Jump to content
Create New...

Seattle's plow crews not trying to clear snow from roads by design


Recommended Posts

seat_rds-icy.jpg

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/27/seattle...-roads-by-desi/

Not long ago, Washington state's Department of Ecology was making noises about not letting people wash their cars at home because "what goes on the street goes into the creek." Now the state is on the opposing side of Seattle's efforts not to let harmful chemicals wash into the freshwater streams feeding into Puget Sound.

Seattle is not using salt to clear the roads because it doesn't want the salt flowing into waterways. As well, the city's snow plows have rubber-edge blades that can clear snow, but can't get the ice off the road. Seattle's DOT cheif says the city is trying to "create a hard-packed surface" of snow. It will then lay sand down over the hardpack in order to offer enough traction to cars, and employ a soy-based de-icer only good for temps below 32 degrees.

The hitch: only 4-wheel-drive and front-wheel-drive cars with chains have any traction. That means that even the police can't drive on many roads. If the police make a call to a location on a hill, they park at the bottom and walk up the hill. As well, the police are having to respond to literally hundreds of collisions and disabled vehicles.

The state DOT has taken a much different tack: it is using sand, salt, metal-edged plows, and chemical de-icer in its battle with the elements. Seattle is now experimenting with a "silver bullet" concoction that is saltwater from a cheese factory, calcium chloride, and de-sugared molasses.

[source: Seattle Times]

Edited by Dodgefan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If environment has such a prime concern, they should have forced everybody to use public transportation. Buses would not have needed to have the roads plowed and safety of individual drivers would not be a concern.

With only buses and heavy vehicles operating, they could have the liberty of letting the snow just melt naturally, thus saving environment completely from the "harmful" chemicals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If environment has such a prime concern, they should have forced everybody to use public transportation. Buses would not have needed to have the roads plowed and safety of individual drivers would not be a concern.

With only buses and heavy vehicles operating, they could have the liberty of letting the snow just melt naturally, thus saving environment completely from the "harmful" chemicals.

Buses are affected by icy roads also, though...there were two buses that couldn't stop on an icy hill and ended hanging over a freeway last week in Seattle..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember a couple winters back we had several big storms between Xmas and February in Denver..the city and some of the burbs ran out of mag chloride and started using salt. Their was a storm nearly every Thurs-Friday for about 6 weeks, and some smaller residential streets were never plowed. I was glad to have 4 wheel drive, never got stuck in the Jeep. Almost set a record, IIRC--something like 63 days w/ snow on the ground (very rare there, usually we get a storm, big snow, and it all melts off in a few days).

Edited by moltar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buses are affected by icy roads also, though...there were two buses that couldn't stop on an icy hill and ended hanging over a freeway last week in Seattle..

Well almost nothing with pneumatic tires will stand chance on ice. But at least two buses are less than hundreds of people driving small cars falling like foliage.

These environmental concerns sometimes are ridiculous. Have these people thought that the sands will wash into rivers and lakes too and cause sedimentation? Moreover, if the sand is not native, or is contaminated, it may even cause pollution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but if one of those crashes it can hurt or kill more people than a couple of cars.

It is not a couple of cars in this case. It is piles of them. On another note, driver error might also be a possibility for those two buses. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pretty ridiculous. I have no problem with their trying to plow snow and make roads dribeable in an environmentally-friendly way, but Seattle needs to perfect this magic bullet and then use it before just deciding to stop plowing roads. Irresponsible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate driving in Seattle in good weather conditions. The hills, cramped parking, and poorly constructed/designed roadways would make it a nightmare to drive in with low traction. As far as Seattle's DOT goes, the methods they employ probably work fine under normal circumstances. It doesn't snow a whole lot here, it mostly just rains. The snow storm caught everyone off guard I think. Usually we get a few inches of snow spread out over January, February, and March. Ice usually doesn't form. But in the last 2 weeks we've had something like a foot of snow, and temperatures from 10-20°F. Very unusual. It seems as those Seattle's DOT was caught with their pants down and simply don't know what to do. They could use salt, but I doubt they are equipped or prepared to do so on such short notice, and there would be the political backlash.

