Last week, concerned residents of Bellevue sent over 200 letters in just 48 hours asking the Bellevue City Council to support the Transportation Commission’s recommendation to remove Bel-Red Road from consideration for bike lanes and road diets (removal of car lanes).
Despite this, and despite over 1,200 letters sent in the last year by residents opposing road diets, the City’s Department of Transportation Director overturned the Commission’s recommendation on Bel-Red Road and decided it needs to be studied further, which may cost hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars if pursued.
Councilmember John Stokes, who opposed road diets during his campaign (like the one staff proposed for 140th), insisted that the community will thank Council later for imposing such projects. He said, “I don’t quite understand why we’re having such angst on this… Let’s go forward on this…[and] when it comes out people will understand and look back and say, “Wow, I’m glad we did this.” It is always remarkable to hear an elected official say that his constituents don’t know what’s good for them.
With the exception of Councilmembers Jared Nieuwenhuis and Conrad Lee, the majority of Council voiced their support for this quiet staff decision, which they could have overturned in support of the Commission’s recommendation, but did not.
We say quiet because in the public agenda memo, staff wrote that this study session would be “for information only” and that there would be no staff recommendation – when clearly that was not the case. Were it not for two sentences buried later in the memo, we would have never known that staff were keeping Bel-Red on the table. Unfortunately for the City, we at Neighbors for a Livable Bellevue read the fine print and alerted our neighbors right away.
Councilmember Nieuwenhuis expressed his frustration at the lack of communication with the community, saying, “When I see that you’re making a recommendation about a controversial corridor – I think we need to have that right in the title. No one is here because of all of the other recommendations…they’re here about Bel-Red. I think going forward we need to be very clear about what’s going to be discussed and what’s going to be recommended.”
During the meeting, Transportation Commission Vice-Chair Drew Magill maintained the position that Bel-Red Road is not a safe road to ride on. In an exchange with Councilmember Janice Zahn, he explained, “One of the biggest issues [is that] if we put a [bike] lane in that’s separated from cars, you still have every single intersection. You still have every ramp. That’s where most of the accidents occur. Safety is broader than LTS (Level of Traffic Stress)…There are over 70 driveways and intersections on Bel-Red Road in each direction. We would actually be encouraging people to use a roadway that is not [safe].”
He went on to add, “We all want better bike infrastructure. The question is where does it go and where is the safest place to put that infrastructure?”
Councilmember Nieuwenhuis, who is the Council’s liaison to the Transportation Commission, said, “Bel-Red is already feeling very congested and would only get dramatically more so if we removed a vehicular lane and added a bike lane…Rather than spending more funds on additional studies, I’d rather put that money toward completion of Spring Boulevard, which includes protected bike lanes and wide sidewalks.”
The City’s decision to overturn the recommendation of the Transportation Commission begs the question – after spending hundreds of thousands on the 358-page Bike Bellevue study, what will this additional study of Bel-Red Road accomplish?
Transportation Director Singelakis said that the study would look at acquisition (widening of the roadway) to accommodate bike lanes, but also added, “The repurposing of a travel lane is still out there – it would have to be evaluated as part of the alternatives…so that could potentially still be on the table.”
This is a remarkable statement about a project the majority of the public do not want. When residents were asked via a Bellevue Chamber survey if they would support or oppose a plan to reduce six miles of arterial roadways in Downtown Bellevue, Wilburton and Bel-Red from two lanes down to one to accommodate a dedicated bicycle lane – 69% said they opposed. This is not surprising, as traffic congestion relief remains a major issue of concern for Bellevue residents and workers, 70% of whom drive.
Cost is also a major issue – Bike Bellevue’s road diets would have cost over $18 million dollars to increase bicycle mode share by 0.1% percent. Of that $18 million – $8 million would be the cost for just Bel-Red Road. The scope of Bike Bellevue described as a small, rapid deployment project is $4.5 million for design and implementation of three priority projects by the end of 2024.
It’s worth nothing that in March of 2023, Council gave direction to staff to not affect other mobilities, to complete bike routes before taking on new routes, and to not build if a bike lane is perceived as safe but is not. A year later in March of 2024, Councilmembers again listened to what they heard from residents and businesses rather than special interests and people living outside of Bellevue – and said that removal of travel lanes to create bike lanes should be a “last resort.” This is the still the Council direction for Bike Bellevue.
However, last week, a couple Councilmembers expressed views that were a significant departure from their March comments – what happened in these five months and why did Council appear to politically maneuver around their own reasonable direction to staff?
Deputy Mayor Mo Malakoutian in March: “I agree that we should find a creative design solution that creates safe, protected bike lanes without needing to repurpose travel lanes… I completely agree that if possible removing traffic road lanes should be our last, last approach especially in Bel-Red – the amount of density that we are bringing there…I don’t even know how our current road capacity will manage that density… I agree that removing road lanes should be our last, last, last resort.”
Deputy Mayor Mo Malakoutian in August: “I was under the impression that the vision – the value of this body – has been to have a rapid implementation of a safe completed network of [bicycle lanes] for bikers and pedestrians…To me, “last resort” in your definition or your implementation of your recommendation is “there is no repurposing.” [Staff’s] interpretation of last resort is no repurposing any road capacity for bike infrastructure…and to me that not the definition of last resort…We should exhaust all options before repurposing a travel lane as a last resort…But again, we cannot just remove repurposing lanes whatsoever from all of our plans.”
Councilmember Dave Hamilton in March: I would like to see an option that doesn’t involve taking out any travel lanes. We should start with that. I would love to see funding and completion of Spring Blvd. prioritized. If we’re not taking out travel lanes, there’s no harm in trying [demonstrations]… I think it is time to take removing travel lanes out of the discussion. It’s a huge impediment to moving forward…In the short-term, we should not be considering removing travel lanes. I can’t imagine ever thinking it’s a good idea.”
Councilmember Dave Hamilton in August: “We want and need to build bike infrastructure in our city. And traveling to other cities, you see this all over the place. It’s not unique in Bellevue…We’ve been very clear that we want bike infrastructure. If we’re not building it, we’re not doing our jobs.”
The only councilmembers whose comments were consistent in terms of being against road diets and responding to the majority of residents were Councilmembers Nieuwenhuis and Lee.
Near the end of the meeting, Councilmember Lee once again spoke about limited resources, how adding bike lanes to Bel-Red Road would affect families and businesses who depend on a car to get around, and how important it is to listen and work together. He ended his comments by saying, “There are 150,000 people in the City of Bellevue. Listen to them.”
We agree. Bellevue residents need to keep making their voices heard and urging Council to oppose road diets citywide, and to add bike infrastructure next to travel lanes instead of in replacement of them. This approach reflects the balanced multimodal transportation network we all want to see in our community, adding transportation infrastructure in proportion to where there is actual demand and use for it.
Thank you again for all of your attention, engagement and efforts on this issue. Should bike lane projects on Bel-Red be selected for further “study” or a “temporary pilot project” (which we know is likely to be permanent), we will let you know. We must all continue to hold our City staff and Council accountable to be transparent and representative of their constituents who have to live with the impacts of these decisions.
Thank you so much for all of your efforts over the last several months in writing and sending hundreds of letters to the Bellevue City Council and Transportation Commission, and for showing up to testify in person and virtually to share your perspective and concerns about Bike Bellevue. This plan would have removed 6 miles of arterial road lanes to provide bike lanes throughout our city.
Instead, Council has listened to residents and directed the Transportation Commission to consider alternatives that implement bike lanes adjacent to travel lanes, not in replacement of them – and only repurpose travel lanes as a last resort. You have made a difference!
New Council direction on Bike Bellevue
On March 25th, the Bellevue City Council directed the Transportation Commission to develop recommendations for each of the 11 proposed Bike Bellevue corridors, consistent with the categories below:
The Council amended and added to the staff-proposed categories – the most notable being Councilmember Jared Nieuwenhuis’ amendment to category #2, which states that if a travel lane is repurposed, it should be done so only as a last resort. This amendment passed with supermajority support. Councilmember Nieuwenhuis clarified on April 11th that “last resort means we’ve looked at everything else before looking at eliminating a travel lane…[it means] every other option has been exhausted before deciding to eliminate travel lanes.”
Several councilmembers echoed this point in their individual comments:
Mayor Lynne Robinson also added an important amendment to this category that if a travel lane is repurposed as a last resort and is evaluated as a trial or demonstration project, data will be used to inform the decision by the Transportation Commission.
Council then directed the Transportation Commission to quickly implement projects that do not remove travel lanes, consistent with category #1.
Transportation Commission approves 3 bike projects that will not remove travel lanes
On April 11, consistent with Council direction on category #1 to implement projects that do not remove travel lanes, the Transportation Commission approved Bike Bellevue Corridor 7 (Lake Washington Blvd conversion of parking spaces), Corridor 9 (restriping Wilburton route), and Corridor 6B (NE 2nd between Bellevue Way and 112th).
Bike Bellevue Corridor 6B was passed contingent on staff creating an updated plan for 6B that does not remove any travel lanes (including right turn, center, thru, left turn), as the current design does. If staff are not able to redesign this corridor to be consistent with what Council has asked them to do, they need to come back to the Transportation Commission and explain why.
Staff discussed replacing the current plan for 6A (the second, controversial portion of the NE 2nd project that would convert NE 1st and NE 2nd between 100th and Bellevue Way to a one-way eastbound only) to be sharrow markings only, preserving two directions of travel for drivers. However, this portion of the project was not voted on.
Below are the three projects that are moving forward (with NE 2nd Street to be redesigned so as not to remove any travel lanes)
A balanced, fair approach to adding bike lanes in Bellevue
This new, moderate direction from Council for the Transportation Commission and staff will expand Bellevue’s bicycle infrastructure and connectivity without removing arterial road lanes we all depend on for mobility, freight and emergency response services.
Overlake Medical Center has come out in support of this approach, saying in a March 25 letter that “cycling lanes must not come with a reduction in driving lanes through the affected areas. As one of the community’s stewards of health and wellbeing, we cannot support an initiative that would potentially slow our city’s ambulance and fire response through the urban core. An alternative bike network through Downtown, Wilburton, and Bel-Red that does not take away road lanes is an approach that we would find sensible to further our collective cause.”
The Council’s balanced, forward-thinking direction on Bike Bellevue comes at a critical time when the city plans to accommodate 30,000+ new residents in the next two decades.
Expanding our multimodal transportation network includes maintaining the arterials we have, and designing new capacity where it is most needed to accommodate this anticipated growth.
Chamber of Commerce poll: 72% oppose replacing road lanes with bike lanes
The City’s new direction on Bike Bellevue is also directly responsive to the priorities of Bellevue residents and voters, not outside interests.
The Bellevue Chamber of Commerce conducted a poll of 400 Bellevue voters by EMC Research and found the following:
Take a moment to thank City Council and Transportation Commission
This is a great opportunity for our community to thank:
- Bellevue’s Transportation Director, Andrew Singelakis, for pausing the project and bringing it back to Council for clarified direction, which we now have
- Bellevue City Council for listening to their constituents and providing balanced direction on Bike Bellevue
- The Transportation Commission for being responsive to Council direction and providing the thoughtful feedback to staff necessary to move us forward on this project.
You can contact the City Council at Council@bellevuewa.gov and the Transportation Commission at TransportationCommission@bellevuewa.gov. Send them your appreciation for listening and responding to your concerns.
What’s next?
- April 23: Staff have prepared a briefing for the Bellevue City Council regarding the Commission’s recommendation for the three corridors that will move forward in implementation. The memo for this meeting can be found here.
- Please remind Council that the Corridor 6B (NE 2nd) was passed contingent on staff redesigning the project so that any portions of vehicular travel lanes are not removed. This is a requirement of the project moving forward.
- June 13: The Transportation Commission will categorize the remaining corridors based on prepared staff recommendations. That will be the time to advocate for projects to be removed from the list (like Bel-Red Road) and replaced with better alternatives (like Spring Blvd.).
An alternative has been provided to Council and the Transportation Commission from Kemper Development and Wallace Properties. The City Council has asked the Transportation Commission to consider these designs and report back with an alternative Bike Bellevue.
The city of Bellevue is considering an $18 million project that would convert vehicle lanes in various local arterials into bike lanes, a move city officials believe would reduce biker fatalities and improve non-vehicular commuting without negatively affecting traffic conditions.
However, opponents are arguing that the project would achieve none of those objectives.
Under the proposed “Bike Bellevue,” the city would create a 15.11 mile-long bicycle network in downtown, Bel-Red, and Wilburton neighborhoods, in most cases by removing at least one vehicle lane on the road from 11 corridors.
According to city documents, the project would “greatly expand the number of employment opportunities, schools, transit stations and stops that people can comfortably get to by bike within the project area.” The city estimates the project, when completed, would facilitate between 825,000 to 4 million bike trips a year, while reducing vehicle miles traveled by between 1.2 to 10.8 million miles annually.
Critics say the city is embellishing the perceived benefits. According to the city’s own estimates, the project would add just 210 bike trips within those corridors and 375 bike trips citywide. Only 13 new bike trips would be for commuting.
