WEST SEATTLE LIGHT RAIL: Your next chance to get briefed

NW February 7, 2022 (4:34 pm)

Bus ridership is so low for a project this expensive is this really going to be worth cost and the rise in real estate it will create? As a person who ride the bus I can say from experience the majority do not use public transit. Additionally security concerns growing by the day in this region especially Seattle!

Derek February 7, 2022 (5:47 pm)

Is this a serious comment? We need trains more than ever. Our planet is DYING. We need trains yesterday.
KBear February 7, 2022 (6:48 pm)

I find it hard to believe that “a person who rides the bus” would be against light rail. You must really enjoy the bus.
- Wseattleite February 8, 2022 (7:12 am)
  
  What is that hard to imagine? As someone who rides the bus, gets picked up close to home and gets dropped off close to work, I am not looking forward to figuring out how to get to one of these station locations, get on a train to go to SODO, get on another bus to then get close to work. Not in favor. Actually, going way backwards. Yeah, not in favor.
  - James February 8, 2022 (9:29 am)
    
    We voted for trains. Sorry but majority rules here. I ride the bus and I want trains. Not gondola. Not electric busses. TRAINS!
  - KD February 8, 2022 (11:38 am)
    
    I’m in Highland Park. My 1 seat 30-40 minute ride to downtown will now become a 3 seat 1.5 hour trip. Nope, I’m not cool with light rail at all. Not to mention this monstrosity is planned to stop at the wealthiest parts of West Seattle. Are people in Admiral really taking light rail every day instead of driving their Tesla? Unlikely. This should be going to and from White Center and Burien where people really need it. The 120 bus route is one of the most popular in the city. This plan is inequitable, wasteful and doesn’t even provide the same level of service currently offered by a robust and award winning Metro Bus program. Have you been to Angle Lake or Northgate to see the true scale of this thing? It’s awful in my opinion.

Yes to SkyLink! February 7, 2022 (4:56 pm)

Any word or progress regarding the SkyLink gondola proposal?

WSB February 7, 2022 (6:09 pm)

You can listen to their presentation before the 34th District Democrats meeting this Wednesday, 6:30 pm – it’s in our calendar.
- Yes to SkyLink! February 7, 2022 (9:25 pm)
  
  👍 Thanks, WSB!
rocket February 7, 2022 (8:52 pm)

The skylink thing seems super foolish. We have a spine of a great commuter rail system and should continue to expand it. I truly can not see how it out competes the light rail extension. I grew up here but spent a couple years in the Bay Area and the BART is such an amazing asset that the only regrets they talk about are among the communities that fought it off. The Max in Portland is great. Just basically commuter rail is a slam dunk and should be pursued doggedly for many reasons.
- Martin February 7, 2022 (10:32 pm)
  
  Nobody is suggesting that a gondola will replace our light rail spine but West Seattle has plenty hills and density. Have you considered the 700 displaced residences and up to 1200 employees who may have to find a new home, job/location? Where will they go in the current housing crunch? San Francisco built BART into the suburbs, not into downtown! They have Muni light rail / tram and they have cable cars to get up the hills. Portland didn’t take Max up to the OHSU hospital, they built an aerial tram up the hill!Mexico City and Paris have metro, light rail, trolleys, they still use gondolas where it makes sense. SkyLink would just allow to connect West Seattle to the light rail spine sooner and without as much disruption. Didn’t we have enough disruption with the bridge being closed, would you want another 5 years of road closures and detours?!?Rather than spending a lot of money to scale the hills towards the Junction, we could use the money to expand light rail to Georgetown and South Park and serve White Center/Westwood earlier.
  - Rocket February 8, 2022 (5:30 pm)
    
    They very much built BART into downtown. The towns that fought it off used the argument that displacing a few people was bad and decades later regret it. I’d be fine to move forward with both but that does not seem to be the goal of the skylink campaign when you look closely but rather NIMBY obfuscation.
    - Martin February 8, 2022 (9:21 pm)
      
      BART only has a single line on the East side of the city, Seattle may soon have two light rail tunnels through downtown. westseattleskylink.org motto says: Connect to light rail THIS decade – not replace light rail. Or check out their tweets: https://twitter.com/WSSkyLink/status/1485853486788984836 where they suggest both light rail and gondola extensions.
- James February 8, 2022 (9:29 am)
  
  I cannot believe people are serious about skylink. I put these signs in the garbage when someone puts them on my business front without permission. Awful idea!!!
TreeHouse February 7, 2022 (9:40 pm)

This gondola proposal is ridiculous and not what we voted for! This proposal is just another “environmental study” or stalling tactic to stop light rail masquerading as a legitimate alternative. Why is SDOT even listening to this alternative? Especially when the money we voted on can only fund light rail. Waste of time.
- jradz February 8, 2022 (12:50 pm)
  
  2035…. Twenty… THIRTY FIVE. I for one would LOVE a gondola ride into the city prior to 13 years from now. Wake up, we need as many transit options as possible!
  - WSB February 8, 2022 (1:00 pm)
    
    West Seattle is currently scheduled to open in 2032.

No To Skylink February 7, 2022 (6:28 pm)

I will never vote for Skylink. That is something that is pushed to halt the train we DID vote for. Stop pushing something that would fail. Gondolas are not efficient and the Portland one is a big disaster and the blueprint for why it does not work.

Martin February 7, 2022 (8:26 pm)

Portland is just an ariel tram with 2 cabins going back and forth, no comparison with a gondola which has hundreds of cabins as proposed with SkyLink. Is it efficient to spend a quarter million dollar per expected rider? Do we want an 8-16 story high light rail guideway cutting through Youngstown and eliminating the Duwamish Greenbelt?Mexico City is planning a fourth gondola line as they found them to be very efficient to get up their hills and reduce smog and emissions in the city. Paris is building one to cross highways and rail lines. Will Seattle be next?
- Lagartija Nick February 8, 2022 (10:46 am)
  
  @Martin, “eliminating the Duwamish greenbelt”? The greenbelt runs north-south, Link runs east-west, so while it may cross the greenbelt there is absolutely no way it will “eliminate” it. It’s pretty sad when you have to lie and fear monger to get people to support your position.
Yes to SkyLink! February 7, 2022 (9:33 pm)

@No, thanks for sharing your opinion. Not everyone will agree or be ready for more progressive ideas when they come. Here’s what some other folks have to say: https://www.westseattleskylink.org/quotes

👍, Martin.
- Rocket February 7, 2022 (11:37 pm)
  
  I clicked on your link and read some comments by elected officials about potentially supporting studying the skylink in addition to building the light rail. Then the lower community member comments talk about wanting to do a study before they build light rail in hopes of not doing the light rail. Kind of like talking out of two sides of the mouth it seems. Reading this I interpret the aim of the campaign you are running to stop light rail and then study a gondola before acting on anything, using the time it is taking to build these systems as reason to not build one while we think about building the other, which seems a little odd. I am not an expert on this and trying to bring myself up in the details but from what I can extrapolate from your campaign makes me think my support for light rail remains intact and leaves me wondering if your campaign is some nimby tactic to stall and add such costs that west Seattle light rail ends up like the monorail extension from back in the day. A lot of confusing narratives. I would also like to add that bringing up cities like Paris as reason to not build rail but do build aerials is an unfair comparison based on the way the aerials supplement an extensive rail network which we don’t have yet. To those using La Paz in Bolivia as an example their gondola system was necessary as this amazing city abuts basically a cliff where they built up onto the plateau above and the only feasible way to connect the high city and the lower city based on geography was a gondola system. TLDR My initial reaction to sky link is Why? And the more I learn about it the more suspicious I am about it. A no thanks turning into an oh goodness no.
  - Lagartija Nick February 8, 2022 (11:40 am)
    
    Rocket, your assessment is correct, the gondola proposal is indeed meant to kill light rail to West Seattle and their claims in support of the gondola are full of half truths and outright obfuscations. In addition to the two points you noted here are just a few others. This one is new, Martin just claimed the light rail would “eliminate” the Duwamish greenbelt. While it is true that light rail would impact the greenbelt around Pigeon Point the vast majority of the greenbelt lies to the south along W Marginal and would not be impacted at all. Next they claim the gondola would be completed before light rail but what they don’t tell you/ignore is the many years of lawsuits Sound Transit would face if they didn’t build the voter approved light rail and how that would delay for years the build for gondola. They claim the gondola can move just as many, if not more, people per hour than light rail. Here they conflate gondola car capacity/frequency and ignore loading/offloading lag times. They also love to point out the loss of housing and businesses due to elevated light rail but ignore a) a tunnel is still possible and b) the footprint of the massive towers necessary to support a gondola system would ALSO eliminate those same houses and businesses. They also claimed during the last snow storm that light rail would be negatively affected by adverse weather and the gondola wouldn’t which ignores that a) that didn’t happen and b) that the gondola would absolutely be shut down during a windstorm which is our regions most common adverse weather event. You are absolutely right that this whole thing is meant to kill light rail. And they are using false appeals to environmentalists, the local business community, housing advocates, progressive urbanists, and well meaning neighborhood groups to do so. I’m not falling for it and neither should you.
    - Martin February 8, 2022 (10:02 pm)
      
      Nick, are you looking for a conspiracy here?!? You’re right, light rail would only eliminate the Northern portion of the Duwamish Greenbelt, I’m sorry misleading people, I would still hate to see those trees come down and replaced by a concrete structure up to 160 ft high. The ST3 measure allows the Sound Transit board to change plans if these turn out to be infeasible or unaffordable, why would anybody sue if the Board takes action? In Sound Move voters had approved a light rail station on First Hill; when it became too expensive, the Capitol Hill streetcar was built, have you seen it being stopped by lawsuits? Gondolas run continuously, what loading/offloading time are you talking about? Have you even watched their video? A proposed tunnels would reduce some of the displacement on top of the hill, but not at Pigeon Point or Youngstown. A tunnel would also increase the construction time and detours and make it very difficult to extend light rail later further South. For light rail you need to clear a 60 ft wide corridor to build the guiderails, for a gondola tower you need a 4×4 ft foundation, the space between the towers doesn’t need to be cleared as the wire can be hung via helicopter or even drone allowing gondolas routes to be built in very dense urban environments such as La Paz, Mexico City, or Ankara.Regarding snow routes: their facebook post said: “If West Seattle would be served by gondola, we wouldn’t have to worry about snow routes or getting stuck in our car – we could still get to do our errands in West Seattle or catch light rail or a plane.” I think they referred to snow bus routes.

Jort February 7, 2022 (6:39 pm)

It’s important to note, as always, that Sound Transit asks for sacrifices from businesses, from home owners, from bus riders — but not a single sacrifice for car drivers in their proposals. All of their “towering” concrete, all of their 200-foot-deep stations, all designed specifically so that not one single inch of public street space is transferred from cars to transit. If Fauntleroy was closed entirely to cars – like, entirely – you could run the trains at street level. But Sound Transit thinks we should spend hundreds of millions more so that people can continue their planet-destroying, anti-social car driving addictions for decades to come without a single obstacle in the way.

Canton February 7, 2022 (8:02 pm)

Do you ever travel outside of your bubble? It’s quite rewarding. 1 hour to the cascades, 3 hours to the Pacific coast, 6 hours across the state to Spokane. The freedom of the road…
WS Guy February 7, 2022 (8:04 pm)

Did you read chapter 3?

“In the West Seattle Link Extension, the Build Alternatives would permanently remove between 55 and 300 on-street parking stalls and would temporarily remove between 155 and 490 additional on-street parking stalls during construction.”

“The Delridge and West Seattle Junction segments each would have up to three intersections operationally affected by the project alternatives.”

“During WSBLE construction, some local and arterial streets would be partially or fully closed in all segments, increasing traffic congestion on adjacent streets for durations of short periods (nights and weekends) up to multi-year closures.”

“Preferred Alternative WSJ-2 would construct a median on Fauntleroy Way north of Southwest Alaska Street, slightly reducing the length for the inside southbound through lane. Alternative WSJ-5* may close Southwest Genesee Street approaching 35th Avenue Southwest. Station access would occur on Southwest Genesee Street with a new road connection between the station and Southwest Avalon Way, east of 35th Avenue Southwest. Alternative WSJ-4* would close 38th Avenue Southwest north of Southwest Oregon Street and 37th Avenue Southwest north of Fauntleroy Way Southwest, with turnaround areas added to the street ends. The existing street grid network in this area would allow vehicles to use other streets, such as 39th Avenue Southwest, to reach their destination.”

Sounds like more than an inch. No need for your propaganda.
- K. Davis February 7, 2022 (8:33 pm)
  
  @WS Guy … shame on you for raising facts to the anti-car fringe zealots. Next thing you’re going to provoke them into using all caps for their diatribes.
  - rocket February 7, 2022 (8:57 pm)
    
    @k Davis in particular but generally many of the posters here can we please save the trolling for SLOG and Reddit. This blog is really nice and maybe we can represent our community here with passionate and respectful discourse, especially with those we disagree with?
    - What Do I Know February 8, 2022 (1:32 am)
      
      @Rocket, I read @K Davis’ comment as humorous and gently poking fun, not to be taken so seriously. Just one person’s opinion.
- bill February 7, 2022 (10:24 pm)
  
  WS Guy: Nitpicking details do not refute Jort’s main point that huge amounts of roadway could be repurposed for light rail and thereby save vast amounts of money. The main pressure on the road system occurs during commute hours. If a large number of commuters shift to rail we won’t need so much road capacity.
  - WS Guy February 8, 2022 (3:16 am)
    
    Thanks for engaging the topic without hysterical exaggerations and strawmen. At least that makes it possible to discuss it.
    
    Personally I’m not convinced that fixed-line rail is the 100-year solution. I can see a future where automated vehicles use existing roadway for mass point-to-point transit. Use an app to summon a driverless vehicle (which could be a multi passenger van on a dynamic route). When the vehicle merges into an arterial it falls in line with other vehicles forming a “virtual train” that breaks apart as each vehicle nears its destination.
    
    Such a system could run on existing roads, co-mingled with human driven cars. It would gain efficiency as they increasingly synchronized with traffic signaling, as fewer humans drove, and as it ran in phased out parking lanes.
    
    Train track is not forward compatible with this, nor is it backwards compatible with the innumerable use cases where current forms of road transit is the best answer. Transitioning existing right of way to rail rather than adding new is an anti-transit opportunity cost.
    
    I’m skeptical that the train is the right answer but we voted for it so it’s getting built, but we did not vote to strike out existing road capacity in the process.
    
    At-grade trains are also known to be deadly to pedestrians, as Rainier Ave has shown. So in addition to opposing the hysterics, I am also opposed to the base point.
  - WS Res February 8, 2022 (7:22 pm)
    
    Do you think it would be better to have a train running down the middle of a street flanked by businesses, or residences? The businesses will lose customer access. The residences will lose their front yards and have to live with the noise.
Joe Z February 7, 2022 (11:35 pm)

At least Fauntleroy is expected to get a road diet and bike lanes as part of this. I do hope they can find a new location for Taco Time, which will be greatly missed.
Chris K February 8, 2022 (9:19 am)

I love the idea of turning Fauntleroy into a carless train corridor. Oh well.
My two cents February 8, 2022 (5:00 pm)

Jorty you said “ It’s important to note, as always, that Sound Transit asks for sacrifices from businesses, from home owners, from bus riders — but not a single sacrifice for car drivers in their proposals.” Didn’t I read somewhere that part of the car tab fees go towards our transit solutions? LOL

Oh Seattle February 8, 2022 (4:09 am)

The elevated sections are certainly visually impressive in that they evoke a sense of both futuristic dystopia and mid-20th century urban renewal.

Yes to SkyLink! February 8, 2022 (6:17 am)

Thanks to those giving the SkyLink proposal a look and consideration!

As a supporter, SkyLink seems to me a genuine, intelligent, proposed solution, in response to some of the big negatives and problems of the rail project for West Seattle. An interesting an exciting alternative opportunity being offered to address West Seattle’s urgent transportation needs!

No hidden agenda here to take anything away from voters, just believe in this as a potentially better option for West Seattle.

shotinthefoot February 8, 2022 (8:26 am)

I can’t wait until I die and someone can take my long dead ashes for a ride on this mythical light rail we’re supposed to see sometime in our lifetimes. Endless talk. PDX pushed theirs through, and they’ve long been a superior city to Seattle for it. And enough of this literal ‘pie in the sky’ gondola idea. Carnival rides are not a substitution for transit.

Derek February 8, 2022 (10:56 am)

You are correct on all fronts. Portland smokes Seattle in public transit and they’re don’t have the taxes we do. Insane.
- Ron Swanson February 8, 2022 (2:47 pm)
  
  Actually the Seattle metro area’s transit ridership per capita pre pandemic was 16% higher than Portland’s despite being nearly 25 years later in starting to build light rail. And, you know, no state income tax…
  - James February 8, 2022 (8:18 pm)
    
    Ridership has nothing to do with my point. Tacoma and higher populated subrubs is why. That’s not the point.
    
    We would be better off swapping no income tax for no sales tax like Oregon. Sales tax and property tax is loads higher on average persons’ sale. So this is wrong. We just take a different poison pill. A more costly one.

VN February 8, 2022 (8:48 am)

In reading these comments, it appears many of you have not read the DEIS with a critical eye to details that will have a negative impact to WS. The DEIS is meant for individuals to identify areas of the plan that may need to be revised or removed. For example, there no mention of adding better transit service to the Peninsula to make sure all residents have equal access to the lite rail. Only individuals who live on or near the C & H lines will have 24/7 access. This leaves out around 2/3 of WS. Hundreds of homes/apartments will need to be removed at a time when housing is at a premium. Where do you think these people will go? There is no readily available land to build replacements. We shouldn’t push people further away from their jobs which has only led to people back on the roads. A significant number of businesses on the river and throughout the route will be closed. We do not do justice to this lite rail plan if we don’t take a critical eye to the plan and request modifications to minimize these impacts.

Ron Swanson February 8, 2022 (2:55 pm)

Because improving local bus service is Metro’s job, not Sound Transit’s?

If you want to see the plans for that, Metro’s plan is here

And no readily available land to build replacement housing? That’ll be news to all the commenters who have an argument about parking on the posts about new buildings in design review that pop up once or twice a week…

Buck February 8, 2022 (11:42 am)

Premature. This is all a huge waste of time and money until they tell us how they will be crossing the Duwamish. Can’t use the existing bridges. Much like the Monorail fiasco, where they spent millions and took away shops to make room…for nothing. I vote for Metro buses, they do the job just fine and cost way less for us taxpayers.

WSB February 8, 2022 (12:26 pm)

That’s part of the DEIS. We just focus on the WS section but the DEIS is for the entire West Seattle – cross Duwamish – SODO – downtown- Ballard project.

KD February 8, 2022 (11:44 am)

ST3 will double your commute time unless you live within walking distance from the station. Otherwise, you’ll be taking a bus from your home to one of the three stations. From there, you’ll ride a train to SODO, where you’ll have to get off again and get on another train to go anywhere else. How is this better? I can take the 125 or 120 and be downtown with a 1 seat ride in 15 mins (non rush) or 40 (rush).

Ron Swanson February 8, 2022 (2:14 pm)

The SODO transfer only exists for a few years before the new Downtown tunnel is complete – then you have a one seat ride to the stadiums, downtown, Capitol Hill, the UW, Roosevelt, Northgate and on to Lynnwood and Everett, with a cross platform transfer to Bellevue, Redmond, the airport, etc. It’s a huge improvement over the bus, and allows those bus service hours to be redeployed to improve service within West Seattle and get people to the stations.
- Martin February 8, 2022 (10:23 pm)
  
