Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
I am voting NO on Washington initiative R-51. Here is why:
As a fisherman I am voting NO on R-51 because I feel that by increasing road capacity in the Puget Sound Region, as is the intention of R-51, there will be an overall negative effect on sports fishing and on Salmon and Steelhead. More roads will lead to more growth, which means habitat loss, more demands on our water supply, and urban sprawl reaching out even further than it is now. More growth means more fishermen crowding our already overcrowded rivers and less access for all of us. From a fishes perspective habitat loss, more demands on river water, and potentially more fishing pressure, is all bad news.
Let's not forget that this is a STATEWIDE tax, 9 cents a gallon tax increase on gasoline, which mainly benefits only the greater Seattle metro area, why should someone in Forks or Spokane, for example, would vote yes on this initiative??
And don't think R-51 is going to solve the Seattle areas traffic problems, how does facilitating more growth create less traffic? And R-51 does not adequately fund the proposed road projects, if it passes, it will only be the first of many tax increases.
So, if you are concerned about the future of salmon and steelhead in this state make the effort to get out and vote NO on R-51.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
CedarR
Offline
king
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/06/02
Posts: 149
Loc: Olympia, WA
|
|
The proponents of R-51 are spending megabucks to polish this turd and make it look like a Milk Dud. Already their "consultants" have released the figures detailing how much money it's costing you to sit in traffic each day. What they don't mention is that the likely cause of the traffic delay you're experiencing is a road project. They also fail to disclose that if R-51 passes, you will be paying the highest gas tax in the nation. That's on top of one of the nation's highest sales tax rates, screwed-up boat/utility trailer fees, and proposed increases in your hunting/fishing license costs. The analysts predict you're going to be blitzed with pro R-51 ads in the coming days. These propaganda pieces will have all the glamor and glitter of a Las Vegas casino. Their intent will be the same... to make you forget how much money they are taking from you.
--------------------------------------------------
Earth First! We'll pave the rest of the planets later. ![[Rolleyes]](images/icons/rolleyes.gif)
|
GutZ
Offline
Native Slab
Profile Status:
Reged: 01/25/01
Posts: 1539
Loc: Ballard, Ya Sure Ya Betcha
|
|
It's great to hear your views of R-51.
Do you have a solution?
Just do nothing? Pretty soon it will be so bad everyone will just leave? (Or maybe move to Forks! ![[Eek!]](images/icons/shocked.gif) )
Vote Yes on R-51. Let's Roll!
--------------------
It's good to have friends.
It's better to have friends with boats!
**GutZ**
|
Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
Gutz a no on R-51 is the solution, unless you want to kiss our quality of life goodbye, kiss your fishing goodbye, and turn Seattle into another Los Angeles, if you have ever traveled to LA you know what I mean, they have been building freeways since the first car hit the street, and they have never solved their traffic problems, all they did was turn LA into a city out of control in terms of sprawl, pollution, and humungous traffic jams. If you want to turn Seattle into another LA vote Yes on R-51, if you want to retain what little quality of life we have left, vote NO. I would encourage anyone who likes the LA lifestyle to move there, don't turn Seattle into another LA by voting Yes on R-51.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10190
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Just no way we can build our way out of the traffic mess. The land is bordered by too much water, and the room to expand and rights of way are no longer available.
Growth will happen.
If the state wants to find a solution, they need to look toward mass transportation. Not expensive light rail either... but good old buses. The infrastructure is already there for busses. Not smelly diesel busses but new electrics or those with fuel cell technology.
State government needs to get the bigger businesses involved. Give incentives for employees who take mass transportation. Look at the Naval Shipyard in Bremerton. Their worker/driver program, has been a transportation success since World War II! Can you imagine how ugly Kitsap County roads would look if all those shipyard workers drove SOV's?
