Link Light Rail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Link Light Rail
Locale Seattle metropolitan area
Transit type Light rail
Began operation Tacoma Link:
August 22, 2003
Central Link:
est. 2009
System length 17.3
Number of lines 2
Number of stations 9 existing
10 under construction
Daily ridership 3,900[1]
Operator(s) Sound Transit

Sound Transit Link Light Rail is a rapid transit project under construction for the Greater Seattle region. It currently consists of two lines, Tacoma Link, which is in service now, and Central Link, which is scheduled to be completed in 2009.[2] The University Link line, extending Central Link northward from downtown Seattle to the University of Washington, is approved and slated to begin construction in 2009.

A November 2007 ballot measure called Sound Transit 2, the Roads and Transit Proposition or Prop-1 would have extended Link northward to Mill Creek (with planning and property acquisition to support later extension to Everett), south via Federal Way to Tacoma, and east via Mercer Island and Bellevue to Microsoft main campus in Redmond. The measure was bundled with roadworks and other transportations priorities but failed garnering only 44% of the vote.[3]

Contents

[edit] History

First trains on a test run in Metro Transit Tunnel
First trains on a test run in Metro Transit Tunnel

[edit] Early years

In 1996, voters in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties approved increases in sales taxes and vehicle excise taxes to pay for a US$3.9 billion transit package that included $1.7 billion for a 25 mile light rail system. The system included a line in Tacoma, Washington and another line from the University District in north Seattle to Sea-Tac Airport south of Seattle, originally planned to open in 2006.[4] Two years later the recently created Sound Transit revealed an environmental impact study that increased the cost of the project to US$2.2 billion and added three miles to the line by adding connections to Northgate.[5] However, the EIS was quickly met with objections from the poorer neighborhoods south of Seattle in Rainier Valley, Seattle, Washington that complained that the plan unfairly impacted their neighborhoods by having the line running on the surface instead of below ground like much of the rest of the route starting at Beacon Hill.[6] Tukwila city leaders were also concerned that route bypassed the important shopping district around Southcenter Mall.[7]

[edit] Dark years

Beginning in early 1999, the light rail program became beset with problems that mired Sound Transit and local governments in political ire. In late February 1999, a financial analysis stated that building light rail out as far as Northgate might not be possible for over a dozen years due to decreases in the amount of federal grant money available to local transit authorities and Seattle-North King County having used so much of its local taxing authority and ability to borrow money to pay for light rail.[8] A vote by the Sound Transit board on February 25, 1999, that made only minor modifications to the route, did little to ease the concerns Seattle's southern neighborhoods and northern and southern suburbs.[9] Increasing land values and the changes to the route voted in by the board added hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost,[10] requiring cuts to the plan to bring the project back to within budget.[11] The cuts were finalized in a November vote that deferred construction on two stations, to only partially build the station under Beacon Hill, and route modifications.[12]

Differences between the University of Washington and Sound Transit over station locations, impacts from the route's running under several science buildings on the campus, and construction impact deferments threatened to delay the project and raise costs.[13] After months of negotiations, University regents and Sound Transit reached agreement in April 2000 with Sound Transit agreeing to install dampeners on the rails that run under the science buildings, air cushions to tables in the science buildings, and to mitigate environmental impacts due to construction and traffic impacts from having the station on university grounds.[14] However, in November, the Sound Transit board voted to defer construction on the tunnel to the university when the construction estimate came in $171 million over budget. This news prompted concerns that Sound Transit could lose out on $500 million in federal grants, but King County Executive Ron Sims said he had been in contact with FTA officials who said the grant was still possible.[15] This announcement coincided with the resignation of light rail's chief, Paul Bay. Two weeks later, Lyndon Wilson Jr., the man credited with turning around Portland's MAX Light Rail project, was tapped as the systems interim director.[16]

