WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE TRAFFIC: Newest recommendations for better ‘management’

It started in 2014 with the West Seattle Transportation Coalition‘s list of priorities. In January 2015, when then-City Councilmember (and West Seattle resident) Tom Rasmussen chaired the council’s Transportation Committee, he announced a West Seattle Bridge Corridor Management Task Force; in September 2015, he presented a “whitepaper” with recommendations.

Some have been put into place.

Last year, the council got a progress report, and asked SDOT to study four possibilities for addressing congestion factors, as noted in the last paragraph of District 1 City Councilmember Lisa Herbold‘s update here.

Now, the results of that request are out, in the form of SDOT’s “West Seattle Bridge Corridor Congestion Management Study,” made public by Councilmember Herbold. (If you can’t read it in the embedded version above, here it is in PDF.)

It addresses goals for the upper bridge and lower roadway – not just the low bridge, but the entirety of lower Spokane Street all the way east to Airport Way.

For the upper bridge, the goal is to reduce crashes, improve responding times when they do occur, and “improve operations capability on alternate routes.” The report says 50 crashes happen each year, on average, on the upper bridge.

For the lower corridor, the goal is to “manage a roadway that experiences frequent and unpredictable disruptions as the ‘normal’ operating condition,” and managing truck queues on Spokane St. The report notes averages of five 12-minute low-bridge openings each day. The report notes the “federal mandate” for maritime traffic to maintain priority and does not recommend “restricted opening hours” for the bridge. (However, the recommended Duwamish Waterway User Group might discuss voluntary limits, the report says.)

Also noted: A daily average of 67 train crossings between 1st and 4th on Spokane. And it acknowledges the low bridge/roadway as “the only pedestrian and bicycle train connection” between West Seattle and SODO, with connections to downtown.

The recommendations, in descending order of their estimated costs:

*Enhance alternative routes (to change traffic flow during incidents) via ITS – $6.6 million
*Smart traffic signals and ITS for Spokane St. – $6 million
*Active Traffic Management System on the high bridge – $5.4 million
*Construct Refuge Pullouts – $2.5 million for one, $5 million for two
*Swing Bridge Delay Information System – $950,000
*24/7 traffic-operations center for SDOT to get information out – $875,000
*Rail Crossing Delay Information System – $600,000
*Raised pavement/striping – $250,000
*Establish Duwamish Waterway User Group ($0)
*Terminal 5 Queue Management System and Port/City agreement to ban truck backups on Spokane St. ($0)

The Active Traffic Management System would include “overhead signs capable of posting advisory speeds, variable speed limits, and warning messages approaching backups or queues at targeted locations. … This would be similar to the system installed on I-5.”

Refuge Pullouts would be spots where responders could “push disabled vehicles or vehicles involved in collisions … to restore traffic in the corridor.”

The Swing Bridge Delay Information System and Rail Crossing Delay Information System would involve adding cameras and messaging signs that would include countdowns for how much longer conditions might last.

Not recommended: “Median gates” that could be used to facilitate U-turns on the high bridge if a serious incident led to a blockage. They wouldn’t improve response times or safety. Also not recommended, striping a “fire lane” on the high bridge; this is a longrunning practice in New York City but those researching for the West Seattle Bridge Corridor Report were told they weren’t a good idea for various reasons.

The study includes an extensive discussion of what might happen when “modernized” Terminal 5 reopens, regarding truck backups. We’ll take a look at that in a separate report. Meantime, Councilmember Herbold says that regarding the suggested actions, “I’ll be looking for ways to work with SDOT to implement these recommendations.”

41 Replies to "WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE TRAFFIC: Newest recommendations for better 'management'"

  • Dave April 29, 2017 (3:23 am)

    Here is an idea light rail before 2030

    can anyone imagine what the bridge will be like in 5  years  let  alone 15

    the report is analogous to moving the chairs around the titanic, what we need is a new way to move people through to their endpoint 

  • WS Guy April 29, 2017 (3:33 am)

    Is this a joke?  How much did this study cost?

    There is a traffic problem because they are the only two bridges off of the peninsula, which has added like 10,000 new households in the last three years.  It does not take a research project to know that.  And their solution is… $20M for signs?  To tell us the bridge is crowded?

    How about:

    – allowing space for a job center on the peninsula

    – building another bridge, i.e. ST3

    – restoring the bus services that the C-Line killed

    – simply having enough C-Line buses

    – encouraging new ride sharing services like Scoop

    – building a safe park and ride on the west side of the bridge

    – encouraging direct-to-campus bus routes from employers

    • Pelicans April 29, 2017 (9:17 am)

      WS Guy, Really like your ideas, especially a park and ride on the west end of the bridge, and a work center for people who are able to telecommute, or work remotely for their jobs. Sometimes working from home has too many distractions, or a self employed person might need a ready-made workspace. The federal gov’t allows people to work from home here, at least part of the time. One more suggestion, look at expanding water routes into Seattle. There were many local ferries at the turn of the 20th century, and it’s still a good idea. The passenger ferry from Kingston to Seattle didn’t do so well a few years ago, but now that so many are priced out of Seattle, it might work. There used to be a run from Des Moines to Seattle in the 20’s (?), I think. The San Fran/Bay area has many smaller passenger ferries, and they have a wierd geography to deal with, just as we do. A co-worker’s commute from Ballard in the late afternoons to the Seattle waterfront (total distance 8 miles) can range from average 45-50 minutes to 2+ hours. During Husky football season, Argosy Cruises runs the Goodtime tour boat from Pier 56 up through the locks to the stadium and back, taking fans who don’t want to suffer in traffic. There are many good ideas out there. The city just needs to seriously look at all of them.

