38 Replies to "FOLLOWUP: Next step in campaigning for a 'Walkable Admiral'"

• Morgan July 25, 2024 (9:58 pm)

  This campaign should focus on public works and SDOT…not edev director. I like most of these proposals don’t get me wrong, but to approach traffic calming and safety it as a political yard sign pressure campaign is incorrect.  By all means ask councilmember to bring appropriate staff to town halls…not just bomb emails. Has a traffic safety engineer reviewed these ideas? Is there a capital plan where these can fit? All way walk is very sensible, and bulb outs maybe if placed into queue when crews already mobilized. Raised intersection here may be problematic near school…give false sense of safety to pedestrians where cars may likely still be speeding. Let’s keep workshopping these…with transportation staff on hand.

  • Allistu July 26, 2024 (8:00 am)

    With a limited capacity and strictly grassroots effort the yard sign campaign opens the door for thorough public response either for or against. Thanks for your advice though.

  • Jay July 26, 2024 (8:49 am)

    SDOT will only invest in car-centric infrastructure unless they get pressured by the public and city council. And SDOT traffic engineers do not follow best practices or keep up with any standards, so their reviews are questionable. People who engage with traffic engineering trends are more knowledgeable than our engineers. They wouldn’t remove the beg button from the Admiral crosswalk even though it doesn’t affect traffic light timing, just whether the walk sign turns on. Without a campaign like this the best we could expect would be sharrows painted on the roads and new crosswalk paint.

• Darren July 25, 2024 (10:53 pm)

  I am all for safety improvements but I don’t think the walk all ways with walk at Alaska & California  is a good idea for Admiral. That is, unless it’s enforced.Alaska and California has vehicles turning right on red despite signs on every corner. People still turn left when it’s prohibited between 7am and 7 pm. And vehicles especially buses run red lights. Pedestrians often still cross when they don’t have the walk light. I think making these changes at Admiral and California may make it less safe.I have asked for enforcement occasionally over more than a decade at Alaska and California and I’ve never seen it. There’ are violations by all modes of transportation with almost every cycle.

  • Dc July 26, 2024 (5:57 am)

    Excellent point! Drivers routinely ignore the existing sign-based precautions. So, I for one will welcome our new bollard overlords.The safest street from cars is the one with no cars at all

    • platypus July 26, 2024 (9:41 am)

      More bollards everywhere!

  • Anne July 26, 2024 (8:00 am)

    Well then we might as well do nothing?? There will always be those that either can’t read the no turn on red /no left  turn or the no walk signs or  just flat out choose to ignore them-always -but by & large the Walk All Ways works in the junction & should work at  California & Admiral. Traffic cams are the only way to somewhat insure enforcement as I believe there will never be enough LEO’s to basically afford to have a car or 2 sitting there all day.I like these ideas & would advocate for implementing them-along with traffic cams .

  • dba July 26, 2024 (9:57 am)

    The walk all ways in The Junction would benefit from new signage.  Same with the intersection at California/Edmunds.  The current signage has been in place for at least 30 years, back to when folks learned how to drive the neighborhood from residents.  We can’t rely on the same “hand me down” education for all of the transplants.  While it won’t eliminate all of the scofflaws, many instances seem to occur from lack of knowledge as to the idiosyncrasies of the intersection.  Updated, more visible signage will help.

• Jennie July 26, 2024 (7:04 am)

  I’m am all for the mid block crosswalks on the 2 incredibly LONG blocks. We’ve all seen and swerved around and stopped for the pedestrians playing Frogger at these 2 locations. There has already been at least one pedestrian killed in the past. I’ll come by and get a sign. You’ve got to start somewhere and I appreciate Stu committing his time to getting this going. Thanks Stu for Walking Your Talk!

  • alkistu July 26, 2024 (12:06 pm)

    Thank you Jennie, Yes, mis-behaved driving is a problem in any scenario. What works best is the raised mid-block crossing that does not have a step down from sidewalk level and has bulbed out or extended sidewalk with a pedestrian flashing light.  It would require only one displaced parking space per side.

