FoS.blog: The Friends of Seattle blog

At Upcoming Open Houses, the Public Can Comment on the Bored-Tunnel Plan

From the State Department of Transportation:

Learn more about the bored tunnel recommendation - Attend a public scoping open house on Feb. 23 and 24
You’re invited to attend a public scoping open house and get a first look at the bored tunnel recommendation to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. These meetings are an opportunity to review current project information and tell us what issues- such as noise, air quality, traffic, etc.- should be considered in the central waterfront environmental document.

Last month, Gov. Chris Gregoire, King County Executive Ron Sims and Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels announced their recommendation to replace the central waterfront portion of the Alaskan Way Viaduct. The recommendation includes an approximately 1.7 mile bored tunnel beneath downtown, a new waterfront surface street, transit investments, and downtown waterfront and surface street improvements. The central waterfront seawall between Colman Dock and Pine Street will also be replaced.

At the scoping open house, you can learn more about the tunnel as well as investments in city streets, transit, and the tunnel’s environmental process. The meetings will also feature information on accessing the tunnel from West Seattle and Northwest neighborhoods such as Ballard and Magnolia.

You’ll also be able to submit comments at the open house in writing or verbally to a court reporter.

Both open houses will be held from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. at the following locations:

Monday, Feb. 23
Adams Elementary School
6110 28th Ave. NW
Ballard
 
Tuesday, Feb. 24
Madison Middle School
3429 45th Ave. SW
West Seattle

If you can’t make it in person, you can also submit comments or questions directly to the program by mail, e-mail or phone.

Mail: Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program
999 Third Ave., Suite 2424
Seattle, WA 98104

Sign up for WSDOT's email updates on the Alaskan Way Viaduct project.

“There Won’t Be Any Cost Overruns,” Promises State Transportation Secretary Regarding the Bored Tunnel

Bold. We'll see.

Anti-Bored-Tunnel Initiative 99 Is Filed

So reports the Seattle Times. I-99 sponsor Elizabeth Campbell and her comrades need 18,000 signatures by July 20.

Seattle Times Ed Board Lauds Bored-Tunnel Proposal for Replacing Viaduct

Using words such as "visionary," "complicated," and "serious" to describe the bored-tunnel proposal for replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct, the Seattle Times editorial board appears to have suddenly developed a taste for tunnels and a tolerance for taxes. We can't figure out why, though. The ed. board obviously loves that the plan might result in less disruption than would the alternatives:

In dramatic contrast to the earlier tunnel plan, sequencing of events requires much less down time for waterfront businesses and streets, with obvious deleterious spillover onto Interstate 5. The old plan would have resulted in perhaps six years of disruption; this approach involves less severe interruption for about half that time. This is key: The viaduct doesn't come down until the tunnel is finished. We've seen what long construction projects can do to a neighborhood. They can kill business and stymie mobility.

Other than that, however, we're hard pressed to see why the ed. board is excited. Usually hostile to new taxes, the board doesn't seem bothered by the prospect of $1.4 billion in new local taxes (at least) and $400 million collected from tolls on the tunnel:

The cost of the project is pegged at $4.25 billion, with most of the total the state share, $2.8 billion already in hand [ed.: this is a misleading characterization of the state's contribution; it is not "in hand," but merely promised, and the state's commitment is $2.8 billion but the state budget currently allots only $2.4 billion towards the project; presumably the remainder will be funded with tolls], and the local portion coming from specified new tax sources. No need to be naive. The cost is a guesstimate; the final number will be higher [ed.: yes, it will be higher; engineering is currently only 1% complete]. Very importantly, increased costs to local residents will be high but borne over many years. The sincere hope is that the economy will improve.

Sure, higher taxes may be "borne over many years," which certainly decreases their sting, but these higher taxes will decrease the likelihood that other new taxes could be levied to fund bus-service expansion (other than the service increases included in the bored-tunnel plan), the streetcar network, and the Bicycle Master Plan. So the bored-tunnel will preclude other investments in Seattle's transportation infrastructure. Brushing aside this consideration and the huge new tax bill, the board seems to view this as a jobs program:

The current recession is one factor that helps make this project more attractive. The convergence of a jobs package and economic stimulus combined with the longtime vision of connecting the city to the waterfront gives this package momentum.

Um, all alternatives for replacing the Viaduct would create jobs. And the surface-transit options would also open the city to the waterfront. So it's hard to see how these are comparative advantages for the bored-tunnel plan. Still, the board dismisses the alternatives, namely the surface-transit options:

Another factor is that all those supporters of a so-called surface-transit option had to realize that the capacity needs of their favorite solution could never be met. The line of red lights would have choked the streets with traffic.

The point of surface-transit options, however, was never to try to move as many vehicles as could the existing highway or as would a replacement highway. The point was to move people, and to do it as cost-efficiently as possible and in a way that would reorient our transportation investment to a progressive mix of facilities for walking, biking, and riding transit.

The Stranger: Tunnel Advocates Viaduct Could Inadvertently Boost the Chopp Plan

Erica C. Barnett of The Stranger raises an interesting point:

The Great Wall of Chopp can still be beaten, but only if the people who oppose it—that would be just about everyone—can get together behind an option instead of bickering among themselves. And that's a big if—currently, opponents of the Chopp option are widely divided, with some (like King County executive Ron Sims) supporting a surface option and others (like King County Council member Larry Phillips) apparently still favoring a tunnel, which viaduct planners rejected as prohibitively expensive.

Tunnel advocates want to see a "surface/sub-surface" option on the table, even though it wasn't one of the two "hybrid" alternatives recommended by WSDOT. The P-I editorial board and Joel Connelly agree.

Upcoming Public Meetings on Viaduct Replacement Options

From the WSDOT Viaduct Project team's email update:

We are coming to a neighborhood near you to gather comments on proposed       replacement options for the viaduct’s central waterfront section. Come       learn about the plan to take down this section of the viaduct in 2012.

In September, WSDOT, King County, City of Seattle and the Federal       Highway Administration are hosting a series of public scoping open houses       throughout Seattle. These meetings are an opportunity to review current       project information and tell us what issues- such as noise, air quality,       traffic, etc.- should be considered in the central waterfront       environmental document. Project information is available at www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/viaduct/centralwaterfront.htm.

The meetings will be held at the following locations:

Downtown
Sept. 11
4 – 7 p.m.
Plymouth       Congregational Church, Hildebrand Hall
1217 Sixth Ave., Seattle

West Seattle
Sept. 16
5:30 – 7:30       p.m.
Fauntleroy Church
9140 California Ave. SW, Seattle

Ballard
Sept. 18
5:30 – 7:30 p.m.
Leif       Erikson Hall
2245 NW 57th St., Seattle