'No-Build' Not Dead Yet

Sorry I'm a bit behind on this one, as it is last week's story. I wanted to post it, but I don't want this blog to be "all Viaduct, all the time." Anyway, a few weeks ago I talked about the option to tear down the Viaduct and just don't replace it. At the time the idea appeared to be dead in the water, but apparently Seattle's City Council is still interested in the thought:

Despite discouraging signals from the state, the City Council said Wednesday that it is going to take a longer look at tearing down the Alaskan Way Viaduct and funneling its travelers onto surface streets and public transit, without building a new elevated or below-ground roadway as a replacement.

"The surface/transit option is emotionally appealing," Councilman Richard Conlin said after the announcement.

But Conlin said he doesn't have enough information to know if that's a feasible alternative. He still favors replacing the 2.2-mile double-decked viaduct with a tunnel — the position that he, and a majority of the council, supported in a 2004 vote.

The council said it's commissioning a preliminary, $15,000 study that will review previous studies of viaduct replacement options and also consider the experience of other cities. Depending on what that examination comes up with in five or six weeks, the council will decide whether to pay for a deeper analysis of the so-called no-build option.

Keep in mind that Councilman Conlin is the only member of the council that actually practices what he preaches about personal trip reduction and alternate methods of commuting. That said, I am still confused about this whole thing, because spending $15,000 on a preliminary study sure doesn't sound like it is being treated like an emergency. Wasn't the imminent collapse of the Viaduct a major part of the emotionally-charged "No on 912" campaign? Oh yes, it was indeed.

It's so much of an emergency that we aren't even in a hurry to decide what we're going to do about it, much less actually start the work.

(Gregory Roberts, Seattle P-I, 04.27.2006)