Archive for the ‘Parks and open space’ Category

Trying not to be a cynic about the Sheraton facade fix

Friday, August 13th, 2010

As reported in yesterday’s DJC, the Sheraton Hotel is finally going to improve the dreadful blank wall along the western side of 7th Avenue between Pike and Union Streets created by its first and second towers.

While I’m thrilled to hear that this long-awaited improvement scheme has not fallen through the cracks and is scheduled to start next week, it’s taking all my patience not to be cynical about this interesting state of affairs.

As I commented in an opinion piece I wrote on the subject for the DJC on 4/6/09, the big blank wall along 7th Avenue (and parts of both Pike and Union Streets as well) should not have occurred in the first place.  The City’s Downtown zoning code would otherwise require street-level uses and “transparency” (doors and windows that allow both visual and physical access to those activities) along 7th Avenue.  Somehow the Downtown Design Review Board approved a departure from those standards in exchange for wall treatment

Mirrors will be added to the blank wall of the Sheraton to make the streetscape more inviting. Image courtesy of Gustafson Guthrie Nichol.
to create pedestrian interest.

To my mind, there is no more naturally interesting phenomenon as one walks down a city street than interacting – both visually and physically – with a variety of shops, cafés, and other establishments that organically inhabit street-level tenant spaces over the years.

I commend Gustafson Guthrie Nichol for their bold, innovative and, yes, probably very engaging “garden walk.”  In my article, I made a rather glib reference to such an applied treatment being akin to lipstick on a certain porcine animal.  And, as with any maquillage, I fear it will require an inordinate amount of maintenance and continual primping to remain the engaging and interesting street-side phenomenon that they intend.

As for the intended reflection of the Eagles Temple across 7th Avenue, this is an interesting homage to that landmark.  It reminds me of the storied reflection of Trinity Church in the adjacent Hancock Tower’s wall of glass in Boston’s Back Bay. There’s something playful and creative about this approach to a response to the

The western side of Seventh Avenue between Pike and Union streets consists of one uninterrupted, blank concrete facade. Photo by DJC staff.
historic landmark.  Yet I also fear for the long-term viability of the mirrors.

Again, actual street-level tenant space, with doors and windows, could last the lifetime of the building with a changing array of establishments naturally responding to their street-level location with appropriate displays and accessibility.  Yet the placement of mirrors seems so impermanent.  Does the Sheraton Hotel management really intend to maintain and likely replace those mirrors essentially ad perpetuum?

Not to be ever the naysayer, I am anxiously awaiting the unveiling of the 7th Avenue “garden walk” next Spring as it will be a vast improvement over the existing pitiful situation.  And the Gustafson Guthrie Nichol group do marvelous work, so it will be a pleasure, yet again, to interact with their work in our cityscape.

Sustainable communities are feet-friendly

Thursday, August 12th, 2010

Chris Persons, executive director of Capitol Hill Housing, has some interesting things to say about what makes communities nice, in part based on a vacation his family took touring some of Washington’s cool places. Here is what he had to say in the Capitol Hill Housing newsletter:

We are late getting out the CHH monthly newsletter because I just got back from vacation.  My family travelled for the first time to the North Cascades and Eastern Washington and we took our friend Marcia along for the adventure.  The boys thoroughly enjoyed themselves and we all soaked up plenty of sunshine.   We toured Diablo lake by boat, explored Dry Falls, dug for fossils in Republic, crossed the Columbia River on Washington’s only free ferry, ate a Billie Burger in Wilbur, drove through the Palouse and drank a responsible amount of red wine in Walla Walla.  (The boys stuck with juice.)  I didn’t think about work at all.  I did think

Walla Walla's Pioneer Park. Photo courtesy of Walla Walla Visitors Bureau.
about what makes some communities so nice to be in.

As I have mentioned previously, the Community Development Collaborative has adopted Five Principles of Sustainable Communities:
• Equitable growth without displacement
• Affordable housing for all
• Transportation equity
• Economic opportunity and viable business districts
• Supportive and diverse environments.

A viable business district is an important element of most sustainable communities.  I tend to think of business districts in the urban village context because that is where I live and work. Columbia City and Broadway in Seattle, and Andersonville in Chicago, are all great examples of vibrant business districts.  But so is downtown Walla Walla.  There are other urban Seattle commercial districts that are not so successful.  How do these urban districts compare with Republic, Winthrop and Wilbur?  What lessons can we learn not just from thriving urban districts but from thriving (and not so thriving) rural ones?

