With voters watching the pillars of our government showing their age, cracks and all, its likely the Mega-Projects such as the Deep Bore Tunnel are doomed for any long term debt support.
For me, it's about faith. They continually sugar coat the projects then point fingers at someone or something else when things go sour.
Brightwater Sewer, Sound Transit, SR520, Tolling, Metro all come to mind locally. Wars we can't win or afford, dismantling of our societal safety nets and health care reform are the hot buttons nationally.
In the meantime, I watch my own foundations crumbling from beneath, with little control over the outcome.
Do I have faith the DBT is worthy of allowing my local government to borrow billions on my behalf? The short answer is no! I've read the environmental impact statement, listened to the debates, such as the City Club one the other night, and tried to reassure myself our elected officials crystal ball is better than my own gut feeling, but I don't get any 'warm and cozy' vibes.
No, it's better to err on the side of doing nothing, or just closing the viaduct for a few months and see what happens. That's the real test of how people will adjust to doing a 'No-Build' option, with two benefits - no more scare tactics if the damn thing falls down, and no more hype over how bad the gridlock is going to be.
If the vote is a NO vote, then Governor should make good on the promise to shut 'er down.

And of course the real purpose of this silly article is to gloss over the fact that an elevated solution is still the superior option for the corridor and that the majority of voters still prefer it. Murray should be ashamed to have his name attached to this kind of "brochure No. 7" brand of journalism.

Senator, if you have a map, a pencil and a calculator all of this will become clear to you.

Don't thank me, just do the right thing.

jmrolls, you are wrong. The purpose of this article is to highlight the amount of hyperbole on both sides of the pro and con promoters. Not the issue. The issue is far more than your rather simplistic view. Both sides warn of world collapse if the other side wins. Amazingly similar to the current debate over whether the Democrats or Republicans are the agents of Hell. (I say both).

Hey! Maybe no one has suggested this idea: why not REPAIR the Viaduct?
Just as we did with the Spokane Street Viaduct, which is on-time and on-budget (of $165 million for roughly half the work done for the AWV!)

Try it! You'll like it!

Good article. my concerns are protecting the elevated view(s) and the impact of the tunnel dig on downtown seattle. With the tunnle we give a world class view and a stunning drive for.....nothing. and in doing so there's a very good chance that downtown seattle will move from an open air drug market to an open air drug supermarket!! drive by deals, empty storefronts, a real decline ala pioneer square. it's my sense of what will happen based on living downtown 40 years and having watched the results of the bus tunnel on 3rd avenue, the effect of metro on 2nd avenue and the effect of bart in san francisco on market street. and then i come back again mentally to the elevated views provided by the viaduct.

chapala21: The only 'views' that David and Senator Murray care about are those of their developer friends, according to which nothing else now matters than taking down that development-obstructing viaduct. Oh, it's so ugly! (Matter of opinion.) Oh, it's so dangerous! (Yet hundreds of thousands of vehicles drive over it every week without incident.) And pay no attention to any talk of possibly turning a car-free viaduct into an elevated park as per the High Line in Manhattan. No, the developers want that land. So just bend over, Seattle!

Disaster? We're already living it. So when you ask if the current political/economic climate has been a disaster, it depends on whom you ask.

If you were on Basic Health, then yes, the current political/economic climate has been a disaster. If you're a teacher, then yes, the current political/economic climate has been a disaster. If you're a public worker, then yes, the current political/economic climate has been a disaster. If you're a student, then yes, the current political/economic climate has been a disaster. If you're a voter, then yes, the current political/economic climate has been a disaster. If you're a small business owner, then yes, the current political/economic climate has been a disaster.

In this issue, however, we're seeing largess and clout being tossed around that suggest for some this political/economic climate has been a benefit. And they're willing to abuse it further. Bad deal. If we're so critical of Kemper Freeman stacking Bellevue City Council, why aren't we casting the same wary eye on the influx of pro-tunnel money to incumbents? They're the same thing. No good.

A megaproject is as it sounds -- it's mega. That indicates mega costs and mega scope. In an era where we need a scalpel and not a hatchet, the idea that the only path "forward" is to spend a lot of money and make really big things is a dreadful anachronism of fifties freeway freedom fantasies that has only served to line pockets and boost campaigns.

Reject the tunnel and work with the tools Seattle has always enjoyed: speedy smaller projects, steady work and a propensity toward solving problems with solutions rather than simply overrunning them with borrowed money.

-fgruben you have no idea what the motives are behind this article. But if you look at what has gone before, you will see that the tactic used by the tunnel/surface folks was to sweep the superior elevated option off of the table in Dec. 2008 and then pretend it isn't there. And if we let ourselves get distracted by articles about what you call, “highlighting the amount of hyperbole on both sides of the pro and con promoters” (whatever that means) we might forget that there’s still time to at least reconsider an elevated solution.

Is that simple enough for you?

Alexjon. You ask a great question. "why aren't we casting the same wary eye on the influx of pro-tunnel money to incumbents? They're the same thing. No good.

The answer to that question is that money is power and the people with money decide the debate and they decide what projects get a thumbs up and what projects get a thumbs down. It's amazing how many people, including jniles from the Discovery institute were highly critical of LRT and ST and analyzed every last word uttered by anyone from the agency or even from LRT supporters like me. The ironic thing is that the vocal critics were critical in saving ST from its own govt lethargy and hubris.

However, when it comes to highway projects, numbers don't seem to matter. The money will just appear, only like magic. The yard stick for LRT was that not one shovel of dirt be turned until all of the funding was in place.

The only hole bigger than the one they are about to dig is the budget hole in the pot of money that isn't there. This project is billions short of money. We haven't even gotten to the Tea Party shutdown of the highway trust fund, which is next on the agenda. So any federal money is in dire jeopardy.

http://www.projo.com/news/content/TRANSPORTATION_FORUM_04-09-11_BUNDRJ8_v7.1864c8e.html

Here's what the Feds told Rhode Island in April:
"Rhode Island officials shouldn’t count on the federal government to bail the state out of its transportation funding troubles, an expert told the audience at a forum Wednesday."

And variable tolling? What investment banks is going to issue bonds on variable tolls when there are dozens of alternate routes to bypass this tunnel? This is starting to make the ETC's monorail funding plan look good.

jmrolls. after rereading this article, I could find nothing in it that tried to sell either side. As to an elevated solution. The state said it isn't going to do that. So who would?? the City of Seattle?? It's state property, not City, so whether we like it or not, it is a state project, not a city project. Would the state abort the project if the vote goes no ( on a sortof obscure parlimentary point, not actually on whether to built the tunnel or not). Good question.

Like the referendum in 2007, this vote will only serve as a distraction and ensure that the choices continue to be between the two worst ideas. I think they call it sub-optimization.

You're right about the balance though...both bad ideas are equally promoted in this article.

Until I read this, it hadn't fully registered that the proposed tunnel ends right on the doorsteps of the Gates Foundation and Allen Town. Lame.

David,

Thank you for posting your article about the upcoming vote on the tunnel project on Crosscut. I worry that some of the information you gave is inaccurate and thus, will sway readers' decisions. You said in the part about who to blame for the tunnel going in "that target would be the assorted fat cats who stand to benefit by the huge tunnel project, and the associated corporate interests (the Port, tourism, Boeing, downtown developers, Japanese tunnel-boring companies, etc.)"

The problem with this is that Japanese boring companies would not benefit from it. In fact, it's my understanding that a Seattle boring company would benefit from it, helping maintain stable jobs here in the city. The Robbins Company, one of the largest boring companies on the planet, is slated to work on that job. There office is located here in King County.

I don't disagree at all that there are issues surrounding the tunnel going in. I would just hate to see voters' decisions influenced because they think Japanese industry will gain from us when that simply isn't the case.

Thanks! :)

I find it amusing that people keep suggesting we close or tear down the viaduct without replacing its capacity, and just see what happens. As if that has not been done.

