Why all the hating on the tunnel option? Whats wrong with a little more park space downtown? The real options should be between elevated and tunnel. Of course elevated will just be a viaduct re-dux. Its an eyesore, its NOISY, but its quick. So put it underground and make the waterfront a nice place to hang out. While theyre at it, tear down Key Arena and put in some more park space there too.

Let the misery commence! All my New Ballard friends and the great, visionary city leaders are doing a fine job making life here as unpleasant as possible. Lets just tear down that ugly viaduct and put up a pretty park in its place? The parks downtown - Victor Steinbrueck Park, the Waterfron Park down by the ferries, that little park in Belltown, Pioneer Square, Occidental Park - now I can't imagine any more pleasant, inviting spaces to while away the hours. We need more just like those. The fresh air and the natural fragrances, ah...

I value my time a great deal. That’s why I choose not to commute across a city to work. I did that for two years and hated every second. Since I choose to live in Ballard I searched hard for a job that was close and I found it. It’s all about choice folks. Love your south end job? Well then move to the south end. Our downtown does not need to be a freeway to support your selfish choices. AND my tax dollars should not have to pay for them either. I am actually all for very large tolls on all limited access roads, I5, bridges etc. Those who use them should pay for them. I have not been on the Viaduct since I changed jobs and have not been on I5 in two years and have not crossed a floating bridge since I can’t remember when. If they do build a new Viaduct I want to see at least $6 one way tolls.

Just wanted to reply to comment 22 by Naes. I think it's funny when people don't value time. What else do we have in live but time? The more we can get the better. Get your head out of your own ass

I lose no sleep worrying over commuters who choose to live in Ballard and work in the south end. Let them move to Federal Way. An elevated road will mean losing dozens of historical downtown buildings. I care about that. Commuters are of no concern to me. They make their own choices and it is not up to Seattle to pay for their bad choices.
If the surface street is limited sped as has been suggested then it will not be a noisy street because all those who feel a need for fast travel times will use alternatives and the surface street will be a slower access to downtown NOT to the south end. I like that a great deal. Let the commuters take the freeway or public transportation.

As for Safco? Lol As if I care a hoot about some sports fan.

Are'nt we in the dark enough?? A tunnel? What about the increased danger of earthquake with one? I disagree with Evan, the viaduct is no more a source of grease, grime, crime or anything else....besides better eleveated then all the traffic spewing their exhaust inthe face of pedestrians and such. I too work within a hands reach of the viaduct and it works well, and there are no ore views that need to be had by the back doors of so many businesses on Alaskan way anyway...it also makes for less congestion downtown...imagine a couple of games, summer and no viaduct....people on the viaduct are not stopping downtown they are passing through, so let them, others can use the surface streets.

Burn it all down. Shove the cinders into the water. Repeat.

If they want to build a tunnel, fine - but don't tax me for it. Tax all the businesses that suddenly have an awesome view and majorly increased property values.

I vote for a tunnel too! Surely they can come up with the money some how. How much would taxes be increased for this option?

I hear you Evan. If it were up to me (as if!), I'd dig. The real problem is that over the course of 50 odd years, Seattle has become accustomed to two highways through downtown. To take one away now would be nothing short of catastrophic. The problem with the surface option is the pedestrian factor. Overpasses are OK, but the handicapped create a burden there. One way I suppose it could work (in conjunction w/ rebuilding the sea wall) would be to elevate the sidewalk along the water in relation to the road surface. If you could get the sidewalk up to say 6' above the street, then the overpasses would only need to rise another 6'-8' feet create a proper separation. Or you could put the road in a 6' deep trench I suppose...same diff.

Evan, do you work in the Maritime Building?

The streets option is the second best alternative after the tunnel from the POV is improving our city and shared downtown. Not to mention the increased potential for tourist dollars and businesses.

We are talking about a HIGHWAY here folks - it is going to have major negative effects on the areas around it. Just look at I-5. Would you buy a house next to I-5, or underneath it in the University District?

boardbrown - I respectfully disagree!

