The West Lake Sammamish Association

Post Office Box 7088 Bellevue, WA 98008

March 4,2003

City of Redmond

Transportation Staff

RE: Public Input Regarding Widening of West Lake Sammamish Parkway

On Feb. 3rd members of our Board joined local residents in meeting with Transportation Staff

regarding this project. Had neighbors along the project not taken note of pre-construction

markings, it is our distinct impression that there likely would have been no further contact until

construction. This is very disappointing as we explain below.

A year ago city staff assured WLSA members at our annual neighborhood meeting that the

design was maintenance only - a replacement "in-kind". We now read that you have been

meeting with cycling enthusiasts since that time, developing an alternative plan. It's only logical

to question the appropriateness of not coming back to local residents, announcing the re-design,

and opening the process to a broad-based input.

In our meeting with you last month, why did staff indicate that other design alternatives would be

considered. The City's flyer distributed last week, announcing this meeting, presents a single,

pre-selected alternative, offering only a road widening. Why the deception?

Almost exactly 2 years ago, WLSA presented a petition to Redmond Council signed by more

than 500 residents along the entire length of the Parkway. The petition opposed such an

improvement and was signed by residents who have dedicated the road's right-of-way, paid

property taxes, and maintained homes in the area since incorporation and earlier.  Why has the

City chosen to ignore its residents? Why do attempts at constructive forms of input fall on deaf

ears?

Is your concern that WLSA is NOT representative of those who rely on the Parkway for their

primary means of travel? - that it is composed only of lakeside dwellers wanting a place to park

boats? We have over 700 members from nearly 525 households. Of these 298, or just 56%,

actually live on the Parkway. Had you looked at the petitions, you would have known this.

This evening you will hear a variety of reasons why the widening of the Parkway to place a bike

lane on the eastside is inappropriate, ill considered, and without merit. Indeed, it would place

the City in an unnecessary position of liability. We regret that you did not take the time to

consider these points prior to narrowing your focus.

We request that this letter be incorporated in this meeting's records as a matter of public input.

To assure their awareness of our concerns, we will copy the Mayor and Council.

WLSA Concerns Regarding Proposed Bike Lane on W Lk Sarnm Pkwy- March 2003

Funding-Has the City considered the feasibility of the proposed design to the south of 24th? Staff

admits the reason the project is ending where it is, is that funds run out! Ironically, this is where you start

to encounter residences that front immediately on the road. An appropriate, coordinated study would

have asked the question, "Can this design be reasonably built along the length of the Parkway?" or

"Where are the fatal flaws in the design - i.e., where can't it be practically built?" It does not appear that -

staff or the cycling community have this as a concern. Tax paying citizens do!!!

Sight Restraints - Should the Redmond project be built as proposed, outside cycling enthusiasts would

obviously want the project extended to the south, into Bellevue. In Redmond as well as in sections of

Bellevue, the terrain is such that driveways approach at extremely steep angles. Nothing being proposed

offers to correct this situation. It would be too expensive to do adequately. Safety will be compromised.

Residents should not be held liable for the city's folly. A faulty design will place unsuspecting, pass-

through cyclist in an unsafe situation. Local residents will avoid using such a bike lane all together.

Accident History - It has been contended by staff that the current two-way non-motorized lane on the

west side is unsafe. When asked about the bike-pedestrian accident trends along the facility, few if any

incidents were substantiated by staff in WLSA's recent meeting with them.

Conflict Analysis - A recognized approach to anticipating traffic accident potential is that of conflict

analysis. The higher the number of points where movements cross, the greater the potential for accidents.

To our understanding, staffer their engineers have not considered this. WLSA members had to conduct

this effort and find there is a 4:1 ratio of driveways along the east side compared to the west side of the

road. Why would you create a situation where there is an increased number of conflicts?

Accidents Waiting to Happen - Residents along the Pkwy have a daily encounter with impatient, non-

resident, through traffic vehicle drivers. One of their favorite practices is to swerve onto the shoulder to

pass cars waiting to get into their driveways. With a bike lane added on the side with so many driveways,

an even greater accident potential will be created. Have staffer it's contract engineers even looked at this

pattern and considered it?

Similar Design - Is this the only place in the world where bikes and peds are mixed in two-way travel.

Not in the least! The Burke-Gilman trail right in staffs back yard is a prime example of one that works.

One of the most heavily used, similarly designed facilities is that in San Francisco's Presidio connecting

to and passing over the Golden Gate Bridge with a width as narrow as six feet. Many other examples can

be found, but that should be up to a NEUTRAL, UNBIASED staff to investigate.

Volume Of Need - The level of use of the present facility does not reflect a level that warrants an

expenditure of precious tax dollars. Our schools, parks, and emergency services present a higher need

than accommodating a few non-resident individuals who rather have someone else pay than themselves.

Alternative Designs - Among the failings of Redmond staff, at least as shared with WLSA, is that of not

considering the need for a sidewalk in the subject 4-6 feet. Perhaps residents, who should have the first

say in how their frontage is improved, would prefer a sidewalk with a raised barrier curb to restrain traffic

and provide their families a needed amenity - - rather than seeing their tax dollars spent for an occasional

pass-through cyclist.

Traffic Increases - It is not even debated in transportation circles anymore — Any widening will increase

the level of traffic along the Parkway. We did not ask for the increased motorized traffic that has

resulted on the Parkway as a direct consequence of development of mega-busineses in Redmond. Had

proper impact analyses been done and mitigation required, huge increases in traffic would not have

resulted along the Parkway. Peak hour traffic increased 20% in just two years between 1997 and 1999.

Traffic Speeds and Enforcement - In off-peak periods, especially at night, racing along the Parkway is

common. Residents have to tolerate the late night scream of hot motorcyclists and street racers knowing

that little enforcement will occur. It is readily apparent that the Parkway is being promoted as a major

thoroughfare by the City's laissez-faire attitude. Widening the Parkway will only make these matters

worse.

Truck Traffic - The City's reluctance to recognize the residential nature along the Parkway has led

delivery services and trucking companies to use it as a thoroughfare. Was that intentional; perhaps to

accelerate the deterioration of the Parkway? Bikes and trucks are even less compatible than cars. In a

year or two staff will return saying, "Oh, we misjudged; now we have to widen even further."

Traffic Calming - Why haven't Neighborhood traffic controls been considered as part of this project.

Narrowing is a recognized alternative treatment to mitigate traffic. Adding a bike lane will effectively

increase the width of the road and further increase traffic volumes and speeds. Neither is compatible with

recreational cycling. The city should go back to the drawing boards saying, "This area is important to the

character of the city. We will look for ways to protect that asset. We will view this as a neighborhood

arterial, not a freeway." After showing some leadership in this regard, come back to us and discuss

compatible designs for alternate modes of transportation.

Lost Property Values - As traffic volumes have increased, so have noise and pollution levels. A

widening, even for a bike lane, will further increase these problems. As a consequence, access to and

egress from our houses will become even more precarious. The net effect of increased noise, pollution,

and traffic will be destruction of neighborhood livability. Our properties that we have worked so hard to

maintain and pay taxes on will reduce in value. That is not fair and equitable and we will not sit idly by

and allow it to continue. Why is the city looking the other way on this issue?

Environmental Impact - The alteration in the original design, which would have merely replaced the

existing facility, moved this project to a road widening. Road widening projects carry with them the

requirement to identify impacts and to. mitigate them. The requiring legislation begins at the federal level

with the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act, as enabled through WA legislation.  Inherent

to these is a required public process. Where is the documentation supporting the City's actions?

Sound Abatement - The levels of traffic being promoted along the Parkway, if widened, would exceed

reasonable levels for a minor arterial, if they haven't already. With residences in close proximity to the

Parkway, sound abatement should have been considered. Bellevue's 140'h Ave project, recently

completed south of NE 8th is an example of the type of walled barricades that will be needed as traffic

levels rise. Have the funding implications of this need been considered?

Parking - Of approximately 100 parking spaces identified, some 24 or 25 would be removed by the

project. Upwards of 5 0% might be affected in some manner, such as having to remove shrubbery and

moving them further off the right-of-way. When were residents going to be told of this?

Drainage - Several locations along the Parkway have witnessed land slides in the last two years.

Although in Bellevue, Redmond should be on notice that a hapless approach to treating surface and storm

water might place further unnecessary expense on limited public coffers should poor drainage treatment

be provided. Saying that, "It's just a maintenance project" disappeared as the excuse when it came to

include widening!

Staff's Role - As noted earlier, staff have worked with cycling enthusiasts to the exclusion of the public

to promote the SINGULAR design that has been presented today. This is a conflict of interest. Staffs

role should be the unbiased exploration of issues and development of a broad range of alternatives.

Conduct such as displayed on this project, one of narrow-minded advocacy, is unprofessional. Such

breaches in sound planning technique places any organization in a position of liable!