Extra Fizz: Seattleites Don't Think the Tunnel is Done Deal

This is really crazy that this is even still a discussion. I sat through the stakeholder process and in the end, the state will not put any money into a surface street option (I supported anything that would open our waterfront). none at all. this is something the candidates for office neglect to tell people when they are campaigning. They also neglect to tell people that the funds allocated for the tunnel will not automatically go to fund Seattle schools and parks – personally I think that the funds will go to resurface rural roads ‘a la’ stimulus funds.

There is a reason this process took so long, and that reason is that the state wanted (and still wants) to shove a replacement viaduct down our throats and Seattle has been trying to stop that from happening and has almost lost that battle many times. the only reason that a replacement isn’t being rebuilt AS I AM TYPING is due to the awesome and hard work of Seattle electeds and I am grateful for that hard work.

The fact that there is funding and agreement for this tunnel is a friggin miracle. The same will not be true if the surface option is revived (which I don’t think will happen). How will Seattle pay for that entire project by itself (+ Seawall)? This is the piece noone is talking about and the costs will be much higher than the portion of the tunnel Seattle is responsible for now.

Weeeh…sorry for the rant…it’s hot.

This is really crazy that this is even still a discussion. I sat through the stakeholder process and in the end, the state will not put any money into a surface street option (I supported anything that would open our waterfront). none at all. this is something the candidates for office neglect to tell people when they are campaigning. They also neglect to tell people that the funds allocated for the tunnel will not automatically go to fund Seattle schools and parks – personally I think that the funds will go to resurface rural roads ‘a la’ stimulus funds.

There is a reason this process took so long, and that reason is that the state wanted (and still wants) to shove a replacement viaduct down our throats and Seattle has been trying to stop that from happening and has almost lost that battle many times. the only reason that a replacement isn’t being rebuilt AS I AM TYPING is due to the awesome and hard work of Seattle electeds and I am grateful for that hard work.

The fact that there is funding and agreement for this tunnel is a friggin miracle. The same will not be true if the surface option is revived (which I don’t think will happen). How will Seattle pay for that entire project by itself (+ Seawall)? This is the piece noone is talking about and the costs will be much higher than the portion of the tunnel Seattle is responsible for now.

Weeeh…sorry for the rant…it’s hot.

This is really crazy that this is even still a discussion. I sat through the stakeholder process and in the end, the state will not put any money into a surface street option (I supported anything that would open our waterfront). none at all. this is something the candidates for office neglect to tell people when they are campaigning. They also neglect to tell people that the funds allocated for the tunnel will not automatically go to fund Seattle schools and parks – personally I think that the funds will go to resurface rural roads ‘a la’ stimulus funds.

There is a reason this process took so long, and that reason is that the state wanted (and still wants) to shove a replacement viaduct down our throats and Seattle has been trying to stop that from happening and has almost lost that battle many times. the only reason that a replacement isn’t being rebuilt AS I AM TYPING is due to the awesome and hard work of Seattle electeds and I am grateful for that hard work.

The fact that there is funding and agreement for this tunnel is a friggin miracle. The same will not be true if the surface option is revived (which I don’t think will happen). How will Seattle pay for that entire project by itself (+ Seawall)? This is the piece noone is talking about and the costs will be much higher than the portion of the tunnel Seattle is responsible for now.

Weeeh…sorry for the rant…it’s hot.

I hate the tunnel. I love the viaduct. I would be happy if it was replaced. I predict a tunnel will be nightmare to build and the costs will run way over the estimates.

@1:

Funding for the tunnel would indeed be a miracle.

@1:

Funding for the tunnel would indeed be a miracle.

@1:

Funding for the tunnel would indeed be a miracle.

Yes – let’s not forget that if a tunnel is not a done deal, and the surface option is still on the table, then a new elevated structure is still on the table.

Yes – let’s not forget that if a tunnel is not a done deal, and the surface option is still on the table, then a new elevated structure is still on the table.

Yes – let’s not forget that if a tunnel is not a done deal, and the surface option is still on the table, then a new elevated structure is still on the table.

What’s that you say? The tunnel’s not a done deal? Seventy percent of Seattle voters rejected it in 2007? There’s only one major mayoral candidate who’s against it?

