Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jay8g]

The Peace Arch/Douglas (as the Canadian side is called) crossing isn't big enough to handle all the traffic through the area and can't really be expanded because the whole surrounding area is a park on both sides of the border (one where they generally won't hassle you if you cross the border, as long as you stay in the area between the two checkpoints and leave on the side you came from). I'm guessing they moved all commercial vehicles to the Pacific Highway crossing as a convenient way to split up the traffic by forcing commercial vehicles to use the slightly-less-convenient crossing.

[jakeroot]

I think it's also advantageous as removing trucks from the Peace Arch Park area does make the park significantly more enjoyable.

[webny99]

Thanks, that does make sense. I was aware of the nearby truck crossing, but there are plenty of similar examples of two close crossings, so that doesn't seem like a reason to ban trucks. I was also aware of the Peace Arch park, but hadn't considered the impact of the trucks or a potential expansion on the park itself.

[jakeroot]

Thanks, that does make sense. I was aware of the nearby truck crossing, but there are plenty of similar examples of two close crossings, so that doesn't seem like a reason to ban trucks. I was also aware of the Peace Arch park, but hadn't considered the impact of the trucks or a potential expansion on the park itself.

Well, even if they wanted to have trucks, there are no commercial vehicle inspection facilities at Peace Arch / Douglas.

Edit: Which, to be clear, has been a conscious decision with trucks not being allowed. But this allows for more "regular" or NEXUS lanes too, which makes sense since most cars heading to that crossing are coming up I-5 or from BC-99, both freeways. Better to give as much capacity to regular cars as possible, and let trucks detour.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/E3bERnVy4MwbTRnLA
What is the blurred out sign supposed to be in the image on I-5 south of customs?

[jakeroot]

https://goo.gl/maps/E3bERnVy4MwbTRnLA
What is the blurred out sign supposed to be in the image on I-5 south of customs?

 

That's an art installation:

https://www.americansforthearts.org/by-program/networks-and-councils/public-art-network/public-art-year-in-review-database/non-sign-ii

[webny99]

Thanks, that does make sense. I was aware of the nearby truck crossing, but there are plenty of similar examples of two close crossings, so that doesn't seem like a reason to ban trucks. I was also aware of the Peace Arch park, but hadn't considered the impact of the trucks or a potential expansion on the park itself.

Well, even if they wanted to have trucks, there are no commercial vehicle inspection facilities at Peace Arch / Douglas.

Edit: Which, to be clear, has been a conscious decision with trucks not being allowed. But this allows for more "regular" or NEXUS lanes too, which makes sense since most cars heading to that crossing are coming up I-5 or from BC-99, both freeways. Better to give as much capacity to regular cars as possible, and let trucks detour.

Yes, that all makes sense - just interesting that trucks were seemingly allowed prior to 1970, so there must have been a clear decision to reroute all truck traffic. No doubt the standards for commercial vehicle inspection have changed since then and there's probably lot more of it now too.

[roadman65]

I believe the Duty Free Shops are at the truck entryways as well. It looks like the Peace Arch entry has no such stores.

Interesting about that crossing not having commercial vehicle checkpoints in order to keep the park clutter free of semis.

[stevashe]

Thanks, that does make sense. I was aware of the nearby truck crossing, but there are plenty of similar examples of two close crossings, so that doesn't seem like a reason to ban trucks. I was also aware of the Peace Arch park, but hadn't considered the impact of the trucks or a potential expansion on the park itself.

Well, even if they wanted to have trucks, there are no commercial vehicle inspection facilities at Peace Arch / Douglas.

Edit: Which, to be clear, has been a conscious decision with trucks not being allowed. But this allows for more "regular" or NEXUS lanes too, which makes sense since most cars heading to that crossing are coming up I-5 or from BC-99, both freeways. Better to give as much capacity to regular cars as possible, and let trucks detour.

Yes, that all makes sense - just interesting that trucks were seemingly allowed prior to 1970, so there must have been a clear decision to reroute all truck traffic. No doubt the standards for commercial vehicle inspection have changed since then and there's probably lot more of it now too.

The Wikipedia Article for WA 543/BC 15, and its sources, seem to imply that trucks were at least discouraged at Peace Arch even before 1970, as they state that before the current routing of SR543 was constructed, the truck route of US 99 "ran east–west along D Street from US 99 to the Pacific Highway border crossing" (the crossing a mile east of Peace Arch that trucks now must use). Said current routing was opened in 1970, so that may have been part of the reason for the truck ban at Peace Arch.

The main reasons as far as I can tell are the lack of space at Peace Arch to accommodate proper truck lanes and inspection areas, and the desire to separate trucks out into their own facility. Even at the Pacific Highway Crossing, the truck lanes split off and take a different route through the customs area.

Incidentally, the other end of I-5 actually has basically the same setup, where trucks are banned from the San Ysidro crossing at the end of I-5 and must use the Otay Mesa crossing to the east.

[jay8g]

WSDOT posted the RFP for the major I-5 paving project (roughly Downtown to Northgate) today, and included in that were the original ROW plans for the initial construction of I-5. These are quite interesting as they show every building that was bought out and torn down to make way for the freeway -- something that's been discussed extensively, but the way it's presented here really makes it clear just how much there used to be where I-5 is now.

[webny99]

The Wikipedia Article for WA 543/BC 15, and its sources, seem to imply that trucks were at least discouraged at Peace Arch even before 1970, as they state that before the current routing of SR543 was constructed, the truck route of US 99 "ran east–west along D Street from US 99 to the Pacific Highway border crossing" (the crossing a mile east of Peace Arch that trucks now must use). Said current routing was opened in 1970, so that may have been part of the reason for the truck ban at Peace Arch.