In addition, the technology is already available for home to work pick up and drop offs for a reasonable fare. Paratransit programs use the technology to combine many similar trips for one vehicle. The same can be done with commuters. The cost to implement this type of transportation system is far cheaper than road projects and you recoup much of the cost through efficiencies and fares.
Combine that with more van pooling and car pooling.. problem solved! If 25% of the commuters were to switch to mass transportation of some kind.. then no one would be sitting in traffic except for road repairs that should be done during non peak hours anyway!
No on R51!
AuntyM, former bus driver! ![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif)
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008 
|
4Salt
Offline
dual red striper
Profile Status:
Reged: 01/18/02
Posts: 474
Loc: Lynnwood, WA
|
|
Amen Aunty,
There's only one problem I see though, convincing the average commuter to remove the 3000lb. metallic growth from their a$$. ![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif)
--------------------
Ronco Pro-Staff
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10190
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
4Salt,
You are 100% correct Sir! That is where big business must help. Will they? Or will they just move to another region like Boeing?
We have inquired about van pooling several times out here and we STILL don't have a program! Transit has the vans, but?
Someone hire me! I will get these folks out of their SOV's!
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
stlhdh2o
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/02
Posts: 810
Loc: Pugetropolis
|
|
Another complicated issue.
If you are 'country livin' type, something to which I aspire, I can see why you would be against this as it seems the impacts would negatively impact you.
On the other hand, us city folk have to deal with an absolute transportation nightmare, something you tenty minute, twenty miles commuters might not understand. Us thirty minute 4.5 milers have a completely different frame of reference.
To answer the question: "why should someone in Forks or Spokane, for example, would vote yes on this initiative??"
They never do so I wouldn't expect them to this time.
I am undecided on this issue with a lean towards yes....Dont you think its reaching though to try and tie this in with the health of our Salmon and steelhead runs? I mean...if you can point to one of the projects specifically as having a negative or potentially negative impact I am all ears...
--------------------
\m/
|
Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
H20, you are being naive if you think this will make your future commute any easier, first you are facing about 7 years of construction, traffic will be worse during that time, then when it is all finally finished, traffic will be just as bad due to population growth, nothing will be fixed by R-51 except you will have less money and the paving companies will be very grateful for your contribution to their well being. As Aunty M pointed out, public transit is the answer, R-51 does very little for public transit.
I don't see how paving more of the Puget Sound area will be beneficial to fish, runoff of oil and pollutants into our streams and into the Sound will only increase as more pavement covers the countryside. If you are not concerned about the future of our environment vote yes on R-51, if you have some extra money lying around that you don't need, vote yes on R-51, if you enjoy sitting in traffic watching road construction, vote yes on R-51, oh, and don't forget, R-51 does not fully funds any of the projects being considered, this is only the start, you'll be asked for more money in the future, and you'll get nothing for it.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
stlhdh2o
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/02
Posts: 810
Loc: Pugetropolis
|
|
Quill -
Political and economic naivete are on rampant display in this thread....and not just from the yes side.
As I stated above, for people that live in the PS region, the issue is complicated and whatever benefit there is to the referendum may not be felt in our lifetime.
One of the projects funded directly by R-51 is the dedicated truck highway from the port to I think Issaquah. Lets forget temporarily the obvious cost savings in reduced commute times and overall lost business hors.....A yes on R-51 might not lead to an outright reduction in the cost of..say...lettuce, but it will lead to that lettuce appreciating at less than the rate of inflation. Even at hundredth's of a percentage point per head, over the course of time this is a huge savings. Carry that same idea forward and apply it to every item that comes through the port of Seattle and we are talking significant dollars.
Granted, its all 'potential' savings...Failure to think forward has made the once priveleged feeling of living in the Puget Sound Region feel like a ball and chain...
If you are living where the impacts of this referendum are likely to be felt, it would be wise to give the issue full consideration. Remember if you will some of the opportunities we had twenty years ago to stem this transportation nightmare we have created for our kids, by not voting 'yes' on some of the more painful issues before us we just put off the inevitable...now, it may be time to pay the piper.
