--( Bored Tunnel Elliott Bay Highway Elliot Bay Floating Bridge Alaska Way Viaduct Replacement Renton to Bothell Tunnel Lake WA Tunnel )--
WE ON THE WEST COAST OF UNITED STATES, CANADA, & MEXICO:
To end gridlock thru Puget Sound Country of Washington State:
NEED TEN LANES LOCAL TO GET PEOPLE OFF OF INTERSTATE
Suggest advocated here Elliott Bay Floating Highway
AND SIX LANES THRU NEW VEHICULAR TRAFFIC CAPACITY
Suggest 18 mile tunnel under Lk WA:
SR 167 Renton (Bryn Maur) Rainer Ave to SR 104 Sheridan Heights
or SR 167 Renton (Bryn Maur) Rainer Ave to greatly improved SR 527 Bothell
ADVOCACY HISTORY SINCE 1961 FOR:
ALASKA WAY VIADUCT
REPLACEMENT
WITH
10 (or two 5) LANE ELLIOT BAY FLOATING BRIDGE'S
from North End Harbor Island to Battery & Wall Streets
Expensive to build but less expensive because no rights of way or temporary detour routing.
Could be completed during term(s) of most elected officials.
I was in hearing (27 then 75 now) resulted in ramps to nowhere for this or parallel viaduct until first Kingdome built.
with almost no disruption of entire or any part of existing traffic system during construction
anything else might cause I-5, I-405, US-99 grid lock
Note map images can be enlarged by use of IE capability (click little down arrow right of %) in lower right
First of three one third parts of excerpts of Oct 10, 2009 interview
Not to be considered a endorsement by TCTV just journalism
also
ADVOCACY HISTORY SINCE SEPT. 18, 2009 FOR;
NEW IDEA
I-5 & I-405
BYPASS
WITH
6 (+ or -) LANE UNDER LAKE WASHINGTON BORED (or underwater caisson) TUNNEL(S)
from SR 167 Renton to SR 104 Sheridan Heights (18 miles)
Good tie to but would require improvement to both SR 99 & 1 5 toward Everett
or
from SR 167 Renton to South end of if highly improved SR 527 Bothell (18.1 miles)
Also, Expensive construction cost but cost less to build because no rights of way costs or temporary detour routing and simple PS&E
Could be completed during term(s) of office of most elected officials
More likely to be considered and funded as a part of Pan American Interstate Highway System
But if not local. Could be built as toll road
with almost no disruption of entire or any part of existing traffic system during construction
anything else might cause I-5, I-405, US-99 grid lock
If approved might convince Boeing not to move some production to Carolinas
They don't have grid lock in Charleston, S. Carolina (at least not yet
Not all union contracts, taxation & workman's compensation etc.
Note map images can be enlarged by use of IE capability (click little down arrow right of %) in lower right
SECOND NEW IDEA
after build Elliott Bay Floating Highway
ADVOCATE CONVERT VIADUCT FOR TOP DECK PARKING
LOWER DECK WALLED&GLASSED IN PROMENADE FOR SIGHT SEEING PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES
Why waste city and $17 M state money for new facilities to solve parking problems for uptown and waterfront pier customers
There will be no view over piers for ourselves or tourists when viaduct down
Save the high cost of demolition
Could be made even more beautiful than it already is like one long greenhouse for instance
Built to highway load standards it is far more seismic resistant than any buildings per UBC in seismic zone 3
If torn down because of seismic risk you better demolish half of downtown Seattle
The Late Retired Dean of College of CE at UW that taught most of my colleagues said Viaduct not at risk in 2003
However I went to WSC & WSU
The simulation by WSDOT showing Viaduct collapse and SR520 Bridge Column's failure is a almost criminal political lie
and insult to engineers that designed them. See further discussion on SR520 columns about CESL MIT analysis below
A seismic event big enough might damage any structure but not specifically these any more than others
However, I believe might be true a fuel tank truck went over the side of the viaduct, burst into flames and heated the rebar in two spans.
Concrete only takes compression loads but I'm still looking for journalism proof. Even if this true doesn't justify tearing down whole viaduct.
The consulting firm should be reported for bad ethics for making a biased study so they can get PS&E
I would ask if the firm has never designed a freeway structure above or below ground in Seismic zone 3
There isn't a building or parking garage structure built any where that can hold up a fully loaded semi-truck like viaduct can.
revised for no longer endorsement of 2 mile long
Bored Tunnel along Seattle's Waterfront
Second of three one third parts of Oct 10, 2009 Interview
SO NOW WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE PLAN TO HANDLE CENTRAL PUGET SOUND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC
Expensive but most likely should be paid for by Federal, State, County, All benefited Western WA, & Puget Sound Cities
Not that much more total cost than other ideas when consider gain 16 lanes thru Puget Sound
Consider advantage to Boeing logistics between Renton/Auburn and Everett Plants
Third of three one third parts of excerpts from Oct 10, 2009 interview
My apologies for mention King County Exec candidate Susan Hutchinson but not mention Dow Constantine in above interview
IF YOU WANT TO SEND SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE PRO OR CON COME BACK HERE AND
CLICK HERE TO CONTACT THE DEMOCRAT MEMBERS OF WA ST HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
CLICK HERE TO CONTACT THE DEMOCRAT MEMBERS OF WA ST SENATE
I regret that I still don't know how to provide individual contacts like above for Republicans yet
But Republican Minority Leaders Contact info at bottom of pages linked to above
BIG MISUNDERSTANDING I THOUGHT IT WAS ON AND OFF I-5
IF I HAVE INFLUENCED ANY POLITICIANS MY APOLOGIES
Especially if I influenced the Governor's Office
WE ON THE WEST COAST OF UNITED STATES, CANADA, & MEXICO:
NEED TEN LANES LOCAL TO GET PEOPLE OFF OF INTERSTATE
Suggest advocated here Elliott Bay Floating Highway
AND SIX LANES THRU NEW VEHICULAR TRAFFIC CAPACITY
suggest advocated here 18 mile tunnel under Lk WA SR 167 Renton SR 104 Bothell
IN AND AROUND SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY
For fun: Come on folks let's get open minded at least I'm not trying to relocate the Duwamish River. Click below link
http://images.google.com/images?q=waterbridge+in+germany&hl=en&rlz=1R2GGLL_en&sa=X&um=1
After your amazed by above bit of humor please don't forget to use your back arrow scroll back here and maybe give serious consideration to the over 30 pages presented below in support of above.
Including why Ramps that went nowhere (15 years) until first Kingdome were built
pontoon construction per below DOT document.
She may or may not agree with any of the contents of this web page
I am non-partisan but admire her efforts on these issues so far
Thanks for everyone's support.
PLEASE NO MORE CONTRIBUTIONS I CAN'T AFFORD TO CONTINUE MAILING THEM BACK
My dream since 1961 (I-5 ramps that went nowhere) might happen, I even was invited some years ago by the late Mac McWhorter then Grays Harbor Port Commissioner (also active in my theater) & testified at public law 405 hearing advocating improvement to Westport turning basin for from Valdez Alaska oil tankers (never so used) saying might be needed for pontoons
Alaska Way Viaduct Replacement/Bypass with
by initiative 964 to get on 2008 ballot see content last half and map on 2nd to last page of this document
but
now is NOT amended to also support a;
Waterfront two mile Bored tunnel
(not to be confused with the four lane waterfront/seawall tunnel previously proposed)
under downtown Seattle Whoops! Alaska Way
or new idea of a bored tunnel under Lake Washington
Whoops! had a misunderstanding below I thought the bored tunnel was to exit off of
I-5 and back on to I-5. (Although I must confess I didn't have a clue where)
I do not approve any tunnel under Alaska Way along the Waterfront
What part of NO to waterfront tunnel do our politicians not understand.
