First Hill Pictures, Projects, etc... - Page 3

Matt the Engineer · May 7th, 2012, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomgoggles

So I was driving around this part of First Hill yesterday:

http://g.co/maps/mmpte

And I noticed that most of the streets really suck. They're not wide enough to be either arterials or complete streets, and the arterial network is not comprehensive at all. Excessive street parking, narrow streets, lack of signage and signals, un-maintained pavement...

For many of us, seeing First Hill develop into an extension of downtown the way Denny has would be a dream come true, but I can't see that happening unless the street grid is fixed, and I haven't heard any plans. I know SDOT is basically out of money for street projects.

What say the experts?

I won't claim to be an expert, but small gridded streets seem to be a good thing for a dense city. The neighborhood is already gridded with bus lines, and the tree-lined streets would be great for walking. Storefronts will hopefully spring up as density increases, especially on the new buildings. Sure, trucks will have a hard time with deliveries, but smart companies will just use smaller trucks. If you're talking about commute-time exiting from parking garages... that will sort itself out. It's not like it's easy to exit the city at 5:15pm from a wide street - you just wait at a wide street in line for the freeway. This has translated into a high percentage of Seattle workers taking the bus.

Doomgoggles · May 7th, 2012, 07:51 PM

Matt, I'm not talking about cars. Most of these streets are totally unsuitable for buses or trucks. I'd like to see the street-parking GONE, actually. However, a couple of arterials from downtown would need to be extended through to maybe Boren or Broadway.

Matt the Engineer · May 7th, 2012, 09:45 PM

Check out your map again. Buses run on 9th, Madison, James, Boren, Seneca, and with a bit of a walk you're at the new Broadway streetcar. That's great coverage. Removing street parking is cheap and easy, though I question whether even that's necessary.

That said, to make sure it's fully connected to downtown, I recommend a little gondola from Pioneer Square to Broadway up, say, Cherry, with stops on 3rd and 9th.

Rogue Linguist · May 8th, 2012, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt the Engineer

Check out your map again. Buses run on 9th, Madison, James, Boren, Seneca, and with a bit of a walk you're at the new Broadway streetcar. That's great coverage. Removing street parking is cheap and easy, though I question whether even that's necessary.

That said, to make sure it's fully connected to downtown, I recommend a little gondola from Pioneer Square to Broadway up, say, Cherry, with stops on 3rd and 9th.

Interesting you should mention that. I always imagined the ideal tram route extending from the downtown waterfront up Madison all the way to the eastern tip of Madison, on Lake Washington. Like the old one. I mean, there are tonnes of hospitals in the First Hill section of that stretch, and it radiates out of downtown, kind of like commuter catchment areas. At any rate, it would also be nice to see one go up First Avenue into Lower Queen Anne, maybe along First and then Queen Anne Ave. with a stop at Seattle Centre along the way.

RMacherat · May 8th, 2012, 09:27 AM

Though I often disagree with Matt, have to agree here. Seattle's grid is definitely part of its charm, and we shouldn't fool around with it, especially in the neighborhoods. No one ever died of old age (documented anyway) sitting in traffic. The worst ever traffic mess always gets over with; we deal with it if we want to get there, and life goes on.

CityView Jim · May 8th, 2012, 04:32 PM

Exactly!

Few may agree, but traffic is something, for the most part, that we choose to sit in.

Don't like your commute? Move.
Don't like rush hour? Avoid it.
Hate being late? Leave earlier.

Works for some BUT NOT ALL (in caps to ward off my critics!). At this point, I'm blessed to work from home, but used to commute from downtown Seattle to downtown Bellevue. Traffic sucked. But I choose to live in downtown Seattle and sacrificed 90 minutes a day going back and forth.

Matt the Engineer · May 8th, 2012, 06:44 PM

I factored in about $10k a year to avoid a cross-lake commute when deciding if switching jobs to Seattle was worth it. Haven't worked more than 3 miles from my home since. But I agree, some don't have that option. Most have some form of a choice.

Doomgoggles · May 8th, 2012, 08:46 PM

That's great and all, but the point is: if we add thousands of new jobs and residences to First Hill, traffic WILL increase. Traffic WILL delay buses, streetcars, etc. It will make it more difficult to bicycle. Unless we do something about the streets, especially getting rid of street parking.

Matt, the area I'm talking about specifically is the square between I-5, James, Boren, and Madison. The triangle between Spring, Boren, and I-5 is pretty bad too.

mhays · May 8th, 2012, 08:58 PM

If the residents are already working downtown, it'll probably just shorten their commute and improve their average mode choice, not add traffic.

Downtown workers on foot or using transit, old folks, hospitals, and colleges don't create traffic jams. Hospitals and colleges have odd and dispersed hours. Senior housing residents (beyond the most "active" varieties) don't travel much, and their times are dispersed. First Hill will never have the crush loads of the CBD.

Doomgoggles · May 8th, 2012, 08:59 PM

Isn't the goal here to bridge the freeway and let the CBD march eastward?

mhays · May 8th, 2012, 09:05 PM

I doubt it. First Hill is tailor-made for housing and big institutions. We don't need more office zones, and it's better to focus them closer to CBD transit, and among other tenants, as many have synergies with each other.

Matt the Engineer · May 8th, 2012, 09:38 PM

[Doom] You can't build your way out of traffic. You'll just encourage more people to drive, while making the place unpleasant for pedestrians. Extending downtown doesn't mean we have to copy the traffic patterns of the past. Worried about buses, trucks, or bikes? Restrict SOV's on a few streets.

alexjonlin · May 8th, 2012, 11:59 PM

Man I wish they had found a way to get the money together to build First Hill Station... That'll always be a problem area. I was thinking one transit solution for that very-congested section of Cherry would be a Gondola just from City Hall Park (next to the County Courthouse) to the end of Jefferson at 9th. Straight shot, easy with just terminus stations, pretty short but serving very high ridership.

mhays · May 9th, 2012, 12:32 AM

Or the skybridge from the parking garage between 5th and 6th (flat entry from 5th) to the north side of Harborview. That would skip three blocks of steep hill, though it would start pretty high up. It's hard to guess which would cost more to build. Both would involve operation costs, including maintenance even while mine wouldn't need a driver.

Doomgoggles · May 9th, 2012, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt the Engineer

[Doom] You can't build your way out of traffic. You'll just encourage more people to drive, while making the place unpleasant for pedestrians. Extending downtown doesn't mean we have to copy the traffic patterns of the past. Worried about buses, trucks, or bikes? Restrict SOV's on a few streets.

I have no problem with restricting SOV access. I still don't think the existing streets are suitable for large trucks or buses, and DEFINITELY not with street parking.

Matt the Engineer · May 9th, 2012, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomgoggles

I have no problem with restricting SOV access. I still don't think the existing streets are suitable for large trucks or buses, and DEFINITELY not with street parking.

Again, there are 4 streets in the area you describe that have buses right now. And each of these streets has garbage service. And likely moving trucks (if a moving truck can make it on my street, it can get in here). Sure, it's a bit tough and takes longer. And smart companies will send out smaller trucks. But European cities have dense, prosperous areas with little more than walking paths - we can get by with these comparably wide streets.

And if not, it's just some road paint and street signs.

CityView Jim · May 9th, 2012, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexjonlin

Man I wish they had found a way to get the money together to build First Hill Station... That'll always be a problem area. I was thinking one transit solution for that very-congested section of Cherry would be a Gondola just from City Hall Park (next to the County Courthouse) to the end of Jefferson at 9th. Straight shot, easy with just terminus stations, pretty short but serving very high ridership.

By First Hill Station, do you mean Link light rail? If so, it wasn't a money issue as much as a geologic issue as I recall.

alexjonlin · May 9th, 2012, 01:29 AM

Yeah for the University Link project. I think the issue was that there was too much risk for it to have a good chance at getting federal funding, so I guess it was partially funding and partially geological.

Ruffhauser · May 9th, 2012, 03:51 AM

This pic was posted in the Stranger recently.

What would be some major objections to having an outdoor escalator system conquer First Hill?

mhays · May 9th, 2012, 04:15 AM

That one plus the Hong Kong version are one way, prevailing direction only (in Hong Kong's case), so you're screwed half the time. And of course it takes a hell of a lot of money to run, made appropriate by the astonishing densities up the hill. This being the US with our stupid liability laws, the insurance costs would probably be high too, acceptable for a high-traffic controlled facility, but not around street drunks etc. And our densities are nothing like theirs.

Would it be good? Maybe. It cuts off one side from the other. US safety regs would keep it separate from everything including nothing that would damage a car within three feet of a lane. Not next to a building either, because their access is important even for maintenance. Any utilities under it in parallel would need to be rerouted because access would be tough afterward. So it would be very wide vs. the lack of room available. You'd still need sidewalks obviously.

And of course the development cost. I don't see it being considered.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 7th, 2012, 07:51 PM	#42
Doomgoggles Unregistered non-user Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Seattle/Kitsap Posts: 740 Likes (Received): 39	Matt, I'm not talking about cars. Most of these streets are totally unsuitable for buses or trucks. I'd like to see the street-parking GONE, actually. However, a couple of arterials from downtown would need to be extended through to maybe Boren or Broadway.

May 7th, 2012, 09:45 PM	#43
Matt the Engineer Registered User Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 1,093 Likes (Received): 94	Check out your map again. Buses run on 9th, Madison, James, Boren, Seneca, and with a bit of a walk you're at the new Broadway streetcar. That's great coverage. Removing street parking is cheap and easy, though I question whether even that's necessary. That said, to make sure it's fully connected to downtown, I recommend a little gondola from Pioneer Square to Broadway up, say, Cherry, with stops on 3rd and 9th.

