Inside Opinion

What's on the minds of Tacoma News Tribune editorial writers

NOTICE: Inside Opinion has moved.

With the launch of our new website, we've moved Inside Opinion.
Visit the new section.

Cross base fight continues

Post by David Seago on May 31, 2007 at 1:27 pm |
May 31, 2007 1:27 pm

The backstage maneuvering over Pierce County’s proposed cross-base highway has been fast and furious all week long. A key vote by the Regional Transportation Investment District executive committee is scheduled today.


The committee will decide whether to drop the controversial highway project from the regional “Roads & Transit” package heading for the November ballot in Pierce, King and Snohomish counties. As the news side has reported, County Executive John Ladenburg adamantly wants the highway, but County Councilman Shawn Bunney favors dropping it to head off environmental opposition to the whole package.


Meanwhile, here’s one argument that surfaced today from inside the county planning department:



it is interesting to observe the debate ongoing in our County

regarding the proposal to limit RTID funding for the Crossbase Highway

based on environmental concerns when no one mentions the environmental

impacts of the proposed expansion of Highway 162. It is my belief that

there are at least as many environmental impacts associated with the

expansion of Highway 162 for the following reasons. When we first began

laying out the Comprehensive Plan for the County it was well recognized

that our valley floors were inappropriate for urban development and

public investment in infrastructure based on the significant

concentration of critical areas on the valley floor. This includes:

flood plains, wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat corridors associated

with the river and stream systems, seismic hazards (the valley floor is

primarily alluvial soils which are highly susceptible to liquefaction

with any kind of ground movement activity) and not to forget volcanic

hazards. Yes, Mt. Rainier is an active volcano but we tend to forget

about it. Based on this information the County drew the Urban Growth

Boundary around the Orting Valley and made the area rural under our

Comprehensive Plan. This area is also the location of the County’s most

productive Agricultural Resource Land.


Expanding Highway 162 through the Orting Valley will increase the

pressure to urbanize this rural area with the ensuing environmental

impacts. In contrast the Crossbase highway is designed to serve an

already established urban area. By adding transportation capacity in a

rural area sprawl is being encouraged rather than addressing the very

real transportation needs within our urban area.


Of course, expanding 162 is a high priority for Bunney, who represents that part of the county. I suspect the environmental groups are more focused on the cross-base highway because it means building an entirely new road corridor, rather than expanding an existing one. I would also note that Ladenburg has said nothing against including 162 in the roads package up to this point.

Categories:
Taking notice
*
The News Tribune now uses Facebook commenting on selected blogs. See editor's column for more details. Commenters are expected to abide by terms of service for Facebook as well as commenting rules for thenewstribune.com. Report violators to webmaster@thenewstribune.com.