We should have a single elevated dual-track train, with improved local traffic below. Imagine stations along the ballparks, ferrys, Seattle Center, waterfront, etc. and with walkways into the downtown. We need to take every opportunity to build this kind infrastructure and access. It could link into other mass transit at both ends ... or expand further. The need for an auto thoroughfare is "yesterday" ... just like the viaduct. We need to continue to build the pieces of a system that would be as effective as the subway system in the other Washington (D.C.).
Jackels - 15 years ago
Frank Chopp's idea is very interesting to me. I like the idea of having the water front expanded to pedestrians only, a park on top for everyone to enjoy the view, and leasing out spaces below the road to make money for the structure rather then a huge amount of taxes. The revenue you would get from leasing out the space to buisnesses would be a constant stream of money, which after the structure is paid off, the money could be used to maintain the structure. In the long run this would help stop the city/state from asking for more taxes to maintain the structure. Plus this option would open up the view to everyone who pleases to see it with a public park on top. this would also hide the traffic and hopefully some of the noise that comes with the viaduct currently. I believe Frank Chopp's idea needs to be the final decisive design as it will benifit everyone in the log run
Bob Larsen - 15 years ago
Thanks for the oportunity to jump in. As cities grow in importance to the world's population, let's think about were Seattle will stand. We are an emerging world class city now, and that brings valuble advantages to us all, assuming GMA and many of Sims' sustainability ideas prevail. What we need is a strong spokesperson who can argue effectively (gain public support) in favor of re-connecting Seattle to its waterfront. Let's put this critical transportation link below grade for the least cost and shortest distance possible, consistent with that critical concept. Those who judge the project only on dollars spent now are short sighted, but well intended folks. But engineers and keepers of the purse are only two of the three critical legs needed for this multi-generational decision to stand on its own. The key lies in our collective vision of what Seattle really is, and can be. Its one of the world's great cities, even now, even with that stung out, view blocking, boom box in the way. Amazing, isn't it? My point is: Dreams and confidece carry us forward, fear stops us in our tracks or yeilds faulty options. Let's not loose sight of Seattle's greater potential. And here, slaming our senses daily, is one of the obvious things we can do to help Seattle reach that potential. Let's show Boston how to do it right. Hey, and now we could demand lower cost, and higher levels of workmanship, and maybe even some nice detail work! What a concept! Put a toll on it. You watch, Obama is going to start talking about rebuilding infrastructure; let's get in that line early, and with a strong proposal. Where's Dan Evan when we need him? What about Bob Drewl? Uh, maybe . . .
fletc3her - 15 years ago
Imagine if they proposed building an elevated concrete highway right down the waterfront?! There would be outrage you couldn't imagine. Building this behemoth was stupid fifty years ago and rebuilding it in place is even more stupid today. Have some self respect, Seattle. Don't give in to the demands of the auto industry yet again.
Concerned - 15 years ago
I am concerned about the growth of the area and the fack that there are not 6 lane options for the cut and cover idea and 6 lane options for the elevated idea. People need to realize that I-5 needs a lot of help to aleviate traffic, and if we (and I mean we being the Washinton state taxpayers- not just downtown Seattle taxpayers) all have to pay for this, then we need to be planning for the future to relieve congestion.
Peter Sawyer - 15 years ago
Frank Chopp's idea appeals to me largely because of the park on top. The tunnel option's appeal is that it allows the possibility of using valuable waterfront property for pedestrian use. However, the higher cost and time for construction along with the possibly less efficient traffic flow make it a tough fight. Frank's idea offers the best of both solutions.
Eric Fisk - 15 years ago
A tolled cut and cover tunnel has been endorsed by ex-governors Locke and Evans, the seattle city council, and the mayor. It is the correct balance providing for throughput needs of buses and carpools plus the urban planning basics required to connect downtown with the Waterfront.
Opposition slots into the groups of those that like to drive alone and see the pretty view, those that are off put by the mayor, and those that think that if we eliminate roads cars will disappear. These people need to compromise and accept the most reasonable compromise, even if it will make the mayor happy...
