WEST SEATTLE LIGHT RAIL: Elected Leadership Group agrees to advance ‘Pigeon Ridge,’ ‘Oregon Street’ concepts to next level

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

When the Sound Transit board meets in a week, it’ll hear that the Elected Leadership Group for the West Seattle/Ballard light-rail extensions pretty much agrees with the Stakeholder Advisory Group on which alternatives should stay in the running.

That’s the upshot of the ELG’s two-hour meeting downtown this afternoon, its first one since the planning process ramped up in January. As declared at the start, its goal was to recommend which alternatives should move forward to what ST calls Level 2 of review, and for West Seattle, those remain the “Pigeon Ridge/West Seattle Tunnel” and “Oregon Street/Alaska Junction” alternatives.

ELG co-chair King County Councilmember Joe McDermott opened the meeting. ST CEO Peter Rogoff spoke next, lauding the “progress” on the project and reminding everyone that the ST board is to “meet in this room …. less than one year from now” to make a preferred-alternative recommendation.

From among the ELG members, only Mayor Jenny Durkan was not in attendance; the six City Councilmembers were – Sally Bagshaw, Lorena GonzĂ¡lez (who recused herself from discussion of the West Seattle route because it might go right by property she owns in The Junction), Bruce Harrell, Lisa Herbold, Rob Johnson, and (by phone) Mike O’Brien – along with King County Executive Dow Constantine, Seattle Port Commissioner Stephanie Bowman, and ST board chair Snohomish County Executive Dave Somers.

ST executive Cathal Ridge presented a refresher of the timelines, all the way from identifying a preferred alternative early next year for formal environmental study, to launching West Seattle light rail in 2030, Ballard light rail in 2035. And he went over the Stakeholder Advisory Group’s recommendations from last month (WSB coverage here), along with what preceded it. Here’s the slide deck for today’s meeting:

He gave a short version of the evaluation criteria and then launched into the five West Seattle “concepts” that were evaluated. He summarized neighborhood-forum feedback (as you can see on page 20 of the slide deck) including “a lot of support for tunneling” and “a lot of support for moving the Delridge station south.” (He did not explicitly mention that the neighborhood forum for West Seattle, on May 5th, was held after the Stakeholder Advisory Group had made its recommendations April 24th on what should advance and what should not. The forum summaries were added to the ST website this afternoon.)

After the brief review of the West Seattle concepts and the stakeholders’ recommendations, facilitator Diane Adams invited ELG members to comment.

Councilmember McDermott said he’d like to have more information – costs, visualizations, transit-oriented development – and is hopeful that will be provided later in the process. His priorities include a north/south orientation for the Junction station, three stations for West Seattle, seeing the Delridge station south of Andover, seeing both elevated/tunnel options, and protecting Longfellow Creek, which he says might be forced into a pipe under some scenario. He said he feels the SAG recommendations meet those.

County Executive Constantine said he also feels three stations are important. He remains “very concerned” about elevated rail in The Junction and also thinks a further-south Delridge station is “intrigu(ing).” He doesn’t see taking anything further off the table.

Councilmember Herbold said that she hopes there’s a way to get some early visualizations, and she also would like more information about walksheds. Seamless multimodal integration, especially buses, is important to her. She said mixing and matching components could be helpful – perhaps, for example, appending the more-south Delridge station idea to the representative alignment. And overall, she said she’s “largely in alignment” with the SAG recommendations, adding she’d like a little more time to find out about reducing the impacts of possible park-property use, wondering if there’s a way to mitigate federal concern over that.

Commissioner Bowman said she had some concerns to raise as the sole port rep – especially impacts to Terminal 5 and Terminal 18 on Harbor Island. “It’s not just critical- the assets of the Port of Seattle are not city or regional assets – they are state assets.” She says that they’re in “negotiations with some of our international shipping lines” regarding T-5 (which needs a new tenant before modernization work). She’s OK with ST’s original “representative alignment” and thinks perhaps it might be combined with the “golf course option.” In summary: The alignment needs to go south of Spokane Street, she said, period.

ST board chair Somers noted that decisions made for one part of the system can affect other parts, and that needs to be kept in mind, so he will be “arguing for some control” as things go along. Otherwise, he had no specific WS comments.

Before the discussion moved on from West Seattle, Herbold added words of thanks for the way ST has conducted the community-engagement process so far. Bowman invited her fellow electeds to come to the Port and see how it works.

Later in the meeting, the key WS discussion points were summarized on one made-on-the-fly slide as:

With that – they moved on to the SODO segment. The SAG recommendations were moved forward for that segment, too (see them on page 29 of the slide deck).

Then for the downtown segment, the First Hill issue came up, the subject of most of the public comment toward the meeting’s start, with people . Councilmember Bagshaw wondered if ST’s assessment that First Hill was inconsistent with what voters approved really meant it couldn’t be considered. ST’s Ridge allowed that the ELG does have the discretion to recommend something to the ST Board. CEO Rogoff said that they probably should have a lawyer comment on that. And so counsel came forward, saying that there is a “legal requirement to construct it as identified to the voters.” He said the question is whether it was identified in the plan, and whether cost and ridership was identified so that it would have been clear to the voters that it was part of the plan.

So, was it? asked Councilmember GonzĂ¡lez. Bottom line, no, said Ridge – it serves a different urban village, for example. Councilmember Johnson then wondered if that was really the casualty of “an unfortunate decision” made decades ago. “At this point I feel the answers from the technical team support taking First Hill off the table but I’m open to discussion.” McDermott said he isn’t ready “to lose this opportunity.” Somers said basically, he is. Bagshaw said she has mixed feelings. Councilmember GonzĂ¡lez too. Bowman says she’s with McDermott and would like more information. Rogoff says moving things to Level 2 takes a lot of staff time and asks group members “to be rigorous in the down-selecting process.” Ultimately, First Hill was taken off the list, but there will be a note to address the ridership concerns somehow, somewhere.

On to Interbay/Ballard: Bagshaw says that she has heard people strongly support a tunnel. Johnson notes that this group carried forward more options than any other group. Somers says he has serious doubts about funding for a tunnel. Ultimately, they removed one off the SAG-advanced list- “west of BNSF/20th/tunnel” – and moved the others on to Level 2.

WHAT’S NEXT FOR ST: Today’s results will be presented to the ST board one week from today (1:30 pm May 24th). The Stakeholder Advisory Group meets again on May 30th; the Elected Leadership Group is expected to reconvene in July.

WHAT’S NEXT IN THE COMMUNITY: The Pigeon Point Neighborhood Council has a light-rail discussion with ST reps scheduled for its June 11th meeting (7 pm at Pathfinder K-8).

SIDE NOTE: The public comment period included perennially profane gadfly Alex Tsimerman (currently banned from Seattle Council meetings), who didn’t stop at the one-minute limit and subsequently walked out with King County Sheriff’s Deputies who had wasted no time in walking up to the public-comment podium as he railed on. (He returned shortly afterward.) Other commenters included a Delridge resident who identified himself as Max and spoke in support of retaining the draft plan for three stations in West Seattle, and against the route that would go through the West Seattle Golf Course and Delridge Community Center Park. “I encourage everyone to go there …it’s the beating heart and soul of the Delridge community.” He said he felt parks would be ever-more important as Delridge continues to redevelop and densify. ]]

30 Replies to "WEST SEATTLE LIGHT RAIL: Elected Leadership Group agrees to advance 'Pigeon Ridge,' 'Oregon Street' concepts to next level"

  • dsa May 17, 2018 (10:07 pm)

    The Oregon alignment is nearly the same as the original ugly cheapskate slap it down be done with it one they dumped on us in the first place. 

    • AvalonTom May 18, 2018 (7:40 am)

      I agree.  It’s like a bull in the china shop, taking out businesses, the senior center, parking lot behind key bank  and creating the maximum traffic, visual, and noise disturbance to the residential neighborhoods. If one was to design the worse case scenario, this would be a very good stab at it. Any resemblance of what west seattle is along genesee, avalon, faulteroy, oregon, and parts of california is gone. I really hope the leadership at ST, the City and Community push for the Pigeon Ridge option. Its one of the most elegant options and is opposite on every level to the Oregon option.  Here are the 3D images I created of the Oregon Option and here is the Pigeon Ridge.

      • RBG May 22, 2018 (2:21 pm)

        I think the intent behind keeping the Oregon option alive was mostly as a tunnel option, not elevated. In a tunnel with one station entrance at the Key Bank lot and the other at the Chase drive thru on Edmonds it could be the best option.  

  • Mike Gilmore May 18, 2018 (12:18 am)

    I’m really glad to see Pigeon Ridge is moving forward. I think it’s the boldest but most beneficial. Oregon Street is the most uninspired. 

    • WS Guy May 18, 2018 (2:21 pm)

      Oregon St option is a heinous travesty of urban planning. 

  • Nick May 18, 2018 (2:50 am)

    I like the Pigeon Ridge proposal mainly for the fact that it turns into a tunnel near the Junction. I don’t really wanna see a monstrosity light rail station plopped down right on the surface of the neighborhood. I think the underground option there is the way to go.

  • Mark May 18, 2018 (8:17 am)

    I really hope all those promoting the the Pigeon Ridge proposal are going to be supportive of the future density required to sustain these types of investments.  No more free parking, no more parking lots period, upzoned California Ave (yes, buildings like Husky Deli getting demolished in favor of 85′ tall apartments).  Think Capital Hill’s union street for an example.  I am all in favor of this, but I fear some of our Neighbors want a world class transit system, with status quo density. 

    • CMT May 18, 2018 (9:11 am)

      Are you suggesting that would not be an issue under every proposal? It will, and I agree there should be more disclosure to the community about what the location of a light rail station will actually mean in terms of how residential and commercial areas will be significantly rezoned. It just impact the properties directly in the path.

      • CMT May 18, 2018 (9:16 am)

        Supposed to say it doesn’t just impact properties directly in its path.

      • Mark May 18, 2018 (9:30 am)

        It will be an issue with every proposal, but the Pigeon Ridge proposal will be substantially more expensive than any other option.  With that type of investment, the area should expect to be built out to the full density potential as shown on current HALA zoning maps.  

        There are people who post on this blog asking for the Pigeon Ridge option while simultaneously complaining about loosing the free 3-hr parking lots.  Advocating for both is a fools errand and casts a poor light on West Seattleite’s understanding of the process. 

        • CMT May 18, 2018 (2:21 pm)

          Unfortunately, there has been zero coordination between the HALA/MHA zoning proposals and planning for Sound Transit, which has been a concern from the start. 

          If West Seattle residents do not have a good understanding of the process (and really, why would anybody that is just living their daily life not steeped in land use), it is because the City has not coordinated the effort and planned with the neighborhood as it is required to do under the Comprehensive Plan.

          • Jeff May 22, 2018 (2:31 pm)

            The reason why ST and City of Seattle like the base option and the Oregon St option is so they can blow up North Delridge area and buy out (steal) all the housing. Then build multi-family housing in its place.

            They intentionally snaked it through the neighborhood for an excuse to buy up property for construction staging and trailers. Then after the project, they can flip that expensive property for high end apartments. 

            If anyone thinks that they’ll build affordable HALA housing in those stolen properties in North Delridge, you’re dreaming. The contractors will pay the minor fee to have the affordable housing built elsewhere, away from here (a.k.a. White Center, where ST is providing “upgraded” bus system).

            They are using the 4(f) review as a scapegoat. The golf course isn’t truly a city park. Only rich yuppies can play there. You think they’ll let Delridge or White Center kids play in that “park”?

            This is the rich pandering to the richer.

            Stakeholders Advisory Group and the Elected Leadership Group are just as corrupt and self-serving as Sound Transit and the City of Seattle.

  • BJG May 18, 2018 (8:27 am)

    Hopefully, this means there is only one plan under consideration now, since the Oregon nightmare is no plan at all.  Just unbelievable.

  • Mark Schletty May 18, 2018 (9:06 am)

    The West Seattle  community meeting wasn’t a main part of this? Only an addendum?  No wonder so many people believe that it is futile to go to these meetings to give input. It will be ignored. My reading of the Blog’s coverage of the West Seattle meeting was that the main thing there was the most agreement on was that the Oregon option was unacceptable. So that is one of only two options to go forward, and, being the no tunnel option, it is probably what we will get.

  • KM May 18, 2018 (9:30 am)

    I like that both options have kept the Avalon station. I used to think giving up the Avalon station in order to tunnel was ideal, but due to the increasing density in the area and access to 35th Ave, I’ve changed my tune (there were a lot of good arguments for keeping it here as well, so thanks to those who mentioned it). These are two pretty good options, but I really like the Pigeon Ridge version not only because of the tunneling, but because of the position of the Delridge station–much more accessible to residents of the area.

    And Mark, yes, I am in favor of MUCH MUCH more density to make this happen!

    • Smo May 18, 2018 (12:59 pm)

      100% agree on Pigeon Ridge positioning being ideal! It’s as far south as you could get while still keeping the Avalon station.

  • KBear May 18, 2018 (9:53 am)

    The great thing about the Oregon Street route is that it should help persuade people that Pigeon Ridge is really the best option.

    • Jort May 18, 2018 (8:36 pm)

      Just an FYI, they can still pick the Oregon Street route and bulldoze dozens of homes. The reason this might happen is because community forums and little feedback letters don’t determine the actual outcome of the planning. 

      Sound Transit has an elected mandate to provide light rail to the heart of the Junction given the available funds. I don’t want anybody to get their hopes up that somehow the money for a tunnel is going to just magically appear. I also don’t want anybody to get their hopes up that, if it isn’t a tunnel, they’re going to just give up cancel the entire line.

      If Sound Transit is collecting taxes but not providing the promised service, as outlined in the ballot measure, then they will be sued, and they will lose. That’s why they’re going to build light rail … even if it’s “ugly.”

  • Jeffk May 18, 2018 (11:03 am)

    I support the Pigeon Ridge plan.

  • Smo May 18, 2018 (12:58 pm)

    I vote Pigeon Ridge route and hope that’s chosen! Keeps three stations, minimizes home displacement, and faces north/south in junction for future (underground) expansion. 

  • Yet Another Transplant May 18, 2018 (2:56 pm)

    Pigeon Ridge FTW!!!

  • Scottc May 18, 2018 (4:31 pm)

    Well, there goes N. Delridge–with either option.  The table I was at on 5 May meeting was rooting for a route that went north of the WS bridge and avoided most if not all housing displacement. I’m guessing the Port probably played a role. Of the two here, Pigeon Point is preferable, but still has huge viaduct coursing through a quiet neighborhood.  Agree that it its hard to see the effect of the May 5th meeting in these decisions.

    • heartless May 18, 2018 (5:48 pm)

      Scott, 

      Just curious, why was a station further north on Delridge desirable?  Was it just a housing displacement issue?

      Overall I’ve been leaning towards a more southern stop for Delridge, simply so it can serve more people more easily–but of course the closer it gets to bigger populations there’s more housing that might be displaced by a station…  Can’t win.

      (And I agree with you–if we can get Pigeon Point, let’s do that one (I actually assume it’ll be nixed due to the extra funding requirements, but who knows).)

      • Mickysme May 22, 2018 (12:14 pm)

        While a station north of the Bridge is not desirable for walkshed to the North Delridge neighborhood, it is potentially VERY good for ridership numbers at the station. THat location (presumably somewhere near Chelan Cafe) would provide walkable access to Harbor Ave and Pigeon Point, is next to a jogging and bicycle path that connects to Harbor Island and points beyond, has an existing Metro facility that could be expanded for bus turnaround and layovers, and close to 200 spaces for a de facto park and ride.

        I don’t know that it’s a particularly good alternative in comparison to others, but ST’s engineers seem to have simply drawn a circle on a map to determine walkshed, and then provided that as their assessment of it being an “isolated” station without seemingly any evidence to support it. Keep in mind, that the biggest segment of ridership at this station would be expected to come from buses serving this corridor from points south and NOT the surrounding neighborhood.

    • CMT May 18, 2018 (5:59 pm)

      The minimal support I heard at the May 5 meeting for the Oregon route was IF it was a tunnel, not elevated.

  • Ken May 18, 2018 (6:06 pm)

    Please demand the low res power point fetishist supply something that can be zoomed to readable or converted to pdf.

  • PigeonPointPerson May 18, 2018 (8:02 pm)

    I am unclear on the Delridge station–is it above or below ground?  I live about 4 houses away from where that station is showing up and am a bit concerned….  is it to be where the Cooper School parking area is?  Assuming I don’t lose my home to eminent domain, I think this option is by far the best of those presented.

    • WSB May 18, 2018 (8:15 pm)

      That all has yet to be settled. In the Sound Transit “representative alignment” (draft plan), everything in West Seattle is above ground – stations, tracks, etc. The process under way now is to come up with a “preferred alternative” to send into full environmental-impact study.

    • Mickymse May 22, 2018 (12:15 pm)

      There is no realistic way for a Delridge Station to be underground due to the elevation the train has to gain to head up to the Junction.

Sorry, comment time is over.