worst historic preservation idea ever: preserve the view from a highway that should never had been built.
The old viaduct will come down, but a smaller new elevated park should rise in its place. Anyone who's walked the HighLine in Manhattan can see the opportunities here. It should be paid for by shifting funds from some of the "park" facilities being planned adjacent to the coming surface highway called Alaskan Way.
Agree with @1.

It was a dumb idea to preserve part of the viaduct to make it into a park in the first place. It is insane to tear the viaduct down, and then rebuild a section of it into a park. The viaduct is a hideous eye sore. Why the hell would you want to rebuild a chunk of it to make a park?
Don't the initiative writers always put themselves on the board of whatever they want the public to pay for? This sounds like it's straight out of the monorail playbook.
Highline is in NYC
Different social/physical context
Foolish idea to try to build one here
This idea preposterous. Also, the same view is currently available from an existing park.
@2: have YOU ever walked the highline in NYC?

have you ever walked to the edge of Victor Steinbreuck Park and looked out? have you actually looked at the Waterfront plan - particularly the portion that will lead from the park to the waterfront? take a gander at the "Overlook Walk":
The study that she commissioned to validate her "Project" turned out to be against the project. The study concluded that an elevated parkway was unfeasible.
Kate Martin is the new Tim Eyman.
The City has already squandered over $60 million on a horrible plan. The idea of admitting they are wrong terrifies them. The SDOT plan will turn Alaskan Way into the winter range of Seattle's homeless. We can't take care of the parks we have now. 123 is a wonderful concept but sadly is not being given the consideration it deserves.
I've walked along the High Line in New York, and it's an interesting solution to the specific problem of an old rail line that snakes through urban neighborhoods. But the High Line doesn't succeed simply because it's a repurposed piece of elevated transportation infrastructure. It succeeds because it Is thoughtfully and carefully connected to the street below, and the flow from above to below is encouraged and easy. Seattle's viaduct is a vast and imposing wall that separates the city physically from its own vibrant waterfront, built on a scale that is vastly more imposing than the High Line. It was originally meant to move thousands of vehicles a day through downtown - not the occasional train.

I-123 is anything but thoughtfully or carefully designed. In fact, the plan was hastily reworked when it was determined the viaduct couldn't be preserved to the extent they had hoped. Hence the departure of one of its main supporters.

I-123 is not a plan. Its a sloppy attempt to thwart years of planning and public input - by someone with their own interests in mind. Vote NO on I-123.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.