Beginning next year, SDOT will be undertaking a major repaving project in Wallingford and Green Lake, including repaving on 40th, 50th, Green Lake Way, 80th, over 500 upgraded accessible curb ramps and more.
For a full rundown on the project, see SDOT’s Green Lake and Wallingford Paving & Multi-Modal Improvements page and offer your feedback online through the paving project Online Open House. Better yet, get yourself to one of the in person, live, face-to-face (“retro”) open houses coming up at the Good Shepherd Center and
If you’d like to chat with the folks from SDOT about the many paving projects they have going on around Wallingford and Green Lake, they’ll be holding several open houses:
- Saturday, July 21, 12-2 PM, Lower level (Good Shepherd Center)
- Tuesday, July 24, 5-7 PM (Green Lake Library)
- Saturday, July 28, 12-2 PM (Green Lake Library)
I’m curious if anyone agrees with SDOT that 40th needs work. I think 40th is in FANTASTIC shape (both in layout and in pavement condition) compared to a lot of other arterials in Seattle. And removing the parking sucks. Seems like a huge waste of resources.
Yes, 40th needs work. I bike that street every day to work (downhill in the morning, uphill in the afternoon). Downhill is fine (if SDOT wanted to save some money, skip the sharrows since they’re useless) but uphill there’s a dire need of a bike lane. Despite the fact that I’m moving faster than the stored vehicles, there’s lots of drivers who seem to think that I’m the one that’s clogging up the street.
Building a bike lane on 40th not only connects Wallingford to the Burke, but also to the bike lane on Latona so will make it easier and safer to get to and from Green Lake and Ravenna by bike.
Why not ride up/down 39th or 41st? You’d have the entire street to yourself and no traffic.
Explain.
a) Both 39th & 41st dead end at Eastern.
b) As has been pointed out already, residental streets are not very safe to bike on.
Pointed out by whom?
You can’t go around the corner to complete your journey???
Much safer than 40th if on a bike.
So — just a wild thought here — both bike lanes and access (parking) for our houses. SAVE N40th has two plans that have both. However, the city wants to go cheap. The bottom line for me is how I continue without deliveries — no oil, ups, contractors, etc. — heaven forbid I need to have my roof repaired. The discussion has always been framed as the needs of cyclists — but at what price?
Phil, that is a very good point. It must be included in any plan. Or else you get to have nice red cones for the workmen to block the bike lane when they need to park there.
Sorry — SDot has told us that we won’t be allowed to stop traffic AT ALL — without a Street Use Permit. That will cost about $3000, include a traffic engineering report, flaggers and cops. — Not really a solution for deliveries or contractors.
— I encourage anyone who wants to work on a solution to go to FB – SAVE N40th.
Jesus, what a nightmare. And all for a tiny and shrinking percentage of commuters, according to the latest ST article. And for N 40th, SDOT’s own figures have N 40th bike commuters at 1/4 of 1% compared to cars.
How many bike trips happen on 40th per day? Betting 10 or 12.
a) Betting way more that 12.
b) A lot more when there is a protected bike lane.
Well, technically, you’re right, GW. 30 is “way more than 12.” Care to guess how that compares to the number of vehicle trips on 40th?
OK, 30 on a nice day (sounds optimistic) – any hard numbers to back that up?
And on a crappy day in February, 5? Remember, there are more crappy than nice days.
The city should do a cost/benefit analysis on 5 bike trips per day vs lost parking, inconvenience and slower traffic flow. But they can’t even order streetcars that fit on the f-ing track. Fire all of them and start over.
John, if you click on the “multi-modal improvements” link in the article, and then go to “boards” you can see the stats for biking and car use on 40th and all the other nearby projects.
According to SDOT’s own figures for 40th, it is indeed 30 bicycle trips/day. To put that in perspective, the same stretch of road has 11,500 vehicle trips/day. So bicyclists represent 0.26% of all trips, or 1/4 of 1.%
But don’t worry, I’m sure GW’s right, we’ll see “a lot more” once the bike lane’s built! Maybe even 35 or 40 per day! Because that’s happened with all the other bike lane projects, right?
I don’t think the plan involves taking away driving lanes, and the parking lane contributes 0 trips per day, so I would say it loses out to the bike lane by that measure!
Touche!
Although I’m not sure how well that point will play with those who will lose parking for themselves and their customers.
Speaking of a huge waste of resources…
Does anyone in SDOT know how to use a tape measure? Heckuva a job, SDOT!
