West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » West Seattle Rants & Raves

1. skeeter
   Member Profile

   Oh my gosh! Anyone driven down Delridge lately? Or even worse - Sylvan Way? There are potholes so large and deep that drivers are swerving all over the road to avoid them. Someone is going to get hurt really bad.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

2. JanS
   Member Profile

   

   weather...it will get worse before it gets better...have you reported them to the city? The city wants to know..

   http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/potholereport.htm

   Posted 1 year ago #         

3. nighthawk
   Member Profile

   Definately report them because I have noticed some new ones in various locations because the weather takes small ones and makes them worse.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

4. Genesee Hill
   Member Profile

   

   Yes, make sure you report them. Believe it or not, I have found SDOT amazingly responsive to requests I have made.

   As JanS said: weather. We had that really cold streak and now the heavy rains. It wreaks havoc on asphalt.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

5. Ken
   Member Profile

   

   Sylvan way was predictable. I think I predicted it here. The paving was half assed and only done to code right in front of the new developments. The green belt(city owned) and the graveyard (low tax rate) mean the rest of the street was done by the lowest bidder and only in spots. The design of the sylvan heights paving shifted the water over to the city/graveyard side of the street which has no curbs or path for drainage. This may be because of restrictions on drainage within the Longfellow creek watershed, but the result is the same as it is every year. The damn street washes out.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

6. christopherboffoli
   Member Profile

   There are some bone rattling potholes out there! But the good news is that I saw a pothole filler truck on 35th a while ago.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

7. ToddinWestwood
   Member Profile

   

   can we all report California Ave between Morgan and Alaska as one large pothole?

   Posted 1 year ago #         

8. Genesee Hill
   Member Profile

   

   Love 'em or hate 'em, I believe the SDOT has their hands full now.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

9. nighthawk
   Member Profile

   for areas that have a lot of damage, more than one pothole I only found the pothole reporting form. There was no other form for street maintenance requests. I live on a street that had a bad, bad section and each time it rained it was like running a mine field not to kill your car. I reported it an presumably others on the street did to because they did redo that section of the street over the past two years.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

10. TammiWS
    Member Profile

    

    Ha.. Good idea Todd - that whole stretch of Calif. is a mess!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

11. Genesee Hill
    Member Profile

    

    Yeah, a lot of streets have problems. It is winter. I have found that going to the City of Seattle website, looking up the appropriate phone number, and (gasp) calling them, you can have good results.

    I have found that complaining on this forum, WSB, does not lead to results! CALL SDOT.

    Of course, if you just like complaining to this forum, please, feel free!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

12. ToddinWestwood
    Member Profile

    

    "Of course, if you just like complaining to this forum, please, feel free! "

    well, Alllllriggghhhhtt! :)

    Posted 1 year ago #         

13. Genesee Hill
    Member Profile

    

    I forgot to add, chupacabras are sometimes useful for filling in potholes...particularly if their bellies are full of gravel...

    Posted 1 year ago #         

14. celeste17
    Member Profile

    

    Have you tried coming back into west Seattle via the surface roads? I took Mom downtown on Friday and came home via First and then over to Alaskan Way and the street to get from first to Alaskan was a mess. Then a train decided it needed to sit at the crossing for a while so i went down first until I could cut back over to East Marginal way and the area where you have to go under the viaduct to turn onto Spokane was one long pot hole. I get tired of trying to protect my tires, transmission, undercarriage of my car by avoiding the pot holes.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

15. GoGo
    Member Profile

    

    What you said, Celeste17! That route back home is terrible, must be all those big ol' trucks. Wonder if we'll ever be able to get back home the old way, doesn't seem like anyone's in a big hurry to fix that problem.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

16. skeeter
    Member Profile

    Original poster here. I did file a report about the big potholes on Sylvan. The city should close that street - it is very dangerous.

