Comments on Well, That's Big of Her

A good position, although I'm willing to settle for a Viaduct, even though the Surface Plus Transit would be another good choice.

The City Council decided to put the issue to an advisory ballot after euphorically reading Friday morning's papers and seeing that some state senators would be open to the idea of a four-lane tunnel if the City held an advisory vote no later than March 13. The problem? Apparently Speaker Frank Chopp couldn't care less what the voters think. He won't allow a tunnel. And if he won't allow a tunnel, then no bill will ever show up on the Governor's desk that appropriates state money on a tunnel. So the pro-tunnel groups have some work to do. No Chopp, no tunnel. The good news for transit + streets supporters? Speaker Chopp has publicly stated numerous times that he is interested in surface alternatives.

"It’s a false choice between the ugly and the unknown, and we shouldn’t fall for it."

word.

this debacle also is a big part of the process by which the RTID project list is being developed. how depressing.

What if the new elevated structure was fancy looking? Not ugly? Like an elegant suspension bridge? Would it be ok then? Because if your reason for not liking the viaduct because it is ugly, a lot of folks were voting for a big ol' ugly ass concrete elevated monorail.

ECB Wrote:
"This vote is, as Peter Steinbrueck put it, a sham. It’s a false choice between the ugly and the unknown, and we shouldn’t fall for it."

If, as you and Steinbrueck assert, this is a sham and a false choice, there
cannot be any valid reason to vote.

Boycott the Vote!!

--Jensen

Does it really matter what I want? I didn't want a two stadiums and voted so and thought we'd actually won that one but, oh wait, look... there are two stadiums right next door to each other that can't ever be used at the same time. So glad I voted there.

I figure no matter what I vote for (and don't worry, I'll vote) I won't get what I want even if what I want is what wins. Seattle has that history.

I'm still waiting to see what happens with the Sonics (I voted for the 'bite me' option).

Well, don’t forget that Madame Governor was swept into office by such a resounding victory at the poles that the mere fact that she will be humored to consent to allow the people to speak, even if she does not feel compelled to hear what they say, is terribly beneficent of her serene highness.

'No and No' sounds good to me.

If we do get stuck with a rebuild, can someone please start a petition drive to offer an initiative to name the damn thing “the Christine Gregoire memorial viaduct” just so no one ever forgets who stuck us with it.

Voting both down is a bad idea. We will just get stuck with the Elevated Highway.

It's time for Tunnel supporters and Surface supporters to join hands and promote the Surface Tunnel Hybrid solution. (KUM-BY-YA and all) It has a lot of merit. It REDUCES the number of SOV lanes which is an admirable goal, it does a better job of re opening the waterfront, it will allow for increased transit capacity, it has the ability to deliver continued freight capacity (do we care about working family jobs?).

It's an advisory ballot and would send a message that Seattle supports a hybrid between improved surface and scaled back tunnel on the Central Waterfront.

It's a good compromise. We need to retain the opportunity to maneuver and right now a solid vote in favor of the hybrid surface/tunnel option is Seattle's best chance at making sure the default (new viaduct) is not rebuilt on our waterfront.

Ditto Mrs. Y. - "No and no" is a vote for the rebuild.

Think about your Nader votes in 2000. Same principal here.

Politics aside, the through capacity of the corridor IS critical to the city as a necessary redundancy to I-5, even if the capacity is reduced as would be the case with the tunnel hybrid. Variable pricing tolls could assure that traffic would flow. Transit capacity would be added.

Utter nonsense, Flotown and Mrs. Y. The money will likely be diverted to the 520 project which by almost every account has needs that currently far exceed the Viaduct.

Screw this tyranny. Boycott the Vote!

---Jensen

If you boycott the vote, then other Seattlites will greenlight the rebuild. Vote no on both and maybe the money will get diverted to 520.

What is with this bullshit tunnel-lite? Hello? A six-lane surface highway would have more capacity, and probably be cheaper. Add to that the additional benefit of not being stuck in underground traffic, waiting for the Big One to crush you to death.

gregoire is just like the viaduct....an unnecessary eyesore that needs to be removed...

and yeah, i'm a democrat saying that...

Ok, next best solution is to vote no and no - but please, don't boycott it. That just doubles the power of some rebuild proponent's vote

Ok, next best solution is to vote no and no - but please, don't boycott it. That just doubles the power of some rebuild proponent's vote

@13 - good point on tunnel-lite.

@15,16 - gonna be fun seeing what the real vote is, as opposed to the astroturf vote paid for by underwater tunnel pushers. wish we had a Surface Plus Transit option.

You guys do realize that an overwhelming majority of the voters are going to vote yes on the rebuild and no on tunnel-lite?

And before you think about it, arguing with me isn't gonna do anything about it.

This is pure political theater for Ms. G. Leave it to WSDOT and the State to leave us with quite possibly the worst two options.

The fact that the two most sensible choices: transit in this corridor + rail freight improvements or a cable-stay bridge are off the table tells you everything one needs to know about the state of Washington.

Write-in campaign for surface/transit?

xcblyt odbpawgz xvfhe vilskc wsqdlr hsax usoakvrw

xcblyt odbpawgz xvfhe vilskc wsqdlr hsax usoakvrw

xcblyt odbpawgz xvfhe vilskc wsqdlr hsax usoakvrw