As someone who commutes this route during rush hour every weekday, I can say with certainty that this is a phenomenally bad idea. Traffic along Alaskan Way is already horrific during rush hour. There just isn't the space there to replace six lanes of access-controlled highway with a street-level boulevard.
You'd need a minimum of eight lanes to handle the load, more like ten, possibly even twelve. And there's still the matter of the bottleneck at the Battery Street tunnel, which because of existing structures can't realistically be widened beyond three lanes in any direction, if that. Northbound traffic on 99 already backs up to the West Seattle bridge and beyond during peak traffic hours as it is, not to mention the backup along the bridge itself to get to I-5.
The net result is that traffic will slow to a crawl, ferry routes will be virtually inaccessible, and the already-significant danger to cyclists and pedestrians on Alaskan Way will be even greater than it is now. In short, a boulevard is an even worse idea than a tunnel. Better to screw up traffic for a couple of years to reengineer the viaduct properly with more durable modern materials than to screw up commuter routes in perpetuity.
Sorry if I got a bit ranty-pants there, but it seems that the majority of the people weighing in on this issue in the media and elsewhere aren't those who'll actually be *affected* by it on a daily basis (with the exception of multi-millionaire downtown condo owners, who get zero sympathy from me).
Unfortunately, the problem goes further than that. No replacement for the existing structure can possibly handle the projected traffic load. At a certain point, commuter driving becomes impossible in an urban setting; you just can't build enough roads to handle that many single-occupant vehicles.
As for the studies you refer to, they are very specific. Millions of people work in NYC and live in NJ, CT, or upstate, and the overwhelming majority commute by rail. The same is mostly true of SF, and almost all European cities live by mass transportation.
Long term, te only viable answer is for Seattleites to realize that their city has outgrown the "small town" so many remember growing up in, and get with the urban program.
I think people are trying, but a lot of efforts are being defeated by self-serving asshats in the business community abusing the public initiative system. How many times did we as a city vote in favor of the monorail? Three? Four?
I have *no* idea why. I just know that all of the transportation studies done shows that people would be driving nearly as much. I think a lot of it has to do with where they are going to, and where from.
And I did miss-speak. It will cut it down but by so little that it is negligable.
What's funny is they used Disney World as an insult.
Since 1971, when the loop at the Magic Kingdom was built, the monorail has traveled the equivalent distance of twenty-one trips around the world. On a typical working day, around 150,000 Walt Disney World guests travel on three routes.
This is a system there moving people efficiently and reliable means MONEY!!! If people can't get around in Disney World they DON"T return.
Can you imagine asking tourists to walk 13 miles in Florida heat?
they have a monorail in Singapore too. Apparently it is hugely popular, and exteremly well used.
the problem with our monorail is that they proposed extremely limited coverage and services. They designed a proposal that would not be "good enough" for everyone to jump on board.
It would be good enough for the thousands who travel from West Seattle to work on Downtown Seattle as well as those who wanted to see one of the sports teams. Plus it's elevated so all those people who cruise the viaduct to see the view could use the monorail.
You'd need a minimum of eight lanes to handle the load, more like ten, possibly even twelve. And there's still the matter of the bottleneck at the Battery Street tunnel, which because of existing structures can't realistically be widened beyond three lanes in any direction, if that. Northbound traffic on 99 already backs up to the West Seattle bridge and beyond during peak traffic hours as it is, not to mention the backup along the bridge itself to get to I-5.
The net result is that traffic will slow to a crawl, ferry routes will be virtually inaccessible, and the already-significant danger to cyclists and pedestrians on Alaskan Way will be even greater than it is now. In short, a boulevard is an even worse idea than a tunnel. Better to screw up traffic for a couple of years to reengineer the viaduct properly with more durable modern materials than to screw up commuter routes in perpetuity.
Reply
Reply
Reply
As for the studies you refer to, they are very specific. Millions of people work in NYC and live in NJ, CT, or upstate, and the overwhelming majority commute by rail. The same is mostly true of SF, and almost all European cities live by mass transportation.
Long term, te only viable answer is for Seattleites to realize that their city has outgrown the "small town" so many remember growing up in, and get with the urban program.
Reply
a lot of people don't belive just *how big* the seattle area actually is now.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Why?
Most reports out now show we're close to peak oil.
http://www.theoildrum.com/?gclid=CO7Lgs2544oCFQkfYAodpgSp0w
Reply
And I did miss-speak. It will cut it down but by so little that it is negligable.
Reply
I can't find any actual studies, just anicdotal stories. :(
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/06/17/MN108484.DTL
Reply
I am glad I got to see them when I worked for transportation engineers, but I wish I could share them with others. :(
Reply
Since 1971, when the loop at the Magic Kingdom was built, the monorail has traveled the equivalent distance of twenty-one trips around the world. On a typical working day, around 150,000 Walt Disney World guests travel on three routes.
This is a system there moving people efficiently and reliable means MONEY!!! If people can't get around in Disney World they DON"T return.
Can you imagine asking tourists to walk 13 miles in Florida heat?
Reply
the problem with our monorail is that they proposed extremely limited coverage and services. They designed a proposal that would not be "good enough" for everyone to jump on board.
Reply
Plus it's elevated so all those people who cruise the viaduct to see the view could use the monorail.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment