‘Keep Alki Safe’: New neighborhood campaign against SDOT’s plan for west Admiral Way

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

West Admiral/Upper Alki residents opposed to SDOT’s Southwest Admiral Way Safety Project have just launched a campaign titled Keep Alki Safe.

With little advance notice of the proposed Admiral Way changes, SDOT first presented them at April’s Admiral Neighborhood Association meeting (WSB coverage here), then at May’s Southwest District Council meeting (WSB coverage here), and finally in a contentious standalone community meeting May 21st at Alki Elementary (WSB coverage here). That meeting included the following slide deck, showing the heart of the plan in the final few pages, proposing removing more than 200 parking spaces along Admiral Way west of California SW, to make room for changes including the addition of bicycle lanes:

(Slide deck from May 21st meeting)
The parking removal is the center of concern for area residents, for reasons including that it would require some of them to park across Admiral and dodge traffic to get to and from their vehicles. When they heard SDOT say it considered the parking removal to have a relatively nominal impact because of usage studies they had done in the winter, rather than in the busy summer season, that led to further concerns. From the group’s newly launched website:

We are a group of neighbors who came together, in shock and disbelief, in April 2015, when Seattle Department of Transportation informed us they were planning to remove 200 parking spaces on Admiral Way, between the Admiral Junction and 59th SW, four months hence. Admiral Way is a residential arterial, bordering the Alki Parking Overlay; it is the main access route to Alki Beach, the Alki business district, Alki Elementary School, Alki Community Center, a church, and the Alki neighborhood.

We are concerned that SDOT does not understand this street: the traffic patterns, the parking, the adjoining structures and the safety challenges. Most of the accidents on this section of Admiral Way are caused by impaired drivers, late at night. The SDOT Admiral plan is dangerous because SDOT would force some residents to park on the dangerous side of the street, the side where impaired drivers crash into cars and structures on a routine basis. The plan is dangerous because SDOT would also force some residents to cross a busy arterial, with children, elderly and handicapped family members in tow, to get to their cars. The plan is shocking because this portion of Admiral Way suffers from extreme parking congestion during the summer and during school pick-up and drop-off time.

The new website also links to an online petition asking Mayor Ed Murray to drop the plan, and organizers say they’ll soon have yard and roadside signs to catch the attention of neighbors and visitors alike, including ones like this:

Organizers also tell us they are lobbying elected officials directly and expect to meet soon with Councilmember Tom Rasmussen.

As for where the plan officially stands:

At the May “open house,” pressed by Admiral Neighborhood Association president David Whiting to commit to at least one more public meeting about the project, SDOT agreed. No date’s been announced yet; Rasmussen asked SDOT director Scott Kubly about this project’s “public process” during yesterday’s City Council Transportation Committee meeting (starting 53 minutes into the clip at that link); Kubly said he knew one public meeting had been held and thought multiple additional meetings would be ahead. The project website now shows this timeline, mentioning a “community briefing” in late summer:

We left a message for project manager Emily Ehlers today to ask about the status, and have not received a response.

56 Replies to "'Keep Alki Safe': New neighborhood campaign against SDOT's plan for west Admiral Way"

  • Choicer June 24, 2015 (10:36 pm)

    SDOT is such a joke it’s not even funny. they really should consult with outside professionals when it comes to planning because their work defies logic in so many parts of the city

  • MacJ June 24, 2015 (11:00 pm)

    The extreme width of Admiral Way west of California really encourages speeding, and street parking for everything but the flat straightaway from 59th to Bar-S is almost entirely empty, speaking as a regular driver and bike rider of the corridor. The plan looks solid to me.

    I don’t see how fighting this is supposed to “keep Alki safe” except for a handful of people that believe free parking is a God-given right, rather than a government subsidy.

  • ChefJoe June 24, 2015 (11:17 pm)

    That’s odd, when I try to watch the transportation committee meeting video (windows machine) about 20:40 seconds in, after Jean asks about some green space, the person starts a response and then the sound cuts out to a musical interlude for a few seconds and then there’s no sound for the rest of the video. I’m curious about the public process question.

    Must have been my cached copy, as opening in a different browser is working ok. I was surprised they’re talking about July ribbon cutting ceremonies given calls for summer studies.

    • WSB June 24, 2015 (11:34 pm)

      The ribbon cutting mentioned by Scott Kubly at Tuesday’s meeting is for the 47th/Admiral light, NOT this project, which includes Admiral through that area but is separate. (I have listened to the clip twice now.) Not this project, which is separate (and noteworthy at that – in all the discussion of 47th/Admiral over the years, as mentioned in yesterday’s 47th/Admiral update, this proposal never came up – then suddenly, a few months ago, there it was).

  • northadmiralupperalkiresident June 24, 2015 (11:21 pm)

    “shocking” indeed. get a grip! exactly which residents would have to cross the street? every house on admiral has off-street parking. maybe not for three cars. it’s full-on summer now, and the street is hardly full of parked cars. i live in this area and I for one am looking forward to modern, proven road design instead of this 1950s retrograde business. get with the times, people.

  • ChefJoe June 24, 2015 (11:43 pm)

    Thank you for the clarification WSB. I was joining one too many sentence-long topics together in a rather rushed finish to the meeting.

    Hopefully the crosswalk project’s ribbon cutting and a few weeks more to finish all the lights at that crosswalk makes sense.

  • I. Ponder June 24, 2015 (11:49 pm)

    I was hoping for a rendering showing what Admiral would look like in the new plan. The name ‘Keep Alki Safe’ is pathetic, because the street is not safe in its current configuration. If the new configuration slows speeds as intended, it will be a good thing.

    • WSB June 24, 2015 (11:55 pm)

      The “open house boards” linked from the project page have cross-sections – I will see if I can add them in Scribd (though you have to get through the discussion rules first) – as they are a little more than the basic slide deck includes., but a little too wide to work as framegrab jpg’s – http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/SDOT_admiral_boards_v2.pdf

  • Justin June 24, 2015 (11:55 pm)

    First, thanks to WSB for bringing this to the community’s attention. As an Alki resident, the last thing we need is less available street parking. Summer visitors already make parking extremely difficult at this time of year, and the continued subdivision and development of older properties into townhouses and apartment buildings is making things worse. The more dense we become, the less accessible this area becomes and the harder it is to park here.

    While intentions may be good, very few people actually bike up and down Admiral Way regularly. Nobody is commuting to work on their bicycle going up this hill! We’re being asked to sacrifice valuable parking spaces in order to please a very small number of people who already comfortably fit in with the flow of traffic and it makes no sense. The street is already wide enough to easily accommodate bicyclists without creating a dedicated bicycle lane that will permanently eliminate hundreds of parking spaces.

  • ChefJoe June 25, 2015 (12:31 am)

    I’m not sure the name is “pathetic” anymore than the idea of questioning “Vision Zero (Deaths)” projects means seeking “blood-splattered streets”.
    If you want to talk about questionable framing, read the v2 pdf WSB linked to and tell me how many parking spaces are being eliminated based on that info. It’s framed as “spaces preserved” bar graphs and since they’re only preserving parking on one half the street from 60th to 44th, a bit of math suggests 182 spaces eliminated.

  • ChefJoe June 25, 2015 (1:34 am)

    As a scientist, looking at the SDOT v2 pdf conclusion on travel lanes being involved in yielding, it’s not really established from the raw data that’s cited in that study, where they make a strong correlation with 85th percentile travel speeds (on two lane roads) and yield to ped rates at marked crosswalks. In fact, the author specifically excluded from the trend analysis the one 4 lane road they collected data on (which SDOT chose to highlight).

