WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE: What we learned from the first 9 ‘progress reports’

(SDOT bridge-top camera image, noontime today)

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

As part of the West Seattle Bridge repair contract, weekly progress reports are required. In late January, we asked SDOT for those reports; they told us our request had to go through the city’s public-disclosure-request system, which subsequently estimated our request would take a month to fulfill. It did. This week we received minutes from the first nine weekly progress meetings, from November 23rd through January 18th.

The documents show that these meetings are held at 8 am Tuesdays. The reports, usually two to three pages long, are not detailed, and the ones we’ve received don’t reveal anything dramatic, but there are a few points of interest. Most notable is that the concrete-drivers strike first turns up in the January 11th report, with this notation:

Ongoing Teamsters strike against the concrete suppliers locally has shut down many jobsites. While there are no impacts to the project yet, concern for concrete availability once suppliers are allowed to deliver again. Concrete suppliers will address in order of priority based on volume. Given the lower volume of the project, concerns with meeting the schedule deadlines are being monitored and schedule options are being explored to condense the concrete delivery timeframe.

That note appeared four weeks before Mayor Bruce Harrell stood before media crews and warned that the strike would delay the bridge reopening if concrete didn’t become available by February 20th.

Other notes of interest include a COVID outbreak reported among the bridge crew in the January 18th report – three confirmed cases and one suspected case; the report adds that “all were fully vaccinated.” From mid-December to mid-January, there were multiple mentions of logistics for the raising of the bridge work platforms.

(WSB photo, January 29th, just before second half of second platform went up)

They were at one point expected to be hoisted in December, but instead went up in January; progress-meeting minutes indicate that working with the railroad took extra time – “railroad comments” were cited as a reason for a resubmittal of documents related to the hoisting.

The reports are on forms with a preset list of discussion topics, and lists of invitees/attendees, from repair contractor Kraemer North America, SDOT, consultant (and repair designer) WSP, and in addition to SDOT’s in-house communicators, representatives of communications consultant Stepherson and Associates. We have put in public-disclosure requests for the weekly reports filed since the ones we received, and are waiting for estimates on how long that’ll take.

P.S. As for what’s happening now with the bridge, work continues, minus concrete. Last week, SDOT told the West Seattle Transportation Coalition they still hope to be able to reopen the bridge in mid-2022.

On the strike front, the drivers’ union, Teamsters Local 174, says it wants to bargain individually with the concrete suppliers; the suppliers responded with a statement today accusing the drivers of trying to “bully the construction industry.”

26 Replies to "WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE: What we learned from the first 9 'progress reports'"

  • dwb March 3, 2022 (9:59 pm)

    “As part of the West Seattle Bridge repair contract, weekly progress reports are required. In late January, we asked SDOT for those reports; they told us our request had to go through the city’s public-disclosure-request system, which subsequently estimated our request would take a month to fulfill. It did.”

    WSB, what’s your interpretation of having to jump through hoops to get this public document? Intentional disregard for transparency? I’d think, out of an overabundance of caution and desire to satisfy the public’s desire for updates, they’d make this more easily accessible, and this was just an oversight. But maybe it’s just another own-goal by the bumpkins running SDOT. Who knows. Either scenario isn’t encouraging.

    • WSB March 3, 2022 (10:23 pm)

      When I protested that the request shouldn’t have to go through a PDR, the explanation from an SDOT spokesperson was:

      “We are responding to the request for the project documents in a consistent manner to how we would respond to any request for project documents for a capital project. These reports aren’t created by SDOT staff, they are technical submittals created by the contractor and each needs to go through a review process before we finalize and then release these documents. Each weekly and monthly report will also be reviewed through the PDR process and released as soon as possible.

      “SDOT’s public disclosure team is best situated to get these documents to you as soon as possible while maintaining compliance with the Washington State Public Records Act.”

      PDR teams are reported to be routinely bogged down in requests, so “as soon as possible” equaled a month in this case. We’ll see if subsequent requests move any faster.

