the stupid, it burns us

Mar 07, 2007 09:44

why on earth would *anyone* think that putting a tunnel for cars RIGHT NEXT TO THE WATERFRONT is a good idea ( Read more... )

seattle

Leave a comment

schmuckythecat March 7 2007, 19:23:01 UTC
Nothing wrong with a tunnel there. It wouldn't be bored, it would be cut and cover. Dig a ditch, insert concrete tubes, cover it up again. They build similar things across Victoria Harbor in Hong Kong, or the BART tubes under San Francisco Bay. They just sink the concrete tubes, connect them up, then drain the water from inside when they are done.

Reply

staxxy March 7 2007, 19:39:14 UTC
all of those areas have far more solid ground they are digging into than we have here.

Reply

cynickal March 7 2007, 19:46:50 UTC
San Francisco has more solid ground?

Reply

staxxy March 7 2007, 19:58:49 UTC
than the landfill we are talking about on the waterfront.

Reply

cynickal March 7 2007, 20:14:10 UTC
I'm just surprised to hear that a major faultline is more stable than landfill.

Reply

staxxy March 7 2007, 20:29:17 UTC
The viaduct is on a faultline too, remember.

Reply

girljim March 8 2007, 02:12:35 UTC
Kind of the difference between a brick on a faultline, and a bowl of jello on a faultline.

Really, the problem isn't boring vs. cut & cover - it's the issue of digging at all.

Reply

cynickal March 8 2007, 22:30:05 UTC
While it's good to consider the structural integrity of the landscape I still think it's overlooked that by digging we remove the landfill that everyone is so concerned about, while rebuilding the viaduct continues the problem of placing a massive amount of weight on a precariously tiny footprint on top of the same landfill that everyone is so concerned about.

Reply

girljim March 9 2007, 18:47:08 UTC
Good point.

Although, my only problems with the tunnel are a.) "Tunnel Light" doesn't have enough capacity for even current demand, b.) (in my opinon) it's going to cost a lot more and take longer to build than they think it will, and c.) I don't like tunnels - or overpasses, for that matter. They just give me the creeps. Which is not a good argument against the tunnel - I know. :)

Reply

schmuckythecat March 7 2007, 19:51:44 UTC
No digging. In both cases the tubes just sit right on top of mud on the bottom of a saltwater bay. Our waterfront tunnel would be dug out then the sides reinforced with concrete. The stability comes from the construction itself not the soil it sits on.

For our tunnel, don't forget there is a bored tunnel through really soft and wet soil for freight trains just a block away. The Burlington Northern tunnel has been in operation for over a hundred years now, built with year 1900 technology.

There is no engineering problem with a waterfront tunnel. It's strictly financial and political.

Reply

staxxy March 7 2007, 20:05:03 UTC
there is also a bus tunnel about 3 blocks away and it has plenty of leaks and problems.

Reply

vulture23 March 7 2007, 21:28:43 UTC
...which I wouldn't be surprised to find were caused by backseat driving and "cost-cutting" measures.

Actually, this is the one thing that might convince me that a tunnel isn't a good idea -- because Seattle is too full of citizen-micromanagers and political point-scorers to let a large public project be done the *right* way, instead of "some vague approximation of right as long as it doesn't offend anyone"... I half expect that the current viaduct won't actually be replaced until the next sizable earthquake takes it down, just because Seattle will never agree on *how* it should be replaced, and whatever option gets chosen will be subject to interminable reviews and second-guessing and recalls...

Reply

schmuckythecat March 7 2007, 23:18:22 UTC
That micro-managing is why a new viaduct is doomed to be a turd as well. Any ideas to mitigate the ugliness and noise will be penny-pinched away. A new viaduct will just be huger, uglier, and noisier and it won't have the views people keep saying they like.

Reply

ozitonaranjo March 8 2007, 02:13:40 UTC
Doesn't matter. As far as the state government is concerned the tunnel option is dead in the water.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up