I used the “Meeting Comments” to email the Board’s System Expansion Committee May 8th meeting my “4/29/23 post “Existing DSTT Can Accommodate Light Rail Riders”. It opined the DSTT could accommodate those needing to beyond CID and Westlake stations if Sound Transit terminated East Link and West Seattle extensions at existing CID stations and terminated Ballard extension at existing Westlake station.
Doing so would avoid the cost of boring a 2nd tunnel, new stations at SODO, either 4th Ave CID stations or North and South of CID, and Westlake. Terminating East Link and West Seattle at CID would avoid limiting Line 1 Link capacity to SeaTac and beyond. Terminating the Ballard extension at existing Westlake Station would avoid waiting for 2nd tunnel to begin operation. (It's current 2039 "Target Date" is two years after the 16.3 mile Everett Link Extension "Target Date".)
The existing DSTT and CID could provide the “once in a lifetime opportunity to create a space for people to transfer from light rail to light rail, to Sounder and Amtrak". The operating schedules and the number of cars in each train for all three extensions could be matched to local demand saving millions in costs.
Typical of the Board, the System Expansion Committee ignored the “Comments”. The March 23rd Board meeting had requested an additional 2 months of study to consider the 4th Ave CID access to second light rail tunnel as well as Sound Transit’s “Preferred Alternative” for North and South of CID station.
The May 1 release of the March “Agency Progress Report” included the following Sound Transit response:
The Board also directed that the CID 4th Avenue Shallower option be
carried forward for additional environmental review.
The board was told in the May 25th meeting Sound Transit needed “additional environment review” of the 4th Ave CID station, delaying the Ballard Link Final EIS. It’s unlikely any delay will affect the West Seattle and Ballard Link DEIS and March Agency Progress Report’s 2039 “target date”. A competent transit board would use the added time to demand “additional environmental review” of a “no second tunnel option” that could shorten the wait and billions in costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment