Tuesday, December 16, 2008
City Where Did People Get the Idea...
Posted by Dan Savage on Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 9:08 AM
...that they have some sort of constitutional right to drive through the center of a city at 50+ miles an hour? Yes, pulling down the Alaskan Way Viaduct—which no one would propose building today if we hadn't been dumb enough to build it then—and replacing it with a boulevard that reconnects the city to its waterfront may add a few minutes to some peoples' commutes. Tough shit. Cities are crowded places, and it usually takes a little time to get from one end of a city to another. Building or rebuilding freeways that encourage sprawl—and encourage a sense of supreme entitlement on the part of drivers—is not in any city's best interest. And a city can survive and thrive without freeways, highways, and expressways cutting through their hearts.
Anyone ever been to Vancouver, BC?
Don't want a long commute? Move closer to work—which means you may have to sacrifice a little bit of living space, or that yard. Don't want to move closer to work? Then you're to blame for the length of your commute and no one should have to listen to you bitch about it.
Share via
1
what about poor people that can't afford to move closer to work?
oh wait, im using arguments against you that are often used against me
oh wait, im using arguments against you that are often used against me
2
Or at least toll it.
Oh wait. Apparently if we charge so much as a dollar, they won't use it. Shows how much they really want it.
Oh wait. Apparently if we charge so much as a dollar, they won't use it. Shows how much they really want it.
4
dan, hoping that people choose against their immediate short-term interests in favor of aesthetics & urbanism is hoping against human nature.
horrible, selfish apes. all of us. monotheists included.
horrible, selfish apes. all of us. monotheists included.
5
Spoken like somebody who lives walking distance from work already.
If you supported the monorail (I know I did) based on the fact that it shortened that particular commute then it doesn't make a lot of sense to turn around and say shorter commute times aren't worth spending public money on. If the argument is against enabling automotive transit then make that argument.
If you supported the monorail (I know I did) based on the fact that it shortened that particular commute then it doesn't make a lot of sense to turn around and say shorter commute times aren't worth spending public money on. If the argument is against enabling automotive transit then make that argument.
6
Sounds like someone's favored position got its ass handed to it at a public hearing last night.
God forbid people should want to get home in the same reasonably timely manner they have for the last 50+ years (unless, of course, they are Dan Savage complaining about how long it takes to get back to Capitol Hill from SeaTac in a cab because he's afraid to take the 194).
God forbid people should want to get home in the same reasonably timely manner they have for the last 50+ years (unless, of course, they are Dan Savage complaining about how long it takes to get back to Capitol Hill from SeaTac in a cab because he's afraid to take the 194).
7
The problem is that city living is really expensive. Most people would love to live in or closer to the city, but can't afford it.
8
#3, the viaduct will be shut down without an alternative for years anyway and everyone will manage. Pretty sure people will be buying houses again in a few years.
9
where exactly does this urban model exist where everyone who works downtown also lives downtown? not everyone who works retail at pacific place, or waits tables at palace kitchen, or tosses fish at pike place can afford a belltown condo. your argument is fucking ridiculous, dan.
10
Dan, not all of us just go to an office and type all day. I use the viaduct almost daily to get things from my suppliers, deliver finished goods, and get to midday meetings with customers. Also, last time I checked, there was no problem walking from downtown to the waterfront. This "reconnecting the city with its waterfront" thing is crap. Having a surface street like Aurora Ave. will be a much larger disconnection than an elevated highway. Have you ever walked across Aurora, Dan? Leave the surface solution preaching to ECB, she does a more convincing job.
11
I agree with Dan in regards to the commuters, but I wonder if a boulevard option will have a large impact on commercial traffic. Have they been vocal in support of the viaduct option?
13
Why should the poor commuters be punished for choosing to live in West Seattle and work in the Port of Seattle? The viaduct is VITAL to that very important segment of the community!
15
amen, banna. west seattle is getting the shaft on this- and it's one of the last neighborhoods where working folks can actually afford to buy houses! but who the hell cares about them, they should quit their whining and move downtown like dan!
16
I agree that we should tear it down, but come on, Dan. The whole "just move closer or shut up" argument doesn't work for people who can't afford the higher prices here. What are they supposed to do, cram the family into a one bedroom apartment and give up the pets? Or just suffer? I'm an environmental professional, and the kind of argument you're making just turns off the people we need to reach because it makes people feel like you have no concept of how they live. This country, unfortunately, was designed around roads after we tore down the rails. To think that most people can just give up their cars within a few years is ignorant.
17
Why should the poor commuters be punished for choosing to live in Madison Park and work in Boeing Field? Build an elevated superhighway from Madison Park to Georgetown NOW!
18
The viaduct is there to get people past the downtown quickly. Downtown should be a destination. More people should be living there, possibly in the area the existing viaduct takes up. Developing that land with parks and living space would be more attractive in many ways. Just giving it to drivers because they are addicted to their cars and whine about it all the time because they are afraid of not being able to get through the city fast enough is an outdated concept.
Fuck just get on with it already! It is like the Berlin wall dividing the city from the waterfront. The only ones that benefit from the Viaduct are drivers and pigeons, both shit on everything.
Fuck just get on with it already! It is like the Berlin wall dividing the city from the waterfront. The only ones that benefit from the Viaduct are drivers and pigeons, both shit on everything.
19
Vancouver has the SkyTrain.
And driving in Vancouver proper (particularly to/from/in those parts where the SkyTrain doesn't go) sucks nads.
Cart, horse.
And driving in Vancouver proper (particularly to/from/in those parts where the SkyTrain doesn't go) sucks nads.
Cart, horse.
20
You don't have to live downtown to make your commute shorter. So, yeah, people can afford to live in a convenient spot, use public transportation or walk (!), and get to work/home in a timely manner. They would just have to sacrifice some space and maybe a car. Boo-fucking-hoo. We should refuse to empathize with those who choose to drive (often one person per car!) and get stuck in a traffic in a densely populated area with other people who chose the same thing. Plus, yes, the viaduct is hideous and there are stretches of the waterfront that could be utilized by businesses and public parks which is a whole hell of a lot more beneficial to all of us.
21
I'm all for an open waterfront, but I'm willing to concede that I'm just a tad jaded by the fact that I live on Capitol Hill and work in North Seattle, so my commute never takes me anywhere near the Viaduct (thank god). If I had to use it everyday, and the boulevard added an extra 1+ hours to my commute, I'm sure I'd think differently.
(After all, that's 1+ hours that could be spent with your kid, right Dan?)
To harp on those who need the Viaduct, when you yourself don't have a car and rarely even find yourself needing to use the Viaduct, shows clear bias and lack of empathy on the part of the writer.
(After all, that's 1+ hours that could be spent with your kid, right Dan?)
To harp on those who need the Viaduct, when you yourself don't have a car and rarely even find yourself needing to use the Viaduct, shows clear bias and lack of empathy on the part of the writer.
22
Christ, Dan. Grow up. I don't think anyone insists that they have a constitutional right to a decent traffic system, but it sure does make it better for the ALL of us to have something that works.
Until you've had to deal personally with 1) driving, and 2) not being able to afford moving closer to work--let alone moving every damn time you have to change jobs (some of us have to deal with layoffs and taking the next possible job, unlike you)--please keep your idiotic self-righteousness to yourself.
Until you've had to deal personally with 1) driving, and 2) not being able to afford moving closer to work--let alone moving every damn time you have to change jobs (some of us have to deal with layoffs and taking the next possible job, unlike you)--please keep your idiotic self-righteousness to yourself.
23
... tear the @#$%ing thing down and use the replacement money to seed construction of rapid transit from West Seattle, through downtown and then over to Ballard/Crown Hill.
No more road projects! Come on Seattle - time to quit pretending to be green. Put your money where your mouth is!
No more road projects! Come on Seattle - time to quit pretending to be green. Put your money where your mouth is!
24
Who the fuck cares about the waterfront? There is plenty of it elsewhere in the City.
Viaduct - a great divide my ass. You can walk right under it pretty easily last time I checked. Now an Aurora Blvd along the waterfront - that will be a little more difficult to cross.
Viaduct - a great divide my ass. You can walk right under it pretty easily last time I checked. Now an Aurora Blvd along the waterfront - that will be a little more difficult to cross.
25
@19 - yeah, SkyTrain makes up for a lot, and we can't build more fast enough.
Then again, we still have the Georgia Viaduct, the one gaping exception to how proud everyone is of Vancouver's lack of freeways. Here's hoping it's gone soon, too.
Then again, we still have the Georgia Viaduct, the one gaping exception to how proud everyone is of Vancouver's lack of freeways. Here's hoping it's gone soon, too.
27
Right fucking on Dan. The days of freeways and unfettered auto abuse are numbered, it is time for a new direction.
28
I take the Viaduct to work most days, as it's the most convenient route for me. And I want it torn down. A fast, highway-speed commute to our downtown core using my own private vehicle is a luxury. Or at least it should be.
29
The whole point of being in a city is you have access to everyone else, in business and socially, so when you destroy mobility you are destroying city-ness.
You might as well say "OK our plan is to cut off West Seattle and make it take as long to get there as it does to get to Bremerton."
Not what cities are about.
It shouldn't take an hour to get from West Seattle to North Seattle but that is what is being planned here.
Tax 'em, fuck 'em and call them whiners.
Very hip 'n' classy.
You might as well say "OK our plan is to cut off West Seattle and make it take as long to get there as it does to get to Bremerton."
Not what cities are about.
It shouldn't take an hour to get from West Seattle to North Seattle but that is what is being planned here.
Tax 'em, fuck 'em and call them whiners.
Very hip 'n' classy.
32
I love how people with money tell us poor people how we should move closer to work, but they won't lift a finger to try to get true affordable housing (studios under $700 a month, 1 bedroom less than $900) built within the city. But we live in a state who is controlled by property developers so that will never happen.
33
Why should the poor commuters be punished for choosing to live in Ballard and work in Issaquah? Build an elevated superhighway from Ballard to Issaquah NOW!
35
Not everyone can afford a big house on Capital Hill, most people can't even afford the condos in/near town. I know I'd sure like to move into something bigger than my 500 square foot studio I've lived in for almost 5 years but it's not exactly feasible, nor does it seem like it will be in the near future if I want to continue living in the city. You don't even ride the bus Dan so maybe shut up about "dealing with it" a little bit, mmmmk?
36
You mean cities like Chicago, where you're from, that has a big ol' expressway running through the central waterfront? Or Boston -- hey, how about them? They took down the Central Artery but they sure as hell left Storrow Drive in place. Or any number of other vibrant cities.
Tearing an expressway down is NOT the same as not building one in the first place.
Vancouver is a case in point. Vancouver is not on the way to anyplace else. The northern suburbs served by the Lion's Gate Bridge are, compared to West Seattle and points south, or the entirety of North Seattle, trivial. They might not be if they'd ever built an Alaskan Way Viaduct across downtown, but even then, it's not on the way to anyplace else. Seattle on the other hand, with it's narrow, choked geography, ABSOLUTELY DEPENDS on this critical artery.
Do, please, note that this "sprawl" that so offends you mostly takes place to the EAST, and does not depend on the Viaduct. Everett and Tacoma have as long and valuable history in this region as Seattle does. Though I have no doubt that you'd be smugly incanting your bogus formulas if the possibility of tearing down the two Lake Washington bridges arose. Downtown Seattle is an island unto itself, right? After all, that's how REAL gritty urban paradises are built, right? Nobody in or out?
The idea of "reconnecting the city to its waterfront" is the most inane idea of all. It's based on a cloudy, pot-soaked romantic notion of what cities are all about. In fact, "connected" waterfronts are not part of that picture -- and giant windswept boulevards are in no way connective. IN NO WAY.
If you want to talk about the merits of the two plans that have been supposedly winnowed out -- and from my perspective THERE ARE NO MERITS to either of them -- go ahead. But try to learn something about how cities work first, and put down the bong and consider, for just a second, the lives of the 99% of the region that doesn't live on Capitol Hill or downtown. Frankly, I'm not exactly clear why people who live on Capitol Hill even get a voice in the discussion, particularly when that voice typically expresses such vacuous opinions as these.
The proposed super viaduct is a terrible, terrible idea. None of the reasons why that is so appear in your item.
More...
Tearing an expressway down is NOT the same as not building one in the first place.
Vancouver is a case in point. Vancouver is not on the way to anyplace else. The northern suburbs served by the Lion's Gate Bridge are, compared to West Seattle and points south, or the entirety of North Seattle, trivial. They might not be if they'd ever built an Alaskan Way Viaduct across downtown, but even then, it's not on the way to anyplace else. Seattle on the other hand, with it's narrow, choked geography, ABSOLUTELY DEPENDS on this critical artery.
Do, please, note that this "sprawl" that so offends you mostly takes place to the EAST, and does not depend on the Viaduct. Everett and Tacoma have as long and valuable history in this region as Seattle does. Though I have no doubt that you'd be smugly incanting your bogus formulas if the possibility of tearing down the two Lake Washington bridges arose. Downtown Seattle is an island unto itself, right? After all, that's how REAL gritty urban paradises are built, right? Nobody in or out?
The idea of "reconnecting the city to its waterfront" is the most inane idea of all. It's based on a cloudy, pot-soaked romantic notion of what cities are all about. In fact, "connected" waterfronts are not part of that picture -- and giant windswept boulevards are in no way connective. IN NO WAY.
If you want to talk about the merits of the two plans that have been supposedly winnowed out -- and from my perspective THERE ARE NO MERITS to either of them -- go ahead. But try to learn something about how cities work first, and put down the bong and consider, for just a second, the lives of the 99% of the region that doesn't live on Capitol Hill or downtown. Frankly, I'm not exactly clear why people who live on Capitol Hill even get a voice in the discussion, particularly when that voice typically expresses such vacuous opinions as these.
The proposed super viaduct is a terrible, terrible idea. None of the reasons why that is so appear in your item.
38
@28- Agreed. Driving a single-occupant car should be a luxury (but this theory can only really be pulled off if there are other transportation options available).
39
I don't want to see a new elevated viaduct (especially one with no downtown exits) but I'd love to have the bored tunnel expressway solution, a more effective and less disruptive alternative to the cut-and-cover tunnel that was proposed and voted on.
Without *something* to keep traffic moving through the city, the whole Seattle metropolitan area will be fucked. West Seattle will be screwed the worst, but everyone from Shoreline to Tukwila will feel the pain. And even if you don't drive a car, buses have to sit in traffic, too.
Without *something* to keep traffic moving through the city, the whole Seattle metropolitan area will be fucked. West Seattle will be screwed the worst, but everyone from Shoreline to Tukwila will feel the pain. And even if you don't drive a car, buses have to sit in traffic, too.
42
If you had real rail and even a commuter rail network for far off suburbs you wouldn't be having these arguments.
43
Lets also think Dan how that precious cab ride you had to take to the airport the other day would be much longer without the viaduct helping with traffic in and out of town.
44
Mitigation. one word. Mitigation.
Mitigation works best in foresight. Welcome to the free-swim. Thanks for your attempt to mitigate a highway project to match your fore thought, Dan. Trouble with preachers and priests, even in the congregation, not many folks agree with what is being said.
To pick your nit... as The Big Cheese Editor you know your staff (let's ignore your freelancers) make only enough to maybe, maybe walk to work (assuming a commute, by foot, bike, car, bus, train should be 30 min, 60 min tops) by having a two-income home ( you know, spouse and/or roomate). why not relocate your offices to a city where ALL your employees can afford rent without a second income need? Where? Old Town Tacoma is my suggestion. Rent for employees on the South Hill is very reasonable and can be walked from in under an hour. I have seen the current offices, so yes, all those old, preserved brick warehouse cum office converstions will be a fit for the staff. Oh wait, Tacoma has Interstate-705, so some of your employees might actually use that to get to work. Those dicks wanting to get to work on time, dry and warm and all. BTW... does The Stranger walk-the-talk? Does The Stranger GIVE FREE bus passes to its employees as a trip reduction effort? If the answer is YES, then that sure helps crediblity.
45
@38 Exactly. I'm all for Light rail, and would gladly take it in a heartbeat if it was an option. I'd also take a bus if my commute wasn't so completely back asswards from the general populous. Two hours and 2 transfers instead of a 15 drive is not exactly enticing.
46
Hey Dan - If you loaned us some of the publishing royalties from your books or syndicated column we could afford to move closer to work. Until then, shut the fuck up with your "holier than thou" bullshit. The cost of housing in downtown/capital hill/fremont/wallingford makes living close to work unattainable for a whole lot of us. We're already spending enough time away from our family just so we can afford to keep the existing roof over their head and food on the table. Now you want us to spend more time away from them by taking away our only decent option for getting to work (thanks to our unbelievably horrible transit options). You suggest I take the bus? I fucking do. The bus rides along the same viaduct you're suggesting doesn't need to be replaced.
47
Dan dan dan dan ... DUMBASS!!! Most people live in the burbs because its cheaper! They would rather live in the city, but squeezing 3 kids in a studio when you can get a three bedroom for the same price in some areas!
That is the problem. In the absence of viable mass transport, we have a damn viaduct. We slow people down, we have more people spending time on the road, thus more cars on the road. Why do you think Boston spent ass loads of money on the big dig? People also use the highways that go through cities, thus making congestion even worse.
I love living in the city and being close to work, but I can only do this because I have ZERO dependants!
That is the problem. In the absence of viable mass transport, we have a damn viaduct. We slow people down, we have more people spending time on the road, thus more cars on the road. Why do you think Boston spent ass loads of money on the big dig? People also use the highways that go through cities, thus making congestion even worse.
I love living in the city and being close to work, but I can only do this because I have ZERO dependants!
48
Complaining online here won't change a single city or county or port vote.
Phoning them up will.
Or emailing them directly.
Phoning them up will.
Or emailing them directly.
49
If people think buses are so great, then ride them. Buses BLOW and I am getting sick of people trying to make the bus a more attractive option only by making my commute shitter. You are like a cock-blocking buddy I had in college who couldn't get girls to date him on his own merits, so he had to resort to bringing down the people around him to make himself look better. Stop cock-blocking my commute!
50
I can't imagine why one would be afraid to take the 194 to the airport, but I can understand why someone would be reluctant: It's only slightly faster than canoeing to Zimbabwe.
That said, as a Capitol Hill resident who frequently rehearses on Vashon Island, I benefit tremendously from the viaduct, even if I walk to my day job (and to pretty nearly all Seattle performance or rehearsals). I understand the argument Savage is advancing, but it's worth noting that "work" isn't always a fixed position.
Of course, a real transit system to West Seattle--one that's on a RAIL--would make this discussion moot. As it stands, we're talking about replacing something that doesn't work with something else that doesn't work, circumnavigating the real key to workable urban mobility.
That said, as a Capitol Hill resident who frequently rehearses on Vashon Island, I benefit tremendously from the viaduct, even if I walk to my day job (and to pretty nearly all Seattle performance or rehearsals). I understand the argument Savage is advancing, but it's worth noting that "work" isn't always a fixed position.
Of course, a real transit system to West Seattle--one that's on a RAIL--would make this discussion moot. As it stands, we're talking about replacing something that doesn't work with something else that doesn't work, circumnavigating the real key to workable urban mobility.
51
Photo of Seattle pre viaduct with streetcars:
http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/n…
#8 stupid argument. Just because we will survive a period without the viaduct doesn't mean we should not have mobility for the rest of time.
We have access to the waterfront, much more so than if we have dual three lane one-way signal-timed urban highways between DT and the water.
The urban highways will need a viaduct to get to the Battery Street Tunnel in one direction and diminish the ambiance of the Market in the other direction.
I can't imagine using the 3/4 of mile of waterfront that the S/T would theoretically open up 1/10 as often as I use the Market.
If the tunnel were the option, I'd argue the spending of additional billions would be much better used elsewhere. Imagine what $1 billion in park enhancements would look like - it isn't an either we spend money on the waterfront or we can't make Seattle better situation.
http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/n…
#8 stupid argument. Just because we will survive a period without the viaduct doesn't mean we should not have mobility for the rest of time.
We have access to the waterfront, much more so than if we have dual three lane one-way signal-timed urban highways between DT and the water.
The urban highways will need a viaduct to get to the Battery Street Tunnel in one direction and diminish the ambiance of the Market in the other direction.
I can't imagine using the 3/4 of mile of waterfront that the S/T would theoretically open up 1/10 as often as I use the Market.
If the tunnel were the option, I'd argue the spending of additional billions would be much better used elsewhere. Imagine what $1 billion in park enhancements would look like - it isn't an either we spend money on the waterfront or we can't make Seattle better situation.
52
The indefensible position: The views from the viaduct are gorgeous and the waterfront is nothing but tacky tourist crap.
The indefensible solution: Tear down the waterfront and expand the viaduct (include BRT lanes, light rail tracks, streetcars, monorails, moving sidewalks whatever you can dream up.)
The non-sarcastic point: Things you value might not be the same things valued by others...good luck finding a solution that pleases everyone or every agenda.
The indefensible solution: Tear down the waterfront and expand the viaduct (include BRT lanes, light rail tracks, streetcars, monorails, moving sidewalks whatever you can dream up.)
The non-sarcastic point: Things you value might not be the same things valued by others...good luck finding a solution that pleases everyone or every agenda.
53
Is it weird that I really like the limited touristy-ness of our waterfront and the way the viaduct separates downtown from that strip of restaurants and gift shops?
54
Don't want a long commute? Move closer to work...
This. We have a couple of very nice highways here in Baltimore, that will take you right into downtown. But they don't save anyone any time because they jam right up during the rush hours. It's inevitable. Encouraging people to live closer to where they work, if not within walking distance, and develop more walkable neighborhoods so people don't need to drive to get basic necessities, will do more to solve traffic problems, oil dependency and all the related environmental issues then anything.
I love to drive. I love my car. I hate commuting. Commuting isn't driving...it's a death march you make twice a day. So I moved to within walking distance of where I work. But I'm fortunate in that I live in a city with lots of housing. Baltimore's rowhouse neighborhoods were once upon a time built so the working class here could live close to all the factories, rail yards and ports. Not all cities have so much densely packed affordable housing.
Cities need to be made livable and walkable. Housing needs to be within the reach of an average paycheck. Making cities more drivable doesn't do anything except make the traffic jams bigger. You just can't cram that many cars into a city.
This. We have a couple of very nice highways here in Baltimore, that will take you right into downtown. But they don't save anyone any time because they jam right up during the rush hours. It's inevitable. Encouraging people to live closer to where they work, if not within walking distance, and develop more walkable neighborhoods so people don't need to drive to get basic necessities, will do more to solve traffic problems, oil dependency and all the related environmental issues then anything.
I love to drive. I love my car. I hate commuting. Commuting isn't driving...it's a death march you make twice a day. So I moved to within walking distance of where I work. But I'm fortunate in that I live in a city with lots of housing. Baltimore's rowhouse neighborhoods were once upon a time built so the working class here could live close to all the factories, rail yards and ports. Not all cities have so much densely packed affordable housing.
Cities need to be made livable and walkable. Housing needs to be within the reach of an average paycheck. Making cities more drivable doesn't do anything except make the traffic jams bigger. You just can't cram that many cars into a city.
55
And what about people whose jobs require mobility? People who have to move goods between different parts of the city all day long, every day? How are they going to get from Ballard to West Seattle?
I hate both the deep-bore tunnel and the surface option, and the replacement elevated option is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. The only option that makes the slightest amount of sense to me is the cut & cover. It's the only option that also fixes the seawall at the same time. It's the only option that adds both open space and traffic capacity. I don't understand why we're even talking about anything else.
I hate both the deep-bore tunnel and the surface option, and the replacement elevated option is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. The only option that makes the slightest amount of sense to me is the cut & cover. It's the only option that also fixes the seawall at the same time. It's the only option that adds both open space and traffic capacity. I don't understand why we're even talking about anything else.
56
The mayor's idea for a tunnel, which - while expensive - really would have satisfied both the folks who demand an open waterfront and folks who demand a quick car commute, was flat out rejected and mocked by everyone a couple years ago. Who is going to be the first to admit that the mayor was right. A tunnel is the only way to (sort of) satisfy everyone.
57
Demo the bitch! I'll even take the bus (just like I do to work) to watch the viaduct fall into history's trash heap.
58
Agreed on the tunnel. Although I'd love a boulevard with tiny pedestrian viaducts over the street that reconnect the waterfront to downtown. I have this fantasy of shouting a medium-speed "touche!" and "touche!" and "touche!" up through the sunroof at people. I mean, there's going to be little pedestrian viaducts over the thing, right?
59
Most ancient Roman cities banned carts from the streets during daylight hours. This of course crippled their economy.
60
Bruce Garrett: the viaduct, unlike your Baltimore freeways, is not primarily designed to bring people into downtown. It's designed to move people and goods AROUND downtown. Ironically, having this capacity is a key element of downtown's success, since it has assured that there is a bustling region AROUND it, in what is an unusually narrow-waisted city.
Here's another blow to the poverty argument: bringing down the viaduct is going to completely isolate South Park, Seattle's most affordable neighborhood. They're going to lose the South Park Bridge next year anyways; this is their only other connection to the north.
Removing the viaduct is going to make neighborhoods like West Seattle and Ballard turn AWAY from this super-excitin' boulevard you're so eager to build, and look south and north instead. This will INCREASE sprawl, not decrease it. A boulevard is NOT a densifying feature; quite the opposite.
Here's another blow to the poverty argument: bringing down the viaduct is going to completely isolate South Park, Seattle's most affordable neighborhood. They're going to lose the South Park Bridge next year anyways; this is their only other connection to the north.
Removing the viaduct is going to make neighborhoods like West Seattle and Ballard turn AWAY from this super-excitin' boulevard you're so eager to build, and look south and north instead. This will INCREASE sprawl, not decrease it. A boulevard is NOT a densifying feature; quite the opposite.
61
Replace the viaduct with an overland-suspension bridge. That way you only need two piers.
Or build a tunnel, cover the top with another six lanes of traffic, and add foundations for future viaduct expansion. And a monorail. And a streetcar. And I want a fuckin' pony, too.
I'm suffering a bit of debate fatigue, I think.
Or build a tunnel, cover the top with another six lanes of traffic, and add foundations for future viaduct expansion. And a monorail. And a streetcar. And I want a fuckin' pony, too.
I'm suffering a bit of debate fatigue, I think.
62
"...good luck finding a solution that pleases everyone or every agenda." pg @52 FTW
Like I said yesterday in the posting about the Vashon ferry lanes, commuters (in general) need to get over themselves. We choose our home, we choose our job, therefore we choose our commute.
However, this is an issue of changing the commute after the fact, so it's not so much an issue of choice as a question of what you're going to be saddled with. I don't think anyone's going to be particularly happy with whatever results.
Like I said yesterday in the posting about the Vashon ferry lanes, commuters (in general) need to get over themselves. We choose our home, we choose our job, therefore we choose our commute.
However, this is an issue of changing the commute after the fact, so it's not so much an issue of choice as a question of what you're going to be saddled with. I don't think anyone's going to be particularly happy with whatever results.
64
Okay, now we can start on the deconstruction of I-5. The reason we want to keep I-5 is what again? Oh, that's right, it completely separates Capitol Hill from the rest of the city and allows a uniquely fast northwest corner bike lane which sometimes ends in a ghost bike. Yeah, that's a real good reason to maintain I-5. What other through roads can we consider deconstructing? I-90? Sure, Mercer should be an island and use ferries, no one needs a car there. 520 and 522, no reason to maintain them. Or, how about putting "street end" signs at the north and south ends of downtown on First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth Avenues - with everyone living and working downtown, that would keep all the ugly traffic away. Maybe we could close Pike and Pine to cars (their whole length) and allow CapHill residents to have a really broad sidewalk upon which to make their downtown sojourn. Be good for skaters, too, and as more recently demonstrated, good for sledders.
65
Good for you, Dan. You have the means to live downtown.
I, along with plenty of other folks, can only afford White Center. So, fuck me, right? Who gives a shit about all the folks who aren't made of money? Not Dan obviously.
I, along with plenty of other folks, can only afford White Center. So, fuck me, right? Who gives a shit about all the folks who aren't made of money? Not Dan obviously.
67
People with cars AREN'T POOR.
If the powers that be in Seattle go ahead and do what they did with the monorail (which is keep asking the question until the public are worn out and they get the answer they wanted) and rebuild, or tunnel, or run it through an empty mall or whatever, Seattle will have completed its fifteen-year trajectory from beacon of hope to pitiful joke.
If the powers that be in Seattle go ahead and do what they did with the monorail (which is keep asking the question until the public are worn out and they get the answer they wanted) and rebuild, or tunnel, or run it through an empty mall or whatever, Seattle will have completed its fifteen-year trajectory from beacon of hope to pitiful joke.
69
Retrofit the existing structure. Cheapest fix and one likeliest to keep the most people happy. Always easier to preserve the status quo than enact disruptive change. Unfortunate that the state DOT has not been more receptive to this common-sense solution.
Also, why is it Savage makes such an effective advice columnist but a shrill, unconvincing transportation advocate? Memo to the Stranger: keep your advocacy to topics you know something about. Gay marriage - sure. Transportation policy - nope. At least until we're done paying off the Monorail debt.
Also, why is it Savage makes such an effective advice columnist but a shrill, unconvincing transportation advocate? Memo to the Stranger: keep your advocacy to topics you know something about. Gay marriage - sure. Transportation policy - nope. At least until we're done paying off the Monorail debt.
70
I love Vancouver, but getting out of it is a nightmare. It takes at least an hour to get to any highway if you live on the west side- at least an hour to get to those Northern 'burbs (which, by the way fnarf, lead to Vancouver Island, the Sunshine Coast, Squamish and Whistler), and you often have to go right to the centre of downtown. It's crazy to direct highway traffic past Burrard and Robson.
It's torturous when you can see the mountains- right there!- but know it will take you all day to get there.
It's torturous when you can see the mountains- right there!- but know it will take you all day to get there.
71
@67 Grant, you haven't read the entire thread, have you? The viaduct carries more than cars- namely, buses and cargo. Cutting off that route effectively makes the poor who work outside the city (because they can't afford rent) less likely to commute to the city (by either car or bus), and thus contributes to more sprawl.
If there was the option to take Light Rail between South, West and Downtown, that would be one thing. But as it stands, that isn't going to be available for some time- meanwhile, the Viaduct needs to be repaired/removed NOW.
If there was the option to take Light Rail between South, West and Downtown, that would be one thing. But as it stands, that isn't going to be available for some time- meanwhile, the Viaduct needs to be repaired/removed NOW.
72
@67,
Bullshit. Abject bullshit. Lots of poor people have cars.
In fact, many of them have several.
Bullshit. Abject bullshit. Lots of poor people have cars.
In fact, many of them have several.
73
@67: being "poor" is different than not being able to afford to live downtown. You know that, right?
74
Grant, 84% of Seattle residents own cars - hardly only the well-off and of the 16% that don't own cars many are students or those too old to drive.
People that make movies aren't poor. If you are poor, it is because of your own actions.
Let's see - poor people don't own condos therefore condos shouldn't be built. Poor people don't invest in the stock market therefore there shouldn't be a SEC.
People that make movies aren't poor. If you are poor, it is because of your own actions.
Let's see - poor people don't own condos therefore condos shouldn't be built. Poor people don't invest in the stock market therefore there shouldn't be a SEC.
75
People in West Seattle don't have any ownership rights to our waterfront, just like Vashon Islanders don't own Fauntleroy Way. It's not your god-given right to put another fucking ugly elevated highway on one of the best parts of our city just so you can save a few minutes each day on your solo car commute.
You'll still be able to drive with a boulevard! And scientific studies show that it will carry a lot of cars with only 5-10 minutes of delay vs. the case today!
Get the fuck over it!
