Here’s the money quote from a Seattle Times article on West Seattle and the Viaduct:
“People want to put the same thing up there because anything new is different, and people are concerned because it would be different,” said Mark Wainwright, president of the Admiral Neighborhood Association.
Is the Viaduct a roadway or a security blanket?
Leave it to working-class Delridge to provide some common sense:
Paul Fischburg, Delridge Neighborhood Association president, said he personally supports a surface road, as long as there’s an “enormous investment in transit.”
“If I could just wave a magic wand, it would be extending light rail in the southwest and northwest through downtown … that would be the best-case scenario,” he said. But “you know this city’s history on mass transit.”
Long term, I’d like to see a train that connects with the current Sound Transit train at SODO. Until then, there’s the E-3 Busway which can be configured to connect with the Spokane Street Viaduct.
Unfortunately, the light rail planning is concerned with Bellevue and Lynnwood at the moment. Seattle residents have no way to mandate additional transit projects through Sound Transit’s governence structure.
Maybe Ed Murray isn’t on the wrong track after all.
“Maybe Ed Murray isn’t on the wrong track after all.”
Fuckin-A right, Will.
The polls from late last year showing support for RTID/ST2 were done pre-Viaduct vote. The viaduct vote showed how transportation planning is hostage to special interests, and how there is no political leadership under the current system. Now all the voters know a “no-no” will lead to a better outcome. Plus Sen. Murray now has come out against RTID/ST2. And of course none of the actual, gritty details of the RTID and ST proposals have been disclosed yet. Whatever goes up on November’s ballot should go down in flames.
One quote from one person allows you to characterize the transportation needs of 100,000 people? Please go away, you silly little twerp. One Erica C. Barnett in this town is quite enough.
@ 2
Ivan, would you like some cheese with your whine?
@3:
GOTO @2
END
BREAKING – Speaker Pelosi and the Dems deal a crushing, agonizing blow to the right wingers – Iraq war funding calls for withdrawl. Amazing victory for Dems and America. Amazing defeat for the cowardly traitors on the right!
Guess What? The Army Low-Balled Desertion Numbers
“Army Revises Upward Number of Desertions
“By PAUL von ZIELBAUER
“The New York Times
“(March 23) – A total of 3,196 active-duty soldiers deserted the Army last year, or 853 more than previously reported, according to revised figures from the Army.
“The new calculations by the Army … significantly alter the annual desertion totals since the 2000 fiscal year. In 2005, for example, the Army now says 2,543 soldiers deserted, not the 2,011 it had reported. …
“National Public Radio first reported on Tuesday that the Army had been inaccurately reporting desertion figures.”
Quoted under Fair Use; for complete story and/or copyright info, see http://tinyurl.com/268z2w
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Hey wingers! Since you claim everyone in the military votes Republican, these guys must be yours. By the way, do you have any fucking idea where your kids are this morning?
Will,
Like it or not, Ivan’s right. People in West Seattle (that I’ve talked to) didn’t want a new viaduct because they were afraid of what might be, it’s because they know how crucial this corridor is, and because they saw the folly of the other options (a tunnel in what is just fill, and unpaid for at this time, or a surface-plus non-option that wasn’t on the ballot). To use one person’s take on the situation and say this is why things went the way they did is worthy only of high school journalism.
Look at the precincts that voted heavily to keep the viaduct. Essentially, it’s the western half of the city, from South Park up to Broadview. Adding more buses is not the solution, and it never will be. There must be a massive investment in a highly integrated mass transit system, utilizing various methods (bus, rail, whatever) that also does not rely on the old spoke-and-wheel system we have. Until this is done, the viaduct corridor will remain heavily used and heavily relied-upon by those neighborhoods not served by increases in downtown-to-Northgate bus service or rapid transit that serves the eastern portion of Seattle.
Right-Wing Authoritarian personality types have a mental defect that causes them to not be able to reason correctly. They have particular difficulty with syllogisms.
The defect is illustrated in “reasoning tests”. They seem unable to grasp the concept that their ability to reason correctly is what is being tested.
