Looks like Seattle is getting a new tunnel.

[csudvm2003]

Vote #1: YES! Let's have it.
Vote #2: Yes! We still want it!
Vote #3: We want it! Stop spending our money on elections and dig!
Vote #4: Yes! We want it!
Vote #5: Nope. Don't want it anymore. Let's raise taxes instead!

[70Ford]

Originally Posted by XXclimberX

who cares how much the tunnel costs. 20 years from now the people of Seattle will be thankful the viaduct is gone.

Yeah. Things like this, when ramrodded, rarely come back to haunt you.

Former Attorney General L. Scott Harshbarger joins Pike toll suit - BostonHerald.com

Most of the time. How do these things go 5 thousand million dollars over budget, anyways? That's 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 single 1 dollar bills.

If someone gave me 5 bucks, I'd be happy. If someone gave me 5,000 million bucks, I'd be really happy. If someone took 5,000 million bucks from me, I'd be pretty mad. . Of course, this would never happen in Seattle...the fiscally responsible land of milk and honey.

[HeyHolliday!]

I always liked driving on the viaduct as it gave you a nice view of downtown and the sound. Now that they are going to get rid of the viaduct and replace it with a tunnel I think they should turn the above ground into public space and connect it to Myrtle Edwards Park. I know it would not help traffic but in my opinion they could use the space to help make downtown even more interesting. They could put something interesting like some space for bars, small vendors, a skatepark, or just anything that could help bring more of a feeling of community in Seattle. It could also help Seattle's hurting tourism industry. Of course they just going to replace the ground above the tunnel with more roads thus meaning that Seattlites are writing a $4 billion check (and probably more) just so they can have somewhat of a prettier view.

[franklin42]

Originally Posted by HeyHolliday!

I always liked driving on the viaduct as it gave you a nice view of downtown and the sound. Now that they are going to get rid of the viaduct and replace it with a tunnel I think they should turn the above ground into public space and connect it to Myrtle Edwards Park. I know it would not help traffic but in my opinion they could use the space to help make downtown even more interesting. They could put something interesting like some space for bars, small vendors, a skatepark, or just anything that could help bring more of a feeling of community in Seattle. It could also help Seattle's hurting tourism industry. Of course they just going to replace the ground above the tunnel with more roads thus meaning that Seattlites are writing a $4 billion check (and probably more) just so they can have somewhat of a prettier view.

That is what they did/are doing in Boston. The downtown area looks SO much nicer now that there are parks and green space where the old green eyesore used to be. Hope they do something similar in Seattle!

[blondandfun]

Originally Posted by LongDawson

I don't understand how, because half-way through they will find an ancient native American pile of sacred rocks, putting the entire project into automatic stop/halt.

Aside from that I think a tunnel is a great idea. Lots of countries building tunnels at relatively low cost, such as where my wife is from the average income is very very low yet in about 10 years they built a fantastic underground system that connects to a massive above-ground skytrain. It's hard to believe what other countries can do, but we are stuck with rotten infrastructure. We are supposed to be such a great country, but we are wasting our money on a mysterious "weapons of mass destruction" trillion dollar war invasion. A sales job put upon us by Mr Wolfowitz et al. Why are they not in jail?

It is really important to study how other countries can do this at such an affordable cost, and for US citizens to demand an end to funding an "attack dog" military which is so counterproductive and wasteful of our labor.

I believe in Seattle redundant environmental studies and legal fees will constitute what percentage of the final cost? Far too much.

Those are my thoughts.

As long as they aren't caught up on giving the contracts to minorities and instead focus on QUALITY design/construction firms it will go well.

My guess is that the WA state Environmental division will be reviewing the design... that takes the longest and they might have problems with it (they need to justify their existence somehow)

I think they will HAVE to do this without ground disturbance because it would literally be impossible to prevent pollution from entering the waters... I'd be interested to know how they accomplish this, I bet you Discovery Channel will pick up on it, hopefully.

2 thumbs up Seattle!

Oh, and BTW, an earthuake in your region would likely cause waters to rise if in the bay... so the tunnell would be flooded anyways and there would be more casualties FYI

[BellevueGuy]

Great news =)

Seattle waterfront without viaduct has great potentials to be awesome! Hope they will get their act together and create something similar to Chicago.

And the senate made the right decision that Seattle city should bear any cost overruns.

[70Ford]

State audit blasts King County over lack of oversight of taxpayer money

Investigators from the Washington State Auditor's Office found selected country construction projects cost $26 million more than initially authorized and that jobs are often completed late but rarely with a contractor penalty for tardiness. Rare, too, was any county audit of how it spent millions on construction projects.

************************
Welcome to Seattle.