Thankfully I don't live in Seattle.

From the comments, they seem to think that is video footage from a city in Oregon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much of what I see municipal politicans doing these days is obfuscation to counter their own incompetent decisions in the past: why would storm sewers flush directly into the lakes/ocean anyway? With all the chemicals and crap on our sidewalks/streets these days they should be treated first, then returned to the water table.

This is one area where Toronto has seen the light and even recently built a huge catch basin in the west end so that during a storm the water would pour into the basin from the area streets and collect there until the treatment plant(s) can catch up.

Politicians of all strips are blaming everything on progress so they can spend our tax dollars on what they (and their pet lobbyists) think is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/200812...iterateuscities

Looks like Seattle is getting all kinds of great press these days.

Yes...good list. Good to see Denver on that list also. Alas, Phoenix is probably on the 10 least literate cities list.. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya gotta remember, Washington state (Seattle mainly) is one of the, if the THE, most far left liberal state in this country. This really isn't much of a suprise.

Look at a Congressional map, and you will see quite a few red districts. Check your facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if they're trying to indict RWD in snow under "environMENTALly friendly" removal techniques, it backfired... look at the previous-gen FWD Malibu, stuck sideways on the hill. :lol:

Seriously.

What lame-o "anti-RWD" propaganda.

Complete B.S. btw, unless their cops are total losers who

have ZERO hours training in their C.V.'s and Chargers in

the winter conditions, and yes kill all "environmentalists",

they'll have a much lower "carbon footprint" once dead!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed I am, the point I'm making is if these people are so educated, how the hell did they come up with something so......stupid?

Ever heard of the phrase "Hell is paved with good intentions"? We'll, Seattle was paving Hell and then it froze over.

It’s my understanding, Bellevue and several over nearby cities (including WADOT as mentioned in the article) used salt and other chemicals to de-ice the streets (thankfully.) Seattle became a frozen island for a few days. Sad thing is, international environmentalists blasted Seattle for the move because salt will dissolve, but sand just turns into sediment... an environmentally dangerous situation in Seattle for creeks & streams. As Siegen said, this doesn't happen often. We're sea-level and the snowline rarely falls this low. Salting the roads once wouldn’t have dramatically impacted the area. I was told Seattle did finally test the concoction mentioned on the roads and it worked pretty well. We’ll see how Seattle does the next time.

Oh well. We ended up with approximately 15” at my house. I worked remotely for a few days. When I did venture out, my Buick performed fantastically. I almost became stuck in a parking lot once, but disengaging Traction Control took care of that issue.

We made it into town to see ‘The Color Purple’ at the Paramount Theatre, but missed ‘Seven Brides for Seven Brothers’ at 5th Ave Theatre due to the snow & ice. Grrghh… Christmas was white. All things considered... not too bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at a Congressional map, and you will see quite a few red districts. Check your facts.

Croc, BuddyP is correct. Most of the state's population (WA State approx 6.5 million) is west of the Cascades. Half of the state's population is just in the tri-county area alone (Pierce/King/Snohomish = 3.3 million.) In fact, I believe King County alone has a larger population than all of Eastern Washington. Another point, the rest of the state lacks the financial resources to match the tri-county area as well.

Speaking politically, the state is technically divided in two (West & East.) There have been several attempts over the years to propose splitting Eastern and Western Washington into two separate states, but none of them ever seem to gain much traction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Croc, BuddyP is correct. Most of the state's population (WA State approx 6.5 million) is west of the Cascades. Half of the state's population is just in the tri-county area alone (Pierce/King/Snohomish = 3.3 million.) In fact, I believe King County alone has a larger population than all of Eastern Washington. Another point, the rest of the state lacks the financial resources to match the tri-county area as well.

Speaking politically, the state is technically divided in two (West & East.) There have been several attempts over the years to propose splitting Eastern and Western Washington into two separate states, but none of them ever seem to gain much traction.

Yep, all the people east of the mountains are red necks. Or so I hear.... Only been over there once. Got chased out by a mob wielding torches and pitch forks. Apparently they don't take kindly to intellectuals.

Lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, all the people east of the mountains are red necks. Or so I hear.... Only been over there once. Got chased out by a mob wielding torches and pitch forks. Apparently they don't take kindly to intellectuals.

Lol.

Heh-heh...sounds like the eastern part of Colorado...anything east of the Front Range is just a dull Kansas-like empty red state void.. the Front Range has the Denver metro area and Boulder which are pretty cool and blue stateish, the mountains run down the center and western half of the state, but to the south of the Denver area is Colorado Springs, which is part of the Bible Belt... I used to live in the Springs-- it does have some nice qualities (great scenery, great bike trails, etc but far too many evangelicals and neocons for my taste).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed I am, the point I'm making is if these people are so educated, how the hell did they come up with something so......stupid?

because they might be the only ones who think of themselves as smart. when in fact, they might be dumber than $h! to the rest of the common sense nation.

of course, i appear to be right in the literacy capital of the universe. there is an equal amount of dip$h!s right here as well.

Edited by regfootball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Croc, BuddyP is correct. Most of the state's population (WA State approx 6.5 million) is west of the Cascades. Half of the state's population is just in the tri-county area alone (Pierce/King/Snohomish = 3.3 million.) In fact, I believe King County alone has a larger population than all of Eastern Washington. Another point, the rest of the state lacks the financial resources to match the tri-county area as well.

Speaking politically, the state is technically divided in two (West & East.) There have been several attempts over the years to propose splitting Eastern and Western Washington into two separate states, but none of them ever seem to gain much traction.

Not to be argumentative, but Massachusetts should IMO hold the "most liberal" crown due to their entire congressional representation being blue, along with their governor. I wasn't trying to say WA is conservative or anything, but that like the other coastal western states, there are pockets of conservatism. Just like I laugh when someone says CA is the most liberal state--because I can't imagine what rock one must live under to have not heard of Orange County in the past 6 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he did clarify his comment by reducing it to Seattle, instead of all of Washington. The overall point he was getting at was that Olympia is very liberal, which is why Eastern Washington feels ignored.

To illustrate how influential Seattle's political standing is in the state of Washington, this was a sign used during the 2008 governor election:

2650909892_9cfe818302.jpg

A friend of mine saw a similar sign to the one above in Spokane, but they were scattered throughout Eastern Washington. The incumbent, Governor Gregoire still won (thankfully.) Rossi actually lives on the Eastside. You'd think I would have voted for him, but I prefer a Democratic state & federal government and a conservative/Republican local government. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'd think I would have voted for him, but I prefer a Democratic state & federal government and a conservative/Republican local government. Go figure.

See I'm the opposite: I much prefer democratic local and national, but prefer conservative state. I will vote for a progressive conservative, though. Those tend to be the Republicans accused of being "crazy liberals" by their own party, though, and rarely win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to be argumentative, but Massachusetts should IMO hold the "most liberal" crown due to their entire congressional representation being blue, along with their governor. I wasn't trying to say WA is conservative or anything, but that like the other coastal western states, there are pockets of conservatism. Just like I laugh when someone says CA is the most liberal state--because I can't imagine what rock one must live under to have not heard of Orange County in the past 6 years.

Quite likely..I studied the county-by-county red v blue maps after the election, every county in MA went blue, and at the opposite end of the spectrum, every county in Oklahoma went red (Oklahoma would be hell on earth for me, Arizona is bad enough).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See I'm the opposite: I much prefer democratic local and national, but prefer conservative state. I will vote for a progressive conservative, though. Those tend to be the Republicans accused of being "crazy liberals" by their own party, though, and rarely win.

You might change your mind once you become a home owner. I did. :AH-HA_wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might change your mind once you become a home owner. I did. :AH-HA_wink:

Well, in CA property taxes are capped at 1% of the assessed value, starting at the sales price, and may rise by no more than 2% of that annually thereafter. I don't see a problem with that, and honestly taxes are not a big enough deal for me to vote for everything else the GOP stands for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buses are affected by icy roads also, though...there were two buses that couldn't stop on an icy hill and ended hanging over a freeway last week in Seattle..

It's funny you mention this because I saw the photo emailed to me from somebody I know in Seattle. The best part of it all is that the bus with the "American Design" and most likely built in America (an MCI) had almost no damage and the "European Design" (Van-Hool) was destroyed.

I'm a busnerd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in CA property taxes are capped at 1% of the assessed value, starting at the sales price, and may rise by no more than 2% of that annually thereafter. I don't see a problem with that, and honestly taxes are not a big enough deal for me to vote for everything else the GOP stands for.

Well, politics are not that black in white. You don't sell your soul to the GOP for voting for or against tax increases. Besides, the amount of tax you pay isn't as important as what the taxes are funding. You become much more invested in the development, preservation, improvement, etc of your neighborhood, community, city, and county as a homeowner. Potential long-term and short-term projects begin to impact you a lot differently than as a renter. I could provide examples to explain myself better, but let's just agree to disagree for now. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, politics are not that black in white. You don't sell your soul to the GOP for voting for or against tax increases. Besides, the amount of tax you pay isn't as important as what the taxes are funding. You become much more invested in the development, preservation, improvement, etc of your neighborhood, community, city, and county as a homeowner. Potential long-term and short-term projects begin to impact you a lot differently than as a renter. I could provide examples to explain myself better, but let's just agree to disagree for now. :)

Ven, I am very politically aware--I follow that stuff far more closely than most people do, and know full well that "black and white" doesn't really fit in anywhere.

I don't recall if I've mentioned this on here or not, but I'm an urban planner--I'm very well aware of the general attitude trends of homeowners vs. renters. But as an urban planner, I'm already far more invested than the vast majority of renters. Because it's my career to be.

Also, in CA, the Propositions allow Californians to vote on individual ballot initiatives. And we do it. A lot. It's a nice sidestep to a two-party system, where I can vote D and still vote for a tax cut to eliminate something truly stupid, or my good friend--a prominent republican--can vote straight R and still vote "No" on Prop 8. We get to eat our cake, so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ven, I am very politically aware--I follow that stuff far more closely than most people do, and know full well that "black and white" doesn't really fit in anywhere.

I don't recall if I've mentioned this on here or not, but I'm an urban planner--I'm very well aware of the general attitude trends of homeowners vs. renters. But as an urban planner, I'm already far more invested than the vast majority of renters. Because it's my career to be.

Then why in the world would you quote CA property tax law when referring to voting trends between renters and homeowners? (which was what I originally referred to - You might change your mind once you become a home owner....) :blink:

Also, in CA, the Propositions allow Californians to vote on individual ballot initiatives. And we do it. A lot. It's a nice sidestep to a two-party system, where I can vote D and still vote for a tax cut to eliminate something truly stupid, or my good friend--a prominent republican--can vote straight R and still vote "No" on Prop 8. We get to eat our cake, so to speak.

We do similar here in WA... thankfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why in the world would you quote CA property tax law when referring to voting trends between renters and homeowners? (which was what I originally referred to - You might change your mind once you become a home owner....) :blink:

That was an assumption on my part--that your reference to being a homeowner vs. renter had to do with property taxes since you were suggesting I'd change my mind on voting conservative/progressive once I became a homeowner. Usually the property tax argument fits in very well here.

That still said, I highly doubt I'd change my mind on this. I'm very principled and don't change my mind often on things. My other concerns about the local area keep me neatly in the D fold too: historic preservation, sustainability, convenient and affordable transit, affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, etc.

Edited by Croc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny you mention this because I saw the photo emailed to me from somebody I know in Seattle. The best part of it all is that the bus with the "American Design" and most likely built in America (an MCI) had almost no damage and the "European Design" (Van-Hool) was destroyed.

I'm a busnerd.

Can you please post these pictures if you still have them, I would love to see them.

Or email me at [email protected]

Thanks,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings