Mercer Island council OKs I-90 bridge changes

By Natalie Singer
Seattle Times Eastside bureau

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

In a 5-2 decision, the City Council voted in favor of a compromise plan that would 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 accommodate rail or express buses.

The vote breaks a deadlock over the plan, crafted after years of negotiation. Mercer Island is one of five entities making the joint decision.

"I respect that there are many different views," said Mayor Alan Merkle. "I think this is a very good solution."

The issue split the Mercer Island City Council. Merkle, Deputy Mayor Bryan Cairns, and council members Dan Grausz, Jim Pearman and El Jahncke supported the plan; while council members Sven Goldmanis and Steve Litzow opposed it. The council has been debating the controversial issue for months, and last week at a town-hall meeting leaders in favor of the plan were scolded by constituents.

Before making their decision, city leaders spent two more hours yesterday listening to residents, many of whom criticized the high-capacity transit component of the deal, which could one day kick Mercer Island drivers out of the center car-pool lanes. Islanders now are allowed in those lanes to Seattle even if they're driving solo.

The exception dates to a 1976 agreement that led to the construction of the bridge: Mercer Island wanted 10 bridge lanes, but Seattle leaders wanted fewer. The region settled on eight, knowing traffic would be congested by the time westbound commuters reached the island.

As a concession to island residents, who would have found it hard to squeeze onto the bridge — their only way out of the city — they were allowed to use the car-pool lanes. But the perk wasn't guaranteed forever.

Last night, concerned commuters argued they were losing an important protection.

"The property values on Mercer Island will be very negatively affected," resident Bob Williams said. To vote yes "would be a very bad mistake," he said.

Seattle, King County and Bellevue already have approved the plan, negotiated last year. Sound Transit's board will take it up this month, and final approval from the state Transportation Commission is required.
 
The $128 million reconfiguration aims to fix the problem of reverse commuting on the bridge, which has two reversible bus/car-pool lanes running to Seattle in the morning and to the Eastside in the evening. Because there's no westbound transit lane during the evening peak period, fewer than half of westbound bus trips are on time.

The project to change the lanes originated with the 1996 Sound Move public vote and is 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 more road lanes. Islanders would be allowed in the center lanes until those lanes became high-capacity transit — likely years away.

Many of those opposed to the plan, including state Sen. Jim Horn, R-Mercer Island, and Metropolitan King County Councilman Rob McKenna, R-Bellevue, have argued that the new lanes could be added to the bridge without an agreement for future high-capacity transit.

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

Natalie Singer: 206-464-2704 or nsinger@seattletimes.com