Hey! Good news! According to an informed citizen and Metro employee, everything is looking good for a mid-November completion of the intersection and signal!
- There will be three lanes at each road entering the intersection, not two! One lane is exclusively for left turns. The adjacent lane (on the right) is dual purpose - for right hand turns and straight ahead pass-through. (I'm not sure how they'll safely cram three lanes into the intersection roads).
- The left hand turn lane will be 12 feet wide to accommodate bus turns. (Sounds like a very tight and slow turn close to the sidewalk) The right turn / pass through lane will be 10-11 feet wide. (Seems like an abbreviated merge and pinch on bicyclers).
- Traffic is slower at intersections with 4-way stops than with stop lights. The wide sidewalks were installed at the intersection to slow traffic and raise driver awareness of pedestrian and bicycle vulnerability to the heavy traffic. The wide sidewalks are also intended to be used by inexperienced bicyclers and children bicycling to school. (Seems like with even moderate bicycle traffic on the north sidewalk corner towards Mann will be hazardous for pedestrians and bicylcers).
- Computer modeling reveals that a two phase signal will accommodate the northbound peak direction with shorter ques than the four-way stop. (Computers don't have emotions but drivers do.)
Nobody likes change or to have their lifestyle re-shaped by government. Citizens were given plenty of opportunity to be heard by the city on this project. (Survey results from the 2/7/08 Public Meeting). But, the changes to the intersection are more than I envisioned and may be clouded by unexpected consequences. We are left to trust the will of our city representatives, computer modeling techniques, and the professional training of city planners and consultants. You'd think this would be a perfect place for a ROUNDABOUT but it's too small, according to Traffic Calming Planner, Jim Palmer. Mr. Cairns advised the improvement will be better understood once the project is completed. Check back here soon .... As Councilman Pat Vache once emphasized in a council meeting - this construction project is all about safety. That's the bottom line.
What do you say?
My husband and I were recently out walking and boy were we shocked and dismayed by the mess that the city of Redmond made of the 166-104th intersection. We all agreed with the city that a change was needed, but what are they thinking?! Where are the bikes supposed to go, surely not the sidewalk since bikes are not pedestrians and the two do not mix!? How are the poor bus drivers supposed to turn those reticulated buses or are they just sending tiny buses into the neighborhood? Why the hugely wide sidewalks when rarely are there more than 5 people wanting to cross?? Why are the lights placed where they are?? Computer generated modeling?-get the heck out of your cubicle and actually look at the neighborhood you are affecting is what we say.
ReplyDeleteThis whole project has been a mess from the beginning. Although there were multiple public comment sessions it doesn't seem that any of the comments were taken into account. The intersection is going to be with us for many years just way the computer says it should be. The intersection is shockingly narrow, and since it handles lots of inexperienced high school drivers I wouldn't want to be sitting in the northbound left hand turn lane of 166th when RHS lets out.
ReplyDeleteI too agree that the intersection is way too tight to accomodate the volume of vehicles/pedestrians at the high peak times. It seems like the same is being built at the intersection of 172 - 112th at the power trail crossing. Is this new type of intersection "pinch" the way of new construction to "calm" traffic? Did anyone ever notice the city buses, the school buses and the new megaMicroSoft Connector bus that make turns at those intersections? Talk about slowing down traffic! How out of touch is the city? Do they leave all data collection to the traffic contractor? I'm offended that my city planners don't seem to know or trust their citizens to be able to drive correctly. I'm afraid that these "improvements" will create frustrated motorists that will do what they often seem to do in frustrating situations, which is to write their own rules of the road and be even more dangerous. I went to the meetings at the Jr. Hi when the proposed changes were presented to the public. I came away from there with this feeling that the city had spent a large amount of money to have traffic studies done by an independent consulting firm. There was a room full of huge, showy, presentation boards, huge boards with graphics, GoogleEarth views, etc. Obviously, there was a lot of money spent on the study by people that are in the business of being in the traffic business and that much of what was being proposed did not make sense to the neighbors that live on the hill. It seems like the "improvements" are a 'done deal' by the time the meetings become public. Does the City feel the "pinch" as well to feel like they have to proceed with a project because tax payer money has already been spent for the study? When I see what a potential mess the 166th - 104th & the 172nd - 112th intersection "improvements" will be, it makes me apprenhensive that the same firm with their recommendations will continue with the proposed project of making 166th a 3-lane road up the hill. I can't finish this rant without mentioning that this project was done with the Jr. Hi students safety in mind. On that I agree. It wasn't the best situation for students walking to school. But what about the safety of the High School students? They are forced to walk into school through the parking lot, with moving cars right next to them. What about their safety as well? Hmmm, there will have to be a study....
ReplyDeleteMy wife tells me the High School traffic parking lot safety issue is an easy fix. All LWSD has to do is remove the shrubbery next to the tennis courts by the egress and install sidewalks. As for the RJH, connecting the two parking lots to allow pass-through has been an option proposed to improve safety, and is endorsed by the Principal last time I talked to him.
ReplyDeleteThe chance is long overdue and really folks that are worried about traffic moving too slow confuse me. This intersection is directly connected to a church and a school and in the area of two more schools. 166th is a 30mph road. 104th is a 25mph road. Nobody obeys the speed limits and it is getting really old. I hope one result of this change is making this route less appealing to passers thru. Education Hill and main routes of 166th and 104th are elements of our neighborhood and not a speedway.
ReplyDeleteLet's reserve the tag of failure until we have time to experience the end result.