By: James Vesely
Seattle Times
March 18, 2007
Original column
ON THE VIADUCT — Man, this thing really zips along. Four trips back and forth from South Lake Union to West Seattle and the Alaskan Way Viaduct is peaches compared to Interstate 5, especially where it balls up under the Washington State Convention & Trade Center lid.
By 3:30 Thursday afternoon, I-5 is a mean-spirited thing, crisscross traffic splitting between heading east on Interstate 90 or south to Tacoma. The viaduct coming north was nearly empty and even though it is a white-knuckle exit down through the tunnel, the jam-up is on the surface streets, not the elevated roadway. We've heard from engineers, all manner of politicians, aesthetic urbanists and the governor, but for drivers, the viaduct is the most dependable and useful artery in Seattle. It appears its fate is to be carted away in pieces, and replaced by some aerial highway and perhaps a smallish tunnel in the north part of the corridor.
I predict a solution that will cover every politician on the dais last week, as Seattle's political establishment reacted to the embarrassment of last week's vote of disdain for Seattle planning.
Indeed, it is a regional question, not a Seattle question. Already, the darts are out on the Highway 520 floating bridge. State Sen. Ed Murray has asked for a mediator to step in, a sign that he and others believe the region cannot solve a problem without outside help.
On today's editorial opinion page, The Seattle Times endorses the idea of a single agency to handle roads, transit and transportation planning under an elected board.
As the editorial states, we are reluctant to create another level of government, but quietly, the professional thinkers on regional and transportation matters are coming to believe our current system cannot absorb the number of political decisions needed to fix roads and rail.
Of the 128 current agencies in the four-county Puget Sound region, many would come under the umbrella of a single authorizing agency. Many other cities and regions understand the role of planning beyond single jurisdictions. This region must, too.
Opposition to the conclusions of the governor's task force headed by Eastsider John Stanton and former Seattle Mayor Norm Rice comes from today's political fortresses. Some would call them silos. I call them castles and moats.
In the current pattern of planning, roads often compete with or discourage rail and rail advocates use their considerable muscle to discredit road projects. No region emerging into the 21st century with so much going for it as ours can compete if projects are endlessly delayed because of local tribal influences. And we have plenty of tribes, from cyclists to eight-lane bridge enthusiasts.
Many will point to flaws in a new, centralized agency, mostly those who will lose clout. But it is no longer acceptable to the region for Seattle to say to the state, "We won't permit your plan," or neighborhoods to say, "We won't allow your bridge." In the wide world of discourse, somebody, somewhere, has to finally make a decision.
We could possibly have a transportation agency that would be the cream of the regional city-states, an independent organization, led by an elected board, that would deal with the monorail, expanding Interstate 405, improving Interstate 5, condoning the most advanced transportation methods anywhere.
Impossible here? Worth a try.
