Deep Bore Tunnel Public Forum Fri at the Market

[inactive]

Thank you so much TD West Seattle –

Appreciate you jumping in and clarifying. Really.

Share This

[JoB]

the marketing guy… Dave Petrick founder of Citizens for Seattle Tube…

now he IS interesting…

http://www.pdsinnovation.com/bio.php

Share This

[JoB]

TD West Seattle…

thanks for posting.. i am not trying to be dismissive…

i just think there is a whole lot of information that is being glossed over here that is really important to disclose…

all i did was go to the website and follow links from that website…

i have no doubt that there is no direct money making happening at this point.. but it wasn’t too hard to find out where the marketing and political connections driving this come from with just a limited amount of research this afternoon.

And.. i have to say that i question the wisdom of spending more money and delaying the process further at the eleventh hour without some serious discussions of the implications of this that goes far beyond basic plumbing and century old engineering information.

I would guess that a breakdown on the geotechnical information you need to proceed could be had for a very limited amount of money from either of the top local geotechnical firms here in town since they have already studied most of the issues involved through working with other projects… and did work for the viaduct replacement assessments.

a less expensive option would be soliciting a volunteer.. i would bet that an advanced geotech engineering student at the University of Washington could do a search that would produce the basic information you need off public sources in a relatively small period of time…

This is a far more complicated issue than is being presented… And a far more expensive option as well.

Perhaps that is why the governor’s office suggested a connection with Cascadia..

they have a plan in place that will pay for the work…

Share This

[Gina]

The Battery St tunnel gets very deep puddles in it every time it rains. Deep enough to float a Volkswagen. If the city does not maintain that tunnel, I don’t feel reassured that a deeper tunnel would be maintained.

Share This

[waterworld]

So much has been posted here and in a related thread suggesting bias or a hidden financial agenda on the part of the Tube promoters. I think it’s worth pointing out that one of the chief critics on the board, who comments that geotechnical information could easily be gotten from a local firm, has a family member in that business. My only point is that it’s so easy to make these kinds of assumptions and so difficult to discern the reality.

Speaking for myself, I do have a lot of questions, and many concerns about costs, yet I nonetheless appreciate the addition of a completely different kind of option to the mix. If, as the promoters suggest, they lack answers to hard questions about costs and risks because they lack the funding to do the necessary studies, then time will (I hope quickly) help us vet the proposal.

A couple of things also seem clear. The seawall is a critical issue, regardless of what viaduct replacement option we adopt. While that can be budgeted elsewhere, the cost will not be eliminated by the Tube proposal. This is a neutral issue, though, since we pay for it regardless of what viaduct-replacement option we choose.

Also, I checked the USGS map of soils in the area, a huge file available at

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1252/of2005-1252.pdf

as well as a kind of crappy Seattle map of liquefaction zones, available at

http://www.seattle.gov/emergency_mgt/pdf/Shiva_11_Liquefaction_and_Slide_Areas.pdf

and it appears from both that the Tube path may be through liquefaction zones. As others have already mentioned, though, there are already two or three tunnels in the downtown area through these same geologic zones. For all I know, the soils issues are more of cost problem than a safety problem.

I’m far from being on board, but I have an open mind about it.

Share This

[captainDave]

Waterworld: The Seattle Tube route appears to be north of the Seattle Fault Zone and east of the waterfront liquefaction zones. Also, I suspect liquefaction zones may not be as troublesome for modern bored tunnels since they are closer to being neutrally buoyant than above ground structures. – In other words, they may have a tendency to float upward rather than sink if anything. But I am not a geotech engineer. However, just think of the jellow the SF BART tunnel runs through and it has survived several earthquakes.

Thank you for posting those links.

Here is a link to the original shoreline of Elliot Bay (It is also a large file – You have to select the dot on the map for Elliot Bay and wait a while): http://riverhistory.ess.washington.edu/tsheets/framedex.htm

JoB: Regarding the finance issue. It is all grass roots funding so far. Actual cash out of pocket is about six bucks per month for the web hosting for the last two years. All the programing photography and graphics I did myself except for the great work that Grace Architects has recently contributed at no charge. It really did not take a whole lot of marketing work to get this in the media. As mater of fact, it was KIRO who recently approached me in mid December asking if I would do an interview on the Dori Monson Show. There is no well connected PR firm or deep pocket ad agency behind this. People just want to see a better solution than what’s on the table now.

