PARKING: Add more street spaces to Alki Avenue after diagonal spaces are removed? New SDOT proposal and survey

| Transportation | West Seattle news

12:45 PM: As first reported here in January, SDOT plans to convert the diagonal-parking area just northwest of Don Armeni Boat Ramp into parallel parking. An update today reaffirms that the work should be complete by mid-June. But today’s update adds something new:

(Google Maps Street View image, part of the stretch where SDOT proposes adding parking)

Re-establishing daytime on-street parking is proposed for the west/water side of Alki Avenue SW, between the 1200 and 1700 blocks, where the street is wide enough. This would help offset the reduced parking at Duwamish Head and meet increased parking demand during summers. Changes could be installed in the summer of 2025.

While the diagonal-parking removal is a done deal, the Alki Avenue parking is not, SDOT says, and it’s asking your thoughts via this brief survey. Meantime, we have followup questions out to SDOT, including the number of spaces planned for removal/addition, and the updated cost (the original announcement of the diagonal-parking removal noted that District 1 City Councilmember Rob Saka had gotten $175,000 for it added to the budget).

ADDED 5:05 PM: SDOT says there’ll be a net gain of 140 spaces with all of this – the 35 diagonal spaces will be replaced with 25 parallel spaces, and 150 spaces would be added to Alki Avenue. SDOT says the $175,000 originally budgeted should cover the Alki Avenue plan as well as the diagonal conversion.

We also asked about other street changes that would be made to accommodate the parking changes: First, at the soon-to-be-former diagonal area, “Wheel stops will block off the space behind the parking lane and the curb on the west side (water side).” Second, in the area between 1200 and 1700 blocks of Alki Avenue, “We will be installing 20′ no parking zones (also called daylight buffers) before and after each crosswalk to enhance visibility of pedestrians crossing at these locations. The parking lane will be established by painting a fog line on the west side (water side of Alki Ave SW). Wheel stops are not here, as these spaces will be adjacent to the curb.”

k May 29, 2025 (12:49 pm)

If they add parking to Alki, it should be monetized. Far too many streets have free parking. It costs the city money to create and maintain that space, they should get paid back by the people that use it.

Camille Gibson May 29, 2025 (1:53 pm)

Reply

I don’t want parking on that side of the street. If it does pass it should be paid.
The King May 29, 2025 (4:53 pm)

Reply

Most pay taxes so “free” isn’t applying. But if we go down that route where does it stop. Charge per mile for bicycle lanes and hourly rates to walk in the park? Those have to be maintained too right?
Erik May 29, 2025 (5:22 pm)

Reply

Absolutely not. We already pay sky high taxes. It’s not being done “for free”. We don’t need to pay twice in the form of taxes plus parking fees.
j May 30, 2025 (5:04 am)

Reply

Lots of things are free and cost the city money. Free parking on alki helps keep it accessible to families visiting from nearby cities where taking transit there is not practical for many
- Mike Hodges May 30, 2025 (9:34 am)
  
  Reply
  
  Since gas, insurance, and car payments are free? Cars are expensive. It makes no sense to force “free” parking in the highest demand spaces, and is certainly not in line with any published city goal or policy. It leads to waste of the resource and abuse.
Shawn May 30, 2025 (9:20 am)

Reply

Yes! I’m genuinely frustrated by how much public land gets wasted storing people’s private vehicles for free. It’s basically a subsidy for car usage. It should have demand variable, market determined rates. The city should be well compensated for renting out public land in this manner, and it should prefer other uses entirely when feasible.
- WS Person May 30, 2025 (12:29 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  So should people have to pay to lock their bikes up? Should people have to pay a usage fee for every time they go to a park? We pay taxes for these things. It’s ridiculous to say every time someone goes out in public they have to pay for the usage, cos that’s what’s implied. Or is it just the “I hate cars” contingency that says this?
  - Fooo May 30, 2025 (2:32 pm)
    
    Reply
    
    Bike lockers exist for a fee and I would 100% pay to feel safer locking my bike up if they existed in more places.
  - Mike Hodges May 30, 2025 (3:42 pm)
    
    Reply
    
    When one vehicle occupies a space, a second one cannot. It is not the same as a Park visit or pole to lock your bike too. When the parking is full people drive from all over l, only to circle around and around. Looking for parking, maybe not people. Pricing it means that some people, who can walk/bike/transit/carpool will do it. It also means others won’t hog one space all day which could have served a dozen groups instead of of just one.

