Today I learned more about a Washington State Department of Transportation (WDOT) strategy that has been in place for several years. This is a tool for transportation project development that helps involve communities and moves beyond just considering transportation mobility. An executive order from the Governor requires that every WDOT project consider context sensitive solutions. This strategy should be applied to any consideration of SR 525 in the future. The last time SR 525 north of 76th was studied by WDOT it was in 2001, before the requirement to consider Context Sensitive Solutions.
Context Sensitive Solutions have been pushed by the U.S. Department of Transportation since 2002. This process requires that transportation projects consider “effects on the aesthetic, social, economic and environmental values, needs, constraints and opportunities.”
Context Sensitive Solutions have allowed for city gateway creation, sensitivity to existing uses, and safety improvements. Examples include improvements along SR 527 in Mill Creek, improvements along SR 99 in Des Moines, and improvements to Route 395 in Colville.
These new strategies consider local needs, and local priorities for corridors. Proponents of an alternate access route through Japanese Gulch have often made the case that the other option is to widen the Speedway beyond what seems acceptable to Mukilteo. This is based on the last study of the 525 in 2001. Perhaps it’s time to ask DOT to apply context sensitive solutions to the future of the Mukilteo Speedway?
Monday, April 26, 2010
Sunday, April 25, 2010
EMS Levy
Last week, the council’s Public Safety Committee met. We discussed the proposed Emergency Medical Services levy and two upcoming open houses. Next week, residents are invited to attend either meeting: Tuesday the 27th, 6-8p at Fire Station 24 (in Old Town on 5th St) or Wednesday the 28th, 6-8pm at Fire Station 25 (in Harbour Pointe: 10400 47th Pl W). These open houses are opportunities to learn about the EMS levy that voters passed in 2004, and what has happened with the department since then. That levy expires at the end of this year, and the City Council is deciding what to do. The revenues from the EMS levy are needed in the future—the type of levy as well as the amount is being debated.
The City Council will make a decision about the levy at the May 3rd council meeting next week.
At the Public Safety Committee, we discussed a variety of things, including the fire department’s future. When the first levy was passed, there was discussion about future regional partnerships. There have been great strides towards this goal. Today, the City has working automatic aid agreements, so that the closest unit throughout the area can respond. This functions well for areas in the south like the Possession Bay neighborhood and Beverly Park Road. It also works well for areas of Everett along Mukilteo Boulevard. The City also has a strong partnership with the City of Lynnwood: Lynnwood has a Medical Services Officer who also supports Mukilteo.
The committee, at our meeting last week, recommended that the City pursue regional options further. At the May 3rd meeting, the Council will receive a recommendation from the Public Safety Committee that the Mayor and Public Safety Committee should pursue discussions with the City of Lynnwood about long term fire service options, such as expanding our existing partnership or consolidating service, and discuss with any other potential partners the possibility of a future Regional Fire Authority. This should be an ongoing conversation, and it makes sense to look at ways to provide good service for a good value for the taxpayers.
The committee also looked at other improvements in the Fire Department that have happened in the last six years. We have a fully functioning paramedic unit, and Fire Station 24 in Old Town is now fully staffed 24 hours a day by career firefighters.
I look forward to the open houses this week and hearing from residents. The future of the Fire Department and its funding structure is an important discussion.
The City Council will make a decision about the levy at the May 3rd council meeting next week.
At the Public Safety Committee, we discussed a variety of things, including the fire department’s future. When the first levy was passed, there was discussion about future regional partnerships. There have been great strides towards this goal. Today, the City has working automatic aid agreements, so that the closest unit throughout the area can respond. This functions well for areas in the south like the Possession Bay neighborhood and Beverly Park Road. It also works well for areas of Everett along Mukilteo Boulevard. The City also has a strong partnership with the City of Lynnwood: Lynnwood has a Medical Services Officer who also supports Mukilteo.
The committee, at our meeting last week, recommended that the City pursue regional options further. At the May 3rd meeting, the Council will receive a recommendation from the Public Safety Committee that the Mayor and Public Safety Committee should pursue discussions with the City of Lynnwood about long term fire service options, such as expanding our existing partnership or consolidating service, and discuss with any other potential partners the possibility of a future Regional Fire Authority. This should be an ongoing conversation, and it makes sense to look at ways to provide good service for a good value for the taxpayers.
The committee also looked at other improvements in the Fire Department that have happened in the last six years. We have a fully functioning paramedic unit, and Fire Station 24 in Old Town is now fully staffed 24 hours a day by career firefighters.
I look forward to the open houses this week and hearing from residents. The future of the Fire Department and its funding structure is an important discussion.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Attention History Buffs
The Council discussed Mukilteo’s Historic Preservation Commission tonight—it doesn’t exist now, but it could in the future (it's in the city code, but has no members right now). We discussed some things that are already being done in the city, as well as what commissions can do. The Historical Society already gathers historical information, but primarily about Old Town. They also work very hard as caretakers of the lighthouse. Other groups have done historical work as well: for instance, the Mayor is working with a volunteer group to identify historical photographs to help decorate Council Chambers.
Some of the topics identified at our meeting that a commission could address include providing information and education about historic register requirements, inventorying historic or nearly historic properties, and assisting in developing design guidelines for the downtown business district in the future. There aren’t specific plans to pursue these, but they fit within the scope of a historic preservation commission.
