EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
Alternative Puget Sound Solution
 A Con-Sol Group Report
3400 56th Street N.W., Suite 102 Gig Harbor, Washington 98335 (253) 858-5100 fax (253) 858-5103 Bob Williams, President and Senior Research Analyst Lynn Harsh, Executive Director VASHON VS TACOMA NARROWS CROSSING ALTERNATIVES COST COMPARISON There has been a lot of discussions over the past years regarding the best solution to solve the traffic congestion problem that currently exists on the west side of Puget Sound. The Con Sol Group of Gig Harbor, Washington has produced several reports on this matter and will focus this report strictly on the cost benefits of a Vashon Crossing over the construction of a second bridge at the Tacoma Narrows Crossing. Lets first take a look at the hard construction cost of each of these two alternative projects: TACOMA NARROWS CROSSING CAPITAL COSTS
Constructing a new bridge with approach roads only solves a small portion of the problem. The other necessary element required to move cars across central Puget Sound and solve the congestion problem involves increasing the capacity of the existing ferry system:4 ADDED FERRY & TRANSIT CAPITAL COST TO TACOMA NARROWS BRIDGE ALTERNATIVE
The combined total cost to relieve the existing congestion on the west side of Puget Sound is: Total Tacoma Narrows Capital Crossing Cost $1,436,210,000 Now, let's look at the hard construction cost to solve the same problem using the Vashon Crossing Alternative: VASHON CROSSING CAPITAL COST
The Vashon Crossing Alternative will move approximately 90,000 vehicles across central Puget Sound daily instead of 6,700 cars which will be the maximum capacity of the ferry system after spending over $1 Billion dollars to make the necessary improvements and upgrades. The Vashon Crossing Alternative eliminates the need for (and the cost associated with) the existing ferry service between Bremerton/Seattle, Southworth/Vashon and Fauntleroy resulting in the elimination of anticipated expenditures as detailed on page two (2) herein of: -$1,012,200,000 Total Vashon Crossing Capital Cost: $319,310,000 COMPARISON OF CAPITAL COST VASHON CROSSING VS TACOMA NARROWS CROSSING Capital cost of Tacoma Narrows Crossing including required ferry upgrades = $1,436,210,000 Capital cost of the Vashon Crossing including ferry system savings = $ 319,310,000 Resultant savings to the taxpayers if Washington State Department of Transportation selects the Vashon Crossing Alternative. $1,116,900,000 THATS RIGHT - OVER $1.1 BILLION DOLLARS SAVED CONCLUSION: Any "apples to apples" cost comparison must include all cost associated with reaching the same end results. In this case, all previous studies on this subject indicated a new Tacoma Narrows Bridge as a "stand alone" project does not solve the problem of adequate mobility across central Puget Sound (thus the need for including the costs of upgrading the existing ferry system into this comparative study). On the other hand, the Vashon Crossing as a "stand alone" project adds more than adequate capacity to the central Puget Sound crossing situation (thus the elimination of the existing ferry routes) yet the most optimistic prediction is that it would relieve no more than thirty (30%) percent of the existing traffic from the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. Thirty (30%) percent today, however, would bring the Tacoma Narrows Bridge under it design capacity and would solve the congestion problem but without a fixed structure across central Puget Sound there will be no way to increase vehicle capacity by even ten (10%) no matter how much money was spent. Whichever solution is ultimately selected will require annual maintenance and operation costs over the entire life of the improvement. If we use the bonding life of fifty (50) years as the useful life of the project these costs annual will be: TACOMA NARROWS BRIDGE MAINTENANCE/OPERATIONS COST
ADD FERRY MAINTENANCE/OPERATION COST (Required under the Tacoma Narrows Bridge Alternative)
VASHON CROSSING MAINTENANCE/OPERATIONS COST
The difference results in a savings to taxpayers of: $36,520,000 Each and every year over the term of the bonds: x 50 Resulting in a lifetime savings to the taxpayers of: $1,826,000,000 Selecting the Vashon Crossing as the preferred alternative further eliminates the existing current costs of ferry operations at Bremerton, Southworth, Vashon & Fauntleroy resulting in additional annual savings to taxpayers of:
The Vashon Crossing will save the taxpayers: $7,342,900,000. Which does not include savings on the debt service associated with this project. With all of these facts and figures and details and numbers available to anyone who would take the time to investigate this matter, why is it that the Washington State Department of Transportation has refused to complete an "apples to apples" evaluate of the VASHON CROSSING ALTERNATIVE? Sincerely, Randy Boss, Chairman 1 1992 Cross Sound Transportation Study, Technical Appendix E, Exhibit 25
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question: "Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
