Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsMonday, November 24, 2008
City Bike Lanes Proposed On Fauntleroy: Will Hell Break Loose?
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:05 PM
As part of the city's Bike Master Plan, the Seattle department of transportation (SDOT) is proposing to narrow Fauntleroy Way SW from four car lanes to three, and to add striping for bike lanes (on uphill portions of the road) and sharrows (shared lane markings on downhill segments) from Southwest Alaska Street to California Avenue Southwest, a segment of about 11 blocks. Downsizing Fauntleroy (or, depending on your perspective, expanding it for the many cyclists who use it to commute) has been, predictably, controversial; over at the West Seattle Blog, the commenters are already apoplectic—screaming, for example, that adding bike lanes unfairly inconveniences the people that use the roads the most, and that cyclists should just commute to work by sidewalk anyway.
SDOT is holding an open house to hear those and other perspectives on Monday, December 1. Ironically, the agency decided to hold its meeting at what may be the toughest spot to reach by bike in all of Seattle—High Point Community Center, 6920 34th Ave. SW, from 5:30 to 8 p.m.
1
I followed the link to the West Seattle Blog and didn't see how the majority of commenters were apoplectic over bike lanes and sharrows - a few were, but it seemed like most weren't at all.
4
"cyclists should just commute to work by sidewalk anyway"
This.
You want to ride a bike, or skateboard, or rollerblade, or use a Segway? Do it on the sidewalk.
I know "sidewalk" has "walk" right there in the name, but DON'T GET CONFUSED.
This.
You want to ride a bike, or skateboard, or rollerblade, or use a Segway? Do it on the sidewalk.
I know "sidewalk" has "walk" right there in the name, but DON'T GET CONFUSED.
5
The "many" cyclists who use it to commute? As usual, Erica, you're a lying sack of shit. Bicyclists are estimated to be 5 percent of users.
If you read all of the threads on this subject on West Seattle Blog -- which I know damn well you didn't -- you'd know that this was proposed 10 years ago -- and the people who, uh, LIVED near this arterial killed the idea.
If good sense prevails again, this dumb-ass idea will die again.
If you read all of the threads on this subject on West Seattle Blog -- which I know damn well you didn't -- you'd know that this was proposed 10 years ago -- and the people who, uh, LIVED near this arterial killed the idea.
If good sense prevails again, this dumb-ass idea will die again.
6
Is this post just meant to fuel the bikes vs. cars argument?
If so, I will start. I will gladly share the road when I am driving if asshole cyclists will stay off of the sidewalk.
If so, I will start. I will gladly share the road when I am driving if asshole cyclists will stay off of the sidewalk.
7
People who think current city policy should be dictated by what other people thought TEN YEARS AGO are fucking morans.
10
Bikes should use a sidewalk? Look, I already have a very real and reasonable fear of bad drivers when I have the right of way in crosswalks. Don't make me have to dodge bikes, too.
11
No one is talking about expanding arterial streets to address growth, but road diets are idiotic. Period.
BTW - the people who post at WS Blog (which is a great forum) are not exactly representative of West Seattle residents as a whole.
BTW - the people who post at WS Blog (which is a great forum) are not exactly representative of West Seattle residents as a whole.
12
i'm fully in favor of what Erica said. oh, and OMFG! i happen to live near where this is proposed in West Seattle.
don't get the idea that you speak for everyone, car-culture dimwits.
don't get the idea that you speak for everyone, car-culture dimwits.
13
elenchos, how do you feel about the 1/3 of the road is serving parked cars? Can't spare a sixth for moving vehicles?
14
"The "many" cyclists who use it to commute? As usual, Erica, you're a lying sack of shit. Bicyclists are estimated to be 5 percent of users."
Ivan, take a chill pill and brush up on the old "dictionary" skills. "Many" people can use something (i.e. Fauntleroy as a bike route) while still making up a "minority" of the population, i.e. 5% of the overall population.
Ivan, take a chill pill and brush up on the old "dictionary" skills. "Many" people can use something (i.e. Fauntleroy as a bike route) while still making up a "minority" of the population, i.e. 5% of the overall population.
