HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2010, 6:51 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,399
Quote:
Q&A: A conversation with Dan Blocher
POSTED: Thursday, August 19, 2010 at 01:55 PM PT
BY: Daniel Savickas


Dan Blocher is the new executive director of capital projects for transit agency TriMet. (Photo by Dan Carter/DJC)

Dan Blocher is the new executive director of capital projects for TriMet. He previously spent 13 years with the transit agency working on cost analysis and contract management for projects like the MAX yellow and green light-rail lines. He left TriMet in 2000, and then returned two years later as senior director of capital projects.

Now, less than a month into his present role, he’s taking on some of the biggest challenges of his career with projects like Portland-to-Milwaukie light rail and the Columbia River Crossing.

Blocher sat down with the DJC to talk about the proposed 7.3-mile, $1.47 billion Portland-to-Milwaukie light-rail project. After receiving a 50 percent match in federal money, instead of the 60/40 split it sought, TriMet is recalibrating the project as quickly as possible to accommodate the proposed July 2011 start date for construction. The first stage of construction is to build a $135 million bridge across the Willamette River.

....continues at the DJC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2010, 2:12 AM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
Portland-Milwaukie light rail finds more funds
POSTED: Thursday, September 2, 2010 at 11:49 AM PT
BY: Daniel Savickas
Tags: Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, TriMet


The proposed 7.3-mile, $1.47 billion light-rail project from Portland to Milwaukie took steps to close a budget gap that threatens the project.

The Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation, composed of elected officials and representatives of area transportation agencies, approved a measure to put $27.4 million in bond money toward the project. If approved by regional government Metro, the funds would be matched by the Federal Highway Administration, which is funding 50 percent of the project, as much as $735.8 million.

The new local funds were obtained by bonding against future Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Project funds. Metro receives federal MTIP funds each year for transportation projects. The measure JPAC approved today commits 12 years of MTIP funds toward funding projects by transit agency TriMet, including the light-rail project. Metro will pay the bonds back, in part, with the future MTIP funds.

When TriMet received word that the project would receive only a 50 percent match in funds instead of the 60 percent it had originally sought, the agency was forced to look for additional funds or cut back the light-rail project.

But TriMet general manager Neil McFarlane stressed that cutting is not the answer. If the project goes that route, he said, the light-rail line might not serve as many people as originally planned. As planned, about 25,000 people will ride the new line each day by the year 2030.

The 17-member committee stressed the urgency of completing the financial plan for the project in time to apply for FHA funds by Sept. 20. Otherwise, the project could face a string of delays, which would ultimately affect the project’s July 2011 start date.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2010, 2:06 AM
Shilo Rune 96's Avatar
Shilo Rune 96 Shilo Rune 96 is offline
PearlHelp.com
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: SE Portland
Posts: 334
TriMet board gives greenlight to Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail bridge funding

TriMet board gives greenlight to Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail bridge funding
Published: Wednesday, December 08, 2010, 4:55 PM

Construction on Portland's first new Willamette River bridge in 35 years has a green light. When the so-called "Caruthers Bridge" is finished, it will be the nation's largest no-automobile urban crossing.

On Wednesday, TriMet's board of directors unanimously approved a $127 million contract to start building the bridge for the Portland-to-Milwaukie light rail line. Construction is slated to begin next July.

Only trains, buses, streetcars, pedestrians and bicyclists will be able to use the 1,720-foot bridge, the centerpiece of the proposed 7.3-mile MAX Orange Line, when it opens in September 2015.

TriMet is still scratching to find an additional $35 million to cover its share of the most expensive transit project it has ever undertaken. The new MAX line is expected to cost about $1.5 billion, with half coming from federal transportation grants.



Still, the board felt confident enough to approve the transit bridge contract and five other funding resolutions. It wasn't without some passionate protest inside the Southeast Portland church where Wednesday's meeting was held.

Union members testified that TriMet shouldn't move forward with the Orange Line's funding at the same time it's cutting health-care benefits and freezing wages.


View full sizeTriMet
Cameron Johnson, a 16-year-old member of OPAL Bus Riders Unite, told the board that the money would be better spent on restoring service cuts that have made it harder for him and others to rely on public transportation.

Last summer, when the federal government rejected TriMet's request for 60 percent in matching money for the project -- agreeing to 50 percent instead -- Oregon's largest transit agency should have applied the brakes, Johnson said.

