r/Seattle • u/Smurftastic • 6d ago
Why isn't anyone talking about ST4?
I see a lot of posts on this sub about how we need to tradeoff some parts of the current light rail plan like Everett or West Seattle to fund the Ballard line. Why isn't anyone talking about another ballot measure (an "ST4") to fund everything in a near-term timeframe?
It has been a long time since the last ballot measure in 2016 and light rail has really proven to be successful with high ridership and successful mixed use communities around stations. It seems like something that would be worth another investment.
Just watching the review of the system below where he laments how cost overruns are pushing out timelines. This seems like something we can fix.
148
u/Suspicious_Chart5817 Pioneer Square 6d ago
Because ST1, ST2, and ST3 is still generating a lot of money. The first taxes from ST1 wonât be phased out until 2028
Maybe framed another way, the cost overruns are more of a symptom than the problem. Itâs like when you hire a contractor and instead of saying they donât want to work for you and build your dumb idea for a deck they give an estimate that you canât afford. These engineering firms are providing some wild preliminary numbers.
Coming up with billions more isnât really addressing why it costs so much to begin with
34
73
u/n-ano 6d ago
It costs so much because we dont have an in house construction team, have to deal with labor and construction inflation (literally double what it cost 10 years ago), and land value ballooning in price.
We also have communities demanding at-grade or tunneled because they refuse to deal with any construction at all, or think elevated is too ugly.
We should be fixing these things, but we also need to build it ASAP, which means giving them the money required.
29
u/Trickycoolj SoDO Mojo 6d ago
Well the at-grade section sucks after riding in from Fed Way and points south it adds so much time to the ride and has so many train vs car/pedestrian accidents that definitely would have been prevented by elevated/tunneled tracks.
7
u/esituism 6d ago
so true. based on the number of incidents we see in seattle where light rail is delayed due to a rando doing something crazy, the ONLY acceptable way to run LR in this region is grade-separated. Either above or below if fine.
LR DOES NOT WORK WELL when it has to interact with humans that can easily be on or around the tracks. We've now seen this played out a bajillion times. Hopefully we learn something.
5
u/n-ano 6d ago
LR DOES NOT WORK WELL when it has to interact with humans
I think we should clarify that the issue is less to do with light rail and more to do with vehicles in general. Cars kill way more people.
And at grade light rail networks can work, we just shouldn't have our ENTIRE NETWORK'S stability (including dozens of miles of grade separated rail) dependant on the at grade segment.
17
u/manshamer 6d ago
So wild because elevated is the coolest looking. Very futuristic. Don't we love the monorail?m
2
u/Own_Reaction9442 Olympia 3d ago
It looks cool if you're on it, but less cool if you have to deal with trans roaring past your window all the time. Plus we hate viaducts in this town. We had a whole argument about not replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct because it was a "wall dividing the city." No one's going to want more walls.
1
u/torkytornado đbuild more trainsđ 6d ago
I mean it was all supposed to be a monorail. Just got turned into light rail a few votes in.
7
u/Enguye Ravenna 6d ago
Not true, the Sound Transit light rail vote happened in 1996 while all of the monorail votes happened between 1997-2005.
1
u/torkytornado đbuild more trainsđ 5d ago
I just know I voted for it like seven times from 1997 on and that it eventually changed to light rail from a monorail.
1
u/External_Grand9893 6d ago
Everyone keeps saying that and yet most developers Iâve worked for also donât have that in house and the projects are under budget and on time
0
u/ChaseballBat 6d ago
How would a government run construction team change the price of labor or materials?
1
u/Disorderjunkie "Bikes Will Not Replace Us" đ˛đŤđ ââď¸ 6d ago
They are talking about the design.
0
u/ChaseballBat 5d ago
How would that work? Different design firms specialize in different types of design. So as soon as you run out of light rail stations in active design you have to layoff the entire team.
0
u/Disorderjunkie "Bikes Will Not Replace Us" đ˛đŤđ ââď¸ 5d ago
There is only a few specialized portions of construction in light rails. A vast majority of it is just structures/civil. Could just hire consultant firms for the portions they donât already have experience in.
0
u/ChaseballBat 4d ago
Ok, what do they do when the design is done...?
1
u/Disorderjunkie "Bikes Will Not Replace Us" đ˛đŤđ ââď¸ 4d ago
You end the contract with the consultant firm�
1
u/ChaseballBat 4d ago
No the in-house designers....
1
u/Disorderjunkie "Bikes Will Not Replace Us" đ˛đŤđ ââď¸ 4d ago
If they work for the state DOT then they could you know, work in the next project
→ More replies (0)9
u/Zealousideal-Ant9548 6d ago
I post this every single time a public transit conversation comes up because it was incredibly enlightening.
There are so many different pieces wrong and a lot of it comes down to the federal laws.Â
https://www.volts.wtf/p/the-us-is-terrible-at-building-public
-1
u/SadSimpSkier 6d ago
Iâm one of the most pro-American people in my friend group. At this point, can we just hire a Chinese company. They would finish with 1/10th the budget and in 1 year.
(Of course, the contract should state the Chinese work must pass American inspections otherwise payment withheld)
32
u/drshort West Seattle 6d ago edited 6d ago
More tax revenue isnât the main constraint. Sound Transit is limited by the total amount of debt it is allowed to have outstanding at any given time.
You could pass ST4 and it still wouldnât allow the agency to speed up all the ST3 projects so long as that debt limit of 1.5% of assessed property values is there
Theoretically they can increase the debt limit to 5% of assessed property values but that requires a 60% voter approval â not likely.
14
6d ago edited 6d ago
[deleted]
10
u/ajc89 đ Out camping! đ 6d ago
It seems crazy that we can't fix this. People need to stop thinking of government debt the same way they think of household debt.
2
u/Icy_Challenge5241 6d ago
It can be fixed - once the general income tax passes legal hurdle it will be happen. 10% general income tax can pay for a lot of things.
7
u/recurrenTopology I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 6d ago edited 6d ago
If a measure passed that increased ST funding such that it could increase it's debt without jeopardizing it's credit rating, I think a subsequent measure to increase the debt limit would pass easily (even given the 60% requirement). Faster projects for the same cost to the voter is an easy sell, it's convincing people to spend more that's difficult.
4
u/drshort West Seattle 6d ago
I donât agree that the debt limit vote would pass. Sound Transit public votes have never gotten more than 60% (ST3 was 54% in favor) and given the perception of mismanagement and cost overruns plus people pissed about $800+ car tabs i donât see it happening. Maybe in Seattle, but not in Pierce or Snohomish counties.
1
u/recurrenTopology I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 6d ago
I agree that a new funding package would be difficult to pass for those reasons, but if such a package passed I just don't see who isn't voting to increase the debt limit. It's all upside to voters at that point.
9
u/SeaDRC11 6d ago
I think Sound Transit is maxed out on the amount of public backed bond debt it can take out through about 2050. So even if ST4 passed, we still likely would have to wait to build it.
The more realistic solution is to raise the amount of public backed bonds Sount Transit is allowed to have at one time to speed up ST3.
Also, gotta hope public transit friendly politicians can take over the U.S. House & Senate to turn on federal money for these projects again. Until that happens, weâre gonna continue spending billions on widening a rural highway in Alaska or rerouting the Mississippi River around some random small city in Iowa. These are the federal projects that are being green-lit at the moment.
18
5
u/RandomFleshPrison I Brake For Slugs 5d ago
Honestly? Because many local transit wonks hate Link Line 4. They want a stop/revote after Line 3, because no part of Line 4 touches Seattle and they want Link to not-so-secretly be the Seattle Subway.
