I have a different take on Jim Veseley’s Sunday article than Ben Schiendelman did. In case you didn’t read the article, Mr Veseley’s argument is essentially that Americans have been adjusting their expectations downward on a number of issues, and the viaduct is the one foremost in Mr Veseley’s thoughts. Veseley says he’s “ready for a retrofit” of the viaduct, rather than a tunnel, elevated replacement, or surface option. This “lowered expectations” argument is a perspective I hadn’t thought of or heard, and it certainly is thought provoking. I think Mr Veseley gets bull’s eyes on a few big points, but I think he misses the mark on some of the details.

David M. Lampton, a much-honored China scholar and head of faculty at the vaunted School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, pointed out last week that China now has 68 subway projects under way — and the U.S. has none.

He cited the decaying Interstate Highway System that spans America, but was built in the 1950s and ’60s. A trip on Interstate 5 bears him out. If not for the patches, we’d be looking at rebar.

…
I don’t see a weakening of our hopes and values, but a realization that some of them belong back in the 1990s. One of our most intensely popular television series, “Lost,” comes at a perfect time.

Roads and transit are just two signs of our decaying infrastructure in the United States, airports and seaports also spring to mind. Still, when most of our best new highway and transit systems were built, the US was spending ten percent of its GDP on infrastructure (H/T to Frank for the link), today it’s just one percent. If a show were to come at the perfect time to describe the state of infrastructure in this country, it’d be called “Broke”.

Veseley puts a sly dig in on Sound Transit expansion:

We see that in the calls for a pause in the funding of transportation projects. Megaprojects are on hold everywhere. A Sound Transit vote for the fall has as many supporters as it has people saying give it a rest, come back to us the following year, or maybe later.

That’s not what the polling I’ve seen has shown, support is much higher for an ST2 expansion than against it. The rising gas prices certainly have something to do with that.

As for the viaduct, I certainly don’t want a large one, as a new elevated option would be, or any super-expensive option, such as a tunnel, when in my mind that funding could be better spent on transit expansions. I’ve heard a retrofit would have a shorter life span, and thus might not get much bang-for-the buck, but as long as it’s cheap enough, I won’t get upset. What about you?

12 Replies to “Sighing?”

  1. As someone who commutes from W Sea to downtown daily, I still support a full tear down. My husband who freelances, and needs a truck for equipment does not want a tear down.

    A tunnel? Not an option. Too expensive, not enough exits, not needed.
    A retrofit? An option, but why not tear it down (upset single occupancy vehicles needing a quick thoroughfare to bypass the city).

    I fully support a teardown WITH and ONLY with a much needed dedicated transit system and re-work of city streets to accomodate new traffic patterns. Pedestrian/bike facilities in place, better access to the ferry system and buses and/or trains. The Viaduct shouldn’t and can’t be discussed without mass transit options, which the city is wont to do.

  2. Get more people out of their cars and it will create more space for those who truly need their vehicles for work and for cargo transport.

  3. What [al] said. I’d prefer a retrofit to a rebuild, but in the same way that I’d like one finger broken rather than two.

  4. Just to tell you and other people reading this blog.
    It might be fun to blog about.
    CT just renewed their website.
    Not just the front page but the whole thing, and it looks much better.
    It takes a while to get used to the new bright colors, but it’s much more web 2.0 =]

  5. I like the way matt put it (one finger instead of two).

    if we could take the difference in price between a tunnel and a tear-down we would come up with enough for some pretty decent transit service.

  6. But you still have the seawall to deal with, no?

    Vesely’s column is depressing, but not unreasonable in an era where 81% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track.

    Still, our leaders (and the editorial editor of the Times is a hugely important community leadership role) should be figuring out a way to get us OUT of this malaise, not just to blithely accept it.

  7. The problem with the surface/transit option is that there is no transit.

    That’s why I’m a little partial to using the project money to create a transit tunnel on the waterfront.

  8. But I just don’t see a transit tunnel happening within the next 15 years – the city simply does not have the foresight to do this. What they may be willing to do is a combination auto/transit corridor of sorts. And yes, the problem is exactly that there’s no transit down there – lets add it! And build a tunnel just because we’re repairing the seawall? Nope, don’t see the reasoning.

  9. We need a waterfront with green space. Get rid of the viaduct and build a park. Add rail transit from Ballard-West Seattle. If we need a tunnel, build it later. That solution makes the most sense to me.

  10. I prefer a Western/Alaska couple, three lanes north on Western, 3 to 4 lanes south on Alaskan Way.

    Western would connect to the Battery St. Tunnel with a short elevated section south of Victor Steinbruck park. This keeps Hwy 99 away from the pedestrians at the market. An extention to the park could be built on a lid over the highway.

    Extend LINK on the busway to Spokane St. then west to Alaska Junction. Perhaps planning and funding could be included in the city’s Spokane St. project.

    The money should also fund a streetcar extention from SLU to Fremont and Ballard, with dedicated ROW east of Westlake and the Ballard Terminal Railway. This could be extended south along 1st Ave.

    The waterfront would be transformed by this project. Parks, greenspace, plazas, walkways, would line the central waterfront. A plaza could span Alaskan Wy. to remove stop lights and provide easy access to the waterfront. But like most of my suggestions above, these improvements could be built as funds become available.

Comments are closed.