Comments on: The Viaduct Conspiracy http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/ There are angels, in your angles, there's a low moon caught in your tangles...* Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:57:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Chris Stefan http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-2018 Sun, 11 May 2008 20:25:27 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-2018 For what it is worth the structural engineering community is in agreement that the viaduct should be shut down as unsafe ASAP. Almost every engineer who has had a serious chance to look at the current condition of the viaduct has come to this conclusion. Frankly I wish the DOT would "red tag" the structure it might provide the incentive needed to actually do something about the situation. For another unsafe bridge that should be closed to traffic see the 14/16th Ave S bridge which looks like it will collapse into the Duwamish before anything is done about it. For what it is worth the structural engineering community is in agreement that the viaduct should be shut down as unsafe ASAP. Almost every engineer who has had a serious chance to look at the current condition of the viaduct has come to this conclusion.

Frankly I wish the DOT would “red tag” the structure it might provide the incentive needed to actually do something about the situation.

For another unsafe bridge that should be closed to traffic see the 14/16th Ave S bridge which looks like it will collapse into the Duwamish before anything is done about it.

]]> by: David Sucher http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1945 Wed, 07 May 2008 19:30:26 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1945 I forgot to mention that there ARE ways to deal with the incedible problem of the construction period (i.e. you can't paint the part of the floor on which you are standing) such as the "Elliot Bay Bridge" http://www.elliottbaybridge.com/ which reporter Danny Weastnet favors or this "high viaduct" http://www.seattleskyway.com/ which also looks intriguing. But I don't think that WSDOT has the flexibility to honestly consider such alternatives. That's fine if they want to prove me wrong. I forgot to mention that there ARE ways to deal with the incedible problem of the construction period (i.e. you can’t paint the part of the floor on which you are standing) such as the “Elliot Bay Bridge”
http://www.elliottbaybridge.com/
which reporter Danny Weastnet favors
or this “high viaduct”
http://www.seattleskyway.com/
which also looks intriguing.

But I don’t think that WSDOT has the flexibility to honestly consider such alternatives. That’s fine if they want to prove me wrong.

]]> by: David Sucher http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1944 Wed, 07 May 2008 19:20:31 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1944 Believe what you want. I have no dog in this fight because I doubt I will be living in Seattle when the bills come due. I am just telling you what I see. Gregoire's statement makes no sense. I am not saying she is lying but I am saying that she has probably not through through the issues and was trying to look bold and decisive, after acting weak and confused. Anyway she'll be gone in 2012. :) The issue is summed up in Cary Moon's good question question: "If we can do without the Viaduct during 5 years of construction, then why can't we do without it at all?" Well a lot of people will say that we can't do without the Viaduct UNLESS we make commit to huge interim transit investments, which cost is not figured into any plan which tears down the Viaduct to replace it with something else. And in any case we are making NO such preparations for alternative transport during construction. Such systems must be in <i>in place</i> well-before the Viaduct is shut down. We aren't even planning such systems nor thinking how to finance them or make them politically palatable. (Who is going to volunteer to have more buses through their neighborhood? Top of QA, maybe?) And 2012 is not that far away, though conveniently after the date at which our Governor will end her second term and probably retire, laeving the issue to her successor who in typical NW fashion will be able to disown whatever tentative decisions she has made. No, it's a mess and the State/City is doing nothing to solve it. The only REAL action which is actually happening is repairing the Viaduct. Just look. Actions talk. Believe what you want. I have no dog in this fight because I doubt I will be living in Seattle when the bills come due. I am just telling you what I see.

Gregoire’s statement makes no sense. I am not saying she is lying but I am saying that she has probably not through through the issues and was trying to look bold and decisive, after acting weak and confused. Anyway she’ll be gone in 2012. :)

The issue is summed up in Cary Moon’s good question question: “If we can do without the Viaduct during 5 years of construction, then why can’t we do without it at all?”

Well a lot of people will say that we can’t do without the Viaduct UNLESS we make commit to huge interim transit investments, which cost is not figured into any plan which tears down the Viaduct to replace it with something else.

And in any case we are making NO such preparations for alternative transport during construction. Such systems must be in in place well-before the Viaduct is shut down. We aren’t even planning such systems nor thinking how to finance them or make them politically palatable. (Who is going to volunteer to have more buses through their neighborhood? Top of QA, maybe?) And 2012 is not that far away, though conveniently after the date at which our Governor will end her second term and probably retire, laeving the issue to her successor who in typical NW fashion will be able to disown whatever tentative decisions she has made.

No, it’s a mess and the State/City is doing nothing to solve it. The only REAL action which is actually happening is repairing the Viaduct.

Just look. Actions talk.

]]> by: vanderleun http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1940 Wed, 07 May 2008 15:35:52 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1940 Why would anyone want to spend the money to tear down the viaduct when just waiting will git 'er done for you? Why would anyone want to spend the money to tear down the viaduct when just waiting will git ‘er done for you?

]]> by: Dan Staley http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1923 Tue, 06 May 2008 13:54:15 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1923 Most of the time, emergencies are declared <i>post facto</i>. Why? Too many emergencies would be declared the other way (Orange Alerts during the 2004 election cycle, Dubya-Em-Dee anyone?) to <a href="http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Pharmacology/dc-bits/horsey-26-10-03.gif" title="Horsey Goering cartoon" rel="nofollow">manipulate the public</a> [link] to do what a government wants. I think we've seen enough of the manipulation of manufactured fear from this crew to realize why we should be careful in this way. Now. I substantially agree with Brian and Dan'l. I think what Brian describes is what is happening. You have to give time for society to change; act too quickly and the old maxim comes into play: <blockquote>There's never enough time and money to do it right the first time, but there's always enough time and money to do it right the second time. </blockquote> Most of the time, emergencies are declared post facto. Why? Too many emergencies would be declared the other way (Orange Alerts during the 2004 election cycle, Dubya-Em-Dee anyone?) to manipulate the public [link] to do what a government wants. I think we’ve seen enough of the manipulation of manufactured fear from this crew to realize why we should be careful in this way.

Now. I substantially agree with Brian and Dan’l. I think what Brian describes is what is happening. You have to give time for society to change; act too quickly and the old maxim comes into play:

There’s never enough time and money to do it right the first time, but there’s always enough time and money to do it right the second time.

]]> by: danb http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1916 Tue, 06 May 2008 05:09:27 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1916 David, This past January Gregoire made a public and highly unequivocal statement that the viaduct will be torn down in 2012 no matter what. Either this is a lie, or she is not in on the "conspiracy." This stated deadline also indicates that the safety concerns are being taken seriously, finally. I agree with Brian about calculated risk. Shutting down the viaduct immediately would not fly with the public, but setting a deadline and allowing time for a plan to be developed is a reasonable compromise. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/eesc/bridge/User_Content/awv_master_5.pdf The above 2001 study estimated $948M for a retrofit and $760M for full replacement. Please don't make me read any more of these tedious things! If the above numbers are realistic, then it is a pretty safe bet that the surface option would be significantly cheaper than a retrofit. So for those, like myself, who believe the surface option is the best option for the future of our city and planet, there is nothing irrational about dismissing the retrofit option. David,
This past January Gregoire made a public and highly unequivocal statement that the viaduct will be torn down in 2012 no matter what. Either this is a lie, or she is not in on the “conspiracy.”

This stated deadline also indicates that the safety concerns are being taken seriously, finally. I agree with Brian about calculated risk. Shutting down the viaduct immediately would not fly with the public, but setting a deadline and allowing time for a plan to be developed is a reasonable compromise.

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/eesc/bridge/User_Content/awv_master_5.pdf
The above 2001 study estimated $948M for a retrofit and $760M for full replacement. Please don’t make me read any more of these tedious things!

If the above numbers are realistic, then it is a pretty safe bet that the surface option would be significantly cheaper than a retrofit. So for those, like myself, who believe the surface option is the best option for the future of our city and planet, there is nothing irrational about dismissing the retrofit option.