I work downtown at Columbia and Western, and can assure you that the viaduct reduces views from downtown, esp from 1st avenue and western.

It also contributes alot to the noise, crime, and grime of our part of downtown. While it is true that the new elevated will have more "view" potential, simply because it has the two directional lanes side by side - it will still be an eyesore.

Ballard girl just touched on a subject I've been thinking for a long time. I just don't buy into the argument that these elevated highways block view...'cause frankly, they don't. The existing viaduct was designed with a nice sentiment towards transparency, and obviously, a new elevated highway will be designed even more so.

Let's be honest, you can see right through the thing. I think Seattle has become spoiled on their emphasis on "view". For Christ's sake, there's view all over this city!

oops- email is actually:

viaduct@wsdot.wa.gov

oh, and if you would actually LIKE to have a say in it. There is a town meeting you can attend at:

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/D9D046C4-E...

or call 1-888-AWV-LINE or send your email preference to:
viaduct@wsdot.wa.gove

I love the elevated view

I think it will lessn the congestion from all the tourist traffic and ferry traffic. I love in Ballard (hence the name..) and I work downtown looking right out at the viaduct. I do work for a living, and I am lucky enough to sit at a desk with a view of the viaduct, and the ferries comming in and going out...I think the elevated will allow for more walking pedeatrian avenues below. and ease the flow of commuters who are just pasing through to go home or get to work.

With the elimination of the tunnel option, I frankly just give up. I say just rip it all up and make the whole thing a park. People can go on I-5 if that they want to go north/south. Both of these options drastically cut down on capacity, so why be half-assed about it, just eliminate it completely. The waterfront will be so much nicer with no roads, the condos will be worth twice as much and the property tax will earn the city a lot more.

Thanks, elle. I'm not new. I just get fed up with the insults.

LOUD NOISES

I LOVE LAMP.

No tunnel.
I like the surface option. Build pedestrian overpasses.

"Damn yuppies and their ‘view’. Never heard a working stiff talk about his ‘view’ have you? That’s because we work for a living! Views are for yuppies and wine sippers."

Well, actually I like the Viaduct for the view. I have fond memories of doing the Komen run up there and every time I drive it It brings them back.

The tunnel would be best... someone needs to find the money to make it happen!

are you new to myballard sheila? this is par for the course. sit back and watch. dont try to suggest polite feedback as they will insult you too.

Why do you resort to insulting people just because they have a different opinion?

Oh - and I live in BALLARD too, but I care more about my downtown too than just a faster commute through it.

Elevated Option Please!
Three lanes in each direction
Thank you!
Chris

Strong advocate for the surface option.

The elevated option is a re-tread of what we have down on the waterfront now: dirt & grime from a highway along our waterfront, tons of noise, and crime and homelessness in the left over space underneath the freeway.

PLEASE lets do something progressive about this problem instead of dooming our waterfront for another 50 years.

...the domestic airline insustry looks about as healthy as the domestic auto industry.

Get rid of the unions and fat, old flight 'attendants', and hire Singapore Airline stewardesses, and at least the US airlines will bounce back.

FYI, all my black, Asian and latino friends have plenty of class and education. So no, I don't obsessively link race and class.

Bark more, Wag less, I'm suggesting that the vast majority of us will not be going to NYC to visit the relatives for a weekend. At this point, the domestic airline insustry looks about as healthy as the domestic auto industry.

As for bringing up race... You think it's not an issue? This isn't just snark on your part? You've notices, I guess, that Ballard is mostly, er, white people?

This is an old, old canard. If I bring up unspoken (unspeakable for many) racism then I must be a racist, right? Cause it doesn't exist anymore. Right? We'd never think about that when thinking about public transportation, right?

It's always about race and class, and we're not supposed to talk about it.

But none of this really matters. We're going to be living very differently twenty years from now. It would be nice if we could get out of denial so we could allocate precious resources more intelligently.

A Republican? In Seattle? In Ballard? Hope you tell your neighbors you're a pedophile instead so they'll talk to you.