The main reasons as far as I can tell are the lack of space at Peace Arch to accommodate proper truck lanes and inspection areas, and the desire to separate trucks out into their own facility. Even at the Pacific Highway Crossing, the truck lanes split off and take a different route through the customs area.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. That Wikipedia article has more information than the one about the crossing itself, which gave a brief history but lacked in details. Based on that it does seem likely that trucks were discouraged from using the Peace Arch even earlier than 1970.

[jakeroot]

WSDOT posted the RFP for the major I-5 paving project (roughly Downtown to Northgate) today, and included in that were the original ROW plans for the initial construction of I-5. These are quite interesting as they show every building that was bought out and torn down to make way for the freeway -- something that's been discussed extensively, but the way it's presented here really makes it clear just how much there used to be where I-5 is now.

That is amazing. Any idea why those ROW plans were included in that RFP?

I do like the name, "SEA FWY".

[jay8g]

I don't know why, but it seems to be typical for WSDOT's design-build RFPs to include historic ROW plans like that. 

[pderocco]

WSDOT posted the RFP for the major I-5 paving project (roughly Downtown to Northgate) today, and included in that were the original ROW plans for the initial construction of I-5. These are quite interesting as they show every building that was bought out and torn down to make way for the freeway -- something that's been discussed extensively, but the way it's presented here really makes it clear just how much there used to be where I-5 is now.

Nice drawings, but too bad they didn't invent color until the late 60s.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/ouz9TJ7aJBLQhx577
Why isn’t the former Alaskan Way Viaduct in GSV 2016?

[dfilpus]

https://goo.gl/maps/ouz9TJ7aJBLQhx577
Why isn’t the former Alaskan Way Viaduct in GSV 2016?

Broad Street is well north of the end of the Viaduct. The viaduct went to ground level about Bell and entered the tunnel by Battery Street.

[stevashe]

https://goo.gl/maps/ouz9TJ7aJBLQhx577
Why isn’t the former Alaskan Way Viaduct in GSV 2016?

Broad Street is well north of the end of the Viaduct. The viaduct went to ground level about Bell and entered the tunnel by Battery Street.

Yeah. Here's a view of the northern end in 2017: https://goo.gl/maps/uCZDnkkLCGy23A5J9

[roadman65]

I see now where it was.  If you go to the current intersection of 7th Avenue and John Street you can go back to when the original tunnel had its north portal there which now is filled in and leveled.

I’m guessing they just plugged the portals but the old tunnels still remain underground.

[jakeroot]

I’m guessing they just plugged the portals but the old tunnels still remain underground.

I'm not sure if access still remains anywhere (inside a building, a small door, hatch from the street, whatever) but the tunnel was definitely filled in.

Here's the WSDOT page: https://wsdot.wa.gov/construction-planning/search-projects/battery-street-tunnel-and-north-surface-streets-complete-july-2021

And an article from KOMO News: https://komonews.com/news/local/old-battery-street-tunnel-now-completely-filled-in-with-viaduct-remnants

[Plutonic Panda]

Article about funding discussions to get several of the proposed mega projects underway.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/gov-inslee-lawmakers-quibble-over-wa-transportation-budget/

[TEG24601]

I’m guessing they just plugged the portals but the old tunnels still remain underground.

I'm not sure if access still remains anywhere (inside a building, a small door, hatch from the street, whatever) but the tunnel was definitely filled in.

Here's the WSDOT page: https://wsdot.wa.gov/construction-planning/search-projects/battery-street-tunnel-and-north-surface-streets-complete-july-2021

And an article from KOMO News: https://komonews.com/news/local/old-battery-street-tunnel-now-completely-filled-in-with-viaduct-remnants

I still think they missed a trick by not repurposing the tunnels for either new rail projects, or to be the basis for a re-generated Trolley (as the sculpture park destroyed their old base).

[kkt]

The tunnels didn't go anywhere I (or Metro) would forsee a rail line being built.

When the sculpture park destroyed the trolley's old base there were like a dozen local politicians promising to find a good place for a new one.  Now, crickets.  Sigh.

And it's not just me.  All those cruise ship passengers loved it (and they're planning on 900,000 of them this summer.

[TEG24601]

Sort of a moot point at this point, as most of the Trolly Tracks were torn up during the seawall work, or destroyed by building foot bridges on the tracks.  And some of the track re-purposed as Streecar.


But the tunnels would have helped connected the waterfront to Seattle Center, by reducing the grade needed, and could even have housed a station.  Just seems like a waste to me.  Heck, even using it at a connecting road to the waterfront would have been useful.

[Bruce]

The "official" replacement for the Waterfront Streetcar will be the Central City Connector on 1st Avenue, which isn't the same corridor and is severely delayed due to several SDOT and city council screwups. I don't think we'll ever get full transit up and down Alaskan Way ever again.

The best solution for the cruise terminal might be to just close it and ban them from the Salish Sea. They're awful.

But the tunnels would have helped connected the waterfront to Seattle Center, by reducing the grade needed, and could even have housed a station.  Just seems like a waste to me.  Heck, even using it at a connecting road to the waterfront would have been useful.

There is a new four-lane road being built from Alaskan Way near the aquarium up to Elliott and Western avenues in the viaduct ROW. Had to be done from scratch for obvious reasons, but extending it through the old tunnel would've been expensive and pointless, since it would drive even more truck traffic onto the waterfront.

[jakeroot]

I think the cruise ship terminal is going to be decently well served by the "preferred" Smith Cove Link station.