Fauntleroy “rechannelization”: Answers promised, next week

Thanks to Chas Redmond for forwarding the city e-mail that’s apparently gone out to all 120-plus people who signed in at Monday night’s open house about the Fauntleroy “rechannelization” proposal (to be done during next year’s repaving). The e-mail, which is officially from SDOT’s Peter Lagerwey via walkandbike@seattle.gov – the address to use, as we’ve mentioned, for feedback – promises answers next week to questions raised at the event (WSB coverage here):

We heard support for re-paving the street, reducing speeds, improving pedestrian crossings and installing new bicycle facilities. We also heard concerns about possible congestion, diversion of traffic and lack of enforcement. As soon as we compile comments, we will respond to questions in writing to the group. We will have this work completed by the end of next week, December 12.

All comments will be taken into account as we move forward on a lane configuration decision by the end of the year. We will provide an update once a decision has been made.

The project website mentioned on Monday night handouts still isn’t up; we’ll check today on a timeline for that. As mentioned that night, the timeline for the “rechannelization” would be during the May-October 2009 period set for the repaving. 2:07 PM UPDATE: As Allie points out in comments, the webpage is now live, with some basics about the repaving project but not much on the “rechannelization” proposal; there’s also a spot to subscribe to e-mail bulletins about SDOT paving projects.

BGH December 3, 2008 (11:20 am)

I would like to know about the Prost opening yesterday. That should be news #1 before Fauntleroy and the schools.

WSB December 3, 2008 (11:30 am)

Check the forums – “Thee” went on day 1 so he provided the first report. We went at 3 pm yesterday when they were supposed to open – they were still setting up and told us to come back in a few hours – we had to go cover other stuff so we’re going back today! – TR

Allie December 3, 2008 (2:02 pm)

Sorry for the delay folks – the project page went online around 11:30am today. It’s a bit thin at the moment. My understanding is that more info will be added soon.

http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/fauntleroy_pave.htm

MB December 3, 2008 (3:07 pm)

Am I the only one who thinks a bike lane in between 2 car lanes is rediculous??

Westwood Resident December 3, 2008 (4:05 pm)

The bike lane isn’t between two car lanes, it goes:
parking…
bike lane…
one car lane…
left turn lane…
one car lane…
bike lane…
parking.

marty December 3, 2008 (4:29 pm)

I only see one area that will be a problem, eastbound at the California/Morgan intersection after a ferry lands. Now there are two lanes for the surge, then there will only be one. This will cause traffic to back up several blocks. It won’t take savvy commuters long to learn that turning off of Fauntleroy ave near Gatewood School and then going down California ave. will avoid the mess. Great idea, but it will only spread the problem and increase traffic on residential streets.

Bill Reiswig December 3, 2008 (5:11 pm)

I’m all for this…

Dedicated bike lanes are good. If the car companies don’t have electric vehicles available soon fate will likely dictate that we have fewer cars anyhow.

Not to mention that with a dedicated turn lane, the car traffic will move as fast as it currently does anyhow.

Ron December 3, 2008 (9:36 pm)

If the people of West Seattle allow this to happen, they deserve the consequences of more congestion. Do any of you really think traffic will move as quickly with one lane each way as two? I hope the people pushing this choke on exhaust fumes. Watch out West Seattle the people with the eliminate all private autos agenda will move next to do the same on 35th. These people don’t really care about bikes, they just want you to get so sick of congestion you will sell your car and ride the bus. Do say, “nobody ever mentioned this”.

MB December 3, 2008 (10:23 pm)

Ah, now I see. The tiny picture was misleading at first. Makes way more sense after a closer look. Nevermind :)

BB_10 December 4, 2008 (2:38 am)

This is a great idea. Try to make a left turn onto Fauntleroy from Dawson, Brandon, etc., during rush hour and you can never catch a break. You are also fairly blind if there are cars parked immediately near. Having a center turn lane will be a lot safer and easier.

mar3c December 4, 2008 (8:05 am)

the left turn lane also reduces the likelihood of rear-end collisions. one of my worst fears is that someone behind me isn’t paying attention. plus, i can almost feel the fury of drivers waiting behind me.
.
hey, ron: do you live along fauntleroy? or just use it as a thoroughfare?
.
don’t be paranoid; no one wants to eliminate cars and supplant them with those icons of creeping european socialism: cycling and bus-riding. we are, however, tired of living by what is turning into a dangerous, lawless freeway with no enforcement. we’re having our say; you’re having yours. someone is going to feel wronged.
.
i still haven’t heard an answer to why the rest of fauntleroy from california to the dock isn’t already the fuming, crawling bottleneck that the naysayers envision for the rechannelized portion.

Aaron December 4, 2008 (1:49 pm)

Ha! Excellent point. The entire stretch west of California is already one lane in each direction. Is there traffic when a ferry arrives? Hell yes. Good luck avoiding that with more lanes…that works wonders down on the waterfront.

I hope they do reduce 35th to one lane next. I drove past 3 cyclists last night (after riding my bike home) on 35th. What a hellish street to ride a bike on.

