Comments

1
Whenever I look at a picture of the mayor, I see a stuffed shirt with a bobble-head doll perched on top.

Am I the only one?
2
I think they should hire someone who has experience in one of the thousands of other successful tunnels that have been bored all over the world and find out why our project sucks so hard. The guys who dug the Gotthard Base Tunnel, for instance, which is almost as big around and about 45 (yes, FORTY-FIVE) times as long, which is being completed before schedule in Switzerland.
3
@2 You mean someone who might actually take into consideration the geological history & composition of the area, and develop an appropriate solution? That's not the Seattle Way!
4
I like the "some other type of tunnel" option. Like maybe an above ground tunnel, what about something like my old childhood hamsters had attached to their cages, with the maze-like transparent plastic tubing?
5
@3, it's not geology that popped the seals on those bearings or whatever it was.
6
"an above ground tunnel"

I love it. Just put it on top of the Viaduct.
7
monorail through the tunnel! why? cuz SEATTLE
8
Just tear the viaduct down. Things will sort themselves out. Then we'll figure out if we need this silly tunnel or not.
9
With how much money we wasted on this ridiculous boondoggle, we could have made a world class subway system and just have torn down the ugly viaduct. But I guess Seattle can continue investing billions into projects like a stupid tunnel that would in fact handle traffic WORSE than the viaduct we have today. How about we just demolish all paved roads and just take mules to work just like the good ol' days. Maybe a horse and buggy.

I better be careful of what I say because I'm sure Mayor Murray would actually approve of ideas like those if he read this comment!
10
@8 Tear it down before it falls down. I would like to know how much money the construction industry has padded the pockets of our "trusty" legislators to continue this embarrassing project. I know the company I work for has made a fortune from this boondoggle.
11
I only know how to dig A Tunnel, not Some Other Type of Tunnel. I like flower arranging though. Does that help?
@BerthaDeBlues
12
I favor a tar sands railway to run the soon to be ex-Mayor out of town on, if he keeps ignoring the citizens
13
But @8 FTW
14
@4 - Love this. Maybe we can team up with Chihuly on it.
15
I may be giving the mayor too much credit, but I can think of two possible things. First, by "a different type of tunnel", he means a different way of digging the tunnel. By that I mean cut and cover. The big problem with cut and cover is that it is very disruptive. The viaduct has to be closed down, for one thing (and it disrupts the surface streets). But if the viaduct slips anymore, then it has to be torn down anyway (which is why we are getting rid of it). So maybe the thing to do is bit the bullet and go cut and cover.

The other thing he may be talking about is a different tunnel, meaning a transit tunnel. This would be in a different location, next to, but just east of, the existing transit tunnel. It could carry buses and eventually trains. The location is a lot less risky, and this could move a lot of people, especially since the other tunnel will be primarily for handling trains very soon (buses will be kicked out of the transit tunnel). Of course, that would be built by the folks that built the tunnels for Sound Transit. Those engineers know what they are doing, and don't have the shoddy reputation of the people trying to build the far more difficult highway 99 tunnel.

Non-tunnel options include building additional freeway infrastructure, as well as added transit. For example, the original "surface and I-5" option, or maybe an HOV ramp from 99 over to the SoDo busway. That would allow buses from West Seattle to be (largely) in their own lane after they leave West Seattle. It would certainly move a lot more people than the tunnel ever would.
16
some other kind of tunnel. Like cut and cover. the problem is that our "leaders are terrified of negative public opinion. Even though cut and cover tunnels are cheaper and much faster. They are disruptive and unsightly while underway. Murray's fear of a backlash if this tunnel fails is a symptom of the same fear. It's actyally funny that the fear of failure that drove them to make the poor choices they did may cause the failure. We are geologically a much better place for cut and cover tunnels than bored tunnels.

17
Cut and cover would be tricky given the fact that it would have to go under dozens of downtown buildings. The entire route would have to change and by the time you do that you're looking at a bankrupt state.

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.