Sound Politics: Legislators question Nickels' Viaduct Plan

August 03, 2006

Legislators question Nickels' Viaduct Plan

Seattle Times: "Funding for viaduct questioned"

"We have serious concerns about the viability of several funding sources outlined by the mayor of Seattle for the additional, $1 billion cost of the tunnel alternative," wrote House Speaker Frank Chopp and Reps. Mary Lou Dickerson and Helen Sommers. "Most of the sources rely on future actions such as a public vote or action by Congress or the Legislature -- and the funding would not be available until these actions are taken."

In some cases the speculative funding would not be available, in the best case, until 2011. It's good that the legislators are providing the adult supervision that is sorely lacking in City Hall.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 03, 2006 12:25 PM | Email This

Comments

1. this from Chopp and liberals? guess even a drunk has a lucid moment;

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on August 3, 2006 12:37 PM

2. Looks like even the legislature possesses a small amount of common sense at times. I think reading between the lines the folks in Olympia realize that if the magic fairy wand does not produce the expected funding, the state will be expected to come up with the shortfall, something not politically wise with the voters. Considering how badly managed and overpriced the other transportation projects have been, it is high time elected officials start taking a more realistic look at how grand schemes are going to be funded before proceeding.

Posted by: Burdabee on August 3, 2006 12:44 PM

3. Am I the only one that thinks that a tunnel in an earthquake prone area is insanity?

When the box is full, the box is full and nothing to be done is going to improve the situation to any meaningful degree.

Is urinating to windward just a full time hobby here?

Posted by: Fox3 on August 3, 2006 01:07 PM

4. I have been questioning Nickelbag's political wisdom, in as much as he has been campaigning for this boondoggle while Boston has been in the news every day for the last month. Anyone with any smarts would have shut up about it, at least until Boston was no longer in the news.

Posted by: JDH on August 3, 2006 01:08 PM

5. It's nice to read that House Speaker Frank Chopp and Reps. Mary Lou Dickerson and Helen Sommers have "stepped up to the plate" and pointed out that the funding is speculative and will not be available until 2011

Although the tunnel would be nice, its estimated cost of $4? billion is almost twice as much as a retrofit/rebuild.

Plus the tunnel is a 7% grade which the tractor trailers cannot legally drive on

Unless Paul Allen wants to pay for the tunnel (and we'll name it after him), let's go with a solution that we can afford and the tractor trailers can use

Posted by: Green Lake Mark on August 3, 2006 01:40 PM

6. Fox3: No, you're not. If I'm not mistaken there is fault going form east to west right through the middle of Seattle and heading across Puget Sound.

The thing that also boggles me about this tunnel is that they are going to have to start digging the 7 degree approach 3/4 of the way to the Aurora Bridge (aka: George Washington Bridge) to get underground by the time it hits the waterfront. Maybe further if they need to get under Broad street. This thing will wipeout access to whole neighborhoods. The insanity of the Big Dig will look like a curb job compared to this monster.

Now might be a good time for a few positive reinforcement e-mails to our elected representatives in Olympia (It's the water).

Posted by: G Jiggy on August 3, 2006 04:22 PM

7. fiscal conservation from a democrat?

Is it a fever? Could get him to cough on Bush so he could catch that illness?

Posted by: Andy on August 3, 2006 06:02 PM

8. The Bridge is the way to go. Everyone was so bitter and divided between retrofit and tunnel that no one was thinking outside the box.

Then along comes Earl Bell with the obvious solution. A beautiful bridge will frame the waterfront, allow for a park like setting once the existing viaduct is gone, eliminate most of the concerns with traffic disruption during construction, and cost far less than any other proposal.

It's a no brainer. And the Bridge will win because it's the "common ground" that will allow all the hotheads on either side to come together and feel like they reached "consensus," sing Kumbaya, etc.

Nickels should give up, the tunnel option is dead even if he has not admitted it yet.

Posted by: Jeff B. on August 3, 2006 11:57 PM

9. My Goodness, The Viaduct is still standing???

I thought it was falling down a year ago...Or at least that is what Gov. Queen Christine said.

Jeezzz, I thought is was a done deal....I need to keep up on the news.

Posted by: Chris on August 4, 2006 06:55 AM