Viaduct open house: Nothing approaching consensus, yet

| Alaskan Way Viaduct | Transportation | West Seattle news

Busy Tuesday night in West Seattle. Among the scheduled events, the Viaduct open house; thanks to West Seattle writer Charla Mustard-Foote for covering it for WSB:

(photo by Robert Shields)

By Charla Mustard-Foote
WSB contributor

State, county and city transportation officials conducted an open house along with an open-mic session Tuesday night at Madison Middle School, as the next step toward figuring out what will replace the “Central Waterfront” section of the Alaskan Way Viaduct.

More than 55 area citizens, including people from the neighboring south King County towns of Burien and Seatac, attended. 16 people used the open mic and all but three expressed views directly in opposition to the plans currently under discussion. To summarize the
dissent: People from neighboring towns thought their views were being ignored and pointed out that people from towns south of Seattle will be more affected by the dismantling of the viaduct than people from East Seattle and Beacon Hill and no presentations had been scheduled for them. (Transportation officials have planned a meeting with the Burien City Council next month.)

This month’s Open House reviews center on six ancillary projects, referred to as “Building Blocks leading to System Level Scenarios”. You can see detailed information about the building blocks and potential scenarios at: www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/viaduct/library-meetingmaterials.htm.

The vast majority of speakers opposed any plan which depended upon demolition of the existing viaduct and favored investigation of various proposals for retrofit. Retrofit wasn’t on the ballot in March 2007, when King County voters rejected two proposals: one for a surface road-tunnel hybrid (70-30 percent) and another for a new elevated highway structure (56-44 percent). Voters interviewed at that time indicated they expected transit authorities to come back with proposals which would include retrofitting the existing structure. Instead, the proposals under discussion emerged, involving replacement of the viaduct with combinations of surface streets, public transit, and increased use of the I-5 freeway.

One speaker, John Chasteen, drew enthusiastic applause when he said, “They called the viaduct a big ugly — it may be, but it’s *OUR* big ugly.”

As the meeting ended, several people expressed interest in organizing to influence consideration of alternative ideas, and to affect upcoming election of local candidates. No specific plans were made, but WSB will follow the evolving story and let you know what comes next. Meantime, transit officials will consider community input (another Open House is scheduled for Thursday in Ballard), and a stakeholders’ advisory board continues to meet regularly.

The current timetable calls for recommendations to Governor Gregoire, Mayor Greg Nickels, and County Executive Ron Sims, who will select an alternative by the end of the year. Current plan is for demolition of the Central Waterfront section of The Viaduct by 2012; other related projects start sooner, including replacement of its southern section.

For more information, watch www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/viaduct.

JT May 14, 2008 (8:32 am)

Charla, congratulations on your first assignment. Great job!

westseattleite May 14, 2008 (9:15 am)

I’m glad to hear that people expressed such strong opinions about not taking the viaduct down. Just dealing with the one or two closures they’ve done over the past few months is enough to illustrate that going to surface streets is a bad idea and frankly public transportation is not going to do the trick either. Personally I would like to see it re-built nicer and stronger than retro-fitted though.

changingtimes May 14, 2008 (9:55 am)

talking about the viaduct, did anyone see the huge fire under it today? i was hoping as i drove 99 to connect to the wsbridge that whatever was causing the flames and black smoke covering the freeway would not explode until i passed.

Patrick the Sales Guy May 14, 2008 (10:15 am)

Kudos to Charla and Bob. Charla and I had an editorial conference about the meeting yesterday afternoon. That’s assuming your definition of an editorial conference is talking about old Katharine Hepburn movies. Thanks C&B!

charlabob May 14, 2008 (10:35 am)

Hey, Patrick, it’s one of the best editorial conferences I’ve been in, and I’ve been in quite a few.

westseattleite, I want to find some links to the alternate proposals mentioned; I felt a little bad that so many people spoke of them but my only official word was the official word. (I used to be much tougher on officialdom — I’m just getting back into the world of real writing.)

toomanyratsinacageakaWS May 14, 2008 (11:01 am)

It would be nice if the city could build, or do whatever will ultimately be decided, before the viaduct / 99 is torn down so as not to impact east bound west seattleites for years. I know this is asking a lot, just wishful thinking I guess. As westseattleite points out, it’s going to be a mess having to use surface streets or all waiting in line in one lane for the alternate northbound option, I 5. I think most everyone can relate who was here the day after the Nisqually earthquake and tried to leave WS in the morning when 99 was closed or when it has been closed for the quarterly inspections. I know something needs to be done.

JE May 14, 2008 (12:14 pm)

I do wish I’d spoken out at the meeting. Not everyone in attendance agreed with the speakers, however loud the response.

The problems the speakers identified are real; but they seemed unable to consider any alternative solutions than keeping the status quo.

Several speakers mentioned needing to get to medical care, especially during a disaster, and argued that keeping the viaduct intact would facilitate this. But with the population growth on the peninsula, we should be pushing instead for a hospital in West Seattle.

The concern that our grandchildren will not be able to drive from Ballard to West Seattle is misplaced: instead, we should be concerned to find ways for our grandchildren to get around without having to haul a ton of steel with them wherever they go!

Transit is inadequate? Push for better transit–and be willing to pay for it! When you take into account building and maintaining roads, buying and maintaining cars, paying for gas and insurance, and medical expenses due to car accidents, taxes to pay for transit are a real bargain!

The noisy speakers with their narrow-minded rebuild/retrofit drumbeat do not represent us all. The stakeholders committee should stick to their guiding principals, evaluate the options, and explain to us their choices. If rebuild or retrofit comes out long-term best for the environment, most long-term fiscally responsible, best for keeping people and goods safely mobile in the long term, then that’s what we should do. But I’m skeptical that’s what an impartial analysis would find.

charlabob May 14, 2008 (12:35 pm)

Speaking as a neutral reporter, JE, I, too, wish you had spoken. :-) Among other things, many sided discussions are much more lively and interesting.

When I pursue the topic further, I’d really like to talk with you. There is a meeting scheduled next week in Ballard — won’t be West Seattle specific, but would be a good time express other points of view and many of the concerns are common across locales.

PSPS May 14, 2008 (10:13 pm)

Of course, the retrofit is the only realistic option. Not only is it the least disruptive (by far,) it is also the least expensive (also by far.) Any plan that involves the loss of the viaduct’s use for any period of time will absolutely cripple traffic and essentially divide the city in two.

mar3c May 16, 2008 (6:51 am)

you know, it was our own mayor – from right here in west seattle – who called the viaduct ugly. this is the same mayor who drove the final nail into the coffin of the monorail, another transportation solution which would have benefited his own neighborhood.
any proposed retrofit or rebuild design of the viaduct should be required to accommodate some kind of rail system – preferably the same gauge track as link light rail.
also, surface pavement should be from recycled tires to reduce noise and improve travel.

Sorry, comment time is over.