34 Replies to "Video: New tunnel simulation clips from WSDOT"

• TheKingofNorway August 10, 2009 (11:47 am)

  Heh. I wish I lived in a Seattle where the traffic always moved that fast, where there were only a few cars on the road on the sunniest of days.

• DALYDBL August 10, 2009 (11:48 am)

  That is a pleasant simulation of a waterfront dream. However, my main concern is the lack of elevated, over-the-street pedestrian bridges. This would allow for fewer stoplights, less congestion, and a quicker route for pedestrians as well as motorists. Even if lifts had to be installed on each elevated crosswalk to make them easy for handicapped and families to use, it would be more economically sound than having so much pollution and time wasted on all of these stop lights.

• viilagegreen August 10, 2009 (12:05 pm)

  You must dream small. Those are some sweet simulations that could be a reality in the near future. But being Seattle, we should elect Mike McGinn as mayor and go back to the drawing board. Why spend money on a solution now when we can spend it on further studies, and whining, and bickering, and delay…

• Grazer August 10, 2009 (12:16 pm)

  Does anyone know if they are planning for anything like the monorail or light rail to be extended in those areas? Also, if the current government (see the latest DOD report) forecast is for the port of Seattle to be under water in 15 years how are they planning for that? How are they planning the new sea wall with that information? We are planning for the future with no concern for what the science is telling us. It’s time to get very honest with the populace.

• E-merge-ncy August 10, 2009 (12:18 pm)

  Having a merge-in point within the tunnel doesn’t seem to account for area drivers’ lack of this particular skill.

• Christopher Boffoli August 10, 2009 (12:22 pm)

  I love these animations. It makes Seattle look so clean and pretty.

• MAS August 10, 2009 (12:23 pm)

  Yeah TheKingofNorway, this doesn’t look like the 100,000 plus / day traffic on the viaduct we all know and fail to love.

• mc August 10, 2009 (1:04 pm)

  Yea, the simulations look great. However, I think they left one major piece out of the picture: the toll booths (or electronic tolling system).

• MrJT August 10, 2009 (1:10 pm)

  There are no potholes either.

• dawsonct August 10, 2009 (1:26 pm)

  That was certainly cool, though there were a couple of unrealistic parts in the second video: first, only stopping at one light along the waterfront. As with the rest of Seattle, unless you are driving 10 over or 15 under the limit you won’t see more than a couple of green lights in a row. Second, towards the end of the video, as the cars were entering SR 99 NONE of the slower cars entering the road on the right immediately moved all the way left without using a signal or increasing their speed. (Well, they ARE taking a left on S. Lucile, so gotta get ready).
  Aside from those minor quibbles it looks great. I am really anticipating the eventual removal of that “see” wall; what an improvement.

• dawsonct August 10, 2009 (1:27 pm)

  There WILL be potholes if we fail to maintain our infrastructure; that’s part of our civic responsibility.

• luvleggs August 10, 2009 (1:45 pm)

  Brilliant work, I mean who needs exits that actually depart into the main area most people are headed. It looks like an express lane for people who live in either south seattle or Ballard and commute to the other. You’ll also notice all the bicyclists have been killed as there are none anywhere to be found, just glorious cars.

• WSMom August 10, 2009 (1:50 pm)

  I can imagine the Sculpture Park continuing down the waterfront gracing the open spaces with art and interest. I’m loving the visuals and hope that we can make this a reality. Sure will miss the Seneca Street exit though.

• Al August 10, 2009 (2:05 pm)

  I was at the SBAB (Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board) meeting last week and the group met with SDOT and saw these videos. The SBAB asked some similar questions to what is asked above (I am not a member of SBAB but just attended as a guest):
  1) Crosswalks. There will be no additional elevated crosswalks but an improved one to access the ferry facility. Reasons are costs and that they work now in any case. SDOT stated that with this change an upgrade can be made of all the crosswalks to make them safer for all users.
  2) Stoplights – will be on every block. Speed limit 30 mph. Estimated 25K users per day, similar to 1st Ave.
  3) No light rail planned so far. Streetcar line to be added down 1st Ave to Stadium area.
  4) Bus only lane as bus exits at Royal Brougham through first several lights at reconfigured street grid. Bus would then be on-street either up 1st or down the new Boulevard. Route not decided. There may be a bus only lane at the entrance southbound as well.

• Al August 10, 2009 (2:15 pm)

  Comment for cyclists: There are good MUPs planned for each side of Marginal, which will be a new “frontage” street, to roughly Royal Brougham. That configuration looked promising and would actually be a good improvement over what is there now. Getting through the construction will be difficult.

  There are bike lanes planed along either side of the new Boulevard, in the “door zone” and to the right of load/unload and bus stop zones. This is predicted to be a major tourist destination. The north area of the Boulevard has Sharrows.

  The SBAB has in the recent past been interested in seeing a Bicycle Boulevard in this area since there does seem to be space for one.

  SBAB is looking into the current bike lane/Sharrow configuration now. For input contact SBAB at bikeboard@seattle.gov, walkandbike@seattle.gov and http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/contactus.htm for input.

• Al August 10, 2009 (2:16 pm)

  I meant bike lanes “to the left” of load/unload and bus stop zones.

• V August 10, 2009 (3:14 pm)

  It looks very nice but it’s unrealistic. I can just imagine what the traffic will be like especially, if there is an accident in the Tunnel. I feel for the people who live outside of downtown Seattle. It’s going to take them forever to get home.

• glendafrench August 10, 2009 (3:17 pm)

  As a bus rider who loves how quickly I am shuttled from the Junction to the first stop on Seneca, it looks like my bus will take an earlier onramp before the bored tunnel – which dumps it into . . . surface street traffic near the stadium? Am I seeing that right? Oh joy! Water Taxi year round I say.

• Gordon August 10, 2009 (3:40 pm)

  The tunnel is a loser for two reasons:

  1. ONLY TWO LANES IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. The current volume demands a minimum of three lanes in both directions. The estimated cost is roughly $4.2Bil for an antiquated solution for today’s transportation needs, what is it really going to cost? The big dig was estimatd at $6.0Bil in 2006 dollars, after adjusting for inflation, the actual bil to date is $14.6Bil.

  With the currentplan, Seattlites are going to be on responsible for any cost over-runs. Based on the cost over-runs with the Big Dig, any thought that the city will be stuck with additional bllions should get the attention of even the most progressive Seattle resident.

  2. NO DOWNTOWN OFF OR ON RAMPS. The Denny regrade and Pioneer sqaure districts will be clogged with traffic, noise and polution impacting small business in these areas. Tourism dollars and those small businesses will be sacrified in these areas for the sake of the Mayor’s lasting legacy called the waterfront.

  To quote President Obama, “You can put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.”

  Rebuild the surface option or take another look at a suspension bridge over the waterfront. It is only our financial futures and freedom at stake.

• Al August 10, 2009 (3:56 pm)

  Glendafrench you may want to make sure your opinion about the Water Taxi is heard. There was a link to it here on WSB not long ago. There are some people who are advocating ending the Water Taxi ASAP…

• grr August 10, 2009 (4:03 pm)

  lolol..they SOOO should have put in some potholes, worn out lane stripes, a bicyclist or two going the wrong way, some homeless peeps walking, and some graffitti in the animation!!! Maybe an ‘I Heart the Chunnel’ poster as well…

• austin August 10, 2009 (4:10 pm)

  Nothing that the city does along the stretch of waterfront in question is going to satisfy everyone, and there will be enormous complaining regardless of what happens.

• Pete August 10, 2009 (4:55 pm)

  The second video does not really depict soem recent changes. If you notice as you go along surface Alaska St it forces you up onto SR99 by the stadiums. There has been a change to allow you to continue along the waterfront so that you do not have to go up onto SR99 unless you choose to. Also, lets remember that the total figures being mentioned are for the entire project not just the tunnel. For those that don’t want the tunnel what will your plan cost? Do the math and surface streets will eventually cost as much or more than the tunnel option. We get so many more options for getting to and through downtown with the tunnel than with the options. Keep reading and learning about this exciting transportation choice.

• Carter August 10, 2009 (6:30 pm)

  Gordon, I second your comments!

• JIm August 10, 2009 (7:32 pm)

  I like the bus that catches some air on Aurora at Aloha St. in the first video. Must be a rapid ride bus.

• wseye August 10, 2009 (8:01 pm)

  Those are some very good animations. One thing they don’t mention is the full lane size in the new configuration, unlike those tight lanes we have to navigate on the viaduct currently, which are especially fun when there is a big truck next to you in a tight turn.