]]> by: David Sucher http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1913 Tue, 06 May 2008 02:38:24 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1913 Brian, I am not sure what taking a "calculated risk" has to do with it. If there is a substantial danger they should do something — and SEPA and lawsuits are not a factor. The State has the power, appropriately, to exempt projects from SEPA when there is an emergency. It is totally irresponsible for them to let a dangerous situation sit there. Btw, I am not now and have never said that the Viaduct doesn't need work. I don't doubt that it does. Every object which is 50 years old needs repair, rehab. The issue is the misuse of a real problem — a bad dictator in Iraq, here a Viaduct which needs repair -- to manipulate the process to do something far beyond what is necessary to deal with the initial problem because one has other goals. That is the story. Consider what Glenn Greenwald said in an interview at <a title="The Art of the Possible " href="http://www.theartofthepossible.net/" rel="nofollow">The Art of the Possible </a>. <blockquote cite="http://www.theartofthepossible.net/"> "One of the biggest mistakes we can make is to assume competence and benign intent on the part of political officials when deciding how much power to give them. We ought to assume the worst about them — about their abilities, integrity and motives — and only then, based on those suppositions, should we decide how much power, and what specific powers, we’re willing to vest in them." That also goes for big-ticket local items for which there is no existing budget. "Trust but verify." And the local press has doesn't it when it comes to the Viaduct. Brian,

I am not sure what taking a “calculated risk” has to do with it. If there is a substantial danger they should do something — and SEPA and lawsuits are not a factor. The State has the power, appropriately, to exempt projects from SEPA when there is an emergency. It is totally irresponsible for them to let a dangerous situation sit there.

Btw, I am not now and have never said that the Viaduct doesn’t need work. I don’t doubt that it does. Every object which is 50 years old needs repair, rehab.

The issue is the misuse of a real problem — a bad dictator in Iraq, here a Viaduct which needs repair — to manipulate the process to do something far beyond what is necessary to deal with the initial problem because one has other goals. That is the story.

Consider what Glenn Greenwald said in an interview at The Art of the Possible .

“One of the biggest mistakes we can make is to assume competence and benign intent on the part of political officials when deciding how much power to give them. We ought to assume the worst about them — about their abilities, integrity and motives — and only then, based on those suppositions, should we decide how much power, and what specific powers, we’re willing to vest in them.”

That also goes for big-ticket local items for which there is no existing budget. “Trust but verify.” And the local press has doesn’t it when it comes to the Viaduct.

]]> by: Brian http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1912 Tue, 06 May 2008 00:31:33 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1912 To why “they” have not shut down the viaduct despite the dire predictions, is it too shocking to consider that our elected leaders are taking a calculated risk? You gamble that the big one won’t hit soon to avoid being the politician who dumps 100k cars onto I-5 (minus those who’d change their trips, routes, and schedules). What if the quake doesn’t come for forty years? You’d look like a fool. So hopefully it doesn’t come in your lifetime. Yet you declare over and over that there is a “crisis” that requires action and try to bring about the fix you think is best. But if God forbid disaster strikes and hundreds or even thousands are crushed to death on the waterfront, you can at least claim you were shouting from the rooftops. I don’t even mean this to be a cynical comment, I just think that’s what’s going on. To why “they” have not shut down the viaduct despite the dire predictions, is it too shocking to consider that our elected leaders are taking a calculated risk? You gamble that the big one won’t hit soon to avoid being the politician who dumps 100k cars onto I-5 (minus those who’d change their trips, routes, and schedules). What if the quake doesn’t come for forty years? You’d look like a fool. So hopefully it doesn’t come in your lifetime. Yet you declare over and over that there is a “crisis” that requires action and try to bring about the fix you think is best. But if God forbid disaster strikes and hundreds or even thousands are crushed to death on the waterfront, you can at least claim you were shouting from the rooftops.

I don’t even mean this to be a cynical comment, I just think that’s what’s going on.

]]> by: Joshua http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1908 Mon, 05 May 2008 19:43:01 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1908 I am not a supporter of the retrofit option, but I have always wondered why, if the viaduct is in such danger from the next big earthquake (which apparently can happen anytime now), the city hasn't shut it down. Anyone know why? Certainly after last year's bridge collapse in the mid-west, a few officials must have made the connection... I am not a supporter of the retrofit option, but I have always wondered why, if the viaduct is in such danger from the next big earthquake (which apparently can happen anytime now), the city hasn’t shut it down. Anyone know why? Certainly after last year’s bridge collapse in the mid-west, a few officials must have made the connection…

]]> by: Kate G. http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1906 Mon, 05 May 2008 18:25:10 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/04/the-viaduct-conspiracy/#comment-1906 Please, which page number of the Popular Mechanics article deals with the viaduct? I want to skip the other nine pages. Thank you. Please, which page number of the Popular Mechanics article deals with the viaduct? I want to skip the other nine pages.

Thank you.

]]>