This clown is one of the #1 reasons to support district elections for the Council. It will likely get rid of him.

@1 not necessarily. His area has high support for him, or at least it did last time I doorbelled it.

The current Montlake Bridge is a thing of beauty on par with the Tower Bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge. The Montlake Bridge, especially when viewed from the cut, is gorgeous. It would be an total shame to maul it by placing a brutalist modern structure right next to it. I would implore my city council to find a solution to the traffic issues that doesn't destroy one of most beautiful man-made structures in the region.

@4, it sure is gorgeous. The Council's been against adding another for a very long time, but since it's the state's decision they want to influence the state as much as possible away from it while they still can. By contrast, the state had already made its viaduct decision by the time Nelson/Nygaard's earlier report came out. That's the main reason it didn't have much of a chance to influence anybody at the time. Also, thought a good report, it was embraced eagerly by the same folks who'd run their surface/transit plan into the ground, which did not add to its cachet.

They should just add outrigger lanes on the Montlake Bridge like they did on the University Bridge, back before I-5 opened when they needed the capacity. This wouldn't effect the visual profile and would increase capacity by 50 percent. A good workable compromise, methinks.

And Conlin lies, and is a pompous bully.

Will be glad to see him gone.

The only thing Conlin is guilty of is crossing the New Urbanist mafia's Party Line. It's not hard to do.

Conlin has done everything the "new urbanists" want him to do.