Comments

1
I'm wondering if they're the firm the I-1098 folks hired?
2
Where will these petitioners be? I'd like to sign.
3

Will they consult Tim Eyman on where to find signature mercenaries?
4
@3 he mostly gets the bad ones from Cali.
5
I'm not fond of the referendum idea, but it's great to know someone was wonderful as Ainsley's on board with them. If anyone can keep a lid on Elizabeth Campbell as needed, it's her.
6
I'm not sure Campbell is doing a lot of the speaking -- she was pretty lowkey at the presser after the Council meeting and gently declined a chance to speak at length. ... but that's now. After the campaign? Who knows.

If you miss her you can always pretend she's Will.
7
I believe this whole effort is a pipe dream. The state project will move forward and as a Seattle citizen I want my city to be a participant, not sitting on the sidelines.
8
Paid signatures ≠ legitimate initiative of the people; no matter who engages in that loathsome practice.
9
I believe this whole effort is a pie dream. We all know that the city can't stop a state project. Time to come to reality folks.
As a Seattle citizen I want the city to participate in the project, not sit on the sidelines. If opponents get their way then that is where we will be....on the sidelines as the state moves forward with the project. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face! All this crying about massive cost over runs is just scare tactics by opponents.

The tunnel IS the best compromise solution. It allows pass thru traffic a route thru the city, and provides some great surface improvements. And it rids the city of the viaduct and the Battery Street Tunnel once and for all. All this while allowing businesses to stay open during construction, and it keeps the viaduct open during construction. No other solution does all this and gives us a product in the end that Seattle will be happy with for 100+ years.
10
So what is the lid on Campbell bit? What that she'll deliver on the required number of signatures for the referendum like what she did for I-101 - 27,600 signatures?

Whether you agree with the tunnel or not - the referendum and the I-101 benefits you - if you're a tunnel supporter - a vote on the project will be the chance to register your 100% support for it.
11
@9: Interestingly enough, this new commenter is using a few verbatim talking points we heard from the dais at the council meeting. :)

Also, "100+ years"? I thought this was a 40 year project? Are we just going to keep building roads in Seattle from here to the end of time? Seattle already has thousands of lane miles of roads in the city, I'm not sure we can build too many!
12
Seattleisagreatcity (before the pro-tunnel people commandeered it), You've been drinking too much of the 150 Proof bullshit that WSODT and their strategic messaging operatachiks have been pumping out.
13
@11 they keep making stuff up.

The funny thing is, most of the things I say are taken straight from the WSDOT and SDOT documents, I just translate them from engineerspeak (my first language) to marketingspeak (my second language).

Still a very very bad idea to build that Tunnel.

Got $200 a barrel oil?

Cause that's what they're projecting in the business news outside the US MSM.
14
Sorry Will,
it is a very very good idea to build the tunnel. Without it we will have 110,000 cars idling in traffic on the surface because there is no way another viaduct is being built. And as much as I support and use transit the reality is most people will still drive cars. Even new electric cars and other new technologies of the future. Oh yes you could go on about the energy it takes to dig the tunnel, and the energy it takes to operate the tunnel. I got news for you: we live in a large dynamic city where we use energy to keep people, goods, and services moving. Of course the energy use will be mitigated as much as possible but it will never be perfect. Go live on an isolated island with a bonfire if you are so concerned.

When will opponents face reality and look at the big picture instead of digging in your heals on one or two sub plots. What is your solution to keep traffic moving during construction? What is your solution to minimize impacts to businesses who want to stay in business? What is your solution for giving the majority of the users a bypass of the city? What is your solution to improve the waterfront? What is your solution to get us out of the mini-2 lane Battery Street Tunnel? Waiting for answers..........
15
Anti-tunnel-Annie,
nope, not at all. I just have formed my own opinion based on the facts as I have interpreted them.
I am so looking forward to the tunnel and all of the benefits, including a new and revitalized waterfront, and the reconnected streets. It is also great that Alaskan Way will connect directly with the new highway. There are so many positives that opponents don't dare talk about them. I say bring on a vote because more of us city residents will approve the tunnel agreements than oppose. The truth is most people have moved on from this topic and are tired of the debate. The debate only matters to a small group of people like us.
16
Baconcat,
must be coincidence then because I certainly wasn't at that meeting.
As for 100+ years, yes the tunnel is a 100+ year solution. Tunnels last a long time. Look at the 100+ year old railroad tunnel under Seattle. And it was originally built before modern technology.
17
If not for the tolls, I might buy your story, SIAGC.

But the only way anyone will pay the steep tunnel toll is if traffic is unbearably slow on alternate routes, a calculation which makes nightmare traffic on alternate routes a foregone conclusion: drivers won't make the decision to use the tunnel UNTIL the other routes get bad, not before. That is, unless the other routes become ALWAYS awful due to the toll avoidance.

See how that works?
18
Free lunch,
I understand what you are saying about tolls. But what toll amount are you referring to? The worst case scenario highest toll? Or a more likely moderate toll amount? Makes a big difference.
Most traffic using the tunnel from the south will be using it to bypass the city because of the vehicles exiting at the new downtown exit near the stadiums. (only 12 blocks from the existing Seneca Street exit). From the north some will exit before the north portal and drive into town via Belltown. And others will use the tunnel if they need to get to a more southern location in the city, like they do today to use the !st Ave exit.
Bottom line is there is no perfect solution. The 100% surface solution dumps all vehicles on city streets. This is clearly a non-starter and the worst option. Building another viaduct doesn't have enough support, and will devistate local businesses. Plus we would have a taller and wider viaduct than we have today. Who would do that to a city waterfront in the 21st century?
19
This anti-tunnel campaign sure is a crew of haters. Sad creatures.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.