      P,S, I should note that my request months ago for the repair contract – multiple documents totaling many hundreds of pages – was granted without a PDR. – TR

  • Name that shan't be spoken March 3, 2022 (10:23 pm)

    Once again, the concrete for this project can absolutely be sourced from nearby sources/counties, it just takes a will to get this important project done.  Whatever BS hurdles are mentioned it is just that, bull$hit.  Source the small-ish amount of concrete needed from other sources, it will only put more pressure on local companies to come back to the table and bargain due to lost money, not the other side of “supporting” the strikers/union.  I fully support union workers, F the concrete companies holding the city hostage.  Work around this unneeded obstacle to get our bridge up and running again.

    • 1994 March 3, 2022 (10:41 pm)

      I agree – there are other concrete sources the SDOT or contractors need to consider. Concrete trucks are rolling!  Today I saw a white concrete truck on 35th Ave SW, no logos on the truck. The bridge is critical infrastructure and WS has endured enough with this closure. SDOT – time to get the repair done and open the bridge. 

  • GT March 4, 2022 (8:19 am)

    The last thing the bridge needs is mickey mouse concrete mix soup. Rushing at the last minute, changing the spec is why the bridge failed in the first place.

    • wetone March 4, 2022 (11:08 am)

      Bridge so called failure had little to due with bad concrete, it had more to do with SDOT not maintaining it properly, just as they are doing with much of the roadway infrastructure through out Seattle. Bridge had known issues almost a decade ago with nothing done. Should of never been shut down in first place. Turned into political mess, used for money grab from feds and social engineering. If SDOT was on there A game and really wanted to help traffic flow in/out of WS they would be working on Spokane viaduct while bridge is down. Redoing another failed job they recently had done by contractor, as spec’d per SDOT. Once bridge reopens, this section of roadway will most definitely need to be resurfaced at the least. Closing lanes down once again. Seattle gov and SDOT have very little interest with really helping vehicle traffic as the cult mentality thinks everyone can ride a bike, bus or walk to work…………

  • Mj March 4, 2022 (9:07 am)

    1994 – I agree, it’s time to source the driver’s, they will be paid the prevailing wage, elsewhere.  Residents and businesses need the West Seattle Bridge repair done yesterday!

  • Roms March 4, 2022 (10:14 am)

    Teamsters Local 174 says “[w]hether it has been through price fixing, job sharing or market control through material allotment, it is time to end the monopolistic power you hold in this region” in their open letter to the concrete companies. Such monopolistic behaviors should be addressed by the justice system, not through union negotiations. That statement is clearly out of touch. What is the union aiming at?

    • Ivan Weiss March 4, 2022 (10:53 am)

      What is the union aiming at? It’s aiming at a just outcome, what the (heck) do you think? What’s more, there’s no reason whatever why this outcome can’t, or shouldn’t be resolved through collective bargaining, if that can be accomplished. That’s just more of your anti-union crapola, and no one is fooled by it.

      • MyThruppence March 4, 2022 (12:18 pm)

        I’m with Roms, as I agree that the union’s claims of monopolistic behavior are outside the scope of their labor contract negotiations. State your minimum achievable requirements, clearly and consistently, without the rhetoric. The owners should do the same. Does anyone know when we will cross into injunctive relief territory within the court system? Perhaps a requirement for a federal mediator? It seems that an argument could be made that public safety is now being impacted with all of the delayed transit projects across the city.

        • WsRes March 5, 2022 (10:58 am)

          I also agree with Roms, that was a strange remark by the unions. Also we need to source this concrete somewhere, anywhere, and do it fast. The amount of co2 emitted by cars via the reroute is speeding up climate change and hitting the lower income neighborhoods here in WS with large amounts of traffic. 

      • Roms March 4, 2022 (7:14 pm)

        There’s no anti-union “crapola” in my comment. There’s no pro-union “crapola” either, by the way. I’m just pointing to a fact. Was that a “fake fact?” No, it wasn’t. It’s right there in the open letter, an open letter which just goes on and on with wild statements that, if true, should be prosecuted. It says nothing about what they currently propose. “Fact.” What a beautiful word that people love to evade when the reality doesn’t match their fiction.

  • seanate March 4, 2022 (11:08 am)

    I find it more than frustrating WSB had to go through a PDR/FOIA request to get these minutes.  Open government is supposed to be the norm, not a hoop jumping exercise.  At the very least this opens up the perception that they are trying to hide something.  This could be easily avoided by posting these minutes on the project web page as soon as they are available, along with all other project records of interest.  Clearly there is no information standard here, as evidenced by some records requiring PDR, some not (like the contract referenced above).  We are lucky the fine folks at WSB go to such lengths to report this information for us.

