Slog - Comments on Re: The Tunnel Is Dead

Comment by Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 18:55:44 -0800

I wish someone would point out that the sense of urgency to replace the viaduct has been created not by the damage from the Nisqually quake, but by WSDOT's opportunistic use of the minor damage sustained by the structure during that event to justify a long-sought megaproject to increase capacity through that corridor (and keep a bunch of WSDOT road-builders employed). Take a look at the entirely-too-minimal information WSDOT has provided about the semi-annual inspections they've been doing on the structure since 2001. The issue with this structure is entirely about a small section directly across from Colman Dock. Has WSDOT shut that section for a short period of time to accomplish the necessary repairs, at a cost of perhaps a few million? No - they've been too busy drawing up plans for a massive replacement of the entire structure.

Comment by Kush

Kush — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:13:30 -0800

Upgrade/retrofit - maybe now we'll suddenly get much lower cost numbers for the fix we should have done years ago.

And I don't think Seattle can tear down a State Highway with Federal funds - ECB isn't there a snow story you could report on?

Comment by GoodGrief

GoodGrief — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:16:09 -0800

Eff the WSDOT engineers -- let them take their money and screw up the 520 project.

BTW, has anyone else thought it odd that the Gov. seems to have forgotten how close her election was and that the only reason her nasty mug is in office right now is because of the good people of Seattle (well, and the fact that Dino Rossi is a weenie..)???

Comment by Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:28:18 -0800

LOL!!! Oh my, I remember right after the earthquake in 2001 (that was the day after the riots that Mayor Schell slept through) everyone was saying that our NUMBER ONE priority (yes, numero uno!) would be to replace the viaduct. Six years later and not a damn thing has been done. Moral of the story? If you have to be on the viaduct make sure it is north bound and not south bound.

Comment by Hal O'Brien

Hal O'Brien — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:38:30 -0800

OK, I give up... why is it you continue to not mention the retrofit as an option at all, even though it's the only one that matches the budgetary and legal constraints?

Comment by Sean

Sean — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:39:23 -0800

Please, God, don't let them rebuild that monstrosity. Anything but a rebuild.

Comment by catalina vel-duray

catalina vel-duray — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 20:09:39 -0800

Tear that schitt down.

Comment by Kush

Kush — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 20:15:36 -0800

#3 let's see Gov backs Seattle boondoggle - price up to $6B by 2008 - rest of state and at least half of Seattle opposed the project - ya that would be good for re-election - but instead she acts in a prudent way gets the viaduct done or stands up to the SCC and nothing gets done and what? the residents of Seattle vote for Rossi - don't think so.

Frank Chopp dreads the idea of the dems running in 2008 with Seattle's Big Dig for the repubos to use against them statewide - the tunnel is fiscally irresponsible (sing it to the tune of simply irresistible)

Comment by Dave Coffman

Dave Coffman — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 20:52:55 -0800

I'm looking forward to suing the city and state if they don't keep the capacity in place. They don't have any transit now, and they'll impact tens of thousands of people with the surface option. It will be quite simple to form a Ballard/West Seattle group that will throw monkey wrenches into the surface option. Couple that with politicians running for city council looking for cover (and a bunch of them are already feeling the heat) and it will be fun times.

Comment by david Sucher

david Sucher — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 21:38:00 -0800

O'Brien asks a good question. Why does Barnett (it's getting comical) refuse to even mention the Retrofit?

Answer: She knows in her heart that it is the only solution which makes sense politically and financially and even in terms of urban design.

How do I know? I read her posts and only someone scared of the Retrofit would so studiously refuse to acknowledge it.

Comment by Mrs. Y

Mrs. Y — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 21:40:53 -0800

The City Responds (Kaboom!)

Statement by Mayor Nickels and Councilmember Drago

The contents of a statement issued by Mayor Greg Nickels and Seattle City Councilmember Jan Drago on Olympia's Viaduct announcement

January 17, 2007

SEATTLE � We are deeply disappointed with the announcement today by the Governor and legislative leadership. After asking for a public vote, the leadership in Olympia is now saying they are not interested in the opinions of Seattle citizens. Instead, they are threatening to impose a new elevated freeway or, even worse, taking state funding away from the most dangerous section of highway in the state of Washington. No other city in the state has been treated in this manner.

It is clear that Olympia is not interested in a real solution to the Viaduct replacement. The proposal for the Surface/Tunnel Hybrid offers a more cost-effective, environmentally-sound transportation solution that will save over $1 billion compared to WSDOT's inflated six-lane alternative.