What Wingnuts typically do is look first for conclusions they agree with, and then assume that the reasoning must be sound.
The ideas they have are “received” not “conceived”. The trustworthiness of the authority figure propounding the idea is all important to them, not the quality of the idea or the reasoning process engaged to arrive at it.
To us, it’s hilarious that they solemnly quote Rush and gather their “news” from the Drudge report, but in their own tiny minds, it all makes sense.
re 5: Yes! And the meathead blabbers on about “victory”.
We need to pay a respected right wing authority figure to declare Southwestern fire ants as the most dangerous threat to the planet.
Give the idiots somewhere to go and something to do.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17753818/from/RS.1/
Oops – this little birdy is singing. I wouldn’t be surprised if Jackoff Jack suddenly has a “heart attack” in prison. Rove and the rest of the Bush Regime can’t afford to have this guy out there telling people the truth.
TJ
Well, tough. Ivan wanted a rebuild and the rebuild lost big at the polls. He can hang out with Stefan Sharkansky, The Seattle Times Editorial Board, Nick Licata and other folks who living in fantasy land.
I suggest you read Erica C. Barnett’s feature in The Stranger about exactly what a surface/transit option would look like. Because that’s what we’re getting.
Will,
I’m not saying the rebuild was a preferred option. Quite the contrary. And I don’t know Ivan and can’t say what he wanted. What I took issue to was your use of the quote from the ANA president as “proof” of why voters in some parts of the city, specifically West Seattle, voted heavily for the viaduct. No official surface-transit option was presented to the voters, at least not on the ballot I got. We might believe a no-no vote would take us there, but based on statements by some elected officials, a no-no vote means both that the tunnel option is still alive, and that the viaduct option is still alive, and by others that now a surface-transit option is the only option out there.
And as for who you think I should go hang out with, all I can say is “Wow!” A far-left liberal criticises your conclusion and tries to point out that this was not a black-and-white vote, and the way you react is to try to tie him to conservatives? I’ve been called many things while supporting immigrant rights, opposing the war and supporting LGBT causes, but an associate of conservatives like Sharkansky is a first. I thought it was only conservatives that liked to view the world as ‘you’re either with us or against us.’
So how many people from West Seattle actually go north of downtown during commute hours? What we really need are honest numbers for how people currently use Hwy 99, and where they are trying to go. The numbers that are floating out there now seem to have very little info to go with them.
A comprehensive survey needs to be taken at multiple points, along with follow up surveys – this is not rocket science and should done by an independent organization (and not hired by WSDOT).
TJ
Ivan was and is a proponent of the rebuild option. A big proponent.
And as for who you think I should go hang out with, all I can say is “Wow!”
That wasn’t to you, that was to Ivan. All of those names are of people who are deluded enough to believe that the rebuild option is still alive despite losing at the polls.
but based on statements by some elected officials, a no-no vote means both that the tunnel option is still alive, and that the viaduct option is still alive, and by others that now a surface-transit option is the only option out there.
Any elected official who believes that a tunnel or a rebuild is still alive is nuts.
Will –
You’re right – my apologies. I mis-read the “he” for “you.”
Unfortunately, after the big hassle that was the viaduct-tunnel vote, we still have plenty of politicians (and non-politicians) arguing that their option is alive, and really, we’re left in the same place as before the vote – no solution or consensus, and continuing work on shoring up the viaduct.
What I took issue to was your use of the quote from the ANA president as “proof” of why voters in some parts of the city, specifically West Seattle, voted heavily for the viaduct.
Whatever, but it’s what the president of the Admiral Neighborhood Association said. Everyone has their own reasons for why they voted. That’s his take on it.
Uptown –
There have been several studies, but with different conclusions. Part of the issue on counting is where does Downtown end? Are cars getting off at Western going to Downtown? I would say yes, but I believe the WashDot or SDOT study on numbers didn’t include them. The same goes, I believe, for those getting off at SODO – they weren’t counted as going to Downtown. I’ve seen numbers as high as 135k, and as low as 75k trips daily on the viaduct, with through traffic being about 60%. But bear in mind too that this doesn’t just affect West Seattle or Ballard, but neighborhoods outside the city (like White Center, or Burien) where use of SR99, including the viaduct portion, is high.
