Comments on Talking About Streetcars

just get the fucking thing to university way & campus parkway, and ridership quintuples.

fucking duh. serve the population concentrations.

What if they built a monorail instead?

I'd imagine that they'd build a loop just like they have in South Lake Union.

Whatever. I refuse to believe it will ever, ever happen until the very day I see it running right in front of me. They'll find a way to screw it up.

We have to start somewhere... who cares what it is, just build it... then build it up... we have the base built now, so why can't we expand it now?

I find it hard to believe that it will cost MORE to build the expansion... it's not as if they have the infrastructure to build... the streetcars, the streetcar barn with maintenance is laready built! Come on!

I'm with 1. Build it where people actually are to nearby (but still far to walk, possibly up hills) places they want to be, and people will definitely ride them. Capitol Hill through to First Hill would not be bad, in my opinion. (I'd personally like one from around the base of Capitol Hill up to 15th.)

The SLUT was a fucking waste of money since it goes no place where people live. I have YET to see the thing full of people and I work downtown and bike to work daily. EVERYDAY the thing is nearly empty.

It would be nice if it went to Cap Hill or the U-District but as we all know (remember the monorail or the Commons) if the price tag is too much, "concerned" people will sue and it will die a painful death.

And remember: this is a study like everything else we do. And when we study solutions that makes us a green city. Right? I mean why do something when you can say you are studying it? And studying it for years on end....

I don't think 1,000 people a day is that inflated considering how packed it is during rush hour.The working community is definitely taking advantage of the service, although it might take longer for tourists and other folks that don't visit downtown regularly to figure out that it exists.

People just love to hate on the streetcar and public transit initiatives in general. They won't be happy until everyone is given a flying rainbow pony to ride to work each day.

@7 Fine! I'm taking my camera to work.

Yesterday, as with most days, it was standing room only at 4:05PM. It does in fact get used by commuters who work in the millions of square feet of commercial space in the area.

Can someone post a picture of the SLUT being packed? Seriously, and remember to date stamp the picture. It is time for some proof of all these "packed" street car rides.

I would imagine the SLUT is more of an early investment and once that area is developed more (like amazon), as it is planned, ridership will rise sharply.

MORE streetcars? More year and a half street construction cluster fucks?

In particular, I'm talking about the proposed South Lake Union - U-District route - why do we need a streetcar for that? You could increase the frequency that the #70 bus runs for a lot cheaper, and without the road construction nightmares.

The SLUT is cute, but is adding more of these things really practical?

A line from the Central District to Queen Anne would please me, especially if it routed down Boren, or even Belltown or further up the Hill would be nice too.

What I'd like to see would be a copy of the high-speed ski lifts, but faster still. Make them the enclosed kind that can seat 6 people, put a couple employees at each stop/end, and have it link Cap Hill, Downtown, and Campus Pkwy/Ave. I wonder what the capacity/efficiency is like compared to trains or busses.

As long as the car that serves Cap Hill is named "Desire" I'm all for it.

I live on Capitol Hill. What if I have no earthly desire to go to First Hill? That's my only option? Sounds like it doesn't even link up with the rest of the system. Totally dumb.

#7 - yeah, a waste of money, sure. But at least it was just Paul Allen's money. He's got money to waste.

people would totally use them on these routes - they would be frequent and a trolley is more comfortable than the bus because it is smooth and open . With dedicated lanes (at least through congested areas) they might even move along at a reasonable speed

The current SLUT can't really expand. Its current design is a closed system, not compatible with anything else (nice foresight, Allen!). For much of it's length it is on a single track. It has a single car that goes back and forth, back and forth. If you add on to it, extending into the U-District, for example, it will just go back and forth more slowly, because that same single car just has more ground to cover. In other words, it would be even slower than it is now, difficult as that is to imagine.

To extend its rout, or to add more capacity, you'd need a dual track or loop, so you can get multiple cars going at once. It would cost a fortune, because you'd not only have to pay for the extension, but you'd have to pay to double the track capacity of the current rout.

I thought this is what trolley buses were introduced to replace?

I was a bit surprised to read they want to put one on The Ave. Is there really room? Seems like that would require ripping out all of the parking and a chunk of sidewalk too.

@18, why would you make such an ignorant comment? I have ridden the SLUT, and it is only on a single track at the very ends so that the cars can reverse direction. For 99% of the route it is on two tracks. Please make sure you have some idea of what you are talking about before you post.

Why not add an additional bus line? A lot cheaper and faster to implement. Do cable cars have any real advantage over buses? I thought the same with the SLUT but never saw any real benefit over an existing vehicle.

Oh and #2, LMAO. You made my day.

hmmm.. how did they choose these routes? are they the most populated?

i'd think that routes from the outer neighborhoods to the center would be best, and then as much of a ring around town as possible. for me, yeah, from downtown up to the top of cap hill would be nice. maybe from freemont to downtown, and one from ballard to downtown.

then link magnolia to the ballard line, ballard to freemont, to the u-dist, to cap hill, to first hill.

then make it a monorail. ha! okay, this is pointless.

Seems like it would be much more effective to close down lanes/roads to cars and make them bus-only. It's not like streetcars are any faster. The only advantage of streetcars is that some yuppies won't ride buses because they seem poor. Is that good public policy -- spending hundreds of millions so rich people don't feel poor?

What is this "Central Area" the Queen Anne line is supposed to cover? Downtown? The Central DISTRICT? The Seattle CENTER? I'm always a little suspicious of these plans that were drawn up by people who don't appear to know Seattle.

A line from Fremont to Ballard is stupid. It needs to follow the people, and follow the traffic. The city KNOWS what streets have the heaviest traffic; they should run the lines right down the middle of them. Start with 45th from Ballard to U Village.

And wouldn't it be nice if it was elevated, and ran on some kind of a concrete beam, instead of steel rails in the middle of traffic?

"EXPAND IT? WHAT??! WHAAAAAAAAT?!!?! EXPAND IT?!?!?! WHAT?!?!"
-Bellevue Ave

Truer words were never spoken

http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/12/the_slut_was_made_for_me#c872804

@19 yes but I think streetcar technology has improved since then. I was skeptical about the advantages over a trolley bus but the tracks do add some comfort and efficiency.

And can we leave some of the technical problems to qualified engineers?

@8: yes, all those tourists who go to South Lake Union on vacation.

I suppose there's the Center for Wooden Boats. But that's *it* for tourist spots.

What if they just literally DOUBLED all major bus lines frequency for that amount, making a bus stop take no longer than 5-7 minutes?

What the fuck good would a Capitol Hill/First Hill line accomplish? To make it easier for drunks and o.d.'s to get to the hospitals? Extend it to Pioneer Square/the I.D. and SoDo/the stadiums so it has some use.

@29: No, no, no. We can't do that! It would be much too cheap and efficient. We need to spend a lot more time and money on this problem. Think of the public meetings! Where will all the obnoxious cranks be able to vent their folly?

I expect NOMWPism (Not Off My Waterfront Property) on the proposed Westlake Ave. route.

But there is that decrepid old rotting Interurban rail that's not being used other than providing neat walks along Westlake Ave. between Fremont and SLU. But there it is, old Interurban rail --> XTRA SLUT rail.

I don't see why it needs to go across the Fremont bridge. How the hell are they going to make that work? Especially with the bridge going up and down all the time. The Westlake extension should just end at Westlake & Dexter/4th Ave N/Fremont Ave. It would be the easiest upgrade, at least for one track.

@25 -

And wouldn't it be nice if it was elevated, and ran on some kind of a concrete beam, instead of steel rails in the middle of traffic?

Shhhh ... that's crazy talk!

Never. Fucking. Happy.

But I live in Seattle! of course I know better than city planners and transportation experts. My opinion is based on years of study (of English Lit), and I dont want to see anything change, but then will bitch about the lack of "real transportation" in this town.

*sigh*

At 1000 riders a day, it takes nearly 50 years to make back the initial investment. That's assuming no other costs other than that initial investment. I do think it will have better ridership in the future, and that a U-district line would have higher ridership. But the U-district is already well served by frequent express buses to downtown.

I don't think more street cars are a bad idea, but I think the evidence that they are a good idea isn't in yet.

Right, so we're gonna do two new streetcar lines that duplicate the Sound Transit Light Rail route (well, in 2016 or 2018, at least) but totally ignore serving the west side of the City - which is not slated to receive any form of serious transit in our collective lifetimes and will be most afffected by Alaskan Way Viaduct construction.

Just when you thought the Nickels Administration (and his enablers on the City Council) couldn't get any more stupid.

The mind boggles....

@31 - oh.

Darn.

Well, in that case, let's remember the original streetcar lines were elevated, and there are pictures to prove it.

One would go only three blocks from my house.

But while we're rebuilding the Viaduct and the 520 bridge, you'd think we could double bus service on all the major lines to cope with the traffic impacts ... and conserve energy and reduce pollution.

Wouldn't it have been better to just build the monorail, since it was all set to go? They already had a bunch of property, some money, and permission from the city. Also they had one important hing that the streetcars don't have: grade separation- no getting stuck in traffic.

Dan, the SLUT is a loop (you did actually ride it before commenting on it, right?). Why wouldn't the others be the same?

We've got actual people who actually ride it saying it's packed at rush hour. Yet those who never ride it insist it's always empty. Hmm, who to believe...

As for the comments that nobody lives or works in South Lake Union, I can only assume you haven't visited the area recently. It's booming, and the growth is only beginning.

The streetcar through Fremont was ELEVATED? Now I know you're high, Will.

Seattle is full of retards. SLUT isn't bad because it isn't big enough, it's bad because it is so fucking expensive for the little bit that it does do.

GAH! I FUCKING HATE SEATTLE AND ITS INEPT MUNICIPAL PLANNING AND VISION BULLSHIT!

When it came off the bridge at Albion it was - didn't descend for a few blocks.

You're thinking the later Fremont Bridge, which followed it.

That said, wouldn't jetpacks make more sense?

I'll tell you what. They can build all of the damn 400' monster buildings (even though the "density" argument is Bull shit that benefits only developers) they want in South Lake Union if they would build a decent streetcar and light rail line, like you find in almost all other major cities. It would be nice for a change to have mass transit that actually showed up on time.

Wait until next Summer when the build out of South Lake Union and Westlake Ave is completed. There are several, several new buildings for office and residential along the Streetcar route that will make the ridership double if not triple.

And as for the reason why the UW route costs so much is because they factored in the cost of utility moves, retrofitting the bridge just North of the Fred Hutch terminal and retrofitting the University Bridge to meet earthquake regulations. The Axle loading of the current streetcars are the same as the 60 foot New Flyer Hybrid bus which frequents the route but I'm sure the City sees this as an in to get the money up front to retrofit and strengthen the bridge supports.

@45 - wrong, the capital investment firm that OWNS 14 ACRES of downtown Seattle property between Denny and the Seattle Public Library building has already announced they've cancelled the builds on most of that.

(source: not the National Don't Wake Up Fnarf To Wikipedia Unreality Day website, but the Wall Street Journal a few weeks back)

And wouldn't it be nice if it was elevated, and ran on some kind of a concrete beam, instead of steel rails in the middle of traffic?

That would certainly be the only way to get it from Ballard to the U Village in under an hour.

@47: Every time I think about that I want to cry. This city's transit planning is unbelievably diseased. They don't WANT it to work; they WANT to build a series of unrelated, unconnected spurs that accomplish nothing, because they don't actually want transit at all; they just want credit for transit projects in the trade literature, while they continue to ride around in their SUVs.

I am amused by this quote by 44:

"...if they would build a decent streetcar and light rail line, like you find in almost all other major cities."

Um most major American cities DON"T have decent mass transit, with one or two major exceptions.

It seems to be an American architectural specialty, building cities that are only good for getting around in with great big SUVs.

Perhaps the problem will be solved when the Chinese rule us all in 50 years or so.