I’ve got an idea: let’s NOT take the opportunity to be a more progressive neighborhood in this city. Make more room for cars, not other methods of transportation. Screw those other people that don’t have cars, right? Single occupancy and more roads are the solutions to our problems. While we’re at it, let’s fight to NOT have the monorail built in our neighborhood, or any of those childish skateparks.

Oh wait…

ivan December 4, 2008 (2:18 pm)

mar3c:

There are several good reasons why “the rest of Fauntleroy from California to the dock isn’t already the fuming, crawling bottleneck that the naysayers envision for the rechannelized portion.”
–
#1, this stretch of highway southbound is used mostly by ferry traffic. By the time you get west of California, most other traffic has dispersed to other destinations.
–
#2, The ferry traffic has a dedicated lane in which to line up, freeing the traffic lane.
–
#3, Parking is forbidden in this lane during rush hour.
–
#4, Northbound is a hell hole. They have reduced the speed limit to 30 both ways west of California anyway. I’m not opposed to this. In fact, I favor it because of the Lincoln Park pedestrian traffic and the Gatewood Elementary school zone. But it takes a full five minutes sometime to get from the dock to California, and that just plain sucks.
–
#5, I’ll tell you where the unwanted impact will be. It will be on Barton Av SW, which will get all the traffic that will head for 35th, where at least there are two northbound lanes.
–
This is IMO a grossly irresponsible plan. But I have given up hope for the outcome that I favor.

grr December 4, 2008 (2:42 pm)

grossly irresponsible is an understatement.

ivan December 4, 2008 (3:52 pm)

Sorry, I meant SW Barton St, not Barton Av SW. I’m sure the increased traffic there will just thrill the parents who will be dropping off their small kids at the day care center at the Hall at Fauntleroy.
–
They can thank SDOT (Slow Down Our Traffic) for the hassles that they are certain to face.

Ron December 4, 2008 (11:18 pm)

To begin with, you people who live on Fauntleroy complaining about the traffic must have noticed it before you bought or rented on that street so you made the choice. Next read the article about the State Ferry System planning on increasing the size of the Ferry Dock to handle more commuter traffic from Southworth that was previously planned for Colman Dock. And finally, if you bike riders want special lanes and considerations, then why don’t you start paying your way with annual tabs. When I owned a trailerable boat, I payed yearly license fees for the boat and separate fee for the trailer and $5.00 every time I launched. They never used the Park Bond to fix the dock that was always broke because they were busy building free bike paths for you free loaders. Now they want to take away two traffic lanes to make you jokers happy. What’s wrong with 40th SW for bikes, you have most of the street there. When it finally takes 30 minutes to get out of West Seattle, don’t say nobody told you. I live far enough South so I can go through White Center if i have to, but most of you won’t have a choice so wake up. Maybe you will decide Ron wasn’t paranoid after all.

mar3c December 5, 2008 (6:43 am)

since i’ve lived here, the traffic has gotten faster, and road conditions have deteriorated. once you see the twice-yearly car wreck at any given intersection and know people who have been nearly run over in marked crosswalks, your perspective changes a bit.
.
besides, once greg nickels isn’t standing in the way, we’ll eventually need the center lane to build stanchions for elevated high-speed commuter rail.
.
ivan: i’m curious about the northbound hell-hole. are you saying that traffic bottlenecks where fauntleroy gets wider – at california? i think that signal needs some serious work. it and all of the other signals – including crosswalks – should be synchronized for 30-35 mph all the way to alaska st.

LK December 6, 2008 (12:42 pm)

Why do our city planners insist on increasing bicycle “capacity” by cramming bike lanes onto existing arterials with buses and other traffic? Yeah, there are sharrows on California and on Admiral now. That doesn’t actually make them safe bicycle routes, and hasn’t increased the number of bicyclists taking them. Same for the stupid lanes sandwiched between the parking and the arterial traffic.

Michael Snyder December 7, 2008 (8:11 am)

LK, because our non-arterials are on the 2000+ year maintainance plan.

As bad as our arterials are with the $300 million dollar backlog of needed repairs, there are twice as many miles of non-arterial lanes as arterials and we only have funding to fix 1 mile of non-arterials per year out of the more than 2000 lane-miles of non-arterials.

The Bridging The Gap levy only bridges a fraction of the true Gap. We don’t even have money budgeted to measure how bad our non-arterials are!

That is why city planners insist on adding bicycle capacity on existing arterials.

Miranda December 8, 2008 (12:09 am)

I beg your pardon, but I am not asking for perfect bicycle safety. In response to some of you…. I keep my car, with paid tabs, parked, while I get my West Seattle weekly errands done without polluting the air. Considering the taxpayer cost of asthmatics’ E.R. visits, more cyclists could save taxpayers money over drivers. Walking up W.S. nonarterial streets’ hills won’t allow me to complete all my errands, so I cycle the flatter arterials. But that’s not the only reason I’d like to see Fauntleroy rechannelled between Alaska and California. I would like to cross Fauntleroy without risking my neck as do all the poor but in-shape residents near Fauntleroy who might not be able to pay the rent near your sidewalk.
Oh, and 5 minutes driving the speed limit while relaxing and listening to your car radio between Fauntleroy ferry and California: Nobody should be forced to live like that. LOL :-)

Sorry, comment time is over.