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/seattles-new-streetcars-may-be-too-big-to-fit-tracks-maintenance-barn/
So who are the stalwart budget hawks looking out for the interests of the taxpayers and overseeing city transportation projects like the streetcar, anyway? Oooh, according to the Seattle bike blog from December 2015, it’s a “dream team,” yay!
“From the Seattle bike blog on December 21st, 2015:
“O’Brien Will Chair The Transportation Committee
Former Transportation Choices Coalition Director Rob Johnson will be the Vice-Chair of the committee, and Kshama Sawant will also be a committee member (with Lisa Herbold as the alternate).
This is pretty much a transportation dream team, and I can’t wait to see them in action next year.”
40th definitively need improvement.
* We need safe crosswalks along 40th to join the two parts of the residential neighbourhood it splits.
* We need to encourage drivers on 40th to slowdown, currently far to many cars are speeding through the neighbourhood.
* The sidewalks on the north side of 40th east of Wallingford Ave are in very bad shape.
* This street carries a lot of heavy buses. The uphill section between Latona and Wallingford has depressions where the buses wheels travel. Without preventative maintenance this will be a problem.
* West Wallingford needs a safe bike route to connect the neighbourhood to the Burke-Gilman Trail and the safe bike route on Stone Way.
* We need a safe bike route from lower Wallingford and the U District to Hamilton Middle School and Lincon High School when it repoens.
* Moving uphill cyclists out of the travel lane will make it safer and less stressful for car and bus drivers.
Every side-street along 40th has on street parking, mostly along both sides. Most of 40th also has unused driveways. Removing on street parking along this one street is well worth it for the benefits to everyone.
* No new crosswalks are being put in on 40th.
* The protected bike lane on the north side of North 40th will be full of leaves during the fall and winter. These are currently moved by buses and other vehicles. They’re just going to stay on the ground inside a protected lane . . and the city aren’t going to be able to clean them up unless they do it by hand (which they are NOT going to do).
* The city does not necessarily have any plans to replace sidewalk.
* Note that there is no point providing feedback to SDOT. It is TOO late. SDOT tell me that these plans are set in stone now. Its happening.
A marked crosswalk is being added to 40th and Bagley. Curb bulbs are being added to Densmore and Ashworth, making the crossing at unmarked crosswalks safer and easier.
There’s already a cross walk there.
Its not a crosswalk if most cars don’t stop for the pedestrians.
Nope – its still a crosswalk even if not a single car stops for pedestrians
A lot of people do drive with that idea.
Yep, same as a lot of cyclists
for sure
It is not too late to provide feedback to SDOT – see open house dates above and/or complete the online opportunity. SDOT made a presentation at yesterday’s Wallingford Chamber meeting and encouraged feedback. That said, I appreciate your skepticism in SDOT listening to our concerns but also note that the Mayor and City Council have understandably taken a hit recently re their lack of response to neighborhood input.
I have confirmation, in writing, from SDOT that “at this point in the design process we have settled on high-level decisions such as the routes for new bike facilities and which intersections we will improve”
And it’s a well-deserved hit. They don’t even care about neighborhood input, they’re too concerned with sucking up to their bike advocacy groups. For example, District 4’s Rob Johnson pretended he didn’t know there was overwhelming opposition to the 35th Ave NE bike lane project now underway. Emails and texts that weren uncovered between him and citycbureaucrats say otherwise.
#7upin2019
I provided positive feedback on the three occasions that SDOT solicited it, and got an email response (from a separate person, even) each time. Just because SDOT is taking action that is contrary to what I handful of people in the neighborhood wants, doesn’t mean that they aren’t listening.
The plans are NOW set in stone. They weren’t always. But now they are.
1. SDOT already doesn’t clean streets so the uphill bike lane on 40th is hardly going to be worse than what we have now, where it’s more of a river bank. If the city wanted to clean the lane, though, they just need to take a lesson from WSDOT, which bought machines specifically for the SR-520 trail on the new bridge.
2. The city shouldn’t have plans to replace sidewalks. They instead should coerce (by legal action if necessary) the property owners to replace the sidewalks, since it’s their responsibility.
3. I’m glad that they’re set in stone – too much of the city’s Bike Master Plan has been delayed by talk and more talk and more construction while people are being intimidated by aggressive driving into not using their own streets (or worse, being hurt or killed on them).
“They instead should coerce (by legal action if necessary) the property owners to replace the sidewalks, since it’s their responsibility.”
Which can cost literally tens of thousand$ of dollars to do. Yes, citizen, fix that sidewalk that isn’t your property. Oh and btw, we’re taking away your parking too. Now shuttup and vote for more levies for bike lanes.
1. SDOT does clean the streets . . with a machine called a street sweeper. But even without a street sweeper, with vehicles passing so close to the curb on the northside of 40th, the leaves get swept away. For an example of how the northside of 40th is going to look once there is a protected bike lane there, just look at the southside of 40th during the fall, winter months. As you put it, yes, like a “river bank”. I’m not going to be cleaning the part of the street outside my house.
2. Yeah, good plan
3. Yep, they’re set in stone
Why should property owners be forced to pay repairs/replacement of city sidewalks on city owned right of way? The property line is typically four feet or six feet INSIDE the sidewalk. The city also owns the trees (inappropriate oaks) that are destroying the sidewalks and side sewers. Can I remove tree — NO!
Because that’s what you signed up for by being property owner? SMC 15.72 explicitly requires adjacent property owners to assume responsibility for sidewalk maintenance and repair.
https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/maintenance-and-paving/sidewalk-repair-program
https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT15STSIUS_SUBTITLE_IIIMACO_CH15.72SIMA
From the first link: “However, if the sidewalk damage is being caused by City infrastructure such as a City-owned tree or sewer line, the City will take the responsibility for making the repairs.”
Repairs consist of a shovel of blacktop.
Skylar, we also signed up for living in a neighborhood zoned single family.
RE. safe bike routes- there is already the route on 44th that cost a lot of money and is rarely utilized from what I have observed. Is there data to support the need for a bike lane on 40th? Why can’t cyclist utilize less busy side streets and Wallingford Ave?
RE. encouraging drivers on 40th to slowdown – SPD could set up speed traps to discourage speeding. Added bike lanes on 40th will just push more cars onto side streets and then we will see more speeding on those streets.
“Why can’t cyclist utilize less busy side streets and Wallingford Ave?”
Your point makes total sense. That’s what I do when I bike my daughter to her school at Green Lake. I take the side streets. They are safer and more pleasant. II don’t want us to be out on the busy arterial even with the bike lane there. The bike activists’ agenda isn’t really about bike safety. That’s just a cover for getting rid of all those evil cars, one block at a time. I even heard yesterday that the city is going to allow those electric-assist bikes on the BG Trail. Don’t worry, they assure us. We’ll keep the speed limit at 15 miles an hour. Right.
A non-arterial street like N 44th is not necessarily a safer bicycle route. It feels safer, because we’re scared of cars and there are fewer of them, and they go slower. But crossing traffic is really what will get you, and all those uncontrolled intersections and the low traffic volume combine to make them much more hazardous. It’s what you don’t see that will kill you.
As for slowing 40th – how about parking some cars along the roadside? Not kidding, that does have an effect, compared to the same road opened up with a lot of empty bicycle lane & buffer.
It’s situational. But even protected bike lanes have to go through intersections, as do cars.
I’ll give you a specific example of why a lot of these bike lanes are nothing more than a false sense of security: At least twice now I’ve seen drivers actually drive into the two-way “protected” bike lane on Broadway from Pike because it’s wide enough for cars and it’s a typically over engineers confusing spot.
And just 2 weeks ago a bicyclist going against the flow of traffic in that same bike lane nearly crashed into me as I was pulling out of the gas station there at Pike and Broadway to head north on B-way. And as I see with easily half the nightime cyclists, it was dark and he had no bike lights or reflectors, and no helmet either. At that spot, if you’re going against the flow of traffic as he was, you’re going downhill. And he was going very fast. When you look to right for pedestrians about to cross in front of you, you expect to see them. Not so with a guy flying downhill with no lights where a moment before there was no sign of him. Luckily I caught a glimpse of him out of the corner my eye and jammed on my brakes just in time. Why they put a bike lane on a downhill where bicyclists can easily go as fast as cars, if not faster, is beyond me.
Yes, I think there’s some published work that shows vastly higher risk at crossings for counter-flow bicycles on 2-ways. I’m not saying any of this is a good idea, just that if you’re say commuting that way at a reasonably brisk pace, you’d be safer on 45th than 44th. Cross traffic – particularly at Dick’s – is still the major hazard, but they’re a little more likely to see you. If you’d encountered that bicyclist traveling at the same speed, same conditions, on a neighborhood street, the collision would be practically guaranteed.
Currently people living south east Wallingford faced with an unsafe route or a considerable detour via 44th Street or the Burke Gilman Trail to get to cycle to most destinations in and around the neighbourhood.
The 43/44th Greenway is used a lot by both people walking and cycling. It cost $110,000. Most of that was spent on improvements to the crosswalk at 43rd St & Stone Way. That’s a small price to pay for a safe route to walk or bike to the middle & high schools.
It also wasn’t a real greenway until very recently – it was a trial project by SDOT, and they cheaped out on everything that would have made it a greenway, aside from occasional sharrow paint. It didn’t get its any stop signs on cross streets or its single crossing assist until last year, when SDOT finally remembered to come back and fix all of the things that they learned from subsequent greenways.
Q: Why don’t car drivers who want to go fast just take I-5 if they want to go fast, rather than 40th? A: Because it doesn’t go where they want to go. That’s the same reason I don’t use it when I bike – it’s eight blocks and a hill out of my way.
~90 street parking spots on 40th will disappear with this proposal and those cars will be forced onto the overcrowded side streets, north and south of 40th. The removal of Zone 5 RPZ will force those folks onto side streets, north and south of 45th. The opening of Lincoln will encroach further on street parking. Please provide feedback to SDOT and/or start cleaning out garages and/or buy bikes!
These conversations often lead to lots of noise, with people debating to win points which are tangential to the real issues. Let me try to summarize the real issues as I see them.
Specific Issue: Some people want a new safe bike route through the neighbourhood. Others feel than giving up the ability to park on the street in front of their house is not worth it to create this bike route.
General Issue: Some people feel car ownership and car use is threatened by an anti-car moment. Others feel the city must do more to protect and support cyclists.
Am I right?
In response to your ‘General Issue’: Car ownership and car use is, by definition, threatened by an anti-car movement.
In response to your ‘Specific Issue’: no, some people are against the new bike safe route on North 40th Street in particular, not against a new safe bike route in general. Personally, I think N 40th is a terrible street for bike lanes. I park my car on N 40th sometimes and really don’t care about having to park it somewhere else.
“In response to your ‘General Issue’: Car ownership and car use is, by definition, threatened by an anti-car movement.”
That is of course true, but it assumes that changes like this are motivated by anti-car policies. I believe the vast majority of people who want more safe streets for biking are also car drivers and are not anti-car.
I heard what you said about leaves and I find it far fetched. If leaves were an issue all bike lanes in Seattle would be unreadable in the fall. Are there other reasons why is 40th a bad street for biking?
I would like to engage in a real conversation about these changes and not just point scoring. However I find your attitude to the uselessness of the current crosswalks on 40th very dismissive of a real problem with the street.
I have a wife and two small kids who struggle to get across North 40th, on foot, every single day. Cars don’t stop no matter what type of cross walk it is; marked, unmarked, kinda marked, blind person with a cane, pregnant woman with a stroller, etc, etc. I realize its a real problem. I’m more so being dismissive of your inability to make sense in what you’re trying to say: “Its not a crosswalk if most cars don’t stop for the pedestrians” – thats simply a stupid thing to say and loses you credibility in the things you say which do make sense. Do you think having a protected bike lane on one side of the street, and an unprotected bike lane on the other side of the street, 2 lanes of car traffic, and no additional cross walks is going to make it easier for people to cross North 40th on foot (or on a bike)? Seriously – is that the argument you’re trying to make?? The issue about leaves is not far fetched at all. I’ve already pointed it out to SDOT and they say that the city will clean the leaves up. And I call BS on that – simply can’t see it happen. North 40th Street is not inherently a bad location for biking . . there are simply other streets that are better. I bike – and even when the bike lanes go in, I will still leave my house and cycle down Sunnyside to the BGT. Why the fup wouldn’t any cyclist want to do that?? Even if you lived on Wallingford, or Stone, you’re far better off cycle south down to the BGT and go from there. There is absolutely no reason for a cyclist to need to use N 40th to do eastbound (to connect with the BGT under the Ship Canal Bridge) .. use your common sense and go south, to the bloody trail. End of rant, and end of engaging with you – you have an agenda and you don’t want to hear any points of view that possibly conflict with the idea that bikes are the best thing ever invented, and cars are evil.
“There is absolutely no reason for a cyclist to need to use N 40th to do eastbound.”
The bike lake is westbound east of Wallingford Ave. 40th is one of the few gradual climbs westboud and will be very useful.