• oerthehillz July 26, 2024 (7:32 am)

  I agree that the flashing signs on the raised crosswalks aren’t enough. They need to be a real crosswalk intersection light. I cross by Right Aid often with the flashers down there and I’m nearly hit every time. Definitely a false sense of security there.

• Kyle July 26, 2024 (7:37 am)

  Honestly, the business district of Admiral is already pretty walkable. Nice sidewalks, lights for crossing etc. I think any uptick in walking would be negligible by the apparently intended consequences to create bottlenecks from customers busing or driving to Admiral. Now a walkable plan to connect Admiral to Alki via sidewalks on Ferry Ave and Fairmount Ave I could get behind. The long roundabout California route as the only safe walking route encourages driving and parking down at Alki or waiting for a slow circular shuttle instead of exercise.

  • junctioneer July 26, 2024 (10:04 am)

    Yes!!! Also, how cool would it be to have stairs from Hamilton viewpoint to California and then down the stairwell that was canceled at those new apartments on Harbor. Obviously that’s done and never will happen but one can dream.

  • Krumpet July 26, 2024 (12:14 pm)

    Yes, completely agree. And is it so bad to have to walk a block or two to get to a crosswalk? Possibly raise one or two crosswalks to discourage speeding, but otherwise, yes…very walkable.

    • Bbron July 27, 2024 (5:29 am)

      folks can have mobility issues, Krumpet, and may still want to walk in their community to get from point A to B without too much strain. it’s also never just the 1 time it’s 1 or 2 more blocks; it’s frequent because of constant pedestrian infrastructure divestment. the real question should be: is slowing down and taking 10 more seconds to commute in your car really that bad?

      • Kyle July 27, 2024 (10:14 pm)

        Okay but the improvements suggested aren’t from a helping lower mobility perspective. Maybe The crosswalk, but is the new standard a crosswalk every single block in the city? The admiral junction has to be one of the more mobile and walkable locations on the peninsula. Instead of using mobility limited folks as a straw man for your argument, would be better to hear from them directly on challenges to accessing this location.

  • alkistu July 26, 2024 (4:55 pm)

    Hi Kyle, I am glad you do feel comfortable in our Admiral Junction. I have in the past considered safety and comfort from my own skill set viewpoint. I also have seen day to day way too many close calls and incidents that has made me more aware of the less mobile, the school students and the many assisted living residents in our Junction area. I want them to feel comfortable too. To go to a restaurant or shopping while getting out for the much needed activity of walking.  Is it fair to say that the Admiral Jct is less comfortable than the Alaska Jct.

    • Kyle July 27, 2024 (10:09 pm)

      If this campaign is about folks with mobility issues let’s here from their ideas on safety improvements for Admiral. The picked improvements seem cherry picked and not tied to mobility. The walk score for Admiral isn’t less than the Alaska Junction because of safety. It’s less because there are less business destinations that meet various living needs. If we want the walk score to go up, it’s more about a variety of businesses that can be walked to.

• Scott - SeattleDiveTours July 26, 2024 (7:48 am)

  Kudos to Stu and his efforts.  

  Is there more we can do (enforcement, including transportation conversations)?  Sure!

  Did he state it exactly or roll it out how you would have?  Maybe not.  Who cares?

  Is this a fantastic start to a worthwhile discussion?  Hell, yes! 

  Thank you to Stu!Let’s do all of it. 

  Let’s refresh the businesses in the corners, let’s have raised crosswalks, let’s have an All-Walk and no turns on red.  

  …and I say that as a local pedestrian who, moments ago, almost got hit in a Admiral crosswalk (with walk light) by a turning driver. The driver who then yelled at me to get out of the road.

