No Hope For I-90 Bridge Traffic

During the three months of summer between my sophomore and junior years of college I worked in downtown Portland while living with my parents across the river in Vancouver. I learned a valuable lesson that summer: never live on the opposite side of a large body of water from where you work. Unfortunately, there are many people in the Seattle area that have not yet learned that lesson.

To the surprise — and disappointment — of local officials, an Interstate 90 traffic study appears to have yielded no methods for easing congestion on the floating bridge in the coming decades.

In fact, state Department of Transportation officials expect dramatic increases in travel times between the Eastside and Seattle in coming years, regardless of what is done in terms of the addition of light rail or other modes of regional transit.
...
The state transportation study, referred to as the I-90 Travel Analysis, was conducted at the request of Sound Transit's Board of Directors.

In July, the Sound Transit board also asked transit staff to work with the transportation department to complete analysis and load testing of the I-90 bridge to examine traffic flow, mobility, accessibility and capacity for users across Lake Washington.

That study showed the bridge could accommodate light rail across the lake, but some modifications would be required.

According to the DOT's most recent study, regardless of Sound Transit plans to put light rail or bus convertible to light rail across I-90, traffic commute times are expected to dramatically increase based on the anticipated additional vehicles and people traveling the interstate.

I have to say, I'm shocked (shocked I tell you) to learn that the addition of fixed rail across the lake will not relieve future congestion. As a side note, apparently what they mean when they say they completed "analysis and load testing," is "we drove a bunch of trucks across the bridge together, because math is hard."

Note that they said "no methods for easing congestion...regardless of what is done in terms of the addition of light rail or other modes of regional transit." Did they even consider adding lanes? You know, actually increasing the capacity for normal cars? I doubt it. When the problem is "too many cars" Seattle's solution rarely seems to be "add more space for cars."

Unfortunately, although you can add more space for cars once, twice, even three or four times, it is not really a viable long-term solution, and rail or buses aren't much better. Realistically the only sure way to reduce traffic is to reduce the actual number of people on the road. Land use restrictions, Growth Management Acts, and other social engineering tactics already attempt to influence that number, but no matter what government regulations are put in place, people still have the right to choose to live 30 miles from work.

I guess the question is, to what extent is the government required to accommodate stupid choices?

(Ruth Longoria, King County Journal, 05.11.2006)