For Wallingford, the real Move Transportation Levy story involves 2 possible pedestrian / bike bridges over I-5.
One bridge connects the Northgate Light Rail Station with North Seattle College. The community college has 6,000 students and is surrounded by a low density neighborhood. The bridge requires a multi-story elevation climb and SDOT estimates the bridge must be about 2,000 feet long to climb that height and then cover the wide stretch of I-5 there, resulting in a 25 million dollar preliminary price tag. While it is needed for pedestrians, an alternative bike path already exists for accessing the community college from the light rail station (go south and cross at 92nd street, a path with about the same amount of elevation change as the new bridge will require).
The other proposed pedestrian / bike bridge is in the bicycle master plan and crosses I-5 at 47th, connecting Wallingford and the U-District. UW has 45,000 students and is in a densely zoned neighborhood, while 45th street is being redeveloped into 40 foot condos, many with only bike parking. A pedestrian and bike bridge at 47th would not require any elevation change and would be only 600 feet long, or less than 1/3rd the length of the Northgate bridge. Unlike Northgate, there are no alternate bike crossing locations over I-5 until you go all the way down the hill to the Burke Gilman or up to Ravenna, forcing anyone from the Wallingford Urban Village that wants to access the U-District to use gridlocked traffic lanes on 45th and 50th.
Comparing these two options on a cost / benefit basis, it seems like the bridge at 47th should be prioritized ahead of the Northgate bridge. It connects more people and it’s far easier to build and use. Instead the levy funds the Northgate bridge and just ignores the bridge at 47th. I asked SDOT why one was chosen and not the other, but instead of answering that question they chose to just talk about the benefits of the Northgate bridge:
The Northgate pedestrian and bicycle bridge is a part of the proposed transportation levy because of the benefits it provides neighborhoods, businesses and schools by:
–Increasing ridership at the Transit Center and future Light Rail Station by doubling the area from which people can walk or bike to the station
–Creating an easier connection for students to and from North Seattle College by shortening the walk distance from the Transit Center by almost a mile
–Providing important access for bicyclists and pedestrians to other improvements coming to the Northgate area
That said, we really want your readers to let us know if the priorities outlined in the levy proposal don’t match their priorities. They can do so by completing the online survey and joining us for upcoming in-person events to learn more and share their feedback with SDOT staff. Thanks for helping us get the word out!
In other words, there is no cost / benefit analysis comparing the bridges. The Northgate bridge is happening because there was a planning process for light rail and people demanded it during that planning process. Since Wallingford has no light rail station and also no neighborhood planning process, our community is just being ignored. We get all the density but none of the infrastructure.
Will it help to fill out their survey? I’d be very surprised if it did. The train has already left the station with respect to the big ticket items in the levy. Switching the bridges would result in a big kerfuffle the city doesn’t want, and adding the bridge at 47th would likely require making the levy more expensive. I filled out the survey as a civic duty thing, just like I’ll vote “no” on the levy if this issue isn’t fixed, but I expect to lose on both counts.
Addendum: In a later post I’ll try to bring myself to cover the tiny, boring levy scraps they’re offering Wallingford. It’s basically a few new crosswalks and some repaving. Ugh.
Nice summary Eric. Seems like we have a runaway SDOT and a cIty council lacking rational thinkers.
I’ve voted for almost every school and transportation levy for 15 years, but I’m all in on the “NO” vote on this one and would be happy to get involved in any campaign in that direction.
SDOT, the Mayor and the city council perceive they have a mandate to do whatever they want and the lemming voters will always say yes. Time for a new mandate, and perhaps a couple new faces on the council and on SDOT advisory boards.
An overpass at 47th is a no brainer and your analysis and research confirmed what I’ve long thought.
I do not live in Wallingford, but am very concerned about all the spending on transportation plans without thought for the impact on the community as a whole, for elderly and physically handicapped, and for lack of parking for the cars that are still necessary for most of us.
Change is necessary , but careful and thoughtful planning is even more so.
I’m afraid we are lacking that in our city government, both by the mayor and the council.
I am sure I will vote against the levy, and I pray that there will be a new council member in my district, instead of the very long time person, running for relection at age 80.
