Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsMonday, January 19, 2009
City A Sign
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Now that the city, state, and county have agreed on a "solution" to the Alaskan Way Viaduct problem*, I'm getting deluged with emails from supporters of the "Elliott Bay Bridge"—a fantastical cable-stayed bridge across Elliott Bay. Perhaps they figure that as long as everyone's getting behind a solution that we can't possibly afford, why not at least make it pretty?
* Footnote 1: I'm increasingly convinced the one-percent-designed deep-bore tunnel will never happen, which will be great news for supporters of the surface/transit option... if and only if the viaduct gets torn down before construction on any alternative starts.**
** Footnote 2: If, instead, the viaduct stays up through construction, Christine Gregoire will have to break her promise to tear the thing down by 2012, making it a guaranteed campaign issue in the next gubernatorial election, whether or not Gregoire runs again.
3
Erica - what is that supposed to be?
I know I'm a bad person because it's not my job to go to planning meetings, but would it be too much trouble to toss in a link to what you're talking about?
I know I'm a bad person because it's not my job to go to planning meetings, but would it be too much trouble to toss in a link to what you're talking about?
4
I stand by my prediction that nothing will ever, ever be done to replace or fix the Viaduct, ever. Also, that light rail will get de-funded and be halfass-realized and generally considered yet another giant boondoggle failure.
5
Gregoire can't run. The state constitution limites her to a max of two terms, just like the federal constitution does to the President.
The Viaduct will stand until the next good quake which we are really over due for.
The Viaduct will stand until the next good quake which we are really over due for.
7
@5 - Just plain wrong. Washington state does not have term limits. She could run, but she won't.
She's already 61, and the last governor to go for three was Dan Evans. Booth didn't; Locke didn't; Gregoire won't.
She's already 61, and the last governor to go for three was Dan Evans. Booth didn't; Locke didn't; Gregoire won't.
8
If she does run I don't really see people getting upset that she is leaving the Viaduct up while its replacement is being constructed. The opposite on the other hand, I can easily see but ensuring that people still have an option during construction is not a bad thing in most peoples eyes.
12
ECB: I'm increasingly convinced the one-percent-designed deep-bore tunnel will never happen,...
I remember a commenter on an earlier Slog post made just this point. It's an intriguing interpretation, but it kind of raises the question of the motivations of Nickels, Gregoire, and Sims. I can see three possible ways to read their minds:
1. Suppose they all really want the surface option. The fact they didn't decide on that to begin with means the powers that be that still favor preserving a highway of some sort just are too entrenched to take on directly.
2. They are so desperate to see a tunnel get built that they're willing to live with the cost estimates blowing up in their, or their successors', faces.
3. They are really just looking for a way to get off the political hot seat, and deciding on a tunnel that doesn't have a solid cost estimate is a way to kick the can down the road. (Forgive the mixed metaphors and cliches.)
I almost feel like it's some combination of 2 and 3, with 2 better describing Nickels and 3 better describing Gregoire. 1 ascribes too much Machiavellian foresight to this bunch, and I don't think any of them, even Sims, has that great a passion for the surface route.
I remember a commenter on an earlier Slog post made just this point. It's an intriguing interpretation, but it kind of raises the question of the motivations of Nickels, Gregoire, and Sims. I can see three possible ways to read their minds:
1. Suppose they all really want the surface option. The fact they didn't decide on that to begin with means the powers that be that still favor preserving a highway of some sort just are too entrenched to take on directly.
2. They are so desperate to see a tunnel get built that they're willing to live with the cost estimates blowing up in their, or their successors', faces.
3. They are really just looking for a way to get off the political hot seat, and deciding on a tunnel that doesn't have a solid cost estimate is a way to kick the can down the road. (Forgive the mixed metaphors and cliches.)
I almost feel like it's some combination of 2 and 3, with 2 better describing Nickels and 3 better describing Gregoire. 1 ascribes too much Machiavellian foresight to this bunch, and I don't think any of them, even Sims, has that great a passion for the surface route.