“end of engaging with you – you have an agenda …”
I to am done engaging with you too because you assume you know what I think. Well let me gusess what you are thinking, “let me try to find any objection possible so that I can keep ‘my’ parking space.
Please — this isn’t about parking. Parking is only a metaphor for access to our homes. Many of us will not be able to load groceries, load moving trucks, or have deliveries. Two minority businesses will be loosing the only access to their houses. One of the folks is a Physical Therapist — her customers will not have access to her house. She talks about having to move.
— What are we going to do without access for repairs and contractors?
Phil, the bike lane zealots don’t care one iota about your physical therapist neighbor having to move. She and your other neighbors are considered by them to be unenlightened, selfish car owners and priviledged homeowners, and as such they are merely speed bumps in the way of their agenda.
Are you suggesting that vehicle access to houses and small business would be blocked so that delivers and customers won’t be able to park on private property?
ABSOLUTELY.
Some houses do not have a driveway. Even those that do – will not be allowed to load on the street without getting a Street Use Permit (about$200).
My question is will vehicles be prohibited from accessing driveways and off street parking?
Yes+No – There will be bike barricades on the north side of the street. That will limit access to only driveways. Some parking will not be usable as they will not be able to drive across the curb and through the barricades.
Since people shouldn’t be driving accross curbs it doesn’t sound like there is any change to people’s ability to use off street parking.
I don’t have a parking space
Hello Wallingford
We are organizing to keep the parking AND have a bike lane on N40th. We call this the Bikes&Parking Option. We are not an anti-bike group. Many of us believe that the redistribution of the parking strips on North 40th to allow for the addition of a dedicated bike lane gives everyone a win.
Furthermore, the Community continues to be not given an honest chance to weigh-in on this project. Property owners were not contacted and are now being ignored. Furthermore, as of April, SDot added a new area to the project – N40th from Latona to 7th AveNE – and will be removed parking. AND — AGAIN, the new “update” is being done without notifying those owners affected by the change.
After the bait+switch pulled on us about the scope of the project – we are now being told it is too late to make significant changes to the project. The Open House events are design to only explain the poor plan. However, we believe we can make a difference if we mobilize the community.
We have over 100 citizens on a petition and a half-dozen businesses supporting the Bikes&Parking Option.
Please join us at these Open Houses to voice our need for a win-win option.
It would be great if the Bikes&Parking Option could work. Do you draft plans (or anything documentation that would show how this would work) we can look at head of the open houses?
Thanks for your interest. Posted below is a rough layout that we are suggesting for the project.
We will have drawings available at the Open House Tuesday.
Waste of money. Not need. Bikes are toys. Not something real people take to work. Bike on trails. Not streets. Biking uphill is stupid. Streets are for cars. Not bikes. 40th is an arterial. Not for pedestrians crossing. Cars don’t come to a screeching stop when someone is out for a stole. People shouldn’t be walking in the street. It stupid to walk here. We pay extra gas tax so people who can’t afford a car can take the bus. Not walk or bike. Streets are for cars. Not people. People bought houses with street parking. They paid property taxes on houses with street parking for years. The city can’t take away people’s parking spaces. Its an unconstitutional land grab.
#7upin2019 #maga
LOL, Brock Howell is trying to be clever.
I have a lot of respect for Phil and Mary for arguing that the removal of parking spaces will be harmful to the neighbourhood. I don’t agree with you but I acknowledge that its possible you are correct and I am wrong.
As for the people here who argue that this part of Wallingford doesn’t need a safe way to connect to the existing bike routes, you are either dishonest or wilful ignorant.
Wanting adults and kids to have a safe alternative to always taking the car for short trips is not ‘an agenda’ and its not anti-car. Wanting people to be be able have customers park near their business or easily unload groceries when with two little kids in the car is not anti-bike. We should debate the pros and cons of this plan without assuming everyone are either pro-car or pro-bike. I drive and I bike and I walk and I bus.
I’m done with selfishness that says that the other-side must be completely wrong. These arguments bring out the worst in me.
Are you a Russian bot? Or does rage simply make you not type words?
GW and the rest of the bike lobby should check their privilege:
https://crosscut.com/2018/07/seattles-bike-lobby-needs-check-its-privilege
This isn’t an anti-bike situation. I also bike, bus, walk, etc. My house on N40 doesn’t have a driveway — as some others don’t either. Are we going to be allowed to block the street when we park trucks in front for deliveries, moving, or construction? (ps the answer is NO). We have an option that has a bike lane and some parking. The city isn’t listening — and neither is Rob Johnson.