Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« More Wisconsin Exit Polling | In the Last 24 Hours on Line O... »

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Lurching Toward Progress on 520

posted by on February 19 at 16:22 PM

Mayor Greg Nickels delivered his annual State of the City speech this morning at a children’s museum—specifically, the Pacific Science Center, which is currently doing an exhibit on “strange matter.”

While Nickels was talking about innovation (didja know we’re going to be the “Green Building Capital of America”?) his deputy, Tim Ceis (AKA the real mayor) was up at the Museum of History and Industry, where the mediation team that’s hammering out designs for a new 520 bridge met today to discuss the latest community-driven option. That alternative, known as the “East Montlake Interchange” or, more ominously, “Option K,” would combine two previously discussed options (G and J, for those keeping score) into a new compromise alternative that would go through the land currently occupied by MOHAI and have less of an impact on the Arboretum than the other two potential options. The new alternative
would also provide direct service for cars and a Metro bus-rapid transit line to a new light rail station at Husky Stadium.

Both Ceis and Governor Gregoire’s senior advisor, Ron Judd, said they liked the new concept in principle, with the caveat that certain design details (a drawbridge vs. a tunnel connecting 520 to Montlake and Pacific Street, for example) still need to be hammered out. (Native American tribes and federal agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a representative of which sits on the mediation team, are skeptical of any tunnel proposal, because tunnels can disturb wetlands and burial grounds.) “[Gregoire] wants to move that [East Montlake] option forward, within the context of a couple of things,” Judd said. “One, we have a budget [of $3.9 billion]. Two, this is about the whole corridor, not ust the west side. Three, we need to design this in the [environmental review process]. This should not be designed in Olympia.”

Neighborhoods around the proposed 520 interchange met last Saturday to hammer out a consensus proposal, and a group of 520 stakeholders met with Gregoire on Monday. The new proposal will become one of three considered in the environmental impact statement for 520. Alternatives the mediation team has also considered include various versions of the much wider “Montlake Interchange” and the once-popular “Pacific Interchange,” which would have included a bulky bridge from Foster Island over Union Bay to Husky Stadium.

The mediation team has until April 1 to come up with a list of proposals for environmental review.

RSS icon Comments

1

They're concerned about disturbing a Native American burial ground with a tunnel under Lake Washington?

Since when did cement overshoes become a Native American burial tradition?

Posted by NapoleonXIV | February 19, 2008 4:25 PM
2

April Fools' Day - perfect

Posted by McG | February 19, 2008 4:39 PM
3

We already are the Green Building Capitol of the World.

Oh, wait, I thought you were including the UW in Seattle.

Never mind ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 4:43 PM
4

Whatever it is better be real nice, so all those cars that are stopped in traffic on it will be able to enjoy their mornings and evenings there. Because unless they're planning on adding a couple of lanes to I-5, as well as Lake Washington Boulevard, Montlake Boulevard, Sand Point Way, and Roanoke, there's not going to be anyplace for the increased bridge traffic to go. It doesn't matter how big a pipe you have if the nipple on the end is still small.

Posted by Fnarf | February 19, 2008 4:45 PM
5

Fnarf, $4.4B can't buy a couple of big nipples?

Posted by MoTown | February 19, 2008 4:55 PM
6

At least they're no longer bisecting my beloved Marsh Island.

Posted by Paulus | February 19, 2008 4:55 PM
7

That alternative, known as the "East Montlake Interchange" or, more ominously, "Option K," would combine two previously discussed options (G and J, for those keeping score)

A few more proposals and they'll run out of letters in the alphabet.

Posted by JMR | February 19, 2008 4:56 PM
8

How the hell could a drawbridge on-ramp be a good idea?

A tunnel sounds a little pie in the sky but we'll see.

Posted by Cale | February 19, 2008 5:08 PM
9

A tunnel sounds far, far more realistic than a drawbridge. A drawbridge may be cheaper, and less likely to disturb native burial grounds (seriously?), but cutting off the flow of traffic every time a ship needs to get by will KILL traffic on that ramp, and so slow up all of 520 westbound and Montlake eastbound.

Posted by Greg | February 19, 2008 5:20 PM
10

@4 - so, you're one of the two ex-boyfriends of that pretty young woman at Dan's 2/14 event?

Look, to take your pipe analogy (wrong concept for a floating bridge, which is a platform structure that covers the equivalents of boats), if eight of the "pipes" are road lanes, it would not increase capacity due to I-405 and I-5.

But if four of the eight lanes are separated light rail (added later) with a capacity of more than 20 people per car/truck equivalent (2 lanes) and Bus/HOV only (2 lanes) - and those lanes are separated on either end (light rail with a tunnel, Bus/HOV with a flyby), then your net capacity increased by a factor of more than 10.

A lot more.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 5:47 PM
11

@10: Don't forget that rail lanes need super-special ramps - spirals, less than 6% grade, those rail transition / expansion joint thingies, etc.

Posted by Greg | February 19, 2008 5:51 PM
12

It's not hard, especially if you drop the two lanes at the lakefront.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 6:57 PM
13

520: the microcosm of Washington state "piss-poor" decision making.

The mantra should not be about a "couple of things." This should be about the whole corridor. That's it. All of these other details are the usual roadblocking that is encountered with these public projects.

Just do it. Fix the viaduct too. Does anyone actually have the nuts to pragmatically take care of these urgent, giant problems?

Posted by grizzly bear | February 19, 2008 9:12 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).