Remember the Yes No - Yes No
No to both (over 70% No on tunnel)
votes on ballots on election demanded by the Governor
A waterfront tunnel would not have all the accesses nor the increase to 10 lanes for local traffic (per 1961 needs by 1982 study) (without prior knowledge of since then ((Smith Tower, IBM, Sea First Black Box "it came in")) new downtown buildings) that something like my Elliot Bay Floating Bridge would have. That can be built elsewhere and floated in so logistics (concrete trucks even lights etc.) not disrupt downtown
Replacement of a six lane inadequate traffic capacity viaduct (with beautiful views of Elliot Bay over the piers) with a very expensive no gain inadequate four to six lane tunnel from which no view of waterfront by visitors is unacceptable.
Trucks carrying hazardous materials would have to not be allowed in a tunnel this long
Even after such a tunnel was built it would be absurd for Seattle to spend money to tear down the beautiful viaduct (more earthquake resistant than any downtown building) that could be used for parking and public market and bicycle paths
The rest of us in the State of Washington do not want to pay 3.1 billion dollars of WA State funds for a SR-99 tunnel that does nothing to increase the vehicular traffic capacity thru the Puget Sound region. Neither should the Federal Highway Administration waste Federal tax dollars for Seattle grants for the same reason.
The City of Seattle should not be allowed to build a cosmetic improvement like this with inadequate future vehicular traffic capacity even if they paid for all of it. Unless something like the proposed 10 lanes floating Highway is built first.
AGAIN
WE ON THE WEST COAST OF UNITED STATES, CANADA, & MEXICO
NEED TEN LANES LOCAL TO GET PEOPLE OFF OF OUR INTERSTATE
AND SIX LANES THRU NEW INTERSTATE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC CAPACITY
IN AND AROUND SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY
BOTH AS A STATE & FEDERAL TAX PAYER THIS IS A ABSURD WASTE OF MONEY FOR A
COSMETIC PROJECT
AND WHY SOME FOLKS SUPPORT THINGS LIKE INITIATIVE 1033 WHICH WOULD BADLY HINDER PROGRESS FOR LEGITIMATE IMPROVEMENTS
Hope the Democrats in the legislature and our great Governor doesn't commit political suicide and do change their mind as I have about support of 2 mile bored tunnel.
She brilliantly asked for and got a;
Yes No (73% NO TO WATERFRONT TUNNEL),
Yes No (57%? NO TEAR DOWN VIADUCT)
unless something with more traffic capacity in place
(thence maybe use top for parking, glass in bay side lower for bicycles - why spend even more of our none Seattle resident state tax money to tear it down. It's strong enough for semi trucks hence more seismic (UBC Zone 3) resistant than most of the buildings downtown.)
WHY WE JUST GOT RID OF MAYOR NICHOLS
that probably other wise a great public servant
AND
DID NOT VOTE FOR ROSSI
what was he thinking supporting for when:
73% voted NO to H2O front tunnel,57% leave viaduct
l
Why should the WA State Taxpayers pay any of;
$290 M, for Seattle Surface Streets which will cause more traffic on our I-5
$17 M for Seattle's Parking problems at expense of same problem we have at our homes
$30 M for extra transit at expense of same problems we really suffer from at our homes
I'm not a conservative.
In fact I don't think we are spending enough for progress but this is ridiculous.
I admit what I advocate costs even more
but it would be closer to getting the job done
for all the citizens of West Coast of North America.
The City of Seattle should be ashamed.
This is not just a Seattle Street
I wonder if we can eliminate the freeway that bisects our town in two
and get the state taxpayers to help pay do it
LOOK OUT FOR INITIATIVE 1033
So, on the other hand it is the responsibilities for the Federal and State Government's taxpayers
to pay a great share but only for the least expensive improvements
that aid them in getting thru or around the Puget Sound region
Not for anything cosmetic that reduces or does not have increased thru vehicular traffic capacity
But,
We do need to consider a 18 mile long bored or caisson tunnel under Lake Washington from SR 167
extended on Rainer Ave to Bryn Mawr (Renton)
The highest part of the cost in large diameter underground boring is that part related to getting the boring machinery in place and removed after completion along with construction of approaches. Thus I conclude since that cost amortized thru length of the project this advocacy for eighteen miles would be something less than nine times the two mile tunnel advocated along Seattle's waterfront
Only preliminary engineering challenge during feasibility studies might have been determination of what it takes not to compromise the many existing bored Metro sewage tunnels under/around Lake Washington.
But
After
review of the maps in the below link along with unofficial conversations with
their. staff it would appear that there aren't any reasons to
consider any conflicts with existing or planned sewage appurtenances'.
Only minor consideration would be that;
There is a concrete pipe on piling along the waterfront in the north end
however – the Kenmore interceptor. ("Otherwise sounds good, no
major conflicts with King County sewers") that the extension of SR-104
would probably have to go over before the proposed under the Lake Washington
tunnel entrance. Or some other coordinated engineering solution
http://your.kingcounty.gov/gis/vmc/Utilities.htm#WTDserviceareamaps has several maps; at least one of which would be useful for you I believe, although they are intended to print out at 11x17. I test printed one at 8x11 and it was ok. Great talking to you!
I advocate emergency exits only at Sand Point & North Mercer Island. If you want to really ruin the (Interstate concept) idea a diamond interchange could be added at I-90. And to make it worse with a little bend a interchange with one end of the SR-520 bridge route could be added. In my opinion such a improvement to the intent of this idea would be detrimental. Except if accidents on either East or West halves of SR 520 or I-90 such interchanges could facilitate detours.
If kept simple would cost much less than 9 times cost of proposed 2 mile bored tunnel because big expense moving in and out boring equipment and typical for it's entire length. No complex Engineering, Plans, Specifications or Estimates except at ends.
Probability of cost over run or force account over bid less likely. Metro consultants already have a lot of Lake Washington vertical test boring information and are experienced to gather more though I doubt necessary unless prime boring contractor demanded
Below are two different maps showing the same proposal
above map showing proposed tunnel route shows neighborhood streets
above map showing proposed tunnel route shows interstate highways and ramps (exits)
Comments Pro and Con and Replies about 18 mile tunnel as received will be posted below if permission granted
kingsleyhall_elmatheater@hotmail.com
left click above e-mail address and let me know what you think. Suggestions appreciated
please state if you want posted, and with full name, first name or anonymous
9/25/2009
Kingsley:
A positively brilliant idea. An underwater tunnel that length would be an
obvious engineering marvel.
Another idea would be to construct a N/S floating bridge from Renton to Bothell.
Anchor points would be on Mercer Island where you could bore another tunnel
through the middle of Mercer Island. If you do both projects, you would more
than double the available traffic capacity by what would obviously be an
analogue to the double deck Alaskan Way Viaduct - one on the water and one under
the water. Crossing of the existing and projected E/W floating bridges could
alternatively be accomplished by a never before seen "Floating
Overpass" structure. How's that for an idea? Better contact the Governor
and get this idea on the books before someone else steals it from us.
Randy Chun
9/26/2009
Thanks Randy,
But, I think as a pleasure boat owner and sometimes Sea plane passenger I think Lake Washington is too small to be divided length wise by floating structures. It's not as big as Puget Sound and Elliot Bay and a composite bored and floating facility could not be engineered & constructed as easily and quickly. Note the 18 mile as proposed above would be a straight shot with vertical curves only at the ends. One beauty of both the Elliot Bay Floating Bridge and 18 mile Lake WA tunnel .projects is they are both within the ability of and can both be engineered and constructed by local WA State firms
Kingsley
At first I was horrified by the idea of a bored tunnel
under
I assume the bored tunnel will be down deep enough to be in some form of soils not bothered by Denny Regrade fills and other existing appurtenances. (This written when I thought on & Off I-5) I must admit as a engineer and CBO (certified building official) (first a former plans examiner) I am nervous about tunnels this long in Seismic zone three but I also realize that any structure except floating (which has the least potential impact) has it's risk. When we look at the success of the Great Northern Railway Tunnel under downtown Seattle that has survived seismic events since 1904 and the vibrations from huge very heavy steam locomotives of the past as described in below link. (Note built by 350 men with pick axes & wheelbarrows) I am convinced there is no reason to fear a tunnel any more than freeway structures that collapse.
http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=4029
Above Revision of January 16, 2009 (WAS) in support of A
(which I did not realize was along Alaska Way Waterfront)
Bored Tunnel
but still advocate
But,
the bored tunnel will not take care of this thru traffic alone without removing the
existing EXIT ONLY Seneca Left hand off ramp from the thru
Northbound lanes of I-5 which is still an embarrassment.
People wanting to go into
And
of course it's obvious the limited access bored tunnel (though great idea and
needed long ago somewhere) will not replace the functions of the Alaska Way Viaduct (nor
will my 18 mile long tunnel idea ) because local traffic will not have and should not have adequate access. So, I
still advocate building the floating bridge to facilitate solution of that
problem by it's provision of access between and to Western Ave-Magnolia, Aurora
Avenue, Madison-Spring-Hospitals, Royal Brougham Way- Sports & Train
Station, New Ferry Terminal,
When
you consider we prepared the PS&E (Plans, Specifications & Estimates)
for constructions of I-5 in 1961 (with those limited access rules) (to
also facilitate moving missiles around in case the cold war turned hot) when
the only tall buildings downtown were the IBM Building, The Seattle First
Building ("Black Box IBM Building Came In") and Smith Tower you can
understand why we have the local traffic problem. Though we knew I-90 would be
improved and
provided for same under the now curved 12th Ave S. bridge
(which I drew the TS&L drawings of) at Connecticut Street Interchange
we had no idea Eastside of Lake Washington development would put the traffic
load as high as it is now on I-5 between I-90 & later SR-520 on and
off ramps. But we did anticipate somewhat from I-90 by providing the ramps that
went nowhere until the first Kingdome that were intended for a double deck
tie to either a parallel (for proposed total ten lane) Alaska Way Viaduct
or ten lane
WHAT PART OF NO (to both waterfront tunnel & viaduct replacement) DO OR DID DINO ROSSI, GREG NICHOLS otherwise a great public servant and mayor, THE SEATTLE PI NOT UNDERSTAND
Above Revision also
written January 16, 2009 in support (but
changed my mind) of (Alaska
Way) Bored Tunnel
but to
as stated still advocate
THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH WRITTEN IN REBUTTAL OF THE E-MAILS POSTED IN BLUE UNDER IT
There are some folks, anxious to tear down the viaduct, that advocate against any replacement of the viaduct and/or (probably any anywhere including the 18 mile tunnel advocated below ) bored tunnel except with the "surface option" transportation improvements including widening I-5 to accomplish part of such improvements. In my opinion that's what we had before we were forced to build the viaduct. I'm 75 years old and I remember as child prior viaduct and when US99 was 2 lane brick pavement thru Fort Lewis. These folks are unaware of how the walls I helped design are built on the Eastside of the freeway. The decorated walls you see are just a facade hung on the front of the functional structures which consist of a row of between 10 & 20 ft. diameter concrete columns with slots in their adjacent sides wherein horizontal Steel I beams are stacked. Because the NB, NBCD, SB, SBCD freeway is depressed under; Madison, Spring, Seneca X bridge etc. overpasses and the reversible lanes are under them the visible part of this wall is over 75 feet high. But, the columns go down until at least 25 feet of bedrock or more if no bedrock found. I understand there is going to be a effort to penetrate this wall with a tunnel for eastbound light rail. I can only speculate how difficult but not impossible this will be. I suspect they will have to do what we did by building similar column walls on the North & South side of their tunnel before they penetrate the freeway wall. Spring street is named Spring Street because there is a underground spring there which creates fluid soil pressures all the way between Madison and the X bridge. If they don't do this first the structural integrity of the entire freeway wall could be compromised. Widening of I-5 is cost and inconvenience to the public prohibitive and may be impossible.
Besides it is exactly one block wide between frontage streets on both sides
We need 10 lanes (for local) (possible floating) and 6 lanes (for thru) (possible not on waterfront bored tunnel) not a former shoulder we can drive on
FOR EXAMPLE; The following e-mails in this color below
Hi Kingsley,
Thank you for your suggestion. Mike supports a modified version of
WSDOT's 2007 surface plan, which would be able to carry all existing
and all expected traffic in Seattle. The plan's details can be found
on their website, but it includes widening I-5, for example, and
improving bus efficiency. If you have any specific questions about the
surface option, please let us know.
Thanks for your message, and feel free to write back with any questions,
-McGinn for Mayor
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Kingsley
Hall<kingsleyhall_elmatheater@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Subject: "Alaska Way Viaduct Replacement" Political Advice
> Dear Mike McGinn;
>
> Congratulations on your success in the primary.
>
> Please be advised I have had over 1.6 million hits on the below web site
> since original posted in 1967. I came within 6,000 signatures of getting on
> the 2007 ballot. Although I could not vote for you since I now live in
Elma.
> WA most of the people that signed the petitions that almost were enough to
> get the Initiative on the ballet at least voted against Greg Nickels or
Dino
> Rossi and will continue to vote against anyone advocating tunnel/seawall or
> viaduct replacement. Neither of which will provide at least 10 lanes for
> local traffic unless something else for vehicular traffic is in place and
> proving working before the viaduct is torn down first.
>
> The negative comments in below may have helped influence voters to cause
> Greg Nickels to take third place in the primary.
>
> http://www.elmatheater.org/Alaska%20Way%20Viaduct%20Replacement%203rd%20Option.htm
>
> Please be advised I'm 74 years old and have no financial or egotistical
> reason for above advocacy. But, It might be in your interest to state
> publicly you might consider such a plan as it could be accomplished
> within your term of office Where else within the 13 block wide (minus one
> for existing I-5) hour glass figure of Seattle can you put 10 lanes for
> local traffic and return I-5 to it's original intent as a through Interstate
> facility instead of a parking lot inconvenience for everyone in the Western
> Hemisphere. Shame on Seattle. Thank God for your new leadership.
