Alki Point sidewalk-project tour followup: Plans now posted online

As the Alki Point sidewalk-completion/traffic-calming project gets closer to the start of construction, we toured the project zone last Friday with SDOT managers and neighborhood reps (WSB report here). Today, the final plans that we saw on paper that day have just been posted on the project website – be forewarned, these are very detailed blueprint-style plans, but if you live in the area or have a close interest in the project, you might want to see them. (Here’s the link, 2 MB PDF.)

11 Replies to "Alki Point sidewalk-project tour followup: Plans now posted online"

  • acemotel February 17, 2009 (2:51 pm)

    Does the city reclaim the areas where the private landowners have encroached on the public right-of-way? The maps should indicate the public vs private land. If it’s there, it’s not evident. Lake Washington Blvd. encroachments are being rectified, Alki is not any different. The city should RECLAIM the property that belongs to the PUBLIC. As members of the public we have the right to insist on it.

  • JayDee February 17, 2009 (8:43 pm)

    As far as encroachment, my attention is drawn to the “deck to be modified by others”, or “Remove Ex. Wooden Walkway and Stairs” or “Reset Paver, Block Driveway” which at least suggests changes due to non-standard conditions, which could reflect at least some of the encroachment. It seems like the sidewalk jigs and jags a bit much — towards the eastern side there is a driveway marked “drain to street” which alludes to the drainage problem mentioned in the earlier story so it may not all be related to encroachment.

    Since the doctrine of adverse procession does not apply to government property, I say reclaim away. The benefits of encroachment benefit the few for the expense of the many. Now is the time to reclaim the public good for the many. In my humble opinion.

  • carraig na splinkeen February 17, 2009 (8:53 pm)

    I am not sure how often City of Seattle decision-makers read blogs, even one as good as WSB, so if you want your voice heard on this project, especially on the reclamation of public property, send an email to the Mayor’s office, Grace Crunican (head of Seattle DOT), and/or Sam Woods (project manager).

  • publicadministrator February 18, 2009 (9:57 am)

    The city does indeed value public opinion and input, and blogs such as WSB is one more way to hear from the community. Just yesterday in fact a hand written letter addressed to a city dept. director was circulated amongst the top brass, and it will receive a response.

    However in this new electronic frontier don’t expect direct postings from public agencies in the comments section. It is nearly impossible to do so without appearing heavy handed. Fortunately TR provides informational updates through our media relations staff and goes the extra step of correcting inaccuracies or rumors as they arise in the comments section.

  • WSB February 18, 2009 (10:05 am)

    As with other news sources, I can verify that we are read in various quarters- I have seen and heard evidence of that. And over our three years of life, we have had some direct responses, though not necessarily on something complicated like this. I will be following up on these questions because it is an interesting issue … not sure until research can be done, how much of it has become a de-facto easement (if that’s the right word) over the years just because people used the land and weren’t challenged on that, much as would be the case if you built a fence a foot over your neighbor’s property line and it sat there for years unchallenged. There were a few questions asked about “encroachment” during Friday’s tour and Sam Woods — who works with one very specific area of SDOT and therefore doesn’t have jurisdiction in this anyway — had to very diplomatically repeat, that’s not in the scope of this project. Stand by for followups!!!! – TR

  • julie February 18, 2009 (12:43 pm)

    I don’t think de-facto easement applies when it is public property. Recently the city has required people to remove fences etc that have been built in public parks even though they had been there for 10+ years. Also, shouldn’t these homeowners owe back taxes for this property if they do consider it theirs. Public use means public access otherwise you owe taxes.

  • julie February 18, 2009 (12:54 pm)

    This is a link to the recent Seattle times article regarding city property and easements.

  • sheesh February 18, 2009 (1:04 pm)

    Gotta love that photo… one city employee trying to carry out the inenviable task of marking the location a proposed sidewalk with one community leader and no less than 6(!) neighbors looking over her shoulder.

  • julie February 18, 2009 (1:55 pm)

    Problem is the city workers chalk marks are really meaningless. They will need surveyors etc to actually locate the sidewalks.

  • WSB February 18, 2009 (11:11 pm)

    The chalk marks were really just for the purpose of showing the neighbors a ballpark vicinity of where the sidewalk, etc., will be – this wasn’t an official “here’s where it will be built” trip, it was a tour expressly to go over the details of the final plan with those most concerned about it. P.S. I am doing an interview tomorrow for the “what about the encroachment” followup, inspired by the questions on this story. So if you check back on this thread and have any more questions, post ’em (or e-mail us, and look for the followup to come! – TR

  • WSB March 4, 2009 (9:50 pm)

    Doubt anybody’s checking here but we did do the encroachment interview and haven’t written it yet. Also expecting news soon – probably – on timetable for the project.

Sorry, comment time is over.

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann