Sound Transit’s Preferred Route: At grade through downtown Bellevue
Here at the Meydenbauer Convention Center in downtown Bellevue, the Sound Transit board and the Bellevue City Council are holding their first-ever joint meeting to discuss a new Sound Transit report about six potential light-rail alignments through or near downtown Bellevue. The report found
A moderator opened the meeting by asking participants to express their hopes and fears about light rail, but most of the board and council members have used their opening remarks to grandstand on behalf of their preferred alignments.
On one side is a majority of the Bellevue council, who want to build light rail either in a tunnel under downtown Bellevue or along I-405 to the east of downtown. Bellevue mayor Don Davidson (in Bellevue, mayors are also members of the city council) talked about wanting to “accommodate the environment” while satisfying Bellevue residents “who are being inundated by light rail.” Bellevue council member Kevin Wallace, whose “Vision Line” alignment had the worst performance of all the downtown alternatives Sound Transit considered, said that his main goal was “to protect the character of Bellevue’s single-family neighborhoods and [avoid] Bellevue’s roads. Bellevue council member Conrad Lee, meanwhile, complained that no one on the Sound Transit has ever contacted him in his 16 years on the council. “Up until now, there has been nothing but rumors, innuendo, and posturing,” Lee said.
On the other side are most members of the Sound Transit board, who want light rail to go through downtown Bellevue but don’t want to provide the additional $300 to $500 million it would cost to put rail in a tunnel. Their faction includes Bellevue council member Claudia Balducci, who noted that people who say they want compromise often “think that means getting concessions from the other side of the table”; Lakewood City Council member Claudia Thomas, who told the Bellevue contingent that “you can’t have everything you want”; and Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn, who said that rising gas prices and federal laws restricting the use of fossil fuels will lead people to drive less in the future.
“My fear is that we sometimes look at the way things have been in the past and think that’s the way we’re going ton continue to do things in the future,” said McGinn.
McGinn showed up an hour late for the 1:30 meeting because he was answering questions from Stranger readers at the Slog.
Caffeinated news & gossip. Your daily Morning Fizz.
1. In case you missed this important piece of news in yesterday's Afternoon Jolt: Thanks to budget woes—and in another sign that green policy is seen as expendable during a recession—the council is considering putting off planned updates to the city's comprehensive plan.
The city council’s budget committee appears poised to put off updating the comprehensive plan, the document that guides the city’s development policies, due to the ongoing budget shortfall.
Although council member Mike O’Brien protested that the city’s Department of Planning and Development should stay on its usual seven-year schedule for updating the comp plan so planners could coordinate that work with the city’s climate action plan, other council members argued today that DPD had more important work on its plate and that putting the comp plan off for a year wouldn’t represent much of a setback.
2. Yesterday, the city council, which is currently working to close an $18 million citywide budget shortfall, debated a proposal by Nick Licata to set aside $10,000 to offset any permit fees for non-religious organizations that want to host homeless encampments in the future.[pullquote]In another sign that green policy is seen as expendable during a recession...[/pullquote]
Earlier this month, the council voted to exempt religious institutions from permit fees for encampments, and made it possible for more private, nonreligious institutions to host encampments. In order to waive fees for nonreligious groups, the council would have to amend the city's comprehensive plan; the $10,000 fund would be a stopgap and would only be spent if a nonreligious group stepped up and said it wanted to host an encampment.
So far, the only secular organization that has hosted an encampment is the city itself, which converted a fire station in Lake City into a temporary homeless shelter.
3. The council also spent a surprising amount of time yesterday discussing the fate of a program so small council member Sally Clark described it as "budget dust": A $17,000 allocation to LettuceLink, a program provided by Solid Ground, to provide vegetable seeds to low-income people. "There's a problem determining whether [Lettuce Link clients] are opening up that packet," Clark said.
Mayor Mike McGinn proposed reducing the program's budget by half. Based on their discussion yesterday, the council seems likely to restore the program's funding, but redirect it toward programs with more easily measurable outcomes, such as direct produce distribution to food banks.
4. In other city budget news, council transportation chair Tom Rasmussen wants the city to dedicate "some initial funding" to improve public safety and transit operations on Third Ave. downtown in coordination with the impending elimination of Metro's Ride-Free Area.
The money, which could be supplemented by car-tab fees if Proposition 1 passes in November, would pay for things like better street lighting, longer bus stops (to activate more of the street), more police officers on Third, and funding for cleanup and graffiti removal. If Prop. 1 fails, the city could pay for some of Rasmussen's proposal by increasing solid waste disposal fees.[pullquote]Today, we'll continue our run-up to the election with a ThinkTank featuring social justice activist David Bloom vs. Metro bus driver Verita Alexander on the the $60 car tab proposal. [/pullquote]
5. Late yesterday afternoon, responding to an emergency motion by the anti-gay rights group Protect Marriage Washington, the 9th Circuit temporarily halted the release (while the appeal is pending) of any more names of people who signed the R-71 petition. R-71 is the failed 2009 measure that would have undone the state's domestic partner rights laws.
The court, however, did not rule on the larger issue of release and also kicked the issue of a longer restraining order (while the appeal is pending) back to the Federal District in Tacoma.
Last week, the Federal Court in Tacoma said the names must be released because PMW has not shown any convincing evidence that they'd be in danger if their names were released. PMW is appealing disclosure.
6. Last week's PubliCola ThinkTank featured I-1125 author Tim Eyman squaring off against his opponents at Microsoft.
Today, we continue our run-up to the election with a ThinkTank featuring social justice activist David Bloom vs. Metro bus driver Verita Alexander debating the city's proposal for a $60 car tab fee to fund road and transit infrastructure.
Stay tuned.
With only 45 minutes left in the meeting, the consultants are still presenting the various alternatives, and it looks unlikely that any real discussion among the various factions will take place today.
UPDATE AT 3:30: Now we’re getting into questions, which, unsurprisingly, are actually statements. For example, Wallace just asked if it would “be accurate to conclude that from the experience of a commuter, having a five-minute ride through downtown would be the equivalent of having a five-minute ride plus a four-minute walk on a moving sidewalk?” (Wallace’s plan includes a tent-covered skybridge and moving sidewalks between a station east of downtown Bellevue and downtown. I’m checking with Sound Transit staff to find out if Wallace’s proposal pays for those amenities.)
UPDATE at 4:00: As expected, nothing has been decided. The joint group has directed Sound Transit staff to look at the tradeoffs in each alternative; however, King County Council member Julia Patterson just expressed confusion at “where we are now versus where we were at the beginning of the meeting.” The group has set an April deadline for meeting and discussing the downtown Bellevue alignment again.
Seattle Transit Blog has a thorough report on the study, which found that the Bellevue council majority’s preferred alternative would cost slightly less than the other alternatives but would have the lowest ridership, the fewest jobs and residences within walking distance of a station, and the lowest potential for transit-oriented development of any alternative.
|
|
|