Good reporting, and bummer about the lack of realistic city dialog on a bridge at 47th. Makes so much sense, on so many levels. I believe it could honestly be sold as part of the recipe for revitalizing the U-District as well. We are already a densely populated walking neighborhood, and Northgate simply isn’t. After we build a very expensive bridge (with more elevation gain them many people will want to deal with) from NCC to Northgate, we then need to build sidewalks and road diets and other expensive infrastructure to make it really practical. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be done, but to your point, a Wallingford/UW project would provide the biggest practical benefit to the most people at the last cost.
I will also fill out the survey. Thanks.
I think both bridges are excellent ideas. Personally, I’m tired of pedestrians and bike riders having to fight over scraps. I-5 has bizarrely few options for getting across on foot/bike.
My question really is, how will this levy be funded? Property tax increase? My feeling is that, as long as homeowners continue to say “yes” to property tax increases, the powers that be never actually have to give serious consideration to a more progressive tax system (i.e. high-income tax). As someone who has always voted yes for parks and libraries and schools, I’m considering voting NO on everything to force the issue. This goes for sales tax funded initiatives, too.
Judith, not sure if you are a senior, but the age 80 is no longer too old.
Base your criteria on the inability to nolonger think rationally, and make
decisions for the better good, than choose a new employee. Ruth Bater Ginsburg
is 82, and functions quite well on the Court.
–Creating an easier connection for students to and from North Seattle College by shortening the walk distance from the Transit Center by almost a mile
A mile!, I don’t want to soundlike my great grandfather who walked a mile in the
Vermont winter snow to get to his one room school house, but in the 1950, from about the first grade through sixth come rain or shine the walk from my home to school was greater than a mile. A new, covered path [optional], alongside 1st and than 92nd will cost millions less. Damn we could fix some potholes.
Runyararo, you win the prise for the best response.
But, voters bewair, the income balance in this city is about to tilt in favor of the “youth” culture. And by that I mean a population of people who live in $3000.00 a month apartments, and will vote “yes” on property tax levies. I refer to people who’s first annual work incomes are between $60,000 and $100,000. And, as seen
more and more are able to purchase $1,000,000 homes, or offer $100,000+ above
asking price. that’s right Judith, you’re getting run out of town and you don’t know it yet.
Plenty of pedestrians and bikers are simply crossing I-5 using 45th st. … … … Am I missing something? A bridge on 47th seems completely unnecessary.
Biking to the university district on 45th or 50th is unsafe. It is unreasonably difficult to walk/bike/drive to our adjacent neighborhood and additional options are required. A bridge would help without sacrificing road space on 45th for protected bike lanes.
If we had an 80 year old city council member who was performing a valuable service down there, then perhaps that person wouldn’t be too old. I don’t know of any such person, though.
When I ride to the U district, I take 45th eastbound, but westbound I don’t much care for riding up hill in heavy traffic, so I take N 50th across I-5 on the south sidewalk and then south to 47th right away, via 5th N. N 47th used to be a marked bicycle route. While a bridge sounds swell, the way things are going they’d probably have to make it a toll bridge, and then no one would use it.
I have to disagree with you on the preferabillity of the Wallingford bridge over the Northgate bridge. I live just North of the College and it is certainly not a low density neighborhood with dozens of apartment complexes and condo buildings. The options for crossing I-5 on foot/bike are to go under the Northgate overpass (when I do I wish I had a ventilation mask). To walk the other way – to the 92nd street bridge you mentioned would be a nearly 2 mile walk to the light rail station. BECAUSE there is going to be a light rail station, the overpass at the college makes all the sense in the world. Unfortunately I-5 is like 9 lanes there. What can be done? Still I think the pedestrian overpass is very much needed at Northgate. And my personal experience is that crossing the 45th or 50th street bridge on bike and on foot is perfectly fine and appropriate. Most business is ON 45th or 50th or easily accessed from there. Is there really another bridge needed at 47th? I really don’t think so.