I wonder if Mike McGinn ever gets bored of being right.

What’s that you say? The tunnel’s not a done deal? Seventy percent of Seattle voters rejected it in 2007? There’s only one major mayoral candidate who’s against it?

I wonder if Mike McGinn ever gets bored of being right.

What’s that you say? The tunnel’s not a done deal? Seventy percent of Seattle voters rejected it in 2007? There’s only one major mayoral candidate who’s against it?

I wonder if Mike McGinn ever gets bored of being right.

LeeLu @1, last I heard, the local share (city & county) of the overall tunnel project is $930,000,000.

Where is that money coming from? Whose taxes are going to be raised and/or what services are going to be cut in order for local government to come up with this money????????????????????

LeeLu @1, last I heard, the local share (city & county) of the overall tunnel project is $930,000,000.

Where is that money coming from? Whose taxes are going to be raised and/or what services are going to be cut in order for local government to come up with this money????????????????????

LeeLu @1, last I heard, the local share (city & county) of the overall tunnel project is $930,000,000.

Where is that money coming from? Whose taxes are going to be raised and/or what services are going to be cut in order for local government to come up with this money????????????????????

@6, @1 I’ve heard the $930 million number, too — and that’s not counting overruns that the city will be on the hook for. Anyone know how much the city-street option would cost? I think a billion oughta cover it.

@6, @1 I’ve heard the $930 million number, too — and that’s not counting overruns that the city will be on the hook for. Anyone know how much the city-street option would cost? I think a billion oughta cover it.

@6, @1 I’ve heard the $930 million number, too — and that’s not counting overruns that the city will be on the hook for. Anyone know how much the city-street option would cost? I think a billion oughta cover it.

@7 it would have to be city/street + seawall estimate. I’m not sure how much the Seawall would cost but the different surface options range from $800 – $1 bil (then you would + whatever the seawall is). Will end up being more than $930mil, with less capacity and open space in the end.

This is not directed at anyone but – I wish people who aren’t experts on mega project financing would stop saying ‘i think’ followed by ‘cost overruns will be ___’. Mega projects these days have better range estimations that they factor in. The price of the tunnel could very well be less than what is tagged. There were many who consulted on this project, and there take on overruns should be quoted, not opinions of reports or commentors.

@7 it would have to be city/street + seawall estimate. I’m not sure how much the Seawall would cost but the different surface options range from $800 – $1 bil (then you would + whatever the seawall is). Will end up being more than $930mil, with less capacity and open space in the end.

This is not directed at anyone but – I wish people who aren’t experts on mega project financing would stop saying ‘i think’ followed by ‘cost overruns will be ___’. Mega projects these days have better range estimations that they factor in. The price of the tunnel could very well be less than what is tagged. There were many who consulted on this project, and there take on overruns should be quoted, not opinions of reports or commentors.

@7 it would have to be city/street + seawall estimate. I’m not sure how much the Seawall would cost but the different surface options range from $800 – $1 bil (then you would + whatever the seawall is). Will end up being more than $930mil, with less capacity and open space in the end.

This is not directed at anyone but – I wish people who aren’t experts on mega project financing would stop saying ‘i think’ followed by ‘cost overruns will be ___’. Mega projects these days have better range estimations that they factor in. The price of the tunnel could very well be less than what is tagged. There were many who consulted on this project, and there take on overruns should be quoted, not opinions of reports or commentors.

@8 This mega-project is only 1-2% designed and yet people are acting all cocky, saying they know for sure that even though 90% of these mega-projects go over budget by an average of 30%, this one won’t.

The same company that did Boston’s Big Dig would be digging our tunnel and using a machine larger than a WA State Ferry to do it. No such machine even exists yet to make such a huge hole.

You really believe cost overruns won’t run Seattle’s budget into the ground? you are either lying or insanely optimistic.

@8 This mega-project is only 1-2% designed and yet people are acting all cocky, saying they know for sure that even though 90% of these mega-projects go over budget by an average of 30%, this one won’t.

The same company that did Boston’s Big Dig would be digging our tunnel and using a machine larger than a WA State Ferry to do it. No such machine even exists yet to make such a huge hole.