"But TriMet seems to have viewed this as just another schoolbook challenge, without considering the consequences on real people," he said. "People are losing trust in you for this, including me."

When the teenager ran nearly a minute over the three-minute testimony limit, the board cut the boy's mic. In response, people attending the meeting began shouting, "Let Cameron speak!"

Various business and community leaders testified in support of the new line, running from the south end of the Portland State University campus through South Waterfront, over the river, through Southeast Portland and south near McLoughlin Boulevard to downtown Milwaukie.


View full size
The project is expected to create 14,000 construction jobs and ultimately relieve traffic congestion along the McLoughlin corridor.

Representatives from the Portland Development Commission, OMSI, the Portland Opera and the Oak Grove community were among several people who spoke in support of the MAX line.

Neil Hankerson, the head of Dark Horse Comics, said the MAX line will be crucial to revitalizing a struggling downtown Milwaukie. "I've seen downtown retail business suffer significantly over time," he said, adding that the light rail line will provide a superhero-like push to "counteract the trend."

The board also approved $219 million to buy rights of way between Portland and Milwaukie, which is expected to displace 12 residences and 65 businesses. According to the project's final environmental impact study, up to 1,500 people are expected to be displaced.

But Jillian Detweiler, TriMet's real property manager, said "displaced" is a misleading term. "Most of them are being relocated," she said. "Some businesses that wanted to move are ending much better off because they were having difficulty finding buyers for their buildings."

With its sharp angles and elegant towers, the new four-pier, cable-stayed bridge is expected to be an iconic answer to the drab concrete of the nearby Marquam Bridge. Plans call for the 72-foot-wide bridge to widen to 107 feet at the towers.

"We're building a bridge for the city of bridges that will be attractive and fit into the skyline in the area it serves," said TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch, adding that there isn't an official name for the bridge yet. The unofficial moniker comes from nearby Southeast Caruthers Street.

Three bus lines currently mixing with traffic on the Ross Island Bridge -- the 9, 17 and 19 -- will move to the new bridge.

TriMet says the Orange Line will make the system more efficient and economical -- the operating cost for every bus boarding is $3.21 ($2.43 for a frequent service bus), while each MAX rider costs $1.89. With light rail carrying 38 percent of riders using just 24 percent of the operating budget, it frees up money for bus service, Fetsch said.

In the end, the board authorized the sale of $724 million worth of bonds for the Orange Line, including $63 million in payroll tax-backed revenue bonds.

Before voting, however, board member Lynn Lehrbach asked TriMet General Manager Neil McFarlane if he was "comfortable" with the project's financial plan for the project.

"Yes," McFarlane replied, "I am."



-- Joseph Rose; Twitter, pdxcommute
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #284  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2010, 2:09 AM
Shilo Rune 96's Avatar
Shilo Rune 96 Shilo Rune 96 is offline
PearlHelp.com
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: SE Portland
Posts: 334
Hopefully this will help the South Waterfront take off more. The OHSU life science building is set to begin construction December 2011, this is gonna be quite the construction area for awhile! I am happy with Trimet's decision because it will be great in the long run; however, at the same time I worry of Cameron's point. I think building the bridge now is better than later, with that they don't necessarily need to construct the Orange line now. We can just get the "bones" to the project going like the bridge, land, and connect the streetcar, etc..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #285  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2010, 11:27 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Has anyone here perused the docs available online about the light rail station locations? I had some free time, and the readings were, honestly, pretty depressing. I like the summary by Trimet:

Quote:
DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITHIN 1/4 MILE

Similar to other stations along the line, the high potential residential acreage is misleading. Roughly half of the parcels that could potentially be redeveloped with residential uses are zoned single-family, low-density residential. Therefore, despite their low IL values, it is unlikely that these parcels will be redeveloped.

Most of the stations have very little within the 1/4 mile walking radius of the proposed light rail stations. In fact, one station, the Bybee station, has only a handful of houses (10?) within the 1/4 mile walking radius, and only parklands, a freight rail line, and highway as adjacent uses. Another such station, the Milwaukie station, has... well, I'll let Trimet's planning doc speak for itself:

Quote:
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY MILWAUKIE STATION AREA
Transit-Supportive Land Uses
• None
Good Connections
• Only pedestrian crossing to the west is at SE Milport.
• North-south pedestrian access is poor.
• No pedestrian connection to the west.
• Vehicle access only from McLoughlin.
Opportunities for Development
• Opportunities are limited. A zoning change is unlikely.
I would *love* to see such an in-depth analysis if we put the stations right along Milwaukie Ave, through downtown Sellwood (I know, not enough space, blah blah blah), and see what the numbers were.