Within days of Wilson's arrival, more bad news came out as new estimates from Sound Transit staff increased the cost of the 21-mile project from $1.9 billion to $3.8 billion and added three years to the construction time. The report cited the frequent changes made to the route in order to appease community members, third-parties, and the wishes of board members and the ambitious construction schedule as reasons for the cost increase.[17] Just days later, Capitol Hill business and civic leaders withdrew their support from the project due to concerns that two years of construction needed to build the station on Capitol Hill would drive customers away from area businesses and force those businesses to close.[18]

In January 2001, the Sound Transit board accepted a $500 million grant from the FTA even though the FTA had not completed the review of the project it started when the cost overruns were announced in December and had not offered Sound Transit the grant. The decision effectively locked Sound Transit into building a 7-mile route from Lander Street to the University of Washington.[19] Days later, the chairman of the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee, Hal Rogers (R-KY) sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater saying his committee could not approve the grant and requesting a review by the Inspector General. Despite this, Sound Transit was still optimistic that the grant would be approved later that week.[20] Representative Jennifer Dunn (R-Bellevue), Washington's ranking House Republican, voiced her support for the independent audit, but stopped short of calling for the FTA to not approve the grant.[21] Despite these questions, on his last day as Transportation Secretary, Rodney Slater, signed the agreement granting Sound Transit $500 million in annual installments through 2006.[22]

However, the grant approval still was not enough to prevent the resignation of Sound Transit's executive director, Bob White. White cited a need for new leadership to restore public confidence in the agency.[23]

March was another difficult month for the light rail project. On March 9, Sound Transit's citizen oversight committee criticized the agency's optimistic assumptions about building costs, its reliance on receiving an additional $931 million in federal grants, and that the agency was in danger of repeating prior mistakes.[24] The next day, Representative Rogers summoned Sound Transit and its opponents to Washington, D.C to testify in front of his subcommittee about the "problem" project.[25] By the end of March, Link light rail was in danger of losing its first installment of federal grant money as Rogers noted the project's local opposition, cost overruns, and reliance on record levels of federal money as troubling.[26]

In April, the Seattle City Council's unwavering support started to falter when a proposal requesting a Sound Transit citizen panel to explore alternatives to light rail was proposed by Councilman Nick Licata. The proposal would have had little to no effect on Sound Transit's plans if it had passed in its proposed form, but by the time it passed the contents of the proposal had been replaced with language praising the agency and explaining the cost overruns as unavoidable and out of Sound Transit's control.[27] Avoiding the City Council's attack was only a short term victory as the next date the US Inspector General's office recommended that federal funding be suspended until the agency is able to provide a final estimate for the project. The Inspector General's report also estimated the cost of the project at $4.1 billion, meaning the cost of the project had increased by $2.5 billion in seven months.[28] The day after the IG's report brought a suspension of the $75 million federal grant for the next year, Sound Transit learned that the $50 million grant from the current year was also in danger.[29]

[edit] Shortening of the line

On April 9, Mayor Paul Schell sent a letter requesting that due to the challenges facing the northern segment of the route (South Lander Street to the University District), Sound Transit should focus on building the southern fourteen miles of the line.[30] Schell's proposal was supported by one of his mayoral election rivals, Greg Nickels, and King County Commissioner Ron Sims, but Sims also suggested continuing the line beyond South Lander and into the bus tunnel.[30][31] However, Councilman Licata was of the opinion that Schell's proposal didn't go far enough because it did not consider scrapping light rail completely and focusing the money on carpool lanes and expanding the monorail.[30]

Part of Schell's request was for the review board to find out if it would be possible to build the southern route without federal assistance, but within days Sound Transit's acting executive director said federal assistance would still be required, an opinion that was echoed by the acting light-rail director.[32] The day after saying the southern route could not be built without federal money, Sound Transit admitted that its current plans for light rail was no longer feasible due to a decrease in the amount of money it expected to get from the federal government, which caused at least a $190 million shortfall. However, there was hope that with modifications to the route, stations, or the amount of tunneling the full 21 miles could still be built.[33] By the end of the month, Sound Transit staffers revealed that it was unlikely that the whole project could be completed before the end of the decade, but some of it could be completed.[34]

