17 Replies to "Followup: RapidRide on California in The Junction? 2 briefings"

• Petert October 7, 2014 (2:16 pm)

  “…she describes that as having been done to improve “safety,”…”

  Really ? Or is it to make it more convenient to the condo developments on that side of the street, i.e. so they don’t have to cross the Junction, but everyone else does ? There’s also an increase in operational cost for the additional lighting, shelter, and associated infrastructure….unless they don’t plan to put any in.

  This is one move (of many) by Metro that just doesn’t make any sense without further illumination from their side.

  • WSB October 7, 2014 (2:28 pm)

    If you read the previous story (linked in this one), SDOT says they initiated it, not Metro (SDOT still has final say over the roads). They say it would save a minute of travel time. Extensive discussion ensued on that point.

    • WSB October 7, 2014 (3:51 pm)

      Also please note I have corrected the meeting descriptions, above. I’d confused WSJA with JuNO, which meets the day before but to my knowledge does NOT have this on its agenda. – TR

• LM October 7, 2014 (2:27 pm)

  Perhaps the RR would benefit from the recently installed (and more or less unused) bike rack being moved from the right turn lane on Calif Ave to E bound Alaska Street

• s October 7, 2014 (5:27 pm)

  LM-I agree. I was in the Junction last Sunday during peak Farmers’ Market hours and the bike rack was empty. Not one bike.

• miws October 7, 2014 (5:59 pm)

  Perhaps the RR would benefit from the recently installed (and more or less unused) bike rack being moved from the right turn lane on Calif Ave to E bound Alaska Street

  .

  https://westseattleblog.com/2014/07/west-seattles-first-bike-corral-now-in-place-in-the-junction/#comment-1432553

  .

  Mike

• JN October 7, 2014 (6:14 pm)

  Kind of hard to get the new bike rack to fill up with no significant bicycle infrastructure combined with more than a few drivers that don’t care about bicyclists or their safety.

• pat October 7, 2014 (6:20 pm)

  I tend to agree with those that do not see a correlation between the C line and the resequencing of the lights in the intersection but even if there is, I don’t see the advantage OR disadvantage at this point. What I fear more is moving the C line from the terminal along Alaska St to somewhere along California. The current path undoubtedly holds some disadavantages for Metro but moving it to the Ave creates bigger problems like holding up the traffic flow as one of those buses try to turn left onto Alaska and then lost parking. Okay, obviously there are a number of questions that need answers before citizens that use the Junction can make intellignet comments for and/or against.

• WSB October 7, 2014 (7:48 pm)

  I wish I didn’t have to say this again and again. STOP THE BIKE VS. CAR SNIPES. I won’t approve any further comments along those lines.

• Azimuth October 7, 2014 (9:08 pm)

  I’d like to see the 2 blocks of California that are 4 lanes be redeveloped. Trade 1 lane each direction for extra wide sidewalks. With all this development we need to make this area walkable. The restaurants could have more outdoor seating, couples can actually walk side by side, and perhaps room for some street vendors.

• RayK October 7, 2014 (9:54 pm)

  I’m not sure what the proponents for this change will do with the minute saved. Metro won’t change other stops. They have slack time in the current schedule. Any idea of having the NB buses turn onto Edmunds from California will create a safety problem for drivers. That was presented to Scott Kubly at the SW District Council meeting in August. SDOT is simply a partner with Metro when determining stops. The issue should be taken to Metro Transit. Period.
  Furthermore, SDOT is to talk with businesses and residents? How? Will there be an outreach? I’m a neighborhood resident and I’d rather they conduct a rider survey at the Junction where many riders are transferring to and from the C-Line.

• Marty Sweetman October 7, 2014 (10:21 pm)

  @LM & S: It’s not a right turn lane from California Ave onto Aaska Ave. Never has been. It’s never been marked as a turn lane and the “No Right Turn On Red” sign on that intersection has been there for at least the past 10 years that I’ve lived here.

• WestSeattleChaz October 7, 2014 (11:09 pm)

  They will likely not move the stop onto California, rather they likely move it to between Jefferson square and QFC. That’d give the busses a block between 42nd and California to move to the left hand turn lane. Doesn’t that make some sense?

  That’s where they already make the stop during street fairs and car shows.

• TomV October 8, 2014 (7:36 am)

  I agree with the comments made by Azimuth – if any revision to the Junction takes place, it should involve the widening of sidewalks so the Junction is more walkable and alive. If SDOT and the city are really concerned about making the Junction a hub for activity and people, then widen the sidewalks / allow outdoor dining and people watching / and make the Junction a great place to live, eat and play. Adding a bus lane or buses down California will have the opposite affect – lets make our voices heard come November.

• Kathy October 8, 2014 (9:05 am)

  If the Junction organizations or SDOT ever had the courage to agree to removing street parking from Edmunds to Alaska or even to Oregon on California there would be plenty of room on those blocks for wider sidewalks, street cafes, cars, buses, emergency vehicles and bikes. That real estate on the street is getting to be too valuable to use it for free car storage. This would also reduce the extra traffic now dedicated to circling the blocks looking for the “perfect” parking space. I think the merchants would be pleasantly surprised that doing this would not hurt their businesses and possibly bring in more customers by creating an environment more welcoming to pedestrians. Will those that say they would refuse to shop because they can’t park right in front of your business really have that much of an impact? The only downside to this that I can see is that the disabled might need accommodation to park a car close to the store entrance.

• enid October 8, 2014 (2:29 pm)

  I’m all for this change if it’s free. It’s free right? Because otherwise why is Metro demanding more money while cutting more services?

• Kc October 8, 2014 (7:06 pm)

  A number of years ago likely before some of you called west seattle home… The city did convert the 2blocks of the junction to one lane in Each direction with a planting strip up the middle the traffic was backed up two to three blocks in each direction before the trees were planted store owners and city said this is not working and ripped it out
  You can bet if the c line moves to California ave the will put a stop just east of the ave like they did at Morgan street
  And don’t forget. The c line could get stacked up you could have the whole block between Alaska and Edmonds ful of c line buses. The free parking in the e junction on the ave is not free the merchant pAy dearly for that

Sorry, comment time is over.