DOCSLIB.ORG

Denny Way Streetscape Concept Plan Plan Drafted in July 2009; Finalized in October 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Denny Way Streetscape Concept Plan Plan drafted in July 2009; Finalized in October 2013 Contributing Stakeholders John Coney........................................................................................Uptown Alliance Ron Turner..................................................................................Belltown Community Darla Norris...........................................................................Pacific Science Center Meike Kaan.......................................................................Cornish College of the Arts Lyn Krizanich...........................................................................Clise Properties Inc. 1200 Stewart Design Team..............................Sclater Partners, Berger Partnership BJ Singletary...........................................................................Archstone Properties Cushing Terrell Architecture & Interiors Karen Kiest......................................................Karen Kiest Landscape Architecture Jill Mackie...........................................................................Seattle Times Company Phil Fujii...........................................................................................................Vulcan Layne Cubell .....................................................................................Seattle Center Mike Boonsripisal ...........................................................King County Metro Transit Susan McLaughlin, Kristen Simpson, Casey Hildreth, Shane Dewald............ SDOT Michael Clark..................................................................................Seattle City Light Gary Johnson, Lyle Bicknell, Geoffrey Wentlandt ...................................Seattle DPD Contents The Denny Way Streetscape Concept Plan was developed between April Introduction and December of 2008 but was not finalized. The plan was updated Purpose, Problem Statement...................................................................................2 in 2103 to reflect current conditions and was adopted in October 2013. Background & Data Collection..................................................................................3 The Study considers the Denny Way corridor from Western Avenue to Denny Way Images...............................................................................................4-5 Melrose Avenue. The Streetscape Concept Plan provides an urban Principles & Assumptions..........................................................................................6 Improvement Actions...............................................................................................7 design strategy for improving the Denny Way corridor. The provisions of this plan are recommendations to permit applicants and are not manda- Streetscape Concept Plan tory. Implementation of the plan recommendations are encouraged but Streetscape Concept Plan.....................................................................................8-9 Concept Detail - Pontius..........................................................................................10 compliance is voluntary. Concept Detail - Westlake .....................................................................................11 Concept Detail - Taylor...........................................................................................12 Preferred Street Section.........................................................................................13 Improvement Actions........................................................................................14-15 Bumgardner Architecture Interiors Planning 1 Purpose Problem Statement Process The Denny Way Streetscape Concept Plan is a part of the greater Center City Denny Way is one of Seattle’s busiest arterial streets. It is one of few east-west To create this report, a series of Stakeholder working groups were held. Stake- Strategy. Seattle is placing a high priority on enhancing the livability of downtown connectors in the greater center city. Denny Way is also at the intersection of two of holders assisted the City with input, creative ideas, and shared information about Seattle as development intensity increases. Streetscape Concept Plans are being the City’s street grids, creating many odd angles. The roadway has a narrow right unique conditions near their properties. Stakeholders consisted of business and prepared for a number of designated Green Streets and key Center City corridors of way of just 66 feet. For many years Denny Way has served as a northern edge, property owners, representatives of neighborhood groups, and contacts from vari- in Seattle. or boundary to Downtown. The street is generally regarded as a divider between ous government agencies. Belltown, Uptown, South Lake Union and the Denny Triangle neighborhoods. The purpose of a Streetscape Concept Plan is to identify a set of preferred urban Stakeholders Included: Meetings Included: design improvements and treatments that can be implemented either in conjunc- Center City Seattle is evolving. Today high density development in the character Cornish College of the Arts April 25, 2008 - Walking Tour tion with new development, or through direct public or private capital investment. of downtown is expanding to the north to include South Lake Union, the Denny Tri- Seattle Times July 10, 2008 - Stakeholder Workshop Streetscape Concept Plans can be adopted into Seattle’s Right of Way Improve- angle and Uptown. Many significant infill developments in the Dennyay W corridor Archstone Properties July 17, Seattle Design Commission ment Manual. Implementation of Streetscape Concept Plans is mostly voluntary, are underway. Despite the street’s important transportation function and critical 1200 Stewart Design Team Interview Sessions but the plans represent an already reviewed design concept, which may stream- center city location, Denny Way has received few if any urban design treatments Seattle City Light August 20, 2008 - Stakeholder Workshop line implementation. and upgrades. Denny Way is generally regarded as one of Seattle least pleasant SDOT Agency Review streets. Comments during the stakeholder process were consistent - that Denny King County Metro Transit Way is difficult to cross, unpleasant to walk along, is loud, and has a poor visual Seattle Center quality. Belltown Community Uptown Community Clise Properties Inc. Archstone Properties Vulcan John St. Pontius Western Ave. John 5th Ave. 5th Ave. N. Broad St. Warren Ave. Ave. N. Warren 2nd Ave. 2nd Ave. N. 1st Ave. 1st Ave. N Queen Anne I-5 6th Ave. 4th Ave. 4th Ave. N. Taylor Ave. Ave. N. Taylor Aurora Dexter Pontius Stewart Westlake Fairview 1st Ave. Denny 2nd Ave. 4th Ave. 3rd Ave. Yale Clay St. Vine St. Minor 5th Ave. 6th Ave. Wall St. Cedar St. Battery St. 2 Denny Way Streetscape Concept Plan July, 2009 Lenora Boren Virginia Background & Data Collection Denny Way is located within Center City Seattle. A wide range of data and background information was collected and analyzed by It is at the boundary or the design team. The background data was compiled in a PowerPoint presenta- edge of several Center City tion for display to stakeholders. Topics of research included: neighborhoods. Denny Denny Way Traffic Function and Volume Way is one of few direct Pedestrian Use east-west connections. Physical Characteristics of the Street System Green Street Locations Current and Pending Zoning Designations Planned and Pending Development Projects Transit Operations Review of Past Plans and Studies All recommendations and proposals in this report rely on the background data, though the data is not reproduced in this document. Pontius John I-5 9th Ave. N. Boren Ave. N Aurora Terry Ave. N. Terry Dexter Minor Ave. N Pontius Stewart Westlake Denny Fairview Yale Minor 7th Ave. 8th Ave. Virginia St. Battery St. Bell St. Bumgardner Architecture Interiors Planning Lenora Boren 3 Virginia Images of Denny Way This image displays typical crossing and sidewalk configuration at the Looking across Denny Way from Denny Park, the 8th Ave. right of At the grid shift on the south side of the street, there are several odd Denny Way / Dexter Ave. intersection. Sidewalks are narrow, and way is extremely wide with little traffic. This is one of several oppor- angled intersections. Crossings for pedestrians are long, and traffic trees and plantings are sparse. The intersection of Denny Way and tunities for greening at angled intersections onto Denny. The crossing organization can be improved. This example at Lenora Street shows Dexter Ave. is one of several important signalized intersections in the distance for pedestrians is too far. movements by two turning vehicles, with pedestrians in the crossing. Pe- corridor. None have special crosswalk or urban design treatments. destrians must effectively cross two streets to walk along Denny Way. 4 Denny Way Streetscape Concept Plan July, 2009 There are six signalized crossings of Denny between Aurora Ave. and This view looks west along the Denny Way corridor from Capitol Hill This good example of sidewalk treatment is the Denny Way frontage at I-5. Both vehicles and pedestrians cross at high volumes in these select at the edge of the study area. New developments visible in the image, the new 2200 Westlake building. Sidewalk treatments that provide an locations, including Fairview Ave. shown below. will increase pedestrian volumes in the corridor. The narrow 66’ right ample pedestrian clear zone of 7’ or more, plus a consistent landscape of way carries
Recommended publications
  • Blue Urbanism: Inviting Urban Play on Seattle's North Waterfront Scan L Design Master Studio, Autumn 2014 [Larch 501/Arch504]

    Blue Urbanism: Inviting Urban Play on Seattle's North Waterfront Scan L Design Master Studio, Autumn 2014 [Larch 501/Arch504]

    Blue Urbanism: Inviting Urban Play on Seattle's North Waterfront Scan l Design Master Studio, Autumn 2014 [Larch 501/Arch504] Instructors: Nancy Rottle (LA), Jim Nicholls (ARCH), and Leann Andrews (PhD BE) Teaching Assistant: VeraEve Giampietro (LA & UDP) With Gehl Architects/Cititek: Bianca Hermansen GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR SEATTLE'S CENTRAL WATERFRONT (adopted by City Council): • Create a waterfront for all. • Put the shoreline and innovative, sustainable design at the forefront. • Reconnect the city to its waterfront. • Embrace and celebrate Seattle’s past, present and future. • Improve Access and Mobility (for people and goods). • Create a bold vision that is adaptable over time. • Develop consistent leadership–from concept to construction to operations. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Seattle's Central Waterfront is heralded as one of the most significant civic projects in the city's history. With imminent removal of the Alaskan Way Viaduct and current replacement of the aging Elliott Bay Seawall, Seattle has begun to envision and enact a great "waterfront for all." Removal of the viaduct and rerouting of Alaskan Way along the waterfront will create abundant new and qualitatively different public space, while the seawall replacement will provide for a more ecologically functional edge. However, while the team led by James Corner Field Operations has proposed and designed a new waterfront between Piers 48 and 62/63, less attention has been paid to the waterfront segment between Piers 62/63 and the Olympic Sculpture Park. With the reconfiguration of Alaskan Way, this northern segment offers rich opportunities for better public, pedestrian, bicycle and ecological space along a less-traveled roadway.
  • Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents

    Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents

    DOWNTOWN ACCESS STRATEGY PHASE 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 II. Review of Existing Plans, Projects, and Programs ......................................... 2 III. Potential Construction Concerns and Opportunities .................................. 3 A. Existing Construction Planning Tools 3 B. SDOT’s Construction Hub Coordination Program 4 C. Construction Mitigation Strategies Used by Other Cities 7 D. Potential Construction Conflicts and Opportunities 10 IV. Future Transportation Network Opportunities ......................................... 12 A. North Downtown 12 B. Denny Triangle / Westlake Hub 14 C. Pioneer Square / Chinatown-ID 15 D. Downtown Core and Waterfront 16 V. Future Phases of Downtown Access Strategy ............................................. 18 A. Framework for Phase 2 (2014 through 2016) 18 B. Framework for Phase 3 (Beyond 2016) 19 - i - September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years I. INTRODUCTION Many important and long planned transportation and development projects are scheduled for con- struction in Downtown Seattle in the coming years. While these investments are essential to support economic development and job growth and to enhance Downtown’s stature as the region’s premier location to live, work, shop and play, in the short-term they present complicated challenges for con- venient and reliable access to and through Downtown. The Downtown Seattle Association (DSA) and its partners, Historic South Downtown (HSD) and the Seat- tle Department of Transportation (SDOT), seek to ensure that Downtown Seattle survives and prospers during the extraordinarily high level of construction activity that will occur in the coming years.
  • Alaskan Way Viaduct & Seawall Replacement Program

    Alaskan Way Viaduct & Seawall Replacement Program

    Alaskan Way Viaduct & Seawall Replacement Program Central Waterfront 01.09 Learning, Listening, and Moving Ahead - Replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall A diverse group of elected offi cials, transportation “As I spoke with individuals and business leaders, fi ve objectives agencies and experts, interest groups, and the public have emerged that guided my decision making. First, the solution must worked over the last year on a solution for the Alaskan improve safety by removing the existing unsafe viaduct. Second, Way Viaduct and Seawall along the central waterfront. the solution must be affordable, and the state’s contribution to Six principles guided the evaluation of possible solutions and eight scenarios were evaluated. Each scenario included the solution must not be over $2.8 billion. Third, the solution investments to transit, city streets, I-5, SR 99, and demand must cause the least construction disruption to our maritime management strategies. What we learned provides a industry and central waterfront businesses. Fourth, the solution critical foundation for reaching a decision. must provide capacity and mobility now and in the future, for freight, vehicles, and transit users. And fi fth, the solution must The following is a summary of the six guiding principles: contribute to improving the health of our environment and open up Seattle’s waterfront. I have concluded that the bored tunnel • Improve public safety. hybrid alternative is the most balanced solution and best meets these objectives.” • Provide effi cient movement of people and –Governor Chris Gregoire goods now and in the future. • Maintain or improve downtown Seattle, “This agreement will improve our transportation system, improve regional, the port and state economies.
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form

    National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form

    NPS Form 10-900-b OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is used for documenting property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin How to Complete the Multiple Property Documentation Form (formerly 16B). Complete each item by entering the requested information. ___X___ New Submission ________ Amended Submission A. Name of Multiple Property Listing Seattle’s Olmsted Parks and Boulevards (1903–68) B. Associated Historic Contexts None C. Form Prepared by: name/title: Chrisanne Beckner, MS, and Natalie K. Perrin, MS organization: Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA) street & number: 1904 Third Ave., Suite 240 city/state/zip: Seattle, WA 98101 e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] telephone: (503) 247-1319 date: December 15, 2016 D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR 60 and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. _______________________________ ______________________ _________________________ Signature of certifying official Title Date _____________________________________ State or Federal Agency or Tribal government I hereby certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evaluating related properties for listing in the National Register.
  • ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX L Economics Discipline Report Submitted by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Prepared by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF J U L Y 2 0 1 1 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project Final EIS Economics Discipline Report The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project is a joint effort between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and the City of Seattle. To conduct this project, WSDOT contracted with: Parsons Brinckerhoff 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 In association with: Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Inc. EnviroIssues, Inc. GHD, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Inc. Mimi Sheridan, AICP Parametrix, Inc. Power Engineers, Inc. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. William P. Ott Construction Consultants SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project July 2011 Economics Discipline Report Final EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction and Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Build Alternatives Overview ....................................................................................................................... 2 1.2.1 Overview of Bored Tunnel Alternative (Preferred) ..........................................................................
  • Report on Designation Lpb 11/12

    Report on Designation Lpb 11/12

    REPORT ON DESIGNATION LPB 11/12 Name and Address of Property: Fashioncraft Building/Recovery Cafe 2022 Boren Avenue Legal Description: Lots 3 and 4 lying West of Fairview Avenue, Block 53 of the Plat of the Second Addition to the Town of Seattle Laid Off by the Heirs of Sarah A. Bell, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 1 of Plats, Page 121, in King County, Washington. At the public meeting held on January 4, 2012 the City of Seattle's Landmarks Preservation Board voted to approve designation of the Fashioncraft Building/Recovery Café at 2022 Boren Avenue as a Seattle Landmark based upon satisfaction of the following standards for designation of SMC 25.12.350: C. It is associated in a significant way with a significant aspect of the cultural, political, or economic heritage of the community, City, state, or nation; and D. It embodies the distinctive visible characteristics of an architectural style, period, or of a method of construction; and F. Because of its prominence of spatial location, contrasts of siting, age, or scale, it is an easily identifiable visual feature of its neighborhood or the City and contributes to the distinctive quality or identity of such neighborhood or the City. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Overall Aspect The Fashioncraft Building at 2022 Boren Avenue is sited on the triangular lot, bounded by Denny Way, Fairview Avenue and Boren Avenue. The building, whose plan is basically a chamfered right triangle, is one story in height, but has a basement. The exterior is primarily clad in light brown brick with cast stone ornament, which echoes Churriguresque decoration or the Spanish Eclectic work of American architects, such as Bertram Goodhue.
  • West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions: Downtown Draft EIS

    West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions: Downtown Draft EIS

    West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Draft EIS alternatives - Downtown segment Centennial Park To Ballard Green Lake BALLARD NW Market St 15th Ave NW Myrtle Edwards Park 99 5 Salmon Bay Elliott Ave W Olympic 4th Ave W W Mercer Pl Sculpture Park W Olympic Pl W Dravus St Western Ave W MAGNOLIA SEATTLE 5th Ave W 520 99 QUEEN Thorndyke Ave W CENTER ANNE Lake Union 99 3rd Ave W Magnolia Bridge 2nd Ave W Pike Place Key INTERBAY SOUTH LAKE Market Arena Mercer St UNION To West Seattle Broad St 1st Ave W Seattle Center 5 /Tacoma Dome 1st Ave W Denny Way Seattle Pine St Pine Queen Anne Ave N Pike St Pike St Battery To Everett Center 2nd Ave St Bell 1st Ave N DOWNTOWN St Blanchard Denny Way Harrison St Warren Ave N W Galer St Pike St 3rd Ave 5th Ave Elliott Bay Republican St Madison St Yesler Way 4th Ave S Jackson St Roy St WESTLAKE Mercer St INTERNATIONAL SOUTH 3rd Ave N DISTRICT CenturyLink Field 90 5th Ave 5th Ave Valley St Safeco Field Westlake Ave N LAKE UNION To Aloha St Redmond S Jackson St 6th Ave 6th Ave Holgate St 5th Ave N SODO Taylor Ave N 5 MIDTOWN Convention Forest St Center Duwamish waterway 8th Ave Thomas St 6th Ave N WEST To Tacoma W Seattle Bridge Aurora Ave N SEATTLE 6th Ave S Dome SW Andover St W Marginal Way SW Avalon Way Pine St Pine Yesler Way St Pike Dexter Ave N 99 5 SW Genesee St BNSF 1st Ave S 4th Ave S Alaska St DENNY 8th Ave N Virginia St Virginia Fairview Ave N Union St James St Spring St St Stewart Boren Ave Cherry St Broadway Seneca St Marion St 35th Ave SW 26th Ave SW California Ave Madison St Fauntleroy Way St Howell Westlake Ave N Columbia St 5 Terry Ave N University St Delridge Way SW Boren Ave To Everett Lake Union KEY MAP John St West Seattle extension/Station area Ballard extension/Station area N DRAFT EIS ALTERNATIVES PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES OTHER ALTERNATIVES AND DESIGN OPTIONS EXISTING LINK ROUTE AND STATION PROFILES ELEVATED AT-GRADE TUNNEL TUNNEL PORTAL N.
  • ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX M Air Discipline Report Submitted by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Prepared by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF J U L Y 2 0 1 1 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project Final EIS Air Discipline Report The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project is a joint effort between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and the City of Seattle. To conduct this project, WSDOT contracted with: Parsons Brinckerhoff 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 In association with: Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Inc. EnviroIssues, Inc. GHD, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Inc. Mimi Sheridan, AICP Parametrix, Inc. Power Engineers, Inc. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. William P. Ott Construction Consultants SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project July 2011 Air Discipline Report Final EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Summary ..............................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Alternatives Considered .............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Build Alternatives Overview .......................................................................................................................2 1.2.1 Bored Tunnel Overview ..................................................................................................................
  • 1 222 5Th Ave North | Seattle Wa 98109 Development

    1 222 5Th Ave North | Seattle Wa 98109 Development

    SECTION 1 THE OPPORTUNITY 222 5TH AVE NORTH | SEATTLE WA 98109 DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY LISTED EXCLUSIVELY BY JLL 1 SECTION 1 THE OPPORTUNITY THE OPPORTUNITY JLL has been retained as the exclusive agent to sell Triple2, consisting The Seattle market is primed with low vacancy, strong leasing of 24,820 square feet on two adjacent parcels located in the shadow velocity, explosive population growth, superior proximity to top tier of the Space Needle in Seattle’s Uptown neighborhood. The existing employers and nation leading job and rent growth. Increasingly, building (currently occupied by a McDonald’s restaurant) and the younger employees want to work closer to home and enjoy everything adjacent parking lot are located within the Uptown rezone area, a vibrant urban setting has to offer. Half of all employees who work located at the base of Queen Anne Hill in and around the Seattle downtown live within 10 miles of their office. Almost two out of every Center. The Uptown rezone was approved by the City Council, 10 residents moving to Seattle between 2010 and 2016 chose to live in following the University District, Downtown, and South Lake Union the downtown core, and nearly 50 percent of downtown residents are neighborhoods. between the ages of 25 and 44. Triple2 is located in the eastern portion of Uptown, in a triangle of land near South Lake Union, between Denny Way, Broad Street and Aurora PROJECT SUMMARY – TRIPLE2 Avenue North, where maximum heights would increase from 85 to Address 222 5th Avenue N, 160 feet. Change is coming to the neighborhood with or without the Seattle, WA 98109 upzone, as the city and Seattle Public Schools plan to build a new King County Tax Parcels 1991200310; 1991200315 high school and stadium at Seattle Center.
  • ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX Q Hazardous Materials Discipline Report