    My overall complaint is that other cities in Western Washington - Renton, Tukwila, Bellevue, Bremerton, etc all have roads in far, far better condition that West Seattle. I wonder what these cities do so well to be able to keep their roads in good condition and Seattle cannot.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

17. Keith
    Member Profile

    

    Agreed on Sylvan - it's not just annoying, but dangerous.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

18. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    the city uses its money to hand out free lights to bicyclists

    Posted 1 year ago #         

19. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    Hooper, you know better than that. You sound very unhappy here...why do you stay?

    As more and more things get cut back, and the legislature doesn't have the balls to put together a 2/3 majority to raise a few taxes, those potholes will grow as big as bathtubs...and we all will have to live with it, as our infrastructure gets further and further behind. They can't do it all if people like Tim Eyman keep taking revenue away. Those bicycle lights came from a fund that is designated for bicycle safety, I understand. We're in trouble because we have too long robbed Peter to pay Paul. We can't keep doing that.Taxes need to be raised, no matter how the sheeple feel !

    Posted 1 year ago #         

20. Ken
    Member Profile

    

    The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
    -- G.B Shaw

    Posted 1 year ago #         

21. Ken
    Member Profile

    

    Note. The infamous area (free range potholes) under 99 where marginal exits to the lower bridge, has been repaved for the first time in memory.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

22. lucky chick
    Member Profile

    I also reported the ones on Delridge. I commute by bike and it's very dangerous on the way home, with cars swerving onto the shoulder to avoid them.

    I find SDOT to be pretty responsive. At least when cars are involved (I sometimes pretend I'm reporting a car hazard rather than a bike hazard).

    Posted 1 year ago #         

23. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    i never said i was unhappy here; but i believe government needs to reassess its priorities to reflect a maxed out credit card.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

24. redblack
    Member Profile

    

    you know that tim eyman's dumb MVET-slashing $30 car tab initiative helped max out that credit card faster, right, hooper? and that taxes on vehicles don't even come close to paying for road maintenance, right?

    it's like saying, "oh, you have more stuff to buy to keep your aging infrastructure intact? well, then let's reduce your budget!" makes no sense.

    furthermore, do you really think that the $5000 you keep wringing your hands over would come close to - or even make a dent in - fixing what needs fixing?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

25. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    the MVET may not have passed if the legislature had fixed the peoples huge irritant of inflated values of older vehicles. this item alone sealed the fate of the MVET.

    i fully support a higher use fee on gasoline.

    the $5,000 is simply a symptom of the issue, $10,000 there another $5,000 here and it starts to add up quickly.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

26. redblack
    Member Profile

    

    well, let's just throw the baby out with the bath water and have a tantrum.

    seriously? instead of addressing the way vehicles are valued, we'll just hamstring the budget! stupid government!

    it's like killing a mouse with a howitzer.

    now, i'd be interested to see how much that pothole work would cost if we hired private contractors to fix them.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

27. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    that is an interesting inquiry what would it cost to use a private contractor versus city forces? my gut sense is that the private contractor would be more cost effective.

    the governor had a chance to step forward and address the valuation issue before it was voted on but did not. the valuation issue alone irked a lot of people.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

28. redblack
    Member Profile

    

    no, hooper.

    see, since SDOT crews are union, then their wages are the prevailing wage for street work in seattle.

    add in a private contractor's 10 - 20% profit margin.

    the city has to expend time and manpower to shop bids. then we have to deal with questions like, "do they have certified flaggers?" "is their license/insurance/bond up to date?" in short, can they fulfill - safely! - a contract with a government agency?

    let's leave the potholes to SDOT. no profit for anyone but the wage earners and the driving public.

    re: vehicle valuation: i was talking about tim eyman's knee-jerk tantrum over licensing fees, when - according to you - MVET was fine. it was the valuation that was screwy.

    so why didn't eyman address the valuation issue through the initiative process - instead of nuking the MVET like a petulant child?

    answer: because he's a horse's ass.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

29. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    the governor could have stepped to the plate on the valuation and if had done so the measure may have been defeated.

    private contractors are more efficient, because they eliminate dead wood on their staffs

    Posted 1 year ago #         

30. gelund
    Member Profile

    I called the city and reported the potholes 3 weeks ago. Yesterday I hit one on Sylvan near the Home Depot entrance and ended up with a flat tire. I just put new tires on my vehicle in November.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

31. Genesee Hill
    Member Profile

    

    gelund:

    Did you hit one of the potholes you called about 3 weeks ago, or a new one?