16
@13
I think bicyclists should get about one percent. Maybe five percent, if we pretend that some day in the far future we will have as many bicyclists as Portland. I also have to say that the anger, aggression, and bottled up rage that I see from those who bike is not something I want more of. Biking on the road seems to work like yoga, except the opposite. Perhaps mixing bikes and cars is not healthy?
The more fundamental point is that bicycling is always going to be a tiny niche, 1/100th to 1/20th at most, and painting lanes is in only a cheap assed way for the city to avoid addressing the real, politically risky mass transit issues.
I think bicyclists should get about one percent. Maybe five percent, if we pretend that some day in the far future we will have as many bicyclists as Portland. I also have to say that the anger, aggression, and bottled up rage that I see from those who bike is not something I want more of. Biking on the road seems to work like yoga, except the opposite. Perhaps mixing bikes and cars is not healthy?
The more fundamental point is that bicycling is always going to be a tiny niche, 1/100th to 1/20th at most, and painting lanes is in only a cheap assed way for the city to avoid addressing the real, politically risky mass transit issues.
18
@ elenchos: You are so lucky you don't live in Crown Hill, Blue Ridge, Ballard or Magnolia, since the City handed over two of six lanes on 15th Avenue West south of the Ballard Bridge to buses, bicycles and right-hand turns (one-third of the road to perhaps one-one-millionth of the users). All of us northwesterners now have permanent smogalicious gridlock for four delightful rush hours every weekday.
19
Mr. X @ 11--
You don't live in West Seattle and I doubt you know what is representative of West Seattle now. It is not the Charlie Chong land it was ten years ago. Increasingly it is chock full of young professionals. Come out and visit sometime before you opine on what WE want.
Ivan @ 5--you only hate this proposal because you are perpetually running late to the ferry dock and need to drive 45 through my neighborhood. If you are driving the speed limit you have nothing to fear.
You don't live in West Seattle and I doubt you know what is representative of West Seattle now. It is not the Charlie Chong land it was ten years ago. Increasingly it is chock full of young professionals. Come out and visit sometime before you opine on what WE want.
Ivan @ 5--you only hate this proposal because you are perpetually running late to the ferry dock and need to drive 45 through my neighborhood. If you are driving the speed limit you have nothing to fear.
20
Haha #16, you mean "road rage" -- they actually have a term for it. Oh, wait, that refers to people driving in cars. I wonder why they have a terms for "anger, agression, and bottled up rage" in drivers, and not a term for this behavior in cyclists, when as #16 points out, it's really a problem with cyclists. Hmm, how odd!
21
If you encounter an inordinate amount of rage in cyclists then you should probably look yourself in the mirror. You're most likely a crappy driver.
22
The argument about percentages of users sure sounds valid. I guess there should be no bike lanes, anywhere.
And no handicapped access, to follow tha logic.
And what percentage of the population is gay? Less than 10%? What say should thay have?
And no handicapped access, to follow tha logic.
And what percentage of the population is gay? Less than 10%? What say should thay have?
23
Grrrrrrrrr! Sorry to get you all so worked up. I know it aggravates your bicycling-related PTSD and all. Think pink happy thoughts! Pink happy thoughts! Breathe in. Breathe out. Breathe in. Breathe out...
24
wow, you are a lying sack. While it is true that one lane in each direction of 15th Avenue West has been allocated to buses and bikes, THAT LANE USED TO BE FULL OF PARKED CARS!! Moreover, because the morons at SDOT FINALLY got around to timing the lights (something that has existed in Manhattan for the past 50 years!!!), traffic actually flows quite a bit faster in the bus/bike lane, even during rush hour. As for smog, you have absolutely now concept of smog unless you've spent time in LA in the 60s, or places like Shanghai Delhi, or Mexico City lately. So STFU about smog in Seattle.
25
This is going to be so popular when they destroy the Viaduct and take it out of action for 5-7 years.
Seriously.
Seriously.
26
I live very near Fauntleroy and I think all we need to do is add sharrows. I bike on that stretch of Fauntleroy frequently (for exercise not commuting) and it is a bad street to bike on because of being jammed between speeding cars on the left and parked cars on the right. I bike it because it is a nice flat straight shot from Morgan to Alaska and beats trapsing around through the side streets. I have seen sharrows on other similar "speedways" make drivers more aware of cyclists. I don't care if they slow down, just so long as they look out for bikes more and maybe change lanes instead of nearly clipping bikes.
