Building a Better Bellevue has posted a study titled: “Inconvenient Truths That Prove the Feasibility of B7R for East Link”, which argues that the B7 alignment for Sound Transit’s East Link light rail in Bellevue is:

• cost-effective,
• has similar or better ridership,
• would have less traffic impacts during construction,
• and would reduce some impacts to the community.

See the post at Building a Better Bellevue’s site (click here).

Starting Monday, Dec. 7, Sound Transit contractors began smoothing the surface of the light rail tracks between Seattle and Sea-Tac Airport in an effort to reduce the high-pitched noise that some neighbors say keeps them awake at night. The work will impact evening light rail service through the end of the month with trains running every [...]

ST2, as approved by the taxpayers, is supposed to extend an ST2 alignment to particular locations in a particular timeline with particular mitigation for negative impacts to properties (noise, vibration, visual blight, environmental, historical, parks, sliver takings, condemnations) accomodated for by law and policy.

$3.1 Billion is a lot to make up for- want to bet:

1. Sound Transit’s ST2  alignment doesn’t go as far as it might have or serve  as many people as ST’s original projections,

2. Sound Transit’s ST2 timeline  won’t be on time,

3. Sound Transit’s dramatically reduced budget  for ST2 will overwhelmingly cut out mitigation to communities it negatively impacts.

The question is: will Sound Transit start cutting staff to match the $3.1 Billion deficit in revenue projections, like most governmental bodies, businesses, and families have in this economy?

Here is Mike Lindblom’s comment on the Seattle Times site re: Sound Transit’s noise levels exceeding the federal standard in Tukwila- hopefully this will NOT happen with ST2.          Click here for the link.

 July 10, 2009 at 7:59 PM

 Regarding track lubrication: I got more info late today from Sound Transit about their lube order, which we first reported this morning. They say the lube is meant for spots where straight wheels meet curving rails –

 so it would not prevent noise on the straight tracks next to Mr. Shumate and his neighbors.
– Mike Lindblom, Seattle Times reporter

 

In a Seattle Times article (click here), reporter Erika Schultz says that there appears to be a large discrepancy between what Sound Transit told impacted neighbors near the Tukwila light rail line their noise readings would be, and what the readings allegedly are now:

“David and Laurie Shumate, who moved into their remodeled 1920s home two years ago, take issue with Sound Transit’s November noise readings. David Shumate bought his own sound meter and says he has measured levels above 80 decibels, 10 decibels louder Ëœ that is, 10 times louder Ëœ than Sound Transit’s measurements from 2008. A rock concert is measured at 100 decibels, and levels higher than 80 decibels over continuous periods can result in hearing loss, according to a Sound Transit report.”

The difference is allegedly 80 decibels and above currently, whereas the noise levels measured by Sound Transit in 2008 were around 72.6. If accurate, the difference is enough to damage normal hearing in humans:

The test found no impact on the neighborhood. Records show the loudest reading was 72.6 decibels, and officials predicted the noise levels would decrease once the tracks smoothed out from use.

But now, residents say, the noise is getting louder.

“It’s much, much, much, much louder than it used to be,” Haynes said. “They said it would be the sound of a whooshing as it goes by. It’s definitely more than the whoosh of the wind.”

See the KOMO news piece on the same issue (click here).

According to KOMO news (click here), Tukwila resident David Shumate was so annoyed by Sound Transit’s light rail noise that he bought a decibel reader to measure it.

“The residents on East Marginal Way South say the noise the new light rail is forcing on their neighborhood far exceeds the minimal noise they were promised during the design and building phases. They claim the noise from the testing runs is so loud that their ears hurt.

“The train is louder, a lot louder than we expected and a lot louder than Sound Transit said it would be,” said David Shumate.

“It’s a higher-pitched squeaking,” said Lynn Sires, who says the noise wakes her up.

Shumate even bought a decibel meter to measure the noise reverberating out to his house and his neighbors. The noise registered as high as 88 decibels. An average vacuum cleaner runs at about 75 to 80 decibels.”

If accurate, that decibel range is far higher than allowed, and Sound Transit will have to mitigate for it. The neighborhood apparently wants noise barriers installed along the line like those installed a mile further down.

Get going, Sound Transit. Do the right thing.

Bellevue citizens! Utilize your chance to communicate with the Bellevue City Council  regarding Sound Transit’s proposed alignments for light rail in Bellevue.

The hearing will start at 8 p.m. in the Council chambers at City Hall, 450 110th Ave. NE.

Sound Transit released a draft environmental impact statement for East Link on Dec. 12, 2008, and set a 75-day comment period. The document is a detailed study of potential routes in Bellevue.

The deadline to comment is Feb. 25.

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

See their website at: http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/proposition_1_redo.html

Here is the first 10:

1.   It would do little to reduce traffic congestion.

2.   It would provide little environmental benefit.

3.   Poor choices were made on selecting the rail routes.

4.   It would downgrade some existing bus service.

5.   It would result in wasteful construction of duplicative facilities.

6.   The start of rail operations would be too slow.

7.   It is mainly a transit system for Seattle.

8.   Serious technical problems remain regarding use of the I-90 floating bridge.

9.   It would have an adverse effect on freight mobility.

10.   So-called “bus rapid transit” may not be effective.

Read all “29 Reasons to Vote No”  at : http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/proposition_1_redo.html

The Bellevue City Council will seek comments from people about proposed changes to the city’s Comprehensive Plan and other recommendations related to developing a light rail system at a study session Monday at City Hall.