Viaduct
Currently, the contentious political question in Seattle is “What to do about the Alaskan Way Viaduct?”
This is our 1950s era elevated highway that carries traffic from the northwest end of downtown towards the south along Elliot Bay; it was damaged in the Nisqually Earthquake a few years ago and engineers tell us it must be replaced because it’s certain to come down the next time we have even a minor temblor.
Since our city council and state governor are spineless, the citizens of Seattle have been asked to vote on whether we would prefer to replace it with a new and bigger elevated roadway or a tunnel. I’m told the cost of this civic survey is something like a million bucks.
But the election is the worst kind of solicitation of input; the vote is non-binding, and it’s entirely likely no consensus will emerge from it. It’s like when you’re a kid and mom asks you what you want for dinner; you say Pop Rocks, your sibling says French Toast, but you both get meatloaf anyway.
The op-ed pages are filled with people weighing in on the issue; everyone expresses their preference and nearly all the reasons offered are self-centered. In my mind, the worst reason for going elevated is that people like the view (from their car?); the worst argument for the tunnel is that it represents a vision for Seattle’s future (from underground?)
A few people advocate building a high-rise bridge over Elliot Bay; to me that sounds cooler and more futuristic than the other two options.
And there’s the contingent of people who advocate dismantling the road and converting the waterfront to a grand boulevard; I appreciate the simplicity of that one.
I was thinking today that instead of any of these, we should just take the 3 billion dollars anything will cost and buy like three million bicycles for people to use. And I wouldn’t even need one; I’ve got plenty already.
This is our 1950s era elevated highway that carries traffic from the northwest end of downtown towards the south along Elliot Bay; it was damaged in the Nisqually Earthquake a few years ago and engineers tell us it must be replaced because it’s certain to come down the next time we have even a minor temblor.
Since our city council and state governor are spineless, the citizens of Seattle have been asked to vote on whether we would prefer to replace it with a new and bigger elevated roadway or a tunnel. I’m told the cost of this civic survey is something like a million bucks.
But the election is the worst kind of solicitation of input; the vote is non-binding, and it’s entirely likely no consensus will emerge from it. It’s like when you’re a kid and mom asks you what you want for dinner; you say Pop Rocks, your sibling says French Toast, but you both get meatloaf anyway.
The op-ed pages are filled with people weighing in on the issue; everyone expresses their preference and nearly all the reasons offered are self-centered. In my mind, the worst reason for going elevated is that people like the view (from their car?); the worst argument for the tunnel is that it represents a vision for Seattle’s future (from underground?)
A few people advocate building a high-rise bridge over Elliot Bay; to me that sounds cooler and more futuristic than the other two options.
And there’s the contingent of people who advocate dismantling the road and converting the waterfront to a grand boulevard; I appreciate the simplicity of that one.
I was thinking today that instead of any of these, we should just take the 3 billion dollars anything will cost and buy like three million bicycles for people to use. And I wouldn’t even need one; I’ve got plenty already.
posted by Professor Dave at 6:35 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home