West Seattle, Washington
21 Tuesday
First, that reminder: Long before Snowstorm ’08, as we were reminded last week, Metro had been planning to run a “partial holiday schedule” for most of the time between Christmas and New Year’s. That includes today through Wednesday, plus Friday; here’s the list of routes that are affected. (Thursday, New Year’s Day, will be on a Sunday schedule.) (Note added: This morning Metro published a specific page to address this week – check that here.)
Now, the “questions answered” part – over the weekend, we received some additional information from Metro’s Linda Thielke, after she read the “editorial-esque aside” we included in this post – it’s about why bus-tracking didn’t work so well, and why it should in the not-too-distant future – for that and more, read on:Read More
A warning about the major road on West Seattle’s eastern border, sent by Laura in Highland Park (we also got a short Facebook note that mentioned West Marginal Way hazards, so perhaps the same stretch):
Want to alert drivers to a hazardous road condition. I was just out doing errands–happily driving on bare, wet streets. As I was going northbound in the right lane on West Marginal Way at normal speed (40 mph) I came around a curve and hit major slush/ice. I lost control of my car–as did the car in front of me. Luckily we managed to come out of it unscathed, but it was scary for a moment, and could have resulted in an accident. I kept going (in the left lane–and much slower this time) and saw that the right lane continued to have many slushy/icy spots AND a few large fallen branches from the greenbelt. So…two warnings: 1) Specifically, be careful on W Marginal and 2) In general, continue to be extra careful driving–though many streets are bare and wet, you never know when you might come upon a spot that hasn’t melted yet.
And now, of course, the rain is back, which may make it worse before major melt makes it better.
Driving around today, seeing asphalt again, we realized a bit of complacency might sneak in – but, especially if you have to go back to work tomorrow, be aware that it could be another dicey morning, because the mercury’s going sub-freezing tonight, and some of that slush could ice over. In addition, more snow showers are possible, especially morning-midday – here’s Cliff Mass’s take on it; here’s what the National Weather Service says. Two other notes: Remember that, as Metro reminded us yesterday, buses will be on a “partial holiday schedule” AS WELL AS “adverse weather” reroutes — so you will still want to check this page. And we’ll see in the morning if city garbage pickup gets back in gear — because of the holiday, homes with Thursday pickup were scheduled for Friday pickup this week, but trucks have gotten to few if any homes in the city for the past week, so we’ll be awaiting a status check in the morning. Since tomorrow might still be tough going in the morning, we’ll publish a “Friday morning updates” post in case commuters need a handy place to share and get info.
(Photo courtesy Austin)
Since Snowmare ’08 (or whatever you want to call it) is seguing directly into Christmas, few things really “get back to normal” for quite some time. Metro bus service, for example. Linda Thielke of Metro, e-mailed WSB a little while ago, wanting to make sure the many bus riders in WSB-land know what’s in store:
I’m concerned that your readers aren’t realizing that before this bad weather hit Metro was already planning for holiday schedules between Dec. 25-Jan. 2. Also, we’ve added a few more next week on historically low-ridership days to give us some recovery/repair time for the buses.
I see several comments in the blog about getting buses back to the normal schedule. So, people need to check what the schedules will be in the coming nine days. I think most of the West Seattle service will be fairly normal (barring more weather emergencies), but there are some individual trip cancellations and route cancellations coming up.
Dec. 25 – Sunday schedule
Dec. 26 – partial holiday schedule – this is the schedule we introduced on the day after Thanksgiving and plan to operate on 10 days in 2009. It’s denoted by an “H” in the paper and online timetables
Dec. 27 – Saturday schedule
Dec. 28 – Sunday schedule
Dec. 29, Dec. 30, Dec. 31 – partial holiday schedule (see above)
Jan. 1 – Sunday schedule
Jan. 2 – partial holiday schedule
Once again, operating these schedules fully will be dependent on road and weather conditions; and how much physical abuse the buses that have been running have taken.
Metro’s website, as you are likely well aware by now, starts here.
(Monday photo, courtesy of Creighton)
With the uproar today over the city not using salt on roads, after this Times article (which we and sixty-skabillion other sites have linked to in the past 20 hours or so), we asked Rick Sheridan at SDOT if there is an official city statement, just to get their side of the story. Here’s what he e-mailed back:
The City of Seattle has not used salt as its principal de-icer since the mid 1990s. Instead we use a chemical de-icer that is effective, more environmentally friendly and less damaging to vehicles and roads. Salt, when it runs off from roadway surfaces, is harmful to vegetation, waterways and wildlife. Fresh water habitat, which shelters fish such as salmon, is especially impacted. The other significant problem is the corrosive impact of salt on metal and other man-made materials. It corrodes cars, city equipment, roadways, and our many bridges and viaducts. So the use of salt comes with a very heavy price tag.
The City of Seattle uses a de-icer, Geomelt C, that provides similar benefits without all of salt’s problems. It has worked effectively in all of Seattle’s recent winter storms, to include the big storm of 1996. The City of Portland and the Oregon Department of Transportation use the same approach. Our de-icer helped clear primary arterials citywide, such as Fauntleroy Way SW and the West Seattle Bridge, and is now part of our efforts on secondary arterials throughout the city.
On a slightly related note, we also asked for a little more info on this grader, which we didn’t recall hearing about or seeing before today (photo’s from California/Thistle at mid-afternoon):
Here’s its backstory:
The road grader is from SDOT’s vehicle fleet. SDOT purchased it within the last
year for grading projects, and snow and ice removal. It typically serves in the northern part of Seattle on Aurora Avenue, a long straight roadway, and is utilized when we have significant accumulations of snow and ice. Given needs elsewhere in the city, SDOT deployed it to Elliott Avenue, downtown and West Seattle. It is great for straight roads and hills (due to its traction). The grader is one of many vehicles we have working on snow and ice clearing in Seattle.
It was seen today on SW Thistle and SW Holden (both hilly and straight).
Updated 12:46 am Wednesday – retimestamped again to keep it below the main post – (this list was first created Sunday). We will keep updating as info becomes available:
ROADS AND TRANSIT
WSB Traffic page with city, state, county cams specifically from, or relevant to, WS
Metro bus route cancellation/reroute status
Real-time bus updates (not necessarily for all)
King County Road Alerts
WSDOT cameras and traffic alerts
Washington State Ferries service bulletins
Sound Transit service alerts (buses, Sounder)
ESSENTIAL CITY SERVICES/UTILITIES
Seattle Public Utilities couldn’t pick up trash Tuesday, will assess Wednesday feasibility today
Puget Sound Energy service alerts
CITY PARKS, COMMUNITY CENTERS, POOLS
The latest update is on the Parks Department home page with Wednesday plans
LIBRARIES
Seattle Public Library system home page (all branches are CLOSED today and Christmas Day)
SEA-TAC AIRPORT
FAA airport-status page (which will show you what’s up with other airports nationwide)
Sea-Tac real-time flight info
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
King County running list of closures etc.
City of Seattle collection of links and news releases
AMTRAK AND GREYHOUND
Amtrak service alerts and advisories
Greyhound service advisories
WEATHER
National Weather Service – Seattle
Cliff Mass’ Weather Blog
WHAT’S OPEN/CLOSED WEDNESDAY (in categories not mentioned above)
Illusions Hair Design (WSB sponsor) CLOSED till Saturday
From the West Seattle Family YMCA (WSB sponsor):
Wednesday, 12/24
Both YMCA Facilities ClosedThursday, 12/25
Both YMCA Facilities Closed – Merry Christmas!Friday, 12/26
Both YMCA Facilities Open at Normal Times
Click! Design That Fits (WSB sponsor) open till 3 pm
Twilight Art in The Junction open till 3 pm and collecting new unwrapped toys for Treehouse
University of Washington closed
MISCELLANEOUS
Real-time Twitter updates tagged as storm coverage – from all over the Seattle area!
Live 911 dispatch log (Seattle fire/medic only, NOT police, NOT sheriff/county fire units)
Particular links you’d like to see us add? Open/closed status to report (businesses, organizations, events, whatever)? Please leave a comment and/or e-mail us – editor@wsb.blackfin.biz – thanks!
We first told you two weeks ago that Fauntleroy Community Association leadership had announced Washington State Ferries officials will be in Fauntleroy January 21st for a hearing on the WSF draft long-range plan — which includes some major changes in direction for the West Seattle dock’s future, such as adding overhead passenger ramps and scrapping the idea of moving Southworth traffic to downtown. Today, WSF has issued the official news release announcing the plan and all hearings systemwide, so we wanted to make sure you saw that too:Read More
Caveat that this is published on a site run by a think-tank with a specific view on what should happen next in the Alaskan Way Viaduct Central Waterfront decisionmaking process, but nonetheless, since we couldn’t get to last night’s Stakeholders Advisory Committee meeting because of ongoing weather coverage, we thought you might be interested in the posting of detailed meeting notes from one member (from outside West Seattle) on the Cascadia Center website – read them here. From the WSB More page – automated news links from regional media mentioning West Seattle and related issues such as the AWV – here’s the Seattle Times article from the same meeting. That was the last scheduled stakeholders’ meeting; next, the governor, county executive, and mayor are supposed to announce their preference by year’s end. (WSB coverage of the Alaskan Way Viaduct is archived here, newest to oldest.) Reminder that City Councilmember Tom Rasmussen has offered to meet tomorrow morning to discuss The Viaduct with anyone who wants to talk about it, 8:30-10:30 am drop in at Uptown in The Junction – we are checking with him if that’s still on, given the weather situation. 1:18 PM UPDATE: Yes, Councilmember Rasmussen will still be there. So if you want to talk Viaduct – or any other city issue – he’ll be there, 8:30-10:30 am Junction Uptown tomorrow. (THEN you can go shopping BEFORE the next suspected storm hits!)
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.”