13
Washington: Limits state senators to eight out of 14 years, representatives to six out of 12 years, and the governor and lt. governor to eight out of 14 years. Terms served before November 1992 will not count toward limits. (S - RC WA Section 44.04.015
14
per footnote #1, me thinks we will still be staring at a Viaduct in 2012 with no tunnelling underway and no funding to do start the work. The tunnel-bore option is basically Monorail 2.0 - hoping that funding from some other source (e.g. the Feds) will come along to cover the shortfall.
Just like the old family-planning saying goes: 'Hope is not a method'
Just like the old family-planning saying goes: 'Hope is not a method'
15
without a finance plan for the tunnel and a drop dead date on bringing down the Viaduct, they ARE just basically kicking the can down the road. Setting aside what an asshat Chopp is, the legislature needs to call them out on this. Per above, it's bascially Monorail 2.0-style planning.
16
I think we need to accept that we're all complicit in the lack of a solution -- No solution has pleased everyone and whenever a decision seems to have been reached an initiative blocking it is proposed.
I am curious how happy everyone will be when/if the viaduct collapses. Hopefully no one will be hurt, but if they are, we all share in the blame.
I am curious how happy everyone will be when/if the viaduct collapses. Hopefully no one will be hurt, but if they are, we all share in the blame.
18
It's not St. Pete, either. The rise to the apex of the cable-stayed section of the Sunshine Skyway Bridge is dramatic and has a wonderful view.
19
If the tunnel doesn't happen, it will be great for proponents of the surface option (sprawl-lovers), but it will be terrible for people who actually want open space for a people's waterfront. The tunnel has more open space and less traffic on the waterfront than any of the surface options that were proposed.
21
@20 Because ECB is too lazy to use google.
Here's the original idea form WSDOT: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/7B7…
Here's the original idea form WSDOT: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/7B7…
22
I did a quarter-long project in college where we designed parts of a cable-stay bridge across Elliott Bay. Having that experience, I can tell you that there is no way in hell to make a bridge work. In addition to being an environmental disaster, it would fuck over the Port, the Aquarium, the ferry terminal, and several businesses on the north end of the run. Plus, the towers would intrude into Boeing Field's airspace.
But hey, don't take my word for it. I'm just some asshole on the internet. See what SDOT and WSDOT said about the bridge option when they considered it.
But hey, don't take my word for it. I'm just some asshole on the internet. See what SDOT and WSDOT said about the bridge option when they considered it.
23
The Elliott Bay Bridge (a visualization of which can be found here: http://westseattleblog.com/blog/wp-conte… ) was expected to actually cost less than bored tunnel - significantly less. It would cost about the same as a viaduct rebuild, but without nearly as much down time, since the old viaduct could be left up while construction of the new bridge begins.
The idea wasn't without problems. It was evaluated by wsdot, and their analysis is here: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/7B7…
The idea wasn't without problems. It was evaluated by wsdot, and their analysis is here: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/7B7…
25
In comparison, the monorail was a rock solid plan. They had a Design Build contract that covered most of the contingencies and a dedicated tax source. What they didn't do was try to get money from other agencies or governments that would have brought the financing costs down billions.
The tunnel will not happen but parsons ripusoff will be paid millions more to tell us that. Nickels will have been reelected or moved to DC, same with Sims and Ms G ain't running again and the tunnel isn't her vanity project, why should she care?
The rest of the state thinks Seattle is getting deluxe treatment and resents it. The legislature will not give Sims the power to invoke a MVET without a vote if at all.
The viaduct was repaired for a few million and isn't sinking anymore. Did the gribbles die? Don't hear about how bad the seawall is anymore.
The viaduct will be up for years and if it is shaken down the feds will rebuild it with one deck.
The tunnel will not happen but parsons ripusoff will be paid millions more to tell us that. Nickels will have been reelected or moved to DC, same with Sims and Ms G ain't running again and the tunnel isn't her vanity project, why should she care?
The rest of the state thinks Seattle is getting deluxe treatment and resents it. The legislature will not give Sims the power to invoke a MVET without a vote if at all.