You really believe cost overruns won’t run Seattle’s budget into the ground? you are either lying or insanely optimistic.

And one more thing. Climate change is real. It is here and it is unconscionable to sink so much money into moving individual vehicles 1/7 miles.

If our city, county and state are going to sink $4.24 billion (+untold overruns) why can’t we have something really great – why not a subway? Why not light rail from West Seattle to Ballard? Why not bus rapid transit in dedicated bus lanes using buses like they have in London?

And one more thing. Climate change is real. It is here and it is unconscionable to sink so much money into moving individual vehicles 1/7 miles.

If our city, county and state are going to sink $4.24 billion (+untold overruns) why can’t we have something really great – why not a subway? Why not light rail from West Seattle to Ballard? Why not bus rapid transit in dedicated bus lanes using buses like they have in London?

And one more thing. Climate change is real. It is here and it is unconscionable to sink so much money into moving individual vehicles 1/7 miles.

If our city, county and state are going to sink $4.24 billion (+untold overruns) why can’t we have something really great – why not a subway? Why not light rail from West Seattle to Ballard? Why not bus rapid transit in dedicated bus lanes using buses like they have in London?

Erica–

Just looking a little closer at this poll. It did not poll voters but residents.

Erica–

Just looking a little closer at this poll. It did not poll voters but residents.

Erica–

Just looking a little closer at this poll. It did not poll voters but residents.

The reality of climate change alone should be enough to sink the tunnel plan, let alone the unavailable technology, the cost-overrun question, the affordability of other alternatives, etc.

McGinn has this figured out, the other mayoral candidates are living in the past.

The reality of climate change alone should be enough to sink the tunnel plan, let alone the unavailable technology, the cost-overrun question, the affordability of other alternatives, etc.

McGinn has this figured out, the other mayoral candidates are living in the past.

The reality of climate change alone should be enough to sink the tunnel plan, let alone the unavailable technology, the cost-overrun question, the affordability of other alternatives, etc.

McGinn has this figured out, the other mayoral candidates are living in the past.

Here’s why the tunnel isn’t a done deal:

you can’t sell bonds for a crazy plan that says City residents will carry all overruns. No one buying bonds would believe they could do that or would do that and the fight between those who say that law isn’t legal just muddies it all up so it’s not bondable.

Investors need a bit more clarity than our Seattleish muddle creates.

We’ve even got tunnel supporters saying “oh well that part of the law isn’t constitutional” so if you are a bond holder hyou ask, um, who’s going to pay for finishing the tunnel and when you don’t know the answer, the answer is don’t invest in this mess. The investors are the final “voters.”

Here’s why the tunnel isn’t a done deal:

you can’t sell bonds for a crazy plan that says City residents will carry all overruns. No one buying bonds would believe they could do that or would do that and the fight between those who say that law isn’t legal just muddies it all up so it’s not bondable.

Investors need a bit more clarity than our Seattleish muddle creates.

We’ve even got tunnel supporters saying “oh well that part of the law isn’t constitutional” so if you are a bond holder hyou ask, um, who’s going to pay for finishing the tunnel and when you don’t know the answer, the answer is don’t invest in this mess. The investors are the final “voters.”

@8 why doesn’t anyone who questions other people’s opinions on cost overruns cite the single most expert researcher on this internationally?

The pre-eminent book on this topic, Mega-Projects and Risk (2003) was based upon an extensive amount of international research, and includes a number of tunnel projects in its enormous data set.
“The authors find that real cost overruns of between 50 and 100 per cent are common, and overruns above 100 per cent are not uncommon, while demand is typically overestimated, with typical overestimates between 20 and 70 per cent.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaprojects_and_Risk

@8 why doesn’t anyone who questions other people’s opinions on cost overruns cite the single most expert researcher on this internationally?

The pre-eminent book on this topic, Mega-Projects and Risk (2003) was based upon an extensive amount of international research, and includes a number of tunnel projects in its enormous data set.
“The authors find that real cost overruns of between 50 and 100 per cent are common, and overruns above 100 per cent are not uncommon, while demand is typically overestimated, with typical overestimates between 20 and 70 per cent.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaprojects_and_Risk

The tunnel isn’t a done deal. We don’t even have an engineering plan and have no idea what it will really cost. Plus, there’s insane overruns coming because we are pushing technology over it’s limit. The brightwater tunnellers are down right now. Not going to be on-line any time soon. The deep bore machines for the tunnel are 3 times as big!

