3 ms·
In Seattle we paid $3.4 billion for a 1.7 mile tunnel (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/berthas-woes-grind-on-more-delay-higher-cost-for-highway-99-tun
by throwawaysea 6y ago
In Seattle we paid $3.4 billion for a 1.7 mile tunnel (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/berthas-woes-grind-on-more-delay-higher-cost-for-highway-99-tunnel/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/berthas-woes-grind...). Construction began in 2013 and it was supposed to open in 2015 but didn’t until 2019. It replaced a 4 lane elevated highway on the waterfront, which gave all drivers beautiful views, with an underground 4 lane highway that gave waterfront property owners a big boost in value, while relegating everyone else to views of subterranean walls. Somehow our local government saw this project as value for our money.
- Slippery_John 6y agoCosts aside, lets not pretend the viaduct was removed just to improve property values. The thing was a ticking time bomb that would have killed dozens or hundreds of people the next time a moderately sized earthquake hit, to say nothing of the cost of cleaning up the damage and replacing it. Speaking a somebody who lived in the area both before and after the demolition (not a property owner), the whole place is just so much more beautiful. Some commuters may have lost a view, but what they lost pedestrians all over the area gained. Even outside of the waterfront itself, the view from the street level in the adjoining neighborhoods is gorgeous now.
- throwawaysea 6y ago> The thing was a ticking time bomb that would have killed dozens or hundreds of people the next time a moderately sized earthquake hit, to say nothing of the cost of cleaning up the damage and replacing it. It could have been replaced with a much cheaper and safer viaduct, instead of a tunnel boondoggle that was way too expensive.