(Added Friday morning: Sound Transit’s meeting video)

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

After an intense year and a half of discussion – capped by a four-and-a-half-hour meeting – potential routing/station locations for Sound Transit‘s West Seattle-to-Ballard light rail are heading into the environmental-study process.

The Sound Transit Board finalized a list of “preferred alternatives” and other possibilities to study – after an extended debate that included two votes on whether to use the word “preferred” in describing the ones that would require third-party funding.

But first – from the motion that won final approval (PDF here) – the language that spells out what will be studied for the West Seattle end:

West Seattle (Avalon and Junction) Preferred Alternative

Elevated stations – Avalon station in vicinity of SW Genesee Street, SW Avalon Way and 35th Avenue SW. Turns southwest on Fauntleroy Way SW with both elevated Alaska Junction station options oriented north/south and staying east of the Alaska Junction on Fauntleroy and in the vicinity of 41st/42nd Avenue SW.

Preferred Alternative with Third Party Funding

Tunnel station – Avalon station in vicinity of SW Genesee Street, SW Avalon Way and 35th Avenue SW. Turns southwest with both tunnel Alaska Junction station options oriented north-south in the vicinity of 41st Avenue SW and 42nd Avenue SW. Based on current information, these alternatives would require additional third-party funding.

Additionally, the Board directs staff to evaluate potential cost savings opportunities and look for opportunities to minimize community impacts and create a high quality transfer environment for both the Avalon and Alaska Junction station locations.

West Seattle (Delridge) Preferred Alternative

N of Genesee station – Elevated guideway runs south adjacent to Delridge Way SW to an elevated Delridge station on a diagonal between Delridge Way SW and 26th Avenue SW north of SW Genesee Street. Continues west on an elevated guideway along SW Genesee Street.

Additionally, the Board directs staff to explore refining the Delridge station location, prioritizing a further south location and looking for opportunities to minimize potential residential impacts, create a high quality transfer environment, optimize transit-oriented development (TOD) potential and reduce costs.

Other DEIS alternatives

S of Andover station – Elevated guideway follows Delridge Way SW south to an elevated Delridge station south of SW Andover Street. Continues south along Delridge Way SW and then runs west along SW Genesee Street.

The Board directs staff to conduct an initial assessment of the following alternatives, which were suggested during the scoping period, to establish whether further detailed study in the Draft EIS is appropriate:

Yancy/Andover alignment – An alignment along the Yancy/Andover corridor with a Delridge Station serving Youngstown.

Pigeon Point Tunnel – A refinement of the Pigeon Ridge Tunnel alignment that was previously evaluated in Level 1 and Level 2 screening. This alignment would include a refined Duwamish crossing location that includes a tunnel through Pigeon Point with a further south Delridge station location. Based on current information, this alternative would require additional third-party funding.

The assessment and recommendation for further study shall be brought back to the Sound Transit Board for review and potential action.

Duwamish Crossing Preferred Alternative

South crossing – Elevated guideway crosses over the Spokane Street Viaduct, curves west and parallels the West Seattle Bridge on the south side. Crosses over the Duwamish Waterway on a high-level fixed bridge on the south side of the existing bridge, then rounds Pigeon Point and heads south along Delridge Way SW.

Other DEIS alternatives

North crossing – Elevated guideway curves west and parallels the existing West Seattle Bridge on the north side. Spans the Duwamish Waterway on a high-level, fixed bridge on the north side of the existing bridge, then crosses over the West Seattle bridge ramp, passes over the Nucor Steel property and runs south along Delridge Way SW.

The Board directs staff to conduct an initial assessment of the following alternative, which was suggested during the scoping period, to establish whether further detailed study in the Draft EIS is appropriate:

Pigeon Point Tunnel – A refinement of the Pigeon Ridge Tunnel alignment that was previously evaluated in Level 1 and Level 2 screening. This alignment would include a refined Duwamish crossing location that includes a tunnel through Pigeon Point with a further south Delridge station location. Based on current information, this alternative would require additional third-party funding.

The assessment and recommendation for further study shall be brought back to the Sound Transit Board for review and potential action.

Ahead, the rest of the story:

The discussion preceding the vote didn’t focus on the merits of any particular routing/station location, or lack of them. It was almost entirely big-picture.

Snohomish County Executive Dave Somers voiced concern that “quite a number” of alternatives remain “on the table” and so “we’re not out of the woods” regarding streamlining the decisionmaking process. “The decisions we make going forward .. affect the rest of the system” and he said assessing the “extra funding” alternatives would be difficult wthout “very clear direction on (that) funding.” He said the with-and-without-funding options can’t be considered as equal “if we could just find the funding.”

King County Councilmember Joe McDermott of West Seattle recalled that he co-chaired the planning process’s Elected Leadership Group as it met over the past year and went through three levels of screening. He reiterated that he’s heard willingness from other partners such as the city and port to have those potential third-party-funding conversations. He noted that the motion sets a clear expectation for when that has to happen.

Everett City Councilmember Paul Roberts said he was concerned that the proposed “if third-party funding” alternatives don’t meet any of ST’s “core priorities” such as connecting centers or increasing ridership.

Pierce County Executive Bruce Dammeier said he was concerned about how the process had gotten here since people were allowed to make suggestions that might need extra funding. “It doesn’t surprise me that communities want the tunnels,” but he’s worried that “all we’re doing is … kicking the can down the path for more pain.” He says “we don’t want to dither .. we want to deliver the service.” So he wanted to call the alternatives “alternative with third-party funding” minus the word “preferred.” He clarified, “We’re going to still study them, but try to bring expectations in some degree to reality.”

Eastside King County Councilmember Claudia Balducci said the word “preferred” was meant to reflect that community members had put a lot into the process and that’s what they preferred. “I hope we would not get too hung up on that nomenclature.”

McDermott argued for “preferred,” saying it won’t mean any more study. But the amendment passed 10-7.

Then King County Executive Dow Constantine took issue, saying that Eastside light rail had started with 19 potential alternatives and here we’re looking at “maybe two.” He thinks “the amendment [removing the word] is a grave error” because it “says to the public that we’re going to build what’s cheapest .. the board has decided to poke in the eye residents who’ve been advocating for the best … option.” He suggested they’re running the risk of repeating past mistakes such as “not building stations that we’re [now] going back and retrofitting into the system.” Cost “is a consideration, but so is quality.”

University Place Mayor Kent Keel countered by saying he didn’t think they were saying no to anything but that they had to state that “solid” third-party funding would be needed for the alternatives requiring it.

And yet others said that they’re trying to “look out” for not only people around the region but also riders of the future.

So then they reconsidered the motion about excising the word “preferred” from the extra-funding alternatives, and this time it flipped, 7-10.

Speeches continued.

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan said that if there is a gap, we will address the gap. She says she doesn’t agree with all the verbiage but in general she’ll support it.

Constantine said he believes in a transit system that “knits together the region” but the board has to work coherently, not just as individuals with specific interests. “I want us to focus now on a system that is affordable and what we can do to accelerate the building of the system – north, south, and east – that we should have had not 10 years ago but 50 years ago.”

Balducci sought to bring it all home and noted that the environmental-study process “gives us 18 months, 2 years” to figure out the third-party funding piece as necessary.