    Sometimes, a follow up call is necessary.

    Sometimes my wife has to ask me twice to clean the gutters. OK, sometimes more than twice.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

32. transplantella
    Member Profile

    

    I've lived in a number of places in the US and several countries overseas.

    I've never been anywhere that the people were not complaining about potholes or the poor condition of the roads. Not anywhere.

    And if it makes you feel any better, I've seen roads worse much worse than anything around here. I once saw a pothole in a city street in Baku Azerbaijan that was big enough to swallow an entire bobtail truck. Gaping hole it was. I think I was so impressed I actually took a picture of it....

    Carry on.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

33. skeeter
    Member Profile

    The Tim Eyman issue is separate. All cities in WA are effected equally by any initiative or funding shortage. I'm still confused why Seattle roads are in terrible condition and roads in other WA cities (Renton, Tukwila, Everett, etc, etc) are in so much better shape than Seattle roads.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

34. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    because Seattle spends more per person on social services that leaves less for basic government such as street maintenance

    Posted 1 year ago #         

35. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    there are more people, more cars, more damage here on the west side in the big city....it's apples/oranges...good grief.It's not just the spending habits IMO. If you're gonna put that out there, back it up with facts and numbers, please, thank you. In other words, prove it :)

    Posted 1 year ago #         

36. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    Seattle budget Human Services $176,476,000 with population of 563,374 yields $313.25/person

    Bellevue budget Human Services $7,581,446 with a population of 126,626 yields $59.87/person.

    Renton budget Community Services $14,258,275 population 86,230 yields $165.36/person

    The data was obtained via looking at each City's budget data available online; thus it is clear Seattle expends substantially more per person 5+ times more than Bellevue and almost twice as much as Renton per person. The streets in Bellevue and Renton are in far better shape than they are in Seattle.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

37. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    thanks...I wonder if the difference is the affluence of the areas. Bellevue has no real poor inner city area...it falls on Seattle to absorbs them. Just a theory. Seattle is a much older city than B'vue., too. In my opinion, one can't just say we don't spend right and call it a day. There are mitigating factors in the differences that have to be studied, too. And roads, well, there are simply more people and more cars in the Seattle city limits, I would think, that simply do more damage. Of course, I could be full of it, too, you know - lol...I'm always the first to admit that :)

    Posted 1 year ago #         

38. chrisma
    Member Profile

    

    hooper is backing up his claims with data. that's a pleasure to see.

    you may change some minds yet, hooper.

    happy new year!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

39. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    Renton is an old City also with a lot of traffic passing through it and its Human Service spending per capita is half of Seattle's. Thus if Seattle simply spent per capita what Renton does the City would have about $83,316.475 more dollars to spend on basic government such as maintaining streets. The City has failed to properly fund maintenance for years!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

40. TDe
    Member Profile

    It's all a matter of spending priorities. If you had about 4x more people in your city than close sister cities, would you spend your bucks on the people of your city or would you spend your bucks on the roads? There are only so many bucks to go around, so what are the prioities? People or roads?

    There are also many possible options to this grave and menacing problem. I can think of 5 right off the top of my head. Can you think of others?

    1. We can sit around and gripe about how bad the roads are and how our money continues to be spent on people, but that doesn't really solve the road problem.
    2. We can wait for another election and try to elect people who will completely change the spending priorities of the city, but it takes a lot of time and money to change an electorate and government spending habits while our roads continue to fall apart.
    3. We can give up and move to another city and live happily where the roads are more of a priority.
    4. We can gather together as residents of the City and try to find a way to solve the problem without government... maybe set up a road fund where city residents can chip in voluntarily to help out in some way.
    5. We can demand that the City raise our taxes for local streets in some way, so that a few more people will be driven to move to cheaper cities and we'll have nicer roads.

    So many options...

