West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Politics

(94 posts)

The tunnel

Started 9 months ago by Dennito
Latest reply from JoB

Dennito
Member Profile

Tunnel opponents bleat about the possibility cost overruns. Why are they focused on the unlikely and unproven? So what if the tunnel goes over budget? The Governor has said the state government will make arrangements to pay them (and hopefully Frank Chopp will be out of office by then). Unlike the WSea-Ballard monorail I would rather pay for something I'm actually using. Remember that little debacle? We spent tens of millions for nothing. The survey that drivers won't pay tunnel tolls and use surface streets is a joke. No one answers a survey question "Are you willing to pay more (for anything)" in the affirmative. But people will gladly pay a toll when it comes down to a shorter commute. Watch what happens on 520.

Posted 9 months ago #
mpento
Member Profile

"unlikely"?

Posted 9 months ago #
Dennito
Member Profile

"The sky is falling?"

Posted 9 months ago #
metrognome
Member Profile

Dennito -- I agree with you; remember all the screaming about people avoiding the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and not using the HOT lanes in S KC?

There are already 2 tunnels under downtown -- the 100+ year old railroad tunnel and the 21-year old Metro bus tunnel. Both withstood the Nisqually earthquake just fine. The viaduct tunnel will be dug in similar geological conditions. One of my favorite quotes on this issue is from Vladimer Khazak, the lead engineer on the bus tunnel; when he was interviewed in 1991 or so when the job was over and he could speak his mind, he said something to the effect that if he had had another tunnel machine, he would have dug another tunnel for the viaduct.

and just to clarify, the Monorail was completely a citizen-driven initiative that was planned completely outside the local federally-mandated planning process. You can't blame that debacle on local governments (which never would have approved it to begin with ...)

Posted 9 months ago #
mightymo
Member Profile

"Unlikely and unproven" cost overruns? Sure, there's no proof that there will be overruns. There usually are with a big project, though, and this one is extra big with the potential for a lot of unforeseen costs because of its width (unprecedented), its route underneath historic old buildings that barely survived Nisqually, and so forth. Right now, we have the word of a governor who is not running for re-election and indications from a legislature not predisposed to help Seattle.
As for who will use it, with no exits downtown, I can't imagine a lot of downtown commuters will bother. Those campaign mailers that imply that traffic on the West Seattle Bridge will somehow get better are a joke. A percentage of the people lining up to go north on 99 will instead head to the 1st Ave, 4th Ave, or I-5 exits. And there's no money in the plan to make those ways into town any better than they are now.

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

if the state had any guts, they would choke the viaduct to two lanes each direction, close all entrance and exit ramps thereon, and start tolling forthwith.

then we'll see exactly what the tunnel will look like.

and sure, west seattle traffic might improve...

sometime around 2020 when the DBT and the seawall are finished.

or we could tear down the rickety old viaduct tomorrow, and thereby light a fire under WSDOT's booty to get something sensible, affordable, and local-job-creating done by 2015.

btw, the average cost overrun for projects of this scope and size is 35%. the DBT's contingency fund was whittled to 15% to make it fit the state's budget.

just saying that there are better ways to skin this cat.

and, no, i don't mean surface-transit only.

Posted 9 months ago #
SomeGuy
Member Profile

I love the viaduct and drive on it 6 days a week. I am hoping we can string out the tunnel discussion/ballot measures/non-voting etc for another 20 years until I retire and move out to the sticks. I'd say the odds are 50/50 at this point. TUNNEL 2031!

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

SomeGuy
Are you willing to bet your life that it will stay up that long?

i think yesterday was the 3rd or 4th anniversary of the freeway bridge collapse in Minneapolis.
The cost crunchers who bet that bridge would stay up in spite of indications to the contrary weren't the ones who lost their lives.

Posted 9 months ago #
SomeGuy
Member Profile

JoB, just driving anywhere in Seattle is statistically the most dangerous thing most of us do on any given day. I don't think the viaduct adds any more risk than encountering blue Suburban lady, crazy white Camry guy, the army of local door-to-door solicitors, Honey Badgers, etc.

Posted 9 months ago #
JayDee
Member Profile

redblack:

The work that is going on now that created the current "squeeze" is job creating and this work would need to be done regardless of which option wins out.
-
Are you are saying that surface-transit only is not the only way to skin this cat? Then what miracle do you propose? The DBT as it stands? The DBT with exits downtown (my fave)? Replacing the current viaduct? Replacing it with a lidded variant ala Mercer Island? How about a bridge? Or a surface option with 27 cross-streets?
-
The reality is that no majority of the voters supports any of these options. In this case we should pick one and go with it. I don't love the DBT but it is better than the continued wringing of hands that passes for process. So the DBT will cost billions? So will any option we choose aside from simple demolition (the seawall is a separate issue). If we opt for no DBT, what are the chances of getting the state to kick in any money at this point? So the "true cost" to Seattle may be as high as the DBT. My 2 cents.

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

SomeGuy..

you didn't stand on the abyss of that bridge looking down into that river contemplating the fact that you missed being one of those cars by about 10 minutes give or take.

you didn't see the market value of your home drop 20% in one day because your home was in a burb on one side of that bridge and the jobs on the other.

Doing so clarifies that notion of everyday risk.

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

Jaydee...

"So the "true cost" to Seattle may be as high as the DBT"

i couldn't agree more..

what are the "possible" costs if Seattle decides to forgo the federal and state money available for the DBT and the state exercises it's option to remove the viaduct in 2012?

is it responsible to make the City of Seattle assume the entire cost of some transportation option because of opposition to the tunnel?

citizens paid into a fund for the monorail that never happened.. without getting an alternative option.

that will be chump change in contrast to what picking up the total bill for traversing the downtown area.

Certainly worth thinking about while risking a bird in the hand by fighting over some elusive perfect solution.

Posted 9 months ago #
KBear
Member Profile

By the way, the tunnel project WILL have downtown exits, one at each end. And not everyone who uses Highway 99 is headed downtown.

Posted 9 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

I liked the front page editorial this morning of the D n' C ... the first paragraph was ... well ... so Seattle.

Posted 9 months ago #
SomeGuy
Member Profile

Nice little summary here:
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-rejecting-the-tunnel/Content?oid=9323195

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

jaydee: i know the south-end replacement work is necessary. it should have been done 10 years ago. i'm a huge fan of that work. road replacement, bike path, train crossings, connecting the port and BNSF... perfect.

regarding surface-transit being the only alternate option to DBT, why do you only give me that choice? because that's mcginn's choice? why assume that if i'm opposed to DBT that i automagically agree with the mayor on other replacement options?

i'll put it this way: of 8 possible scenarios to replace AWV, in '07 the AWV stakeholders committee rejected DBT in favor of 3 options, which they then recommended to WSDOT: replace AWV with another elevated; replace AWV with an integrated seawall/tunnel; or replace AWV solely with surface improvements.

it should be noted that of the 8 scenarios, all were over budget, with DBT shattering the limit as the most expensive.

so WSDOT said, "elevated or integrated?"

AWV stakeholders said, "let's ask seattle."

then AWV stakeholders crafted a specious ballot measure that gave seattle voters the option of rejecting BOTH options. and in typical seattle fashion, we rejected both options.

so. considering that i was never asked what i thought was the most feasible of the 8 scenarios, here's my suggestion:

tear down the viaduct. yesterday.

on a fast track - i.e. 3 shifts a day for 6 months - maybe a year? - simultaneously dig a shallower tunnel in AWV's footprint and rebuild the seawall.

now, regarding labor, this option - the lidded trench option, otherwise known as "scenario H" - employs local contractors, and nothing but local contractors. DBT, on the other hand, brings in hundreds of out-of-state "tunnel experts" and requires a huge out-of-state conglomerate to dig it.

regarding your cavalier attitude toward seawall replacement: well, the seawall is actually more important than 99 to seattle's infrastructure... unless you're okay with downtown sliding into elliott bay - and the shearing of water, sewer, and electric lines - in the next major earthquake.

and if you think that the waterfront will be magically transformed during and after the tunnel is built, then you've been sold a bill of goods. this whole thing is going to be messy - and it will make traffic suck - no matter what option replaces AWV.

AWV has to come down sometime, and it has to come down somewhere. that "somewhere" is the waterfront.

and only after all of that debris is cleaned up and the old pilings removed can SDOT begin replacing the seawall.

now. where do you think the old seawall will go?

bingo!

the waterfront.

the upshot? washington state needs a DOT like caltrans: take no prisoners, call all of the shots, and have a dedicated budget. WSDOT is only half-serious.

maybe this debacle will teach them a lesson.

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

and furthermore, DBT cannot and will not in any way, shape, or form have exits downtown.

...unless you're okay with paying to dig two tunnels, one of which would go almost straight up from 200 feet underground.

think about it.

scenario H, on the other hand, could have central downtown exits.

and it's a hell of a lot cheaper.

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

quoth jo:

citizens paid into a fund for the monorail that never happened.. without getting an alternative option.

or a monorail!

but we got 2 stadiums we didn't want - in the worst possible locations.

hey, it's something, huh?

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

i swear i'm done with this thread for the day... after i say this:

surface/transit should happen in addition to and regardless of whatever option replaces 99. the waterfront should not only be a vibrant economic destination; it should also be a jumping-off point for car, bike, ferry, and rail for visitors and locals to enjoy and explore the rest of our fair region.

DBT rules that out altogether, at least as far as funding goes.

Posted 9 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

I read the Stranger article too SomeGuy...is this nuts or what? All that Seneca Street exiting traffic,, no Western Ave exit? All that traffic doing on surface streets, no toll fees, and Ballard destinations? It's a remnant from Nickles and his love affair with Vulcan/Paul Allen.. a private multi-billion dollar tunnel to his developments in South Lake Union... and you thought the SLUT rail was a boondoogle...that was just a test to see how stupid we are and how short our attention span. So far .. we have financed his stadium, his private choo choo, and now his private tunnel to raise the value of his southlake land grab... I predict a new trillion dollar re-do of the ship canal, the locks so he can park his yachts downtown...

Posted 9 months ago #
KBear
Member Profile

Since more than half of the cars on the Alaskan Way Viaduct are NOT going downtown, it makes perfect sense not to have an exit in the middle of the tunnel, where it would be expensive to build and would impede traffic. There are several other routes to downtown, including the FOUR DOWNTOWN EXITS along the proposed tunnel route.

From the way the tunnel opponents describe it, you'd think that "downtown" comprised only a two-block area around the Art Museum. Just because you can't get off at Seneca anymore doesn't mean there are "no downtown exits".

Posted 9 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Gonna force all those downtown workers into "Allentown"...office space. This is just the last chapter of the Nickles love fest with Vulcan and Paul Allen... first the stadium...then the SLUT to see if we were paying attention.... no? Perfect let's build a private tunnel to South Lake... shoot...this deal was probably done 10 years ago...

Posted 9 months ago #
socamr
Member Profile

Kbear,

I'd love to know what you define as "downtown". The stadiums are south of downtown (hence SODO, right?), and Belltown is north of downtown. Where exactly are four exits between those two places?

And since approximately half the cars using the Viaduct use it to commute, that's going to be a problem.

I'm still undecided on the tunnel, but voting for it just because "something needs to be done" isn't a very convincing argument.

