[Chicago3rd]

Why not start a discussion group in SSP that is PDX Loves Cars and there you can discuss the positives of cars. Lots of room on the boards. Would be nice to have two different leaning groups going since this is a huge issue overall. Just think this page was set up not to discuss Public Transit 101 but had evolved out of that to Urban Transit issues surround public transportation.

I don't want to have to come into this group, from one of the most progressive city/public transportation centers in this country and always have someone come in here and delibertly try and take us off topic. Form your own discussion group and let this type of discussion/study exist.

Sort of like being in a history class and having people bringing up questions about math.......

[Urbanpdx]

For the record I despise our involvement in Iraq. Massive waste of lives and money, money we already owe to China and India by the way. I really don't see how even if the invasion is lowering the price at the pump it would offset the billions we are spending there. Anyway, even with cab's numbers that 25% of the roads budget comes from the general fund (which is collected from people who predominantly drive) how does that compare to mass transit covering less than 20% of it's costs? There are many people, myself included, who would continue to drive purely out of necessity even if the gas tax doubled and oil was $150 a barrel. Are tradesmen and pizza delivery people going to ride the bus that they pay for? They can't even if they want to. I would much rather pay the full cost of my transportation (I belive I already do) than pay 15.32% payroll taxes that a large chunk of goes to mass transit I rarely use. Its only fair that drivers, bikers, and bus riders each pay for the resources they use. To my knowledge theres only one bus line that pays for itself, #72 on 82nd.

Cab's numbers are most likely incorrect. 90% is a more accurate figure. Even so, car drivers should not pay 100% of road costs, we all benefit from the goods that are transported on roads and there has to be something in front of our houses/buildings...

[Urbanpdx]

Why not start a discussion group in SSP that is PDX Loves Cars and there you can discuss the positives of cars. Lots of room on the boards. Would be nice to have two different leaning groups going since this is a huge issue overall. Just think this page was set up not to discuss Public Transit 101 but had evolved out of that to Urban Transit issues surround public transportation.

I don't want to have to come into this group, from one of the most progressive city/public transportation centers in this country and always have someone come in here and delibertly try and take us off topic. Form your own discussion group and let this type of discussion/study exist.

Sort of like being in a history class and having people bringing up questions about math.......

I will admit that since I started watching this board my mind has been changed slightly. On a recent trip back east I thought about the postings here and the way Portland is built. I still think most of you don't have a clue about free choice and efficient economies but I don't think some people have a clue about the quality of life in a dense, compact city either. I would not have my mind opened in the kind of circle jerk you suggest is somehow better.

[MarkDaMan]

I don't see a fight erupting, and urbanpdx has a point. I did go off, and than chastise those that go off...kinda 'have my cake and eat it to' but, it is a knee jerk reaction. I can't read or participate in an honest discussion about Portland's transit on Portland Transport or Sam Adams because of all the libertarian rhetoric injected into the conversation. Which is fine if they stuck to the discussion but they take the conversations personal and get ugly going as far as claiming our city leaders are forcing some sort of Hitleresque social engineering and those that support transit are penthouse living elitists or sponges. They then go on posting every piece of O'toole 'fact' to support their theories, much of which is some old man's wet dream. So when I see some of that popping up here, it raises flags.

In reality, I don't see how a discussion on the cost per rider could be anything but a large circle going round and round about the same tired points. There really is no way to know the true costs to taxpayers, and benefits to the economy of transit nor does this page ever take that issue head on. When a building design is presented, we don't sit here and discuss the financing mechanisms, so when we discuss transit additions I don't think a conversation of whether the costs justifies the means is appropriate on this board.

[Eagle rock]

“Even so, car drivers should not pay 100% of road costs, we all benefit from the goods that are transported on roads and there has to be something in front of our houses/buildings...”

What about the enormous detriment cars and car infrastructure bring into the city? What about all of the homes that were displaced to build the massive freeway infrastructure around Portland? What about all of the kids with asthma that live near freeways and truck corridors in NE Portland? Cars do not pay for themselves. This country runs off petroleum through enormous subsidies. The car lifestyle has an enormous toll on cities and people. People who rely solely on cars do not pay for the countless problems that they create.

[cab]

http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0506.pdf

Good reading here. 63% user fee, 37% from other non-auto related funds.

[Urbanpdx]

Just heard this:

http://tinyurl.com/y6rkg2

A kind of funny case against living in the burbs. It might lighten up the discussion. :)

[zilfondel]

.

[westsider]

http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0506.pdf

Good reading here. 63% user fee, 37% from other non-auto related funds.

The link goes to an advertising site, maybe you put it in wrong.

[pdxman]

So i had my first ever encounter with a fare collector on the streetcar yesterday...she was probably the nicest, sweetest lady ever and in no way could she have been considered an "enforcer" by any means. She probably got the short straw at work that day--but if they want to actually get any money from those they should probably have someone a little more intimidating. BTW the fare machine wasn't even working

[bvpcvm]

I can't read or participate in an honest discussion about Portland's transit on Portland Transport or Sam Adams because of all the libertarian rhetoric injected into the conversation. Which is fine if they stuck to the discussion but they take the conversations personal and get ugly going as far as claiming our city leaders are forcing some sort of Hitleresque social engineering and those that support transit are penthouse living elitists or sponges. They then go on posting every piece of O'toole 'fact' to support their theories, much of which is some old man's wet dream. So when I see some of that popping up here, it raises flags.

[etc]



i SO wholeheartedly agree. i've seen this same discussion going on in internet forums for the last 10 years. has it changed one thing in the real world? i doubt it. the conversation just goes round and round. you could probably take most of the sentences in the "discussion" we've been having and find hundreds of hits of google for the exact same text. i'm sick of it. leave us, urbanpdx etc, to our nerdly speculation of where max might/should go next and when we have our doubts, we can look around and easily find arguments pro and con on our own without having our conversations here hijacked. in fact, i think the real reason for the visceral reaction against having this discussion at all is, like mark started to say, it devolves into just the kind of partisan name-calling that infects the rest of american politics these days. no one likes it, so let's not spread it here, ok?

[zilfondel]

rp.

[zilfondel]

Anyways, back onto topic:

Commuter Rail construction pics! Woohoo!

Taken from Trimet's website (http://trimet.org/commuterrail/gallery.htm).

http://trimet.org/images/commuterrail/whistlestop.jpg
Mandatory photo-op for excited politicians on really old train.
We'll skip all the rest of those.

http://trimet.org/images/commuterrail/p811_1.jpg
Cool track machine.

http://trimet.org/images/commuterrail/p811_2.jpg
Profile view of sexy rails.

http://trimet.org/images/commuterrail/p811_3.jpg
Ugly-ass track machine.

http://trimet.org/images/commuterrail/p811_4.jpg
Smooth and sexy, brand-spanking new rails.

[MarkDaMan]

Driving TriMet: A conversation with Fred Hansen
by Libby Tucker
11/17/2006


Fred Hansen likes to think of himself as just a regular rider.

The Pearl District resident and general manager of TriMet takes the No. 17 bus to and from the Portland-area public transit agency’s eastside headquarters every day.

“I have these patterns of what I read in the morning and at night when I’m going home,” Hansen said. “I’m one of the lucky ones because ... I can take the (bus) without changing downtown.”

But the TriMet general manager isn’t just along for the ride. Hansen guided the outfit through a three-year recession that left all of Portland’s agencies struggling just to provide basic services.

His policies of focused investment and streamlining for efficiencies axed nearly $20 million per year in operating expenses, helping to keep the agency afloat.

Now, Hansen says, the agency is nearly back to its pre-recession revenue, and it has three major rail projects under way that will greatly expand its services. The Washington County Commuter Rail project began in October and will connect Wilsonville to Tigard and Beaverton. The downtown Transit Mall light-rail project will bring MAX service on Fifth and Sixth avenues from Union Station to Portland State University. And the Interstate 205 MAX line will link the Gateway Transit Center and Clackamas Town Center.

DJC: What were the highlights of 2006 for TriMet?

Fred Hansen: A whole series of things.

The Washington County Commuter Rail groundbreaking was a few weeks ago, but it took a long process to get to that point. That’s the first commuter rail in the state of Oregon and one of a handful of projects that’s really suburban-to-suburban area across the nation. Most commuter rail projects, whether in Seattle, California or the East Coast, tend to be far-out exurban areas that go into central cities. And this is coming through Wilsonville on to Tigard and Beaverton.

Number two is the work on the South Corridor project, which is the mall and I-205. We’re now just completing the 100 percent design of it. There’ve been utility relocations in the mall but some on I-205 as well, and to see that project just on the brink of being launched in the beginning of 2007 is very exciting.

Beyond that, the next big one was as Google looked across the nation to do travel planning, they decided they wanted to do a transit project somewhere in the nation, and the only place they chose was us because they knew we were the best in terms of the information we had and secondly to have very willing partners in TriMet. Now (at www.google.com/transit) you can Google any place you want to go in Portland and get the transit way, from walking to bus or light rail, then it has the cost of that and the alternative if you drove, the cost that way. In the last few weeks there have been four or five cities added to Google since then, but we were the first.

And biodiesel – at the beginning of this year we began biodiesel use in our Lift vehicles as a pilot during the winter. ... It worked very well. We expanded it to the rest of our Lift vehicles, that’s the elderly and disabled one, in April, and just a couple weeks ago we announced we’re putting biodiesel into all our buses, and as a result we are now the largest purchaser of biodiesel in the state.

DJC: You’re about a month into the B5 biodiesel use now in all the TriMet buses. How’s it going?

Hansen: It’s going very well. Frankly, biodiesel burns cleaner than diesel, it works as a solvent and cleans out the engine.

We’re at 5 percent now – that’s 5 percent biodiesel, 95 percent diesel – and we’re hoping that the engine manufacturers will certify that we can go to 20 percent biodiesel. But until we do the warranty issues we’ll stay at 5 percent.

Also, EPA mandated that all diesel had to be ultra-low-sulfur diesel as of (Oct. 15), so the combination means we get much cleaner exhaust, and we’re looking at making it even better yet.

DJC: Going back to the top of your list: Are both of those rail projects fully funded now?