Testifying at a recent Transportation Commission meeting, Kemper Development Transportation Director Mariya Frost said that “the plan does more to increase traffic congestion and worsen conditions at intersections than it does to actually increase bike ridership, much less do anything for people living below the poverty line who will not bike to work. Worse still, some of the plan designs create serious safety concerns for all road users.”
According to city documents, the removal of these vehicle lanes won’t negatively impact traffic. In fact, the city claims that even with population and employment growth, traffic levels in those corridors will actually go down. The city bases its claim on traffic volume data gathered from those areas, arguing that six of the 11 bike corridors have either seen no increased traffic or decreased traffic.
However, Frost told the commission the data doesn’t paint an accurate picture of the situation because it’s based on combined average traffic levels in both directions.
“In other words, peak demand in one direction on a busy afternoon is offset by moderate traffic in the opposite direction,” she said, “and this then represents whether the road is fully utilized. Instead, staff should compare directional demand to directional capacity during peak hours of the day, which is when we need to accommodate vehicular traffic the most.”
The city is accepting public comments and feedback on the proposed designs through Nov. 15.
The Census Bureau reports that in Bellevue, the top quintile of households has soared past the half-million mark for the first time. They now bring in an astounding $562,670 per year per household. That’s up 28% — about $125,000 more per year — since 2019.
Meanwhile the poorest fifth of Bellevue households makes $32,500, up 1% since before the pandemic, or just $350 more per year.
I wrote last year that these widening gaps in Bellevue are bound to upend that city’s placid politics, as they did Seattle’s. The pressure the top exerts on the bottom, by being so rich, is relentless. It’s most visible with housing and restaurant prices, and also shows up in the volatile issue of who pays for city services and amenities that are at a premium due to rapid growth.
Sure enough, there’s now a mini tax revolt going on in Bellevue — against potentially raising a sales tax or other fees to pay for road work in the city.
“If approved, this will be the fourth tax the council has approved in 10 months,” Craig Spiezle, of the group Neighbors for a Livable Bellevue, protested at a council meeting this past week.
Spiezle and a dozen others went on to detail how the proposed taxes are regressive, meaning they would hit Bellevue’s working poor the hardest. People are facing rising costs for groceries and gas, Spiezle said — “There’s a growing number of Bellevue households who are one paycheck away from being unhoused. … The council has made positive steps to support affordable housing. But you need to focus on affordable living.”
Read the full article at: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/the-splitting-of-seattle-and-the-eastside-too-is-accelerating/
(The Center Square) – The Bellevue City Council is receiving pushback from residents over a transportation benefit district that, if funded as proposed, would generate an additional $10 million in sales tax revenue. While proponents within city hall say it’s necessary to cover some transportation projects, including maintenance work, some critics have called it an unnecessary and permanent “slush fund” and one of many recent tax increases without voter approval.
Under state law, local governments can form TBDs to raise revenue for specific transportations projects such as roads and sidewalks. Typically, they are funded through vehicle license fees or the local sales tax.
The Bellevue City Council first studied the concept of a TBD back June, then voted to create it in July. At its Monday meeting, the council voted to assume control of the TBD, though it has yet to vote on creating the sales tax to fund it. The assumption means that the city council can conduct TBD business during a city council meeting, rather than hold a separate meeting.
According to city documents, the TBD would be used to fund the maintenance budget for streets and signals maintenance, which saw a revenue reduction of $1.7 million in the 2021-2022 budget and $1.8 million in the next budget.
However, opponents note that most of the revenue under a proposed 0.1% sales tax increase would not be tied to any specific project.
The current local sales tax rate is 3.6%. The council might also impose a $20 vehicle license fee
Although the city estimates the 0.1% sales tax increase would cost the average Bellevue household $20 to $30 per year, Craig Spiezle with Neighbors for a Livable Bellevue told the city council at its Monday meeting that it would be the fourth new tax the council has enacted in 10 months without voter approval.
“While individually these taxes may be small, collectively they have a significant impact on a growing number of households who are one paycheck away from being unhoused,” he said. “Continually increasing taxes cannot and should not be the answer.”
While both city staff and some councilmembers stressed that the meeting’s vote was on assuming control over the TBD and not on a new tax as originally scheduled, Spiezle said “we need to be honest. The only reason to approve a TBD is to impose a tax. This is the elephant in the room.”
Read the rest on The Center Square at: https://www.thecentersquare.com/washington/article_bc754b58-5260-11ee-808d-5bd40e175f28.html