Um…
Why not THIS?
Tunnel’s too expensive, Rebuild’s is stoopid as shit… Why not at least CONSIDER an option that has 1) worked in other cities 2) meets the city’s global warming goals 3) and is affordable AND attractive.
In a KUOW report in December, the Surface+Transit option was reportedly set aside by the Governor because (I’m paraphrasing and not making this up, I swear)
The Governor doesn’t know where all the cars will go.
Is that the scientific term?
she’s your bitch, so stop whining. Dopn’t be surprised when she runs off to hide on another “trade mission”.
I celebrate you fools getting exactly what you want… in this pathetic city, in this formerly great state and nationally.
The faster the non-thinkers see the ship your corrupt, stupid but political fools do, the quicker they will wake up and pay attention.
Finally we agree goldy. Tearing down infrastructure is the only way to move forward. You should be commended for taking action to reduce “global warming”.
I know you’re connected with the kook fringe. See if you can get algore to come here and give a speech against rebuild. Coupla hours of the gawd of global warming and the discussion would be fucking over.
Do it goldy. For the children…
Hey Rabbit – Since you’re broke, I’m wondering if you’d be interested in being a junior research assistant for me.
The post you made yesterday where you provided a link about global warming in souf pacific being part of a natural cycle is exactly the kind of “out of the box thinking” and unique perspective that’s needed in this debate.
Get back to me willya?
Let’s just and the rest of us can take the bus.
well…i guess you got what you and several thousand dead and or convicted people voted for…….
Go figure.
Maybe if Nickels and his council hacks count their revenues once more tommorrow, we can vote on an ultralight might mouse resurrection that passes through a tunnel of love on the waterfront.
I knew the righties would like this one…
But don’t jizz your jeans just yet:
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=2390
skimaxpower – singapore… which is a little country far away from here populated with many foreigners tried this a few years ago.
Singapore gummint decided that they would charge people a lot of money if they drove into the downtown core alone. Cars with 3 or more people got into the city for free.
In reponse those horrid “rich” people would recruit bums to ride with them into the city so they could get in free. The bums had nothing to do all day, so they mostly caused trouble and the crime rate skyrocketed.
After a while, they decided it was a dumb idea and shitcanned it. Like most librul ideas of social engineering it was a “dismal failure”.
This was an interesting tidbit “year-round economic vitality into a stagnant tourist zone”
Will having a park or some more shops bring in more vitality? Also, stagnant? The waterfront is bussling during our tourist season and still does business in the winter. I suppose a park would bring more people down in the pouring rain. Or I guess more homeless will be there so it will bring in more families and spure economic growth because they have tons of disposable income.
Fix missing or broken links in the larger road system and spread Viaduct traffic out
(If the link is missing it’s not a fix…its called create. What are the broken links thru downtown? I-5? 4th & 5th ave? The waterfront? Where do the cars go? You can’t expand those roads.)
Take advantage of excess capacity of the new transit systems coming on line
(excess capacity, because they don’t service where people live and they don’t want to use them. Though if this was to fix the metro system, then that might be a good thing. I used to take the bus downtown on the express still took 40 minutes from U dist. 65 min non rush hour. I did to save $$, but then stopped and parked in free spots in Pioneer square (taking spots the ferry folks use for their cars overnight then drive to work) and then take the bus or walk to work)
Create truck only lanes on important freight corridors to keep freight moving
(Not sure why this isn’t being done either way. No matter what we do, we need to make it easier for our freight to leave the port and get N, S & E.
Reduce demand with dense, walkable neighborhoods and disincentives for excessive driving.
(Ah hah! Just don’t let cars go there. That is fine. Why not say that in the heading. We don’t want cars in the city anymore. If you make it so people can’t drive they won’t. Thus business leave downtown because the workforce can’t get there.)
I am against a tunnel and rebuild. A retrofit seems to be the best solution and can be made to “not look ugly” (ever seen a brick facade?). A surface option will harm our city, unless moving traffic is the goal, which it isn’t. So why do it?
Here’s another great idea from MTR…
If we decide not to replace the AWV, then that frees up a whole shitload of money that could be used for other purposes.