    Posted 1 year ago #         

41. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    or we can prioritize maintenance appropriately using existing resources.

    remember TDe i ascertained spending level per capita and Seattle expends twice (almost) as much as Renton on human services and far more than other local agencies and our streets are in poorer condition. thus i would propose adjusting per capita spending on human services to the same level as say Renton (Bellevue expends even less) and use that money for basic maintenance.

    the residents of seattle need to contact the electeds and let them know that they want human service spending to be more in line with other local agencies on a per capita basis and make basic maintenance a higher priority.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

42. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    you keep quoting "per capita"..now quote me the numbers of people who actually live in these cities who are getting these "human services". That makes a difference , too, IMO. We have more in need here...so we spend more.

    Another option...give up your car, stay off the roads as much as possible (I do it), and stop adding to the problem.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

43. skeeter
    Member Profile

    Very insightful analysis Hooper. And good job going through data. Thank you.

    My thoughts - Seattle has a great deal of poverty (per capita) compared with other cities, so Seattle has to spend more money in human services (per capita) and less on roads.

    You'd think Seattle would have the best roads because it is a dense city. So the miles of paved road per taxpayer in Seattle is much less than basically any other city in the state.

    I actually do more that just complain on forums, though! I also complain to officials :-) I have written to the Mayor, the councilperson in charge or the transportation division, and the SDOT. The letter to the mayor went unanswered. The councilperson and/or SDOT (can't remember which) wrote back that Seattle has a 30 year backlog of street repair and there's not much we can do about it with existing funding levels.

    I've only lived in Seattle for 3.5 years but once I have more experience with the city, I may contemplate a run for city council. I am significantly more conservative than the typical Seattle voter, though, so I'm not sure how much chance I would have.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

44. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    JanS i provided you the data you had requested and it is clear the city spends more per capita than other city's in the area. and arguments can be made that the services attract people from outside seattle. maybe seattle ought to limit services to people who have lived in the city at least say a year (and of course they should be limited to physically and mentally challenged people only).

    the city has deferred maintenance on streets for years and it shows in the poor quality of many streets.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

45. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    here you go...just for you, hooper ;)

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013832220_potholes03m.html?syndication=rss

    Posted 1 year ago #         

46. austin
    Member Profile

    

    In that article the example of a woman blaming a pothole because she fell down and broke her arm (?!) is pretty absurd. That's like walking face first into a light pole and blaming the pole for your broken nose. I'm additionally amused by the increasingly default "where I just moved from is better cuz thats what I'm used to" followup.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

47. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    there is a big article today in the seattle times regarding potholes

    Posted 1 year ago #         

48. Dalamar437
    Member Profile

    An occasional pot hole doesn't bother me that much... but a new one every couple of days year after year is ridiculous!
    Sylvan Way is repeated problem and needs long term fix. We can keep calling in the pot holes and they'll come out and patch them but that only lasts a short while.
    That whole strip from the new developments down past home depot all needs to be completely redone.
    I think the big semi trucks going in and out of home depot everyday contribute to the breakdown faster too!
    By now I'm sure they've spent more money in patch work than it would have cost to redo the whole road properly.
    Is it expensive drainage issues? Or why does it feel like they're avoiding doing it right 1 time?
    Is seattle.gov/transportation not the right place to make these sorts of requests?

    ...and yes, I've tried reporting it this way.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

49. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    Dalamar437 - that is the cost of deferred maintenance. fixing potholes hap hazard is not cost effective.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

50. Sue
    Member Profile

    

    Todd (reply #7), I just did what you suggested - I reported the entire roadway of California between Edmunds & Fauntleroy (with particular emphasis on the bone-rattling pothole going southbound, just north of Hudson). I drove up and down California in that stretch half a dozen times this weekend, and it was horrendous - I was spending more time swerving to avoid potholes and paying attention to what I might be driving into, that it was hard to also pay attention to the other important things of driving, like traffic and pedestrians.

    I encourage everyone to start reporting these potholes when they encounter them: http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/potholereport.htm

    Posted 1 year ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.