In an article in the Seattle Times, reporter Will Mari quotes various contenders for the 41st district seats.

Read their views (links to their websites are provided) on Sound Transit’s Prop 1 (ST2) tax proposal for 2008, and other ideas on transportation improvements that would provide congestion relief for the eastside, such as bus rapid transit (BRT), and the future use of the BNSF rail corridor.

Here’s a few excerpts from the Times article:

“(Steve) Litzow, 46, a Mercer Island city councilman, faces Democrat Marcie Maxwell, 53, in a tight race. The House seat became open when Democratic Rep. Fred Jarrett decided to run for state Senate.”

“The big issue on people’s minds is the economy, despite the area’s comparative wealth, and voters will not be marching in lock-step, (Steve) Litzow argues.

“Mercer Island residents depend on I-90, and most of the district’s voters live on or near I-405. As a result, transportation joins education as the most important issues on voters’ minds….”

“Litzow opposes Proposition 1, the proposed sales-tax increase that would extend light rail north, south and east. Instead, he wants bus-rapid transit combined with light rail running north-south along the former BNSF Railway line on the Eastside.”

Here is a link to Litzow’s proposals for transportation improvements on the Eastside (scroll down halfway):  Reduce Traffic Congestion: http://stevelitzow.com/index.php?p=30

“His opponent, (Marcie) Maxwell, is a Renton Realtor and member of the Renton School Board. She’s more on the fence regarding Prop. 1, but is concerned about the emphasis on light rail.

“On the Eastside, we need to have the convenience and the routes” to make mass transit more of an option for commuters, she said.”

Maxwell’s statement would seem to support the flexibility of bus rapid transit corridors.

Here is a link to her position on transportation:

Reducing Traffic Congestion:  http://www.marciemaxwell.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=27

Fred Jarrett (D) is running for State Senate.

Here is a link to his website: http://vote4fred.org/default.aspx

From the Times:

“State Senate switcheroo”

“In the Senate race, Fred Jarrett is running as a Democrat for the first time.”

“Jarrett is in favor of Prop. 1. While not perfect, “it doesn’t matter to me whether the transit has rubber wheels or tracks,” he said.”

His opponent for State Senate is Bob Baker.Here is a link to his views on transportation:

“Are your transportation tax dollars getting you to work faster OR are they focused instead on government efforts at social engineering? “ http://www.voteforbaker.com/issues.shtml

From the Times article on Bob Baker:

“The 21-year Navy veteran, “Top Gun” graduate and Alaska Airlines pilot spent a career on the F-14 Tomcat as a test pilot. He also worked at the Pentagon, a job that included testifying before congressional committees and convincing admirals and generals to fund appropriation projects.

Like Jarrett, he said he shares a disdain for waste, and backs State Auditor Brian Sonntag’s use of performance audits to look for savings in state agencies….”

“An opponent of Prop. 1, (Bob) Baker favors bus-rapid transit instead of an east-west rail line.

“By Sound Transit’s own analysis, it won’t relieve traffic congestion,” he said.

As far as his district in concerned, he said it’s “not so much that it’s moved Democratic, but we have a lot of independents a, as people weigh their options.”

41st District is realigning Seattle Times, United States - 4 hours ago "By Sound Transit's own analysis, it won't relieve traffic congestion," he said. As far as his district in concerned, he said it's "not so much that it's ...

That's what John Niles, a transportation consultant, tells me in the e-mail below. Niles declares that he is a volunteer advisor to the campaign that is opposing Proposition 1, the $17.9 billion ballot measure for Sound Transit. I offer up Niles' observations and a couple of attachments for your perusal because I don't have time to go investigate how much Portland, Denver and all those other cities spend on their light rail vs. buses. Here are a couple pdf's that Niles sent. One is a spreadsheet, the other is the Washington Policy Center's take ...

Here are a few highlights from some compelling arguments put forth by Eastside Rail Now at : http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/proposition_1_redo.html

1.   It would do little to reduce traffic congestion…”In fact, the plan could even increase congestion in some areas, such as the I-90 corridor.”

3.   Poor choices were made on selecting the rail routes.…”The most urgent need for rail transit on the Eastside by far is in the I-405 corridor (which would also be vastly cheaper than the I-90 corridor).”

4. It would downgrade some existing bus service. For example, several bus routes between Seattle and the Eastside would likely be eliminated or cut back in attempt to induce their riders to switch to the light rail line.

8.   Serious technical problems remain regarding use of the I-90 floating bridge. “Rail transit has never before been attempted on a floating bridge…”

9.   It would have an adverse effect on freight mobility. Constructing a rail line on the I-90 floating bridge would reduce the freight capacity of the region’s most important east-west road freight corridor.

14.   It is enormously expensive, despite only marginal benefits.  …”Furthermore, these are only the direct monetary costs — not included are a variety of other costs, including the opportunity costs, that is, the loss to the region from not using the same funds for more effective projects, such as lower cost rail lines with better routes.”

