Disagree with Tom Rasmussen about The Viaduct? Talk with him!

| Alaskan Way Viaduct | Transportation | West Seattle news

In the first four days following the announcement of two “hybrid scenarios” for “replacing” the Alaskan Way Viaduct‘s Central Waterfront “mile in the middle” section, we brought you four expanded reactions/commentaries (all archived here with the rest of our Viaduct coverage). The one that drew the most criticism — in posted comments, anyway — came from West Seattle-residing (entire-city-representing) City Councilmember Tom Rasmussen (read it here). Wondering what he thought about that reaction, and/or why his Viaduct view is what it is? You don’t have to wonder – you can talk to him yourself. According to a note from his office (and he himself has posted this in a comment), “he would like to meet with anyone who would like to discuss this issue in person this Saturday morning. Tom will be at Uptown Espresso, 4301 SW Edmunds (California & Edmunds; here’s a map) between 8:30 – 10:30 am this Saturday, December 20th. He would welcome the opportunity to meet informally to hear people’s comments and recommendations on the viaduct and to exchange views on this important issue or any other Seattle issue of concern.”

Scott B. December 17, 2008 (3:53 pm)

There doesn’t seem to be much point in talking with Mr. Rasmussen. He lives here, he has presumably thought carefully about the viaduct replacement, but he supports a surface street “solution.” I doubt he will change his mind as a result of the discussion at the coffeeshop.

I think I will instead spend the time writing to my state senator, my state representatives, Frank Chopp, and the governor in order to ask them to maintain current capacity, exits, and onramps no matter which option is chosen.

I think we can have more effect doing that because the state has allocated money for the *viaduct replacement,* not for tearing down the viaduct then hoping we get so gridlocked that we spend all our time waiting for and riding hoped-for future buses.

Since the city and Mr. Rasmussen are hoping for a surface street “solution,” it seems like the coffeeshop session would be a waste of our time.

Koni December 17, 2008 (7:22 pm)

I don’t think the coffee shop will be big enough to fit all of the West Seattlites outraged by this whole fiasco. I hope he is prepared to be hoarse the next day ;)

d December 17, 2008 (7:46 pm)

Not a waste of time to me – or to many others, I’m certain.

One could potentially argue the opposite – that letter writing is a wasted effort, frankly. But, I don’t want to do that, because I think that it is another available avenue to express our opinion and concerns and to a very real extent, that makes it important. Ya’ know, the written comments might end up in the trash, but who knows, right?

It’s not a done deal with the city’s decision. The door is not yet slammed shut. There is now at least an offering to WS citizens which did not exist five days ago. Our local stakeholders representatives, Pete and Vlad, have asked for a meeting and they’ve apparently been granted that. If nothing else, for me, there is an opportunity to learn more. Learning is never a waste of time in my universe.

Show up and meet your neighbors, if nothing else.
WHo knows what can come of that, really?

Magpie December 17, 2008 (9:38 pm)

I guess I know which west Seattleite I won’t be voting for again. Might be nice to get someone in office who actually cares about us and our concerns. I am a very forward thinking person and to have him infer that if we don’t like his idea, we must not be thinking of the future is ludicris. (and so are his examples)..the low level bridge would have better served us if it were 4 lanes and the high bridge doesn’t hold adequate capacity and is a nightmare in inclement weather. Let’s not even talk about the additional carbon emissions from the kind of gridlock we will see with strictly a surface option.

What is a world class city if no one can get around in it (except the tourists downtown)..oh, except their cabs will have to take them on the freeway, no more quick back route on 509-99…and the cost will be much greater.

I’m willing to give everyone a chance, but who in their right mind can think that taking current capacity, adding more stop lights and putting all those cars on a street with ferry traffic and port traffic is a smart move,let alone with about half the current capacity.. I’ve got some snake oil to sell you.

ZS December 17, 2008 (10:28 pm)

It is very pathetic. Didn’t Gregoire say when she was first elected that she was replacing the viaduct with another raised highway regardless? And the budget was already approved and committed and that was that?

But she got roped into the wishy-washy inability to make a decision Seattle/King county government BS. It’s why I didn’t vote for her or any of the people currently in office but I guess I am the minority.

So public transportation is what they try to force us into. I try to ride the bus every day. the so-called public transportation option they want to force us into – besides the fact they are usually late, in the past few days I had to sit on Delridge and watch three buses go by without stopping because they were full. This is so unacceptable, it is if we don’t matter and our jobs don’t matter and they can’t handle capacity and that is that, live with it.

I would LOVE a real public transportation option, fixed rail, subway, monorail, whatever, but I look at the Sound Transit plans for the next 30+ years and West Seattle is not up for any new options. Why?? It’s like we don’t matter to this city but somehow they keep approving more apartments, condos and townhouses, congesting the bridge and our commute but no option to improve our transportation in and out. Crazy…

Sorry, comment time is over.