It may also be naive to think that this referendum doesn't affect you immediately. It is likely that funding for a project in your area is included in the referendum.
.02
[ 10-24-2002, 09:21 PM: Message edited by: stlhdh2o ]
--------------------
\m/
|
reel_nut
Offline
dual red striper
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/07/02
Posts: 411
Loc: Montesano
|
|
I hope that the R-51 people are not the same folks who came up with the idea of putting a tow truck at each end of the floating bridge @ an unbelievable doller amount for 91 tows.
--------------------
Fish on!
|
Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
H20 - You should do your homework before you vote - there is no dedicated truck roadway being funded by R-51 from the "Port" to Issaquah, that will require another funding round and additional taxes, and where exactly would this dedicated truckway be built? Another bridge over Lake Washington? In the I-90 median? Where did you come up with this one? And as you know, building more freeways leads to more sprawl, take a trip to LA, that's what the Puget Sound region will be like if R-51 passes, more roads, more traffic, is that what you want? The argument that building more roads will reduce your cost of living, which as you admit, will save you very little, is ludicrous. If you drive only 12 thousand miles a year this referendum will cost you $100, that number is from the backers themselves, most families drive two to three times that amount so the average family is going to pay 200 - 300 per year, AND this is not enough money to finance any SINGLE one of the major projects proposed for the region, so you'll be paying much more in the future, this to save 2 cents on a head of lettuce? And to turn Seattle into another LA? You'll still be sitting in traffic my friend, 50 years from now, whether R-51 passes or not, until the day when there's no more oil left to burn, then what are we going to do with all that concrete and blacktop? There is no long term payback, long term, mass transit is the long term answer.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
stlhdh2o
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/02
Posts: 810
Loc: Pugetropolis
|
|
Crap Quill -
I'll be doublechecking my resources today. If, as you say, this is untrue it will push me back towards a 'no' vote.
Just because I am not saved money immdiately is not sole reason enough to sway me though. I agree that ultimately, a mass transit system is the ultimate answer, the political reality though I believe is that type of measure will be even harder to gain public approval and therefore remains unrealistic.
I'll do some digging today and refute my own statement when I find out the truth.
--------------------
\m/
|
Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
Yeah H2O I agree that finding the public will to put in a mass transit system will be tough, If the money that would be collected through R-51 was dedicated towards mass transit I would probably vote for it, but as you point out, it probably wouldn't pass if that were the case, my hope is that if more roads aren't built maybe a mass transit system will start to gain support.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
stlhdh2o
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/02
Posts: 810
Loc: Pugetropolis
|
|
Thanks for the push Quill....
Here is a comprehensive list of project improvements....
Project list
I see nothing about 'new roads'...just safety improvements to existing ones, much needed in my estimation. Since from your profile I see that you from PS as well, scrutinize the project list and tell me honestly that this funding is unnecessary or ill advised.
--------------------
\m/
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10190
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
I don't think mass transit is naive. Not in any way shape or form.
Our transit system is fragmented by all the different Transit Authorities involved and they aren't meeting the needs of Puget Sound commuters.
Sound Transit was created to solve that problem. HA! Turned into a big joke! A money grubbing fiasco, and it didn't include some of the Transit Authorities that wanted/needed to be included! Had some of the communities in outlying areas been included, as they wanted to, it's likely the power of the Light Rail advocates would have been diluted.
Since the infrastructure is already there for busses, why do we need Light Rail? An express bus will get you to your destination just as quickly. (don't make me look it up, but yes, the study was done and published in the Seattle Times I believe.)
More transit/carpool only lanes, more park and ride lots, (look at all the available and usually empty Church parking lots that could be leased) more EXPRESS busses, and companies that give financial incentives would go a long way towards alleviating congestion. Nice thing about park and ride lots, is that folks can still get in their own vehicles after work and run errands if they are so inclined.