• Chuck July 26, 2024 (9:08 am)

  I’ve traveled this intersection almost every day for over 25 years now and I definitely think it warrants a professional traffic planners examination to see what would work best.  A four way walk might be a great addition, it seems to work well at the busy Junction intersection. I’m not supportive of an additional crosswalk mid-block between Admiral and Lander.    This relatively short block is already book ended by four way, traffic light controlled, crosswalks.  Additionally, the west side of the block has relatively few businesses and they (Mud Bay, Circa) are quite close to the Admiral crosswalk.   The largest destination on that side of the street is LaFayette.   It is well served by the two existing crosswalks and, importantly, the crossing guards that are there on school days.  Encouraging kids (or adults) to play chicken with traffic mid block doesn’t seem wise.   I think this added crosswalk would also cause havoc with the existing heavy north and south bound traffic on this block, resulting in further back ups in both directions and Admiral. I do think the idea of a mid block crosswalk NORTH of Admiral is worthy of consideration.   There is a high density of businesses on both sides of California between Admiral and College and I’ve seen plenty of people crossing mid block.   Then crosswalk at College is not traffic light controlled, or even a stop sign.   This stretch of California isn’t as heavily travelled as the section south of Admiral so the mid block crosswalk would be less impactful to the flow of traffic. Again, I think this warrants a professional traffic planners examination to determine what solutions would be effective and safe.

  • alkistu July 27, 2024 (9:50 am)

    Chuck, thanks for your comments.  You are absolutely right about the north of Admiral Jct. The growth of cool and small, mom and pop businesses in that corridor is very good for the North Admiral Neighborhood.  The college street crossing is a concern as well and should be included in the overall assessment. Also, streets adjacent to California Ave.  What is a basic proposal is not final by any means. What you have said about the professional transportation planners is definitely in the process. What can be difficult with that input however is not having the same vision to start with.     

• Jeff P July 26, 2024 (10:05 am)

  Cars are always the danger. Always. We need to road diet the heck out of these roads, no more double lanes!

• platypus July 26, 2024 (10:10 am)

  This is excellent! Admiral is a great location to focus for human-centric design. I love all of his ideas. The no-right on red is newish to Seattle, but the more its implemented the better it will go. Haven’t a concerted effort at our urban villages seems like the biggest bang for the buck. Closing Lander between 44th and California is a no brainer. I need to get one of those yard signs.

• Krumpet July 26, 2024 (11:30 am)

  Maybe I’m alone on this, but I can’t really understand how Admiral isn’t walkable. I’ve lived there for over a decade and I consider it extremely walkable. In fact, that is one of the things I like most about the area.

  Pedestrians that choose to cross the road not at a crosswalk do so at their own peril. There are plenty of nearby, accessible crosswalks anyone can use that are just a short walk away.

  I could see an argument for updating a few so they double as a crosswalk and a speed bump, but adding more crosswalks seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars to me.

• James July 26, 2024 (11:31 am)

  As someone (among many) who lives and parks in the alley between California Ave SW and 44th Ave SW, I am not in favor of closing off 1 of 2 exits from that area (that being the Lander end). That alley often sees blockages with garbage/recycling trucks, utility vehicles, and PCC semi traffic, and only having the Stevens end to exit is going to be a hard no from me.

  • Alley Neighbor July 26, 2024 (2:44 pm)

    Agree on this point. The south alley entrance is a busy parking lot and often blocked by trucks for PCC. Blocking the ability to get in and out at the north end would impact the many residents who park off the alley, as well as the garbage/recycling and trucks for businesses.  

  • alkistu July 27, 2024 (10:17 am)

    Thanks for that input.  On the last day of school this year we did a prototype road closure of Lander and found that closing from California Ave. to the alley worked quite well keeping the street from the alley to 44th open for use. The purpose of the street closure is again, to control misbehaved drivers who use this corridor as a cut through to avoid any traffic lights. When the folks who have a problem with planning their day race up 44th to lander and then cross California to Walnut there is only the stop light at Lander and California to get past in order to speed down Admiral. This occurs right at the door of the Lafayette school during arrivals mainly and only benefits folks sitting very comfortably and safely in their cars. There was an effort to close the street during morning school arrival and end of day pick up but that was purposely ignored, and the signs were moved and damaged. This once again putting the heavy lifting on to the venerable while the comfortable drivers get the pass.  I hope in some distant future we can prioritize the safety and comfort of those who are choosing a healthier path in life.  

