# Navigating Safety Concerns and Community Streets Projects The Bellingham Transportation Commission convened on October 14, 2025, for what would become a deep dive into the city's approach to neighborhood traffic safety and the challenging balance between data-driven analysis and resident concerns. Meeting in the Pacific Street Operations Center, commissioners wrestled with fundamental questions about how to prioritize safety improvements when community perceptions don't always align with engineering data. ## Public Concern Over Lane Width Requirements The meeting opened with public comment from Miles Silverman, calling in to express concerns about a potential fire department requirement for 11-foot minimum travel lane widths throughout Bellingham. Speaking with evident passion about road safety, Silverman argued that such a requirement would undermine the city's ability to use one of its most effective traffic calming tools: narrower lanes. "In my experience, when I've driven on roads with narrower lanes, it feels less safe to drive faster, whereas when I drive on roads with wider lanes, it feels safe to drive faster," Silverman explained, highlighting how lane width affects driver behavior beyond just accommodation of emergency vehicles. He emphasized that with Bellingham currently working to lower speed limits on arterial roadways, maintaining flexibility in lane design was crucial for comprehensive traffic safety. His concerns extended to bicycle infrastructure, noting that concrete-separated bike lanes—like those in Seattle and Toronto—require space that often must come from somewhere. "Where are you going to use the space to provide those concrete buffers?" he asked, pointing out that the choice often comes down to taking space from either bikes or cars, with the latter being preferable for overall safety. Chair Addie Candib invited Silverman to wrap up as his three-minute comment period concluded, and he used his final moments to suggest that the fire department consider smaller fire trucks, citing successful European models. ## The Heart of the Matter: Community Streets Program Results The evening's main business centered on Shane Sullivan's presentation of the Community Streets Program (CSP) results—a comprehensive report representing months of data collection and analysis across Bellingham's northern neighborhoods of Cordata, Meridian, King Mountain, Irongate, Barkley, and Silver Beach. Sullivan explained that after receiving 401 individual locations of concern through community input, the city had studied 20 discrete locations, scoring each based on objective safety criteria including traffic volume, vehicle speeds, crash history, and contextual factors like proximity to schools. The highest-scoring project was Tremont Avenue from Corona Court to Guide Meridian, earning 23 out of a possible 40 points. "This had some of the highest speeds, had high volume," Sullivan noted about Tremont Avenue. "So we think there's a decent amount of cut-through." The street carries 1,621 vehicles per day with a median speed of 28.1 mph—figures that clearly exceed typical residential street parameters. However, even the top-scoring project represented a sobering reality check. Commissioner Jamin Agosti observed, "The highest scoring is 23 out of 40, right? And so... a perfect score would be about 40. So it's still not even really high, but it's the highest on this route that we got." Sullivan acknowledged this concern, explaining that the scoring criteria had been designed assuming worst-case scenarios that the program might encounter. "I think after we've done this for four years, we can revisit our point structure and see, you know, if we never broke 30, maybe we should revisit that," he suggested. ## A Perfect Project That Wasn't Perfect Enough The second-highest scoring project—McGrath Road from McLeod Road to elementary school—illustrated the program's complexities. Sullivan described it enthusiastically: "This one, I actually like a lot. It has pretty high volume, it's like over 1,000 ADT, and there's not enough houses to really justify that, so we know there's a lot of people going up and down, probably pick up, drop-off kids and everything else." The location scored 16.5 points, prompting a commissioner to ask why something described as a "perfect project" scored relatively low. Sullivan's response revealed the methodical nature of their approach: they had calibrated scoring to differentiate between projects across the range of conditions they might encounter, even if none reached theoretical maximums. ## The Controversial Skipping of Projects The staff recommendation to skip the fourth-highest scoring project (St. Paul Street) while selecting third and fifth-ranked projects sparked intense discussion about transparency and consistency. The decision was driven by practical considerations: Silver Beach Avenue and Sylvan Street could be treated together more cost-effectively than addressing each separately. "We chose those two because individually, in order to treat those issues, would require additional speed humps," Sullivan explained. "But if we combine them together, we could take one off of each one and do them together for less." Commissioner Agosti raised concerns about deviating from the ranking order, drawing parallels to controversial legislative practices: "The way a lot of funding happens at the legislative level... it's very controversial when a legislator comes in and says, 'Well, you know, I want to monkey with the order here.'" He worried about community perception: "The perception to the community will be, well, you know, for