3 ms·
But above ground doesn't matter as long as it is grade-separated, which is what every new foot of rail laid for Sound Transit 3 will be. (That's also one reaso
by techsupporter 10y ago
But above ground doesn't matter as long as it is grade-separated, which is what every new foot of rail laid for Sound Transit 3 will be. (That's also one reason for the long time-frame: A new tunnel needs to be dug under downtown and a new bridge built over the ship canal to Ballard.)
A very large chunk of the Sound Transit 3 cost will be interest paid on borrowing. Because Washington State has no state bank or infrastructure bank, Sound Transit has to "borrow as it goes" by issuing bonds, building, paying back, issuing more bonds, building, and so on. It doesn't get the funds in one up-front chunk--like Vancouver did for its light rail system, from the BC and Canadian federal governments--so it's fund-as-we-go.
- saosebastiao 10y agoThe borrowing limits affect the timeline, but I'd be surprised if they affect the cost in any measurable way. Bond interest rates are so low for something like this that after adjustment for expected inflation they might as well be zero. Above ground does matter. Grade separated still mostly works from a transit perspective, but there are other concerns: how they affect surface traffic, how they can be affected by marine traffic, etc. Underground is more expensive but still demanded for a reason, and we are still paying >2x per mile for above ground vs what Paris paid for underground lines.