Will Too Much Public Input Create 'The Big Ugly'?
Can soliciting too much public input on civic decisions result in nothing getting done? Seattle's efforts to figure out what to do with the Alaskan Way Viaduct provides a "textbook" example.
"[Seattle's] 2.2-mile-long Alaskan Way Viaduct [is an] aging, earthquake-vulnerable elevated expressway that separates much of downtown Seattle from Elliott Bay, one of the city's iconic natural features...One [proposal] would replace the viaduct with a tunnel. It would be a visionary reclamation of Seattle's somewhat neglected waterfront, according to proponents, and a Boston Big Dig-style construction nightmare, according to opponents. The other measure would replace the viaduct with a new elevated expressway...In a way, the saga of the neglected roadway is a textbook example of what many call the 'Seattle process,' or the reputed civic inclination here to seek so much public input and listen to so many sides of an argument that nothing actually gets done."
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
- Meter Maids Get New Tool - Jun 21, 2009
- Idea to Tax Drivers By the Mile Gathers Support in Washington - May 14, 2009
- The Urban Impact of Bicyclists - Apr 21, 2009
- Inside a 20-Minute City - Apr 14, 2009
- TOD Boom Goes Bust in Seattle - Apr 07, 2009
- New York's Legislative Lock Down Leaves Cities Hanging
- Census Conspiracy Theories?
- Make Your Own Bike Lane
- St. Louis Opens New Art Park
- Supreme Court Nominee's Eminent Domain Experience
- Ten Fastest-Growing Cities in U.S.
- Will a "New Direction" in Housing Policy Mean a "Return to Feudalism"?
- Tiny Submarines Run Real Cable
- Big and Getting Bigger
- Investing In and Revising Mexico City's Center Square
Gain the practical knowledge needed to create TODs in your community with our affordable, self-paced, online course.
Learn more »
Financial Resourcefulness in a Recession – How can you Revitalize your Community?
International Economic Development Council
Jul 01, 2009
The American of Institute of Architects RFP
The American Insitute of Architects
Jul 01, 2009
RFP--Transit Implementation Plan Update
City of Manhattan
Jun 29, 2009
www.flickr.com
|
Too Little Input In Seattle
I would say the problem is too little input, not too much. The ballot only gives voters the tunnel and elevated expressway options. It deliberately leaves out the surface-streets-and-transit option, which many people back. Obviously, you cannot resolve this issue with a phony vote that does not let the voters choose among all the options.
The LA Times calls the surface-streets-and-transit option the "No-No option." This reflects their LA view of the world: if you are against freeways, you must be against everything.
In reality, of course, if you are against both freeway alternatives, it may be because you are in favor of a more transit-oriented and less auto dependent city - and because you are in favor of taking serious action to deal with global warming.
Gov. Chris Gregoire says: "I can't see just tearing it down and letting it go and creating a parking lot on I-5. "I think the citizens would be appalled…. They want congestion relief." If she really believes this, why did she refuse to put this alternative on the ballot? She could have resolved the issue by letting the citizens vote on this alternative and reject it - unless she is afraid that they would not really reject it.
Charles Siegel