some reason, they didn't want to do my project, or they're just doing the projects that are cheap." ## When Data Meets Lived Experience Perhaps the most challenging discussion centered on projects where extensive community concern didn't align with engineering data. St. Paul Street had generated significant resident complaints but scored only 12 points, with data showing just 300 vehicles per day at a median speed of 19 mph—well within normal parameters for residential streets. "The vast majority of that... there's enough houses to produce more than 300 trips a day," Sullivan explained, suggesting the traffic was largely local rather than cut-through. "The level of traffic stress for pedestrians is one, which is considered comfortable for all ages and abilities." This created a philosophical tension that ran throughout the discussion. Commissioner Agosti argued passionately for taking resident concerns seriously regardless of data: "70 people in the community telling us that there's a problem on the street is a problem, whether or not people are going 19 or 22 miles an hour... When people don't feel safe putting their kids on the road, that's a real problem." Staff pushed back, with Sullivan emphasizing that the program had a specific mandate: "This program is only allocate[d]... has a budget to treat measured, documented safety issues." He explained that other resources existed for addressing perception-based concerns that didn't meet engineering thresholds. ## The Perception versus Reality Challenge The discussion of a 70-resident petition for one location that showed no significant safety issues highlighted the challenge of reconciling community perceptions with engineering data. Sullivan addressed this directly: "Speed, perception of speed, is a real thing when you're a pedestrian... 25 mile an hour car feels very different when it's going right by you than if you're 8 feet separated off on a sidewalk." He shared experiences from transit operations: "We have GPS on all of our buses, and I will tell you, 9 out of 10 people that call, and I mean, they're saying that we're excessively speeding, we're usually under the speed limit, but there's just a very different perception of speed when you're outside the vehicle." Several factors contribute to speed perception, including vehicle noise, acceleration patterns, and the pedestrian's position relative to traffic. "A louder vehicle, they always think is going faster," Sullivan noted, explaining how multiple variables affect how fast traffic appears to concerned residents. ## Alternative Approaches and Budget Constraints Commissioner Agosti proposed exploring cheaper "quick-build" alternatives using flex posts and paint for locations that didn't justify expensive permanent infrastructure but still represented community concerns. "Single-digit thousand dollars instead of $22,000 speed humps," he suggested, noting that such approaches could address more locations within the same budget. The staff response revealed ongoing internal discussions about expanding their toolkit. Tim Hohmann, stepping into his new role, acknowledged the value of such approaches but emphasized the need for proper policy development: "I think having a toolkit of traffic calming items... that maybe includes some quick builds, I think that's great input." However, maintenance concerns tempered enthusiasm for temporary solutions. "That comes with a much shorter lifecycle, so you're looking at having to replace it within a few... multiple times over 20 years. It might not be as cost-effective," Sullivan explained. ## The Final Vote and Selected Projects After extensive discussion, the commission approved five projects representing a careful balance of scoring, cost-effectiveness, and geographic distribution: 1. **Tremont Avenue** (Corona Court to Guide Meridian): Three speed humps in areas with sidewalks and houses, estimated at $66,000-$70,000 2. **McGrath Road** (McLeod Road to Tree Farm Lane): Two speed humps near the elementary school, addressing both high volume and speeding concerns 3. **Silver Beach Avenue and Sylvan Street**: Combined treatment of connected streets for cost efficiency 4. **Peter Street**: Low-cost signage improvements addressing operational and driver confusion issues Commissioner Cindy Dennis made the motion to approve study ID numbers 3, 10, 13, 12, and 15, with Commissioner Jamin Agosti providing the second. The motion carried unanimously, though not without acknowledgment of the difficult choices involved. Commissioner Agosti offered a pragmatic perspective in his support: "The scoring system we have is always just an attempt to put numbers to a complex system, and I have no concerns with looking at it, seeing what makes sense, and selecting the projects that would make sense, because there's so much context that you can never put into a matrix." ## Looking Ahead: Policy and Process Improvements The discussion revealed several areas for program refinement in future cycles. Staff indicated they would examine crash data more carefully, distinguishing between crashes related to primary safety concerns versus incidental incidents like backing out of driveways. The commission also expressed interest in expanding treatment options beyond the current default of speed humps and traffic circles. As the program matures, Sullivan suggested, they might encounter locations scoring much higher or situations requiring more intensive interventions. Commissioner Andrea Reiter summarized a common sentiment: "I'm glad that the program exists, and that it's off to a good start, and I feel like as the years go