Pike/Pine renovation bicycle tour. (Best Side Cycling)

The worst bike lane law in the world, in Ontario, Canada. (Not Just Bikes)

This is an open thread.

56 Replies to “Sunday Double Feature: Pike/Pine & Bikes”

  1. What do you think of those rectangular metal things before each stoplight in the Pike/Pine video? When I first saw them a few months ago I guessed they were bike racks, although they seemed the wrong shape and too high to lean a bike against and put a U-lock around, much less two or three bikes. The narrator leaned his hand and foot against the structure as he was waiting for the light, although he said it’s not optimal for his reach. Is that what they’re for? Do they exist in other cities? Is there a demand for something to lean on like that? I think I’d want to remain upright with my feet on the ground and my hands on the handlebars so I could start up quickly before I miss the light or people behind me do. Does this thing have a name?

    What are the beeps at each stoplight? At first I thought it was the signal, except the sound is a small-device sound and might not be audible across the intersection? Is it something the camera is doing?

    What do you think of the left-to-right weaves? I didn’t notice them while walking, but they seem to be excessive and confusing from a bicyclist’s view. I wouldn’t be surprised if bicyclists disobey them because they look like “this is an option if you’re turning”, not “the bike lane itself shifts to the other side”.

    1. Thanks for using Best Side Cycling. I like the inclusion of local content creators. Even if a lot of commenters here aren’t regular cyclists, he does make videos that are helpful to transit users, like his recent video of the Overlake Village station area pedestrian and cycling improvements, and touring the new Montlake ped/bike bridge.

    2. They’re called bike rests. I’m not sure how Seattles installed them or if it’s just me but I think they’ve installed them incorrectly either too far from the street or too high. I’ve tried using them and it’s impractical.

      For the left to right shift I’m not quite sure. There some plans to extend the one way couplets on pike/pine into Capitol Hill but at the same time it’s be kinda annoying to loose bike lanes on both sides of the road for only one side

    3. The beeps are the cyclist’s cycling computer that’s paired with the rear bike light with radar. It’s notifying them that there are cars behind.

    4. The bike rests are very nice and easy to use when installed at the proper height and distance. It actually makes it easier to start back up because you never have to get off the seat.

      An example of good ones I’ve tried are on the new trail near the Microsoft offices on 156th near Redmond tech station.

    5. I like some of the bike rests but are far too high for a normal cyclist to use. Maybe if you’re dutch and 7 feet tall but not for smaller folks like myself. I think they are designed for pavement level installation rather than the bike curb level they are at now.

    6. Left-to-right weaves are indeed confusing and I think they contribute a little to how many people ride the wrong way down the bike lanes (mostly people go the wrong way down these bike lanes to avoid having to go around the block, just like they would in cars if they could get away with it). They make signal cycles longer and more complicated and particularly make cyclists wait longer. Some left-to-right weaves (and forced turns) make you wait in uncomfortable places and some (like 8th/Virginia) are unsettling to ride through — you have this green light to go diagonally while all the cars are stopped, and if one crossing pedestrian or driver waiting to turn right gets impatient and doesn’t realize whose turn it is to go, it would be the easiest thing for them to go right into your path and cause a crash.

      When they take place at stop sign-controlled intersections (like 9th Ave N crossing John) they add even more conflicts and confusion. I try to be really careful and follow all the rules but it’s tough when you’re dealing with cars from four directions and pedestrians from four corners across the full sweep of your vision. And if you’re dealing with drivers that aren’t familiar with the intersection (especially during nightlife hours as opposed to commute hours) they aren’t expecting you to cross the intersection diagonally. Conflicts with same-direction drivers can be particularly scary… sometimes they don’t see you and just drive right at you after you take your turn, sometimes they do see you and think you’re doing something wrong and get mad.

      A lot of time when left-to-right weaves happen there’s some reason why — trying to position the bike lane to avoid specific conflicts on specific sides of the street on particular blocks (or through particular intersections). But they end up being some of the worst intersections to ride through. I think we’ve installed too many of them in the last several years and every time one is proposed in a design I comment that SDOT should try harder to avoid it.

    7. SDOT recently extended the one-way system from 9th Avenue (?) to Melrose Avenue. Longer-term it’s thinking about extending it to Broadway.That would allow the left-side bike lanes to be extended along with it.