I can think of no better use for these extra dollars than to give a bunch of millionnaires some true corporate welfare to build a third pro sports facility paid for by The Producers. Ya see… it’s not really a cost… it’s an investment that will pay back richly. Ummm… like the other two stadiums….
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ics18.html
C’mon… It’s “the right thing to do”. For the children…
will…geez…the crude mental images. i take it you don’t care that people think you are an idiot?
Gregoire loses my vote if she goes ahead with this. Fucking study the surface-transit option. We didn’t elect you so you could accelerate global warming in the “greenest” city in the country.
re 8: So you are saying that most rich people are so cheap that to save a fiver they will give free rides in their luxury cars to the hoards of suburban “bums” who want to take a field trip to the city and get the hell out of Issaquah for the day?
Don’t you ever stop to think? You are fuckin’hilarious.
http://www.thenation.com/classroom/
TEACHERS: FREE LESSON PLANS
“The Nation Classroom offers a unique alternative for college and high school educators looking for ways to encourage a healthy diversity of opinion while instilling in students the confidence to express themselves freely. The program features a FREE weekly teaching guide available below for 24 weeks during the fall and spring semesters, with breaks during the summer and December holidays.”
will…geez…the crude mental images. i take it you don’t care that people think you are an idiot?
Coming from an idiot such as yourself, why should we care?
http://www.thenation.com/image.....MU0luj8A==
Reading Comprehension
1 What is the connection between President Bush’s latest response to the situation in Iraq
and President Johnson’s actions regarding Vietnam forty years ago?
2
What is “network neutrality”?
3
In the context of globalization issues, what are “free riders”? How do they allegedly
harm America’s economy?
4
According to “Mutiny for the Bounty,” what are the major reasons why marine life
in the world’s oceans is dying off?
5
How have those pundits who supported the President’s policies on Iraq defended their
own comments and explained the reasons for the war’s failure, according to Eric Alterman?
http://www.thenation.com/image.....MU0luj8A==
1 When the war in Vietnam
did not go as
President Johnson hoped, he, like President
Bush did last week, ordered an escalation of
American troops instead of a withdrawal.
2
Network neutrality is the principle that all
Internet users must have equal access to all
websites.
3
Free riders are companies that have
moved much of their manufacturing offshore.
As a result, they enjoy the benefits of
being an American corporation while taking
on none of the obligations, which include
providing jobs, investing in the economy and
paying a fair share of taxes.
4
Marine life in our oceans is dying off
for several reasons, including: overfishing,
excessive runoff of fertilizers, sewage and
other land-based pollution, and increasing
carbon-dioxide emissions, which is making
seawater too acidic.
5
Their response is that the policy itself
— which they supported — wasn’t wrong,
the problem was in the execution of a policy
that was carried out incompetently.
Vocabulary:
aquifer: a water-bearing stratum of permeable
rock, sand or gravel • vortex: something
that resembles a whirlpool • denouement: the
outcome of a complex sequence of events •
insenates: lacking humane feeling • screed: a
lengthy discourse • panacea: a remedy for all
ills or difficulties • iteration: version, incarnation
• subsume: to include or place within
something larger or more comprehensive • narcissism:
love of or sexual desire for one’s own
body; egocentrism
So what should happen is that cameras will track frequent traffic on Alaskan Way, and frequent drivers will get bus passes in the mail. This will be a lot cheaper than a tunnel or a rebuild, and the money saved can finance the world’s largest professional hackey sack pavilion.
“The governor doesn’t know where all the cars will go.”
I don’t get the joke. Seems like a reasonable enough question to me.
It is a pipedream to think that if you tear down the viaduct we’ll all just deal with it. Actually, it’s worse than a pipedream. It’s foolish to take a good idea out of the context that made it work, apply it in an entirely different context, and think it’s going to work the same. Sure the ideas to fix the context sound nice; it’s just that they won’t work. If you screw up the traffic before you adjust the context to accept the change, all you’ve got is a big mess. So, for example, you tear down the viaduct. Who, exactly, is going to build condos downtown when you can’t get there? If you can’t build condos because no one will buy them because getting around downtown sucks in a massive way, then all you’ve done is made the problem worse.
The governor is right. This alternative is not worth spending time on.
17
#2 is close, but not the way I understand it. My interpretation of net neutrality is that all packets carried on the network are given the same priority regardless of their source or destination.
