Kirkland city officials have found themselves between a rock and a hard place over possible rapid transit on the Cross Kirkland Corridor (CKC).

The biggest complicating factor in the discussion is that while the city owns the CKC, Sound Transit’s easement rights supersedes their ownership. Sound Transit ultimately has the authority to place whatever the organization wants, or not, on the corridor.

At the moment, the city is trying to lobby Sound Transit to get bus rapid transit (BRT) on the CKC as part of their 2016 ST3 ballot measure for voter approval. Kirkland officials envision electric buses on a road running parallel to the trail.

At the same time, the city is simultaneously trying to address concerns by residents, many of whom feel the plans have come up suddenly and left little time for discussion.

Tonight, city officials held an open meeting for residents to bring questions or express their thoughts at 6:30 p.m. at the Kirkland Performance Center.

While the CKC masterplan envisions transit on the corridor, it doesn’t specify precisely what type of transit or what kind the city would like to see.

City Manager Kurt Triplett said that this situation puts the city in a dicey position that could result in a rapid transit system not best suited for Kirkland commuters. Additionally, he said that anticipated growth, along with current traffic congestion, makes it imperative that they get more transportation options in the city. Because Sound Transit ballot measure projects often take years, even decades, to actually get off the ground, he said they can’t wait for another ballot measure.

“This is the time to get Sound Transit service,” he said. “We can’t miss the moment, so now is the time to take advantage of it.”

Earlier this year the Kirkland City Council approved a $250,000 conceptual design plan for a BRT they hope to present to Sound Transit in order to convince them to place it on the ballot. Triplett said the design plan would provide the city with strong vision of what the BRT would look like in terms of scale and feel, which he said would be a smaller, less expensive and less impactful BRT system. The study might also be applicable if King County Metro ever decided to implement regional express bus routes.

While some residents are adamantly opposed to rapid transit on the corridor at all, others believe the city should not be taking a pro-rapid transit stance on the matter either way.

Triplett said that on top of trying to secure benefits for Kirkland residents who pay taxes to Sound Transit, the current mood on the ST board favors light rail systems, which he and other city officials believe would be less appropriate for Kirkland. BRT has more flexibility, less impact on the surrounding neighborhoods and lower costs, according to city officials. For example, BRT buses could go off the CKC and onto regular roads at intersections rather than require additional structures to accommodate a light rail system.

Because of this, city officials say they need to advocate in favor of BRT or else risk seeing a light rail system installed in the corridor that might not take into account Kirkland’s particular transportation needs.

At the council’s Sept. 15 meeting, Mayor Amy Walen said without the study any lobbying to Sound Transit could result in a BRT that fits a general model rather than the most optimized.

“What you have to do is be a self starter,” she said. “And you have to go and show Sound Transit what you mean, because when we say BRT on the Cross Kirkland Corridor what they hear is ‘This is how we do BRT. It’s a 60 foot right-of-way. It’s this size of buses. This is how much its costs per mile.’ They have a huge machine that grinds out one model of BRT.”

Triplett also argued that the city has intentionally developed and absorbed growth in such a way as to put it in a position to receive Sound Transit services.

“We’ve been running to keep up with them,” he said.

Sound Transit will create a draft of the final projects next month, with a final decision sometime early next year. The Sound Transit Board first adopted a list of possible projects in August.

The short time-frame of the process is the result of the state legislature’s special session, which lasted an extra 75 days, forcing Sound Transit to delay their own examination of possible projects until they received authorization from the legislature to put a measure on the ballot.

Also, Triplett said that because of Sound Transit’s easement rights, the city is very unlikely to ever further develop the CKC interim trail until a decision is made on what kind of transit will go in there.

Although the city’s hope is to allow the current trail to remain where it is, with BRT on the east section of the corridor, if and when Sound Transit puts rapid transit on the corridor, their actual design might require the city to move the trail. If this happened, the city would be liable for all financial costs associated with moving it.

“It’s going to happen sooner or later,” Triplett said. “We want it to be sooner, and we want it to be right.”