    • Mark32 April 29, 2017 (5:39 pm)

      WS Guy

      Someone that thinks! How much money is wasted on stupid things like this?

      Please run for mayor.

       

      • CMT April 30, 2017 (6:29 am)

        Agreed – WS Guy for mayor!

    • j April 30, 2017 (11:01 am)

      There IS a park and ride on the WEST side of the bridge from Harbor Ave to the Chelan Cafe on Spokane St.

  • Question April 29, 2017 (6:25 am)

    How about we use the infrastructure we already have. And move the barricade on the west seattle bridge thus creating an additional lane every morning like they do on the h-1 in Hawaii. The traffic into west seattle in the morning is none existent. They could easily do it and have the extra lane exit onto first. But that would require politicians in Seattle actually wanting to help traffic move. 

    • Pelicans April 29, 2017 (9:22 am)

      This is a kind of a “zipper” thing, and I’ve seen it before, too. A special vehicle moves the barriers every day. Maybe one or two lanes in the morning to WS, and the opposite in the evenings.

      • WSB April 29, 2017 (9:24 am)

        We have asked about that before; I’ll try to dig up a link. Short answer was basically “no, can’t do that.”

        • Question April 29, 2017 (12:29 pm)

          Of course they said that. 

          • Alex April 29, 2017 (9:52 pm)

            There would be no point in adding lanes to the bridge itself, the bridge is already quite wide both directions. The bottleneck is at the end of the bridge, the i5 N on-ramp. As long as we have just the one ramp to i5 and it’s always backed up, there’s nowhere for the cars lining up on the bridge to go. 

            I fear this this will only get worse when we tear down the 99 viaduct

  • Gene April 29, 2017 (7:08 am)

    WSGuy- are you nuts????–those things you mention would require common sense- practically non existent in anything the city does anymore. Sure wish you had been part of this ” task force”  study. 

  • Azimuth April 29, 2017 (8:05 am)

    The root problem, with morning traffic at least, is in I5 and 99 outside of W Seattle. 

    • Alex April 29, 2017 (9:56 pm)

      I think you can trace a line from where I5 N chokes down to two lanes as it enters downtown, all the way back to the onramp from the w seattle bridge, and over to the arterials leaving w seattle. 

      There is nothing wrong with the bridge design itself, it’s the lack of anywhere for cars on the bridge to exit that isn’t stop-and-go traffic. I say we try to fix I5 through downtown.

  • chemist April 29, 2017 (9:11 am)

    I was hoping for some quick fixes such as the city’s tow contractor stationing at least one tow truck on the West side of the bridge in the mornings and keeping it available to clear bridge incidents from 6-9 AM.

    • WSB April 29, 2017 (9:22 am)

      It’s a 33-page report so there are a LOT of details beyond our summary, but we did take some time to go through it rather than just posting a link. See page 3 for what’s already been done – it mentions SDOT is procuring more incident-response vehicles. Not the same as tow trucks (which have been pre-stationed in limited circumstances in the past) but could be helpful. The last tow truck for the NB 99 incident on Thursday morning seemed to take quite some time … – TR

  • KT April 29, 2017 (9:19 am)

    Yet another Seattle Task Force that solves nothing.  A feel good exercise period.  

  • JRR April 29, 2017 (9:21 am)

    I’m surprised at how many of my neighbors are urban planners, highway engineers and otherwise experts at how to solve these issues. Oh wait. Maybe you’re not and should be glad we have people who make moving us around their life’s work. 

    • Question April 29, 2017 (12:59 pm)

      Completely agree. Nothing has ever happened to make Seattle residents question SDOT. Because those experts would clearly handle a situation “expertly.” Like if say a truck carrying fish tipped over right next to a piece of equipment that could have pulled it off the road and into an area that was vacant due to construction. They would clear that area in about twenty minutes. They would handle a situation like that with such expertise that it would give every one  of their taxpayers the belief in their unqualified abilities. 

      • JRR April 29, 2017 (4:29 pm)

        One dumb and weird thing that was totally mismanaged doesn’t mean there is no one competent at SDOT.

        • Question Authority April 29, 2017 (9:49 pm)

          It’s certainly not Paul “Snowplow” Jackson.   That’s a Google search you won’t forget. 

          • Question Authority April 30, 2017 (12:14 pm)

            Make that (Paul Jackson SDOT,) for a level of dysfunction not tolerated elsewhere.