Posted 9 months ago #
metrognome
Member Profile

redblack -- I agree with you about what needs to be done (post 19) and there IS money to do it as part of the city of Seattle seawall replacement project. All that land under the viaduct will be available and belongs to the city or the state. It may take 10 - 15 years, but the waterfront will be transformed.

http://www.seattle.gov/DPD/Planning/Central_Waterfront/Overview/

kooch -- you may want to try reading more and typing less; the deep bore tunnel has only been an option since 2008.

as far as exits in central downtown, we will be WAY better off without them. The reason traffic comes to a standstill during pm rush hour, esp when there is an event at one of the stadii, is the influx of traffic from the NB off-ramp at Seneca and the outflux trying to use the SB Columbia on-ramp (and the idiot drivers who insist on blocking intersections.) The redesign of Alaskan Way street level and the redistribution of traffic with all the projects that are underway will be a much better solution than the current mess.

Posted 9 months ago #
chrisma
Member Profile

WARNING: purely grammatical post:

stadia or stadiums (not stadii)
Greek, not Latin.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/stadium

Posted 9 months ago #
me on 28th Ave SW
Member Profile

Redblack posted earlier:
if the state had any guts, they would choke the viaduct to two lanes each direction, close all entrance and exit ramps thereon, and start tolling forthwith.

then we'll see exactly what the tunnel will look like.

I have wondered exactly the same thing. Makes you wonder.... I am so tired of ten years of theories; let's see how it works before we commit all that money!

Why do I keep thinking of that scene in A Few Good Men "You can't handle the truth!"???

Posted 9 months ago #
metrognome
Member Profile

ummm ... maybe because you have a thing for Tom Cruise in a dress Navy uniform or Jack Nicholson in a dress Marine uniform ...

Posted 9 months ago #
me on 28th Ave SW
Member Profile

Eww, not really! ; )

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

i think my opinion on the matter can be summed up with the term "cost effective."

because i don't think that keeping AWV open is worth the cost of DBT - especially after AWV is choked to two (maybe two - i'm still skeptical about those ramps) 25-mph lanes in each direction from november 2011 until 2016. and that's if there are no contingencies.

really? what is the point of keeping AWV open if it's that crippled and useless as a through-route?

kootch might be merely offended at state spending levels. that doesn't bother me so much. i just think this is a bad damned idea from a transportation standpoint.

nonetheless, politics make strange bedfellows, eh, kootch?

no on 1! just because. even though it's probably futile.

Posted 9 months ago #
velo_nut
Member Profile

What does this have to do with goats at Nickelsville?

Posted 9 months ago #
Dennito
Member Profile

R/B: (or should I address you as Mr. Mayor?) "Vote no on 1- just because?" Really? Anyone who has sat in traffic for an hour or two during the recent and multiple closures of the viaduct might agree that "just because" is an inadequate reason to vote no. Whether you are sitting in a car or a bus, gridlock is highly unpleasant. We need to move forward with the tunnel. It is an important public works project that is vital to the economy of not only this city, but the region as well. Vote yes on 1.

Posted 9 months ago #
KBear
Member Profile

Socamr, Belltown is on the north end of downtown, and the stadiums are on the south edge of downtown. If you drive anywhere north of the south exits, you'll be downtown. If you drive anywhere south of the north exits, you'll be downtown. Saying "there are no downtown exits" is like saying the 21 bus doesn't go to Safeco field because it doesn't drop you off at home plate.

Posted 9 months ago #
KBear
Member Profile

I would agree that if your usual destination is central downtown, the tunnel is not an improvement over the viaduct. However, the viaduct is NOT an option for the future. It's tunnel or surface streets. And for the majority of commuters on 99, who are not going downtown, the tunnel will be vastly better than surface streets. Furthermore, of those who do exit downtown, I see far more getting off at Western than at Seneca. That's not too far from the north exit from the tunnel.

Posted 9 months ago #
velo_nut
Member Profile

But goats?

Posted 9 months ago #
metrognome
Member Profile

velo_nut: they will be using goats to clear the shrubs and blackberry vines under the viaduct before they tear it down after the tunnel is open -- satisfied?? Bleat once for yes, twice for no.

