What's the latest?
Project route and station options under consideration
In May 2019, at the conclusion of the Alternatives Development phase of project development, the Sound Transit Board identified preferred alternatives and other alternatives to study in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), based on technical analysis and community, stakeholder and agency feedback. Read the full Board motion here.
The Board also directed Sound Transit staff to conduct an initial assessment on alternatives that were suggested during the scoping public comment period (February – March 2019) to help inform if they should be studied further in the Draft EIS. Find out the results of the initial assessment below.
After reviewing the initial assessment results, share your feedback in the comment section below by Oct. 4, 2019. Input will be shared with the Sound Transit Board. The Board will convene in October to identify if any of the potential alternatives suggested during scoping will advance to the Draft EIS for further study.
We're beginning environmental review
The Draft EIS is the next step in the environmental review process. We will evaluate potential impacts and benefits of the alternatives on the natural and built environment and identify potential mitigation measures. The Draft EIS is anticipated to be released in late 2020 for public review and comment.
The West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions will provide fast, reliable light rail connections to dense residential and job centers throughout the region. In addition, a new downtown Seattle light rail tunnel will provide capacity for the entire regional system to operate efficiently.
New to the project and looking for more background? Visit the project website to get up to speed!
Initial Assessment
Initial Assessment
Potential alternatives in initial assessment
The Sound Transit Board will review the initial assessment results and community feedback in October to identify whether any potential alternatives should be added to those previously identified for study in the Draft EIS. After reviewing the key differences between the potential alternatives and the alternatives previously studied (in Level 3) of the Alternatives Development phase, share your feedback with us!
20th Ave Tunnel Ballard
BNSF Portal - Option A
Thorndyke Portal - Option B
After some early analysis of the BNSF Portal alternative, several engineering challenges were found. This second option was developed to meet the intent of the Board's direction.
Summary
Potential alternatives to include in the Draft EIS for further study
20th Ave Tunnel Ballard – BNSF Portal
- Ballard Station closer to core of urban village but potentially affects more properties and adds constructability challenges
- Potential effects to freight/rail operations and large utilities add complexity and risk
- Tunnel crossing, long span, additional displacements add cost; requires Third Party funding (+ $750 million*)
20th Ave Tunnel Ballard – Thorndyke Portal
- Ballard Station closer to core of urban village but potentially affects more properties and adds constructability challenges
- Potential effects to Dravus and/or Emerson Street bridges and large utilities add complexity and risk
- Tunnel crossing adds cost; requires Third Party funding (+ $450 million*)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
Alternatives previously studied during alternatives development phase
ST3 Representative Project
- Movable bridge has potential service interruptions; most in-water effects to maritime businesses, vessel navigation and Fishermen’s Terminal
Fixed Bridge Crossing / Elevated Station at 14th
- Fixed bridge reduces in-water effects, avoids Fishermen’s Terminal but has other potential maritime business effects
- Station location further from Historic Ballard but with fewer displacements in Ballard (+$100 million*)
Tunnel Crossing / Tunnel Station at 14th or 15th
- Tunnel avoids columns in water and permanent maritime/navigational effects
- Tunnel crossings add cost; requires Third Party funding (+ $350 million*)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
SODO Elevated
Double Elevated Station – Option A
Partial Elevated Station – Option B
After some early analysis of the Double Elevated Station alternative, several engineering challenges were found. This second option was developed to meet the intent of the Board's direction.
Summary
Potential alternatives to include in the Draft EIS for further study
SODO Double Elevated
- Facilitates transit integration with SODO busway maintained and platform closer to Lander
- Constructs elevated guideway in poor soils
- Guideway and station footprint potentially resulting in greater business effects
- Maintains at-grade Lander Street and gated at-grade crossing of existing light rail line
- Holgate roadway overcrossing eliminates light rail/traffic conflicts
- More complex and costly elevated track; higher potential business effects
(+ $300 million*)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
SODO Partial Elevated
- Maintains Lander at-grade and existing gated grade crossing; grade separates Holgate with roadway overcrossing
- Maintains SODO busway for long-term operations
- Higher potential business effects
Alternatives previously studied during alternatives development phase
SODO At-Grade**
- Grade separations of Holgate and Lander eliminate light rail/traffic conflicts
- Displaces SODO busway
- At-grade track alignment reduces cost and complexity (- $200 million*)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
