Take Action: Mail Legislators About Light Rail to Bellevue

Washington State Capitol Building. Picture by swishphotos.
Washington State Capitol Building. Picture by swishphotos.

We’ve talked about about R8A and other legislature inference plenty over the last few days. It’s time for us to take action. We need to contact leaders in Olympia and tell them what we think:

  1. The state should fund, as promised, the two-way HOV lane project on I-90 so that light rail can be completed to the Eastside on time. East Link will be delayed for years without this funding.
  2. Sound Transit should receive funds for the three Regional Mobility grants which it was competitively awarded. ST won these grants because the projects are among the best transportation investments in the state.
  3. There is no need for a bureaucratic “asset assessment study” for light rail across I-90. A new study could only serve to delay building light rail across a bridge that has already been studied numerous times.
  4. The region voted overwhelmingly to support this light rail package. The legislature shouldn’t thwart the will of the voters.

Here’s a list of important transportation legislators:

The email address for your legislators can be found on the state legislature website, or you can use this form to automatically email your legislators based on your address. You can email Governor Gregoire on her website.

After the jump is the letter we’re sending out which reflects the above talking points. Feel free to change the text as you see fit and forward it to the above legislators as well as your own — let them know you’re paying attention.

Continue reading “Take Action: Mail Legislators About Light Rail to Bellevue”

News Round Up: Recession, Recession, Recession

Pan Shot
Link in Action, photo by Stephen De Vight
  • Olympia’s devil transportation budget, the one that imposes a huge delay on East Link, seems to have passed out of the House Committee, with a full house vote Friday. The Senate version is bouncing around committees still. There is still time to email your legislators and tell them you want R8A and Eastlink back in the budget.
  • Newcastle 411 is reporting that the Sound Transit-funded Newcastle Transit Center project’s lowest bid was $2.1 million, 22.2% under the $2.7 million estimate. A number of projects have come under estimate recently, including the longer of the two U-Link tunnels. The bad recession is causing a huge shortage in construction projects, and engineering and construction firms are competing very strongly for the projects that are available.
  • The FAA foresees a 9% drop in air travel in the US this year due to the bad economy.
  • The rotten economy seems to be slowing transit-oriented-development in the Rainier Valley, according to the South Seattle Beacon. The nice thing about train lines is that even though they only open once, they stick around a long, long time. The TOD will show up eventually.

Opinion: WSDOT and Amtrak Cascades

Amtrak leaving Seattle by Brian Bundridge
Amtrak leaving Seattle by Brian Bundridge

Where to begin after the troubling news that was brought forward to us recently? Washington State Department of Transportation reorganized the passenger rail division during a critical time when federal funding is available for key improvements along the corridor. These improvements would wildly benefit thousands of passengers who take the Amtrak Cascades daily. Read on below the fold.

Continue reading “Opinion: WSDOT and Amtrak Cascades”

A Very Quick Overview of Why R8A Matters to You

Martin had a fantastic post this morning about the I-90 Two Way Transit and HOV project, also known as Alternative R-8A, or just R8A. I want to add to this some history, and exactly why this is a key issue for transit.

In 1976, a Memorandum of Agreement was reached to build I-90. There are some gems in here, but I think the key is that I-90 was originally intended to be converted to rail:

2. The I-90 facility shall be designed and constructed so that conversion of all or part of the transit roadway to fixed guideway is possible.

In 2004, the same stakeholders partnered with Sound Transit to amend the 1976 Memorandum of Agreement. This amendment (and it’s really worth a read, it’s pretty short) established that:

“…all parties agree that the ultimate configuration for I-90 between Bellevue, Mercer Island and Seattle should be defined as High Capacity Transit in the center roadway and HOV lanes in the outer roadways; and further agree that High Capacity Transit for this purpose is defined as a transit system operating in dedicated right-of-way such as light rail, monorail, or a substantially equivalent system;”

Furthermore, they liked one particular alternative for reaching this configuration:

“…all parties agree that building HOV lanes on the outer roadways as identified as Alternative R-8A as set forth in the May 21, 2004 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) prepared for the project, is an essential first step toward achieving the ultimate configuration;”

The final resolution was crystal clear, we need to put HOV lanes on the outer roadway ASAP:

1. Alternative R-8A with High Capacity Transit deployed in the center lanes is the ultimate configuration for I-90 in this segment;
2. Construction of R-8A should occur as soon as possible as a first step to the ultimate configuration;
3. Upon completion of R-8A, move as quickly as possible to construct High Capacity Transit in the center lanes;
4. Commit to the earliest possible conversion of center roadway to two-way High Capacity Transit operation based on outcome of studies and funding approvals.