Posted 9 months ago #
Huindekmi
Member Profile

How in the world do people coming from the north use the AVW???? I mean... there are NO downtown exits!! Only one in Belltown and one by the Stadiums! I can't believe they built something so completely useless way back when!

Posted 9 months ago #
metrognome
Member Profile

Huindekmi -- it was actually brilliant planning back then because they thought we'd all be flying around in our little personal helicopters or jetpacks by now and the AWV would make a great combination landing strip and parking lot. Turns out they were right about the parking lot ...

Posted 9 months ago #
DP
Member Profile

From the safety of their hillside redoubts they stood and watched.

They watched as if they understood that the end for the meat chewers was truly now at hand.

They watched as if foreseeing that Earth and all her treasures would soon belong to the cud chewers once more and yet again . . . forever.

http://1greengeneration.elementsintime.com/?p=1305

Posted 9 months ago #
velo_nut
Member Profile

Boom!

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

dennito: no, you should not address me as mr. mayor. for one thing, i disagree with surface/transit only to replace mainline 99.

and i find it amusing that the "yes on 1" campaign commercials go right after mcginn instead of discussing the importance of the DBT.

i understand seattle citizens needing to get behind something - anything - in order to feel like we accomplished something here. our dreams for mass transit are constantly foiled by big money, tim eyman, and austerity measures.

we can do better than DBT to fix seattle's transportation problems and traffic flow. DBT gives us the least amount of relief for the most amount of money.

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

Seattle turned down cut and cover because they didn't want to endure the traffic mess it would create.

now you want to undo the option you left on the table and create the same traffic mess with no payoff..

this is an example of short term thinking at it's worst.

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

redblack..

do you honestly believe that defeating the tunnel will induce the state and the feds to similarly fund public transportation in Seattle?

you don't get city public transportation from the same pile of money that funds state and interstate hiways:(

Posted 9 months ago #
KBear
Member Profile

JoB, that's the whole problem with this issue. Half of the tunnel opponents don't understand that defeating the tunnel will not result in increased funds for mass transit nor a rebuilt viaduct. The other half are ignorant hippies who apparently don't have jobs nor any need to commute to other parts of the city, except downtown. The tunnel opponents seem to be fixated on having a free ride to First and Seneca.

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

KBear..

i honestly believe some tunnel opponents believe it was the worst of all available options.

I agree that the tunnel was not the best option by a long shot.

but.. in true we won't vote for anything that disrupts our lives fashion.. Seattle voted the best options down.

what can you do? the tunnel is what is left.

it is approved and funded. The sooner we get it built the more likely we are not to run into those deadly cost over-runs.

I agree that the tunnel does not solve the daily downtown commute... but that's not it's purpose.
it's purpose is to get through traffic past downtown Seattle quickly and efficiently.

If you want to go downtown you get off before or after the tunnel. pretty simple really except for the traffic gridlocks at both ends.

I will miss the viaduct with all of my heart. I choose to drive it in spite of the risk because of the way my heart skips a beat as the bay reveals itself...

but the viaduct needs to come down:(

cut and cover would have been a much better option.
it's too bad so many people are just now figuring that out.

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

kbear: and half of the tunnel proponents don't realize that this thing is in the red before it even begins. the state put a cap on tolling, right? what did WSDOT do? figured in the maximum amount of tolling to fill their budget gap. still wasn't enough. the port of seattle said, "we'll shovel $300 million in" and voila! instant balanced budget. except, oops. 619 western... hmmm. what to do, what to do...? a ha! let's cut the contingency fund to 15%! and, uh... voila! instant balanced budget.

this budget is so tight it squeaks.

i'm no ignorant hippy, and i have a job - in ballard. i know full-well the importance of that through-route. and furthermore, as a union laborer, i know the importance of civil engineering and construction jobs. but i'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face, so to speak.

furthermore, yes - i know that the monies don't come from the same place. that's why we need good council representation - to deal with the state on projects like this and sweeten the pot for seattle with the things we want or feel that we need. after all, king county is the state's cash cow. other replacement options would have left more money on the table for local improvements related to that corridor.

if the city hadn't crafted that idiotic ballot measure in '07, perhaps there would have been more visible public discourse and vetting. but i'm pretty sure that that initiative was written the way it was to ensure that discovery institute and downtown seattle association could skirt democracy and get the gentrification they crave - and without coughing up any money of their own!

it's probably too late to stop the damned thing anyway. too many forces at work. but i don't like getting screwed, and having my fellow citizens tell me to just lay back and enjoy it isn't very comforting.