  2. I ride from Second to Seventh on Pike and I can’t recall ever using the bike rests. I do use the bike rests on the Burke-Gilman trail and they do seem lower than the ones on Pike. I ride from Broadway to the waterfront on Pine and while the bike infrastructure is improved, it’s definitely idiosyncratic. BTW, I’m really underwhelmed by the sidewalk and street repairs Seattle has accomplished in the Pike-Pine corridor. Only the block of Pike from First to Second seems fully renewed. A lot of other repairs seem unconnected from each other and possibly unfinished. I guess I was expecting something more like Madison. Did Seattle run out of money with P-P?

    1. I haven’t heard it ran out of money: they just seem to be doing one block or project at a time. Some of the money for Pike-Pine renovation is coming from the Convention Center expansion as an environmental mitigation.

      1. Now that I think about it, I can’t recall other bike rests on the BG than those at 25th. I ride from Fremont to Sandpoint and from Fremont to downtown water front via Westlake and Eighth front but can’t seem to recall encountering other bike rests. There may be a few on bike path on new highway from Bell to the ferry docks.

    2. I’ve never seen bike rests on the Burke-Gilman Trail. When were they installed? Where are they?

      1. The only ones I’ve see are at the 25th Ave crossing near U Village. Not completely useless like the ones in the videos, but could be place a bit better.

        They need to either move the ones on Pike off the separator and into the bike lane, or perhaps encroach a bit into the crosswalk (or push the crosswalk up a bit), so the left turn cars can better see the bikes, and they aren’t tempted to take a left on the red arrow (which, to my surprise, is legal in Washington I think, if it’s 1-way to 1-way).

    3. In my opinion the city has been way too timid in trying to find a solution for the Missing Link. The city has brought knives to a gun fight. The other side agreed to a deal (after a lot of a legal wrangling) only to pull out at the last second and send it back to the courts (further delaying things). Changing things at this point would open up the possibility of this happening again. While it is probably best at this point to continue down the current path (and make sure every ‘i’ is dotted and every ‘t’ is crossed) they should also be aggressive in trying to protect the street. They should put stop signs at every intersection and then ask the cops to arrest drivers who make a California stop. (It should be noted that bikes no longer have to make a full stop — they can treat the stop signs as yields.) Make the streets one way so that drivers have to go all the way around. Do that sort of thing and you’ll quickly see the other side stops their lawsuits and embrace bike lanes on Shilshole.

      Note: I wrote the same thing on the Bike Blog. That blog is a great source of information and discussion on bike matters. Occasionally the issues overlap.

      1. Eh, Ballard Alliance and fellow travelers bullied Mike O’Brien out of a city council seat (now held by Strauss). I’m not sure our Chamber of Commerce mayor wants to pick such a fight.

      2. I’ve sometimes thought the city could use better tactics to give obstructionists an incentive to agree to something and stick with the agreement… but I really think the obstructionists would still view chaos as a better tactic than trying to make a deal. Unfortunately state law gives them the weapon to do that. Reform of that law is the only real solution.

      3. We need to streamline the process for these public projects similarly to what we are talking about doing for low-income housing.

        People get to express their opinion, and maybe use the courts. But just once. Not endlessly.

        That would be a legislative fix, I would guess.

      4. Cam Solomon,

        Remember that all politicians will try to play both sides of an issue to keep anybody from getting mad at them. The State legislature certainly gave changing housing zoning a try, knowing full well all of the changes would be dragged into court for years. And if the political pressure mounts, well, it can always go back to the way it was with a simple vote.

        The other reason Progressive ideas never happen is they’re just not funded. Seattle is a City full of Progressive ideas without a penny to pay for them. Look at the JumpStart bullshit. It’s 100% general revenue now right?

        The whole missing part of the Burk-Gilman trail is a case study and everything wrong with the Left Coast. With Trump in the White House, you’d think the Washington State Legislature would smell the coffee and get some important stuff done, starting with a State income tax and litigation reform on transportation and housing…. I’m not holding my breath however.

      5. “you’d think the Washington State Legislature would smell the coffee and get some important stuff done”
        The 2025 legislative session just started today

        “starting with a State income tax ”
        That’s unconstitutional under Washington’s current constitution. Amendment to the constitution requires a 2/3 majority from the state house and senate. Which neither the house or senate dems have the votes for doing such a thing.