When the viaduct was closed for a few days after the earthquake which damaged it, traffic was a disaster, especially between W. Seattle and downtown.

Whenever the viaduct is closed on weekends for inspection, traffic on I-5 slows to a crawl.

Even now, when one lane of the viaduct in each direction, south of the stadiums, has been closed for several weeks, traffic out of W. Seattle in the mornings is terrible -- backed up across the W. Seattle Bridge.

And in the afternoon peak hours, southbound traffic on the viaduct backs up from the point where one lane is closed, all the way north of the Galer Street pedestrian overpass on Aurora Ave. N. It may be backed up all the way to the Aurora Bridge at times, but I have not walked that far north to take a look.

So, just narrowing the viaduct from 3 lanes in each direction to 2 lanes in each direction south of the stadiums has caused major traffic problems for the past several weeks. And people think we could close the entire viaduct without causing any problems?

girl...: please explain this:

The Robbins Company
29100 Hall Street
Solon, Ohio 44139 USA
voice: +1 440 248 3303
fax: +1 440 248 1702

Robbins And Company
818 Southwest 142nd Street
Seattle, WA 98166-1554
(206) 244-1023

This from publicola:

http://publicola.com/2011/08/10/campaign-fizz-the-challengers-the-money-and-the-tunnel/

The pro-tunnel campaign, Let’s Move Forward, has raised nearly half a million dollars in the runup to the August 16 election deadline (ballots must be postmarked by that date), and they’ve already spent $46,000 on TV ads, with more almost certainly to come.

Anti-tunnel campaign Protect Seattle Now, meanwhile, remained nearly $2,000 in debt, with $95,374 raised overall. This month, the campaign spent $577 on robocalls and $3,753 on a campaign insert in the Seattle Times. They do not plan to do any mailings.

Follow the money.

@Lincoln: Traffic is not the problem, SOVs are the problem. SOVs don't scale. Most people in this tech-savvy city understand this. Bill Gates understands this, which is why he donated a bunch of money to the Discovery Institute to have them come up with the DBT idea. The DBT is a gold-plated, tolled lexus-lane right to SLU. The DBT will be fantastic for anyone travelling between seatac and SLU who has $5 to spare.

The current viaduct is totally congested at rush hours. Any of the current proposals, including a retro-fit will not solve this problem. The rational choice is ST5 to get us started, then increase transit to actually move commuters into and out of downtown. This is how almost every city in the world solves this problem--with solutions that scale.

For those who have eyes to see, the end is not in sight. To "delay" this insanely reckless tunnel proposal advances better options. The corporate notion of globalization heralded by Constantine is equally reckless. Ed Murray may have sat on transportation committees, but his credentials are in Billion Dollar deal-making rather than an understanding of transportation engineering expertice.

The end is NOT in sight because a better replacement option instead of the "INSANE=DANGER" Bored Tunnel has not been formally approved, dahling, by those who formally approve such troublesome freeway matters which oh so disappointingly deprive them of regular golf outings and other more entertaining pasttimes.

I have already voted for the Referendum.

The late voters may have an opinion but simply do not care enough about this particular vote to bother. This is a matter of motivating and less about lobbying a bunch of undecided voters. Latching on to other things on the primary ballot isn't going to do it.
I'm guessing I'll see more theatrics in the next few days.

Maybe the particulars can express their well reasoned arguments through interpretive dance, or a marching band, rather than the crude street theater politicos subject the public to.

You can tell people are tired of it when we lose our desire to derisively mock the event.

You're no fun anymore Seattle.

“You're no fun anymore Seattle.”

Riiiight . . . this isn’t fun, like the monorail authority and Sound Transit were fun.

Has everyone noticed how the same individuals and groups behind the monorail authority and Sound Transit are pushing this AWV tunnel megaproject?

The Seattle Popular Monorail Authority was designed by the same people and entities who put together Sound Transit and its abusive ballot measures. Moreover, those sister taxing districts are flawed for the same reasons (only in Sound Transit’s case the damage to the public and the economy is FAR worse, because of its vast scale).

