51% of Seattle Voters are complete idiots

[maxsolomon]

Here is the Scientific Proof that Democracy is not the Alpha & Omega of all political processes. Thank Sweet Jesus that Nickels has the sack not to submit this lesser of 2 evils quandry to a vote. The Seawall MUST BE BUILT REGARDLESS. Tightwads of Seattle, say it with me: SURFACE SOLUTION. http://www.peopleswaterfront.org/

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003305374_viaductpoll15m.html\

Times poll: Voters say rebuild the viaduct
By Bob Young and Susan Gilmore

Seattle Times staff reporters

JIM BATES / THE SEATTLE TIMES

A poll of Seattle voters shows that a majority prefer a replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct to a tunnel. The Nisqually earthquake in 2001 exposed weaknesses in the current 53-year-old structure.

Citing a growing unease over costs, a slim majority of Seattle voters say the aging Alaskan Way Viaduct should be replaced with a new aerial roadway, not a more expensive tunnel, a Seattle Times poll found.

Just 25 percent of voters favor a tunnel through town, while 51 percent want a new viaduct built.

About one-quarter of those polled by Elway Research were either undecided or wanted to tear down the viaduct and route traffic onto surface streets.

The poll was commissioned by The Times after Mayor Greg Nickels and the City Council decided last month not to ask voters what they want done with the viaduct, which was damaged in the 2001 Nisqually earthquake.

Replacing the viaduct is a statewide priority: It's a regional corridor for commuters and freight, but replacing it with a tunnel — the option preferred by Nickels and the council — would cost an estimated $4.6 billion. That's about $1 billion more than the last state estimate.

"I actually like the idea of a tunnel and opening up the waterfront. But I'm a pragmatist and the money isn't there and you've got to go where the money is," said Scott Saunders, 59, a property manager who lives in Ravenna.

The voters were then asked their preference after being given the latest cost estimates, announced last month by the state. By a 2-to-1 margin, they said they wanted a new viaduct, which is now pegged at $2.8 billion.

[maxsolomon]

1. self bump

please: tell me i'm wrong & a rebuild is the best solution. i'll bite your head off.

[geniph]

2. I'm not about to argue with you

I think the Viaduct is an obscenity. I use that highway all the time, too, as I work in Burien. Anytime I need to get into the city after work, I take 99, so doing without it, to me, is NOT an option.

I wish I could figure out just what the people yakking on about how "the tunnel is too expensive" plan on replacing the seawall, too. To me, the only sensible thing is to replace the seawall at the time the cut & cover for the tunnel is done. But a goodly number of people in this state believe in Death By Committee - just keep studying and recommending new options and hiding your head in the sand until Mother Nature takes the whole thing out of our hands.

Have you SEEN the pictures of the structural supports of the Viaduct following the Nisqually quake? It's enough to make you not even want to WALK on the damn thing, let alone drive on it. :scared:

[maxsolomon]

3. i see the supports every day

i work on the waterfront. walking under it spooks me every day.

so far, 100% of this threads respondents favor a tunnel or surface solution.

lets hear it, rebuild advocates! give me your 'rationale'.

[stumblnrose]

4. Not a big pool yet

The viaduct must come down for this to become a big city. I have worked on upgrading the waterfront area and simply nothing can happen to make it work without a tunnel scenario. All you lib-rul romantics Seattle is not gonna stay static or even shrink. Gonna grow so let's make it liveable not just for Mayor Nickels, the developers and the nouveau inhabitants of condo ville NW.

[maxsolomon]

5. Reagan Dunn supports a rebuild

Mr. Dunn is the son of Jennifer Dunn. He is indeed named after St. Ronnie. he was appointed to the King County council, not elected. Because he apparently never leaves the eastside, he thinks the county stops at the Seattle border.



http://www.reagandunn.com/bio.htm

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003311352_reagandunn19.html

As project costs rise, spending $800 million or more may come at the expense of other regional priorities — such as the 520 bridge.

Few disagree that the Alaskan Way Viaduct might be destroyed in the next big earthquake and needs to be replaced. But the essential difference between a replacement viaduct and the tunnel option is a waterfront park.

In my estimation, building a waterfront park provides no identifiable transportation benefit.

[geniph]

6. He was originally appointed to the council, but has since been elected

as is true of a number of other county council members. The County Council has very little to say in the matter, though - it's mostly an issue for the Seattle City Council.