Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly

Author: **Whoa, an accurate headline**

Date: **11-20-2020 - 11:39**

“If the ballast had been cleaned and kind of shaken out so that all of the mud and fine particles were removed, reusing the ballast probably would have been a cost-effective and time-effective strategy,” Kirschbaum said. “But it wasn’t. And as a result, we now have ballast that is really more mud than rock and needs to be addressed.”

In an answer to a question from Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, Kirschbaum said the cost of having a contractor go in and replace the ballast would be in the millions of dollars.

“Millions or tens of millions?” Mandelman asked.

“I think tens of millions,” Kirschbaum said.

Subject | Written By | Date/Time (PST) |
---|---|---|

Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly | synonymouse | 11-20-2020 - 11:33 |

Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly |
Whoa, an accurate headline | 11-20-2020 - 11:39 |

Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly | .......... | 11-20-2020 - 12:31 |

Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly | muni lover | 11-20-2020 - 15:57 |

Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly | It's only money | 11-20-2020 - 16:21 |

Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly, yep.... | BOB2 | 11-22-2020 - 09:04 |

Re: Re-used ballast in Twin Peaks Tunnel to prove costly, yep.... | BOB2 | 11-22-2020 - 09:08 |