I live in Wallyland and Jean’s correct. A 47th bridge would be nice, but the need at Northgate is greater. Why? *Pedestrians* and the light rail station. A biking map doesn’t really show that need. A 47th bridge would serve pretty much only bikes. Pedestrians are going to take 45th if it’s shortest. Given that, the cost/benefit analysis you’re looking for is likely going to discover that the Northgate bridge has a greater benefit. If that makes you pouty, too bad. Not every squirrel can get a nut.
You could be egually sad that Montlake gets a lid when 45th->50th would be a great place for a lid. But like Northgate there are bigger projects involved.
If the light-rail expansion is successful, it’s a long & short-term win for Wallingford. The more people that ride it, the more trains they will run, especially on the Northgate Downtown segment, which will mean it’s easier for us to catch a train at Brooklyn/45th. Long term, we really want an East/West light-rail corridor from Ballard through upper or lower Wallingford, and an under-capacity train is not a good argument for that.
The Wallingford bridger will make a safer, more comfortable connection to the U-district station, but the Northgate bridge will shorten the Northgate NSCC walk from a really crappy ~1.1 miles to a fairly pleasant ~0.4 miles, which is a huge improvement.
I really don’t understand the comparison between the number of students at UW and the number of students at NSC. The vast majority of students at UW either live on campus or come to school from a direction other than across 45th street (including those who pack the buses along 40th street). There is no huge demand among UW students for another means of crossing I-5, which they can do at 45th, 50th and 40th and on the Burke-Gilman.
On the other hand, at North Seattle, there is both a huge mall and a huge transit center (soon to be for many years the northern terminus of Link) across the freeway from that college. There is not just a denser neighborhood than was described, there is a commercial district and a hospital. And the path under the freeway at Northgate Way is simply unacceptable, while walking across at 45th Street is a nice flat walk. And so is walking across at 50th Street.
I go to the doctor’s at Northgate. Under current conditions, I would never consider biking there because all the possible ways to get there are dangerous. I bike over the 50th Street bridge all the time and I’ve biked the 45th Street bridge without incident. But I’ve felt my life in danger going across at Northgate Way. So even though I live in Wallingford, the Northgate proposal would change my life habits, while I suspect I’d never take a 47th Street crossing.
Breadbaker: Biking on Northgate Way under I-5 is bad right now, but I don’t know that it has to be. There is a center turn lane going under the bridge but it isn’t being used since there’s nowhere to turn into. If that turn lane was squeezed out then it seems to me that a protected bike lane could be added on the south side off the roadway under the bridge. From there, there’s space beside the freeway to add a bike lane that connects with the transit center, all without requiring the elevation change and extreme expense that the bridge would require. Do you know if that option was looked at?
I wish there were more crossings over and under I5 in general (or fewer homeless camps at the ones we have), but the one for NSC makes more sense; they are maxed out for parking, and the light rail is the key north/south route for the future in that neighborhood. It’s a shame we have to compete for the bucks for the projects, but until I am made the bus czar and we all get hoverboards and jetpacks, that’s the way of the world.
Eric: doesn’t help pedestrians. Again, the bridge at Northgate isn’t about bikes only or even primarily, yet the 47th one would be pretty much only bikes because there are two other bridges within 2.5 blocks. Huge, huge difference.
Stevesliva: The article mentions the need for pedestrians going from the train station to the community college. There’s no way around that, the few people taking that path will need to get a bike unless we spend this 25 million plus on a 7 football field length foot bridge. On the flip side, a bike crossing near 45th is the top priority for Seattle Greenways in all of Seattle City Council District 6. If you look at https://www.seattleinprogress.com/ and zoning maps, there’s tons of development going into our areas, much more than Northgate.
I’m not saying do nothing at Northgate. The Northgate Way underpass has a turn lane to nowhere that could be squeezed out to improve things for bikes and pedestrians there. Improvements can be made connecting to Northgate Way and to improving access to 92nd. I’m just saying we shouldn’t take the entire budget of this levy for the next 9 years and throw it at Northgate, ignoring the U-District / Wallingford needs completely. That’s what this levy does. A train is just a very expensive bus, it should not be seen as this place where we put every last levy dollar.
