At a public meeting to discuss Sound Transit's plans to extend light rail to Northgate at a Northeast Seattle elementary school last night, dozens of residents spoke out with concerns about the impacts a new light rail station might have on their neighborhood.

Although most of the concerns residents voiced were confined to the usual neighborhood worries---noise, people parking in the neighborhood, visual blight, and decreased property values (one woman suggested that Sound Transit just put the whole station underground, since it's going to go over budget anyway)---some new concerns came to light. One involved an issue I wrote about yesterday---the possibility of a 500-stall, multistory parking garage at the new Northgate rail station.

To recap: As part of its Northgate plan, Sound Transit has agreed to replace all 428 park-and-ride spaces that will be temporarily displaced during construction, as well as all 117 spaces that will be displaced permanently by the new rail station. Although only those 117 spots would be gone for good, the board is considering (among several other options) replacing all the displaced spaces with permanent parking, including the 428 that will ultimately be replaced elsewhere, with the new parking garage.

"Our current assumption is that a parking garage would be associated with the station," North Link project manager Ron Endlich told the crowded auditorium during his presentation. "We are obligated to provide replacement parking during construction."

However, Endlich noted, some of the spaces could potentially be replaced by shared parking or additional transit service. And, he said, Sound Transit might ultimately reduce the number of parking spots after the Lynnwood station opens to the north (on the assumption that most suburban commuters would choose to park their cars there instead of driving further south to Northgate.) Overall, Sound Transit is not proposing to increase the total number of parking spots near the station.

The issue for some, though, is this: Why build a permanent structure to solve a temporary problem? If only 117 stalls are being displaced in the long term, why build 500 stalls to replace them instead of finding a more flexible, temporary solution---such as leasing part of an underused nearby parking lot?

"Why are we spending more money on parking?" transit activist Jacob Struiksma said. "Your name is Sound Transit. We should be spending more money on transit-oriented development" Struiksma, incidentally, got the only applause line of the night.

Transit activists have been asking Sound Transit to ask the Federal Transit Administration to lift a requirement that it replace every parking space that's displaced permanently---the 117 spaces mentioned above---on a one for one basis, and have been optimistic that the agency might do so. Last night, however, Endlich said Sound Transit has not made any overtures to the FTA so far. "There are no ongoing discussions with the FTA on that at this point," Endlich said. "This is an area of potential future discussion if the plan is not consistent with the" agreement with the feds to build light rail.

Asked for clarification today, Sound Transit spokesman Bruce Gray said, "If the option that the board wants would not include the one to one replacement," Sound Transit would go to the FTA at that point and ask them to change the language of the agreement. "Essentially, we can't ask them if that's all right to do that if we're not 100 percent sure that that's the direction we want to go," Gray said.

Another issue---a potential pedestrian bridge connecting North Seattle Community College to the station across I-5 (pictured)---came up repeatedly last night, with questioners wondering how much the bridge would cost and whether it was just a pipe dream. The answer, although the Sound Transit planners didn't put it this way, was: Pretty much the latter.

"There has been a feasibility study done by King County Metro on the pedestrian bridge and they've confirmed it's physically feasible," Endlich said. But, "there's no funding to advance the environmental work or design or construction. At this point, it's not part of our scope."