I have long wanted to do a Pacific Northwest trip where I get from one city to the next via Amtrak's Cascadia line. Well I finally did it a couple weeks ago. I first went to Vancouver for three days, then to Seattle for four days. I haven't yet edited all of my Vancouver photos yet, so here are the ones I like from Seattle. Enjoy!

 

1. Smith Tower

 

2.

 

3. My attempt at being artsy.

 

4. Queen Anne neighborhood

 

5. The next slew of these are from Capitol Hill.

 

6.

 

7.

 

8. Capitol Hill is the hipster haven in Seattle, and appropriately so, they have bike boxes.

 

9.

 

10. The district formerly known as Chinatown (now known as International District or "The ID").

 

11.

 

12.

 

13. Pioneer Square

 

14.

 

15.

 

16.

 

17.

 

18. Downtown

 

19.

 

20.

 

21.

 

22.

 

23. There was a pretty great shopping district in downtown Seattle.

 

24.

 

25.

 

26.

 

27. Seattle's modern streetcar line connects the rapidly growing South Union Lake district with downtown.

 

28.

 

29.

 

30. While construction quality was good throughout Seattle, the area immediately along the streetcar line was perhaps most impressive.

 

31.

 

32.

 

33.

 

34.

 

35.

 

36.

 

37.

 

38. Skyline goodness.

 

39.

 

40.

 

41. That's Pier 70 down there...the location of Real World Seattle and where the slap heard 'round the world took place.

 

42. Space Needle

 

43.

 

44.

 

45. The sun sets over Pier 69.

 

46.

 

47.

 

48. Inside Pike Place Market.

 

49.

 

50.

 

51.

 

52. This is where the fish get tossed.

 

53. So long from Seattle...ATL style.

LOL! @ that last photo.

 

I'm presuming you rode the SLUT.

Seattle ranks high among my favorite vacations ever! I had the good fortune to be there in early August, when skies were blue and the air was clear the whole time. Wonderful place!

I'm presuming you rode the SLUT.

 

Funny thing is that it's no longer called the SLUT because they started calling it a streetcar and not a trolley. I did check it out though, and I walked almost the entire line end to end to get a feel for what was happening around it. Very impressive.

Nice shots! I love Seattle.  The ammount of energy, infill, downtown offerings, etc in cities like Seattle, Denver, and Minneapolis is just on another level than what we have in Cincinnati. These are the types of cities we should be aspiring to compete with...not Indianapolis.

What can I say that edale hasn't already said about this amazing city?  UncleRando, your photos aptly illustrate the richness of Seattle, not only in its awesome natural setting with Mt. Rainier in the distance, but in its human dimension seen in its downtown.  Like edale suggested--forget cities like Indy.  Perhaps even Portland!  Seattle and Vancouver are the two Emerald Cities that Cincinnati might emulate.

What is it with this need of Ohio cities to try and emulate some other city?  Do you think the folks in Seattle are saying we should be more like [insert city]?  Or do you think they have naturally evolved into what is typical of a pacific northwest large city and love being 'Seattle'.... not [insert city]-lite?  I definitely get tired of hearing this line up here in Cleveland, especially when the 'comparables' are not comparable at all or, worse yet, don't even set the standards which should be aspirational [i.e. any 'new south' city].

 

Cincy will never be like Seattle.  Too many different dynamics at play for that to happen.

I've been to Seattle twice this year already for business and always love going. Great place and modern, lively, youthful, full of sights, stores and resrairants..... Wonderful airport, too. Then I come jome and realize that Cleveland is no Seattle but why does it have to be? No depressing rain, no traffic, affordable housing.... Evertone loves Seattle, but CLE is awfully nice in its own way, too. I can appreciats that.

Here are some photos I took of the SLUT district three years ago:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,18697.msg377954.html#msg377954

 

Yeah it looks like the whole Amazon headquarters area has really built up since I was there. 

 

What is it with this need of Ohio cities to try and emulate some other city?  Do you think the folks in Seattle are saying we should be more like [insert city]?  Or do you think they have naturally evolved into what is typical of a pacific northwest large city and love being 'Seattle'.... not [insert city]-lite?  I definitely get tired of hearing this line up here in Cleveland, especially when the 'comparables' are not comparable at all or, worse yet, don't even set the standards which should be aspirational [i.e. any 'new south' city].

 

Cincy will never be like Seattle.  Too many different dynamics at play for that to happen.

 

You're missing the point.  No one is arguing that Cincinnati or Cleveland should try to copy Seattle, or turn in to Seattle.  What I was saying is that there are some cities that have a level of development that is truly astounding, with some pretty damn good urban design and architecture throughout.  The quality of infill, vibrancy of the commercial corridors, transit service, and relative lack of blight in Seattle (and Denver, Minneapolis, Portland, etc.) is simply better than what we get on a widespread basis in Cincinnati and Cleveland.  As an urbanist, I of course want to see Cincinnati improve in all of these categories, and you have to set a standard for what want to see in your city.  A lot of people in Cincinnati are content to compete with Indy or Columbus, and occasionally Pittsburgh (which is just on the cusp of being added to the Seattle category IMO).  Seattle, Denver, Minneapolis aren't a whole lot bigger than the Cincy or Cleveland Metros, and I think we would be wise to not just aspire to be the best city in our little regions of Ohio, but rather strive to step up and truly be a nationally prominent city.  Cincinnati and Cleveland have the bones to return to this level, and each  can retain their identity while simultaneously increasing the vibrancy (and population) of their center cities.

