I am all for the street car idea. It might not be the fastest way to get downtown (probably the same as the 17 or 18), but it would be much quieter and cleaner. If voters don't want the street car, can metro at least look into converting some of its routes to electric, say the 17 or 18?

happy to have a street car in ballard. plus anything to help connect ballard to the outside world. it is easy to stay in ballard and not get out because we are far from the rest of the city.

i am all for bigger distances between stops.

Agree with Bill, I will go for any alternative transit method as long as it's fast and reliable. Currently in Seattle that usually equals Bicycle. Since I've moved to Ballard recently the buses actually seem pretty frequent reliable compared to other neighborhoods. But taking the bus is always way slower than driving, even when it happens to be on time. Let's add incentive to take alternate transport. Make it faster than driving. Add transit-only lanes from Ballard to downtown, Fremont to downtown... Make single-occupancy car commuters feel the pain, not those of us trying to make a difference.

I think a main issue is travel time. If a streetcar -- or a bus -- is given a devoted lane/track, separate from car traffic, that could make the mass-transit option actually a time SAVER (vs. car) during rush hours. That could convince a huge number of car commuters to switch over to mass transit.

I ride the bus monday through friday to and from work. Most of the notable complaints about busses are addressable with proper funding, and frankly, I find I prefer it to driving. It's worth pointing out that if you really want bang for your buck, the commuter-run busses are already overflowing, and Metro doesn't have the funding for more. Ridership is already being limited to some degree by capacity and availability. A streetcar isn't going to solve that nearly as effectively as simply adding more bus service to better meet demand.

You may notice there are overhead cables on some streets. Those are for the electric buses. No reason we couldn't expand that cable system and add more electric buses. Except of course for bright ideas like street cars and the monorail taking money away from such projects.

All that said, I like the *idea* of street cars. Seattle used to way back when have an extensive street car network. I just don't think this is the time to try to revive it. Given our current infrastructure, there are far more effective ways that money could be appropriated to address transportation needs.

I keep wondering how many of the bus advocates here actually ride the buses.

CK said:

"I think streetcars are much more attractive than bus rapid transit proposals, which am I correct would be diesel, not electric… and therefore loud and polluting, not quiet and clean like a streetcar?"

Our buses may not be as pretty as the brand new streetcars, but we do have quite a few quick and quiet electric trolleys in the fleet. They would work well for Ballard.

And remember, kids, the streetcars are as pretty now as those buses were when they were brand new. Transit vehicles don't stay shiny forever.

San Francisco has buses, streetcars, BART, and cable cars. As a tourist, I found it challenging to negotiate the different payment strategies, schedule sheets, maps and hours of operation of these various overlapping systems.

Rather than adding another layer of complexity to the traffic problems in Seattle, spend that money on new electric trolley buses, more of them per hour, and a "Next bus in XX minutes" system. I know it's not as sexy, but it makes good sense.

Quoth The Raven:
"As far as I can tell, most of the people who say that bus is superior to rail don’t actually ride the buses."

I've been riding the bus in Seattle since I was 15. That was a long time ago. It's because I ride that I have such strong opinions on the subject.

"Getting my teeth rattled loose every day on the bus seems a pretty good argument for streetcars."

Bumpy bus rides are a function of two things:
1.) The model and condition of the bus, and
2.) The condition of the roads
Neither of these will be addressed if money is siphoned off for shiny new streetcars.

Streetcar tracks will, however, make your car rides bumpier and traffic more exciting.

I like the public-private partnership aspect. Make business pay for the new light rail (we could have a townhouse development tax), and the public can ride for free.

That should attract a lot more riders, get people to stop using their cars (gas will soon be $17/gallon anyways) and remove the steep learning curve on how to pay.

When your head starts hurting, stop thinking!

just what we need...more construction on the fremont bridge...no thanks

If you like bicycling around Ballard, or like seeing bicycles and our three bike shops, be very very careful about pushing for a streetcar here. The city really messed it up badly on Westlake.

I ride the bus every day, and I'm skeptical of this idea. It's not that streetcars are inherently bad, it's that the cost of a streetcar (relative to its utility) is often dramatically higher than a comparable bus route. The city and county don't have endless resources and we can't say "yes" to everything.

We really shouldn't hold Portland up as an example of successful transit planning. Sure, the light rail & trolleys are fun for tourists, but TriMet spent so much on the in-city light rail that it totally neglected its bus system, and as a result, lost market share.

And frankly, people who refuse to ride buses but simply LOVE streetcars? They can go pound sand -- or pay for the streetcar themselves.

Is there any serious consideration to making the streetcars grade-separated (even for part of the journey, like down 15th/elliot)? If so, the streetcars would be a clear advantage over bus, including all of Evan's valid points. If we can build a streetcar line in a year or two and with local funding, and without a painful string of votes... I say go for it. Won't we need better transit for all the Ballard condo-dwellers?

Maybe the line can be extended in a couple years to serve the majority of ballard residents as well. While I ride the bus regularly my gf for example has no patience for unreliable buses but would likely ride streetcars. I think streetcars are much more attractive than bus rapid transit proposals, which am I correct would be diesel, not electric... and therefore loud and polluting, not quiet and clean like a streetcar?

As far as I can tell, most of the people who say that bus is superior to rail don't actually ride the buses. Getting my teeth rattled loose every day on the bus seems a pretty good argument for streetcars. Seattle has good geography for rail systems; let's take advantage of it.

nothing to polarize a group like talking about mass transit he he. i am no exception, it gets me worked up.

anything that keeps more cars off the road and gives people other, easier options to take it is fine by me.

if the paymetn system is flawed, that can be fixed, that really isn't a reason to not have a streetcar. my only personal complaint about these plans is it doesn't help me get anywhere useful. other than going for a drink in fremont, it doesn't get close enough to down town to get me to use it. i will still take the bus.

As long as they keep the hobos and bums off, I'll ride it.

Also, a streetcar through that relatively industrial area might make the land too valuable to stay industrial. Just something that needs to be considered.

Personally I would like the streetcar to go much deeper into Ballard. This route goes TO Ballard, it doesn't go through it. Or, what if it went up 8th and then West on Market Street, that would serve a lot more residents of Ballard (or do the businesses along leary need it more?).

we spent sunday afternoon walking around downtown like tourists, so we decided to get a feel for the merits of the streetcar. how (and why) to pay was moderately confusing. the ringing sounds and stop announcements, complete with various sponsorship plugs, were moderately detracting, and the overall efficiency and effectiveness was questionable. verdict: dumb.

As someone who has actually ridden the SLUT, I can tell you that the payment system they are using is ridiculously confusing! Everyone getting on, that wasn't a regular rider (only a few of those got aboard) had a steep learning curve just to figure out how to pay the fare! We were almost to the end of the line before we were finally seated. Imagine the line to pay when there are actually crowds!

Buses work. They can be made greener. They don't require tracks that can trap bicycle tires. They don't require riders to learn YET ANOTHER payment system. They don't require us to support YET ANOTHER repair facility with dedicated repair staff, parts and supplies. Not to mention management staff and drivers!

Streetcars require all of the above, and they don't even get us up above the surface street traffic!!

Why didn't Paul Allen buy us a monorail instead of a Science Fiction museum? I would have paid to use a monorail!

I say yay! for streetcars. It's not an either-or situation: in our geographically-restricted, heavily developed (and further densifying) city, we need ALL the transportation options we can get. Evan's points are all well-taken. What's the point of only adding buses if riders won't use them? Having a "next bus in X minutes" readout at every stop, (and weatherproof shelters!) would help a lot in making buses more user-friendly and user-welcoming. Portland is doing many things right, especially having a mix of transit options including buses, light rail and street cars. Seattle can do the same, if we demand it of elected officials, and support them when they try.

Does it matter whose fault the accidents are? I think what matters is that the SLUT has had 4 (or more?) accidents that stopped service since December. The #17, which follows a similar route in SLU, has had how many?

Wrong Sorin, most of the accidents are driver (vehicle error).

Lets start a committee count list. I'm counting two already.

Well, I'm a streetcar fan. I think the post on the PI site summarizes the pro-streetcare POV well.

1. Many more people will ride rail than buses.

2. Rail, including streetcars, don't need the fuel or spew the greenhouse gas buses do.

3. Rail catalyzes development and land use patterns; buses follow them.

4. Train rides are smoother than buses.

5. Rail stops are farther apart, reducing travel time. They are much clearer to find and provide more information to riders than bus stops. The SLUT tells me when the next train is coming. If a Metro bus gets delayed or taken out of service, I have no way of knowing.

Watching other cities develop I can vouch firsthand for #3, having streetcar track and stops defined helps developers and businesses locate around existing and new centers with confidence. We should all be writing the council to advocate for the Ballard/fremont line first.

"If we are going to do rail, let’s take a cue from Portland and spend the time, resources, and planning to do it properly" - this applies to many many things our mayor and his committees touch.

Bus service would be more flexible, cheaper, and wiser than streetcars. you could take a small % the extra cost of a streetcar, put it into bus service, and still have $ leftover to create giant costumes for the busses, so we could have a fremont troll bus, and a ballard swedish or viking bus. I'd like a salmon or halibut bus.

I think that mostly, we need to make sure incompetent people aren't involved *cough* Mayor and committees*cough*

I really can't see these streetcar lines as anything but boondoggles *cough* Monorail *cough*. Added bus service would be far cheaper and less prone to accidents. (The SLUT line has already shown it is having some trouble with fender benders, due mostly to the poor layout of the tracks.) If we are going to do rail, let's take a cue from Portland and spend the time, resources, and planning to do it properly.