Essentially the same legal template was used for both those taxing districts, so they would be heavy tax imposers that lacked appropriate oversight and accountability measures. The state and local enabling legislation for SPMA was drafted by the private law firms in town that would use them to make money as bond counsel.

Here’re examples of the same characters that were behind Sound Transit showing their support of the monorail authority – this is from the 2002 voters guide.

“Broad support. Monorail supporters include League of Women Voters, Washington Conservation Voters, King County Labor Council, King County Democratic Party, Sierra Club, Speaker Frank Chopp, environmentalist Denis Hayes, Dick Falkenbury, Peter Sherwin, Judy Runstad and many more.”

That “Statement For” in the 2002 voters guide was signed by Greg Nickels, Dan Evans, and Jim McDermott. Jamie Pedersen was one of the SPMA’s main outside lawyers.

Here’s an editorial in the Times from a key municipal-client law firm, and a labor honcho:

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20030205&slug;=monorail05 .

Those are the same groups and individuals now pushing for the deep bore tunnel.

The Cascadia Center introduced the deep bore tunnel concept in October, 2008. Representatives of the law firms responsible for designing those two taxing districts (K&L; Gates and Foster Pepper) sit on the board of the Discovery Institute; they call the shots for the Cascadia Center. This deep bore tunnel is a product of the same self-interested cabal that ginned up the other big, abusive, and essentially wrong-headed megaprojects around here.

Even the financing plan for the WSDOT SR-99 work is comparable to what Sound Transit uses (and the SPMA used): lots of new bonding, very little federal grant money, and limitless spending budgets.

Regarding the jobs in Japan, I should have been more specific. It is Hitachi Zosen of Tokyo that was chosen to design and build the tunnel boring machine. That company is also supplying the tunnel boring machines for Sound Transit’s Capitol Hill Station to Pine Street segment. Typically these huge machines are built locally, to be near the actual tunnel.

@David Brewster: Why aren't the anti-tunnel people playing the Discovery Institute/Cascadia Center card? This seems like a natural in left leaning, secular Seattle.

To taint the tunnel with its origin in the bowels of the Discovery Institute and all that that entails (Intelligent Design, Right Wing Christianist Agenda) would sway a few votes.

On the question of retrofits and repair of the viaduct, here is my perspective: It is perfectly safe to drive on until a wrecking ball or earthquake destroys it. Quoting the Viaduct protectors at WSDOT:

"Is the viaduct still a safe structure on which to drive?

"Routine safety inspections and maintenance keep the viaduct and seawall safe for public use. In 2008, crews strengthened four column footings where the viaduct had settled approximately five-and-a-half inches into the ground since the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. The column safety project limits settlement in this area of the viaduct and prevents further damage to the structure.

"We also installed a system designed to close the viaduct automatically in the event of a moderate to severe earthquake in the greater Seattle area. The new automated closure system consists of traffic gates at all viaduct access points controlled by an earthquake detection system. When the earthquake monitoring system detects significant ground movement, it will simultaneously lower all nine traffic gates and safely close the viaduct in two minutes."

So while the Seattle process grinds on, we can drive with comfort on the Viaduct.

The State is pushing this project. No one else really matters because the State's decided to do it. You may not like that, that may be immoral, that may be stupid, that may not be economical, that may be dangerous, but none of that matters. So figure out what you're going to talk instead about when the damned thing starts being built.

How about talking about who pays for the bailout? Read this article below. This one line says it all:

"....the $150-million road could wind up costing more than $1-billion."

http://www.sptimes.com/News/071600/State/Flawed_figures_leave_.shtml

Flawed figures leave toll roads running flat

A consulting firm has grossly overestimated traffic projections for five different projects in Florida, leaving the state to deal with the cost overruns.

By CRAIG PITTMAN
© St. Petersburg Times, published July 16, 2000

At $1.25 per car, the Osceola Parkway was supposed to pay for itself. But five years after the Osceola opened it has attracted such meager traffic that taxpayers must subsidize it. County officials say that by the time all its debts are paid, the $150-million road could wind up costing more than $1-billion.

......