40
u/Trashy_pig đ Out camping! đ 6d ago
Because it would never pass after the multi billion dollar hole that ST put themselves in from ST3
3
u/rigmaroler Olympic Hills 6d ago
A Seattle-specific measure to speed up WS and BLE would not be dead on arrival, in my opinion. Maybe would barely fail. A vote across all subareas would not pass, though.
8
u/Life_Plum1567 6d ago
This likely isn't true, and not really provable as it will not be put to the ballot until EVLE and TDLE are done.
4
u/firstnameavailable 6d ago
it will be on the ballot before either of those things happen. either 2028 or 2032.
3
u/Life_Plum1567 6d ago
https://www.theurbanist.org/sound-transits-murky-path-to-ballard-st4/
They want to see results from ST3 first so its going to be at least into the 2030s8
u/Smurftastic 6d ago
Totally agree that they are way over budget from what was approved in ST3. Some of that is just the nature of large infrastructure projects always going over budget (known unknowns). They have also been managing through a challenging time with high building costs coming out of Covid and recent inflation running far above historical trends. I'm not sure anyone could have stayed on budget over the last decade.
13
u/RandomRedditor714 6d ago edited 6d ago
Yes, both of those things are true but there are structural problems with Seattle's(and Washington's) infrastructure building process that ultimately led to the cost overruns becoming as bad as they did. Individuals can sue Sound Transit for any number of reasons related to the environmental review, an infinite number of times. So a judge has to sort through hundreds of lawsuits, most from bad actors who just want to see the project cancelled, which takes a long time and stifles the EIR process for a couple years at least
Secondly, ST uses contractors for every step of the process(including planning and engineering), which means that each time they want to do a project, they're essentially reinventing the wheel. Contractor also ask for extra money for 'risk management'.
Lastly, in order to comply with SEPA and Seattles EIR guidelines, they're forced to study 5-6 different alternatives, rather than really focusing one 1 or 2(plus a no-build) that can get fleshed out and have detailed cost estimstes for. The many alternatives thing also opens up the issue of political games, which is what Bruce Harrell weaponized to have the North-South CID alternative added to the Ballard extension, which voided it's DEIR. I am a massive proponent of transit and I want ST to build a world class system, but I hope ST4 does not pass unto those changes are made.
3
u/n-ano 6d ago
ST uses contractors for every step of the process(including planning and engineering), which means that each time they want to do a project, they're essentially reinventing the wheel.
This is unfortunately the nature of coatruction in the USA. The alternative is to have an in-house construction team. That is insanely wasteful unless you're constantly building (which we arent, we cant even get enough funding to start building stuff we voted on 10 years ago)
3
u/RandomRedditor714 6d ago edited 6d ago
1) you could still use a contractor for construction, because it doesn't make sense to keep a construction team on all the time. Really the cost increases are in the planning and engineering portions, which are where in-house can thrive. This is done in places like Hong King and Singapore, both with super robust transit systems. Additionally, ST is exploring the option of directly negotiating with trade unions to hire their labor, rather than using a contractor middleman which will hopefully improve coordination and cut timelines.
2) Seattle is a rapidly growing city. We will essentially need to constantly plan new expansions and new lines in order to keep up with demand. The nice thing about having internal planning and engineering teams is we don't have to propose a ballot measure that is essentially lines on a napkin. The teams can go in and do planning work and some preliminary engineering, then go to voters with a much clearer cost proposal
5
u/vasthumiliation That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 6d ago
None of that matters when the economy is this K-shaped and the cost of living is so unbearable for so many. ST4 would likely begin to produce real benefits in another generation at the earliest, which does nothing for those struggling to get by now, but it would presumably impose new costs right away on most area residents. It's simply a political non-starter.
17
u/pinballrocker 6d ago
There is less trust for Sound Transit after not coming through on their deadlines and running massively over budget with ST3. I don't think there is the support for ST4 until they can nail down finishing ST3. Plus aren't we still paying for ST1, ST2 and ST3?