(Taken @ noon, Sullivan east of California [map], just south of plowed/sanded Thistle)
With all the concern and complaints about our iced-over side streets in West Seattle not getting de-icing/plowing, we asked SDOT communications boss Rick Sheridan for an official response. Just got this:
While still keeping an eye on arterials, we are now focusing solely on plowing and sanding residential streets citywide. Out of 15 trucks working across Seattle, there are seven trucks out on West Seattle residential streets at this time.
Our policy is to maintain a network of pre-selected key routes that provide access to most city areas and are pathways for regional transit. Our sanders/snowplows must take care of this network of arterial streets first. Once we are comfortable with the condition of those main streets, we turn to residential streets on a request-basis.
SDOT started including more side streets in West Seattle in our routes late yesterday as we worked primary and secondary arterials. The main roads in West Seattle required a lot of attention because of the repeated refreezings.
If there are roads that residents want to highlight for plowing and sanding, please call our Charles Street dispatch (24 hours a day) at 386-1218. We will prioritize those requests and attempt to work as many as possible.
So if your street needs love, call now – because more snow’s on the way. Reminder that the city’s snow and ice info online starts here – that page links to the plowed/deiced routes’ map plus this FAQ (which explains the priorities etc.).
The state, county, and city officials who’ve been working on the future of the Alaskan Way Viaduct‘s Central Waterfront section always freely admit they have much more to study and figure out. But it was made clear at Monday night’s public forum — first comment opportunity since the unveiling of two “hybrid scenarios” — that one of the things they’re still figuring out is what the scenarios would mean to this side of the bay. Read on:Read More
In the four days since first word of the two “scenarios” for Alaskan Way Viaduct Central Waterfront replacement — one, a “couplet” of surface streets; the other, a new single-deck viaduct, 2 side-by-side structures — WSB has brought you comments and commentary from: The two West Seattleites on the Stakeholders Advisory Committee, Vlad Oustimovitch of Gatewood (read his thoughts here) and Pete Spalding of Pigeon Point (read his, here), former West Seattle Herald editor Jack Mayne (read his guest editorial here), and the West Seattle Chamber of Commerce. We also asked West Seattle-residing (but entire-city-representing) City Councilmember Tom Rasmussen if he would share his thoughts; here they are:
As a resident of West Seattle I find the viaduct incredibly convenient to travel between home and downtown and to most areas west of I-5. Often, other routes are slower and less direct. For this reason the elevated options are attractive.
However, I believe we have to look at numerous factors as we make a decision we will live with for the next century. For historical context, your readers may recall the decisions made by the city nearly twenty-five years ago to build the high and low level West Seattle bridges were very contentious and controversial. The high level bridge was opposed in large part because it cost more than a low level drawbridge. The high level bridge was selected because it would meet current and future transportation needs.
The low level swing bridge was controversial because it employed a unique technology and replaced a four lane bridge with a two lane bridge which allowed the construction of shoulders, pedestrian and bicycle lanes and a clear shipping channel for future maritime needs. The low level swing bridge was more costly than other options but was selected because it too would meet current and future transportation needs.
Like the West Seattle Bridge decisions, I hope the option selected by the state to replace the viaduct will be one which will best serve the City for many generations and that speed and costs are not the only criteria. For the long term benefit of the City I believe that we need to consider a number of factors. Speed, convenience, number of vehicles served are important but are not the only criteria. We should also consider the environmental and economic benefits and how we can improve conditions on our waterfront to make it more attractive to all of us including visitors and businesses.
The options that I favor are those which would remove the elevated structure and replace it with a combination of surface street and transit improvements without creating highway-like conditions on the waterfront. The options that I would support should meet our needs now and preserve the ability to construct a cut-and-cover or deep bored tunnel if required to meet any need in the future for additional non-stop transportation through the City. We can select an option today that preserves future options which are complimentary to the investment we would make now.
I want Seattle to support our current businesses and successfully compete for international trade and business. I meet with local business leaders and with executives who are traveling to Seattle to explore opportunities. Last week I met with executives of French-owned companies that have major businesses here and who are seeking new opportunities. It was interesting how often the beauty of the setting of our City is mentioned as being attractive to them. On more than one occasion individuals told me how they hope that Seattle does create a great waterfront. Other cities are doing this and I am confident we can too while meeting our transportation needs.
Tom Rasmussen
Last reminder, tonight is a major opportunity to voice your opinion “in person” — the public forum at Town Hall downtown, starting at 5 pm (here’s a map/directions to TH).
All WSB Alaskan Way Viaduct coverage is archived here, newest to oldest; project information is at alaskanwayviaduct.org. To read what citywide news sources are reporting about the Viaduct, see the latest links on the WSB “More” page (which also automatically picks up citywide media coverage of West Seattle).
Just discovered, while looking for snow/ice info on the SDOT website, that the department has posted the promised “Q & A” following up on the December 1st “open house” regarding the proposal to reconfigure – “rechannelize” — Fauntleroy Way between Alaska and California. Among other things, the city maintains that the changes would not add more than a minute to travel time along that stretch, and explains why this is considered to be different from the proposal that Morgan Junction community members voted down a decade ago. Read it all here.
