I do not support bus rapid transit on the Cross Kirkland Corridor (CKC).
The city’s arguments for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on the Cross Kirkland Corridor (CKC) are based on theoretical, idealized and misleading renderings of what the combination of trails and BRT will look like. Here is what the pro-BRT and pro-train people are not mentioning.
There actually is an emergency, but I am not feeling it in the King County response. I have dedicated the last seven years of my life to bringing people inside and to providing safety on the Eastside.
I am writing as a Kirkland resident for the past 10 years, and urge the Council to pursue option E-02 and leave bus/rapid transit on 405 where it belongs.
I am against having transit on the Cross Kirkland Corridor (CKC).
There’s a lot of uproar in Kirkland against buses on the trail. But the uproar is a red herring that distracts us from the real question: what locations in our city should be connected by rapid transit? Only after identifying those points should we consider which routes best connect them.
We are so proud of all of our team for pitching in during our annual food drive in partnership with Nourishing Network in Kirkland this year.
We all are concerned that we in the land of great technology companies are still using a very old transportation network design criteria for our “transit" needs.
I am the mother of three boys and one of the 25,000 Kirkland residents living within a half mile of the trail. If mass transit were to be added to the trail, I and many other people living close to the trail would no longer be able to access the trail through our backyards and side streets.
I have read the news articles on the City Council's push to add a bus rapid transit line on the Cross Kirkland Corridor as a means to alleviate current and expected traffic congestion through our city before the light rail line is implemented by Sound Transit.
The Nov. 17 windstorm knocked-out power to over 300,000 households across the Puget Sound region, and more than 30 transmission lines were badly damaged.
Back at the beginning of the second round of dreams of an ARC (Aquatics, Recreation and Community center), a small survey of 400 people indicated that 80 percent of Kirkland residents wanted the ARC. Wow. Lets move forward. However, potential costs were not included in the survey.
Once again, the Kirkland City Council is on the wrong side of an important community issue and once again, the citizens of Kirkland have to fight against their own elected officials.
My wife and I moved to Kirkland a year ago and the clincher for making the move was the beauty and availability of the Cross Kirkland Corridor (CKC).
My family uses the Cross Kirkland Corridor (CKC) to take walks and ride bicycles. It is a nice feature of our community.
In Kirkland we still have vehicle pedestrian injuries in spite of the flags and some flashing pole mounted LED cross walks.
On Nov. 13, we experienced a combined phone and internet outage from around 8 a.m. through 7 p.m. We noted that the north end of Holmes Point Drive was closed, and thanks to the emergency crews working all day on repairing the damage.
Kirkland has been my beloved home for 21 years now.
After reading comments about the ARC defeat and the mourning going on over it, I was particularly amused by the comments of our mayor.
In my wildest imagination I cannot fathom why the city of Kirkland would support constructing two lanes for bus traffic, destroying some areas along the trail that are ecologically sensitive wetlands, and trying to integrate bus traffic safely alongside of a walking and bike path enjoyed by all ages that has become a signature green space connecting numerous parks and neighborhoods.