Mercer Island residents blast officials over I-90 plan

By Natalie Singer
Seattle Times Eastside bureau

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

Residents accused some leaders of not representing their interests and not working hard enough on the issue. Reproach came, too, from some office-holders who attended the meeting, including state Sen. Jim Horn, R-Mercer Island, who criticized the council for succumbing to pressure from Seattle.

Mayor Alan Merkle and other council members who support the plan defended their position.

"I believe every possible configuration, mitigation, notion that humans could think of has been put forward," said Merkle, who has spent five years negotiating with Seattle and Bellevue.

Councilman Dan Grausz told the crowd that he and some other city officials "firmly believe that this is the best way." Also supporting the plan are Deputy Mayor Bryan Cairns and Councilman Jim Pearman.

The meeting was an attempt to outline a plan that would do two things: squeeze two new car-pool lanes onto the bridge as soon as money is available, and begin a long-term effort to turn the reversible center roadway into high-capacity transit lanes, which could use rail or an express-bus system.

The second part of the plan is what's opposed by some on Mercer Island, where residents have permission to use the reversible lanes into Seattle even if they're driving solo. A few council members and some residents worry because the island would lose that perk if the lanes were replaced with rail or express buses.

Mercer Island is one of five local entities that need to agree on the plan. Seattle, King County and Bellevue have approved the two-step regional solution negotiated last year after years of wrangling. Sound Transit's board will take it up next month, and it must get final approval from the state Transportation Commission.

The Mercer Island City Council will vote Monday night.

The change aims to address the problem of reverse commuting on the bridge, which has two reversible bus/car-pool lanes running to Seattle in the morning and back to the Eastside in the evening. Because there's no westbound bus/car-pool lane during the evening peak period, fewer than half of westbound bus trips are on time. The project to change the lane configuration stems from the 1996 Sound Move vote and is being led by Sound Transit.

The compromise of new lanes now and high-capacity transit later seeks to strike a balance between freeway-hungry Eastside interests and Seattle, whose leaders favor rail and don't want new lanes into their city. Islanders would be allowed in the center lanes until those lanes became high-capacity transit — likely years down the road.
 
The issue has caused a 4-3 split on the Mercer Island City Council, with council members Sven Goldmanis, El Jahncke and Steve Litzow opposed.

Many of those opposed to the plan, including Horn, the state senator, argue that the new lanes could be added to the bridge without an agreement for future high-capacity transit.

Those in favor say that's a fantasy: Seattle and some Bellevue leaders, they say, simply won't agree to new lanes without a nod to high-capacity transit.

If Mercer Island turns down the plan, supporters said, the state could simply force another alternative such as turning the reversible lanes into two-way traffic, kicking islanders out immediately.

The only thing that all attendees seemed to agree on was that islanders are different from other I-90 commuters and deserve special consideration.

The exception that allows them in the transit lanes dates back to a 1976 agreement that led to the construction of the I-90 bridge: Mercer Island wanted 10 lanes on the bridge, but Seattle leaders wanted fewer. The region settled on eight, knowing traffic would get congested by the time westbound commuters reached the island.

As a concession to islanders, who would have a hard time squeezing onto the bridge — their only way out of the city — they were allowed in the car-pool lanes. But the perk wasn't guaranteed forever.

On Thursday, Metropolitan King County Councilman Rob McKenna joined in warning against the plan. High-capacity transit could be included as part of a vote as soon as 2006 on a second phase of Sound Transit projects, he said.

State Transportation Commissioner Aubrey Davis offered to add wording to the plan that would require trade-offs, such as parking and ramp meters, to help keep islanders' commute times down if they are pushed out of the transit lanes, but for some that wasn't enough.

Resident Charlie Kaminski reminded council members in favor of the plan that islanders' easy commute to Seattle contributed to the high property values.

"When we go to the voting booth next time ... why shouldn't we link you and your vote to the destruction of the values of our ... homes?" he asked.

Natalie Singer: 206-464-2704.