Ballard

Ballard Center Station

January 15, 2026January 14, 2026 by Martin Pagel

Originally Ballard was going to be served by a bridge over the Ship Canal along 14th or 15th Ave NW with a station along on that street. Either way such station would be far from the old town or the current center of Ballard along Market Street. While 3 stations were proposed for West Seattle, now that a tunnel is preferred, Sound Transit should consider another station further west and closer to the center of Ballard. This station may even be a surface or very shallow station. It could be designed as the last station on the line or allow for an extension along 24th Ave NW with the ultimate goal to connect back to the 1 Line further north.

Sound Transit should also consider how an east/west line towards Fremont and UW could connect to the Ballard station. If such connection could be made south of the Ballard station and if it would also include a crossover, then trains coming from UW could either turn around and head back or continue towards downtown.

One possible route would go one block further north parallel to Market Street on NW 56th St. and stop at the Ballard Library. A second station could serve the brewery district on 14th (or 15th) Ave NW. A UW line (thin line) could join from Leary Way.

Another possible route would go closer to the old town along Leary Way NW with a single station close to Market Street. A UW line (thin line) could add another station close to Fred Meyer.

Either way, the line would need dive not only under the Ship Canal, but also avoid the stormwater and sewage tunnel north of the canal which extends up to 120 feet below the surface.

It seems a single station along 15th Ave, or even worse 14th Ave, would not be enough to serve Ballard. In particular, if Sound Transit decides to truncate the Ballard line for now, it should consider a station closer to the heart of Ballard at a later time.

Repaving Begins on Ballard Bridge & 15th Ave NW

July 8, 2024July 8, 2024 by Nathan Dickey

A southbound RapidRide D bus climbs onto the Ballard Bridge. Photo: Nathan Dickey.

Starting tonight, the stationary portions of the Ballard Bridge and 15th Avenue NW from Leary to NW 57th Street will be getting a major facelift. Associated closures will have significant impacts to buses using the bridge (specifically, RapidRide D, Route 17X, and Route 994 when it operates), and people attempting to walk, roll, drive, or otherwise cross Salmon Bay.

When the project is completed in 2025, there will be a wide planted median between NW 50th and NW 54th streets replacing a southbound lane, a new signalized pedestrian crossing at NW 51st street, and new red-painted bus lanes to help RapidRide D get past a few pinch points in the area (PDF schematic of improvements, here).

*SDOT’s rendering of the new pedestrian planned for NW 51st Street, planted median, and red-painted northbound bus lane.*

West Seattle – Ballard Link staggers towards the EIS

June 10, 2019June 10, 2019 by Frank Chiachiere

The original genius (or sin, if you prefer) of the legislation that created Sound Transit was that it yoked together the region’s high capacity transit needs. The suburbs and the cities had to work together to get what they wanted, or no one would get anything, like a municipal prisoner’s dilemma.

The West Seattle – Ballard link extension (“WSBLE” in Sound Transit’s lingo) is pushing that 25-year-old decision to its limits. Pierce and Snohomish County reps want WSBLE to be fast and cheap, lest it jeopardize the extensions to Tacoma and Everett (to some of them, WSBLE it isn’t part of the “spine,” so the whole thing is a kind of agency scope creep anyway). Seattle reps, meanwhile, are hearing an earful from their voters and maritime interests about elevated alignments at the termini. These reps also know that without the votes from Seattle’s west side neighborhoods, there might not have been enough support to get ST3 over the finish line to begin with, and certainly not enough money to support Snohomish’s speculative and expensive detour to Paine Field.

Like I said, yoked.

Broad Support for West Seattle and Salmon Bay Light Rail Tunnels

April 15, 2019April 15, 2019 by Peter Johnson

Troubled bridge over waters. Credit: King County

Letters from businesses, government agencies, and community groups show a citywide desire for the West Seattle and Ballard Link extensions to be almost entirely tunnels.

Troublingly for Sound Transit, businesses on the Duwamish Waterway made conflicting demands about where to build the bridge that will cross the river mouth, which means a costly legal fight to acquire right of way is likely.

The letters indicate that the ST3 project could be headed towards a higher cost than planned.

That cost could come from several scenarios that would drive expensive litigation and mitigation. The first is a contentious Duwamish crossing, with legal and condemnation battles fought against the Port, maritime businesses, and industrial concerns. The second is a similar fight over land and right of way with neighborhood groups and residents, if their tunneling preferences are ignored.

On the third hand, if the agency does follow public opinion and put trains underground, engineering costs could spike dramatically. In that scenario, Sound Transit would need to either find new sources of revenue (such as the City of Seattle or the Port), find significant cost savings (as occurred with U-Link), or some combination of both.

Follow these links for letters from stakeholders in businesses, government, and community groups. View a table here of various interests’ positions on specific elements of proposed alignments. Continue reading “Broad Support for West Seattle and Salmon Bay Light Rail Tunnels”

A Better Ballard Option for Link

March 21, 2019March 20, 2019 by Guest Contributor

by Dale Menchhofer

tl;dr: This post proposes a new option for the Interbay – Ballard segment of the West Seattle – Ballard light rail project that is measurably and significantly better than any of the remaining official options. The major components are (1) an aerial bridge over the BNSF rail yard, (2) an optional station at Fisherman’s Terminal, (3) a shorter tunnel under Salmon Bay, and (4) a station at 20th Ave NW and NW Market St.

This option has the highest possible value—retaining the high quality of a tunnel, but with significantly higher ridership, and at a competitive cost. In fact, it has a lower capital cost per rider than any of the official options. It has opportunities to turn Port of Seattle and BNSF into 3^rd party funding sources, instead of potential adversaries. In spite of its superior characteristics, the only hope it has of becoming the preferred alignment is if enough of you support it in ‘scoping’ comments submitted to Sound Transit. Find handy links to do that at the end of the post.

Intro: why this option is optimal

The best possible ridership puts the station location in the center of the urban village, at 20th Avenue and Market Street. This location is closest to all of the current density, and closest to potential future development.

This option uses the shortest tunnel possible for crossing the ship canal of any practical location. It is about 10-12 % shorter than the 14th or 15th Avenue tunnel options. It is 28% shorter than the “BNSF West/20th Tunnel” option rejected in Level 1 scoping. The shorter the tunnel, the less costly the option. The limiting factors preventing the tunnel from being even shorter are (1) a maximum 5% grade and (2) allowance of 25 feet between the top of the tunnel and the bottom of the ship canal.

In order to reach the shortest possible tunnel, it is necessary to bridge over the BNSF rail yard. I acknowledge that would generally be unwise, but in a later section, I explain why this route is different; why it is uniquely feasible.

There is no practical route using a high fixed bridge to reach a station on 20th Avenue, because of impacts on the legally protected Ballard Landmark District. A tunnel is the only way to do it that does not sacrifice quality.

This option has two additional advantages. It has a net reduction in properties taken, thereby reducing cost further. By eliminating a curve, the Interbay station can actually be at Dravus Street, a better location.

ST3 Level 3 Planning: Lets Not Paint Ourselves into a Corner

February 19, 2019March 8, 2019 by Seattle Subway

We’re finally here: ST3 Planning level 3 is where we cut everything but two options and send those on for an environmental impact study. Those options will include a high end options that relies on local funding an an affordable option that doesn’t. At this point, our primary concern is with the low end options. There is a conversation to be had in the future about whether spending $1.9B on high end ST3 options makes sense and where the money will come from, but that’s a topic for another day.

Right now we need to make sure the affordable options that we send through are acceptable in case additional local funding never comes. Building on our central concepts of Reliability, Expandability, and Accessibility along with our Level 2 feedback and plea to put riders first, here is what we’re focused on now by station:

Though we’ve heard ST staff say many times that the options are mix and match, we don’t get the impression they mean it when it comes to the Ballard station location. As we (and others) have said many times a 14th NW station and a drawbridge are both unacceptable. A drawbridge is an unacceptable reliability compromise for the future or our system. A station on 14th NW simply doesn’t serve riders west of 15th or transfers well. A station on 15th NW with entrances on both sides of the street does.

A 14th high bridge crossing with a station on 15th is our minimal expectation for an affordable option. While it’s not impossible to see local funding via the port come through for a tunnel to Ballard, as the current options stand, the 15th Ave NW tunnel station the only option we can support.

Where Now For The Water Taxi Expansion?

February 23, 2016June 17, 2018 by Dan Ryan

This dock at the Kirkland Marina, currently used by Argosy Cruises, might be a future foot-ferry port — Might this dock at the Kirkland Marina have a Water Taxi in its future? (Photo by the Author)

On February 8, the King County Council accepted the final report on Water Taxi expansion. The Council vote followed an occasionally contentious review at the TrEE (Transportation, Economy and Environment) Committee the week before. No decision was taken on moving forward with the expansion. That’s a budgetary decision to be taken up, if a request is made, as part of the budget process later this year.

The final report refines analysis presented in the interim report, and accommodates some suggestions by the jurisdictions and stakeholders that might be served. But the key findings haven’t changed greatly. Three routes are being considered:

Kenmore (Log Boom Park) to University of Washington (Waterfront Activity Center)
Kirkland (Marina Park) to University of Washington (Waterfront Activity Center)
Ballard (Shilshole Marina) to Downtown Seattle (Pier 50).

A few modifications are suggested. In Kenmore, the ferry may eventually serve Lake Pointe where development could create an opportunity for shared parking (initial service would be via Log Boom Park with parking at a remote lot served by shuttle bus). In Kirkland, where downtown parking for transit riders would not be available, a circulator shuttle to bring riders to the Marina is examined. Expedia has asked that the ferry from Shilshole Bay stop at Interbay en route to downtown Seattle.

The revisions to the proposal do not improve expected performance. These are low-ridership high-cost services. At launch, off-season ridership would range between 135 and 165 daily riders per route, growing to 285-370 after 10 years. Summer ridership, boosted by recreational users, would grow from about 300 daily riders on each route to just over 500 after 10 years.

Continue reading “Where Now For The Water Taxi Expansion?”

Timing out Ballard to Issaquah via Sand Point

December 5, 2014December 5, 2014 by Peyton S.

View post on imgur.com

A couple of days ago there was a great deal of discussion about the merits and costs of a Sand Point crossing. There are two things that a study would find out that everybody would like to know; the monetary cost of the crossing and the potential ridership over the connection. Unfortunately I can’t give any insight into those things. What I can to do is provide some tangible benefits based on travel time using Seattle Subway’s previous posts about the Crossing, Ballard Spur and Better Eastside rail.

Continue reading “Timing out Ballard to Issaquah via Sand Point”