In the two days since the two “scenarios” for Alaskan Way Viaduct Central Waterfront replacement were announced — one, a “couplet” of surface streets; the other, a new single-deck viaduct, 2 side-by-side structures — we have brought you expanded comments from some well-known voices: The West Seattleites on the Stakeholders Advisory Committee, Vlad Oustimovitch of Gatewood (read his thoughts here) and Pete Spalding of Pigeon Point (read his, here), as well as former West Seattle Herald editor Jack Mayne (read his guest editorial here). Tonight, another voice, advocating on behalf of West Seattle economic concerns: the West Seattle Chamber of Commerce. WSB received a copy yesterday of this letter sent Thursday to area elected officials:
Re: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Options
Dear Governor Gregoire, Executive Sims and Mayor Nickels:
The West Seattle Chamber of Commerce adopted position statements in May 2006 on various transportation issues. Included in this document is a position for the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement project:
The Alaskan Way Viaduct capacity needs to be fully replaced in either an elevated or tunnel alternative, the “boulevard” concept is unworkable.
Importantly, the current plan to remove all viaduct capacity during two years of construction is completely unacceptable due to the disastrous consequences of such a plan to both commuters and emergency vehicles.
These positions were adopted after very careful consideration. While the West Seattle Peninsula continues to absorb great population growth (home to approximately 20% of the City’s population), our region has failed to be recognized as meriting the transportation and economic infrastructure that it deserves to create a community that can be self sustaining.
Given this dynamic, West Seattle’s population continues to seek employment, medical care, goods and services that are situated off of the Peninsula. Our community sends thousands of cars OFF of the peninsula onto SR-99 and I-5 every day (presently including the Southworth and Vashon ferry traffic as well as industrial / freight transport) and thousands of cars returning each day. Our gravest concern is that the construction impacts along the waterfront will impede our community’s ability to access job, critical medical care, and services not available on the peninsula. It is equally clear that the re-routing of traffic to I-5 will cause great hardship to our commuters, our businesses, the neighboring industrial community, and emergency vehicles. We must remind you ALL that access to jobs and medical care is paramount.
We have strong concerns about the long term impacts of a surface design and strongly urge you to retain at least one tunnel option on the short list.
The tunnel options provide for on-going movement to the downtown corridor during construction; lessens the overall impact of any additional congestion on I-5; maintains capacity for freight and commuters thereby easing a significant burden on West Seattle; and after completion, provides for both through access and an improved waterfront boulevard, the best of both worlds.
We request you give careful consideration to the long term impacts on the West Seattle community that would result should a surface option be implemented. We formally request a more thorough investigation and disclosure of genuine economic and social impacts on the West Seattle community as a whole.
The superficial and cosmetic appeal of a surface option will quickly disappear when the West Seattle Bridge and Spokane Street Viaduct become parking lots; when Alaskan Way, Second Avenue and Fourth Avenue become truck routes; and traffic sits idling at stop light congesting our streets.
We urge officials to preserve the tunnel options and consider truly “putting people first.”
Our organization is committed to working with state, county and city transportation agencies to bring about change for the good, to help meet the demands, but our adopted positions are ones that speak clearly on behalf of our community.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Dawn Leverett
Chair
(West Seattle Chamber of Commerce board)
Thanks to those who have shared their Viaduct opinions with us so far; there’s still room, and time for more (editor@wsb.blackfin.biz) – and your comments are vital too. All WSB Alaskan Way Viaduct coverage is archived here, newest to oldest; project information is at alaskanwayviaduct.org; and as mentioned previously, an important opportunity to voice your opinion “in person” is the public forum at Town Hall this Monday night, starting at 5 pm (here’s a map/directions to TH). To read what citywide news sources are reporting about the Viaduct, see the latest links on the WSB “More” page (which also automatically picks up citywide media coverage of West Seattle).
First there were eight, then there were two. Since we first saw the two “scenarios” to which the Alaskan Way Viaduct Central Waterfront options list has been narrowed, and relayed them to you in as-it-happened coverage from City Hall late yesterday, we also have been glad to facilitate the sharing of opinions as well. You’ve heard from West Seattle’s representatives on the Viaduct Stakeholders Advisory Committee, Pete Spalding (his reaction here) and Vlad Oustimovitch (his, here). You’ve heard from dozens of WSBers in comments on our Viaduct reports (all archived here). Now another West Seattleite’s voice — that of the veteran journalist who wrote editorials for the West Seattle Herald for years, until his position as editor of the WSH and Ballard News-Tribune was cut last week. Jack Mayne contacted us this week and asked if we would be interested in editorial contributions. WSB itself has not taken official editorial-style positions on issues since our first year, before evolving into a news site. But this is certainly a place for voices to be heard, and read. Here is what Jack Mayne has written about the latest turn in the road to the Viaduct’s future (followed by a personal note from him):
BOTH VIADUCT OPTIONS DOOM WEST SEATTLE
Editorial by Jack Mayne
Special to West Seattle Blog
Yesterday, transportation officials chose two preferred options to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. Both of them would shaft West Seattle, dooming commuters to long, slow traffic-snarled slogs to downtown, and even dooming promised added bus routes by enmeshing them in the traffic mess either option would create.