27
@1: Anyone who has a point of view other than Erica's narrow one is "screaming" and "apoplectic." It's how she "wins" her arguments. Michelle Malkin does the same thing when she refers to leftist wingnuts.
28
when i ride my bike, i stay on the damn sidewalk, i'm scared of cars slipping for 1 sec and crippling me. i wish other cyclists acted the same, when i'm driving i'm terrified of hitting them and getting auto-blamed. keep the goddamn bikes off the road, for both side's safety
29
I'm all too amused reading all these debaters who Use and/or Know the stretch of road in question.
If you're on a bike, this scrap of road is utter shit. If you're on a bike and have spent five minutes considering parallel routes, you don't use it. Not just (or even primarily) because the pavement is miserable (that's going to be redone, along with the restriping), but because visibility is poor due to hills and winding turns, and because traffic is heavy, so if you're on a bike, you're breathing dust and exhaust for the whole mile (yes, you're debating a single mile of road, here, for those who have never driven or ridden on it).
Reducing the lanes and restriping will likely increase car/truck frequency, making dust, draft, and exhaust even worse for those few bikers too stupid to figure out alternate routes (though repaving will likely help with the dust, in the short term).
Those of us who actually enjoy cycling, can read a map, and can handle about three more yards of elevation in the mile will continue to use 41st, or other parallel routes.
Erica, along with the rest of the cyclists who want to go to the mat for these particular new bike lanes, are entirely welcome to keep riding over broken glass and huffing fumes along Fauntleroy.
If you're on a bike, this scrap of road is utter shit. If you're on a bike and have spent five minutes considering parallel routes, you don't use it. Not just (or even primarily) because the pavement is miserable (that's going to be redone, along with the restriping), but because visibility is poor due to hills and winding turns, and because traffic is heavy, so if you're on a bike, you're breathing dust and exhaust for the whole mile (yes, you're debating a single mile of road, here, for those who have never driven or ridden on it).
Reducing the lanes and restriping will likely increase car/truck frequency, making dust, draft, and exhaust even worse for those few bikers too stupid to figure out alternate routes (though repaving will likely help with the dust, in the short term).
Those of us who actually enjoy cycling, can read a map, and can handle about three more yards of elevation in the mile will continue to use 41st, or other parallel routes.
Erica, along with the rest of the cyclists who want to go to the mat for these particular new bike lanes, are entirely welcome to keep riding over broken glass and huffing fumes along Fauntleroy.
30
Westside @ 19:
I drive 35 on Fauntleroy, asshole, and have for the past 32 years. The surface is so fucked up it's unsafe to drive any faster.
Narrowing the street to one lane in each direction will make it impossible to pass the idiots on the road who insist on driving 5-10 miles UNDER the speed limit, whatever that speed limit is. That means people will be late for work whether they are in a SOV, a bus, a car pool, or a van pool.
What sense does that make? No sense at all. The population is growing and the roads are shrinking? Dumb. Beyond dumb. Let's hope we can drive a stake through the heart of this idiocy.
I drive 35 on Fauntleroy, asshole, and have for the past 32 years. The surface is so fucked up it's unsafe to drive any faster.
Narrowing the street to one lane in each direction will make it impossible to pass the idiots on the road who insist on driving 5-10 miles UNDER the speed limit, whatever that speed limit is. That means people will be late for work whether they are in a SOV, a bus, a car pool, or a van pool.
What sense does that make? No sense at all. The population is growing and the roads are shrinking? Dumb. Beyond dumb. Let's hope we can drive a stake through the heart of this idiocy.
31
Westside @ 19:
I drive 35 on Fauntleroy, asshole, and have for the past 32 years. The surface is so fucked up it's unsafe to drive any faster.
Narrowing the street to one lane in each direction will make it impossible to pass the idiots on the road who insist on driving 5-10 miles UNDER the speed limit, whatever that speed limit is. That means people will be late for work whether they are in a SOV, a bus, a car pool, or a van pool.