I first publicized the idea in an article I wrote for PugetSoundMagazine.com two years ago for which I am an editor. Puget Sound Magazine is dedicated to covering water centric news and local travel information. The viaduct issue has a direct impact on the Seattle waterfront and Seattle’s relationship with Puget Sound. What was originally intended to be an inspiring article, has now developed into a movement though the encouragement of friends, neighbors and a few astute media folks browsing Google. I, along with many others living around the city stand to benefit if the viaduct is replaced with a bored tunnel for all the reasons I mention on the Seattle Tube web site. As you have found, I have been involved with many kinds of businesses over the years providing unique solutions to complex problems. However, the Seattle Tube project I started does not have a paying client at this time. You should think about coming to our scheduled public meetings and meet the people involved to hopefully dispel your suspicions of our efforts.

Share This

[JoB]

CaptainDave…

thanks for speaking to us as adults…

Your article in PugetSoundMagazine.. which i occassionally read btw.. was two years ago…

if this option were a cost effective option for the city, why has it only grown legs now?

We have been given a mandate to find a short term solution to the viaduct replacement…

how do you expect a bored tunnel at least three times the length of the one for the light rail and bored in much more challenging conditions to be investigated, approved and built within that time frame?

When you think it will take less than 12 years.. are you thinking just construction or actual process from beginning to end.. since the time required for the investigation and approval process often exceeds the time required for construction?

at best, all this option will do for the traffic gridlock during construction that you are throwing up as a reason for investigating this will be to postpone the traffic gridlock while this is fought out politically and is or isn’t constructed.

and then there is that ugly question that everyone seems to want to avoid.. how will we pay for this?

One of the factors narrowing the current replacement options to two was the need to pay the difference between what the governor has budgeted and the actual costs..

That is where Cascadia and their connections to the company constructing the light rail bored tunnel come in, isn’t it… and their answer is tolls.

Ask those who live in West Seattle if they would like to pay a toll to drive from here to downtown every day… or to access I-90 quickly and conveniently..

barring some money falling from the federal sky and our governor deciding to spend it on this transportation project.. that is what it is going to take to finance a bored tunnel option.

i don’t count on the federal money not having public tansportation strings tied to it.. and public transit doesn’t appear to be one of the features of this proposal… it’s all about how to move individuals in cars more quickly and efficiently…

I am not a conspiracy theorist.. far from it… but i do follow the money.. that is the business interests.. and the talent… that appears to be you…

and have a deep suspicion of anyone offering “simple” solutions to complex problems.

in the current financial climate, i would be far more inclined to back a tunnel option that gave us the added benefit of reinforcing the sea wall than one which would still create the same gridlock problems and leave us with the cost of the reinforcing seawall.

and that’s before any geotechnical considerations… which will have to be faced regardless of which viaduct alternative is built.

We live in an earthquake zone… and clay is at best a bowl full of jelly during an earthquake…

Now.. putting one of those bored tunnels under the bay.. as they mostly did in San Francisco… might get traction:)

Share This

[captainDave]

JoB: I have to go to work to pay the mortgage, but I will try to answer these questions sometime tonight to the best of my laymen’s ability. Lots of good questions. Are you planning on coming to our public forum tomorrow night? We will have a couple of experts who can answer some of these questions better than I.

Share This

[JoB]

CaptainDave…

i don’t know…

nor am i sure i would welcome this burr under your saddle if i were you:)

we will see how i feel tomorrow.. if i am up to it i may attend… if only to meet you:)

btw.. welcome to the West Seattle Blog Forum…

Share This

[charlabob]

KUOW had an interesting discussion of tunnel options on Weekday this morning: http://www.kuow.org/program.php?id=16672

I have to admit I haven’t followed thid closely; I have trouble dealing with the compulsive inability of Seattleites to “disagree and commit” so I assume whatever they decide this month will be re- and un-done many times before I drive through a tunnel or down a street. Having said that, I came away from the broadcast favoring the tunnel. (Much to my surprise).

