WHEREAS, there is a serious lack of consensus among elected leaders as well as the general population as to what is the best course of action related to selecting a replacement for the Alaskan Way Viaduct; and

WHEREAS, tensions are high, stakes, political, environmental and economic, are high, and the

long term impacts of the replacement decision are extremely meaningful, so that no one can afford to look at this decision from a perspective that only considers their self-interest; and

WHEREAS, the City of Seattle and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) are responsible for providing the citizenry with accurate information to enable the citizenry to accurately envision the choices; and

WHEREAS, the choice about the preferred alternative for the Alaskan Way Viaduct is ultimately more than a transportation project, it is a choice about how Seattle wants to relate to its waterfront for the next 50-100 years. It is also a choice about the type of future we want for our City: one in which we have a continuous park and open space that is dedicated to public use or one in which we prioritize driving over public open space; and

WHEREAS, a project of this magnitude and cost requires the ability to achieve partnership between the City, the State and the Port of Seattle, as well as between the City, the immediately impacted businesses and neighborhoods, and the public; and

WHEREAS, we have not achieved the partnerships necessary to implement any of the options, and without these, any choice for replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct will only continue to get bogged down, creating antagonism between potential partners. Whatever replacement option is chosen will generate transportation and construction impacts that will require creativity, patience, interdependency and goodwill among the public, agencies and businesses. This cannot be fostered in a climate of anger, mistrust and serious conflict; and

WHEREAS, there are well reasoned differences of opinion as to whether a public vote on the viaduct replacement options should occur. The Governor and some legislative leaders want a public vote to validate a replacement choice since decision-makers themselves are so divided, while some elected City officials express concern that the voters themselves are divided, do not necessarily view the decision as a choice among acceptable options, and have communicated those concerns to City officials; and

WHEREAS, all of the concerns expressed by the State and City elected officials, stakeholders and the general public are valid, and everyone wants to find clarity and take action. Strong opinions are the common ground, but there is not one direction that will please enough people, whether it is to vote or not vote, what project to build, or what the benefits are to whom; and

WHEREAS, we, the elected officials and citizens, are not where we'd hoped we would be, and we cannot ignore the reality where we find ourselves today, constrained by political congestion and conflict. Therefore, to move forward, we must step back from taking positions, reevaluate our options, enhance communication, acknowledge current problems and find compromise in how we address the issues; and

WHEREAS, there is agreement on the design, engineering, and funding plan for much of the section of the project south of King Street; and

WHEREAS, there is also general agreement on the kinds of mitigations and transportation alternatives that will have to be implemented no matter what design is chosen for the Central Waterfront; and

NOW THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE, THE MAYOR CONCURRING, THAT:

Section 1. The project partners, who are the City and the State, should proceed immediately with construction on the section of the project south of King Street where there is agreement on the design, engineering, and funding plan.

Section 2. The project partners should proceed immediately with the mitigation measures and transportation alternatives that will have to be implemented no matter what design is chosen for the Central Waterfront ("the thousand little steps", including, among other things, expanding transit service and the West Seattle Water Taxi; renovating the Spokane Street Viaduct and adding a new connection from the Spokane Street Viaduct to Fourth Avenue South to better connect with downtown; improving the Spokane, Lander, and Mercer corridors; better coordinating traffic signals to improve traffic in downtown and to the north). The project partners should coordinate Transit Now, Bridging the Gap, and WSDOT mitigation money to improve the movement of people and freight throughout the corridor, emphasizing Bus Rapid Transit, pedestrian connections, and additional transit.

Section 3. The project partners should also take such steps as are necessary to operate and maintain the Central Waterfront section of the Alaskan Way Viaduct to ensure public safety.

Section 4. The City requests that the Governor, state legislators, city elected officials, and key stakeholders convene in a mediated summit to seek consensus on how to proceed with a principled solution for the Central Waterfront section of the Viaduct. Such a summit would save invaluable time that will otherwise be expended in various forms of conflict and offers the only possibility for resolving this issue in a timely fashion and meeting our mutual interests and obligations to the public.

Adopted by the City Council the _____ day of _____________, 2007, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its adoption this _____ day of ________________, 2007. ________________________________________ President __________ of the City Council

THE MAYOR CONCURRING: __________________________________ Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor

Filed by me this ______ day of _________________, 2007. ________________________________________ City Clerk

01/19/07 Ver. 5)