State shouldn’t carry risks of Seattle tunnel
THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Gov. Chris Gregoire wants the Legislature to write a blank check for a multibillion-dollar tunnel through downtown Seattle. Washington’s lawmakers should refuse to sign it.
The tunnel – a proposed replacement for the Alaskan Way viaduct – is a reasonable idea. It wouldn’t merely replace the viaduct, as a new elevated highway would have done, it would also eliminate a huge concrete barricade between downtown Seattle and its waterfront. It promises huge benefits for that city.
The problem: After pledging that Washington taxpayers will pay no more than $2.8 billion for the project, Department of Transportation officials now say the state will assume financial liability for any cost overruns.
That ought to be a show-stopper. A new elevated highway would serve the essential purpose of the project: letting motorists drive through downtown Seattle safely and efficiently. The additional cost of a tunnel serves other purposes – legitimate, but chiefly of benefit to Seattle and King County. State taxpayers should not be left on the hook for any and all overruns on the tunnel’s construction.
The Department of Transportation officials say there will be no overruns. Although big tunnel projects are notorious for unexpected costs, they point to tunnels that have already been dug in the Seattle area, most recently the light rail tunnel under Beacon Hill. The geology is understood.
They also appear to be using conservative methods in estimating the project’s cost. There’s no evidence of a scam here.
But … this is still a megaproject in the early stages of design. Sound Transit’s early blunders demonstrated that much of the engineering has to be done on a project before cost projections become genuinely reliable.
The currently projected cost of creating the tunnel is $1.9 billion. Go much above that – and throw in other known expenses – and you’ve busted right through the $2.8 billion total that was supposed to be a ceiling.
The DOT’s actual estimates do in fact reflect much uncertainty. Using respected cost-projection methods, the DOT calculates a 60 percent chance the tunnel will ultimately cost less than $1.9 billion and an 80 percent chance it will cost less than $2.2 billion.
Do the math: That translates into a 40 percent chance of running over $1.9 billion and 20 percent chance of running over $2.2 billion.
When the governor first announced the tunnel decision, we took her at her word that the state’s share of the project would be securely capped. Now it appears there is no cap at all beyond educated guesses.
Seattle gets the benefits of the tunnel; the state gets the risk. It doesn’t take an accountant to see what’s wrong with that equation.