What sense does that make? No sense at all. The population is growing and the roads are shrinking? Dumb. Beyond dumb. Let's hope we can drive a stake through the heart of this idiocy.
I drive 35 on Fauntleroy, asshole, and have for the past 32 years. The surface is so fucked up it's unsafe to drive any faster.
Narrowing the street to one lane in each direction will make it impossible to pass the idiots on the road who insist on driving 5-10 miles UNDER the speed limit, whatever that speed limit is. That means people will be late for work whether they are in a SOV, a bus, a car pool, or a van pool.
What sense does that make? No sense at all. The population is growing and the roads are shrinking? Dumb. Beyond dumb. Let's hope we can drive a stake through the heart of this idiocy.
32
Everyone is so DUMB, aren't they, Ivan? Idiots! Idiots everywhere! Why don't they ever listen to a smart man like you, Ivan? Because they're all so dumb, that's why. Everybody. They whole world is full of dumb people and they're all here to piss off Ivan, all because he's the only smart one. Poor Ivan.
33
ASDF @ 28:
Go to the library and check out "Effective Cycling" by John Forester.
Or read this page:
http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health…
Bicycling on the sidewalk is *much* riskier than bicycling on the road.
Go to the library and check out "Effective Cycling" by John Forester.
Or read this page:
http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health…
Bicycling on the sidewalk is *much* riskier than bicycling on the road.
34
@28 - it may seem counterintuitive, but most experienced cyclists, as well as traffic studies, agree that cyclists are safer in the street than on a sidewalk.
The problem comes at intersections, where if you're riding a bike on the sidewalk, you're likely to be entering the intersections from a direction unexpected by motorists, at a greater speed than a pedestrian. It's far safer to be where motorists expect to see other traffic; on the roadway, travelling with traffic. Hit-from-behind crashes like the scenario you describe are much less common than other crashes where one person (driver or cyclist) didn't see the other while turning. Some details here.
35
Fauntleroy is what, 3 miles long? If you're late for work because of the extra 51.4 seconds it takes to drive 30 instead of 35 along that road, that's your problem, I think.
idiots on the road who insist on driving 5-10 miles UNDER the speed limit, whatever that speed limit is. That means people will be late for work whether they are in a SOV, a bus, a car pool, or a van pool.
Fauntleroy is what, 3 miles long? If you're late for work because of the extra 51.4 seconds it takes to drive 30 instead of 35 along that road, that's your problem, I think.
36
@19,
I rent band room space in West Seattle, and am out there at least 3-4 times a week. Most of my friends live in West Seattle, as they were priced out of Capitol Hill, etc. - and many of them are lifelong West Seattleites (which I suspect is more than you can say).
I will be rehearsing with 5-7 West Seattle residents tonight who would laugh in your face if you told them your views represent West Seattle (and a couple of them would probably literally hand your ass to you to boot for abusing the westside's good name).
West Seattle has indeed changed over the last 10 years, but your opinion re the AWV and making it hard for people to get around in cars for its own sake is by no means a majority one there. Not by a longshot.
I rent band room space in West Seattle, and am out there at least 3-4 times a week. Most of my friends live in West Seattle, as they were priced out of Capitol Hill, etc. - and many of them are lifelong West Seattleites (which I suspect is more than you can say).
I will be rehearsing with 5-7 West Seattle residents tonight who would laugh in your face if you told them your views represent West Seattle (and a couple of them would probably literally hand your ass to you to boot for abusing the westside's good name).
West Seattle has indeed changed over the last 10 years, but your opinion re the AWV and making it hard for people to get around in cars for its own sake is by no means a majority one there. Not by a longshot.
37
@24: Mud Baby, prior to the dedication of outside lanes on 15th Avenue West to buses and bicycles during rush hour, no parking was allowed in the outside lane during rush hour. Parking was and still is permitted during non-rush hours. The lights were synchronized prior to the resurfacing work but were taken off schedule during construction. Flow is much worse during rush hours than it was prior to the bus/bike lane dedication (which only makes sense--that's what happens when you force three lanes of traffic into two). And just because we're not at Mexico City levels doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying to prevent additional air pollution. In short, virtually everything you wrote is factually incorrect or nonsensical, yet you accuse me of lying and tell me to STFU. Wow.
