^[1]
the p-i’s nifty “how to build a tunnel” infographic

Yesterday, some pro-tunnel people released the results of another public opinion poll. Like the one conducted by the Seattle Times earlier this month [mb ^[2]], they show that when you tell respondents how you want them to answer, you can shift the results in your favor. The Times poll got a few people to change their minds about their preferred viaduct replacement by laying out the cost estimates.

Although voters surveyed in the latest poll originally favored the relatively thrifty (but ugly) viaduct option, the pro-tunnel survey group was able to get a majority to support the cut-and-cover option once they sold them on the benefits (noise, air, water pollution reduction; more enjoyable downtown; etc.) [p-i ^[3]].

I’m guessing that they left out the part about the tunnel being built on the Seattle Fault [p-i ^[4], (with nifty graphics!)]. Although the prospect of a massive tidal wave flooding the highway sounds pretty scary, tunnel lovers will be consoled to know that such a catastrophic event only comes around every 3,000 – 6,000 years. By then, we’ll all be driving flying cars; so who cares about a little water damage?