http://www.kuow.org/mp3high/mp3/WeekdayA…
I am very turn about this issue, I can see how poor of a plan is for the city and that it's also forces the city to pay for some of it. However I have been to Boston, and going to through a passby tunnel is somewhat convenient, and because it's underground it won't disturb the urban areas. I really wish the State won't charge the city for the project... I think I will have to vote no. It sucks because it's a dangerous decision to leave the waterfront as it is ... One thing though, it's if you are gonna have a high way regardless of an exit to downtown or not, it's better to have it under ground than over ground. I am from New York, and all along Manhattan, under the highway, it's dirty, smelly, and the business are just chains with parking under the highway, dead zones... the areas where you have the best areas are with viaducts... the areas on surfaces are not that pedestrian friendly, and the zones are not lively, tall residential buildings for the most part, and if there are parks, they are not accessible by foot (because there is a road there). Maybe it was meant that way? So maybe I will vote yes... see what I mean?!