edale, you remind me of this article by Aaron Renn:

 

http://www.newgeography.com/content/001110-the-white-city

^I'm well aware of the "white city" argument, and I think it's a valid observation, but I don't really think it's relevant here.  There are, of course, numerous cities with large black populations that also have the level and quality of development and vibrancy of Seattle and co.  DC, Atlanta, NYC, Philly, LA, Dallas, Miami all have large black populations and are tier 1 cities in America.  All of these metros are much larger than Cincinnati, so I don't think they are necessarily a realistic goal for what we could expect to see in there. 

 

When you look to more mid-sized metros, there are way fewer that are as successful/prominent as those tier 1 cities.  So we hear all about Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, and Austin, but there are countless other cities like Cincinnati (imo) that are well on their way to entering that realm if current progress continues.  St. Louis, Cleveland, Baltimore, Pittsburgh are all in similar situations, and if these cities can join the ranks of Seattle et all, the White City thesis gets squashed.  I simply refuse to believe that we can't expect excellent planning, design, architecture, vibrant neighborhoods, and a working transit system because we have a large black population.

What is it with this need of Ohio cities to try and emulate some other city?  Do you think the folks in Seattle are saying we should be more like [insert city]?  Or do you think they have naturally evolved into what is typical of a pacific northwest large city and love being 'Seattle'.... not [insert city]-lite?  I definitely get tired of hearing this line up here in Cleveland, especially when the 'comparables' are not comparable at all or, worse yet, don't even set the standards which should be aspirational [i.e. any 'new south' city].

 

Every city I've ever been to, compares itself to another city which it at some level admires for whatever reason.

 

People in Seattle admire San Franciso's built environment. People in Portland don't care about much of anything. And People in Vancouver are in the closet about loving Asian cities on the Pacific Rim.

 

Atlanta what's to be the New York of the South, whatever that means. Philly wants to be NYC. Milwaukee wants to be Chicago. Chicago just wants to be noticed. And so on, and so forth.

 

The bottom line is that comparing one's city to another city isn't a unique phenomenon in Ohio. It happens everywhere. As long as cities can maintain their identity and stay true to who they are as a people, then looking to others for inspiration and examples is a good thing.

Yeah, when I look at a set like that I don't think about why Cleveland isn't like Seattle, but I do look at the positive assets of a city like that and think about which of those aspects would benefit my city. Why is Seattle so 'satisfying' to look at? Based on what I've seen in this set they have a lot of residents, which puts people on the streets, creating a more vibrant feel. Also, love the fully matured trees in the midst of the urban parks, and along the streets, juxtaposed against the skyscrapers. I wish Cleveland had a little more of that.

 

Cleveland (and I'm sure Cinci too) is on it's way. Doesn't hurt to look around, though.

 

Beautiful set, btw. That trip (the Amtrak from Vancouver to Seattle) is on my list of things to do as well.

Absolutely love Seattle.  For me, the only major negative is the lack of extensive rail transit.  Otherwise I think it's a fantastic city.  I visited last spring (late March/early April) and enjoyed myself immensely despite the generally cloudy & showery weather.  They have some rather sweet neighborhoods, from Capitol Hill to Fremont to the U District to Ballard to South Lake Union to Queen Anne to downtown, there's plenty of areas to enjoy.

Nice Randy!

 

I am looking forward to the day to head out west again. The quality of construction that you showed was leaps and bounds better than comparable projects at The Banks, for the most part, and highlights the differences in planning and implementation on our two cities.

 

Not saying that we need to emulate Seattle, or that any city needs to emulate others, but that it is always great to see and hear about other locales, what they have accomplished, and what is possible.

 

And I want to ride the SLUT. Can we get a great acronym for the streetcar in Cincinnati?

Absolutely love Seattle.  For me, the only major negative is the lack of extensive rail transit.  Otherwise I think it's a fantastic city.

 

Totally agree. For a city the size of Seattle, and with as many great neighborhoods as it has, it should really have a more comprehensive rail transit system. They are working on it by building regional light rail, but I sure do hope they tear down that dumb monorail sometime soon.

 

And I want to ride the SLUT. Can we get a great acronym for the streetcar in Cincinnati?

How about "G(reater) H(amilton) O(n)-S(treet) T(ransit)"?  :drunk:

I am looking forward to the day to head out west again. The quality of construction that you showed was leaps and bounds better than comparable projects at The Banks, for the most part, and highlights the differences in planning and implementation on our two cities.

 

This has very little to do with differences in planning and implementation. The real cause for the difference in building quality is the wealth of the people and businesses occupying the structures. Granted, The Banks is occupied by wealthy individuals, but it is also a very costly site on which to build.

 

And I want to ride the SLUT. Can we get a great acronym for the streetcar in Cincinnati?

 

Seattle quit calling their modern streetcar system the SLUT. They dropped the trolley moniker from the end and began calling it what it is - a streetcar. The operators now simply call it the South Lake Union Line of the Seattle Streetcar: http://www.seattlestreetcar.org/.