WEST SEATTLE LIGHT RAIL: 600+ ways to cut system-expanding costs? Sound Transit edging closer to official proposals

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

This afternoon’s Sound Transit Board System Expansion Committee meeting had two items of note for those watching the West Seattle Link Extension plan, still on record as pointed toward a 2032 launch. The question is, what will the plan look like once the staff and board are finished trying to reshape it into “affordability”? The process aimed at answering that question, the Enterprise Initiative, was the subject of another briefing at this afternoon’s committee meeting.

Before that was discussed, the first item of interest was another real-estate acquisition – a residential property on Pigeon Point. Not because it’s needed soon for planning/construction, but because, according to agenda documents, its owners have “medical circumstances” requiring them to sell soon, but because of the looming light-rail project, the agency says, nobody else will buy it. The board already has approved a couple other such purchases, and the committee sent this one on to the full board for approval (along with another in the Ballard project area), though with reservations voiced by Dan Strauss, the Seattle City Councilmember who sits on the ST Board – he revived a topic brought up with previous acquisitions, concerns about ST just letting the properties sit empty for years; apparently a policy change is in the works that might allow a different use for such properties, but not quickly enough to alleviate the concerns Strauss voiced.

Then it was on to the Enterprise Initiative briefing. The next major milestone is the development of “scenarios” for the full board to discuss at its retreat in March, so they can finalize an “updated ST3 system plan” by midyear.

ST’s Brad Owen told the committee that they’re now evaluating more than 600 “opportunities” for getting the full ST system plan close to something realistic.

The “takeaways” from that work included another warning that project phasing or even deferrals might be required.

And as has been the case at previous briefings, they again discussed possible cuts/changes as “levers” of different levels that could be pulled. Then Owen presented examples of possible levers at each level, such as, in the West Seattle project, dropping the Avalon station.

This, he said, would have “no notable effect on ridership” and would mean fewer property acquisitions, a more direct route from Delridge to The Junction, less impact on sites of concern like Longfellow Creek and the West Seattle Health Club property, with up to almost half a billion dollars in savings. (No new total project-cost estimate was mentioned at this meeting.)

Board approval would be needed for that or any other top level “lever” proposed – and keep in mind, what was presented today (here’s the full slide deck) was just a set of examples, not a formal proposal. And the West Seattle project isn’t the only one they’re reviewing for cuts – in addition to Ballard, there are Tacoma and Everett Link Extensions in planning, as well as Sounder and ST Express Bus projects discussed at today’s meeting. (Added: Here’s the meeting video.)

WHAT’S NEXT: The full board generally gets discussion items like this at its next meeting after committee briefings; that will be two weeks from today, on Thursday, February 26 – watch here for the agenda.

31 Replies to "WEST SEATTLE LIGHT RAIL: 600+ ways to cut system-expanding costs? Sound Transit edging closer to official proposals"

  • CarDriver February 13, 2026 (5:31 am)

    ST had a service disruption in the south end last Wednesday due to copper wire theft. They need to be held accountable for having a clear security plan to handle any and ALL security scenarios.

  • North Admiral Cyclist February 13, 2026 (5:48 am)

    Having watched and supported Sound Transit since their inception, it sure looks to me like the current board has an appetite for “expanding” the system to more cities, and not servicing the central populations that have financially supported transit all along.  Decisions were made decades ago to build a medium capacity, “light rail” train line, and not a high capacity, heavy rail system like exists in major cites elsewhere.  We did not build a high capacity, heavy rail, system like San Francisco’s BART or New York’s subways.  This means there are limits to the number of people the trains can move.  The ST system limits were stress tested just this week with the Seahawks Super Bowl parade, and the capacity weaknesses of light rail were felt as trains overloaded and people at close-in stations, such as Northgate, were unable to board.  West Seattle’s elected officials such as Saka and the new mayor need to sit up and take notice.   I’m all for transit, but our elected officials need to work to curb the ST Board’s current appetite to lengthen the Sound Transit system so its metrics sound impressive.  Instead, there should be a refocus to improve service to close-in neighborhoods within the City of Seattle – which is much more consistent with the capabilities of light rail.