Despite all of the problems with cost overruns and schedule slippages related to the project, a poll conducted by Elway Research for The Seattle Times and Northwest Cable News between April 28 and May 1 revealed that only 40 percent of Puget Sound voters wanted to put a stop to a project, with 37 percent wanting to build a smaller line with existing funds, and 14 percent in favor of increasing taxes to pay for the full line. This contrasts with when Sound Move passed in 1996. At that time, 54 percent of Seattle residents favored stopping the project.[35]

By the late May, Sound Transit's board began to seriously consider shortening the line, including what to do with the money allocated to light rail if it was scrapped.[36] Support in the board began to form around four alternative plans, two of which included a tunnel through Capitol Hill that divided the board, with Ron Sims saying "Taking us to Capitol Hill is fatal to any light-rail project".[37] Sims would later join a group of current and former community leaders sent a letter to the board urging them to develop a route through South Lake Union to avoid the tunnel through Capitol Hill.[38]

In June, it was announced that two key staff members would be leaving the project, the interim director, Lyndon Wilson, and chief engineer, Bill Houppermans. Two current staffers were chosen as interim replacements.[39]

The board decided to instruct staffers to focus their attention on building the southern segment of the line in late June and to provide alternatives to choose from by September.[40] Supporters of the plan noted that by building the southern segment Sound Transit would be showing that they can get something built and that once it is built, money and support would follow. Critics said that by focusing on the southern segment the line wouldn't attract as many riders and that major population and job centers would not be serviced.[40]

[edit] Light at the end of the tunnel

The decision to shorten the line from 21 miles to 14 miles marked a turning point for the embattled project. While the path to completion would not be trouble free, Sound Transit would at least make progress towards starting construction.

Amidst the turmoil caused by the resignation of two of the light rail projects high ranking members and decisions regarding the shortening of the line, Sound Transit received some good news when a federal court judge lifted a court injunction preventing them from contacting Rainier Valley residents about purchasing their property and tossed out a majority of the lawsuit filed by other Rainier Valley residents.[41] Of the three issues in the lawsuit, the judge removed two of the claims made by the residents' group, the first claim that was tossed out was that Sound Transit was violating the Fair Housing Act and the other that it was violating the National Environmental Policy Act. The one claim that the judge left in the lawsuit was whether Sound Transit intentionally discriminated against Rainer Valley by choosing a surface option instead of tunneling through the valley as it had done in more affluent and less racially and ethnically diverse neighborhoods.[41] A month later, in August, the Rainier Valley group dropped the remaining issue of discrimination due to a lack of funds to continue the lawsuit and because Sound Transit had not yet finalized the route.[42]

Light rail would soon have competition to provide mass transit to Seattle. All three of the major candidates for mayor of Seattle in 2001 endorsed a monorail project despite no details being known about the project.[43] According to the head of the University of Washington's Transportation Research Center, "Maybe the best thing going for monorail is that it's not light rail." However, while the Seattle Monorail Project would ultimately pass a referendum in 2002, it too would be plagued by many of the same cost overruns and delays that afflicted Link Light Rail and in 2005, Seattle residents voted against a new plan and essentially killed the monorail project.