We should have a single elevated dual-track train, with improved local traffic below. Imagine stations along the ballparks, ferrys, Seattle Center, waterfront, etc. and with walkways into the downtown. We need to take every opportunity to build this kind infrastructure and access. It could link into other mass transit at both ends ... or expand further. The need for an auto thoroughfare is "yesterday" ... just like the viaduct. We need to continue to build the pieces of a system that would be as effective as the subway system in the other Washington (D.C.).
Frank Chopp's idea is very interesting to me. I like the idea of having the water front expanded to pedestrians only, a park on top for everyone to enjoy the view, and leasing out spaces below the road to make money for the structure rather then a huge amount of taxes. The revenue you would get from leasing out the space to buisnesses would be a constant stream of money, which after the structure is paid off, the money could be used to maintain the structure. In the long run this would help stop the city/state from asking for more taxes to maintain the structure. Plus this option would open up the view to everyone who pleases to see it with a public park on top. this would also hide the traffic and hopefully some of the noise that comes with the viaduct currently. I believe Frank Chopp's idea needs to be the final decisive design as it will benifit everyone in the log run
Thanks for the oportunity to jump in. As cities grow in importance to the world's population, let's think about were Seattle will stand. We are an emerging world class city now, and that brings valuble advantages to us all, assuming GMA and many of Sims' sustainability ideas prevail. What we need is a strong spokesperson who can argue effectively (gain public support) in favor of re-connecting Seattle to its waterfront. Let's put this critical transportation link below grade for the least cost and shortest distance possible, consistent with that critical concept. Those who judge the project only on dollars spent now are short sighted, but well intended folks. But engineers and keepers of the purse are only two of the three critical legs needed for this multi-generational decision to stand on its own. The key lies in our collective vision of what Seattle really is, and can be. Its one of the world's great cities, even now, even with that stung out, view blocking, boom box in the way. Amazing, isn't it? My point is: Dreams and confidece carry us forward, fear stops us in our tracks or yeilds faulty options. Let's not loose sight of Seattle's greater potential. And here, slaming our senses daily, is one of the obvious things we can do to help Seattle reach that potential. Let's show Boston how to do it right. Hey, and now we could demand lower cost, and higher levels of workmanship, and maybe even some nice detail work! What a concept! Put a toll on it. You watch, Obama is going to start talking about rebuilding infrastructure; let's get in that line early, and with a strong proposal. Where's Dan Evan when we need him? What about Bob Drewl? Uh, maybe . . .
Imagine if they proposed building an elevated concrete highway right down the waterfront?! There would be outrage you couldn't imagine. Building this behemoth was stupid fifty years ago and rebuilding it in place is even more stupid today. Have some self respect, Seattle. Don't give in to the demands of the auto industry yet again.
I am concerned about the growth of the area and the fack that there are not 6 lane options for the cut and cover idea and 6 lane options for the elevated idea. People need to realize that I-5 needs a lot of help to aleviate traffic, and if we (and I mean we being the Washinton state taxpayers- not just downtown Seattle taxpayers) all have to pay for this, then we need to be planning for the future to relieve congestion.
Frank Chopp's idea appeals to me largely because of the park on top. The tunnel option's appeal is that it allows the possibility of using valuable waterfront property for pedestrian use. However, the higher cost and time for construction along with the possibly less efficient traffic flow make it a tough fight. Frank's idea offers the best of both solutions.
A tolled cut and cover tunnel has been endorsed by ex-governors Locke and Evans, the seattle city council, and the mayor. It is the correct balance providing for throughput needs of buses and carpools plus the urban planning basics required to connect downtown with the Waterfront.
Opposition slots into the groups of those that like to drive alone and see the pretty view, those that are off put by the mayor, and those that think that if we eliminate roads cars will disappear. These people need to compromise and accept the most reasonable compromise, even if it will make the mayor happy...