Um...tunnel opinions aside...

Are they trying to appeal to the gays in the city or something?

Yeah, I don't get the Lady Gaga song (that is Gaga, right?). Is there some significance?

That's just tacky. A quick copyright claim could get that yanked. Meinert, please ring your Grammy peoples and make it happen. Thank you.

You know what would be great about the "Tunnel + Transit Coalition"? If they actually, you know, worked for more transit. They aren't. I can't see any substantial or successful lobbying on their part at the state level where Governor Gregoire actually vetoed our ability to fund transit improvements, or at the port level where a $300,000,000 payment would create enough of an offset to push more transit.

False flag operation. They're attempting to greenwash the tunnel.

I think the surface option would be the best, because clearly the number of car/pedestrian collisions is too damm low!

I'm with Baconcat... I'd be much more willing to support the Tunnel -- which will fail without transit -- if there actually was some "+ Transit" monies secured prior to signing off on these agreements.

Along with actual commitments from the Port, and more data suggesting drivers will actually pay the toll instead of, you know, overwhelming Pioneer Square.

Got funding?

... didn't think so.

Baconcat is right.

I really hate to see the mayor squandering his political capital fighting the tunnel when his leadership is desperately needed to fight the worst impacts of the tunnel. Impacts like the tens of thousands of cars that have the potential to be dumped on city streets by the tunnel.

This is what's so infuriating about these tunnel supporters calling themselves the Tunnel + Transit Coalition. These people have about as much interest in transit as Cheney and Rumsfeld had in sowing the seeds of democracy in the Middle East. If it were up to them, this highway would happen without giving the slightest thought to transit.

As Mickymse says @6, the tunnel "will fail without transit." Or to be more precise, without transit the tunnel will cause downtown Seattle's transportation system to fail.

This is where I'm hoping that somehow Mayor McGinn is crazy like a fox and that he can hold a gun to this project's head to make a real transit component happen.

And if that transit component doesn't have dedicated lanes and dedicated rights of way, then we're all just fooling ourselves. The City Council's own consultants have recommended as much. You can throw all the money you want at new transit service, but what good does it do if it stuck in the same overflow traffic as all the diverted cars? There's no point in putting up a dike once the floodwaters have already come in.

Compromise? What the fuck is the DBT a compromise between?

A couple things folks are conviently overlooking here. The clip above reflects McGinn's oringal flip-flip from opposed to the tunnel to OK with itl So he has actually changed twice or back again if you prefer.
Also there are bunch of other issues impacting the city that McGinn's Ahabesque obsession with the tunnel has eclpsed such as unemployment, failing schools, budget crises. police matters etc,etc.
None of his drama has helped Seattle or Seattleites. He's making Schell look good.

The aquarium meeting is 15 minutes on & there's no sound. This is SeattleChannel camera work, we're watching at an important meeting that appears to be now 20 minutes behind schedule, which makes me wonder who's running the show.

The images projected onto a screen behind the podium have near zero idea imagery. "Hey everybody, let's get together to see your ideas, but not ours." The early proposals are nice. Nice enough to project the main "changes" with closeups, materials, examples. I suggest people observe the first of "their" ideas and note which seem good until you look close. I'm sure there'll be many.

The dbt is a poor match for the soil conditions, topography, roadway design efficiencies, etc. The surface-transit option fixes I-5, takes AWV down soonest, expands transit
AND does NOT rule out the better cut/coer tunnel to build later or at the same time.

It is possible to rebuild the waterfront with half the traffic that results with the bored tunnel. Only with the smarter cut/cover tunnel will the waterfront have least traffic. It's something your waterfront rebuild people should explain along with not explaining much else.

OMG! The presentation after Mike's speech is shit. If the whole thing is this bad, it's off to a bad start. This doesn't look like cooperation. Putting the global-trade guy on first was a mistake. good grief. Stop the DBT.

I can't get enough tunnel.

The Tunnel is the only option that allows continous traffic flow along the alaska way viaduct as well as opening up access between the waterfront and downtown. Not to mention allowing the waterfront project which turns the now crumbling alaska way corridor into a multimodal(thats right ped, bike, TRANSIT) corridor. Think about it, adding tons of green space, connections from the piers to downtown/belltown for bikes, buses and hopefully streetcars, all by allowing a quick bypass of the city by those who arent looking to go downtown.