8520Re: [mythsoc] Re: Seattle stinks
- Mar 1, 2003At 10:37 AM 3/1/2003 -0800, Ernest wrote:
>Also, there's no better view of Seattle to be had than from theI can think of a few as good, including some that don't require one to be
>northbound deck of the Viaduct.
in a moving car to enjoy them. Some of these also are not themselves
unsightly. Duwamish Head, just to name one. Ever been out
there? Unfortunately much of its view of Seattle is blocked by ... the
> Yes, the Viaduct is old and liable toThat depends entirely on how the tunnel is built. It's not the ground that
>earthquake damage, but why not simply _repair_ it? That must be cheaper
>than the ludicrous notion of wrecking it and replacing it with a tunnel
>_under_ Alaskan Way, a notion that puts the lie to all of the developers'
>fits over the Viaduct's unsafety: it's all fill under Alaskan Way, and a
>tunnel through it isn't going to be any more earthquake-safe than the top of
makes construction earthquake-unsafe, it's how you build in that
ground. The Viaduct is not in disrepair in some way that could be fixed
for less money than building something new: it is unsafe in original
construction down to its foundations. This was already well-known when I
was living there, 20 years ago, and it's long past time to do something
about it. It couldn't be "repaired" without tearing it down to those
foundations and rebuilding it from scratch. Which is what they're going to
do, only the new version will be less unsightly.
I love it when ignorant amateurs complain that the professionals don't know
what they're doing.
- David Bratman
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>