WSDOT has a fantastic project page where you can see the details of R8A and the schedule WSDOT committed to – with construction ending in 2014. Martin noted that Sound Transit needs this to happen before they can build East Link – so anything the state does to alter this schedule will directly impact our ability to build light rail to the eastside.

So why am I writing this? Because the response we’ve gotten demands some scrutiny. Last time I wrote about this project, it was to point out that Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1978 (PDF), the bill to distribute transportation stimulus funds, reduced funding for R8A Stage 1 (page 42). When I pointed out that Representative Judy Clibborn’s amendment removed money for R8A, Representative Eddy commented with (in part):

I am advised that the language in question reflects an accounting change. “We revised the amount for the I-90 two-way transit stage 1 project down by $2.8 M in the 2009 supplemental budget. This is due to project savings in stage 1. These savings are being transferred to the budget item for stages 2 & 3 of the project. Unfortunately the proviso does not mention this other budget item.”

She goes on to report that the total budget for stages 2 & 3 is being increased by $3.27 M, beyonjd the $2.8 reduction in ‘09 to recognize increased inflation.

A commenter named Allison emailed Clibborn and got this response:

The I-90 two-way transit project is a three-stage project. The first stage was completed $2.8 million under budget, so the savings on stage one have been transferred to stages two and three. – Judy Clibborn

In fact, ESHB 1978 did mention R8A stages 2 and 3 – it didn’t move money from stage 1 to them, it removed another $1.8 million from them (page 47).

A staffer in Olympia tells me the Senate Transportation Committee plans to release their 2009-2011 budget tomorrow at 12:30 pm. Do keep in mind that this is just Senate Transportation, not the House, but it will give us a good idea as to whether these promises will be kept. Tomorrow I’ll look at what’s in the budget, and we’ll figure out what’s next. See you then.

East Link in 2024?

Sound Transit
Sound Transit

The most disappointing thing about the PSRC stimulus list is the failure to include any funds for the completion of the I-90 two-way HOV project.  Under current state budget plans, the last tranche of funding ($24m) is programmed for the 2017-2019 biennium.  Since it will take approximately 5 years from the completion of this to opening day of the Seattle-Bellevue segment, this could potentially delay its opening from 2020 to 2024.

The project consists of three stages:

Stage 1 extended the westbound HOV lane from Bellevue to mid-Mercer Island and was completed last October.

Stage 2 would upgrade the same stretch in the eastbound direction, and it’s here that the state’s contribution of $24m is required.

Stage 3 is to complete the HOV lane into Seattle in both directions, and was fully funded by Proposition 1 last year.

Of the $188m total cost for all three stages, the state and ST agreed that the split would be $51m and $138m, respectively. Until 2007, the last chunk of state funding was scheduled for 2009 (pdf, page 20), so that Stage 2 could be complete by 2012.  In early 2007, however, ESHB 1094, implemented a “LEAP” plan that pushed back the $24m (pdf, page 15) to beyond 2017.

ESHB 1094 was sponsored in the House by Rep. Judy Clibborn* (D-Mercer Island), Rep. Fred Jarrett (D-Mercer Island), and Rep. Al O’Brien (D-Bothell).  O’Brien was probably interested in an interchange in Bothell, but it’s clear what the big impact in Clibborn and Jarrett’s district was.

Rep. Jarrett, incidentally, is running for King County Executive this year.

It seems ridiculous to hold up a $4 billion project for want of $24 million, so one has to hope that the relevant parties will find a way.  It may be that this delay is an opening bid by the state, since there’s a pending negotiation over whether or not WSDOT will charge Sound Transit rent for the express lanes.

On the other hand, that assumes good faith on the part of both parties.  If the legislature wants to, it can certainly create enough obstacles to prevent Sound Transit from ever using the I-90 right of way.

