It's not every day that a journalist is asked to write a top-of-the-fold opinion piece regarding such a controversial local issue, but given I personally spoke with Washington State DOT on Friday, May 31 in an exclusive interview over the forthcoming roundabout, I figured why not.
Raymond residents along with the city council and mayor who attended the Raymond City Council meeting on May 22 learned the roundabout project is set to begin on July 9. After my conversation with DOT, I can backup that information even though they have yet to officially announce it.
The roundabout has been a hot topic among local communities for the last several years and why shouldn't it be, who honestly wants one? There were a small few who love to debate and vindicate the project with big words and "data", but in that regards the many outweigh the few and most don't want any roundabout at all. A poll conducted by the Herald showed approximately 78% of the 874 people who cast a vote said no to having a roundabout.
The roundabout as many know will be at the intersection of SR 6 and US 101 where the state has determined to 'program' the lights [a fancy term they are using with as many definitions as the engineers can come up with]. According to DOT Region Traffic Engineer Scott Langer whom I had the pleasure to speak with, the state looks at problem signals and decides the best option of what to do. We all know what they chose to do here....ahm.
Now to the nitty-gritty. Being the math snob that I am when I interviewed Langer I had to ask a burning question...what would it cost to keep lights at the intersection? His response was possibly one of the most intriguing answers you'll find in this write up. It would cost the state $600,000-$650,000 to replace the lights with new ones. They would have a lifespan of roughly 25-30 years with an annual maintenance cost of $5,000.
Now the roundabout project was awarded at a bid of $2.6 million with $1.3 million of the contract going directly to the roundabout. The contract also includes a drainage project and paving/sidewalk project in South Bend to make up the remaining $2.6 million. The lifespan of the roundabout will be approximately 50-60 years and according to Langer, "won't cost anything additional to maintain each year then what's already there." Whoa! Wait a minute...so he's claiming the maintenance cost per year is the same? He couldn't confirm nor deny my assumption.
So let's get this right, the roundabout itself will cost $1.3 million and could last 50-60 years and to replace the lights right now it will cost $600,000-650,000 and last 25-30 years? So to match the lifespan of the roundabout the lights would have to replaced twice...but that's only $1.2-1.3 million?! That's exactly the same as the roundabout! And if both cost the same for yearly maintenance....the state is really saving money with a roundabout aren't they?
Things only get weirder here when I had to ask the wonderful question if there was any concern for large trucks maneuvering the intersection. Langer's response...the intersection will have a three-inch curb in the center that semi-trailers are able to drive up and over to make the tight turn.
Of course being the annoyance I am I had to then ask if there's any concern regular motorist could do the same? Langer's response, "No, it would give the vehicle a pretty violent jolt."
Logic would also say that over time with the amount of commercial truck traffic through that intersection the middle median would eventually wear down or become damaged. Not according to Langer as he simply put it, "when we are talking about a roundabout and just that one spot, we can really beef it up." To me, just like one Facebook user commented to my online post, this just sounds like a challenge accepted moment right before someone "Dukes of Hazard's" the middle median.
I understand roundabouts have their place and I can fully support them, just not here. The logic to me is lacking and with two lights within an eighth mile and another a half mile down the bend it seems utterly ridiculous. I refuse to believe the logic that traffic moving smoother off of SR 6 and US 101 without a stop won't cause any congestion downtown. Langer assured me that their data does not forecast any traffic ques hitting the roundabout.
After my persistent annoyance Langer did explain that money only had a small portion of the equation as safety is DOT's primary concern. The data on roundabouts and fatalities is hard to argue because it does show a major decline in fatality accidents. However, the data of accidents in general is quite a grey area. Some studies show crashes, such as those with fatalities, decrease while others show minor accidents skyrocketed.
In the past 7 months I have been at the Herald, I have not covered nor been briefed on any accidents at the intersection of SR 6 and US 101.
While I have covered three accidents at Heath St and US 101 over a two month span. So I had to ask Langer a question that was burning me up inside since DOT had decided to place a roundabout at SR 6 and US 101 with safety a top priority. Why not put a roundabout at Heath St and US 101 or Commercial and US 101.
Langer's response to my wisecrack actually left me speechless for a few moments, "That's really undetermined at this point," he stated. "I think there's a good chance especially at Heath that the math will equal out the same way though. But that's not a given." Langer then went on to mention that a second roundabout seems like it would make sense, but the current project will not dictate what they do with the other lights. From the conversation we had, I would be surprised to not see an additional roundabout proposed within the next year or so. It was clearly obvious to me throughout our conversation the topic had been tossed around prior to my interview.
The reality is residents had ample time to fight the project with as much opposition as Montesano showed against the proposed roundabout there, but we didn't.
Council and community meetings about the project were left unattended and the actual care wasn't shown until it was basically too late. The project could still be fought because nothing is ever for sure in life, but with a mayor who is more concerned about glorifying the beloved theatre then showing an actual interest in residents real concerns. The backbone of any fight was lost months ago and we all will have to learn to drive around a circle, dodge rogue cars, and hope I am not covering crashes on a weekly basis.