The City Council meeting of 11/20 was centered on the redevelopment work, planned but not approved, for SR 520 widening near Marymoor Park and the light at 166th AV. & 104th ST. intersection by Redmond Junior High.
SR 520 widening by Bear Creek:
The proposed SR520 widening near Bear Creek drew attention from "Citizen Vicky" and Brian Dennis - both gave 4 minute "Items" talks to council. Vicky made a plea to citizens to write their legislatures to hold off on the widening until the Evergreen Point bridge was fixed. Brian agreed and asked staff and council to take a hard look at noise mitigation requirements.
Brian and Vicky are not the only citizens concerned about SR 520 widening. Three citizen groups have formed in opposition of 520 widening - many asking to re-route the creek away from the highway. My next blog will give detail and, again, a plea to write your state representatives. This project will bring SR 520 fifty feet from Break Creek where 150 foot buffers are required now by city law.
166th Av & NE 104th St traffic light by Redmond Junior High
John Marchione had preliminary concerns about approving a consultant for final design of the light because the traffic light installation included up to four blocks of rechannelization. A federal grant will pay for the installation but Marchione objected stating Council would be untrue to the Open Public Process they committed to for any rechannelization.
Channelization related to the light could extend as far as NE 100th ST and could be completed by the end of 2008. Staff stated the purpose of the modest channelization was to: 1) help make the intersection run efficiently, 2) improvements to pedestrian safety, 3) the grant paid for it.
Richard Cole was most unyielding of the council. He emphatically stated during election doorbelling he talked to "several hundreds" and "it was unanimous everyone" was against the rechannelization -- especially along the hill. One should know that Mr. Cole's constituents and neighborhood is in N. Redmond where faster traffic through 166th to downtown is valued. Cole didn't feel design work was needed to calculate safety requirements in front of the school.
Vice President, Councilman Pat Vache offered the most widely accepted comments that the redevelopement should be all about SAFETY -- not how many feet from the intersection rechannelization should go. Ives and Allen supported Vache's emphasis on safety. Vache agreed to preliminary design work. Marchione motioned to approve the grant but bring it back to council for preliminary review before bidding work would begin. Approved.
President Nancy McCormick noted that the speed study done by Evans Consultants did not include buses and trucks. Mr. Cairns, Traffic Planner, said they would be included in further reviews and that a public process was required for any extensive rechannelization - as required by Council.
SR 520 widening by Bear Creek:
The proposed SR520 widening near Bear Creek drew attention from "Citizen Vicky" and Brian Dennis - both gave 4 minute "Items" talks to council. Vicky made a plea to citizens to write their legislatures to hold off on the widening until the Evergreen Point bridge was fixed. Brian agreed and asked staff and council to take a hard look at noise mitigation requirements.
Brian and Vicky are not the only citizens concerned about SR 520 widening. Three citizen groups have formed in opposition of 520 widening - many asking to re-route the creek away from the highway. My next blog will give detail and, again, a plea to write your state representatives. This project will bring SR 520 fifty feet from Break Creek where 150 foot buffers are required now by city law.
166th Av & NE 104th St traffic light by Redmond Junior High
John Marchione had preliminary concerns about approving a consultant for final design of the light because the traffic light installation included up to four blocks of rechannelization. A federal grant will pay for the installation but Marchione objected stating Council would be untrue to the Open Public Process they committed to for any rechannelization.
Channelization related to the light could extend as far as NE 100th ST and could be completed by the end of 2008. Staff stated the purpose of the modest channelization was to: 1) help make the intersection run efficiently, 2) improvements to pedestrian safety, 3) the grant paid for it.
Richard Cole was most unyielding of the council. He emphatically stated during election doorbelling he talked to "several hundreds" and "it was unanimous everyone" was against the rechannelization -- especially along the hill. One should know that Mr. Cole's constituents and neighborhood is in N. Redmond where faster traffic through 166th to downtown is valued. Cole didn't feel design work was needed to calculate safety requirements in front of the school.
Vice President, Councilman Pat Vache offered the most widely accepted comments that the redevelopement should be all about SAFETY -- not how many feet from the intersection rechannelization should go. Ives and Allen supported Vache's emphasis on safety. Vache agreed to preliminary design work. Marchione motioned to approve the grant but bring it back to council for preliminary review before bidding work would begin. Approved.
President Nancy McCormick noted that the speed study done by Evans Consultants did not include buses and trucks. Mr. Cairns, Traffic Planner, said they would be included in further reviews and that a public process was required for any extensive rechannelization - as required by Council.
.
Of a personal note:
I can find four good reasons why rechannelization from 4 lanes to 3 lanes would be valuable to our neighborhood:
1) The Neighborhood Community Advisory Committee met for months on the issue and after thorough review voted for rechannelization,
2) The City paid good taxpayer dollars for an independent, qualified consultant whose recommendations were to build the 4:3 conversion; the city ALWAYS accepts qualified consultants for land use applications - why not here?
3) City Council passed "Streets" legislation committing to building new streets that are bicycle friendly. A 4:3 conversion would create wider sidewalks and bike lanes!
4) The council plans to hold public meetings on any rechannelization proposed outside of the traffic light project.
I can think of a few reasons why converting 166th Ave NE from 4 to 3 lanes is a bad idea:
ReplyDelete1. it will be more difficult to enter the road from side streets, such as 95th St and 100th St. These side streets have limited sight lines because 166th Ave curves near 95th and 100th.
2. making the traffic flow in a single file on 166th Ave NE at the bottom of the hill (near the elementary school) has created long back ups for commuters traveling to Redmond Town Center and Redmond Way.
3. putting bicycles onto 166th Ave will increase the risk of serious injury because the speed of cars on the steep hill is too high.
4. reducing the traffic flow from 4 to 3 lanes will slow down emergency response vehicles from reaching their destination. The road would become clogged during an emergency.
5. the volume of cars on 166th Ave is too great for reducing the capacity of the road. Making traffic flow in a single file could cause more accidents, since there are so many cars turning onto side streets, and so many cars entering 166th Ave from side streets.
6. the number of buses, and service vehicles (trash, recycle, yard waste, delivery, and other services) requires a greater capacity for the road.
Hi Bob:
ReplyDeleteMost of the council favors rechannelization around the Junior High to improve safety, but is also concerned about the impact of slow traffic (buses and trucks) over the three lane segments. Four to Three channelization has some theoretical appeal if the directional traffic lanes can be kept moving (with pullouts and entry lanes as appropriate, for example). I will get up to speed on the SR-520 widening. Last week we heard comments about delaying the widening across the Sammamish River until the over SR 520 projects are done. I disagree with any delay, the important thing is that when the new floating bridge is done that the supporting infra-structure be complete as well. What is important is consideration of all environmental issues and providing improved protection from pollution runoff.
Keep those cards and letters coming.
Councilman Hank Myers
3) City Council passed "Streets" legislation committing to building new streets that are bicycle friendly. A 4:3 conversion would create wider sidewalks and bike lanes!
ReplyDeleteThe city council should get on a bike and ride what they think are bicycle friendly lanes on the 4:3 lane conversion along 85th before the go and screw up 166th. What they did on 85th is a JOKE!