Tae May 29, 2025 (1:29 pm)

It will be interesting how many spots the SDOT thinks this re-configuration will add. Will it be worth $175,000 and at the expense of folks with neck/back disabilities to now have to struggle with parallel parking?

heartless May 29, 2025 (4:15 pm)

Reply

If you struggle with driving (including the often necessary skill of reversing) you should not be driving. Driving is not a right.
- Seth May 29, 2025 (5:57 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  There are plenty of counter examples to your point. Gasoline taxes immediately comes to mind. We also have a proposed EBike tax ect. The idea of paid parking is to control demand there’s only so many spaces.
flimflam May 29, 2025 (7:36 pm)

Reply

I would assume/hope anyone impaired to the point they can’t functionally turn their head in a car wouldn’t still be driving. That’s a strange argument.
Joe May 29, 2025 (8:11 pm)

Reply

Oh be quiet. If you struggle to look behind you while parking, the current back-in diagonal parking isn’t any better.(I say this as a person with handicap permit for mobility issues)

Lives nearby May 29, 2025 (1:39 pm)

SDOT should put those bollards or something on either side of cross walks. The signs don’t work. People park right up to the crosswalk on nice days which prevents pedestrians from seeing oncoming traffic and vice versa. I’ve seen it enough over the years and never seen tickets.

I May 29, 2025 (1:53 pm)

An added benefit is traffic calming! These addional stalls should reduce speeding a bit along this stretch.

Barbara Otterson June 1, 2025 (11:57 am)

Reply

I sincerely doubt that these parking spaces would cause traffic calming. These additional spaces will create additional viewing audiences for the loud engine revs, loud ‘music’ and cycles driven by drivers standing on their bike seats!!! STOP THIS OPTION!!!

M May 29, 2025 (2:38 pm)

Alki is already the most dangerous part of Seattle during summer. To basically invite more people to come down to party in front of people’s houses, leave their garbage and block off access to Emergency vehicles completely makes no sense. The speed bumps have had little impact. You will just be making the raceway that much narrower inviting more crashes and injuries. Police can’t enforce the laws as they are. How are they going to enforce “daytime parking only?” To further congest an already congested area is asking for trouble. There was a reason this was blocked off years ago go. Don’t bring it back!!

Alki resident May 29, 2025 (3:15 pm)

Reply

M, when did Alki become the most dangerous part of Seattle?
Rhonda May 29, 2025 (4:21 pm)

Reply

M, Alki is FAR from being the most dangerous part of Seattle. It’s closer to being one of the safest.
Hunk May 29, 2025 (5:51 pm)

Reply

Are you worried about congestion or about speeding? Bc it can’t be both. If you want to reduce speeding (and related crashes and injuries), increasing congestion and narrowing streets is a good way to solve that problem.
Lauren May 29, 2025 (7:26 pm)

Reply

“Party in front of people’s houses” oh you mean the houses people knowingly purchased directly in front of one of Seattle’s largest public beaches? 😅
Liang May 29, 2025 (9:54 pm)

Reply

Exactly. Other than no new parking space, county should install noise-trigged-camera to catch those loud motorcycles and automobiles.
TAnderson May 30, 2025 (10:04 am)

Reply

Completely agree. It seems that because it’s impossible to control behavior at the current diagonal location it will be made less convenient for those people who legitimately want to use it and consequently we need more parking in the area so naturally we should move all those cars and their problems further down the road to Alki ave SW

Access is for everyone May 29, 2025 (3:08 pm)

Taking away parking, and in so doing making harder for people to be on Alki, limits access for everyone other than those affluent enough to live there. This is more policy making that hurts everyone because of the bad behavior of the few. I’d much rather this money be going to fund real community policing, which is the only real solution! An absence of accountability is what allows behavioral problems to fester. And the failed policies of Vision Zero and traffic calming are literally killing people. This is about policing. Let’s put the time and resources where they will provide the most benefit.

Com. Sens. May 29, 2025 (6:26 pm)

Reply

what are the “failed policies of Vision Zero and traffic calming” that “are literally killing people”?
Nolan May 29, 2025 (7:59 pm)

Reply

Have you ever encountered a problem that couldn’t be most effectively solved with policing?
Dan May 30, 2025 (9:40 am)

Reply

What are the failed policies and traffic calming that are literally killing people?

