Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Fauntleroy Rechannelization Musings
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 11, 2009 at 7:32 pm #592274
Cali101MemberI am very humbled to admit that the rechannelization project on Fauntleroy turned out much better than I expected it would. I like the openness of it, and haven’t experienced extensive traffic delays from it. I am a bit perplexed that although the lovely bike lanes have been established, I have only seen one biker in the past week utilizing the lanes(I travel Fauntleroy by car back and forth 1 – 2 times a day, during commuting hours). I am curious to learn how much use the bike lanes will really get, and I also wonder, where do the bikers go after they hit Alaska/Fauntleroy. I don’t see any established bike lanes for commuting beyond there, but I am probably missing something since I am not a biker. Interested in other’s thoughts on the new format….
September 11, 2009 at 7:37 pm #677038
CMPParticipantI think most cyclists turn onto Alaska then zig zag their way to Avalon…where there isn’t a dedicated bike lane for them (please correct me if that’s changed recently). I guess I’ll have to take a drive down Fauntleroy to check out the new set up, but I had a feeling it wouldn’t negatively impact traffic when a ton of people said it would. Glad to hear from a frequent commuter that it’s not all that bad!
September 11, 2009 at 8:53 pm #677039
cjboffoliParticipant
For anyone who would like to take a look, today I shot a video of part of the Fauntleroy re-lane (basically from Morgan Junction to the Fauntleroy/Alaska intersection). That video is here:
http://gallery.me.com/cjboffoli#101263
As you’ll see, traffic is moving along quite smoothly despite the reduced lanes.
September 11, 2009 at 9:19 pm #677040
JoBParticipantSeptember 11, 2009 at 10:23 pm #677041
swimcatMemberI drove it southbound the other night during rush hour. First, I can’t believe that after all of this work, the lane surfaces do not match. It looks terrible. Second, I thought the placement of the merge point for two southbound lanes is bizarre and dangerous. It is right at the crest of a small hill, so you can’t see that it’s coming until you are right at the merge point. I know this will cause issues for people who don’t use this route very often.
And there was a bit of a back up when I drove it during rush hour. I was behind the 54X and every time it pulled over it slowed me down. Also, the line of cars was so long that it would be extremely hard for someone to try and turn left onto Fauntleroy from a side street.
September 11, 2009 at 10:44 pm #677042
Cali101Memberwhere are all the bikers?
September 11, 2009 at 10:51 pm #677043
JenVMemberthe stretch of Fauntleroy between California and Holly is beautiful, and smooth – I wish all road surfaces were that easy on my car. That’s about it. The rest of it blows. Ridiculous to bring Fauntleroy down to one lane each way. Good luck trying to pull out from Findlay, or any other side street. I got used to not using Fauntleroy while construction was underway, and now don’t use it at all…maybe it’s people like me who just found other routes that contribute to “less traffic”
September 11, 2009 at 10:54 pm #677044
JenVMemberalthough, in all fairness, it’s always been a pain in the arse to pull onto Fauntleroy from any side street…
September 11, 2009 at 10:54 pm #677045
JoBParticipantSeptember 11, 2009 at 11:00 pm #677046
pixel pusherMemberWhy, I used the new bike lanes just yesterday and today on my commute into work. And it was very nice. I did not feel like I was holding up traffic while also putting myself at more risk than necessary. I will be using the new lanes 4-5 times week.
September 12, 2009 at 10:43 pm #677047
AlParticipantI use the northbound bike lane early in the mornings, between 6:15 – 7:00 am when there’s little traffic. It’s been great to have that lane and be off the sidewalk (used it during construction). It doesn’t feel much different space-wise as I’m riding roughly in the same position I did w/out the bike lane, but now I don’t have to worry too much about vehicles passing me too close or coming up behind me aggressively. I do worry about the “door zone” issue but try to be vigilant about checking out the parked cars.
I think cyclists are not going to be as comfortable using the southbound sharrowed only lane. I used it for the first time yesterday (didn’t use the sharrow lane until those sharrows were laid down on the pavement) and rode in the no parking zone since it was available. When I had to use the vehicle lane the cars were responsive and patient (and I do signal before making a move so they knew my intention). But the traffic is heavy and a sharrow doesn’t really “separate” the bikes from traffic which is a concern. I just hope that vehicles remember that it’s a shared lane, bikes can be there and that drivers take care passing (it’s ok to use part of the turn lane to execute a safe pass, like drivers do on Avalon – it’s not ok to drive in it or make an aggressive pass). And cyclists should take care to signal and be patient with other vehicles as well.
