Regional Boards > Northwest

US 2 (Hewitt Avenue) Trestle

(1/2) > >>

Bruce:
Might as well start a separate topic for this project, since it will be a pretty major one if it gets funded (either in a state package or with tolls).

WSDOT has published two concepts for the westbound trestle replacement (heading towards Everett) as part of a community survey: https://engage.wsdot.wa.gov/us-2-westbound-trestle/

Option 1 is a four-lane trestle with one HOV lane, Option 2 is three general purpose lanes with a short HOV bypass for traffic using the I-5 SB offramp

Option 1 also includes a new pathway to directly connect WB traffic to Hewitt Avenue instead of linking to the Maple/California intersection as it does currently.





Neither concept actually fixes the very tight turn from WB US 2 to NB I-5, not to mention the mess of a merge/weave in the area. So there's that.

froggie:
At first blush (I have some limited experience with Everett, having been through the Naval Station there a handful of times but none since 2008), I would opt for a hybrid of the two...have a 4-lane trestle with a dedicated managed lane like Option 1, but retain the existing connections to the local grid like Option 2.  I don't see a huge benefit to a direct tie-in to westbound Hewitt Ave, especially since any such tie-in would impact eastbound operations from Hewitt to eastbound 2.  Not doing the direct tie-in would also cut down on ROW needs, which are already going to be existant just to replace the westbound trestle.

From what I can see/tell, improving the curve from WB 2 to NB 5 is theoretically doable, but would require two things:  relocating the NB on-ramp from Everett Ave, and probably adding ROW by taking out that first building on the south side of Everett Ave (what Google labels as "PRLifting").  The amount of earth movement to relocate the on-ramp from Everett would also add to the cost.

(EDIT):  Going through the survey, they seem to place more emphasis than I'd expect on a bike/ped path on any potential trestle replacement.  I find that odd considering that the eastbound trestle has one.  Also noticed that the survey is geared pretty much exclusively for those who live east of the river and travel across the trestle...not really any way for others to provide comment.

stevashe:

--- Quote from: froggie on September 17, 2020, 09:44:52 AM ---At first blush (I have some limited experience with Everett, having been through the Naval Station there a handful of times but none since 2008), I would opt for a hybrid of the two...have a 4-lane trestle with a dedicated managed lane like Option 1, but retain the existing connections to the local grid like Option 2.  I don't see a huge benefit to a direct tie-in to westbound Hewitt Ave, especially since any such tie-in would impact eastbound operations from Hewitt to eastbound 2.  Not doing the direct tie-in would also cut down on ROW needs, which are already going to be existant just to replace the westbound trestle.

--- End quote ---

I think the hybrid option you propose could be a good choice. I think there could be some benefit from realigning the Everett off-ramp from California to Hewitt though seeing as most traffic is making the jog to Hewitt anyway and that would save them having to turn left and travel a block down Maple to get there. It would definitely have an impact on traffic turning onto US 2 from Hewitt though, since it's currently a free left. I could see it improving things at the Hewitt/Maple intersection though since there would be less conflicting traffic from Maple if the WB ramp isn't dumping the traffic onto it.


--- Quote from: froggie ---(EDIT):  Going through the survey, they seem to place more emphasis than I'd expect on a bike/ped path on any potential trestle replacement.  I find that odd considering that the eastbound trestle has one.  Also noticed that the survey is geared pretty much exclusively for those who live east of the river and travel across the trestle...not really any way for others to provide comment.

--- End quote ---

The path on the eastbound trestle doesn't go all the way across (it turns off to the right and dumps onto a surface street just across the Snohomish river channel) so a path along the full length of a replacement westbound trestle would certainly provide more utility. As for the survey, the trestle really only back up during the morning commute, it's fine at other times (I drove it at various times of day during my internship with Snohomish County in 2017), so residents travelling into WB in the morning would have the most at stake in a potential replacement.

TEG24601:
4-Lanes would be a minimum.  Ideally, there should be a reversible HOV lane to help with eastbound traffic, as the eastbound trestle was under built.  If they were smart, they would could actually do the 3-lane project and plan space for commuter rail, using it initially as a BRT route.


Of course, I would still prefer connecting US 2 to SR 526 and extending US 2 all the way to US 101.  Seems much better for the traffic patterns, and better separates local traffic from longer-range traffic.

jakeroot:
I've been hearing of this proposal, so it's nice to see some concepts.

I would prefer a four-lane alternative with a twist:

lane 1: HOV/Bus (w/ meter bypass for southbound 5 on-ramp) with a new left exit onto westbound Hewitt Ave (for buses destined for Everett Station)
lane 2: GP exit to southbound 5
lane 3: GP exit to southbound 5/California/Walnut/northbound 5
lane 4: GP exit to northbound 5

Lanes 2 and 3 may need to be placed on the right side of that support column, and a new two-lane overpass built adjacent to the existing single-lane overpass above Hewitt Ave where it merges onto southbound 5. The two adjacent carriageways would merge together immediately after the overpass, but stay separate up to that point to reduce weaving; the existing overpass would become HOV/bus, and the new overpass a double-lane meter. Weaving protection isn't normally necessary, but the existing infrastructure makes this just as easily said as done.

The capacity-limiting effects of the tight curve onto northbound 5 could be alleviated with a second lane. This is the situation eastbound on 16 as it merges onto northbound 5 in Tacoma. The turn is very sharp (even after reconstruction), but a second lane allows slower vehicles to stick to a single lane, and regular cars to use another lane to "keep moving" (so to speak).

BUT, I don't know much about this area. I'm just going by the assumption that, like other city center freeway interchanges (WA-509 @ I-705, Interstate 90 @ I-5 to an extent), "most" traffic is actually turning onto the freeway; city-bound traffic is relatively non-intrusive assuming light timing allows relatively constant flow into the city. With this in mind, I reduced Everett-bound lanes to just one, itself shared with exits to both northbound and southbound 5. If this is a bad idea, someone speak up!

As a side-note: if we are to start fixing tight corners, northbound 5 to westbound 518 in Tukwila needs to be fixed ahead of any others. How that ramp even got off the drawing board is beyond me (although the whole interchange is crap, to be fair),

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version