Forum and Classifieds

My Ballard Forum » Open Forum

questions on the seawall

(28 posts)

Started 6 months ago by bambooboy
Latest reply from InBetweenDays

bambooboy

offline
Member

So I was reading about the Alaskan Way Seawall repair proposal. I read that if this repair is not approved, it will stop or at a minimum postpone the tunnel project.
The first thing I thought was that if they knew the seawall needed repairing in order to finish the tunnel project, and they had to know this, why the hell wasn't it mentioned and included in the cost when they were talking about the total price of the tunnel fit? Seems kind of sneaky to say that we can get a tunnel for "X" dollar amount , when in reality, it can only be completed if you add "Y" dollar amount for the seawall repair to the total.
I'm surprised I haven't heard this reasoning in print yet.

Posted 6 months ago #
onederfullone

offline
Member

No worries, you can just suck out the flood water daily.

I'm sure it's just some alarmist crap /sarcasm.

McGinn tried to warn you idiots. but NO, you are so facebooking brilliant.

Posted 6 months ago #
Mondoman

offline
Member

The seawall is needed for whatever happens road-wise -- tunnel, viaduct rebuild, or surface-only. The shady part IMHO is that the money is apparently not just for the seawall, but also includes paying for the new landscaping/improvements/etc along Alaskan Way.

Posted 6 months ago #
gracie

offline
Member

one - I've only seen reference here of "facebooking". Going to feel like a total blonde here, but what does "facebooking" mean - other than the obvious.

Posted 6 months ago #
woodchucker

offline
Member

Does anyone remember the news articles last year where there were proposals submitted for a design for the waterfront? This is just the first phase, the next phase will cost another 400 million, they just don't want to hit us all at once.
They want all of us to pay for this to benefit the property owners along the waterfront. We're being screwed again,as usual

Posted 6 months ago #
great idea

online
Member

that's why I voted NO.

Posted 6 months ago #
woodchucker

offline
Member

Great Idea, I thank you Sir.

Posted 6 months ago #
iPlod

offline
Member

gracie,

"facebooking" is a MyBallard forum euphemism for "effing".

"eff you", "eff off", "kiss my effing whatever", "doooood, oh man doood! you really effed up this time!"

You get the idea by now, right?

More clever forum users than me will be able to link the post that started it.

Posted 6 months ago #
onederfullone

offline
Member

"the next phase will cost another 400 million, they just don't want to hit us all at once."

lmfao, you are almost correct, but dead wrong on the price. Everyone I know wouldn't touch it for a billion. (Billion w/ a B.)

Yes, I know some people.

Gracie...um...are you really a total blonde? ;-p...

..sorry, I should facebooking know better by now...

Posted 6 months ago #
biophile87

offline
Member

"Gracie...um...are you really a total blonde? ;-p..."

I just vomited a little in my mouth. Thanks, Rodney Dangerfield.

Posted 6 months ago #
onederfullone

offline
Member

yw

Posted 6 months ago #
woodchucker

offline
Member

"Lmfao, you are almost correct, but dead wrong on the price.Everyone I know wouldn't touch it for a billion. (Billion w/a B)"
Your numbers are pretty close, everyone I know wouldn't touch it either.
Let's hope we don't have to.

Posted 6 months ago #
onederfullone

offline
Member

We won't, trust me.

It'll only cost another billion to ignore it, but most figure if you talk about it, you aren't ignoring it.

Price for talking about it is going up, fwiw.

Posted 6 months ago #
bambooboy

offline
Member

Well actually, my concern here isn't how much the seawall will cost to repair but the fact that a vote was brought up about should we have a tunnel or not and if we vote yes, it will cost "this" much, but now they are saying that in order to complete the tunnel the seawall needs to be fixed first. This is something that they had to know needed repair before they even thought about the tunnel. That's my concern.

Posted 6 months ago #
Catherine

offline
Member

bamboo... where did you read that? Because that's contrary to what I've been seeing. For example - from the Seattle Times 10/12/12 Seattle Voters face....

"Part of the complexity and cost of the project is the need to coordinate the seawall construction with the state's Highway 99 tunnel project. If the bond measure fails, city leaders say, it would leave the waterfront at risk and delay viaduct removal and Alaskan Way reconstruction. " None of those things means the tunnel wouldn't be built/finished.

There are a few reasons they disconnected the seawall from the 99-replacement - one big one had to do with the state not paying for any of the seawall, but contributing for 99. If the projects are joined, then accounting for project manager time/shared resources gets messier. It's also a weak move by the Seattle City Council and the Mayor.

And this is indeed does not reflect costs from whatever waterfront park/boulevard/whatever rebuild gets put in.

Posted 6 months ago #
bambooboy

offline
Member

I read in the Seattle times that the tunnel project would be, at a minimum delayed if the referendum on repairing the seawall fails. This kind of tells me that the seawall needs to be fixed before it is completed. I will look through the archives and find the specific article for you.
I don't care if this was a federal project or not. If someone posts a cost to repair/replace something, I'm thinking that's the cost to do it, not half way through coming up and saying that "oh by the way you need to fix this before we can complete it".

