Submitted by Breck Lebegue MD MPH for WA Physicians for Social Responsibility.
STEILACOOM – Those who attended the WSDOT Open House for the I-5 Marvin Road to Mounts Road Corridor Improvement project Tuesday evening were well informed by the numerous storyboards and helpful staff. Others should visit www.wsdot.wa.gov/i5NisquallyDelta to understand. The project is in National Environmental Policy Act review, now open for comment until Sept. 12.
Project elements include: “Widen I-5 by adding one high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction from approximately Marvin Road in Thurston County to Mounts Road in Pierce County; Replace existing bridges and construct new bridges across the Nisqually Delta to increase resiliency of I-5 to flooding and sea level rise and habitat enhancement” and other revisions to restore the natural delta environment. While the less restrictive estuary flow would provide ecological benefits, a massive highway widening project would create negative effects. The concrete paving for the project is 150’ wide, 5 miles long, from MP 111 to MP 116. That’s more than twice as long as Sea-Tac’s longest runway—inducing more traffic past Billy Frank Jr Nisqually NWR. It would be elevated between 20 feet and 70 feet. (A building ‘story’ is 10 feet.) Bridge alternatives are either 6,000 feet or 12,000 feet long; but that’s a false transport choice.
This expensive highway project ignores the obvious rail-bridge alternative to rapidly mode-shift freight and passengers from lanes and planes, onto trains powered by modern diesel-electric locomotives; that use 1/3 the energy and cause only 1/3 the pollution. The project will increase, rather than decrease Vehicle Miles Traveled, as required by WA Law and climate imperatives to cut GHGs, PM 2.5 and 6-PPD quinone salmon-killing tire preservatives. Finally, it will increase the sight and sound of traffic past a wildlife refuge, just where it should be limited. And the proposed 7-mile bike lane (14 round trip) is right next to 8 lanes of highway noise & fumes.
For these reasons, WA Physicians for Social Responsibility opposes the WSDOT project as described; rather supports Dupont rail curve revision, expanded rail bridge over the river, and more passenger-only track in rail right-of-way to the south, as the best alternative. Please visit the Wildlife Refuge, decide for yourself, and comment at www.wsdot.wa.gov/i5NisquallyDelta
Also see www.wpsr.org/transportation www.climaterailalliance.org www.solutionaryrail.org for more sensible future WA transport plans.
Hopefully this will eliminate or reduce the traffic through Roy, Yelm and Spanaway due to major incidents on this section of I 5 in the future.
What is the time-line or timeframe from start to finish? It has to have affect the Rail Traffic that crosses I-5 N & S about Mounts Rd as it crosses OVER South of the WSP Truck Scales across from DuPont.
Pugetropolis is always 20 years behind the curve. JBLM limits potential routes. Yelm? They are a bottleneck all to themselves. An extra lane isn’t going to solve your problem. Trains are not the answer. That’s just a bottleneck area. Mounts Road has always been my quick route around an I-5 Traffic issue. Yelm and South Hill Puyallup have always been a traffic nightmare. I expect they want to incorporate salmon rearing habitat near the Nisqually River mouth. Eel Grass beds provided cover for young salmon, and most of that prime natural rearing was eliminated and it affects smolt survival. I’m going to look at the plans and see what gains can be made vs the cost of the project. I don’t see how unloading trucks to bypass a 5 mile stretch of Hwy and reloading them to continue on is efficient. Logistically it is a nightmare. The Mounts Road offers a quick route around that section but it is one lane each way. Any savings in power or pollution are not going to offset the additional cost to the public. Roy, Yelm, Rainier, Tenino, are bottlenecks. They need 2 lanes each way to help with traffic while they build this so you’ll have months of increased traffic.
Do not do a bike/walking path… it is too dangerous and a distraction to traffic. And besides, “who” is going to walk that area? And, it is illegal for bikes,.. they need to exit at the end if Pac. Hwy…. has been the law for years.
No bike /walking path! It’s a dangerous proposal, a distraction to traffic and illegal… (bikes should be exiting at the end of Pac. Hwy. at Gravelly Lake). And gee, WA Physicians for Social Responsibility: your support for an alternative doesn’t hold water… something needs to be done to better traffic flow here, especially for those who gave to drive thru here for work and life. Besides, traffic has been driving by the preserve since 1962, and earlier (via the Old hwy).
if there only adding car pool lanes then they are doing nothing to relieve the traffic problems. This whole project reeks of political bias. Why spend millions to accomplish nothing.
Before they decide to shut down this choke point.Maybe they should consider a cross base highway.Or a perimeter highway to go around the base so that the traffic isn’t stuck in roy or yelm for 12 + hours remember the derailment with amtrack?
Well, the pastoral dream of Supertrains hauling human cargo to all ends of the earth and then disgorging the hordes on a landscape of electric ride-me savors is certainly one way of beating a plowshare into roller skates. Seems fantastical, wouldn’t you say? It does seem like the beastie presence of this thought train is yet further sacrilege on good intentions. May yet the individual’s freedom as is shown by the ubiquitous car hold yet strong. It is yet the way of the future. Unless you opt for the sardine can aaroach.
I support this project 100%.It is unrealistic to think rail is a solution.
There will always be more cars and more traffic. Washington roads are in extreme disrepair, neglected by J inslee for the light rail boondoggle.
Build this bridge and resurface all our roads first priorities should be I-5 to Bellingham, I-90 past CleEllum, and ALL of Hwy 18 before any more money is spent elsewhere.