      6. Zach B.

        Washington State is a Liberal place…. with a Republican State Constitution. Without the stability of a State income tax, it’s impossible to really fund a Liberal agenda. Every time the economy hits a little road bump, sales tax revenue falls and government is in deficit. So having a 10% sales tax is going to end up blocking any progressive programs…. look at the foolish JumpStart tax. It’s all getting rolled into the City general fund to pay for “budget shortfalls” It works the same way with the State budget….

        States like Mississippi have slashed income taxes and leaned into higher sales taxes because the GOP knows it will kill off any chance for Progressive change. Because the economy runs on a cycle, the sales tax will make a budget “crisis” every so often. Politicians never waste a good “crisis”.

        Because Washington State isn’t Mississippi its answer to running out of money was jacking up property taxes to the point fixed income home owners can’t really afford them. Enter Seattle’s failing schools…. What’s the answer there?

        Are you sure the Washington State Legislature couldn’t have changed the constitution over sales taxes in the last 100 years? Or does the current system give them cover for failing us?

        On the Seattle front, the City’s shortfalls have allowed a more centrist City Council roll back most of the last Liberal Council’s plans. How convenient for Mayor Bruce, right! Step one… use the JumpStart taxes to fill holes in current budget….Step two…. use the JumpStart money for whatever pet projects Council wants in couple years after voters have pretty much forgotten what it was ever used for. Mayor Bruce is one smart cookie!

        Funding is like gas…. as long as Progressives keep running out of it, their agenda will always stall. That’s why Progressives need to go all in on a State income tax…

      7. Income tax revenue is impacted by short term changes in the economy too. This is something that California and other states have to struggle with, as well as the federal government. The most stable form of taxation is probably property tax.

      8. Article Vii, Section 1 of the state constitution states as follows…
        “The power of taxation shall never be suspended, surrendered or contracted away. All taxes shall be uniform upon
        the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word “property” as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership.”

        WA Supreme Court ruled in 1933 in Culliton v. Chase that a graduated (i.e. tax brackets) income tax system was unconstitutional because it didn’t adhere to the state’s constitution.

        Sales taxes are not subject to this because they are for purchasing goods and services, i.e. consumption tax. So they are following state law.

        Sources:

        https://leg.wa.gov/state-laws-and-rules/washington-state-constitution/

        https://dor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/Appendix_B.pdf

      9. asdf2,

        Yeah, I understand income taxes take a hit when economy does. But sales taxes are much more volatile. Say we work at a big company like Boeing and there’s a recession. 10% of us get laid off, so there’s 10% less payroll tax. The other 90% are still paying taxes… because it’s a payroll tax. You can’t skip those.

        Not all sales taxes are mandatory. Layoffs or slowdowns cause a drop in the sales of big ticket items (cars, boats, vacations). People don’t go out as much, they start to save cash…. so the sales tax drop is likely double of a payroll tax. The one thing that always seems to block progressive ideas is fear…. and to a certain degree, sales tax are controlled by fear. Transit needs to uncoupled from sales taxes because it’s unfunded at the exact minute it’s needed the most.

        Zach B.

        The problem of the American Left is they have never found a way to finance their vision in the USA. That’s not true in Europe of course, but then the differences between us and them are often so fundamental it’s impossible to replicate Europe’s Lefty success stories here. We’re not Germany.

        As long as Washington State holds on to a horrible, regressive 10% + sales tax that craters local and State budgets every 10 years (or less)…. there’s less chance of progressive ideas actually happening.

      10. Constitutional amendments take a 2/3rd majority of both houses. Yes.

        But they only take 50.1% of a popular vote.

      11. “The problem of the American Left is they have never found a way to finance their vision in the USA. That’s not true in Europe of course, but then the differences between us and them are often so fundamental it’s impossible to replicate Europe’s Lefty success stories here. We’re not Germany.”

