As I listen to the forever arguments about Seattle and its transportation problems. I have gotten to this point and have some questions.
Cheap oil is never coming back and the destruction of public transportation took place long ago, at a time nobody worried about it. Here we are in 2011, not 1911. We all have a responsibility to leave a functioning city for the future. At the current rate of elongated debates and division between car and mass transit, we simply keep passing the debate to the next generation. I grew up here in the Puget Sound area; about ten miles outside of the city of Seattle to be more precise. So to say I have been hearing this debate since childhood is accurate.
Yes, I am for the recall of the current mayor for various reasons but this about solutions, not just a rant against the failings of a public servant.
I have looked at and heard about the surface option as opposed to the tunnel. What goes through my mind is this: why does there seems to be only one option? That is the basic problem. I see both the tunnel and the surface improvements as an option. A tunnel, along with surface improvements for a better traffic flow. Seems that it would offer viable choices. It would be a huge civic improvement for the city and a win, win for both sides of the argument. The “city” needs to create jobs. Jobs are good for the economy. The city is not creating jobs. (Excluding the political payback jobs the mayor created.) This idea that both can’t be done is mind-boggling.
The surface improvement would mean some long term jobs creation and also offer the option, if needed for instance, when there is trouble in the tunnel due to breakdowns etc. For the city to simply ignore the surface option is akin to a child saying I want it my way or I’m going home. A very selfish way of dealing with the problems we are going to face with just a tunnel and no surface overhaul.
It is clear that the surface option as it currently sits is in need of improvements. With those improvements, there would obviously be a maintenance program that would continue after completion… Uh??? Hello…jobs, jobs creation, long-term jobs that feed the economy. Spending money to make money; it is a reality in economics that seems to work. I think the big wheels call it investing; investment for the future.
Does anybody remember the I-5 project in 2007??? They were able to get that job done in record time. The city did not come to a standstill. Incentives to the contractors to get the job done under schedule and under budget; again, win/win. Let the state dig their tunnel. Let the city rise to the occasion for civic improvements by creating jobs that boost the local economy. That is the kind of political leadership we are looking for. Why are the politicians not getting the big picture? As a politician, I would think one would want to be remembered for the overall long-term improvement of the city.
The car is not going away. As I write this, the electric car is getting closer and closer to a reality that will take over the internal combustion car. The city has recharging stations! In other words, the city government is supporting the use of a private car. The private mode of transportation is simply not going away. Lets break it down one more time: the city has recharging stations for electric cars. The private car is not going away. I think that my fantasy/dream vision of the city is far more attainable then the narrow vision of a utopian mass transit/bicycling/walking city. Hence the need for surface improvements to go along with, rather than instead of, the tunnel.
Sincerely a concerned citizen of the city of Seattle.
Chris J Hutchins
© 2011
All rights reserved
Chris J Hutchins
Dog Hair Productions
Cheap oil is never coming back and the destruction of public transportation took place long ago, at a time nobody worried about it. Here we are in 2011, not 1911. We all have a responsibility to leave a functioning city for the future. At the current rate of elongated debates and division between car and mass transit, we simply keep passing the debate to the next generation. I grew up here in the Puget Sound area; about ten miles outside of the city of Seattle to be more precise. So to say I have been hearing this debate since childhood is accurate.
Yes, I am for the recall of the current mayor for various reasons but this about solutions, not just a rant against the failings of a public servant.
I have looked at and heard about the surface option as opposed to the tunnel. What goes through my mind is this: why does there seems to be only one option? That is the basic problem. I see both the tunnel and the surface improvements as an option. A tunnel, along with surface improvements for a better traffic flow. Seems that it would offer viable choices. It would be a huge civic improvement for the city and a win, win for both sides of the argument. The “city” needs to create jobs. Jobs are good for the economy. The city is not creating jobs. (Excluding the political payback jobs the mayor created.) This idea that both can’t be done is mind-boggling.
The surface improvement would mean some long term jobs creation and also offer the option, if needed for instance, when there is trouble in the tunnel due to breakdowns etc. For the city to simply ignore the surface option is akin to a child saying I want it my way or I’m going home. A very selfish way of dealing with the problems we are going to face with just a tunnel and no surface overhaul.
It is clear that the surface option as it currently sits is in need of improvements. With those improvements, there would obviously be a maintenance program that would continue after completion… Uh??? Hello…jobs, jobs creation, long-term jobs that feed the economy. Spending money to make money; it is a reality in economics that seems to work. I think the big wheels call it investing; investment for the future.
Does anybody remember the I-5 project in 2007??? They were able to get that job done in record time. The city did not come to a standstill. Incentives to the contractors to get the job done under schedule and under budget; again, win/win. Let the state dig their tunnel. Let the city rise to the occasion for civic improvements by creating jobs that boost the local economy. That is the kind of political leadership we are looking for. Why are the politicians not getting the big picture? As a politician, I would think one would want to be remembered for the overall long-term improvement of the city.
The car is not going away. As I write this, the electric car is getting closer and closer to a reality that will take over the internal combustion car. The city has recharging stations! In other words, the city government is supporting the use of a private car. The private mode of transportation is simply not going away. Lets break it down one more time: the city has recharging stations for electric cars. The private car is not going away. I think that my fantasy/dream vision of the city is far more attainable then the narrow vision of a utopian mass transit/bicycling/walking city. Hence the need for surface improvements to go along with, rather than instead of, the tunnel.
Sincerely a concerned citizen of the city of Seattle.
Chris J Hutchins
© 2011
All rights reserved
Chris J Hutchins
Dog Hair Productions
No comments:
Post a Comment