The SDOT Blog has a lot more info on NE 125th St if you haven’t seen it already. They specifically highlight the speeding and collisions and the rates compared to other parts of the city. A lot of these details have been discussed in the past but it’s helpful for the discussions to have more specifics.
http://sdotblog.seattle.gov/2010/08/13/the-facts-on-ne-125th-street-speeds-and-collisions/
Also, while I’m putting this up I would like to thank everybody for keeping the comments and discussions relatively civil in the previous posts. I know this is a heated topic for many people but it’s nice that we can discuss it without the comments getting mean-spirited.
Here is an article in Seattle Times from Sunday, August 15:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012625760_125thstreet15m.html
Here is a column in the Seattle Times today by Nicole Brodeur- http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nicolebrodeur/2012638352_nicole17m.html
There were two Publicola articles on the 125th rechannelization yesterday as well:
http://www.publicola.net/2010/08/16/times-road-diet-story-perpetutes-car-vs-bikes-highlights-need-to-reevaluate/
http://www.publicola.net/2010/08/16/if-the-number-of-campaign-signs-mattered-ron-paul-would-be-president/ (see #2)
And here is another take on the propsal from the Lake City Live blog:
http://www.lakecitylive.net/2010/08/16/the-road-diet-saga-continues
For 20 years I drove on 125th from 17th Ave NE to 30th Ave NE. When I drove downhill to work before 8 AM, all the traffic was coming up hill. When I came home after 5PM, driving up hill, all the traffic was comng down hill. Now the traffic is bad both ways in the AM and PM. If here is a narrowing of lanes, a lot of traffic will go into the neighborhood streets, such NE 120th, etc. For whatever its worth, one more vote against the proposed street change.
I’m not saying people CAN’T go down to 120th to make that trip but it would be pretty silly… From 15th to 25th it’s about half a mile. If you go south to 120th and then back north at the end it’s literally TWICE the distance at a slower speed limit. Also, you can’t go any further than that along 120th without making even longer detours. It just doesn’t go through. And 123rd and 127th are even worse.
The traffic would have to be pretty horrible to make up for going twice as far at a reduced speed limit. And they’ve done this same change in other places a LOT and it hasn’t made traffic horrible and it hasn’t re-routed traffic onto the neighborhood streets. All the evidence I’ve seen or heard suggests that isn’t what is going to happen. I’m not saying there isn’t going to be traffic. Without less driving and better public transportation it’s basically a given with the way our city is laid out. But I don’t think this change is going to be the cause of it.
Also, I commute along 125th every day myself (the same direction you mentioned) and the traffic doesn’t seem heavy most of the time, just fast. If there was really a LOT of traffic, how in the world would so many people be going over 40 mph? When traffic DOES stop it’s almost always when people are trying to make turns which this change is supposed to help address.
Why take a well-functioning, 4-lane arterial and screw it up? Who comes up with this stuff?
I think the accidents have just as much if not more to do with sudden or tentative left turning vehicles more than speed alone. I’m cautiously optimistic that the center turning lane will help maintain better flow even with the decrease in lanes.
While the bike designation might encourage some hard core cyclists to use 125th more, I find the idea that little white lines and diagrams on the pavement provide any real safety for bikes, a little laughable.