Sep

2

aLIVe@Bumbershoot

Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Labor Day Weekend, September 3-5, 2011
11am – 8pm @ Center Square (between the EMP and the Space Needle)

Schedule

• All weekend, Johnnie Olivan of Rejuiced Bikes is offering rides on his Bike-Carts
• Julia Field of Undriving.org will be issuing Undriving Licenses™ all weekend
• The LIV/DIY craft table designed by Cheryl dos Remedios will be open all weekend
• Peter Reiquam’s Walk and Roll will be on display with artist demos from 1:00 -5:00 on Saturday and 2:00-6:00 on Sunday
• meadow starts with p (MSWP) will provide impromptu demos of the mythical bicycle on Monday
• aLIVe short films are being screened at SIFF Cinema onSunday from 1:00-1:45

aLIVe@Bumbershoot is hosted by Great City and sponsored by 4Culture and One Reel. All activities are FREE thanks our sponsors and crew of fabulous volunteers!

Jul

25

Council Candidate Cookoff Winners!

Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Thanks to all of the candidates, judges and attendees at last week’s Council Candidate Cookoff. Here Bobby Forch, Brad Meacham, Sally Clark and Tim Burgess show off their zero-waste prizes as the winners.

Jun

22

citytank: The Low-Hanging Fruit Of Public Urban Eco-Services

Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Great City board member Nate Cole-Daum wants to see more electric cars in multifamily buildings.  This post originally appeared on citytank and is republished here with permission:

Electric cars and charging stations have arrived, bringing with them the opportunity to reduce commuters’ carbon footprint. Nowhere is this more true than in dense urban areas.

Even if you travel by single occupancy vehicle (as opposed to transit or bicycle) living in the dense, compact-development context of multifamily housing can bring your carbon footprint down way below the national average. It is well-known that folks who live in vertical neighborhoods are far more likely to find what they need (and head out to earn their living) via much shorter trips than their single-family dwelling counterparts.

So I find it surprising how little discussion there has been about the apartment and condo context for electric vehicle owners. And that’s why I was glad to see this Transportation Nation blog post recently, featuring a condo dweller who was among the first in the nation to own the new Chevy Volt. His challenge (working with his HOA to retrofit their parking area) will hopefully be resolved; the solution celebrated and replicated.

For while there’s simply no match for a city networked with robust, convenient and pleasant public transit, walking and biking routes, rethinking a car-oriented city takes time. While we wait, making it easy for individuals to lighten the impact of their single-occupancy vehicle, especially when they’re already urban, ready and willing to pay that premium for eco-piety, behooves us all.

Here in the Puget Sound, in particular, since our grid is fed largely by lower-impact hydropower, getting urbanites off oil and onto the grid, can be low-hanging fruit.

Speaking of fruit, how many multifamily buildings have food waste pickup at this point?

Feb

17

Copenhagen’s Potato Rows

Filed Under Copenhagen, planning, Streets For People, Uncategorized | 4 Comments

The Potato Rows - shared streets where people are prioritized.

A daughter and father enjoying the afternoon.

A recent blog written by Justin Martin of SvR Design caught my attention and brought back some fond memories of Copenhagen. I decided to pull out my external hard drive and find my own photos of Copenhagen’s “Potato Rows” – a community of townhouses in the Østerbro neighborhood that was built in the 1800s as housing for workers and is now one of the most popular and highest-priced addresses in Copenhagen (oh, gentrification).

Examples of private open spaces buffering homes from the public street.

The Potato Rows, or Kartoffelraekkerne in Danish, features narrow streets that are utilized as a shared space between people and cars. The townhouse homes all have small gardens or courtyards that face the street, with front porches where neighbors can enjoy their private outdoor space. The private courtyard space has landscaping and short fences to buffer residents from the street activities and provide privacy, but there is a visual connection between the street and yard. When I visited the Potato Rows on a sunny afternoon, many neighbors were sitting on front steps reading a book or just enjoying the sunshine. Others were taking advantage of street furniture within the public rights-of-way.

Chalk-filled streets with people walking down the middle are the "norm" in this neighborhood.