    “In order to determine whether or not there is a relationship between the data, the data were plotted and observations were made (Figure 4). The eight, two-lane roadway locations were analyzed for observable and transferrable trends, while the ninth location, Hyde Park Avenue at Eldridge Road, the only four-lane road, was removed from the sample set due to its uniqueness to the data set.”

  • Kathy June 25, 2015 (1:38 am)

    To the people who complained at the meeting about possibly having to cross Admiral Way to get to “their” street parking spot, I suggest they be aware that people already have to cross Admiral Way with kids and groceries to get to their bus stop. This SDOT project will make it safer for all people crossing Admiral Way. There are plenty of people, old and young, using bicycles to get up and down Admiral Way, contrary to what Justin claims to observe. If SDOT designs our street to be safer for people walking and biking, it will be safer for everyone, including people in cars. The campaign against this project appears to be a lot of fear-mongering, misinformation and a tempest in a teapot. If you are not using those 200 parking spaces, or merely using them for a used car lot, why shouldn’t they be put to better use to make the street safer? Narrowing the roadways has been proven to slow down speeds so it will probably help reduce those car on parked car collisions, too.

  • You have no right to street parking June 25, 2015 (6:21 am)

    Sorry, people. Use your driveways and garages. Too many cars to fit off street parking? That’s YOUR problem, folly, and pointless expense — not ours to subsidize.

  • Larry June 25, 2015 (7:20 am)

    The key safety aspect is the elimination of the left turn lane. Every one using Admiral whether car or bike makes a left turn either going down or coming up. The parking is needed for all the beach visitors as well as residents.

    A note to “no right”. Then you agree that bike improvements should be paid by cyclists and not car taxes?

    • WSB June 25, 2015 (7:50 am)

      Before any further detours into funding discussion as per a few comments ago: This proposal, as noted on its webpage, would be funded by Bridging the Gap. That’s primarily a property-tax levy paid by property owners regardless of whether they drive, ride, walk, or never leave their residences; it expires this year and that’s what the city is seeking to “replace” (and then some) via a $930 million levy that also would be paid by property owners, regardless of how they get around, or don’t. – TR

  • just above alki June 25, 2015 (7:45 am)

    A bike lane on Admiral is a waste of money. I ride my bike up Admiral occasionally, have no problem with traffic because of the ample shoulders, and hardly ever see anyone else peddling it. I drive up and down frequently and hardly ever see a bike. The majority of bike traffic heading off West Seattle simply takes the longer but much-easier water-side route.

  • Community Member June 25, 2015 (7:50 am)

    Parking is used by non-residents as well. when sdot removes this parking, they are reducing the available parking for Schmitz Park, Alki Park, Whale Tale park, the Alki Community Center, and Alki Elementary School.
    Some posters make the point that street parking is not a right; that the street is there to serve the needs of the many. I agree with that, but in this case I believe that idea should include recognition that lower Admiral provides not only transportation and residential parking, but also provides access to school, recreation, etc by providing significant parking for non-residents.
    Residents may have the option of downsizing to a single car, and parking off-street. Non-residents wont have that option.
    I do not live on Admiral; this issue affects me as a park-user.
    I think the timing of this is probably connected to applying for the grant to expand bike sharing services. And that REALLY should have been part of the Community Meeting, press releases, etc; whether you support or oppose this project, sdot shouldnt disrespect public input by holding pretend open meetings whee they dont mention the grant.

  • John June 25, 2015 (8:20 am)

    I just have to say, I appreciate the commenters on this blog. Generally, there is no trolling, people provide honest opinions without divisive attacking language (mostly…). Thanks for being a good neighbor, everyone, even when you disagree.

  • Kim June 25, 2015 (8:56 am)

    As a frequent pedestrian user, I appreciate the city looking at ways to calm/slow traffic from the Admiral Junction to Alki. Whenever I drive on Admiral and go the speed limit, I get very aggressively tailgated. (Aggressive driving patrols could also help.)