We strongly urge anyone who commutes to downtown daily, or who travels north of downtown to Ballard and beyond: Attend and make your concerns known at a public forum this Monday, December 15th, beginning at 5 pm at Town Hall.
The first option chosen is a new elevated viaduct, starting at Safeco Field and connecting to the Battery Street Tunnel. At first blush, this sounds as though it would be a good replacement for the viaduct the governor has said she will tear down in 2012.
But it is not.
Gone would be the Seneca Street offramp that allows people working downtown to move directly into the central city.
There would still be an offramp onto Western Avenue just before the roadway enters the tunnel, as is the case now. This arrangement would mean a commuter would either have to drive north of the city center and backtrack on surface streets, or would have to exit State Route 99 at King Street and then negotiate numerous traffic signals and downtown city traffic to their destinations.
But the real stake through the heart of this proposal – which would have an end cost of well over $3 billion – is that Mayor Greg Nickels has vowed again and again to never allow an elevated roadway along the waterfront. Nickels, Metropolitan King County Executive Ron Sims, and Governor Chris Gregoire are the three who will make the final decision. Further, the Seattle Downtown Association, the Metropolitan Seattle Chamber of Commerce, and numerous politicians have opposed the construction of another elevated roadway to replace the viaduct.
That option appears to be only a stalking horse for the politicians who want it their way or no way.
The second choice by the transportation agencies is the real disaster for West Seattle. It needs a stake driven so deeply into its heart that it never, ever comes up again. That is the so-called surface and transit option.
A two-street surface esplanade has magical music for many downtown romanticists — but West Seattleites, think what it would mean to you.
Pigeon Point resident Pete Spalding said this on West Seattle Blog last night:
“If you leave West Seattle and drive through downtown going to north Seattle you will encounter 28 stop lights, a 90 degree turn to proceed through the Battery Street tunnel and a 30 mile per hour speed limit. On top of this there is no mention of how the ferry traffic (entering or exiting Colman dock) will be figured into the traffic flow.”
Remember, buses will travel many portions of this route, too, so taking the bus may not save commuters any time.
Besides Nickels and Sims, we are told that West Seattle resident and City Councilmember Tom Rasmussen is in favor of not replacing the viaduct with anything but city streets, thus making downtown streets into clogged transportation corridors.
Not only will this option cost almost as much as the elevated option, more than $3 billion, but it will doom West Seattle resident to an estimated two hour commute each way. Traffic will mean buses will be caught in the gridlock.
You can forget going downtown for anything but the most important of missions, considering the traffic snarls on the way, then the exorbitant cost of parking once you get there.
Shoppers will find it is faster, cheaper and easier to journey to newly renovated Southcenter, with relatively easy access via Highway 509 and free parking once there.
The 20 percent of Seattle’s population that lives here seems to mean nothing to the politicians who are making this choice. The only question on final judgment now is Gov. Gregoire, who does have a wider constituency to answer to.
We urge West Seattle residents to crowd Town Hall next Monday night and demand that we have a say in this. Old-timers remember the bleak days when the West Seattle Bridge was down and being replaced. Many businesses went under, others barely survived. Getting to the job center downtown was a daily nightmare.
The one good thing out of this is the decision to keep the deep-bored tunnel option on the table for the future. That is a best answer to moving traffic through the city. It would not permit direct access to Ballard, but it would to the north. The tunnel as now conceived would start at Qwest Field and come out a couple of blocks north of the current mouth on Aurora, allowing connection of some surface streets around Seattle Center.
We need to kill the surface and transit option once and for all — or else maybe we should take up the old cause of leaving Seattle and becoming the City of West Seattle (again).
-Jack Mayne
jgmayne@gmail.com
=====================
Note from WSB editor/co-publisher Tracy Record: We are checking with Councilmember Rasmussen re: his current official stance on Viaduct replacement; in 2006, this link reminds us, he voted with a majority of Council colleagues to support the cut-and-cover tunnel option, and clearly voiced opposition to an elevated replacement.
Now, one more note. After Jack met with co-publisher Patrick Sand and me earlier this week, we also offered him the opportunity to publish a personal note regarding his change in status, as so far as we can tell from the newspaper’s website and current print edition, it has not posted anything aside from changing the name on the masthead. Read on for Jack’s message:Read More
Thanks to several WSB’ers for e-mailing us in the past day and a half or so to point out that those speed bumps have just gone in on 16th SW north of South Seattle Community College. The ironic and head-scratch-inducing aspect of the installation, however, is that they are very close to the massively pitted stretch of 16th SW that was supposed to be repaved this year (but as we reported last month is now on hold till 2009). So what’s up with that? we were asked. We in turn relayed the question to SDOT, whose communications chief Rick Sheridan managed to track down the vacationing project engineer to retrieve this explanation:
The speed cushions installed by SDOT on 16th Avenue SW are part of a series requested and approved as a small Neighborhood Street Fund (NSF) project. After the community requested them through the NSF process, SDOT studied vehicle speeds in the area and determined that speeding could be controlled with these devices. Speed cushions will be installed on 16th Avenue SW, SW Dawson Street and 21st Avenue SW.