As the Sound Transit Citizen Oversight Panel put it in their report:

Very significant schedule and budget risks continue for the I-90 Two-Way Transit Stages 2 and 3 projects. Sound Transit has funded its share of the projects as well as the entire current estimate for Stage 3, contingent on WSDOT’s commitment to work collaboratively to manage scope. But  WSDOT’s $24 million contribution to Stage 2 is currently budgeted for the 2017-2019 biennium.  Funding authorization by the state is urgently needed to be moved to the current biennium as these projects are on the critical path for East Link over the I-90 bridge and they are essential to provide needed capacity during the 520 bridge reconstruction. Also, we want to highlight that WSDOT and Sound Transit must work earnestly and cooperatively over the next year to resolve the terms of the agreement for the conversion of the I-90 center roadway for use by East Link to avoid further significant risks to the I-90 Stage 2 and 3 projects and East Link light rail.

*UPDATE: A source in Olympia points out to me via email that as Transportation Chair, it’s customary for Rep. Clibborn to sponsor the transportation budget.  That isn’t to say that she was unaware, opposed, or somehow not responsible for the fate of a project in her district.

Editorial: Metro’s Funding Gap is a Doomsday Scenario

I would say that Martin described yesterday is not a full and comfortable solution to the funding gap that could force Metro to cut 20% of its bus service. Given the constraints of the situation, Martin’s ideas are strong and well-rounded — but those constraints must be changed by Olympia.

In addition to steep fare hikes (up to $1.25 over the last few years) and a stronger reliance inconvenient transfers, much of Metro’s less popular service would to be severely curtailed. And though these routes aren’t popular, people do depend on them. Additional savings would have to be found by cutting night and weekend service across the region. This would necessarily include even busier routes that operate in Seattle. And finally, we’d see cuts even in good, solid routes that perform well. We would all be affected, even with the smart mitigation that Martin proposes.

So yesterday’s post isn’t this blog outlining a rosy scenario for making the appropriate cuts. We are saying that with a 20% reduction of service, you run out of “appropriate” cuts very quickly and begin to harm the core service that Metro provides. We are saying that cuts would be dramatic and a disaster for the progress that this region has made over the last decade.

And the combination of the above options is not a solution to Metro’s funding gap, it’s a doomsday scenario that will turn many back toward automobile dependence and leave many unable to get to work. That isn’t just bad for congestion. It’s bad for our economy, ruinous for our environment, and a setback for our walkable, livable urban landscape.

This doomsday scenario is something Metro may be forced to do. But it shouldn’t have to.

Legislators in Olympia need to give Metro taxing authority to solve this problem, and local politicians need to use the appropriate tools to put the pressure on. From Rep. Eddy to County Councilmen Constantine and Phillips to Mayor Nickels: You have a responsibility to ensure that Metro doesn’t have to make these drastic cuts. Our region, our county, and our cities depend on you.

So news like this is not encouraging:

King County lobbyist Chuck Williams said one proposal for financing more buses, a 1 percent motor-vehicle excise tax, has gotten the cold shoulder so far from legislative leaders, who told him the idea “is dead on arrival.”

Another measure that would have expanded annual vehicle-license fees also failed to get enough support, as did a bill that would have allowed use of property taxes to help support buses. Another bill, SB5433, is still alive and would allow the county to use up to 0.3 percent sales tax for bus service. It passed the Senate and will be heard by the House Finance Committee Friday. “That’s our last shot,” Williams said.

WSDOT Request for Cascades Corridor

Cascades @ Carkeek Park by Brian Bundridge

The rail office in Olympia just release the final list to be submitted to USDOT for funding.  It’s pretty impressive, as well as aggressive. The total is $692.22 Million.

WSDOT Amtrak Cascades Requests
Location Project Funding Request
Vancouver Yard Bypass and W 39th St bridge $45.1 million
Tacoma Pt Defiance Bypass $60.0 million
Stanwood Stanwood Station $600,000
Everett Curve Realignments and Storage tracks $2.12 million
Cascades Four New train Sets $108 million
Cascades Capitalized Maintenance $97.4 million
Kelso to Martin’s Bluff Rail project (In three phases) $222.0 million
Seattle King St Station Track And Signal Upgrades $120 million
Blaine Swift Customs Facility Siding $3.8 million
Cascades Advanced Signal System/Positive Train Control $30.2 million
Centralia New Crossover near China Creek $3.0 million
Total $692.22 Million

H/T to Mike Skehan for the great news!

Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies

At capacity
Metro Buses Queued in the Tunnel, Photo by Oran

One of the topics current King County Council Member Larry Phillips discussed in the Q&A that we had with him last week at our meet-up was the possibility of finding future funding sources for King County’s Metro. Metro, like many other state and local agencies, faces a massive budget crisis and may be forced to cut service in order to make up the future revenue deficit. Metro is without any way to raise new money: Metro, along with Snohomish’s Community Transit has currently reached its state-allowed limit on its taxing authority: nine-tenths of one percent sales tax collection. Even if the people of King County wanted to tax themselves to provide more bus service, state law wouldn’t allow them to.

At first it seems bizarre that Olympia wouldn’t allow voters to tax themselves to provide more bus service, but it makes a little sense when you think about it. Until very recently, no transit agency had reached the nine-tenths of a percent allocation, and before I-695 passed in 1999, these agencies were allowed to collect the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET). And it’s only now that any transit agency has faced a potential service cut.

Phillips mentioned two additional funding sources Metro could potentially go after if the state allowed. The first is the MVET that Ron Sims was pushing around the time the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement tunnel plan was announced. The second option would be to allow some or all of the taxing authority given to county ferry districts – a property tax of 75¢ per $1000 assessed value – to be used for transit by the voter’s approval. The MVET has been a wildly unpopular tax, and attempting to use that for transit might be a disaster, but the property tax seems reasonable.

Currently the King County Ferry District collects 5.5¢ per $1000 assessed value, worth a little more  more than $18 million a year for King County, and it looks like the Ferry District in King County couldn’t ever need the entire 75¢. There are counties where ferries are crucial transportation connections, such as Island County, where state Senate Transportation Chair Mary Margarett Haugen (D-Camano Island) lives, and they may use the whole allotment. But doesn’t it make sense for the state to allow counties to use that 75¢ taxing authority on any transportation project they need? King County may not want a lot of ferries, but the voters may decide they could use more roads, buses or rail. The ability to implement a levy to build a specific project or pass a permanent tax increase to fund transit service seems like something the voters should have the right to do. Fortunately there is a bill going through Olympia right now that would enable exactly this: letting the county use some of the ferry taxing authority for transit.

The transportation leaders in Olympia, Rep. Judy Clibborn (D-Mercer Island) and Sen Haugen among others, have made it very clear that they expect the Greater Seattle area and it’s outlying communities to fund their own transportation improvements. The state relies nearly entirely on gas tax revenue to fund roads proejcts, and with people driving less, choosing more efficient cars and taking transit more, the revenues are far short of paying for all the needs across the state. That’s one of the main reasons why they pushed RTID, the now-defunct regional roads agency, so heavily and why they are fighting for “governance reform”, also known as stealing transit money to pay for roads. If Olympia expects Seattle and its neighbors to solve their own transportation problems, it needs to stop trying to push their preferred plans down onto us. I would have hoped in light of Prop. 1 first failing by a large margin with roads and transit and then passing by an even larger margin with just transit, Olympia would realize the voters here don’t agree with their vision of what our region’s transportation system should look like. Instead, they ought to provide tools to the local governments here, and allow the voters to approve the transportation plans that they want in their own communities. The 75¢ per $1000 property tax set aside for ferries seems like great tool for this purpose.

Density Around Light Rail Stations (Again)

The intersection of MLK and Rainier Avenue, Seattle
Rainier and MLK, photo by rutlo

The state TOD bill is still making its way through Olympia, and I’ve been thinking a lot about development around Central Link stations. The one that always springs to mind is Mount Baker station, at the intersection of Rainier and MLK. Clair Enlow, a who writes a regular “design perspectives” column in the DJC, has written a great piece on HB 1490, and has a terrific description of the area around the station:

The intersection of McClellan Street and Rainier Avenue is straight out of the late auto age, where cars take precedence over pedestrians.
There’s a gas station, an auto supply store with parking, a big apron of parking for a drugstore-grocery and the back wall of a big-box hardware store. At a bus stop nearby, passengers wait for a Metro bus to fight its way through the heavy traffic on Rainier.

But the future is rising just beyond the auto supply and tire stores. The glass and steel vision that is Mount Baker Station now stands below the arc of the light rail platform, which swings around from Martin Luther King Jr. Way South and disappears into the Beacon Hill Tunnel.

More Enlow and my thoughts below the fold.
Continue reading “Density Around Light Rail Stations (Again)”