September 10, 2008
Why our Transportation System has Problems: Example 173,852
Options for replacing the Viaduct are still at the public-input gathering phase.
Pathetic.
God forbid the structure falls down. It would take us six years to clean-it up and have public meetings to talk about everyone's feelings about the piles of concrete rubble and twisted steel.
Posted by Eric Earling at September 10, 2008
07:15 AM | Email This
1. State 'citizen' Sir Dino would do well to attend these forums and present his ideas; do you think he might.
2. Naaa, why wate Dino's time. They are never going to fix it Duffie.
Just spend bucks galore talking about it and keep asking for more money in taxes. Because it will fall down tomorrow don't ya know. )-:
3. And People want to know why the transportations projects cost so much. It is the hot air from all these meetings. Delay so the most expensive or the practical fixes that would do the job cheapest is forgotten. Can we say tunnel in Seattle. Watch it be 10 times even more expensive than the tunnel in BOston. And the seawall breaks because the lawyers running the show built it to flood it after it is done. So they have to rebuild it again. Remember you must use Mass transit but how when you have no roads to use for the buses.
4. Oh yes I forgot to mention. Politicians use meetings as an excuse not to make a decision. IT shows they have no brains to take and give to the public the most cost effective project. Instead hide their ideas until after an election so they are safe for 4 more years. ANd if they have to make a choice people will have forgotten about the billions wasted.
5. David, you say things so concisely and correctly.
I really don't think the bridge is in any danger of falling down, except for a major event at which time the viaduct will be the least of our worries. Get the thing repaired, as they are doing, and move on. I am comfortable with the design earthquake and am uncomfortable with the proposed magniture of earthquake they want to design to.
6. Well I think we ALL know. They want this land for other than cars. Say ocean front homes or?
7. At least this albatross is mostly around Greg Nickels neck. He was the one pushing the plan that no one could afford, or wanted. There was only ONE exit out of the tunnel, and it was at King St. Ridiculous. Downtown is still a major destination for people using 99, they were trying to make it a bypass.
Gregoire should have played tougher with Mayor McCheese and Frank Chopp. Because guess what? It's the state's money and the state's highway not the City of Seattle's. They would probably just buy more toilets with it.
8. The problem is that it's been called a disaster waiting to happen so often that, when it does, the state is going to be sued up the wazzo.
The first time someone is killed by a falling piece of that thing, the family is going to own the statehouse.
Frankly, there should have been a plan in place to replace the thing before Locke left office. He had, what, over two years? At least getting something official committed to and on paper should have been a priority. Since he failed, Gregorie should have made that one of her administrations main priorities from day one. But she's failed. And if Rossie wins, he better make it a priority or he'll be a failure there, too.
9. Chrissy has a plan. Tear it down.....in 2012! This is her plan. I don't support even Rossi's idea of a tunnel, but at least he made a friggin decision.
10. Eirik
If that bridge comes down, it's not the only thing that will fail. Good luck on that lawsuit.
It's all about ocean front view and NOTHING more.
11. But... but.... Eric, that idiotic gas tax was gonna fix the viaduct! It was going to fix EVERYTHING! It was going to make the ENTIRE WORLD safe!
Isn't that what you told us when you were supporting that idiocy so much?
12. don't expect anything to get done any time soon by anyone, I used to live in Iowa near Illinois, I was in the area for over 20 years, they have known they need another bridge over the Mississippi River, one of the main bridges is handling over 2 as many vehicles as it should have to. they have had meeting they did studies but still no bridge, I wonder if it will take a collapse of one of the bridges to get them off their collective butts, the same problem you have in Seattle area.
13. Our transportation system has problems because WSDOT can't manage to visualize any mode of transportation beyond cars and most of the constituents can't either. Given the topography and conditions they have to work with, they do pretty well. Frankly I think they are spiteful and nervous about cities and multimodal transportation because they'd have to cede some control. Seattle on the other hand is pretty stupid in constantly forgetting about its past and its future and is always stuck in the political maneuvering of the present. The needs the viaduct was built for along with the political and cultural climate that spawned it don't exist anymore. Like a lot of things in Seattle, it was a short term politically charged outlook that produced that fanciful but weak solution to congestion. Instead of developing a better city plan, they spent millions of 1950s dollars to elevate the existing corridor above that nasty old Railroad Avenue. They didn't give rerouting a second thought. It currently carries nearly double the load it was designed for, and is performing about the same as all capacity increasing congestion solutions do - ultimately increasing the amount of congestion that it contains rather than relieving the congestion it was sold to. The concept of running expressways and freeways through the middle of the most dense parts of a large city is a proven failure and requires constantly increasing capital expenditures to prevent the load from seizing up (see big dig). The hub and spoke system goes back to the beginnings of civilization, we ignore it at our expense.
Rebuilding or tearing down the viaduct without addressing the reasoning behind the placement of it in the first place is as big of a mistake as pretending we didn't build it across a major fault line. Though tearing it down would produce a shock and a more clear wake up call to the dummies that knock themselves out preserving a 2.2 mile stretch of road in a city with hundreds of miles of traffic problems. The viaduct shouldn't be where it is to do what it does. Preserving it is nosing up to the state trough in in a gesture of self justification in the most porcine way imaginable. It's worse than the Mayor's tunnel. It ain't about cars versus trains or waterfront condos or whatever. It ain't about little guys versus big rich guys either. Our transportation has problems because there is weak leadership and dim visions of the future.
