Now that I’ve beaten to death Seattle’s options for its three high capacity transit corridors (plus two in the center city), it’s time to look at what the other 12 corridors might look like in the Transit Master Plan.

SDOT and Nelson/Nygaard have not completed the plan, but they did brief the City Council on an example treatment, West Seattle’s Delridge corridor (slide 14). For a mere $1m in capital costs and $5m in annual operating costs, these street improvements could bring 2030 ridership to 6,600 per weekday, for a net increase of about 1,000.*

The cumulative changes save about 1.7 minutes on a typical trip end-to-end.

* Note: Nelson/Nygaard confirms the slide from which I got these numbers has a typo. The “annualized capital cost per ride” is not $35, but about 10 cents.

9 Replies to “The Delridge TMP Corridor”

  1. I’ve looked at these sorts of plans for Delridge as they come out, and it’s hard to see what BRT would be here besides a repainted 120 with fewer stops. I catch the 120 almost daily to downtown: it’s one of the more reliable bus commutes I’ve had in Seattle. I love it… except on nights and weekends, of course, where I sometimes have to wait an hour to get home. I’d take $5 million/year worth of night and weekend service, along with some stop consolidation, rather than $5 million/year worth of new paint.

      1. Ah, thanks for the clarification. I was confusing this with the Delridge Rapid Ride which was axed by Gregoire in the tunnel budget.

  2. Actual consideration being given to the Delridge corridor is exciting to me.

    This happens to be the most affordable residential corridor in the city (in the region?) with frequent transit service. I myself hope to move out there when I become a homeowner.

    Zoning changes to leverage the existing transit service should probably come first, IMHO.

    The City needs to encourage some more retail development along the corridor. A one-seat grocery run currently involves going all the way south to Westwood Village, with a 1/4 mile walk from the stop, or going downtown to the Kress. Convenience stores abound, though, which mitigates it somewhat.

  3. These proposed improvements aren’t very impressive. First, I’d be surprised if you could add curb bulbs and traffic signal priority at nearly every intersection for only $1 million. But if you did all of that, the bus would only save 1.7 minutes??

    I would rather see money invested in bus reliability on the W. Seattle Bridge and 99 sections of the corridor. All West Seattle bus routes are at risk of increased travel times and reduced reliability due to the 99 tunnel project. Advocating for a dedicated, prioritized path for transit from SR 99 to the 3rd Avenue transit spine is critical. In my mind, far more important than any improvements to transit routes in West Seattle.

    1. We’ve got the busway from Spokane to Royal Brougham. 1st Ave also has some bus lanes, and once the new 1st ave onramp to the Spokane Street Viaduct, I suspect that will be a faster route than 99 for the outbound West Seattle buses.

      Once the new 99 setup is complete, the biggest issue will be getting transit prioritized through the 99/Atlantic interchange – from there, everything should move smoothly northbound right up to Prefontaine.

      Southbound is uglier, though. The natural route from 3rd down to 4th is a huge timesink from Yesler to Jackson, and the alternative of 1st is even worse. Shifting west-seattle buses over to 2nd somewhere around Columbia could improve that time, but not by much. Perhaps once the Alaskan/Western couplet is completed, buses will just be able to hop on Alaskan where they currently get on the Viaduct? Assuming that ferry traffic doesn’t screw that route over.

    2. I’m sure it will be fine… there was that big shiny bus on the Let’s Move Forward poster! ;)

  4. Pingback: Streets For All Seattle Campaign Kicks Off - Seattle Transit Blog

Comments are closed.