Monday, July 31, 2006

Say hello to a longer commute

As reported here, in another seemingly unending list of "studies", whenever they get around to closing the Alaskan Way Viaduct to replace it (the state DOT says the "repair" option is a no-go, and rightfully so), traffic in Seattle is going to be brutal.

Well, duh! Hello! Another study did not need to be done, for that conclusion to be arrived at, because that is something that should have been obvious, even to the most obtuse individual. But apparently it wasn't. The study does not address any type of solution to what will be done with dispersing the approximately 110,000 vehicles that currently use the viaduct at all - it merely states that 'creative solutions' need to be found to do this.

Look kids, here's the situation. Both the viaduct and the seawall that is part of the foundation for the viaduct were badly damaged by the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. Support piers for the viaduct were shifted during the earthquake, and they are still moving, albeit very slowly; meanwhile, the seawall was damaged by the earthquake, as well as by little wood boring creatures called gribbles allowing seawater to get at the concrete in the seawall, which is slowly but surely eating the concrete away.

Both of these structures need to be replaced (not just 'repaired'), and it is going to take upwards of ten years to do the work, and the powers-that-be are conducting 'study' after 'study', looking at the obvious, and have managed to waste five years in the process. Many geological scientists, in collaboration with structural engineers, have stated that the next earthquake - of even minor significance - will bring down one, or both, of the structures. Let's get past the "paralysis-by-analysis" stage, and get on with replacing both of these structures! Please?

I, for one, do not want to be driving on the existing viaduct when (not if) the next earthquake hits.


Do you?!

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree more. In fact, I think all civil engineering project should be undertaken according to majority opinion. It's nonsense to think that some sort of hard science education/research is remotely useful in determining the fate of things such as bridges.