|
Re: Another silly/dangerous proposal? |
Hi All: I'm not sure sure building this tunnel would be any more dangerous than anything else we build. It would be built through bedrock, which is a lot better than pretty much any other type of ground. There seems to be a bigger problem with bridges than tunnels during quakes. The tunnel for the LA aquaduct had no problems during Northridge, other than the flow of water is somewhat slower now as the inclination changed slightly as a result of the quake. The 1-2 mile train tunnel in the Newhall pass had no problems. The train tunnel in Chatsworth had no problems. The Red Line does the same thing by going through the Santa Monica fault. In fact, if you ever get a chance to ride the red line, sit up front with a view out the front window. About halfway through the tunnel under the Hollywood Hills, you can see where they have widened the tunnel at the fault to allow them to correct for creep and quakes. I think the bigger concern should be cost to the taxpayers. I don't think safety would be any worse than for any other transportation project. That's my 2 (billion) cents ;) Michael Follow Ups: ● Re: Another silly/dangerous proposal? - Petra Challus 17:52:03 - 8/1/2001 (8752) (0) |
|