And here’s the kicker:

16.   It would preclude the region from taking on more worthy projects for decades. The region would become legally locked into this massive and unprecedented tax increase and its poorly planned projects for many years. Tax capacity would be exhausted for decades, and all flexibility to reduce taxes or to replace the Proposition 1 projects with more effective projects, including those that might become necessary due to changing circumstances, would be lost. 

It’s the Opportunity Cost, folks… see the link here

In an article in The Ballard Tribune regarding Reuven Carlyle’s candidacy for the 36th District state House seat, The Tribune reports:

“Another issue Carlyle said he wants to look at is the lack of coordination between city and state agencies, exemplified in the case of transportation.

The candidate said he requested master plans from Sound Transit, Metro and the Seattle Department of Transportation but noted they were all completely different and did not mesh together.

It is going to be increasingly important in the next years for the city and state to figure out how to link separate transportation components like bike paths, HOV lanes and light rail, he said.”

Interesting that the same subject (lack of coordination) was discussed at the Neighbors for Responsible Transportation Forum on October 4th.  Speaker Ted Lane brought up a lack of coordination in regional planning:

“The interface between north-south trips and east-west trips is very poor“, as well as the interface at the planned University station. They have “designed a system where there’s no compatibility between them“.

Lane went on to say that “buses work well in areas that are growing, where rail seems to work best in areas that are stable”, and far more dense (a higher # of persons per square mile).

Lane further commented that Sound Transit 2 (Prop 1) was “poorly thought out” and “would lock us in” to a course of action.

The Washington State Department of Transportation will share the latest plans for the SR 520 bridge replacement with the public at an open house next week in Bellevue.

Is it just me, or does it seem just a little bit weird that the local press continues to refer to the planned 520 project as a “$4.4 billion bridge?”

While the the more savvy writers have recognized that in 2007 $400 million had been cut from the price tag due to “Design Change & Early Construction of Pontoons,” no one seems to be pondering what the Economist calls “staggering price increases for commodities” .

Shouldn’t reporters be asking questions about a cost estimate that hasn’t changed since October 2006? Didn’t Proposition 1 unexpectedly fail? Didn’t that impose a delay (which raises costs?)

Didn’t the cost of steel/rebar just spike?

Now I understand that in 2006, the DOT was estimating future costs, and they assumed a modicum of inflation and material cost increases in the estimate for a future 520, but c’mon — you can’t tell me that they assumed “staggering” price increases like these.

If the number-crunchers (or should I say the Excel “goal seek” mechanics) at the DOT knew that oil prices were going to double to 116 dollars a barrel and cause asphalt prices to soar, they could have funded a new bridge entirely by creating a hedge fund. The returns would have been phenomenal.

Other states seem to be recognizing that prices have surged and have re-evaluated the road projects in the pipeline.

Eager to see if anyone but me has asked this question. Moderately rigorous searches of the blogosphere and major news sources have not revealed anyone yet…

Rossi's road plan and what's missing Seattle Times, United States - 55 minutes ago He relies on tolls less than Gregoire but only because he reaches into a currently untappable fund, Sound Transit's pot of gold. For Rossi to accomplish his ...

In an article in the Seattle Times, reporter Chris McGann quotes Dino Rossi on congestion relief:

“Our system is broken, clearly,” Rossi said. “Congestion relief is nowhere on the radar. … Christine Gregoire started talking about congestion relief, but unfortunately, she’s also said that she wants to force 50 percent of us out of our cars by 2050. Everybody thinks ‘Well, you’re not talking about me because I have important things to do.’ Well no, she’s actually talking about you.

“We’re talking about two different visions,” Rossi said. “One of trying to force people out of their car or of freedom for you to choose how you’d like to move about the region.”

In an article by Larry Lange of the Seattle Post-Intellingencer, Rossi’s ideas on providing congestion relief on 405 & 520 are outlined:

“Besides resurrecting proposals for a Seattle tunnel and an eight-lane Evergreen Point Bridge, GOP gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi’s transportation plan contains another controversial idea: getting Sound Transit to build more car pool lanes with cash it might otherwise spend extending light rail to the Eastside.

This element, part of the plan Rossi unveiled this week, estimates that Sound Transit will collect enough unplanned tax revenue in the next 30 years in its Eastside district to produce $690 million for HOV projects on Interstate 405 and state Route 520.

Sound Transit’s extra cash would “be used for what it was intended — to finance transit-related infrastructure on the Eastside,” Rossi’s plan says. In an interview Friday, Rossi said Sound Transit has “many buses, so we should have a place for them.”

If BRT (bus rapid transit) lines on the eastside had dedicated lanes on 405 & 520 (funded by Rossi’s plan) that could then branch off to numerous routes north, south, east and west (not stuck on one light rail corridor), wouldn’t that serve eastside communities’ needs to go to work, home, school, errands, etc., better than a fixed guideway?

Another controversial part of GOP gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's transportation plan: getting Sound Transit to build more car pool lanes with cash it might otherwise spend extending light rail to the Eastside.