Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

x close
The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

The Cost Overrun Time Bomb

Opinion   April 12, 2010 at 10:33 am Dan Bertolet

Even those who are rabidly opposed to the idea of spending billions to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a deep-bore tunnel would have a hard time coming up with a scheme for sabotage as effective as the state’s cost overrun provision. It’s a ticking time bomb, and the state is going to need some Hurt Locker-style luck to keep it from blowing up in the tunnel’s face.

Because they keep making statements like this:

“‘And while acknowledging McGinn’s concerns about overruns, and who pays for them,’ the governor’s office said the issue is a nonstarter because ‘we intend to bring the project in on time and on budget,’ Shelton said.”

Which incite reactions like this:

“Super-duper! The state intends to bring it in on time and on budget. That’s wonderful news. I mean, it’s certainly better than intending to bring the project in late and over-budget!”

Tick tick tick…


  • Stacy

    And the Port “intends” to come up with $300 million for the project; how's that going to work exactly?

  • elaineinballard

    would that be an “intention” or an “aspiration?”

  • joshuadf

    Not sure whether to say “I have a bad feeling about this” or “What could possibly go wrong?”

  • rehana

    If they believe there won't be any overruns, they should have no problem agreeing to pay them.

  • davidsucher

    “If they believe there won't be any overruns, they should have no problem agreeing to pay them.”

    That's great. Would make a great bumper-sticker (for the few of us who drive) and if it had fewer words.

  • tvguide

    To fill in an uneventful day, Publicola's frothing journalist Dan Bertolet goes to the dubiously true and tired rant about the boring tunnel and the cost overrun apocalypse. Stay tuned next week, when we learn who will fill the role of Charlton Heston in this upcoming disaster movie.

  • Morning Fizzy

    Dan,

    Have you written about the $3B+ cost overrun for the light rail in Seattle that is totally paid for by the North King County sub-area, which is Seattle plus Lake Forest Park and Shoreline.

  • Come on, Seattle

    Where exactly is the news in this posting??? What the Mayor and all other tunnel fear-mongers refuse to acknowledge is that, according to the Attorney General, the state probably cannot even require the city to pay cost overruns. This is the state's project and, almost certainly, if there are costs overruns, the state will have to pay for them.

    Enough of this shrill “the sky is falling” pablum. Let's defuse this “time bomb” for once and for all. This “overrun” issue is a ruse, used by opponents of the tunnel to kill the project.

  • Stacy

    OK then, will you commit to paying them; cause the State sure as hell won't.

  • joshuadf

    That's actually the point–even badly needed infrastructure projects like light rail often have huge cost overruns. It would be interesting to parse out which of those were related to the engineering (i.e., Beacon Hill Tunnel), which were unexpected materials cost increased, etc.

  • Pine Grove

    Sure, there are those people who are determined to stop the tunnel at all costs. But there are also those people who are determined to build the tunnel at all costs. And it's the latter faction that has a heck of a lot more to prove than the former.

    Telling Seattle taxpayers, “Hey, don't worry, you probably won't be on the hook for the cost overruns”–that's a bit like telling someone who shows up at an emergency room after a serious car accident, “Hey, don't worry, you probably won't be on the hook for the ridiculous medical bills that you're going to rack up.” “Yeah, thanks a lot for telling me I have nothing to worry about with MY money.”

    But there's another great danger to Seattle besides getting stuck with the tab. The state knows it doesn't have the money to pay for this project, and it's already cutting corners. My understanding is that Gregoire has already reneged on the added transit funding that was supposed to come to Seattle. The more corners WSDOT keeps cutting, the worse the impact on the areas of Seattle that will be impacted by the tunnel. I'm thinking of Pioneer Square in particular.

    And there's one other huge detail the “tunnel at all costs” contingent likes to gloss over. We don't have enough money yet either for 520 bridge replacement, and we don't know yet how much extra that project will have to cost. So we're trying to commit to two projects for which we haven't committed the money, and need I remind anyone that, in turns of usage and economic impact, the viaduct corridor pales beside 520.

  • Chris

    Actually, SR 520 with about 115,000 ADT and SR 99 with 105,000 ADT are nearly the same in terms of traffic.

    However, what the deep bore tunnel has is an appalling adopted design standard where, to save costs, WSDOT has reneged on its orignal design promise.

    When first presented to the public, via the legislature in March of 2009, the tunnel had 2-12 foot lanes in each direction and an 8-foot shoulder on the right side of the through lanes and a 4-foot shoulder on the left side.

    Today the 8-feet has shrunk to 4-feet and the 4 feet is down to 2-feet. Additionally, while the height of most freeway bridges at a minimum 15 feet 6 inches the tunnel is barely 15 feet. Last, the lane widths have shrunk to 11 feet. (See draft design sheet RS006, station 200+00 to Sta 288+20)

    Worse, in the deep bore portion on the northbound lanes, the lower roadway in this case, the right shoulder is reduced to 2 feet and the left shoulder is now 6 feet. This switch is contrary to the adopted federal design standards (AASHTO manual, pg 459) since the wide shoulder is supposed to be on the right – like the rest of North America's multi-lane highways.

    Why should you worry? Well, in the event of a major crash, and we can expect one a month with an attendant fatality, there will be a need to get a fire engine down there and accompanying ambulances and tow-trucks. They need an 8-foot width clear of obstructions to get to the scene. So, how do you get emergency services down a tunnel with only 2-foot shoulders? Answer – you can't.

    My prediction. The deep bore tunnel is a victory for the trial lawyers. And of course folks like me who will be their expert witness at trial. Who will lose? The taxpayers who will be on the hook for those costs.

    Last, has WSDOT been “put on notice”? Answer, Yes. I have donw that already.

  • http://twitter.com/Zelbinian Dustin Hodge

    Star Wars references trump all ;)

  • http://twitter.com/Zelbinian Dustin Hodge

    No, see, the state will not pay cost overruns. And the city won't pay cost overruns. So what happens when we build it, get to the point where there are cost overruns, and there's no money for it because no one will pony up? I'll tell you what happens: instead of a $2.4B tunnel, we get a $2.4B hole.