The Daily of the University of Washington

The backward SLUT


Share

Last week, I decided I should go ahead and take a ride on everyone’s favorite South Lake Union Trolley (S.L.U.T.). Sure, it’s only $1.50 a trip, but she’s still new to the game and probably hasn’t had time to pick up anything dangerous.

When I went to the S.L.U.T.’s Web site at seattlestreetcar.org to look up the nearest route, however, I more or less lost interest in it completely. When they named it the “South Lake Union” streetcar, they weren’t kidding.

The streetcar line, as I see it and as it stands now, is absolutely without purpose. The area it seeks to connect is the one part of town that I’ve never in my three years of living in downtown Seattle had reason to visit. Honestly, if I’m in that area, it’s because I’m passing through on my way elsewhere.

This tiny quibble of an issue serves as the tip of an iceberg, however. Think about it: In order to get to the streetcar line, I would have to take a bus or drive my car to the nearest station (that being Fairview and Campus Drive, in my case). Since my final destination will be downtown somewhere, I’ll probably have another mile or two to go before I reach my final destination.

If I have to take a bus or drive my car into downtown in order to be within reach of the streetcar, what’s stopping me from just driving or taking the bus that last additional mile or so to my final stop and pocketing the $1.50?

In my mind, it would have made much more sense to begin constructing the streetcar network not from the inside out, as is being done now, but from the outside in. Streetcars and trains could have been used to ferry people from the various park-and-rides and other locations outside downtown (in satellite boroughs) to the outer fringe of downtown, where they could then take a bus from that very stop to wherever they need to go.

Such a plan would serve to keep a large amount of cars out of downtown, and isn’t that what public transportation is trying to do? As the system now stands, streetcars will continue to run nearly empty much of the time as cars continue to flow into the city. Drivers don’t want to deal with an inefficient bus system that can no longer afford to advance itself in a timely manner, simply because the empty streetcars are using all of the metro funding.

The system is backward.


6 Comments

#1 Steve
(Wilton, CT | Unverified Name)

on January 29, 2008 at 7:28 a.m.
Report this comment

You're correct. Same thing is going on with light rail. Waste of money.

#2 Patrick
(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)

on January 29, 2008 at 11:31 a.m.
Report this comment

You realize that a) since Metro runs the streetcar, transfers from buses are valid so there is no extra $1.50 if you ride the bus, b) your U-PASS is good for the fare, and c) you are several years too late with this sort of criticism? Yes, the SLUT serves a very limited population and was a bad choice of investment, but that's been clear for quite some time. You really had no idea that it was a one-mile line serving only, hence the name, South Lake Union?

#3 Reece
(UW Campus | Unverified Name)

on January 29, 2008 at 12:57 p.m.
Report this comment

Yes, let's take your anecdotal personal experience and apply it to everyone else: 1. You live in downtown Seattle. Nice. 2. You have never been to South Lake Union. Okay. Therefore, no one has been or goes to South Lake Union. Fail. So what's going on in SLU that woulid warrant a streetcar? Let's see... it's not as though anyone is developing anything over there. Some really rich guy or something. SLU is completely barren and serves no purpose--after all, you haven't been there before!

#4 LR
(UW Campus | Unverified Name)

on January 29, 2008 at 3:45 p.m.
Report this comment

I have to agree with Anthony, in that it was a poor place to start a streetcar and it's not long enough to really serve anyone.

I have to disagree with Steve for the same reason. Light rail isn't a waste of money, they just chose the wrong place to install it first. It should have started in Northgate and went through the U-district to downtown. Then they could expand it to the airport later.

I don't think people will ride either until they go someplace more useful and populated, but hopefully light rail will continue being funded so Seattle can realize it's full potential and benefits.

You just can't physically fit more cars into the already crowded Seattle Metro area. Where will they park?

#5 JW
(Fremont, CA | Unverified Name)

on January 30, 2008 at 10:37 a.m.
Report this comment

This is about starting a system. Do you all seriously think that this is all that was to be built? There are plans for extensions all over the city that will connect places. Another advantage of the streetcar, creating walkable neighborhoods that reduce VMT. Portland's Streetcar network (only Streetcar, not light rail) is calculated to reduce vehicle miles traveled by 53 million a year. This is just the beginning, and just because you won't use it, others won't also.

#6 Jarrett
(San Jose, CA | Unverified Name)

on January 31, 2008 at 12:22 p.m.
Report this comment

The point of the South Lake Union Streetcar is for local mobility in the SLU area, not for regional mobility. Link and Sounder will/already provide some options for regional connectivity. Also, the South Lake Union area is undergoing major redevelopment as a job and housing center. The streetcar is an effort to plan ahead and accommodate the throngs of people headed to and from the area in the future.


Post a comment

Name:


(None, None | Unverified Name)
Login to verify your name

Email:


Required, but not shown.

Comment: