If you’ve been confused by all of the updates with regard to light rail recently, this is the event for you. Local residents are invited to learn more about Bellevue’s proposed light rail route at an open house next week.
The City of Bellevue will host a discussion about its proposed alternative route for Sound Transit’s East Link light rail, from 5-7pm, on Tuesday, January 25, at City Hall, 450 110th Avenue NE, room 1E-108.
The proposed route is a variation of a route studied by Sound Transit. The City Council has requested staff to compare the routes to determine if design changes can reduce impacts and costs, as well as improve performance, according to a press release.
The original proposed route would run along the BNSF rail corridor through south Bellevue, while Sound Transit’s preferred route runs along Bellevue Way and 112th Avenue.
Sound Transit’s board of directors is expected to make a final decision on the location of the East Link routes this year.
This will go well…Everybody on the downtown side will want it across the highway and everyone over there will want it in Bellevue.
Let the bickering begin.
For those who want to see the map of the revised route B7, here it is: http://www.bellevuewa.gov/pdf/Transportation/b7_revised_map.pdf
Focusing on trying to secure the inferior B7 alignment will cost the city it’s chance to get a tunnel through downtown, which is much more essential. The Sound Transit proposed routes are faster, less expensive, and are forecast to carry more passengers.
I can’t believe the city spent $700,000 to study this idea in this economy, just to appease the Surrey Down NIMBY’s and Kemper Freeman…. It’s a good thing that Sound Transit, and not the city council has the final say on the alignment of this regional system!
@Tony,
Sound Transit will NOT build a tunnel through downtown Bellevue unless the city comes up with the 500 million dollars it costs to build it. If there is no tunnel, I would rather have the rail along 405 corridor than through 108th. That will impact downtown traffic far less.
I agree, Bellevue needs to pay to play, which is all the more reason for the council to stop wasting our money. There is no reason to build light rail if it doesn’t go to people’s destinations.
Surrey Downs is not “downtown”, and I’m pretty sure all the Bellevue residents along the East side of the Mercer Slough would prefer it to be on the West side of the slough. Why does Surrey Downs feel they are somehow better than the rest of Bellevuites?
Finally, the whole point is that light rail IS supposed to affect downtown traffic, by reducing the number of people that drive. No one visits Bellevue to see the SE 8th on-ramp, they come to shop and do business in the downtown core. That’s where stations need to be. Anyone who argues otherwise is unfortunately acting in their self interest and not seeing the big picture of what the system is supposed to do.
“If there is no tunnel, I would rather have the rail along 405 corridor than through 108th. That will impact downtown traffic far less.”
@LD
I cannot disagree with you more.
This is the typical stunning short-sightedness this region uniquely has regarding to massive public projects, e.g. the SR520 bridge in limbo, the viaduct bickering, the brilliant but defunct Seattle Commons idea, the Monorail, Seattle streetcar, etc.
Maybe because PNW is so isolated so people don’t know what amazing projects that are happening outside?
Not only I want the LightRail to get away from I405 as far as possible. If it’s up to me the Rail should run maybe along 106th Ave deep in downtown area. The rail is built for people to use instead of some exhibition you can see while driving on 405.
@Tony
Actually upon seeing the revised B7 route, I hate it less.
Visually it looks about the same distance to travel from I90 to downtown.
And I also liked the idea of big Park & Ride lots in South Bellevue and East Main stations.
I still prefer the route through Surrey Downs, but if B7 is cheaper (less money spent on shutting those NIMBYs up), I might be on board.
What are your reasonings of rejecting B7? I wonder whether I missed any big red flags.
Kevin I’m not sure about a few of your points.
B7 has nothing to do with the station called East Main, that is dependent on having surface through DT vs a tunnel.
Also the park and ride for B7 is in a new spot (currently SF housing) vs building on the existing one near the slough.
B7 costs MORE and every study Bellevue wastes studying it seems to say it would be even more risky then previously thought.
Reasons for rejecting B7:
1. costs more
2. more risky – could cause delays
3. Does not use existing P&R
4. Dump more traffic through Enatai
5. Worse for the slough
6. May prevent BNSF bike / jogging trail
The only reason Surrey wants it over on 118 is so that is one block further away from them…
What you’re all missing is that given the budget ST has for the East Link project, you can’t have both the B7 and a downtown tunnel. And now that the city has re-designed the B7, it’ll cost another $150 million more than the old B7, money Sound Transit doesn’t have either.
ST doesn’t want to build on the BNSF. They don’t want to risk crossing the slough. There’s a cheaper, higher-ridership option called B2M, which they’re on record as preferring.
So the Council is offering Bellevue citizens a big red herring, since they don’t make the final call on the alignment, and they cannot stop Sound Transit. The false choice they offer Bellevue citizens with this event tonight means this: we get either the inferior, lower-ridership B7 Enhanced (and the City covers the cost of the ‘enhancements’) combined with a surface route through our downtown, or the ST-preferred B2M (running up 112th, technically next to and not through the Surrey Downs neighborhood) and a tunnel.
And correcting LD’s grasp of the issue, the gap between the ST budget and the cost of a downtown tunnel is $300m, and the City Council already agreed to fund up to half of that in in-kind contributions and real dollars. A downtown tunnel is totally within Bellevue’s ability to achieve – if it truly prioritized it, the Council could make it happen.
Why are they putting the tunnel at risk to advance something south of the downtown that the Sound Transit Board won’t even consider doing? Picking favorites among constituents for this year’s Council election, that’s why.
Does anyone know if someone has had yard signs (like the election signs) printed saying “I want light rail in Downtown Bellevue”? I’d love a couple for my yard just a block off downtown.
Jeanie-I haven’t heard of/seen any. Maybe you could try getting in contact with the people who run seattletransitblog.com, I’m sure they could point you in the right direction.
I missed the meeting. How did it go?