|
1. “Light rail will not ease traffic congestion. Yes, that’s a fact.” This is a quotation from a Seattle Times article by the Chairman of Sound Transit’s Board of Directors on December 26, 2000. The Central Link Light Rail Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) confirms this statement. Does spending over $20 billion on something that doesn’t reduce congestion make sense? |
2. Construction of Link Light Rail will make global warming worse for the next half century.
This conclusion is from the 2006 Environmental Record of Decision for North Link from downtown Seattle to Northgate. The CO2 generated in constructing the 6 mile light rail tunnel and other components will be 45 times greater than the CO2 emissions saved each year from auto drivers switching to riding it. Here are more details.
3. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) would have more geographic coverage and ridership much sooner than light rail, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and decades of construction disruption.
The US General Accounting Office found BRT to be a less expensive alternative to light rail. Analysis of Sound Transit documents indicates switching to BRT could save taxpayers about $1 billion/year over the next 30 years. Details of the analysis are here.
4. Sound Transit has suppressed the region-wide BRT alternative to new passenger railroads and misled voters about their transit options.
Sound Transit has millions to spend on public relations. In contrast, those opposed have no funding to publish their views. You’ve gotten a one-sided story.
Return to the Public Interest Transportation Forum home page.
Last modified: February 07, 2011