We won’t be able to push bonds and the seattle taxpayers will be on the hook. Seattle will exhaust it’s taxing authority for a decade.

Which leaves no money for ANYTHING else.

The Tunnel Tax drills Seattle taxpayers for a decade!

The tunnel isn’t a done deal. We don’t even have an engineering plan and have no idea what it will really cost. Plus, there’s insane overruns coming because we are pushing technology over it’s limit. The brightwater tunnellers are down right now. Not going to be on-line any time soon. The deep bore machines for the tunnel are 3 times as big!

We won’t be able to push bonds and the seattle taxpayers will be on the hook. Seattle will exhaust it’s taxing authority for a decade.

Which leaves no money for ANYTHING else.

The Tunnel Tax drills Seattle taxpayers for a decade!

The tunnel isn’t a done deal. We don’t even have an engineering plan and have no idea what it will really cost. Plus, there’s insane overruns coming because we are pushing technology over it’s limit. The brightwater tunnellers are down right now. Not going to be on-line any time soon. The deep bore machines for the tunnel are 3 times as big!

We won’t be able to push bonds and the seattle taxpayers will be on the hook. Seattle will exhaust it’s taxing authority for a decade.

Which leaves no money for ANYTHING else.

The Tunnel Tax drills Seattle taxpayers for a decade!

Stakeholder is just another word for Billionaires and their flunkies.

Fremont doesn’t want it.

Seattle doesn’t want it.

ONLY NON-RESIDENT BILLIONAIRES WANT THE BILLIONAIRES TUNNEL!

Deny the permits.

Stakeholder is just another word for Billionaires and their flunkies.

Fremont doesn’t want it.

Seattle doesn’t want it.

ONLY NON-RESIDENT BILLIONAIRES WANT THE BILLIONAIRES TUNNEL!

Deny the permits.

Stakeholder is just another word for Billionaires and their flunkies.

Fremont doesn’t want it.

Seattle doesn’t want it.

ONLY NON-RESIDENT BILLIONAIRES WANT THE BILLIONAIRES TUNNEL!

Deny the permits.

That retrofit is looking better and better every day, isn’t it? If a retrofit has a 25-year life, as WSDOT has said, they had better do it soon, because the way it looks, they’ll be arguing over the tunnel for at least that long.

That retrofit is looking better and better every day, isn’t it? If a retrofit has a 25-year life, as WSDOT has said, they had better do it soon, because the way it looks, they’ll be arguing over the tunnel for at least that long.

That retrofit is looking better and better every day, isn’t it? If a retrofit has a 25-year life, as WSDOT has said, they had better do it soon, because the way it looks, they’ll be arguing over the tunnel for at least that long.

It is highly unlikely that anything will replace the viaduct. When it collapses, as it surely will, there will remain little political will or money to do much about it. Let the local property owners whose interests will benefit pay for the cleanup.

It took 23 years to open a truncated version of the “light rail” line that we voted on in 1996. We are tapped out in Seattle. Phony streetcars, private sports stadiums, and mayors from the planet Vulcan have bled us dry. Let the developers and construction unions fleece some other town.

When the viaduct is gone, we will see that the law of gravity still pertains, that day still follows night, and adapt accordingly.

Seattle had the good sense to avoid the disaster of Washington Public Power Supply System plants 4 & 5. Lets hope there is some common sense left in this town.

John Crosby
at Canal Coffee in Fremont where we support McGinn for Mayor

It is highly unlikely that anything will replace the viaduct. When it collapses, as it surely will, there will remain little political will or money to do much about it. Let the local property owners whose interests will benefit pay for the cleanup.

It took 23 years to open a truncated version of the “light rail” line that we voted on in 1996. We are tapped out in Seattle. Phony streetcars, private sports stadiums, and mayors from the planet Vulcan have bled us dry. Let the developers and construction unions fleece some other town.

When the viaduct is gone, we will see that the law of gravity still pertains, that day still follows night, and adapt accordingly.

