One light rail to Bellevue is more than enough
Let me get this straight: The mayor wants to stop all planning on the replacement 520 bridge so that it can include possible light rail, should voters approve of expanding it from Mountlake Boulevard to Bellevue in the future. [“Slam brakes on design of 520, McGinn urges,” page one, April 7.]
I may be wrong, but isn’t the I-90 bridge, which is currently undergoing plans to retrofit lanes for light rail, already going to Bellevue?
Are we seriously thinking about halting 14 years of planning, just so we can spend millions more dollars and years of delays, just so we can add a second light rail to Bellevue? I have nothing against Bellevue, but there are already plans to expand it from downtown to Redmond, Kirkland, etc. We should let that happen.
But to have a second light rail go to Bellvue and all the places that light rail will go does not make much sense to me.
— Russ Crandall, Seattle