Share This

[JoB]

charlabob.. thanks for posting this link.. i just finished listening to the broadcast and can see why you came away favoring the tunnel…

but i had real moment of disconnect when they talked about where the proposed tunnel would go.

According to this broadcast.. the deep bore tunnel option that is still under consideration would basically go under 1st and 2nd.. starting around King St Station and ending the other side of battery tunnel… and it does not appear to include egress to downtown Seattle…

On that option all but 30% of the possible route has deep core samples already…. and is projected to cost around 2 billion… and would cause minimal disruption of current traffic patterns… and thus minimal disruption to current businesses…

in comparison to the open trench tunnel option which would have basically shut down the waterfront for 10 years…

in the meantime, improvements to I-5 (mainly non-construction changes if i understood them correctly.. but possibly including closing the senaca st exit…) were projected to divert about 30% of the current viaduct load…

if i read things correctly, it seems we may be discussing two different proposals here…

So Captain Dave.. what gives?

Share This

[Huindekmi]

The tunnel proposal has just as much egress to downtown Seattle as the elevated replacement that made the “final two”.

Somewhere along the way, the vetting committee determined that an exit/entrance in SODO and another on one side or the other of the Battery Street Tunnel is more than enough.

Regardless of the solution implemented, we are assured to have less capacity and reduced access to downtown. <_<

Share This

[villagegreen]

Huindekmi – that is exactly my understanding. None of the options have an exit at Seneca (or anywhere in the downtown core).

Share This

[inactive]

Folks might want to envision the inclusion of our new Ferry District in any discussions of capacity and access to not just downtown but on the Eastside too. That would be amazing to see that level of cooperation and leadership operating, however, wouldn’t it also be amazing to see the Demonstration Routes stepped up a few years ahead of their originally proposed debut?

I think it would be friggin’ fantabulous to include ferries immediately in a new “surface” scenario. Heck, if this much money is going to be spent toward a vision of a spectacular waterfront, then let’s just bloody go for it across the board. We’ve lost the Monorail, it seems, so let’s supplant it with a mosquito fleet. Now. While the momentum is there.

Find the money, docks and whatever else is needed before the cruise ships growth absorbs all the “motorized” carrying capacity, if you will, for sustainable transportation on the Sound. Though it does seem to me that the cruise ships on the Sound seem to be doing a good job of not discharging in the sound, or even within State waters.

If you haven’t heard enough already, here are a few other sites to check out:

http://www.portseattle.org/seaport/cruise/

http://kingcountyferries.org/

I linked the Vancouver BC water transportation agencies that I was aware of on the post above. Maybe take a gander at those, as well as the above.

I realize none of what I say here on the forum matters to the Big Deciders, but who knows what the tipping point of an idea is, really?

Share This

[inactive]

About the downtown exit thing –

I saw one of the 1st Ave tunnel promoters on TV. He said not only will funding issues be addressed, but also that the exits can easily be reevaluated, paraphrasing his words. This was right after the decision, so don’t hold me to verbatim.

Share This

[captainDave]

JoB: I have tried to answer your questions below, but best to come to the meeting tomorrow for better clarification:

Why hasn’t this idea been considered until now? I don’t know exactly why a 6th avenue tunnel alignment has not been discussed. It might simply be that WSDOT is a reactionary bureaucracy doing what they were told to do – that is replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. They or anyone else was not told to look for other alignment possibilities outside the box. Sometimes, it is easier for an outsider to see possibilities since they are not aware of the bureaucratic boundaries.

How can it be studied and built in less than 12 years? – The big delays occur when so many disagree. If we can solve 90% of everyone’s issues, than I believe it will go rather quickly. Like the narrows bridge, sound transit system, Brightwater tunnel, etc. If we have a clear collective vision and desire, it will happen faster. Why do you think the conditions are more challenging than the Sound Transit Tunnel? I am told the substrate conditions are similar.