Dammeier reiterated that he’s concerned that they’re starting to depart from a plan that serves the entire region. He voted no, as did Edmonds Mayor Dave Earling, Keel, Roberts, abd Somers. Final vote, 12-5. Here’s the entire motion if you didn’t already read it above:

Earlier, there was a bit of awkward history, when it was asked, what is the precedent for stipulating that they could consider alternatives that might cost third-party funding? Bellevue, was the reply. Balducci – that city’s former mayor – elaborated on that, saying the city decided to “contribute in things of value … the city wound up dedicating more than $100 million of property, services,” and other things. She shortly thereafter said she “wouldn’t hold up (that) process” as an example, warning against “high-level comparisons of the situation.” Another board member underscored, “that became the poster child for how we did not want to do the rest of the alignments.” So when would they have to have a third-party funding agreement if required later in the proces? That’s a “board decision” but “publication of the final EIS” would be a good milestone – mid-2022.

One key reminder as the discussion began: “We are not selecting the project to be built today” said board chair Redmond Mayor John Marchione.

STAFF BRIEFING: Before the discussion and vote, ST’s corridor director Cathal Ridge made the presentation, using this deck.

His presentation ran through “what happens next.” Nothing new, but if you want to leaf through “what led up to this point,” that’s one way.

At the meeting’s start, more than 40 people were signed up to comment on agenda items including this one. We took notes on the WS-related speakers:

PUBLIC COMMENT: First West Seattle comment was from the second of 47 people signed up to speak, Dennis Noland, who organized Youngstown residents to oppose the idea of building a station that would take out homes in their homes. “Our standalone two-square-block neighborhood is unique” and areas nearby could be used for a station instead. “Include the Pigeon Ridge tunnel and the Andover/Yancy route in the Draft EIS for study. These routes make sense. … This is a neighborhood that should be served by light rail, not destroyed by light rail.” …

(WSB photo. 3 Junction residents speak to board during public-comment period)

At 2:19 pm, the next West Seattle speakers, three from the East Alaska Junction Neighborhood Coalition, neighbors “distraught and dismayed” that Sound Transit would consider “wiping out” their neighborhoods, as Aimee Riordan put it. They’ve worked for many hours and days to try to prevent ST from making that mistake. They want to ensure that the orange/yellow “diagonal line” stays “off the table now and in the future” and, she said, they hope ST will find a way to tunnel into The Junction. Charlie Able said the orange/yellow line has been “vehemently opposed” by other West Seattle groups and “explicitly rejected” by the SAG and ELG. He said that exploring 41st/42nd station siting needs to be clarified as not including the residential areas. As an architect, he said he was passing on advice he had received: “Budget and schedule will heal wth time, but bad design is forever.” Tighe Aurelius said he’s concerned about the Youngstown neighborhood: “These neighbors deserve a complete EIS process” and he also voiced concern about the possibility of an 80-100′ guideway in that area. Overall. “The benefits of a tunnel are vast” including the Junction area.

Port of Seattle Commissioner Stephanie Bowman said that while she understands crossing the Duwamish River on the north side – “that would detrimentally affect our terminals” – might have to be in the Draft EIS, it shouldn’t go any farther.

A representative of Centerpoint Properties – which has warehouse properties north of the bridge – spoke in opposition of a north crossing. He also asked ST to be sure that “requiring third-party funding” alternatives would get as much consideration and review during environmenal studies as those that do not.

Another speaker, Peter Mason of West Seattle, encouraged the board to keep the orange/yellow line out of consideration. Deb Barker of Morgan Junction, who served on the Stakeholder Advisory Group for the planning process, said: “We want Sound Transit to succeed … I want to leave you with a very important word, ‘tunnel’. … Please think a hundred years from now … You’re not going to be here but your kids will be … Tunnel into West Seattle.” Another West Seattleite speaking after her echoed “tunnel, tunnel, tunnel.” Regarding Delridge, “I don’t think it makes sense to destroy the neighborhood you’re supposed to serve.”

WHAT’S NEXT? The studies now set in motion will result in a Draft Environmental Impact Statement due by the end of next year. That will touch off a new round of public comment. Feedback will be part of a Final EIS expected in 2022; that’s when the board will decide on final routing and station locations. After design, construction would start in 2025, and West Seattle light rail would open in 2030. (Here’s the full projected timeline and milestones.)