  • Eddie April 29, 2017 (9:46 am)

    Improve the flow onto northbound I5.

    • J April 29, 2017 (12:31 pm)

      This is the biggest issue. The 1-lane wait near the i-5 north onramp clogs the entire bridge up 

  • flimflam April 29, 2017 (10:07 am)

    the traffic problems are a direct result of too much development, the speed of the development and the lack of forethought as to what the consequences may be. all the “density” and re-zoning advocates couldn’t see this coming?

  • Sigh April 29, 2017 (10:37 am)

    There is already a park’n’ride in West Seattle, it’s called every side street within three blocks of Easy Street. Good luck trying to find a spot on your block from 8-6. The time for restricted residential​ permit parking has come.

    • Dave II April 29, 2017 (11:55 am)

      Park and ride, lol. I agree about RPZs. 

    • West Seattle since 1979 April 29, 2017 (8:09 pm)

      Haha, yeah or any street 3 blocks or fewer from a bus stop!

  • George T. April 29, 2017 (11:14 am)

    Are the developers who build the massive apartment buildings required to contribute funds to help manage increased traffic congestion? Or are they only required to provide a certain amount of parking slots for residents and shoppers? 

    Yes, ST3 cannot happen soon enough. And replacing those Junction parking lots with parking garages badly needed. 

    • Dave II April 29, 2017 (11:53 am)

      I don’t think they are. The city gave developers many sweet deals to encourage building during the economic downturn. Many, if not all, are still in place, like no or limited off street parking. It’s expensive to build parking plus that space could be used for dwellings. Not saying I agree but just relaying the mentality of the city. Good idea to turn the parking lots into garages.

  • Dave II April 29, 2017 (11:49 am)

    ST3 would be good for the area but it won’t help congestion, at least not long term. Reason being (more) people will choose to live in WS because there is mass transit available.

  • Mr. B April 29, 2017 (12:30 pm)

    I like the zipper idea, but the problem remains the bottleneck chokepoint at I-5 North onramp.

  • Mark Schletty April 29, 2017 (2:16 pm)

    This worthless proposal should come as no surprize. SDOT does not want to improve traffic flow, or to reduce congestion. Simply looking at what they have done establishes that. If, like 98% of us, you can’t, or won’t, ride a bike you aren’t supossed to live in Seattle anymore. The totally inadequate mass transit system is no real alternative for most of us either.

  • Raye April 29, 2017 (4:16 pm)

    Some really intelligent suggestions here, but I have to echo Flimflam’s comment:

    the traffic problems are a direct result of too much development, the speed of the development and the lack of forethought as to what the consequences may be. all the “density” and re-zoning advocates couldn’t see this coming?

    • AMD April 29, 2017 (8:26 pm)

      There was a chance to build regional mass transit decades ago–AHEAD of the development.  And it was rejected.  So now we’re dealing with the consequences of then-voters’ lack of foresight and playing catch-up with our infrastructure.

      Growth and development are good things for cities, you just need infrastructure to support people. 

  • Diane McCasland April 29, 2017 (8:18 pm)

    I find it interesting that no one has addressed the very annoying clogging of the lane to I-5 South that gets blocked everyday on the West Seattle Freeway with people rudely merging far down from where they should be and just stopping traffic for many minutes everyday. I think there should be those white 4 foot tube barriers going down the lane dividing the I-5 N traffic from the Columbia Way/I-5 South like they have downtown on Olive way going towards I-5 South. 

  • Mark April 29, 2017 (10:48 pm)

    P and R opportunities are needed.  Beacon Hill street parking near the Light Rail is only 30% occupied during the day.  Failure to provide options that include a car is a part of the problem.  The City is so focussed on bike lanes, I am a rider (but not in the winter), that it has failed the majority of transportation users.

    Maybe adding a lane on NB SR 5 from the WSB to SR 90 to help reduce congestion.

  • Chris Cowman April 30, 2017 (6:59 am)

    Self driving cars but half the width of current cars.   We could double the capacity of all roads.   

  • Artsea April 30, 2017 (7:10 am)

    The answer to the W.S. Bridge problem is what the city is pushing to have happen.  Give up our cars and only use public transportation.  They’ve stated that often enough over the past ten or so years.  It’s one of the main reasons for the Urban Villages concept.  

    • Cmt April 30, 2017 (3:22 pm)

      Those of us that use public transportation know that it is woefully inadequate for the existing density.  At the same time, the City is pushing to massively increase WS density (HALA) without any commitment to improve transit (they will be eliminating routes downtown).  Neighborhoods  were supposed to receive infrastructure and amenities, i.e., library, community center, actual park, in exchange for becoming an urban village.  All of the burdens, none of the promised benefits.

  • Mamasuze May 1, 2017 (10:21 pm)

    Whoever decided that all the traffic from West Seattle, Beacon Hill and truck traffic from Spokane Street should merge into ONE lane to get on I5 north, should have lost their job for just coming UP with the idea. Oh, and the lane they merge into is the exit only lane for I 90.  Nice one.Doesn’t anyone have some common sense at City Hall?

Sorry, comment time is over.