Comments for Orphan Road http://www.orphanroad.com Seattle-area Transportation, Infrastructure and Land Use Issues Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:47:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Mercer Island Link by serial catowner http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/mercer-island-link#comment-1603 serial catowner Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:47:43 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1956#comment-1603 Ironically, probably the first apartment complex on the eastside was the Shorewood complex built after the opening of the original floating bridge. The buildings were attractive modernist in plan and function, dressed with some brick and all of a piece, mostly three stories high. Buildings by the shore had close access to the lake and tennis courts, while the buildings higher up the hill had great views. Highway 10 (now I-90) roughly bisected the complex. At the time, the traffic on 10 was nothing like what you would see on a Seattle arterial today, but the management provided a footbridge so people from upper Shorewood could walk down for a swim. This would be considered a stiff little walk today. The apartments were never supported by any kind of retail or services in the complex, and their history serves as a sad reminder of the limitations of tower housing, even a jewel of tower housing in an opulent setting. Ironically, probably the first apartment complex on the eastside was the Shorewood complex built after the opening of the original floating bridge. The buildings were attractive modernist in plan and function, dressed with some brick and all of a piece, mostly three stories high. Buildings by the shore had close access to the lake and tennis courts, while the buildings higher up the hill had great views. Highway 10 (now I-90) roughly bisected the complex.

At the time, the traffic on 10 was nothing like what you would see on a Seattle arterial today, but the management provided a footbridge so people from upper Shorewood could walk down for a swim. This would be considered a stiff little walk today.

The apartments were never supported by any kind of retail or services in the complex, and their history serves as a sad reminder of the limitations of tower housing, even a jewel of tower housing in an opulent setting.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by Adam Parast http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1602 Adam Parast Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:45:43 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1602 I heard from someone, I can't remember now, that the mayor and people associated with him were thinking of this as well. It actually makes a lot of sense, not just for a transportation perspective, especially when you factor in that a new terminal has to be built anyways. I heard from someone, I can’t remember now, that the mayor and people associated with him were thinking of this as well. It actually makes a lot of sense, not just for a transportation perspective, especially when you factor in that a new terminal has to be built anyways.

]]> Comment on Mercer Island Link by Adam Parast http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/mercer-island-link#comment-1601 Adam Parast Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:42:06 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1956#comment-1601 You know I never thought of that either. It is a really good point. This might bode well for the condo market, especially for those targeted at early 30 something professional couples that want to settled down a bit but not have kids yet. You know I never thought of that either. It is a really good point. This might bode well for the condo market, especially for those targeted at early 30 something professional couples that want to settled down a bit but not have kids yet.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by EvergreenRailfan http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1598 EvergreenRailfan Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:15:58 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1598 Converting the upper car decks to carry just passengers sounds like a good idea, especially since Washington State Ferries gets good use out of their boats, with the Evergreen State class boats now getting the golden bands on the funnels, as they have been in service over 50 years now. Perhaps converting both a Jumbo Mk.I and a Jumbo Mk.II as an experiment. Although I wonder how trucking interests would take that, as it would put space on the boats at a premium, and that would see the costs go up for them, which they would pass on to their customers. RVs and Trucks, since they can only go in the center-tunnel of the car deck, take up more space, and the state charges more for that. Still, I think your idea is pretty good, and it might be worthwhile to do the same on the Cathlamet and Kittitas as the passengers have to exit via the car deck anyway. If the SOUNDER station at Mukilteo could have been closer, I wonder how much Whidbey Island traffic the train would be carrying into Seattle? Right now there is a disincentive to taking the train from there, the CT/ET bus stop is across the street from the terminal, while the train station is a 3-4 block walk from the dock. Converting the upper car decks to carry just passengers sounds like a good idea, especially since Washington State Ferries gets good use out of their boats, with the Evergreen State class boats now getting the golden bands on the funnels, as they have been in service over 50 years now. Perhaps converting both a Jumbo Mk.I and a Jumbo Mk.II as an experiment. Although I wonder how trucking interests would take that, as it would put space on the boats at a premium, and that would see the costs go up for them, which they would pass on to their customers. RVs and Trucks, since they can only go in the center-tunnel of the car deck, take up more space, and the state charges more for that. Still, I think your idea is pretty good, and it might be worthwhile to do the same on the Cathlamet and Kittitas as the passengers have to exit via the car deck anyway. If the SOUNDER station at Mukilteo could have been closer, I wonder how much Whidbey Island traffic the train would be carrying into Seattle? Right now there is a disincentive to taking the train from there, the CT/ET bus stop is across the street from the terminal, while the train station is a 3-4 block walk from the dock.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by serial catowner http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1597 serial catowner Sun, 07 Mar 2010 19:23:55 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1597 Yes, the Carlyle is a cute little boat, but not shaped at all like the boats that ran from Bremerton to Seattle and West Seattle. What they should do on the Bainbridge run is convert the upper car decks to passenger use. Yes, the Carlyle is a cute little boat, but not shaped at all like the boats that ran from Bremerton to Seattle and West Seattle.

What they should do on the Bainbridge run is convert the upper car decks to passenger use.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by EvergreenRailfan http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1596 EvergreenRailfan Sun, 07 Mar 2010 10:42:46 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1596 The Carlisle II, I believe, has been running Port Orchard-Bremerton since 1936. Before that, it was mainly running between Bellingham and a cannery on Lumi Island. It still gets the job done in Bremerton. Kitsap Transit is going to do some improvements to the Admiral Pete. http://blog.seattlepi.com/kitsapandbeyond/archives/121857.asp I was wondering, if a Passenger-Only Ferry version of the Chtezemoka would fit that bill, possibly with an enclosed upper deck as well. The poster on the Cascadia Prospectus that I mentioned kind of got his idea from the Staten Island Ferry, but those boats have been Passenger ONly since post-9/11 security measures went into effect. Now with a POF version of the Chetzemoka, the docks would have to be modified, with a foot-bridge that would be able to accommodate a bigger load of walk-ons. This kind of boat probably would not happen, but it should be studied and modeled anyway, just in case. In long-range plans I have seen in the past, for Bainbridge, to avoid the need for a third car-ferry on that route, it was suggested that enclosing the upper decks of the Tacoma and her sisters would be a better way. The crossing for Bainbridge-Seattle is short compared to Bremerton-Seattle, a POF probably would not work, because it would probably be just a few knots faster than the Tacoma, which I believe is one of the fastest car ferries in the fleet. If the West Seattle Water Taxi does take off, perhaps it would be worth studying something like the SeaBus, to make the route more efficient on boarding and de-boarding. A hybrid of what they got now plus the SeaBus design probably would work better for the Vashon run. The Carlisle II, I believe, has been running Port Orchard-Bremerton since 1936. Before that, it was mainly running between Bellingham and a cannery on Lumi Island. It still gets the job done in Bremerton. Kitsap Transit is going to do some improvements to the Admiral Pete.

http://blog.seattlepi.com/kitsapandbeyond/archives/121857.asp

I was wondering, if a Passenger-Only Ferry version of the Chtezemoka would fit that bill, possibly with an enclosed upper deck as well. The poster on the Cascadia Prospectus that I mentioned kind of got his idea from the Staten Island Ferry, but those boats have been Passenger ONly since post-9/11 security measures went into effect. Now with a POF version of the Chetzemoka, the docks would have to be modified, with a foot-bridge that would be able to accommodate a bigger load of walk-ons. This kind of boat probably would not happen, but it should be studied and modeled anyway, just in case. In long-range plans I have seen in the past, for Bainbridge, to avoid the need for a third car-ferry on that route, it was suggested that enclosing the upper decks of the Tacoma and her sisters would be a better way. The crossing for Bainbridge-Seattle is short compared to Bremerton-Seattle, a POF probably would not work, because it would probably be just a few knots faster than the Tacoma, which I believe is one of the fastest car ferries in the fleet.