• Michael August 10, 2009 (11:15 pm)

  This is going to be GREAT.
  .
  Of special note to us in WS is the DEDICATED BUS LANE that splits off toward downtown northbound.
  .
  And anyone griping about “ONLY TWO LANES” should not be talking about a “surface option”: if fewer lanes slows us down, imagine what 15-20 blocks of stoplights will do!
  .
  Let’s get it built!

• Michael August 10, 2009 (11:18 pm)

  Oh, and anybody still referring to the “Big Dig” is massively and sadly out of touch. Nothing a little remedial reading won’t help though (like what the “Big Dig” actually was).

• Larry August 11, 2009 (7:56 am)

  I noticed the absence of the toll booths as well (lets not talk about those pesky tolls) sorry poor folks this simulation is the closest you are going to get to use the tunnel. Also all the rail lines are missing the sim wouldn’t look so good with a freight train in the middle.

• RPH August 11, 2009 (8:29 am)

  What a joke! How is it, that in seven years, all of Seattle’s traffic and industrial blight will miraculously disappear as depicted in these video fantasies? Absence of toll booths? How about absence of reality? Welcome to Cartoon Land.

• Gurn August 11, 2009 (12:35 pm)

  I’m sorry to say this, but I’m beginning to lose my faith in the passion of my fellow West Seattle residents. I don’t believe all of us should think alike…not at all. But I do feel that the relative inaction around the viaduct replacement by our citizens has been appalling. We see these animations and criticize them but, in reality, the scoping meetings, etc weren’t exactly jammed with people providing (and following up on) their PROACTIVE ideas/demands of our community. I’ve said it before that this issue is one of the most important facing WS in the past 50 yrs and one the will greatly impact our relationship with the rest of the city for decades to come….yes, I believe it’s that big of a deal. In the grand scheme of things, smooth access to downtown for 2 years is incredibly shortsighted if, in the grand scheme of things, it’s a flawed solution thereafter. Can you imagine explaining to your children’s children why you didn’t more aggressively fight against a roadway that compressed traffic by 3 lanes in each direction down to 2? And, yes…take away two existing exits? (Does anyone know the main reason the Downtown Seattle Merchants Association started years ago was to demand that the Seneca Street exit be added to the Viaduct???)

  So, in absence of a real solution here…I’m reaching to a possible outside source: New Obama Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood for possible sanity. Gregoire is passionate about the Obama cabinet and various Beltway influences…perhaps someone there with more of a historical perspective can talk some sense…nobody in SDOT is.

• Georgia August 11, 2009 (4:28 pm)

  Am I the only one who noticed the lack of parking in this video? What happened to all of the reasonably priced parking that is currently under the viaduct? Oh wait, that’s right, as a mother of three who takes the kids to the Aquarium and the waterfront to play, I am supposed to take my 3 kids, a double stroller, diaper bag, lunch bag, handbag, as well various toys and books for the ride on some sort of mass transit. Looks like I’ll be cancelling my membership.

• Echoeversky August 15, 2009 (8:40 am)

  This will be the most expensive aquarium ever built when (not if) the seawall fails and this tunnel fills. And all we got is these beautiful videos produced on our collective dime.

  Love the big green running icons on the side.

  You should hear the Parking Enforcement officers WTF as to where are all the people going to park. Issues raised and swept away.

  The reason why all that historical buildings will look all nice and shiny is that they will all be immensely more valuable, torn down, and rebuilt.

  All of Mayor McCheese’s buddies are really looking forward to unobstructed views of the sound.

• dawsonct August 24, 2009 (10:19 am)

  So we should keep the waterfront ugly in order to spite the landowners to the East of the viaduct? So many assumptions based on misinformation in your post, echo, I don’t know where to start.

  The seawall WILL fail, and soon if we don’t start this project before it happens. Seawall replacement is PART of the overall plan.
  The tunnel is mostly aligned uphill from the bay, so unless sea levels rise 50-60 ft. it should remain fairly dry.
  Having trouble finding your favorite free parking? Well, tough, as citizens we shouldn’t be encouraging single-occupancy vehicle use in any case. Pay for the convenience; realistically you already do.

  You even have a problem with the icons directing people to the emergency exits!? I think the echoing you hear is all in your head.

Sorry, comment time is over.