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.

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.

Consultant: Deep-Bore Tunnel 40 Percent Likely to Go Over Budget

At today’s lengthy city council viaduct oversight committee meeting, a consultant hired by the city council to analyze the risks of replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a deep-bore tunnel told council members that the tunnel had a 40 percent likelihood of costing more than the state’s $1.96 billion budget. According to the state’s Cost Estimate Valuation Process (CEVP), the tunnel is 60 percent likely to cost $1.96 billion or less, and 40 percent likely to cost that much or more. The state estimates that the tunnel has a 90 percent probability of costing less than $2.2 billion.

Put another way, there’s a 30 percent chance that the tunnel will have overruns of up to $300 million. A 2004 study found that, on average, tunnel and bridge megaprojects go 34 percent over budget.

“When things go wrong with tunnels, and they can go seriously wrong, it can lead to cost overruns,” the consultant, John Newby, said. State viaduct project staffers did not refute Newby’s numbers, but they did rush to qualify that the cost estimates will be more reliable once the two remaining contractors actually submit their bids on the project.

The meeting was mostly a rundown of all the potential pitfalls that could lead to cost overruns, including: Unanticipated soil conditions, wear and tear to the tunnel boring machine (which will be the largest of its kind, by three feet, in the world), and ground deformation or settlement during tunneling.

After the meeting, council member Mike O’Brien, a tunnel opponent, told PubliCola he wasn’t comforted by today’s presentation.

“At some point, risk is risk, and either the contractor has got to bear it or the public has got to bear it,” O’Brien said. O’Brien wants the council to ask the state legislature to remove a provision in state law that says Seattle taxpayers will be on the hook for any cost overruns on the tunnel.


  • tvguide

    My my, what a surprise that McGinn hired consultant who agrees with him.

  • TranspoGuy

    Um, John Newby was the consultant hired by the council. Thomas Neff was the one hired by McGinn

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    Still hundreds of millions of dollars short of the 2.8 billion dollar number.
    Put another way, there is a 30% chance that Seattle area tax payers will be nowhere near throwing cost overruns back in the state's lap.

  • Selma

    “According to the state’s Cost Estimate Valuation Process (CEVP), the tunnel is 60 percent likely to cost $1.96 billion or less, and 40 percent likely to cost that much or more.”

    So then, how much exactly did the City Council pay this guy to read a report that's available on the WSDOT web site? This isn't exactly hidden information, and he doesn't seem to have done any of his own cost analysis.

    We're looking at the distinct possibility that this project is will be killed by FUD, which as tunnel opponents have shown, is extremely easy to manufacture.

    Do keep this in mind when you're asking for $30 million for bicycle improvements, or $2 billion for a light rail line that will require risky bridges from West Seattle to Ballard.

  • morning

    Right Baker, how can it be that only you have noticed that there is an $800 million cushion?

    Because there isn't.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    Wanna try again?

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    The deep bore tunnel will lead to death panels.

  • joshuadf

    My favorite part was when Newby said the structure in the most danger of collapse from the tunnel boring machine is the Viaduct. They're apparently going to try to reinforce its foundation, along with several other buildings.

  • Brice

    Erica, my understanding is that this is the Council-hired consultant, not the Mayor-hired one, correct?

  • tvguide

    I guess I got worn down from the 6 cola anti-tunnel rants in a single day… my bad. However I see that in more credible media the story is a little different:

    “WSDOT's planned tunnel “is a reasonable increment in terms of not stretching the technology too far at one time,” he said.

    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/423273_viaduct13…

  • Gomez

    - That 40% includes the situations where the tunnel goes just a hair over budget. For example, if the $1.96 billion project ended up costing $1.97 billion, that's technically over budget. But it's not a backbreaking excess. Nor is $2 billion on the dot, probably not even $2.1 billion or more provided the project has a built in overage.

    - This sort of risk analysis is standard practice, and it's likely that every project, including the ones ST brought in under budget, came with a significant risk (such as this project's estimate of 40%) of going over budget.

    - Yeah, that undercuts Conlin's confidence statement that the project would not go over budget. But 60% is still a fairly strong chance, and again that 40% technically includes scenarios where the project goes a hair over-budget.

  • Gomez

    Sounds like several people, including the writer, misunderstood the numbers.

    $1.96 billion is the estimated cost of the tunnel. However, the state has appropriated a cap of $2.8 billion in funding for its construction. As with any other major project, they'll finance any portion of the funding they don't have and pay it off in due time. Since it's a state highway they're fully committed to moving forward on, they will finance the difference if they're at all short of the $2.8 billion.

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    You are right, it is more, the contingency would have to have been consumed, too.

  • seandr

    Might I suggest some alternative headlines?

    - “Consultant 100% likely to tell us what we already know”
    - “Publicola 100% likely to go with sensationalistic anti-tunnel headline”

  • Flustered_reader

    Josh and Erica: once Shia advocates of costs-be-damned Monorail. Now Sunni advocates of what-will-it-cost-before-we-build tunnel. Backwards reels the mind.

    Their real agenda is, everybody go childless and ride a bike in the rain and blue-collar Boeing workers move to Wichita and longshore workers move to Tacoma.

    But Erica and Josh, who will pay for your broadband wireless?

  • Gomez

    And by 'budget' I mean in the terms ECB described, which is actually the $1.96 billion cost estimate. The actual WSDOT budget is $2.8 billion.

  • Jakers

    Run by Muslim socialists!

  • Pride/fall/hubris etc.

    actually, any estimate is simply not a single number but a probability curve of outcomes. This has been known for years. So the fact they know this is not news. The fact they're telling us this, yes it does make Richard Conlin's “confiidence statement” a …

    well, it's a lie.

    The real issue is that 40% only includes the stuff they know they don't know about. It doesn't include the unkown unknowns.

    If you ask them if they're studied the unkown unkowns, they'll look at you and say, “that's ridiculous. We don't know what we don't know about and can't even imagine or model!”

    Which is the point.

    those who evade this fail to understand risk.

    Here's an example. All actors predicted the risk that one mortgage would fail or that an entire city of mortgages would fail, but NOT the feedback loops inherent in a whole industry of mortgages failing nationwide to the point where the insurer was not even solvent and was going to fail.

    No one (hardly no one) foresaw that.

    Look at the Seattle Times today. See the nice color drawing? See how huge a five story high tbue is underground? It's as high as the freaking viaduct is already. and it's only a little bit under the existing viaduct. and they're actually going to have to REINFORCE THE EXISTING VIADUCT when the boring machine goes underneath it so IT DOES NOT FALL DOWN DUE TO THE BORING MACHINE.

    Now, how many models have they worked with involving a real life example of a 54 foot diameter bore in similar soils directly underneath a tottering rotting huge Viaduct whose faults are the reason we're doing this in the first place?

    I will tell the answer: zero models.

    When you do something new, there is a larger universe of risk of things you didn't think of. Remember, intergranular stress corrosion cracking that shut down many nuclear power plants? they didn't realize that.

  • tpn

    Why build anything then? Lets all live in huts.

  • Gomez

    Right, and as with any estimate (since every engineered project has multiple uncertainties) it is figured the ultimate total will fall within a standard deviation of the given estimate. Given all your text and arguments, I gather you have the exact total of that standard deviation (which is probably more reliable than any of ours given you seem to be so very intelligent) so perhaps you could share that number with us so we can compare notes.

    … oh, but wait, they actually won't be boring directly underneath the viaduct, since the viaduct is on the waterfront and the tunnel proper will be farther east. But since you're obviously very intelligent, I'm sure you knew that. So I guess you just wrote this long diatribe (without putting your name on it) to troll the discussion! Nevermind!

  • Jakers

    “Consultant: Deep-Bore Tunnel 40 Percent Likely to Go Over Budget”

    Why not change the heading to read: Consultant: Deep-Bore Tunnel 60 Percent Likely to NOT Go Over Budget

  • tpn

    Only if the subject was the Monorail. Then “that's different”.

