 months of study was unanimously approved.

 

This post opines any additional study should consider a 3^rd alternative. Use the existing CID Station on DSTT to provide “a space” for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder, and Amtrack".  Terminate East Link and West Seattle Links there.  Terminate Ballard Link at the existing Westlake station since most link riders would get off at the new Westlake Station rather than at Pioneer station on 2nd tunnel.  Both stations could provide commuters with egress and access to light rail trains at a fraction of the time, cost, and disruption required for access at either end of a second tunnel.  Those needing to go beyond CID or Westlake could do so on existing DSTT.  The Sound Transit Board should use the two months to determine how many will need to do so. 

 

First, the Board needs to recognize Sound Transit’s goal should be to reduce congestion on routes into Seattle, not implement “voter approved” light rail extensions. That reducing congestion requires attracting more commuters to public transit. Estimate how many will use the light rail spine along I-5 and I-90 into Seattle.

Release the quarterly performance provided reports detailing how many of Sound Transit’s predicted 41,000 to 49,000 were added by the three stations on Northgate Link route to Westlake. While Sound Transit continued to route 510 into Seattle, Northgate Link riders were added by King County Metro ending KCM41 and Sound Transit terminating ST511-513 at Northgate, not increasing public transit ridership into Seattle. 

 

When Lynnwood Link begins operation, ST510 as well as most of the Snohomish Community Transit 400 bus routes into Seattle will terminate at Lynnwood station for light rail into the city.  Again, terminating bus routes reduces transit capacity into Seattle and nothing to reduce I-5 congestion. Thus, riders to Westlake could be reduced by continue to route ST510 and some of the SCT400 buses to Northgate for those going to UW and Westlake but continuing into Seattle.  I-5 riders to CID from Federal Way could be limited when Line 1 Link begins operation by continuing ST557 during peak commute into Seattle.

 

I-90 riders to existing CID station could be limited to those along East Link route to Redmond. Allow I-90 corridor bus riders to ride into Seattle rather than transfer to East Link on Mercer Island for the commute.  Ballard riders to Westlake and West Seattle riders to CID will be limited by the number of commuters within walking distance of the limited number of light rail stations.

 

The best available information as to how many of those arriving at Westlake and CID will continue through DSTT is to assume commuters will arrive at the same station they depart.  2019 pre-pandemic boardings show most got on at Westlake and CID stations to depart.  Sound Transit can use more recent departure data to anticipate how many future train riders continue through DSTT. It's unlikely to exceed the ~9000 rider per hour light rail capacity in each direction.

 

The bottom line is the Sound Transit Board has three choices. Continue with plans to spend 6-7 years and $12 billion on a second tunnel with an undetermined station near Westlake and at Pioneer Square.  Spend additional years and additional millions on a “once in a lifetime" opportunity to create a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak”.  Or allow some bus routes to continue into Seattle to allow using the existing Westlake and CID stations for that opportunity with a minimum of time, cost, and disruption. 

 

It should be an easy choice