Here are three lessons I came up with. I would be interested in hearing your ideas, too.
1) There has to be a reason for people to come.  Whether it’s Old West charm, fossils, crop circles or wine, you’ve gotta get people there.
2) There has to be a reason for the people who live there to come.   Main Street, U.S.A. attracts many tourists to Disneyland, but it doesn’t build community.  Amenities and services that support day-to-day living are important to sustainability.  If they are provided by locally-owned businesses even better.  I stood in a long line with locals and tourists at the Wilbur Billie Burger.
3) Feet-friendly streets create a comfortable scale for people.  Trees.  Wide sidewalks.  Narrow streets.  Unobstructed windows.  Benches for people to sit on.  Friendly merchants.  This works as well on South Rainier as it does in Walla Walla.

Of course a glass of Washington State merlot doesn’t hurt.  Cheers!

Park design mistreats public

Sunday, July 25th, 2010

I’m writing about a little park along a major regional paved trail. The park will go nameless here…no sense embarrassing the design team or owner. It’s actually a nice park, depending on the weather.

The temperature was in the low 80s yesterday when I stopped on a long bike ride. The park has lots of benches and low walls for sitting, and there were a dozen bicyclists hanging out, along with others presumably from the neighborhood. The benches and low walls, all in the sun, were empty.

Instead, the bicyclists — nearly every one – huddled in the shade of trees along the water’s edge, despite the lack of seating there. There were five or six good shade spots, one paved and the others not. Each shade spot was staked out by between one and three people. Thankfully the paved spot had enough room for a couple of us to share.

The park was renovated not long ago, and got a new restroom building. It has no awnings, and provides no shelter from either sun or rain. Unless you want to hang out with the toilets.

Here’s my question: Do park designers REALLY have so little understanding of how parks are used? Don’t they know that bicyclists are generally overheating when we stop during a summer ride? Or that on many other days, for familes too, it’s reassuring to be able to dash under an awning if it suddenly starts raining?

In the case of this park, simply moving a few benches to the shady areas would give a lot of tired people a respite on a hot day. And an awning, anywhere, would be nice.

‘Windfall’: Catch it while you can

Friday, July 9th, 2010

Last month, an engaging temporary public art installation, “Windfall,” opened at Seattle Center next to the new Theater Commons and Donnelly Gardens.

Created by Annie Han and Daniel Mihalyo of Lead Pencil Studio in Seattle, “Windfall” consists of some 1,000 cast iron wind chimes hanging in the trees on both sides of a walkway. The ringing is sublime and the bliss is unexpected in a busy urban environment. You can see how it catches people off guard when – as they’re hurrying by – they stop and stare into the trees.

Upon hearing that it’s a temporary installation, many of them say it should stay permanently. The short answer is it won’t. So you should go see it before it’s dismantled in mid-September.

Like the new Theater Commons and Donnelly Gardens, “Windfall” honors the late Peter Donnelly who, starting in the latter half of the 20th century, invigorated the city’s arts scene.

In an e-mail, Han and Mihalyo said they sought to highlight this new public space by providing visitors with “a heightened experience of the spatial qualities of wind and its impressive volume.” They chose bells to do this due to chimes’ association with the cycles of life and birth.

“We wanted this artwork to be a contribution to the landscape experience, filling the available site without overwhelming the primary experience,” they wrote.

With the garden completed only about a week before the planned opening, the artists had no time to test their idea. They worried “Windfall” would seem either not large enough or too large. They wondered, too, whether the chime “feathers” – made of eucalyptus wood veneer – might appear “too artificial.”

Mihalyo and Han designed the chimes and fabricated prototypes before finding a company, Travis Pattern – N.E.W. Foundry near Colville, to manufacture them. After the castings arrived, the artists had three assistants help for about 3 weeks, applying metal primer, drilling, tying knots and fabricating the feathers.

The idea of making the installation permanent did come up when the project was proposed, and some members of the artist selection committee recommended a longer-term installation. Ultimately, however, Seattle Center and the city’s Office of Arts & Cultural Affairs decided it would be most appropriate to make “Windfall” temporary.

There were concerns about the health of the trees, which could be damaged if people yanked the chimes down. The materials are “very ephemeral,” said city Public Art Project Manager Patricia Hopper. “It simply could not last forever.” And, to make a longer lasting exhibit would have exceeded the project’s $24,000 budget.