>
> In my opinion both the Bored tunnel hopefully without much local access
(For
> interstate traffic) and the Ten lane Elliot Bay Floating Highway (For local
> SW WA traffic) along Alaska Way
should not be built before if ever the present Alaska Way
Viaduct
> torn down to facilitate replacement of itself.
I wrote this before I realized it was
not going in and out of I-5 or for supplemental to existing viaduct traffic
capacity
>
> It is not a Seattle street. It's 1/3 of the Pan American way thru
> Seattle. I-405 no longer a Interstate bypass. After communication with the
> Mayor of Vancouver, BC he asked and Their Prime Minister sent messages to
> our President asking viaduct be left alone until at least after their
> Olympics-Fair etc are over
>
> On the other hand if the floating pontoons are to be built and stored
> secretly for catastrophic or terrorist attack (against say the 4 3,000 foot
> long I-5 bridges you can park under above Sea City Hall & KC
Courthouse) a
> low profile of this information may be in order.
>
> Thanks for your time
>
> Regards
>
> Kingsley
>
> Kingsley Hall Jr.
> cc: To your opponent
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
REVISED I HAD HOPED BY:; Another pair of nice (temporarily, I hope , lost) e-mail, communications between myself and a Mr. David Levinger, of Mr. McGinn's campaign, Note; as will be shown below.. He stated that he was in charge of advising and was spokesman for Mr. McGinn on stated positions regarding transportation. When I read this reply e-mail, I thought, in contradiction to above unsigned e-mail it implied some serious consideration of the proposals as outlined on this page might happen. So, I called on the phone to thank him only to find out that that was not true and that their position was as stated in first unsigned e-mail above. Not only that, he was emphatic about being opposed to the bored tunnel which he emphasized in his opinion was not a "Done Deal" or a in progress effort. He implied that they were going to do everything possible to stop the bored tunnel project
Oh! I finally found paper copies of them so here they are scanned and inserted below in black
______________________________________________________________________________________________
I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANSWERS TO FOLLOWING E-MAIL SENT TO
SUSAN HUTCHISON
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________I
Dear Joe Mallahan;
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
WHAT PART OF NO BY SEATTLE VOTERS (to both waterfront seawall/tunnel (NOW I HATE TO ADMIT IT MYSELF ON BORED UNDER A. WAY) viaduct replacement) DO OR DID DINO ROSSI, GREG NICHOLS ( Maybe a great public servant and Seattle Mayor except on this issue), AND DARN IT ME TOO did not realize under A. Way!!!, THE SEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER with no coverage of Initiative 964 and or any other info on this page UNLESS THE SEATTLE TIMES STARTS CARRYING NEWS REGARDLESS OF RELATIVE AMOUNTS OF CAMPAIGN FUNDS FOR ADS they might not survive either- (Please note almost corrupt non-coverage of below Initiative 964 information), ALL BUT PUBLIC TV NEWS (Thank God for NPR, public TV, and the internet) NOT UNDERSTAND. Ron Simms at least eventually agreed that the viaduct (six out of eighteen lanes thru Seattle) should not come down until something else in place successfully carrying vehicular traffic during and after construction Too bad we lost one of our best to Washington D.C. New open minded leadership of Seattle & King County fills all of us with great anticipation. I urge we not support ANY Politician (S) that are too stupid to realize how important to our economy and even survival solutions to these local vehicular traffic problems may be. For instance, Boeing may be moving out some of their manufacturing efforts because they can't (with both their vendors or their own fleet of trucks and buses) handle their logistics around the Seattle area. These decisions should not be decided based on campaign funds or DOT consultants trying or competing to get PS&E contracts. Note, I don't want or need any. But, I, with respect of course, (personally by contribution or whatever) may decide to support, not support or oppose any entities that will not at least consider my or other people's ideas. (including Victor Gray's save the viaduct philosophy. Those folks advocating a surface solution should realize that's what was there before the viaduct resulting in conditions such that the viaduct was built in the first place. At least save $$$ by not tearing it down. Built to highway loading standards it's less seismic risk than any multistory garage including at SeaTac airport. There isn't a building built than you can park a fully loaded semi-truck in. Great parking lot & glassed in lower deck bicycle path) It's not that I think I'm absolutely correct that my Elliott Bay Floating Highway is the only answer it's just that at that time I wanted it looked at. I ask too. How else are you going to add ten lanes around downtown Seattle's hour glass figure (between Lake. WA and Elliot. Bay) to fix the local vehicular traffic problem?
IT'S OK THAT A POLITICIAN OR MEDIA DOES NOT ENDORSE MY IDEAS
THE GOVERNORS OFFICE HAS NEITHER ENDORSED MY ELLIOT BAY FLOATING HIGHWAY OR DISMISSED THE IDEA YET BUT I KNOW THEY HAVE CONSIDERED THE ONGOING REVISIONS TO THE CONTENT OF THIS WEB PAGE (that is all I ask)
I so appreciate when any elected official takes the time when they are as busy as Representative Ross Hunter, House Finance Committee Chairman to respond per Below e-mail.
As I say such actions restore my faith in our democracy. I don't ask anyone to agree I just want the information looked at. Maybe someone else after looking will get a better idea.
I read most stuff people send me. Thanks for thinking about these issues.
Rep. Ross Hunter
Finance Committee Chairman
Bellevue Office: (425) 453-3064 (until January)
Olympia Office: (360) 786-7936 (January – May)
From:
kingsley hall [mailto:kingsleyhall_elmatheater@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:21 AM
To: Hunter, Rep. Ross
Subject: Uder Lk WA bored tunnel & Elliot Bay Floating Highway
Dear Mr. Hunter
Thanks for looking Your only legislature member to reply. I can
tell they looked though by below counter related to daily number e-mails I
sent above what hits I usually get
http://my3.statcounter.com/project/standard/stats.php?account_id=1823698&login_id=2&code=1e9724b0bc2971beecc4f65ff995616f&guest_login=1&project_id=3115231
Talked with Boeing Corp Office in Chicago before Gov signed 2 mi tunnel.
Insisted Anonymous Lady Executive Secretary admitted privately Puget Sound
Grid lock has been discussed. She said she would send link to their powers
that be. Interesting right after she signed they announced open South Carolina
plant.
A couple weeks ago contacted Sen. Patty Murray's Seattle Office. They said
liked info so well would forward to her DC office. Have heard no more.
Probably concerned with health care concerns etc.
Depend on when you looked more revisions to below every once in a while.
Revised tunnel plan to consider alternate SR167 to SR 527. Actually should
consider all the way for a total of about 25 miles to junction I-405 rejoin
I-5 junction (Result in very complicated Interchange). I prefer my
original plan because simpler at ends because almost no R/W and PS&E
therefore less debate. In house DOT engineers in cooperation with tunnel
contractor without consulting firms could do PS&E. I would be willing to
volunteer to help. I don't need and don't want money compensation or
contributions. Retired and trying to run my 600 seat theater which is closed
(why I have time to fool with these matters) until after legislature is
routinely likely to adopt 2010 Uniform Electric Code Allowing Plastic
conduit thereby facilitate X-10, Plug n Power remote computer lighting in
Assembly & Green Buildings
Thanks again. You made my day. Restored my faith in Democracy. Even if I'm
only half able to help test something to find the Democratic Party some
consensus I'll try. If there is anything I can do let me know
http://my3.statcounter.com/project/standard/stats.php?account_id=1823698&login_id=2&code=1e9724b0bc2971beecc4f65ff995616f&guest_login=1&project_id=3115231
Anything you want copied and pasted into my above web site let me know.
Include separate e-mail so I know if you want and how you want to be
identified
Thanks yet again
Kingsley
> Regards
> Kingsley Hall Jr.
> Lions Club MD19G-5 Zone Chairman
> http://elmatheater.org/LionsClubMD19G-5BulletinIndex.htm
> Owner/mgr./Art/Dir Elma Theater since May 1991
> http://www.elmatheater.org/
> Home of Elma Children's Theater Assn.
> Non-profitIRS 91-1678178 Wash.State UBI 601-356-680
> 1-360-482-4810 Cell# 1-360-590-2054
> Long Winded Resume
> http://www.geocities.com/kingsleyshall/
> CEO Kingsley HallAssociates1219 SmithTower 69-91
Just
coming out of retirement as Chicago consultant on 1948 project of my (died
1971) Dad's
>
historic link to be created soon
> Formed/MgrTeleComputer Services Co.
> Dorset Bldg,Bellevue-Becker Bldg.Aberdeen.BleakHouse,Seaview-nowElma,WA
> historic1969 link below
> http://elmatheater.org/TCS1969brochurepage1.htm
> Proponent of Nov 2007 Initiative 964
> Re; Replacing Alaska Way Viaduct w/Elliott Bay Floating Bridge
> Revised Dec./2008; Building a temporary Floating Bridge
> Revised again Jan./2009 to endorse Bored Tunnel under 2nd Ave etc.
Revised again to NOT endorse 2 mi tunnel
Revised again to propose 18 mi tunnel under Lk WA.
Revised again to not tear down wonderful viaduct. And use
money elsewhere. Save parking cost dollars
Revised after talking as Boeing Stockholder with Chicago
Corporation headquarters
> http://www.elmatheater.org/Alaska%20Way%20Viaduct%20Replacement%203rd%20Option.htm
Certainly food for thought. It seems the people can't pull it together in Seattle so any suggestions seem up for grabs.
Thanks.
Lynn
-----Original Message-----
From: Kessler, Rep. Lynn <Kessler.Lynn@leg.wa.gov>
To: 'kessler24@aol.com' <kessler24@aol.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 11:36 am
Subject: FW: Instead of 2 mi B. T. use funds for 18 mi B. T. under Lk WA
SR167 to SR104 & El Bay Fl Hiway
From:
kingsley hall [mailto:kingsleyhall_elmatheater@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 11:37 PM
To: Kessler, Rep. Lynn
Subject: Instead of 2 mi B. T. use funds for 18 mi B. T.
under Lk WA SR167 to SR104 & El Bay Fl Hiway
Dear Representative Kessler;
Hello again from Elma. Thanks for listening on pontoons. As you know when I first started in 1961 then again on pontoons in 2003 everybody said "Not a chance" Well As you know Thanks to you and others some success.
Very privately I don't think SR520 bridge replacement will happen very quickly if at all but this might. I know when I worked on I-5 Connecticut Interchange as related to I-90 Mercer Island folks held it up in the courts for 16 years
Regarding: Advocacy of 10 lane Proposed Elliott Bay Floating Highway
(Why ramps that went nowhere til first Kingdome built)
Advocacy of 6 lane bored 18 mile tunnel under Lake WA
SR167Renton to SR104Bothel (then with SR512 New I-205)
No longer advocating two mile long bored tunnel along Alaska Way
(only cosmetic waste use money to help pay for above)
Please look at below latest revision I think for good of the Democratic party. Should be interesting even if you don't agree
I fear Initiative 1033 if 2 mile tunnel (73% voted against H2O front tunnel) funded even though I advocate something that costs more
Since again Thanks for taking the time
Kingsley
> Regards
> Kingsley Hall Jr.
> Lions Club MD19G-5 Zone Chairman
> http://elmatheater.org/LionsClubMD19G-5BulletinIndex.htm
> Owner/mgr./Art/Dir Elma Theater since May 1991
> http://www.elmatheater.org/
> Home of Elma Children's Theater Assn.
> Non-profitIRS 91-1678178 Wash.State UBI 601-356-680
> 1-360-482-4810 Cell# 1-360-590-2054
> Long Winded Resume
> http://www.geocities.com/kingsleyshall/
> CEO Kingsley HallAssociates1219 SmithTower 69-91
> historic link to be created soon
> Formed/MgrTeleComputer Services Co.
> Dorset Bldg,Bellevue-Becker
Bldg.Aberdeen.BleakHouse,Seaview-nowElma,WA
> historic1969 link below
> http://elmatheater.org/TCS1969brochurepage1.htm
> Proponent of Nov 2007 Initiative 964
> Re; Replacing Alaska Way Viaduct w/Elliott Bay Floating Bridge
> Revised Dec./2008; Building a temporary Floating Bridge
> Revised again Jan./2009 to endorse Bored Tunnel under 2nd Ave etc.
Revised again Oct 2009 to NOT endorse 2 mi Bored
Tunnel
Revised to advocate 18 mi Bored t. Under Lk WA SR167Renton SR104Bothel >
Regards
> http://www.elmatheater.org/Alaska%20Way%20Viaduct%20Replacement%203rd%20Option.htm
It is nice to know that as probably the busiest politician, she is the House Majority Leader, Lynn Kessler was one of the few I have been able to contact directly that took the time to read what's on this page and reply above . If I ever get a chance to vote for her for higher office I certainly will. It is irrelevant whether she agrees with me or not she listens to her constituency
Below e-mails before I realized bored tunnel along Alaska Way instead of in and out of I-5
Below from the Governors Office. They listen too. Too bad I misunderstood and endorsed the 2 mile bored tunnel along the Alaska Way Waterfront. I am truly embarrassed that I was so stupid. I have no idea if they know what a terrible mistake I claim I made as a person that tries to be as professional as a planner as possible. These matters should not be decided by amount of campaign dollars or party politics. Both as a disgrace to democracy (73% voted against a waterfront tunnel) and technically we are not making any progress solving the economic loss and misery of grid lock (by building a cosmetic 2 mile tunnel) when I think we could. But, What do you expect when often more people vote for American Idol than President of US, or political personalities personal ideology than how they will deal with the issues they would actually have control of if elected, The public's choice was not heard on this issue in this last election. Very poor journalism except Public Television bought out by campaign dollars. A DOT that pays unethical consultants for studies (including fear video presentations not based on fact) they prepare that are biased in hopes they will get the big multi million dollar fee for preparation of PS&E based on a percentage of total construction cost regardless if project in best interest of the public. Obviously, they aren't motivated to come up with the least expensive best solution. It would be a amazing day if in the US some consulting firm said leave some structure alone or do a minor fix. What a insult to our fathers that designed the Alaska Way Viaduct to replace what was then if it had not been built be a today described "surface option".
THANKS TO VARIOUS BOTH DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS AND CANDIDATES FOR OFFICE THAT HAVE ENCOURAGED ME
FOR EXAMPLE; The following e-mail correspondence in this color below
Matthew,
Thank
you for your detailed response. I can’t say I agree in a few areas
though.