The viaduct was repaired for a few million and isn't sinking anymore. Did the gribbles die? Don't hear about how bad the seawall is anymore.
The viaduct will be up for years and if it is shaken down the feds will rebuild it with one deck.
26
@25
I hate fuckers like you. You spew out a litany of authoritative sounding predictions, but you don't tell us who you are, nor do you supply data to build your case on. What you just wrote was a complete waste of your time and the time of everyone who reads it. Dick.
Oh. And next time you post some long-assed time-waster, you'll use some other throwaway handle, so nobody who remembers what a dick you are can recognize you and not bother reading again.
We'd have a lot fewer dicks like this dick if we made the fucking dicks register accounts. Most of them would go somewhere else to be a dick.
I hate fuckers like you. You spew out a litany of authoritative sounding predictions, but you don't tell us who you are, nor do you supply data to build your case on. What you just wrote was a complete waste of your time and the time of everyone who reads it. Dick.
Oh. And next time you post some long-assed time-waster, you'll use some other throwaway handle, so nobody who remembers what a dick you are can recognize you and not bother reading again.
We'd have a lot fewer dicks like this dick if we made the fucking dicks register accounts. Most of them would go somewhere else to be a dick.
27
@25 and 26,
Um, I'd say that aside from the Monorail paragraph post #25 was a reasonaby astute prognostication about what is likely to come of tunnel "decision" (which is to say, nothing), and was no more or less speculative than ECB's look into the crystal ball that sparked it.
You might want to work on those anger issues @26, however....
Um, I'd say that aside from the Monorail paragraph post #25 was a reasonaby astute prognostication about what is likely to come of tunnel "decision" (which is to say, nothing), and was no more or less speculative than ECB's look into the crystal ball that sparked it.
You might want to work on those anger issues @26, however....
28
Mr. X, any fool can predict it will rain tomorrow. What good does that do you? Either they're a meteorologist, or they have convincing evidence, or else they're wasting everyone's time.
A completely anonymous nobody predicting rain for no good reason is of no use at all to you or to me or to themselves, even if it does rain.
A completely anonymous nobody predicting rain for no good reason is of no use at all to you or to me or to themselves, even if it does rain.
29
Just you watch - within 5 years he will be proved right on most of his predictions - ie -
1) tunnel work will not have started, but PB will have been paid millions to "study" it.
2) the elected officials who made this so-called "decision" will indeed have kicked all of the actual hard work needed/uncovered costs/etc down to their successors
3) the rest of the State will indeed choke off any of the additional funding required to pay for this "decision" in the legislature (and this one will probably occur within months - not years).
4) we haven't heard much about gribbles or the pressing emergency that the seawall allegedly presents since this so-called "decision" was announced because the tunnel no longer does anything about the seawall (which was its key selling point when it got stomped by 70% of Seattle's voters)
5) as ECB also predicted, Gregoire will indeed punt on her "deadline" of 2012 to demolish the existing Viaduct (heck - she said as much in announcing that a deep bore tunnel allows the AWV to remain in operation and citing that as a reason for her "decision")
Now, I'll grant that no one can know what will happen if an earthquake brings the Viaduct down, though the most likely scenario is an earthquake similar to the 2001 Nisqually event (these occur on a fairly regular basis) happening sometime in 15-25 years that renders the AWV "unusable" (in SDOT parlance) but probably not catastrophic failure of the structure itself.
Now if we get that 500 year Cascadia subduction quake, all bets are off (and I-5 is probably falling into the Ship Canal, as well).
It's hard to say what the Feds would be willing to pay for if a disaster did bring the AWV down and they were ready to provide funds for a replacement, so you probably have a point on that prediction (but I will make a counter-prediction , it ain't called State Route 99 for nothing, and replacing it with nothing won't fly once you get off of Capitol Hill and/or Slog)
All that said, you really ought to lighten up - this is a blog, dude. Anonymous speculation is its currency.