Besides these practical issues, there is the purpose of “Windfall.” Hopper explained it’s to celebrate the opening of the gardens and draw people into the new space. The work is something “that thrills for the moment and then lives on.”

And it will.

When the installation comes down, Mihalyo and Han plan to give the bells to people who come to Seattle Center Sept. 16-17. They say this will allow the memory of “Windfall” to be dispersed out into the city to the backyards and porches of residents who experienced it.

Creating of a new central waterfront neighborhood

Thursday, July 1st, 2010
The Alaskan Way Viaduct and downtown Seattle. Photo courtesy of Clair Enlow.

Reading Clair Enlow’s very insightful piece in yesterday’s DJC gave me hope.  For too long all I’ve heard about is the proposed new Central Waterfront park that could some day replace the dead zone now created by the Alaskan Way Viaduct.  Don’t get me wrong; parks can be great and we do need more gathering space(s) at the City’s front door, but the thought of a single, long, linear park in that location would send shudders down my spine!

When I read that partnership committee member Mark Reddington stated exactly what I’ve thought all along, my fears started to relent, and hope entered the picture.  “This isn’t just a single space,” he said.  “It really should be a deeply integrated place.”

That’s exactly right. that does three crucial things: 1) knits back together the waterfront and the downtown neighborhoods uphill; 2) creates a new series of microneighborhoods with their own new and exciting character, and finally 3) provides a series of interesting, engaging, diverse, interconnected public spaces.

Stated succinctly, Seattle has not done a good job (yet) with downtown public open spaces. In addition, for some reason the political ethos has not yet warmed to the notion so prevalent elsewhere around the world of a genuine integration of public spaces with other public, semiprivate and private uses to achieve truly urbane spaces.  Just look at Westlake Park versus Westlake Plaza (next to the Westlake Center).  The City’s ludicrous policy of essentially disallowing any private activities (vendor carts, spill out of café tables or sales tables) onto public land leaves that park rather lackluster.  Just across the street, on private land, the smaller Westlake Plaza, complete with its coffee shop, vendor stands and exhibits is often so lively and populated it can actually become crowded. For an important civic space in a major city’s downtown that’s not a bad problem to have!

Can you imagine if that policy were allowed to prevail in the much larger central waterfront public spaces?  Just think of Pier 62/63, where not even a popcorn stand, hotdog vendor or espresso stand can be found in that vast, vacant, yet valuable space.  Yes, the view is lovely there, but imagine how much richer the experience would be if there were some minor services or amenities, together with more movable tables and chairs.

If we can truly shed this mindset and move towards an underlying principle of a genuine integration of public and private spaces, activities and uses, then we will have set the stage for a remarkable central waterfront neighborhood that could become the envy of cities across the country.

The remarks by Cary Moon, Clair Enlow and Mark Reddington are giving me hope. Let’s work with them and support this new vision for the central waterfront.

Licata: Time to look for cuts in Mercer project

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

Seattle City Councilmember Nick Licata says in his May 13 newsletter Urban Politics that Seattle’s financial troubles mean it is time for a hard look at the city’s construction budget to look for ways to save, particularly on the Mercer West project. Here is an edited version of his comments.

By Nick Licata

By now just about everyone should be aware that the city will have to cut over $50 million from our budget next year. The mayor is currently providing city departments with guidelines on what percentage of their budget will have to be cut. A number of departments could see cuts as high as 14-15 percent, if Human Services and Public Safety (Police and Fire) remain relatively whole; they account for 49 percent of the city’s general fund. Around 13 percent of the general fund pays for fixed costs such as debt, pensions, etc., leaving 38 percent of the general fund likely targeted for larger cuts. This is the portion that includes parks and libraries, for example. In addition, the council and the mayor must still make mid-year 2010 cuts, which will likely be in the $12 million range.

The mayor will send a mid-year reduction proposal to the council, likely by mid-June. For the 2011 proposal, due in September, the only options are to cut spending or find new revenue. Even with new revenues, cuts will still need to be made.

I believe we must re-examine our current construction budget to see what savings we can realize. In a March presentation the City Council’s central staff laid out a sobering assessment of future city construction projects and current financial resources.

Upcoming needs include replacing maintenance facilities, the North Police Precinct, Magnolia Bridge, Harbor Patrol and downtown waterfront fire stations, and of course, the seawall and viaduct-related work. This totals around $1 billion.