There
would be far less disruption of businesses with the floating bridge than likely
ANY other option, and with a boardwalk, could dramatically increase business,
tourism, and walking public access. It also would dramatically reduce wave
action on the shoreline thus preserving the sea wall and making shoreline
walking drier and safer. Also, traffic would be unimpeded through existing
routes until the floating bridge was completed. Then the Viaduct could be
torn down or used as a gardened walkway or other activity.
Environmentally,
there should be little impact with a floating bridge because it has little or no
contact with the seabed. And there won’t be the huge volume of downtown
construction trucks and equipment for years, which certainly would create an
unhealthy noise and dust problem for workers, tourists, and residents.
As
for ships, the floating bridge, acting as a breakwater, can provide for marinas
and would have some raised areas for smaller boats to passage under. As
the plan details, the cruise ship terminal would have to be relocated outside
the bridge but I understand it has little expansion space in its current
location, so that might be good. And the plan details how an opening would
allow for container ships to pass through.
It
is expected the biggest disadvantage probably be political from the construction
contractors who may not get much of the work. They I believe will fight it
tooth and nail. Fortunately WSDOT is above such things.
Regards,
Randy
Dutton
Republican
Candidate
360-249-5833
From:
Alaskan Way Viaduct [mail to: Viaduct@WSDOT.WA.GOV ]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 10:27
AM
To: randydutton@centurytel.net
Subject: RE:
Thank
you for your interest in the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement
Program.
The
State of
The
agencies have expanded the project corridor. Rather than focus on replacing SR
99, they are now looking at the entire transportation system from Lake
Washington to
While
a bridge over
The
benefits and drawbacks of a bridge over
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/viaduct/library-meetingmaterials.htm
In
regards to your concerns about cost, we are committed to finding a fiscally
responsible solution. Any solution to the Alaskan Way Viaduct will be grounded
in the state, county, and city’s recognition of, commitment to, and
integration across a set of six guiding principles:
A
stakeholder advisory committee of local community and business representatives
has been appointed to provide feedback on potential central waterfront
solutions. A copy of your comments was submitted to the committee for their May
22 meeting.
Thank
you again for your interest in the program.
Matthew
D. Preedy, P.E.
Deputy Program Director
From:
Randy Dutton [mailto: randydutton@centurytel.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008
1:53 PM
To: Aldridge, Jo
Cc: RandyDutton@centurytel.net
Subject:
Can you please explain to me why the
My military career involved government contracting, and project financial
review, so I am no stranger to engineering proposals. As a legislative
candidate, I want to ensure that highway money is spent in the most economic and
forward thinking process with all viable options considered.
Regards,
Randy
Dutton
Republican
Candidate
360-249-5833
AND OTHER REPUBLICAN EFFORTS
From:
Cathy Colley [mailto: cathycolley@comcast.net]
Sent:
Tuesday, April 29, 2008 2:27 PM
To:
RandyDutton@centurytel.net; 'Kingsley Hall'
Cc:
'Ken Estes';
Subject:
RE: Traffic Problem Can Be Solved by floating highway
Hip,
hip, hooray!!!!
The
truth shall set them free! (of traffic!)
I
hope this gets things going.
Have
a terrific week!
______________________________________________________________________________________
Below Revision of November 1, 2008 Advocating
Temporary Elliott Bay Bridge aka; Elliot Bay Bridge aka; Alaska Way
Replacement
Please read info below old You-Tube excerpt from public television
broadcast and see map on last page or at bottom.
Thank God for Public TV, The Internet, and everyone involved within
same with forwarded e-mails and blogs.
Click on the lower left arrow
of you-tube rather than center arrow
Alaska
Way Viaduct Replacement with a
Above YouTube a excerpt out of 30 minute after May 3rd 2007 TCTV Interview that was broadcast on various public TV stations.
Another YouTube excerpt of a recent interview recorded October 3&4, 2009 will appear above (now there in three parts) soon after when permission allows which will be granted after broadcast
Consider having this web page in browser favorites or bookmarks
Thence See updates including this video at later date
IN RESPONSE TO WSDOT U-TUBE; click on postage stamp of their presentation to right of my first youtube above
I'm not sure I agree with the WA State DOT implied opinion that the event causing columns shown failing in their seismic failure simulation are any more or less likely to occur than any other freeway already built or could be built to replace them with today's most modern technology. I did not work on the SR 520 bridge but I did work on design of SR-520 from the bridge to Redmond and I/we gave unofficial suggestions to our friends working for Mr. Korpf(Sp?) (PE in charge of SR-520 bridge design team). that those columns be studied by computer calculations at the CESL (Civil Engineering Systems Laboratory) and simulation vibration burst tests both at Lincoln Laboratory of MIT. I was told they did. It was determined that hollow columns with spiral steel reinforcement in the walls acting somewhat like a DMRSF (ductile moment resisting space frame building or aircraft wing. A 707 wing is flexible enough that the tips deflect 12 feet on takeoff.. It's amazing how much top floors of buildings (i.e. DMRSFs move in wind storms. I was told the theory is don't make structures that are experiencing cyclic loading brittle. Also like a beam the strength is in the extreme fibers. Additionally the attempted movement of the mass of the materials in a solid core are detrimental to the ability of the column to withstand either constant vibration or that of seismic activity. There' s always a lot of shaking going on. Jack Kopets (alsoSp?) of HNT&B pioneered single column ramp bridges on Interstate throughout the US came to the same conclusion 20 years previously.
If I am correct I think we should not subject the public to the agony of replacement of the existing SR-520 bridge but instead build another floating bridge across Lake Washington with improved diamond interchange on I-5 at 92nd Street where there is already a overpass. Thence Northgate Way to new .bridge. Improvement to Eastside approaches there would be easier due to topography. Such a alignment would serve people from Eastside wanting to get to N. Seattle & Northgate (without having to get on I-405) and N. Seattle folks going to Bellevue Kirkland, Microsoft (without having to get on I-5). But regardless we need to build pontoons now for either location. Indeed this route might be the fastest temporary fix like the concept of a WW II Bailey bridge.
PLEASE READ BELOW REVISION OF NOV 1,
2008 TO THIS PAGE IN RED GREEN AND BLUE
PLEASE NOTE I AM RETIRED FROM CIVIL
ENGINEERING AND DO NOT REPRESENT ANY ENGINEERING OR CONTRACTOR FIRMS AND DO NOT
WANT ANY CONTRIBUTIONS. I HAVE SPENT ONLY THE $5.00 FILE FEE AND ABOUT $30.00
FOR GASOLINE FOR THE FUN OF PRESENTATION OF THIS IDEA AT PUBLIC MEETINGS.
THANKS TO ALL YOU FOLKS THAT HELPED. WE
SPENT SO LITTLE AND ALMOST GOT ON BALLOT SO THE IDEA MUST HAVE SOME MERIT. I
HOPE A NON-PARTISAN EFFORT WILL RESULT
AFTER NOVEMBER 2008 ELECTIONS. WE STILL HOPE OUR GOVERNMENT WILL NOT TEAR DOWN
THE
Copyright © 2009 The Daily World.
|
|
|||||||||
The text of this document is an accurate copy
of what was filed by the initiative proponent with the Secretary of State for
assignment of a serial number. The accuracy of code in
amendatory sections has not been verified.