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX Q Hazardous Materials Discipline Report

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX Q Hazardous Materials Discipline Report Submitted by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Prepared by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC J U L Y 2 0 1 1 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project Final EIS Hazardous Materials Discipline Report The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project is a joint effort between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and the City of Seattle. To conduct this project, WSDOT contracted with: Parsons Brinckerhoff 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 In association with: Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Inc. EnviroIssues, Inc. GHD, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Inc. Mimi Sheridan, AICP Parametrix, Inc. Power Engineers, Inc. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. William P. Ott Construction Consultants SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project July 2011 Hazardous Materials Discipline Report Final EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction and Summary ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Build Alternatives Overview ................................................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Bored Tunnel Alternative ..........................................................................................
  • Capitol Hill Transit Oriented Development: Public Feedback Report

    Capitol Hill Transit Oriented Development: Public Feedback Report

    Capitol Hill Transit Oriented Development: Public Feedback Report October 2012 Table of Contents Comment Summary 1 Background 3 Background, overview, process moving forward Appendix A: Comment forms and emails Appendix B: Seattle LGBT Commission Report of Needs Assessment Survey 2010 Comment Summary Overall, the majority of comments received during this process support both the term sheet and the City of Seattle and Sound Transit’s process to date. Those comments will be responded to in the month of October and in advance of the Development Agree- ment process beginning. Housing: Comments expressed significant support for requirements and bonus points in the Term Sheet for af- fordable housing. In addition, some commented they would like to see the Term Sheet go further with depth and/or duration of affordability. Most of the comments support an increase in height that allows for increased development capacity on the sites; however several others expressed concern regarding the additional 20 feet and a potential impact on the plaza, festival street and neighborhood scale Community/Cultural Center: Strong support for inclusion of a cultural/community center and for it to have a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (LGBTQ) focus. Some expressed support of a cultural/community center with LGBTQ activities/services included in the programming. Amenity Areas: Comments support creation of Denny Way “Festival Street” and a few comments spoke to further lim- iting vehicle traffic, while another spoke to including two-way traffic. Support received reinforced the inclusion of the Broadway Farmer’s Market in the plaza. While support remains for the plaza, some questions were asked and concerns raised regarding its pro- gramming and oversight.
  • Streetscapes

    Streetscapes

    Executive Summary within the neighborhood, including SLUFAN, the Cascade Neighborhood Council, the City of Seattle Parks Department, Mayor Greg Nickels, Vulcan Real Estate, Although currently dominated by the automobile, South Lake Union has great and the City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development. potential to enhance its appeal to pedestrians. Focusing on the pedestrian has the potential to attract new business, tourism, and residents, while enhancing the Methods and Processes neighborhood character for current residents and businesses. With close proximity to Seattle Center, Downtown Seattle, Capitol Hill, and Queen Anne, South Lake Several principles from classic planning texts were critical in informing our work Union is in an optimal position to emerge as a neighborhood for the pedestrian. and guiding our ideas. These principles have been summarized in Appendix A Combined with the large investments planned for the area, a focus on walkability and were pulled from the following books: and human-scaled urban form will ensure the vitality of this neighborhood for several generations. The Death and the Life of Great American Cities, by Jane Jacobs Jacobs writes about what makes streets safe or unsafe; about what constitutes a Fostering a vibrant pedestrian neighborhood requires investment in the pedestrian neighborhood and what function it serves within the larger organism of the city; environment. The purpose of this paper was to look into ways of enhancing and about why some neighborhoods remain impoverished while others regenerate the streetscape and public spaces in order to transform South Lake Union into a themselves. Key to the importance of her work was Jacobs’ reliance on empirical pedestrian-friendly neighborhood.