Welcome to my own personal hell.

The SR 520 Bridge

At the heart of Seattle’s traffic congestion is SR 520 – one of Puget Sound’s major arteries for transporting people and goods. One of the oldest floating bridges in the world, the SR 520 Evergreen Point Bridge is at the end of its useful life and needs to be replaced for the safety of the traveling public. If this bridge were to suffer a seismic failure, travel time between downtown and Seattle and Redmond would nearly double from an average of 33 minutes to 55 minutes.

Um, we must have had a seismic failure like 2 plus years ago because my commute takes a hell of a lot longer than 33 minutes. Hell, it takes more than 55 minutes. 55 minutes? Where the hell do I sign up for that? I'll take a 55 minute commute any day of the week because it still beats my hour plus commute, each way on a daily basis.

And don't get confused. When they said "at the end of its useful life" they were referring to the life in which the bridge served as a means to get from point A to point B. Because let’s not mince words. It’s still got a full time life devoted solely to the purpose of sucking the soul of each and every person that has to sit on it, in traffic, the non-moving variety. Oh joy! I can't wait until they built that Monorail, you know, so I can continue to sit and traffic.

Just in case you're not from Seattle and don't know what I'm talking about, let me break it down like this...

Comments

[the birdherder]

the only thing that is worse than being on an old road in need of an upgrade is getting to live through the construction project...

your highway taxes at work! completion date: Spring 2045!

[the birdherder]

oh, and the commute times are computed at 3am.

[Sally]

I remember when that initiative was coming up, I thought "Huh, how many people are commuting from Ballard to West Seattle?" And for that you get to pay fat taxes for through 2040 (insane). I understand the downtown connection in between that will help, but still, the worst congestion is between Everett and downtown Seattle (#3 worst 10-mile stretch in the nation behind a stretch in Los Angeles and another in San Francisco) and it's equally bad across the floating bridges. It confused me even more since there are SO MANY BUSES that service downtown the need isn't half as bad.

If I wanted to take a commuter bus from Snohomish county when I lived there, the last morning service left at 7:40, and last bus heading north thru the U-District for evening service left at 5:15. That went over real easy at work when they always wanted us there until 7.

[successlessness]

Hey! I commute from Ballard to downtown everyday and then take the bus to redmond. The Seattle Monorail was always designed as a city thing and is intended as the first part of a much larger cross city system. For the Redmond commute, there is help on the way: http://www.kingcountymonorail.org/.

Commuting via the bus is definately the best way to get to redmond every day. I would go insane too if I drove everyday too. You give up some flexibility especially when you work late but the average time saved is more than worth it and there are buses at availble until midnight. Even when I have needed to have a car after work. I'll usually park near montlake and still take the bus to redmond.

Too bad we didnt approve the original Sound Transit plan back in 1995 because we'd already have light rail from Everett to seattle and from Seattle to Redmond about to go online.

[Egan]

Ah, the Seattle traffic debate. I have much to say about this, but just backspaced over all my mean comments. Successlessness you are my hero!

[sprizee]

Just for the record, I voted for the Monorail and unlike some lame-os I didn't evade the tax by registering my car out of the county. I'm all for the Monorail. I'd just also like to see something done about the commute over to the eastside. And, sure I like to complain about traffic, but I choose to take my car because I like having the option to run errands during lunch, and normally end up staying late to avoid the traffic anyways...or go to the gym.

At any rate, traffic yesturday was awesome. Thank you President's Day.

[Howard Muhlberg]

A couple of weekends ago I read an opinion piece in the Times about a proposal to build a new suspension bridge that would not only replace the current bridge, but would include a new exit near Husky Stadium to unclog traffic.

There was a great artist's rendering that I can't find online, but here's the link:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002178293_dubman13.html

Sounds like a great idea, but sadly not likely.

[sprizee]

Yes, I'm all for that.

http://www.betterbridge.org/They can even make it a toll. I'd happily pay. Bring it.

[Sally]

This post has been removed by the author.

[Egan]

That suspension bridge idea is a farce. There's a reason a floating bridge has been used. Lake Washington is rather deep so it would be a monumental task to build some huge monstrosity crossing the lake. Clearly there are better options than that proposed eye sore.

[sprizee]

Suspension, floating, I'm open to all options. I'm no engineer and clearly haven't thought about the technical requirements of what is and is not a reasonable solution.

I say the more ideas the merrier. Right now, there is no plan to add a transit only lane, route, Monorail, helicopter, what-have-you. I think any conversation about this commuting problem is a valid one. Except that idea someone had to commute via lamas. No thanks. Too much spitting.

[the birdherder]

you know you wouldn't have these problems if the guy in the movie singles had his way with the super train. or speed train.

and conversing about monorails as a viable way to handle traffic is too much like the simpsons.

[Egan]

If it can work for Springfield it can definitely work for Seattle. "monorail monorail monorail".

[Howard Muhlberg]

Egan, that you would find the suspension bridge to be an eyesore highlights the subjectivity issues involved here. The writers of the proposal not only don't think it would be an eyesore, but they think it would join the Spaceneedle as another icon of the city, like the Golden Gate Bridge is an icon for San Fran.

I thought the artist rendering was pretty cool looking, but who knows what the impact would be once it is actually in place.

Certainly a good solution would not destroy the natural beauty that coexists with the already existing development on the lake.

As for the most important issue, traffic, it would kick ass if there was a monorail line going over the lake.

[Egan]

Howard, thems fighting words my friend. I think we have a common goal here. I know something needs to be done to fix our traffic woes. While the artist's rendering looks "pretty cool", the reality is that would destroy more neighborhoods than other options.

Why not focus more on carpooling or other rideshare programs? Why do people insist on commuting back and forth over the bridge each day? It's a conscious decision we make and sometimes it shouldn't be about the money. Meaning I could probably find a job on the Eastside that might pay me more, but why when my time is money. Ask Sprizee how many hours a week she spends in her car not getting paid. Then you have people that buy big cheap houses in Kent and commute to Seattle each day. These aren't responsible choices.

Do we really want Seattle to be dominated by some huge bridge spanning from I-5 to Evergreen Point? Let me take a stab in the dark here Howard... do you by any chance live in Montlake or near to it? Just wondering. (NIMBY).

[sprizee]

[chanting]

Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!

[ding]

[Egan]

No need for a fight, I just want to make sure we aren't trying to improve traffic by better accomodating more vehicles when we should really work on decreasing the amount of vehicles on our highways.

[sprizee]

Egan, didn't you get the memo? Once a new post is added to the mix all other posts die. Duh.

[Howard Muhlberg]

Egan, I actually live a little north of Montlake. In Bellingham. ;-)

Believe me, I agree with you that more needs to be done in Seattle in terms of transportation alternatives to the SOV. Hence, my comment about the monorail crossing the lake. Simply telling people to work nearer to where they live is not going to reach a lot of people, especially in a tight job market.

Anyway, I was mostly focused on the contrast between your calling the bridge an eyesore and the proposal calling it an icon. I thought it was interesting, and really didn't intend to get into all the nitty gritty. Peace!