« Sexual Immorality |
Fuck Garrison Keillor »
on March 14 at
City council member Peter Steinbrueck, ring-leader of the anti-elevated pro-surface/transit avengers, talks about the night’s victory….
i dig the "slog" mic.
go Peter go!
Now when can I donate to your mayoral campaign?
Help us, Peter Steinbrueck- you're our only hope...
since the ballot was advisory - the rebuild won and will go forward - screams and howls of the mortally wounded
some of these people are in love with their own shadows and need to get a clue
two options, which is the less supported by voters, tunnel, MORE SUPPORTED-REBUILD
carrie moon is a winner, she is bright and intelligent, and a potential leader if she can get her own identity going separate from the nononononononononno - doom gloom doom gloom crowd
The vote was "hell no" and no. S&T should now take all the data gathered over the years STI, ICT, STP etc and put together the plan. This really isn't rocket science and with SDOT and Metro working on it a plan should be put together in a couple of months. Then the city should do a poll of the options.
You'd think that after the Monorail debacle, the Stranger nose rings would show a bit of caution.
Here's a thought: assume for a moment that the surface-transit options has some appeal, that leaves Seattle with just one major corridor. Suppose there's an accident on that one corridor, or an earthquake, suppose that one corridor is shut down for repairs...then what? How would your newsrags own delivery trucks get through the city?
Gang, it's fine to denounce the car but let's get real here.
Hey @ 6, how is SR99 a "corridor" without I5? If I5 was unusable, some combination of 405 and I90/520 would be much more important, no?
Steinbrueck didn't "ring-lead" anything." He merely recognized a no-risk chance to run in front of the parade route and convince some fools to carry him on their shoulders.
Aye smarm. Its called politics. Now he has an issue he can run against Greg with. Peter is a smart politician.
It's worked for some people. Lets see, Nick and the stadium, David " I have no clue" Della and Seattle city light, Judy and renter's rights, Jean " goofy moral crusade" Godden.
Hell, its hard to beat incumbents so whatever you can take-grab it. Most voters arent all that informed so if there is a sexy issue, they will vote on that. Sometimes they vote out good incumbents like Judy, but sometimes they can also vote out duds like Greg.
The important thing is that Greg is in trouble, and Peter is a legitimate candidate. As far as Gregoire, I doubt that this will hurt her. Besides, if Hillary wins, she is our next AG.
Not that this time or place for an analysis that doesn't support the day after cheering - but it would seem that 75% of the vote was pro road capacity. Some voters may have voted yes-yes and maybe elections will give us the breakout but many voted no-no to reject the process and support other points of view than S&T - both repair and retrofit camps asked for a no-no vote.
As I said in an earlier post - the data is available - no new study needs to be done. One piece that I don't think has been studied is a tunnel from the north end of AWB through Denny Hill to Aurora - this would create a busy boulevard on the waterfront but might address the issues of many S&T skeptics - buses, buses, and more buses is not enough.
@7: Highway 99 is as much a "corridor" as 405 and I-5. What travels through on Highway 99 isn't using I-5 to get through (or in some alternate universe, I-405 for that matter, as if someone going from Burien to Ballard would go over or around Lake Washington to go between those points). The fact will be that I-5 will be further stressed unless real ways are found to relieve that stress. It won't just be a simple matter of more buses. Look at Manhattan as an example where traffic crawls much of the day on the surface.
Highway 99 can't just go away without proper transit improvements. We're 30 years from having that scenario if we start today, so what will it be? Gridlock? Probably.
The surface people may win this battle, but I suspect their war will be lost when people see that there isn't anything other than signal changes and more buses mingled with cars in their plans. A lot of people in the city don't get that in the vision the surface people put forward Highway 99 as a through route disappears. When that fact comes out, the tone of the debate will change within the city I suspect.
If something connects through to the Battery Street tunnel and you can get through the city in a north south fashion, even via a surface route, I'm for it when it's attached to a comprehensive rapid transit plan for the inner city.
The vote results give potential life to some of the vision given by Moon, the PWC and The Stranger. It's time for Moon, Steinbrueck, Savage, Feit and Barnett et al to now put their money where their mouth is. They can no longer just put up glossy pictures of cartoon sized viaducts and kids on skateboards.