        I don’t even know what you’re talking on about in this tangent here that honestly had nothing to do with what I said. All I mentioned was that…

        – Legislature starts it’s annual session today
        – It requires 2/3 vote majority from each legislative chamber to amend the state constitution
        – That Article VII, Section 1 of the state constitution defines how taxation can happen in the state and that the Supreme Court has made rulings on taxation in the past. Including that graduated income taxation is unconstitutional under state law
        – Sales tax is different from income tax based on the legal definition of the tax, as it’s not related to “property” as defined by the state constitution but an excise or duty & consumption tax legally speaking.
        Including providing sources from the State of Washington and Washington’s Department of Revenue.

        Not once did I bring up Lefty politics, Europe, Germany at all. I don’t even know how you went from me talking about income tax in the context of Washington’s constitution to Europe and Lefty politics. You throwing out random stuff that doesn’t make any coherent sense to what I was saying to you.

    1. BNSF under Buffett has been considered one of the best passenger-rail partners in the US, if not the best. It doesn’t oppose and obstruct passenger rail like Union Pacific; it just wants a fat profit for accommodating it, and it doesn’t want to lose existing freight capacity which is more lucrative.

      Electrification is a somewhat different issue. Advocates haven’t pushed for electrification for Sounder and Cascades because it’s seen as a lower priority and heavier political lift than just adding runs or speeding them up. Electrifying the entire tracks for freight has been seen as a pie-in-the-sky ideal, not a realistic target for passenger rail activism.

      1. For what it’s worth, freight rail probably saves much more CO2 emissions by replacing truck trips than passenger rail does by replacing car trips, at least in the U.S. So, if additional sounder runs were to come at the expense of some freight rail having to shift to trucks, that would be an increase, not a decrease to total emissions.

      2. Of course,the flip side argument is that one of the biggest sources of revenue for the freight rail industry is transportation of fossil fuels. That is, get coal from the mine to the power plant and crude oil from the well to the refinery. So, if the world ever stops burning that stuff, at some point, Warren Buffet and others are going to need to look for new customers for their tracks and trains, with leasing tracks to passenger rail being one potential option.

      3. While it does sound like Buffet (or now Abel) hasn’t been quite as guilty of short-term profit-focused, and gutting of profits for shareholders rather than maintenance, that may be changing.

        “Though Buffett’s BNSF has attempted to buck this trend in its management style and rhetoric, it is not immune to the trend. In fact, on October 4, the WSJ reported that BNSF has hired a “PSR” expert Ed Harris to help them “streamline their business.”

      5. The article makes it sound like he’s calling the shots for at least the BNSF stuff.

        “Greg Abel is BH vice chair of Non-Insurance Business Operations and heir apparent to Mr. Buffett.”

        Berkshire generally also has a bit of a hands-off approach to their various holdings, with each company having it’s own president. But I would guess that something like the massive investment in electrification would need Abel’s stamp.

      6. Buffett is 94. While there are exceptions, there has to be some decline there. That’s freakin’ old.

      7. “It doesn’t oppose and obstruct passenger rail”
        Not really when they have gotten greedy off needing so many time slots open for their precious miles long polluting freight and against electrification of rail. Buffet is also a hypocrite in this regard as he has mentioned using public transit before for work despite being well off and yet BSNF doesn’t want commuter rail on their tracks interfering with their schedules despite the fact that the rails sit quiet and empty most of the day. I have little sympathy for a polluter who is unwilling to be a good neighbor, especially one as bad at maintenance as BSNF.

        Quite frankly they shouldn’t have ownership of the rails in this country in the first place and should be owned by the FRA and state DOTs instead.

      8. Of course,the flip side argument is that one of the biggest sources of revenue for the freight rail industry is transportation of fossil fuels. That is, get coal from the mine to the power plant and crude oil from the well to the refinery. So, if the world ever stops burning that stuff, at some point, Warren Buffet and others are going to need to look for new customers for their tracks and trains, with leasing tracks to passenger rail being one potential option.

        Or they will let the company rot and squeeze out every last dime until that happens. If there is one thing we’ve learned in this era: you can’t trust the CEOs. Everything from the collapse of Boeing to the Great Recession can be blamed quite easily on CEOs looking for short term profit over long term viability. Many believe they have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize *short term* profits even if it means the company collapses in a decade. After all, you can always just move the money elsewhere.

        The CEOs have no long-term vision let alone a sense of civic responsibility. So what if a town dries up because the mill is shut down. What is important is making money in the short term.