    • CAM March 4, 2022 (4:38 pm)

      Alternate perspective, as noted by WSB’s quote above, these documents are not being produced by SDOT but are being provided to SDOT by an outside agency. They would not have gone through any kind of internal review before publication/creation like other government created material. I assume nothing was redacted from the documents but the public disclosure team is responsible for reviewing the documents to make sure nothing needs to be redacted prior to their release. Should the documents be released without that information redacted the City would be liable for any damages. So again, it is unlikely that these documents would contain that information and the review is probably quick, but they also can’t prioritize the request in the queue and it has to wait its turn. Something like a contract the City signed is different because it has already gone through multiple levels of review and is also likely published somewhere else, even if not accessible from an external site. 

  • HarborIslandworker March 4, 2022 (12:56 pm)

    Seanate… they did the same thing to me when I asked how many personal vehicles each Maritime and industrial business had attached to the license plate camera system…

    • CAM March 4, 2022 (4:48 pm)

      This kind of request most likely requires a public disclosure/public records request be made because the data you are requesting are not stored in the format you are requesting them and they would need to be reformatted and redacted. 

    • Roms March 4, 2022 (7:08 pm)

      I asked for the plates numbers and the names of people who have access to the low bridge a few month ago and got it in a few weeks. That didn’t say who is granted access for which reason because I didn’t ask for that, but that should be straightforward to get this data.

      • CAM March 4, 2022 (9:37 pm)

        They gave you the names that are attached to specific license plate numbers? That seems unnecessary and dangerous. Why would you need that?

        • HarborIslandworker March 4, 2022 (10:22 pm)

          CAM… The applicant is made aware of this when they apply 

          • CAM March 5, 2022 (1:31 pm)

            I am well aware that the government when it has access to private contact or address information of its constituents (provided by them as required to participate in their government) will release that data. You seem to have missed the part of my statement where I pointed out the dangers to the personal safety of those same individuals when they do so and also missed the part where I asked why someone, average citizen, would need the names AND license plate numbers in combination of people crossing the bridge. One or the other independently would seem to suffice to answer any question you might have in an unofficial capacity. The first question you asked had no identifying information for individual vehicles and is actually a really reasonable and important question to ask. This other data is intrusive and ripe for abuse. So again, I’m aware they’ll give it to you but that isn’t typically a blank check and in todays world with the surveillance technology the average citizen has access to from their pocket I’m not sure the government regulations around this have kept up. I rely on my neighbors to act rationally. 

      • HarborIslandworker March 4, 2022 (9:51 pm)

        Roms… Yeah you’d think it would be pretty straightforward to tell me how many personal vehicles are attached to each business… i’m not asking for names or vehicle license plates. Just passes per business. I would find it interesting though if say-One business had 20 while the other one had 5. But I do know for a fact that SDOT doesn’t pay close attention to what these passes are being used for because a coworker of mine that I told about the application process. Applied for a pass and got it and I did the same and was denied. This person uses the bridge every single day to travel back-and-forth to work… I really think the whole system should be audited. Because that’s one person I know of…how many other people are slipping through the cracks 🤷🏻‍♂️

  • Duffy March 4, 2022 (12:57 pm)

    Agreed that by any means necessary they need to get this thing open. I support the union and their efforts, but unfortunately we are well beyond using the bridge as a sticking point to a labor fight. This is (and really has been from the beginning) a transportation emergency to our community and sadly not everyone has treated it that way. By any means necessary, the BRIDGE NEEDS TO OPEN.

    • Brian March 4, 2022 (1:38 pm)

      Direct your anger and energy at the responsible parties then: the concrete company ownership. 

      • Roms March 4, 2022 (7:18 pm)

        The employers are not the responsible party. Currently, the lack of cement is directly due to the strike. That’s a clear fact. The strike is due to something else that only emotions and passion are used to describe, diluting the whole message. That something else is itself due to other things, probably such as inflation, etc. And so on.

        • Brian March 5, 2022 (5:59 pm)

          Pay the workers and the work gets done. It’s actually not that complicated. 

  • MrB March 4, 2022 (7:17 pm)

    The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many… and those in charge do nothing about it for political reasons.  

Sorry, comment time is over.