By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

Though the motion approved by a Sound Transit Board committee today recommends the West Seattle light-rail “project to be built,” committee members needed to be amply reassured that their vote was not a commitment that it will be built.

They got that reassurance from Terri Mestas, ST’s deputy CEO of megaproject delivery. She told System Expansion Committee members the board would have other milestone votes before a commitment to construction, while stressing that moving the project further along the design path was the only way to resolve some of the concerns.

Committee chair King County Councilmember Claudia Balducci of Bellevue observed that there are “some big questions besides cost.” But it’s the potential $7 billion price tag, which emerged with the Final Environmental Impact Statement last month, that hung in the air throughout the discussion.

Before getting to the actual resolution spelling out the station locations and routing they’re recommending, committee members heard about the “workplan” mandated by the board in a motion sponsored by King County Councilmember Dow Constantine of West Seattle. (He’s not on the System Expansion Committee, so wasn’t at today’s meeting.)

That’s the first time the other milestone decisions came up; outlining what would be in this “workplan,” ST staff noted that there would be funding decisions related to design and construction, “a series of iterative decisions.” Here’s the slide deck from the workplan presentation, including this key page laying out many steps along the way:

Balducci noted that all those points seemed to comprise more of a primer of how to do a project, than anything specific to West Seattle and its potential price. Mestas explained that it’s the “framework” of the plan, and they would have more details in the first quarter of next year.

Before the workplan discussion ended, committee member Cassie Franklin, mayor of Everett, had a very pointed question: What’s the “operational importance” of the West Seattle extension – what would it mean to the system if the extension simply wasn’t built? She was told that might be clearer after the presentation about the recommended routing/station locations, and soon afterward, the meeting segued into that.

ST high-capacity-transit development manager Jason Hampton led that briefing. Here’s the slide deck; these are the two key pages, first the recommendation and what they see as its selling points:

Then, why they say the West Seattle extension matters:

A side benefit of the West Seattle project, he said, would be up to 1,225 units of transit-oriented development near the station areas. Meantime, Hampton said that ridership wouldn’t vary much between alternatives – all were projected at 24,000 to 27,000 daily boardings. If the Avalon station were dropped, they envision ridership would only drop by about 100 a day.

In Q&A, the committee members did not delve into any of the options beyond the preferred alternative. They were focused on the process and the cost. Franklin re-asked her question about “what if we didn’t build this?” and Mestas said she would have to research the answer. Franklin also voiced concern that they were committing to something that could adversely affect the rest of what’s on the drawing board for the system. Balducci wanted more specifics on the “levers” the board could pull along the way so that didn’t happen, ensuring they would “retain control.” Mestas said that the 1st quarter and late summer/fall of 2025 would likely bring a few – opportunities for savings, perhaps “scope refinements.”

Franklin then asked how much money they were voting to spend with the “project to be built” decision. There’s no money attached to this, Mestas replied. Shortly thereafter, interim CEO Goran Sparrman broke into the discussion to explain that the overarching desire right now was to stay on schedule, because “time is money.”

After veering briefly into a related topic involving agreements for dealing with the project’s impacts on cultural/historical/tribal resources, the committee engaged in a bit more discussion before the vote. Seattle City Councilmember Dan Strauss, one of two Seattle reps on this committee along with Mayor Bruce Harrell, said he had a lot of questions about the SODO leg of the extension (which was a major topic in the public-comment period at the start of the moment, which we’ll get to in a moment). Balducci summarized that in order to “understand” the project’s issues, they needed to advance to the next stage. And so, without any proposed changes to the “preferred alternative” routing and station locations, the committee voted to recommend board approval.

The full board is scheduled to vote at its next meeting in two weeks (Thursday, October 24).

PUBLIC COMMENT: The meeting started, as usual, with a summary of written public comments that had been received, followed by in-person and remote commenters. (Some addressed the SODO station; we’re just focusing on the West Seattle legs.) Written comments included support for the “no-build option” as well as support for building light rail but dropping the Avalon station. 17 people signed up to comment “live”; they also included “no-build” supporters as well as people calling for dropping the Avalon station. Among them was Transitional Resources executive director Darcell Slovek-Walker, who thanked ST for the Delridge route revision that spared her nonprofit’s Avalon/Yancy-area supportive housing, but said that the no-Avalon-station version would assist their operations – with the frequent need for emergency services – via less traffic disruption and fewer displacements. Others have spoken to the board before, including Kim Schwarzkopf, who declared that she had voted for ST3 but felt “scammed” by how it’s turning out, and suggested it would make more sense to accelerate Ballard (currently with a 2039 launch date, seven years behind West Seattle). The most ardent project supporter to comment today was also someone who’s previously spoken to the board, Transportation Choices executive director Kirk Hovenkotter, who declared, “This project is worth investing in.” He also said 900 transit riders had written letters in support of the project on short notice (as solicited here).

IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY … at or before the October 24 board meeting, here’s how.