May 17, 2006
State to Consider Viaduct Retrofit

For the past couple of years the state has been considering only two options to fix the Alaskan Way Viaduct: an expensive rebuild, and Greg Nickel's insanely expensive tunnel. Both options would close the viaduct for years, forcing traffic onto surface streets or requiring temporary bypasses to be built.

What about repairing the viaduct rather than replacing it? Victor Gray of Port Townsend, a retired structural engineer, proposes just that, and the state Department of Transportation has agreed to study his plan:

Gray, along with engineer Neil Twelker, has proposed bracing the viaduct with steel beams. While Gray claims his plan is much cheaper than the $2.5 billion to $4 billion replacement cost, the fact it could be done without major viaduct closures gives the idea clout among business owners.

Gray claims the viaduct could be repaired for $800 million.

We can only hope the plan will be given due consideration and not just dismissed. If it truly does offer a safe alternative to the other plans, it should be implemented. The extra money allocated for viaduct replacement should be used to fix SR 520 or be refunded to the people.

Posted by Andy MacDonald at May 17, 2006 09:36 AM | Email This
Comments
1. It'll never happen, because Mayor Nickels wants his sea wall, and unless there is some provision for a sea wall in that retrofit, he won't support it..

Posted by: JustSUmGuy on May 17, 2006 08:58 AM
2. As it is SR99 (correct??) why does Nickels have a say in it? Surely the state can repair and maintain its roads without permission of city governemnt?

Andy, what are you smoking, and can I have some? "... or be refunded to the people". Yeah, right! A lib government returning their money to the people.

Or should that be a lib government returning the people's money to the people?

Posted by: Fred on May 17, 2006 09:11 AM
3. what happened to the "emergency" that her highness declared?

Posted by: danno on May 17, 2006 09:43 AM
4. I believe that there is an inescapable logic to the Retrofit.

Posted by: David Sucher on May 17, 2006 09:48 AM
5. Perhaps King Nickels could benefit from the story of King Canute (also spelled Knut), who was a Danish King of England (and Scotland, and Denmark, and other places too) in the 11th century.
He was flattered by his courtiers, who said that he was so powerful that he could reverse the tides. He had them drag his throne out to the edge of the North Sea, whereupon he proved that he had no such power, and chastised his court for their arrogance on his behalf.
I doubt that Nickel's tunnel would be any more effective, or cost-effective, than Canute commanding the sea to lower itself.

Posted by: pseudotsuga on May 17, 2006 10:09 AM
6. I am not holding my breath for any epiphany from WSDOT for the retrofit option. This "study" will probably conclude that the most expensive, gov't expanding option be utilized, at double today's estimated cost.

Recall this is the same state agency that mismanages our ferry system, and despite repeated audits that call for it, cannot give an accurate accounting of where that money goes.

Posted by: Shaun on May 17, 2006 10:10 AM
7. and the Spokane Street viaduct was retrofitted without a peep.

Once they tear it down they will not replace it with anything. This is the second biggest fraud being perpetrated on us (the first is Deanron/Terwilliger voting).

Looking at the plans I do not see how a tunnel is really constructible from an engineering point of view. I think the design consultants are honestly trying to find a solution but that equals a lot of money and time. They just do not know they are being played by the politicians. They were told to spin a golden tunnel from the muck of the waterfront. (BTW there are mutipliple tunnel options being studied by the designer).

(ask the monorail consultants...that Monorail board and director Joel Horn did exactly what it was supposed to do..tell the consultants to design this fancy system and then surprise it costs too much we need to shut it down and Metro bus drivers keep their jobs and Sound Transit can continue to build billions worth of no trains to no where-populist plans like monorails and retrofits are bad for unions and us smarty politicians)

So once the viaduct is torn down and the contractor starts trying to build the tunnel hits one snag King Nickels will then decree it just costs too much to finish! We'll put in a 4 lane road with 20 traffic lights the King then decrees. Traffic forever torpedoed through Seattle exactly the way a communist would want it!