38
Oh, and "westside" - West Seattle residents supported an elevated replacement of the AWV by over 60% last year.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transporta…
Yup, you've sure got your finger on the pulse of that community!
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transporta…
Yup, you've sure got your finger on the pulse of that community!
40
Road diets are good. We need to create incentives to get people into smaller vehicles, on mass transit, and bicycles. The way our roads are built creates an incentive to be in the biggest gas guzzling car possible and drive everywhere at high speed. It's fun and convenient when there is no one else on the road, but in the city, there are too many people and the environmental damage is too severe from that setup.
41
I walk that way to work everyday. And for the past few days, that walk has been over broken glass and car parts by the park there. I shouldn't have to dodge cyclists on the sidewalk. I'm all for a bike lane.
42
@40,
Road diets do none of that - very, very few people will be induced to ride bikes as a result, but the 95-plus percent of us who get around by car or bus will be unduly inconvenienced if this is implemented.
Greatest good for the greatest number, and all of that...
Road diets do none of that - very, very few people will be induced to ride bikes as a result, but the 95-plus percent of us who get around by car or bus will be unduly inconvenienced if this is implemented.
Greatest good for the greatest number, and all of that...
43
@19: I looked it up and got a primer on past politics, but "Charlie Chong land" sounds really racist, even though I guess you mean it's no longer a world of "angry populists"?
44
@42 getting you out of your car is the greatest good for the greatest number. And making it less convenient to drive a car and safer and more efficient to get around by bicycle, scooter, motorcyle, and mass transit goes hand in hand with road diets.
Get out of your car, for the sake of the greatest good, and all that...
Get out of your car, for the sake of the greatest good, and all that...
46
@44: Do you really think messages about "the greatest good" really influence people? If you want to change the world you have to show how it will benefit the individual.
47
@44,
"Road diets" only make roads efficient and safer for one set of users (and marginally, at that) - bicyclists.
You know, those 3 percenters?
"Road diets" only make roads efficient and safer for one set of users (and marginally, at that) - bicyclists.
You know, those 3 percenters?
50
...I'll grant that, though removing crosswalks citywide probably makes everything else the City is doing a net negative....
51
@43: It is not racist to use Charlie Chong's name simply because it is not of European extraction. Sheesh. He was elected to the City Council because he was apotheosis of West Seattle secessionist anger. It would in fact be racist to shy away from his connection to the issue merely because his name sounds funny to you.
52
Just saw this. Yet more discussion (I agree that the "apoplectic" is a little hyperbolic) ensued in our meatier followup the next day, in which we did Q/A with the guy who will make the final recommendation to SDOT brass:
http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=11898
Other followups ensued (we first reported this proposal 11 days ago) including the fact that Morgan Junction neighborhood stakeholders voted down a similar proposal while crafting their neighborhood plan in 1998.
http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=11898
Other followups ensued (we first reported this proposal 11 days ago) including the fact that Morgan Junction neighborhood stakeholders voted down a similar proposal while crafting their neighborhood plan in 1998.
53
@51: I simply meant that should could have phrased that much much better. "Charlie Chong Land" sounds a little odd to people who aren't in the know.
"It's no longer prone to the same Charlie Chong style politics it was years ago." Would have been much better.
Also, anyone who references "young professionals" automatically sounds like a gentrifying douche.
No offense.
"It's no longer prone to the same Charlie Chong style politics it was years ago." Would have been much better.
Also, anyone who references "young professionals" automatically sounds like a gentrifying douche.
No offense.
54
@ 53
I certainly didn't mean to offend, I was simply referring to a popular, and populist, school of thought represented by the late West Seattleite Charlie Chong. One that many Northenders who never visit still believe is the predominant school of thought out here.
But, hey, editing on blog posts is somewhat futile. Reread your own last post and tell me if it makes grammatical sense.
I will have to ponder the phrase "gentrifying douche". For someone so upset by my choice of words it seems a little out of character. I was merely pointing out that more and more young couples are moving to WS. Visit any grocery store or restaurant and look around and you will see them.
