Admiral Neighborhood Association pushes for 47th/Admiral light

(Google Map removed because of technical problems for some site visitors)

Three and a half years have passed since it was the site of a much-publicized deadly crash … but area residents say the Admiral Way crosswalk at 47th is still a place where you take your life into your hands just to cross the street. So the Admiral Neighborhood Association is leading a new push to get the city to install a pedestrian-activated stoplight. The crosswalk goes between two busy businesses – Life Care Center on the north side, Alki Mail and Dispatch on the south side – with residential neighborhoods behind each. Since the fall 2006 death of Tatsuo Nakata, “traffic-calming” measures have gone in nearby – in 2007, the intersection was marked by a “Crosswalk” sign with flashing lights overhead and narrowed by curb bulbs, while more recently, a radar speed sign was placed on the eastbound (uphill) side of Admiral at Garlough. The ANA says that’s not enough. Karl de Jong brought up the issue at last month’s meeting, and since then, a group also including ANA’s president Katy Walum and Jim Del Ciello has explored the concept, including talking with SDOT. Del Ciello said he’d also spoken with an Alki Community Council rep who suggested they’d be willing to partner on the safety advocacy too. Tonight Walum plans to be at the 34th District Democrats‘ meeting to make the case for a pedestrian-activated light directly to Mayor Mike McGinn.

Meantime, when this was discussed at last night’s ANA meeting, talk also turned to the study on eastern Admiral Way – where SDOT is looking at possible rechannelization, as first reported here May 21st. Walum says SDOT’s study will include measurements of bicycle traffic as well as cars, and then, she says they’re promising a “well-advertised open house” in “early fall” to unveil what the study revealed. She also said SDOT has assigned project manager Virginia Coffman to that Admiral Way study.

22 Replies to "Admiral Neighborhood Association pushes for 47th/Admiral light"

  • pam June 9, 2010 (9:29 am)

    It’s a tough one – the traffic gets SO backed up on Admiral I fear another light will have traffic backed up to Beach Drive. However…. I don’t like crossing at that crosswalk either. I don’t feel safe there even when a car has stopped. Perhaps a more ideal situation would be to remove the crosswalk from there and put it to a block further to the east or to the west to avoid the dangerous curve.

  • Mike June 9, 2010 (10:27 am)

    The bigger issue is that you come over a slight incline and into a curve, by the time you’d see the red light, it’s too late for some drivers that are exceeding the speed limit already. Unless they put signs further away from the cross walk warning that pedestrians might be in the crosswalk, it won’t help. A light really won’t help the situation.
    .
    Stricter speed limits, better signage, less people parking along the North side of the road sticking out too far. That will help.

  • Kate K June 9, 2010 (11:21 am)

    Anyone that doesn’t want a light at that intersection – try crossing Admiral at 47th around 5 pm. It’s very scary.

  • Michael June 9, 2010 (11:33 am)

    The problem is that the crosswalk is in a dangerous place. No “fix” will change that fact.
    .
    The City should NOT compound the original mistake of that crosswalk placement by throwing money at it.
    .
    Move the crosswalk a block either direction. There, I’ve saved lives while saving the City money. You’re welcome.

  • M June 9, 2010 (11:45 am)

    I agree with Mike. However I think the solution is to MOVE the crosswalk down the hill to the other end of the block. Like Mike pointed out this will have more time for cars comming down the hill more time to notice and stop. This is especailly true when the sun is setting this time of year (well not so much so far)

  • Jeff June 9, 2010 (11:59 am)

    I agree, it’s the location of the crosswalk that’s really dangerous. And it’s made even more dangerous when the sun is shining in your eyes as you approach.

  • Greg June 9, 2010 (12:05 pm)

    Crosswalk is in a VERY bad place – 5 way intersection with primary traffic going around a curve with bad visibility issues due to terrain. Why would Seattle DOT think a pedestrian activated signal would mitigate the physical factors?

    As stated in other posts – move the crosswalk. Probably not a popular choice with Alki Mail & Dispatch, but human safety needs outweigh business needs.

    One more thing – barriers for people who will continue to try to cross at that intersection.

  • Tim June 9, 2010 (12:16 pm)

    This city needs less lights not more. Move the sidewalk and add some warnings for drivers.

  • KBear June 9, 2010 (12:23 pm)

    ANY intersection is considered a legal crosswalk, whether it’s painted or not. Moving the paint does not move the crosswalk. Drivers need to hang up their phones and pay attention to what they’re supposed to be doing, and police need to do a better job of citing drivers who ignore crosswalks.

  • Jerry June 9, 2010 (1:05 pm)

    That’s not entirely true. A painted crosswalk requires drivers to stop if someone is standing on the corner waiting to cross; that’s not true of a corner to corner cross. On a busy street people are not as likely to cross without a painted crosswalk. Moving the paint to a safer spot would encourage safer behavior for both drivers and pedestrians.

  • sam June 9, 2010 (2:04 pm)

    I think a pedestrian-activated light is a great idea there. Even if you are going the posted speed limit, it feels too fast for that curve if you think there might be pedestrians around the bend.
    there are some crosswalks that have pedestrian activated blinking lights in the road (one down on Alaskan Way) that seem to be effective.
    could another option, instead of stoplight, be to have a flashing yellow light (also pedestrian activated) further in advance of the intersection ? I don’t know.

  • KBear June 9, 2010 (2:05 pm)

    Jerry, drivers are required to stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk whether the crosswalk is painted or not. It is true that a painted crosswalk in a safer spot might encourage more pedestrians to cross there, but removing the paint does not change the driver’s obligation to stop for pedestrians when they are crossing the street legally.

  • Steven June 9, 2010 (2:37 pm)

    Try crossing at 44th & Admiral. I have had drivers swear at me, swerve around me while maintaining their high rate of speed, or totally ignore me in the middle of the street. I have seen pedestrians stranded in the middle of Admiral. We need more police enforcement, even a string operation. Maybe then the uncaring, dangerous drivers will stop for and lawfully yeild to pedestrians as they are supposed to.
    The West bound double lane at Calif. & Admiral should also be right turn only from the right lane, not a through lane that creates a race track. I watch and listen to cars racing and losing as they come close to or are involved in a collision. Several things need to be changed for the safety of pedestrians and drivers alike.

  • Manolita June 9, 2010 (2:55 pm)

    Steven, for my own safety I NEVER try crossing 44th and Admiral. I walk to California Ave. and cross the street there.

  • M June 9, 2010 (4:13 pm)

    Any way we can voice an alternative to just moving the sidwalk (adding a light would be nice also)?

    Light, flashing crosswalk or whatever you still have the kinetic energy of a car comming around a blind curve with little time to stop

  • JayDee June 9, 2010 (5:25 pm)

    When this was discussed earlier, the point was raised that everyone knows this is a dangerous intersection. Everyone crossing it is aware of it being problematic.

    Yes, it was the site of a horrific accident (the driver who was clearly at fault, and a ped who reportedly was distracted (perhaps by a cell phone?). A tragic loss, but if I recall correctly, it was an aberration in the accident statistics for that intersection. Based on those accident stats, I seem to recall even this intersection did not warrant addition of any lights according to SDOT. If so, have things changed? We should justify the costs to install a costly signal that may do little to increase safety–lights don’t stop cars, people do, and we are the weak spots.

    My two cents. Before you jump all over me, I stop for peds in unmarked crosswalks if the idiot behind me can figure it out, and if I am aware of the ped’s intentions. Make eye contact, and clear indication of intent, and then cross. Just jogging up to the corner in a black tracksuit doesn’t cut it. OK, another cent.

  • Kate K June 9, 2010 (6:13 pm)

    I like the idea of pedestrian activated stop lights. Saw a lot of them in Tucson this winter and they worked very well. They’re only activated when someone wants to cross the street.

    Here’s a photo:

    http://dot.tucsonaz.gov/traffic3/images/hawk.jpg

  • Ben June 9, 2010 (6:26 pm)

    I was a witness to the tragedy that happened that day. There are many reasons for why it happened as listed by everyone above. However, watching a promising young man bleed to death in the middle of the road leaves a lasting impression. I worked at that intersection for 2 1/2 years. Every day one would be guaranteed to hear screeching tires, witness swerving cars and many a near miss.

    Yes, this intersection is very dangerous. People will continue to speed, the sun will glare, and cell phone usage while driving will not abate.

    I would suggest the following:
    1 – Install in a traffic light that is pedestrian activated.
    2 – Decrease the speed limit at said intersection.
    3 – Set up a Police Van with a camera and a radar gun. Earmark the proceeds from tickets issued at this intersection to offset the costs of the traffic light. Drivers, unfortunately, are best motivated not by sparing a life, but avoiding the loss of money.

    Hope that helps.

  • Noelle June 9, 2010 (10:15 pm)

    That road is like a freeway during rush hour. It would be good to have a light to make it safer for people crossing the road there.

  • maria June 9, 2010 (10:56 pm)

    After witnessing someone being clipped as they crossed in the cross walk on the way to our bus stop, I am all for a light. In addition, we’ve waited almost 3 minutes to turn left onto Admiral during rush hour.

    Ben’s ideas are good but I am quite motivated by not hurting someone in addition to $ saved.

  • Eddie June 10, 2010 (7:46 pm)

    What is it about the html – or whatever – that causes WSB to load directly to this topic for the last couple of days. Annoying. Is it the google mapview?

    I’ll be glad when it rolls off the front page – unless it somehow carries it’s mojo forward….

    • WSB June 10, 2010 (7:48 pm)

      Probably Google Map embeds acting up again. Some op systems apparently do this. Will get rid of it (the embedded map) now that it’s out of the top section.

Sorry, comment time is over.