|
|
||
 | The 'California' Sign at Disney's California Adventure. Anaheim, CA July 18, 2007 |
|
| Apple | Cool | Disney | Entertainment | Fitness | Geek | Microsoft | Politics | Seattle Storm | Transit | Travel | UW MBA | ||
|
« Back From Bentonville | Main | Getting Things Done » September 20, 2006Earth To Nickels: It's OverIt's official: The Seattle Times reports that replacing the Viaduct is going to be really, really expensive: The price tag for a new, elevated structure to replace the aging Alaskan Way viaduct has grown from $2.4 billion to $2.8 billion... But you know what's worse? The Mayor's prized replacement option - a cut-and-cover tunnel along the waterfront - is even more expensive: ... and the cost of building a tunnel has gone from a high of $3.6 billion to an estimated $4.6 billion, according to a report released today by the state. The difference between replacing the Viaduct and the tunnel is now $800M to $2,200M, depending on which set of cost estimate ranges you believe. For the sake of simplicity, I'm splitting the difference and calling it $1,500M. One point five billion dollars. With numbers like these, it's time for City Hall to slow down, take a deep breath, and take a very, very long moment. I've been on record since March ("Tear It Down, Leave It Down") that we should simply detonate the Viaduct and call it a day. It's aging, it's breaking, it's going to kill people. If it comes down outside of our control, it'll cause the loss of life, limb, property and do serious economic damage to our region. The tunnel is the gosh-it-would-be-nice solution to this problem. But the Mayor, rather than see the handwriting on the wall regarding the tunnel, has devised a cunning plan: raise the cost of the Viaduct rebuild so the tunnel is more cost-competitve! Seriously: Seattle believes it has control over street-use and other permits needed for construction. By obstructing an elevated project, the city thinks it can drive up the cost another $1.6 billion, to nearly $5 billion, according to a chart issued this morning by Seattle Department of Transportation director Grace Crunican. That would put the elevated structure close to the cost of a tunnel. This is insanity. Only in the strange, BizarroWorld of a dysfunctional public servant with an Ozymandias complex does this make any kind of sense. Here's the deal, Mayor Nickels: we have real transit problems in this state, and they're going to take real money to fix. Our roads have a major maintenance backlog. 520 needs to be replaced. I-5 could use a lot of rework. We want a Light Rail extension to pass on the 2007 ballot. And every day we waste dicking around with this tunnel fantasy is one less day that we can talk about things that will actually solve transit problems. Tear it down, leave it down, and let go of the tunnel fantasy. It's not going to happen, and the goodwill and credibility you're squandering - yes, even with with tax-friendly liberals like Yours Truly - with your pointless, juvenile brinksmanship is going to be sorely needed when Sound Transit 2 goes to the polls next year. Throw in the towel, Greg. Gracefully. This one's not going to happen. Posted by Gavin Shearer at September 20, 2006 4:27 PM. Posted to Politics | Transit. CommentsYou have convinced me. I am more than a little annoyed that this "tear it down; leave it down" option (which could also be called the "copy San Francisco" option) is not going to be on the ballot in November. This "advisory" vote is only giving us two options: tunnel or bridge-thing. Posted by: purple Post a commentThanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out) (If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.) |
