4 years till Viaduct-lessness

grr January 4, 2008 (4:33 am)

…and if she’s NOT around??? Then what?

Steven January 4, 2008 (7:45 am)

Maybe no viaduct would even get the mayor to use public transportation! Then, we’d get decent service out of the Admiral district!

chas redmond January 4, 2008 (7:51 am)

Well, that’s one gauntlet thrown. Wonder what the Citizen Stakeholder members have to say. We’ve already heard from deputy mayor Tim Ceis and he didn’t sound that positive about the Governor’s comments. Given the timing, Gregoire’s comments do seem to have that familiar ring of politics to it. SR99 is a state highway, though, and from previous discussions it seems that the state trumps the county and the city. On the other hand, the legislature (Chopp in particular) seem to be on another wavelength. We seem to like political dogfights and this one appears to have all the earmarks of a long and interesting show. 2012 gives everyone four years and a couple of elections to mull this one over. Looking forward to whoever next tosses their gauntlet into the ring.

Tonya January 4, 2008 (7:53 am)

She really does think she’s queen christine doesn’t she..

I for one hope she is not around.

JohnM January 4, 2008 (8:14 am)

So much for Rapid Ride…..Monorail anyone?

Kayleigh January 4, 2008 (8:15 am)

I don’t understand why the Governor is strong-arming this one, especially at this point in time. Apparently she doesn’t regularly commute on the viaduct and hasn’t felt the pain when it is backed up, closed, etc.

Heaven help us if I-5 is our only North-South highway for ANY length of time.

Mr. JT January 4, 2008 (8:43 am)

SDOT is so tied up being PC internally they don’t get anything done. One would think with the Director of SDOT and the Mayor both living in West Seattle, that there would be a bit more action than waiting for a theat like this from Olympia.

coffee geek January 4, 2008 (8:58 am)

Doing something (soon) about the viaduct is better than doing nothing. Any amount of commute inconvenience is better than a structure that crumbles during a rush-hour earthquake.

JE January 4, 2008 (9:08 am)

JohnM–Yes, please!

David January 4, 2008 (9:45 am)

Wow…if we hadn’t run from the monorail (which was ready to start actual construction) and just stopped to refigure the financing (maybe 6-8 month delay) it would be done by the time the viaduct comes down…and we’d have a high speed ‘over traffic’ transit to downtown.

But Seattle being scared of doing anything bold…chickened out after half a dozen ‘yes’ votes and 3 years of work. We tossed it all out because of one no vote. Now we have nothing. We didn’t replace the monorail with anything else. And the viaduct is still coming down. Way to go Seattle! Maybe we can start a whole NEW (mono)rail project. Design it from scratch again. Spend 3 years on it…and cancel it again…and again…and again. By 2213 we might actually have a train into West Seattle.

Rick January 4, 2008 (12:24 pm)

Don’t give the queen a red button to push or we’re all toast! Anyway, let’s use these best and brightest minds we keep hearing about to build the offshore bridge. Think outside of the box a bit. Sometimes it works!

MassTransitNeeded January 4, 2008 (1:12 pm)

Monorail… oh boy. Try sitting on the citizen’s advisory commmittee for Portland’s light rail for 6 years… it gives an entirely different perspective about the viability of a single-track monorail without adequate parking support, representing the most costly and least effective form of mass transit known in this nation. Think about the nightmare that has to be inherent in a project that would make all but one contractor back out of a construction bidding process. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. I’m ALL FOR mass transit. I agree Seattle has sat on our collective hands far too long. But “just doing something” that represents a poor decision is not wise. I’m still waiting for someone with foresight and a cohesive plan. Can’t blame the voters for agreeing with me. And yes, I’m prepared to be flamed mercilessly on this topic, but everyone… please… no matter what solution is proposed, ALWAYS peruse the details of its scope, program, budget, constructability specifications, and ridership trends around the nation before judging its potential for solving our transportation crisis. There were (and are) far more viable solutions available.