@ 15
Unfortunately, after the big hassle that was the viaduct-tunnel vote, we still have plenty of politicians (and non-politicians) arguing that their option is alive, and really, we’re left in the same place as before
So? Such is life. The pols are figuring it out in their own time. Nickels has come around. Gregoire is still struggling with it. Jan Drago is still for a tunnel, while Licata is still gung-ho for a rebuild.
The glorified poll of a vote seems to have moved the debate. Folks didn’t like their choices. There is yet more work to be done.
It seems to me that what has won isn’t the surface option but rather just keeping the current structure there and patching it up as we go along.
Where is the will to actually tear the viaduct down? I don’t see it.
@ 17
Through traffic is at 60%? I think its the opposite. A majority of trips on the viaduct originate or end in downtown Seattle.
A quote form Barnett’s piece:
The day before the 2001 Nisqually earthquake, 110,000 vehicles used the viaduct every day. After it reopened later that year, only 80,000 vehicles did. More recently, a WSDOT study found that if the state charged a $1 toll on the viaduct, 40,000 trips would disappear, indicating that “demand” is a very flexible concept
So, the 110,000 trips aren’t in stone.
@20
Check the state findings. They were released most recently in the document “Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement and State Route 520 Bridge Replacement Projects” released on December 15, 2006.
Point 4 under “Current Use of the Viaduct” states “Approximately 60% of the trips travelling on SR 99 through the project area use the Viaduct as a route through downtown Seattle. The remaining 40% go into or out of the downtown area.”
Stoopid Rabit @ 6 Roger Rabbit Commentary: Hey wingers!
http://www.usatoday.com/news/w.....ters_x.htm
Article also says desertions since start if Iraq war are lower than during the early war in Afganistan. Also, current desertions are currently 1/2 that during the last year of the Clinton’s Monica term.
I can only think of one question for the scum on this board – shouldn’t you be studying for the WASL?
Please – keep bringing knives to the gunfight….
re 22: And you, keep reading USA Today. It’s a start, and I know the bold graphics and primary colors are just the thing to capture your attention.
21 I’d say the 40% number is way high unless your definition of “downtown” includes Belltown, south Lake union, lower Queen Anne and the Elliott/15th corridor. No way are that many vehicles jumping off at Seneca.
headlice lucy @23
Thanks for proving my point…..
“…shouldn’t you be studying for the WASL?”
24 – I’m just saying that as it stands now, the State of Washington says that 110,000 trips are made daily on the Viaduct, and the State says 60% of it is through traffic. Whether we agree or not, those are the numbers the State is looking at when they have to evaluate alternatives for this State Route. I believe, though am not certain, their definition of downtown did not include the Western exit (going northbound) or the southbound exit at the southern end of the Battery Street tunnel. I’m not certain if their numbers include the SODO on/off ramps from First Ave.
@8, Eureka, Headless Lucy!!
“Clinton fired all 93 federal prosecutors!”, the talking point repeated by all republican automatons; nevermind those firings have a precident set by incoming presidents from both parties.
“But, federal prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the president”, nevermind the suggestion implied that serving the president’s pleasure is more meant as ‘pleasuring’ the president.
Bill Clinton got a blowjob. George Bush Jr decreed from on high a blowjob assembly line and a bend-over America.
Idiotic Bushism #18,605: “The proposal I proposed is the proposal.”
Impeachment is on the table.
re 25: You are Mr. Cynical.
27 – “But, federal prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the president”,
At least three of the fired eight were flagged by troop-haters…(i.e. lefties…)
In San Diego, U.S. attorney Carol Lam was under fire for failing to prosecute illegal alien criminals. On June 15, 2006, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein complained about Ms. Lam to Alberto Gonzales saying: “It is my understanding that Ms. Lam may have some of the most restrictive prosecutorial guidelines nationwide for immigration cases, such that many Border Patrol agents end up not referring their cases.”