Seattle had the good sense to avoid the disaster of Washington Public Power Supply System plants 4 & 5. Lets hope there is some common sense left in this town.

John Crosby
at Canal Coffee in Fremont where we support McGinn for Mayor

It is highly unlikely that anything will replace the viaduct. When it collapses, as it surely will, there will remain little political will or money to do much about it. Let the local property owners whose interests will benefit pay for the cleanup.

It took 23 years to open a truncated version of the “light rail” line that we voted on in 1996. We are tapped out in Seattle. Phony streetcars, private sports stadiums, and mayors from the planet Vulcan have bled us dry. Let the developers and construction unions fleece some other town.

When the viaduct is gone, we will see that the law of gravity still pertains, that day still follows night, and adapt accordingly.

Seattle had the good sense to avoid the disaster of Washington Public Power Supply System plants 4 & 5. Lets hope there is some common sense left in this town.

John Crosby
at Canal Coffee in Fremont where we support McGinn for Mayor

Nothing in this town is ever a done deal until construction is finished (or at least well underway). It’s our greatest strength and biggest weakness.

Nothing in this town is ever a done deal until construction is finished (or at least well underway). It’s our greatest strength and biggest weakness.

Nothing in this town is ever a done deal until construction is finished (or at least well underway). It’s our greatest strength and biggest weakness.

@ 18 “Let the local property owners whose interests will benefit pay for the cleanup.”

Those property owners are the ones who are required to pay for any cost overruns, according to the state legislation funding the tunnel.

People keep complaining that “Seattle will be stuck with the overruns”, but that’s not accurate. Only owners of property which the KC Assessor’s office determine has risen in value as a result of the tunnel being built will have to pay anything extra. I.e. the downtown property owners who want the tunnel are the ones who would have to pay for the cost overruns. Seems fair to me.

Some say that part of the legislation is not enforcible, but I have yet to see a convincing legal argument why. In fact, I’ve seen a good argument that the Port of Seattle would be authorized to levy such a tax.

@ 18 “Let the local property owners whose interests will benefit pay for the cleanup.”

Those property owners are the ones who are required to pay for any cost overruns, according to the state legislation funding the tunnel.

People keep complaining that “Seattle will be stuck with the overruns”, but that’s not accurate. Only owners of property which the KC Assessor’s office determine has risen in value as a result of the tunnel being built will have to pay anything extra. I.e. the downtown property owners who want the tunnel are the ones who would have to pay for the cost overruns. Seems fair to me.

Some say that part of the legislation is not enforcible, but I have yet to see a convincing legal argument why. In fact, I’ve seen a good argument that the Port of Seattle would be authorized to levy such a tax.

@20 “Local” property owners are going to be able to pay potentially billions in cost overruns and not declare bankruptcy?

That’s how crack addled this pseudo plan is – there is no plan for cost overruns, except Seattle citizens will have to pay.

It is less than 2 miles of roadway.

@20 “Local” property owners are going to be able to pay potentially billions in cost overruns and not declare bankruptcy?

That’s how crack addled this pseudo plan is – there is no plan for cost overruns, except Seattle citizens will have to pay.

It is less than 2 miles of roadway.

@20 “Local” property owners are going to be able to pay potentially billions in cost overruns and not declare bankruptcy?

That’s how crack addled this pseudo plan is – there is no plan for cost overruns, except Seattle citizens will have to pay.

It is less than 2 miles of roadway.

@21 Lets say, hypothetically, any cost overruns are paid over 20 years, and that 50,000 property owners are affected.

For every $1 billion in cost overruns, that’s an additional $83.33 per month in property taxes, on average (1,000,000,000 /20 /12 /50,000). And only those whose property values have increased due to the tunnel (i.e. a windfall of added asset value) are paying the additional property taxes.

Looks like a great deal for everyone involved, especially considering it’s the only way to get $3+ billion in state funding (which would otherwise pay for other road projects in some other part of the state).

If Seattle went with surface/transit or a retrofit, all Seattle property owners would be stuck with the ENTIRE cost, plus the cost of rebuilding the seawall. We should take the state gas tax money that’s dedicated to road projects while we have the chance.

