:o
QuoteThe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers consistently, and sometimes drastically, underestimated the cost of deepening Jacksonville Harbor over the past 50 years, according to documents obtained by the Times-Union from the corps and JaxPort.
The cost sometimes ended up double or triple what was predicted, even after inflation is taken into account, due to environmental problems, unexpected amounts of rock below the river and the difficulty of finding disposal sites for dredged material.
The history of cost overruns raises questions about the Army Corps' $766 million cost estimate for the project being considered now to deepen a 13-mile stretch of the river from 40 to 47 feet. Half of that, about $383 million, would come from the state and local governments.
Each of the three most recent harbor deepening projects went over budget, according to government documents and newspaper reports:
■ The most recent project, which deepened about five miles of the harbor from 38 to 40 feet, cost almost four times what was planned, according to Army Corps documents. In 2003, the corps predicted the project would cost $16.4 million, but when it wrapped up in 2010 the cost ran to $64.8 million.
■ The previous project, which deepened a 15-mile stretch of the harbor from 38 to 40 feet, was estimated to cost $26.1 million in 1999. By 2003, it had cost $47.9 million.
■ The project before that, which deepened the harbor from 34 to 38 feet, was expected to cost $8.7 million when planning began in 1966. By 1974, the price estimate had risen to about $34 million, according to coverage in the Times-Union.
In an email, Army Corps spokesman Mark Ray said the corps learned from past projects and that new technology makes its predictions more precise.
Full article: http://jacksonville.com/business/2015-04-15/story/army-corps-has-underestimated-cost-deepening-jacksonville-harbor-over-past
I, for one, am shocked.
Shocked.
Likewise, they underestimated the environmental damage in Miami.
Three deepening projects ... what was the reasoning used for each? What was the net result? Did the increases come as predicted? It just seems that if we already have three deepening projects to project success from, we should be able to get a pretty good gauge of how successful this latest deepening project could be.
And the costs were higher? Of course they were. Everyone involved knew they were going to be. In fact, they probably counted on it.
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise