By: Bob Donegan
SAC Member
December 19, 2008
Editor's Note: Cascadia Center, with the author's permission, is happy to share these notes from Bob Donegan, of Ivar's, Inc., a member of the Stakeholder Advisory Committee of the state/county/city process to replace the seismically vulnerable Alaskan Way Viaduct on State route 99 along Seattle's downtown waterfront.
* * *
The lightning and thunder that greeted this morning hinted at the start of a strange Seattle day: two to six inches of new snow overnight; sustained temperatures below freezing; even a skim of ice on the bays at Green Lake. The atypical pattern continued in the final Stakeholder Meeting at 2:30 in the Seattle Dept of Transportation offices when the Bored Tunnel Hybrid Coalition held its strength and became the preferred alternative of 13 of the 14 stakeholders who made the meeting. This compares to 24 of 25 supporting continued investigation of the tunnel hybrid at last Thursday’s meeting.
The surprises continued, when, in closing comments, Tim Flynn, Ron Sims’ Director of Government Affairs, announced that Sims supports the Deep Bore Tunnel investigation. Tim Ceis, on behalf of Greg Nickels, supported the effort to investigate the Tunnel option and pledged the city’s support to find financing if the Deep Bore Hybrid develops as the best solution. Mike Merrit, on behalf of Tay Yoshitani and the Port said the Port would participate in funding if it becomes the best alternative, and subject to review and approval by the Port Commission.
The Facts
Despite two changes in timing and a change in location, 14 stakeholders made the meeting, and 40 others squeezed into the SDOT conference room on the 38th floor of the Muni Tower. On short notice, the Seattle Channel recorded the meeting, but with a single microphone that speakers passed via Hannah MacIver to each other.
Famous faces in the crowd included Royer, Constantine, Drago, Ceis & Viet, Harvey Parker, John Reilly, Knutson, Joncas (with new boots) and Scholes, Merrit, Burke and Wolfe for the port.
David Dye dispensed with the usual discussion of agenda, minutes, and rules of order, and asked each Stakeholder to give final reactions, observations and guidance for the Project Team and Electeds.
David Freiboth, Labor.
Is developing a secret handshake for use among stakeholders only
Need to maintain capacity
Cap state contribution at $2.8B, local finance any amount above that
Analyze and select the best hybrid: include in EIS the Tunnel hybrid
Work together to create a great solution
Asked that notes of last stakeholder meeting be sent to legislature since
they were so thoughtful (Those notes are on line at WsDot website)
Tayloe Wasburn, Greater Chamber Of Commerce
Cap state funding at $2.8B
If any spending over that, raise it regionally in financing to be determined:
Local improvement district, regional tolls
Focus on fed funding by presenting a coalition solution
Continue with EIS process for Tunnel hybrid
Get comments from city, county, port on financing at this meeting
Maintaining Capacity is still critical concern for Chamber
Chamber doesn’t trust the data that surface + transit protect economy
--elevated provides capacity
Altman, North County
Bored Tunnel hybrid is 1st choice
I-5 + surface + transit is second choice
Reject elevated
There is a lack of park and rides: 4 in early plans, now 3
No park and ride in Lake forest Park, but 2 in Burien, 2 in Shoreline, 1 in
White Center-South Park. Intercept commuters at home and keep cars off roads.
Rob Sexton, Downtown Seattle Assn.
Support I-5 + Surface + transit
Include in EIS and analysis Deep Bore Hybrid
Cap state spending at $2.8B
Investigate regional tolling and additional funding
Plan for mitigation
Binder, Pike Mkt.
Oppose Surface Option - least desirable for market
Tunnel Hybrid is most attractive
The funding crisis is really an opportunity to get funding
Coney, Uptown
We have reached near consensus: Surface + Transit + I5
Analyze Deep Bore for capacity, include in EIS analysis
Must develop capacity for BINMIC and Ballard if tunnel
Consider tunnel in a later phase?
Odlan, Manufacturing Industrial Council
MIC voted to reject surface, elevated and investigate of Deep Bore
Must deal with 35,000 vehicles that go to NW Seattle
--consider a tunnel spur or surface connection
Capacity and Disruption in construction are MIC’s two biggest issues
Both hybrid options are fatally flawed in this dimension
Cary Moon, People's Waterfront Coalition
The systems approach rather than Viaduct corridor is attractive
Prefer I-5 + Surface + Transit now
Study Deep Bore hybrid in case surface can’t meet needs for bypass
Technical analysis showed surface can work, but we can’t risk failure
Therefore, keep Deep Bore alive to protect downside
Expect continuing change in consumer behavior away from SOVehicles
Cap state contribution at $2.8B
Be wary of adding Deep Bore to Olympia now: it will be killed
Mary McCumber, FutureWise
Connect the city and waterfront, but maintain strong regional economy
That means we need capacity
Control capacity with tolling and pricing
Cap state at $2.8B contribution
Take down the viaduct
Prefer I-5 + Surface + Transit
Deep Bore Hybrid going in EIS, analysis, cost investigation
Vlad Oustimovitch, West Seattle
Deep Bore Tunnel Hybrid is most attractive
Look at new book: Atlas of the Real World - Can we get traffic analysis
for viaduct replacements and uses in this format?
Replacing capacity is the goal of most W. Seattle residents
Rob Johnson, Transportation Choices Coalition
A consensus has formed
Remove the viaduct to improve safety
Surface has the quickest construction period, lowest disruption
But we need capacity: proceed with Deep Bore analysis and EIS
Mike O’Brien, Sierra Club
If surface + transit doesn’t work, we have big community problems
Make I-5 + Surface + Transit best option, but
study, keep Deep Bore hybrid alive in case Surface can’t work
Take viaduct down
Cap state at $2.8B
Install variable pricing and regional tolling to control use
Gene Hoglund, Elevated Option Advocate
How can we pay additional funds for tunnel?
--if downtown, Chamber, Property Owners benefit, they should pay
70% of Seattle voted no on tunnel last year
Connection to Ballard and Maritime is critical
It is OK to continue to include Tunnel in EIS analysis
--concerns about portals, grades in tunnels, safety
Supports elevated
Thank you for cruise ship analysis in traffic patterns
Concern for pedestrian safety in surface option
Bob Donegan, Waterfront Businesses
We need data on all three hybrids: traffic on streets; costs of each option
into components with risk, inflation, contingency; mode split counts; ped
counts; real mitigation plan; real economic impact analysis; travel times
on major routes;
Reject elevated which kills waterfront during construction
Reject surface which kills waterfront in operation
Support continued investigation of Bored Tunnel Hybrid
Build on the new consensus: cut EIS time and time to build
Reduce risk-contingency-inflation to cut tunnel costs
Challenge political leaders to make the best long-range choice:
--not cheapest cash cost in short run
Peter Philips, Maritime
Could not attend the meeting, but sent written comments
Consider $200-$300M retrofit to meet current codes, buy 10 years
--works out to $20-$30M a year: cheapest choice
Most important goal is efficient movement of people and freight
Preserve capacity for 22,000 family wage jobs at $70K each
Dow Constantine, Jan Drago, and Judy Clibborn serve on the government oversight committee of the stakeholders and Jan and Dow were at the last three meetings to observe. Dow thanked the stakeholders, said he's committed to maintaining transit AFTER the project is built. He noted this is the most agreement in eight years of looking at viaduct and congratulated Stakeholders. Said he liked surface + transit + deep bore.
Tim Ceis thanked the group on behalf of the city and mayor and said he had stayed away from the meetings to reduce political distractions and let stakeholders see data unbiased. He warned that funding for the tunnel hybrid is not in place now, but the mayor and city will seek it if it becomes clear in evaluation that the Deep Bore tunnel option works. He suggested work on I-5 begin NOW, and transit improvements NOW. He asked if he could reconvene the stakeholders after more data come in.
Jan Drago thanked the stakeholders and said council has voted eight times on viaduct, first cut and cover, and later Urban Mobility (surface + transit). Accepts the idea to cap state funding at $2.8B and is committed to finding regional funds to pay the rest. She said funding sources are available, esp since the strong coalition has formed around this latest hybrid. Supports the Deep Bore option for its capacity to maintain regional economy.
Grace, David and Harold thanked the Project Team, technical team, stakeholders and presented each with a rock from the viaduct and a certificate of thanks.
Bob’s Interpretation
Harold (Taniguchi, King County DOT) was the cutup of the meeting and upon starting to read Peter Philips’s comments into the record, said "I had had a change of heart and fully supported Surface and Transit." The room cracked up.
In concluding the meeting, after so much support for the tunnel, Harold joked “For the record, I’ve always supported a tunnel.” The enthusiasm among the stakeholders may have been due to the weather, but more likely due to the power of the coalition which had formed. There is no truth to the rumor that Mike Holmgren asked Stakeholders to be available Sunday to raise the 12th Man Flag on Sunday against the Jets.
It comes to the politicians now. The governor and the speaker meet Friday to discuss the project. The city, county, port have promised to step up to help find financing for any portion of the tunnel project above $2.8B promise from the state. Will they retain the wills, in tough economic times, to support a solution with huge long term benefits but perhaps higher short term costs?
I met with two consultants to the project after the meeting and they estimated that an EIS could be completed in six months, since so much work has already been done. They said the key for making a Deep Bore tunnel work is political will and if the leaders match the will the stakeholders showed in the past two meetings, the tunnel could be completed quickly at the low end of cost projections, not triggering the risk-inflation-contingency factors, and removing the viaduct quickly.
And to all, a good night, atypical though it may be.
