In a guest op/ed for the Seattle Transit Blog, Bellevue City Council member John Chelminiak shoots down one of the major arguments made by proponents of the so-called B7 light rail route through South Bellevue: That it would allow Bellevue's rail line to hook up to a future line to Issaquah.

B7, the alternative preferred by a majority of the Bellevue council, would run along an abandoned BNSF right-of-way just east of I-405, traveling across the Mercer Slough wetland and bypassing most jobs and residences in the area, as well as the existing South Bellevue park and ride. Sound Transit prefers a more direct alignment that it says would be less expensive and serve more people than the B7 route.

Although supporters have argued repeatedly that B7 provides the guideway for a future rail line to the Eastgate park-and-ride in Issaquah, Chelminiak points out that the route would require light rail to climb up the east side of the Mercer Slough---a ridge that's too steep for light rail, which can only climb a grade of about 5 percent. The only possible solutions, according to Chelminiak? Build the rail tracks more than 150 feet in the air, or build a winding tunnel through the slough at great expense.

The bottom line is it’s impossible to go directly east on the proposed B7 guideway.  So let’s take the Issaquah connection out of the talking points.  Using the BNSF still goes a mile-and-a-half out of the way to use a mile-and-a-quarter of railroad bed. And it still costs $140 million more than the Bellevue Way route.

Let’s concentrate on what’s already been promised: a line serving Mercer Island, South Bellevue, Downtown Bellevue, Bel-Red, Overlake and on to Redmond.  The Eastgate and Issaquah markets might be better served by an Eastside route connecting with Bellevue, Kirkland, and the Totem Lake area.  And let’s be thinking where a great transfer point would be to connect up new lines.  That’s a vision grounded in reality.