I certainly didn't mean to offend, I was simply referring to a popular, and populist, school of thought represented by the late West Seattleite Charlie Chong. One that many Northenders who never visit still believe is the predominant school of thought out here.
But, hey, editing on blog posts is somewhat futile. Reread your own last post and tell me if it makes grammatical sense.
I will have to ponder the phrase "gentrifying douche". For someone so upset by my choice of words it seems a little out of character. I was merely pointing out that more and more young couples are moving to WS. Visit any grocery store or restaurant and look around and you will see them.
55
Mr. X @ 36 & 38:
I am not sure how you got on the elevated subject--I didn't bring it up here.
You drive out to West Seattle four times a week and most of your friends live there? Hey, Mr. X--you could move here and save time and gas...
I have lived here for 15 years, some of my family for almost 50. Unlike you, apparently, I have all kinds of West Seattle friends. Crazy retrofit people, elevated lovers, tunnel advocates, and surface optioneers.
To illustrate the West Seattle vote you trumpet a ballot measure in March with two goofy vague choices and only 20% of the electorate voting. Special elections like this typically skew older and more conservative. Perhaps that is who your friends are.
I am not sure how you got on the elevated subject--I didn't bring it up here.
You drive out to West Seattle four times a week and most of your friends live there? Hey, Mr. X--you could move here and save time and gas...
I have lived here for 15 years, some of my family for almost 50. Unlike you, apparently, I have all kinds of West Seattle friends. Crazy retrofit people, elevated lovers, tunnel advocates, and surface optioneers.
To illustrate the West Seattle vote you trumpet a ballot measure in March with two goofy vague choices and only 20% of the electorate voting. Special elections like this typically skew older and more conservative. Perhaps that is who your friends are.
56
Mr X @ 47
Road diets are safer for cars as well as pedestrians and bikers. The idea is a complete street that works for bikes, pedestrians, the neighborhood, and CARS. Not just a street that works for people who drive everywhere. Here are a few links:
http://www.smartgrowthonlineaudio.org/np…
http://egov.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/do…
Road diets are safer for cars as well as pedestrians and bikers. The idea is a complete street that works for bikes, pedestrians, the neighborhood, and CARS. Not just a street that works for people who drive everywhere. Here are a few links:
http://www.smartgrowthonlineaudio.org/np…
http://egov.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/do…
57
One last comment for now--IT IS JUST PAINT. If we tried this and it didn't work, we could just go back to the way it is now. There is no risk to this at all.
58
westside: The phrase "young professionals" has a lot of baggage attached to it. I've seen many a condo ad that says "perfect for young professionals." "Young families" might have been a better choice of words or even "younger people."
But, you're right, criticizing grammar on blogs is a waste of time. Mine generally stinks.
You couldn't pay me to live in West Seattle -- and I was briefly paid to live there, so I can say this with some authority. It just feels so remote and suburban.
But, you're right, criticizing grammar on blogs is a waste of time. Mine generally stinks.
You couldn't pay me to live in West Seattle -- and I was briefly paid to live there, so I can say this with some authority. It just feels so remote and suburban.
59
@33, 34
well the bikers should actually stop at intersections while on the sidewalk, thats what i do. i dont cross til it's safe, it doesnt matter who has the fucking right of way if it isnt safe
i guess i'm too common sense for most people
well the bikers should actually stop at intersections while on the sidewalk, thats what i do. i dont cross til it's safe, it doesnt matter who has the fucking right of way if it isnt safe
i guess i'm too common sense for most people
60
@55-56,
We wound up on the elevated replacement for the AWV because I was pointing out that you were just as out-of-touch with the average West Seattle resident on that issue in very recent SLOG post as you are on popular support for a so-called "road diet" on Fauntleroy.
With regard to the casting aspersions part of your post, I most recently didn't move back to West Seattle because I work in NE Seattle and getting to and from WS is hard enough even with the AWV up and running, let alone if it is torn down and not replaced. (Oddly enough, one of the few other band members at tonight's rehearsal who doesn't live in WS was talking - unsolicited by me - about how he and his wife were considering moving to WS from Phinney Ridge because so many of their friends live there, but that they probably wouldn't just for this reason.)