As a result of our discussion, I, Councilmember Vanderwielen, Councilmember Tinsley (or Councilmember Stoltz, if Councilmember Tinsley is not available), and the Mayor will pursue meeting with the Historical Society to assess their perspectives on a commission. We’ll report back to the Council and potentially discuss it again. I'm also hoping that work group can inventory what’s already being done, and what a Historic Preservation Commission could do. The other part of our discussion was to have an open house or workshop for other interested Mukilteans. Keep an eye out for that opportunity—or just email me and let me know if you value the city investing in historic preservation activities. Let me know if you have ideas about what those activities could be!
Some of the topics identified at our meeting that a commission could address include providing information and education about historic register requirements, inventorying historic or nearly historic properties, and assisting in developing design guidelines for the downtown business district in the future. There aren’t specific plans to pursue these, but they fit within the scope of a historic preservation commission.
As a result of our discussion, I, Councilmember Vanderwielen, Councilmember Tinsley (or Councilmember Stoltz, if Councilmember Tinsley is not available), and the Mayor will pursue meeting with the Historical Society to assess their perspectives on a commission. We’ll report back to the Council and potentially discuss it again. I'm also hoping that work group can inventory what’s already being done, and what a Historic Preservation Commission could do. The other part of our discussion was to have an open house or workshop for other interested Mukilteans. Keep an eye out for that opportunity—or just email me and let me know if you value the city investing in historic preservation activities. Let me know if you have ideas about what those activities could be!
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Improvements for Pedestrians
On Monday, April 5, the council took action to allow Washington State Ferries to move forward with installation of a new right turn lane on the Speedway, onto Front Street at the ferry dock. This should allow traffic stuck at the intersection while the ferry offloads to take a right turn rather than waiting for the ferry offloading to finish.
We also took action allowing WSF to install a walk signal for pedestrians at the Speedway, tied to the cars offloading from the ferry.
These improvements will ensure predictability and more safety for pedestrians at this busy intersection. I also pushed for better signage making it clear to non-ferry-related cars that they should be aware of pedestrians crossing. I also encouraged WSF to remove the posts discouraging pedestrians from crossing at Ivars toward the Lighthouse Park. When the ferry is not loading, that is a safer place to cross!
The right hand turn lane should be installed by late fall this year. The pedestrian signal should be in by next year, April, 2011. Both items will come back to council one more time once the designs are final.
We also took action allowing WSF to install a walk signal for pedestrians at the Speedway, tied to the cars offloading from the ferry.
These improvements will ensure predictability and more safety for pedestrians at this busy intersection. I also pushed for better signage making it clear to non-ferry-related cars that they should be aware of pedestrians crossing. I also encouraged WSF to remove the posts discouraging pedestrians from crossing at Ivars toward the Lighthouse Park. When the ferry is not loading, that is a safer place to cross!
The right hand turn lane should be installed by late fall this year. The pedestrian signal should be in by next year, April, 2011. Both items will come back to council one more time once the designs are final.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Transportation Committee
Councilmember Kevin Stoltz invited to be a second alternate and attend this week’s Council Transportation Committee. What a hard working group! We talked about which roads the public works department expects to apply chip seal to this summer (Beverly Park Road and Harbour Pt Blvd in front of Kamiak, generally), parking on the waterfront, and improvements WSFerries plans to do at the Front Street/525 intersection at the ferry.
The state Department of Transportation is working with our staff on designing the traffic signals for the Front Street and 525 intersection. The goal is to install some signals for pedestrians, so that intersection can be safer for them. However, the mechanics of the intersection, including ferry offloading (and loading), the regular traffic movement and pedestrians, is complicated. Just remember when the lights go in—DOT engineers, city engineers, and also some councilmembers spent a lot of time thinking about how it might work. This issue will be discussed more by the entire council at our April 5th meeting.
We also discussed parking on the waterfront and in the downtown. Staff should be presenting new strategies in early May, I think. I felt like the plan we have now is coming together and can really work. Whidbey Island commuters will obviously be troubled, but Mukilteans should enjoy more parking at Lighthouse Park during the busy weekend hours and early evening hours (when commuter parking and park user parking would most conflict). There should be more parking available during Mukilteo Farmers’ Market, as well as Waterfront Wednesdays in general. This topic will be discussed more by the full council at our May 3rd meeting.
Remember, the best way to get to the waterfront is on the Community Transit 113 bus, running every twenty minutes, for $1.50.
The state Department of Transportation is working with our staff on designing the traffic signals for the Front Street and 525 intersection. The goal is to install some signals for pedestrians, so that intersection can be safer for them. However, the mechanics of the intersection, including ferry offloading (and loading), the regular traffic movement and pedestrians, is complicated. Just remember when the lights go in—DOT engineers, city engineers, and also some councilmembers spent a lot of time thinking about how it might work. This issue will be discussed more by the entire council at our April 5th meeting.
We also discussed parking on the waterfront and in the downtown. Staff should be presenting new strategies in early May, I think. I felt like the plan we have now is coming together and can really work. Whidbey Island commuters will obviously be troubled, but Mukilteans should enjoy more parking at Lighthouse Park during the busy weekend hours and early evening hours (when commuter parking and park user parking would most conflict). There should be more parking available during Mukilteo Farmers’ Market, as well as Waterfront Wednesdays in general. This topic will be discussed more by the full council at our May 3rd meeting.
Remember, the best way to get to the waterfront is on the Community Transit 113 bus, running every twenty minutes, for $1.50.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