When the work is complete, 16th Avenue SW will have two sets to help address speeding. The first set, reported by your readers, was installed in an area that is not scheduled for repaving. The second set will be installed in an area of 16th Avenue SW that, funds permitting, will be repaved and so we are waiting until that work is accomplished.
Got questions? We do our best to get answers, so we’re always glad to get notes about sightings like this … we don’t say “thanks” often enough. Any time: editor@wsb.blackfin.biz (or if you’re on Twitter, @westseattleblog)
On this day after the state, county, and city went public with the final two “scenarios” for an Alaskan Way Viaduct Central Waterfront replacement, we are continuing to publish expanded reactions to the proposals, starting with the West Seattleites who have been part of the Viaduct-vetting process as members of the Stakeholders Advisory Committee. This committee does not get to vote on what it wants to see – it’s been brought together from various groups and areas with a particular “stake” in this, and has been used as something of a sounding board, through a series of long and arduous meetings (for which they are not compensated). Late last night, we published the reaction of committee member Pete Spalding of Pigeon Point; this morning, here’s what we’ve received from committee member Vlad Oustimovitch of Gatewood:
As I’m sure everybody has already learned, the combined project team from the three Departments of Transportation (Washington State, King County and City of Seattle) announced two options for dealing with the damaged Alaskan Way Viaduct. Unfortunately, the two options selected, a new waterfront side-by-side viaduct with no downtown exits, and a surface option that simply boosts the capacity of existing surface streets without maintaining through capacity, are both options that will generate incredible opposition from opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. The rebuilt viaduct option has been deemed unacceptable by both downtown and environmental interests, and the surface solution is unacceptable to both the business community as well as all of the commuters that depend on the Viaduct to get to their jobs. West Seattle, more than any other community, would be seriously impacted by the surface solution. Neither of the two options offer a solution that will garner support from a broad base of constituents, and will undoubtedly once again lead us into acrimonious debate, dividing the region and stalemating the process.
The good news is that at yesterday’s meeting the stakeholders took the initiative for a diplomatic solution, with 24 out of 25 stakeholders stating that it was important to avoid the battles that would ensue from the decision to limit the options to the two offered, and to work on a compromise solution. David Brewster wrote an excellent article in Crosscut
“A peace treaty for the Viaduct wars” that explains how we are trying to broker a solution that is acceptable for the greatest number of stakeholders. Not just the stakeholders on the committee, but to all the stakeholders in the region. This would include different components of surface improvements, as well as a bored tunnel that would allow through capacity similar to what it is today.I realize that many people in West Seattle would like to see another elevated solution that maintains the drive with the best views in the region, but I think that we all recognize that the most important thing is to maintain our ability to get around. The bored tunnel offers us two things, first the potential to retain the existing viaduct during construction, which is not possible with a rebuild and secondly (but perhaps most importantly) a political alliance that allows the Viaduct issue to finally get settled. If we do not consider the interests of everybody in the political equation, then it is very possible that we will be left with the surface option, which to me is not an option at all. We need to maintain our transportation capacity. The bored tunnel, although slightly more costly than a rebuild is a good investment. Economic studies have shown potential losses to our regional economy of up $3.4 billion dollars a year during any closure of the Viaduct and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs.
We need a solution, not another impasse that could have disastrous consequences not only to West Seattle, but to the whole region. That is why I am working very hard with the other stakeholders to help craft a diplomatic solution to stave off the crisis that will certainly result from the selection of the two alternates announced yesterday by our political leaders. I am disappointed that after a year of working on this, our leaders have decided to pit us against each other. To me, that is not an option. We need to work together in these difficult times.
I read all the responses posted on the West Seattle Blog on the subject on the Viaduct, so please take the time to post a comment. It is very useful to me to get feedback.
Thanks to Vlad and Pete for agreeing to share their thoughts. In the pipeline for later today – a guest editorial from former West Seattle Herald editor Jack Mayne.
If you want to follow just our Alaskan Way Viaduct coverage, by the way, here is the direct link to all stories we’ve flagged for that category (newest to oldest) – if you read via RSS, find the WSB Categories list in the right sidebar, where you’ll note each category has its own RSS feed.
For all the project information, and links to send your thoughts directly to decisionmakers, there’s an ever-growing website at alaskanwayviaduct.org. For other coverage, you can also check the automated feed on the WSB “More” page – in addition to pulling links from regional media mentioning West Seattle, we also programmed that feed long ago to include Alaskan Way Viaduct mentions too.
After the two “final” Viaduct scenarios went public late today (WSB as-it-happened coverage here), they were presented to the Stakeholders Advisory Committee that was created as a sort of “sounding board” in the Alaskan Way Viaduct scenario-review process. Two West Seattleites are on that committee: Pete Spalding and Vlad Oustimovitch, both longtime community activists (Pete lives in Pigeon Point; Vlad, in Gatewood). We have asked both for their thoughts on what was announced today. First response in, from Pete:
I am still concerned about the long-term viability of citizens of West Seattle to have the ability to get out of or into our community. Most folks do not realize that 20% of the population of the city of Seattle lives on this side of the Duwamish River.