Hansen: Commuter rail is. We signed the full funding grant agreement, essentially the contract the federal government makes with the local government to say we’re going to pay our full share, and it lays out a schedule of payments per year. We signed a few weeks ago for Washington County Commuter Rail, and we would expect that same agreement, which is working its way through the process, to be signed somewhere in about March of ’07. In that sense all the funding is there. Everything is in place.

DJC: How do you view your ridership numbers? Are they where you expected them to be? And what are your expectations for next year?

Hansen: We’ve been increasing our ridership year over year for the last 17 years. What’s more exciting is we see our ridership increasing on weekend trips. ... Our MAX trains are nearly as full on Saturday as they are during the week, which is really kind of amazing.

DJC: Is that why you consolidated bus lines this year, in order to provide more frequent service?

Hansen: We always look at how do we make them better. ... How do we allocate service hours where people use them? And certainly that’s what’s allowed us to, during hard economic times, expand our service lines.

DJC: As general manager you introduced the idea of focused investment to TriMet. Where does that idea come from?

Hansen: I’m a believer that you have to be able to touch and feel things for it to be a difference. I’m a regular rider and I know those things.

What we did (in the past) was we spread whatever investments we had over a wide distance and nobody could tell any real difference. Now we’re able to promote them. Here’s a bus that’s going to be coming at least every 15 minutes seven days a week. And as a rider that makes a real difference.

DJC: Where is TriMet sitting financially?

Hansen: We’ve had, as most every business in the greater Portland region in the three-and-a-half-year period between 2000 and 2003, we really saw essentially flat revenues, and that was a direct reflection of the fact that this region had lost a little over 30,000 jobs and most of our revenue is based on the payroll tax.

But what we did during that period is we launched an effort that we call the productivity improvement program, and what it was really aimed at ... was how do we get more resource out of our existing base and put it into more service. Do things smarter, do it cheaper. And as it ended up ... we’ve been able to save on, an annualized basis, a little over $20 million and still deliver the same service.

And we’ve done it in a thousand different things. Literally our frontline workers came up with virtually all these ideas. And it’s everything from how do you tighten up the front-end alignment of buses so we get less tire drag because there’s play in the wheel, and that means we need to use less diesel fuel. And so we’ve increased our fuel efficiency. And putting nitrogen, not air, into the tires because nitrogen’s a bit heavier, it doesn’t leak as easily, and therefore we’re able to maintain tire pressure a little bit more consistently. We’re a big business. ... We run 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. When the vehicles aren’t out they’re in being maintained, so in many ways we’re a very big pick-up and delivery service that runs all the time. So we applied business practices to all those things.

DJC: What are you looking forward to in 2007, both in projects and financially?

Hansen: First of all financially. This last year was the first year we saw our payroll taxes start to reflect the economy and increase our revenue. And that’s allowed us to expand service and do a whole lot of other things. Overall, I think we’re coming back out of that recession.

As you look forward we look toward the launching of the full construction of the mall and I-205, and although that is a two-year process ’07 will see a lot of construction work.

And we’re doing that a lot differently than the last time people saw light rail in the downtown area really being torn up. This time, instead of being building-face to building-face reconstruction, this is curb to curb, so it’s really in the roadway.

Number two is we’ve really learned how to be in an area – do the construction, get it done and get out – and we expect to be able to do that in a six- to eight-week period in about three different construction phases on Fifth and on Sixth. All that time we’re going to keep the sidewalks open for the businesses.

I-205 is a lot longer alignment but, because it’s in a dedicated right-of-way, we’re not going to be going through as much activity like the mall. ... It’s a bit easier setting because when they built I-205 Multnomah County required that there be a transit way set aside along and in the middle of 205, and we’re going to use that and that makes it a lot easier.

DJC: And that downtown mall project also has requirements for minority and women participation?

Hansen: Absolutely.

We set the bar higher than anybody has ever set it before on Interstate MAX. We set a goal of having 16 percent participation in our contracting; we reached 19 percent.

A lot of people use those numbers, (but) what to us is very important is we used locally owned minority and women businesses and we put about $8.6 million on Interstate MAX into businesses that were located in that area.

And it wasn’t the big businesses. This is the one- or two-dump-truck operators or the small engineering firm that’s trying to get going.

DJC: I know the Portland Development Commission is looking at setting goals for minority and women participation. Is there a difference between how such a program would be implemented in an agency that oversees building construction versus transportation?

Hansen: Obviously there are differences, but the ability to break down contracts is very similar in both settings. ... So the ability to do that is there, but it takes effort and real commitment. And very frankly, we got quality work, a very low changeover level, no litigation that came out of Interstate MAX, and those are the things you can actually deliver for the community, the project and the overall budget.

DJC: So you’re saying with all the messy business surrounding projects at the PDC that it could be more difficult for them to implement goals for minority and women participation?

Hansen: If you think about it from a mechanical standpoint, many of the same elements are there. In fact Bruce Watts, who’s the director of diversity and reports to me and oversaw much of the Interstate work and is overseeing much of the mall and 205, we’ve lent him to the PDC to help them out as he has to the city of Portland and others. But, no, I think fundamentally you can still do that. In any construction it’s going to be different from one project to the next.

One other thing we did and are doing now is often times these small businesses don’t have the financial wherewithal or the sophistication to put together the financial records to put together the performance bond. We ended up hiring consultants to work with those firms to get their books in the right shape so they can get to the bond. We had one that their records literally came in a shoebox, so it kind of helped out. You’ve got to find different ways to help those firms compete…

DJC: So basically the key is to streamline a lot of the way the contracting happens with the agency to make it a successful program?

Hansen: Yes, and you need a contractor who’s equally committed to make those things work. ... It takes the willingness ... on both sides: on the owner, us or PDC, and the contractor.

DJC: All of the agencies involved in transportation in the region are feeling the budget crunch of huge looming projects, such as the Columbia River Crossing. Yet it sounds like you’re saying that TriMet is doing well. Do you not feel the squeeze?

Hansen: Let me not leave you with the impression that we feel like we’re doing well. We’ve had a very tough three years – flat revenues with normal inflation or expenses, about $10 million more a year just to stay in place. And that $20 million total essentially offset the additional (annual) costs just to stay in place. So we felt the exact same pressures. ... We’re suffering much the same thing every other business and government has suffered.

We’ve just been able to leverage our investments in a way that’s been very critical. The mall I-205 project, 60 percent of that is being funded by the federal government. And that means every time that goes into the local economy we get that extra benefit. ... What we’re able to do is really build off of that and make things work.

Bridging the authority gap

DJC: Have you heard Ted Wheeler’s proposal about a regional bridge authority?

Fred Hansen: I smile only because I think I was one of the sources of that idea. Obviously, you have to figure out how to make it happen but I think if you look right now the mixture of bridge ownerships are really kind of screwy. You have ODOT owning the big ones, Ross Island and the interstates, you’ve got (Union Pacific) owning the Steel Bridge and Multnomah County essentially with the rest of the bridges.

And they’re not the highest focus certainly within Multnomah County, so you end up getting to this crisis where something’s got to happen, and that’s not the way we ought to be maintaining things. So, in the long run, something like an authority makes sense.

DJC: Do you think (Wheeler) is the natural champion of that?

Hansen: He certainly has the most bridges.

I was just talking with Sam Adams two days ago and we were talking a little about the bridge authority as well, and he sees it doesn’t make sense that what are essentially city streets but have to cross a river are now in another jurisdiction.

How do we think smarter about this? I don’t think it’s going to come quickly because you need to have a revenue source that goes with that. ... You’ve got to have a way that is dedicated dollars so those bridges are maintained. But I think in the long run it does make sense, given how critical river crossings are to Portland.
http://www.djc-or.com/viewStory.cfm?recid=28379&userID=1

[pdxtex]

since we can't perform searches on this site anymore, has trimet ever seriously considered how max would be affected if the steel bridge were structurally comprimised in any way. its sweet that we have this great rail system but seriously, the steel bridge sees tons of bus, car, heavy rail, AND max traffic every day. plus its a draw bridge which is even more of a potential problem. not sure what the alternative is but relying on the strength of a old ass bridge as the sole outlet for so much traffic seems like an accident waiting to happen.

[edgepdx]

since we can't perform searches on this site anymore, has trimet ever seriously considered how max would be affected if the steel bridge were structurally comprimised in any way. its sweet that we have this great rail system but seriously, the steel bridge sees tons of bus, car, heavy rail, AND max traffic every day. plus its a draw bridge which is even more of a potential problem. not sure what the alternative is but relying on the strength of a old ass bridge as the sole outlet for so much traffic seems like an accident waiting to happen.

I'm sure it was taken into account by engineers. From what I understand the Steel Bridge is quite the engineering marvel and is extremely stout.

[pdxman]

The steel bridge definitely seems like a liability...if something did happen to it, there goes the max, amtrak and car traffic. and theres no alternatives to the bridge so if some nut wanted to really make an impact they could blow that bridge.

[pdxtex]

that was another angle i never really considered but crazy terrorists aside, even from a capacity standpoint, any addition to eastside service seems destined to go over the steel bridge. rose quarter is already a mess at high traffic times and now they want to put max down 205? i hope those trains are not originating in downtown. anyway, i know there presently is not much of an alternative but it just seems dicey having all of your east side transit eggs in one relying on one really old steel um, basket.

[tworivers]

Dicey is an understatement.

The Mall/205 trains will, of course, be going over the Steel. I remember reading in the Tribune awhile back that there is at least an upgrade (particularly for the eastside ramps) planned for the bridge before the new line opens in 2009.

[pdxtex]

i think somebody over at trimet is hittin' the bong a little bit. sturdy bridge or not, the thing is already at what i would call reasonable capacity. and now those braniacs want to run max down the busmall?? any semi fit person could walk the length of dt is ten minutes. i think a 205 extension is great but maybe they should build a eastside depot. anyway, we shall see.

[pdxstreetcar]

I recall this was a big issue with AORTA (http://www.trainweb.org/aorta/index.htm) regarding the Mall LRT. I think they were more concerned about congestion on the bridge (and its junctions on both ends of the bridge) than on the actual transit mall between MAX and buses.