That was Feinstein then. Here she is now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, D-CALIF.: The White House is in a bunker mentality: won’t listen, won’t change. I believe there is even more to come out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Yes. And then there’s fired U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton, who wouldn’t prosecute pot-smuggling cases unless they were above 500 pounds. Wow.
How about San Francisco federal prosecutor Kevin Ryan? Here is what the liberal Los Angeles Times wrote about him today: “It was only when a Democratic judge threatened to go to Congress to raise a public fuss over Ryan’s poor performance that Ryan was put on the termination list, according to e-mails released by the White House.”
“Impeachment is on the table.”
Although it probably gets in the way of allowing BDS symptoms to work their way out, was there any law broken? Just curious.
re 27: How could a president who had no knowledge of the firings have experienced pain or pleasure at the US attorney’s.
Serving “at the president’s pleasure” implies that he knows what’s going on.
If he doesn’t, then what the hell does that phrase mean?
Support our troops. Take their place.
Unfortunately, my quote was taken out of context, as to be expected from the Times. I’m a big surface/transit supporter, and my comment was about people just wanting a rebuild because they couldn’t see past it to the benefits of what an open waterfront and removal of the Viaduct would bring.
So there ya go…
Mark
11, 12 How relevant can a vote (and debate) be that excludes suburban commuters?
The reason the advisory vote was limited to CITY voters was because the ballot question asked CITY taxpayers whether they were willing to chip in for a tunnel. However, even that was misleading, because 2/3rds of the tunnel cost over and above state funding would have been paid by City Light ratepayers, many of whom do NOT live within city limits.
But AWV carries a STATE highway, and when you start talking about eliminating the downtown highway link by turning it into a 4-lane boulevard with cross streets, you’re now impacting the region, not just city voters or City Light customers.
Shouldn’t suburban commuters have a say in that?
So I see The Stranger and Will and so forth waving a magic wand and saying we can make 30,000 to 40,000 vehicles a day simply “disappear” but I don’t see them asking the people who actually use AWV what they think of that idea.
@29 “was there any law broken?”
If the purpose was to interfere with prosecution of Republican crooks, the answer is yes. This crime is called “obstruction of justice.”
If the purpose was to instigate malicious prosecution of Democrats for nonexistent election fraud, the answer is yes. This crime is called “malicious prosecution.”
If false statements were made under oath to congressional committees about the reason(s) for these firings, the answer is yes. This crime is called “perjury.”
Any more questions?
35 Maybe it’s a matter of “build it, and they will come, don’t, and they won’t”. I don’t see where the officials who issued the permits for all the Belltown condos went and asked the good people of Burien if it was OK. Not that I think everything about those uppity-yuppity elevated f*ck boxes is wonderful, but yanno, that’s a lot of people who no doubt spend their nights and days in more or less the same place.
And if you’re talking about how we’re going to deal with “traffic” over the next few decades, how and where people are going to be living that far into the future indeed ought to be part of the discussion.
Some people will stubbornly continue to drive, no matter how much it takes to fuel up their buggies with whatever’s available–gasoline, alcohol, biodiesel, hydrogen, battery charge or melted yak fat. Other people will choose to take some sort of communal transit. Still others will see something to be gained in altering their lifestyle so they don’t have to cover a lot of miles between where they earn their daily bread and where they break it.
Much of the traffic that enters and exits the viaduct dumps into the city and comes out of the city. Those vehicles, although counted as viaduct trafic, went through the city to get onto or get off of the viaduct. So shutting it down would not have as big an impact as many think.
As Ernest might have said: “See what I’m sayin’, Vern?”
@30 “what the hell does that phrase mean”
I’m glad you asked this question, lucy, because the phrase “serves at pleasure” is easily (and widely) misunderstood.
The private-sector counterpart is “at will employment.” Let’s use, as an analogy, a company whose employees are employed “at will.” This means they don’t have a contractual right of continuing employment, and can be discharged at any time — generally speaking, for any reason, or no reason.
