Road Safety Improvements in the Gooseberry Pt Lease

Sam Crawford saw the query following an earlier post about whether / where the road safety improvements at Gooseberry were in the lease, and emailed us this information about where we can find the road improvement information.  Thanks, Sam.

(Note: All the lease documents, along with many other official documents, are stored and can be accessed quickly by anyone at Nancy Ging’s easily-searched Whatcom County Ferry Documents Archive. Those documents are also on the County Public Works Ferry site, but are slower to load from there.)

>From: Sam Crawford <>
>Sent: Jun 8, 2012 1:26 PM
>Subject: Safety improvements specified in lease

>Wynne, I just saw your website, and someone is asking about the “safety improvements” now being implemented. I also see you reference a copy of the Uplands lease, which you have posted at:


>Exhibit B (page 15 of the pdf file) lists the improvements.

>Sam Crawford
>Whatcom County Council Member
>360 676-6690

>NOTE: In nearly all cases, email communications with any county council member are subject to public disclosure, and are considered public documents.

5 thoughts on “Road Safety Improvements in the Gooseberry Pt Lease

  1. I had not been aware that the GOOSEBERRY PT agreement included all roads on the reservation, not just Gooseberry Pt.

    • Unfortunately, we islanders were so obsessed with the ferry terminal at Gooseberry that I think most of us really couldn’t ‘see’ all the Other Stuff in the lease even when it finally came out. That’s not totally our fault, of course. The biggest problem was the County caving to the LN preference for super-secret-no-public-oversight negotiations. Islanders argued logically and strongly for open meetings. Had everything in that lease been fully visible to the entire county council and all county citizens, we’d have gotten a better lease. Or no lease and dealt then & there with the federal road right of way issue, which we may have to anyway. What if the County runs out of money to do the ‘lease-required’ road improvements etc, simply stops paying the LN thereby breaking the lease.

      • If I recall correctly, none of us had actually seen the final version of the lease agreements before Council passed them either. Some of this might have been the so-called minor changes made at the 11th hour.

  2. After posting the comment above I pulled up a copy of the proposed ordinance and lo & behold the proposed reduction on the speed limit on Haxton was only at Kwina and Smokehouse, and was almost exactly as I had proposed following my accident study last year. Maybe I should look into things instead of objecting. The reason for the changes is to make sure the speed limit at those 2 intersections is 35 mph. When the 35 mph speed limit sign is beyond the intersection the speed limit is still 50 mph, even though most drivers are slowing.

    • Is it just the intersections? I’m understanding that it may be all of Haxton Way, which makes no sense as it’s one of the best county roads. I’m not picturing any driver going 35 the whole way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s