The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program in Seattle involved a matrix organizational model for collaboration among engineers, geologists, and project managers, emphasizing subcontractor integration and specialized technical expertise. Key features included collaborative governance, proactive risk mitigation, and streamlined communication, which enhanced project efficiency and accountability. Despite challenges such as cost overruns and scheduling conflicts, the design-build method balanced innovation with risk management, ultimately proving crucial for successful project delivery.

1. ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM (SEATTLE, WA). REPORT.
Mateo Lee, Emmanuel K Ansah, Abraham G
Debasu, Adam Mugenyi.

2. • Matrix Organizational Model:
Collaboration across
disciplines (engineers,
geologists, managers).
• Subcontractor Integration:
Specialized tasks outsourced
to experts.
• Technical Expertise Centers:
HDR (tunneling), Shannon &
Wilson (geotechnics).
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES
AND PROJECT DELIVERY METHOD
(Contractor)
Seattle Tunnel
Partners
accountable
for
Design & Build

3. Influence on Management:
•Increased Accountability: Adherence to safety and
environmental policies.
Resource Utilization: Federal and state funding
reduced financial risks.
•Integrated Management Office (IMO): Combined
WSDOT and Parsons Brinckerhoff personnel for
unified oversight.
•Hierarchical Control: Simplified activity
coordination from procurement to milestones.
•Risk Management: Dedicated team for tunneling,
seismic, and traffic-related risks.
IMPACT ON PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Key Features
Collaborative Governance:
• FHWA - Policy compliance
• WSDOT - Oversight
• City of Seattle - Urban integration
Role Specialization:
FHWA (funding), WSDOT (execution),
Seattle (community alignment).
• Stakeholder Representation:
Public consultations ensured
balanced input.

4. Proactive Risk Mitigation: Early detection of issues like property
acquisitions.
•Smoother Communication: Faster decision-making via joint
offices.
•Improved Efficiency: Streamlined approvals reduced
bureaucratic delays.
Key Takeaways:
• Collaboration among owners, contractors, and management
was pivotal.
• Design-Build method balanced innovation with risk transfer,
despite reduced owner control.
• Matrix and integrated structures enabled efficient resource use
IMPACT ON PROJECT MANAGEMENT

5. BUDGET

6. HISTORICAL PHOTOS
Photo from the waterfront in 1935 Photo of viaduct in 1959

7. SEATTLE BEFORE AND AFTER THE ALASKAN WAY DEMOLITION

8. South End Viaduct Replacement (bored
tunnel)t: 351m
Connecting the Northern and South
street connections: 2.0532 B
Decommissioning of the street tunnel:
291.7m
Enviromental reviews/design ROW:
163.7m
Other Projects & Construction mitigation
came out to be 202.9m
7000 Ton digging machine named Bertha:
80m
Program Management: 75m
TOTAL COST

9. FUNDING
Federal Funding: 787.2m
State Funds: 2.0541 B
2005 gas tax: 1.523 B
2003 gas tax: 326.3m
Other state funds: 4.8
Tolls: 200m
Local funds: 28.4m
Port of Seattle: 267.7m

10. COST OVERRUNS
2016 Ballot measure to create an
elevated park along the waterfront
223m at the time
2018 cost overruns were 600m
due to tunnel boring

11. SCHEDULING

12. STEPS IN SCHEDULING
• Initial Assessment
- Evaluate viaduct
condition
• Alternative Analysis
- Cut and Cover Tunnel
• Cost Estimate Validation
- Budget and Risks

13. KEY CHALLENGE
• Concurrent Construction
• Traffic management
• Environmental Mitigation

14. METHOD FOR SCHEDULING
UPDATE AND REPORT
• Regular Progress
• Collaborative Reporting
Tool
• Adjustment and
Mitigation Planning
• Frequent Updates and
Communication

15. CONTROL

16. MEETINGS

17. QUALITY MANAGEMENT

18. RISK MANAGEMENT

19. SECANT WALLS AND TIME

20. CRITIQUE

21. DESIGN-BUILD USE

22. CHALLENGES

23. REFERENCES:
Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program, Washington State Department of Transportation.
Bodenmüller, Klaus Otto. The Alaskan Way Viaduct. 1981.
Duke, Andrew. Alaskan Way Viaduct: Review of the Transportation Factors Associated with a Surface Roadway . DKS Associates, 2006.
Harn, Robert, et al. “Development of replacement concepts for the Alaskan way seawall, Seattle, Washington.” Ports 2007, 22 Mar. 2007, pp. 1–10,
https://doi.org/10.1061/40834(238)88.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaskan_Way_Viaduct
Parker, Bagley. Alaskan Way Viaduct: Report on Preliminary Plans. The Dept, 1948.
Ševčíková, Hana, et al. “Uncertain benefits: Application of Bayesian melding to the Alaskan way viaduct in Seattle.” Transportation Research Part
A: Policy and Practice, vol. 45, no. 6, July 2011, pp. 540–553, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2011.03.009.