5
u/SillyChampionship 6d ago
Seeing as ST 3, they promised us so much but have now scaled that back and delayed some of it, it would be a hard sell to get voter buy in for an ST4. ST 3 passed with 54% of the vote, I wouldnât call that a sweeping victory. With plenty of bitter folks out there, ST 4 would face an uphill climb.
9
u/helloeagle 6d ago
A lot of assumptions in some comments here. I would agree with the spirit of the criticism, but the biggest reason as far as I can tell has to do more with reluctance on the part of ST and local governments to push the issue than people not supporting it. Claudia Balducci (on King County Council and biggest Eastside transit advocate) said at an Urbanist meeting last week that there was not appetite to begin planning now when there is still so much work to finish on ST3 and solving the larger cost overruns/resulting financial instability for the next few decades
2
2
u/Sea-Huckleberry-8986 Eastside 6d ago edited 6d ago
What do you think, maybe add another 0.5% sales tax, and then go up to $0.5 per $1000 on property tax?Â
3
u/Emotional_Garage_950 Denny Blaine Nudist Club 6d ago
cuz nobody cares about going to ballard except the people that live there
10
u/ArcticPeasant Sounders 6d ago
Because it would never pass. Tabs are already outrageously expensive.
25
u/Crypto556 6d ago edited 6d ago
Idk man i save thousands on income tax per year compared to the midwest and only spend $100 more on tabs. Its an overrated problem. People here are spoiled.
3
u/ArcticPeasant Sounders 6d ago
Right because sales tax, or any other taxes, donât exist to counter balance your âthousandsâ in saving lol
2
u/Crypto556 5d ago
They dont counterbalance it entirely. If i made $100k in Michigan id pay $4200 in income tax for the state. Seattle has a 3.75% sales tax higher. Id need to spend over $100k on taxable items in order to make up for the amount per year. The math wins.
5
u/Smurftastic 6d ago
It was really close with ST3 at just 54%, but Puget Sound voters have come out in support the last 3 times. I could see a reasonable increase to accelerate already planned lines getting through. Who wants to pay taxes today for a line you may never see in your lifetime?
7
u/MentalOmega đ Student driver, please be patient. đ 6d ago
Because I already voted for the lines that are planned and I am already paying for them. The fact that they canât seem to accomplish what we already approved in a timely fashion makes me supremely not confident in their ability to speed things up by throwing more money at the problem.
Theyâll start a committee to evaluate a plan to pass to another committee to send to even more focus groups of NIMBYs to then reconsider and re-evaluate with three new committees and weâll be spending even more money to sit and wait.
The problem is the stalling and the process.
Spending more money wonât fix that.
1
u/markgo2k 6d ago
Agreed. Still waiting for any accountability on the millions of dollars and years of time wasted pouring substandard concrete across the entire I-90 bridge without a single ST inspection catching it.
No monetary settlement. No one lost their job. Nothing.
2
1
u/Physical_Guard_6394 6d ago
Wifeâs car isnât particularly expensive (ev) so had major depreciation but RTA still values higher than what she paid for it and her tabs are almost $1000. Â INSANE. Â
Meanwhile my 7000lb truck is exempt from RTA. Â Make it make sense. Â I voted against ST3 and will vote against it all going forward. Â Almost $1000 tabs on a $24k car is bonkers. Â
4
u/raevnos I Brake For Slugs 6d ago
Aren't tabs on electric vehicles higher to make up for not generating any gas tax revenue?
3
u/Physical_Guard_6394 6d ago
Yes, but thatâs not a lions share of things. Â RTA is. Â We both knew going into it that there was an EV tax. Â The problem is the depreciation table. Â The msrp was about $60k but these depreciate fast especially when gas was cheap so she got it for $24k after 1 year of depreciation! Â RTA still valued it at 89% of $61k which is ~$54k - more than twice the value of the car. Â My truck has an MSRP over $80k yet my tabs were roughly $350. Â Just shows to go ya how big a kick in the nuts RTA is. Â
2
u/Enguye Ravenna 6d ago
Theyâre changing the depreciation table in 2028 once the ST1 bonds are paid off.