How do we pay for it? I am far from a funding expert. But because of our 6th avenue alignment and potential to reduce traffic on I-5 along with our proposal to carry a rail line under the car decks, we stand a chance of obtaining funds from federal sources more than the waterfront option does. There is also the option for the city to sell or lease some of the waterfront property to offset some costs. I hate the idea of toll though.

Suspicions: Again, I nor any of my family has any financial ties or employment with any government agency, contractor, tunneling company, downtown property owner, cruise line or any other major corporate entity that would immensely benefit from influencing the viaduct decision. However, I am private citizen and not a politician, so it really should not matter anyway. You say that your daughter is an expert and discusses the seawall issue with you frequently? Is she employed by someone who has anything to do with the seawall? If so, it may appear that you have your own agenda here. :)

Gridlock: we are proposing that the existing viaduct remains in use until construction is completed. As you might remember, studies and plans were done to look at what it would take to reinforce the existing viaduct with external steal structures at a fraction of the cost of new construction. I have had discussions with the folks who worked on that project and they have convinced me that the viaduct can be kept safe to use for quite some time if necessary. It does NOT have the design flaws of the ill fated Cypress Viaduct that fell in the San Francisco earthquake.

Simple is a relative term: I am told that seven different government agencies need to coordinate to do anything on the waterfront before a project even starts – that dose not include the utility companies and railroad who also has certain rights on the waterfront. Any transportation infrastructure adaptation of this magnitude is complex compared to smaller scale projects, but in relative terms, boring a tunnel under 6th avenue seems to be a cake walk compared to all the issues along the waterfront. Our sixth avenue route is through dry, stable public land on the entire route.

Earthquake: Again, our high and dry” route is well above the water table and sediment along the waterfront and is not in a liquefaction zone as indicated on the seismic maps.

Seawall: again it is not a transportation concern if we tunnel under 6th avenue, therefor the city does not have to spend as much on it to make it secure for things like a bicycle and foot traffic.

Two Tunnels: Yes, there are two different alignments being discussed. Cascadia is talking about more of a compromise that can be sort of worked in after the surface street option is bought off on. The Cascadia tunnel is a single tube, 2-lane in each direction with a alignment on first or 2nd Ave and a connection somehow with the existing viaduct route. The Seattle Tube is a complete 6 lane + rail reroute of SR99 onto the 6th ave. right of way that solves other transportation problems too. Think of the Cascadia Tunnel as the “happy meal”, and ours as the “whole enchilada”. Either tunnel is better than the two options on the table and both will be discussed at tomorrows meeting.

Huindekmi: The ultimate rendition of the Seattle Tube 6th avenue tunnel would have an egress in the middle of downtown near Seneca. You will have to come to the meeting to learn more about that, but it is a very cool discovery made by a survey done by Grace Architects.

westseattledood: Totally agree with improving the ferry district and a renewal of the old Mosquito fleet runs, but that is probably a subject for another thread. I think vancouver has an excellent balance of recreational, transit , and port facilities along its shoreline. It was largely the inspiration for to spend time re-thinking Seattle’s situation.

Share This

[inactive]

CaptainDave:

Can you speak to the “Expressway” concept in detail so that folks are introduced to that piece of the 6th Ave. scenario? I think that is what it was called – the hi-speed freeway proposed over 6th Ave which is specifically addressing the WS and Valley commuters, yes?

Where might the tolls go in all of this?

It’s not been explicitly mentioned here yet. Details would be good.

Share This

[captainDave]

Our proposed SoDo Expressway would extend from an intersection on the First Avenue rail yard bridge at Diagonal St. to just south of the I-90 ramps where it would descend down to the tunnel entrance. It would span over the West Seattle freeway (like 99) and remain at the same elevation until it cleared the new transit rail bridge (roughly the same elevation as I-5. Between the Sound Transit bridge and the tunnel, it would be about the same elevation as the West Seattle Freeway. There is about 100 feet of city right of way down 6th avenue south which is plenty of room for a up to six lanes + emergency lanes in a side by side configuration. However, engineers may consider a double deck structure also. 6th Avenue South would remain available under the structure.