  • Bbron July 27, 2024 (1:10 pm)

    there’s plenty of examples of places all over Seattle where residential roads are only 1 car wide and 1 way, yet still have utility vehicles go thru and work; are still intertwined with nearby commerce. yet they seem to survive just fine having them there a few minutes potentially blocking access. like,  you only say you see it blocked, not that you’ve personally been blocked, so it doesn’t even seem to impact you that often, and probably doesn’t to 99% of the residents 99% of the time. like Stu said, you’re letting a handful of car drivers dictate the use of a street that many, many vulnerable folks interact with and putting it on the vulnerable because you might be inconvenienced.

• ell July 26, 2024 (12:57 pm)

  I disagree with closing a public street as in Lander. Here we go again. For that matter, I don’t agree with that restaurant’s expansive patio in a public street either.

  • walkerws July 26, 2024 (1:31 pm)

    Well closed/pedestrianized streets can be great and benefit businesses, and patio expansions are a win-win for both the small local businesses and the community.

  • Jeff P July 26, 2024 (2:55 pm)

    They pay for it… so it’s allowed. It’s just parking spaces. Not a street through way. 

  • Bbron July 27, 2024 (1:16 pm)

    is there any real reason you think those things, or just because the way things have been they need to stay the same? you don’t even seem to go to that restaurant, so maybe you just want a convenient thru fair to putter your vehicle thru and not interact with the surrounding environment like those that would benefit extraordinarily from what would amount to minor inconvenience to you?

• John Dodd July 26, 2024 (1:12 pm)

  Design psychology should be at the forefront of proposals for making the Admiral business district more walkable. Feelings of local community are vitally important. Instead of advocating for a midblock crosswalk (which I guarantee SDOT would never allow) in front of the Admiral Theatre, concentrate on enlivening the pedestrian dead spaces. Get an active tenant into the funky dry-cleaning building on the southwest corner of the California & Admiral Way intersection. Lobby for design improvements to the drab Lafayette Elementary School building that fronts half a block of the business district on California Avenue. Update and refresh the crosswalks at the California & Lander intersection between the school building and the corner stairs of Hiawatha Park. Perhaps most importantly, organize a community campaign to sponsor a new marquee for the city landmark Admiral Theatre. The original neon “ADMIRAL” marquee that projected over the sidewalk and anchored the business district for decades was a glorious incentive for taking a stroll in the neighborhood.

• Bbron July 27, 2024 (5:56 am)

  it’s kinda striking seeing comments about we shouldn’t have folks crossing mid block between Admiral and Lander where the Safeway is… y’all drivers know about unmarked crosswalks and intersections, right? there is a crosswalk, unmarked or not, at every. single. intersection. in the state. The only thing Stu forgot to add is that a raised crossing wouldn’t be a new crossing; it would visualize an existing one. this is why it’s so dangerous to be a pedestrian: car drivers don’t know the rules of the road either because of inadequate licensing or refusal to keep up-to-date. you drivers should expect pedestrians at any intersection, but you don’t because… complacency? selfishness? ignorance? pick any.

  • nothend July 27, 2024 (1:04 pm)

     Although I do stop for pedestrians at both the Safeway and Circa driveways (and anyone crossing just about any street anywhere) I don’t believe that these count as intersections. I’m thinking the only legal place to cross California ave SW would be Admiral or Lander.  RCW 46.04.220   (3) The junction of an alley with a street or highway shall not constitute an intersection. (4) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.

    • Bbron July 27, 2024 (1:28 pm)

      nope, it’s a crossable intersection because the street between California and 42nd is not an alley but a roadway as it goes all the way thru and provides access to the primary entrance of businesses (see the legal definitions for alley, intersection, etc. here). because that is an intersection between the 2 signaled, the 2nd part of the RCW you copied does not apply as those signaled intersections are not adjacent, rather have an intersection between them.

      • nothend July 27, 2024 (2:43 pm)

        It’s a driveway to a parking lot,,, on private property. Not a road nor a street. 

        • Bbron July 27, 2024 (5:13 pm)

          it being private property would mean places like Broadmoor don’t have unmarked crosswalks at all; nor the entrance to them when they connect to public roads. there’s also school crossing signs before this area but after the signalized crossing coming S and much further N that the southern sign from the signalized when coming N, so it’s warning of presentations crossing in this area around Safeway. I emailed SDOT for their interpretation of the RCW in the context of this area.

Sorry, comment time is over.