American planners know the advantages of density, the need for a proper transition from private to public space, and the importance of encouraging homes to face the street. But, to me, the Potato Row’s shared streets are what really makes the community stand out. While the streets have “sidewalks” that are slightly above the road, most people walk down the middle of the road. This is because the sidewalks are usually where cars park or where the many street amenities, including benches, play structures, picnic tables, and landscaping, are placed.

Streets for play.

Examples of amenities that double as traffic-calming elements.

A family strolls down the middle of the street.

On these streets, people are prioritized.  This is reinforced by street furniture, play structures, and landscaping that are all placed in the streets themselves. These amenities take traffic calming to a level that I’m sure most American fire marshals would find completely unacceptable. But, the residents of the community seem to approve. And I think that is an important factor. As Danish planner and architect Jan Gehl says, places must be designed with people in mind and creating human-scaled communities is crucial. The Potato Rows stands out because of “the vibrant street life, sense of community and the walkability of the neighborhood,” making it one of the most sought-after locations in town.

—–

More images:

Exit condition where the road abuts a busier neighborhood collector street.

A "sidewalk" where play equipment and benches are placed.

A cat-approved street.

Jan

13

An Option Everyone Can Agree Upon

Filed Under Sustainability, Transportation, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Downtown needs a congestion management strategy, regardless of what we do about the Viaduct.

By Alex Broner

London. New York City. Stockholm. Singapore.

What do all of these cities have in common? They’re all great cities and they’ve all approved congestion pricing for their downtown areas. As Seattle comes to terms with replacing the Viaduct we should make sure our downtown is not overwhelmed by traffic and remains a vibrant place for people and for local businesses.

I watched the Publicola Tunnel debate in December with great interest in order to confirm a theory I had been developing. What the tunnel debate confirmed was that no one wants more automobile traffic on the streets of downtown. Indeed both sides tried to outdo each other in complaining about the traffic generated by their opponent’s alternative. The thing is both sides are right that both the Deep Bore Tunnel and the I5/Surface/Transit option in their present form are expected to push enormous numbers of cars onto surface streets. Fortunately for us, there are things we can do about it.

Why is more traffic a problem? More traffic means more delays for both drivers and transit users. More traffic means more long lines of idling vehicles at traffic lights and more noise and pollution. The pedestrian experience worsens and becomes more dangerous. As traffic increases street life disappears and businesses close. No one wants this.

In Thursday’s Debate the 2008 Gehl Architect’s study was mentioned, it’s worth quoting from page 10 of this study:

“Pursuing traffic capacity is an endless task. a rule of thumb: the more cars we invite, the more cars will come; therefore, the system will never be sufficient. trying to ‘solve’ the traffic problems encountered in the city today will only lead to larger streets and a more congested traffic network.”

The report goes on to talk about designing for people, what it calls the “3 mph” scale as opposed to the “40 mph” scale. They conclude that creating a vibrant pedestrian environment necessitates reducing the amount of traffic on city streets.

How do we do this?

Congestion Pricing

Congestion pricing works on the principle of charging drivers for use of motor vehicle travel lanes. In practice it means charging more to enter a set area when demand is high, and charging less (or nothing) during other times of the day. Modern toll collection technology means that cars need not stop at toll booths. This technology is already used throughout the world and is planned for use on the SR99 tunnel and the 520 bridge.