You'll still be able to drive with a boulevard! And scientific studies show that it will carry a lot of cars with only 5-10 minutes of delay vs. the case today!
Get the fuck over it!
76
@70, I know what's up there. Whistler's nice, but it's not like a lot of people live there. According to Wikipedia Squamish has 17,000 people in it; Snohomish and Pierce Counties have 800,000 apiece.
78
@75,
And they've been handing out building permits for the last 50 years based on the presence of that State Highway.
By the way, those "scientific studies" contradict every other set of studies done over the past 15 or so years since a toll tunnel was first proposed in this corridor. To say they are highly suspect would be extremely generous.
Do us all a favor - drive through downtown today from Denny Way to Royal Brougham in less than 20 minutes between the hours of 4 and 6PM and get back to me on that.
Tell ya what, you can go to the existing mile-long waterfront park at Myrtle Edwards right after that.
And they've been handing out building permits for the last 50 years based on the presence of that State Highway.
By the way, those "scientific studies" contradict every other set of studies done over the past 15 or so years since a toll tunnel was first proposed in this corridor. To say they are highly suspect would be extremely generous.
Do us all a favor - drive through downtown today from Denny Way to Royal Brougham in less than 20 minutes between the hours of 4 and 6PM and get back to me on that.
Tell ya what, you can go to the existing mile-long waterfront park at Myrtle Edwards right after that.
79
Not building a super-viaduct from Columbia City to Ballard is going to make neighborhoods like Columbia City and Ballard turn AWAY from the super-excitin' surface streets you're so eager to keep, and look south and north instead. This will INCREASE sprawl, not decrease it. Surface streets are NOT a densifying feature; quite the opposite.
81
...the viaduct, unlike your Baltimore freeways, is not primarily designed to bring people into downtown. It's designed to move people and goods AROUND downtown.
That would be our I-695. What...Seattle doesn't have a beltway?
I appreciate that goods need to be hauled into a city, and products hauled out. But if the highways are clogged with automobile traffic because people find it easier to commute then move or take the train then having them isn't buying the trucks anything.
That would be our I-695. What...Seattle doesn't have a beltway?
I appreciate that goods need to be hauled into a city, and products hauled out. But if the highways are clogged with automobile traffic because people find it easier to commute then move or take the train then having them isn't buying the trucks anything.
82
Well, hey Dan, I'm with ya, but I have a favor to ask...
could you hook me up with a college lecture or two... those usally pay low-end, like what 2 or 3 grand? I can do one a month, easy.
Oh, I also need to get a few books out... no one needs read them, but I will need to be on a few cable talk shows to promote them as well. That should generate a few extra grand a year income from the college lectures.
And, btw, but I do like to keep busy. I am such a hard worker and a complete people-person, the part-time lecture job and the talkshow gigs will be done using vacation days, weekends and evenings, so could I be your assistant editor... I don't ask for much pay.
I think the seattle median wage should be fine... since I will only be your assistant, $43K will be just fine.
This help you will give me will totally, totally help me get out of this video store job I currently have and even maybe get into one of those $300,000 Press condos down the street? I could also rent, but then like, but if I did that, the $2100/month rent for a Cap Hill apartment would mean I would have nothing to write off on taxes... ya know what I mean?
Can we keep my ownership a secret and we tell everyone I rent, for street cred, ya know?
Oh, for your wonderful help, I will so total walk to work everyday and will only take cabs to the airport. If I need to get downtown or to the U-Dist, I will of course take the bus... unless I am going to one of those dressy places, then I will totally make due with asking friends for a lift.
My family lives out of state, so I have no need to own a car, since I won't be driving out of town anytime soon.
Thanks, Dan. You're a pal.
83
I love this wonderland view about how six lanes of traffic in boulevard form will allow downtown to connect with the waterfront any better than simply walking under an elevated highway. And how we forget that parts of downtown are separated from downtown by massive dramatic elevation changes.
84
It's been alluded to already, but for many people, living close to work means living in a Seattle neighborhood. Like Ballard, Magnolia, Crown Hill, W. Seattle, South Park...all neighborhoods dependent on the Viaduct. Let's not kid ourselves -- downtown is for wealthy retirees and out-of-state transplants unfamiliar with the neighborhoods.
I live in Ballard, which is a few miles from work. I don't use the Viaduct to commute, but I sure as shit use it to get to the airport, stadiums, W. Seattle, etc. And as anyone not lost in Savage's dream world will tell you, tearing down the Viaduct will have a ripple effect on Aurora, 15th, downtown streets, I-5, etc. It's not just about capacity on 99, it's about capacity -- and options -- on both sides of the city. Failure to replace the Viaduct will add not just to the commutes of single-car drivers headed to Burien, but also to bus commuters headed downtown.
I live in Ballard, which is a few miles from work. I don't use the Viaduct to commute, but I sure as shit use it to get to the airport, stadiums, W. Seattle, etc. And as anyone not lost in Savage's dream world will tell you, tearing down the Viaduct will have a ripple effect on Aurora, 15th, downtown streets, I-5, etc. It's not just about capacity on 99, it's about capacity -- and options -- on both sides of the city. Failure to replace the Viaduct will add not just to the commutes of single-car drivers headed to Burien, but also to bus commuters headed downtown.
85
Last time I looked, there is no freeway thru West Seattle. How do those folks ever make it to their houses? We should extend the Seattle Fwy south to White Center to help those poor folks speed home at night.
And what about those poor Vashon Island commuters, stuck in West Seattle traffic twice a day, just because there's no freeway to the dock. Time for an extension from the new Seattle Fwy to Fauntleroy.
And what about those poor Vashon Island commuters, stuck in West Seattle traffic twice a day, just because there's no freeway to the dock. Time for an extension from the new Seattle Fwy to Fauntleroy.
86
Actually 35th Ave SW is referred to as I-35 because it IS a freeway - certainly can get speeds up to Viaduct downtown velocities. Fauntleroy, also a freeway, for the most part. Delridge, less so, California - no. So everyone walks on California and drives everywhere else. Simple rule, yes?
87
Depending on the option chosen, we'll probably be without the Viaduct for anywhere from 6 to 12 years. At the very best, unless they can somehow bore a tunnel underneath while keeping it open, we're all going to have to figure out how to get along without this highway for a *minimum* of six years. SIX. SIX YEARS. Somehow I don't think that all of Seattle will come to a complete standstill and fall apart at the seams because of that. People will adapt. Business will adapt. Traffic will adapt. Transit will adapt. People will still figure out how to get where they need to go. Businesses will still figure out how to move goods and services. You can argue about replacement options all you want, but it's not like we wake up one day and *bam!* there's a new option all ready for use. So if we can all adapt for six years, why not for all time?
88
The fact that people can adapt to a situation doesn't make the situation good, or even ideal. If the Viaduct isn't at least partially replaced, commutes will take longer for those in cars and buses, for those traveling along the waterfront, I-5, and downtown streets. Those 6-12 years will suck.
I could adapt to a city that's 25 degrees most of the year, but that doesn't mean I'm going to wake up one day and say, "Hey! This is really the ideal temperature for Seattle."
I could adapt to a city that's 25 degrees most of the year, but that doesn't mean I'm going to wake up one day and say, "Hey! This is really the ideal temperature for Seattle."
90
If a surface street option is chosen, not everyone who is on the viaduct right now will continue to use the replacement route. It's not as though we'd have to take every one of those cars and plop them down on Western Ave. Many people will choose to take alternate routes, or choose to travel at different times, or shop somewhere else, or take public transportation, or walk, or bike, and some people will even consider moving somewhere that is more convenient for their particular needs. Certainly not everyone is going to change their habits, but plenty will (especially over a long period of time.) And those that do decide on alternate options will free up space for others. No road operates in a vacuum.
I'm reminded of a story from Jane Jacob's "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" (I think that's what it was called.) There was a busy road running though a park in New York, and when the city wanted to close that road, much fretting ensued about what would happen to all those cars--quite similar to our fretting about the viaduct today. When they finally did close the road (with no mitigation arrangements whatsoever), the prophesied traffic nightmare never materialized. In fact, it was as though all of the cars just disappeared. The point of the case study was to illustrate that there is no fixed number of automobiles, and that everyone makes tradeoffs when deciding among dozens of transportation options.
