Transportation Chapter

1. Infill can be great, but please require parking on private land where new infill takes place. We chose a place to live where one parent and children can walk or ride to school and work. The other parent has always carpooled. We still would like street parking to be available when we have visits from guests. When a few properties in the neighborhood consume all the street parking, this is unequitable to those who take care not to. Often infill projects are completed by landlords who do not live in the neighborhood and don't really care about parking difficulties. 2. When choosing streets that are the most bike-friendly for maps, bike lanes, and painting bikes onto, please please bring in bicyclists to give input and to try the routes for extended periods of time. Also, use the most cost efficient ways to do this. Does painting a bike on a street actually work for cyclists in our community or raise awareness by cars? Perhaps. What do surveys say about this? 3. How can we encourage businesses and employers to encourage patrons and employees to use alternative transportation? How about a city-wide initiative like, "a buck off if you bike" ... I just made that up, but some businesses (Wander, I think) do this. Great idea. Kulshan does this with Smart Trips. I think only reducing car lanes and reducing parking is short-sighted. I never drive downtown from home... but our city is growning. Reducing lanes and parking make less sense (even though I never use it). Anyways, thanks for reading.

As many others have mentioned in other comments, Bellingham would greatly benefit from a focus on Public Transit. An option to reimplement the trolley system with a similar system like a light rail or intercity rail system would elevate so much of the congestion on high traffic routes. If planned and implemented correctly it would help fix so many of the issues just be removing vehicles off busy roadways. Many of busy streets in Bellingham are already five lanes wide (usually with a median in the middle) which leaves space to have a rail system run through the median of the road as seen of Capitol Hill section in Seattle. Though this would be a very expensive to obtain, it would prove greater benefit to the future. If this option is not viable in the near future, I think it would important to focus on frequency of bus's to neighborhoods that are outside of the planned urban villages. For example services to Sudden Valley, it makes it an almost impossible system to use when a bus comes only once an hour. If frequency were to increase, and more infrastructure surrounding the bus stops themselves were developed it would most likely increase ridership in the area and similar neighborhoods in Bellingham.

Public transit should take priority over POV's and should leave dedicated lanes for the bike lanes. There wouldn't be so many problems with the bike lanes if they weren't shoehorned in and were incorporated into transit only lanes. Expanding road use would increase the amount of 66PD-Q in the water. It would be deeply problematic for our obligations to preserve salmonid species. Streetcars could reduce the amount of traffic via tired vehicle and replace it with steel wheels.We would greatly benefit from the recreation of the trolley system in the City of Bellingham. I know it would be costly but it's in Bellingham's legacy and will ease the growing congestion in the city. It would beneficial to have transit/ bike only lanes which eventually could be turned into streetcars as well. Street cars are a part of this cities legacy and help us drive the level of car traffic down in the city. Bellingham is at a crossroads because it has the capability to prepare itself for bigger. Id rather have a superior public transit system that benefits us all from all walks of life. If we build it now, we won't lag behind. Its easier to build our transit network now then to catch up later.

I appreciate all the time and thought that went into this, and the proposed areas of emphasis align with my vision of a thriving community. Thank you! I appreciate the focus on trails, safety, alternatives besides cars, and accessibility.

Removed by moderator.

Living near a busier part of town, I've had some close calls with people almost hitting me as a pedestrian crossing the roadway with active indicators of crosswalk use in place. Drivers only seem to listen to signage and visual indications when lights are being used to signal someone's presence. They even ignore speed limits, clog crosswalks, or don't let people merge onto the highways. I can't say that I am one of those people, but I notice that there are just impatient and selfish people wherever you reside, unfortunately. I feel that making Bellingham safer for pedestrians and cyclists alike should be a priority, as well as making the city more accessible for public transit options and those who don't have easy access to a vehicle, want to remedy traffic flow, express environmental concerns with emission consumption, and are weighed down by longer commutes and the inability to move around the city as much. I love the trails as a transportation method that is being used on Railroad. I think implementing these throughways around the city would be an excellent idea! With the ever-increasing interest in WWU by locals and visitors alike, I think expanding the transportation system to accommodate a wide variety of barriers would make the city more attractive to the general public. Being an owner of a hybrid vehicle, I value being able to have the opportunity to charge and use electric power whenever convenient, but the lack of electric vehicle ports, those that get mistreated, and those that are privatized, make it nearly impossible to have this privilege and benefit from it. I would like to see public charging stations with consistent maintenance throughout the city and that surrounding it. To further drive these points, I feel that incorporating wildlife corridors for their safe travels would prevent unnecessary collisions with automobiles and animals. I see resident deer that live in the city limits, wish them well, and encourage others to brake for all sentient creatures. Please improve this city for the betterment of everyone and everything alike, as we are all interconnected. Thank you.