[zilfondel]

i think somebody over at trimet is hittin' the bong a little bit. sturdy bridge or not, the thing is already at what i would call reasonable capacity. and now those braniacs want to run max down the busmall?? any semi fit person could walk the length of dt is ten minutes. i think a 205 extension is great but maybe they should build a eastside depot. anyway, we shall see.

FYI, Downtown Portland is around 2 miles long from N to South (Amtrak station to PSU), so one would have to walk about 12 miles/hour to do it in 10 minutes.

Most people walk closer to 3-4 mph or slower, putting the walking time closer to 30 minutes.

[Dougall5505]

^not to mention crosswalks

[MOPIdaho]

I don't know if its been brought up, but this month's Dwell magazine has two Portland articles. The first is on the Belmont Lofts and the second is a transit story.

[cab]

http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0506.pdf

FYI
The earlier posted link works again.

[Urbanpdx]

That is Canada!

[cab]

Its out of Canada, but the study is based on US numbers.

[65MAX]

Its out of Canada, but the study is based on US numbers.

Sure, blame Canada. Actually, what I think Urbanpdx meant to say was,

"This information runs counter to my ideological beliefs, therefore, it can't possibly be valid. If it were true, then everything I believe in is wrong."

[Urbanpdx]

http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/publications/2000/UCD-ITS-RP-00-08.pdf


Subsidies and social costs of autos together average less than 7 cents per passenger mile today. That compares with transit subsidies of 45 cents per passenger mile -- which doesn't even count the social costs of transit. Since buses and commuter rail can produce as much air pollution per passenger mile as autos, the true discrepancy between autos and transit is even greater.

[MarkDaMan]

^bleh

TriMet did run worst case scenario disaster planning. One of the scenarios was a bomb going off on the MAX while it was crossing the Steel. I'd love to see those graphics! But anyway, they have thought about it.

[tworivers]

Columbia bridge advice: Scrap the old, build new
$2 billion - State officials say a six-lane span is needed, but a task force and the public must weigh in first
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
JAMES MAYER

VANCOUVER -- Officials from both sides of the Columbia River on Tuesday proposed building a new six-lane freeway bridge, with room for transit, bikes and pedestrians, and dropping the idea of re-using the existing spans for any purpose.

"This is what we think makes the most sense," said John Osborn, project director from the Washington Department of Transportation.

The recommendation will be presented Nov. 29 to the 39-member Columbia River Crossing Task Force. After a period of public comment, the task force is expected to decide in February whether to endorse a yearlong federal environmental impact study. A final decision on whether to build the new bridge could come in 2008.

The cost of the new bridge is not known with any accuracy, but Doug Ficco, Oregon Department of Transportation project manager, said $2 billion was a good ballpark figure.

Osborn and Ficco cited numerous reasons for taking out the existing bridges. The spans, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, are unsafe and can't carry enough vehicles to make fixing them worth the money, they said.

The existing spans lack shoulders, and the interchanges on both ends are too close together by today's engineering standards. The bridges see twice the accidents that occur on other urban freeways.

An arterial connection between Portland and Vancouver using the old spans would not carry enough traffic. Osborn said an arterial bridge would remove only 10 percent of the traffic from the freeway.

"We don't fix the problem of I-5" with an arterial, he said.

Osborn said a new freeway bridge would substantially ease northbound congestion on Interstate 5 for many years, but the bottleneck at the Rose Garden in Portland would limit the southbound benefits by 2035.

The lift spans on the existing bridges create several problems. Lifts would play havoc with light rail scheduling. Barges and other users of the river would benefit from the removal of the lift spans as well, the officials said.

The recommendation proposes leaving in two transit options for further study. One would extend the Portland-area's light-rail system across the bridge into Clark County. The potential route and station locations would be explored as part of the study. The other alternative is "bus rapid transit," which features special buses, stations and an exclusive or separated lane.

"Light rail is a very good option," Ficco said, but the staff wanted a chance to more closely examine the bus rapid transit idea.

Officials are optimistic that the project will fare well in the competition for federal money because it is a bi-state project on an interstate freeway that also includes a transit project.

James Mayer: 503-294-4109; jimmayer@news.oregonian.com

[mcbaby]

seems silly to even consider BRT when light rail is nearly there. they would have to widen I-5 another lane between jantzen beach and downtown to make BRT even work with our traffic. even if they removed the bottle necks, 3 lanes is not enough.

[Urbanpdx]

BRT, especially when combined with HOT lanes is WAY better than LR.

[MarkDaMan]

so in two years, the cost has doubled to $2 billion...WoW! I think it is time we talk about how to pay for this bridge before we go much further. Sure we need a new solution, but where are Oregon and Washington going to get a billion each to fix arguably one of the most important crossings in the PacNW?

In a region that has spent hundreds of millions, if not billions in today's dollars, to build a massive, reliable and popular LRT system, it wouldn't make sense to persue a temporary alternative that doesn't build on the current system as envisioned. BRT will probably never be seen in Portland besides the small stretches of bus only traffic lanes on Hawthorne.

[MarkDaMan]

For Burnside Bridge, a new approach to a struggling span
by Dan Carter
11/22/2006


Like the two bridges built in its place that preceded it, the Burnside Bridge was designed and constructed to be replaced in 25 or 30 years. The unique steel and concrete lift system built 80 years ago was never meant to be repaired.

But repairs began in January 2006, with workers from contractor Advanced American Construction Inc. attempting to fix the failing mechanical lift system, replace the deteriorating concrete deck, clean and inspect all gears, replace lift controls motors and brakes, add a new coat of paint and do some seismic upgrades.

Although such work is the bridge contractor’s specialty, several aspects demanded a great deal of creativity to overcome problems.

First, even though they are enormous, the two spans, or leaves, that rise to allow river traffic to get by are carefully balanced. As contractors removed the old concrete surface, an equivalent weight had to be added elsewhere to keep even the balance.

“We devised a ballasting plan that first weighed the concrete that was being taken off,” said Advanced American Project Manager Kainan Bodenlos. “We then fabricated a wood-frame structure lined with heavy plastic and hung it under the bridge. As the concrete was removed, we pumped an equivalent weight of water into the swimming pool to keep the balance intact.”

As far as he can determine, said Jeff Harper, an Advanced American partner, a system like this had never been used before.

“It is pretty simple and has worked very well,” he said. “I’m sure that we can use the system for other similar projects.”

Creative thinking had to be employed to replace a shattered pin that serves as one of the hinges around which the bridge rotates when it opens. The pin itself is large – 4 feet long and 13 inches in diameter – and replacing it means a 3.5 million-pound concrete counterweight needs to be moved. The crew from Advanced American Construction will bore holes 25 feet long through the concrete and insert cables that will support the counterweight.

“Replacing that pin will be the hardest and riskiest part of the whole project, and adequately supporting that counterweight is crucial,” Harper said. “We have had to get very creative with our rigging.”

Scheduling was the final aspect of the job where creativity, and a good dose of patience, came into play. Of course, at least two vehicle lanes and a pedestrian/bicycle lane had to be open most of the time for the nearly 50,000 vehicles that use the bridge daily. Also, the bridge had to be operable continuously for three weeks during the Portland Rose Festival in June and for a month during the holiday season in December.

“We have been able to get ahead of schedule so that the open times haven’t been too bad,” Bodenlos said. “But one thing that we can’t schedule for is the bridge openings for the ships and barges that come through. I am supposed to get four hours notice so we can be ready. But, since we can only open one leaf, I am responsible for arranging for a tug to assist the vessel through the narrower opening. Sometimes those calls for tugs occur in the middle of the night and it has to be taken care of right then.”

The contractor until recently was met with confusion when it worked on bridge projects because of a name workers say no longer properly described it. Advanced American Construction Inc. was founded by Konrad Schweiger and Kent Cochran in 1983 as Advanced American Diving Inc., a diving and salvage company. It soon was doing repair and construction of bridges that were on or near the water. After six of the employees at the company became principals, they decided to change the name to Advanced American Construction at the beginning of 2006.

“We wanted a business name that more adequately described what our company did,” Harper said. “Before the takeover, we would bid on a bridge project and people would ask what a diving company was doing bidding on a bridge. We still have the diving and underwater expertise, but heavy construction work with a significant mechanical component is what we do best.”
http://www.djc-or.com/viewStory.cfm?recid=28404&userID=1

[zilfondel]

Oooh, I know! They could tear out that old rail line that goes from the Rose Garden up to N Portland, and replace it with a BRT line! Excellent.

Now for those that like reality, try to ride the Division 4 bus ruding rush hour for a taste of what Portland-style BRT is like. Bus bunching, 45 minutes late on a 10 mile route, and 200+ people waiting at each stop! Yeah... sounds great! Sorry, I prefer trains for high-capacity lines.

[tworivers]

Sure we need a new solution, but where are Oregon and Washington going to get a billion each to fix arguably one of the most important crossings in the PacNW?

I'm sure the Feds will find a way to fund this thing. With the new Democratic majority in power, it should be considerably easier. Talk about a multi-year construction nightmare, though.

The BRT will not happen. I suspect that there is some sort of required "alternatives" analysis as part of the funding effort. Either that or they want to at least placate the folks in WA who oppose light rail, particularly anything over the border that will be administered by Tri-met. But it won't get beyond this stage of study, for all the obvious reasons.

Personally, I was warm to the idea of a new arterial bridge to the west of the current one, with light rail et al, that would remove local traffic from the 5. It would be far cheaper, for one thing. But I think the powers-that-be had a brand new bridge in mind from the start, and I also think there were significant issues around height for any arterial bridge.

[zilfondel]

Here's an interesting take:

Entire max system to date costs how much? Around $2 billion?

One highway bridge across the Columbia serving only a few ten's of thousands of drivers? same price.

'Nuff said.

[mcbaby]

BRT, especially when combined with HOT lanes is WAY better than LR.

HOT lanes would still require widening the freeway. my point is since the lightrail already serves the Expo Center, it only has 2.5 miles to go before reaching downtown Vancouver. it's about 8 miles between vancouver and portlands downtowns and at least 5 miles would have to be widened. not cheap. it would be a whole new expense to put in BRT when LRT is already serving most of the corridor.