  • morning

    Baker, Gomez et al., the costs are estimated at over $2.8B

    http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/Viaduct/

    BTW – contingencies are not “extra” money – they are part of the expected budget they just haven't been precisely calculated – the $415M is part of the budget – the tunnel piece is about $2B – the state's budget also includes other pieces as shown below.

    Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement projects 2010 Cost estimate
    (millions)*
    S. Holgate Street to S. King Street (aka south end) viaduct replacement $483
    S. King Street to Battery Street (aka central) viaduct replacement – proposed SR 99 bored tunnel $1,960
    Central waterfront viaduct removal and new Alaskan Way $290
    Central waterfront construction mitigation $30
    Other Moving Forward projects:
    - Column safety repairs
    - Electrical line relocation
    - Battery Street Tunnel maintenance
    - Construction mitigation for south end viaduct replacement $181
    Prior Environmental Impact Statement, right of way and design costs $164
    Total $3,108
    *All costs are in year of expenditure dollars.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/6SAQ6R2ZBGQQNNBXVJZG66K6KY Mickymse

    Still might want to try again…

    This quote was only in reference to the likelihood that that the large diameter of the tunnel boring machine would cause problems.

  • Gomez

    We're discussing the cost of the tunnel itself, are we not, since it's the big bone of contention in this debate? We know the estimated cost of the whole project is ~$3.1 million, and the costs of those other aspects will be handled separately.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/6SAQ6R2ZBGQQNNBXVJZG66K6KY Mickymse

    That's because he wasn't hired to do a competing report… He was hired by the Council to evaluate the work being provided to them, and to help them understand it.

  • Gomez

    Oh, you mean the monorail that was going to require $11 billion in bond payments and excessive MVETs? Yeah, I have no idea why that failed either.

  • WenG

    Why debate an option that carries unnecessary risk and cost?

    Brightwater? Machines trapped under my kid’s elementary school in Bothell for over a year? 2 years behind schedule? Bueller, anyone?

    Tunneling through glacial till is an engineering nightmare. A submarine, or submerged tunnel, is pre-fabbed and sunk into place. Instead of wasting billions getting stuck under pilings and gravel, sink a tunnel in Elliot Bay or the Duwamish.

    We have options, but carry on with the policy snark. There’s more than one way to bore.

  • morning

    They are all part of the budget. The approaches have already had scope changes increasing the costs.

    When you say And by 'budget' I mean in the terms ECB described, which is actually the $1.96 billion cost estimate. The actual WSDOT budget is $2.8 billion. some people just might think there was a $800 million cushion.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    See Josh's comment above: “My favorite part was when Newby said the structure in the most danger of collapse from the tunnel boring machine is the Viaduct. “

  • joshuadf

    Yep, according to the crazy graphic in the Seattle Times the machine will bore “20-40ft” under the viaduct pilings at Yesler Way:
    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews…

    Also right under a bunch of Pioneer Square, of course.

  • Gomez

    Oh hey, way to change the route, guys.

    They are taking measures to ensure they don't just plunge headlong into trouble.

    The tunneling crew will be required to bury extensometers, probes that measure soil settlement, said Monique Nykamp, geotechnical engineer for consulting firm Shannon & Wilson. Vibration monitors will be at the surface, about one every block, she said.

    Every building near the tunnel path will be outfitted with at least four highly sensitive tiltmeters, capable of measuring any change. And other devices on the old viaduct will indicate whether existing cracks widen.

  • David Schraer

    Delaying the Green Tunnel is Seattle's Biggest Risk
    No proposed solution to replacing the Highway 99 Viaduct is perfect but the deep-bore tunnel is a good compromise between the very diverse interests at the table. The truth is that delay is the biggest cost risk and tunnels are inherently green. More at –
    http://lightandair.wordpress.com/

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    “They are taking measures to ensure they don't just plunge headlong into trouble.” I'm not sure measurement devices ensure you don't plunge into trouble. They just tell you how far you've plunged.