Shelton narrows Olympic Highway North design choices; council asks staff to refine Options 2 and 3 and widen outreach

Acting City Manager and Public Works Director Jay Harris and the Transport Group presented the Olympic Highway North pavement rehabilitation project and four design alternatives at the council study session.

Harris said the project limits run from C Street north to Wallace and Keland and that the city received a 2023 Transportation Improvement Board grant for about $3.6 million that required a 10% local match. He told council the city used a federalized systemic pedestrian improvement project as part of the match and expects to contribute additional local TID funds.

Consultant Aaron (Transport Group) presented four options that keep the curb‑to‑curb width but reallocate space among vehicle travel lanes, bike lanes and on‑street parking. Option 1 preserves parking on both sides and inserts bike lanes by significantly narrowing vehicle lanes; staff expressed safety concerns about bike lanes in the door zone. Option 2 removes parking on one side to widen vehicle lanes and separate bike facilities from parked cars. Option 3 creates a two‑way bike/multiuse path on one side of the street while retaining parking on the opposite side and tying into an existing multiuse pathway at C Street. Option 4 removes parking both sides to maximize bike and vehicle lane width but would eliminate on‑street parking entirely.

Harris and the consultant presented on‑street parking utilization counts (32 stalls east side, 56 stalls west side) taken as snapshots; they said utilization during the sampled times was low and that many businesses also have off‑street parking. Harris said Pacific Power (PUD) plans to replace street lighting in the corridor and that the project team will complete a photometric analysis and utility undergrounding coordination.

Council and staff representatives discussed tradeoffs: business access and convenience, enforcement if parking is limited, emergency vehicle needs (minimum recommended lane widths), drainage and stormwater effects if medians or hard separators are added, bicycle speed and the growth of e‑bikes, and opportunities for landscaping or intermittent medians to calm traffic. Several council members expressed a preference against Option 1 (both‑sides parking with narrow lanes) and Option 4 (remove all parking), and a general inclination to refine Options 2 and 3.

"I love option number 3," one council member said, praising a connector trail tie‑in that would link uptown and downtown and provide a segregated bikeway. Other council members recommended keeping Options 2 and 3 available for public outreach, preparing refined sketches and community materials, and then scheduling town‑hall style meetings and online outreach before moving to detailed design.

Staff reported geotechnical work shows surface binder deterioration (oxidation and raveling) without major subbase failures, which could reduce reconstruction costs relative to a deep base rebuild. Harris said the earliest construction would be summer seasons in the mid‑2020s but that detailed design and community engagement need to proceed now to meet grant and coordination schedules.

Council directed staff and the consultant to prepare refined cross‑sections and sketches for Options 2 and 3, include parking‑utilization and driveway/lot mapping to assess impacts, and develop public‑engagement materials; staff will return to council with those materials and schedule community outreach.