  Ron, have you looked at the designs for the downtown stations? The second tunnel may end up far deeper and far away from the current tunnel. It may take a while to do a transfer from one line to the next. The next question is when the 2nd tunnel will be done, 2037? In the meantime, most people will arrive by bus at one of the WS stations and may have to wait 10min (depending on time of day) for a train to SODO where they have to wait another 10min for another train from the airport and during peak time it may already be full.
WS Guy February 8, 2022 (3:02 pm)

This is true. For most people ST will make the transit time worse. That’s one of the flaws of fixed rail; its service area is limited to handful of stations. I have a feeling that once people figure that out, the buses will continue to run downtown rather than lose ridership. However, there are billions of dollars of contracts to award so it’s a little late to point this out.
Jon Wright February 8, 2022 (3:18 pm)

A one-seat ride definitely has a lot of appeal. Peak times, however, are subject to a lot of variation. From the Junction on the C during rush hour pre-Covid, our experience was that a ride to/from downtown could take anywhere between 30 and 60 minutes. The idea with light rail is that travel times would be predictable. And if your ride averages 40 minutes today, do you really think it will still “only” be 40 minutes 10 or 20 years from now? As roads continue to get more congested, light rail will continue to gain advantage in travel time. The SODO transfer is going to be annoying (unless SODO is your destination) but that is only a temporary measure until the line to Ballard is operational. Metro has claimed that the bus service hours currently spent on routes driving into Seattle will be used for local service within West Seattle. With more buses and frequent light rail service, transfer time would be reduced. That plus the shorter trip time of light rail will hopefully overcome the transfer penalty.

Gene February 9, 2022 (10:55 am)

Why are we extending our light rail system? Because it’s cost efficient? According to published numbers from AAA, the National Transit Database, and the Federal Highway Administration, light rail’s total cost per passenger mile is about $2.03, while private vehicles average about $1.02. Even taking these numbers with a grain of salt, light rail is a tough sell based on cost-efficiency. Because it’s better for the environment? Given sufficient passenger loads, light rail’s environmental benefits are real, but they’re probably not durable. Current reckoning favors light rail over fossil fuel cars, but the huge carbon footprint of initial light rail construction is rarely included in these calculations, and the numbers get turned upside down when hybrid and electric cars are factored in – a Toyota Prius consumes half the energy and emits a third less CO2 per passenger mile than light rail. LTR is greener today, but maybe not tomorrow if we end up where we want to be with alternative fuel cars. Because it improves quality of life via reduced congestion and commute times? No study has found any US light rail project reduced traffic more than marginally, even in the most successful systems. This seems to be borne out in the draft EIS, which estimates Seattle light rail extensions will reduce traffic 20 years from now by 0.1 percent, or 1/1000th. So why light rail, then? Most casual arguments can be lumped under something like ‘How can mass transit be a bad thing?’ Serious proponents, though, focus more on light rail’s ability to guide and influence economic development. This can make some sense. A highly subsidized transportation solution like light rail shifts the cost of mobility from the individual to society. We all benefit from enabling the mobility of individuals participating in the economy, especially those just getting started or working at lower wage scales. Unfortunately, light rail also tends to drive up property values, independent of any real economic expansion. This can work against the very populations subsidized transportation can most benefit. So, are these mixed blessings worth the blight of elevated light rail? Light rail, maybe, but elevated light rail? No. Elevated guideways can be a great solution along existing freeways or through unpopulated stretches, but they’re not defensible in urban and semi-urban areas. If we can’t afford sub-grade over elevated, we can’t afford light rail. This is not subjective opinion: new urban light rail in successful cities around the world are universally below grade. US cities seem to be uniquely willing to permanently sacrifice living space and urban character for relatively small one-time savings. Personally, I can imagine other ways to spend billions in the hope of lessening our carbon footprint and improving economic opportunity, but the reality is these types of public funds take on a life of their own. So if we’re going to spend billions on this particular vision, let’s make sure that vision isn’t myopic. Let’s suffer only once, spend the relatively small additional amount needed, keep guideways below grade in West Seattle, and not accept irreversible mediocrity in the name of economy and easier execution. Expediency erodes our future.