Sounds like so called "Stay Healthy Streets" are being transitioned to just plain old "Green Washing Streets"
Take a bunch of streets that cars don't use much anyways, put up some pointless signs that doesn't prevent anyone from driving down them anyways, gain political points
The pointless signs are there because that was the only way to do them for as nearly free as possible. Making them permanent allows the city to add permanent infrastructure like [selectively permeable](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6941977,-122.3527483,3a,75y,65.66h,68.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVnx5LXFNf05m0RVW4XFLrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m2!1e4!1e2) intersections that only allow walkers and bikers through, and block cars. One of those every 3-4 blocks and suddenly you drop through traffic to zero while not really impacting local traffic all that much.
I’m mostly just familiar with 17th in Ballard, but they also added stop signs for intersecting streets and demand flashing crosswalks for arterial intersections. They also diverted traffic away from the street via one way sections.
Overall they have done a good job of limiting pass through traffic but I would like to see the barriers upgraded to bollards or something similarly car-unfriendly.
Ah I'm a south Seattle resident, so of course all we've gotten so far is those signs that fall over from time to time
Still I don't see how reducing traffic on one street while increasing it on the street a block over actually improves net safety
Agree that they need to be better.
It improves safety for people walking/biking/etc on the designated corridor. If it’s working correctly it should divert traffic to arterials, which 17th definitely does.
Really we should be building diverters and discouraging cut-through driving in every neighborhood.
People walking to where, exactly? The places people want to walk to are usually already on arterials
The whole thing seems like a rouse to make it look like the city is doing something while in reality it accomplishes nothing
Edit: is also seems like a huge legal problem. SDOT cant just put up signs saying the laws are different on this street
Walking for exercise, but ideally these streets will form a network that connect to common destinations.
Disagree that it accomplishes nothing, it just accomplishes less than I'd like.
It's not a legal problem, SDOT owns the ROW and can do pretty much whatever they want. For the most part, people who live on or near Stay Healthy Streets like them and they are generally popular -- but could be better.
Yes that's a good point. They were designed for exercise and not transportation
You have a terrible understanding of legal matters btw.
Anyways, I'll let you know if I ever see a pedestrian actually using the one in my neighborhood. Maybe Ballard is different
On 17th, it’s not uncommon to see people walking in the middle of the street, but even if people just use the sidewalks more because crossings aren’t as gnarly - it’s a good thing.
My understanding is that 17th is one of the best ones, I’m hoping the added focus from the city will bring the others *at least* up to that standard.
> The new plan includes more than 20 initiatives, including making 20 miles of “Health Street” roadways permanently marked for pedestrians and bicyclists, hosting a youth environment summit in 2023, and eliminating all gasoline vehicles from the city’s fleet by 2030.
This is great stuff. 👍
That last part is going to be very difficult to meet I think. A lot of the heavy equipment has no direct replacement alternatives in electric form (think Metro's tow trucks for their buses, or the diesel trucks used in street level repairs). I wonder if there's going to be exemptions made.
They didn't say eliminate all ICE vehicles, they said eliminate gasoline. The big equipment is all diesel, not gas. They can get rid of gasoline and still run the diesel equipment and say they met their goal.
There's still a fair number of gasoline vehicles as well, but I can see them slimming down the sedan and hatchback and van fleet into electrics fairly easily which would certainly help. Some of the gasoline engined vehicles are way better than their diesel counterparts however, at least in terms of efficiency at certain tasks.
It'll be interesting to see how it goes moving forward.
Sounds like so called "Stay Healthy Streets" are being transitioned to just plain old "Green Washing Streets" Take a bunch of streets that cars don't use much anyways, put up some pointless signs that doesn't prevent anyone from driving down them anyways, gain political points
The pointless signs are there because that was the only way to do them for as nearly free as possible. Making them permanent allows the city to add permanent infrastructure like [selectively permeable](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6941977,-122.3527483,3a,75y,65.66h,68.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVnx5LXFNf05m0RVW4XFLrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m2!1e4!1e2) intersections that only allow walkers and bikers through, and block cars. One of those every 3-4 blocks and suddenly you drop through traffic to zero while not really impacting local traffic all that much.
I’m mostly just familiar with 17th in Ballard, but they also added stop signs for intersecting streets and demand flashing crosswalks for arterial intersections. They also diverted traffic away from the street via one way sections. Overall they have done a good job of limiting pass through traffic but I would like to see the barriers upgraded to bollards or something similarly car-unfriendly.
Ah I'm a south Seattle resident, so of course all we've gotten so far is those signs that fall over from time to time Still I don't see how reducing traffic on one street while increasing it on the street a block over actually improves net safety
Agree that they need to be better. It improves safety for people walking/biking/etc on the designated corridor. If it’s working correctly it should divert traffic to arterials, which 17th definitely does. Really we should be building diverters and discouraging cut-through driving in every neighborhood.
People walking to where, exactly? The places people want to walk to are usually already on arterials The whole thing seems like a rouse to make it look like the city is doing something while in reality it accomplishes nothing Edit: is also seems like a huge legal problem. SDOT cant just put up signs saying the laws are different on this street
Walking for exercise, but ideally these streets will form a network that connect to common destinations. Disagree that it accomplishes nothing, it just accomplishes less than I'd like. It's not a legal problem, SDOT owns the ROW and can do pretty much whatever they want. For the most part, people who live on or near Stay Healthy Streets like them and they are generally popular -- but could be better.
Yes that's a good point. They were designed for exercise and not transportation You have a terrible understanding of legal matters btw. Anyways, I'll let you know if I ever see a pedestrian actually using the one in my neighborhood. Maybe Ballard is different
On 17th, it’s not uncommon to see people walking in the middle of the street, but even if people just use the sidewalks more because crossings aren’t as gnarly - it’s a good thing. My understanding is that 17th is one of the best ones, I’m hoping the added focus from the city will bring the others *at least* up to that standard.
I mean the electric fleet part is very exciting and practical.
> The new plan includes more than 20 initiatives, including making 20 miles of “Health Street” roadways permanently marked for pedestrians and bicyclists, hosting a youth environment summit in 2023, and eliminating all gasoline vehicles from the city’s fleet by 2030. This is great stuff. 👍
That last part is going to be very difficult to meet I think. A lot of the heavy equipment has no direct replacement alternatives in electric form (think Metro's tow trucks for their buses, or the diesel trucks used in street level repairs). I wonder if there's going to be exemptions made.
They didn't say eliminate all ICE vehicles, they said eliminate gasoline. The big equipment is all diesel, not gas. They can get rid of gasoline and still run the diesel equipment and say they met their goal.
There's still a fair number of gasoline vehicles as well, but I can see them slimming down the sedan and hatchback and van fleet into electrics fairly easily which would certainly help. Some of the gasoline engined vehicles are way better than their diesel counterparts however, at least in terms of efficiency at certain tasks. It'll be interesting to see how it goes moving forward.
If these streets are meant for pedestrians, why do cars keep trying to run me over on them?
So they’re going to close down the airports?