on, we're going to learn a lot... I would love to see more options involved in these default projects." ## Staff Updates and Ongoing Initiatives Beyond the Community Streets Program, staff provided updates on several ongoing initiatives: **Speed Limit Policy**: The city expects to bring final recommendations to council in late February 2026, following a February Transportation Commission meeting and a January workshop with the Safety Coalition. Implementation will involve targeted outreach similar to the Community Streets Program approach, focusing on specific corridors or areas. **Transportation Report on Annual Mobility (TRAM)**: Dylan Casper reported ongoing work to update the data components, particularly working with Whatcom Transit Authority on access and frequency measures. The update should be ready for commission review in November or December. **Bellingham Plan**: The comprehensive plan update continues through final council readings, with November 17 and 18 scheduled for second and third readings. The plan includes a new policy requiring annual analysis of mode shift trends. **Parking Management Expansion**: Steve Haugen presented plans for paid parking expansion in downtown and Fairhaven, adding 176 and 98 spaces respectively. The expansion converts time-limited signed areas to metered parking, improving turnover while generating an estimated $200,000-$220,000 annually. ## Chair's Perspective on Data Collection Challenges Chair Candib shared her experience participating in the Whatcom Council of Governments household travel survey, highlighting concerns about the methodology's invasiveness and potential for incomplete data. "This thing is so invasive," she reported, describing the week-long tracking requirement and extensive surveys for each trip. Her experience raised questions about data quality when survey requirements might discourage participation. "I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of folks get started and then say, no way, I'm not [continuing]," she observed, noting that effective transportation planning depends on high-quality data that may be compromised by overly burdensome collection methods. ## The Broader Context of Community Safety The October meeting reflected broader challenges facing cities nationwide as they work to balance engineering standards with community concerns, limited budgets with expansive needs, and objective data with subjective experiences of safety and comfort. The Community Streets Program represents Bellingham's attempt to create a systematic, equitable approach to neighborhood traffic safety while remaining responsive to resident concerns. The program's first year revealed both the value of data-driven decision-making and its limitations when community perceptions diverge from engineering conclusions. As Commissioner Reiter noted, "We're all kind of learning." The commission's willingness to grapple with these challenges while maintaining focus on meaningful safety improvements suggests a mature approach to the inherent complexities of transportation planning in a growing city. The evening concluded with announcements about upcoming work, including automatic traffic safety camera discussions planned for 2026, continued work on the Holly Street project, and the annual officer elections scheduled for December. Commissioner discussions revealed enthusiasm for expanding the city's traffic calming toolkit while maintaining the systematic approach that has characterized Bellingham's recent transportation planning efforts.

### Meeting Overview The Bellingham Transportation Commission met on October 14, 2025, with their primary focus on approving the Community Streets Program (CSP) project list for construction. The commission evaluated 20 traffic safety studies and selected 5 projects for implementation, while also receiving updates on speed limit policy work and parking management expansions. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Community Streets Program (CSP):** A 4-year rotating program that addresses traffic safety concerns on residential streets through community input and data-driven analysis, focusing on one geographic area of the city each year. **Point-to-Cost Ratio:** A metric used to compare the safety score of each project against its estimated construction cost, helping prioritize which projects deliver the best value per dollar spent. **Speed Humps:** Asphalt traffic calming devices that cost approximately $22,000 each and are the preferred treatment for addressing speeding concerns on residential streets. **Level of Traffic Stress (LTS):** A measurement scale from 1-4 that evaluates how stressful a street feels for pedestrians and cyclists, with LTS-1 being comfortable for all ages and abilities. **85th Percentile Speed:** The speed at or below which 85% of drivers travel, used as a key metric for determining if speeding is a problem on a given street. **Traffic Circles:** Permanent traffic calming installations at intersections, previously installed under earlier traffic calming programs as an alternative to speed humps. **Cut-Through Traffic:** Vehicles using residential streets as shortcuts to avoid congestion on main roads, often creating safety and livability concerns for neighborhoods. **Quick-Build Solutions:** Low-cost, temporary traffic calming measures using materials like flex posts and paint that can be implemented faster and cheaper than permanent infrastructure. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Addie Candib | Transportation Commission Chair | | Shane Sullivan | City Traffic Engineer, PE, PTOE | | Tim Hohmann | Assistant Director of Public Works-Transportation | | Jamin Agosti | Commissioner | | Cindy Dennis | Commissioner | | Dylan Casper | City Planner | | Steve Haugen | Public Works Staff | | Miles Silverman | Public commenter | ### Background Context The Community Streets Program represents Bellingham's systematic approach to addressing neighborhood traffic concerns through community engagement and data analysis. This year's focus on Group A covered northern neighborhoods including Cordata, Meridian, King Mountain, Irongate, Barkley, and Silver Beach. The program received 401 community responses, which were narrowed down to 53 eligible concerns and ultimately 20 discrete study locations. The commission's challenge was balancing limited budget ($200,000) against community needs while maintaining transparency and equity in project selection. The meeting also highlighted ongoing tensions between data-driven decision-making and community perception of safety issues. Some locations with strong community concern showed relatively low safety scores based on traffic counts and speed measurements, leading to discussion about how to address perceived versus measured problems. ### What Happened — The Short Version The commission approved five Community Streets Program projects for construction: Tremont Avenue (3 speed humps, $66,600), McGrath Road near elementary school (2 speed humps, $44,400), combined Silver Beach Avenue and Sylvan Street projects (3 speed humps, $66,600), and Peter Street signage improvements ($4,000). They skipped the 4th-ranked St. Paul Street project after determining the data didn't support safety intervention despite community concerns. Staff also provided updates on upcoming speed limit policy changes, parking management expansion, and various other transportation initiatives. ### What to Watch Next - Speed limit policy recommendations coming to the commission in February 2026 - Implementation of approved Community Streets Program projects in summer 2026 - Transportation Report on Annual Mobility (TRAM) update expected in November or December 2025 - Expansion of paid parking to 274 new spaces in downtown and Fairhaven areas - Automatic traffic safety camera discussion planned for early 2026 ---

**Q:** What was the total budget for Community Streets Program construction projects? **A:** $200,000 for the 2025 construction cycle. **Q:** How much does a single asphalt speed hump cost? **A:** Approximately $22,000, including a 10% contingency for cost variations. **Q:** Which project received the highest safety score in the Community Streets Program evaluation? **A:** Tremont Avenue from Corona Court to Guide Meridian, scoring 23 out of 40 possible points. **Q:** Why did the commission skip the 4th-ranked project (St. Paul Street)? **A:** Data showed only 300 cars per day with 50th percentile speed of 19 mph, indicating no significant safety issue despite community concerns. **Q:** What is the point-to-cost ratio and why is it important? **A:** It compares each project's safety score to its construction cost, helping maximize safety improvements per dollar spent. **Q:** How many traffic studies were conducted for the 2025 Community Streets Program? **A:** 20 discrete locations were studied, covering 53 eligible community concerns from 401 total survey responses. **Q:** Which commissioner made the motion to approve the five recommended projects? **A:** Cindy Dennis made the motion, seconded by Jamin Agosti. **Q:** What alternative traffic calming method did Commissioner Jamin Agosti suggest exploring? **A:** Quick-build solutions using flex posts and paint instead of permanent asphalt speed humps. **Q:** When will the approved Community Streets Program projects be constructed? **A:** Implementation is planned for summer 2026. **Q:** How much revenue is expected from the new paid parking expansion? **A:** Approximately $200,000 to $220,000 per year from 274 additional paid parking spaces. **Q:** What was Miles Silverman's main concern during public comment? **A:** Fire department requirements for 11-foot travel lanes could undermine road safety and traffic calming efforts. **Q:** Which project was selected despite being ranked 12th due to cost-effectiveness? **A:** Peter Street signage improvements, costing only $4,000 with a high point-to-cost ratio. **Q:** What is the 85th percentile speed measurement used for? **A:** To determine if speeding is a problem - it's the speed at or below which 85% of drivers travel. **Q:** How often does each area of Bellingham receive Community Streets Program attention? **A:** Every four years, as the program rotates through four geographic areas of the city. **Q:** What Level of Traffic Stress score indicates comfort for all ages and abilities? **A:** LTS-1 is considered suitable for users of all ages and abilities. **Q:** When are speed limit policy recommendations expected to come before the commission? **A:** February 2026 Transportation Commission meeting. **Q:** How many parking enforcement officers does the city currently employ? **A:** Four parking enforcement officers (PEOs) manage the city's parking management zones. **Q:** What was the median speed on St. Paul Street that influenced the commission's decision? **A:** 19 mph, which is below the threshold for speeding concerns. **Q:** What time period are the new paid parking enforcement hours? **A:** 11 AM to 6 PM, Monday through Saturday. **Q:** Which neighborhood elementary school was specifically mentioned in the McGrath Road project? **A:** Northern Heights Elementary School, making McGrath Road a high-priority school zone safety project. ---