Blethen the Younger is all pissy ‘cos voters didn’t vote his way:
Seattle voters gave politicians a free pass to spend more political capital on a one-mile stretch of highway, when a vote for the elevated rebuild could have ended the debate. All Seattle voters had to do was use reason on a nonbinding vote to let Olympia, the Seattle City Council and the mayor’s office know that a rebuild is the best option for the city and region.
What a load of garbage! Seattle voters saw their options, and they said “we can do better.” Some folks want a surface option that uses transit and other improvements to move freight and people. I know several voters who chose “No-No” because they want to retrofit the viaduct. Neither was on Tuesday’s ballot.
The Seattle Times Editorial Page has a history of treating their readers like retarded children, but this column is just too much.
Yeah well he lives in Magnolia, what do you expect? Everyone who grew up in the city knows that both Queen Anne and Magnolia are islands, accessible only with difficult crossing.
The state didn’t build the AWV, the city did it with the feds money, and behind closed doors. It was a bad idea then, and it’s a bad idea now. Travel patterns will adapt, and if bad traffic hurts pricey real estate in Magnolia and Queen Anne because it is no longer practical to commute, so be it.
That is what we’re really talking about, commuter traffic. Don’t drive first thing in the AM or near dinner time, and you can get where you want without too much trouble.
I DON’T GIVE ONE FRICKIN’ PENNY TO THAT FISH WRAPPER. WHEN THOSE FOOLS CALL ME ON THE PHONE, I HANG UP IMMEDIATELY.
I URGE EVERYONE TO DO THE SAME UNTIL THE BLETHENS SELL TO PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE SANE. KNIGHT-RIDDER WOULDN’T BE A HALF BAD BUYER.
Reading that got me so mad I felt like going out and shooting my neighbor’s dog.
I have no dog-in-the-fight about this “AWV rebuild or the tunnel controversy.” Can anyone tell me what they’re actually going to do, or is that question still unanswered?
Can anyone tell me what they’re actually going to do
900 MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF NON-CONTROVERSIAL UPGRADES AT THE NORTH AND SOUTH ENDS OF THE CORRIDOR WHILE THEY FIGURE OUT THE NEXT STEP.
VALERIE PLAME TESTIFIED IN FRONT OF CONGRESS TODAY AND THE FIRST QUESTION OUT OF THE GATE WAS: WERE YOU COVERT? MUST HAVE ASKED THAT A DOZEN TIMES!
THE ANSWER IS: YES!
DO YOU HEAR THAT JANET STUPID? WHEN NOVAKULA WAS WRITING THE BRAINDEAD COLUMN THAT OUTED HER PLAME WAS COVERT!
BUT JANET STUPID WON’T ADMIT IT BECAUSE IT CONTRADICTS THE TALKING POINTS COMING FROM VICTORIA TOESTINK.
Waah Waah. So Blethen feels like Charley Brown trusting Lucy to hold the football for his kick? Give me a break! The analogy is a stretch. It only reveals Blethen acting like a spoiled power broker, as if the AWV decision was his alone. And what is with his “most important” need for the viaduct to get to Costco? He cares so little for nearby neighborhood stores he will only shop at Costco? Is he a paranoid masochist? Blethens response strengthens the argument for the surface + transit alternative.
Would Blethen make the cut as an editorial writer if he didn’t inherit the position? Silly question.
Aaron is sorta right about this. The commute is sometimes a little slow to Queen Anne and Magnolia. But most of the time even the commute is a breeze. Pretty much the same heading to West Seattle.
The improvements now moving foward south of downtown (thanks to the vote) will actually help Ryan get to Costco and to Mercer Island family events easier, in his car. And they will really help West Seattle get downtown and back and help things move through the port.
And most of the time the Viaduct moves amazingly well. And even when its mostly empty, you move about 45 mph, depending on which stretch, and the speed limit is 50 MPH the whole way.
Seattle just rejected two really pricey freeway plans. The Viaduct is an arterial. The highway engineers should treat its replacement that way. That’s the pragmatic thing to do. And that’s the way the city and the state both benefit.
The Seattle Times swallowed the state highway engineer’s dreams of a pricey new freeway whole hog. Thank goodness the voters didn’t listen to them. And thanks to the Governor, the Mayor and the County Executive for listening to them now.
