Like legal challenges to their EIS.

http://www.gt-wa.com/RTA/appealsumm.htm

On November 18, 1999, members of the steering committee of Citizens for Mobility, John Alkire, Emory Bundy, and Don Padelford, filed an appeal to invalidate the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Link light rail in Seattle. Citizens for Mobility is an association of concerned citizens dedicated to promoting cost-effective, environmentally-friendly mobility solutions to traffic congestion.

Issuance of a Final EIS document is a legal requirement for a major public works project to be built. Under the Washington State Administrative Code of Regulations, the EIS document must analyze Link light rail and a set of reasonable alternatives for impacts on the environment. The same day that the appeal was filed, the Sound Transit Board of Directors approved moving forward on Link light rail as described by the EIS. Citizens for Mobility seek to reverse that decision.

Petitioners Alkire, Bundy, and Padelford assert that Link light rail will cause injury to the air they breathe, to the traffic conditions they face, to the quality of life in the region, and to their finances. The appeal claims that the EIS document violates provisions in the Washington Administrative Code because:

* It fails to address reasonable alternatives that can be developed through least cost planning.

* It fails to address adequately the capacity constraints on rail in the Downtown Seattle Bus Tunnel. (See open letter from Citizens for Mobility.)

* It fails to address speed and ridership assumptions made by Sound Transit.

* It fails to address the issues impartially.

* It fails to address new information such as the statewide I-695 vote in November 1999 to reduce the automobile license fees that provide crucial transportation revenue.

* It fails to address adequately the critical financing, budgeting, and cost issues.

* It fails to use appropriate interdisciplinary methodology as required by the regulations.

* It fails to address important impacts with adequate specificity.

* It fails to discuss impacts that cannot be mitigated.

* It fails to address air quality issues adequately.

* It fails to address adequately the likelihood of increased transit times.

The complete text of the appeal is at http://www.gt-wa.com/RTA/appeal.htm . The appeal was filed with the Executive Director of Sound Transit. There are many levels of review ahead, and the appeal may very well

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 31, 1999