[bvpcvm]

Personally, I was warm to the idea of a new arterial bridge to the west of the current one, with light rail et al, that would remove local traffic from the 5. It would be far cheaper, for one thing. But I think the powers-that-be had a brand new bridge in mind from the start, and I also think there were significant issues around height for any arterial bridge.

Whether they ever replace the bridge or not, a local-access-only bridge, at least from the OR side to Hayden Island is desparately needed.

[Urbanpdx]

Here's an interesting take:

Entire max system to date costs how much? Around $2 billion?

One highway bridge across the Columbia serving only a few ten's of thousands of drivers? same price.

'Nuff said.

It would take 5 MAX lines to equal just one extra freeway lane (Calculated from FTA and FHWA data) and that does not include freight. I-5 is a MAJOR freight corridor.

Over 125,000 vehicles per day cross that bridge, over 10,000 of those are trucks. How many people ride the entire MAX system every day?

[alexjon]

Regarding the steel bridge-- I think they should make the eastside streetcar with at least a bit of deep track just in case the MAX needs to use it... drop in a crossing mid-span for emergency purposes, and there you go

[westsider]

Over 125,000 vehicles per day cross that bridge, over 10,000 of those are trucks. How many people ride the entire MAX system every day?

Trimet claims 73000 originating rides per day in 2005 and 87500 total boardings per day. As clark county keeps growing there will be many more trips over the bridge in the near future than today, even with growth in the local job market.

[zilfondel]

It would take 5 MAX lines to equal just one extra freeway lane (Calculated from FTA and FHWA data) and that does not include freight. I-5 is a MAJOR freight corridor.

Over 125,000 vehicles per day cross that bridge, over 10,000 of those are trucks. How many people ride the entire MAX system every day?

Dude, let's not go there. If you want to argue numbers of traffic capacity, go to portlandtransport.com

Skyscraperpage is not the correct forum to debate this kind of shit on, and - as most people here are pro-urban, big cities, and big-ticket transit systems, it is hardly appropriate to hijack entire discussion threads for whatever libertarian crusade you're on.

[zilfondel]

I am going to respond to what's been falsely claimed, however.

Trimet claims 73000 originating rides per day in 2005 and 87500 total boardings per day. As clark county keeps growing there will be many more trips over the bridge in the near future than today, even with growth in the local job market.

According to Trimet's statistics for 2006 (http://www.trimet.org/pdfs/publications/factsheet.pdf), MAX is averaging 99,800 boardings per weekday.

Also, "MAX carries 26% of afternoon rush-hour commuters traveling from downtown on the Sunset Hwy. and Banfield Fwy. corridors."

[Urbanpdx]

Dude, let's not go there. If you want to argue numbers of traffic capacity, go to portlandtransport.com

Skyscraperpage is not the correct forum to debate this kind of shit on, and - as most people here are pro-urban, big cities, and big-ticket transit systems, it is hardly appropriate to hijack entire discussion threads for whatever libertarian crusade you're on.


This was a response to Zilfondel. I don't think that is a hijack...

[Urbanpdx]

http://www.portlandalliance.com/pdf/2005census.pdf

Portland Business Alliance's latest survey.

Note that light rail’s market share for downtown commuters dropped by 30% over the past 5 years. Remember that 2 new Max lines opened during that period! Amazing.

[westsider]

www.trimet.org/pdfs/ridership/busmaxstat.pdf+trimet+ridership+figures&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3


Thats were I got those figures from. Wasnt trying to argue, just a response to the question.

[alexjon]

I am going to respond to what's been falsely claimed, however.



According to Trimet's statistics for 2006 (http://www.trimet.org/pdfs/publications/factsheet.pdf), MAX is averaging 99,800 boardings per weekday.

Also, "MAX carries 26% of afternoon rush-hour commuters traveling from downtown on the Sunset Hwy. and Banfield Fwy. corridors."

That's a logistically sound rationalization for the east/westside MAX, which leads me to believe that TriMet just *might* know what they're doing with the south corridor and potential expansion to vancouver.

Especially with washington and oregon on board...

[mcbaby]

if max went to vancouver, imagine how many people would opt to ride it rather than take the freeway. the freeway is the only link for most people in clark county to portland. we definitely need a new bridge but light rail should be part of the mix. to widen the freeway would be great but for how long? it needs to be widened just to accomodate the existing traffic. to just make it a BRT lane would be foolish. to allow the MAX to stop just short of vancouver is foolish as well.

[Drmyeyes]

"Note that light rail’s market share for downtown commuters dropped by 30% over the past 5 years. Remember that 2 new Max lines opened during that period! Amazing.". UrbanPdx.

Uh-huh. Interesting census, conducted, as measuring implements such as these often are, completely from the PBA's point of view. To the minds of their members, downtown, even possibly the entire metro area and it's infrastructure, exists to serve the prosperity of the business community.

Of course, tri-met and their censuses are also likely to be biased. I am not inclined to get too excited about any individual authority such censuses might claim. On a collective level, they may offer a constructive contribution.

It's worth anybody's effort that wants to seriously rely on statistics derived from censuses, to study them closely; the science that the're based on and the specifics relating to how the particular census in question is conducted.

[mcbaby]

just get on the dang max and see for yourself. it's always full. it bothers me when people look at statistics rather than see for themselves. from my experience, portland has a large amount of transit riders compared to other cities. i've lived all along the west coast and been to the east coast and south west. with gas prices more people are taking public transport. go check it out for yourself. lets make it more efficient while we're at it.

[Urbanpdx]

maybe it is only counting people who pay

[pdxman]

maybe it is only counting people who pay
Which is almost nobody...

[PacificNW]

Just a thought: Tri-Met could redesign their passenger platforms as secure islands where a passenger only gains access with a token and eliminate fareless square.

For those with limited means there could be programs that allow them to pay something for their fare. For those who are attending a convention center event a part of their admission could be for the fare on MAX. Metro and Tri-Met could be working more closely together to resolve the needs of the "whole community" regarding MAX and bus service.

[Drmyeyes]

Do not eliminate Fareless Square. Many people of limited means rely on this service to get to and from work, school, and home. Trimet simply needs a more effective fare payment management system to ensure that those who should be paying, do.

[tworivers]

Transit projects running on empty

$10 billion wish list - A group is updating a 20-year spending blueprint because "the old model won't work"

Monday, November 27, 2006
JAMES MAYER

Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder likes to provoke conversation about reshaping the Portland area's $10 billion wish list for transportation projects with this startling statement:

"Every penny we spend on transportation is wasted."

Burkholder, a former bike advocate, chairs the powerful Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation, known as JPACT, that helps Metro decide how state and federal transportation money is spent in the region. The group is rewriting the 20-year spending blueprint known as the Regional Transportation Plan, a federal requirement to be completed next November.

Metro estimates that the state's 24 cent gas tax, last increased in 1993, would have to be raised $1.40 a gallon to pay for everything in the current plan. That's clearly a fantasy, Burkholder says, and he wants to bring a dose of reality to the process.

He doesn't really want to halt all transportation projects, but he starts with the premise that the least expensive solution is avoiding travel completely.

The region faces a viselike squeeze with a million more residents on the way, needs that vary from more bike lanes in Portland to more highway lanes in Washington County, and far less money available to pay for it all.

After years of thinning the soup to keep everyone happy, there's very little meat left. "We're down to fumes," says Washington County Commissioner Roy Rogers, a veteran of many years on JPACT.

"The old model won't work," Burkholder agrees.

But changing the JPACT political culture won't be easy, and there's no consensus on how to go about it.

The old model was based on cheap land and a steady flow of federal highway and transit money. The entire freeway network fits this model. Interstate 205, completed in 1982, was the last freeway built in Oregon.

"We could actually meet the needs of a population that had to drive everywhere. We built this huge system," Burkholder says.

But the money available now is barely enough to maintain that system, much less build anything new, and it's clear that people aren't willing to pay higher taxes, he says.

Bridges' repairs tap funds

The current version of the plan, approved in 2004, lists more than 900 projects, totaling $10.4 billion, ranging from $512 million for the proposed Sunrise Highway in Clackamas County to $5,775 for a bikeway on Portland Avenue in Gladstone.

The plan also includes a "financially constrained" list of 527 more essential projects with a total price tag of $4.2 billion. The list includes $515 million to extend light rail to Milwaukie.

But Burkholder says even that 2004 "constrained" figure was based on a 1 cent annual gas tax increase. Not only has that not happened -- voters overwhelmingly rejected a nickel increase in 2000 -- the amount available for new projects is even less because it will be needed to pay the debt for the state $1.3 billion bridge repair program.

"Given these resources, what are we capable of doing?" he asks. "Is it enough? And can we do things differently?"

Burkholder says meetings with neighborhood associations, business leaders, and environmentalists have revealed a desire for more compact development along the lines of the Pearl District or the proposed high-density community in the Tanasbourne area as the best way to stretch the transportation dollar.

If people can live near where they work, and walk and bike more, it can free up space on the highways for freight and necessary travel, he says.

Burkholder says he expects the revamped project list to be smaller. Projects that survive will meet these criteria: clean air, safe and pleasant neighborhoods, reliable -- if not necessarily speedy -- commutes, and freight reliability.

Clackamas County Commissioner Bill Kennemer, a JPACT member, says he's worried Metro is thinking too small.

"I think we should have audacious goals, not timid goals," he says.

Congestion hurts livability

Clackamas County is expected to absorb much of the population growth in the coming decades, Kennemer says, particularly in the Happy Valley-Damascus area, and it needs roads and other infrastructure to handle it.

He believes the region might support a gas tax increase for transportation if it was sold correctly, pointing out how well money measures for schools and law enforcement did in typically tax-averse Clackamas County in the recent election.

Congestion hurts livability, the region's most precious resource, Kennemer says.

"I don't think less is going to be acceptable," he says.

Measure 37, which changed the land-use planning landscape, throws transportation planners a curve as well, Kennemer says.

Clackamas County has added 20,000 acres of potentially developable land through Measure 37 claims, and no one knows how that will affect transportation.

Washington County's Rogers says there's a more fundamental political problem: There is no regional system, and that makes it hard for regional government to be accountable. There are state highways and county roads and city streets. But Metro doesn't own an inch of pavement or operate any buses or trains, and yet the regional government decides how the money will be spent.

Metro does a valiant job of trying to get people to work together, "but it's hard to do when you don't know what the mission or the product is," Rogers says.

Burkholder says he knows his efforts to change the way the region's political leaders approach transportation planning face a long road ahead.

But he comes back to the cost of a system that forces people to drive.

"People making $40,000 a year or less are now spending more on transportation than on housing. Is that a good idea? Every trip avoided is actually money in my pocket."

James Mayer: 503-294-4109; jimmayer@news.oregonian.com

[zilfondel]

maybe it is only counting people who pay

That works bloody well, as most people use monthly/trimonthly transit passes! Only occasional bus riders actually pay when they board; its such a pain in the ass - and costs more money if you pay per ride, as well.

[65MAX]

MAX trains may have nowhere to go but down

from The Portland Tribune 7.9 hours ago

Portland’s MAX trains may “need to go to another level,” said Portland Planning Director Gil Kelley. “Literally another level — below.”

It used to be that local officials derided Portland subway advocates as kooks — but no longer.

In another 15 or 20 years, Kelley said, “At least in the central city, I think we’re going to have to put light rail underground, and under the river.”

Kelley’s is not a new thought — it’s been bubbling around for 20 years.

But the more time goes by, advocates contend, the more it makes sense. Our transit system is nearing the time when it just can’t handle the need.

While TriMet General Manager Fred Hansen believes the current system can handle demand for the next 20 years, others are highly skeptical. Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder has said he thinks it could max out in a decade or less.

The problem is not abstract. It’s about space.

The most obvious problem: downtown blocks that are 200 feet long. Because of earlier decisions to run trains on city streets downtown, that means we’re stuck with two-car train maximums.

To meet future demand, it’s widely accepted that four-car trains will be needed.

Second, there is a problem with the Steel Bridge, over which all light-rail trains must pass.

In theory, it can handle 30 train crossings in an hour, but some transit advocates don’t believe it — and even TriMet officials seem unsure. Hansen recently said it would need some ramp work to be “assured of” handling 29 trains.

Kelley said he hopes to find money to start looking at the idea in the coming year. Given a future with a lot more people, more jobs and congestion downtown, “we’ve got to at least examine it,”he said.

— Nick Budnick


“we’ve got to at least examine it,” ...... gee, ya think?

It's about damn time.

[alexjon]

OK, either MAX is doomed or needs an overhaul-- which is it?!

I say they should just get rid of MAX altogether and use the rail for scrap. Lay road through the Robertson and put in BRT. Saves money, is more efficient, more environmentally friendly, and the complaints about the MAX will go down to zero.

[PacificNW]

Contrary to what I have posted in the past concerning MAX/Subway: If they come up with a plan to place the subway below the surface in dt PDX, as well as under the river I support the concept.

It appears that PDX is reaching that critical mass of people/jobs that new MAX options (including subway and/or new river crossings) must be studied and BUILT.

Portland is growing whether people like it, or not.

[bvpcvm]

OK, either MAX is doomed or needs an overhaul-- which is it?!

I say they should just get rid of MAX altogether and use the rail for scrap. Lay road through the Robertson and put in BRT. Saves money, is more efficient, more environmentally friendly, and the complaints about the MAX will go down to zero.

Excellent suggestion. And while we're at it, let's get rid of that money-pit, I-5 North. When was the last time it turned a profit? Never. It seems like it's just endless subsidies to repair or repave it. And what do I get out of it? Given that my McMansion is in Happy Valley, I make use of it about 0.5% of the time - so it's useless. Just bury it! Imagine all the subdivisions that could be built!

[pdxman]

So, i guess trimet thinks that no one uses buses after 9 because you can't catch a bus out of downtown to SW unless you wait 1/2 an hour. I can walk from nw portland to my place in sw(near ohsu) faster than a bus can take me there after dark, plus the streetcar becomes superfluous after 9 too. Does anyone else have problems with post 9 o'clock bus travel? Unless you live near a max line you're pretty much screwed. Am i just crazy for thinking trimet should have a little more frequency on buses after 9?

[zilfondel]

OK, either MAX is doomed or needs an overhaul-- which is it?!

I say they should just get rid of MAX altogether and use the rail for scrap. Lay road through the Robertson and put in BRT. Saves money, is more efficient, more environmentally friendly, and the complaints about the MAX will go down to zero.

I hereby proclaim that unless you actually ride the MAX (on a regular basis), please STFU regarding it, ok? This shit just gets really old.

Not to get on your case, alexjon, as I'm going to assume that you are tongue-in-cheek here.

[zilfondel]

So, i guess trimet thinks that no one uses buses after 9 because you can't catch a bus out of downtown to SW unless you wait 1/2 an hour. I can walk from nw portland to my place in sw(near ohsu) faster than a bus can take me there after dark, plus the streetcar becomes superfluous after 9 too. Does anyone else have problems with post 9 o'clock bus travel? Unless you live near a max line you're pretty much screwed. Am i just crazy for thinking trimet should have a little more frequency on buses after 9?

Here's what normal people do: since the buses come... every 30 minutes... wait for it here! Almost... ok: memorize the schedule! Night buses (even in London and other big cities) don't come as often as regular buses, but typically come at the same time every 30 minutes. That's right - for instance:

9:32 pm
10:02 pm
10:32 pm
11:02 pm

Since you now know the schedule beforehand, check your watch and time your arrival at the stop to minimize waiting.

Side note: night buses to SW Portland are usually packed with all seats taken, so its not like they aren't getting riders. But isn't this more efficient anyway?

[pdxtex]

So, i guess trimet thinks that no one uses buses after 9 because you can't catch a bus out of downtown to SW unless you wait 1/2 an hour. I can walk from nw portland to my place in sw(near ohsu) faster than a bus can take me there after dark, plus the streetcar becomes superfluous after 9 too. Does anyone else have problems with post 9 o'clock bus travel? Unless you live near a max line you're pretty much screwed. Am i just crazy for thinking trimet should have a little more frequency on buses after 9?

half an hour between buses is not unreasonable i would say. buses that run more frequently then that are on routes with consistantly high ridership, ie, powell, hawthorne, burnside. if you live near ohsu then half hour increments sounds reasonable. get a bike and make that 30 min walking commute in ten.

[pdxman]

It just seems like everything leaves right as i get there, which is incredibly annoying. I'm basically walk/running to get to the mall and then its a 30 minute wait, which at that point i can just walk. But, i'd rather catch a bus. The weird thing is is that there are like 4-5 lines i can choose from all of them are like 30-45 minutes away--bad luck i guess. And pdxtex, i'm working on that bike(money)

[MarkDaMan]

It was my assumption that new MAX lines will last, without much needed repair, for over 50 years. So, we spend buckets of money to lay tracks through downtown only to bury the system in the next 15 to 20 years? Seems a bit of a waste.

[Urbanpdx]

OK, either MAX is doomed or needs an overhaul-- which is it?!

I say they should just get rid of MAX altogether and use the rail for scrap. Lay road through the Robertson and put in BRT. Saves money, is more efficient, more environmentally friendly, and the complaints about the MAX will go down to zero.

That has been considered, it is an old article but still makes some sense:

Pave eastside MAX line, run buses on it

by John A. Charles

Last weekend, Tri-Met celebrated the opening of westside light rail. The westside line offers what the eastside did not: an opportunity to take vast tracts of undeveloped land and create high-density communities concurrent with rail construction. While this concept is unlikely to work, rail proponents will at least have a chance to empirically test their so-called "Field of Dreams" theory.

Meanwhile, we should admit that building light rail into mostly suburban neighborhoods on the eastside has been a failure, and move on to a better idea: paving over the line and turning the MAX right-of-way into a peak-direction busway.

Why should we replace the MAX line? Because light rail is slow, crowded, and inefficient. The maximum service that Tri-Met has ever been able to provide is 10 trips per hour, one-way. With 72 seats per car, in a two-car train, light rail moves 1,440 seated passengers per hour. Even adding in the 30 or so standing passengers typically riding in each peak-period car, the maximum hourly ridership is only about 2,040.

The nation's busiest highway bus lane — the Rt. 495 busway entering New York's Lincoln Tunnel from New Jersey — routinely carries 35,000 people per peak-hour, and most of these people are seated. This is 17.2 times more passengers than MAX per hour.

Furthermore, if eastside MAX is eventually forced to share the Steel Bridge tracks with south/north light rail — as currently planned by Tri-Met — the 10 trips per hour will have to be cut back because of operational limits. Thus, there is no potential for peak ridership growth on eastside light rail; it is already "maxed out".

Even non-freeway busways are supperior to MAX, as evidenced by the Portland Transit Mall. The bus mall currently carries 158 buses per hour on 5th Avenue at the afternoon peak. With an average seating capacity of approximately 44 seats per bus, this part of the transit mall offers service for 6,952 passengers — 4.8 times more than MAX during the comparable period.

A key part of the problem is that rail tracks are inherently under-utilized, relative to roadway lanes. Tri-Met only runs 115 trains per weekday on each track, and no other transit vendors have access to the right-of-way. This means that the MAX tracks are unused 99.3% of the time. In contrast, busways can be used by more than 700 vehicles per hour, 24 hours per day, if necessary.

Since congestion on the Banfield is getting worse, and there is no room to expand it, the best transit strategy would be to convert the MAX right-of-way into an exclusive, two-lane busway with reversible lanes — westbound in the morning, and eastbound in the afternoon. That way, transit vehicles could offer both express and local service, which would be a major improvement over the MAX local.

Converting the MAX line to an exclusive busway would cut the Gateway-to-downtown travel time for transit commuters from 21 minutes on MAX to about 10 minutes by bus. This would make transit much more competitive with auto travel. If the legislature simultaneously eliminated the Tri-Met monopoly on bus service, the potential for transit would be huge. Private vendors would create niche markets with such amenities as reclining seats, on-board television, and door-to-door service.

Construction costs for a busway would be relatively modest, especially compared to expanded light rail service. The city of Curitaba, Brazil — widely acclaimed as an international transit leader -- built a high-speed, 37-mile busway system for less than 5% of the cost of comparable light rail. The busway carries some 1.3 million passengers a day in a city of 1.6 million, using 2,000 privately-operated buses. There is not a light rail system anywhere in North America that can match the cost-effectiveness of this approach.

The central lesson of our 12-year test of eastside light rail is this: MAX is not high capacity transit; it's high-cost transit. It's time to recognize the difference.

[Urbanpdx]

OK, either MAX is doomed or needs an overhaul-- which is it?!

I say they should just get rid of MAX altogether and use the rail for scrap. Lay road through the Robertson and put in BRT. Saves money, is more efficient, more environmentally friendly, and the complaints about the MAX will go down to zero.

That has been considered, it is an old article but still makes some sense:

Pave eastside MAX line, run buses on it

by John A. Charles

Last weekend, Tri-Met celebrated the opening of westside light rail. The westside line offers what the eastside did not: an opportunity to take vast tracts of undeveloped land and create high-density communities concurrent with rail construction. While this concept is unlikely to work, rail proponents will at least have a chance to empirically test their so-called "Field of Dreams" theory.

Meanwhile, we should admit that building light rail into mostly suburban neighborhoods on the eastside has been a failure, and move on to a better idea: paving over the line and turning the MAX right-of-way into a peak-direction busway.

Why should we replace the MAX line? Because light rail is slow, crowded, and inefficient. The maximum service that Tri-Met has ever been able to provide is 10 trips per hour, one-way. With 72 seats per car, in a two-car train, light rail moves 1,440 seated passengers per hour. Even adding in the 30 or so standing passengers typically riding in each peak-period car, the maximum hourly ridership is only about 2,040.

The nation's busiest highway bus lane — the Rt. 495 busway entering New York's Lincoln Tunnel from New Jersey — routinely carries 35,000 people per peak-hour, and most of these people are seated. This is 17.2 times more passengers than MAX per hour.

Furthermore, if eastside MAX is eventually forced to share the Steel Bridge tracks with south/north light rail — as currently planned by Tri-Met — the 10 trips per hour will have to be cut back because of operational limits. Thus, there is no potential for peak ridership growth on eastside light rail; it is already "maxed out".

Even non-freeway busways are supperior to MAX, as evidenced by the Portland Transit Mall. The bus mall currently carries 158 buses per hour on 5th Avenue at the afternoon peak. With an average seating capacity of approximately 44 seats per bus, this part of the transit mall offers service for 6,952 passengers — 4.8 times more than MAX during the comparable period.

A key part of the problem is that rail tracks are inherently under-utilized, relative to roadway lanes. Tri-Met only runs 115 trains per weekday on each track, and no other transit vendors have access to the right-of-way. This means that the MAX tracks are unused 99.3% of the time. In contrast, busways can be used by more than 700 vehicles per hour, 24 hours per day, if necessary.

Since congestion on the Banfield is getting worse, and there is no room to expand it, the best transit strategy would be to convert the MAX right-of-way into an exclusive, two-lane busway with reversible lanes — westbound in the morning, and eastbound in the afternoon. That way, transit vehicles could offer both express and local service, which would be a major improvement over the MAX local.

Converting the MAX line to an exclusive busway would cut the Gateway-to-downtown travel time for transit commuters from 21 minutes on MAX to about 10 minutes by bus. This would make transit much more competitive with auto travel. If the legislature simultaneously eliminated the Tri-Met monopoly on bus service, the potential for transit would be huge. Private vendors would create niche markets with such amenities as reclining seats, on-board television, and door-to-door service.

Construction costs for a busway would be relatively modest, especially compared to expanded light rail service. The city of Curitaba, Brazil — widely acclaimed as an international transit leader -- built a high-speed, 37-mile busway system for less than 5% of the cost of comparable light rail. The busway carries some 1.3 million passengers a day in a city of 1.6 million, using 2,000 privately-operated buses. There is not a light rail system anywhere in North America that can match the cost-effectiveness of this approach.

The central lesson of our 12-year test of eastside light rail is this: MAX is not high capacity transit; it's high-cost transit. It's time to recognize the difference.

[Drmyeyes]

Mr. Charles idea is just poorly thought out, simplistic thinking. However, just in case there's a remote chance his idea has a possibility of working, let's have him show us any studies he's made that will explain how anything approaching 700 busses per hour and 35,000 people per peak hour on a paved east side light rail track will actually work.

"....the best transit strategy would be to convert the MAX right-of-way into an exclusive, two-lane busway with reversible lanes — westbound in the morning, and eastbound in the afternoon.". So they get to the end of the line. Then what?

At the end of the line, will all those busses enter into the regular street grid? Going where, doing what? How will the city's current or future infrastructure support such volume, if it is in fact possible to acheive it by this means?

Busses on the Steel Bridge would also be impacted by north-south traffic.

A major factor limiting the efficiency of light rail downtown, is that it has to coexist with cars, busses, and trucks.

[zilfondel]

I somehow doubt this is feasible, or appropriate. Gresham has a population of 94,000 people. Do we really need a transit system capable of moving the entire city in under 3 hours? Probably not.

Secondly, 35,000 ppl/hour on buses equates to 700 buses a minute each carrying 50 people, or 12 buses/minute: a completely full bus every 5 seconds. Since bunching on busy lines such as the 12 and 4 are already a serious problem, how would these buses stop to pick anyone up? You'd end up with a line of over 700 buses stuck in their own traffic. Not that they'd actually be carrying anyone, mind you.

Thirdly, one hour's worth of buses on one line would equal the entire bus driver force of Trimet. And buses don't last as long as a train does.

Lastly, 700 buses would cost approximately $140 million (@ $200k each) and would need to be replaced every 10 years.

[zilfondel]

New topic!

Since we're getting commuter rail to extend 1/3 of the way to Salem, when do you guys think the other 2/3 of the way will come online? If you look at google, there's already tracks that extend clear to the train station in downtown Salem. This stuff shouldn't cost too much money.

[MarkDaMan]

^there's rumbling in the Democratic House that they will be pushing for an extension of the Commuter Rail in this next session (and since the Portland delegation is huge, and would benefit from the extension, it appears possible). It also appears the state is up something like $3 Billion over the last biennium so I'd expect more transportation funding. The governor also is pushing to extend his special transportation funding (I can't think of the name they gave it) that brought us the massive ongoing bridge repair and a smaller hundred million dollars or so for the transportation package last session.

[pdxman]

Since we're getting commuter rail to extend 1/3 of the way to Salem, when do you guys think the other 2/3 of the way will come online? If you look at google, there's already tracks that extend clear to the train station in downtown Salem. This stuff shouldn't cost too much money.
I read in the statesman journal months ago about a plan for the boise site that is on the riverfront in DT salem. Boise wants to move the building closer to their other one in the industrial area and the city is hoping to buy that building and turn it into a mixed use project with a trader joes. Anyways, this all leads to commuter rail because there are tracks(which i believe connect to the ones with the commuter rail) that run right along the riverfront park up to the boise building and their was mention of putting a station for future commuter rail there. It makes more sense than running it to the other train station where it would tangle with amtrak and freight trains. It will be great if/when this gets done;the train would pull up right in DT next to the park and across from the conference center.

[65MAX]

That has been considered, it is an old article but still makes some sense:

Pave eastside MAX line, run buses on it

by John A. Charles

Last weekend, ....... blah, blah, blah,.......

Even non-freeway busways are supperior to MAX, (is that like dinnerior?)......

bs, bs, bs,......

flawed comparison to Curitaba, Brazil (it's Curitiba, btw).....

blah, blah, blah......

A genius, that Mr. Charles. Do people actually believe this crap?

[Bender13]

I'm wondering about the commuter rail. If Trimet starts to get serious about an extension to Salem, I don't think they would just leave it as line from Salem to Beaverton. A line from Salem to Portland makes more sense but I don't know if there are existing tracks that could be used for that route.

[bvpcvm]

^ tracks that go from salem to portland exist, but union pacific would be loath to let more passenger trains run on them - there's already a bottleneck where trains turn sharply and cross the steel bridge (or so i've heard).

^^^ i no longer work in salem (yay!!!!) but one thing to keep in mind is that most of the people who would be commuting down there are state employees. unfortunately, the government ghetto is probably a half mile from where those tracks pass by downtown (i'm talking about the tracks that continue on from wilsonville). as it is, it seems like for most of my (former!) coworkers, even walking from the ghetto to downtown for lunch on a nice day is beyond the pale - to say nothing of walking in the early morning cold rain on a daily basis. so while i'd love to see a way around that horrible slog - and i'd definitely take advantage of it myself if i was ever cursed with working down there again - i have my doubts.

[65MAX]

I'm wondering about the commuter rail. If Trimet starts to get serious about an extension to Salem, I don't think they would just leave it as line from Salem to Beaverton. A line from Salem to Portland makes more sense but I don't know if there are existing tracks that could be used for that route.

Yes there is, what do you think Amtrak uses?

[pdxtex]

^ tracks that go from salem to portland exist, but union pacific would be loath to let more passenger trains run on them - there's already a bottleneck where trains turn sharply and cross the steel bridge (or so i've heard).

^^^ i no longer work in salem (yay!!!!) but one thing to keep in mind is that most of the people who would be commuting down there are state employees. unfortunately, the government ghetto is probably a half mile from where those tracks pass by downtown (i'm talking about the tracks that continue on from wilsonville). as it is, it seems like for most of my (former!) coworkers, even walking from the ghetto to downtown for lunch on a nice day is beyond the pale - to say nothing of walking in the early morning cold rain on a daily basis. so while i'd love to see a way around that horrible slog - and i'd definitely take advantage of it myself if i was ever cursed with working down there again - i have my doubts.


the whole cooridor through oregon is a bottleneck as far as i can tell. since union pacific owns the tracks, commercial freight going in either direction gets the right of way. its not uncommon to wait half an hour on some side tracks while the amtrak is yielding to an oncomming freight train.:(

[bvpcvm]

i've long thought a streetcar line down burnside would be an excellent idea..........

http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=116527640480134700

Traffic plans are ready for unveiling
Citizens will see ideas for I-5 bridge, couplet for Burnside, Couch streets

By Jim Redden

The Portland Tribune 14.9 hours ago


Portlanders will get their first formal look at two major and potentially controversial transportation projects today.

City Commissioner Sam Adams will unveil his proposal for rerouting traffic on West Burnside and Northwest Couch streets at a morning news conference. Adams will propose running one-way traffic on each street between Northwest Second and 19th avenues.

He also will call for building a new Portland Streetcar line along the route from Northwest 24th Avenue – and then running it across the Burnside Bridge to a similar new Burnside-Couch couplet on the east side of the Willamette River.

“Streetcars are development-oriented transit, and this project could spur millions of dollars of private investments along the street,” said Adams, noting that Portland once had several streetcar lines, including one that ran over the Burnside Bridge in the 1930s.

The next step is for the public to weigh in on the proposal, after which Adams will ask the City Council to approve a formal, detailed study.

The second project to be discussed today is much bigger – the replacement Interstate 5 bridge over the Columbia River. The current recommendations for the project will be presented to the Metro Council during a 2 p.m. work session at the agency’s headquarters, located at 600 N.E. Grand Ave.

Metro, the regional government charged with managing growth in the tricounty area, must approve the work on the Oregon side for the project to proceed.

The Columbia River Crossing task force approved the staff recommendations last Wednesday evening. It called for the existing bridge to be replaced with a far larger structure that also would accommodate a yet-to-be-determined mix of light-rail trains and express-bus lanes between Portland and Vancouver, Wash.

“There are a lot of concerns that need to be addressed,” said Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder, who serves on the task force and made the motion to accept the recommendations.

Bridge could be pricey
Adams said the westside Burnside-Couch couplet project could cost $80 million or more, with half the money for the road work and half for the streetcar. Much of the funding could come from the Portland Development Commission, Adams said.

The replacement I-5 bridge would be much more expensive, making it more potentially problematic. Although Burkholder said he considers a large replacement bridge the only logical option, Metro Councilor Robert Liberty – who does not serve on the task force – already is preparing to question why the staff believes it is necessary.

“People say you have to sometimes take things on faith, but when you’re talking about $2 billion or more, I’m not going to take anything on faith,” Liberty said.

The task force will not formally approve the options for detailed study until February. Even so, there is no doubt that bridge-area congestion is a serious problem – a problem that only will grow worse as an expected 1 million more people move to the region over the next two decades.

Wednesday’s staff presentation painted a grim picture of future travel over the bridge unless action is taken. According to the presentation, the population growth will increase the number of trips over the bridge from around 130,000 per day to 180,000 per day by 2030.

The resulting congestion will create rush-hour-level traffic for most of each workday. Delays of a half-hour of more will become common because of increasing accidents caused by too many vehicles trying to use a hopelessly insufficient and outdated bridge.

One option rejected by the staff was keeping the existing bridge and building a smaller supplemental bridge to carry light-rail trains, express buses and short vehicle traffic between Portland and Vancouver.

TriMet also balked at the idea, arguing that such a bridge would need a lift span to allow river traffic to cross under it – the same structural flaw that causes frequent and lengthy delays on the I-5 bridge.

Multnomah County Commissioner and task force member Serena Cruz said public support for a supplemental bridge could prompt the task force to approve further study of it, however.

Progress is a good thing
After the task force accepted the staff recommendations, co-chair Hal Dengerink called the unanimous vote a major step forward in a process that began more than five years ago with preliminary studies of growing congestion on the bridge.

“We’ve accomplished a lot,” said Dengerink, the chancellor of Washington State University’s Vancouver campus.

Much work remains to be done, however. An indication of the unfinished work surfaced at the very end of the meeting when Adams and Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard – both of whom serve on the task force – asked that an urban design committee be formed to ensure the new bridge fits into the communities it will serve.

In making the request, Pollard said that the current interchanges in Vancouver to the I-5 bridge cut the city in half when they were first built more than 50 years ago.

Although Pollard does not expect the new bridge to undo that damage, he believes it can be designed to minimize future harm and perhaps even free land for redevelopment.

The task force unanimously approved creating the design committee before adjourning.

jimredden@portlandtribune.com

more, from the oregonian:

a map: http://www.oregonlive.com/cgi-bin/prxy/accessor/nph-repository-cache.cgi/base/pdf_captions/1165287308190250.pdf

http://www.oregonlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news/1165289125239470.xml&coll=7

Adams forms plan to tame Burnside

Downtown - One-way traffic and a streetcar on Burnside and Couch could make the corridor less intimidating
Tuesday, December 05, 2006

JOSEPH ROSE
The Oregonian

Commissioner Sam Adams has taken an old idea to improve traffic through downtown Portland -- turning Burnside and Couch into a couplet of one-way streets -- and added a river-crossing streetcar line.

Nearly five years after City Hall began talking about one-way options along the West Burnside Street corridor, Adams will unveil a $39 million plan today that he says will vastly improve traffic and urban design in the city's core.

Traffic on Burnside would travel east, with westbound traffic diverted one block north to Northwest Couch Street from Second Avenue to 19th Avenue. Along the same stretch, Burnside would be shrunk to two lanes, with the other lanes converted to 240 parking spaces.

The streetcar line would follow the one-way streets before extending west five blocks to Northwest 24th Avenue and east across the Burnside Bridge to Northeast Sandy Boulevard.

Increasingly, City Hall sees Burnside Street as a barrier to drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists -- pretty much everyone trying to get around.

"This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to put the 'center' back in center city," Adams said, "and to bridge this divide between north and south."

But the project already has a small army of opponents.

Some Pearl District developers and residents have written to Adams, concerned that the plan would permanently damage the street environment.

Howard Shapiro, who lives in the Henry condominium tower in the Brewery Blocks, said diverting traffic onto Couch would move as many as 20,000 vehicles a day through an area that now has a tucked-in atmosphere of leisurely sidewalk dining and upscale shopping.

"It's an archaic and auto-focused solution that has been rejected in other cities," Shapiro said.

In Spokane, opponents note, the City Council is considering dismantling a 5-year-old couplet in the city center. Business owners have bemoaned a loss of business they attribute to lower traffic counts.

Downtown Portland, however, where traffic already flows on a series of interlinked one-way streets, isn't Spokane.

Barnes Ellis, a Henry resident who walks to work downtown, isn't convinced that Burnside needs fixing.

"This is a city," Ellis said, "and it's going to have busy streets."

It's not that simple, said Adams, the city's transportation commissioner.

For one thing, West Burnside is a nightmare for anyone trying to cross it on foot, he said. Five of the city's 10 most deadly intersections for pedestrians are on that street between Second Avenue and 19th Avenue.

A traffic analysis released earlier this year by consultant DKS Associates found that synchronized traffic lights and turn lanes on the proposed one-way streets would subtract about five minutes from the average westbound vehicle trip.

What's more, Adams says, the traffic lights, two-lane streets, increased parking and extended streetcar line would make the corridor easier to walk.

In 2002, the City Council approved the Burnside-Couch plan without the streetcar and continuing east of the Willamette River to East Burnside and 12th Avenue, only to decide later to re-examine the idea. At the time, the Planning Bureau urged the council to adopt less costly pedestrian enhancements along Burnside.

Urban design and traffic studies followed, with the plan Adams is pushing emerging as the preferred of 10 options.

With the streetcar in the mix, Adams' office thinks it can rally the financial assistance and political support needed to push the project forward.

"Even some who were reluctant before are now on board with the streetcar option," said Roland Chlapowski, Adams' chief transportation policy adviser. "It boosts the potential for development."

Michael Powell of Powell's City of Books and parking king Greg Goodman are among the plan's supporters.

The plan calls for the street car line to extend west to Northwest 24th Avenue and east to Northeast 12th Avenue, where it would be in place to spark development along Sandy Boulevard to the Hollywood District.

Of course, there's the issue of money.

Adams said the $39 million price tag is an early estimate based on a number of studies. The next step would be a one-year preliminary engineering study, which the City Council could approve as early as January. Adams thinks he has the council's support to take that step. The study would firm up the cost.

Paying for it, Adams said, would take a combination of sources, from developers paying through local improvement districts to federal grants to revenue from parking meters.

He said $10 million from an existing urban renewal district already has been set aside.

A cost analysis by two independent consultants found that the city would save about $1.5 million by making the street improvements and building the streetcar line simultaneously.

"It makes sense to do it now," Adams said.

Joseph Rose: 503-221-8029;



©2006 The Oregonian

actually, looking at the map, i'm not so sure a streetcar would make sense if it didn't cross the river. and it should jog down next to the stadium and then return to burnside to make transfers easier.

[zilfondel]

This is like a 10-megaton bomb being dropped on the future plans for the city - talk about shaping things up! Note that Adams said the streetcar would likely follow AFTER the eastside loop and Lake Oswego extension; it isn't to replace them. Portland looks pretty well poised to rebuild its paved-over historical streetcar network. Pretty sweet stuff!

[der Reisender]

the Trib had the potential couplet price tag at $80 billion...seems a little high to me. very exciting stuff though, i like the idea of running a new line down to 12th/Burnside in east portland. though it seems like hawthorne really should be getting streetcar before even the CEID.

a question, does anyone know of any master plan the city or metro or trimet have for rail? it'd be great to have a big ol' map with streetcar, light rail, and even commuter rail extensions all drawn up, waiting to be filled in. plus it might give some developers incentive to buy/develop future parcels that would be near rail

[PacificNW]

80 billion? Hmmmm...

[bvpcvm]

i doubt trimet would publish much more than "future potential maybe high-capacity routes of some kind" like they have in the TIP. i remember back in 95 when the N/S LRT issue was being talked about and trimet or metro did put out a map with a few possible LRT lines, and, no surprise here, CPI etc went to town on it. it was a magnet for critics and i'll bet trimet/metro have learned their lesson.

[bvpcvm]

here's the map from today's Oregonian (obviously they screwed up and forgot the east end of the line):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y237/bvpcvm/burnsidestreetcarmap1.jpg

and here again, with a better connection to the max:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y237/bvpcvm/burnsidestreetcarmap2copy.jpg

[MarkDaMan]

Driving a streetcar through Portland's 'Berlin Wall'
by Kennedy Smith
12/06/2006


Portland Commissioner Sam Adams is gearing up to propose to City Council a transportation plan for turning Burnside and Couch streets into one-way avenues in a project that would also include a streetcar line along both streets. But the streetcar development’s feasibility will depend on whether Adams can drum up enough money to fund it.

