So while I bash on the Seattle Weekly for its increasing distance from matters that concern, you know, Seattle, I have to call out that this past Wednesday, they actually delivered a nice bit of Viaduct history. The story confirms a few of the surmises that I had picked up - that the viaduct was originally intended as a bypass, not a route into the city, and that the mid-century years of Seattle history were just a tad murky in regards to record-keeping about large structures being built in their midst.
The article is here, because their web site is miserable for navigation.
And don't think about it as voting "no" - think of it as voting "Future hazy, ask again later".
ACES 2017: The rest of it - Friday night, as I said last time, was the banquet. Because so many of us editor women have embraced colorful hair, there was a group photo taken before we...
10 hours ago