There is a big battle over the popular Burke-Gilman Trail, which traverses Lake Forest Park near Lake Washington from NE 145 St. to Logboom Park at the north end of Lake Washington, less than 3 miles in length. This section is in bad shape and the LFP City Council has resisted the efforts of King County to repair and improve it. Even though LFP is an incorporated city the trail is a County park.
Last summer I was amused by LFP's effort to severely limit improvements by downgrading the trail for the fish at McAleer and Lyon Creeks. They learned of a guideline that trails near salmon streams should not be paved, but instead be pervious - allow water to go through. That means wood chips or gravel. It would be a strange scene to see people who rode on pavement 14 miles from Gasworks to suddenly be on gravel. The mayor vetoed this bill, but the council overrode the veto.
A second proposal to the LFP city council was truly unbelievable - that every crossing of the BGT be elevated. Imagine building the Alaska Way viaduct to carry walkers and cyclists in the leafy suburb of LFP.
(Mac Safari users click the time link below to continue.)
Now the battle is now going stop sign by stop sign along the trail. The "King County Citizens Advisory Task Force" is studying the situation in detail.
There are a lot of stop signs in the stretch of about one mile from the Seattle/LFP city limits at NE 145 to around NE 155 or 157th. The controversy is that most of them access private driveways. If you take one step toward the lake at one of these crossings you are trespassing. Why should 700 riders a day on a public right of way be required to stop for a private driveway? On the other hand, there are people who have very limited visibility when entering the trail crossing to leave their property.
Furthermore the railroad, then the County, allowed adjacent property owners to occupy the right of way. Now King County needs to reclaim some of its right of way to improve sight lines and widen the trail. But the people allowed to use the right of way tend to think they now own it.
I am a regular cyclist and live 3 blocks from the BGT in LFP. I want the trail to be repaired and improved. But there is a problem with speed. Some cyclists exceed the 15-MPH speed limit - 10 in some places - and pass close with no warning. I am not among them. But I hope we can find a way to limit the speeds so it is safer for walkers with dogs and children.
From what I have seen, County Council member Carolyn Edmonds has been a reasonable go between in this area. But now the battle is escalating, according to Jane Hadley in the Seattle P-I, and both sides are recruiting people to run for LFP city council in the fall.
Fed-up,
John
Ask the bike riding community if they would accept the existing 10 mph speed limit being enforced in return for getting rid of the private crossings.
Didn't think so.
Posted by: LFP Mike on May 30, 2005 01:17 PMAlkai beach has a great solution, parallel paths for pedestrians and bicyclists. Ok, so the roller bladers and bicyclists co-mingle but pretty much it works.
This is a real quality of life issue for cyclists and pedestrians alike.
Why not put forward a King County trails tax to a vote? I'm sick and tired of more taxes, but that's one I would support. I initially hated having to get a wilderness permit, but when I see the improvements at Denny Creek and elsewhere- It's definitely worth it.
Posted by: zapporo on May 30, 2005 02:05 PMOr, we could go with tolls. A toll trail. That pays for the upkeep that we all pay for but we don't all use.
And, since people are paying a toll, I'd say let them go as fast as hell if they want. If you want to walk, go somewhere else.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on May 30, 2005 06:49 PMAs far as the property owners access though the trail, it only make since that there would be stop sign so the cars would not hit the cyclists.
I am so glad I don't have to deal with that many cyclist egos on a daily basis. Know wonder they got the city council behind then.
And then, they should ban fertilizer and weed killer on lawns in LFP.
And, everyone in LFP should have to tear out all the lawns, driveways, etc. and make sure that a minimum of 65% of each lot is in native vegetation. If that means bulldozing the house, then bring out the D-9 Cat and have at it.
That'll get those belltown wheenie liberals with their holier-than-thou attitude to scream for the CAO to be eliminated faster than a salmon can lay an egg.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on May 30, 2005 07:57 PMBut to those of you who hate bikes on the trail; I don't think you'll be satisfied with us on "your" roads, either. I have been spat on, nearly intentionally run over, had curses/garbage thrown at me, and all for what? The "crime" of riding a bicycle on the roadway.
We are all fortunate to have some semblance of a trail system around to keep us speedbumps off the road some of the time, and bike haters should be thankful for it as well, as we don't impede your progress anymore than necessary.
(Oh, and last time I checked, I paid sales tax on every inner-tube, tire, spoke and sprocket on my crate. But of course that money never trickles much into trail maintenance.)
Perhaps the trail should return to its original use...heavy rail. Then the adjacent property owners can enjoy those wonderful train horns and seismic events of 30+ years ago.
Posted by: Shaun on May 30, 2005 08:26 PMI have watched the Lake Sam situation from the distance. Ron Sims said it's all resolved. Didn't he?
Everyone,
I agree there are cyclists who rudely speed and cut people off. I hope we can get them to cherish the trail acccess and treat other users well.
Posted by: Ron Hebron on May 30, 2005 09:56 PMAs for bike trails, I am getting tired of perfectly good rail corridors being turned into hiking and biking trails. Once they become trails, the whole idea of banking the corridor for future tranist use becomes moot, as the rails to trails group will seem to want to fight to keep it as a trail. I was out on SR-169, and my mom was lamenting on how their were more developments being put up every time we pass by their. She grew up in Maple Valley. Paralelling SR-169 just after leaving Renton is a former railroad Right of Way now a trail. It was unpaved. It could have been a good alternative to getting semi-trucks off of I-90. You see, this is the right of way of the North Coast Railroad, a branch line that the Milwaukee Road used to get their trains from Black River(Tukwilla) through Renton to their route up Snoqualmie Pass. For 50 years it used electric locomotives.
Also, I would like to see somebody stop the Seattle Art Museum from building their sculpture park on the Waterfront. I do not care if it was mostly private money that is funding it. It was a Local Improvement District made up of Waterfront Property Owners that built the Waterfront Streetcar Line.
Posted by: MASSTRANSITFAN on May 31, 2005 03:17 AM
Whining about how the county should provide bike trails? BS, ladies and gents. The county should be involved in NOTHING OF THE SORT. Good god, and you people get all uppity on the liberals for such frivilous tax and spend policies! If the bikers/hikers/trail folks want a paved/unpaved/graveled whatever trail, let them pay for it through usage fees and membership fees. NOT ONE CENT of the public's money should go to it.
You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Is this what you people really belive the purpose of government taxation is? It's bad enough that local tax money goes to hiring inept elections officials, now you want to spend it on a neglible trail so you can ride your bike through colorful scenery? If you want to do that on your own nickel, I support it. In fact, being an avid cyclist when I'm not working in former communist regimes, I'd probably even chip in. BUT NOT ONE PENNY OF ANY WORKING MAN'S SALARY OUGHT TO BE GIVEN FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S AESTHETIC ENJOYMENT. That is ridiculous.
Posted by: Aaron on May 31, 2005 06:36 AMCouldn't agree more!
Posted by: alphabet soup on May 31, 2005 06:48 AMI have had most experience with cyclists on the Burke Gillman primarily in Seattle where an attentive and/or courteous cyclist is much more uncommon than a Republican in Seattle. Of course that reflects what I've observed is the usual Seattle cyclist, rude, thoughtful only of themselves, an attitude that only they are of any import, in short the typical Seattleite.
Good for the LFP City Council, lefty cyclists aren't used to not having all public officials roll over for their every whim.
You destroyed any credibility you might have had by your gushing compliments for Carolyn Edmonds, come on!, this is the same person who attacked her Democrat opponent for agreeing to appear on "right wing hate radio" KVI, for goodness sakes, even Patty Murray has appeared on there.
Posted by: Jeena on May 31, 2005 07:04 AMSecondly, we have got to figure out more ways to burn gas, get people into cars, and stop all this nonsense about biking.
Finally, we need to think of really good names to call people that don't agree with these points.