  • Marcus February 13, 2026 (6:40 am)

    I am not convinced WS really needs sound transit. The impact is severe, the cost is prohibitive and is just moving people out of the very flexible bus system. And if the idea is reducing auto traffic then sound transit is limited with destinations. The tracks, tunnels, stations and bridges are just going muck up WS. Keep a flexible bus grid at an incredibly lower cost.

    • West Seattle Mad Sci Guy February 13, 2026 (9:29 am)

      Using that logic we don’t need a light rail system at all. “We can just use buses”.  Light rail is faster than buses. I use light rail and buses almost daily.

      Also security on light rail is FAR superior (because it’s easier to manage with fewer fixed points). I know many people who won’t take buses with me. Light rail security is always on it. High folks generally don’t try to camp out on light rail any longer.

      • R February 13, 2026 (10:38 am)

        How is light rail faster than buses if it doesn’t have dedicated lanes? The only reason I’d have a need for light rail would be to get to SeaTac but no way am I going to do that, going the opposite direction to Sodo, waiting for a transfer and then having easily double the 15 minutes, if not significantly more time a taxi takes.

        • Derek February 13, 2026 (2:36 pm)

          Buses fight with cars for traffic. You can transfer at Sodo and it’ll be so much faster than 50. I’m a rider of the 50 and it’s unbelievably slow, it’s 25 mins from Triangle area. That’s insane time added to daily commute. Build lightrail now because you have to take 21 and walk. I despise it.

    • North Admiral Neighbor February 13, 2026 (10:01 am)

      Yep, if we just banned parking along California Ave, Admiral Way, Fauntleroy Way, and Avalon Way then we could use the freed up lanes to put in bus only lanes that wouldn’t get stuck in traffic. Banning street parking would go a long way toward making our neighborhoods more pedestrian and transit friendly.

      • Marcus February 13, 2026 (11:36 am)

        Will check in, in 15 years to see how it all turns out.

      • EVGuy February 13, 2026 (1:14 pm)

        Sure, just tell all those stores to close too while we’re at it, since they’re going to have a massive decline in traffic once you take away all the parking. Seriously, stop taking away our lanes – we use them. The buses come AT MOST every 15 minutes, and I don’t see them sitting in traffic at all, so I think they’re fine. Better yet, put security on every bus so people actually want to ride them, because right now our buses are little third world apocalypses. 

        • Jort February 13, 2026 (3:34 pm)

          OK then, sounds like we’ll do the train. 

      • CarDriver February 13, 2026 (4:42 pm)

        You’re welcome to start a petition to accomplish that. You can go to your neighbors and California Ave businesses gathering signatures. Holding my breath that you-and like-minded people will actually do so. Just kidding. Nobody would sign.

  • Seth February 13, 2026 (6:54 am)

    Would be totally fine to cut Avalon if it means we keep the whole thing. Waking from Avalon to California or the junction isn’t so bad and with scooters us super quick. 

  • Platypus February 13, 2026 (8:18 am)

    I would miss the Avalon Station, but I understand the reduced complexity. Feels like a bit of a missed opportunity, but the sooner the light rail gets to the Junction the better. LET’S GO! 

    • Slightly Mornful Avalon Light Rail Fan February 13, 2026 (9:41 am)

      The Avalon station would have been the most convenient for me, but understand it’s the least vital, and I’m willing to forgo it to get the rail overall.  I wonder if they could design in a way that would allow it to be added as an infill station later.

      • Platypus February 13, 2026 (12:23 pm)

        The new route moves the possible “infill station” significantly north, into the neighborhood

        • S.M.A.L.F. February 13, 2026 (1:53 pm)

          Yes, I responded before I read all the way: the proposal to decrease costs by moving the tunnel does certainly seem to preclude a future infill station. Still, rail w/o avalon now and forever is better than no rail.

  • Belvidear February 13, 2026 (9:15 am)

    Is parking in the Junction going to be a nightmare?