The difference is, under your definition it sounds like no one should censor porn sites, or Nazi web sites or sites promoting Falun Gong for instance. While that would be the end product of a truly laissez-faire society, in practice employers and governments tend to restrict employee access to llamasgonewild.com (or even the relatively tame suicidegirls.com). Germany bans at least some Nazi sites, and China tries to filter any mention of Falun Gong. So such things aren’t restricted to porn.
The real idea behind net neutrality is that network providers cannot give the GEs, the Viacoms, the Disneys and the AT&Ts of the world privileged treatment just because they can afford to pay better than Goldy or me or you. In practice that’s what makes the Internet what it is, where access to the ideas of flat-earthers, Republicans, Unitarian-Universalists and both the sanest and most wacked-out representatives of any belief system or philosophy you can think of all share a level playing field.
Problem solved. Build a tunnel, and replace the seawall with tons of fed money, and some money from the port, and railroad that need it to stay in business. Our state practically runs the congress, so let’s use some of our clout. Gonna be a lot cheaper than the big dig and other insanely stupid projects on the east coast. What we are short we can charge in tolls.
Gregoire needs to get cookin’ with Jim, Jay, Patty, Maria, Brian, and Norm and get the cash. Maybe even Reichert, if he is not too busy raising money to defend his seat next time.
The money we spend for 3 weeks in Iraq would build a gold plated tunnel with limo service for everyone.
@1 I can’t get enough of Gregoire, and I’m looking forward to getting at least 6 more years of her!
@3 Inasmuch as you haven’t paid Goldy, I assume you have no plans to pay me either, correct? I don’t work free, ya know. But keep pouring my gas in your Hummer, Reddick! I bought more oil stock this week.
@3 Hey Reddick — how do ya feel about Exxon jumping ship and joining the greens? Getting awful lonely over there in the “global-warming-is-bunk” corner! Are you next?
Ok, now that we’ve all had our fun, let me try to answer the question in the topic.
Because it’s pie-in-the-sky, fuzzy thinking.
The “other arterials” are already overcrowded almost to the point of total gridlock.
Everyone except the folks trying to move people, goods and services north and south throught Seattle.
Fine, but what about those goods and services?
Some of them described on the site include:
Nice thought, but there really isn’t any way to add much more capacity to those roads without knocking down a lot of very expensive buildings, and those streets are pretty crowded now.
More really busy streets lined with really expensive real estate.
Actually, those signals never seemed to be a problem. The jaywalkers, however, seem to keep traffic tied up pretty well. If you can figure out how to time them for better flow, you might have a solution here.
Essentially, putting a lot more traffic onto already overcrowded urban streets is downtown Seattle’s way of saying “go drive somewhere else”.
In one sense, they have a point. The whole argument for fixing or replacing the viaduct is that it is a corridor for people, goods and services going through downtown Seattle. The streets and other arterials probably are sufficient for people, goods and services going to or from Seattle.
Once the viaduct is gone, and this idea is “tried”, noone will be able to rebuild the viaduct, or even put in a tunnel. Some sort of bypass road will be required, and considering the topography of the area, it will be a very expensive road. But, since the alternative will be to let the economy grind to a screeching halt, it will eventually get built.
Perhaps “I don’t know where all the cars will go” isn’t a very scientific term, but it is a pretty accurate description of the problem.
It isn’t like this problem just came up this week. We’ve all known for years that the viaduct was going to need either major repair or replacement. Something will be built to deal with all that traffic. “Go drive somewhere else” isn’t an option, unless downtown Seattle wants to foot the bill.
Personally, I rather liked the bridge option. It was prettier than the viaduct and seemed to have less potential for construction disaster than the tunnel. It also had the additional advantage that we could keep the viaduct open during construction. I’d even vote to pay for it using tolls.
Unfortunately, Bechtel’s bridge people are busy putting in an unwanted bridge down here in Pierce County (for which we thank all of you Seattle voters) and their tunnel folks are done helping out the good people of Boston, so the bridge idea was doomed from the start.
But, being that I don’t live in Seattle, I don’t get a vote on this. My only real concern is that people, goods and services that start out north of Seattle can get to me over here in Gig Harbor. I do get a vote on whether a major state highway gets eliminated for the benefit of downtown Seattle landowners.