Posted by: commonsense on May 31, 2005 07:11 AMStep one, draw up a plan for a trail without consulting adjacent property owners. Step two, completely ignore the community-backed trail plan financed by homeowners as an alternative. Step three, while locked in litigation rebuff every offer to enter binding arbitration. Step four, coerce homeowners who wish to apply for building permits and/or refinance their residence into signing "special use permits". Here are the highlights of my special use permit (presently unsigned.)
First, I must indemnify the county (discussed in previous post.) That means that when there is a lawsuit, no matter how frivolous, I am required to defend the county in court at my own expense. I had a similar agreement with the railroad but I was OK with it because the railroad required me to exclude the public with gates and fences. The county wants the same deal even though I am now asked to embrace a public corridor through my neighborhood. The county has remained intransigent on this issue. Second, I must move my private access road 10 feet closer to Lake Sammamish to make room for a much wider trail. Moving this road will require cutting down 400 trees and dumping 300 dump trucks of dirt in the Lake Sammamish floodplain. Where am I going to get the 16 required permits and signoffs from City, County, State, Federal and Tribal agencies to do that? Third, if I don't move my road the county will move it for me and send me the bill.
I have some advice for the citizens of Lake Forest Park who may be asked to "negotiate" with the county because they happen to live next to the Burke Gilman Trail. Don't sign those special use permits and don't let Sims and his cronies buy their way onto your city council.
First of all, we have got to eliminate all taxes that don't benefit us directly.
Bull. We have got to stop all taxation that leads the government to do more than it was meant to do.
Secondly, we have got to figure out more ways to burn gas, get people into cars, and stop all this nonsense about biking.
Again, bullsh. I never said burn more gas. One more straw horse the fa66ish dems (and apparently republicans) on this thread will pull. I said that no one should pay for it who isn't using it.
Finally, we need to think of really good names to call people that don't agree with these points.
Indeed. Because inviting the government to run our lives worked out real well for the soviet union. Anytime you want to ask people directly involved in that fiasco, I intvite you to a simple dinner with my wife's Uzbeki family (living in Kyrgyzstan).
If we used the same logic when dealing with drivers, all the roads would be posted 15mph, be unpaved with a stop sign every 100 yards.
And should you think that if you ride responsibly you'll be ok with respect to the drivers, I laugh in your face. Try it. Most drivers may watch for you, give you the room to safely ride, but whether intentially (annoyed by the few seconds delay) or accidentally (chatting on that cell) it only takes one.
I can't count the number of times I have been threatened with death and maiming with a driver's vehicle because I was trying to ride my bike responsibly but in "their road". It gets *far* worse if I'm paralleling the BGT in LFP. I'm stuck ... 10 to 15 mph is *way* too slow to commute to work and there are no side streets in that area.
For you oh-so-damned-rightous drivers out there how many times have you sped? How many times has your speeding nearly caused an accident (e.g. "mowing people down")? How many times have you driven too fast through neighborhood streets? How many times have you come too close to people on crosswalks (or didn't even SEE them)? How many times have you gone too fast in a parking lot and had a close call? How about we just ban cars 'cause when they hit a pedestrian they kill them? Come on, be honest now ... you KNOW you've done it so many times you can't count.
Now let's compare the damage done to pedestrians by an inattentive or aggressive cyclist versus a driver. Who loses? Why is the driver's rights to kill and maim protected while cycling is villified?
I have a choice between a$$hole owners living adjacent to the trail trying to grant themselves rights they never had ("yes Mr. Train Engineer, you must stop for my driveway. See? I posted a stop sign.") or a$$hole drivers trying to kill me because I'm not on the trail. Guess which choice I'll make?
My tax money helped build the roads there by LFP but due to speed and proximity to the trail, they're too dangerous to cycle on.
My taxes also helped pay for the trail. The trail is classified as a "multi-use path" and its use as a bike through-way is being intentionally curtailed and/or eliminated. If you don't like bikes on the BGT ... then work with us to create a bike path or shut the he__ up 'cause you haven't a leg to stand on.
Posted by: lee egg on May 31, 2005 11:55 AM