We envision a northbound onramp off the eastbound west seattle freeway at the new 4th avenue exit planed by SDOT and a southbound off-ramp to the westbound lanes of the West Seattle Freeway. There is an article on our blog (blog.seattletube.org) about how we propose to integrate with the new west Seattle Freeway project now underway. The west seattle ramp to the SoDo expressway would be a “fly-over” which will allow higher speeds then the existing 99 loop ramp.

We also are proposing a full interchange at I-90 for both north and southbound directions. This is one of the key advantages of our plan. it will allow for West Seattle and Ballard traffic to access I-90 without getting on I-5. This should have the effect of reducing the I-5 bottleneck and the Mercer Mess.

The SoDo Expressway can be constructed with a cost efficient functional design with less regard to aesthetics than the waterfront expressway idea since it is situated in an industrial area.

Of course traffic engineers will need to determine weather 4 lanes or 6 lanes are needed to carry through-town and I-90 bound traffic, but initial findings appear to indicate that there is enough room to do all this largely within public lands.

The south end alignment of the SoDo Expressway to first avenue south works better than the existing SR99 route because there are less lights and no railroad crossings.

More details available at tomorrows public forum at the Market.

Share This

[inactive]

Hmmm..lots of details CaptainDave, but ya’ know schematics would definitely help for folks such as I. Well, maybe just me – who knows.

Has anybody supporting this or at Grace stepped up and put drawings online? Surely in it’s conceptualization, drawings were made, yes?

Or link and mark up a google map, or something, eh?

Share This

[captainDave]

westseattledood: Here is a pdf of the overall Seattle Tube alignment scheme.

http://seattleTube.org/blogContent/seattle%20tube%20-%20draft2_small.pdf

We have done lots of detail drawings, measurements and overlays on various sections of the route as a fit check so to speak. But we don’t want to put off engineers who have much more knowledge of the rules and regulations regarding traffic structures. Our job we feel is to provide a strong system concept, but to allow for as much latitude as possible for the traffic, transit, geotech and other civil engineers to work out the details. Our goal is to get this on the table for an Environmental Impact Study along with the other potential tunnel alignment suggested by Cascadia.

Share This

[JoB]

CaptainDave..

My daughter has been technically employed by the US govt for the past 4 years since that is who funded her initial PhD grant at Virginia Tech.

She is now technically employed by the state of Virginia since that is who is now funding her PhD grant at Virginia Tech.

She is working on deep soil mixing… and that work is being done in connection with The US Army Corp of Engineers for the levies in New Orleans. She is also doing contract work for the corp on a levy project that i think is being done in Alabama.

Her goal for her PhD project is to create a new simplified tool for field engineers trying to calculate the properties of deep soil in their projects. (ok.. that’s a really really simplified picture of what she is trying to do…)

I have not named the geotech engineering company she worked for here or the one she worked for in Denver who now have an office here i think or the other two geotech engineering firms she spoke very highly of to avoid any conflict of interest.

Her only connection to them at present is a deep and abiding mutual respect, the friendship that grew out of that and a continuing interest in the science that makes our homes, bridges, freeways and dams safer.

At present, it is far more likely that she would be employed by the University than by one of those firms when and if she returns to Seattle… but at this point any talk about possible employment is just a wild guesstimate.

Sorry.. but i wanted to be sure you had full disclosure…

i’d publish her name too because i am really proud of her accomplishments and she googles really well.. but that would disclose the name of the engineering firm she worked for here.

You can find them.. and the other good goetechnical firms in the Seattle area by looking for the companies employed to do analysis for the viaduct replacement by WSDOT and SDOT. I am not sure.. but i think they were even employed on the light rail project.. i don’t remember if they got any of the tunnel work.

My bias towards good geotech work is a desire to drive over bridges and through tunnels without worrying what will happen to that structure if an earthquake hits while i am there….

so yes, you could say i have a vested interest… the same one shared by everyone who uses those structures.

My daughter’s dinnertime conversation only served to educate me about both the complexity of the issues and the need to look at the big picture…

is that full disclosure? it’s certainly far more than most of the people reading this thread wanted to know ;(

btw.. i did like how you phrased your disclosure.. that you did not currently have a paying client on this project:)

and i gotta ask.. who paid for all that work you just mentioned in post 45. did grace architects donate their work for that? somehow i think that the donations for this go beyond the cost of a website ;~>

so what does full disclosure mean to you?

it doesn’t really matter because i am not engaged in a pissing contest but a search for the kind of information that would let people make informed decisions…

What this city lacks is a comprehensive transit plan which includes public transit and roads… and in this city.. waterways.