“Four out of the city’s top 10 most dangerous intersections are right along West Burnside,” Adams said. “Burnside itself, because it is so busy and there’s no parking, it’s generally an unpleasant atmosphere; there are businesses that are just holding on and do most of their work from the side street. Burnside serves as a big Berlin Wall down the middle of the central city.”

The plan, which has been in the works for more than four years, will go to council in mid-January and will include a proposal to extend Burnside’s sidewalks to make them more “pedestrian-friendly” and transform the street into one-way auto lanes headed east, with Couch a one-way street headed west.

Further, the proposal includes erecting a streetcar along Burnside Street from 24th Place on the west side to 12th Avenue on the east.

However, roadblocks to Adams’ plans come in the form of opposition from some businesses in the Brewery Blocks and the fact that the streetcar proposal is third on a list of transportation priorities.

Streetcar plans

Preliminary studies of the Burnside-Couch couplet include a streetcar that would cross the river through Opus Development’s bridgehead project up to where Burnside meets 12th Avenue and Sandy Boulevard on the east side.

“From the point of view of reducing single-family occupancy trips, we think (the streetcar) is going to work well,” said Bill Hoffman, project manager with the Portland Office of Transportation. “It is tying the Northwest 23rd neighborhood in with Goose Hollow, and the Pearl District to Old Town/Chinatown.”

Portland Streetcar Inc., the agency that manages Portland’s streetcar system, is currently working on plans to build a streetcar from the Broadway Bridge to the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry on the east bank of the Willamette River – a project estimated to cost at least $169 million, according to a Portland Streetcar advisory committee’s study.

Its second priority is construction of a streetcar line from Portland to Lake Oswego, a project the regional government Metro has been studying.

The total cost for a westside streetcar would reach around $39 million, according to preliminary studies by Lloyd D. Lindley, a consultant on Adams’ proposal.

A Burnside streetcar, Adams said, “would go into the hopper for consideration with those,” so the city commissioner’s challenge is gathering enough funds to create the streetcar even though it’s lower than the other projects on Portland Streetcar’s list.

“Now, as with all visions, we have to go out and find the money,” he said. “There’s been $10,000 budgeted from the urban renewal districts that are adjacent to this, and I’m going to ask for consideration of expanding the River District (urban renewal area) to go up Burnside to help pay for the costs and to capture some of the redevelopment that I think will happen west of I-405 with this proposal.”

Adams said other opportunities for funding would come from 420 new parking meters along Burnside and Couch streets and federal funding secured by U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, who has already earmarked $5.2 million for the eastside Burnside-Couch couplet project.

Funding also could come in the form of newly taxable property in the area, Adams said. According to Adams’ study, property tax values would increase as much as $1.4 billion over 20 years, and payback on the streetcar could be achievable by the 15th year, based on current market conditions.

http://www.djc-or.com/viewStory.cfm?recid=28492&userID=1

[dfriedman]

I think Commissioner Adams' proposal to build a streetcar line on Burnside from NW 24th Place to the East Side is a terrific idea. Done properly, it would unite Northwest, the Pearl, Old Town, Downtown, and the East Side into a single, seamless urban district.

However, the Burnside Streetcar is years away. In the meantime, I would love to see the Commissioner work with Trimet to accomplish the following:

1. Extend "Frequent Service" status to the #20 Burnside bus. It's shocking to realize, but the #20 is not a "Frequent Service" line. (See: http://www.trimet.org/bus/frequentservice.htm)

2. Create a "Burnside Shuttle" that would operate at frequent intervals during peak hours along the route of the proposed Burnside Streetcar (24th Place to SE 12th). [Operation should extend well into the evening in order to promote greater night-time activity along the Burnside corridor and in order to create a heightened perception of safety by increasing the number of eyes on the street after dark.]

3. Extend Fareless Square to include the path of the #20 Burnside bus along the full route of the proposed Burnside Streetcar (NW 24th Place to SE 12th). [Like it or not, Fareless Square's current boundaries serve as an invisible barrier that reduces the interchange between Downtown and Northwest and between the East Side and Downtown, Northwest, and the Pearl. The result is a larger number of short-hop automobile trips and a reduction in the number of potential inter-district visits by tourists, shoppers, and diners.]

If Trimet implemented these measures as part of an integrated package of "Burnside Corridor" improvements, it would provide a real-life test of the development impact of the Burnside Streetcar. And, if the benefits are real (and I think they are), some of them could be realized right away rather than years down the road.

[pdxman]

I don't know how i feel about the streetcar running down burnside...with all the homeless people on burnside you're just asking for it to become a public toilet. There should definitely be one going out to hawthorne or LO before this tho. I also would rather see the interstate and 205 light rail run down mlk and grand out to milwaukee instead of a streetcar(it'd be tunneled in my dreams)

[Urbanpdx]

Driving a streetcar through Portland's 'Berlin Wall'

“Four out of the city’s top 10 most dangerous intersections are right along West Burnside,” Adams said.

http://www.djc-or.com/viewStory.cfm?recid=28492&userID=1


Doesn't he think that is mostly because of the number of drunken or drugged folks walking around there? Will a one-way street or trolley suddenly sober those people up?

[Urbanpdx]

I don't know how i feel about the streetcar running down burnside...with all the homeless people on burnside you're just asking for it to become a public toilet. There should definitely be one going out to hawthorne or LO before this tho. I also would rather see the interstate and 205 light rail run down mlk and grand out to milwaukee instead of a streetcar(it'd be tunneled in my dreams)

The current streetcar line serves the bums well. They get the fortified wine and free food down in Old Town and hop the Trolley up to 23rd to panhandle and hang out.

[MarkDaMan]

the homeless people will soon be seen in smaller numbers. There are a number of outreach services in Old Town/Burnside redeveloping their buildings, or building new. The city is now requiring all homeless service oriented businesses to provide waiting space inside their buildings. Many of the homeless people you see sitting on lower Burnside near the MAX stairway are there because they are waiting in a food line, or for a shelter to open their space.

I think for the Eastside line to be successful, it has to connect with the current line. A Burnside crossing seems to be completely logical as opposed to a Broadway Bridge and new Bridge near SoWa for the streetcar loop. The streetcar will also stimulate further development along Burnside improving the entire area. I think dfriedman, your suggestions are very pragmatic. I'd like to see TriMet implement them soon!

[MarkDaMan]

urbanpdx, the problems with homeless riding the streetcar seem a helluva lot less than the homeless riding through fareless square on the MAX. It doesn't make sense to hold Portland's development hostage because the line might attract homeless people. In reality, with the upgrades to Old Town/Chinatown, the Brewery Block crossing Burnside into the 'gay triangle' and the Burnside Bridgehead development, in five years we wont remember the Burnside we see today. That is why it is important to plan today for the changes taking place over the next few years.

[Urbanpdx]

Until we have real investment in Mental Health services and a new institution like the one that is now "Villabous" along with forced addiction treatment, the problem wont go away.

[MarkDaMan]

Governor Kulongoski's 07-09 budget already includes $80 million to begin that process...but this thread isn't about the mental health, it's about transit and the extension of the streetcar up Burnside, currently.

[Urbanpdx]

True but we got here by discussing why the transit system proposed might not do well and mental health is a factor. The opinions of many here make me think it may be more of a problem than any of us realize.

[cab]

I thought Reagun solved this years ago with his massive disinvenstment in public mental health services with the almighty private market as the obvious replacement. Where are the private answers Urbanpdx?

[zilfondel]

Doesn't he think that is mostly because of the number of drunken or drugged folks walking around there? Will a one-way street or trolley suddenly sober those people up?

I don't know. Just in this past year I have seen three pedestrians hit by cars on Burnside within a couple of blocks from Powell's; one of them was a girl walking down the street during Friday night clubbing hour when a car sideswiped her (sidewalk was too narrow and around 100+ people were passing each other in the road near Aura and Ringler's - this happens every week, however); and the other memorable one was a mother standing on the sidewalk with 3 children who was run over by a car across the street from Powell's around 4pm.

[pdxman]

The current streetcar line serves the bums well. They get the fortified wine and free food down in Old Town and hop the Trolley up to 23rd to panhandle and hang out.
I've already had MANY instances where a homeless guy will just camp out in a couple seats and and ride the streetcar until who knows when. Atleast two times the dude has been too drunk to even put together a sentence, and i had the fortunate experience of sitting in front of a homeless guy who was clearly passed out over an open beer can with the smell of beer stinking up the car. Its ridiculous and all of this is happening outside of fareless square. Honestly, it doesn't bother me--but when it starts to affect everyone on there and tourists then it bothers me. I won't get in to the larger debate of homelessness but when it comes to them (or anyone) free loading and exhibiting poor behaviours on public transit then it really begins to irk me. Thats my number 1 complaint about trimet-they have no balls to enforce ticketing on the max or streetcar. I guess they figure that since the government paid for most of it they don't care if it makes money or not. If the government were smart they'd hold transportation agencies accountable for making some sort of steady revenue when they're being federally funded. The honesty system doesn't work, unfortunately.

[MarkDaMan]

Having served a year on the TriMet's 'citizens committee on TriMet safety' I can tell you pdxman this is not TriMet's fault. TriMet's police budget is actually mostly municipally funded. TriMet will spend money on extra expenditures, such as the bomb sniffing dogs, but the Transit Police is a division of the Portland Police Bureau. Why they hire Wackenhut to actually ticket non compliance people, and not just get cops to ride the system, is beyond me and a frequent disagreement while I was on the committee.

TriMet does have a sophisticated under cover program. They have officers who really look homeless, street thugs, or drug dealers that solicit people they suspect. The TriMet police division even has a room that has nothing but thousands of clothing items from grungy blankets, to bling bling fake jewlery. They also have two detention cells under the garage. While fare evasion isn't a top priority, everyone did agreed that TriMet was taking the correct steps by going after the more serious, but fewer, major problem causers.