Agree with several others. I live in Wallingford and likely will never use the proposed bridge at Northgate. But, I would sooner give my tax dollars for a Northgate bridge rather than 47th because UW students (and others) have plenty of options for getting over 1-5. If the 45th or 50th street overpass feels too dangerous to bike across, get off your bike and spend an extra five minutes to walk it across on the sidewalk.
The need is greater in Northgate, for reasons listed by other readers above.
But, I’m not surprised if lots of Wallingford people think it’s unfair.
Eric, If grade-separated light rail is just a bus, you don’t need a new bike bridge to cross I-5 to get to it in Wallingford either, because the 26 is just the same.
If a bike bridge at 47th is Wallingford’s greatest need, Wallingford is sounding particularly well-served by existing infrastructure.
But the bike bridge isn’t Wallingford’s greatest need. It’s a bone you’re demanding to be thrown because some other neighborhoods might get one. Wallingford and Fremont could really use another ship canal crossing. Wallingford could use Ballard-UW subway.
Eric, great observation. If NCCC students need to get from the station to the school and want a ride, Rent a Bicycle. If the neighborhood peds. can walk to an overpass at the school to get to the station, they can walk or rent a bicycle at the School and take 92nd. Q. How many years could a shuttle run from the station to the School, 6 A.M-
7,8 P.M., for $25 million dollars?
Charlie – for two shuttles, about 25 years.
I suppose Wallingford could also institute a shuttle for the onerous trek from 47th to 45th street.
Light rail can’t drop everyone off at their front door. I make the distance from the station to NCC via N 92nd to be 0.7, someone else above says 1.1 – which it is, no doubt, depending on where exactly on campus you’re going. If you’re looking at the population who are more than a 10 minute walk from a light rail station, then there are going to be an awful lot of under-served people out there. Efficient bus connections seem like an essential part of the system – not as glamorous as the rail, but arguably more important. 25 million does seem like a lot, for a bridge less than 1/2 mile from another bridge, for riders getting off at what should be a major transit hub.
Eric, the problem under the Northgate overpass is the cars turning out of the four exit and entrance ramps to the freeway. It’s a lot faster and a lot busier than the 45th Street ramps (in part because the 45th Street southbound ramp is usually backed up so far that no one is moving–which is actually a significant advantage if you’re biking across the 45th Street bridge).
And as to biking across a Northgate bridge, it’s a perfect setup for a couple of Pronto stations.
Breadbaker: The argument you seem to be making is that 45th is so gridlocked that traffic generally moves slower than bikes, so therefor bikes can safely use general capacity lanes through Wallingford. Since traffic is less gridlocked and backed up in Northgate it moves faster, so we need a separate bike bridge there.
First, the data doesn’t back that up, crash statistics say that 45th is one of the most dangerous streets in Seattle to bike on. Yes, Northgate would need to spend money to make Northgate Way safe for bikes and to connect to the train station, but a lot can be done with 10 million dollars. The off ramps need bike crossings, the underpass needs a protected bike lane, but all that is doable.
Second, gridlock should not be a reason to avoid investing in a neighborhood, especially since Wallingford is zoned at 40 feet with bike-only parking all the way up and down 45th street. We have 5 times more DPD applications for new development than Northgate does (check out https://www.seattleinprogress.com/). The fact that our traffic is far worse because our density is far higher (and getting denser faster) should not be a reason to skip investing in the neighborhood for the next decade.
I agree with runyararo that both bridges are a good idea. I-5 is a big barrier to walking and biking and needs to get fixed up and down the corridor through Seattle. Absent a bridge across at 47th it might be worth doing something to make either the 50th or 45th st bridges more manageable for people walking and biking.
YES, YES, YES for the 47th Street bike/pedestrian bridge. I once stood for 30 minutes at the corners of 50th and I5 and 45th and I5 and counted the number of vehicles entering cross-walks while pedestrians were in the cross-walk while the pedestrian signal was telling them that it was OK to be there, and it amounted to 1 violation per 17 vehicles, or in excess of 100 in an hour. It’s time pedestrians stopped having to risk life and limb to cross the street. Footnote: I reported the results to DOT. DOT seemed mildly irritated, and did nothing. Too many other priorities, they said.