Post navigation

Prev: (02/29/12) | Next: (03/01/12)

Bill could push 520 construction forward despite Arboretum environmental concerns

The Washington House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday that will allow the state to ignore an environmental lawsuit and avoid a possible work stoppage on construction of a new 520 through the Arboretum and Montlake. Here’s Publicola’s take on the bill which now moves to the Senate:

The state house adopted legislation this afternoon that would give the Washington State Department of Transportation an exemption from state law, allowing them to continue construction on the 520 bridge across Lake Washington despite an ongoing environmental appeal under the state Shoreline Management Act. Current law mandates that projects must shut down while they’re under SMA appeal—a process that typically takes about six months but would delay 520 by as much as a year due to weather and fish migration schedules.

We reported in September on the lawsuit brought against the state by Sustainable 520 and a community coalition with groups in Montlake, Madison Park and north Capitol Hill.


Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Russ
12 years ago

The third runway project was started in 1992, should have been completed in 2000 at a cost of 217 million. Ultimately it was completed in 2008, at a cost of a 1.1 billion, thanks to all the NIMBYs. Im sure most would be concerned about the wildlife because what damages an airplane most of the time are birds hitting the plane.

If WSDOT has all the permits, impact studies, etc, etc, all set to go and all the neighbors want to do is challenge those permits and studies, then it makes sense for the state to simple exempt themselves. Nobody wants to see a repeat of what happened to Sea-Tac, nobody wants to see the cost of the project double, perhaps triple like it did with the third runway project.

The state can barely afford to replace the bridge, but it totally needs to be replaced. Ive taken the bus over this bridge for 15 years and when you get wind storms of 30-40mph, those buses struggle to steer straight. With winds over 80mph, there is a serious risk of one of the pontoons ripping from the main platform and sinking.

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/SR520Bridge/Photos/Damage.h

wes kirkman
wes kirkman
12 years ago

To be fair, the sustainable 520 group suggests repairing the problems you speak of rather than building a whole new (behemoth of a) bridge. I admit, the group is just grasping for whatever they can to stop this project, much like the Alaska way viaduct opposition, even suggesting voting for Tim Eyman’s stupid initiative. But to just disregard their opposition as NIMBYism is rather selfish of you. What you are doing is “as long as it’s not in my backyard” (ALAI-NIMBY anyone?) because if the new 15 lane west span of the 520 were to be proposed in your neighborhood, you would be throwing a fit too.

My opposition to the 520 expansion project (let’s call it what it is; this is not a replacement project) isn’t NIMBYism because I rarely go over there; I just know that more highway capacity will ultimately mean more traffic on our local streets and more pollution in our air. I guess that is a form of NIMBYism; well call me a NIMBY.

Elizabeth Campbell
12 years ago

This is more of the renegade WSDOT arrogance. Plan on more of the same. They are a rogue agency that thinks it is above the law at all levels. Your legislators are complicit in this, so is the governor. If the line is not held over this kind of thing, a federal lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation, it will only get worse. Might as well forget about accountability and environmental protection.

Elizabeth Campbell
12 years ago

Your conclusion/causal analysis is unsustatinable Russ. The rate of inflation does not account for the escalation of project costs like this. What cost $217 in 2000 would cost $268.76 in 2008. Get on the Internet and get an inflation calculator. Project cost creep is one, about deflated agency estimates intended to sell a project, then when it comes time to build it, “oops” the cost is higher, who could have known; two, changes in project scope; three, changes in the purpose and need for projects over time; four, contractors colluding with WSDOT officials to pump up the project’s costs – includes the ever willing Parsons Brinckerhoff that never met a project that it didn’t provide support for its expansion.