INITIATIVE
XXX
For possible inclusion on the PAST November 2007 ballot
I am
considering filing a new initiative for
inclusion on sometime
after Nov 2008 ballots advocating building and
using this bridge
during
whatever revisions of
Like the concept
of Army Bailey Bridges during World War II
Thence maybe
Then removing tension cables etc.
and moving pontoons thru ship canal
and use on a new parallel to 520 bridge and
I-5 interchange at Northgate and/or improvements to or replacement of existing 520
bridge when and if deemed necessary
Outside of my concern as a citizen
of SW WA State but if I lived in Seattle or had business downtown anymore I
would advocate in the future leaving the Elliot Bay Floating Bridge and saving and
turning the viaduct into a combination parking lot for downtown so it could
compete with malls on top deck, promenade and bicycle path with glassed walls
on lower deck on bayside and more public market on opposite side but with
height restriction so people could still see thru from existing adjacent
buildings. The viaducts design for highway loads far exceeds any seismic risks
for any buildings built under old ICBO (International Conference of Building
Codes) Seismic zone three requirements. Which includes the majority of downtown
structures? So, if you tear it down on that basis you better consider
demolition of most of downtown
I, Sam Reed, Secretary of State of the State of
custodian of its seal hereby certify that,
according to the records on
file in my office, the attached copy of Initiative
Measure No. XXX to
the People is a true and correct copy as it was
received by this
office.
An act forcing the building of “The Third Option Alaska Way Viaduct Replacement
Plan including a Floating Highway” or The Elliott Bay Floating Highway Project.
AN ACT
Relating to all funding by state Government related to replacement or improving
(except maintenance to last five years) any appurtenances that are a part of
the present Alaska Way Viaduct and it’s associated vehicular transportation
system; deleting RCW XX.XXX.XXX; amending RCW XX.XXX.XXX, XX.XXX.XXX, and
XX.XXX.XX; adding a new section to chapter XX.XXX RCW; adding new sections to
chapter XXX.XX RCW; creating new sections; and providing an effective date(s).
These deletions, amendments, and additions resulting in concentration of all
such future expenditures along with additional appropriations from the general
fund as necessary on efforts immediately after the effective date of this act
resulting in The Washington State Department of Transportation or their time of
the essence contracted consultants meeting requirements of National and as
amended by Washington State Environmental Protection Acts, Washington State
Shorelines Management Act, and Public Law 405 (regarding navigable waters and
as related to small amounts of rights of way from The Port of Seattle) conformance
and hearings simultaneously preparing to retain main
consultants within one year of effective date for preparation of engineering
PS&E, (plans specifications and estimate) to all the same standards that
applied to the Hood Canal Bridge and utilizing as much of the same details as
possible from the Hood Canal Bridge, to be completed within the next year,
allowing the next ten months for
construction contract letting, and the next three years for construction of
some two parallel five and some ten lane floating bridge style structure(s)
about one mile out in Elliot Bay from the North Tip of Harbor Island (on west
edge of East Waterway) to Battery Street Tunnel & Wall Street and include
restrictions on The Governor of Washington State, The Washington State
Department of Transportation, The City of Seattle, and The Port of Seattle to
do otherwise per attached map. All to be completed within five years after
effective date of this act with higher priority than any other major new
Washington State Department of Transportation project. Generally referred to as
“The Third Alaska Way Viaduct
Replacement Plan including a Floating Highway” or Elliott Bay Floating Highway
Project.
“
to
find revised info on Secretary of State’s Web easily. Note they misspelled
Elliot with one t instead of two.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. Washington State
Government has spent a lot of money and other resources investigating options
as relate to this act.. The people have clearly and consistently illustrated
their ongoing and passionate desire to ensure that state wide taxpayers are
protected but also realize that all state residents have interest that the
problems related to these expenditures result in the best possible solution for
the most local and statewide taxpaying users of the thru Seattle US-99
transportation system along with it’s impact on Interstate I-5 or other users
and visitors to the waterfront area as possible. The people find that even
without raising taxes, the government consistently receives revenue growth many
times higher than the rate of inflation every year. With this measure, the
people intend to protect taxpayers by creating as immediate a stop as possible
to further expenditures for studies of any other option except that as outlined
hereafter and herein as Option Three. Hopefully wider agreement in support of
this act will result before state government takes more of the people's money
for studies of the two current proposals under consideration that have no consensus.
THE ABOVE
TO BE REVISED ( Mostly shortened and with RCW numbers included) BY CODE
REVISERS AND ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICES
“
to find revised info on Secretary
of State’s Web easily. Note they misspelled Elliot with one t instead of two.
Attorney General’s Office has provided
FOLLOWING
INFORMATION WILL NOT APPEAR ON THE INITIATIVE SIGNATURE FORMS OR BALLOT
WHEREAS:
Option
Three; Have two parallel 5 lane floating structure(s)
about one mile out in Elliot Bay instead of a Alaska Way Viaduct, Depressed
Roads, or Tunnel which would be a lot cheaper per lane to and faster to build and less painful
for all state citizens while being built. THEREBY COMPLETING SYSTEM SO PRESENT
TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON I-5 AND MANY DOWNTOWN STREETS FINISHED AS
CONTEMPLATED AND PLANNED FOR IN 1961. Origin & destination studies
even then indicated a minimum of ten lanes required for local traffic to be
provided outside interstate system by
Forty six years ago there was a meeting with Bill Bugge
PE, Dir WSHD; Squeege Glaze (Sp?),WS Dir Hiway Planning Dept.; George Andrews PE, at that time WSHD
Dist 7 (Seattle Freeway) Engineer, Ed Johnson PE, Office Manager
HNT&B, A couple of gentlemen from The City of Seattle Planning
& Engineering Depts. & Bernie Hoskins of Pacific NW Bell Planning and
Kingsley Hall (in charge of all research of existing & PS&E preparation
of all utilities relocations between Seneca St & Connecticut St Interchange
i.e. I-90) to discuss details of locating ramps @ interchanges to
provide ties between principle local then present and future North-South non
thru traffic facilities. At that time The Interstate Highway was mandated
by law not to be designed nor was it funded to handle local traffic and of
course every metropolitan area argued for more ramps etc. which upset the
freeways intended purposes especially as a defense system for moving missiles
around during a all out Cold war turned Hot. All present agreed we needed
5 more thru downtown lanes with no more room within I-5 R/W. The delegates
from

Front cover of 1961 report showing
proposed double deck tie to proposed parallel Alaska Way Viaduct or floating
bridge
This document justified Building
Ramps that were unused until first King Dome built
Note this is a rendering showing
future freeway Note 12 Ave S shown straight – Ended up curved (Up left corner
picture)
Reasons for advocating another look at this 46 year old never really investigated idea are;
a) Seismic
end product concerns of building another elevated North South structure when
already the downtown section of I-5 has four parallel 3,000 foot
long elevated longitudinal structures. (just) uphill from King County &
Seattle City Hall buildings.) With
b) There
are those people throughout the world that are striving to improve
utilization of municipal waterfronts and associated views The Seattle
waterfront with it's streetcars, piers and public markets are among
c) Washington State DOT says 110,000 vehicles per day presently using the AWV But, more interesting perhaps; Most Freeway or Expressway Design manuals for traffic analysis assume a lane of traffic at a design speed of 60-65 mph can carry 2,980 cars per lane per hour. directly proportional to design speed) Lets round that to 3,000 max DHV (daily hour volume) then present 5 lanes carries about 15,000 cars per hour during peak. If you remove the AWV during construction of either a depressed, tunnel, or elevated structure a loss of 15,000 cars North-South capacity is about 5/17ths (Downtown I-5 12 lanes wide + or - ) That's too close to half for a reasonable thing to have happen for several years. Proponents of a tunnel say construction start in 2010 and take ten years to complete. Replacing elevated structure start 2010 and take seven years to complete It will take until 2010 to relocate all the utilities necessary for the tunnel and almost as long for the replaced elevated structure.
e) Building
a elevated seismic event resistant (everyday there's a little shaking
going on) structure requires a lot of good aggregates (gravel) for high
strength concrete. When you dig a hole in your backyard for a swimming pool or
septic tank you run into the water table just a few feet down. After you get it
built and are enjoying it you decide to pump it out for some reason you might
be surprised when the pool or tank floats up out of the ground like a boat.