Unfortunatly, we in this region still think we should be able to drive in a large urban area without congestion. With the amount of people all trying to negotiate their way around in the same vicinity, isn't that expectation rather ridiculous? We already know that growth can't be stopped, only manipulated. One thing to consider though, is that some day, we may be required to use mass transit or pay for SOV privleges. ![[Frown]](images/icons/frown.gif) It has been suggested before.
As far as paving over the land mass surrounding Puget Sound to provide humans with places to drive, Quillback is correct in my opinion. Go out to the suburbs and look at drainage ditches along side some of our hiways. YUCK! All that stuff is making in into our waterways and groundwater. It's hazardous waste for crying out loud. Thing is, it came from many sources, not a spill from a commercial carrier!
So far, demand pretty much exceeds capacity in many areas with vanpool programs, Express busses and the aforementioned P&R lots. The excuse that people won't use mass transit doesn't work if the demand is there and the capacity isn't.
And just for you Stlhdh20, people who live in the sticks and drive 30 miles also need mass transit. Once they get into town, they also become part of the problem. And yes, demand exceeds capacity out here too.
To my knowledge, there is still no database, region wide, of people wanting mass transportation from one locale to another. And there damn well should be! How can you determine who needs a ride and where they need to go when the databases are not combined to include all transit authorities! Until we have exhausted all avenues in the way of mass transit, we shouldn't commit to road building and a blank check!
Oh... and one thing I need to point out, AGAIN. You recoup some of the cost for mass transit. You don't recoup squat with building more roads.
Sorry about the soap box thing. I just get a little passionate on this topic. ![[Razz]](images/icons/tongue.gif)
As you might have guessed, I know a little more about this than just driving a bus for a few years.
Edit, adding lanes is road building. I looked at some of the examples on the Yes page Eric posted for my region. Three of the projects listed have had on going construction in the same intersections and they didn't get it right so they want to improve AGAIN! What really annoys me most is that widening Clear Creek Road and Silverdale Way just makes it that much easier to funnel more cars into an already congested mess that is near gridlock. There are already so many parking lots and roadways, that when the rain comes, the flooding is horrible. So lets add several thousand more square feet of blacktop? Most of the other projects could also be mitigated by more mass transit. Oh well... I said my piece. Peace!
[ 10-25-2002, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: AuntyM ]
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
busybeaver
Offline
sockeye
Profile Status:
Reged: 03/31/01
Posts: 91
Loc: Western Washington
|
|
Ok country boy here.... who just came back from the city!!
Wednesday morning meeting in bellevue at 9 am put me in the heart of rush hour mess Edmonds to bellevue via 405. Do we need more roads? No better utilization of what we have would make the commute doable. The HOV lane was empty while the other 3 lanes parked. What kind of crap is that? Those lanes should be opened to traffic during the rush hour peaks. Sure I would love to see the euotopia of the mass transit system but does it go where I want it to... NOO
Utilize what we have and lets get a moving. I can see the need for extra lanes for safety and the traffic jams that exist daily. Not sure that r51 is the answer.
--------------------
Marty
Welcome to my home ...
|
Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
H2O, I read the project list for the PS region, I agree that safety improvements are needed and will always be needed, I'm all for that, if that was what R-51 was all about I might consider voting yes, however there are many projects that are going to be "started up" based on R-51 revenue - replace Alaska Way viaduct, replace 520 bridge, widen 405 etc., I saw one estimate to replace Alaska Way viaduct by routing it through a tunnel, and this is appears to be the most favored option for AK way - cost? $15 billion!!! I believ it is estimated R-51 will raise $7 billion over the next 10 years (I'm not exact on the time frame). Oh, also the widening of 405 is estimated to cost $7-10 billion alone.
