tl;dr – 5 Minutes to Support the Portage Bay Bridge Multi-Use Trail!

This is the difference between the width of a bridge with and without the bike and pedestrian trail that we support. This is to scale.

Yesterday, we posted a monster post that went over the WSDOT’s 520 Online Survey with a fine-tooth comb. We know that that is a lot to go through, so we are offering today the “too long, didn’t read (tl;dr)” version of what we posted yesterday.

What we are asking is the same:

If you have 5 minutes WSDOT has a survey www.surveymonkey.com/s/FC577SY that you can fill out, which will take you point by point through all of the design preferences for the Portage Bay Bridge, the Delmar Lid, and the changes in Montlake. As you may recall, we have been advocating for a bike and pedestrian link on the Portage Bay Bridge from the Delmar Lid to Montlake. It’s a connection that will open up new ways to move through the city and make the most of our investment in the new bridge. We need to ask for it and ask for it directly, both to WSDOT and the City Council. Please find a cheat sheet below if you would like some ideas as what to say for each section: 

Preference 1:
 I strongly support this for connecting neighborhoods and schools

Preference 2: 
I support this preference with safe pedestrian and bicycle connections.

Preference 3:
 I strongly support bicycle and pedestrian shared-use paths on the Roanoke lid.

Preference 5:
 I strongly support this pedestrian access to multiple local and regional parks.

Preference 8: 
I strongly support WSDOT not just studying but actually implementing a pedestrian and bicycle trail on the Portage Bay Bridge.

Preference 9: 
I strongly support further planning for safe, direct, and comfortable walking and biking in this area.

Preference 10:
 I support this preference in order for the multi-use trail to better connect east-west.

Preference 11:
 While I support the goals of this preference to create a multimodal hub somewhere in the project area that is safe and pleasant for all users, there needs to be a new approach to the design that better supports active users.

Preference 13:
 I only support this preference for pedestrians and only as a partial solution: 
pedestrian and bicycle access should be entirely separated from car and HOV traffic.

Preference 15: 
I support continuing to work with the city of Seattle to enhance the connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users.  The current proposals are not satisfactory.

Preference 16:
 I strongly support a shared use path along the SR-520 bridge.

Goals. What is your feedback on these goals? The goals are good.  But, the design for the Montlake Lid and the entire Montlake Blvd E. Corridor does not reflect adherence to these goals. 
It seems that the design for the lid was created without understanding of automobile, transit and most especially pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the adjoining neighborhoods and this sector of the city. Instead of creating a space designed for safe, direct and efficient pedestrian and bicycle crossings, reuniting neighborhoods and creating vibrant connections that benefit the entire region, the lid appears to be conceived simply as a way to hide the SR 520.  

Generally, the design team has been given a very difficult task: fitting a bigger 520 and a massive interchange in Montlake is an enormous challenge. I want to give the team the credit it deserves for working under some enormous constraints. However, the current plan needs to be given the time to re-assess the needs of Seattle and to understand multi-modal traffic patterns and how to best create the kind of city and region we all want. Thank you

/// For a significant amount of background material supporting these preferences as well as a detailed map, please see: http://centralseattlegreenways.com/2012/10/we-need-your-help-sr520-portage-bay-bridge-trail/