[edit: jo, i know that something needs to be done. i predict that the something that we're being forced to accept here is the wrong thing, though, and the consequences may well be disastrous.]

Posted 9 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

interesting question, related to transit. maybe metrognome can enlighten.

would k.c. metro run a route through the DBT? they don't currently have routes on AWV north of columbia/seneca streets. as metrognome has asserted, there isn't much demand for buses through downtown on that corridor.

if there is a metro route on 99 through downtown, will fares for that route be increased, or is metro exempt from tolling?

Posted 9 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

JoB I watched the Bremerton tunnel... AS they were demolishing the surface streets.. they were cutting, pouring, setting precast panels.. A cut and cover, properly sequenced, takes less time. Now, since the new seawall means ALL the utilities have to be relocated..you are going to dig it all up anyway... the water/sewer/electrical/gas lines all have to go. The congestion is still going to happen..with the cut and cover option..seawall, tunnel, utility relocation happen all in one operation... the surface streets along the waterfront are going to be ripped up for utility relocations just as if they had done a cut and over... and better yet... instead of trucking the tunnel debris...imagine the pounding the surface streets are going to get..do you remember 1st Ave after they trucked all the Kingdome debris.and Seahawk Stadium?....and all that surface traffic ... cut an cover uses much as an overburden AND can be barge loaded... ask redblack about the sixe of the aggregate and sand barges over in Ballard for SBSG and Inland Asphalt... a few trucks and front end loaders instead of dozens of trucks.... I disagree. This baby was designed to made "midtown" completely incacessible... (that work better than "downtownn?") Think ... more revenues to Seattle Metro..? Another way to keep the unwashed masses in complete isolation from ALL the government office buildings... Why didn't the city just build all the new Seattle City Hall at Southlake? Hmmm Paul Allen wanted it? And all the height and code variances that came with it... ? The tunnel options is just too blatantly flawed ... well at least we will have a 50 year conspiracy theory to banter about... when revenues fall short, cost overruns balloon, and we all sit at stop lights, along with the metro buses...pumping carbon into the air....

Posted 9 months ago #
johnnyblegs
Member Profile

I was all for the tunnel. The choice was made for us voters. Progress was made all on its own with getting the process done. People hated the idea but at least it was the one on the table getting done. I was pissed at McGinn for running a campaign against it, then back peddling saying that he wouldn't do anything to prevent it if he was voted in, then going against his word after he was in office.
.
Then I found out that there wasn't any downtown exits. Sure, people would argue that there is - one in SODO and the other at the Center. WTH? But if I was going to SODO I would just take the 1st ave or 4th ave exit off the WS bridge. I ride the 54 every week day and the Seneca exit is the best thing in the world for all buses on 99.
.
People say that there's nothing this vote will do. It won't stop anything. The city will take another look at it - evaluate. Hopefully when this thing is rejected they will redesign the project and put in at least ONE mid-downtown exit - not to mention some money towards metro. Then I'd vote for it. Until then...I'm a patient person. I can wait.

Posted 9 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

redblack has the right idea.. lets cut off the exits..start the tolls... so we can get a preview of coming attractions... ugh.

Posted 9 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

johnnyblegs..
and how exactly do you expect them to design that midtown exit? parking garage style?

kootchman..
cut and cover was a great idea
and it's not an option now

redblack
if it really is this or nothing
are you really willing to deal with the consequences of nothing?
i don't think so.

Posted 9 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^