**Similar for SODO At-Grade and SODO At-Grade with Station Further South.
Yancy/Andover Elevated
Summary
Potential alternatives to include in the Draft EIS for further study
Yancy / Andover Elevated
- Station north of Andover with less accessible station location
- High guideway along Andover/Avalon
- Lessens potential residential effects overall, but increases effects along Avalon; increases potential business effects
- Potentially constrained freight movement at Delridge/Andover
- Avoids West Seattle Golf Course
- Similar comparative estimate and schedule to ST3 Representative Project
Alternatives previously studied during alternatives development phase
Delridge Station South of Andover
- Station south of Andover with better station access
- High guideway on Delridge/Genesee
- Potential residential effects in Delridge
- Connects to elevated Avalon station
- Similar comparative estimate and schedule to ST3 Representative Project
Delridge Station at Dakota St
- Station north of Genesee with better station access
- Station with higher quality equitable transit-oriented development potential
- Low guideway on Delridge/Genesee
- Must connect to tunnel alternatives in West Seattle Junction
- Comparative estimate includes West Seattle Junction Tunnel (+$700 million*) and North Duwamish Crossing (+$300 million*); requires Third Party funding (+$1,000 million* total)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
Pigeon Point Tunnel
Summary
Potential alternatives to include in the Draft EIS for further study
Pigeon Point Tunnel; Delridge Station straddling Delridge Way
- Avoids proximity to West Seattle Bridge and BNSF railroad bridge
- Bisects West Duwamish Greenbelt habitat area; closest to known archaeological site
- Furthest south Delridge Station, low height facilitates best access
- Station with higher quality equitable transit-oriented development potential
- Similar potential residential effects; fewer potential business/freight effects
- Must connect to West Seattle Junction tunnel; higher schedule risk
- Comparative estimate includes West Seattle Junction Tunnel (+ $700 million*) and Pigeon Point Tunnel (+ $200 million*); requires Third Party funding (+ $900 million* total)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
Alternatives previously studied during alternatives development phase
Delridge Station South of Andover Street; South Duwamish Crossing
- Most engineering constraints; Pigeon Point steep slope and proximity to West Seattle and BNSF railroad bridges
- Delridge station south of Andover; better station access
- High guideway in Delridge/Genesee, must connect to elevated Avalon station
Delridge Station at Dakota Street; North Duwamish Crossing
- Avoids Pigeon Point steep slope and BNSF railroad bridge
- Avoids West Duwamish Greenbelt habitat area
- Delridge station north of Genesee with better station access
- Station with higher quality equitable transit-oriented development potential
- Potentially affects freight, port terminal facilities especially during construction
- Low guideway in Delridge/Genesee must connect to tunnel alternatives in West Seattle Junction
- Comparative estimate includes West Seattle Junction Tunnel (+$700 million*) and North Duwamish Crossing (+$300 million*); requires Third Party funding (+$1,000 million* total)
*Compared to ST3 Representative Project.
Comment
What's next
Stay engaged
Your comments on the initial assessment alternatives will be shared with Sound Transit's System Expansion Committee and the Board to help inform whether any of these potential alternatives advance for further study in the Draft EIS. Sign up for project email updates to stay in the loop!
- Sept. 26: Sound Transit Board meeting
- Oct. 4: Feedback on the potential alternatives in initial assessment will be summarized and shared with Sound Transit's System Expansion Committee and Board.
- Oct 10: System Expansion Committee meeting
- Oct 24: Sound Transit Board meeting
We hope you stay in touch as we develop the Draft EIS. There will be opportunities to engage with us throughout the process.
Get involved at any time
- Request a briefing
- Call the project line to speak with an Outreach Specialist (206) 903-7229.
- Email wsblink@soundtransit.org with questions, concerns or comments.
Equity and inclusion
Sound Transit is committed to inclusively engaging those who live and work along the project corridors, including historically-underrepresented communities. Throughout planning and environmental review, we are working closely with these communities to identify and understand potential benefits and impacts and to provide opportunities for meaningful engagement.