Bybee station - via Trimet's planning doc


Portland light-rail stations
Milwaukie light-rail stations
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #286  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2010, 1:03 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,788
I'm pretty sure that the Milwaukie station you're referring to won't actually be built. That location of that station would have been on a cut-over from McLoughlin to the railroad tracks just north of 224. However, the final route shifts from McLoughlin (or parallel to it) to the freight tracks at the Tacoma station. This map shows the stations that made it into the final plan.

I agree that it's disappointing that there isn't much opportunity for redevelopment; unfortunately, this is because the line mostly follows an industrial corridor - the UP freight line - which is of course much cheaper than building it through a residential area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #287  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2010, 1:53 AM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
I'm pretty sure that the Milwaukie station you're referring to won't actually be built. That location of that station would have been on a cut-over from McLoughlin to the railroad tracks just north of 224. However, the final route shifts from McLoughlin (or parallel to it) to the freight tracks at the Tacoma station. This map shows the stations that made it into the final plan.

I agree that it's disappointing that there isn't much opportunity for redevelopment; unfortunately, this is because the line mostly follows an industrial corridor - the UP freight line - which is of course much cheaper than building it through a residential area.
Yeah, you're right, that Milwaukie station is gone. As far as SE Tacoma St. is concerned, I remember the first (and only) time I rode my bike over that one. Scared the **** out of me, with all the cars heading onto the highway.

Still, it will be strange having MAX service to the Acropolis.

Last edited by zilfondel; Dec 10, 2010 at 3:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #288  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2010, 6:09 AM
philopdx philopdx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Deep South
Posts: 1,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
Yeah, you're right, that Milwaukie station is gone. As far as SE Tacoma St. is concerned, I remember the first (and only) time I rode my bike over that one. Scared the **** out of me, with all the cars heading onto the highway.

Still, it will be strange having MAX service to the Acropolis.
That one fact may, at long last, win Vancouver's countless Rush Limbaugh mini-me's over to funding light rail.

Milwaukie light rail: $1.4 billion
Vancouver CRC: $4.? billion

Being able to get on a train in Washington, ride straight down to Acrop, get piss drunk, enjoy a steak, and ride back with no chance of a DUI?

Priceless.

Some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's the U.S. Treasury.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #289  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2010, 9:20 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
Yeah, you're right, that Milwaukie station is gone. As far as SE Tacoma St. is concerned, I remember the first (and only) time I rode my bike over that one. Scared the **** out of me, with all the cars heading onto the highway.

Still, it will be strange having MAX service to the Acropolis.
How very Portland of this city....I wouldn't expect anything less.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #290  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2010, 4:01 PM
jaxg8r1 jaxg8r1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,518
I'm curious as to why this line is so expensive. $203 million per mile seems like a lot. I know the bridge is going to be $120 ish million, but that still leaves 1.38 billion to get a little over 7 miles through an industrial area.

Striking, especially looking at the cost of the Yellow and Airport/Red line extensions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #291  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2010, 2:43 AM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaxg8r1 View Post
I'm curious as to why this line is so expensive. $203 million per mile seems like a lot. I know the bridge is going to be $120 ish million, but that still leaves 1.38 billion to get a little over 7 miles through an industrial area.

Striking, especially looking at the cost of the Yellow and Airport/Red line extensions.
I believe that part of it (only part) is they calculated the debt financing in the project's total cast. The feds have never required that before, so all future LRT dev will seem higher than in the past.

Plus, compared to the original eastside MAX, inflation is much higher. Not to mention the global market for steel and concrete... I doubt China had much influence on those prices in 1982-86!