Why don't we build another light rail line from West Seattle up to Ballard? That could move a lot of people. Aren't we already planning a rapid bus route there as well? Seems like it's more important to count the number of people moved rather than the number of cars.
I'm reminded of a story from Jane Jacob's "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" (I think that's what it was called.) There was a busy road running though a park in New York, and when the city wanted to close that road, much fretting ensued about what would happen to all those cars--quite similar to our fretting about the viaduct today. When they finally did close the road (with no mitigation arrangements whatsoever), the prophesied traffic nightmare never materialized. In fact, it was as though all of the cars just disappeared. The point of the case study was to illustrate that there is no fixed number of automobiles, and that everyone makes tradeoffs when deciding among dozens of transportation options.
Why don't we build another light rail line from West Seattle up to Ballard? That could move a lot of people. Aren't we already planning a rapid bus route there as well? Seems like it's more important to count the number of people moved rather than the number of cars.
91
@88, I'd like a private elevated freeway from my front door to every place that I wish to go in the greater Seattle area. Any transportation option that is not a private elevated freeway on which I can drive my single-occupancy vehicle to the destination of my choice completely unimpeded by any traffic or obstacle is not good, or even ideal. Now, I don't have a private elevated freeway. Yet somehow I still manage to get to work, the store, out to visit friends, shopping, bars, restaurants, museums, parks, the post office, the airport, the dentist, etc. etc. Even if it took an extra 10-15 minutes, I could still manage to do all those things. Yes, it's not ideal. But neither is my situation of not having a private elevated freeway. And yet, somehow, I still manage to live life. My guess is that during the 6 to 12 years that we're without the Viaduct, Seattle will figure out how to keep going. We may even discover that life is just fine, or god forbid, great, without that ugly, gray, dirty noisy behemoth looming over downtown and the waterfront.
92
@90: Few people take the Viaduct to get from Pioneer Square to Belltown. Some take it from West Seattle to Ballard. Even more take it from points further out. The idea that a downtown streetcar line will suffice to service existing Viaduct trips is laughable. A "busy road running through a park" is quite different than an eight-lane bypass freeway running through a city center.
@91: The Viaduct is important not because it's an elevated freeway, but because it's an elevated freeway bypass THRU DOWNTOWN -- a downtown, I might add, that's a natural choke point. I'm not suggesting people need a freeway between all possible commute points. But people need reasonable alternatives to sitting in I-5 or surface street gridlock. Light rail, you say? Fine. Call me in 40 years when ST3 has some light rail on the west side.
Also, 15 minutes a trip may not seem like much, but that's still 2.5 hours a workweek.
@91: The Viaduct is important not because it's an elevated freeway, but because it's an elevated freeway bypass THRU DOWNTOWN -- a downtown, I might add, that's a natural choke point. I'm not suggesting people need a freeway between all possible commute points. But people need reasonable alternatives to sitting in I-5 or surface street gridlock. Light rail, you say? Fine. Call me in 40 years when ST3 has some light rail on the west side.
Also, 15 minutes a trip may not seem like much, but that's still 2.5 hours a workweek.
93
@87, they can indeed bore a tunnel while keeping the Viaduct open. Once the tunnel is complete, then the Viaduct comes down.
94
The cost of living in the city is much lower than the cost of living in the suburbs. Oh, you want a huge house and lawn? Then maybe you should accept that you have to have a long ass commute. Seattle has a heck of a lot of parks, and I'll tell you, kids like a trip to the playground where there are other kids a lot more than they like playing in their yard by themselves. And there's actually some shit for teenagers to do in the city, rather than play video games, cut themselves and do drugs like in the 'burbs. (OK, so they still do a lot of that, but at least they have alternatives.) I am raising a kid in the city, I bike, my family owns one car. We even have a yard. I make $11.00 an hour and my partner is a grad student who picks up some odd jobs in addition to her loans. It's not only doable, it's so much better. The 'burbs give you in the inconvenience of the country with the alienation of the city. Why anyone ever thought they were a good idea is beyond me.
95
Replacing the viaduct with another huge bulky elevated thing would be a sadly wasted opportunity for Seattle. The viaduct was built in an age when the car was king. We now live in an age when we have to find solutions to global warming as well as the political problems arising from our dependence on oil. We have to commit to these solutions NOW. One of the solutions? Denser living, with urban planning that uses space intelligently within city centers -- there are millions of possibilities, many of them in use in other cities in the US and around the world. Those who support a new viaduct option to speed vehicles through the city are overlooking the evidence from other cities that there are other options. On 14 December, the New York Times reported that the city's population growth from 2003-2007 did NOT result in more traffic on the roads -- people took public transportation to get into work because it was faster, cheaper and more convenient. That's the way it's going to have to go for us to survive on this planet. And without an ugly new viaduct blocking out the light from the water, Seattle would be a prettier, more pleasant city for walking and taking the bus etc. There is space for sensitive development of denser housing and more shopping and amenities in the center of town if we look at this creatively, and aren't afraid to consider what works elsewhere. And this doesn't have to all be development for the rich -- let's change how we build this city.
96
Blah blah blah. There is no mass transit planned for the westside - none whatsoever - and vague generalities about the wonders of New Urbanism aren't going to get 80,000 people to and from their jobs and homes. Period.
97
dear dan,
i like candy canes. i once threw one out my window and it landed in the yard. two days later, i grew a giant beard, where birds came to nest. within weeks these birds laid eggs that were the size of nickles. i survived off the birds milk and eggs for months until i broke out in hives. these hives became boils that were full of puss and smelled like the air in bicycle tires and tasted like peppermint. i went to the doctor who took one look at me through a giant telescope and diagnosed me with having a rare virus called, "throwmapsinegypt". there was no cure and i was forced to stay in doors. no visitors (except on fridays and sundays), no phone calls and no smoking filtered cigarettes. i grew lonely and depressed and decided i needed an outlet for my boredom, so i started a band. the band consisted of only three members, me, myself and carl, who was my pet blanket. we called ourselves "the mark arms" and played only two shows. this of course went against my doctors orders to never leave the house.. but when you gotta rock you gotta rock right? you feel it and you go for it. as for me i really really felt it. deep in my pus. anyways, we played just two shows. one was an instore at the crown hill taco del mar where we blew the beans right out of the containers and the other show was at the cha cha. the turn out was a great due to our massive poster campaign and in just two shows, we made enough money to cut our first demo. the recording took place at a studio called reciprocal recording, with someone named jack endino. i'd never heard of the guy, but he apparently had a good reputation of being a great producer. we spent a total of $600. the demo turned out great and mr. endino liked it so much, he passed it on to sub pop. we weren't expecting much to happen, since we were a new band. i was wrong. the calls came in and wouldn't stop. we decided to ink a 10 album deal, with no tour support and album budgets so huge, we would never recoup. it was just what we wanted, we were on our way to stardom, when tragedy struck. our drummer, blanket, lost his arms in a dryer accident. there was no way that we were going to go on with him, so we broke up.
my sores grew bigger and i eventually became so sick that i couldn't work. i lost my job at scarecrow video, my birds, my ethnic friends, my record collection, my subway card, my hearing, my eye site and my feet. now i live under the viaduct.
now i find out that i will be losing that? FUCK YOU DAN SAVAGE! YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW IT FEELS TO BE ME YOU SELFISH SACK OF BALLS! I'M COMING TO LIVE AT YOUR HOUSE!