Mr. Ceis and Mr. Nickels stop me when I am wrong.

Posted by: Col. Hogan on May 17, 2006 10:32 AM
8. Btw, I don't think it takes very much away from the argument for a Retrofit toi acknowledge that even with the great views, the Viaduct is not ideal. But it is there and we have a lot of other priorities besides spending more money on the Seattle CBD. So in that spirit, I think we ought to be think about how we could make a Retrofitted Viaduct an urbane and interesting place..

Posted by: David Sucher on May 17, 2006 10:53 AM
9. This is nothing more than lip service to placate the populous. See my post for a translation of what the Viaduct project manager is really saying.

Viaduct Retrofit: The Undead Option

Posted by: The Tim on May 17, 2006 10:57 AM
10. The Tim is right.

One of the biggest frauds I have ever seen perpetrated on the public is hiring the same firm that found the retrofit unfeasible before, to study the issue again. This should be criminal if it is not. This firm has almost certainly built alliances that are in the interest of seeing a rebuild or tunnel and not a retrofit.

The only thing we have going for us is the Internet and the Monorail Debacle that is fresh in citizen's minds. Now that there is a way to get the word out besides the talking heads and complicit newspaper reporters, blogs combined with the multibillion dollar price tag just might be enough to wake up the largely ignorant public to the folly of the rebuild and tunnel plans.

But ... I highly doubt it. Seattle has chosen it's own fate. By electing fools like Nickels that will choke traffic for years in the CBD, Seattle deserves every bit of the suffering it will endure and then some.

Posted by: Jeff B. on May 17, 2006 11:20 AM
11. +1 to The Tim

Posted by: danno on May 17, 2006 11:45 AM
12. I have to wonder who profits from yet another study.

Posted by: Cheryl on May 17, 2006 12:11 PM
13. The best perspective I saw earlier this year but haven't seen since is to build a tunnel down 2nd and/or 3rd Avenues and demolish the Viaduct later.

It would keep the Viaduct operating in the meantime. Downtown is already a mess so having metal plates cover the avenues shouldn't throw drivers and pedestrians too far off.

Anyone know where that idea went?

Posted by: Michael on May 17, 2006 12:44 PM
14. I don't think these old engineers are just going to go away.

They are highly respected in the community.

And I was shocked to see that Twelker had plans prepared for the retrofit. No, I don't think the retrofit is going away.

And it won't go away if we can get ourselves some elected officials in Olympia with some guts.

Posted by: swatter on May 17, 2006 01:18 PM
15. A FLOATING Viaduct should solve Mayor Nickels sea wall obsession.

Posted by: ReVOTERguy on May 17, 2006 02:47 PM
16. There is no viable alternative to retrofitting the Alaskan Way Viaduct. This seems to obvious to all but the politicians and bureaucrats resonsible for the decision and the loud minority who too ignorant or stupid to give a damn.

Massive traffic congestion resulting from either a new viaduct or a tunnel will dammage the quality of living and commerace in Seattle beyond repair.

Posted by: Paddy on May 17, 2006 03:48 PM
17. Cheryl--exactly! Like lawyers on each side of a nasty divorce, someome always gets their ("consulting") payments--i.e.--more studies. Win, lose or draw, consulting is where it's at with Seattle's lame, indecisive personality. One outcome is fairly certain--taxpayers will get their wallets "retrofitted" with a big re-bar up their exhaust pipes.

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on May 17, 2006 10:33 PM
18. David Sucher makes a very good point.
Personally I've had enough of the irresponsible spending and liberal economic shell games in this area, and for that reason alone I don't trust plans made by Democrats any more than I would trust a dog to guard my lunch.

Sucher's arguments are irresistably logical as well as useful in stopping the liberal-democrat trainwreck of an insane tunnel project.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on May 18, 2006 11:10 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?