Me, I can't bring myself to be a Republican. Too low class, filled with crazy Bible thumpers with 3rd grade educations who shop at Walmart. The smart ones go to 3rd rate state colleges and has been shown, run the country into the ground.

Bring back the Rockefellers and maybe we can talk.

...does that make my money talk enough for you?

Raising marginal taxes, for people making more than $250k, a year from 35% to 39%?

Come on Zipper, man up! My grandpa, 'til his dying breath at the age of 102, was still angry at FDR for raising his taxes to 80%. 39% on $250k? That's for wuzzes.

39%? No sweat. As long as it goes towards beautifying the water front and raising the value of my investments in this city.

I'm a Republican silly. And I said income taxes for folks who make over $250K, like my conservative self.

Republicans for taxes , buses, tunnels, bikes and tomatoes from the grocery store! Whoo-hoo!

The bus makes good sense, light rail makes even more sense. A tunnel would be fab, but I'll go with the surface option...

I do not want another viaduct of any form. It will continue the current state of visually and psychologically cutting off the waterfront from town and blocking the view and access from the town. Plus, the traffic noise would continue to be very intrusive to what could be a really a nice experience on the waterfront and the street adjacent to it. Imagine side walk cafes, and buildings and views that “flow” from town to the water. A definite plus for tourism, and hopefully an incentive to clean up the existing buildings, or replace them due to the increase demand for the properties.

The boulevard idea has some merit, but it would probably spread the traffic across the downtown 2nd, 4th and 5th Avenues, and decrease the psychologically access to anything north of the sculpture park.

I prefer the tunnel option, at least along the waterfront, because it will free the downtown of the obtrusive view and noise. It would also provide an opportunity to replace the rotting and deteriorating seawall.

...Really, you think you’re be flying domestically for vacations & to visit relatives? Think train.

That's a joke, right? In our lifetimes? Taking Amtrak to see the folks in NYC for a long weekend?

...it’s pathetic how every political issue in the US eventually comes down to issues of race and class.

Who mentioned race? You're the only one who's mentioned race. Must be more of an issue for you.

...How much did you pay for parking or cab fare or shuttle fare last time you used the airport?

With tip? $50. Worth every penny. Less than 30 minutes door to door and help with the bags. Plus you get to spend time with people who came to this country to work hard, not sit around and blame others for their misfortune.

Zipper, another liberal elitist! And I thought I was the only one out to screw the poor out of Seattle thru' higher taxes, tolls and fees to pay for our enviro-heaven of expensive hybrid cars, green spaces, fancy museums, electric trains to every neighborhood of $750K+ homes and farmer's markets selling $4 hierloom tomatoes. Our plan has been devilishly successful, wouldn't you say?

Enjoy the bus! Just remember: that warm, fuzzy feeling you sometimes get on the bus maybe a bum urinating down your leg.

I like the surface option.

More transit is a great thing. When light rail is built to the University District, you can hop on the 44 or 48 bus, wait 20 minutes, hop onto the light rail, and be at the airport with no congestion worries.

We have a GREAT bus system, except that it needs more service hours, and those of you who complain about travel times really could lower your stress by using the bus more.

Bus Rapid Transit will be coming to Ballard, which also helps reduce the problems.

How much did you pay for parking or cab fare or shuttle fare last time you used the airport? The bus won't cost you more than an extra 30 minutes and $2 per person.

Umm, I have the money to drive my Audi TT and park for months at Seatac if I care to. I just prefer to support public trans because it's important to the city.

Let's just institute an income taxfor folks who earn more than 250K to pay for a tunnel. I'm willing to fork over my share...does that make my money talk enough for you?

Wild. This thread tells you most of what you need to know about political gridlock in Seattle and the US.

OK, my $0.02:

We're screwed either way. The problem is not the damn viaduct. The problem is that we're undergoing massive and accelerating changes in our economy (the world, really).

