State, city, and county leaders decided to move forward with a deep-bore tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct yesterday, despite the fact that no one knows just how the hell we’re going to pay for it. So naturally, today, someone filed an initiative to stop them. In this case, someone who wants state, city, and county leaders to choose another rejected option: A new viaduct.
The initiative petition if passed would prevent the City from using any public property or right-of-way, above or under the ground, to construct a tunnel.
According to the submitter of the petition, Elizabeth Campbell, representing the Yes Viaduct! Community action group:
The City leaders have a history of unilaterally pursuing and setting in place initiatives and projects that they and a select group of special interests want, exclusive of any public sentiment to the contrary or public desire to exercise fiscal restraint. The Mayor, the King County Executive, and the Governor by their decree that a deep-bored tunnel should be built have demonstrated their contempt for the public at large, and all public processes, including even their own process concoction, the Alaskan Way Viaduct Stakeholder Advisory Committee. They have delegitimized the stakeholders that participated in it and the work that they produced with the selection of the deep-bore tunnel option.
If the city accepts the petition, supporters will have to gather about 18,000 valid signatures within 180 days to put it on a city ballot.
The advisory previous public votes were against both of the options presented – anyone trying to construct a mandate from that clusterf**k of a vote is crazy.It is time for us to get on with it. We elect folks to make decisions, Seattle’s public process has kept this dinosaur in place for years…those surface option proponents who talk of “carbon footprints” need to consider the amount of carbon burned while sitting in the 30000 car per day traffic jam at the traffic lights of the ‘surface’ option. Start digging !!!
Where do I sign?
billyT, #45
If you look the election people had a choice:
1. Yes Viaduct
2. Yes Tunnel
3. No on both (which by default is surface option)
More people voted for option #1 than the other two so yes, a plurality of people preferred a viaduct than the other 2 options.
billyT, #45
If you look the election people had a choice:
1. Yes Viaduct
2. Yes Tunnel
3. No on both (which by default is surface option)
More people voted for option #1 than the other two so yes, a plurality of people preferred a viaduct than the other 2 options.
Not that it matters but the no on both covered the rebuild, bay bridge, different viaduct, different tunnel etc.
a SurveyUsa poll after showed that a strong majority wished to keep the capacity.
if only we all had FLYING CARS like we were supposed to have by now, in this 21st century, we wouldn’t have to deal with this problem at all. goddamnit.
I want to sign the anti tunnel initiative, and invite all my friends and family to sign too.
Who do I contact to sign?
Does anyone even have a clue how the tunnel will cripple our city? Forget what the viaduct looks like we can put some pretty wallpaper and cool decals on it. It is a freeway folks not a fucking piece of art. We can expect TONS of taxes, tolls, and cost overruns. This isn’t a project to just let mommy and daddy take care of our best interests. Other major citys have had similar problems… http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-pblie.htm
We did not vote for a tunnel – so we’ll probably get one…it worked with the baseball & football stadiums. And while we voted for a monorail, we didn’t get that. Notice a pattern? The tunnel is a disaster waiting to happen – not only will it be built through shifting fill dirt, but it is under capacity vehicle-wise and also eliminates access to the city and surrounding areas. Gone will be access to Ballard, Queen Anne & Magnolia – gone, too will be access to downtown at Seneca St.
Where will this traffic go? The commercial traffic out of Ballard will be adding to the Mercer Mess as it tries to navigate around downtown Seattle. And that, in turn, will further foster gridlock on I-5. Or, the trucks will continue to run down 15th / Elliott Avenue and then down Alaskan Way and the waterfront. Won’t that make for a pleasant experience for everyone.
The ONLY reason for the tunnel is to appease the developers who will leap on that property like stink on (oops!). Next, there’ll be buildings instead of open space and the city will increase its tax base to try and ward off budget shortfalls. If you think this won’t happen, you’re sadly mistaken – in fact, the Emerald City you live in is more like the one in the Wizard of Oz than Washington.
City / State government is pathetic when it comes to making ANY decision. They either study it to death and do nothing or completely ignore the vote of the people.
Interesting,
Anyone not interested in initiatives does not understand the damage an elected official can do in the short time that “they” might be in office. Initiatives and referendums are a critical protection from wholesale disregard of the true governing faction, the majority of the will of the people.
The question that has never been asked is…why not retro-fit this current vintage structure…all while keeping at least 2 lanes open while doing so…and re-naming it something like +the peoples elevated transporter” or some such. Without a corporate name, which I hate..let a state wide contest re-name it whatever…but I will tell you this, the via-duct is yours, and if that “view” road were allowed to be gone, you would never have that view for yourself ever again. Remember, you are the Government, and that is your road.
B.Longwill