14. And the emergency was?
Guess they continue to vote present.
15. This is why we need a LEADER in Olympia.
You will never please everyone on how to fix the problem. Given Seattles long history of bad transportation decisions the solution needs to be handled in Olympia. It is a STATE highway after all.
16. I guess Republican's feel we can afford to blow a couple billion dollars of the state's money in a recession economy on a bridge replacement that only serves a few thousand people. I guess everyone in the local GOP has adopted Ted Stevens-esque spending habits.
If the thing falls down we'll get emergency money and the Fed's will pay for it. Currently the bridge would be considered pork spending, the same type of pork the Hypocrisy Party rails on and on about this election season.
17. Cato
I guess everyone in the local GOP has adopted Ted Stevens-esque spending habits.
____________________________
Yep a few did and in 2006 we didn't vote for them.
So why is it that now the dem's are in charge since 2006.
The spending is going even higher. Plus they want to bail out Freddy & Fanny.
So cato you lost big-time in the other thread so you came here to spew?
18. If the thing falls down we'll get emergency money and the Fed's will pay for it.
God help me, it's difficult not to devolve to name-calling.
Ahem, obfusCATOr, how do the "fed's" get that money? Do they earn in it some way we aren't privvy to?
Or do they get it from ALL OF US, THE TAXPAYERS, you nitwit!
"Bless me Father for I have sinned..."
On another note, I would like to honor my beautiful Mother who we suddenly lost 6 years ago today. She was kind and a bit meek... and afraid of my Grandmother even well after we lost her! Mom, the daughters you raised missed somehow managed to miss that meek gene! We love you Mom.
19. Or do they get it from ALL OF US, THE TAXPAYERS, you nitwit!
Oh look, now we're name calling. What are you 10?
You also seem to be claiming that voters in Palouse, WA are more happy to take a couple billion from the general fund (previous threads seem to say we're in debt) to fund a bridge that they will likely never use in Seattle. I think you opinion is seriously misguided.
20. Cato you are not making sense. The bottom line is all these emergencies for roads that our gas tax is suppose to be used for. And light rail wants to somehow get their hands on that money. Mass transit takes a bigger hunk of the transportation dollar than any other source. We get very little for what they collect. Broken promises on light rail that was suppose to be built by 2000 where is it. Now those same people who spent the entire budget prior to one inch rail line being biult. Claim the are on time and under budget.
Mass transit the bigger it is needs more tax dollars to keep it running. Yet the roads needed for buses to use are getting worse each year. Hundreds of bridges in this state have problems that need fixing. Maintenance of the infrastructure is put on the back burner. Look at the money Seattle voted for to fix thier roads. It did not happen instead money diverted to beautify a road.
Democrats never solve a problem they let it get worse. ANd because they own the Governor, The House and the Senate. Where are the fixes. WHere are the solutions. They are in still discussing in. By my estimate the Via duct will have 3 solutions for the voters to vote on in 2100. Just hope it can not kill anyone in the mean time.
Just as the Queen will not make a decision if her life depended on it. except to raise salaries for her Union State Workers. when she knows we have a 2.7 billion deficit waiting to happen. If Dino cancels the agreement will the state workers go on strike. THat will be good. THey can balance the budget by the state workers not getting paid. ANd no social programs being able to use their funding because the workers are on strike. Get a 6 month strike and we will have a balance budget. I love that idea. Sorry to those on social programs but you voted for the Democrats because you wanted the social programs run by the Government. You will have to do without if they go on strike.
You say it is against the law. Well Look at the teachers strike in Bellevue. Still happening and it is against the law. Laws mean nothing to Government employees. it is for everyone else to follow.
21. Cato,
You are a nitwit; it's not a name, it's an accurate label.
You nitwit, it's not "a few thousand cars a day", it's over 100,000 cars a day, and a full 25% of the total North-South traffic through Seattle.
Yes, so your nitwit opinion is to let it fall down, kill a few thousand people, then let it completely destroy the traffic in the Seattle area for years while it's cleaned up.
I guess since you nitwit Slavery Party hacks like to murder babies (both born and unborn), killing thousands of adults is completely logical.
I guess, Cato, you're not a nitwit. You're a monster.
22. Hey look folks, Cato the liar showed his face.
Cato's lies:
Claimed Levi Johnston was a rapist by Alaskan Law. When confronted to prove it, he selectivey
quoted a sentence of rape law when in fact when the entire text reveals the intercourse was
perfectly legal in Alaska.
Claimed Seattle Times endorsed Bush in 2004.
Makes stuff up out of thin air, no facts, no proof.
23. LX1iG5
srhfxcebhzrg, [url=http://vjytnhvlnphc.com/]vjytnhvlnphc[/url], [link=http://ytebhxqiqdnj.com/]ytebhxqiqdnj[/link], http://ptoqexyqmygf.com/