        Even the rise of Trump can ironically be blamed on the CEOs. Conventional wisdom is that the neoliberals (led by Clinton) embraced deregulation and multinational trade. But it is more complicated than that. Clinton (and others) were well aware of the pain they knew this would cause. But they were also were quite aware of how the Japanese (and Germans) did much the same thing in the 1970s only to be at roughly equal footing a decade or two later. Many of the jobs went overseas because of cheaper labor but over time the other countries weren’t much cheaper. But the difference is that Japan and Germany had strong labor unions. China and Mexico do not. Chinese and Mexican CEOs exploit their workers just like American CEOs exploit their workers.

        Then there is the rise of automation. Again, unions play a strong role in the workers not gaining from this. Quite some time ago the longshoreman’s union decided to strike a deal with the owners. Rather than fight the loss of jobs they would simply split the profits. As a result there are far fewer longshoreman then there were in the past (and their work isn’t nearly as back-breaking) but they make way more money. That hasn’t happened in a lot of America and it is often because the unions lack power (due to weak government regulations).

        It is easy to look at Boeing and think they are anomaly. A once proud company that made the greatest passenger jets in the world is now a shell of its former self. Yet if you dig into the details you find that it has all the trademarks of every major economic failure made over the last fifty years. There are two major unions at Boeing — the engineers and the machinists. Both got screwed. The machinists were the first. Jobs went to non-union states. This led to short term gains and long term losses. The stock went up, the CEO cashed out and then the company suffered. Then they went after the engineers ignoring their complaints about the design on the Max. In the middle of it all is a board more concerned about lobbying Congress for new contracts then it is building a quality product. It is all part of the same problem:

        You can’t trust the CEOs.

        Which is why regulation is so important. We need stronger unions. We need the “neutrality” laws that existed before so that smaller companies get charged the same as big companies. We also need to nationalize industries that are clearly natural monopolies and extremely difficult to regulate (like the railroads).

      9. Ross Bleakney,

        Could we ever trust CEOs? Maybe we have a different view of history, especially American history, but from my view CEOs were suspect ever since Peter Minuit, the director of the Dutch colony of New Netherland, traded 24 dollars worth beads to the Indians of the Island of Manhattan.

        The success of America stems from the commoner’s ability buy into “the system”, starting with owning land (and houses). European peasants certainly did own real estate in the percentages of American peasants in 1800. There’s been a couple of slides, but “peasant life” in the USA has been pretty darn good.

        Then came a banking system we could trust, and publicly traded stocks. It’s not all that hard to tap into the wealth building tools the Rich use. It’s owning real estate and buying publicly traded securities over time using “dollar cost averaging” to grow wealth. Life doesn’t have to be that hard…

    2. Thanks for the other great article Cam. The other one (https://washingtonmonthly.com/2024/10/29/train-drain/) was more nuanced, suggesting that either regulation or nationalization would work.

      But I really think the best answer is public ownership of the railroads. We just don’t get much out of them being privately owned, even if it they were well regulated. There is no real competition and thus no real private innovation. Regulation can (and has) worked in the past but corporate law and lobbying has become increasingly powerful. Furthermore if a company is hellbent on selling off the parts of the company there is little the government can do to stop them. So at best you are spending a fortune on lawyers only to end up buying up key pieces eventually. I firmly believe in a free market but sometimes the best thing can do have the government run it. Plenty of other countries do this and things function just fine.

      1. Yeah, totally agree. I liked the first article better, but this is more inside-baseball focused on BNSF as well as the author’s crusade to talk Buffett into electrification. It does provide some idea of where BNSF is, in terms of what they are willing to do, or not do. They seem to want to get rid of the maintenance headache.

        Maybe that’s just an old man wanting less headaches, period.

  5. The Pike/Pine bike video was also referenced a while back on this thread. It is an interesting discussion if you have the time. Here is my (long) summary:

    Various buses from Capitol Hill (e. g. the 10/11/12/49) go downtown, loop around and head back. The closest they get to the waterfront is Fourth. Even though the buses turn on Second there is no easy way to make the series of left turns to turn around (from westbound Pine to eastbound Pike) while also making a stop.

    The most likely short-term solution is to add an island bus stop between second and third (right after the alley way). The bus could stick out into the alley (while stopping) — you just need enough space for a bus stop.

    The long term solution involves adding exclusive right-of-way. There are basically two options:

    1) Turn Pine into a two-way bike/bus transit mall. You would also need to add a small section of contraflow on Stewart so that buses could turn around using either Second or Third (https://maps.app.goo.gl/4dKpQk8gvvApDre87).

    2) Add a contraflow bus lane for Pike and Pine and on Second between Pike and Pine. This means buses (and only buses) could go westbound on Pike and eastbound on Pine (and north on Second to turnaround).

    Each approach has its advantages in general and in particular this case:

    Contraflow:

    1) Contraflow can complicate signal timing. This is mainly an issue with express buses that run on highways (it isn’t an issue here).

    2) One-lane contraflow doesn’t allow buses to pass buses. Since these are trolleys such passing would not happen on a regular basis but would be an issue if a bus stalled. Other buses can run off-wire long enough to get around the stalled bus. This is more complicated with contraflow.

    3) Contraflow is easier for drivers to understand. Cars are not allowed to go that direction, ever. Thus you have fewer people accidentally (or purposely) violating the law and delaying buses. At the same time you have full access to the street (for freight, taxis or even just regular cars).

    4) To allow the buses to turn around on Second you would need to add a northbound (contraflow) lane there as well. This would mean removing parking (https://maps.app.goo.gl/9bHhBBU3LbpYmMQRA) — it would not impact traffic on Second.

    5) It is not clear what the best approach would be for bikes. If you move the bike lanes to the other side of the street (to the right of cars/trucks) and have the bikes continue to go the same direction you don’t need island bus stops but it is inherently more dangerous. I think the best approach is to use island bus stops and have the bike travel the same direction as the buses (the opposite direction as the cars/trucks). As with the current approach, cyclists wouldn’t have to worry about cars turning right. The bus wouldn’t be an issue but as with all island bus stops the pedestrian/bike interaction would be.

    6) With Pine as a transit mall you could make Pike two-way general purpose (although I’m not sure what that gets you).

    Transit Mall

    1) Easier for riders to understand if their bus stop is on the same street. In this case all the stops would be on Pine.

    2) More complicated for drivers as it typically involves a system involving special permits and time limits. But Seattle has managed this world on Third, so it would be nothing that new.

    3) The buses could serve a bus stop very close to Pike Place Market (quite possible on First) which is much farther west than today.

    4) Using Stewart to turn-around would also largely only involve removing parking, although you would also need to remove a curb-bulb on Second & Stewart (where the folks are holding flowers in this picture). If the bus turned right on Third it would merge into the eastbound lane that starts midblock (coming from the parking garage).

    5) Only bikes and buses would use Pine on a regular basis. Every bus stop would be an island stop. I think there is enough room for this, but I am not sure. Having only buses and bike would be much safer for biking. The buses don’t turn. Turns would be fully regulated with their own signal (left or right) and only occur when cars/trucks are allowed (which is rare).

    Both would be a huge improvement in terms of bus speed and reliability. Both would allow the buses to get further west. I’m leaning towards the transit mall approach although I think SDOT should study both options.

    1. Yes, the Pike-Pine Renaissance alignment is awkward for cyclists, transit, and transit riders.

      Cyclists have to transition in both directions at Melrose-Minor. Eastbound transit on Pike Street will be delayed at Boren Avenue as the right turn queue will block the buses going straight as that queue will wait for pedestrian crossing. The reversible Pike Street ramp to I-5 is still open and may attract enough traffic to delay transit.

      The video pointed out the awkward meeting of the Pine Street PBL into the curb ramp at 5th Avenue. This has been in place since the end of the Kubly term; it predates the PP Renaissance. The recent change may make it worse for transit. Before the painted bike lane, westbound cyclists and buses had some risk, as the cyclists had to merge north around the bulb and buses needed to merge south around the queue of traffic making the west to north turn to 4th Avenue. With the painted lane, buses must wait to shift left and will probably be slower.

      I suggested a different configuration, but it was already baked. I proposed the Benson option: two-way transit on Pine Street and two one-way PBL on Pike Street. This would save transit riders transferring between Link and eastbound buses 400 feet of walking. Cyclists would not have to transition at Minor-Melrose. It would have matched what SDOT had already implemented east of there.