My West Seattle friends (and yeah, there are dozens and dozens of them) are mostly between their mid 20's to their mid 40's. Some have lived in West Seattle for all of their lives, but a lot of them have moved there much more recently (including more than a few couples, some with kids). For the most part, they are blue collar working-class folks, musicians, artists, teachers, government employees, contractors, developers, and - yes - even "young professionals." So you just keep on telling yourself that your view is the majority one in West Seattle, Mr. "westside."
Back on topic, the more interesting question is whether SDOT will change their Fauntleroy plans in the face of significant public opposition if that emerges at the Monday hearing or in written comments to the Council (this is a funny thing about the public process - it is at least theoretically supposed to have a significant influence on the outcome).
If SDOT's recent initiative to impose paid parking and a new RPZ in Fremont over massive public opposition is any indication, I wouldn't hold my breath on public comment that raises questions or concerns making much - if any - difference in this project, either.
More...
We wound up on the elevated replacement for the AWV because I was pointing out that you were just as out-of-touch with the average West Seattle resident on that issue in very recent SLOG post as you are on popular support for a so-called "road diet" on Fauntleroy.
With regard to the casting aspersions part of your post, I most recently didn't move back to West Seattle because I work in NE Seattle and getting to and from WS is hard enough even with the AWV up and running, let alone if it is torn down and not replaced. (Oddly enough, one of the few other band members at tonight's rehearsal who doesn't live in WS was talking - unsolicited by me - about how he and his wife were considering moving to WS from Phinney Ridge because so many of their friends live there, but that they probably wouldn't just for this reason.)
My West Seattle friends (and yeah, there are dozens and dozens of them) are mostly between their mid 20's to their mid 40's. Some have lived in West Seattle for all of their lives, but a lot of them have moved there much more recently (including more than a few couples, some with kids). For the most part, they are blue collar working-class folks, musicians, artists, teachers, government employees, contractors, developers, and - yes - even "young professionals." So you just keep on telling yourself that your view is the majority one in West Seattle, Mr. "westside."
Back on topic, the more interesting question is whether SDOT will change their Fauntleroy plans in the face of significant public opposition if that emerges at the Monday hearing or in written comments to the Council (this is a funny thing about the public process - it is at least theoretically supposed to have a significant influence on the outcome).
If SDOT's recent initiative to impose paid parking and a new RPZ in Fremont over massive public opposition is any indication, I wouldn't hold my breath on public comment that raises questions or concerns making much - if any - difference in this project, either.
61
...oh, and at the risk of being presumptuous let me guess, you and everyone in your West Seattle social circle thinks that instituting paid parking in the Junction is a great idea too, right?
62
Hey Mr. X--you have taken great pains to prove yourself more West Seattle than me. You win Mr. U-District guy, you truly are more "westside".
I never claimed to represent the majority view in West Seattle. My only claim was that there are an increasing diversity of opinions on the viaduct and on restriping Fauntleroy in West Seattle. My hope would be that the city listens to all opinions. If you are right and the public opposes this change, so be it.
You are the one with the bullying monolithic view of what is best for West Seattle. I am merely adding my voice to the debate.
I never claimed to represent the majority view in West Seattle. My only claim was that there are an increasing diversity of opinions on the viaduct and on restriping Fauntleroy in West Seattle. My hope would be that the city listens to all opinions. If you are right and the public opposes this change, so be it.
You are the one with the bullying monolithic view of what is best for West Seattle. I am merely adding my voice to the debate.
63
I certainly agree there is a diversity of opinion in WS.
It might behoove you to recall that you're the one who started this argument when you essentially told me to STFU, because I obviously can't know anything about WS since I don't currently live there.
See you on the next thread....
It might behoove you to recall that you're the one who started this argument when you essentially told me to STFU, because I obviously can't know anything about WS since I don't currently live there.
See you on the next thread....
64
Although it is counter-intuitive, the logic behind a road diet is sound. On the surface, it would seem that removing half the lanes would double the congestion, but this would only be true if the lanes were 100% utilized all the time. Although this may be true for some streets, it has been shown that road diets can be successful on streets carrying up to 20,000 vehicles per day. The affected area sees between 9,000-10,000 vehicles per week day—well under this limit.
