April 09, 2008
Coming Soon, To An Earthquake Near You

By now you've probably heard of the Popular Mechanics ranking of the Viaduct as the fifth most significant piece of infrastructure in the country "We Must Fix Now."

Via Postman, however, Dan Savage's take is of all things something which transcends partisan lines:

We won't do anything, of course, until it actually falls down and dozens of people are killed and injured. Until then, we'll shore up the damaged Alaskan Way Viaduct with Seattle-style process--i.e. hot air, non-binding votes, and dithering elected officials.

Agreement on the root of a problem ranging from an urban liberal with a penchant for being offensive to the conservative masses. Uh oh.

Posted by Eric Earling at April 09, 2008 07:26 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Popular Mechanics: that bastion of engineering prowess! :) HELP...Dino...save us.....

Posted by: Duffman on April 9, 2008 07:26 AM
2. The number of studies to figure out what to do is amazing. Democrats are doing the typical concesses and if one person disagrees well back to the drawing board.
It is a tradegy that People will die because of the Democrat way of fixing roads. or the desire not to fix roads. I wonder how many busses will be on this road when it collapses. It will not be a few deaths but could be a large number if it happens during rush hour.
And the politicians who could not make up their mind and make a decision will use it for political purposes to increase their election chances. They will never be held accountable for their inaction. Funding has been there but always they want to spend more money and control who gets the contracts. I wonder what special interest groups are helping to block these repairs.
They will blame East King County for not agreeing to every tax increase that was bloated with mass transit projects as the reason why instead of their own incompetence.

Posted by: David Anfinrud on April 9, 2008 08:33 AM
3. It's not just the Viaduct. There are many buildings in the downtown area of Seattle that will come down with a good shake long before the Viaduct does.

Walk around any old brick bld and if you see bolts and flat pieces of metal bolted near the top of the roof area. Stay out of them, if your smart.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 9, 2008 08:56 AM
4. One can only hope Mrs. Gregoire and Co. are on it during the big one in their silly little "re-election" bus.

Posted by: Mark1 on April 9, 2008 09:24 AM
5. Army Medic/Vet - it is the old brick buildings that don't have the plates and bolts that you should worry about.

What you're seeing is hardware that ties the walls to the internal structure - absent from the original buildings.

Posted by: BA on April 9, 2008 09:35 AM
6. Who has put Popular Mechanics as judge and jury of what is or isn't the top structures that have to be repaired?

I listen to those old farts; you know, the engineers that said a retrofit would solve the problem a lot cheaper, thank you, just as well as a rebuild.

Posted by: swatter on April 9, 2008 09:54 AM
7.
Why did Gregorius spend all that money fixing it last year anyway?

Shouldn't she have just torn it down and then let the cards fall where they may (instead of the cars falling, that is).

Same with the 520. Regardless of what we do in the future, it's still a clear and present danger.

Quite frankly though -- it comes down to the individual. Anyone foolish enough to use the 520, or to take his family in car across it is inviting death and danger. Same with the Viaduct (and that includes walking or parking underneath it).

But, that doesn't concern me as much, since lately I have studiously avoided going to downtown Seattle and happily find entertainment in the hamlet of Kent...much nicer place I think...

Posted by: John Bailo on April 9, 2008 09:59 AM
8. ...and a street light can just as well fall on you, your house, car, etc or a cavernous hole open up anywhere; if you happen to be chicken little! I know: let's all confine ourselves to our homes, under a safe reinforced structure behind our computers....Oh wait, don't we do that now. ;)

Posted by: Duffman on April 9, 2008 10:05 AM
9. @7 John Bailo - I haven't driven across 520 since the last inspection and have avoided the AWV for years, specifically because they keep telling us how dangerous they are.

So if they are so dangerous, why is the Queen not doing anything to push forward a fix?

Posted by: Melissa on April 9, 2008 10:07 AM
10. BA...

Having studied on this, neither is safe.

The plates are what I would called a half A** fix at best. It makes no difference if it's a rolling or a shear earthquake brick builds will fall!

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 9, 2008 10:20 AM
11. What's all the panic about the viaduct? I thought the "emergency gas tax" increase that was pushed through by The Gregoire Gang a few years back was going to allow her administration to jump right on this problem and have it resolved based on having adequate financial resources on hand from the emergency gas tax increase. Or maybe the tax increase was just needed to pay for the ongoing studies that have no end.

Posted by: JohnB on April 9, 2008 10:31 AM
12. Anyone foolish enough to use the 520, or to take his family in car across it is inviting death and danger.

I see, that's why it's backed up both ways every single day at rush hour? Looks like people of all races/incomes/genders are choosing not to live in fear of 520 sinking. =P

have avoided the AWV for years

I ran across it with a couple thousand other people on March 16th, seemed pretty stable to me.

No one is going to replace AWV until an earthquake happens and some people die. This way Gregoire/Rossi can declare a state of emergency, the US Govt. pays for a new AWV, the Wa. State taxpayers do not, everyone wins except the 30 or so people who died.

Posted by: Cato on April 9, 2008 10:36 AM
13. Gas tax increases to actually be used for what they say they would be used for? Are you kidding me? They add on these "emergency taxes" for these projects but name one project that actually got the tax assigned to it. Kinda like the flailing ferry system...ferry rate increases year after year...$265 mil set aside in 2005 for new boats...have wew seen any yet? Where did that $265 mil go?

Posted by: Melissa on April 9, 2008 10:41 AM
14. Gas tax increases to actually be used for what they say they would be used for?

Oil prices go up = gas prices go up = people drive less = less revenue collected.

Where did that $265 mil go?

There was a lot of work done expanding 405 in the Bellevue to Bothell area. They stuck in a huge new bridge going over 405 in Bellevue. If you look around improvements are being made I doubt that accounts for the entire $265 mil but I bet there's a website somewhere that will let you to find out.

The problem with the 520/AWV projects lies with very wealthy NIBYS on both sides of 520 bridge, and lack of clear plan for AWV (not to mention the pointless vote).

Posted by: Cato on April 9, 2008 10:49 AM
15. "There was a lot of work done expanding 405 in the Bellevue to Bothell area. They stuck in a huge new bridge going over 405 in Bellevue. If you look around improvements are being made I doubt that accounts for the entire $265 mil but I bet there's a website somewhere that will let you to find out."

The $265 mil was set aside to be used SPECIFICALLY for new boats, but once again our government chooses to tell us "this money will be used for this project if you pass this tax increase" then they choose to use it elsewhere and we end up with limited ferry service, roads ready to fall into the water and no plans in place yet for these things to be fixed, oh and we need more money for these projects because we allocated it elsewhere instead of where we said (lied) we would use it.

Posted by: Melissa on April 9, 2008 10:56 AM
16. We're talking about spending several billion dollars to fix the viaduct to save "maybe" a couple dozen lives? Doesn't make much sense to me. We cannot make the entire world totally SAFE. If a massive quake hits which is strong enough to bring down the old viaduct and kill a couple dozen people, what do you think the rest of the region will look like? The viaduct is going to be an afterthought. You'll see total building collapses, flooding, coastal catastrophy from a tsunami, thousands of people dead who were NOT on the viaduct. Someone needs to put this into perspective. LET IT FALL. Then build a new one. Chances are a new one would be seriously damaged in a massive quake anyway. And even if it wasn't destroyed, you'd see a shiny new viaduct amidst a huge pile of ruins and dead bodies. Where should we have spend the money, on strengthening buildings or on the viaduct?

Posted by: Scott on April 9, 2008 11:00 AM
17. Scott, it's more than saving a "few" lives. When our goverment poses an "emergency gas tax" to replace the viaduct and then does nothing...what does that say? Bait and switch anyone?

Posted by: Melissa on April 9, 2008 11:07 AM
18. We're talking about spending several billion dollars to fix the viaduct to save "maybe" a couple dozen lives?

GOP mantra, every life is sacred, no matter the cost (unless you don't have health care, then you are just gaming the system).

Posted by: Rabble Rouser on April 9, 2008 11:36 AM
19. I find it comical how readers here will complain about Sound Transit and Transportation spending, yet in the same breath, blaim CG for not wasting tax payer dollars on a Viaduct boondoggle.

Here is a plain an simple solution. Utilizes a Public/Private Partnership contract to replace the Viaduct with the Private enterprise floating the bonds and pay the Private enterprise with tolls charged on the highway that equal the costs of paying off the bonds. No State Money and the people who use it pay for it.

Can't be done? Well, it already has been done in this state. It is called the new (Gig Harbor) Narrows bridge (or Bob Oke Memorial bridge -- i.e., final name hasn't been selected yet).

Even better let the Peninsula Residents vote on the proposed tolls, or even the whole state. You see if the Peninsula can be stuck paying tolls on a bridge that they rejected (but passed due to the measures was put to vote over too broad a geographic base). If we have to pay tolls, then Seattlites need to buck it up too.

Posted by: tc on April 9, 2008 12:13 PM
20. Reply 18: "GOP mantra, every life is sacred, no matter the cost (unless you don't have health care, then you are just gaming the system)".

Liberal Mantra: Confuse the issue by ignoring "scale". It's just nonsense. There is a difference between ripping millions of unborn children out of the womb and spending $8 Billion on a viaduct to save 24 people.

Posted by: Scott on April 9, 2008 12:21 PM
21. Scott, what you are saying is do we design our structures for an earthquake 6, 7 or 8? Then you say the highest earthquake on record was a 6.8 or whatever it was. Then you design for that earthquake or one a little more or less. But, you don't design for one 10 times as big (earthquakes are assessed on a logarithmic scale where the difference between a level 7 and level 8 is a factor of 10).

Then, you look around and look at the thousands of structures in existence in Seattle and assess the damage that would be caused by the design earthquake. Then, you will find that a couple dozen people will die in a smaller design shaker whereas there will be tens of thousands dying in other structures for that same shaker.

Hate to put a dollar tag on a human life, but Scott is right on with his reasoning.

