西雅圖凹凸鏡

西雅圖市中心水岸的高架橋拆除後，未來將會如何？市政府日前將這個難題交由公民投票決定，市民可以針對建隧道與重建高架橋這兩個方案中選擇支持或反對，三月十四日，公投的結果出爐：西雅圖人不要隧道也不要新的高架橋！

根據報導，共有41%的選民參與這次以郵寄方式進行的公投，在有效選票中，隧道這個方案遭到了70%的否決票，而新建高架橋則有56%的否決。無論是隧道或新建高架橋都遭到了超過五成以上的否決，西雅圖的市民認為隧道太過昂貴，將會排擠到其他的市政預算，而再蓋一座更高更大的高架橋，則會徹底毀掉水岸。這對西雅圖來說是一個重要的結果，也說明了將水岸的議題簡化為不是隧道就是高架橋，是行不通的。這看似陷入僵局的結果，其實對西雅圖來說是個契機，西雅圖的政府和市民都需要拿出智慧和遠見，找出一個真正對城市永續發展有利方案，無論是隧道和新高架橋這兩個方案在西雅圖各有大量的支持人馬，但都是短視近利的解決方案，我很高興西雅圖人集體做了正確的選擇，至少拒絕選擇短視的策略。

在這樣的情況下，短期內有可能出現兩種後續發展，第一個，就是在維持交通流通的考量下，先修復補強原有的高架橋，另一個可能則是走向之前被認為天真、不切實際的「平面交通」方案，也就是People’s Waterfront Coalition一直以來的極少獲得正視的主張，而現在，越來越多人開始看到這個方案作為不得不然的選擇。「平面交通」的方案是最經濟、最省錢，也經顧到永續以及環境面向的主張，當政府財政困窘時，當然得以最有效率的方式來解決問題，如果沒有錢蓋隧道，又不希望高架橋破壞水岸視覺美感，唯一的解決方是就是好好研究如何除去不必要的交通流量，這絕不是什麼艱深的科學，有很多配套措施可以一起達到這個目的，重要的是，政府和民眾能不能改變心態，以治標的角度來看待問題。

台灣目前也還陷在蘇花高的爭議中，姑且先不論環境破壞問題（雖然環境絕對是經濟發展的基本支柱，沒有健康的生態環境，經濟也不用玩了），政府和在地人為什麼沒有想過，要解決花東發展的問題，難道只有興建昂貴的高速公路一個選項嗎？要達成一個目的，不會只有一種辦法，我們要選擇的是最經濟、最有效率、又最永續的方式，目前政府財政吃緊，預算赤字擴大，我們真的負擔的起一條蘇花高嗎？這條興建蘇花高的錢，是不是可以拿來做其他更有效的利用，來促進花東地區的經濟發展？

-----------------------------------------------------

關於西雅圖水岸議題，請參考 西雅圖會選擇哪一種水岸的未來？ 一文

Seattle Post Intelligencer 在西雅圖高架橋（Viaduct）這個議題上，有很好的報導與整理，請至以下網址：http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/viaduct/

People’s Waterfront Coalition的「平面交通」主張，目前也慢慢獲得了重視，這裡轉載一篇相關報導供參考，原文網址：http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/307563_surface15.html

Surface-transit option is gathering steam
Details are hazy, but Steinbrueck pushes for study

Thursday, March 15, 2007

By LARRY LANGE
P-I REPORTER

The surface-transit concept is still alive -- even though it didn't make the ballot in Tuesday's advisory election and no one seems to know exactly what it would entail.

But in the wake of resounding rejections by Seattle voters of a hybrid tunnel and a new viaduct as replacements for the Alaskan Way Viaduct, the surface-transit option -- considered Seattle's official fallback option -- is gathering steam.

City Councilman Peter Steinbrueck plans to introduce an ordinance Monday to require the city Department of Transportation to study the idea, see how it might work and develop a plan. The concept would mean removing the 54-year-old viaduct from the city waterfront, then dispersing traffic onto surface streets and requiring tens of thousands of commuters to give up car trips and travel by bus.

But details are scarce and it has had limited scrutiny.

A study commissioned by the council in 2006 "didn't come up with any new information or develop plans or alternatives," Steinbrueck said. "I wasn't very satisfied."

It concluded that some city streets could handle extra traffic, but adding viaduct traffic to them would leave little room for future growth. Steinbrueck's new ordinance proposes initially spending $500,000 on a study, then committing $7.5 million more in the department's budget to further study.

On Wednesday, some council members said they hadn't seen Steinbrueck's proposal, but agreed that the surface-transit concept needed further study.

A frequent advocate of taking steps to reduce car traffic and exhaust emissions in the city, Steinbrueck recently announced that he planned not to run for his seat again, and instead devote his time to advocating the surface-transit proposal.

Steinbrueck said he didn't see Tuesday's advisory vote as an endorsement of the option, but city officials "are talking about rethinking the problem and applying different strategies."

"Conventional thinking has it that there's no way out of this but to build more roads and expand capacity for cars and vehicles. I disagree with that," he said Wednesday.

But Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels isn't supporting Steinbrueck's proposal.

Nickels spokeswoman Marianne Bichsel said the mayor's main objection is that the ordinance would force the department to study only the surface-transit idea, at a time when staffers want to work with the state to find a more acceptable replacement for the viaduct.

"It would not be consistent," Bichsel said. Nickels and several City Council members in Olympia Wednesday "stood with the governor, and said we're going to work collaboratively and keep an open mind."

Councilwoman Jan Drago, chairwoman of the Transportation Committee, agreed that passing the ordinance would restrict study to the surface-transit concept exclusively.

"If that doesn't work, there's going to have to be more flexibility," she said, but wouldn't comment further on the ordinance.

After city voters on Tuesday resoundingly killed a four-lane tunnel replacement plan and one to build a new viaduct, officials took a cue that new replacement ideas are needed. Gov. Chris Gregoire announced Wednesday that the state will start viaduct-replacement construction work, estimated at $915 million, this summer. The work will include a new interchange at South Royal Brougham Way, upgrading the Battery Street Tunnel, and investing in transit and bus lanes.

But state officials said none of that work would rule out opting for a surface replacement for the rest of the double-decker structure.

The surface-transit alternative "will most likely be in the mix of options that will be discussed by the parties," said City Councilman David Della, who said he's open to the idea if it is safe, but that he hasn't yet studied Steinbrueck's proposal.

Councilman Tom Rassmussen, another Transportation Committee member, also hadn't read the ordinance. He wouldn't comment, but said the surface-transit option needs study.

Initial agreement about a viaduct replacement "was being built around this underlying requirement that we have to move a minimum of 110,000 vehicles a day ... we have to move people and goods. Let's not limit ourselves by saying we have to move the same number of vehicles."

The concept isn't a slam dunk, Council President Nick Licata said, and it needs further development, but it could be more of a waterfront barrier than an elevated highway.

"The noise will be right there" at ground level, he said.