    • CarDriver February 13, 2026 (10:03 am)

      Yes. A LOT of people drive and park now. It’ll just be more.

      • Foop February 13, 2026 (11:04 am)

        Good thing we have plenty of busses that stop at Alaska junction. I wish we had a bike lane in California or 35th. Biking up that way is always sketchy. As is I can bike to sodo station but even that’s not great once you leave marginal.

        • GH February 13, 2026 (1:47 pm)

          I would love to see bike lanes on 35th accompanying a driving lane reduction.  They can build a separated bike path up the hill on the city-owned land east of 35th and have it rejoin the street at the signal at Edmunds.  I can dream, right?

  • side-walker February 13, 2026 (9:29 am)

    Build it all the way to the Fauntleroy Ferry docks, so that this very much needed piece of infrastructure serves even more purpose and helps to alleviate congestion/commuting issues for communities in WS and even the Island/Port Orchard side!

  • Matt H February 13, 2026 (12:07 pm)

    Building West Seattle rail before the part up to South lake Union never made any sense.  But seems clear here that a station that costs whatever gobs of money BUT DOESNT ADD RIDERS isn’t going to be built.  But uh, why then was it suggested and designed in the first place? You can guarantee that tens of millions have already been spent on the paper plans for it.  This is not how you run an agency. 

    • Marcus February 13, 2026 (1:17 pm)

      I get the feeling like it is the journey rather than the destination or completion that is most important. As long as we are doing something that is the feel good. Sort of shallow and costly. 

  • Marcus February 13, 2026 (2:05 pm)

    Seems like West Seattle will lose its community feel, its separation from the rest of Seattle, its identity as WS will just be another part of Seattle whole like northgate, with a big ugly structure. What happened to “the peninsula” or “the island”? Probably inevitable although yet I wish more WS people would advocate for community over this urbanized mass submission.

  • Derek February 13, 2026 (2:31 pm)

    Just build the trains already! We need them. Nothing improved community more than density and lightrail. Ask Roosevelt. 

  • Shawn February 13, 2026 (5:13 pm)

    I have no idea how they think dropping an entire station isn’t going to affect ridership. That’s insane. This project was already modest bordering on timid. Cutting critical infrastructure that’s going to be around for a century or longer to save a few bucks is criminally short sighted. Hopefully the board tells them no and to find ways to raise or save money that doesn’t involve abandoning the entire purpose of the train in the first place. 

  • Admiral2009 February 13, 2026 (5:51 pm)

    Two ways to enhance revenue:

    1. Fare evasion needs to be stopped 
    2. Expired car license tabs need to be paid 

    Getting everyone to pay their fare and car tabs would significantly enhance revenue, I estimate $50 to 100,000,000 a year!

  • Gloria February 13, 2026 (7:48 pm)

    Dump everyone who wants to go downtown or connect to other parts in Sodo and  then they must transfer from Sodo to another destination. Not a good solution. Who decided on this? Such poor planning a waste of taxpayer dollars with a mess for years to come  in the Alaskan junction. Why is this ineptness allowed to continue.This light  rail system will be obsolete by the time it’s paid for not to mention a proposal to extend financing that our children and grandchildren would be paying for . A dinosaur at that time. All important studies have been ignored, displacement of people, businesses, lack of transparency, and Dow Constantine  trying to keep pushing this big mistake and outdated plan. Times have changed since 2016 when this was voted on.

    • Derek February 13, 2026 (8:39 pm)

      It goes downtown, QA, then Ballard eventually 

  • Marcus February 14, 2026 (8:03 am)

    There are some good ideas. Let me see; tracks over and through the woods in Longfellow Creek and an extension to the ferry terminal where we can take about 100 feet of Lincoln Park along Fauntleroy for tracks and then build an elevated station over the south parking lot. Excellent ideas to trash our environment on our way to mass urban submission. Really??? I think everyone gets so involved with the idea that we forget the lessons learned from the construction and removal of the downtown viaduct. Besides what are the cost now?? Almost $8 billion. Man what we can do with services for our poor, unhoused, and struggling lower middle class. 

Leave a Reply to Marcus Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.