We also have a Seattle Center Master Plan, estimated at $625 million over 20 years, a Bicycle Master Plan at $240 million over 10 years that we’re behind on funding, and a Pedestrian Master Plan with an open-ended commitment of around $1 billion.

Although separately funded, there are several major utility projects in the pipeline: combined sewer overflow, Duwamish clean-up, South Lake Union Substation, Smartgrid, all at $100 million or so-each. That doesn’t include the $250-plus million for Viaduct-related utility work.
These projects do not address the mayor’s possible proposals for light rail and broadband.

And lastly there is the South Park Bridge, owned by King County, which is scheduled to be closed June 30.

The city will receive bids for the Mercer Project on May 19, and the Council’s Transportation Committee could vote to lift a ban on construction spending as soon as May 25. I expect the bids to come in below projections, perhaps by as much as 15 to 20 percent. That is the good news. However, close to $100 million is required for the second part, called Mercer West, much of which may have to be funded by bonds, which would add principal and debt costs. It is critical that we evaluate the design on Mercer West to determine if any savings can be achieved.

The current Mercer West design would convert Mercer to 2-way traffic east of Dexter, and expand the underpass under Aurora from four to six lanes for the two blocks from Dexter to Fifth. It also includes bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Most of the cost is for the underpass. Given the current budget situation, the underpass is worth reconsidering.

SDOT has emphasized that the goal of the Mercer project is to improve area-wide travel, not just to redo Mercer. It has long included, for example, narrowing Valley adjacent to Lake Union Park. It may be possible to attain project goals without the underpass, since the state is funding three new crossings over Aurora at John, Thomas and Harrison between Mercer and Denny as part of the Viaduct replacement project. This adds six lanes of crossings over Aurora, three in each direction, and counterbalances the four lanes of Broad Street likely to be removed.

Bicycle and pedestrian crossings could be incorporated into the three crossings. Dexter Avenue on the east side of Aurora already has bicycle lanes.

There hasn’t yet been any travel time analysis I’ve seen that incorporates the three Aurora crossings. SDOT’s earlier travel time analyses didn’t include the crossings, as they weren’t funded yet. I believe this should be done. Expanding the Mercer underpass would give us eight new lanes to cross Aurora, instead of six. Do we really need all eight new lanes in a time of sharp budget cuts, especially if project goals can be realized at a lower cost?

Eliminating the expanded Mercer underpass, if it doesn’t create a safety hazard, would help in two ways. First it would reduce the need for any bond financing and secondly it would allow funds to go towards completing our pedestrian and bicycle master plans, or perhaps allow the City to direct some funding to King County’s South Park Bridge replacement project, an indisputably pressing need.

Where pedestrians count

Tuesday, May 11th, 2010

New York sure treats pedestrians better than Seattle does.

I’m in Manhattan for a few days, walking loops from the Battery to Harlem. Being used to Seattle, I’ve rarely felt so coddled by a city.

Many Seattle annoyances are gone. Sandwich boards are neatly out of the way. Jaywalking doesn’t require looking for cops first (still honoring right of way of course), and sidestreets are narrow so crossing is quick. Tree wells aren’t designed to hurt you or make you walk single-file. Dog owners keep their leashes short so they don’t trip people. I’ve yet to see a push button. Cars stop before crosswalks, not in them, in part because there’s (presumably) no free right turn, and in part because they’re not rude.

In other words, both New York and its public have learned that walkability is more than platitudes, and living close together comes with a code of conduct. Seattle should learn from that.

Without waxing too poetic, I love this city…not in the critical but permanent way I love Seattle, but more a deep admiration. Manhattan’s density of buildings, residents, tourists, jobs, and transit is phenomenal, both in ambiance and in the great things it supports. And the architecture! It’s scientific fact that the two best highrises in the world are the Chrysler and Woolworth Buildings, and the midrise vernacular…

My hotel computer is running out….off to the view from Empire State!

Puget Sound region historic sites vying for dollars

Friday, April 16th, 2010

 

Town Hall Seattle is one of 25 sites hoping for cash. Photo courtesy of Partners in Preservation.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has launched a contest in the Puget Sound region called the Partners in Preservation program that will provide $1 million in grants from American Express to local historic sites.

The online program encourages people to vote for their favorite historic places from among 25 sites in the region.

For information about the sites or to vote, go here. Votes can be cast until May 12. People can also post personal stories about the sites and share photos. Open houses will be held May 1 and 2 at the sites.

