The over the next few weeks, the Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) will be putting the final touches on Segment 1 of the Beacon Ave S & 15th Ave S Safety Project. This project has resulted in protected bike lanes from S Spokane St to the Dr. Jose Rizal Bridge, several new speed cushions and curb bulbs, and four new transit islands. The improved pedestrian infrastructure and new transit islands will be used by passengers of routes 36, 60, and 107.
Given the lack of safe infrastructure along arterial roads in Southeast Seattle, this project is a welcome improvement. The new bike lanes will connect to the rest of the Seattle’s bike network via the Dr. Jose Rizal Bridge and the I-90 trail. The not-yet-funded Segments 2 and 3 will continue these improvements further south along Beacon Ave.
Current Status
Over the past few months, I’ve used the new bike lanes when traveling to Beacon Hill and downtown Seattle from Rainier Valley. The photos below show the recent state of the project. Do note that the bike lanes are not formally open and may be closed at any time for further construction.
This is an open thread.
Thank you for the pics and the opportunity to talk about the newly-fancified Beacon Hill bus stops!
After 6 months of waiting at a temporary patch of raised asphalt (that slowly but surely disintegrated) with an orange dingy to mark where to stand, right in front of a bustling carnivore food truck…
And after previous attempts to make pedestrians crossing the street yield to car traffic with crossing lights, and a middle island designed to let cars squeak around in front of buses…
,,, the wait is finally over. Buses are picking up on the bus islands, and there is room for two buses to pick up at a time, each direction!
The middle island has been replaced by a bright yellow tripping hazard, that nevertheless serves the secondary purpose of stopping cars from crossing into oncoming traffic, mid-block.
Hopefully the traffic lights eventually go away, replaced by on-demand flashing bulbs along the crosswalk, so passengers don’t miss their connecting buses. The library one block south (bizarrely built as a single-story structure when the council knew there would be a light rail station one block away) already has these.
The next TOD construction around the station ought to include space for a replacement library and first-floor grocery store. Or move the library into El Centro, at least temporarily, and build the next TOD on the site of the library, with a grocery store to replace the Red Apple. And then the surface parking across from the station can finally be replaced with TOD.
The general lack of TOD around beacon Hill station puzzles me. Granted, I haven’t been there in the last couple years, but I recall maybe 3 or so 5-6 story TOD apartment buildings, and the rest of the neighborhood as sleepy as ever.
The rest of the land isn’t zoned high enough. https://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Research/gis/webplots/k52W.pdf
The plots of land right next to the station are NC2-55 so large apartment buildings can be built
There were some plans for a couple 80 unit apartments at 2531 16TH AVE S and 1405 S BAYVIEW ST but they were kinda stalled due to the pandemic
unfortunately in the one seattle plan https://www.seattle.gov/documents/Departments/OPCD/SeattlePlan/OneSeattlePlanZoningUpdateProposedCentersAndZoningD2.pdf it does not look like the rezoned for more apartments near beacon hill station
“The general lack of TOD around beacon Hill station puzzles me.”
It’s nimby opposition. There’s a three-level hierarchy of urban villages, and Beacon Hill is the lowest one. The city yielded on Beacon Hill to focus on Mt Baker and Westwood Village and such that are in the middle tier, and on the top tier regional centers (downtown, U-District, Northgate, and now the Ballard industrial center).
There’s one residential highrise on Beacon Hill, like there are two in Madison Park. Those were built when zoning was looser, and it was tightened after that to prevent more of them. When I was in northwest Everett on the 4th, I saw another isolated highrise like that somewhere (I don’t remember exactly where), and it reminded me of that phenomenon.
Regarding TOD, It’s really frustrating to me that the northside gets several regional centers in the new comp plan, but the south side gets nothing. The North Beacon Hill Urban Center and the Mount Baker Urban Center should be combined into one regional center given that they have 3 Light Rail Stations, a transit hub, and growing commercial.
The north side just has higher population and non-industrial commercial activity. “Regional center” means highrises, and the city isn’t anywhere near approving that in southeast or west Seattle, and there would be fiercer opposition than just expanding the U-District or Northgate.
