Seattle-area taxpayers would pay at least $169 million to replace a potential high-capacity transportation corridor through the Eastside with a bike trail, under a deal signed Monday.
That's what the Port of Seattle plans to pay King County in a swap involving the rail line and Boeing Field airport. There are parts of the deal that make sense, including the idea that the length of the trail will remain intact. Parts of the deal that would improve freight mobility through the Port are important for the region's economy.
But removing the track through the corridor would be a huge mistake. Though all parties say that rail could be added in the future, there's probably no chance of that happening after neighbors and bike trail users get used to having the area to themselves. Instead the route should be intensively studied as a complement to the region's planned rail lines and roads.
Is there any evidence that the track itself is salvageable? Assuming that we were to turn it into a 21st-century commuter rail corridor (which I think would be a swell idea), we'd probably rip up the existing tracks in favor of a newer, double-tracked setup anyway, no?
Look at the downtown tunnel -- it was laid with tracks in the 1980s, in anticipation of light rail, and they had to tear them out last year because of sub-optimal insulation and b/c the newer trains had slightly different height requirements.
I dunno... I'm all for preserving the corridor for commuter rail in some form, I'm just not sure the existing tracks are worth anything. All of the engineers involved say they aren't.
Posted by: Frank Bruno | February 27, 2007 at 12:39
Exactly - they might not be worth anything, but if we tear them up, then the space will get used for a bike path that would most likely never get taken back to use as a transit corridor. So the idea would be to keep them laid down in the short term to be replaced later with the tracks that will work.
Posted by: Laura | February 27, 2007 at 15:04
Interesting. That's a pretty hard sell, politically, isn't it? To give away an entire airport and not be able to show anything for it in the short term? (i.e. between now and when the KC council is up for re-election).
Especially since the County wouldn't be the ones building the new rail line anyway, they'd have to give or sell the land over to Sound Transit.
Who knows, maybe in 20 or 30 years, the technology will be there to build a super-quiet, lightweight carbon-fiber elevated monorail that can share the land with the trail and not disturb the runners and bikers below!
Posted by: Frank Bruno | February 28, 2007 at 10:21
Frankly I'm surprised that this swap isn't finding more opposition. The county only gets $169 million for a major airport? The county plans to essentially give up one of the only corridors in the metro area that could be used to move people?
Posted by: brad | February 28, 2007 at 15:28
The Eastside BNSF corridor is a great place for a trail AND commuter light rail. Commuter rail should be instralled there ASAP. However, trading Boeing Field to the Port is a horrible idea, especially considering the numbers in the proposed deal. I dont know anybody who thinks this is a good proposal.
Posted by: paul symington | March 08, 2007 at 16:17
The airport swap is about expediency. To make the Eastside line work, we also need proposals to efficiently integrate it with Sounder and light rail in Tukwila.
Posted by: brad | March 20, 2007 at 11:31