More...
i like candy canes. i once threw one out my window and it landed in the yard. two days later, i grew a giant beard, where birds came to nest. within weeks these birds laid eggs that were the size of nickles. i survived off the birds milk and eggs for months until i broke out in hives. these hives became boils that were full of puss and smelled like the air in bicycle tires and tasted like peppermint. i went to the doctor who took one look at me through a giant telescope and diagnosed me with having a rare virus called, "throwmapsinegypt". there was no cure and i was forced to stay in doors. no visitors (except on fridays and sundays), no phone calls and no smoking filtered cigarettes. i grew lonely and depressed and decided i needed an outlet for my boredom, so i started a band. the band consisted of only three members, me, myself and carl, who was my pet blanket. we called ourselves "the mark arms" and played only two shows. this of course went against my doctors orders to never leave the house.. but when you gotta rock you gotta rock right? you feel it and you go for it. as for me i really really felt it. deep in my pus. anyways, we played just two shows. one was an instore at the crown hill taco del mar where we blew the beans right out of the containers and the other show was at the cha cha. the turn out was a great due to our massive poster campaign and in just two shows, we made enough money to cut our first demo. the recording took place at a studio called reciprocal recording, with someone named jack endino. i'd never heard of the guy, but he apparently had a good reputation of being a great producer. we spent a total of $600. the demo turned out great and mr. endino liked it so much, he passed it on to sub pop. we weren't expecting much to happen, since we were a new band. i was wrong. the calls came in and wouldn't stop. we decided to ink a 10 album deal, with no tour support and album budgets so huge, we would never recoup. it was just what we wanted, we were on our way to stardom, when tragedy struck. our drummer, blanket, lost his arms in a dryer accident. there was no way that we were going to go on with him, so we broke up.
my sores grew bigger and i eventually became so sick that i couldn't work. i lost my job at scarecrow video, my birds, my ethnic friends, my record collection, my subway card, my hearing, my eye site and my feet. now i live under the viaduct.
now i find out that i will be losing that? FUCK YOU DAN SAVAGE! YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW IT FEELS TO BE ME YOU SELFISH SACK OF BALLS! I'M COMING TO LIVE AT YOUR HOUSE!
98
UHm.
Vancouver's cool. How bout
- NYC (minus the triboro/GW bridges)
- SF (101, the goldengate highway, just PLOPS into surface street mode)
- Paris, Athens, Dublin, Rome, etc
Big Cities have traffic, you know? And they don't require freeways. Not every californian whim /concrete contractor needs to be stroked.
The freeways vitally connect snohomish county to the south? Who the fuck cares about Edmonds, SnoHo, Goldbar, etc? If taking down 3.5 lanes of northbound earthquake-prone and expensive viaduct somehow causes the death of Everett, shouldn't the person responsible get a medal? If we're going to need N-S freeways so bad, how come you radicals aren't proposing another Interstate 605?
I think Grants (@67) comment about 'car owners arent poor' is more a reality check than trying to define poverty: it's like that poster I used to see: "Poverty: you and your TV... or a village in bangladesh?" On the grand scheme of things, in global scale, you are not at all poor. You have luxury and don't even know it.
I worked/lived in NYC, and manhattan lacks freeways of any 'normal' sort, and with 9 million citizens, they're doing ok. Long Island hasn't withered away from being disconnected to Jersey; Brooklyn residents still travel north to Conn on surface streets. Cargo gets delivered, from a port, two train stations and 3 airports, just fine - and buses, while they dont run on time always, run frequently.
Yes, transit, trains, monorails are needed. Affordable dense housing needs to be built downtown [instead of the yesler terrace handout to Harborview]. But what, praytell, fire are you going to lite under the city's ass that will get the job done faster than tearing down the antiquated asphalt veins?
West Sea, South Park, White Ctr, et al - I sympathize that you bought your house or business in a place where you thought that the freeway was a given. Your commute will not be the same, your quality of life might change. But what model did you use to determine that cities never evolve?? What freeway, ESPECIALLY viaducts, did you think would last forever?? Even the elevated subways were removed from manhattan. Cities change.
That strip you luna park/west seattle folks are on, for example, use to be home to gamblers, drunks, rapists, arsonists and whores. See? Aren't you glad things change?
Hey Stranger staff: did anyone research Seattle's reaction/letters to editors when Railroad Avenue was replaced (by landfill) to become Alaskan Way? Was there this same bitchin and moanin and fear of progress?
More...
Vancouver's cool. How bout
- NYC (minus the triboro/GW bridges)
- SF (101, the goldengate highway, just PLOPS into surface street mode)
- Paris, Athens, Dublin, Rome, etc
Big Cities have traffic, you know? And they don't require freeways. Not every californian whim /concrete contractor needs to be stroked.
The freeways vitally connect snohomish county to the south? Who the fuck cares about Edmonds, SnoHo, Goldbar, etc? If taking down 3.5 lanes of northbound earthquake-prone and expensive viaduct somehow causes the death of Everett, shouldn't the person responsible get a medal? If we're going to need N-S freeways so bad, how come you radicals aren't proposing another Interstate 605?
I think Grants (@67) comment about 'car owners arent poor' is more a reality check than trying to define poverty: it's like that poster I used to see: "Poverty: you and your TV... or a village in bangladesh?" On the grand scheme of things, in global scale, you are not at all poor. You have luxury and don't even know it.
I worked/lived in NYC, and manhattan lacks freeways of any 'normal' sort, and with 9 million citizens, they're doing ok. Long Island hasn't withered away from being disconnected to Jersey; Brooklyn residents still travel north to Conn on surface streets. Cargo gets delivered, from a port, two train stations and 3 airports, just fine - and buses, while they dont run on time always, run frequently.
Yes, transit, trains, monorails are needed. Affordable dense housing needs to be built downtown [instead of the yesler terrace handout to Harborview]. But what, praytell, fire are you going to lite under the city's ass that will get the job done faster than tearing down the antiquated asphalt veins?
West Sea, South Park, White Ctr, et al - I sympathize that you bought your house or business in a place where you thought that the freeway was a given. Your commute will not be the same, your quality of life might change. But what model did you use to determine that cities never evolve?? What freeway, ESPECIALLY viaducts, did you think would last forever?? Even the elevated subways were removed from manhattan. Cities change.
That strip you luna park/west seattle folks are on, for example, use to be home to gamblers, drunks, rapists, arsonists and whores. See? Aren't you glad things change?
Hey Stranger staff: did anyone research Seattle's reaction/letters to editors when Railroad Avenue was replaced (by landfill) to become Alaskan Way? Was there this same bitchin and moanin and fear of progress?
99
& No "reconnection" is needed.
Unless you're talking about putting a sandy beach there instead of a seawall, you won't fool me into thinking the waterfront's attractive, with or without the viaduct.
A park might be nice, and housing of-the-800-bucks-a-month variety might be a good look there.
I think the suspension bridge isn't an altogether terrible idea (though I'd rather see it across elliot bay, from Alki north to Smith Cove, for example). The piers are/always will be ugly. The cranes and shipping containers too.
@2 you have the best point: how important is it really.
Crazy brainstorm: Merge sr99 traffic into West Seattle bridge. Extend west seattle freeway through north beacon hill and over to MLK/SR900. Build MLK into a freewayish highway to take NorthSouth traffic. Connect at the south to I-5 or 405 in renton. Keep it going N through the arboreteum & Jump it across to UW. Make a floating bridge from Magnuson to Juanita/DennyPark (shortest jump across the lake). Let 520 AND the Viaduct rot, (Probably cheaper than both projects) and shut up about it already.
Unless you're talking about putting a sandy beach there instead of a seawall, you won't fool me into thinking the waterfront's attractive, with or without the viaduct.
A park might be nice, and housing of-the-800-bucks-a-month variety might be a good look there.
I think the suspension bridge isn't an altogether terrible idea (though I'd rather see it across elliot bay, from Alki north to Smith Cove, for example). The piers are/always will be ugly. The cranes and shipping containers too.
@2 you have the best point: how important is it really.
Crazy brainstorm: Merge sr99 traffic into West Seattle bridge. Extend west seattle freeway through north beacon hill and over to MLK/SR900. Build MLK into a freewayish highway to take NorthSouth traffic. Connect at the south to I-5 or 405 in renton. Keep it going N through the arboreteum & Jump it across to UW. Make a floating bridge from Magnuson to Juanita/DennyPark (shortest jump across the lake). Let 520 AND the Viaduct rot, (Probably cheaper than both projects) and shut up about it already.
