Seattle Area Traffic and Roads Thread

[uwhuskies]

Originally Posted by meku

First of all, what's the point in adding more lanes to the bridge when you don't add more lanes to already clogged I-5 ? How's that gonna help anything ?

...
Now, me saving 10.000 dollars a year by not owning a car, that will definitely help local commerce.

I can assure you if they need to start over with analysis and research for a new design because of Mayor McDip****, then you will be paying more than just 10,000 more per year.

You can't just change a design without environmental studies, community meetings, etc. This will add years to the project, BILLIONS of dollars and potentially kill the project entirely which is what I think Mayor McGinn and his cronies at City Hall desire anyways.

[alexjonlin]

No, they want to build a bridge that is not built for the past fifty years, but is built for the next fifty years. I know it pains you so much to hear this, but gas prices are going up and up and we're going to hit peak oil, and at that point we're going to need as much rail and other non-car forms of transportation to get around as possible. It would be very short-sighted to build the bridge without light rail, or at least without making it very easy to add light rail, as we're going to add it someday. We're trying to make sure that we spend a little more now so we don't spend a lot more later.

[uwhuskies]

Originally Posted by alexjonlin

No, they want to build a bridge that is not built for the past fifty years, but is built for the next fifty years. I know it pains you so much to hear this, but gas prices are going up and up and we're going to hit peak oil, and at that point we're going to need as much rail and other non-car forms of transportation to get around as possible. It would be very short-sighted to build the bridge without light rail, or at least without making it very easy to add light rail, as we're going to add it someday. We're trying to make sure that we spend a little more now so we don't spend a lot more later.

I-90 is supposed to get the Light Rail.

Why are we duplicating costs? The public pocket is not bottomless. Such endeavors will only ruin the ENTIRE transportation plan NOT improve it as many are being led to believe. Why do you suppose it will ONLY be a "little more now?" Such changes do NOT occur in a vacuum. Potentially the ENTIRE project could end up stalled costing BILLIONS extra that is not in the budget. What do YOU do then? Simply wanting something will not pay for it. There is NO such thing as small fix or alteration in a multi-billion dollar infrastructure project.

How many years has the Washington State Dept. of Transportation been studying the alternatives, drafting the DEIS and FEIS, holding public meetings? They can not just add an addendum as Mayor McGinn thinks will happen. The entire process will begin again...is that what YOU want?

Our area simply can NOT afford another 5 to 10 years of no action because some silly whim that is politically expedient but financially unsound.

[pwalker]

Originally Posted by uwhuskies

I-90 is supposed to get the Light Rail.

Why are we duplicating costs? The public pocket is not bottomless. Such endeavors will only ruin the ENTIRE transportation plan NOT improve it as many are being led to believe. Why do you suppose it will ONLY be a "little more now?" Such changes do NOT occur in a vacuum. Potentially the ENTIRE project could end up stalled costing BILLIONS extra that is not in the budget. What do YOU do then? Simply wanting something will not pay for it. There is NO such thing as small fix or alteration in a multi-billion dollar infrastructure project.

How many years has the Washington State Dept. of Transportation been studying the alternatives, drafting the DEIS and FEIS, holding public meetings? They can not just add an addendum as Mayor McGinn thinks will happen. The entire process will begin again...is that what YOU want?

Our area simply can NOT afford another 5 to 10 years of no action because some silly whim that is politically expedient but financially unsound.

Agreed. Time for WA to get off the snide and start moving.

[alexjonlin]

Your argument that I-90 also is getting light rail applies just the same to roads: Why do we need both I-90 and 520 bridges? Because it is important to have those connections that are must faster over one than the other! We need that just the same with light rail.

[uwhuskies]

Originally Posted by alexjonlin

Your argument that I-90 also is getting light rail applies just the same to roads: Why do we need both I-90 and 520 bridges? Because it is important to have those connections that are must faster over one than the other! We need that just the same with light rail.

There is a KEY difference: I-90 with Light Rail has been in the equation for many years. The studies are done, the light is GREEN. If we start confusing the story again with 520 that will likely lead to Mercer Island residents saying "hey, maybe I-90 is NOT needed now!" Mercer Island will want even MORE concessions after a new debate ensues.

Can you see the specter of the ENTIRE transportation plan that has been laboriously agreed to--finally--being opened again. Please tell me you do understand the can of worms that will be opened.

If 520 debate is opened again, I have an awful feeling it will be the beginning of the end of the Puget Sound Comprehensive Transportation plan. It is simply TOO late to revisit the plan. Let's move forward while we still can.

Please dear god, someone shut up the stupid politicians in Seattle.

[mhays]

It's true that any redesign on 520 would set the timeline back significantly.

[alexjonlin]

I agree that planning light rail on the 520 bridge will push the opening back probably a year or so. But it's far more important to make sure this is the right bridge for the next 50 years than to make sure that we get it done in a couple.

[mhays]

My guess would be multiple years, depending on whether the current EIS covers a similar option, and depending on the state legislation, particularly the funding legislation. If it's different enough, it triggers a start-over on a lot of fronts.

[uwhuskies]

Originally Posted by alexjonlin

I agree that planning light rail on the 520 bridge will push the opening back probably a year or so. But it's far more important to make sure this is the right bridge for the next 50 years than to make sure that we get it done in a couple.

Why do you suppose it is a "year or so" increase in time? Wishful thinking aside, the way that projects in the Puget Sound area live and die has NOT been just a "year or so" for ANY project redesigns. Maybe you should take a look at when the second I-90 bridge was built or the Sea-Tac Third Runway. Costly changes to both added BILLIONS of dollars and nearly two decades to the I-90 project and a decade to the Third Runway.

Because everyone wants to feel important and heard, the town meetings and lawsuits alone will extend the project beyond just a "year or so".

Please take a look at the I-90 Second Bridge project and you will feel entirely different.

We cannot afford to wait. Lets move forward and leave wishful thinking for the Sound Transit 4.

Opening up the discussion at this stage will DOOM the project entirely.

[alexjonlin]

It's ridiculous to suggest that the bridge may not go through at all because we look into putting light rail on it, the bridge is a vital link across the Lake that will be built no matter what. It could be a year, it could be two, it could be three, but in the larger scheme of things those couple years don't matter, the usefulness of the bridge in several decades is what matters.

[pwalker]

I believe there are some in Seattle who don't want to see this project completed in ANY form. That is sad.

[alexjonlin]

Yeah I don't understand those people. I don't want to create more freeways but this isn't just a freeway, it's a bridge. There's not alternative transportation along there.

[CrazyAboutCities]

Originally Posted by pwalker

I believe there are some in Seattle who don't want to see this project completed in ANY form. That is sad.

I agree. I personally think it is stupid to design a bridge that will last up to 50 years. I think we should get new bridge that will last much longer than that. Look at Brooklyn Bridge, it lasts more than 100 years and still standing. That will save TONS of money in long run.

[uwhuskies]

apparently there is little room for more discussion...those for have made up their minds and those against have as well. Good luck!

[sequoias]

<---saving 3% on sales taxes by moving to other state.

[bgwah]

Originally Posted by sequoias

<---saving 3% on sales taxes by moving to other state.

What about the income tax? :P

[mhays]

Let them leave. I wouldn't mind a few less voters who think more about their wallets than their state.

[Seasun]

Highway 522 realignment in Bothell is kind of like the redo of Mercer Street:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...owntown7m.html

[alexjonlin]

I love all the suburban mixed-use downtown plans. These will go a long way towards finding a way for everyone, whether they like to live in the big city or in the suburbs, and whether they have enough money for the city or not, to live in a dense environment.