Some things are predictable - including the fecklessness of our local elected officials, their willingness to move forward with the most expensive plans possible, and their utter inability to see them through to completion (well, except for dueling stadiums). I'd say that the post @25 demonstrates a fairly well-founded understanding of that history.
More...
1) tunnel work will not have started, but PB will have been paid millions to "study" it.
2) the elected officials who made this so-called "decision" will indeed have kicked all of the actual hard work needed/uncovered costs/etc down to their successors
3) the rest of the State will indeed choke off any of the additional funding required to pay for this "decision" in the legislature (and this one will probably occur within months - not years).
4) we haven't heard much about gribbles or the pressing emergency that the seawall allegedly presents since this so-called "decision" was announced because the tunnel no longer does anything about the seawall (which was its key selling point when it got stomped by 70% of Seattle's voters)
5) as ECB also predicted, Gregoire will indeed punt on her "deadline" of 2012 to demolish the existing Viaduct (heck - she said as much in announcing that a deep bore tunnel allows the AWV to remain in operation and citing that as a reason for her "decision")
Now, I'll grant that no one can know what will happen if an earthquake brings the Viaduct down, though the most likely scenario is an earthquake similar to the 2001 Nisqually event (these occur on a fairly regular basis) happening sometime in 15-25 years that renders the AWV "unusable" (in SDOT parlance) but probably not catastrophic failure of the structure itself.
Now if we get that 500 year Cascadia subduction quake, all bets are off (and I-5 is probably falling into the Ship Canal, as well).
It's hard to say what the Feds would be willing to pay for if a disaster did bring the AWV down and they were ready to provide funds for a replacement, so you probably have a point on that prediction (but I will make a counter-prediction , it ain't called State Route 99 for nothing, and replacing it with nothing won't fly once you get off of Capitol Hill and/or Slog)
All that said, you really ought to lighten up - this is a blog, dude. Anonymous speculation is its currency.
Some things are predictable - including the fecklessness of our local elected officials, their willingness to move forward with the most expensive plans possible, and their utter inability to see them through to completion (well, except for dueling stadiums). I'd say that the post @25 demonstrates a fairly well-founded understanding of that history.
30
Bonus question.
Q. Where did millions of dollars of the proceeds from the sale of the Mercer Street properties that the City of Seattle sold to Paul Allen go?
A. To prop up the EIS process for the AWV project when it ran out of money, and that developed the two options Seattle voters subsequently defeated (talk about throwing good money after bad!).
Bonus question.
Q. When did the City and WSDOT first decide to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a tunnel?
A. 1994.
Q. Where did millions of dollars of the proceeds from the sale of the Mercer Street properties that the City of Seattle sold to Paul Allen go?
A. To prop up the EIS process for the AWV project when it ran out of money, and that developed the two options Seattle voters subsequently defeated (talk about throwing good money after bad!).
Bonus question.
Q. When did the City and WSDOT first decide to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a tunnel?
A. 1994.
31
Mr. X
Don't worry I know this elenchos and here of course he just jests. He doesn't reveal his fields of expertise but I'm sure that he has deep knowledge of proper blogging behavior. The fact that he waited 6 hours to make his first post may give us a clue as to how we should approach posting.
Be gentle with him as his teenage acne scarred him not just physically.
Don't worry I know this elenchos and here of course he just jests. He doesn't reveal his fields of expertise but I'm sure that he has deep knowledge of proper blogging behavior. The fact that he waited 6 hours to make his first post may give us a clue as to how we should approach posting.
Be gentle with him as his teenage acne scarred him not just physically.
32
@31
Are you drunk? What are you talking about? My point still stands. A stopped clock is right twice a day...
Are you drunk? What are you talking about? My point still stands. A stopped clock is right twice a day...
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
Announcing The Stranger's Tournament of Dunces! Who's the Dumbest Representative in the State House? by Christopher Frizzelle
-
Survey Says: Cyclists Would Rather Give Up Sex Than Their Bikes by Bethany Jean Clement
-
Rachel Maddow Uncovered the Secret Ron Paul Strategy by Paul Constant
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (32) RSS