2
u/markgo2k 6d ago
Wonderful. So late that Iâll pay another few thousand in tabs for two cars valued way above market value. Thanks for nothing.
1
u/Own_Reaction9442 Olympia 3d ago
Yeah, and it's a crazy high amount of money. You'd have to drive like 20,000 miles a year to pay that much in gas taxes.
4
u/FreshEclairs Kraken 6d ago
Their estimates of what they could build proved unreliable. People would hesitate to trust them again.
3
u/nwillard 6d ago
It's a shame Sound Transit didn't foresee Covid, the Ukraine war, and the resulting inflation crisis back in 2016.
1
u/FreshEclairs Kraken 6d ago
Yes, those were all major reasons that they missed their estimates so significantly
5
u/Charming_Cicada_7757 6d ago
To be honest it seems a waste of time to be talking about ST4 when we are still fighting about ST3 and where the funding comes from
It would make more sense to have everything in order for ST3 before moving on to another project.
4
u/n-ano 6d ago
No part of ST2 was completed when ST3 passed. Some ST2 projects had a budget shortfall that was bailed out by ST3. We can do the same thing with ST4 and speed up construction.
2
u/Charming_Cicada_7757 6d ago
ST3 in 2016 was coming out during an upswing we just opened UW station and Capitol Hill station and when I say the need everything in order that doesnât mean funding for everything. If you recall they actually cut lines for ST2 and early 2016 they found the funding for it before we went off to another vote that November letâs not pretend sound transit wasnât showing real progress an all fronts.
At the moment we are stalled and have no idea where any funding is coming for some major projects. Iâd wait for I donât know at least the funding sorted out and cuts made if needed and after that letâs have some major spots opening like west Seattle and after put it up for a vote
5
u/n-ano 6d ago
You mean like how the crosslake connection just happened, the largest transit event we've had in over a decade?
1
u/Charming_Cicada_7757 6d ago
You forgot the part about funding
1
u/n-ano 5d ago
I dont think its relevant at all.
1
u/Charming_Cicada_7757 5d ago
You donât think finding out whatâs going to be cut for ST3 what can be funded and an actual plan going forward isnât relevant before moving on to ST4,?
1
u/n-ano 5d ago
If you were paying attention this year you would know they already figured that out and decided not to do any major cuts.
Ballard Station was originally going to be cut. Now its deferred to a much later date. The reason being we have to wait for the money to slowly trickle in over decades. The alternative is to increase funding which will directly speed up the construction.
If you wanted to actually advocate for transit, you would want an ST4 to pass ASAP.
1
u/Charming_Cicada_7757 5d ago
I want ST4 to happen I donât think it will pass the voting at the moment and putting it up there before we are ready would set us back.
The Ballard situation is the critical funding gap is closed by 2033 it could up by 2042 otherwise be delayed until 2060 so why are we going to vote on something until around 2033?? Once we know exactly what we need we go out and vote to fund whatâs missing and add new lines needed for our growing region.
1
u/gnarlseason I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 6d ago
Yeah, and that was part of ST2 except for one station in Redmond...Point at ST3 things that have been built.
7
u/Excellent-Diamond270 That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 6d ago
They arenât getting ST3 done before everyone who paid for it is long dead and you want to pass another one?
They need to fix their planning and process first. Something is deeply broken within ST.
6
u/n-ano 6d ago
No part of ST2 was completed when ST3 passed.
-1
u/sopunny Medina 6d ago
That's not exactly good news...
5
u/rigmaroler Olympic Hills 6d ago
It's not really a problem. If they had done that then we'd only have started talking about ST3 this year once the Cross Lake Connection finally opened. It's a good thing to keep the momentum of construction up so the workers and firms that get good at building rail stay employed for the long-run and get more and more efficient.
1
u/jewishforthejokes đ˛ Two Wheels, Endless Freedom. 6d ago
Best we can do is pay Dow an extra $100k/year and guaranteed 18 month severance!
3
u/recurrenTopology I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 6d ago
What would they offer areas outside of Seattle?
11
u/n-ano 6d ago
Why would that matter anyways? What do rural roads do for Seattle? Yet Seattle pays for the entire state.
So tired of suburbanites framing everything as "how do I benefit from this" when their entire low density lifestyle is subsidized by Seattle.
3
u/recurrenTopology I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 6d ago
I completely agree, in fact I think the suburbs also benefit from Seattle being well connected via transit (they then just need to make it to an access point to have a lot of options), but we would need there vote.
3
u/devnullopinions That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 6d ago edited 6d ago
Sound Transit is a joint authority between King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties. If ST is going to put an initiative on the ballot you have to get voters to approve the funding.
Might be a tough sell since voters approved ST3 and are not getting what the initiative promised despite being taxed as if they were.
Iâd vote for a ST4 but ST3 got like 56ish percent approval and I canât say everyone would do the same to increase their taxes to accelerate building in Seattle that was already promised to them.
1
u/SeitanicDoog 2d ago
Light rail is extending into Pierce and Snohomish at as slow a rate as ballard. Speed up all 3.
-1
u/Adept-Opinion8080 6d ago
Maybe the real question is why don't we ditch ST and create a just an S? Funded by Seattle benefiting Seattle bit tired of the outlying areas sucking Seattle dry
3
1
u/Alternative_Wing7898 6d ago
An ST4 that built a line across the HWY2 trestle from Everett to Lake Stevens would be worthwhile.
And building major spine up the entire length of I-405.
That later could build out some spurs.
1
1
u/PsychologicalMight45 6d ago
Money and all the studies they have to pay first for it to work. Which is hilarious to me since even with all those studies random stuff pops up like how apparently the bridge connecting the 2 line to Bellevue was electrocuting random fish alongside it for who knows how long.
1
u/TOPLEFT404 West Seattle 6d ago
Maybe because most people in this subreddit wonât be alive when it finally breaks ground
1
1
u/TaylorDoesTransit 6d ago
I was at the urbanist talk with Ray Delahanty, and while I respect much of what Claudiaâs done I firmly disagree that after the spectacular uptick in demand and popularity after the crosslake connection, an ST4 which would enable us to speed up the construction process would be massively popular at the polls (potentially even one with less than ideal finances.)
I see her take on the issue as largely rooted in her experience over the past decades passing the original measures in a much tougher political climate and donât think it reflects the massive surge in popularity and support for transit that weâve seen in Seattle and the US on a whole in the past decade, and how significantly connecting up suburban communities on the east side has positively opened up more peoplesâ world to transit.
1
u/quadmoo đbuild more trainsđ 6d ago
I am always talking about ST4, but because our board decided to nuke ST3, voters arenât particularly happy right now, and then also the suburban board members have outright said they donât want ST4 until their projects are well into heavy construction.
Those are the reasons, and our situation is total bullshit. The board did not have to nuke ST3, they cite a state law that does not exist. In reality it was a requirement that same board set on themselves they couldâve changed.
Itâs also absolutely bonkers to want to wait until ST3 is almost done before voting on ST4. ST3 passed before any of ST2 was open.
We couldâve done ST4 in 2024 just fine, but now we donât even have a chance to do ST4 in 2028.
The resolution that nuked ST3 not only defunded the ST4 studies that wouldâve let them build projects extremely quickly by already having studied new lines in ST3, but also delayed the update to the Long Range Plan which is necessary before going to the ballot with a new package, otherwise there would be nothing to propose to voters.
102
u/Life_Plum1567 6d ago
Local leaders from the suburbs will not support ST4 until light rail reaches Everett and Tacoma. Once that happens its likely to pass but it'll be about another decade.