Posted by jim5car at 7/7/08 3:24 p.m.

I'm a bicyclist, love riding my bike, love the Burke-Gilman trail, BUT ir really bugs me that Burke-Gilman is a bikes-only trail when it would have made a wonderful light rail/bike duo-way. Now we have the east side rail line available immediately for light rail, standard guage cars. Please make a bike trail along the tracks, but preserve the rails for commuter service. Try driving along 405 some rush hour and see how crowded it is...

Posted by buddhabrad at 7/7/08 5:07 p.m.

The Eastside Corridor is a critical back-up route for the main freight corridor thru downtown. The Eastside Corridor MUST be maintained as a rail corridor.

If they tear up the tracks, they'll never be replaced in our lifetime.

Posted by Will in Seattle at 7/7/08 5:39 p.m.

It's sad, in these days of rising fuel prices, when much of the money shipped to the middle east for oil is used to sponsor al-Qaeda, that we're removing energy-efficient rail ...

Posted by TerryP at 7/7/08 11:51 p.m.

To look at that rail corridor as anything less than an excellent route for passenger rail is foolish. The people on the Eastside are going to have to understand that this country is in a crisis mode and we need to find ways to move people in more efficient ways.

No one really wants to be caught in traffic, stopped for a train; but it is something we're going to have to live with.

Anyone who harps on keeping that area as a trail only for hiking and bicycling is living in a dream world. As was said, but bears repeating, if those tracks are torn up, all is lost.

Historian and train expert Al Runte has said he has walked that track and it is suitable for passenger rail, as it is. We need to act in the next year or two, to make that a reality.

Posted by unregistered user at 7/7/08 11:59 p.m.

Jim, as a biker and sometime bus, sometime car commuter I think we eventually will need everything on that corridor, but:

1) those tracks are in rough shape and will need work

2) the Wilburton tunnel is going away, which was essentially the bridge over 405 for the train. It will take years for a new bridge to go in, especially if it has to do rail + a trail.

3) I don't know how many people I see driving up 405 in their cars when there are already buses that travel in the HOV lanes there.

I don't know how much of a panacea rail will be.

-Eric

Posted by husky fan at 7/8/08 9:21 p.m.

The fact that Discovery is not actually funding the study hardly seems like a dust up. It seems reasonable. While Agnew may tout rails and trails, the bulk of Discovery's promotion has been all about rails. I sorta doubt he'd be bumbed by not having to use a portion of his budget on an objective study.

I'm glad public agencies are removing any perception of bias. We need an even handed assessment of the future of commuter rail along the corridor with a minimum of turf bias and the PSRC is the best option in my view.

Had Discovery had any money in the study, they no doubt would have insisted on some level of control about the outcome. No deal.

Now the real question is: will Discovery be able to live with the results.

The PSRC, backed by the entire region, has already designated the entire corridor as a trail, plus potentially rail, within overall transportation plans, virtually assuring that government policy right now means at least dual use - trails, and potentially rails.

Rails will happen if they cost out, in the places that make sense. Trails are already virtually assured.

Neighborhoods next to the rail line will have plenty to complain about when it comes to new trails. And they'll complain about rails. Who can blame them.

Just remember they bought their property long after the rails were established and made their beds. The big thing to remember is that the Port aquires the property for the benefit of everyone.