It appears that the Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorial board has succumbed to reality:
Reality is that the double-whammy of tax revenue overestimates and project cost increases has left a gap too wide to bridge. Yawning wide as well is the Seattle Monorail Project's public credibility gap, first gouged by a fantasy financing scheme and broadened by the agency's circle-the-wagons mentality.I'm stunned. Encouraged, but stunned.Going back to the voters for more taxes is implausible, given the mood of the electorate signaled by the massive signature drive to repeal the gas-tax increase and the other pressing demands for transportation funding, beginning with the Alaskan Way Viaduct.
The SMP Board should vote immediately to abandon the project and sell acquired real estate and other assets to diminish the cost to taxpayers...
Another dream due for downsizing is that of replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a tunnel.
Naw! I think someone is polishing their resume for their next gig...
I liked the snippet: "Some may argue that the best course is to shut the structure down now, as a safety precaution and a prod to action."
Not a bad idea. If the viaduct really is dangerous, and we shouldn't be trading dollars for human lives, then we should shut it down right away, and not wait for a replacement project to begin. We would have to do without the viaduct for seven to nine years during a rebuilding process. In that amount of time, we would certainly have to learn to live without it.
1. After the recent bridge dig that just cost us taxpayers 60 million before it was totally abandoned due to the number of Indian relics found in that dig, would one want to choose the most expensive option on the table, a massive major dig along the historical waterfront of Seattle over the other more reasonable cost options available for fixing or replacing the Viaduct"?
2. What would the chances be that this massive dig was stopped completely due to relics found, being another massive waste of taxpayer dollars?
3: What would be the chances that this project would heavily overrun over the 4+ Billion estimate that is currently being offered?
Quoting myself (except for the title, which the P-I came up with on their own...):
VIADUCT
Replacing it with tunnel is a very, very bad idea
I'm impressed with the capacity Seattle's politicians have for pressing ahead with public projects in the face of concern from all corners, and with their ability to ignore even the most obvious pitfalls. The author of yesterday's Alaskan Way tunnel article is a disaster planner, but he left out some crucial points.
We have an urban tunnel megaproject precedent to consider. Boston's "Big Dig" came in many billions of dollars over budget, many years late, springs leaks and drops chunks of concrete on commuters.
The Alaskan Way tunnel would be separated from the full water weight of Elliott Bay by a concrete wall. We live in a region that can easily uncork a magnitude 8 or greater earthquake at any time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's going to happen to that wall between commuter and water on the day the ground moves. Disaster response forces will concentrate their efforts where they can do the most good for the most victims. That won't be the Alaskan Way tunnel, where most of the effort will take place as a casualty recovery operation days, weeks and months later.
I think most risk managers will think twice about the wisdom of an Alaskan Way tunnel in terms of the potential human and almost certain financial costs of the open view of the Puget Sound and Olympics being chased by Seattle's politicians. Will those politicians listen? If not, maybe we need some who will.Add to all of that the concept that Rep. Young from Alaska was recently in town and told the City Machine that the federal government would not participate in funding a tunnel, and you have more than enough to kill that turkey of an idea. Posted by: gaelwolf on July 15, 2005 07:37 PM
Certainly, I wonder about the cost of the tunnel option, but something...conservative...in me says that the increased property taxes resulting from the increase in land value near that corridor would make up for the cost in a relatively short time. Trickle-down economics are funny that way.
Posted by: A Moderate on July 15, 2005 07:49 PMSeeing as the viaduct is built mostly on fill land, the odds of finding artifacts are about zero. Most of the waterfront, if memory serves me right, was built on land taken from the Denny Regrade and dumped into Elliot Bay, and by the creation of the seawall that runs under the Alaskan Way.
Also, I don't think the bridge project you are refering to was abandoned, they just had to find a new source of dirt.
That said, the idea of a tunnel, while definatley attractive in theory, is impossible in practice without paying an insane amount for. Just look at Boston's "Big Dig". Way overbudget, way behind schedule, and the thing leaks.
Posted by: Mike H on July 15, 2005 07:54 PMDead on!
Boston's Big dig, is exactly what we can expect based upon the historical nature of this area, but our current Mayor is highly in favor of this Highest cost option!
We have P'd away 60 million tax dollars on a similar bridge dig we absolutely failed to accurately survail before digging, so we still got to pay for nothing! No-one got fired due to this massive waste of taxpayers money! It's just another goverment free for all!
The left has started to smell the coffee, and it says that they won't get all the projects they are asking for. This is a fallback position.
The line of defense will be drawn at the 2.5B the state is paying to replace the viaduct. Seattle will get their viaduct for free...if I-912 is defeated or thrown out. This will be promoted as reasonable and sane and moderate. Those who "want no transportation improvements," will be portrayed as radical and extreme.
Posted by: South County on July 15, 2005 09:06 PMHmmm....
I am skeptical.
The liberal Dems are up to something.......and it won't be good for the people.....