So, if R-51 is not about building additional roads, why spend money to start up all those huge, costly road projects? Where is the additional money going to come from? Why don't we see cost estimates to COMPLETE all of the projects listed under the Pro R-51 link you provided? Why don't we see tax proposals to fund these hugely expensive projects? Because the backers know that if they presented a final cost and a tax plan to pay for it, R-51 would be overwhelmingly rejected. The strategy of the politicians and road pavers is to get R-51 passed and then come back time and again to ask for more money to finish everything, their future argument will be: "Gee you've already spent $7 billion to get started, it will all be wasted unless you hand over another $25 billion to finish the job." What taxes will then have to be raised? Another gas tax? Higher excise taxes on cars and boats? Property taxes? Tolls? And for what? More traffic, more sprawl, more pollution, it's just nuts!
And let's not forget fairness, a gas tax is highly regressive, a poor person who drives 30 miles to work a day pays just as much as a wealthy individual does that drives the same amount, to the wealthy person the tax is a minor issue, to people with lower incomes this tax will hurt, is this fair?
Another question I have, can we pay for the safety improvements listed in R-52 with the taxes we already pay? I think so, I think the main reason they are included is to deflect attention away from the fact that this is mainly about laying more pavement, not about safety, however that is a personal observation, I can't prove it.
Something else to consider - The state is paying for the Pro R-51 campaign using our tax dollars, therefore there is a lot of Pro-51 propoganda in the form of TV ads, etc., that can't be countered because the state won't equally fund a "NO" campaign, it's unfortunate because a lot of Pro 51 BS flies by unchallenged and people can't make an informed decision. Only at the grass roots level can you find any argument to halt this monster.
I've about said all I can say, I just ask that people study the issue, figure out what the TOTAL cost will be to them, and ask themselves if this is what they want for the future, because once this monster comes to life it won't be stopped, and it will need to be fed an unending stream of our dollars.
I think Aunty M makes the case for public transit, so I'm not going to say anything about that subject.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
stlhdh2o
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/02
Posts: 810
Loc: Pugetropolis
|
|
Good post AuntyM, I could argue some minor points but over all I agree with the main points...it also goes to support my statement about the complexity of this issue, as all of our good points have.
One quick one, more to clarify what I had said than to argue....when I spoke of twenty minute, twenty milers I was meaning to indicate more those persons whose total commute outlies the city than those people who commute from rural to urban areas.
My passion comes from having lived in this region for twenty years, remembering what drew me here in the first place and juxtaposing those feelings with my current disgust for the deteriorating quality of life. From having held so many jobs in so many parts of the sound I am familiar firsthand with the horror that is a PS commute.
Marty -
By opening the carpool lanes during rush hour you remove the incentive to carpool, thereby increasing the number of cars on the road. It would also hose the busses who rely on those lanes for predictable commute times. Unpredictable busses lead to more cars on the road. We should encourage these modes of transportation and facilitate them in whatever way we can. I am very much in favor of opening these lanes during non-peak hours as it could ease evening, early-morning and weekend congestion. Ever tried to get out of Seattle at 7 pm on a Friday night??
Thanks for the enjoyable conversation....ALL!
--------------------
\m/
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10190
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Ya Got me Eric!
I knew you knew more than you first let on.
When the time comes, there is still cheap country living out this way.
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
stlhdh2o
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/02
Posts: 810
Loc: Pugetropolis
|
|
Funny thing is I am a hairs breadth away from moving to P.A....(look out Marty!)...
I know I am getting old when I say stuff like 'I sure miss the olden days...." or "twenty years ago"
--------------------
\m/
|
busybeaver
Offline
sockeye
Profile Status:
Reged: 03/31/01
Posts: 91
Loc: Western Washington
|
|
Gonna talk amazon into using our fiber optic lines? No reason to stay in the big city if its online.
The buses could be equipped with a light similar to emergency vehicles to move traffic to the right if congestion slows the lane.
--------------------
Marty
Welcome to my home ...
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 