Tolling for the SR99 tunnel is part of a funding package that requires tolling to pay for part of the construction costs. As Cary Moon pointed out in Thursdays debate, the state draft environmental impact statement shows that tolling diverts a further 40,000 cars onto downtown streets for a total of 80,000 thousand cars under the tunnel + tolling scenario. She also pointed out that absent tolling we’d need to find another 300 million dollars from somewhere. The I5/surface/Transit option relies upon improved surface streets to handle traffic along with the I5 and Transit components. While this is better than the existing tunnel’s plan to handle surface diversion (there is none), traffic on improved surface streets is still traffic and therefore undesirable if we want a vibrant street life and economically successful downtown. The way out of this Hobson’s choice between traffic clogged downtown streets and a giant budget hole is to price access to downtown streets according to the level of traffic we’d like to see. Pricing our city streets according to demand will shift incentives the same way that tolling the tunnel does. Only in this case we’re pricing something we don’t want: excess traffic downtown. Congestion pricing will divert trips to the tunnel (if we build it) and to transit. People will also live closer to where they work and walk and bicycle more. As we reach the desired level of automobile traffic, increased street life will develop. In places where people used to hurry past on foot, (if at all) they will now stroll down.  New plazas and parks will be created and new space for outdoor seating for businesses will be possible. Street food vendors, plays, and performers will draw crowds and children will run and play without fear of being struck down. Seattle will enhance its status as a regional destination. Regardless of whether or not we build the tunnel, congestion pricing is the right policy for increasing the vitality of downtown Seattle.

If that weren’t enough, here are some additional reasons to do congestion pricing:

Congestion pricing will help drivers.

Automobiles will always be part of our transportation system because there will always be people who’s unique circumstances make transit impractical. It is these people who most need an uncongested roadway and are most ill-served by allowing traffic to slow to a crawl. Both emergency vehicles and delivery services will benefit from reduced congestion.*

Downtown is well served by transit (and it will only get better).

In the next 6 years Light rail will connect downtown Seattle to Capitol Hill and to the University district. Rapid Ride lines from Downtown to West Seattle, Ballard and Shoreline will be completed in the next two years.  By 2023 we will have light rail to Northgate and Redmond. We can use the money from congestion pricing either to buy more service on already planned transit lines or to fund construction of new projects. The mere fact of reduced congestion will help transit in mixed traffic flow more smoothly, allowing greater service quality and frequency before another dollar is spent. Increased frequency, quality, and funding will together drive up ridership, pushing our transit system towards the kind of high ridership/high quality equilibrium that residents of great cities have come to expect.

We are already moving towards congestion pricing.

We’re going to toll the Viaduct and also State Route 520. Tolls for the I-90 bridge and for Lake Washington Boulevard are under consideration. Meanwhile the city council has voted to support increased parking meter rates downtown and to move towards a performance driven parking system. Pricing use of through lanes appropriately follows the same principle as pricing parking appropriately. Additionally, we should not make driving through downtown without stopping cheaper than stopping to patronize downtown businesses. With these two policies in place, the efficient price of parking actually drops from what it would be without congestion pricing.

Other cities have successfully implemented congestion pricing.

London, Singapore, Stockholm and Milan have successfully implemented congestion pricing. New York City approved a congestion pricing system but it failed to gain approval at the state level. San Francisco congestion pricing is currently being planned.

Congestion pricing will accomplish state and city policy goals

In 2008 the State Legislature passed and governor Christine Gregoire signed into law HB2815 which makes reducing vehicle miles traveled part of the state’s greenhouse gas reduction strategy. The City of Seattle in early 2010 announced its intent to make Seattle Carbon Neutral by 2030. Congestion pricing not only allows us to reduce automobile emissions, it will allow us to generate much needed funding for pedestrian, transit, and bicycle improvements.

Where we go from here

The first step is for the City Council to direct the Seattle Department of Transportation to conduct a study of the issue. SDOT should look at how congestion pricing fits in with the existing legal framework and with various other transportation policies and programs. We will want to examine the relationship between currently planned highway tolling and congestion pricing. We’ll also want to examine ways to repurpose street real estate for people and local businesses, such as they did in New York City with the highly successful Broadway pedestrian plaza or in San Francisco with their new “parklets”. After SDOT completes its study, the council, the mayor, and Seattle’s delegation in Olympia will be able to craft the appropriate legislation at the city and state level. Ultimately I believe this project will unite otherwise divided political leadership and create a downtown that we all can enjoy.

The opinions above represent those of Alex Broner alone and not those of Great City or any other organization.

Alex Broner can be reached at alexbroner@comcast.net

*Emergency vehicles and some other government vehicles will be exempt. Delivery vehicles may be charged at a full price and then the money refunded to them on an equal basis (incentivizing off peak deliveries) or else might be charged a reduced rate or nothing at all.

Next Page →