The decision by transportation planners to possibly map a replacement for the Alaskan Way Viaduct along Western Avenue worries those at the Pike Place Market who fear it could damage the Market’s historic character.
“We’re disappointed this was chosen,” said Carol Binder, executive director of the Market. “We’re going to have to change and look at some of the ways we operate.”
Apparently, the folks at the Market would rather have an elevated freeway in their front yard than an arterial street. Huh.
If you’re not 100% clued in to why they’d be upset with the surface “couplet” option, here’s the skinny:
Instead of a viaduct freeway through downtown Seattle, the “couplet” would send traffic north and south on a reconfigured street grid, using Alaskan Way’s southbound lanes and Western Avenue’s northbound lanes as replacements, knitting together the street grid without building a limited access freeway through the neighborhood.
Western currently comes to a four-way stop at the north end of the Market, near Victor Steinbrueck Park. The plan would be to lid Western near the park, sending traffic under the Market instead of through it.
There is all sorts of hyperventilating over this whole viaduct mess. The Pike Place Market has nothing to worry about. On an issue where so many can disagree, everyone involved agrees that the Market is something worth protecting.
Will
Sounds confusing. Your post is not c lear though, how will this affect access to and traffic around the market?
I think the entire plan is verblundget! The gal ought to be to improve access to the N and S for the west side of Seattle rather than to serve the very small need for traffic NS through Seattle.
I would hope the surface option would make the market MORE accessible!
As much as I respect the Governor, I think this issue is one that I wish she’d show some leadership. It’s a state highway, and the proverbial buck stops with her, so step and make a call. Rebuild, tunnel, surface, whatever.
I would like to see some explanation of how the surface only option ballooned in cost into as much as the hybrid-viaduct option.
Sound and fury signifying nothing…….
Over at Cross Cut they’re yelpin’ for a “deep bored tunnel.
I wonder where Chapman’s planning on putting all that dirt?
I think the Market will always have plenty of trade from the pedestrian traffic consisting of people who work in the downtown core. However, I think Seattle would live to regret a decision to convert a third of its north-south through-traffic capacity into an urban arterial. Aesthetics are important, but sometimes functionality matters more.
So all you car bound whiners want a second freeway through downtown, fine you can have it but:
1. It will be a tunnel, no new fucking elevated eyesore.
2. there will be tolls, you want the fancy fast road you bloody well can pay for it.
3. Any remaining money to build the thing should come from the pork of Seattle and/or the suburban assholes who insist on driving their fucking single occupancy vehicles everywhere. A steep parking tax would also be an acceptable funding source.
“the suburban assholes who insist on driving their fucking single occupancy vehicles everywhere.”
You mean the suburbs known as Queen Anne Hill and West Seattle.
@6 Roger
My understanding is that only 20% of Aurora is NS traffic.
ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of Aurora is NS traffic, you unspeakable imbecile! Can you read a fucking map?
I read all about the critiques of Frank Chopp’s proposal — and I still think his is the best, by far.
The so-called “experts” who weighed in against it didn’t have time to do a real market analysis, they were simply defending their vested interests. Pathetic.
Have any of you even been to Barcelona, let alone studied it?
Frank’s vision would have enhanced Seattle’s economy and general livability for generations to come. I’m astonished that intelligent, progressive forces didn’t leap to its defense. (With minor tweaks, sure.) Part of the excessive backlash against Frank? Typical Democrats, not knowing a great thing when you have it?
10 Tovarich ,,,,
I can read a map. Can you read English?
Aurora, of course is oriented N and S but it is largely a local boulevard because most traffic going North or South uses I5 since it is a rtestricted access highway and a lot faster w/o street lights etc.
What I have been told is that 80% of the traffic on 99.Aurora that involves Seatttle is INTO or OUT OF the City.
One reason I dislike the viaduct and the tunnel is that neither does much to improve access to Seattle itself.
The idea of using any city as a olimitted access highway is nuts. Even Boston’s bigdig was designed to create greater access to downtown and the harborfront. The simple existance of the city bgounding the viaduct (as is true withy I5, makes any effort to increase north south capacity HUGELY expensive,
Logic would suggest we build I605, if not that, improve I405. Logic would also suggest working on the access to Seattle from its Eastside by turning Montalke 23rd into a boulevard.
11 Mark,
I have nto been to Barcelona but it seems to me that Seattle is more lif SF than ut is Barcelona. Both Seattle and SanFran sit on narrow peninsulas. Both sit on coastal plains that must provide commercial traffic from the Norht to the South. Uisng the city on its little spit of of land to move traffic from Vancouver to Caliornia seems foolish to me. Even if Schopps’ project were built, it would still be a very inadequate part of the commercial traffic and would only get worse as years come.
My idea would be to work city wide on the problem of traffic and transport within Seattle. I would diver some of Aurora NORTH of Seattle so it fed easily into Ballard and Elliot Ave. I would create a suegnel connection between Elliot and 99 within Seattle.
I would fix East John, and the Mercer mess. Straighten out Aloha::Belmont.
Finally, I would widden and boulevardize 23rd:: Lake City Way.
BTW all this would create the right of way to make major improvement in light rail, trolleys or busses! Moreover, it should all stimulate real estate values in underused areas!
Or we could build a viaduct so the fools too stupid to use I5 or I405 can get stuck in Seattle traffic.
The reason for the objection from the Market folks should be pretty obvious to anyone who’s spent much time around there. Western Avenue presently runs right between the north end of the Market and Steinbreuck park–no doubt the most heavily trafficked crosswalk in the entire city. Presumably, the plan would be to underground the the northbound “through lanes” and route them directly into the Battery Street Tunnel. Either the concerned folks at the Market haven’t figured that out yet, or they have and they’re still concerned about that whole area being dug up for a year or so during the construction process.