Even addicts and drunks have fleeting moments of lucidity. 99 in 'column A' for the P.I. does not offset 1 in 'column B;'
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on July 15, 2005 09:37 PMAs for the PI, I am sure they have now reverted back to their misguided notion that increasing government spending is going to fix the transportation mess. I can see it now: the PI is going to tout "alternative funding", "regional solutions",and "comprehensive planning". Blech!!
Posted by: Burdabee on July 15, 2005 09:54 PMNot to seem too anti-912, but if poltical leaders were savvy and smart, they would pressure the Seattle City Council and the Mayor to abandon their tunnel idea. I remember hearing the head of WSDOT saying that the 2+ billion would be more than sufficient to REPLACE the Viaduct, but the reason there would be another tax increase regionally is that the tunnel they want will cost at least 4.5 billion. Now while they can go Chicken Little and proclaim 'THE VIADUCT IS FALLING!! THE VIADUCT IS FALLING!!!' They should realize that the people are far smarter than that. We know that if the Viaduct was REALLY in as bad of shape as they say, then they would condemn it. They would close it because of how dangerous of shape it is in. And since I still drive on it nearly daily, I have YET to see tht happen. No, the real reason is that the only danger the Viaduct poses right now is too the potential boonfall of tax dollars the city can get from an unobstructed view with a tunnel. Now if the anti-912 were to pressure the council and mayor to drop the tunnel and the screaming Viaduct hysteria, they could quite possibly sway potential for votes from the city itself to become against.
But I am not worried that will happen.
You see, they will not be able to do it, because when it comes down to it, the council and the mayor will not give up a project they (or more accurately their contributors) came up with that will 'better the city.' To them, pulling the plug on their tunnel idea is like pulling the plug on Paul Allen before he gives them their latest stipend. (Couldn't resist...) So rest assurted that come November, they will all be crying and whining and wondering just what happened.
Domo.
Posted by: Left Behind by the New Democratic Party on July 15, 2005 10:14 PMIn addition to a replacement of the viaduct (tunnel or bridge) the project also includes an upgrading of Alaskan Way, a new seawall, pedestrian and bicycle access improvements. Pedestrians and bicylists won't have to pay any taxes for these improvements, unless they own a car too....
If the tunnel plan is pushed through, it "Improves central waterfront by building pedestrian promenade and creating bicycle trails"
This is so much more than just a safety replacement project, but it is also so much less than a congestion reducer.
All the current options: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/Preferred/Rebuild.htm
If a regional tax package is rejected in 2006, what will happen? Will a bridge replacement occur? Will we just reallocate the money to other projects? What about earthquakes and safety? By 2007, costs will have gone up by 20%-30% and more taxes will be needed anyway.
We will probably see yet another gas tax and fees increase to cover the balance. An emergency clause will be placed on that too. It will be signed late in the session by the governor and the supporters of the tax will try even more tricks in the courts to make an initiative impossible. The Feds still won't help.
All of this fun for only 2 billion - what a deal.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on July 15, 2005 11:13 PMAt some point, their rapidly declining readership and the fact that those readers that are left don't make much of an attractive target market for advertisers was bound to kick in.
Posted by: BananaLand(aka Iguana) on July 15, 2005 11:37 PMThere's no way it could be more expensive or absurd than whatever magic dragon idea Seattle will eventually propose to implement.
Posted by: Andy on July 16, 2005 12:35 AM"Even a broken clock is correct twice each day"
The PI has got the first part of the message.
The second part is that many feel a lot of these projects are doable, necessary and affordable.
That requires and immense overhaul of the structure of government, planning, contracting, and construction in WA state. If the damn french can do something like the Millau Viaduct Project for $500 million, a stunningly beautiful multi pier cable stayed bridge. We should be able to do some of these project around here at a fraction of the cost.
However that requires a huge sea change in the thinking of government which is highly doubtful.
Posted by: JCM on July 16, 2005 08:07 AMAfter a few years of operational problems, scandals, and low rideship it will be torn down.
Posted by: Mark on July 16, 2005 10:30 AMThat said, WsDOT 'obstructionism' and waste of tax dollar does not take them off the hook for not planning and publishing a detailed traffic mitagation plan.
How will traffic be managed during reconstruction? Could new on/off ramps to I-5, (temporary or permanent), near Mercer and Tacoma Streets reroute traffic well enough to eliminate the need to replace I-99, either elevated structure or tunnel? How should any Fix of The Mercer Mess incorporate rerouting I-99 traffic? Good luck getting WsDOT to answer these questions.
Just be glad that the Green Line Monorail ship is sinking. Don't forget to squash the rats as they jump ship.
Posted by: Artie on July 16, 2005 10:39 AMThis is why I signed an anti-tax initiative for the first time, and why even the progressives (as opposed to corporate democrats) I know who hate cars will probably vote yes on I-912.
Gotta love those rare moments when right and left meet....
Posted by: Mr. X on July 18, 2005 11:06 AM