Actually, now that you mention it, yes I do. Since I’m not only politically involved in my community but I’m directly affected by this fiasco I’ve tried to keep abreast of develops on the project.
Please understand that this folly is years in the making. The left has dominated the government in this area for years and years to the point where they have managed to replace planners, engineers, and administrators with politically partisan planners, engineers, and administrators. As a result practical engineering and growth management has been supplanted by political correctness.
The Viaduct is an aging limited access highway (predates freeway) that runs along the Seattle waterfront north <> south. It is absolutely critical to the movement of traffic in the downtown area. It is old and in need of replacement. It also happens to cross a subduction faultline. In our last quake the Viaduct suffered some slight damage but came through in pretty good shape overall. None of that matters to our illustrious leftists whose primary objective was to recapture the waterfront.
In the wake of the earthquake, the left seized in the moment (and the ill-ease of the citizenry) to insist that now was the time to replace it. Study and debate ensued and in the end The People determined that they wanted it replaced with like~for~like. So naturally the leftists in charge decided to hell with The People - we want what we want - and told us that they were going to replace the Viaduct with a tunnel.
There were battles both in the press, at the ballot box, and in the courts. The left lost at every turn but held to their insistence. It was all horribly expensive - but not to the left who was using public money for their fight.
In the end they prevailed, despite the will of The People, and all of the seismic evidence introduced to show why a tunnel is a terrible idea.
The fact is, they haven’t even encountered the real problems yet. Everything so far has been self-inflicted. It’s costing us somewhere north of 10 times what replacing the Viaduct would have cost, and for that we get 33% less capacity and a goddamned tunnel that promises to be an albatross for the next 50 years.
Outstanding post, and right on target.
The Alaskan Way Viaduct could have been replaced at MUCH less cost and with much greater engineering justification than this “tunnel” idiocy. This sucker will be BELOW sea level for its entire length. Seattle sits on what’s called “glacial till”. It ain’t bedrock.
Oh well, you said eveything important.