Seattle's mayor lays out where he'd find the money to replace the viaduct with a tunnel.
With the money already in hand, the state Department of Transportation says, it's ready to go--it can rebuild another elevated highway to replace the viaduct. But Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels is still trying to persuade the state that he can find an extra billion dollars or so to build a tunnel instead. This week, Nickels laid out where he would find the extra money:
FEDERAL MONEY: Nickels is hoping for as much as $280 million more in federal transportation funding, an additional $60 million to help the city repair earthquake damage, and $200 million from the Army Corps of Engineers to rebuild the seawall.
REGIONAL MONEY: Nickel is still hoping that next year, voters in the King, Pierce and Snohomish region will approve a new transportation tax, likely sales and vehicle taxes. He hopes $800 million of the money raised would go toward the viaduct. Despite some controversy over whether the new structure would be suitable for tolling, Nickels is talking about a $2 toll each way, which could bring in as much as $150 million.
LOCAL MONEY: Nickels has unveiled a new open space tax--a type of impact fee on developers. He's also planning to get as much as $400 million from the capital budgets of public utilities, as there are major utility lines along the viaduct that need to be relocated. The mayor's office says, this would not affect City Light rates, but could affect water, sewer and drainage rates. Nickels is also asking the Port of Seattle for $200 million, though the Port has given no commitments yet. And he's introducing the idea of a Local Improvement District, which would tax property owners in an zone yet to be defined west of Fourth Avenue--the logic being that a tunnel would increase their property values and they should contribute to the project.
So there you have it. A lot of this money isn't certain--especially federal dollars and regional tax money voters would have to approve. But if you had to make the call, is it worth pursuing the tunnel?
I'll be voting a big no for any tax increases to build an Alaskan Way tunnel. I know they need a tunnel, but I'd rather let them do what the region decided I should do to pay for a new bridge over the narrows - pay an escalating toll, starting at $3 and going to $6 or $7, probably for the rest of my life. Instead of $2 each way, how about $3 to $4 dollars until the thing is paid off. They use it, let them pay for it!
Sue said:
Ever been to New York, Euorpe, or even Japan? Public transportation, trains, bus, and rail are the answer. Go to LA and take in a deep breath. SMOG is taking over. OR just charge every person entering Seattle $5, $10 if there is only one person in the rig!!
David said:
Common sense for anyone who has to drive around here would be to require fixing the current traffic messes on the other roadways which will absorb the blow of the viaducts closing, prior to the release of any funding to build a tunnel.
Craig Orff said:
This is another example of Ron Sims politics passed on by his protege. I agree with Sue that we have bigger problems to deal with before tearing down any roads or bridges. When the Mayor can run this city the way it should be run then he can talk to us about improvements. Until it's safe for everyone to go into the Pioneer Square area at any time of day, without the Mayors police escort, the Mayor has work to do. When crime is just chased from one neighborhood to another rather than controlled, the Mayor isn't doing his job. If taxing employers to support city road projects is the answer, any repairs should last forever as there will be no one commuting into the city. This should also help the School District's budget crisis by driving more families into the suburbs. No, we the citizens of Seattle were sold a bill of Ron Simms goods when we elected Mayor Nickels.
Debbie said:
Simms, Nickles, and former gov Dixie Rae all have the same place in history..Failed the people! Dump Nickles and get someone who wants to serve Seattle.
Bryant Floyd said:
Our state has the money on hand to rebuild another elevated highway to replace the viaduct. If Mayor Greg Nickels got his way on the Viaduct there would be no money left for other highway projects. Instead of Nickels trying to come up with the extra billion dollars he should just let the state rebuild the viaduct with another elevated highway.
Dan Caldwell said:
The State has money to fix the viaduct, let them fix it. The Tacoma Narrows bridge which started after the viaduct repairs were under discussion, is almost completed. I want utility and water revenues and taxes to go for solving the water shortage. I saw the Boston "big ditch last month". It is the equivalent of the proposed tunnel, has been under consonstruction for years, its cost over runs and leaks are a Boston Joke. Where are the cars using the viaduct going to go during the ten year construction period---? I5 cannot handle them. I5 is a parking lot now.
It is clearly a project Developed Under Many Bureaucrats-- DUMB for short!
Jon said:
I think Sue has the answer. Spend the money on creating a public transportation system that worLook at Califks. More roads equals more cars and more pollution. Can you remember when we had clear days around here, when you could see Mt Rainier clearly? Now we have smog views! YUK Just look at CA
Gino Turrella said:
Is the tunnel worth pursuing? That depends on who you are asking to pay for it. Seattle residents need to grow up and take responsibility for their own city projects. The residents outside of Seattle and King county are not your parents. The rest of us don't feel obligated to raise the residents of Seattle like spoiled teenagers. One of the biggest hitters about this project, like so many projects of the past, is cost plus. Seattle and King county have no idea what it is to manage public tax dollars; ie the Seattle monorail. Ohhhhhh, bet that was a punch in the groin. How about the Seattle stadium. Was it on budget? Hell no. Left hook. How about light rail? The ol kick in the ass. Thats just three, and the list can go on and on. This state has some of the highest property taxes in the whole nation. What for? A broke education system. Police and fire that are screaming for more money because the very city government officials who collect property taxes etc. are not allocating the money where it belongs. Do I need also mention the transportation system? Thankyou Mr. Ron Simms. This plea for more public tax hand outs will do nothing more than fuel Tim Eymans crusade.
Daniel said:
The tunnel is worth going for because it opens up the chance to revitalize the waterfront. Taxes, how about oil companies increase production and instead of paying a majority of your price per gallon to the profit bank why not having it go to transit projects. Mr. Eyeman has not been a help when it comes to transit projects, keeps putting taxes that go to transit on the chopping block, putting projects on hold. He is now wanting to get rid of the gas tax for transit projects and other taxes in place for a 30 dollar extra car tab tax. It would also get rid of 2 of that 8.5 billion dollars in funding. I do agree that paying for what you use makes more sense than making everyone pay, however, can people be convinced of this method when it comes to the vote.
With the money already in hand, the state Department of Transportation says, it's ready to go--it can rebuild another elevated highway to replace the viaduct. But Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels is still trying to persuade the state that he can find an extra billion dollars or so to build a tunnel instead. This week, Nickels laid out where he would find the extra money:
I'll be voting a big no for any tax increases to build an Alaskan Way tunnel. I know they need a tunnel, but I'd rather let them do what the region decided I should do to pay for a new bridge over the narrows - pay an escalating toll, starting at $3 and going to $6 or $7, probably for the rest of my life. Instead of $2 each way, how about $3 to $4 dollars until the thing is paid off. They use it, let them pay for it!
Ever been to New York, Euorpe, or even Japan? Public transportation, trains, bus, and rail are the answer. Go to LA and take in a deep breath. SMOG is taking over. OR just charge every person entering Seattle $5, $10 if there is only one person in the rig!!
Common sense for anyone who has to drive around here would be to require fixing the current traffic messes on the other roadways which will absorb the blow of the viaducts closing, prior to the release of any funding to build a tunnel.
This is another example of Ron Sims politics passed on by his protege. I agree with Sue that we have bigger problems to deal with before tearing down any roads or bridges. When the Mayor can run this city the way it should be run then he can talk to us about improvements. Until it's safe for everyone to go into the Pioneer Square area at any time of day, without the Mayors police escort, the Mayor has work to do. When crime is just chased from one neighborhood to another rather than controlled, the Mayor isn't doing his job. If taxing employers to support city road projects is the answer, any repairs should last forever as there will be no one commuting into the city. This should also help the School District's budget crisis by driving more families into the suburbs. No, we the citizens of Seattle were sold a bill of Ron Simms goods when we elected Mayor Nickels.
Simms, Nickles, and former gov Dixie Rae all have the same place in history..Failed the people! Dump Nickles and get someone who wants to serve Seattle.
Our state has the money on hand to rebuild another elevated highway to replace the viaduct. If Mayor Greg Nickels got his way on the Viaduct there would be no money left for other highway projects. Instead of Nickels trying to come up with the extra billion dollars he should just let the state rebuild the viaduct with another elevated highway.
The State has money to fix the viaduct, let them fix it. The Tacoma Narrows bridge which started after the viaduct repairs were under discussion, is almost completed. I want utility and water revenues and taxes to go for solving the water shortage. I saw the Boston "big ditch last month". It is the equivalent of the proposed tunnel, has been under consonstruction for years, its cost over runs and leaks are a Boston Joke. Where are the cars using the viaduct going to go during the ten year construction period---? I5 cannot handle them. I5 is a parking lot now.
It is clearly a project Developed Under Many Bureaucrats-- DUMB for short!
I think Sue has the answer. Spend the money on creating a public transportation system that worLook at Califks. More roads equals more cars and more pollution. Can you remember when we had clear days around here, when you could see Mt Rainier clearly? Now we have smog views! YUK Just look at CA
Is the tunnel worth pursuing? That depends on who you are asking to pay for it. Seattle residents need to grow up and take responsibility for their own city projects. The residents outside of Seattle and King county are not your parents. The rest of us don't feel obligated to raise the residents of Seattle like spoiled teenagers. One of the biggest hitters about this project, like so many projects of the past, is cost plus. Seattle and King county have no idea what it is to manage public tax dollars; ie the Seattle monorail. Ohhhhhh, bet that was a punch in the groin. How about the Seattle stadium. Was it on budget? Hell no. Left hook. How about light rail? The ol kick in the ass. Thats just three, and the list can go on and on. This state has some of the highest property taxes in the whole nation. What for? A broke education system. Police and fire that are screaming for more money because the very city government officials who collect property taxes etc. are not allocating the money where it belongs. Do I need also mention the transportation system? Thankyou Mr. Ron Simms. This plea for more public tax hand outs will do nothing more than fuel Tim Eymans crusade.
The tunnel is worth going for because it opens up the chance to revitalize the waterfront. Taxes, how about oil companies increase production and instead of paying a majority of your price per gallon to the profit bank why not having it go to transit projects. Mr. Eyeman has not been a help when it comes to transit projects, keeps putting taxes that go to transit on the chopping block, putting projects on hold. He is now wanting to get rid of the gas tax for transit projects and other taxes in place for a 30 dollar extra car tab tax. It would also get rid of 2 of that 8.5 billion dollars in funding. I do agree that paying for what you use makes more sense than making everyone pay, however, can people be convinced of this method when it comes to the vote.