Last June, members of the Seattle City Council gathered at the groundbreaking event of the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement project. The first segment to face demolition runs from South Holgate to South King streets.
Deemed unsafe in the event of a natural disaster such as an earthquake, the viaduct, which traces the Seattle waterfront, is scheduled to soon be a distant memory.
A design-build contract was signed Jan. 6 by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) with Seattle Tunnel Partners, a joint venture of Dragados USA and Tutor Perini Corp., to design and build the preferred alternative deep-bore tunnel along U.S. Highway 99.
The project is estimated to cost $3.1 billion with funding from state and federal sources as well as toll funding.
But this progress has not been well received by all Seattle residents.
Elizabeth Campbell, former mayoral candidate, Magnolia resident and chair of Seattle Citizens Against the Tunnel (SCAT), wrote an email to Seattle City Council members on Jan. 18 informing them of her disapproval.
According to Campbell, the problem with proceeding to do preliminary work on the tunnel is that “these actions are prior to any final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) being completed, prior to a Record of Decision in this matter.”
“At some point there has to be some observance of the required administrative and legal procedures that are mandated by our State statutes,” she said in the email.
Two days after receiving her email, Tom Rasmussen, councilmember and co-chair of the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Project and Central Waterfront Planning, responded to Campbell in an email.
“It is important to me that the City comply with all applicable laws,” Rasmussen wrote. “We receive guidance from the City Attorney on our work including that related to the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement project.
“We want the city to follow all laws regarding this project and all other projects,” Rasmussen continued. “The work that the state is doing will help to further repair the viaduct regardless of which option is chosen.”
City Councilwoman Sally Bagshaw, also a co-chair of the committee, agreed on continuing to work on the project.
“This is about public safety and it has already been a decade. If we delay moving forward it only puts the public at potential risk,” she said, alluding to the looming danger of the current viaduct in the event of a sizable earthquake.
Both expressed urgency in getting this project started due to the fast-approaching 10-year anniversary of the Nisqually earthquake, which shook Seattle and the surrounding areas.
WSDOT confirmed that it is able to move forward with the design-build proposal based on the revised regulations by the Federal Highway Administration in 2007.
KaDeena Yerkan, who handles communications and public involvement for the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program, explained the contracting and environmental process in an email.
“FHA revised its regulations to allow contracting agencies to issue design-build request-for-proposal documents, award contracts, and issue notices-to-proceed for preliminary design work prior to the conclusion of the National Environmental Policy Act environmental process,” she explained in the email.
“After the environmental process is complete, if the bored tunnel alternative is selected, the contractor would complete the design and begin construction of the bored tunnel. If the bored tunnel alternative is not selected, the contract can be terminated,” she said.
According to Yerkan, materials unique to the tunnel cannot be purchased until after the Record of Decision. In her email she wrote that the work being done to demolish the southern mile of the “seismically vulnerable” viaduct was cleared under a separate environmental process from the proposed bored tunnel and could connect to the existing viaduct or any future replacement of the downtown waterfront section.
The purpose of the EIS, which is published in accordance with the National and State Environmental Policy Acts (NEPA and SEPA), is to give the public and the decision makers enough information in order to make an informed decision on the project.
When considering the Alaskan Way Viaduct, there is an ongoing EIS process, which is reviewing the three alternatives: the cut-and-cover tunnel, an elevated alternative and the deep-bore tunnel.
SCAT has been working on the City of Seattle Initiative Measure 101 to stop any further action concerning work on the tunnel. As of Jan. 22, more than 26,000 signatures have been gathered.
“This is one more reason that the City, and even the State, need to rethink their strategy of continuing to ignore all the indicators against the tunnel project proceeding (including economic indicators), and more importantly, or just as importantly, ignoring all the legal bars against their continued extra-legal efforts to proceed with the tunnel project,” Campbell said in her email about the petitions’ support by community members.
To qualify for the ballot only 20,629 signatures are needed. SCAT will turn in the petition to the City Clerk’s office on Feb. 1.
“Our big focus now is to stop the tunnel project itself. … It’s a huge challenge to make the government accountable,” said Campbell, who would prefer to see a different viaduct replacement.
Council members Rasmussen and Bagshaw forwarded Campbell’s concerns to the City Attorney for further review. They said moving forward with the project is in the best interest of the community.
“We cannot continue to twiddle our thumbs,” Bagshaw said. “We have been working in a very conscious way. … The big question is, do we want to keep putting bandages on this or fix the problem?”
[[In-content Ad]]