Posted 6 months ago #
ballardgirl

offline
Member

I say no on the seawall, the tunnel is putting in a massive amount of concrete, that will protect most of downtown Seattle. The $eawall is to protect the waterfront land owners, to the west of the tunnel! Just my opinion, but let Ivars pay for it! Also, after the tunnel is in, the $eawall may be a much less expensive project.

Posted 6 months ago #
bambooboy

offline
Member

If that was the option, I would not have written this. Apparently as I have read in the Seattle Times, the seawall needs attention or the tunnel will not finish. I hope I am wrong

Posted 6 months ago #
Catherine

offline
Member

bamboo boy... I'm pretty sure the tunnel will be finished, but the completion of the tunnel project (as defined by all the stuff that goes along with it) could be delayed. Could all depend on your definition of done and the project are. I will look for your post with a link to the article you read.

I get the frustration with the splitting the project and the oh by the way we need to pay for this too. It's sadly common. I don't know if you've ever had major damage to a home covered by insurance - but it's kinda like the insurance company paying for the direct damage, but not covering the upgrades the building inspector requires you to include before they'll sign off on the project. Say you have a fire in a house that has no attic insulation. As part of the repairs, the insurance company pays for your new roof, ceiling, walls and new kitchen because it was a stove top fire. The inspector, won't sign off the final inspection unless you put R32 in the entire attic. The insurance company isn't paying for it, you get to cough up the dough. Should your contractor have been up front with this to begin with.... yup. Municipal project- multiply by a few million in scale. I can tell you that the city council and the mayor were aware of this all along, and choose to kick this over to us very... quietly.

Ballardgirl - that massive amount of concrete is 50+ft below sea level, so of no use protecting the down town core.

Posted 6 months ago #
lifeisamazing

offline
Member

OK, so, a little off topic but maybe someone can answer me. Here's what I keep wondering and have been wondering since the whole tunnel thing came up: Once the tunnel is built, how, in the future, will it be made wider? There will be more cars. Roads get widened. How will they widen a tunnel?

Posted 6 months ago #
Cate

online
Member

Shhhhh..... We are not supposed to think about that.

Posted 6 months ago #
Norge

offline
Member

The City's ultimate goal for the waterfront is a big park designed by a NY architect. So this is the first step yet they are framing it as a rebuild of the seawall (which will be done) at a cost of $300+ million yet the amount needed for the seawall is around $270 million. The additional funds start the park. This won't be the first time the city comes to the voters for a levy on this issue as the total project costs are $1+ billion. So, are Seattle taxpayers ready to fund a waterfront park starting with the guise of repairing the seawall -- who knows. Again to me this seems to be a project that will greatly benefit a specific set of the landowners downtown and should be paid for with a local improvement district tax.

Posted 6 months ago #
GAM

offline
Member

My understanding is the seawall needs repair no matter what else happens. So, yes, not repairing it would delay the tunnel. But if the tunnel weren't happening the seawall would still need the repairs.

We all benefit from the seawall. Sure, the property owners downtown benefit a little more directly, but there are taxes I'm far more outraged about (stadium tax, anyone?).

Posted 6 months ago #
gracie

offline
Member

Thanks for clarification on "facebooking." Makes sense.
And Onederfullone - am I a "total" blonde? (shame on you) That would be a no. This summer my hair dude kept adding more and more blonde highlights to my hair. Started feeling I looked like a hooker! So now I'm a deep red auburn, no highlights.This is my winter look.

Posted 6 months ago #
bambooboy

offline
Member

Here's the deal on the seawall. "if" the seawall is not repaired, they say they can't move traffic from the Viaduct down to Alaskan way, and if they can't move the traffic off the Viaduct, they can't tear down the Viaduct and if they can't tear down the Viaduct they can't finish the tunnel.
So apparently it's all about displacing the Viaduct traffic

Posted 6 months ago #
Rudy

offline
Member

gracie as others have stated, Facebook is a replacement for common swear words. A long time ago Pennygirl had a thread that was removed due to excessive cursing. I re-posted the thread and replaced all offending words with the word Facebook as the Geeky Swedes had just moved the article comments from Disquss to Facebook. Every time I see people use Facebook I'm proud of my lasting contribution. :)

Here is the original thread: http://www.myballard.com/forum/topic.php?id=10906

Posted 6 months ago #
onederfullone

offline
Member

It was pure brilliance Rudy.

I really facebooking loved that facebooking thread.

Gracie, I wasn't intending to be facebooking offensive, fwiw. But I still feel facebooking shameful about it.

I just can't shake this lousy facebooking sense of humor...

Again, I blame Rudy ;-p

Posted 6 months ago #
InBetweenDays

offline
Member

This isn't new information. If you look through the Seattle Times archives you'll see that even back in 2009 they were talking about the city needing to consider additional taxes to pay for the seawall, road improvements, parks, etc. Here is just one of many articles...

"The plan commits $2.4 billion in state money to the project and adds an additional $400 million in tolling revenue - money that can only be spent tearing down the current structure and building the new one.

Replacement of Seattle's aging waterfront seawall, and improvements made to the waterfront will need separate sources of money."

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2009109110_apwaxgralaskanwayviaduct2ndldwritethru.html

Posted 6 months ago #