In September, the Sound Transit Board announced that they had enough money to fund a 14-mile route, later to be called Central Link, that began in Downtown Seattle at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center, proceeded through Downtown in the Metro Transit Tunnel, then through Rainier Valley and Tukwila before ending one mile short of Sea-Tac Airport.[44] The decision to stop this "starter" line a mile short of the airport would later be criticized by light rails opponents,[45] but the explanation provided by Sound Transit was that it was that the designs were not completed for a planned remodel of Sea-Tac[44] and that they only had $12 million to extend the line when the projected cost to do so was between $350 million and $500 million.[46] An audit by Deloitte & Touche discovered that while Sound Transit was much better than before, it still ran a risk of cost overruns by not having better procedures to control scope creep.[47]

On September 25, the Sound Transit Board finally voted to approve the new, shorter, 14-mile line with an estimated cost of $2.1 billion, clearing the way for construction to begin as early as the summer of 2002. While concerns were raised that the project was wasting money, others noted that it was time to get construction started.[46] The line was officially approved on November 29, but some opponents threatened lawsuits to stop construction.[48]

At the end of 2001 and beginning of 2002, the project encountered more conflict. After having most of their lawsuit dismissed by a federal judge in mid-July and then dropping the remainder in August, the Rainier Valley community group filed an appeal on December 26, stating the judge had incorrectly ruled when dismissing the discrimination claims.[49] Tim Eyman, a political activist known in Washington for filing anti-tax initiatives and referendums, filed an initiative that would remove an excise tax on car tabs that goes to transit,[50] while another group of opponents threatened a referendum to block light rail from using the Downtown bus tunnel.[51] The result of the initiative, if passed, would remove $67 million of funding from Sound Transit's $270 million annual income.[50] Yet another group questioned the legality of the shortened line, urged Sound Transit to have another public vote, and threatened legal action if Sound Transit did not listen to its urging.[52] Sound Transit declined the request citing that they would be required to pay for both their court costs and their opponents, bonds were not needed for another two years, and the legal proceedings would tie Sound Transit's hands politically.[53]

In late January 2002, Sound Transit began working to repair their image in the nation's capital and paid a visit to federal officials to show that the project had left behind its problems from the previous year.[54]

Ron Sims, Sound Transit's chairman, announced that it may be possible to extend the line to the University of Washington without raising taxes as long as route modifications to the route saved enough money, they were able to get help from the federal government, and their financial plans were changed to allow more borrowing.[55] The route to the University had previously been narrowed down to two options both with tunnels under Lake Washington Ship Canal, one under Montlake Cut and another near University Bridge.[56]

[edit] Construction

In March 2002, Sound Transit began the process of acquiring land in the Rainier Valley when its board authorized the agency to purchase all of sixty-four properties and parts of two hundred and thirty-two others.[57] Sound Transit was also informed that Link Light Rail received a rating of "Recommended" from the Federal Transit Administration, making it eligible for federal funding. Critics of the project viewed it as further troubles for the project because prior to the previous year's problems the project had a rating of "Highly Recommended", while supporters viewed the rating as an affirmation of the progress the project had made since then.[58]

In an attempt to ease the worries of Rainier Valley residents about the impact of light rail, Mayor Nickels proposed over $50 million in investments in the neighborhood, including paying off small business loans, burying power lines, and other community developments. The proposal was unanimously approved by the city council, but not without some complaints that the timing of the funding was questionable as the city was facing budget cuts and that it was the city that was making the funding and not Sound Transit.[59]

[edit] Current lines

Tacoma Link at the Tacoma Dome Station
Tacoma Link at the Tacoma Dome Station

[edit] Tacoma Link

Main article: Sound Transit Tacoma Link

Tacoma Link is a free light rail line running through the densest parts of Tacoma. This light rail system connects the Tacoma Dome Station (a regional hub for local and express bus, and commuter train service) with downtown Tacoma. Link trains run every 10 to 20 minutes, Monday through Friday, every 10 minutes, Saturday, and every 20 minutes on Sunday. It has stops at Tacoma Dome, S 25th Street, Union Station, the convention center, and the Theater District. The Union Station stop is next to the University of Washington's Tacoma campus and several museums. As of March 2008, Tacoma Link has a daily ridership of 3,900[1], surpassing the prediction that by 2010 it would have ridership of 2,000 per day.[60]