Parts of I-5 have concrete over 7 feet thick as ballast to keep it from
floating up out of the ground (there's a reason Spring St is so named and the
transit tunnel so expensive. Because of urban development all around
f) Note how
quickly PS&E (Plans, Specifications & Estimate by engineers) and
construction completed on the actual floating part of floating structures like
g) Famous rule of thumb on Public Works projects. Don't try to relocate a railroad line. Note the one right alongside & under the existing AWV. Not to be confused with streetcar track. And they certainly are essential to the piers in our port.
h) In the future if you need more parallel lanes over the water you build them without having to acquire more rights of way over land except maybe at the ends. That is sure to happen. Ferry terminal expansion could be on West side of Floating structure w/added parking. This would be impossible where ferry terminal is now. Floating helicopter pad to airport to get really futuristic
i) Anchoring such a structure would probably be easier than a floating bridge between shores as floating roads as extensions of streets could be built that would act in compression or tension to help hold the structure in place.
j) In
addition to “slide in opening pontoon assemblies” the center section of the
long floating structure and each of the two street extensions would have
to have non opening medium rise openings for pleasure craft. These could be
four standard pontoons with steel or concrete over channel bridges but with
pontoon continued under them with thru cable compression thru and under the
channel with top deep enough for shallow draft pleasure craft. Note that some
places within the breakwater produced by the floating highway could
be developed as an additional marina the rents from which could be used to
help fund maintenance etc
That
portion of the curved south end of the main floating bridge structure within
the North end of Harbor Island (thence thru the East Waterway) would be
floating within a just a few feet wider sheet pile canal (requiring tidal ramps
for SW Florida and 11th) and
the portion thru the East Waterway would consist in part of one of the five
“slide in opening pontoon assemblies” which are exact copies of the same
devices as used on the Hood Canal Bridge. Thence typical land to floating bridge structures. If fundable
structures should be built to go up and over Marginal Way, US-99, and railroad yard tracks and on to
k) Back to (a) above. It’s believed it's easier to replace one or more standardized sections of a floating structure than a structure on land in case of terrorist sabotage or seismic event because not so much debris in the way. One or more of which could be stored somewhere secretly
I) A large
part of the floating structure could be built in The State of Washington. The
State of
m) Note energy required for ventilation or 24/7 bright adaptive lighting as would be required for tunnel
n) NOTE: MAY BE ALMOST CRIMINAL NOT TO CONSIDER EVENTUAL IMPACT OF MAJOR EARTHQUAKE ON SEATTLE
In event of existing four 3,000 foot long I-5 longitudinal structures (N Bound, N Bound Collector Distributor, S Bound, S Bound Collector Distributor) (above City Hall & KC Courthouse) and Alaska Way proposed or existing Alaska Way elevated or tunnel structure collapse the only North-South Seattle City Streets crossing Yesler Way (This is the narrowest constriction of the hourglass figure of Seattle between Lake Washington and Elliott Bay) are;
Second Avenue South
Combine to 4th at
ABOVE ONLY STREETS LEFT THRU HOUR GLASS
Due to the
flexibility of floating structures because they are already designed to
withstand tidal, large ship 30 foot bow waves (such as ships going to
o) It was assumed in 1961 that a minimum of a additional five for a total of ten lanes other than I-5 was necessary for local traffic either at Alaska Way, Thompson Expressway (Proposed through arboretum which was dropped) Or floating. There is not any other place except over or under water within the hour glass for enough Rights of way to accomplish this
NOTE: ONE
FLAW IN THIS IS CONSTRICTION THRU
IT IS
ABSURD TO REPLACE A INADEQUATE STRUCTURE WITH ANOTHER INADEQUATE OR EVEN LESS
ADEQUATE STRUCTURE WHICH FORCES A INTERSTATE HIGHWAY TO ATTEMPT TO FUNCTION IN
A MANNER IT WAS NEVER INTENDED. The failure of the City of
The
previous proposed elevated structure will not have over six thru lanes Latest
tunnel plan only four lanes.
PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION WILL NEVER SOLVE THE NEED FOR AT LEAST A REASONABLE HIGHWAY
SYSTEM
Three
thru N-S streets and a maximum additional six lane replaced elevated highway to serve the local population of
the greater
NOW THEREFORE THE FOLLOWING CODE
REVISIONS:
THIS AREA WILL BE COMPLETED BY CODE
REVISERS
AND POSTED HERE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE
SEE MAP SHOWING APPROXIMATE
ALIGNMENT

Third
See http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/Alternatives.htm for cost of other two alternates (4 lane tunnel (not the Governor’s new not good "Whoops! Changed my mind" bored tunnel idea) or 6 lane replacement)
Above link no longer available directly from Washington State Department of Transportation
So for a scanned from a as typed paper copy of above info with info added with a pen by “Save The Existing Viaduct” proponents
See http://www.elmatheater.org/AlaskaWayViaductReplacementComparitiveCosts.htm
The A new bored tunnel idea is a
absolutely needed improvement for thru
This
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hood_Canal_Bridge
Possible to save Demolition Costs of the Alaska Way Viaduct because not necessary and may be used for other purposes like top level downtown parking and lower level promenade, bicycle route /open market
Like Father....Like Son
Below about Kingsley S. Hall Sr., 1885-1971, Retired Technical Director of Chicago Planning Commission
This above web site by Kingsley S. Hall Jr., 1934- now 75 years old, Retired CEO of what was:
Kingsley Hall Associates, (Urban and City Planning Consultants) 1219 Smith Tower, Seattle, Washington
and
Kingsley Hall Jr. dba /TeleComputer Services Company that in 1969 was the first to use large (2,000 point) COGO* database technology on facilitating over five freeway PS&E and construction supervision survey using portable ASR-33 teletypes.
* Developed by Lincoln Laboratory of MIT, Puerto Rican Highway Dept. and some folks I think from Wash. District of C
Involved with several hundred other such projects on West Coast
http://elmatheater.org/TCS1969brochurepage1.htm
I can be contacted by phone 24/7 @ 1-360-482-4810 for the fun of: debate, answer questions, arrange interviews, or speaking engagements.
Thanks for your consideration
Kingsley
Kingsley S. Hall Jr.
kingsleyhall_elmatheater@hotmail.com
Thanks to everyone that helped gathering petitions
Thanks to