What is the song? Several people have asked but no answer given. Kind of gives a vibe of a mix of "Doot Doot" by Freur with "Run" by Collective Soul....with less singing. I like it.
Still left side entrance/exit from/to I-5. Same major design fault.
What about HOV lane towards west? Are all 3 lanes going to become 1 to merge onto I-5? That's a major design fault. In any case, this seems to be as bad as it is now...
WSDOT, It looks like you truly took that data you got 13 years ago and user that to build this project! You are basically adding 1 lane each way, and that's an HOV lane, to a bridge that is pretty much stop-and-go in rush hour. I am glad you are putting all of our money to 'good' use! As other users sait, this bridge would need 4 lanes each way. As soon as you exit I5 to go east, you hit a merge, which as we all know, will cause a really nice slowdown of traffic...An old design for a new bridge.
@bogdi1988 There is an open house Wednesday December 7 at the Museum of History and Industry in Seattle. We would love to have you show up and share those comments with the project staff.
The landscaped median on the Portage Bay bridge unnecessarily adds width to the bridge - which adds to the impact of the structure on the people living next to it and on the environment. Even without the median, the width of the bridge is still much wider than 6 lanes due to the inclusion of I-5 merging lanes. Removing this narcissistic addition to the design is an opportunity to reduce the impact of the project on people in the area without affecting the functional capability of the bridge.
The bigggest problem with this bridge is that only has 2 lanes and 1 HOV lane in each direction. It needs to be an 8 lane bridge. Hopefully when it is completed and they get rid of that ding bat mayor of Seattle, they can re-stripe the freeway to an 8 lane option. The same as they are doing on I-90.
@helenanymark exactly, seems like they decided on 3 lanes about 14 years ago (when the project started), long before our population became what it is. Also, it makes zero sense to have the HOV lane on 520 West be for 3 ppl. It's hardly ever used during peak rush hour. Just by changing it to 2 persons we'd move more ppl thru. Expecting 3 people to arrange carpooling is not realistic; better to have 2 person HOVs instead of everyone piled up w/o using the existing HOV to its maximum potential.
In addition the increase in air pollution in the Montlake cut area would become intolerable. That area already has higher than average levels of air pollution than the surrounding area. Building it to accommodate cars is bad in many ways.
I have to admit the Video looks cool.. but lets get back to reality... they are basically adding 1 additional lane each way, which will be a HOV lane... The improvments to the on and off ramps will be nice and make things smoother... But lets remake this video with real world #'s in terms of volume of cars.. I bet it wont show a drastic improvment of travel times. Then project additional traffic loads .... Sounds doomed to me
I say just build a major 10 lane total freeway, same with 405, that way when there is an accident in the far left or far right then there would be enough room to safely pass, and this would allow people to continue passing at a resonable pace instead DOT invests in this cluster of a mess of fancy speed boards telling people to slow down when there is an accident ahead, this to me slows down the movement of goods and what not, no wonder people dont stay in this state very long.
if you are going to toll a section of highway, why dont widen it more, instead of only adding an HOV lane, add 4 lanes on each side. But of course DOT does not want to upset the people of Bellevue on the water, it would obstruct the view. This is the major reason companies leave the area, Boeing is leaving, T-mobile will be gone soon, behind them is microsoft, it is because this state does not know how to keep up with growth on the freeways, and other forms of transit.
This has a very strange resemblance to the Big Dig project in Massachusetts... (putting tunnels and grass lawns over them, to "extend" the city of Boston) which wound up costing around $13 billion, alarmingly over budget, and was delayed by years, not to mention, a fatality in the first few months of exploitation. I hope, this project actually *can* happen by 2014.
I hope this is not going to end up like the second Narrows bridge, which cost $497 Million to build, and $1.9 Billion to pay back 3 decades later. The government should be sued for corruption. This could have been done much cheaper and faster than the $5 or $6 billion initial projected cost. In 30 years time, with cost overruns and interest, this monstrosity will have cost over $25 billion, and still not able to handle the traffic load!
Are you serious! We're paying 3 years before the bridge is build to add one lane of traffic each way so we can outgrow the new bridge even by the time it's built!!!! Oh My Washington Gvt. can't you guys get it together and create a fix that will last us a while - this will not be a fix to our traffic problem - if we're spending all this money and paying for a bridge we don't even have yet please look at what the future brings and really fix the problem!
I'm all for improving what is presenetly an unmitigated disaster of highway considering the woefully lacking design and abhorrent daily congestion. However, as pretty as this plan looks it still fails to address some critical issues contributing to overall congestion and appears to *maybe* be a fix for the current congestion problem - definitely not for those we'll face in 20-50 years. I-5 south from 45th and north from Mercer St merge to get to 520 eastbound ramps will continue to kill I-5.
This looks like a good alternative, except for the Montlake interchange. Looks like 6 lanes north/south on Montlake Ave, very little space to change your mind about which exact lane you need to be in, to get to 520. The long exits west bound to Montlake, two lanes, will significantly reduce the traffic backups westbound on 520, but will shift the congestion to the Montlake interchange. It is a shame that bypasses can't be added there. Good video!
This bridge is going to be a joke. It is only going to have 2 SOV lanes and a worthless HOV lane in each direction. It needs to be an 8 lane bridge. Maybe after it is completed and one of the worst ding bat mayors in Seattles history is voted out, then they can re-stripe or add the much needed extra lane each way. (like what they are doing on I90)
You took away the montlake freeway bus stop from 520 eastbound! Cyclists like taking any available bus over the bridge today. In the future I'm guessing not every bus on 520 is going to exit the freeway, cross montlake, and stop at the bus stop.
The design should address problems of Seattle 2030 - 2070, not 2000. The transportation we build will shape peoples commuting habits. More lanes= more cars. We have to design for future adults, who are currently in preschool. Half of us will be retired before 2030!
The chief problem with the bridge is the inherent promise that we will all be able to drive w/o congestion. Consider the inevitable rise in energy prices over the next 30 years.
The #1 thing this fails to address is getting traffic at 45th/50th merging onto 520 from crossing 5 lanes of traffic to get to the ramp. Any solution that does not get the southbound I5 onramp to 520 Eastbound across I5 to the right hand side of the freeway is just ignoring the source of one of Seattle's biggest congestion points. Anyone who's lived in Seattle for more than a year knows that the traffic crossing all the lanes of I5 from 45th is a big share of the problem.
@atworkwithjf not to mention the fact that placing the meging point from I5 south onto 520 East on the right side of I5 south instead of the left lane would widen the turn radius making it possible to raise the speed in that corner further reducing the yo-yo effect that causes such a horrible knock on slowdown on I5 south at rush hour.
@atworkwithjf Could not agree more. The traffice from 45th and 50th getting to the Eastside is next to ridiculous and as stated above.... COMPLETELY inpedes traffic on Southbound I-5 Unless they can do something about that and make a ramp from the RIGHT side that either goes over, or a tunnel to 520... this solves little congestion.
I totally agree! I was searching the simulation for this solution, thought I must be crazy (or that killer track was distracting me) because I couldn't find it. Not only does the lane-change traffic cause congestion, its dangerous; especially during times just before and after rush hour when traffic speed is erratic.
Anyone know what this proposal will net as far as the S I-5 ramp? I'm hoping shorter? I see the same problem as above when 520 traffic is trying to exit downtown...
A 45mph speed limit on the Seattle side that has nothing to do with sound traffic engineering and is not set at anything near the 85th percentile. But it's being imposed just to satisfy the NIMBYS in Montlake who will probably still file a lawsuit to try to stop the bridge being built.
And still, no mention of the fact that people in Wallingford, Freemont, Ballard, Phinny, and all the neighborhoods west of the freeway have to cross 5 lanes of traffic to get on 520, causing a HUGE backup EVERY day. Sometimes all the way to Shoreline.
Imagine the waste of fuel that is. Maybe Mike McI'magainst-it should worry about that if he wants to do some greening of Seattle.
@mishalo It addresses the noise issue, reduces congestion at on- and off-ramps due to the density of ramps in 1/2 mile area, reduces accidents caused by weaves....it's a good thing contrary to conventional wisdom. What is a non-transport/planning wonk watching this anyway?
@safesler awesome, i also heard that people will also be frolicking with unicorns right there on that stretch of 520....
Snap out of it, it's Seattle! this is the region that introduced America to it's first mall. the poor must drive here to sustain their lives, the crime infested slow bus system and a joke of a subway system in this region can't get people out of poverty or crisis. This is planned for congestion and more accidents, to prove some utopian point that driving is bad...
What is the song? Several people have asked but no answer given. Kind of gives a vibe of a mix of "Doot Doot" by Freur with "Run" by Collective Soul....with less singing. I like it.
pleasanton99 8 hours ago
if you don't like it...move out of Seattle...bunch of cry babies
dhide14 6 days ago
Still left side entrance/exit from/to I-5. Same major design fault.
What about HOV lane towards west? Are all 3 lanes going to become 1 to merge onto I-5? That's a major design fault. In any case, this seems to be as bad as it is now...
avitya 1 month ago
WSDOT, would really like to know the title & artist of the musical track used?
hiergehts 1 month ago
WSDOT, It looks like you truly took that data you got 13 years ago and user that to build this project! You are basically adding 1 lane each way, and that's an HOV lane, to a bridge that is pretty much stop-and-go in rush hour. I am glad you are putting all of our money to 'good' use! As other users sait, this bridge would need 4 lanes each way. As soon as you exit I5 to go east, you hit a merge, which as we all know, will cause a really nice slowdown of traffic...An old design for a new bridge.
bogdi1988 2 months ago
@bogdi1988 There is an open house Wednesday December 7 at the Museum of History and Industry in Seattle. We would love to have you show up and share those comments with the project staff.
wsdot 2 months ago
Baixaki Report.
Gustavohandebol 2 months ago
The landscaped median on the Portage Bay bridge unnecessarily adds width to the bridge - which adds to the impact of the structure on the people living next to it and on the environment. Even without the median, the width of the bridge is still much wider than 6 lanes due to the inclusion of I-5 merging lanes. Removing this narcissistic addition to the design is an opportunity to reduce the impact of the project on people in the area without affecting the functional capability of the bridge.
ah25747 3 months ago
2 problems I see with this animation: 1. There's hardly any traffic.2am simulation? 2. It's sunny
Stanger182 3 months ago
This music rocks!
listerofsmeg0 5 months ago
Why is the speed limit slowed to 45mph just before the i-5 merge?
th3kid13 6 months ago
The bigggest problem with this bridge is that only has 2 lanes and 1 HOV lane in each direction. It needs to be an 8 lane bridge. Hopefully when it is completed and they get rid of that ding bat mayor of Seattle, they can re-stripe the freeway to an 8 lane option. The same as they are doing on I-90.
helenanymark 8 months ago
@helenanymark exactly, seems like they decided on 3 lanes about 14 years ago (when the project started), long before our population became what it is. Also, it makes zero sense to have the HOV lane on 520 West be for 3 ppl. It's hardly ever used during peak rush hour. Just by changing it to 2 persons we'd move more ppl thru. Expecting 3 people to arrange carpooling is not realistic; better to have 2 person HOVs instead of everyone piled up w/o using the existing HOV to its maximum potential.
hawksblue 7 months ago
Comment removed
timzorrr 8 months ago
This will be obsolete before it is even finished. Accommodating cars is an old and obsolete way of thinking.
If you build it for cars they will come...and fill it up and there will be gridlock once again.
1 - Build it for light rail and get it out to Redmond
2 - Keep it low profile (taking into account all of the people who live along the lake)
3 - Design it with some style...this design is amateur with the clunky floatation tanks in view...I-90 looks great.
Neat Video (sappy music)
timzorrr 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In addition the increase in air pollution in the Montlake cut area would become intolerable. That area already has higher than average levels of air pollution than the surrounding area. Building it to accommodate cars is bad in many ways.
timzorrr 8 months ago
I have to admit the Video looks cool.. but lets get back to reality... they are basically adding 1 additional lane each way, which will be a HOV lane... The improvments to the on and off ramps will be nice and make things smoother... But lets remake this video with real world #'s in terms of volume of cars.. I bet it wont show a drastic improvment of travel times. Then project additional traffic loads .... Sounds doomed to me
adavash 10 months ago
@veronicastep You got to be kidding me. This is no "Big Dig" scale project. The Alaskan Way Viaduct project is way more scarier than this one.
gman5541 10 months ago
I say just build a major 10 lane total freeway, same with 405, that way when there is an accident in the far left or far right then there would be enough room to safely pass, and this would allow people to continue passing at a resonable pace instead DOT invests in this cluster of a mess of fancy speed boards telling people to slow down when there is an accident ahead, this to me slows down the movement of goods and what not, no wonder people dont stay in this state very long.
acejack33 10 months ago
if you are going to toll a section of highway, why dont widen it more, instead of only adding an HOV lane, add 4 lanes on each side. But of course DOT does not want to upset the people of Bellevue on the water, it would obstruct the view. This is the major reason companies leave the area, Boeing is leaving, T-mobile will be gone soon, behind them is microsoft, it is because this state does not know how to keep up with growth on the freeways, and other forms of transit.
acejack33 10 months ago
This has a very strange resemblance to the Big Dig project in Massachusetts... (putting tunnels and grass lawns over them, to "extend" the city of Boston) which wound up costing around $13 billion, alarmingly over budget, and was delayed by years, not to mention, a fatality in the first few months of exploitation. I hope, this project actually *can* happen by 2014.
veronicastep 10 months ago
I hope this is not going to end up like the second Narrows bridge, which cost $497 Million to build, and $1.9 Billion to pay back 3 decades later. The government should be sued for corruption. This could have been done much cheaper and faster than the $5 or $6 billion initial projected cost. In 30 years time, with cost overruns and interest, this monstrosity will have cost over $25 billion, and still not able to handle the traffic load!
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
Are you serious! We're paying 3 years before the bridge is build to add one lane of traffic each way so we can outgrow the new bridge even by the time it's built!!!! Oh My Washington Gvt. can't you guys get it together and create a fix that will last us a while - this will not be a fix to our traffic problem - if we're spending all this money and paying for a bridge we don't even have yet please look at what the future brings and really fix the problem!
SparkleeeGirl 1 year ago
@SparkleeeGirl
We are the problem.
ward1969 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SparkleeeGirl
We are the problem.
ward1969 1 year ago
I'm all for improving what is presenetly an unmitigated disaster of highway considering the woefully lacking design and abhorrent daily congestion. However, as pretty as this plan looks it still fails to address some critical issues contributing to overall congestion and appears to *maybe* be a fix for the current congestion problem - definitely not for those we'll face in 20-50 years. I-5 south from 45th and north from Mercer St merge to get to 520 eastbound ramps will continue to kill I-5.
t0adman 1 year ago
This looks like a good alternative, except for the Montlake interchange. Looks like 6 lanes north/south on Montlake Ave, very little space to change your mind about which exact lane you need to be in, to get to 520. The long exits west bound to Montlake, two lanes, will significantly reduce the traffic backups westbound on 520, but will shift the congestion to the Montlake interchange. It is a shame that bypasses can't be added there. Good video!
nbruland 1 year ago
This bridge is going to be a joke. It is only going to have 2 SOV lanes and a worthless HOV lane in each direction. It needs to be an 8 lane bridge. Maybe after it is completed and one of the worst ding bat mayors in Seattles history is voted out, then they can re-stripe or add the much needed extra lane each way. (like what they are doing on I90)
jefflykken 1 year ago
totally agree
SparkleeeGirl 1 year ago
this music is so epic.
mgalberto23 1 year ago
You took away the montlake freeway bus stop from 520 eastbound! Cyclists like taking any available bus over the bridge today. In the future I'm guessing not every bus on 520 is going to exit the freeway, cross montlake, and stop at the bus stop.
superdave98008 1 year ago
Comment removed
superdave98008 1 year ago
Comment removed
superdave98008 1 year ago
Comment removed
superdave98008 1 year ago
Comment removed
superdave98008 1 year ago
We need more capacity. An additional HOV lane is hardly an improvement.
harrigill 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Regardless of your point of view on the project itself, everyone can agree that this video was terrible and a waste of money.