We run our city and our society with cars running on cheap oil. That story is ending. Is this so hard to understand? How many nobel prize winners or TV talking heads do we need to get this? The question is not bridge or tunnel, it's how are we going to move goods and people around? The tail will wag the dog: we'll move our homes and businesses around so we don't have to move so much stuff. It's going to cost a lot of money we don't have. It's going to hurt but it's going to happen. Because there isn't any other way.

Oh, and you won't be going to the airport so don't worry about getting there. Really, you think you're be flying domestically for vacations & to visit relatives? Think train.

One more thing: it's pathetic how every political issue in the US eventually comes down to issues of race and class. Oooh, riding the bus with skanky stinky poor people. How terrible.

No, it's just the Python ridiculing fools who are being oppressed. Nothing for you to learn from.

BTW I actually support the surface street option. Raise some more taxes, increase tolls on 520, I90 & 99, increase parking fees downtown. Make it more expensive for the truckers and delivery people clogging up the roads, and those of us who can afford all of this will be able to zip through in our cars and taxis. You all can take the buses and feel good about yourselves.

Remember: money talks, bull**** walks (or takes the bus).

@34 Ok, now we know your true bias. I guess those of us who work downtown and would rather invest in public transit pay $11 for parking are just scum. Any way for you to avoid contact with lesser beings is your M.O.

No thanks on the"watching" thing. My intuition tells me you have nothing of value to share.

You appear to very close minded and negative. Crazies, bums, bike-a-holics, waste time. Good luck with the attitude. How is your blood pressure?

See you on the surface street! And I'll watch for you and your 7 bags on the bus. ..

Is there something wrong with working at Kinkos? Do you think they're below you? Sounds like someone has a superiority complex. That's never attractive.

....I would ask where the pedestrian walkways and bike paths are.

Here we go again, I guess you need to watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

....You can get from Ballard to Seatac on the 28 or the 15 downtown, then the 194 to the airport.

With 2 kids, 3 check in bags, 4 carry-on bags? Oh, then you get to meet all the bums downtown, what a way to start a vacation.

Some people also travel to the airport regularly for work trips (2-3 times a month for me), so do you seriously think I can waste time talking with crazies and bike-a-holics on their way to work at Kinkos on the bus?

You can get from Ballard to Seatac on the 28 or the 15 downtown, then the 194 to the airport.

I think we should have spent teh money on the tunnel. This is our one chance to do this right.

With that off the table, I like the surface option, although from the pix, I would ask where the pedestrian walkways and bike paths are. It will be a longer commute, but we will adjust. I travel from Ballard to West Seattle on a regular basis, so I am well aware of the "growing pains" we will go through.

The Seattle decision making process understood:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

Problem in this town is there's too much democracy. Anyone with a grievance gets heard and god forbid, successful, wealthy people be allowed to have a voice. What have they ever done?

The surface option would be great for getting people out of cars if there were transit alternatives, but there aren't any on the table, for Ballard.

I will say this, though. The light rail option to get to the airport (via bus from Ballard) was already looking pretty good, and now it's looking downright great in comparison.

Both options suck. Too many problems with any sort of surface option and only two lanes each direction for elevated? No wonder our region has a crappy reputation for big business - transportation is horrible.

"Grubby Ballard // Dec 11, 2008 at 7:37 pm

Damn yuppies and their ‘view’. Never heard a working stiff talk about his ‘view’ have you? That’s because we work for a living! Views are for yuppies and wine sippers."



"lol"

Does it concern anyone else that the elevated plan only allows for 2 lanes in each direction?

Most of the viaduct has more than 2 lanes in each direction as it is now... and last time I checked, Seattle is growing...

I wish they'd just decide and start building whatever it is so that I can start complaining about it.

Why dont they kill two birds with one stone by making a tunnel below the peer where the logs are almost due for a replacement due to natural decay?

There can never be too much green.

The "surface option" is a farce. We already have one-way surface streets on Western Ave. and Alaskan Way. The plan will not do anything but take away capacity.

