darwink
Senior Member
Those risks are not show stoppers, it is basically saying: this is not a design, which is true. The city can task its existing office and contractors to build this. I am reasonably confident the city already has a more advanced version of this report, that was prepared as an option alongside the Lynnwood option.Not willing to blindly trust the 'report' that the Province pushed out of which the report itself identifies, that other than, will a track and station barely fit on a road, basically no other impacts were assessed (pg48).
That's not being risk averse, thats accurately assessing the risks that have been presented to you clearly by them being omitted in the first place.
The city is convinced that it is right, that the entire process that got the city here (short tunnel, short line) was right. That they didn't make spectacular errors at key points. That their evaluation of stakeholder complaints as worth a billion dollars or more was the right call.
That the project shrank every time they tried to accommodate more demands and try to engineer around geology should have been a warning sign blaring that they weren't doing a good job. Instead they stayed path dependent and insisted they were right.
Today, the city can accept the province's report as an opportunity to go yes and (improv style, keep the sketch going), and receive sign off from the feds and province. Or they can say no and book a billion dollar charge on their books.
It is inevitable that the city accepts the report as a general guideline to build elevated. The city should, and get on with it as rapidly as possible.
The city should also take the massive gift from the province: the province rejected the Jim Gray group plan entirely.