Light Rail Testing
Light Rail Testing

[edit] Central Link

Main article: Sound Transit Central Link

Construction is under way on a new 14-mile Central Link light rail line that many consider to be a critical piece in the Puget Sound region’s transportation future. The trains will begin carrying passengers in 2009, stopping at 12 stations and running 4.4 miles on elevated tracks, 2.5 miles in tunnels and seven miles at grade. To support the line, Sound Transit retrofit the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel and four of its existing stations for joint use by both light rail trains and buses. Sound Transit is also building new light rail stations in the following locations (from North to South): Near Qwest Field and Safeco Field, in the Sodo district at Lander Street just south of downtown Seattle, on Beacon Hill, in the Mount Baker neighborhood at McClellan and Rainier, in the Columbia City neighborhood at Edmunds and Martin Luther King Jr. Way, in the Rainier Beach neighborhood at Henderson and MLK, and in Tukwila on Tukwila International Blvd. Soon after this initial segment of the light rail line opens, Sound Transit will extend the line another 1.7 miles to the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, adding a thirteenth station. The Beacon Hill tunnel is one of the main components of Central Link. Its west portal, or opening, will be under I-5, east of Airport Way. The underground Beacon Hill Station will be located at the southeast corner of Beacon Avenue South and South Lander Street, approximately 150 feet below grade. The east portal, or opening, will be east of 25th Avenue South and south of South McClellan Street, where the light rail line will emerge to an elevated trackway as it approaches the Mount Baker Station near the intersection of Rainier Avenue South and South Stevens Street.[61]

[edit] University Link

Main article: University Link

In November 2006, the US Federal Transit Administration approved SoundTransit's plan for extending the light rail to the University of Washington after completion of an Environmental Impact Study. Actual construction will last approximately from 2009-2016.[62]

[edit] Future lines

Sound Transit's Phase 2 plan, under the name of ST2 (Sound Transit 2), proposes future goals of a regional light rail system. Sound Transit phase 2 was put before voters in November 2007 as part of the "Roads and Transit" measure. The measure failed to pass, but because a large roads package and the ST2 rail package were placed into a single ballot measure by the state legislature, it's unclear what support would have been for the Sound Transit package alone.

Sound Transit has the authority to bring a revised version of the Sound Transit 2 package back to voters in its district.

[edit] North Link

Main article: North Link

North Link is a light rail project being considered as a future light rail segment. It would connect the University of Washington station under way to a central University District station, Roosevelt, and Northgate. Once North Link is complete, the major urban centers of downtown Seattle, Capitol Hill, the University District, and Northgate will be connected via light rail. It is a top priority for Sound Transit for as it would add over 40,000 daily riders to Link Light Rail by 2030, easing pressure on the Interstate 5 corridor. A possible future extension north to Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood, and eventually Everett is also possible.

[edit] Tacoma Link west extension

Sound Transit is considering extending Tacoma Link Light Rail west to Tacoma Community College. The proposed route would be at grade, and would serve key destinations including Stadium High School, Mary Bridge Children's Hopspital, Tacoma General Hospital, and the University of Puget Sound. It is projected to boost the daily ridership of Tacoma Link by 8,000 people. There are two proposals for this route. One would have the extension use Central Link technology, and the other would use Tacoma Link technology.

This potential extension was included in preliminary drafts of the Roads & Transit measure on the ballot in November, 2007, but it was removed from the final plan. There is concern over whether or not it would be sensible to make this extension, as it would be costly and it would be at-grade, which is contrary to Sound Transit's goals of building and operating rail systems with separate rights-of-way.