@21 Lets say, hypothetically, any cost overruns are paid over 20 years, and that 50,000 property owners are affected.

For every $1 billion in cost overruns, that’s an additional $83.33 per month in property taxes, on average (1,000,000,000 /20 /12 /50,000). And only those whose property values have increased due to the tunnel (i.e. a windfall of added asset value) are paying the additional property taxes.

Looks like a great deal for everyone involved, especially considering it’s the only way to get $3+ billion in state funding (which would otherwise pay for other road projects in some other part of the state).

If Seattle went with surface/transit or a retrofit, all Seattle property owners would be stuck with the ENTIRE cost, plus the cost of rebuilding the seawall. We should take the state gas tax money that’s dedicated to road projects while we have the chance.

@21 Lets say, hypothetically, any cost overruns are paid over 20 years, and that 50,000 property owners are affected.

For every $1 billion in cost overruns, that’s an additional $83.33 per month in property taxes, on average (1,000,000,000 /20 /12 /50,000). And only those whose property values have increased due to the tunnel (i.e. a windfall of added asset value) are paying the additional property taxes.

Looks like a great deal for everyone involved, especially considering it’s the only way to get $3+ billion in state funding (which would otherwise pay for other road projects in some other part of the state).

If Seattle went with surface/transit or a retrofit, all Seattle property owners would be stuck with the ENTIRE cost, plus the cost of rebuilding the seawall. We should take the state gas tax money that’s dedicated to road projects while we have the chance.

@22 – We’re not getting $3 billion in state funding, we’re only getting $2.4 billion and it was WSDOT that deemed the I-5 + Transit + Surface street the best solution – cheapest, worked for traffic and provided the increased transit service that we need. How in the world is the largest tax increase in our City’s history to pay for a tunnel that doesn’t serve 60% of the traffic that uses the roadway today, sucks up all of our taxing ability for decades (goodbye future school, parks and library levies) and doesn’t pay for any I-5 or transit improvements a great deal for everyone involved? Oh yeah, because a bunch of downtown business interests say so, right.

@22 – We’re not getting $3 billion in state funding, we’re only getting $2.4 billion and it was WSDOT that deemed the I-5 + Transit + Surface street the best solution – cheapest, worked for traffic and provided the increased transit service that we need. How in the world is the largest tax increase in our City’s history to pay for a tunnel that doesn’t serve 60% of the traffic that uses the roadway today, sucks up all of our taxing ability for decades (goodbye future school, parks and library levies) and doesn’t pay for any I-5 or transit improvements a great deal for everyone involved? Oh yeah, because a bunch of downtown business interests say so, right.

@22 – We’re not getting $3 billion in state funding, we’re only getting $2.4 billion and it was WSDOT that deemed the I-5 + Transit + Surface street the best solution – cheapest, worked for traffic and provided the increased transit service that we need. How in the world is the largest tax increase in our City’s history to pay for a tunnel that doesn’t serve 60% of the traffic that uses the roadway today, sucks up all of our taxing ability for decades (goodbye future school, parks and library levies) and doesn’t pay for any I-5 or transit improvements a great deal for everyone involved? Oh yeah, because a bunch of downtown business interests say so, right.

@5: I’m guessing he will be bored with it for about 2.5 more weeks at which point he will be out of the race.

@5: I’m guessing he will be bored with it for about 2.5 more weeks at which point he will be out of the race.

@5: I’m guessing he will be bored with it for about 2.5 more weeks at which point he will be out of the race.

It’s this kind of back-and-forth and “let’s keep working the issue” that kept Seattle from getting light rail way back in the late ’60′s/early ’70′s. At the rate Seattle moves, the viaduct will still be there in 20 years.

It’s this kind of back-and-forth and “let’s keep working the issue” that kept Seattle from getting light rail way back in the late ’60′s/early ’70′s. At the rate Seattle moves, the viaduct will still be there in 20 years.

It’s this kind of back-and-forth and “let’s keep working the issue” that kept Seattle from getting light rail way back in the late ’60′s/early ’70′s. At the rate Seattle moves, the viaduct will still be there in 20 years.

I hate the tunnel. I love the viaduct. I would be happy if it was replaced. I predict a tunnel will be nightmare to build and the costs will run way over the estimates.