Under the I-5, Surface & Transit Hybrid Scenario
If you leave West Seattle and drive through downtown going to north Seattle you will encounter 28 stop lights, a 90 degree turn to proceed through the Battery Street tunnel and a 30 mile per hour speed limit. On top of this there is no mention of how the ferry traffic (entering or exiting Colman dock) will be figured into the traffic flow.
Elevated Bypass Hybrid Scenario
I am not convinced that another elevated option will solve our transportation needs 50+ years into the future. This is our opportunity to make Seattle a world class city with a world class waterfront. Building another elevated structure running along the waterfront does not help to accomplish that in my opinion.
_________________________________________________________________________
No matter what decision is made at the end of the day we have to have better transit service into and out of West Seattle. Not only for Delridge but for all of the peninsula. I pointed out that not everyone leaving West Seattle had downtown as their final destination. Our transit options must include destinations to the north, south and east without first having to connect to another bus somewhere in the downtown business district. Adding a new Rapid Ride line on Delridge is being proposed but has its own unique set of difficulties. Not the least of which is where do you come up with dedicated bus only lanes from Genesee to the bridge?
In conclusion I lean toward the hybrid solution that has been brought forward by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce (presented to the SAG on Monday) which was referred to tonight as the P3 hybrid option. I also encouraged the Executives to give a much stronger look at the deep bored tunnel option which was the final option taken off the table late today prior to the briefings beginning. This option needs more study as it would be the least disruptive to all of us here in West Seattle. I am not convinced that the cost estimates have been thoroughly vetted and are somewhat exaggerated in materials that we were presented.
Finally, just as reminder there is a public hearing on Monday, December 15th beginning at 5 pm at Town Hall. If you feel strongly about this issue please state your preference (opinion) at that time or go on line to the Viaduct website and do it there.
That site is at alaskanwayviaduct.org. Meantime, we’ll have more Viaduct views tomorrow, including Vlad’s thoughts.
(meeting now concluded at 5:35 pm- to recap, the two “finalist” scenarios just made public are “surface/transit hybrid” and “elevated bypass hybrid” – 6:54 pm update, all the materials presented today/tonight are now posted online – here are graphics of the two options)
(above photo added 3:45 pm, just after Executive Sims, Gov. Gregoire, and Mayor Nickels sat down)
ORIGINAL 3:23 PM POST: We’re at City Hall, where state, county, and city leaders are about to be officially briefed on the final scenarios for the Alaskan Way Viaduct Central Waterfront replacement. We’ll post first word of what they are, as soon as we get it – we’ve all just been allowed into the briefing room, where the officials (elected and otherwise) are gathering. The mayor, governor, and county executive haven’t come in yet – city council Transportation Committee chair Jan Drago is here, though, as are the officials who’ve led this project for the three agencies, including SDOT director Grace Crunican, WSDOT’s Ron Paananen, and Metro’s Ron Posthuma. (There’s a name card for West Seattle’s King County Councilmember Dow Constantine, too, so we’re expecting to see him.) They say they’re not handing this out in print ahead of time – so we’ll type and post as announcements are made. For reference, here are the 8 scenarios that have been under consideration to date. A spokesperson is telling reporters that TWO scenarios will be unveiled here momentarily. 3:37 PM UPDATE: Still awaiting the briefing. Councilmember Constantine’s here now; he notes this is actually a regular monthly meeting that the leaders from the state, county and city have been having for quite some time – he and City Councilmember Drago participate as chairs of their respective councils’ Transportation Committees.
BULLETIN: The final scenarios are L, “surface/transit hybrid” – with two roads along the waterfront – and M, “elevated bypass hybrid” – with two elevated bridge structures side by side. More details to come.
3:45 PM UPDATE: The governor, county executive and mayor are here now. It appears there is no TUNNEL of any type involved in either of the scenarios.
3:52 PM UPDATE: They have finished background review and are now moving on to explain more about these scenarios. Reminder, these are new HYBRIDS with elements of the original 8 – they had said, and we had reported, all along, that they would not choose 2 of the 8, but take elements of some of them and make “hybrids” for final review.
3:57 PM UPDATE: A few more details on Scenario L – Alaskan Way would become one way southbound with three lanes and a bike lane; Western would (starting near Yesler) be one way northbound with three lanes and a bike lane, connecting to Battery Street Tunnel.
4:03 PM UPDATE: Turns out they’re STILL in background. More on the “elevated bypass” scenario – two independent bridge structures side by side, two lanes in each direction, connecting to B-Street Tunnel at north, new south end project at King Street. Also noted, a Delridge RapidRide bus route would be part of this. Also noticing – the INTRO copy on this page says “further analysis will be done on investigating a bored bypass tunnel.” (added) Just got more printouts. The explanation on the tunnel is, “The bored tunnel was not carried forward due to its high cost. However, it does have advantages associated with avoiding some of the construction on the central waterfront. The agencies will continue to investigate the costs of the bored tunnel as a future project that could be constructed if the I-5/surface/transit hybrid alternative is agreed upon.”