But wait! Let’s suppose the company fires an “at will” employee because she refused the boss’s sexual overtures. Is there a legal liability there? I don’t really need to answer that, do I, because we all know the answer — that company is going to eat a $500,000 judgment.
My point is, “at will” employees can be fired at the employer’s will for any reason, for no reason, or even a bad reason — as long as it’s not an illegal reason.
Now let’s go back to the U.S. Attorneys. It’s perfectly kosher for a new president to fire them all and appoint his own people. Most presidents do that. It raises no questions of illegality or impropriety.
Likewise, a sitting president can replace some or all of the U.S. Attorneys he appointed if he feels like it, and that ordinarily raises no issues, either. Only thing is, he can’t fire them to obstruct justice or because they refuse to file malicious charges against political opponents … because obstructing criminal investigations and malicious prosecution are crimes.
re 36: Not to worry,Roger! The president had no knowledge of the illegal doings of his appointed lackeys, so no crimes could have happened and when he didn’t know why other people were firing them, it was all “at the president’s pleasure” — which is perfectly legal!.
“Ya gotta unnerstan’ uh uh uh uhhhhhhhhh……….” George W. Bush
Aren’t the U District, Downtown, Capitol Hill, Roosevelt, Northgate, the Rainier Valley, International District etc. all in Seattle, and aren’t they all being connected in the near term in Sound Transit’s plans? And don’t people who live in Seattle sometimes work in Bellevue and vice-versa?
The idea that Sound Transit isn’t focused on Seattle is nutty. And the idea that Seattle would do better under Ed Murray’s suburban controlled regional government is even nuttier.
Seattle will lose big time in any regional government with a directly elected board because under any one-man-one-vote construction, which Murray is, amazingly, the leading advocate for, Seattle loses clout it enjoys now. Why Murray is getting away with this stunt in Seattle is one of life’s big mysteries.
Or maybe not, Murray has proven time and again that he can get attention promoting the idea and get votes out of one side of the legislature, provided his colleagues are sure that the bill will never be enacted. Which has been the silly history of this long running sideshow.
We should have a higher standard for politicians around here. Instead of measuring them by what they are FOR, we need to judge them by what they actually DO.
Murray’s ongoing regional drama is DOING NOTHING.
Guess what, Will, I’m happy with repairing it. I zipped right down it today while I-5 was bumper-to-bumper, and I expect to be doing the same 20 years from now.
So to say I “lost big” is just more of your usual juvenile ranting.
Rabbit-36 “Any more questions?”
Are you high?
There are hundreds of real prosecutors working the cases, with the lead dudes taking credit. Even when Clinton dumped the 93 the one who was about to indict Rostenkowski did not shut the case down. At most the indictment was delayed for a few months. Clinton later pardoned him, yet he was still able to fulfill the role of poster boy for the dems.
What about the complaints of the lefties regarding three of the fired eight? I thought so……
Seattle will lose big time in any regional government with a directly elected board because under any one-man-one-vote construction, which Murray is, amazingly, the leading advocate for, Seattle loses clout it enjoys now.
Want to know how Seattle could REALLY lose big? If ST2 and RTID get approved. That package is absolute crap from the standpoint of Seattle. Very little in road improvements. The train extension to Northgate would be fine, but BY FAR most of the taxes that get raised from Seattle would shoot off to Bellevue (light rail and roads), and Factoria and Pierce County (for roads).
Your head is up your ass, thor. Murray is representing his district wisely. And SB 5803 proves it.
I live in West Seattle and I would prefer a surface/rail option. People in West Seattle seem to believe if the Viaduct is torn down, they will be forced to take 4th Ave S or I5 into the city. Not quite, we will still have access to Northbound 99, it will just dump us off somewhere around the stadiums I would imagine. There will still be easy access to the city. What we will not have is as-easy access to Fremont or Green Lake. I, for one, am not comfortable subjecting the rest of the city to Roadzilla so I can get to Blue C quicker.
West Seattle should vote as a bloc “no” on RTID/ST2. It does nothing for us. That goes for Ballard (and points north and west of Ballard) as well.
Does anybody have serial for Windows Vista ? If you can help me just e-mail me it please. Thank you