  • Jon Wright June 25, 2015 (9:07 am)

    “Keep Alki Safe!” You bet! We need to do something about the fights and shootings. What’s that you say? This is about somebody losing street parking in front of their house? Hmm, seems like a disingenuous and excessively melodramatic use of “Keep Alki Safe.” I have a difficult time taking this kind of alarmist hyperbole seriously.

  • SGG June 25, 2015 (9:13 am)

    These people are totally off base. Admiral is completely unsafe now. It will be a little better once the signal is in place, but we need a better design. Whenever I am driving down the hill westbound, I get some leadfoot tailgating me as they are racing to get to the beach. It makes it really unsafe to merely slow down for a right hand turn onto Lander. I really look forward to these changes. There isn’t a single home on Admiral that doesn’t have their own parking. Quit complaining.

  • Don Brubeck June 25, 2015 (9:16 am)

    This group of my neighbors says “The plan is dangerous because [it] would also force some residents to cross a busy arterial, with children, elderly and handicapped family members in tow, to get to their cars.”

    What about the safety of those children, elderly, and adults, disabled or not, who cross the street every day to get to a bus stop, or to Alki Elementary School or Madison Middle School? Or who travel by bike on Admiral? We all need slower, safer speeds on Admiral, for everyone to be personally safe, not just for those who (understandably) park their cars across the street from their houses on a short stretch of Admiral to keep their cars from being hit. This plan looks like it will help make it safer for both people and parked vehicles.

  • ChefJoe June 25, 2015 (9:20 am)

    Kim, enforcement patrols are another branch of the Vision Zero plan, but eliminating parking on half the street is certainly going to nearly eliminate car-parked car collisions (the majority of the collisions cited) in one direction.


  • Admiral user June 25, 2015 (9:22 am)

    SDOT needs to rethink its approach and work on a plan that takes into account the needs of the neighborhood, the community and residents. More bike lanes and less parking is not appropriate for this neighborhood which sees extensive use during the summer months.

  • KBear June 25, 2015 (9:38 am)

    The city doesn’t owe anyone a street parking space in front of their house. Street parking is temporary parking; that’s why there’s a 72-hour rule.

  • Mel June 25, 2015 (9:47 am)

    But BIKES!!
    And Seattle needs to abandon this “Vision Zero” thing – it’s basically a smokescreen (zero ped casualties will never, ever happen, no matter how many heart-tugging radio ads you run) for removing more access to autos without replacing it in a meaningful way.
    The “Seattle Way” when it comes to transportation is to cause pain to drivers, rather than to provide better methods. It’s really ramping up with 20MPH zones, eliminated parking, and “dieted” roads.
    Yet (for example) not one signaled intersection has been converted into a roundabout, despite the latter’s much greater efficiency and much lower maintenance cost, while offering traffic “calming” features. Because pain, not efficiency, is the goal.

  • OP June 25, 2015 (9:49 am)

    Way to go, Alki residents! Let your voices be heard loud and clear. Many of us stand with you!

  • Admiral neighbor June 25, 2015 (9:54 am)

    Those who’ve said that all Admiral Way houses have offstreet parking aren’t correct; please take a look. And I don’t see plans for crosswalks across Admiral in the plan.

  • groupthink June 25, 2015 (10:05 am)

    This city loves their Orwellian campaign names, but this might be the worst one I’ve heard in a while. The opponents themselves claim the street is dangerous to cross. How is doing nothing keeping the area safe?

  • Jim Borrow June 25, 2015 (10:40 am)

    I live at the west end of Admiral, near Bar S field. A few observations about the current SDOT plan: 1) I don’t think it will reduce auto-parked car accidents significantly. Most of these are caused by impaired drivers, who will speed whether or not the plan is implemented. 2) I drive up and down Admiral at random times…few cyclists and plenty of room for drivers to give them room except near the Admiral Way/California Ave shopping district. Striping a bike lane as a visual cue in the existing street confirmation should be adequate. 3) The SDOT plan clearly does not address peak crowds at Alki Beach as shown by choosing 2 weeks last December for their parking survey. 4) access to street parking: for a variety of reasons, & since the Admiral District & Alki do not, & are unlikely to have adequate bus service in spite of being taxed for it, residents do use street parking in addition to driveways & garages. From time to time visiting family members & friends also may park on the street. Crossing a busy arterial to get to a car can be dangerous for many folks, especially when traffic is heavy or at night or especially on a wet winter night.
    5) reducing the street to a single lane in either direction will increase congestion & increase the risk of accidents by removing the center lane for left turns & maneuvering around stopped buses or delivery trucks.

  • ChefJoe June 25, 2015 (11:21 am)

    Jim, I don’t think they’re planning to remove the center turn lane except from the 63rd-to-60th blocks and, in any event, the center turn lane is not supposed to be used for passing.

  • dbstock June 25, 2015 (11:45 am)

    I live along Admiral Way and I watch and listen to speeders throughout the day. Why would you want to eliminate a project designed to slow the speeds down? I literally watch motorcycles race up and down the the hill including the occasional wheelie. I also see people passing in the center turn lane frequently – a head-on collision waiting to happen. I also ride my bike up and down this hill and it is sketchy to say the least – especially as you navigate around cars parked on the curves near Schmitz Park. For those worried about on-street parking, how about SDOT add additional crosswalks. That’s how we cross the road between 47th and 49th. Set up a couple well-marked crosswalks at the bottom of the hill. And to be extra safe, wait until the oncoming cars come to a complete stop before you dart across the street with your kids in tow.

  • Justin June 25, 2015 (12:16 pm)

    ChefJoe, that’s little comfort to this 59th Ave SW resident. They also plan to consolidate parking to the North side of Admiral at 59th & Admiral, when we don’t have any street parking to spare. This proposal is a disaster for those of us who actually live here.

  • AceMotel June 25, 2015 (12:33 pm)

    What about (one of) the Seattle Comp Plan’s objectives, to prevent parking overflow in residential neighborhoods? What about the Alki parking overlay – SDOT plans to remove parking within the overlay??? Is the city working at cross-purposes? What is the purpose here, SDOT? It sounds like this is part of BMP, not a safety project. In spite of all the rhetoric, that portion of Admiral Way is not a dangerous arterial, except when drunks are on the road. We support this group’s objectives.

  • ChefJoe June 25, 2015 (12:40 pm)

    dbstock, considering that the study SDOT cited about traffic speeds and yielding to pedestrian in crossings was specifically about marked, but unsignalled crosswalks on (for 8 of 9 intersections) two lane roads, it would be a huge error NOT to add marked crosswalks while doing all the other actions.

    “This report is an evaluation of the effect of motor vehicle speed on yielding rates to pedestrians in marked crosswalks.”

  • Bando June 25, 2015 (12:54 pm)

    “This proposal is a disaster for those of us who actually live here”.
    I’ll tell you what is a disaster for those of us who live here. It’s keeping things as they are now. I live in the immediate area and really don’t appreciate this group going around and saying that they speak for me. Any attempt to slow things down on Admiral is welcome.

  • Justin June 25, 2015 (1:26 pm)

    Brando, slowing things down would be great. But sacrificing that much street parking in our neighborhood is unacceptable. My friends and relatives already have a hard time parking near my 59th & Admiral home. This proposal would make things unacceptably worse.

  • Kathy June 25, 2015 (1:29 pm)

    The sad thing is, many commenters on this blog thread feel so dependent on their cars because public transportation and amenities are so limited in the Alki neighborhood, and many are afraid or find it inconvenient to bike. Sure we have lots of restaurants and bars here; we have one little convenience store, one dry cleaner/tailor, one casual clothing store, medical weed? But for anything else, major shopping, medical/dental, drugstores, banks, we must go to the California junctions or downtown. Direct downtown bus service has been eliminated except for a few weekday only peak direction runs and infrequent Water Taxi trips. Frequency is low so public transportation trips take much longer than a private auto, even with traffic. You can easily get stranded due to lack of late night service. We are inundated with visitors in cars every sunny weeknight and weekend. The city sponsors events here without providing adequate public transportation options for visitors to participate, just wait until the Pirates land on Saturday. The hourly late evening bus service leaving Alki ends at 9:30 PM on Friday and 10:42 PM on Saturday, even though the bars are open until 2 AM. Our transportation options have become very limited with many incremental bus reductionsover the last 40 years, not keeping pace with the increasing density in Alki (check the last census). Adding bike facilities on Admiral Way and a bike share system that connects Alki to Rapid Ride via the Alki Trail would help to increase our travel options.

  • Benjamin June 25, 2015 (3:30 pm)

    I live on Genesee across from the golfcourse in North Delridge. The citiy took away ALL of the (very little) street parking we did have. But you know what? We got used to it.

  • Alicia H. June 25, 2015 (5:25 pm)

    Benjamin, firstly the local golf course is nowhere near the kind of destination that Alki is. Secondly, did you at least get a bike lane out of that raw deal? Thirdly, poorly planned proposals DON’T have to be implemented. SDOT needs to let this one die. I am a homeowner on 60th at Admiral. Just try parking on my street at any time of year!

  • Kadoo June 25, 2015 (5:47 pm)

    This change brought to us by Bridging the Gap? Yet another reason to vote no.

  • m June 25, 2015 (8:34 pm)

    All these residents want is a well thought out plan. The SDOT plan takes away parking and adds a bike lane on one of WS steepest streets, nothing else. I would favor a plan that was better researched and had community input.

  • dis June 25, 2015 (8:52 pm)

    Wait. If this is really about safety, how does eliminating parking make the street safe?
    IF this is about safety, why did it take SDOT 10 years to install a streetlight where Tatsuo Nakata was killed in 2006?
    No, really.
    We all know this is NOT about safety. Safety is a distraction so Kubly can rack up the bike lane miles, after Washington DC, Chicago, and Alta Bike Share.

  • Kathy June 25, 2015 (10:13 pm)

    m – take it from one 64 year old woman who bikes up and down Admiral Way regularly, it is not one of West Seattle’s steepest streets, and the plateaus by Schmitz Park and 49th make it a fairly easy climb. Charlestown, Morgan west of 37th SW, 37th itself between Alaska and Graham, Andover east of Delridge, Highland Park Way – those are steep West Seattle streets. But Admiral Way could be a lot safer for all users and should be. The older I get the more unsafe I feel competing with the car traffic on Admiral Way as it is currently configured, walking or biking.

  • ChefJoe June 25, 2015 (10:32 pm)

    I feel unsafe with bicyclists on arterial streets too Kathy. I like the adjacent greenway approach, or at least something that doesn’t use bicycle lanes (and their bodies) as a way to narrow a car lane.

  • Kathy June 25, 2015 (11:38 pm)

    Remember the first bike lane on westbound Admiral Way after the freeway exit? It had one line separating bikes and cars and was worn off fairly quickly, presumably by car traffic. The redesign of that bike lane with a striped buffered zone separating modes instead of a single line, seems to be enduring very well. Which could mean that a better visual cue like a wide buffer is better at separating car from bike traffic. Or maybe they used better paint? At any rate, either way it is better than no stripe at all which is what we have now with cars weaving all over the right of way. I would like to hear what your suggested adjacent greenway would be for a diagonal arterial like Admiral Way, ChefJoe. Please don’t say Charlestown. Or Lander. Talk about steep, when folks on this thread are complaining that Admiral Way is too steep….