By providing the left turn lane, conflicts between thru traffic and turns is eliminated—improving flow. Providing more maneuvering room for bicycles allows vehicles to pass safely without having to change lanes. Pedestrians only have to deal with two lanes of thru traffic instead of four. Traffic flow is more uniform and speeding is reduced.
The current four lane configuration may be good for motorists, but if we can improve conditions for pedestrians, bicyclist and the neighborhood (reduced speeding through the area) without significant adverse affect on traffic why not do it?
To those of you asserting that there is no justification for improving conditions for bicyclists--motor vehicles do not have a superior right to the road in Washington. Where they are allowed (and they ARE allowed on Fauntleroy regardless of whether bike lanes are added), bicycles have the same right to travel in the rightmost thru lane as a car and can take as much of the lane as needed to be safe.
By providing the left turn lane, conflicts between thru traffic and turns is eliminated—improving flow. Providing more maneuvering room for bicycles allows vehicles to pass safely without having to change lanes. Pedestrians only have to deal with two lanes of thru traffic instead of four. Traffic flow is more uniform and speeding is reduced.
The current four lane configuration may be good for motorists, but if we can improve conditions for pedestrians, bicyclist and the neighborhood (reduced speeding through the area) without significant adverse affect on traffic why not do it?
To those of you asserting that there is no justification for improving conditions for bicyclists--motor vehicles do not have a superior right to the road in Washington. Where they are allowed (and they ARE allowed on Fauntleroy regardless of whether bike lanes are added), bicycles have the same right to travel in the rightmost thru lane as a car and can take as much of the lane as needed to be safe.
65
I stand corrected. After I thought I'd done my research I found information that shows the flow to be about 18,000-19,000/day (still < 20,000 but close to the limit). I still think a road diet can be successful on the street. Sorry about the mistake.
66
Mr. X--fair enough. I don't think I told you to STFU, but my tone could have been more inclusive. Have a Happy Thanksgiving and I will see you on future threads.
BTW--where the hell is Ivan? He hasn't called anybody an asshole for days now...
BTW--where the hell is Ivan? He hasn't called anybody an asshole for days now...
68
I don't have to call anybody an asshole -- even when it fits -- to point out that all projections for this area show more, not fewer, people will be living here over the next 10-20 years and more, not fewer, cars will be using this arterial.
That means more apartments. more condos, more people, more buses, and -- whether anyone likes it or not -- more cars, and more trucks to deliver goods and services to all those additional residents and employees.
Washington State Ferries has already said the Southworth ferry traffic will NOT be going downtown to Colman Dock, and that instead one dedicated ferry will connect Southworth with Fauntleroy. That means an entire ferry will be discharging Kitsap County cars and vanpools onto Fauntleroy Way SW.
Does anyone want to bring back the Monorail? I sure as hell do, and I curse every son of a bitch who scuttled it. But until such time, let's not pretend that this magic, sacrosanct 20,000-vehicle figure won't be blown sky-high pretty damn quick on Fauntleroy. If a "road diet" doesn't being intolerable delays immediately, it will bring them pretty damn soon thereafter.
It's a dumb, irresponsible plan. It should die a quick, unmerciful death, with extreme prejudice.
That means more apartments. more condos, more people, more buses, and -- whether anyone likes it or not -- more cars, and more trucks to deliver goods and services to all those additional residents and employees.
Washington State Ferries has already said the Southworth ferry traffic will NOT be going downtown to Colman Dock, and that instead one dedicated ferry will connect Southworth with Fauntleroy. That means an entire ferry will be discharging Kitsap County cars and vanpools onto Fauntleroy Way SW.
Does anyone want to bring back the Monorail? I sure as hell do, and I curse every son of a bitch who scuttled it. But until such time, let's not pretend that this magic, sacrosanct 20,000-vehicle figure won't be blown sky-high pretty damn quick on Fauntleroy. If a "road diet" doesn't being intolerable delays immediately, it will bring them pretty damn soon thereafter.
It's a dumb, irresponsible plan. It should die a quick, unmerciful death, with extreme prejudice.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Whitney Is Dead, And So Is Hollywood by Kelly O
-
Planned Parenthood Exposed! by David Schmader
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (68) RSS