Posted by: swatter on April 9, 2008 01:05 PM
22. Designing for earthquakes puts a price-tag on human life by definition.

A decision is made as to what intensity of quake to design for - which is a compromise against the cost of addressing that quake.

A structure that can truly survive a very intense quake is unaffordable - Plus, the design intention might be to save lives (i.e. the structure stands up and people evacuate) and then the structure is torn down because it can't survive a second quake.

Shore up the viaduct (as is happening now in one area) replace what makes sense (like what is happening soon at the south end of it) - save the balance of the money and apply it to 520 where a combination of safety, and increased capacity, can be dealt with in one fell swoop.

Posted by: BA on April 9, 2008 01:20 PM
23. Exactly right, last two comments.
The same reason exists on anything that is designed. It's the reason airliners don't have ejection seats with parachutes on them for every passenger.
It's not really putting a price on a life, it's putting odds on them that nothing will happen within the normal lifetime of a structure. Granted we're getting pretty close to both a large quake and probably the useful life of the viaduct. But since a large quake will probably render the new viaduct unusable but possibly survivable, you still have that "price of a life" issue. $8 Billion divided by 24 or 100 or 500, it's still magnitudes more money per life than is spent by anyone on any other health care program, structure, or insurance policy.

Posted by: Scott on April 9, 2008 01:28 PM
24. Hopefully when the viaduct goes it will take the "Ride The Duck" down with it..

Posted by: Doc-T on April 9, 2008 03:22 PM
25. The fact that Swatter and I are on the same page here is not something to dwell on, but if he agrees that having the "Ride the Duck" underneath the viaduct at the time the earthquake drops it - well then the stars really are aligning.

Posted by: BA on April 9, 2008 04:10 PM
26. Has anyone acutally thought about the viaduct issue from a simple perspective?

There is only ONE factor of concern.

The "inconvenience quotient". Or IQ.

Everyone is going to die. So death on the viaduct is not the main concern.

Sudden death is more inconvenient than gradual death. Let's give it an IQ of 10.

Twenty people will probably die if the viaduct comes down in a quake. That's 20 x 10 or 200.

The taxes, traffic delays and re-routing associated with the viaduct removal or re-build are kind of minor compared to sudden death. Let's give those concerns an IQ of 1.

It's said that 100,000 trips are made per day on the Viaduct. If the re-build occurs then we have 100,000 x 1.

The choice is clear. Leave the viaduct up until mother nature pays to take it down.

Personally I'd rather be taken out by a lightning strike than cancer, but glory for glory, an obituary that read "He was killed in the Alaskan Way Viaduct Collapse" reads pretty well.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on April 9, 2008 04:47 PM
27. Bart, I hope you neither write climate models nor review them.

Interesting "math".

Posted by: BA on April 9, 2008 05:01 PM
28. Hey, BA,

What do climate models have to do with this discussion?

My commentary is half tongue in cheek and about the climate free viaduct.

For myself, I hope you don't review comedy OR climate models since the latter are pure humor.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on April 9, 2008 05:14 PM
29. The only given is that WHEN, NOT IF the Viaduct collapses, it will certainly be laid at the feet of G.W. Bush by the Leftist Loonbats in Seattlegrad.

Posted by: Rick D. on April 9, 2008 06:15 PM
30. Bart - poking fun at your obviously tongue and cheek calculations...

Posted by: BA on April 9, 2008 09:48 PM
31. Have you looked at the earthquake activity lately? Two over 5.0 quakes on the San Juan plate this week. Two over 3.0 near Punta Gorda CA which is the southern tip of the plate. Maybe nature will make the decision for us pretty soon. Just like climate. Brrrrrrrrr...

Posted by: scott on April 10, 2008 11:17 AM
32. Democrats of this stae had 7 years....SEVEN YEARS to come up with a plan. THey are no closer today than they were the day ofter the Nisqually quake.

It's time for CHANGE. Then we will have some HOPE of getting the viaduct replaced before it kills people.

Posted by: pbj on April 10, 2008 11:46 AM
33. I'm really surprised with all the Global warming in Seattle that the Viaduct hasn't melted!

Instead they are sanding it in April

I just can't take all this Global warming, I'm going to have to have an AC unit installed on my bicycle.

Posted by: GS on April 10, 2008 09:06 PM
34. Seattle Times seems to know something the rest of us don't:
"AWV Construction to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct is scheduled to begin in 2012, and the streetcar would not be able to operate while work is under way. Construction is expected to last until at least 2018."

Posted by: Cato on April 11, 2008 11:04 AM
35. ""AWV Construction to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct is scheduled to begin in 2012, and the streetcar would not be able to operate while work is under way. Construction is expected to last until at least 2018."

So after 7 years, theyt have "scheduled" construction to being in 2012 and it will take 6 years. So for 4 years the viaduct will be used and people will be at risk. Hardly the priority the DOT said it was when they robbed our pockets for the gas tax.

Posted by: pbj on April 11, 2008 01:30 PM
36. I'd have more respect for you if you chose to live under the bridge until the construction started Cato.........What say you?

Posted by: Rick D. on April 12, 2008 11:37 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?