  • m June 26, 2015 (8:38 am)

    So Kathy I’m sorry you felt that you had a to denegrate my earlier comment; but apparently not everyone is as fit as you (and has time to post at midnight on a work day). All I ask is this gets a better plan with input from the community

  • Don Brubeck June 28, 2015 (8:54 am)

    If there was a parallel adjacent Greenway street to Admiral, that would be perfect. But there is not. The reason Admiral goes at angles to the grid is to make it less steep. It worked for horses, wagons and trucks. Any other east-west route is too steep, and the streets do not even go through. That’s why is is still the bus route and a good bike route.

  • Kathy June 29, 2015 (8:58 pm)

    m – to ride a bike with the standard range of gears up Admiral Way probably takes no more effort than walking up Admiral Way, which many people do every day. I don’t think that a person has to be exceptionally fit to ride a hill of that gradient and distance, they might just need a little practice. A bike will get you up a hill that grade at least 2 if not 3 times as fast as walking with the same amount of effort, thanks to those gears. SDOT counted an average of 68 bike trips on Admiral Way per day at 48th Ave during one week in April. Those riders are probably not all Chilly Hilly or Seattle To Portland Classic riders, I’m certainly not.

  • m July 2, 2015 (6:37 am)

    Kathy – as I live on Admiral Way and seriously doubt SDOT’s bloated figures, never the less at least 100X people travel that stretch per day in their automobiles; so are you suggesting we should inconvenience the many for the few? And I appreciate the fact you are in better shape than me as I am more than 10 years your junior it is impossible to think that I can ride my bicycle to Redmond 5 days a week to get to my job.

  • Gordon Padelford July 2, 2015 (2:04 pm)

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

    ChefJoe: I can’t speak to the research SDOT presented, but the connection between speeding and yielding to people in crosswalks has been well established: http://www.ssti.us/2015/04/drivers-more-likely-to-ignore-crosswalks-at-speeds-above-30-mph/

    m: unlike the embarrassingly titled group working to protect parking, this effort would actually keep people safer. Narrowing car lanes has been proven to be effective and is considered a national best practice: http://nacto.org/usdg/street-design-elements/lane-width/

  • Kathy July 2, 2015 (3:40 pm)

    I applaud SDOT for being proactive about slowing down speeds and improving safety on the west end of Admiral Way. We should do everything possible, as soon as possible to reduce the chances of someone else getting seriously injured or killed. I bet there are a lot of regrets in Issaquah right now that something wasn’t done to slow down speeds where the 4-year-old boy was killed by a driver last week. http://www.issaquahpress.com/2015/06/26/car-hits-boy-in-crosswalk/

    And I hope the neighbors who sound like they want to stop the project or study it to death instead of working out their concerns quickly with SDOT don’t live to regret their actions if the project is delayed or shelved.

  • Michelle July 3, 2015 (7:34 pm)

    I encourage everyone to actually view the presentation created by WSDOT. As someone who drives Admiral on a daily basis this seems like a very reasonable plan.

    Most of the arguments on here are quickly cut down if you look at the facts:
    There is another usage study slated for July.
    They have talked to residents multiple times.
    They do indeed want to make the hill safe for cyclists.
    Some street parking will indeed be removed.

    I would suggest that “Keep Alki Safe” rename themselves to “Save Our Parking.” If you asked for what you want, we might be able to help.

    • WSB July 3, 2015 (7:41 pm)

      Just to be clear … it’s an SDOT project (city), not WSDOT (state).

  • Wsnorth July 5, 2015 (6:48 pm)

    SDOT should actually stick to transportation issues, not messing up traffic flow and destroying parking. Their actions are a joke compared to their mission statement! This is an obvious NO!

  • NoMore July 13, 2015 (6:44 pm)

    It is just more war on cars. How many parking places has Seattle eliminated throughout the year in the city, including these? This includes the mini parks and free restaurant space in the streets that remove parking, as well as bicycle lanes. As a senior citizen who has lived in Seattle since starting college here in 1962, I now feel like a second-class citizen and feel that I am not welcome here.

Sorry, comment time is over.