[edit] Tacoma Link to Central Link connection

Main article: South Link (Link Light Rail)

Sound Transit plans to connect the south end of Central Link, SeaTac Airport, with the east end of Tacoma Link, the Tacoma Dome. The proposed route would have stations at Fife, South Federal Way Park-and-Ride, Federal Way Transit Center, Renodo Heights Park-and-Ride, Highline Community College, and South 200th Street. The length of this connection would be aerial, and would drop down to grade at the Tacoma Dome. It would mostly follow Highway 99. There are many stakeholders, so agreements must be made with all of these organizations, including the Washington State DOT, before it is built. There is a projected daily ridership of 38,000, and it would fulfill one of the main goals of Sound Transit: to connect Seattle and Tacoma via light rail. However, this will not be possible unless Tacoma Link is retrofitted with Central Link technology. Tacoma Link currently runs on 750 volt power, while Central Link runs on 1500 volt power. It uses different types of cars and different sized stations as well.

Sound Transit had put an extension of Central Link to the Tacoma Dome in its Roads & Transit package on the ballot in November, 2007. However, this does not include converting Tacoma Link to be compatible with Central Link, so riders wishing to travel to Downtown Tacoma will have to transfer from Central Link to Tacoma Link.

[edit] Central Link - Everett Extension

Main article: North Link

On the Roads & Transit measure on the ballot in November, 2007, was a plan to extend Central Link north to Ash Way Park & Ride. The ballot measure also includes funding for a study to develop possible routes for a future extension of Central Link to Everett. As the extension to Ash Way Park & Ride, near Mill Creek, will be finished in 2027, it can be assumed that an extension to Everett would not be completed until well after 2027.

[edit] East Link

Main article: East Link

East Link is one of three potential second phase extensions to light rail which was part of the Roads & Transit ballot measure in November, 2007. This line would split from North and Central Link just south of the International District Station in downtown Seattle extend across the I-90 bridge express lanes through downtown Bellevue and serve the Overlake Transit Center, including Microsoft headquarters.

For planning purposes, it is divided into three logical segments: The first would provide stations on I-90 at Rainier Avenue and Mercer Island. The second would include four stations in Bellevue: one at a regional park-and-ride, two in downtown Bellevue, and one at Overlake Hospital. The downtown stations of this segment could be either elevated or underground. The third segment would continue east of downtown Bellevue to the Overlake Transit Center with a connection to a light rail vehicle maintenance facility. This segment of East Link would have three stations which would serve the Bellevue-Redmond Road corridor, the Overlake neighborhood, and the Overlake Transit Center.