Curtis May 29, 2025 (3:09 pm)

SDOT hates us. We might as well be ruled by Genghis Khan. They apparently think diagonal parking is akin to a confederate flag or something. How they removed all the parking at the waterfront is a marvel is authoritarian design.

heartless May 29, 2025 (4:18 pm)

Reply

Genghis Khan hated nothing more than Confederate flags. Actually, that tracks… Carry on!

Runner May 29, 2025 (3:32 pm)

No,No,No,No! Every weekend night people hang out drinking and partying at Duwamish Head. I have to walk past it often. Now the plan is to reduce the spaces there to keep the activity down and move it in front of even more of the people that live here! We already put up with the street racing and loud cars and motorcycles. Now you want to move the partying in front of us too, no thanks! Definitely no overnight parking, but just like other areas who will enforce it? This is a terrible idea for those of us it will impact. No, No, No! Rob, please don’t create a new problem to solve another problem.

Derek May 29, 2025 (5:26 pm)

Reply

You have to walk past people enjoying public spaces? You poor thing 🙄
Individuals don’t own the beachfront, move out of the city if you hate sharing your surroundings with others so much.
- M May 29, 2025 (9:09 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  Let’s party on the sidewalk in front of your place. Public space. I am sure it’s nice!They are not all enjoying it, which i love, love watching. Many are abusing it!!

Marcus May 29, 2025 (4:33 pm)

Alki is a park. A very wonderful park that is unique. When people buy on Alki it comes with a city park. I have absolutely no qualms about this and the tax revenues feed the city. Now there should no street racing, no drinking or gathering for loud partying. The open close times need to be observed. And the police need to patrol because guns are fired and there are reported drug sales. So city do your job, SPD please patrol and let Alki be enjoyed by all.

Admiral-2009 May 29, 2025 (4:56 pm)

Vancouver, BC charges for parking at Stanley Park, it’s past time for Seattle to do the same at Alki and Lincoln Parks in West Seattle and other Seattle Parks such as Seward and Golden Gardens

Rhonda May 29, 2025 (5:29 pm)

Reply

No one lives at Stanley Park, but thousands of high-income people live at Alki. Thousands of wealthy people also live within a few hundred yards of Lincoln Park. You wanting to charge low-income working people who drive from several miles away is pretty classist and disgusting.
- Nolan May 29, 2025 (8:01 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  Alki has public transit service. Also, spare us the hand-wringing about “low-income working people” unless you plan to pour that energy into improving said transit service. It is not possible to build enough parking spaces for Alki, and it’s a fool’s errand to try.
  - Gordy May 29, 2025 (10:02 pm)
    
    Reply
    
    Alki has public transit service??? Are you thinking the shuttle counts as public transit service? It’s negligible, at best! Only one direction and not very far!
    - Nolan May 29, 2025 (11:06 pm)
      
      Not only is the shuttle literally public transit (773 and 775), we also have the 50 and 56 covering Alki Beach.
      
      If your point is that those routes need better coverage, then I’m glad to hear that we agree.
    - j May 30, 2025 (5:08 am)
      
      Alki’s transit is not practical if you are coming from Kent, Auburn etc. Which many people i know do when they visit alki. Its a big attraction in our region and shouldn’t just be accessible for one type of person who happens to live around it
    - Kyle June 1, 2025 (12:57 am)
      
      @Nolan neither the 50 nor the 56 go to duwamish head or the area of Alki ave where the parking is being discussed here. The 37 uses too but that has been cut. This area only has a shuttle you would have to flag down and not dedicated bus service.
Johnny Stulic May 29, 2025 (5:55 pm)

Reply

The overzealous willingness of the American conservative to consistently vote against his own economic interest is only matched by the overzealous willingness of the American “progressive” to tax himself to death every step he takes.
- Look Both Ways May 29, 2025 (11:16 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  Amazing observation. Well put.
  - Nolan May 30, 2025 (2:18 am)
    
    Reply
    
    Please elaborate on how the comment you’re responding to is an “amazing observation.”
- Mike Hodges May 30, 2025 (9:30 am)
  
  Reply
  
  A user fee isn’t a tax.
Derek May 29, 2025 (7:37 pm)

Reply

Hell no this is so gross. KEEP PARKS FREE

Pixie May 29, 2025 (5:49 pm)

By suggesting paid parking you are taking away the ability for those of us who can not afford it. The busses don’t work for me to access the beach from where I live in WS. Taking 5 grandkids anywhere is expensive these days. Free Parking is disappearing -like the parking lots in the Junction. I no longer go there to shop or attend church as I cannot walk distances and close street parking is gone with all the apartment complexes built. It will be a rare visit to Alki if paid parking is proposed for this grandma.Dissatisfaction from those who bought their condos and homes in the area seem like they don’t research the area’s activity level before purchasing. You already got an unrestricted view. Parties on the beach, cars, some racing, violence, this can be found everywhere in Seattle. As for Alki, it has been like this for years. I am a kid from the late 60s,and 70s. Cruising, fights, races – it was all there and will remain part of Alki. We pay high taxes for our parks. Voted on many of them. We at least deserve this one perk.

Pookie May 30, 2025 (7:47 am)

Reply

Spot on. It’s like people moving next to the airport and then complaining about the noise. Alki has ALWAYS been a summer activity spot since the earliest days of the city. The new condo owners are manipulating other city council via SAKA, to essentially commit a land grab and push the public out. I agree, the “issues” these fear pandering condo lords are pushing is all BS.

Justin May 29, 2025 (5:58 pm)

I never park at Alki. I bus or ride my bike or both.It’s a nightmare getting down there and parking. If they want to park on the waterfront have them pay.

West Seattle Mad Sci Guy May 29, 2025 (7:15 pm)

Just curious – why did they remove the diagonal parking? Was it considered a hazard?

WSmom June 1, 2025 (10:54 pm)

Reply

I was wondering that myself. First I’ve heard of it.

Joe May 29, 2025 (8:08 pm)

Absolute nonsense from Saka. Improve public safety by… removing parking so there’s fewer people? The issue isn’t the number of cars.

wetone May 29, 2025 (8:37 pm)

This is so Seattle…… spend millions $$$ over the last 50 years on parking re-configurations around and at Alki beach area only to end up with what was there originally. Can’t make this crap up…….. People need to start paying attention when voting and quit passing levy’s after zero accountability from city for years of repeated failures with roadways that involve all.

Kyle May 29, 2025 (8:51 pm)

Bus service is abysmal to non-existent for that area of Alki. Yes to more parking. As for should it be paid, SDOT should just follow their normal demand analysis for paid parking like they do elsewhere in the city.

Admiral May 29, 2025 (9:43 pm)

Maybe they should enforce the existing rules, the crowd at don armeni is already suspect, they always park in the “trailer only” parking. I love coming back to the boat ramp after a day of fishing to a bunch of shady activities.

WestSeattleDerm May 29, 2025 (10:25 pm)

Net gain of 140 parking spaces is material. Especially during the summer months (this past week already!) when most every Seattle resident is flocking to Alki and driving around every Alki street just to find an open parking spot. That’s not going to change.I’m a dad, kids get after school care in Alki beach area. I opt to bike to pick-up vs drive my car cause it’s a round and round headache to park. Made 3 loops of the same streets on Wednesday trying to get something legit for a 3 minute pick-up at 4pm. Every other car on the streets is doing the same thing.Totally agree with peoples posts about late night partying and street racing. That has got to stop. No overnight parking or limited parking (2-3hours?) makes great sense. Mandate it and get enforcement. City needs to start collecting revenue again through violation enforcement vs adding more soft taxes onto those already paying.Adding 140 parking spots in any neighborhood is a huge benefit. Had no idea this was in the works till this WSB post. Thanks!

WSmom June 1, 2025 (10:56 pm)

Reply

Has the aftercare asked to have restricted parking out front for drop off and pickup? They do that at a number of places around seattle, day cares, schools, etc.

Lee May 30, 2025 (12:55 am)

Absolutely not ok. Taxes I already paid aside, the primary route to and in front my family’s home will now have 120 plus people trying to parallel park in a small span of street causing even more congestion on Alki. Furthermore, I feel this will impede emergency vehicles which are frequently needed on Alki Avenue. Moreover, policing this area will become much more difficult due to increased parking AND partying activity, which is bound to occur.

22blades May 30, 2025 (2:45 am)

More social engineering with a bucket of paint. I have lost confidence in SDOT’s ability to engineer solutions that move people from A to B in a safe manner. I’m surprised we still get Federal funding with all the haphazard & constant changes. I seriously doubt our roads conform to science, based DoT designs anymore. This will be the third design of Duwamish Head parking curb since the pandemic: nose in, back in & now parallel. The guy that gave us often silly citywide blanket of “No Right on Red” is long gone (Not that it’s bad idea, but too many ill placed ones that accomplishes cars sitting going nowhere). So many street lanes that don’t align with each other after crossing an intersection like Admiral & 47th. Too many curves without a constant radius.

Alley Oak May 30, 2025 (7:52 am)

The survey has three questions. Even so, take the survey.

WSB May 30, 2025 (9:14 am)

Reply

Stopped at one when I opened it but will amend the description to “brief.”

Mike Hodges May 30, 2025 (9:27 am)

Why is the parking here not metered and paid? That would be self regulating. What kind of US city would have free parking in a place like this in 2025?

TAnderson May 30, 2025 (10:26 am)

Moving the mayhem and illegal activity further down the road on to Alki Ave hardly seems like progress to me

AlkiBeachIsPublic May 30, 2025 (2:29 pm)

If you purchased a home along Alki Avenue-good for you, you also purchased home facing a public street and public park…save your privileged comments about being annoyed with people parallel parking for another day. This community consistently amazes me at its ability to eat itself around its competing priorities of “I hate cars” vs “NIMBYism” vs “Not another tax but we need public programs” … the hippocracy is suffocating … enjoy the sunshine this weekend everyone, I’ll wave at ya from the beach!

Jenna S May 30, 2025 (7:06 pm)

Please do not add parking on the waterside to this stretch of Alki Beach where it is currently prohibited.. That section of Alki Beach is the much more pleasant for walking and jogging.. And a cyclist who rides in the road (yes that’s legal and marked) to avoid scooters, double-wide carts, roller skaters and more it is also safer. No risk of getting “doored” when riding inches from cars parked on the waterside of the street as is the case further down Alki Ave SW. Getting rid of these parking spaces originally was an improvement. Don’t casually add them back without considering the safety implications of making an already overrun beach and road (at peak times) that lacks adequate law enforcement even worse.

Marge May 31, 2025 (12:08 am)

Why are we moving the problem from Duwamish and spreading it along Alki? I stayed in those apartments right opposite the diagonal parking spots. People hang out there when the weather is nice which is fine, but you add loud music, drinking, weed etc and the occasional arguments and fights occur. Remember the shooting that happened there? Well, I drove past that dead body and called the police. Adding additional parking spots will just bring all that up the street. Solve the loitering problem, don’t spread it and make it a bigger problem please.

Edna May 31, 2025 (6:35 am)

This is a crazy idea. As it is, the situation is dangerous with loud motorcycles and cars until 1-2am and one or two major accidents every summer. More traffic will increase the likelihood of vehicle accidents and pedestrian accidents . The noise would be doubled all the time in a residential condo area that already has high population density. Also, diminished property values will reduce city property tax income.

Carlos Perez May 31, 2025 (3:47 pm)

This idea is so ridiculous that it will be laughable if it wasn’t true. It looks like going back to the fifties where they put parking everywhere. Basically, the city cannot control the bad guys that concentrate at the diagonal parking area so they want to spread them out instead. We need enforcing the current rules, not creating new ones. By the way, there is already a huge underutilized car park and at the end of Harbor avenue (Southwest Spokane Street Park & Ride) that can provide car access to Alki visitors. We even have a free bus (line 775) to bring visitors to the business a the end of Alki. No need of new parking, thanks

JC June 1, 2025 (6:39 am)

What is the need for more parking at that section of Alki. There are no commercial business or beach for people to visit.

35-koala.dodgy@icloud.com June 1, 2025 (7:52 am)

Peserv the beauty of Alki and the view ir affords.No to the proposal.

Bob June 1, 2025 (6:39 pm)

This is a joke. You try listening to the motorcycle go by with the loud noises they make, plus the cars with the loud muffler’s and the police do NOTHING about it.. plus the crosswalk where I’ve witness people getting almost hit without looking.

Bettyann Nassar June 2, 2025 (7:47 am)

Absolutely no parking. Our homes are here. It’s not a parking lot. Thank you

LM June 3, 2025 (2:02 pm)

Not all of the residents along Alki are entitled , wealthy owners. This is a neighborhood and the increased noise and lack of policing will turn this into a more dangerous raceway with speeding cars and their loud mufflers, along with the blaring music.