May 12, 5:24 PM 4
What Are They Celebrating?
Today Mayor Nickels joined Christine Gregoire at a champagne reception to celebrate the signing of the Viaduct Tunnel bill. Yep, champagne — the photo attached is straight from the reception.
What are they celebrating? They have picked the most expensive, the most risky and the most polluting option. It wastes money needed for more urgent priorities, such as providing good schools for our children, eliminating overcrowding on buses, making our neighborhoods safe, and preparing Seattle for a better economic future.
It could end up costing Seattle dearly. On top of the state’s gas-tax money, which is paid in part by Seattle drivers, Mayor Nickels promised that Seattle’s citizens would contribute another $930 million toward the tunnel project. That level of commitment of city resources — resources we don’t have — endangers other things we want to do in this city.
That’s before we get to cost overruns. The state law signed today says that if there are any cost overruns on the project, Seattle is going to have to pay for them. Considering that 90% of mega-transportation projects worldwide experience cost overruns, the implications of this requirement are enormous. And we know there will be overruns. First, engineering is only 1% complete. Second, a bored tunnel as wide as 54 feet (as is planned for Seattle) has never been built anywhere in the world. Third, Sound Transit’s bored tunnel through Beacon Hill created a 21-foot hole underneath a house, one of several “voids” that resulted from the tunneling. And the soils there are basically the same as those downtown, according to the State Department of Transportation.
So what is Mayor Nickels’ response to the cost overruns issue? Unfortunately, like too many other issues facing the Mayor, he believes “that language is the state’s problem. Not mine.” It may not be his problem, but it will become a problem for Seattle taxpayers. What should be done instead? Start by rethinking our goal. Seattle must reclaim its waterfront from today’s elevated highway, but we also needs to prepare for the future. In 2015, when Nickels says the tunnel will open, gas prices will likely be higher than ever, and vehicle miles traveled will go down further, as they already have nationally.
Demand for transit will also be at an all time high. The need to address global warming will be even more urgent, and Seattle’s air quality — already bad — could be even worse.
Given these realities, will we be glad that we dedicated so much money to a two-mile-long tunnel that is usable by only cars and trucks?
Instead of business as usual, Seattle should invest wisely in a smart transportation network that is cost efficient, green, and clean. Citywide there are already 4,000 lane miles of streets, according to the Seattle Department of Transportation. We can make improvements to I-5 through downtown. We don’t need Nickels’ expensive tunnel if we are smarter with our existing streets and invest in the future.
Good ideas were developed last year by the state department of transportation. We should make Seattle’s streets work better for people by furthering expansion of light rail and the RapidRide bus system. And we should build Metro’s plan for a rapid trolley network, which would increase capacity by about 14,000,000 million riders per year — with minimal carbon emissions.
Investments like these would be wise and modest enough to leave plenty of money for Seattle’s other needs. We’d have a functioning transit system in Seattle. And we wouldn’t be setting ourselves up for an unknown, and risky future.
a sad footnote to this, on the same day that we commit to spending $900M + Seattle Schools is laying off 160 to 170 teachers, and that’s above and beyond 115 unfilled postitions! http://www.seattlepi.com/local/406144_layoffs13.html
Misplaced priorities.
The tunnel bill was signed on the same day as:
Seattle Public Schools announcing layoffs:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2009212978_webseattleteachers1.html
UW researchers announcing climate change is reducing the amount of snowpack in the Cascades:
http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=11&sid=167114.
Our current leaders’ priorities are out of whack.
I have a sick feeling of incredulousness… how can they celebrate this when they’ve sold out on all of their promises?!? Fully funding transit as a key part of any construction project — GONE! Listening to the recommendations of the transportation consulting team and the broad stakeholders process — BYPASSED! Asking for guidance from greenhouse gas reduction advisory groups at the State and City levels — IGNORED!
The vanity of Nickels and Gregoire matches their impoverished leadership on the issue of transportation.
Mike. Your position on the Deep-bore can make an ideal debate question between you and Malahan. The question you and he should answer is — Is it possible that neither the Deep-bore nor the surface boulevard/transit options are the best environmental solution?
Consider: The Deep-bore does not serve Ballard-bound traffic, thus forcing roughly 40,000 vehicles daily, or 2500 per hour onto Alaskan Way, repeatedly stopped with 15-20 stoplights. On the other hand, the surface boulevard/transit option serves neither Ballard-bound nor Aurora-bound traffic, which will force as much as double that amount of traffic onto Alaskan Way, undoubtedly reaching the point of gridlock, resulting in severely diminished air quality, more noise pollution, and a safety hazard for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists.
The only way I can see yours and Malahan’s candidacy taking the high ground on this issue, (higher than Nickels), is to keep the 4-lane Cut-n-Cover tunnel on the table.
In 2007, voters rejected the 6-lane Cut-n-Cover tunnel. Its construction was far more disruptive to SR-99 motorists and waterfront businesses. The 4-lane Cut-n-Cover can be built while leaving the AWV in place until the last year while the Lower Belltown segment is rebuilt, with traffic diverted via Broad to ‘north’ Alaskan Way then enter the completed tunnel portal at Pike. It has sufficient capacity with a speed limit of 40mph, a good idea with any tunnel.
You should also note that the current Alaskan Way rebuild designs (both 4-lanes and 6-lanes) are poorly engineered. The best designs were the early ones that combined 4-lane Alaskan Way with a 2-lane frontage road on the east side with a wide island between for the streetcar line, bicycle path, a sidewalk facing the frontage road (but not Alaskan Way), and more (but not too much) curbside parking. It was rejected because WsDOT proposed an exit/entrance ramp system between Columbia and Spring — 3 blocks of wasted space and a disjointed frontage road. Without those ramps, the frontage road was a very sensible plan that left plenty of room for beautifully rebuilt Seawall sidewalk widened 6′ to 12′ with landscaping an street trees.
Please heed this analysis. And find a decent replacement candidate for Grace Crunican. She’s done a terrible job overall.