Former Mayor Newman’s recent article endorsing a three-lane option for Island Crest Way (ICW) leaves many issues unaddressed:

1. 19,000 cars currently travel daily on ICW in four lanes. Per lane volume will double if ICW is reduced to two lanes (unless travel moves to East or West Mercer Way).

2. If the volume of cars in two lanes becomes too dense on ICW, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to enter or cross traffic to merge onto ICW in either direction, with or without a turn lane.

3. Turn/merge lanes can actually prevent cross-lane merging because the turn/merge lane is occupied by a vehicle waiting to exit ICW, which blocks the vehicle attempting to cross into the turn/merge lane.

4. What happens to traffic when a Metro or school bus stops to pick up or drop off passengers?

5. It is not easy to pull out safely into a center turn/merge lane when traffic is heavy and moving at 35 mph, such as at Island Park School.

6. Mayor Newman argues that three lanes will better allow people to cross ICW by first crossing one lane to an island, and then the other lane to the other side of ICW (despite the doubling of lane volume). I have lived on Mercer Island since 1970. Who walks or bikes along ICW? Even with a center island, what parent would allow their kids to walk or bike along — let alone cross — ICW’s 19,000 daily cars to the library, Ellis Pond or anywhere else?

7. I thought the three-lane option was originally due to the fact the city didn’t have the funds for a traffic light at the intersection of ICW and Merrimount Drive, despite all the anticipated fees from the development of the business district.

I live on the North end (but travel regularly to the South end for the kids’ sporting activities), and maybe I am a more disinterested observer of this argument. But I must say that I am unable to discern the wisdom of reducing Island Crest Way from four lanes to three lanes.

Daniel P. Thompson