A sports arena proposal that the Port
of Seattle has repeatedly warned could have a negative effect on area maritime transportation
businesses, has apparently won approval by the Seattle City Council.
On Sept. 11, the Council announced
it had reached a tentative agreement with developer Chris Hansen to build a $490
million basketball and hockey arena in the city’s SoDo industrial area.
The deal, which was approved by the
King County Council earlier this year, still faces a formal Council vote, which
could come later this month. Increasing its chances of approval is a recent revision
to the plan that includes a $40 million road improvement fund.
Container operations, railway lines
and truck activity are all currently located within blocks of the proposed arena
site, and multiple Port of Seattle studies have determined that traffic congestion
and pressure on industrial businesses brought by a sports facility near the waterfront
could squeeze out small businesses, disrupt port operations and limit the potential
for port growth.
During an Aug. 7 panel discussion
at the port, three experts noted several key issues that must be addressed regarding
the proposed arena, including how port terminal operations are significantly impacted
on game days because game traffic makes reaching terminals difficult for trucks.
Also according to the panel, congestion
increases transit time and costs and makes the gateway less attractive for customers,
therefore, SoDo’s well-documented traffic management issues could theoretically
worsen the situation.
However, the $40 million road improvement
fund, which would be covered by tax revenues, would go toward the study and prioritization
of area transportation improvements. The city has also said that additional funds might be secured from the port and federal government.
The port released a statement the
same day the potential deal was announced, saying it was not yet ready to endorse
the plan.
“We will carefully review this proposal
to ensure it addresses the traffic and environmental risks the Commission found
in the initial proposal,” the port said in its statement. “Failure to adequately
address those issues and fully review alternative sites could jeopardize the marine
operations that support more than 30,000 jobs in our region and generate $3 billion
in revenue each year and would weaken the port’s ability to create jobs and strengthen
our maritime-industrial community.”