The "surface option" is the quickest way to kill commerce in Seattle. Say goodbye to businesses. Say goodbye to contractors. Say goodbye to sanity.

@Naes. Tunnel was my first pick. But I bet the surface adds 20 minutes in rush. And as far as the bus is concerned, if I'm going to the airport with my wife and baby, I'm not going to schlep my luggage and baby to the bus. I'm going to drive or take a taxi like everyone else in Ballard.

Are those extra 10 minutes really that important? How about leaving the car at home and taking public transit? God no, that would take too much of your precious time! Replacing the viaduct with another ugly elevated structure doesn't move this city forward. However, the surface option has just too many problems as well.

Neither option is a good one. We need to either send that traffic underground in a tunnel or over water on a bridge. "Too expensive!" they cry. Come on! This is a once-in-a-city's-lifetime chance to do it right. Find the money. Do it right.

M, there's like 2 parks with grass and trees next to the water already. The olympic sculpture park and that older one by the grain silo with other sculptures.

It will take us twice as long to get from Ballard to Safeco or West Seattle or the airport with the surface option. Stoplights, tourists, etc. No thanks. Elevated, please.

Surface. Freeways are a thing of the past.

Although I am not sure what the right plan is, I just want a park next to the water, with grass and trees... Not this brick and concrete thing that they have in those renderings.

Maybe they could patch it together with all those idiotic 'Save the viaduct' bumperstickers the red necks like?

Grubby's laying it on thick w/ this one.

Bridge. Period.

Build new again, that which is falling down today.

Quiet? Try working in a tool shop for 10 years, then a walk along the waterfront. You can't hear a thing.

'Quiet', 'views', 'clean air'....all yuppie nonsense to keep the working man down.

I like the surface transit option . It would be great to have a more quiet waterfront to enjoy downtown.

oh, yeah...i vote elevated.

hey grub, while I agree about the part where you state your wife walks aurora, I think you ought to fess up that you live in wallingford. maybe if you beg, the kind swedes will start a blog for your ilk as well.

...how many of you like to walk along Aurora?

Mrs Grubby does it all the time, how else can we afford the internet?

Can't imagine the surface option working well because:
- As a pedestrian it is not pleasant being next to a busy road (how many of you like to walk along Aurora?)
- Unless there are plenty of overpasses (none shown in drawings) there will be lots of gas wasted at any crossings/ferry unload, not to mention backups.
-The Viaduct has always been used as an extra freeway...it seems unlikely that it could become a wonderful pedestrian-friendly street by sheer will alone at this late date in the city's planning.

Just look at the street option photos, they all look like latte sniffers to me, not regular, Ballard Joes who need to get their pick ups down to the south side asap for an illegal trash dump.

So there are plans for improvements to I-5 with the surface option. But what about from I-5 to Ballard? I can't imagine 45th, 85th, or Northgate handling more traffic. Why is this never addressed? The surface option would be a nightmare.

Damn yuppies and their 'view'. Never heard a working stiff talk about his 'view' have you? That's because we work for a living! Views are for yuppies and wine sippers.

@tortue: I don't think the 'preserving the view' consideration is intended for the drivers, but rather, the people in the city (such as @ pike place market) whose views are currently obstructed by the large and ugly viaduct.

The surface option looks really dumb. There was a lot of concern about pedestrian bypasses in several of the proposals. How would people get from one side to the other? Would there be bridges every 10 blocks people would be forced to get to?

Surface options would be a nightmare, what with the sports stadiums, ferries, and tourists. Those cars need to be up in the air or down in the ground.

I agree that the surface option has some big questions.
Where will ferry lines spill out?
If it is a more congested and bigger Aurora Ave, it is going to be pretty noisy down there. I'm thinking overhead option would make for more enjoyable waterfront area and speedier commute. Only negative is the views.

Tunnel would be nice. Free up more room on top for parks or businesses.

All the drivers who are whining about loosing the view should focus on driving instead.

The surface option is LAME!

I use the viaduct everyday and can't imagine that option working out at all!