I'm going to the 34th District Dems meeting tonight in West Seattle. I suspect that meeting will be very interesting.
Tell me one more time why a lack of a decision aside from summary rejection on a non-binding advisory ballot in a city with poor transportation and worsening traffic and incompetent leadership is a victory for anyone. Because I'm unclear. I mean, it looks like you all went to some nice parties and got to make fun of people, but that's what you do all the time anyway, right?
Actually, forget it. I don't care anymore. I've lived here for almost four decades now. It's time to move.
People do realize that cities like Vancouver, BC have NO freeways running through them, right?
And that the Viaduct was originally conceived and built because it was the only corridor through Seattle at the time?
Before I-5, SR-99 was the route into the City, and the Waterfront was the front door. Today, with I-5, we no longer need this as a primary corridor, and the waterfront should be our "backyard" to play in.
Right on #13.
The problem is that buildings come and go, but roads are forever.
However, we should prioritize roads for freight, deliveries, bikes, travel-on-foot, and buses FIRST and single-occupancy vehicles second.
Another non-binding advisory vote. Gee, we are just about at the same level as the US Congress. When did rule of the people via elected representatives become the people just saying "Could you please do the right thing? Pretty Please?"
Am I the only one who has noticed this "delightful" trend in our system?
"75% of the vote was pro road capacity"
So . . . 125% of the vote was anti-road capacity? I'm confused. That's too many percents.
I love hearing from people who think the Port and the downtown are the "backyard". Let me guess: you want mommy and daddy to let you go play there? Maybe we should build a swingset where the ferry terminal is.
Bah, it's the same with the initiative process. For better or worse, everyone wants -and gets - their voice heard. But then you just have utter confusion. Ie, "no and hell no!" That means no 4-lane tunnel. But a 6-lane tunnel maybe? Or surface transit? No wait, we should repair and retrofit. Well, a rebuild got more votes, so maybe that.
The assumption is that not many people voted yes/yes. I suggested replacing this vote with a poll from the beginning and still think that would be the way to gather information.
The pro S&T vote would max out at 55% since no S&T supporter except Will voted for the viaduct. :D
#17: What are you referring to? I used to live blocks from downtown, so technically, it is in my backyard. If I had a yard.
#20 - no, you don't have a yard. And it wouldn't be in your backyard. It's not a yard. It's a city. Or pretends to be.
He's borin and she's sexy ;)
Jeez, Fnarf @ 17,
I'm not talking about putting in a sandbox and inviting classmates over for cookies and punch...
Seattle's "backyard" could feature a bike trail, good restaurants, outdoor concert space, sculpture gardens and museums.
The point is when they ripped I-5 through the city in the 50's and built the Ship Canal bridge, the Interstate became the main throughfare bringing most visitors (and residents) into the Downtown core.
We may still need to consider options for moving LOTS of cars along the waterfront, but we don't need a second freeway.
we don't need a second freeway.
Right let's get rid of I-5 and 520! 99 was first. :D
Well, well. If you Surface Option (PLUS TRANSIT, man!! SERIOUSLY!!) people actually get your way, you better get it done and done well. If you don't, they're'll be a lottery to see who gets to super glue the clown noses to yiz.
Meaning: I hope you actually have a plan.
But, that aside, I did love hearing Steinbloke roaching Sharkanfsky (who called in to complain) on KUOW this morning. He worked him pretty good. I crowned a pee drop in laughter.
Well, since 405 is being widened as part of RTID anyway, why don't we just swap the numbers and move the mainline 5 designation to the eastside? Move the thru traffic where there the lanes are.
Fnarf @17. There are some really cool mixed industrial & environmental parks all over town. Check out the city and state parks web pages. Matter of fact a huge number of our city parks already have industrial use cross over. Treatment plant at Discovery Park, railroad tracks & marina at Golden Gardens, there are even canoe & kayak portages along the Duwamish, all the reservoirs, it's a long list. Seattle is one of the most terrain modified cities in the world, and it was done mainly for industry, not scenic beauty. There's no wrong in getting a little more beauty and public space into the city.
NO news is good news!
Realistically, the result was obvious.
Dude, you're getting a Viaduct!
But with bonus extra transit.
I have a surface plan, and it will blow your mind...
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).
All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave
Seattle, WA 98122