4:16 PM UPDATE: In response to Mayor Nickels’ question, WSDOT’s David Dye explains the two elevated structures would be somewhat separated and slightly different elevation – one could be built alongside the existing structure, so it would be ready to take on some of the traffic when the existing viaduct comes down, then the other structure would be built after the existing viaduct is demolished. As for whether they would be taller than the current one – WSDOT’s Ron Paananen says that could be determined in the design process. As we’ve mentioned on partner site White Center Now in the past few minutes, both scenarios also mention “expanded park and rides” in White Center and Burien (as well as Shoreline).
CONTINUE TO READ RUNNING COVERAGE POSTED DURING MEETING, BY CLICKING AHEAD:Read More
Heading north on Fauntleroy Way this morning, just before the straightaway that leads from Fairmount Springs to the Triangle area, we spotted Pothole Rangers in action, so we pulled over for a pic. Not far away, a relatively sizable group of people in safety vests was in position on both sides of the street – didn’t think much at the time, but when we returned southbound down the same stretch 2 1/2 hours later, what looked to be members of the same group were still on the move, this time up at Fauntleroy/Edmunds:
We’re checking with SDOT to see if there’s anything to say about what this delegation was doing, beyond inspecting curb cuts, which seemed to be the activity at that particular corner. Meantime, we’re also checking on the status of the decisionmaking/question-answering process on the big proposal involving that same stretch of Fauntleroy – “rechannelization,” as discussed at last week’s open house (WSB coverage here) as well as in several previous reports. 4:48 PM UPDATE: Here’s what Marybeth Turner from SDOT tells us:
City crews are constructing curb ramps in advance of the paving project. During the city budget process we had to stop and start the crews a few times when the future of the Fauntleroy paving was in question. They are getting ready to begin again and are meeting with Pavement Management staff and the Project Engineer to make sure they are built correctly.
Just combed through the latest report released as part of the ongoing drive to settle on a Central Waterfront Viaduct replacement by year’s end: the draft version of the Economic Analysis of Viaduct Scenarios. The only major West Seattle-specific mention is this look at how the project might affect Nucor in North Delridge:
Nucor, a major steel company, operates Seattle’s steel mill. The Nucor plant is located south of the West Seattle Bridge. It is a 660,000 square foot plant with 291 workers that can make about 800,000 tons of steel a year. The plant recently got new air quality permits that would allow it to make up to 1.1 million tons per year.
In theory, viaduct removal and construction could pose problems for the mill. Because of its location, Nucor has few options but to deal with traffic on I-5, and will be concerned that capacity reductions, both temporary and long-run in the SR 99 corridor, will affect I-5. Its customers are primarily construction projects located around the region where steel has to be delivered by truck during daylight hours. Because there are limited options for stockpiling steel mill products outside of the affected area, the company’s ability to deliver products to customers could be impaired during construction. Permanent closure, however, seems doubtful because permits for steel mills are difficult to obtain and the Seattle plant has no local competition for steel production. Nucor does not provide all of the steel needed for construction in the Seattle area; a major portion of it is imported or comes from steel from mills in Oregon. Construction impacts would also affect imported steel, however, leaving Nucor with no net competitive disadvantage. Indeed, the viaduct project itself could be a major customer for steel and may even help Nucor.
Overall, the report reached no clarion conclusion, with this among its final bulletpoints:
No single scenario emerges as the best or worst from an economic impact perspective. On the many dimensions we evaluated, we found no option that was consistently at the top or consistently at the bottom. That makes decisionmaking harder. For example, the bored bypass tunnel (F) probably reduces business impacts during construction, but it will likely cost more, take longer to build (so that the impacts it does have last longer), and have an unquantified but important cost of exposing Seattle to several additional years of risk of a catastrophic collapse in an earthquake if the viaduct remains until the bored tunnel opens to traffic.
Before the next Stakeholders Advisory Committee meeting this Thursday (4:30-8 pm, City Hall downtown), state, county, and city reps are scheduled to reveal the finalists — two or three “hybrid” scenarios ostensibly to be cobbled together from elements of the 8 original ‘scenarios’ (all shown here). One committee member has already come up with a hybrid of sorts, according to citywide newspaper reports today. Then, whatever emerges later this week as the list of finalists, you’re invited to speak out about them at a public meeting next Monday night (12/15), 5-7:30 pm, Town Hall downtown – 1119 8th Ave (map).
Gas prices continue to drop — the national average is its lowest in five years, according to weekend reports — but they’re falling more slowly; two West Seattle stations actually have the same prices as they did during our last survey a week ago. As for everybody else, varying drops. In the list you’ll see ahead, the first number is regular, as posted on the stations’ streetfront signs; second number is premium (where posted)Read More
We’ve been following the city Transportation Department‘s plan for a “parking review” in the greater Junction area (WSB coverage archived here) — and with active work on that review set to start soon, we thought you’d be interested in the latest development in another neighborhood whose “review” has just concluded: Despite outrage and outcry, the city announced today it’ll put pay stations in Fremont.
| 8 COMMENTS