Seattle Times: "Tunnel in place of viaduct: A deal, but how to pay?"
UPDATE: Among other things, tunnel will be used as an excuse to further soak car owners, who will derive less benefit from the tunnel than from the Viaduct:
King County will seek state authority to raise more money through a car-tab tax of 1 percent to fund $190 million in transit capital, such as buses, along with $15 million a year for operations.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 13, 2009 10:41 AM | Email ThisMore transit would be needed as the tunnel, two lanes each direction, instead of the three lanes each direction on the viaduct and lack a Western Avenue exit serving Belltown, Interbay and Ballard.
I do not think this is a problem with one party politics. It is a problem with politicians in general.
Posted by: Lysander on January 13, 2009 11:38 AMApparently they assign no value whatever to those hundred thousand daily trips along the Viaduct, yet feel that an extravagant cost must be borne by the public for their overtechnical cramped roadway, in addition to the loss of that mobility value.
Tar and feathers.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 13, 2009 11:40 AMThere may not be any recognizable pieces for us to pick up when the electorate finally uses their brain rather than their greedy hands to chose their "leaders".
On the other hand, we see the seeds of a perfect storm for their failure. The bad news is that we are ALL in the path of that storm of their stupidity and power hunger.
God help us.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 13, 2009 11:56 AMWould Rossi have backed off when faced with the deficit? Yet, he knew there was one.
Posted by: swatter on January 13, 2009 12:31 PMI was very disappointed to hear the Matt Rosenberg and the Discovery Institute were involved with the tunnel. As Lysander notes, the problem isn't just Democrats. It's irrational Seattle culture in general, which reveres indecisiveness and emotion over sound engineering and reason. There are many, much cheaper and more immediate fixes to the region's transit problems other than the knee jerk of trains and very expensive infrastructure projects such as this tunnel. Yet the political forces are squarely aligned behind the expensive options because they play to the entrenched majority and union interests. We could be getting a lot more bang for our buck, but not with the poor leadership from all angles that has become the hallmark of Seattle.
I suspect that with the coming greater taxes, more unfriendly business climate and increasing congestion, many will take the first opportunity to leave the area. Friends and family bind us, but at some point, it's better to shrug and leave Seattle in the helpless mess it deserves.
Posted by: Jeff B. on January 13, 2009 12:33 PMThe existing Battery Street tunnel will still be used, but not as part of the new tunnel route but instead an independent route to the waterfront - from presumably Aurora north of downtown. Seems to me this could be a real benefit if this is true.
I agree that the "commerce" traffic is strongly required between south of downtown and Interbay and Ballard - whether this solution is better, or a new viaduct (did the new viaduct still have the exits?) - I think remains to be communicated and understood.
By the way. I see your buddy Ron Paul is back in the news again. He blames the war on Israel.
That's your buddy!
Posted by: Medic/Vet on January 13, 2009 01:05 PMAnother reason why I never go to Seattle any more...
Posted by: lookoutwife on January 13, 2009 01:54 PMPaula Hammond was on KIRO Radio today and stated that tolls would probably be around $2.00 for the new Tunnel a 4.3 Billion Dollar Project. The Estimates for the 520 Bridge Toll, a 4 Billion Dollar project are estimated to be a $5.00 Toll, WHY?
Posted by: Smokie on January 13, 2009 02:44 PMTwo lanes each way is an absolute joke. But after this fiscal monstrosity is built, traffic will be even worse that it is now. The solution to that of course will be taxes in and out of the city, more mass transit boondoggles and whatever other tax looneyness they can imagine to get us out of our cars.
They did it with energy. Making drilling for our own oil impossible, than announce that we are to dependent on foreign oil and must foot the bill to change to "green" energy in 10 years and insist that we prop-up noncompetitive industries in the process (read that ethanol).
The collapse of mortgage industry. The spark for this recession is the the direct fault of the Feds and the cure (and the expansion of it) they have will kill the economy for decades. Just like the Japanese we will have a "lost decade" or more.
This garbage never stops. They make the problem and then the cure is worse than the disease.
Posted by: G Jiggy on January 13, 2009 02:50 PMBuild it too small, and make it so expansion is never possible.
Didn't they learn anything from the mess on I-5?
Posted by: Vince on January 13, 2009 04:06 PMIdiots. Absolute idiots.
Posted by: JMHawkins on January 13, 2009 05:06 PMOther than that, I love the idea of a tunnel if it didn't cost so much and if there were at least 3 lanes (better yet 4) each way and if there was an entrance and exit to mid town.
Posted by: RBW on January 13, 2009 05:50 PMVince, cars are obsolete. Light rail and Sound Transit is in.
Is this the same Sound Transit rail that couldn't go around flooded track last week and had to shut down?
Posted by: RBW on January 13, 2009 06:00 PMSeems pretty absurd when an $800 million retrofit would preserve the capacity, cost 10-20% of the tunnel option, not require the same increases in mass transit enhancements, and be done in a fraction of the time. But the state's Democrat leaders need a tunnel that, wishful thinking, won't be complete until the middle of the next decade. That's a lot of years rolling the dice on a big earthquake, isn't it?
BTW, what private property is the city now expected to take using eminent domain for this tunnel project? Are we going to see another Monorail-like theft of private property for a park that is 60 feet wide?
Posted by: Reality on January 13, 2009 07:48 PMNo way off...so this is only to get thru downtown....so to get into downtown you have to right Transit....you will live your life like they say. Be happy for your life because once you have to be on government medical issurance, they'll just take it if they want to.
Posted by: Dengle on January 13, 2009 09:07 PMI work at home and drive little. So I barely care about this except for my anticipation of the high entertainment value to be viewed from my TV couch.
Can't wait to watch Jim Forman reporting from the tunnel mess each night for seven solid years.
I expect most of the expense of the tunnel project will be environmental studies and millimeter by millimeter excavations of the indian cemetaries along the route.
OOOOHH! That's a big new part of my business. Characterizing provenance of indian artifacts for highway projects. Whoopee! May it take twenty years!
Posted by: Bart Cannon on January 14, 2009 06:15 AMSeriously, if Republicans have no power to stop or slow the left's drive to socialism here, and enough voters exist out there determined to live off others' labor and success by voting to simply take what they want, what real threat are Republicans? In fact, aren't Republicans necessary so the socialist paradise can survive financially? Then again, maybe leftists would all like to live in tent cities as long as the misery is shared by all.
Posted by: Reality on January 14, 2009 08:15 AMI thought we were already paying for additional transit with the additional taxes approved by the TRANSIT NOW! vote a couple years ago.
Posted by: Palouse on January 14, 2009 09:05 AMIf done right, it seems like it could work out. Of course the $4.25 billion question is, are our electeds capable of doing it right.
Posted by: russell garrard on January 14, 2009 09:17 AMBe careful what you ask for. With Republicans gone, you won't have anybody left to tax.
Posted by: RBW on January 14, 2009 11:16 PM