East Link also includes right-of-way preservation work for later service extension from Overlake Transit Center to downtown Redmond.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ a b American Public Transportation Association, Light Rail Transit Ridership Report, First Quarter 2008.
  2. ^ Link Light Rail Projects. Sound Transit. Retrieved on 2007-06-04.
  3. ^ Mike Lindblom. "Prop. 1 too big, costly to pass, survey finds", The Seattle Times, 2007-11-29. Retrieved on 2007-12-25. 
  4. ^ David Schaefer. "Voters Back Transit Plan On Fourth Try", The Seattle Times, 1996-11-08. Retrieved on 2007-02-26. 
  5. ^ David Schaefer. "Big Plans For Light Rail -- Sound Transit Suggests 24-Mile Route From Seatac To Northgate", The Seattle Times, 1998-12-04. Retrieved on 2007-02-24. 
  6. ^ Tom Brune; Barbara A. Serrano, Tan Vinh. "The Light-Rail Transit Plan -- On Wrong Track? -- Many People Who Live And Work Along Martin Luther King Jr. Way South Believe The Current Transit Plan Unfairly Favors Residents Of North Seattle", The Seattle Times, 1999-01-27. Retrieved on 2007-02-26. 
  7. ^ Lisa Pemberton-Butler. "Hearings To Begin On Light-Rail Line", The Seattle Times, 1999-01-13. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  8. ^ David Schaefer. "Light Rail To Northgate? Maybe Not For 12 Years -- Report Says Finances, Limited Taxing Authority Might Delay Expansion", The Seattle Times, 1999-02-23. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  9. ^ David Schaefer. "Rail Route Creates Hard Feelings -- Northern Cities, Rainier Valley, Tukwila Feel Slighted", The Seattle Times, 1999-02-26. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  10. ^ Kery Murakami. "Rising Costs For Light Rail May Require Further Cuts", The Seattle Times, 1999-06-03. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  11. ^ Kery Murakami. "Sound Transit Is $216 Million Short -- Project's Initial Phase May Be Scaled Back Further", The Seattle Times, 1999-07-01. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  12. ^ Alex Fryer. "A Milestone For Light Rail -- Regional Board Selects Station Sites, Alignment", The Seattle Times, 1999-11-19. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  13. ^ Roberto Sanchez. "All aboard? UW dickers on light rail", The Seattle Times, 2000-01-28. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  14. ^ Andrew Garber. "UW rail tunnel gets boost", The Seattle Times, 2000-04-06. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  15. ^ Andrew Garber. "Price puts tunnel on hold", The Seattle Times, 2000-11-17. Retrieved on 2007-02-27. 
  16. ^ Cindy Zetts. "Sound Transit taps Portlander", The Seattle Times, 2000-11-29. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  17. ^ "Light-rail cost soars $1 billion", The Seattle Times, 2000-12-13. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  18. ^ Tim Boyer. "Transit doubt runs deep on Capitol Hill", The Seattle Times, 2000-12-21. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  19. ^ Andrew Garber. "Sound Transit votes to take $500 million", The Seattle Times, 2001-01-12. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  20. ^ Andrew Garber. "Congressman wants to delay light-rail money", The Seattle Times, 2001-01-18. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  21. ^ Andrew Garber. "Dunn backs rail-project review", The Seattle Times, 2001-01-19. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  22. ^ Andrew Garber. "Half-billion allocated for Sound Transit", The Seattle Times, 2001-01-20. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  23. ^ "Sound Transit executive director resigns", The Seattle Times, 2001-01-23. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  24. ^ Andrew Garber. "Its own watchdog bites Sound Transit; panel fears light-rail budget unrealistic", The Seattle Times, 2001-03-09. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  25. ^ Andrew Garber. "Light rail labeled 'problem' project", The Seattle Times, 2001-03-10. Retrieved on 2007-02-28. 
  26. ^ Andrew Garber. "Federal aid in jeopardy for light rail", The Seattle Times, 2001-03-30. Retrieved on 2007-04-21. 
  27. ^ Jim Brunner. "Light rail survives attack: City Council rejects anti-Sound Transit move", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-04. Retrieved on 2007-04-21. 
  28. ^ Andrew Garber. "Suspension of light-rail funds urged", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-05. Retrieved on 2007-04-21. 
  29. ^ Andrew Garber. "Sound Transit troubles, Day 2", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-06. Retrieved on 2007-04-21. 
  30. ^ a b c Andrew Garber; Jim Brunners. "Schell: Put South End segment of light rail first", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-10. Retrieved on 2007-04-21. 