Ryan’s editorial exposed a lazy whiney reporter in tune with his Dad’s debunked Kemper Freeman-like sensibilities on these matters. This nut did not fall far from the tree.
Dave… you’re behind this silly surface/transit thing? Oh please, say it isn’t so!
Dollar-for-dollar, money spent on roads serves 10-50 times as many people as money spent on transit. And transit is entirely irrelevant in the context of the viaduct because almost nobody who uses it is a candidate to substitute transit as their mode of travel.
The answer here is so, sooo obvious that I can’t believe we are still bickering about it. We need an eight-lane tunnel. Anything less is a waste of my money.
@1 No, travel patterns won’t adapt. Seattle has many times the population and traffic it did in 1954, and far fewer options for creating new transportation corridors. Seattle is a north-south strip city, and always will be, because of geography. (At least, until the Big One, at which time it may become an island city.) The very idea of reducing traffic speed and capacity on one of the city’s only two north-south corridors is ludicrous.
@3 May I make a suggestion for your dogicidal moods? There’s plenty of unleashed dogs here in Green Lake Park that need shooting! Not that I particularly have anything against dogs …
@4 They’re going to start the work on the north and south approaches, and defer a decision on the middle section that includes the viaduct until after the 2008 election, presumably to solicit more public input and take a closer look at the surface + transit option. The tunnel is dead; an elevated structure is still on the table, but not the shoo-in it was a couple months ago.
spring training for budding editorial writers. another strikeout.
Could Ryan explain why the 520 bridge is “super-regionally important” to anyone except Bellevue suburbanites, given that 520 is a 5-mile-long dead-end highway that doesn’t go anywhere except to Bellevue?
Ryan hasn’t figured it out yet: If The Times is for it, it will be defeated.
Rabbit @ 15
You need to hop around more. The 520 connects the East side, which I am sure you know include anything east of I-5, and where one hell of a lotta people live. You know where the CAO was imposed, because so much growth has happened.
I really think it is pathetic to waste all that money on a vote that now puts that crumbling AWV on hold until 2008. You people in King County, and Seattle sure know how to take care of things.
But Hey, you guys elect em, you gotta love em. You people wont be able to blame the rest of the state when the AVW crumbles. Remember the Gov said so…….
@17 “The 520 connects the East side, which I am sure you know include anything east of I-5, and where one hell of a lotta people live.”
Yeah, but they’re all Republicans, so let ’em build their own fucking bridge. They like to privatize our stuff, so let’s privatize their stuff.
Tne Bumbershoot Project: Cover Seattle up.
The illogical outcome of the claim that Seattle MUST support the Viaduct because the State needs it, is that eventually we will pave Seattle over with an expanded I5 and I99.
This makes great sense. We could simply lid the city, with portals for the tallest buildings. A continous I 5 would extend form the peak of first hill to the western edge of the current I 5. Sky ramps would then run to I99, not merely six lanes but wide enough to bring a level field from first Ave to Elliot bay. Sky ramps would connect the two ribbons in the sky as forseen in the Jetson. This would provide unlimited NS traffic. The remainder of the city would then be shielded perfectly from rain by freeway park extensions that would fill the spaces between the Sky ramps.
That way the stadia would not need roofs! We could host the world convention of foosball enthusiasts in Safeco Field!
Seattle would be truly a world leader! As Venice sinks, Seattle would rise!
Rabbit, though you may be annoyingly verbose, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Repeating yourself ad infinitem does not strengthen your argument. Rebuilding the AWV will only lead to more traffic congestion, not less, as has always been the case with freeway expansion worldwide. It may not be obvious from the drivers seat, but the only real answer is to drive less. The only real solution is to formulate urban and suburban environments whereby more occupations, services and amenities can be arranged and built closer to home, and accessible walking, bicycling and with mass transit. Hint: scraping off Issaquah’s high hillsides for view housing only creates a travel demand that can’t be met other than by driving. Why is it so many Seattlers can’t see this? Hello? Duuuuuh! Has the TV hypnotized the lot of you? Are you on drugs, man?
Maybe global warming will make all these problems moot.
wells@20
BUT … the lidded Seattle solves everything. Bicycle riding under a dome! Scrubbers to clean out air! Monrails HUNG from the roof so they do not obstruct traffic.
Support the Seattle Bumbershoot option