if i walk up to the bus tunnel @ benaroya, get off at westlake, then walk over to the SLUT, i figure i could get from work to hooters in a blazing half hour.

If it was faster (maybe elevated and above traffic LOL!) it would be a real incentive to use it long term.

SLUT is destined to end up a touristy thing to do. Not a viable transportation alternative.

To the transit fetishists, the cost does not matter - we will spend whatever we have to spend to get the different "feel" that will herd people onto rail.

Naming it "SLUT" sounds more appropriate than ever.

But also yes, this SLUT makes little sense. It is another un-integrated vanity project.

Every transportation improvement should (a) have very short headways and faster travel times that going in traffic, (b) be connected to an integrated network (create synergy with other parts of the transit system), (c) pencil out financially with disclosure of real capital and operating costs per new rider.

We, the public, can't manage what we can't measure.

Perhaps this short, slow trolley expenditure of $50 million (does that include operating costs going forward btw??) gives us the most "mobility bang" for the buck -- but most likely not. Perhaps it can later be part of a bigger system, but shouldn't we plan first and build later?

We have bus routes in Seattle that are overcrowded and need more buses. We have plans for more ferries and more light rail. Without sensible planning we will not know how to spend dollars wisely. Just throwing money at various projects is not "plannning" and is not accountable.

Without integration, competing governments will continue to spend money on piecemeal, unconected pet projects; this will not in the end produce a functional rapid transit system without great luck.

The Portland trolley has actually been a pretty big success. Check out their ridership history if you disagree. I 75% buy the argument that it increases development near it, too.

That said, the SLUT is still short and slow -- it seems like a particular smack in the face that the SLUT is going open 2 days from the day the monorail was originally supposed to open.

Does it become the WHORE when they start charging people to ride it?

http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/download/StreetcarNetworkMapnew.pdf

1. Streetcars do something that no bus can do: Putting the rails in the pavement makes the statement that the transit is there to stay. That promotes transit-supportive density...which promotes more transit.

2. Because the line's going to be there for awhile, it very likely has far more sophisticated signal preemption than the bus network does. So it will go faster by far than diesel buses, and faster by a bit than trolleybuses.

3. Going to South Lake Union gets ya half way to the U-District, and it looks like SDOT's finally figured out that it makes far more sense to get to the U-District via Eastlake than tunneling thru Capitol Hill.

1. SLU's been densifying for some time, and would likely continue to do so with or without the SLUT. Anyway, shouldn't you wait to make this judgment until AFTER the line's been operating for a while?

2. It could have signal preemption, but it doesn't. Then again, a bus could have signal preemption, too.

3. Existing buses also take you to the U-District. In fact, most buses go farther than 9 blocks, and cost significantly less than $50MM/route.

It's pretty. It's kinda neat. It will probably be fun to ride. But it's not a cost-effective or efficient use of transit dollars.