Very interesting. Amazing that the technical report predicted the road diet would introduce a 30 second delay for eastbound PM peak traffic in the year 2030. The city decided to prioritize saving seconds over peoples safety and the livability of the neighborhood. Hopefully the city gets it right this time (and 175th West of I-5 needs the same treatment).
It's funny North City business owners were pushing back against making 175th / 15th safer. This is the exact reason why I always avoid going to North City...its dangerous and hostile to pedestrians/bikes. Now that there are light rail stations in Shoreline I have no reason to ever go to North City when much more walkable neighborhoods in Seattle are easily accessible.
A previous version of this article incorrectly named John Sims as the current owner of Frank Lumber when in fact, Sims sold the business to long-time employees last year. The previous article also claimed Sims has opposed pedestrian safety projects over concerns they will harm Frank Lumber’s business. Sims and the current owners of Frank Lumber dispute this claim and said they support traffic safety measures, and disagree that road diets will make the North City neighborhood safer.
Not sure how this redesign would result in less traffic. I traveled down 130th last week (west to east) in the new redesign there (four lanes are now two with turn lane and bike lanes) and traffic was very backed up. Took a few tries just to get through one light. I think if anything traffic might reduce because people get frustrated with backups during busy times of day so they take different routes. “Less traffic”’in one area can only spill into other areas as there really is no such thing as a decrease in traffic in Shoreline - despite light rail. People still have to get to and from the rail stations, often during peak hours.
Will the combination of factors lead to the return of the grant funds? Hopefully. Here are some of the factors:
According to the Shoreline 2024 traffic safety report the number of serious injury crashes in the whole city of Shoreline was eight, as in the single digit number between seven and nine. That's the whole entire city: 8. On the other end of the considerations 20,000 people a day use 175th on their way to work. Folks gotta get to work so they can eat. Say no to the road diet.
We need more lanes, not less! Traffic is already so congested there. I see way more cars than I ever see a bike in that area. Instead of bike lanes we need to make the right lanes turning lanes for getting onto the freeway. That would deal with so much of the congestion.
Very interesting. Amazing that the technical report predicted the road diet would introduce a 30 second delay for eastbound PM peak traffic in the year 2030. The city decided to prioritize saving seconds over peoples safety and the livability of the neighborhood. Hopefully the city gets it right this time (and 175th West of I-5 needs the same treatment).
It's funny North City business owners were pushing back against making 175th / 15th safer. This is the exact reason why I always avoid going to North City...its dangerous and hostile to pedestrians/bikes. Now that there are light rail stations in Shoreline I have no reason to ever go to North City when much more walkable neighborhoods in Seattle are easily accessible.
A previous version of this article incorrectly named John Sims as the current owner of Frank Lumber when in fact, Sims sold the business to long-time employees last year. The previous article also claimed Sims has opposed pedestrian safety projects over concerns they will harm Frank Lumber’s business. Sims and the current owners of Frank Lumber dispute this claim and said they support traffic safety measures, and disagree that road diets will make the North City neighborhood safer.
Thanks for the info!! Good luck shoreline
Not sure how this redesign would result in less traffic. I traveled down 130th last week (west to east) in the new redesign there (four lanes are now two with turn lane and bike lanes) and traffic was very backed up. Took a few tries just to get through one light. I think if anything traffic might reduce because people get frustrated with backups during busy times of day so they take different routes. “Less traffic”’in one area can only spill into other areas as there really is no such thing as a decrease in traffic in Shoreline - despite light rail. People still have to get to and from the rail stations, often during peak hours.
Will the combination of factors lead to the return of the grant funds? Hopefully. Here are some of the factors:
According to the Shoreline 2024 traffic safety report the number of serious injury crashes in the whole city of Shoreline was eight, as in the single digit number between seven and nine. That's the whole entire city: 8. On the other end of the considerations 20,000 people a day use 175th on their way to work. Folks gotta get to work so they can eat. Say no to the road diet.
https://shoreline.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php%3Fview_id%3D4%26clip_id%3D2088%26meta_id%3D175078&ved=2ahUKEwj10bCFgPuUAxVpCTQIHZFgDPMQFnoFCJYBEAE&usg=AOvVaw3sBn1oBxAu29ig6QpZ8Hh2
We need more lanes, not less! Traffic is already so congested there. I see way more cars than I ever see a bike in that area. Instead of bike lanes we need to make the right lanes turning lanes for getting onto the freeway. That would deal with so much of the congestion.
Thanks for sharing this important safety / business-owner story.