From the Department of “You could see this coming from across the lake,” Governor Christine Gregoire sent a letter (.pdf) to the Seattle City Council yesterday rebuffing the city’s resistance to the replacement 520 bridge. The council had argued last week that the west side of the bridge needed to be redesigned to mitigate traffic and accommodate more transit; and a group of city and state lawmakers called for transit in the two additional center lanes instead of HOV.

But the state planned the 520 bridge, you see, and they’ve spent a long time planning it, and THE BRIDGE IS GOING TO SINK SOON. So, really, Seattle, seriously, baby, suck it up. Or so says the guv and the chairs of the legislature's two transportation committees:

We have heard that some may wish to revisit the legislative direction regarding the use of the two additional lanes for high occupancy vehicles (HOV). The Supplemental Draft EIS focuses on alternatives based on the four general purpose lanes—two high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes option resulting from years of previous analyses and public input. Changing the configuration now would require a new environmental process. The office of the Attorney General tells us that revisiting these decisions from several years ago would set the project back at least 18 to 24 months. Our commitment to ensuring public safety does not allow that kind of delay.

Does this mean that Seattle—late to this party, led by a fractured coalition, and behind the clock on an urgent public-safety issue—have to roll over for the state? Will Gregoire along with Judy Clibborn (D-41) and Mary Margaret Haugen (D-10) just kick Seattle around like a paraplegic Chihuahua or what?

Not at all.

The state's missive is responding to a statement sent last week by the council, which you can read in this .pdf. The council was, in essence, asking to buy time while it considered alternatives to the state's preferred plan (called A+). In addition, the mayor, community groups, and the 43rd Disitrict Legislative delegation all came out against the state's A+ plan. That's a formidable force, and nuances in the letter show the state won't try to push an anti-transit plan down Seattle's throat.

The governor's letter concludes by saying, "We look forward to working with you, the Mayor and SDOT to address the issues associated with the Westside interchange options analyzed in the supplemental draft environmental impact statement." No environmental review is necessary for the city to pursue the options studied previously. Moreover, while the state is firm that construction needs to be done by the end of 2014, the governor say that technical work and deliberation "must be substantially completed by April 15th."

In other words: (1) the state will let Seattle look at other interchange options, which there are several (.pdf) that meet Seattle's needs; (2) the state is giving Seattle wiggle room by saying designs need to be "substantially" complete, which relaxes the hard deadline; and (3) the state is careful to note in the letter that "decisions we make now on the design features of the facility do not preclude future options for high capacity transit in the corridor."

Every side will probably end up bending a little. And in this case, everyone could win. The state can talk a tough game, Seattle can design an interchange on its side of the lake that it can live with, we get a bridge that has capacity for light rail in the future (we can't afford it by 2014 anyway), and nobody gurgles to their death trying to cross a sinking bridge.