September 12, 2009 at 10:48 pm #677048
AlParticipantAs a pedestrian I find it mostly easier to cross but it’s sometimes more difficult during rush hour when there’s a constant stream of cars. One can use the turn lane as a “waiting area” to cross the next traffic lane, but have to be careful about turning cars. The fix didn’t do anything about instructing drivers that each intersection curb-to-curb is a legal crosswalk and drivers have to stop for crossing pedestrians. ;-)
September 13, 2009 at 4:14 am #677049
vincentMemberFunny, my impression is pretty much the opposite, every morning since I the completion of the lane painting I have seen at least one other cyclist in my lane, not to mention usage of the oncoming lane. Anecdotal evidence is king on the WSB though.
September 13, 2009 at 6:57 am #677050
grrParticipantSeptember 14, 2009 at 5:29 am #677051
MillertimeMemberEvery year in West Seattle, we add more condos, more townhouses, more multifamily dwellings, which all adds up to more people and more cars. The city’s answer- fewer lanes for cars to get in and out of West Seattle. Fauntleroy is- I mean, was the best route to get through town for people in the Fauntleroy/Lincoln Park area. I appreciate the effort put forth for bike lanes, but as a cyclist, I didn’t have a problem with the old set up. There seems to be no end in sight to the more people, more cars issue in West Seattle, and with no light rail coming soon to our area, how far down can we choke our roads in the name of pedestrian/bicyclist safety?
September 14, 2009 at 9:13 am #677052
HMC RichParticipantWe lost a lane of traffic each way. I think a toll booth for cyclists should be put up. That will keep the riff raff off the bike lane. ;-)
Are bicycles licensed in this city? I think they should be taxed. Of course I am joking. Only the jerk cyclists should be taxed.
I will miss the construction. My three year old loved watching all of the construction. It provided hours of entertainment.
September 14, 2009 at 3:41 pm #677053
austinMemberThe absurd thing is that with all the new condos, townhouses, multifamily dwellings, which all adds up to more people, we expect to just keep adding more and more cars to the equation. This is not a rational point of view. It’s as if these princesses move to a city and expect to either be able to drive their personal transportation at high speed with no impediment whatsoever, or expect the government to provide a public option that is just as convenient. Of course, these are the same people who claim that there are no bikes using these road based resources but at the same time every time they leave the house they boast of witnessing teams of bikes running red lights, supposed slights against their spotless self image to fuel the selfish rage that gets 1 out of 3 cars to actually gun the gas when they see me in the intersection trying to walk across Avalon in the morning.
September 14, 2009 at 4:14 pm #677054
vincentMembermore people = more cars = more roads right? The logic works if your a gradeschool student. Look at how great it works in LA! We should use grade school solutions for everything.
September 14, 2009 at 5:21 pm #677055
AlParticipantPeople who are concerned about the amount of construction and people moving here should contact both the City of Seattle, your representatives and Metro and demand more and better bus service and alternate transporation choices. The bridge is only so big and more cars = longer backups. Get better multi-modal transportation options and you may in fact have a quicker commute to work. However, now we have a what, 9% service CUT to look foward to in the near future which will lead to more cars on the roads? I’ll stay on my bike, thank you!
September 14, 2009 at 5:26 pm #677056
MindDriveMemberHaving been a Fauntleroy driver, pedestrian, bicyclist, and resident, this is the way to go. Without the weaving around people trying to turn (or trying to speed,) traffic moves pretty consistently. Don’t forget the left turn lane can be used to turn IN to, not just out of (confirmed in current WA Driver Guide, Pg.35). With that available, turning left out of Dawson is not bad at all – certainly better then crossing 3-4 lanes at once.
I’ve heard it suggested that this is catering to bikes. Instead, think of it as getting bikes out of your way. :-) Uphill northbound they tend to be slower, so it’s much easier to go around them now. Southbound downhill, they’re faster and the existing laws are represented nicely by sharrows. Fauntleroy is one of the most flat routes in inland West Seattle, so making it safer for cars and bikes to co-exist is important. There are indeed a fair number of bikers throughout the day, and the safer route will likely increase that.
September 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm #677057
MindDriveMemberFYI, they are pulling the no parking signs from the West side of Fauntleroy now, just passing Dawson about 10 minutes ago.
September 16, 2009 at 1:33 am #677058
MillertimeMemberVincent, I absolutely agree with you about more roads not being the answer. However, I don’t think the answer is to reduce the road capacity we currently have.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.