Larry Matsuda
by Larry Matsuda
Northwest Asia Weekly
I object to your proposals and variants for the Chinatown-International District (CID) Sound Transit.
First, you said there are two main options. Some in the CID community described the choices as bad and bad. This is a common tactic used by urban planners—meaning there are only two options. Limiting choices controls the narrative of the community. Planners don’t want real community involvement, they just want something cheap and fast. Still, there are other not-cheap-and-fast options that should be on the table:
- For example, use the existing Union Station as light rail. If it doesn’t work, demolish it and rebuild it brick by brick on top of the new structure, so it ends up looking the same. Or just demolish it. It must be a historic landmark, but the CID should be a conservation area, managed by some advisory committee. I think it’s CID, so what’s the difference?
- Use the north parking lot in Lumen Field, build a station there, and on top of the station, make a 10-story parking lot, so that there is a parking lot in Lumen Field. It is possible to connect to the Union Station from Lumen Field and use the Union Station as it already exists.
- Land that uses industrial land in SODO areas without affecting existing communities.
- Take the old immigration building and demolish it or keep the historic façade.
It would be absurd to say that there are two options for variation.
Where is Peter Steinbrueks in Seattle now? Why wasn’t the conservation awareness instilled in planners and architects to preserve Pike Place Market to make it known around the world? Instead, it’s the same old “make it cheap, make it fast” mantra, with two options. Is it the same limited thinking that lays the track in a bus tunnel that doesn’t fit any operating system, the same thinking that keeps “Big Bertha” in the tunnel for months (or maybe years)? Making it cheap and fast should be replaced by clear thinking and focus on affected communities.
In conclusion, I would say that this project is in line with Boeing’s approach, with one principal saying: “We never had time to plan it properly, but when it went wrong, we always had time to do it all over again.
I urge planners to listen to the CID community and find creative solutions that are not detrimental to CID.
Do it right, not cheap!
