A proposed amendment to the Washington State University Forest development agreement was tabled by the Bonney Lake City Council for discussion and action during the workshop on Sept. 16.

The WSU Forest agreement, passed by the City Council in 2009, allows Bonney Lake to develop 40 acres of the forest to attract commercial and medical business.

The current agreement would only allow right in, right out access to 204 Avenue East, meaning drivers would not be able to turn left at the intersection.

The amendment would connect 204 Avenue East to state Route 410 and South Prairie Road, and would allow a traffic light to be installed at the intersection of SR 410 and 204 Avenue East. Left turn lanes would be installed for drivers heading west, and the median barrier at this intersection would also be removed.

There is no plan for a left turn lane to be installed for drivers going east on SR 410 to turn onto 204 Avenue East at this time. Transportation analysts from Washington State University and Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Development Company indicate the new traffic signal at 204 Avenue East, in coordination with the other seven signals along SR 410 between 192 Avenue East and 214 Avenue East will slightly improve traffic and travel time during peak afternoon hours.

In 2013, Seattle firm Transportation Engineering Northwest, indicated SR 410 traffic flow will be slower overall with an additional traffic light, but traffic would be better guided with a traffic light than by an unsigned right in, right out system adjacent to the highway’s eastbound lane.

Mayor Neil Johnson said the seven lights in the area will by synced together, “making sure the intelligence of the lights keeps traffic going.”

Additionally, retailers have said they are not interested in developing in an area with right in, right out access.

“Big box stores need to have a mechanism to get traffic in and out efficiently,” said Johnson. According to the mayor it is not confirmed which big box stores are looking at the area.

In 2009, a previous incarnation of the WSU Forest agreement failed to pass the council on a 4-3 vote. The council added a signal prohibition at 204 Avenue East to the agreement, which helped the agreement pass at 6-1.

“It was going to fail (without the prohibition),” said Johnson.

The amendment to add the traffic signal back into the agreement was brought up in March 2013. Deputy Mayor Dan Swatman expressed concern over the amendment, since a traffic signal prohibition was what allowed the agreement to originally pass in the first place. Swatman is the only council member currently on the council that voted “no” in 2009, before the signal prohibition was added to the agreement.

Swatman told the council in 2013 while he didn’t disagree with a traffic signal in principle, he disagreed with the contradiction to the original 2009 vote, and urged the council to consider alternatives before deciding on a signal.

Swatman said in a recent interview he does not want another light to be added to SR 410, because it will increase traffic on the highway, and minimizing traffic “is a priority for most of my constituents.”

“A light is a good solution for the commercial developer,” Swatman said, “But is it a good solution for the city?”

Instead of adding a light, Swatman suggested connecting the Fred Meyer parking lot to the new development through a driveway parallel to SR 410. Swatman also suggested improving the traffic light in front of the Fred Meyer.

However, Swatman said, the city does not have authority to develop connecting parking lots without permission, and would need to talk to property owners about the option of connecting the parking lots.

Swatman cited how the parking lots between the Safeway, Fred Meyer, Ben Franklin and the movie theater between 214 Avenue East and 200 Avenue Court East already have interconnecting parking lots parallel to the highway.

“The city failed to get property owners in the same room and provide a solution for the area, and not an individualized solution,” said Swatman.

During the public hearing portion of the Sept. 9 meeting, Swatman submitted an email from the Washington State Department of Transportation, originally sent to a previous council member during the original rezone in 2005. The email stated that the WSDOT would not allow the installation of a traffic signal or barrier removal on SR 410.

Johnson said WSDOT’s position in 2005 might have been to not install any new traffic lights, “but if a traffic light is justifiable and makes better sense (than right in, right out), they will look at doing that.”