Editor,
Thank you for coverage of the Council of Governments (COG) meeting with WSDOT regarding the seismic resilience of the Deception Pass and Canoe Pass bridges. Your reporting was accurate, but a critical issue was overlooked: the underlying rationale behind WSDOT’s bridge seismic prioritization.
The COG meeting, prompted by your March 13 article highlighting WSDOT’s 2019 seismic study recommending seismic retrofits to our bridges — yet, six years later, retrofit remains unaddressed. In that same period, WSDOT spent $196 million to retrofit 191 bridges. Funding for seismic retrofit has been available, raising the important question: Why were our bridges not prioritized?
Commissioner Bacon asked WSDOT why our bridges were classified as “ordinary” — the lowest level of importance of service after a seismic event. WSDOT’s response? The classification system is “relatively new” and then focus on WSDOT’s funding challenges, never addressing their criteria or process for “Bridge Operational Importance Categorization.”
The key points I urge you to address in future coverage are:
•WSDOT has invested heavily in seismic retrofits since 2019, but not in our critical bridges.
•Neither local officials nor the public have been given explanation of how bridges are prioritized for seismic upgrades. Is the process political? Is it based on technical feasibility? The rationale remains opaque.
•The “Ordinary” classification of our bridges is a default, not a considered judgment. WSDOT could not explain the criteria or methodology used to assign this classification, despite established guidance in WSDOT Bridge Design Manual (BDM) M 23-50.23, Chapter 4: Seismic Design and Retrofit.
The purpose of Bridge Operational Importance Categorization is to identify the importance of service after a seismic event, informing planners. The purpose of categorization is not to reflect funding constraints or technical issues that restrict WSDOT’s ability address bridges.
Categorization should serve as a yardstick, guiding transportation planning and, where necessary, supporting advocacy for legislative action. Understanding the gap might ultimately prompt evaluation of replacement or additional critical infrastructure to meet the needs of the people to get on and off the Island.
Our bridges are existential to our communities, our economy and Naval operations. I encourage the newspaper to more fully explore the real risks we face from a seismic event, the potential for retrofitting, and — crucially —the accountability of our elected and appointed officials, both in their official roles and as members of WSDOT, the COG and the IRTPO Executive Board.
James Blaisdell
Oak Harbor