EnElBarrioFino 1 year ago
Comment removed
EnElBarrioFino 1 year ago
Sorry, I meant:the Chief problem with the public perception of the bridge...
and: ALSO, consider the inevitable rise in energy prices over the next 30 years.
nomorepasswords100 1 year ago
The design should address problems of Seattle 2030 - 2070, not 2000. The transportation we build will shape peoples commuting habits. More lanes= more cars. We have to design for future adults, who are currently in preschool. Half of us will be retired before 2030!
The chief problem with the bridge is the inherent promise that we will all be able to drive w/o congestion. Consider the inevitable rise in energy prices over the next 30 years.
nomorepasswords100 1 year ago
The #1 thing this fails to address is getting traffic at 45th/50th merging onto 520 from crossing 5 lanes of traffic to get to the ramp. Any solution that does not get the southbound I5 onramp to 520 Eastbound across I5 to the right hand side of the freeway is just ignoring the source of one of Seattle's biggest congestion points. Anyone who's lived in Seattle for more than a year knows that the traffic crossing all the lanes of I5 from 45th is a big share of the problem.
atworkwithjf 1 year ago 17
@atworkwithjf not to mention the fact that placing the meging point from I5 south onto 520 East on the right side of I5 south instead of the left lane would widen the turn radius making it possible to raise the speed in that corner further reducing the yo-yo effect that causes such a horrible knock on slowdown on I5 south at rush hour.
atworkwithjf 1 year ago 6
@atworkwithjf Could not agree more. The traffice from 45th and 50th getting to the Eastside is next to ridiculous and as stated above.... COMPLETELY inpedes traffic on Southbound I-5 Unless they can do something about that and make a ramp from the RIGHT side that either goes over, or a tunnel to 520... this solves little congestion.
JuergenGDB 9 months ago
@atworkwithjf
I totally agree! I was searching the simulation for this solution, thought I must be crazy (or that killer track was distracting me) because I couldn't find it. Not only does the lane-change traffic cause congestion, its dangerous; especially during times just before and after rush hour when traffic speed is erratic.
Anyone know what this proposal will net as far as the S I-5 ramp? I'm hoping shorter? I see the same problem as above when 520 traffic is trying to exit downtown...
justinmrusk 4 months ago
@atworkwithjf Same thing for Westbound 520 trying to get to Mercer on I-5 south. I cringe when I take that route. Insanity.
AffinityPhoto 3 weeks ago
anyone notice that all the speed limits were only 45 mph?
or1jinalbeauty 1 year ago
Looks too good to be true. Just wish it were done already.
evets2007 1 year ago
A 45mph speed limit on the Seattle side that has nothing to do with sound traffic engineering and is not set at anything near the 85th percentile. But it's being imposed just to satisfy the NIMBYS in Montlake who will probably still file a lawsuit to try to stop the bridge being built.
mrforrrest 1 year ago
And still, no mention of the fact that people in Wallingford, Freemont, Ballard, Phinny, and all the neighborhoods west of the freeway have to cross 5 lanes of traffic to get on 520, causing a HUGE backup EVERY day. Sometimes all the way to Shoreline.
Imagine the waste of fuel that is. Maybe Mike McI'magainst-it should worry about that if he wants to do some greening of Seattle.
kutis1210 1 year ago
Where's the traffic? Why are we investing in such a huge project for 17 cars to use? And how about a closeup of the bike lanes?
uwdan 1 year ago
A mega-road project I'm not terribly in opposition to, wow. But still, what about public transport provision?????????
safesler 1 year ago
45mph speed limit?! lol whats good about that?
mishalo 1 year ago
@mishalo It addresses the noise issue, reduces congestion at on- and off-ramps due to the density of ramps in 1/2 mile area, reduces accidents caused by weaves....it's a good thing contrary to conventional wisdom. What is a non-transport/planning wonk watching this anyway?
safesler 1 year ago
@safesler awesome, i also heard that people will also be frolicking with unicorns right there on that stretch of 520....
Snap out of it, it's Seattle! this is the region that introduced America to it's first mall. the poor must drive here to sustain their lives, the crime infested slow bus system and a joke of a subway system in this region can't get people out of poverty or crisis. This is planned for congestion and more accidents, to prove some utopian point that driving is bad...
mishalo 1 year ago
Comment removed
safesler 1 year ago
where's the space for the light rail?! think about the future people.
sirervan 1 year ago
that would take decades!
bajabusta 1 year ago