A press release from the trust said the winner of the public vote is guaranteed grant funds. Funding for the runners-up will be determined by an advisory committee of civic and preservation leaders in collaboration with the American Express Foundation and the trust.

Grant recipients will be announced June 15.

Sustainablity advocates must fight big-road big shots

Tuesday, April 6th, 2010

At Saturday’s Climate Neutral Unconference  Mayor Mike McGinn made some strong comments about values and politics, and the role they play in limiting our success in closing the Sustainability Gap. McGinn took attendees on a walk down memory lane, recounting past struggles with the regional power structure that is highly motivated to build big, spendy highway projects.  He gave what amounted to a half-time locker room speech, encouraging advocates of carbon neutrality for Seattle but also calling on them to get into the fight.

And it is a fight. As Publicola reported  leaders aren’t prepared to put their money where their mouths are in terms of reducing carbon emissions. Just the opposite is true, with regional bodies like the Puget Sound Regional Council and the State Legislature pushing huge highway projects. McGinn pointed out that carbon neutrality is not a technical problem but a political one and set out three basic principles about the political limits being set by elected leaders on progress.

The first point McGinn made was about access. He recounted his days as staff to a congressman and how certain groups—labor unions especially—when straight into the congressman’s office, while others met with low level staff. Political leaders ought to pick who they listen to. If they listen only to business interests then we’re likely to get more highways because their argument is always that economic development depends on roads.

The second point he made was about the decisions being made by local leaders. He recounted the repeal of the “head tax,” showing a now well known picture of him holding up a “no” sign indicating his opposition to the appeal. The “head tax” repeal was a clear example of the persistent and continuing efforts by some interests to reduce taxes at the expense of sustainability. As I pointed out earlier the repeal of the tax certainly won the praise of the business community, but blew a $4.5 million hole in the Seattle Department of Transportation budget.

McGinn wound up his comments with a third point, saying that ideas are powerful. But they are a lot more powerful when backed up with action. He cited the uphill climb on defeating 2007’s roads and transit package. The ‘no’ effort started out small, outspent, and overmatched with support of elected officials from the governor on down. Governor Christine Gregoire said at the time “it’s not a perfect package. It’s not necessarily one I would have done … but the fact is it’s the only game in town and there is too much at stake.” The grass roots effort ended up proving her wrong.

In the end unconference discussions were framed by technical and political realities. And the political reality is that most elected officials in the region don’t hold the same values as conference goers based on who they listen to (the roads lobby) and what they actually do (vote for roads over alternatives). With the vast majority of emissions coming from transportation it’s difficult to see how the regions leaders hope to tackle the challenge of climate change by building more roads. McGinn’s comments were sobering, but also reframed the issue around getting better organized. Based on his own election as Mayor, the lesson is that people can be powerful when they organize around their values regardless of the odds.

 

 

 

 

 

A SR 520 six lane bridge with train tracks in all lanes?

Thursday, April 1st, 2010

At least someone is having fun in Seattle city government. Just read City Councilmember Richard Conlin’s not so modest proposals for the SR 520 Bridge replacement project.

Here they are:

 

The replacement of the SR 520 Bridge continues to be a high priority project, as the need for safety improvements and transportation enhancements remains great. However, the options currently under consideration are limited in their creativity, focusing primarily on what planners call the “Goldilocks Set” – a 4-lane alternative that is ‘too small’, an 8-lane alternative that is ‘too big’, and a 6-lane alternative that is ‘just right’. Although other ideas have been suggested in the past, such as a group of drivers calling for a dedicated SUV bridge and a so-called “Chartreuse Green Alternative” that appears to be focused on the color of the bridge, it is only in the last few weeks that some truly visionary ideas have been proposed, such as the following:

•  The “Rabbit Hole” alternative. This would consist of interlocking bored and/or floating tunnels that serve multiple locations on the east and west sides of the lake. On the west side, there would be tunnel entrances at Sand Point, Laurelhurst, Madison Park, and Madrona Park, while on the east there would be entrances at Kirkland, the Point Cities, and Mercer Slough in Bellevue. All of the tunnels would meet in a submerged roundabout in the center of the lake, so that vehicles would be able to get to various destinations. This would decentralize traffic, therefore allowing it to be absorbed by existing roads (e.g., Madison Street, Sand Point Way, etc.), thus eliminating the Portage Bay viaduct and connections through Montlake.

•  The “Train to Anywhere” proposal. This would involve creating a six lane bridge with tracks in all six lanes. At the Seattle side, one set of tracks would run north over the Montlake Bridge, and then split and run on the surface down Sand Point Way and NE Pacific, another would run south along 23rd Avenue with a spur through the Arboretum, while the third line would continue to I-5 and run in tracks embedded in those lanes as well. This alternative assumes that there will be virtually no cars in the future, so there is no need for lanes for them. Any remaining vehicles other than trains (such as horse and carriages) can share the rail lanes (as is done in the Third Avenue tunnel currently). Trains running the in the same lane will notify the horse and carriage operator via GPS, and the operator can move his vehicle to one of the unoccupied lanes. This will require the nimble use of technology as well as genetically modified (GMO) horses that can shift from side to side very quickly.
 
•  The “Greener Than Thou” proposal. This would rebuild the bridge with only a pedestrian/bike path. There is a variation on this proposal, called the “Lemming Alternative”, that would include vehicle lanes, but terminate them at the current ‘Ramps to Nowhere’ in the Arboretum.

•  The “Zero Lake Option”. This was inspired by the bold and visionary actions of our ancestors, who reshaped the landscape in major ways such as the Denny Regrade, the rerouting of the Cedar River into Lake Washington, and the lowering of Lake Washington by 9 feet. Proponents of this option ask the logical question: ‘If we can do 9 feet, why not the whole Lake?” The savings in concrete are enormous, as is the potential for development on the slopes and valley floor that would now be available. There are moderately significant impacts on fish resources.
 
•  The “Dunkirk Strategy”. This alternative was inspired by the heroic World War II experience when yachts and fishing boats were mobilized to evacuate the British Army from France when Hitler overran the continent in 1940. Since there are many yachts and pleasure boats in the Seattle area, most of which are only used a few hours a month, why not mobilize a ‘Dunkirk Fleet’ of hundreds of these small boats to carry people across the water instead of rebuilding the bridge?
 
•  The “Sustainable Surface” alternative. This proposal is designed to counteract the impact of global warming on Lake Washington by submerging a system of pipes under the SR 520 corridor, and then continually pumping liquid nitrogen through them to create a frozen surface. The cooling effect would spread through the Lake and protect fish against excessively warm temperatures. Travel across the Lake could be by dogsled caravans, and there could be year-round winter sports adjacent to the travel corridor. Since the ice bridge could not be raised to allow boats to go through, there would be an icebreaker stationed in the corridor, which would simply break through the bridge at regular intervals, and allow it to refreeze to restore travel across the Lake.

• Perhaps the most radical proposal is the “Cloud Suspension Bridge”. This would synthesize the use of cloud computing with visualization techniques and nanotechnology to construct a bridge suspended by trillions of nanowires connected to individual droplets of rain and microparticles above the bridge. As particles fall or dissolve, new nanowires will be deployed using spider-like spinnerets to seek out newly formed droplets and dust. The bridge will look like it is suspended from thin air. On extremely windy or clear days when this technology may be unstable, drivers will rely on visualization techniques to imagine that the bridge is still working, as they already do in its current condition.Perhaps the most radical proposal is the “Cloud Suspension Bridge”. This would synthesize the use of cloud computing with visualization techniques and nanotechnology to construct a bridge suspended by trillions of nanowires connected to individual droplets of rain and microparticles above the bridge. As particles fall or dissolve, new nanowires will be deployed using spider-like spinnerets to seek out newly formed droplets and dust. The bridge will look like it is suspended from thin air. On extremely windy or clear days when this technology may be unstable, drivers will rely on visualization techniques to imagine that the bridge is still working, as they already do in its current condition.
It is important that all reasonable choices are considered as we move through the key stages of decision making on this critical transportation facility. These and other ideas will now move into the state’s process for selecting a ‘Draft Preliminary Preferred Alternative’ in April. Following public hearings on the draft in May, a ‘Revised Draft Preliminary Preferred Alternative’ will be recommended in June, followed by a public hearing in July. Based on the response from this hearing, in September the State will select a ‘Consensus Draft Preliminary Preferred Alternative’, which will have a public hearing in October. After that there will be a “Revised Consensus Draft Preliminary Preferred Alternative”, which the State will consider in a Decision Agenda at a meeting to be determined at some point in the future. Once this meeting has taken place, there will be an opportunity for further public comment prior to the State selecting a ‘Final Preliminary Preferred Alternative’, which will then move into the next stage of the decision-making procedure.