If the West Seattle Water Taxi does take off, perhaps it would be worth studying something like the SeaBus, to make the route more efficient on boarding and de-boarding. A hybrid of what they got now plus the SeaBus design probably would work better for the Vashon run.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by serial catowner http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1595 serial catowner Sat, 06 Mar 2010 21:53:31 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1595 The ferry traffic is actually not a considerable part of the traffic you expect to see on an urban arterial. Westlake North carries about 20.000 vehicles a day, and the ferries are obviously not moving anywhere near that through Colman Dock. The problem comes when summer traffic fills up the holding lots and the traffic backs up on city streets. As you note, to the south are the Port of Seattle and BNSF facilities for unloading ships and loading trains. Also, a lot of people on the Seattle boats are going to Seattle. If they weren't, they would drive north and take an Edmonds boat or south to use the bridge. Like so many of the regional problems, this one is cursed by the inability to realize that the age of happy motoring is drawing to a close. All things considered, maybe hoping that the 520 rebuild will take all the available funding is the best we can do. At least communities on both sides of the sound would be spared the bigger boats, bigger parking lots, and bigger roads on the highway department's 'to-do' list. The ferry traffic is actually not a considerable part of the traffic you expect to see on an urban arterial. Westlake North carries about 20.000 vehicles a day, and the ferries are obviously not moving anywhere near that through Colman Dock. The problem comes when summer traffic fills up the holding lots and the traffic backs up on city streets.

As you note, to the south are the Port of Seattle and BNSF facilities for unloading ships and loading trains. Also, a lot of people on the Seattle boats are going to Seattle. If they weren’t, they would drive north and take an Edmonds boat or south to use the bridge.

Like so many of the regional problems, this one is cursed by the inability to realize that the age of happy motoring is drawing to a close. All things considered, maybe hoping that the 520 rebuild will take all the available funding is the best we can do. At least communities on both sides of the sound would be spared the bigger boats, bigger parking lots, and bigger roads on the highway department’s ‘to-do’ list.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by Federal Way Graffiti http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1594 Federal Way Graffiti Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:04:02 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1594 I love the idea of moving the terminal south. As much as the idea of "fewer cars" is a nice idea, the ferries are a part of our transit system. Poor connections to the freeway system actually speaks to bad planning. The more you can do to align these, the faster you get the unwanted cars off the city streets. Problem with south is that you quickly run out of space with the port right there and there's risk to Pioneer Square. You end up having to go really far south and dump them in Burien (extend 518 to the water?) but then you to make the connections international with the airport right there. North's not much better. Extend Battery to the water and you lose some existing pedestrian waterfront and need to make Denny a strong connector to the 5. Further than that and you're into parks and rural with no water-close freeways again until Mukiteo. Maybe Shoreline. Still, love the idea of moving the ferry. What about relocating the parking further east and building dedicated flyovers? Pioneer Square again. Darn cars. (Why is the captcha below the submit button?) I love the idea of moving the terminal south. As much as the idea of “fewer cars” is a nice idea, the ferries are a part of our transit system. Poor connections to the freeway system actually speaks to bad planning.

The more you can do to align these, the faster you get the unwanted cars off the city streets.

Problem with south is that you quickly run out of space with the port right there and there’s risk to Pioneer Square. You end up having to go really far south and dump them in Burien (extend 518 to the water?) but then you to make the connections international with the airport right there.

North’s not much better. Extend Battery to the water and you lose some existing pedestrian waterfront and need to make Denny a strong connector to the 5.

Further than that and you’re into parks and rural with no water-close freeways again until Mukiteo. Maybe Shoreline.

Still, love the idea of moving the ferry. What about relocating the parking further east and building dedicated flyovers? Pioneer Square again.

Darn cars.

(Why is the captcha below the submit button?)

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by serial catowner http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1593 serial catowner Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:20:31 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1593 Well, naturally, I would also prefer to get the best boat for the route. In practical terms, we're really only talking about two routes here (at the present)- the Bainbridge run and the Bremerton run. Both of them cross open water and to stay on schedule need to be a certain size, otherwise the sea conditions will slow them down sometimes. Basically, long narrow hulls that are double-ended are the most economical and swift for any given size. This also affects the size of the wake, because the wake is just the disturbance caused by the passage of the boat- it tells you how much power you're wasting. Of course, the car ferries are always pushing a set of props at the front end of the boat, but a passenger ferry wouldn't need to do that. Then you have your fixed expenses to deal with, which suggest that making the passenger boat bigger and attracting more riders might not cost you anything, or might even improve the financial picture. The ferries that shuttle Bremerton-Port Orchard are cute, but nothing like the old Mosquito Fleet boats, which usually had a length-beam ratio of at least 6:1 and were very fair underwater. However, this is the modern world, and the chances of seeing a practical passenger ferry emerge seem pretty slim. So the above information is provided for amusement purposes only, as we wait to see what ugly monstrosity will next be put into a mercifully brief effort to provide passenger-only service. Well, naturally, I would also prefer to get the best boat for the route. In practical terms, we’re really only talking about two routes here (at the present)- the Bainbridge run and the Bremerton run. Both of them cross open water and to stay on schedule need to be a certain size, otherwise the sea conditions will slow them down sometimes.

Basically, long narrow hulls that are double-ended are the most economical and swift for any given size. This also affects the size of the wake, because the wake is just the disturbance caused by the passage of the boat- it tells you how much power you’re wasting. Of course, the car ferries are always pushing a set of props at the front end of the boat, but a passenger ferry wouldn’t need to do that.

Then you have your fixed expenses to deal with, which suggest that making the passenger boat bigger and attracting more riders might not cost you anything, or might even improve the financial picture.

The ferries that shuttle Bremerton-Port Orchard are cute, but nothing like the old Mosquito Fleet boats, which usually had a length-beam ratio of at least 6:1 and were very fair underwater.

However, this is the modern world, and the chances of seeing a practical passenger ferry emerge seem pretty slim. So the above information is provided for amusement purposes only, as we wait to see what ugly monstrosity will next be put into a mercifully brief effort to provide passenger-only service.

]]> Comment on Future of Seattle Ferries by EvergreenRailfan http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2010/03/future-of-seattle-ferries#comment-1591 EvergreenRailfan Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:29:37 +0000 http://www.orphanroad.com/?p=1952#comment-1591 I would prefer the best boat for the particular route, if that is possible. Like int he case of the Admiral Pete and Carlisle II in Kitsap County. They are interesting boats, but they get the job done, especially the latter, it may be one of the last of the Mosquito Fleet operating as intended. It is slow, but it is used mainly on Bremerton-Annapolis and Bremerton-Port Orchard route. Kitsap Transit still intends to try a Seattle service, but using a new low-wake design they will be trying out. I doubt the low-wake boat, if the Seattle service don't work out, would be useful in running on the two existing Kitsap Transit ferry services, the boat would be too fast. Takes about 12 minutes for the Admiral Pete and Carlisle II to do the Port Orchard Run. I would prefer the best boat for the particular route, if that is possible. Like int he case of the Admiral Pete and Carlisle II in Kitsap County. They are interesting boats, but they get the job done, especially the latter, it may be one of the last of the Mosquito Fleet operating as intended. It is slow, but it is used mainly on Bremerton-Annapolis and Bremerton-Port Orchard route. Kitsap Transit still intends to try a Seattle service, but using a new low-wake design they will be trying out. I doubt the low-wake boat, if the Seattle service don’t work out, would be useful in running on the two existing Kitsap Transit ferry services, the boat would be too fast. Takes about 12 minutes for the Admiral Pete and Carlisle II to do the Port Orchard Run.

]]>