      The loop via 2nd Avenue for the Capitol Hill routes dates to fall 2012. It is suboptimal now. Through routes would be better. The fall 2024 restructure increased the headway and waits on routes 10, 11, and 49.

      The video dialogue wondered about the bike signals; they are not needed when traffic is not turning across the PBL, so it depends on which way the north-south avenue is headed.

      1. “Through routes would be better.”

        Do you mean when routes used to turn south on 3rd like the 49/7 and 11/125?

        Metro at the time wanted to get rid of turns on 3rd between Olive and Yesler, saying they created delays. Is that not true anymore?

      2. Mike Orr: in fall 2012, Transit and SDOT minimized the transit turns to/from 3rd Avenue to protect flow on the transit spine. So, routes 11-125 and 14-14 were broken. Routes 10-12 were broken as 1st Avenue was jammed with AWV related traffic. Routes 7 and 49 only went through at times of low congestion. In fall 2024, that was broken and Route 49 service was reduced.

        I mean careful and well-designed through routes would be better. The fall 2024 extension of Route 3 trips to Summit has the issue of delaying the 3rd Avenue transit spine. I think that was mistaken. Note that the south end pathway routes turn at Columbia Street; loads may be lower there. Turns at Pike and Pine may have higher loads. Routes 3 and 4 turn a James Street.

        Shifting routes to 1st Avenue from 3rd Avenue would have turns to/from 1st Avenue and would not threaten flow on the spine. Note that Pike Street has an all-walk phase; perhaps one would be warranted at Pine Street.

        The loop via Pine, 2nd Avenue, and Pike does not really work well for transit; it is congested in the peaks. During the Kubly era, lanes were taken from both streets to add PBL; transit was left behind in congestion. The live loop does not provide any advantage for riders.

        A through route of Route 70 and 7 turnback to Mt. Baker was suggested by planners for the draft Metro Connects network. The final Metro Connects included the seven RR lines suggested by the Kubly SDOT. It may be difficult to change the J Line after branding and FTA funding.

  6. How easy would it be engineering-wise to adjust the bike rests to their intended position? Could SDOT just dig them out and reset them? Or would it require a larger tearing-up and reconfiguration of the area to provide a place for them, which SDOT wouldn’t want to do near-term?

    1. I’m sure they could move them. Whether they set the first bolts and then laid the cement, or simply used a roto-hammer, either can be undone and done in the proper location. I don’t know how well the fix would stay, if just in asphalt rather than concrete.

      2. It’s probably a one day thing (probably less). Hopefully they can just reinstall the bike rest with a lower one. If they have to reconfigure the concrete it’ll be a larger item. Aka moving it closer is probably harder

  9. Drove the wife to work today. It was another opportunity to witness the traffic since Amazon implemented its 5 days in the office policy.

    Another Monday commute, another CF for southbound traffic on I-5 heading into downtown Seattle. From the express lanes, the Mercer and Stewart exits were completely backed up, much worse than for a Monday before the Amazon RTO policy.

    It’s hard to imagine that what is happening on the roads isn’t also happening on Link. I expect a bump in Link ridership in the next few months.

    Can’t wait for DRLE and Full ELE to open. We need both, and we need them now.

    1. FYI wsdot will also start doing construction on northbound lanes soon so the reversible express lanes will be northbound all day

      1. Revive I-5 is going to be a complete traffic nightmare for the Northside. Thank gawd we have Link, because it is going to be the only non-impacted transit mode available.

        However, Link is already absolutely packed SB for the AM commute. I rode it last Friday and was barely able to squeeze into car #4. And it will only get worse with Revive I-5.

        I pushed hard for a scheduled overlay in the urban core, but that ship has sailed. The best we can hope for now is lots of gap trains and maybe a slight frequency bump. Even going to 7.5 min headways from 8 would increase capacity 6.6%. Every bit helps.

        And still no word on a DRLE opening date. I’m beginning to wonder if they aren’t delaying that again in hopes of moving Full ELE forward a bit. With Revive I-5 and Amazon RTO, Full ELE is of the utmost importance. If DRLE needs to be delayed again so Full ELE can open sooner it would be a good trade.

        But hopefully that doesn’t need to happen.

Comments are closed.