But still no focus on a Viaduct retrofit

Ross Reynolds offered an interesting but still-flawed talk show on the Big Ugly versus the Big Dig. It's fascinating that few in local politics and media are willing to discuss, per the Seattle Times headline writer put it, a Simple and Cheap Viaduct Fix — as misleading as that phrasing may be. (Anyone who knows construction even a little is aware that there is no such thing as "simple and cheap." Fixing the Viaduct is still going to be expensive. But a difference of at least a few billion dollars is certainly worth considering.)

So when will Ross have engineers Neil Twelker and Victor Gray (or someone from their group) on his show to be grilled on their proposal to repair the viaduct in place? This is a big issue and we should hear all the options in detail. My own take is that an awful lot of power people (that includes KUOW interviewers) are wearing rose-colored blinders, to mix-up some metaphors, and confusing what might be nice with what is plausible.

•••

End of the day, what will we do? The Twelker/Gray retrofit-in-place.

The Achilles heel of any of the plans is "the problem of the interim."

Once you go with either a new viaduct or a tunnel you lose (because of construction logistics) the existing corridor for 3-4 years at least. Then people start considering the People's Waterfront Coalition's very appealing tear-it-down & leave-it-down approach and ask the question: "If we can live without the Viaduct for 4 years, why can't we do without it forever?"

Such thinking will freak out downtown business, Ballard & Magnolia neighborhoods (business & residential) and of course the Mayor's Office and WSDOT....maybe even the Feds for whom the SR 99 corridor has tactical defense implications.

What's left? The retrofit.

QED.