Olympia has arbitrarily rejected the Hybrid solution and ignored the advice of their own Expert Review Panel. Their assertion that the Hybrid Tunnel had not yet been validated rings hollow in light of the Governor's order that WSDOT stop working on this proposal last Friday.

The voters of Seattle have a clear expectation that they will be given honest choices; that their voices will be heard; and their choices respected.

This is a choice about the future of our city, not about politics in Olympia. We will move forward with our plans to put the question on the ballot and let the people of Seattle decide the future of our city.

We will follow the will of the people of Seattle, not the dictates of Olympia.

Comment by Cold Hard Truth

Cold Hard Truth — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:26:38 -0800

So Nickels says he�ll accept the result of a public vote. Then Tim Ceis says a rebuild is dead.

And it�s the Governor who�s fickle and indecisive?

Nice story, Ms. Ceis. Or is it Nickels?

Comment by T-Rex

T-Rex — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:35:53 -0800

Confidential to Nickels and Drago: nice suicide note!

Nominations for the Crassest Comment of 2007 are now closed. The winner, from the aforementioned suicide note, goes to Greg Nickels, for his reference to �WSDOT's inflated six-lane (tunnel) alternative�.

Uh, that would be *your* alternative, Mr. Mayor! Remember the, uh, last five years and stuff? Nice job, and have a happy 2007!

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:52:54 -0800

Greg - you're playing poker with the wrong people - Chris eats multinationals for breakfast, and Frank's stood down radical rightwing majorities for years.

Time to wake up and smell the lack of a do-over.

Comment by Mr. X

Mr. X — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 23:00:55 -0800

Memo to Jan and Greg - maybe it's because no other City in the State has dithered so long on behalf of such an indefensible and expensive project, or has threatened to tear down and not replace an essential State highway.

Ryan - you're right to a point, but WSDOT always preferred the tunnel replacement. They just got real about the costs of the two respective projects before the City did (as if it has).

BTW - when do you think the $500+ million proposal to lower SR99 north of Battery Street for Hallivulcan's Mercer scheme - a project that has been lumped in with all of the AWV options in the EIS but that has no connection to the AWV or Seawall - going to come off of the table? Nickels, Drago, and the Tunnel cabal still plan to piss our tax dollars away planning for it and beginning pre-construction even though the project is unfunded.

Now there's some BS that citywide taxpayers get to subsidize (On the other hand, to rebut another post you did on a separate thread, keeping West Seattle and Ballard moving seems perfectly reasonable to share to cost of to me).

Comment by Mr. X

Mr. X — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 23:10:17 -0800

BTW, WSDOT were far from alone in their cynical motives behind creating a false sense of crisis about long-held plans to get rid of the AWV - you can add most of the City Government and Downtown business players to that list, too.

I'll be charitable and put the Allied Arts/PWC/Stranger types into a perhaps slightly more idealistic and less cynical (but dare I say considerably more delusional?) category of others who also exaggerated quake risks to support a longtime anti-AWV agenda.

Comment by Fact Checker

Fact Checker — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 23:20:53 -0800

�The city still has $200 million from the federal government; it could choose to use that money to tear down the viaduct and come up with local funding to implement the surface/transit option.�

Wrong, wrong, wrong�a thousand times wrong.

The Viaduct is part of a State highway. The City cannot tear it down. Only the State can.

The City does not have $200 million in Federal money to use for the surface/transit option.

The federal money does not go to the City, first of all. Secondly, it is not funny money that can be spent willy-nilly on a non-highway project. Third, the federal transportation bill was a commitment�has the money even been allocated yet? Don�t think so.

So, in sum: the City has $0 in Federal money to use for the surface/transit option.

Comment by LH

LH — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:09:46 -0800

ECB - don't go all stenographer on me now. Mayor's release went out at 6:08 PM. You posted "Gov's fickle" 30 minutes later.

Gov's not fickle, she gave 2 non-negotiable options for a vote 2 weeks ago. She knows that people haven't been using this time to pursue this and were instead negotiating an option that wasn't on the table while pushing back on the session-end deadline she gave. She's not fickle, she's fed up.

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:32:56 -0800

Damned straight she is. Can't say I blame her.

Comment by Explorer

Explorer — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 09:49:55 -0800

re: #9 Anyone who would actually look forward to suing the city and state (over the life-and-death matter of reduced highway capacity!) definitely needs to get a life and probably needs to get laid.