The city tried to upzone Mt Baker after Link came, and succeeded to some extent, but the result is particularly mediocre and a lost opportunity. It drops down quickly to single-family in just a couple blocks. And while the middle-level tier is envisoned as having a significant institution and one or two office buildings, I don’t see that at Mt Baker. All I see is a couple TOD buildings with artists’ spaces. That’s not a significant institution like college, and not an office building. It’s just a little more than regular 7-story TODs.
“All I see is a couple TOD buildings with artists’ spaces. That’s not a significant institution like college, and not an office building. It’s just a little more than regular 7-story TODs.”
The Mt Baker Station area has had a significant institution for decades: Franklin High School (with lots of both Link and Metro users). It has many residential TODs (not just a couple) in the area.
The commercial district has the only QFC in SE Seattle as well as the only Lowe’s, Bartells, Wells Fargo and US Bank in SE Seattle. There are several medical and dental offices too. It’s just that they tend to not be new.
A reuse strategy for the former UW laundry is still evolving.
I’m not sure what more major functions can come to the Mt Baker Link station area. It has way more going on than the Link stations on either side of it (Columbia City and Beacon Hill).
The middle level is for 2-3 80′ commercial buildings that would be a good place for something like a college or hospital or such, not just a high school. Mt Baker still doesn’t have that. Seattle isn’t about to zone regional centers at every high school. Franklin has nothing, and Rainier Beach has just a supermarket plaza (the Safeway a block south, since the lot at Henderson is underused).
Banks aren’t large enough to count, since they’re usually small one-story things, or in a ground-floor TOD space, not entire multistory buildings themselves. Likewise, a supermarket+drugstore, while larger than a bank, are all over the place. Even the smallest urban village would have several more buildings than that, like Beacon Hill.
Lowe’s is an anomoly, since it’s a suburbanesque big-box store, all in a sprawling 1-story building. It’s more an invasion of the neighborhood taking advantage of industrial-friendly zoning, and is not what urban villages are for. Instead it’s the kind of lot that would be redeveloped in an urban village. Lowe’s could be creative and turn the store into a multistory one with a smaller footprint, or put housing on top or something. Then it would be more of an urban village thing.
There is a difference between station area building height and station area activity or trip ends.
Seattle has historically concentrated taller buildings in its central area in Downtown or close by as well as around UW. Northgate is becoming that way too. But most of the rest of the city is not that way — including West Seattle (except Alki waterfront buildings) and even much of North Seattle (besides UW and Northgate). It’s not unique to SE Seattle.
My response though is to note that Mt Baker is a key active hub that serves all of SE Seattle. Without the things there today, residents would have to travel several miles to get to lots of important things. Finally, SE Seattle has lost many bank branches including those in supermarkets and increasingly relies on the Mt Baker businesses. Banking needs are very different for immigrants than for tech-savvy natives.
That’s good for transit because transit services to places like Renton, South Center and even Westwood is awful. Losing those existing businesses would be detrimental to the quality of life of the residents of SE Seattle — making it more of an urban desert. While the area could ideally more active, losing the existing business activity around Mt Baker would be awful for our entire section of the city.
Martin Duke wrote about the problem with the station over ten years ago: https://seattletransitblog.com/2012/04/18/the-awfulness-of-mt-baker-station/. Not that much has changed. The root of the problem is that the station is too far to the west (the same is true for all the Rainier Valley Stations). Head east from the station and you go past the high school, some apartments and then houses. Sure, there could be more apartments but at least there is something. Go west of the station and you almost immediately encounter a forest. This is a big problem. Raccoons don’t ride transit. Having the station to the west not only means fewer people can walk to the station, but it means the connection to the buses is worse. Mount Baker Station is a major transit hub. Yet transfers are awkward.
As that article mentions, the planners had the right idea in the first place. Put the station in the triangle transit center and a lot of things get a lot better. Transfers are much easier. There is more development in the area as it is closer to the station. The suburban-style Lowes (and its giant parking lot) gets replaced with an apartment building*. The Mount Baker Station goes from being awful to being just fine.
As much as I have criticized the planners it is striking how often they had the right idea but changed their mind. The folks in charge knew this was a lot worse than having the station to the east but they ran out of money. Fair enough. The problem is that they prioritized quantity over quality. It was essential that they go as far as possible, even if it meant short-changing the places along the way. This is completely backwards from how you should do it. It is not the end of the world if your subway system barely leaves the city (or even leaves the city at all). There are some highly successful mass transit lines that are very short. But if you string together a bunch of awful stations it doesn’t matter how far you go. It reminds me of the Reece Martin line, if you spend the money on the wrong thing, you won’t have money to spend money on the right thing. The station is stuck where it is.