I am glad to see the City's continued focus on promoting alternatives to driving. As part of this, traffic planning and infrastructure should seek to distinguish between "streets" (destinations, like houses or Railroad Avenue) and "roads" (thoroughfares, like Northwest or Sunset).
Both can and should be multimodal, but this is accomplished in different ways: Streets limit and calm car traffic to create comfortable environments for all (see also: the concept of "shared streets"), while roads allow higher travel speeds (while still using the road's design to encourage safe speeds) by physically separating cars, bikes, and pedestrians.
Places that attempt to be street and road at the same time, like Meridian north of I-5, should be avoided whenever possible.

Staff Note: Comments made early than this one were based on an older version of the chapter material released in November 2024.

Transportation
• Integrate WTA with BSD bus system to cover more areas, with a single branding and safety emphasis, to increase frequency and reduce duplication.
• Diversify the bus system to include a range of vehicle sizes to accommodate known variations in ridership and match services with needs.
• Consider integrating bikes within traffic lanes instead of isolating bikes into bike lanes that often don’t make sense (e.g. deathtrap lanes on Holly where right-turning traffic can’t see bikes and threaten bicyclist’s lives at every block!)
• Provide safe, weatherproof bike parking in high use areas.
• Stop discouraging neighborhood groups from creating foot and bike transport corridors along unused street rights-of-way; provide funding and use street ROWs to increase connectivity amongst trails and neighborhoods.
• Incentivize bike use through bonus programs for bike commuters.
• Create an electric trolley system in the core urban area, using historically-similar transit cars that run on a figure-eight route with downtown as the hub, Fairhaven/WWU at the south end, and either Barkley or Meridian/Bakerview (“Mallsville”) at the north end. This way buses can cover less-central locations linked to the core trolley route.
• Absolutely do not support the widening of I-5 through Bellingham. Consider closing certain exchanges to streamline freeway traffic and reduce incidental freeway use by local commuters. Any spare space in the I-5 ROW should be preserved for future rail transit.

The bus from Edgemoor to downtown takes too long because it goes up to Western before it goes downtown. It would be nice if the Fairhaven to downtown bus included Edgemoor. This route would most likely see increased use if that the route were changed.

Looking forward to the possibility of more frequent buses and more connectivity between different areas of town (not just centered around downtown transit center/Cordata bus station). A 15 minute drive is often a 1hr trip with the routes available right now. I live near Sudden Valley, the number of cars (with just a driver and no passengers) that come through on weekdays as people go to work is quite high. We are also near Lake Whatcom, I wonder what amount of pollution that adds to the water. More frequent buses might encourage people to take public transit instead of driving.

Although we live outside of city limits, I used to take the bus into town and park at a friend’s house near a bus stop. But now that WTA changed the Yew Street Road route to a counter clockwise direction, I have a much longer ride. What was the rational behind that?

No, we don’t need a third freeway lane. Do you realize the expense that would entail? We should have put in the highway 9 transportation corridor proposed some years ago for rail and truck traffic. I5 would be less congested.

I do not like that Samish Way was reduced to one lane from two. This accomplished nothing but more congestion. And, Holly Street is a disaster. You are trying to get us all to take the bus, ride bikes or walk. As a rural resident, I can’t schlep several bags of groceries on the bus or by biking.

I really hope there is a way we make the freeway safer through town, slowing down the speed through the city proper might do that, or less freeway exits/entrances. Or better yet make sure the transit is good enough to where most people can get to where they need without a car, if there are people who it would benefit there should be better transit coverage. (And plan for light rail in the near future we shouldn't need to be Seattle size for that)

More aspirational but, fix north Bellingham - meridan and cordata and the other urban sprawl hell areas those parking lots sit largely empty 90% of the time, the roads probably don't need to be as wide in most places and most importantly it would stop people going as fast through largely residential areas anyways.

The transportation element in the Neighborhood plans for Puget, Whatcom Falls, Cordata and Meridian Street call for arterial linkages that were ideas from the 1980s and 1990s. So much much has changed in 40 years. Some of these potential roads became conditions os approval for building in those neighborhoods and due to cost no one chose to develop the affected properties. I know of one portion of an arterial that was formally removed from one neighborhood remains in the conditions for an adjacent neighborhood. The ambiguity of what the connectors should be in the Cordata and Meridian Street neighborhoods and who should pay for them disincentivises some builders. A single plan for all required transportation improvments should be implemented so that builderss can be confident in their project conditions.

Resolve the roadway connection issues which have been attached to the zoning regulations in Cordata and Meridian neighborhoods for decades ! Existing neighborhoods in the northern communities remain unfinished and unsettled until these decisions are put to rest.

Bellingham needs to work closely with WTA to ensure that bus routes go where people need them and do so efficiently. It feels to me that Bellingham does a lot of its planning around where WTA has existing routes. Take, for example, urban villages, which are zoned near existing transit routes. But it should be the other way around - The city should be able to designate certain areas as underutilized and upzone them, and then WTA should figure out how to provide the area with bus service.

Also, I'm not sure how realistic the city is being trying to discourage single-occupancy vehicle use. I agree, it would be great to live in a walkable community and rely on bikes to get around. But that's just not practical for lots of people, like those with mobility challenges, children to cart around, or who just don't want to get rained on. I'm in favor of reducing parking minimums, but not eliminating them entirely. It's better to provide positive incentives for doing something other than single occupancy vehicles instead of punishing those who do drive by turning the whole city into a parking nightmare.

Another thought - can we eliminate some of the on- and off-ramps to I-5? So much of the traffic and many of the accidents are just from the constant shuffling people do getting on and off. I'd suggest adding an inner lane in each direction, but I don't think that's practical and I'm not sure it would solve the problem. I was always taught (way back when) that the interstate is for longer trips and if you're only going a few miles, it's better to take surface streets, but the number of ramps we have make it tempting to take I-5 even if you're going just a mile or two.

I watched the YouTube video of the plans for redeveloping the Civic Field area and they are exciting! They mentioned that lakeway will someday get a buffered bike lane. I like to commute by bike for fun, exercise, and to reduce my car use. I also drive my car frequently. I support making a safer, protected corridor for bikes along Lakeway, as the current one feels very incomplete and very dangerous. However, I'd be very concerned if you would take away car lanes for bike lanes - we already get large backups and the city isn't done growing. Hopefully you plan to leave the car lanes and find additional space for the bike lane? Could bikes get routed around somehow? Also, where would the buffered bike lane lead? How would it connect to downtown - how will the bikes get under I-5 without needing to merge with traffic? The underpass is too narrow. Will bikes be routed around? Could you build a separate bike tunnel, like the I-90 bike tunnel? (But would it just become a place where people camped and left garbage and needles?) There is not an easy solution that i can see.

I can't tell what the city is doing to work with WSDOT and other agencies to improve I-5 through Bellingham. The onramps and offramps are terrible as a whole. There clearly needs to be a third lane throughout Bellingham. Advocating for improvements to I-5 should be a top priority as this is clearly a safety issue.

Slide 2 mentions eliminating or reducing parking requirements, but it is not mentioned anywhere else in the chapter overview. Where would that concept appear in the plan?

Holly Street! I drive down Holly street almost every week day in the morning (although I admit to sometimes avoiding it now). How many bikes do I see? Usually NONE! Sometimes 2. However, I have seen a few near misses. And NOW, we have the absurd Bay St. traffic revision! Visitors to our city -- and our residents who do not regularly travel on Holly St -- will be stunned at the traffic revision by Bay Street! I was... and I drive it multiple times a week. Who came up with this idea? There WILL be accidents at that location. Further, there will be bike vs. automobile accidents along the unsafe bike lanes.... and the City should be liable for it's crazy planning.