The light rail construction process is going to start eventually on Capitol Hill, we promise. The first big construction steps — actually deconstruction and tearing down of the buildings between John and Denny on Broadway — are delayed pending Sound Transit clearing up permit issues. Spokesperson Jeff Munnoch told the Capitol Hill Community Council last week that the demolition work is slated to begin in the first week of March.
Munnoch said the delay was not related to the pending city council vote regarding changes in the way variances to Seattle’s noise code are granted to large projects like the light rail station. That vote is now scheduled for Monday, March 2.
Meanwhile, Sound Transit is planning to hold its groundbreaking ceremony for the University Link line on March 6th at Husky Stadium and the first in a series of public forums to discuss the retail, housing and community development around the Capitol Hill station on March 25th.
re: potential changes to noise ordinance
I posted the following comment in response to the other post you referenced, but I was kind of late doing so, and it didn’t generate any discussion:
Remember, when Sound Transit convinced us to support their proposal — and Capitol Hill residents were big supporters — their motto was “You’ll never know we’re here.”
Allowing construction crews to create more noise than they would otherwise be allowed to create would probably reduce construction costs, as effective noise abatement doesn’t come cheap. But they’ve already lowered costs by changing from deep-bore to drastically more invasive cut-and-cover station construction in our neighborhood and also by completely eliminating the First Hill station. It seems unreasonable to ask our neighborhood to absorb even more of the cost of construction, and it seems likely that the cost of doing noisy construction in a densely-populated residential area in a responsible manner would have been factored in long ago before plans were approved.
If we are to accept another change in plans, we should find out what led to adoption of the current plans, and in what ways the situation has changed and led to the desire to change plans. In other words, if it once made sense to construct the tunnel and our station within the bounds of the law, why is changing the law (in order to allow construction that would otherwise be illegal) warranted now?