Comments on: We Can Stop the Largest Tax Increase in Seattle History

By: Holly

Holly — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:24:41 +0000

I agree with almost everything I hear from McGinn’s camp - except the lack of “other options” to the tunnel plan. I commute along the viaduct every day with a two-year old in my backseat. The viaduct as it stands is NOT safe. I can’t believe we can’t come up with a solution, and I can’t vote for someone that says the tunnel is not the solution but doesn’t offer up any immediate alternatives. Did we not learn from San Francisco? The viaduct is an urgent problem that requires an immediate solution. Sorry Mike.

By: Donna

Donna — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:39:00 +0000

As a Seattle voter I am sooo torn on which Mayoral candidate I will vote for. Opposition to the tunnel is the only issue standing in my way of completely endorsing McGinn. At this point I don’t care what gets put in place of the Viaduct, I am just sick and tired of visiting and revisiting and revisiting this issue. I just want to move forward with the plans that have been put into place so far, an have the Mayor focus on other more pressing issues.

By: Ben Evans

Ben Evans — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 02:30:47 +0000

Brandon,

This whole tunnel is a very hard thing for many people to swallow. “ugly braces on the face of our beautiful city”…….Those are the words that make people like me so vehemently opposed to this tunnel. Let me explain.

The viaduct has been here since 1953 and everyone is painting it as ugly. Public safety is a tangential issue as to why the tunnel should is being built. The main issue is the tunnel bypasses any utilitarian function of a road. This is a 4.2 billion dollar tunnel for vanity sake.

It is nice to live in a place so beautiful as Seattle but we need to move traffic and conduct business. The container traffic is ugly, Boeing plants are ugly. Traffic is just plain ugly. Shall we do away with business for the beautification of Seattle.

I think that we need to move traffic. The tunnel wont move traffic so what type of solution is it? This is done at an extremely high cost. I know there are some peripheral costs but mainly this is just a waste of money.

If the idiots currently in office will put a solution in front of us, then we can find a solution. I am also a small businessman and the this state, city, and county are hanging and bleeding me with their taxes. This is happening to everyone. This tunnel is actually anti-business and anti-human. It needs to be stopped.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:57:23 +0000

Is this tunnel idea supposed to be for freight? If so, then Olympia/Port of Seattle and the corporations which want it should pay more money for it and it should be a toll road to fund future maintenance.

Those Chicago Boeing Executives can pony up the money to pay for the whole thing.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:48:11 +0000

MichaelBob,

The so-called $2.4B “gift” you site seems more like a “trick or trap”. Sounds more like bribe money.

By: MichaelBob

MichaelBob — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:57:10 +0000

The biggest lie here is about the tunnel causing a great tax increase. McGinn is using disinformation and distortion as the flagship of his campaign. The tunnel is being paid for along with a +27% overrun . The Beacon Hill tunnel was 22% under budget. The 930 mil we pay for street/transit/seawall will be spent even with the street option. Absolutely disingenuous!

By: MichaelBob

MichaelBob — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:50:53 +0000

Linda you are so correct. We need solutions that make it possible to travel to nearby communities. It seems this group wants all to live in the city and ride bikes. I’ll bet they like roads when they travel to do the outdoor stuff this area is known for. Or they’ll just make other choices.

By: MichaelBob

MichaelBob — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:41:35 +0000

The vote was for a cut and cover tunnel project that would disrupt traffic for years while it was being built. The deep bore tunnel allows for work to be done while the viaduct is still in use.

By: MichaelBob

MichaelBob — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:31:39 +0000

The downtown exits need somewhere to go and the tunnel will be deep under downtown to build it cheaply. There will be better access at each end. Perhaps this will encourage perimeter parking and a better more livable transit oriented downtown.

By: MichaelBob

MichaelBob — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:26:20 +0000

The truth is that the 930 mil we’ll spend on the viaduct project goes to street/transit/sea wall/utility relocation that must be done in any event. He’s talking about walking away from a 2.4 Bil gift to make our city better. Nuts.