Even someone living here in Gig Harbor can see that trying to spread the viaduct traffic onto the other arterials going through Seattle is an absurd idea. Your traffic is already so bad that I don’t even consider driving over there. I’ll simply do without anything beyond walking distance from the ferry terminal.
@8 “In reponse those horrid “rich” people would recruit bums to ride with them into the city so they could get in free. The bums had nothing to do all day, so they mostly caused trouble and the crime rate skyrocketed.”
Exactly what I expect from the freeloading rich! “Bus” criminals into the city to get out of paying a fucking toll. Ain’t that just like a fascist?
Ever been to Singapore, Reddick? I spent my R & R there. A whole week with a whore in Singapore! Man, that was great — as long as you remember all the fucking rules. No spitting on the streets there — the dictatorship canes you for that. Chewing gum gets you thrown in jail! And for God’s sake don’t let anyone here you criticizing the dictator! But you don’t have to worry about the voting machines malfunctioning, because there aren’t any.
hear not here
@10 So who wants to give the Sonics a taxpayer-financed stadium? Wasn’t there an election on that recently? Didn’t 99% of the voters say “No!”?
@13 Yeah, that’s what he’s saying, and for once he’s right. They didn’t get rich by paying for things.
@21 This ground has already been plowed, and what federal money there is to be got, has already been got.
“We can transfer trips now made on the Viaduct to other arterials”
“The ‘other arterials’ are already overcrowded almost to the point of total gridlock”
What other arterials? Third Street?
Sorry Roger. The quotes were from the “let’s just tear it down” (http://www.peopleswaterfront.org/ ) website. I didn’t make that clear enough. I agree with you that the “other arterials” described are not a practical alternative, unless the real goal is to simply make it too hard to move goods and services through Seattle.
The way I see it may be subjective rather than objective, but if you tear down the viaduct then you may as well bulldoze West Seattle at the same time.
If not for the viaduct I and many thousands of others would be trapped here 4 to 8 hours a day. The traffic is already insane on the existing structure and cutting through town during some off peak hours only works now because most people don’t know the backstreets of the city well enough to use some of the lesser known arterials. Once a hundred thousand of us are forced to share them they too will become impassable and the local residents will live in permanent gridlock on the cross Queen Ann arterials, the east lake to green lake arterials and others including all the street level fighting between trains, drawbridges and the already destroyed surface streets used by the port traffic.
Anyone who remembers the traffic nightmare after the earthquake cannot support the tear it down faction and belief in global warming has nothing to do with it.
Will apparently has a belief that cars idling on surface streets are better for the environment than when on the viaduct, upon which they get from Seattle Center to the West Seattle Bridge must faster than on the Avenues. Goldy presents his subjective, apocryphal observations of traffic on the viaduct when he uses it, challenging a reality West Seattle residents see for themselves. I don’t recall that David named the route that would have been better for him, even without the competition from traffic no longer on a through route.
Just a couple of gas-bags without their plugs. Never a serious answer to the obvious problem of reducing traffic capacity from those two worthies.
I think Frank Chopp’s time has come to step down and move on. The jackass is completely out of touch with his voters and I’m tired of his vendictive arrogant attitude.
re 20: Good Point! I, too, want to restrict minors from viewing porn and to ban certain types of porn altogether. But I fear that those who want to restrict information and political speech could care less (really) about porn.
They just want to establish the principle that censorship is OK and then whittle away at your freedom.
The bastards never give up — and neither should we.
26 Maybe there’s a novel idea implied here…it should be OK to recruit street people to get you in the carpool lanes as long as you take ’em home for the night.
I’m still waiting to hear the true price of the so called rebuild. If you remember, the rebuild was supposed to be the same footprint as the original, now it’s turned into a full blown mega freeway (50% wider so it will have Federally mandated shoulders on both sides). The price somehow didn’t increase as much as the project did.
The price of tunnel went through the roof even though that project stayed the same size. Go figure.
You’re wrong, Uptown – the current rebuild estimate is for a new AWV with wider shoulders. The price did rise some following the Governor’s Expert Panel review, but not as much as the tunnel (because, surprise surprise, tunnels tend to be more expensive).