And follow through with your swing.

DOUG. I confess. I know that's a cheap shot, but you made me laugh.

Ha! Thanks for the hilarious post : )

You'd look great in a beret.

Viva la Surface Transit Option!

Revolution!

ECB - careful, you may be seen as objectifying womens' breasts with that picture. But thanks for the insight on "coordination". He pulled out the Hitler card. Sheesh. By any chance, were you the one chiming in with "Cars suck"?

I have asked this question before... has *anyone* ever seen a CONTAINER truck use the Viaduct?!!? They virtually all already use Spokane or Atlantic/Martinez....

Anyway -- vote NO and NO!!!

If only it were true. (but keep the Storm cause they don't suck)

you twist facts, cherrypick data, and ignore reality through wish fulfillment (people will stop driving because you can force them to; how grandiose). he may have not done it well, but you shouldn't be surprised that you're being ridiculed.

Oh, and by the way - tear that schitt down.

in seattle i fear that people are so used to being told what to do by the city council et al that unless a bill is passed explaining what streets to drive on and when, nobody is going to have a clue what the expectations are and they'll make the already clogged freeways worse.

And I'd dispute your view of San Francisco as successful. I know that data is not the plural of anecdote, but I've driven through that part of town on a Saturday afternoon, and it makes Northgate to downtown at that time look like a racetrack.

@20:
You're right. Piss-poor satire, but the target is very much deserving.

@13:
Let me put this as gently as possible: Set down the inflatable doll and try to take a walk outside for once. Just out to the sidewalk will do for now.

note, i'm as skeptical as you. i'm only parroting the references made by the author to make a later point. i don't personally understand how any of those cities can be held up as shining examples of success when all of them are painfully bad to drive in.

it proves my point though that it is a case of the blind leading the blind, and that's how the seattle majority seems to want it.

I'm fairly familiar with Portland, and I don't recall their ever tearing a viaduct down. I suppose the viaduct haters are tearing a page out of the GOP playbook and just making stuff up.

Here's a very balanced piece from the Chronicle on SF's Octavia Blvd. (formerly Central Freeway)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/09/13/BAGP6EMIOR1.DTL

wikipedia has some facts on redevelopment post-Embarcadero removal here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Embarcadero_(San_Francisco)

Here's NYC looking to SF for lessons from Embarcadero removal:

http://www.nycsr.org/nyc/video-view.php?id=27

Even Milwaukee has figured out that freeways in dense urban areas aren't real smart:

http://www.mkedcd.org/parkeast/newsletters/ParkEastNews0302.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbor_Drive

I do know they put I-405 in through downtown Portland, though, and I-5 still occupies the east bank of the Willamette River.

Repair-to-prepare is the only honest surface + transit option, and the "prepare" part needs to be a solid plan and not someone's wishful thinking based on "cars are icky." Otherwise it's not a page from the GOP playbook, but a page from the underpants gnomes. That whole Step 2 thing is a pain, isn't it?

Well done! Joel is so smart to point out that only fascists would suggest that Americans learn to get out of our cars before the planet melts. I'm looking forward to more of your spot-on humor and commentary in the future.