Boy, wish we had built more back then. Would have saved SO much money compared to today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #292  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2010, 4:53 PM
Okstate's Avatar
Okstate Okstate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE PDX
Posts: 1,367
^ Not to mention Trimet is displacing a huge amount of businesses and some residential as well with this expansion. I am not sure how this matches up with previous light rail line installations but it's worth noting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #293  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 1:37 AM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okstate View Post
^ Not to mention Trimet is displacing a huge amount of businesses and some residential as well with this expansion. I am not sure how this matches up with previous light rail line installations but it's worth noting.
True, something like 1,000 homes and businesses, right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #294  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 4:14 PM
jaxg8r1 jaxg8r1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
I believe that part of it (only part) is they calculated the debt financing in the project's total cast. The feds have never required that before, so all future LRT dev will seem higher than in the past.

Plus, compared to the original eastside MAX, inflation is much higher. Not to mention the global market for steel and concrete... I doubt China had much influence on those prices in 1982-86!


Boy, wish we had built more back then. Would have saved SO much money compared to today.
I figured there was an actual reason that it costs significantly more. I would've guessed it was something like what you mentioned, or perhaps all elevated ROW or something like that.

And your point about inflation is good as well. Honestly, I wish there was some sort of endgame plan for MAX where we could just plan all of the lines that will be needed for the next 50 years, then do some sort of tax levy to fund them all at once (sales tax, or something like that). That way, although it would initially be expensive, eventually it would seem like a huge bargain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #295  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 4:15 PM
jaxg8r1 jaxg8r1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okstate View Post
^ Not to mention Trimet is displacing a huge amount of businesses and some residential as well with this expansion. I am not sure how this matches up with previous light rail line installations but it's worth noting.
Good point. I wonder how much more expensive this line would've been had it been built a couple of years ago at the real estate peak. Seems like building it now (when home values are significantly lower) might end up saving money?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #296  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 7:02 PM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
True, something like 1,000 homes and businesses, right?
what? where'd you get that number?

if you look in the SDEIS, chapter 3, table 3.1-1, (link), the total is 55 businesses and 2 residences displaced.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #297  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 8:21 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
what? where'd you get that number?

if you look in the SDEIS, chapter 3, table 3.1-1, (link), the total is 55 businesses and 2 residences displaced.
My mistake, I don't know where that # came from.

Anyways, according to the Oregonian:

Quote:
According to TriMet, the entire light-rail project will displace 73 properties - 61 businesses and 12 residential.

The light-rail project also requires 15 partial business acquisitions and 16 partial residential acquisitions in the Milwaukie area, according to a final environmental impact statement released earlier this month.
Out of those 61 businesses, who knows how many people work at them...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #298  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 9:00 PM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
...all of those businesses get new customized replacement buildings built for free, get moved for free, and are legally bound to minimize disruption. I think those 61 businesses are getting pretty good deals... The increase in businesses affected and properties displaced comes from UPRR requiring a 50 foot buffer versus the sdeis old 25 foot safety zone. We can thank the LA commuter rail accident for the buffer zone increase.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #299  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2010, 6:32 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaxg8r1 View Post
And your point about inflation is good as well. Honestly, I wish there was some sort of endgame plan for MAX where we could just plan all of the lines that will be needed for the next 50 years, then do some sort of tax levy to fund them all at once (sales tax, or something like that). That way, although it would initially be expensive, eventually it would seem like a huge bargain.
That's what Los Angeles is attempting to do with their 30/10 plan. And I wish them good luck.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #300  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2010, 7:01 PM
2oh1's Avatar
2oh1 2oh1 is offline
9-7-2oh1-!
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: downtown Portland
Posts: 2,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaxg8r1 View Post
I wish there was some sort of endgame plan for MAX where we could just plan all of the lines that will be needed for the next 50 years, then do some sort of tax levy to fund them all at once (sales tax, or something like that). That way, although it would initially be expensive, eventually it would seem like a huge bargain.
Please tell me you didn't say sales tax.

The problem with a sales tax is that most of us don't trust politicians. I'd fight tooth and nail against any form of a sales tax. There are parts of the country where the sales tax exceeds 10%! Regardless of how low an initial sales tax would be, if one were created here, it would become permanent and it would climb. It would climb because our politicians are spineless and gutless. They lack the courage to cut or even balance budgets but they sure do know how to increase budgets, often with money they don't have. Give a politician a buck and he'll find a way to spend it five times and then he'd try to raise taxes to pay off the $4 debt.

Then again, most Americans have thousands of dollars in credit card debt which shows they don't understand basic math either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:47 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.