I-90 Trees

Perhaps I'm missing something, and you can help me understand.

Today, the Spokesman-Review reports that the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) will be removing trees along I-90 between the Division and Hamilton exits. According to the S-R, the spokesman for the WSDOT said that the trunks have grown to larger than four inches and could be a hazard to high-speed traffic.

Where to begin. First, did the people who planted the trees in the first place, presumably WSDOT, realize that the trees were going to grow? I understand that sometimes standards change, but even so, I'm confident there were standards they were trying to live up to when they planted them in the first place.

Of course, the trees along the freeway provide several benefits. First, they do beautify that rather stark corridor. Second, they baffle the noise that the cars create, and important consideration since part of that stretch has an adjacent residential component. Third, they do actually provide some habitat for birds in the area. Fourth, they convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, the opposite of what the cars are busily doing.

WSDOT has not had a sterling record on such things. A while back, they expanded I-90 in the valley, and ripped out some trees near Spalding Auto Parts. (You can see some of those trees on the right side of the historical photo on that web page.) Not only was the tree removal unnecessary, but it also seriously degraded the view in that area. Neither the public nor Spalding's appreciated the state's decision. I believe the state reversed course after some of the trees were removed, however, so we know, at least, that reason can prevail.

So, the thing I don't understand? Why are they so concerned about the 4" tree trunks along the side of the highway, when immediately behind them is either exposed basalt or huge concrete retaining walls? I understand that they're arguing that the trunks could present a hazard, but don't the stone cliffs present at least the same danger? WSDOT argues that sideswiping the wall is safer, and normally I'd agree. But the basalt is not smooth, and would throw the cars back into traffic--also not the safest solution. That turns a one vehicle accident into a multiple vehicle accident.

And, let's think critically here: if the trees survived long enough to become a hazard, how much of a hazard could they be considering how long they've survived?

There must be a better solution available here. Breakaway/redirecting barriers? (No, not cable barriers until WSDOT can satisfy people they're safe which involves admitting some were engineered badly and the problem has been corrected. Of course--they're safer than the trees, right?) How about an engineered ditch which redirects vehicles along the highway rather than into the trees? Give me your ideas. Let's solve this for WSDOT.