While your tunnel proposal may or may not be a good proposal on it’s own… it certainly does not speak to the whole…

And we are still left asking the million dollar question.. who will pay for this?

The governor’s budget is 2.8 billion… total… which won’t cover the cost of the 6th av tunnel project…

so where is the money going to come from for the second project linking west seattle to I-90… or the one linking to 100… those interchanges marked as possible on your diagram…

and I am not entirely sure i see how they are an improvement on the current direct route from west seattle to I-5 to I-90 once they too fill with traffic.

the best case scenario for the cost of the bored tunnel along the 1st av corridor is 2 billion… and as you have pointed out to us that tunnel is not nearly the breadth or scope of the tunnel proposed along 6th…

while i admit that the layered rail access might well qualify your project for inclusion when it comes to federal dollars… it’s no guarantee..

and the “sweetener” you are throwing in for West Seattle isn’t part of that project at all.

Nor does your project address the waterfront issues… or the seawall… which are both pressing concerns for the City of Seattle.

anyone want to go to that meeting tonight with me?

this could be entertaining ;)))))

Share This

[captainDave]

JoB:

I am told that $2 billion for the first avenue tunnel alignment is a wrong number for comparison since it includes a range of unrelated issues. Cascadia’s experts conclude that tunneling is $600 million per mile for boring a tunnel. This is a number consistent around the world with other tunnel projects using the same equipment. The first avenue Tunnel proposed by Cascadia is estimated to cost $1.2 billion as with the 6th avenue route if we do only one tube.

Both alignments are talking about using same diameter bore. it’s just that we would like to see six lanes + 2 rail lines rather than just 4 lanes. But that is up to the engineers to figure out. According to extensive research work done by Cascadia regarding cost, a bored tunnel option is within the cost range of the other options. Best way to get a reality check on bored tunnel costs is to spend an evening reviewing TunnelBuilder.com They list all the active tunnel projects and costs around the world.

There are some who would like people to believe that bored tunnels are more expensive then they really are. For example, Frank Chops today apparently made a number of blatantly wrong statements to the press regarding the bored tunnel option – saying that it was turned down by voters (implying that it was the same as the cut-n-cover tunnel) and that it would be much more expensive than his waterfront viaduct shopping mall idea.

Grace Architects has done the work so far on a pro bono basis.

Look forward to meeting you (and anyone else) for a lively discussion this evening at Pike Place Market!

Share This

[JoB]

CaptainDave…

yes, the numbers for the bored tunel option do include other costs.. like the 30% of the proposed route that has not yet had deep core sampling.. and the cost of the environmental statement.. and .. and..

and of course there are the costs incurred evaluating the project…

Since the taxpayer ends up paying for all of those costs in the final bill.. such as the costs we will incur if you convince people to put enough pressure on the governor to evaluate your plan before making a decision… it’s only fair to include them in the tab…

i will try to make it to the market tonight but am struggling with an eye condition.. so we will see.

Share This

[captainDave]

JoB: The cost of getting it wrong would be devastating to the region. Seattle politicians have departed from the strategy of having a tax base reliant on self sustained industry to one that relies on escalating property values. I believe that this house of cards will fall when people can’t get to work and businesses can’t ship goods effectively.

Share This

[JoB]

captaindave..

you just gave a cogent argument for making sure that we get the most benefit for our dollar…

if we were to go for a deep bore tunnel.. the one along 1st is substantially shorter.. and still goes from point a to point b…

At 600 million per mile, one would think every inch counts…

and if it is the same size.. could still carry the same amount of traffic and trains…

so.. one has to ask.. what is the advantage of drilling further to run this under 6th?

i was hoping for a report the meeting.. my eyes were too inflamed to drive…

did you get answers to the million dollar question.. how will we pay for this?

Share This

[Author]

Posts