Alaskan Way Viaduct future: Toll beyond the tunnel unlikely

| Alaskan Way Viaduct | Transportation | West Seattle news

From the Alaskan Way Viaduct/Seawall Replacement Project South Working Group meeting Wednesday:

No bombshells; group members – including Jerome Cohen, Vlad Oustimovitch and Pete Spalding from West Seattle – were shown long lists of numbers regarding travel-time and traffic-flow projections, depending on scenarios including toll or no toll, vs. tunnel toll or tunnel-plus-other stretch(es) toll. (“Meeting materials” are linked here.)

Two of the scenarios looked at the possibility of tolling the stretch of 99 between the future tunnel’s entrance and the West Seattle Bridge, and Oustimovitch expressed concern about that in end-of-meeting around-the-table Q/A, but after the meeting, WSDOT’s Ron Paananen clarified to WSB that the extra stretch is NOT being seriously considered. “We looked at (tolling beyond the tunnel), recognizing that diversion (of traffic seeking toll-free routes) would be an issue, to see if (tolling) would change diversion patterns. It had a modest effect … people diverted further upstream. So if you’re worried about diversion, (expanding the tolling) is not a great strategy.” It brought in more money, of course, he noted, but he said that it appeared they would get the $400 million they need by tolling the tunnel. Summarizing, he said, “I think we answered the question that funding this project most likely will occur through tolling of the tunnel only.” If the tunnel is tolled, it is currently expected to start in early 2016, would be collected electronically, and could range from $1 to $5 in “2015 dollars.” Other toplines from the meeting (plus an explanation of the graphic above left, added Friday morning) – read on:

LOW BIDS: Paananen told the working group members that bids on projects continue to come in way below projections – they’ve saved tens of millions on projects that were expected to cost hundreds of millions. And he reiterated some of the cost estimates in another document that was circulated to the working group members (see it here), including the already-reported stat for the tunnel – “now 640 feet longer and 60 million dollars more expensive.” Any chance bids could be so low that tolling wouldn’t be needed? “Interesting question,” replied Paananen, saying that would ultimately be a “policy call by the Legislature.”
to repay borrowed money

TRAVEL TIMES: The new document laying these projections out in detail is here. Highlights – In 2015, using the tunnel isn’t expected to cut anybody’s travel time, and in fact those times could increase several minutes each way. In 2030, projections suggest, the Junction-to-Downtown drive would increase a few minutes each way. Looking at the fine print, one group member said, “It’s crazy to believe we’re only going to increase 6,000 vehicles per peak period in 15 years.” The reply: They’re expecting light rail, RapidRide and regular buses to be fully deployed and take some pressure off the roads. West Seattle’s Spalding, in end-of-meeting Q/A, voiced some skepticism, pointing out that rush-hour traffic from and to the peninsula thickens all the time.

TUNNEL’S NEW ROUTE: After the new route for the tunnel was shown at the last South Portal Working Group meeting, leading to some concerns about how close it would run to the seawall at Washington Street, WSDOT came up with some sketches to show it won’t be that close, and will already be into the “glacial fill” material deep underground by that point. The new drawings also showed a cross-section of what it’ll look like when it passes directly under The Viaduct. (Those drawings are not in the materials posted online today by WSDOT – we will be asking again tomorrow for electronic copies. FRIDAY AM UPDATE – Thanks to Kristy Van Ness for the fast response:)

TIMELINE: Four groups have been chosen to make proposals for the tunnel; the draft Request for Proposals goes out next month, according to Paananen, and they’ll work with those “design-build” teams for a few months to shape the RFP before issuing a final version. “Then they will submit their formal proposals in October, November,” he said, and they hope to announce the “best choice” by the end of the year.

NEXT MEETING: They’ll prepare information about construction staging as well as how biking, walking and transit travel times would be affected under various Viaduct/Tunnel scenarios. No date set for the next meeting yet; watch this page (and of course we’ll share the news as soon as we get it).

Rob January 29, 2010 (6:40 am)

Go ahead and charge a toll and the surface streets will be clogged with those, like me, that will avoid it. A toll will always cause a backup regardless of the method of collection. Studies show a toll on 99 will actually increase traffic congestion. Had this replacement been done after the last Earthquake, we would not be paying so damned much.

Chris January 29, 2010 (9:49 am)

I have to wonder how useful this tunnel will be. It goes underground where the current viaduct begins (sodo) and there are no exits until Queen Anne. I suppose if it has no downtown exits then they only need two lanes each way because no one will need it.

on board January 29, 2010 (11:00 am)

I will be happy to pay the toll because those, like Rob, will be taking a different route or planning a different trip altogether, thereby freeing up so much capacity that it will be easily worth paying for.

KT January 29, 2010 (2:07 pm)

I truly wonder about all these traffic “studies”. Come on, it is just guessing. There is nothing to comkpare with.

Mickymse January 29, 2010 (4:53 pm)

Actually, I think “it’s crazy to believe” that people will be driving cars 10+ years from now in the same way that we drive them today.
.
Seattleites are becoming more aware of our impact on the environment, are looking for ways to live in denser transit-oriented and walkable neighborhoods, and the costs of gas (and electricity) will increase exponentially during that time (even if we find cheaper alternatives).
.
It may be more than 6,000 vehicles, but I also don’t think it’s “crazy” to expect the number to be low.

Mickymse January 29, 2010 (4:58 pm)

On another point, TR can you get them to provide you with a graphic of what the south portal design currently looks like?
.
I wonder if folks realize how much of a freeway interchange is going to be constructed right there next to the stadiums. It’s looking much better than it did 6, 9 or 12 months ago… but I still think some may find it rather imposing.

WSB January 29, 2010 (5:59 pm)

I’m pretty sure, having been to almost all these meetings, that this is already online somewhere. I don’t have time to look it up right now, gotta grab a catnap before being on a “new media” panel at the KC Dems event tonight, but if nobody else comes up with it, I’ll look around afterward … TR

artsea January 30, 2010 (7:30 am)

All I can tell ya is that if they are determined to charge a toll (up to $4.00??) to use the tunnel, I’ll skip it and drive through downtown. Hey! I can cope with that. I’m retired. I’m guessing some who are commuting to work will decide to just add to the congestion on I-5….putting Seattle on more lists of “Most Congested Cities in America”. Not good for our image. In fact, maybe some people will choose to move elsewhere.