Tunnel Law Suit Filed Today

As has just been reported at Publicola, Elizabeth Campbell and The Citizens Against the Tunnel filed a lawsuit today to stop the deep-bore tunnel. Check out the gory details here (3 MB pdf).  Campbell’s group supports a new elevated solution to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, but that is irrelevant to the case being made against the tunnel.  Interestinger and interestinger.

12 Responses to “Tunnel Law Suit Filed Today”

  1. gene

    politics makes strange bedfellows!

  2. Joe G

    What a way to put a smile on my face. And before 9:30! I’m glad to see that someone is doing this. Although I do not support an elevated highway on the waterfront I want to support these folks in the efforts. Hmmmmm, what to do, what to do.

  3. chrispy

    Here’s an idea: let’s fight and fight and fight and get nothing done.

    It’s the Seattle Way™

  4. KSB

    The tunnel is not just about getting people in and out of downtown itself. It is also about getting from one end of the Seattle metropolitan area to the other. It allows people an alternative to the bottleneck on I-5. Geographically, it is impossible to go around Seattle any other way, in any short amount of time. Let’s leave the Seattle downtown and cross-town streets for the locals… not dump a bunch of extra traffic on them. Let’s make a vibrant and walkable waterfront. Not clutter it with a “surface street” freeway. I live in Magnolia too, Elizabeth Campbell. And I want move forward with the tunnel.

  5. Wells

    Magnolia resident Elizabeth Campbell sensibly opposes the Deep-bore because it does not maintain access at Western/Elliott. About 40,000 vehicles access SR-99 there. This is about 2500 per hour that will be dumped onto the new Alaskan Way. Mercer will also be converted to a freight corridor through Lower Queen Anne between Elliott and the Deep-bore portal on Aurora. An environmental impact study is necessary.

    Ms Campbell may prefer an elevated replacement, but that’s just not going to happen. Period. The most sensible tunnel option is WsDOT’s Scenario ‘G’ 4-lane Cut-n-cover because it maintains the Western/Elliott access, though SR-99 is rebuilt beneath those streets, (makes southbound entrance ‘downhill’ with a visable merge, and northbound (probably 2-lane) exit ‘uphill’, slowing vehicles to surface speed.

    In the long-run it’s best to bite the bullet and tear up the Waterfront for the 4-lane Cut-n-cover. It’s was designed to reduce construction impacts after voters rejected the 6-lane version. It has a manageable construction process the Waterfront District could survive. The preliminary work now going on in SoDo is applicable to the 4-lane Cut-n-cover.

    Another point: Have a close look at SDOT’s design for Alaskan Way. It too must go back to the drawing board. Early designs showed a 2-lane frontage road probably necessary to divide thru-traffic from motorists looking to park; helps maintain the economics of a working waterfront; makes reinstalling the streetcar line possible, seawall sidewalk would still be widened nicely, etc etc.

  6. RossB

    A plurality of people voted for the elevated solution. It was clearly preferred over the tunnel (45% to 30%). The board tasked with coming up with a replacement chose it (and a surface option) amongst the available choices (they rejected the tunnel). So, why is it “just not going to happen”? Is it because it the preferred choice by the voters or it is because it is (one of the two) preferred choices by the Stakeholder Advisory Committee?

  7. Ben Schiendelman

    Some of these comments are hilarious.

    KSB doesn’t realize the tunnel doesn’t get people into and out of downtown.

    RossB doesn’t realize 55% of the voters rejected the elevated option.

  8. Wells

    Ross, listen. An elevated replacement for Seattle’s Waterfront would be a travesty, most people I’m sure would agree, not just those damn stakeholders nor their crony developer associates.

    Most people voted against an elevated replacement, so don’t say otherwise. In that vote, more people rejected the “6-lane” Cut-n-cover because its construction disrupted SR-99 traffic and the Waterfront District ‘more’ than the elevated replacement, though that’s debateable. Both were very disruptive.

    WsDOT went back to the drawing board and produced Scenario ‘G’ “4-lane” Cut-n-cover to reduce construction impacts, plain and simple. This tunnel option maintains Western/Elliott access that Ms Campbell and many others believe is critically important. If you want to help, consider the 4-lane Cut-n-cover has been ‘ruled out’ by the ‘stakeholders’ as ‘inconvenient’. Producing the best AWV replacement isn’t important to them. And they don’t like Mike McGinn getting all uppity and making a case against their machinations.

  9. Wells

    KSB is correct about eliminating the Seneca and Columbia access ramps to downtown. Those ramps increase traffic on 1st Ave and worse than that, they increase east/west traffic on Seattle’s treacherous hilly streets leading to them.

    On the other hand, the Western/Elliott access ramps are as much a traffic thru-corridor as Aurora. Losing them is much more serious than losing Seneca/Columbia ramps. Indeed, it’s the Deep-bore’s fatal flaw.

    Furthermore, without the Western/Elliott access ramps, Mercer is planned to become a dedicated freight corridor through Lower Queen Anne from Elliott to the Deep-bore portal on Aurora.

  10. Stacey

    It is just baffling to me that the McGinn/surface crowd seem to think if they can stop the tunnel, that they will get there way. At least half the people who oppose the tunnel want a rebuild! Don’t you folks get it? There is NO CONSENSUS. None. There never was and there never will be. There are thousands of Elizabeth Campbells out there and you might think they are your friends right now, but just wait til you succeed in stopping the tunnel. At that point we go back to SQUARE ONE with this. All the squabbling and fighting for years and years, and in the end there will be a very, very good chance that nothing at all will happen with the viaduct until an earthquake takes it down.

  11. Wells

    Consensus, Stacey, is also missing on the Deep-bore, excluding thee stakeholders. The compromise between elevated replacement and Deep-bore is the 4-lane Cut-n-cover. It serves both interests by maintaining Western/Elliott access and tunnel advocates get the best means to manage traffic overall and the least on Alaskan Way. The preliminary work going on in SoDo applies to the cut-n-cover which is more ready to go than the Deep-bore overall. In other words, the Deep-bore is closer to square one. It’s time for a clean sweep at City Hall, starting with filthy SDOT offices.

  12. David Sucher

    The last option standing will be the Repair.
    And that’s what we’ll do, Repair it, but after we have several hundred million in planning.

Leave a Reply