Trisket January 4, 2008 (1:48 pm)

Sorry Mr JT- Don’t expect any action from the mayor or the SDOT director. They are very busy building a streetcar and spending all that new transportation tax money. Besides, tearing down the viaduct is exactly what the mayor wanted…

Todd in WEstwood/S.Delridge January 4, 2008 (2:47 pm)

Well, Mayor Gridlock and now Gov. Lady think that everyone in Seattle MUST be in the tech sector and can telecommute. I must be the last person in Seattle who does not work in I.T. I have to drive to work, sorry Mayor McCheese.

JohnM January 4, 2008 (3:27 pm)

MassTransitNeeded sounds like….wait, is that you, Mr. Mayor?

Al January 4, 2008 (3:47 pm)

“There were (and are) far more viable solutions available.” Ok, what are they? And are they available to West Seattle BEFORE the viaduct comes down? Be realistic here, there will be incremental closures before it comes down, right? It’s not going to be an overnight destruction in 2012. We want to hear “dedicated right of way east AND west bound bus lanes – for more than just 1/2 mile on the bridge (think all of 1st Ave to Spokane St), plus more frequent and earlier/later running route options” if nothing else.

Bob Loblaw January 4, 2008 (3:54 pm)

Flying car?

Burton January 4, 2008 (3:56 pm)

Madam Governor, tear down this viaduct!

Mickymse January 4, 2008 (5:26 pm)

Just a couple facts to note:

RapidRide is not dependent upon the Viaduct at all. It is planned to run in an extended bus lane across Spokane Street to a new eastbound exit onto 4th Ave, where the buses would then take the E-3 Busway into the Transit Tunnel.

As for monorail, I’m not looking to debate it or promote it right here… but just wanted to say that internationally-recognized experts repeatedly said the problem was the financing. It wasn’t the design, the technology, or anything else. It was money, pure and simple.

grr January 4, 2008 (8:36 pm)

Micky…I’d love to read the reports from those ‘experts’.

– Indeed, Financing was just ONE of the issues. The simple fact is that 3 of the 4 original companies bidding on the monorail looked at the scope of work and specifications (including the structural engineers) and said it couldn’t be done they way they were trying to do it.

and..gee..what happened to the profit the city made by reselling the land they acquired and ended up not using?

grr January 4, 2008 (8:40 pm)

â€œThere were (and are) far more viable solutions available.â€ Ok, what are they?”

I can think of one big one…ENCOURAGE some business growth and development on the Huling Properties to create our own ‘business center’, and encourage employers to create branch offices over HERE.. Make it so a few thousand of us DON’T have to go over the bridge…

–that’s just a start.

do ya’ll remember when they were ‘creating’ those bus/HOV lanes going Eastbound….BEFORE they were designated as bus/HOV? Remember how much SMOOTHER traffic flowed across the bridge???? I sure do.

PSPS January 4, 2008 (9:05 pm)

The monorail was doomed to failure due to its ridiculous “$1 billion per mile” pricetag. Better that the plug was pulled before construction actually started.
I think the best viaduct solution is a simple retrofit. It will cost less than half of even the cheapest of any other alternative, plus it won’t require any closure of the roadway.
And this “street level” option? What a joke! 100,000 cars and trucks per day dumped onto SODO? It was bad enough after the 2/14/01 quake when the viaduct was closed for just a few days.
(An amusing aside: I saw an “artist’s rendition” of the “street level” option. It showed nice wide boulevards without traffic lights and without … traffic! It had maybe four or five cars shown whizzing down the happy street. In your dreams, maybe!)

Booger January 4, 2008 (10:10 pm)

I say tear it down. It takes too long for Seattle to make up its mind and do anything. I for one use the viaduct everyday, and just hope I’m not on it in an earthquake.

So what do we do when that comes, and hundreds die. Sorry! We couldn’t decide what to do! We couldn’t make the difficult decisions! We couldn’t all agree, so we did nothing! Sorry those people had to die.

Plan to tear it down, and force the issue to be discussed and resolved. I don’t care if it is another viaduct, a tunnel, or surface streets, as long as it is a complete solution.

And speaking of better transit options, why not light rail into West Seattle?