³ÉÈËXÕ¾

An elevated park near the Seattle waterfront might seem like a good idea at first glance, but when you read the plans a little closer, it’s something that voters could quickly come to regret.

calls for the construction of a new, mile-long bridge-type structure to replace the aging Alaskan Way Viaduct. It would, as backers say, “save our view, not the viaduct.”

That means that if I-123 gets enough votes, it will halt what called a “well-planned and well-funded” community park that is being planned once the viaduct is demolished.

Related: Should Sound Transit have chosen this guy for ST3 opposition?

What might scare taxpayers more than interrupting current plans for the viaduct is that advocates for the elevated park wrote themselves into the proposal. If approved, they would be in charge of the project that has, as ³ÉÈËXÕ¾ Radio reporter Josh Kerns put it, no real plan and no specific budget.

Though advocates of the park have argued that other cities have done this type of project successfully, that doesn’t mean it will work for Seattle’s waterfront. High Line park in Manhattan, for example, works because it’s one story up, ³ÉÈËXÕ¾ Radio’s Dave Ross points out. It was built on an elevated track and didn’t require the city to rebuild the structure.

Keeping the viaduct up might seem reasonable, Dave says, especially with the price tag of tearing it down as part of the Seattle tunnel project that is already over budget.

“But to knock it down and build it back up? That’s crazy talk,” Dave said.

And maybe that’s why the Seattle City Council unanimously rejected the proposal in the first place, sending it to the ballot.