Amtrak is not light rail. The whole point should be to make passenger rail a more viable option for people who cannot or choose not to drive. Alleviate congestion and pollution at the same time.
Why not reroute I-5 straight thru Fort Lewis Mchord and connect near Centralia, more parallel to BNSF RAIL Put a branch leading to Olympia and Hwy 101 south of Olympia leave no hwy near Nisqually delta . Maybe a two lane local access road for local and recreational activities. A shorter bridge near McKenna for a new I-5.
THANK YOU Dr. Lebegue, for posting this information, among the most important and impactful WSDOT projects in a generation. Every regional citizen should be aware, every regional jurisdiction involved.
See what you fail to realize is that the vast majority of people are not willing to give up their car. You can improve all these non car alternatives but the end result will be worse traffic because people want their car. So either you can have a bunch of cars stuck in traffic just idling or get them through the area faster thereby less pollution.
25-30% of folks do not drive cars. They need better options like trains that arrive on time.
The Physicians for Social Responsibility’s views are disappointingly idealistic, simplistic and speculative to be workable. To creative a less restrictive estuary flow requires a long bridge, for either tracks or a freeway. It is not a “false transport choice”. A rail system of adequate capacity to handle future commuter and freight demands would require multiple tracks and create a great deal of noise, and vibration; probably more than future electric vehicles. Construction of tracks, although perhaps narrower, would require little less intrusive construction to accommodate the substantially greater weight of locomotives. It also avoids addressing the military contingency for rapid deployment of personnel and equipment, should the unfortunate need arise. Lastly, moving freeway commuters to rail would require an unbelievably expensive infrastructure of stations and tracks on both sides of the valley. Based on the Seattle Sound Transit debacle there may be little political, or public, stomach for a rail replacement; and without replacing the freeway there is little environment advantage.
It is obvious that with population density increasing yearly, pollution and travel will collide in conflict. It is impossible to avoid growth without consequences. Alternative routes will need to be expanded meaning property condemnation, noise difficulty, and environmental impact. People need the space. Without the growth of transportation, the economy will choke and then rebound into a spiral that will impact all other areas of commerce and family living conditions. The groups that fight this seek to control growth and violate the overall improvement of living. It will create a war that only will be solved by concession of minor things. These groups fight and yet continue to use the same highways as everyone else. The solutions are inhibited by regulations that have been antiquated by the heavy increase in population density. New law must be enacted to make way for growth, or it will destroy our future economy. Highways can only be widened to a point, and even then it will always create a bottleneck where it must taper down.
As for this new proposed project, it may alleviate some congestion in one place, but as the researchers already know, it will cause build-up somewhere else. Unless the federal government allows more use of the military base property, I-5 and the side routes will continue to be a bottleneck all around the base. A new 901 loop needs to be put into place to bypass all of the smaller bottlenecks. Another option (or in addition) is to put some kind of trucking bypass extra lane in place rather than a high density commuter lane. We can use the analysis of the expansion of highway 167 at the intersection of 405 to see the problem.
In any future transportation planning, let the people who have and do run Sound Transit, stand as an example of how not to manage such a project.
In doing so, we may be able to claw back some value from their multi-billion dollar failures.
I came upon this project like MANY MAJOR WASHINGTON STATE PROJECTS HIDDEN FROM MOST TAX PAYING CITIZENS, BY ACCIDENT!!! Many commentors are frustrated and upset that our ELECTED OFFICIALS HIDE SPENDING OUR TAX DOLLARS, so they are not held to account for decisions that are NOT endorsed by their Constituency! That being g said, there were many positive comments on solutions from fixing basic maintenance on our roads to alternate routes to alleviate traffic on the NORTH SOUTH I-5 CORRIDOR!! IN ORDER TO INVOKE CHANGE IN OUR STATE WE MUST INVOKE CHANGE IN OUR ELECTED SERVANTS!! DEMOCRAT IDEOLOGIES ARE DESTROYING OUR STATE FROM THE INSIDE OUT! FROM INCREASED TAXES AND NO ACCOUNTABILITY, TO NEW LAWS BEING PASSED IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT AND DAYS THAT NO WORKING CLASS CITIZEN CAN ATTEND OR HAVE A VOICE IN RESOLVING AND FINDING SOLUTIONS THAT BENEFIT THE ENTIRE STATE!! WE NEED AN EFFECTIVE CHANGE IN THE BACKWARDS BRAIN TRUSTS IN OUR STATE, COUNTY, CITY AND TOWN GOVERNMENTS!!
SOLUTIONS ARE AVAILABLE TO THOSE WHO TRULY CARE AND HONESTLY LISTEN!!!!
To clarify: WPSR and multiple passenger rail advocacy groups recommend 2 new passenger-only tracks across Nisqually, for 14 Amtrak Cascades round-trips daily + Sounder extension to Lacey; inducing many travelers off I 5 onto faster trains. BNSF freight will continue on their same tracks, unimpeded by Amtrak. Building rail bridge first solves highway bridge jams.
Agreed! I am not educated in building, although since I drive it five days a week I’ve “wondered” isn’t it possible to build over the top of the existing bridge and interstate? It’s done in so many places… California is big where so many people are going. I read Pierce County is having one area rebuilt. Thurston into Pierce via Nisqually Bridge should be prioritized… the recent work at Dupont 118 to JBLM 120 has improved traffic coming from the Lacey area 114 in my experience.