Summary of Documents in Packet
This packet of information on walking and biking issues on the Seattle side of the SR 520 corridor contains three folders.
The first folder, named “The Problem and the Vision,”
is a collection of summaries and analyses of the current design from a Seattle Neighborhood Greenways and Cascade Bicycle Club perspective.
The second folder, named “Overwhelming Support for Improvements,”
holds a number of the community letters of support for improved pedestrian and bicycle connections in the design.
The third folder, named “Supporting Documents,” provides additional useful documents
that are referenced by many different parties.
Folder Name: The Problem and the Vision
File Name:
“
A)
One Page Summary
”
Contents:
Summarizes Seattle Neighborhood Greenways primary asks of City Council and WSDOT and includes a conceptual flow map on the second page.
Reason for Inclusion:
Quickly summarizes the problems with and potential solutions to
WSDOT’s current proposal.
File Name:
“
B) Montlake Hub's Missing Connections
”
Contents:
A general
map demonstrating existing and proposed high quality pedestrian and bicycle improvements in
WSDOT’s plan
.
Reason for Inclusion:
Easy to understand map that visually demonstrates the gaps in the current proposal.
File Name:
“
C) Toward a Connected Montlake Lid
”
Contents:
Using drawings from WSDOT’s 2012 Community Design Process, this
document highlights failures and opportunities to make critical walking and biking connections on the Montlake Lid with neighborhoods, parks, light rail and the UW.
Reason for Inclusion:
Easy to understand visuals that highlight the problems with the current proposal and some potential solutions.
File Name:
“
D) Specific Areas of Concern
”
Contents:
A detailed list of the current problems Seattle Neighborhood Greenways sees with the 520 design.
Reason for Inclusion:
Requested by a Councilmember, the document discusses specific concerns with the current design.
File Name: “
E)
Wendy the Willing-but-Wary Cyclist
”
Contents:
Describes the concept of the willing but wary cyclist persona.
Reason for Inclusion:
Underlines the importance of creating walking and bicycling infrastructure that work for everyone, not just the most adventurous of us.
File Name: “
F)
Cascade Bicycle Club Comments
”
Contents:
Cascade Bicycle Club’s commen
ts to WSDOT on how to improve the 520 design.
Reason for Inclusion:
Provides suggestions on how to make it safe and convenient for everyone, from an 8-year old child to his 80-year old grandmother, to ride to and through the project area.
Folder Name: Overwhelming Support for Improvements
File Name:
“
A) Montlake Community Club Statement
”
Contents:
A statement from the Montlake Community Club on the need to continue to improve the design to ensure that everyone is able to get around Montlake.
Reason for Inclusion:
Demonstrates the Montlake Community Club
’s
desire for improving the 520 design for people who walk and bike.
File Name:
“
A2) October Montlake Community Club Minutes
”
Contents:
These are the minutes from the September 19 Community Club Meeting.
Reason for Inclusion:
Demonstrates that the Montlake Community Club supports a bicycle trail on the Portage Bay Bridge.
File Name:
“
B) Capitol Hill Community Council Resolution
”
Contents:
Resolution passed by the CHCC 27-0 on October 25.
Reason for Inclusion:
Demonstrates
the CHCC supports a process to improve the 520 walking and biking connections and a trail on the Portage Bay Bridge.
File Name:
“
C) Montlake Small Business letter
”
Contents:
A letter from Montlake small business owners concerning the current 520 design.
Reason for Inclusion:
Demonstrates small business owners in Montlake need a better 520 design to thrive economically.
File Name:
“
D) Madison Park Community Council letter
”
Contents
: This document includes the Madison Park Community
Council’s comments to WSDOT
.
Reason for Inclusion
: Demonstrates that our concepts have support from the Madison Park Community Council.
File Name:
“
E) Laurelhurst Community Club letter
”
Contents:
Letter from the Laurelhurst Community Club from November 7.
Reason for Inclusion:
Demonstrates that communities in NE Seattle see the need for improved walking and biking connections through the 520 project area.
File Name
:
“
F) August 2012 letter from 350 community members to WSDOT
”
Contents
: Letter to WSDOT concerning their proposal circa August 2012 (the issues have since evolved). Signatures and comments from around 350 community members (quickly collected via a few community blog posts).
Reason for Inclusion
: Demonstrates genuine grassroots community support
for family-friendly pedestrian and bicycle connections.
File Name:
“
G) Sustainable Capitol Hill letter
”
Contents:
Letter from local sustainability group about 520.
Reason for Inclusion:
Demonstrates grassroots community environmental groups see the need for bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
File Name
: “
H) Seattle Design Commission 520 Recommendations
”
Contents
: This September 20 letter describes the Design Comm
ission’s
recommendations to the City of Seattle for the project.
Reason for Inclusion
: The commission recommends the City and WSDOT work
to “improve the quality and safety of the experience for all modes of travel” including a “
Shared-Use Path on Portage Bay Bridge
.”
It calls for further work to be done on the design.
File Name:
“
H2) Seattle Design Commission Memorandum
”
Contents:
A memo from the SDC from September 2012.
Reason for Inclusion:
In this memo the SDC calls for interdepartmental collaboration and leadership to improve the 520 design.
File Name
: “
I) SBAB SR520 Replacement Project Recommendations
”
Contents
: This document is the Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board’s September 13
letter to WSDOT about important bicycle connections in the project.