100
@98: UrbanMapSmith: Dude, I don't know what NYC you lived in, but the one I resided in had the FDR, the West Side Highway, and the Gowanus Expressway. I lived near (under?) the Gowanus for 5 years and I would guess it moved at least 3 times as many people through my completely residential neighborhood as the Viaduct does on a good day.
What you're saying about Brooklyn residents traveling on surface roads is a blatant lie.
Oh, and lest I forget, there's the L.I.E in Long Island, and multiple high capacity tunnels into and out of Jersey.
What you're saying about Brooklyn residents traveling on surface roads is a blatant lie.
Oh, and lest I forget, there's the L.I.E in Long Island, and multiple high capacity tunnels into and out of Jersey.
101
@98: Also -- you know and I know that you can't compare a robust underground mass transportation system, largely unaffected by weather and surface transit issues, with a system of busses which are easily affected by traffic jams, heavy rain and snow.
NYC's landmass is also 22.96 sq miles, versus Seattle's 91.5685. NYC is mostly flat, Seattle is hilly and built around lakes and rivers. The two are so different -- It's like comparing apples and oranges.
I love mass transit - we just have a lot of infrastructure we need to create before we can start seriously impeding all vehicular (car, delivery truck, bus) traffic.
NYC's landmass is also 22.96 sq miles, versus Seattle's 91.5685. NYC is mostly flat, Seattle is hilly and built around lakes and rivers. The two are so different -- It's like comparing apples and oranges.
I love mass transit - we just have a lot of infrastructure we need to create before we can start seriously impeding all vehicular (car, delivery truck, bus) traffic.
102
Comparing Big Apple to little apple.
The future of transportation will be electric cars that are recharged in the middle of the night from wind, wave, tidal, nuclear and other green sources. These same cars will give back their power during peak use periods when sitting at home. If density is desired, then strict zoning is the only way to make it happen.
The current structure has now lived 7 years since the 100 year earthquake in 2001. After waiting 6 years to stabilize the three bad columns , they now are not sinking.
How about fixing what we have and building a sound wall to block the noise from the lower car deck. The sound wall could be another sculpture park - let local artists carve Buddhas of Bamiyan and other classical wall art in them which will be one of the greatest tourist attractions in the world. Imagine the glorious Seattle waterfront on one side and a march through wall art history on the other. Makes you want to spend money doesn't it?
If cars didn't pollute, would a tree make noise when it fell? Spend on clean electricity not tunnels.
The future of transportation will be electric cars that are recharged in the middle of the night from wind, wave, tidal, nuclear and other green sources. These same cars will give back their power during peak use periods when sitting at home. If density is desired, then strict zoning is the only way to make it happen.
The current structure has now lived 7 years since the 100 year earthquake in 2001. After waiting 6 years to stabilize the three bad columns , they now are not sinking.
How about fixing what we have and building a sound wall to block the noise from the lower car deck. The sound wall could be another sculpture park - let local artists carve Buddhas of Bamiyan and other classical wall art in them which will be one of the greatest tourist attractions in the world. Imagine the glorious Seattle waterfront on one side and a march through wall art history on the other. Makes you want to spend money doesn't it?
If cars didn't pollute, would a tree make noise when it fell? Spend on clean electricity not tunnels.
103
I lived in Pioneer Square for several years, I never found the viaduct to be a "barrier" to the waterfront. Not like the I5 is a barrier between downtown and Cap/First Hill or the way Aurora is from Denny to 70th St.
I'm not sure what the best choice here is, but as someone who uses the viaduct as a way to get from one part of the city to another, not for commuting, and also uses it when going downtown, I'm not sure how the Stoplight Option solves anything. It's certainly less green. More stops of that many vehicles a day is a lot more gasoline consumed.
I'm not sure what the best choice here is, but as someone who uses the viaduct as a way to get from one part of the city to another, not for commuting, and also uses it when going downtown, I'm not sure how the Stoplight Option solves anything. It's certainly less green. More stops of that many vehicles a day is a lot more gasoline consumed.
104
What is it about West Seattle that makes the people there so whiney? Jesus, they whine about EVERYTHING.
105
"Where did people get the idea..."
People are generally selfish douchebags that act only in their own self-interest. If driving a single occupancy vehicle to any and all locations, regardless of whether or not it's actually necessary, and regardless of the environmental and societal impact, AS LONG AS IT GETS ME TO MY DESTINATION IN 15 MINUTES OR LESS, BECAUSE I CAN'T TOLERATE BEING IN MY CAR AND DRIVING FOR ANY LONGER THAN THAT OR I WILL SERIOUSLY FREAK OUT, well, people will do so. And if they can't do so, they will whine, bitch, complain, moan, cry, fret and throw giant temper tantrums about it. Like all these pathetic douches on the Slog.
Anybody crying to replace the Viaduct with another freeway monstrosity is someone that can't look beyond their own selfish need and desire to drive and SOV in the quickest possible manner to any and all destinations. And you know what?
FUCK THOSE PEOPLE.
Seriously. They don't matter. If we left city planning up to those douchebags, we'd live in LA, Phoenix, Houston, Dallas, Miami, or San Diego. And you know what? Those cities SUCK MY BALLS. If the douchebags whining about the Viaduct want a freeway, let them move to any of the above-named cities. They all happen to be suffering the worst in the recession, but whatever - they can drive their SOVs straight to oblivion with a big fucking smile on their faces.
So, FNARF and everyone else that is whining, SUCK MY HAIRY STINKY BALLS. If you can't bother to think beyond gas-guzzling SOVs and trucks, then you are a dinosaur, and completely inconsequential to the future of our society. You are the children of the Neanderthal, destined to live out your sad lives in a cave, waiting for death. FUCK YOU.
People are generally selfish douchebags that act only in their own self-interest. If driving a single occupancy vehicle to any and all locations, regardless of whether or not it's actually necessary, and regardless of the environmental and societal impact, AS LONG AS IT GETS ME TO MY DESTINATION IN 15 MINUTES OR LESS, BECAUSE I CAN'T TOLERATE BEING IN MY CAR AND DRIVING FOR ANY LONGER THAN THAT OR I WILL SERIOUSLY FREAK OUT, well, people will do so. And if they can't do so, they will whine, bitch, complain, moan, cry, fret and throw giant temper tantrums about it. Like all these pathetic douches on the Slog.
Anybody crying to replace the Viaduct with another freeway monstrosity is someone that can't look beyond their own selfish need and desire to drive and SOV in the quickest possible manner to any and all destinations. And you know what?
FUCK THOSE PEOPLE.
Seriously. They don't matter. If we left city planning up to those douchebags, we'd live in LA, Phoenix, Houston, Dallas, Miami, or San Diego. And you know what? Those cities SUCK MY BALLS. If the douchebags whining about the Viaduct want a freeway, let them move to any of the above-named cities. They all happen to be suffering the worst in the recession, but whatever - they can drive their SOVs straight to oblivion with a big fucking smile on their faces.
So, FNARF and everyone else that is whining, SUCK MY HAIRY STINKY BALLS. If you can't bother to think beyond gas-guzzling SOVs and trucks, then you are a dinosaur, and completely inconsequential to the future of our society. You are the children of the Neanderthal, destined to live out your sad lives in a cave, waiting for death. FUCK YOU.
106
Since I walk everywhere, traffic is meaningless to me. It just doesn't exist, and I never have to deal with it. And I find it endlessly humorous that the only people I know who complain about traffic are those who drive in it.
107
"Don't want a long commute? Move closer to work..."
Sometimes spouses work in different places. Often actually. If my husband and I moved into the city, we'd be paying more for less space and he would have to commute back out to the 'burbs.
Sometimes spouses work in different places. Often actually. If my husband and I moved into the city, we'd be paying more for less space and he would have to commute back out to the 'burbs.
108
@107: Obviously you should divorce your spouse for a more transit-appropriate companion.
If your spouse changes jobs... time to start looking for a new partner.
If your spouse changes jobs... time to start looking for a new partner.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Pit Bulls! by Dan Savage
-
Becoming a Man by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
Unreal Americans by Dan Savage
-
Precious: Brutal New Classic or African-American Bruno? by David Schmader
-
Meanwhile in Vancouver by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (108) RSS