Sound Transit publishes draft EIS on light rail extension across Lake Washington to Bellevue and Redmond

by John Niles

Full EIS document is posted in sections at http://www.soundtransit.org/x9959.xml.

 

Sound Transit collected comments in the formal, legal sense through February 25, 2009 and published them in a summary document.

 

An informal comment period is now underway until the final version of the draft EIS is published around mid-year 2010, with a final Record of Decision coming a month later.  Comments should now be sent to elected officials in the city and county governments within the Sound Transit taxing district.  Most elected officials are not aware of what the draft EIS actually states. For example, the draft EIS reveals that traffic congestion across both Lake Washington bridges in 2030 will be made worse if East Link light rail is in operation then.

Comments by King County Metro Transit on the East Link light rail draft EIS, focusing largely on impacts to bus service between Seattle and the Eastside suburbs (pdf). 
Part 1 comments of February 2009.   Part 2 comments of March 2009.

 

Comments filed by Coalition for Effective Transportation Alternatives (pdf), noting that a strong express bus alternative should have been included, given the high cost, poor environmental performance, and weak customer attraction of light rail.

 

Comments filed by Kemper Development Corporation (7 megabyte pdf), a leading commercial developer and property owner in downtown Bellevue. These comments also recommend a stronger bus alternative.

U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration comments (pdf) on the East Link light rail draft EIS, mostly focused on the impact to the Interstate 90 corridor.

Comments from Eastside civic activist Bill Hirt, who is following up with a series of essays presented to Bellevue City Council

All of the alternatives shown below will be analyzed in the Final EIS due out in mid 2010.  However, the greatest emphasis will be given to Sound Transit's preferred alternative, which is shown on map provided on this Sound Transit web page.

Sound Transit's East Link Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) assesses the impacts on transportation, energy, air quality, and other parts of the physical environment caused by constructing and operating a new light rail extension connecting Seattle, Mercer Island, and the east side of Lake Washington.

For example, this document reports on page 3-9 that East Link light rail will reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the region by 200,000 per day in 2030, compared to not building this train.  That's a change from 93,666,900 VMT per day to 93,470,700, a reduction of about one quarter of one percent.

This passenger railroad would cross the Lake in the center roadway of Interstate 90, which would become part of an 18 mile dedicated right-of-way between Seattle and Redmond.  Funding for this extension was passed by voters on November 4, 2008 in the Proposition 1 ballot measure.

This Draft EIS does the following:

The East Link corridor is divided for planning purposes into five geographic segments:

The EIS also considers a No Build Alternative and four potential locations for a light rail maintenance facility alternatives (three in Segment D and one in Segment E).

Below are detailed maps of the five segments, showing the various alternatives under consideration.

Note: In a letter dated July 23, 2008, Sound Transit has assured the Washington State Department of Transportation that "Sound Transit has responsibility for the cost and risk to construct and maintain electric light rail on the I-90 bridge."

Below is a map showing City of Bellevue's preferred transit alignment in the Bel-Red corridor.

Much more detail on the various alternatives are posted at http://www.soundtransit.org/x9959.xml.

Next is shown City of Bellevue's map of its preferred transit alignment through the Bel-Red corridor as shown by Planning Director Dan Stroh at a conference on September 16, 2008, posted at http://your.kingcounty.gov/solidwaste/greenbuilding/summit/documents/Bel-Red_Green_Conference.pdf

Return to the Public Interest Transportation Forum home page