News
12th Avenue Streetcar: (Still) A Bad Idea
The Stranger has been cheerleading for weeks about the possibility that the First Hill streetcar—promised to the First Hill neighborhood when a planned light rail stop on First Hill was eliminated—might be moved to Capitol Hill.
As The Stranger's transportation writer for six years, I followed the streetcar debate closely, and I find their case for moving the streetcar line myopic and off-base.
Let's go through the arguments one by one (all quotes are taken verbatim from The Stranger ).
1) "The hospitals on First Hill, naturally, want the streetcar at their front doors. But that doesn't mean we should build a streetcar for the hospitals."
"For the hospitals"? First Hill is the densest neighborhood in the state, with nearly 25,000 residents per square mile (compared to around 10,00 in Capitol Hill and about 2,700 in Seattle as a whole). Yes, there are hospitals on First Hill, but there are also lots and lots and lots of residents. Most of those residents (75 percent) get to work by some means other than driving, and only 50 percent even own a car—prime real estate, in other words, for new transit. Moreover, a disproportionate number of First Hill residents are elderly or live below the poverty line. Building a streetcar to serve those people isn't about "satisfy[ing] the hospitals"—it's about serving a huge population of vulnerable, low-income, elderly, and disabled people—people for whom transit is a daily necessity, not a luxury toy to spur new condo development.
Additionally, the abstract "hospitals" to which The Stranger refers see a million patients (many of them disabled or elderly) every year and collectively employ 20,000 people—all of them potential transit commuters.
2) "First Hill isn't the only neighborhood in the area that wants a piece of the project, nor is it the only one with a compelling case to make for increased transit service."
Well, okay—but the voter-approved plan actually included a light rail station in First Hill (they didn't get theirs; Capitol Hill did). Because of cost concerns, the Sound Transit board scrapped the station and voted to build a First Hill streetcar to replace it. That isn't merely "one neighborhood's sense of what they were promised, as another Stranger editorial puts it—it's an actual promise by the Sound Transit board. That history may be inconvenient for folks who want the board to renege on that promise now, but it's significant to those who supported light rail because it included transit in their neighborhood.
Imagine, for comparison, that you voted for a transportation levy because it would build sidewalks in your neighborhood, only to be told later that "your" sidewalks were going in one neighborhood over.
3) Data showing lower ridership on the 12th Avenue route than any other alternative are somehow fabricated.
As the Seattle Transit Blog pointed out , turning the streetcar line into a two-way couplet separated by three blocks significantly reduces the number of people who will use it, because it reduces the number of people who live within walking distance (within seven minutes' walk) of both a northbound and a southbound streetcar line. That matters, because the longer it takes to get to a transit stop, the fewer people ride transit. This is particularly true when a large percentage of those using the transit line are elderly or disabled, for whom a long walk is more than what a Stranger op/ed by 12th Ave. proponents Kate Stineback and Bill Zosel refers to as a mere "inconvenience" for people who live in "one of the fittest cities in America."
(And as STB also pointed out, Capitol Hill proponents want it both ways: Three blocks is way too far to walk when it's the distance between First Hill and 12th Avenue, therefore the streetcar should go on 12th; and it's no big deal to walk three blocks from 12th to First Hill, therefore First Hill should stop complaining).
4) Twelfth Avenue has more development potential than First Hill.
Twelfth Ave. may have plenty of empty lots, but it also lacks the development capacity (meaning, taller allowed building heights) of First Hill, where most lots can be built (or redeveloped) as high as 240-300 feet (compared to between 40 and 60 along 12th). Yes, heights can be changed, but that's a lengthy process that must go hand-in-hand with the neighborhood plan revamps currently underway at the city (neighborhood plans that don't typically include increasing allowable heights sixfold). Meanwhile, First Hill—one of the only parts of the city with high-rise zoning—is ready for redevelopment now.
And—contrary to the Capitol Hill proponents' claims—First Hill actually has a ton of unrealized development potential. For evidence of that, just look to the last boom, when high-rise apartment buildings sprouted all over the neighborhood.
Finally, the redevelopment of Yesler Terrace will include mixed-use buildings up to 22 stories high, bringing as many as 5,000 new housing units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, and 50,000 or more square feet of retail. The Capitol Hill route would not serve any of those residents or commuters.
5) First Hill already has plenty of buses.
First Hill does have lots of bus service, and buses don't serve 12th Avenue directly. But they could—if the streetcar is built on First Hill, and buses are rerouted to serve 12th instead. Sound Transit and Metro worked together to reprogram bus service in Southeast Seattle after light rail opened there, and they'd certainly do the same thing here—allowing streetcars, which carry more riders, to serve the neighborhood with high demand, and providing new bus service for a neighborhood that has been crying out for transit.
Finally, two more arguments against the Capitol Hill alignment that The Stranger hasn't addressed.
6) Putting a streetcar on 12th, a major arterial for bike commuters with a bike lane in each direction, is a terrible idea. If you think dodging car doors in the downhill southbound lane is dangerous now, imagine dodging streetcar tracks perfectly aligned with your wheels. As the South Lake Union streetcar and the Ballard Shortline Railroad have shown again and again, bike tires and train tracks don't mix. Putting them directly adjacent to one another makes no sense.
7) In general, proponents' argument for 12th is seriously myopic. Riding around in a giant loop might not be a big deal to people who are commuting between Capitol Hill and an ID dim-sum shop (the example provided by Stineback and Zosel here); if you're commuting on light rail from Rainier Beach and can't or don't want to walk an extra three blocks, however, those five or ten extra daily minutes are going to add up.
As The Stranger's transportation writer for six years, I followed the streetcar debate closely, and I find their case for moving the streetcar line myopic and off-base.
Let's go through the arguments one by one (all quotes are taken verbatim from The Stranger ).
1) "The hospitals on First Hill, naturally, want the streetcar at their front doors. But that doesn't mean we should build a streetcar for the hospitals."
"For the hospitals"? First Hill is the densest neighborhood in the state, with nearly 25,000 residents per square mile (compared to around 10,00 in Capitol Hill and about 2,700 in Seattle as a whole). Yes, there are hospitals on First Hill, but there are also lots and lots and lots of residents. Most of those residents (75 percent) get to work by some means other than driving, and only 50 percent even own a car—prime real estate, in other words, for new transit. Moreover, a disproportionate number of First Hill residents are elderly or live below the poverty line. Building a streetcar to serve those people isn't about "satisfy[ing] the hospitals"—it's about serving a huge population of vulnerable, low-income, elderly, and disabled people—people for whom transit is a daily necessity, not a luxury toy to spur new condo development.
Additionally, the abstract "hospitals" to which The Stranger refers see a million patients (many of them disabled or elderly) every year and collectively employ 20,000 people—all of them potential transit commuters.
2) "First Hill isn't the only neighborhood in the area that wants a piece of the project, nor is it the only one with a compelling case to make for increased transit service."
Well, okay—but the voter-approved plan actually included a light rail station in First Hill (they didn't get theirs; Capitol Hill did). Because of cost concerns, the Sound Transit board scrapped the station and voted to build a First Hill streetcar to replace it. That isn't merely "one neighborhood's sense of what they were promised, as another Stranger editorial puts it—it's an actual promise by the Sound Transit board. That history may be inconvenient for folks who want the board to renege on that promise now, but it's significant to those who supported light rail because it included transit in their neighborhood.
Imagine, for comparison, that you voted for a transportation levy because it would build sidewalks in your neighborhood, only to be told later that "your" sidewalks were going in one neighborhood over.
3) Data showing lower ridership on the 12th Avenue route than any other alternative are somehow fabricated.
As the Seattle Transit Blog pointed out , turning the streetcar line into a two-way couplet separated by three blocks significantly reduces the number of people who will use it, because it reduces the number of people who live within walking distance (within seven minutes' walk) of both a northbound and a southbound streetcar line. That matters, because the longer it takes to get to a transit stop, the fewer people ride transit. This is particularly true when a large percentage of those using the transit line are elderly or disabled, for whom a long walk is more than what a Stranger op/ed by 12th Ave. proponents Kate Stineback and Bill Zosel refers to as a mere "inconvenience" for people who live in "one of the fittest cities in America."
(And as STB also pointed out, Capitol Hill proponents want it both ways: Three blocks is way too far to walk when it's the distance between First Hill and 12th Avenue, therefore the streetcar should go on 12th; and it's no big deal to walk three blocks from 12th to First Hill, therefore First Hill should stop complaining).
4) Twelfth Avenue has more development potential than First Hill.
Twelfth Ave. may have plenty of empty lots, but it also lacks the development capacity (meaning, taller allowed building heights) of First Hill, where most lots can be built (or redeveloped) as high as 240-300 feet (compared to between 40 and 60 along 12th). Yes, heights can be changed, but that's a lengthy process that must go hand-in-hand with the neighborhood plan revamps currently underway at the city (neighborhood plans that don't typically include increasing allowable heights sixfold). Meanwhile, First Hill—one of the only parts of the city with high-rise zoning—is ready for redevelopment now.
And—contrary to the Capitol Hill proponents' claims—First Hill actually has a ton of unrealized development potential. For evidence of that, just look to the last boom, when high-rise apartment buildings sprouted all over the neighborhood.
Finally, the redevelopment of Yesler Terrace will include mixed-use buildings up to 22 stories high, bringing as many as 5,000 new housing units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, and 50,000 or more square feet of retail. The Capitol Hill route would not serve any of those residents or commuters.
5) First Hill already has plenty of buses.
First Hill does have lots of bus service, and buses don't serve 12th Avenue directly. But they could—if the streetcar is built on First Hill, and buses are rerouted to serve 12th instead. Sound Transit and Metro worked together to reprogram bus service in Southeast Seattle after light rail opened there, and they'd certainly do the same thing here—allowing streetcars, which carry more riders, to serve the neighborhood with high demand, and providing new bus service for a neighborhood that has been crying out for transit.
Finally, two more arguments against the Capitol Hill alignment that The Stranger hasn't addressed.
6) Putting a streetcar on 12th, a major arterial for bike commuters with a bike lane in each direction, is a terrible idea. If you think dodging car doors in the downhill southbound lane is dangerous now, imagine dodging streetcar tracks perfectly aligned with your wheels. As the South Lake Union streetcar and the Ballard Shortline Railroad have shown again and again, bike tires and train tracks don't mix. Putting them directly adjacent to one another makes no sense.
7) In general, proponents' argument for 12th is seriously myopic. Riding around in a giant loop might not be a big deal to people who are commuting between Capitol Hill and an ID dim-sum shop (the example provided by Stineback and Zosel here); if you're commuting on light rail from Rainier Beach and can't or don't want to walk an extra three blocks, however, those five or ten extra daily minutes are going to add up.
Filed under
Share
Show Comments
