Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: State Route 16

Oct.
20th

STATE ROUTE 16: Nothing beautiful about ‘beauty’ bark

I’d like to know what Tacoma official has connections to the “beauty” bark suppliers. Recently, crews have been cutting the grass bordering state Route 16, and applying the ugly and noxious bark on the hillsides, near the retention ponds, etc.

What is the reasoning behind this? The grass was cut, but it’ll soon grow through the bark, preventing the crews from mowing or trimming the grass, unless they want to stir up a cloud of bark everywhere.

What a waste of money, when other areas of Tacoma could use the funds.

Oct.
13th

ROADS: Waste before our eyes on state Route 16

Can anybody tell me where the state got the money to kill off the erosion-proof, hydro-seeded hillsides that line state Route 16 and cover it with that unstable beauty bark?

I was just curious. I thought we were in a budget crisis. This is proof of our leadership’s incompetence. One can only imagine what waste we do not see.

Aug.
24th

ROADS: State engineers broke what didn’t need fixing

Re: “Engineers for roads rarely err, state says” (TNT, 8-22).

Who are they trying to kid? In my opinion, revising State Route 16 over the Nalley Valley is absolutely stupid and has been a fiasco. If something isn’t broke, don’t fix it.

I drove on 16 from North Tacoma to Fife, sometimes using the Sprague Avenue exit. I never had any problems.

My husband works at Fife. He comes home on State Route 99 or Interstate 705 to Pacific Avenue, makes a right, then a left on 11th Street, and comes up the hill to avoid the mess the engineers

Read more »

Aug.
2nd

DOT: Taxpayers foot bill for those errors

Re: “Oops No. 2 for DOT” (TNT, 7-21).

When The News Tribune reported that it will cost $500,000 to replace a sound barrier on state Route 16, every taxpayer in the state should have responded. After all, they’re paying for the Department of Transportation mistake.

There should also be changes in responsibilities for paying for sound barriers. The location of roads and highways are clear. They are not subject to change. The responsibility for paying for sound barriers should clearly be on the developers who build so close to the existing roads and highways.

Aug.
2nd

TRAFFIC: Where is promised patrol presence?

When the state Department of Transportation reduced the exit from southbound Interstate 5 to state Route 16 to one lane, a story ran in the News Tribune quoting a State Patrol spokesperson as saying that the patrol would regularly provide “emphasis patrols” at the exit in order to reduce the number of drivers who dive into traffic at the last minute while others waited patiently in line to take the exit.

I travel this route every day, and I have yet to see the State Patrol position themselves to stop anyone. Car after car is nose-diving into the right-hand lane

Read more »

Aug.
2nd

VIADUCT: Easy fix already available

The solution to the Seattle viaduct problem is really quite simple. The project would become financially feasible if the tunnel design incorporated a “T” intersection.

Sure, that would require drivers to make a 90-degree turn, but if they also incorporate a couple of stop lights and provide more than 1,000 feet of approach ramp, any backups could easily be cleared with a single cycle of the signal lights.

July
5th

OFFRAMP: Design error costly for taxpayers

So the design error made on the Sprague Avenue offramp will only cost about $1 million of taxpayers’ money.

I have witnessed many mistakes made by highway engineers, but this tops them all.

The joke about doctors – “What do you call the person who graduates last from medical school? Doctor.” – can also be applied to the last in class from engineering school: highway engineer.