this really makes the most sense.  As others pointed out, going north-south from the junction is a going to destroy lots of housing, and is topographically really complicated.  Going north-south from Delridge station to White Center/ Burien, etc. makes sense.

Went around the existing light rail and snapped pics to put
into scale what an elevated option would look like in our neighborhood:  :(
Tunnel is the only sane option given all the issues mentioned by the
group in this article PLUS the scale of the elevated track doesn’t work
within our neighborhood at all. Everywhere else that’s elevated is in
wide open spaces.

How quickly people have forgotten the monorail fiasco…In 2000, city voters approved a $6 million monorail planning effort. Two years later they narrowly passed a car-tab tax of $140 per $10,000 vehicle value, to build the 14-mile Green Line. It turned out that Seattle Monorail Project (SMP) grossly underestimated the revenues, and by mid-2005 leaders issued a controversial 50-year funding plan, and later put a shorter line on the ballot.Voters said no, the station properties were auctioned off, and taxpayers wound up losing $124 million.https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/monorail-proposition-on-fall-ballot/

You have a short memory if you cannot imagine voters of Seattle approving a transit plan, reconsidering, cancelling it, then maybe regretting that reconsideration and approving something similar again. I’m still holding out for monorail version 5.0. I mean, we get it: you want rail and will brook no opposition. But that’s not how Seattle works, process-wise. Even if there’s no opposition to a plan, we commission a study and empanel a committee to investigate the lack of opposition before proceeding. Personally I love the light rail and use it every day. But I do so knowing that the construction and operation of the system is incredibly inefficient, disproportionately impacts vulnerable segments of the community, and is fiscally irresponsible. You say the tax will be 30 years; the truth is the amount of tax, the period of collection, and the services provided by the tax are all left to the discretion of Sound Transit. It’s literally a blank check.

Nolan – Time will tell.  A community consists of voters and if there is enough community support/demand for a tunnel, the funding will be located, whether or not is currently earmarked.    

Chemist:Should’ve cut and pasted more, I guess:”One at-grade station: StadiumFour elevated stations: SODO, Delridge, Avalon,  Junction”Again, it was very clear the whole West Seattle portion was planned to be elevated.

Mickey,Yep, the representative alignment: Delridge to Genesee to Fauntleroy to Alaska.  Perfectly good route.

BJG: It’s in a tunnel under Capitol Hill because it’s in a tunnel under downtown, a decision made by Metro in the 1980s.  There is no way to go from a tunnel alignment under downtown, get under the I-5 express lanes, and rise up to an elevated alignment that can climb a steep hill.  Let alone trying to thread a track through a narrow pre-war street grid up there.There are good reasons for the existing line to be in a tunnel where it is.  There is no good reason to be in one in West Seattle.

“There is available right of way to get from Nucor to the Junction elevated.” What are you talking about @Ron? The current elevated route proposal is to run down Delridge and turn at Genesee, taking out some number of houses along the way and running up Genesee at 140+ feet in the air — in other words, imagine extending the West Seattle Bridge through and across the North Delridge neighborhood. There are some folks who would like to look at other elevated alternatives or a tunnel to the Junction because it would do far more than just reduce impacts to the Junction itself.   

If we want to talk about what is “unachievable” or “unrealistic” and who is “qualified” you might want to consider a few additional points of information:

1) Many people in West Seattle always advocated for a tunnel if light rail was going to come here or that an elevated line would run in existing rights of way — as previous rapid transit system proposals had supported — and were never supportive of ripping through some parts of the neighborhood.

2) Don’t underestimate popular opinion. Folks who want to see this extended further south should consider what the likelihood of that is if we build elevated now and the only option for future extension is to continue southward through lots of million dollar plus single family homes.

3) It’s easy to say that a tunnel costs X amount “extra” than what was proposed in the ballot measure… BUT the public wasn’t consulted on what to put in the ballot measure. In fact, they made changes with just weeks to go to the route in West Seattle, without ever showing it to the public. And they merely drew a line on the map with only 1% or LESS engineering done to the line. So this “representative alignment” that we are supposed to use as the baseline for the budget isn’t some magically wonderful route option. In fact, it’s clear to many people actually on the ground that parts of it may, in fact, be nearly impossible to build or may turn out to cost considerably MORE than other options that have been proposed. 

If we don’t have a source that is already “requested and found”, then the difference between that source and “appearing out of thin air” is merely academic.No one should be surprised that ST needs to make decisions based on funds that are accounted for: the severe funding gap can’t just be handwaved away on faith that something might pan out. By all means, demand a tunnel; just don’t be surprised if the money isn’t there, and definitely don’t make bombastic and misleading claims about not “getting a voice” if ST can’t move mountains on your behalf.

I hereby acknowledge that the community cannot make hundreds of millions of dollars appear out of thin air.However, having solicited and obtained the community’s input, elected officials and governmental agencies have the ability to explore alternatives and funding sources that would help achieve a goal consistent with the community’s vision.And I believe they should have the community’s input in order to enable that exploration.  

What Sound Transit has said is that “third-party funding” would be required. That wouldn’t be “appear(ing) out of thin air” if it is requested and found, and the full array of possible sources has not yet been discussed publicly. Example: Last night at the Pigeon Point Neighborhood Council discussion with Sound Transit, a Port of Seattle rep jumped into the discussion of whether the line might cross the Duwamish River north of the bridge instead of south of the bridge, and said that the port MIGHT be willing to contribute funding. That discussion was *not* related to possible Junction tunneling but it was a bit of a window into side discussions that are proceeding outside the comment process (at another meeting on which we’ve reported, funding discussions “with the city” were mentioned). Also at last night’s meeting (story later today), pressed by a community member, a Sound Transit rep acknowledged that the numbers they’ve been throwing out are guesstimates at best. And they reiterated that this IS the time for community members to be clear about what they want. So whatever that is, this IS the time to speak up and speak out. (Reminder that ST also has reiterated that even if you’ve commented before, they need to hear from you now for your comment to be part of the official “scoping” process – https://wsblink.participate.online is the “online open house,” through April 2nd.) – TR