*There is little incentive for Lowes to sell the property given its location. Yes it is great for transit, but it isn’t that easy to get to the station. The area feels like it is geared towards driving so it is no wonder it is still there. Meanwhile, there is a Stewart Lumber & Hardware store only a few blocks away. It clearly fits the (more urban) neighborhood much better.
Mt Baker is already an urban center, the middle tier. It’s intended to be the largest urban village in southeast Seattle. (In West Seattle the Junction and Westwood Village fill that role.)
Looking at the built environment, Mt Baker is not yet at what that would imply, and Westwood Village’s shopping center really isn’t. The Mt Baker upzone was stunted: it didn’t really fulfill the urban center vision, just some of it. It needs help in height and breadth. But it will probably grow into the retail/commercial hub of southeast Seattle, as it is a bit already.
Columbia City will remain a protected historic district. Othello will remain a small residential village. Rainier Beach will be something in between. Rainier Beach is currently being held back by a lack of developer interest and a “go-slow” approach to upzoning to give the low-income community time to adjust and to generate local businesses/institutions serving their needs. (A community college branch or agricultural/food training has been suggested.)
See RossB and Martin on Mt. Baker station site.
When the initial segment was laid out, there were three governments debating the stations: ST, that was budget constrained, SDOT, that was not yet that transit friendly, and Metro that wanted good integration, but had little power. Seattle has urban planning notions about Cheasty Boulevard. Metro would have liked the station to straddle Rainier Avenue South to provide riders with a grade separated crossing. (SDOT and Metro disagreed about Route 7 layover conflicting with bicycle dreams on South Henderson Street, so Route 7 was not extended to the Rainier Beach Link station; today the extension capital funds are in the R Line budget).
Even the current infrastructure could be used better for integration. The Mt. Baker TC has an electric trolleybus loop, so a truncated Route 9 could terminate there. (Before 2005 and Route 49, Route 9 was ETB between South Rose Street and the U District via Broadway). In the planner Metro Connects network, a Route 70-7TB terminated at Mt. Baker; given the J Line, that may not be possible any longer. A hybrid route such as Route 8 could terminate west of Rainier Avenue South on South Forest Street and provide shorter transfer walks.
The UW laundry area may become housing. The air space above the MBTC could become housing.
“ Othello will remain a small residential village. Rainier Beach will be something in between.”
Uhhh… when is the last time you walked around the Othello Station area? Not only are there now around 10 6-8 story apartment buildings (some quite large with three new ones in just the past year), there’s lots of independent retail as well. It makes Rainier Beach look rural.
Rainier Beach Station area is limited by a wide swath of land with high voltage wires that cannot be built upon. There’s no way that the station area will ever surpass what Othello already has unless the wires are moved.
Why Beacon Ave has such wide median south of Alaska St? Was it a streetcar corridor back then?
Looks to me like it was:
https://seattletransitblog.com/2008/10/15/seattle-street-car-maps/
The Seattle Times has a good article from earlier this year that discussed the median: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/have-you-explored-beacon-hills-magic-median/
I’ve always thought so. Some if it is now parking, but then there’s not much else you can do with an obsolete median.
The trail in the middle doesn’t look very convenient, as it zigzags all around and crosses streets without proper intersections.
It is because of a water pipe. See https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/have-you-explored-beacon-hills-magic-median/
I’m visiting Georgetown, Texas right now. 30 miles north of Austin, population 96,000, zero public transit except for a once-per-day Greyhound bus. For comparison purposes, Olympia and Mt. Vernon do have regular bus service, in spite of being further from the big city (Seattle) and having a smaller population.
If you don’t like transit in Washington away from big cities, it is still much, much better than what you’d find in most other states.
The placement of the bus stop sign on the west side of Beacon Avenue across from the light rail station is wrong.. it forces those waiting for a southbound bus to stand in the bike lane. The sign is several yards south of the actual bus shelter where there is more appropriate standing area for bus patrons. The sign should be moved to the front of the bus shelter. Currently, people in the bus shelter have to dash south to get the bus. Dangerous.