May 8th, 2012, 09:27 AM	#45
RMacherat Buy used books Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,743 Likes (Received): 92	Though I often disagree with Matt, have to agree here. Seattle's grid is definitely part of its charm, and we shouldn't fool around with it, especially in the neighborhoods. No one ever died of old age (documented anyway) sitting in traffic. The worst ever traffic mess always gets over with; we deal with it if we want to get there, and life goes on.

May 8th, 2012, 04:32 PM	#46
CityView Jim Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,965 Likes (Received): 64	Exactly! Few may agree, but traffic is something, for the most part, that we choose to sit in. Don't like your commute? Move. Don't like rush hour? Avoid it. Hate being late? Leave earlier. Works for some BUT NOT ALL (in caps to ward off my critics!). At this point, I'm blessed to work from home, but used to commute from downtown Seattle to downtown Bellevue. Traffic sucked. But I choose to live in downtown Seattle and sacrificed 90 minutes a day going back and forth.

May 8th, 2012, 06:44 PM	#47
Matt the Engineer Registered User Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 1,093 Likes (Received): 94	I factored in about $10k a year to avoid a cross-lake commute when deciding if switching jobs to Seattle was worth it. Haven't worked more than 3 miles from my home since. But I agree, some don't have that option. Most have some form of a choice.

May 8th, 2012, 08:46 PM	#48
Doomgoggles Unregistered non-user Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Seattle/Kitsap Posts: 740 Likes (Received): 39	That's great and all, but the point is: if we add thousands of new jobs and residences to First Hill, traffic WILL increase. Traffic WILL delay buses, streetcars, etc. It will make it more difficult to bicycle. Unless we do something about the streets, especially getting rid of street parking. Matt, the area I'm talking about specifically is the square between I-5, James, Boren, and Madison. The triangle between Spring, Boren, and I-5 is pretty bad too.

May 8th, 2012, 08:58 PM	#49
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	If the residents are already working downtown, it'll probably just shorten their commute and improve their average mode choice, not add traffic. Downtown workers on foot or using transit, old folks, hospitals, and colleges don't create traffic jams. Hospitals and colleges have odd and dispersed hours. Senior housing residents (beyond the most "active" varieties) don't travel much, and their times are dispersed. First Hill will never have the crush loads of the CBD.

May 8th, 2012, 08:59 PM	#50
Doomgoggles Unregistered non-user Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Seattle/Kitsap Posts: 740 Likes (Received): 39	Isn't the goal here to bridge the freeway and let the CBD march eastward?

May 8th, 2012, 09:05 PM	#51
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	I doubt it. First Hill is tailor-made for housing and big institutions. We don't need more office zones, and it's better to focus them closer to CBD transit, and among other tenants, as many have synergies with each other.

May 8th, 2012, 09:38 PM	#52
Matt the Engineer Registered User Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 1,093 Likes (Received): 94	[Doom] You can't build your way out of traffic. You'll just encourage more people to drive, while making the place unpleasant for pedestrians. Extending downtown doesn't mean we have to copy the traffic patterns of the past. Worried about buses, trucks, or bikes? Restrict SOV's on a few streets.

May 8th, 2012, 11:59 PM	#53
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,271 Likes (Received): 87	Man I wish they had found a way to get the money together to build First Hill Station... That'll always be a problem area. I was thinking one transit solution for that very-congested section of Cherry would be a Gondola just from City Hall Park (next to the County Courthouse) to the end of Jefferson at 9th. Straight shot, easy with just terminus stations, pretty short but serving very high ridership.

May 9th, 2012, 12:32 AM	#54
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	Or the skybridge from the parking garage between 5th and 6th (flat entry from 5th) to the north side of Harborview. That would skip three blocks of steep hill, though it would start pretty high up. It's hard to guess which would cost more to build. Both would involve operation costs, including maintenance even while mine wouldn't need a driver.

May 9th, 2012, 01:29 AM	#58
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,271 Likes (Received): 87	Yeah for the University Link project. I think the issue was that there was too much risk for it to have a good chance at getting federal funding, so I guess it was partially funding and partially geological.

May 9th, 2012, 03:51 AM	#59
Ruffhauser Registered User Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: North Belltown Posts: 1,358 Likes (Received): 218	This pic was posted in the Stranger recently. What would be some major objections to having an outdoor escalator system conquer First Hill?

May 9th, 2012, 04:15 AM	#60
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	That one plus the Hong Kong version are one way, prevailing direction only (in Hong Kong's case), so you're screwed half the time. And of course it takes a hell of a lot of money to run, made appropriate by the astonishing densities up the hill. This being the US with our stupid liability laws, the insurance costs would probably be high too, acceptable for a high-traffic controlled facility, but not around street drunks etc. And our densities are nothing like theirs. Would it be good? Maybe. It cuts off one side from the other. US safety regs would keep it separate from everything including nothing that would damage a car within three feet of a lane. Not next to a building either, because their access is important even for maintenance. Any utilities under it in parallel would need to be rerouted because access would be tough afterward. So it would be very wide vs. the lack of room available. You'd still need sidewalks obviously. And of course the development cost. I don't see it being considered.