  31. ^ Eric Pryne. "Sims agrees: Start light rail in South End", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-11. Retrieved on 2007-04-21. 
  32. ^ Andrew Garber. "Federal help needed even if light rail starts south", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-12. Retrieved on 2007-04-27. 
  33. ^ Andrew Garber. "Light rail can't be built as planned", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-13. Retrieved on 2007-04-27. 
  34. ^ Andrew Garber. "Light rail can't be finished by 2009", The Seattle Times, 2001-04-27. Retrieved on 2007-04-27. 
  35. ^ Susan Gilmore. "Thin majority still backs some light rail", The Seattle Times, 2001-05-06. Retrieved on 2007-04-27. 
  36. ^ Andrew Garber. "Light-rail talk grim: Time to cut losses?", The Seattle Times, 2001-05-20. Retrieved on 2007-06-10. 
  37. ^ Andrew Garber. "Capitol Hill tunnel splits transit panel", The Seattle Times, 2001-05-25. Retrieved on 2007-06-10. 
  38. ^ Andrew Garber. "Rail agency is urged to skip tunnel", The Seattle Times, 2001-06-15. Retrieved on 2007-06-10. 
  39. ^ Andrew Garber. "Sound Transit losing two of its key people", The Seattle Times, 2001-06-06. Retrieved on 2007-06-10. 
  40. ^ a b Jim Brunner. "Sound Transit looks south for its first line", The Seattle Times, 2001-06-29. Retrieved on 2007-06-10. 
  41. ^ a b Andrew Garber. "Light-rail suit cut down: Judge tosses out most claims made by Rainier Valley group", The Seattle Times, 2001-07-17. Retrieved on 2007-07-03. 
  42. ^ Janet I. Tu. "Rainier Valley group drops claim against Sound Transit", The Seattle Times, 2001-08-10. Retrieved on 2007-07-03. 
  43. ^ Andrew Garber. "Major mayoral hopefuls climb aboard monorail", The Seattle Times, 2001-08-28. Retrieved on 2007-07-03. 
  44. ^ a b Susan Kelleher. "Sound Transit says it can build 14-mile line; light rail stops short of airport", The Seattle Times, 2001-09-13. Retrieved on 2007-07-14. 
  45. ^ Andrew Garber. "Shorter light-rail line OK'd", The Seattle Times, 2001-09-28. Retrieved on 2007-07-14. 
  46. ^ a b Andrew Garber. "Light rail lite goes to vote tomorrow; 1st leg would link Seattle, Tukwila", The Seattle Times, 2001-09-26. Retrieved on 2007-07-14. 
  47. ^ Andrew Garber. "Sound Transit's budget warning", The Seattle Times, 2001-09-27. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  48. ^ Eric Pryne. "Sound Transit adopts 14-mile route; light-rail construction could start in summer", The Seattle Times, 2001-11-30. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  49. ^ Eric Pryne. "Rail-line foes file appeal of ruling", The Seattle Times, 2001-12-27. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  50. ^ a b "Revised I-776 launched", The Seattle news, 2002-01-08. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  51. ^ Eric Pryne. "Rail foes threaten to try referendum", The Seattle Times, 2002-01-09. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  52. ^ Eric Pryne. "Light-rail foes open new battle", The Seattle Times, 2002-02-05. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  53. ^ Eric Pryne. "Rail foes push for court ruling, but Sound Transit declines to test its own legality", The Seattle Times, 2002-03-01. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  54. ^ "Sound Transit officials, Seattle mayor visit nation's capital", The Seattle Times, 2002-01-23. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  55. ^ Eric Pryne. "Sims: Light rail might reach U District without new taxes", The Seattle Times, 2002-03-02. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  56. ^ Eric Pryne. "Light-rail route options in north narrowed to two", The Seattle Times, 2002-02-15. Retrieved on 2007-07-15. 
  57. ^ Eric Pryne. "Sound Transit gets green light to buy land for light rail", The Seattle Times, 2002-03-15. Retrieved on 2007-07-21. 
  58. ^ Peyton Whitely. "Light rail's rating slips a bit, but Sound Transit still eligible for federal money", The Seattle Times, 2002-03-23. Retrieved on 2007-07-21. 
  59. ^ Jim Brunner. "Millions OK'd for Rainier Valley to mitigate effects of light rail", The Seattle Times, 2002-04-30. Retrieved on 2007-07-21. 
  60. ^ Tacoma Link: The Little Tram That Could. Light Rail Now! (February 2004). Retrieved on 2007-07-14.
  61. ^ Link Light Rail Fact Sheet, June 2006 (PDF). Sound Transit. Retrieved on 2007-07-14.
  62. ^ Meghan Erkkinen. "Feds give light rail green light", The Daily, 2006-11-28. Retrieved on 2007-07-14. 

[edit] External links

v • d • e
Mass transit in the Puget Sound area
Transit agencies
Light rail
Bus rapid transit
Commuter rail
Monorail
Other
Italics denote proposed or under construction lines