You got that right.

Not only will Barbur likely be reduced to just two lanes (like North Interstate and East Burnside are - except unlike those streets, there are no paralleling arterial streets to Barbur that one can use, like M.L.K. and Greeley/Denver, or Division, Stark and Halsey), but how is one seriously going to put MAX down the center of 99W from I-5 to Tigard - one of the busiest streets in the entire Portland metro area with over 50,000 vehicles per day - only a time amount of them could even be considered a possible MAX trip?

Right now Tigard business owners want Highway 99W to actually be THREE LANES in each direction to handle the traffic; building MAX will create more congestion, at extreme cost, would eliminate businesses along the highway...all for what?

The folks involved in the Barbur Crossroads working group (the Neighborhood Association chairs from Far Southwest, West Portland Park, Markham, Ashcreek, Crestwood and Multnomah) are pretty adamant that any HCT, whether Max or high speed busses) requires additional right of way, and cannot run down Barbur, precisely because Barbur is the relief valve for I - 5 when it jams up, as it does at least four times a week.

Interestingly, ODOT seem to share that opinion, and is yelling loud and clear, "Its our road and Not on Barbur or I 5 you don't"

Going to be interesting times.

You're right again. Combine the bottleneck that light rail would create on Barbur, like Eric says with no parallel arterial streets, and Sam's intent to make SW Macadam a trolley street, again with no parallel arterial streets, there won't be any streets left to serve traffic to southwest Portland and environs beyond.

This is what Sam's PDOT calls planning. Planning for Chaos.

When are citizens going to say enough to this car hatred? When are businesses going to speak up and demonstrate how lack of service vehicle mobility hurts everyone, even the 6% that supposedly bike and use mass transit?

Lee -

PBOT has very little, if anything, to do with Tri Met Max locations. The big players are Metro and Tri Met. With ODOT having a veto.

The problem is that Tri Met is hopelessly fixated upon light rail and will do almost anything to promote it, especially canibilize functioning bus routes, and Metro "planners" think like Portland.

There are parallel routes to the Barbur / I - 5 "couplet" (sorry, just had to do that). The parallel routes just can't handle the freight and long distance traffic, much less the commuter traffic traffic.

SW Lesser Rd, SW Pomona, SW 35th , SW Arnold, SW Boones Ferry, SW Taylors Ferry, SW Macadam is one north bound route from the junction of I-5 and Barbur at SW 64th.

Further north, there is an off ramp north of the first Capitol Highway overpass directly onto Taylors Ferry, to SW Macadam

West of Barbur, SW Multnomah Blvd and SW Beaverton Hillsdale both provide some alternates closer to the Wash County line, but they each dump their northbound traffic onto Barbur.

The long distance freight lobby isn't going to go away. Look at the 2009 transit package and the spending on freight routes to see that power. Those folks are not going to sit still for the crippling of I 5 or their northbound alternative.

If only Ted Kennedy was still aive and was from PDX. A "Big Dig" into the hill at Duniway Park, a deep zoo style station at OHSU, daylight the tunnel in Hillsdale near the old Red Electric route at Bertha and BH HIghway, and go to Washington Square, then out Scholls Ferry to Beef Bend to Sherwood. Then Metro actually could conform ti its 25 year old light rail plan and run light rail only through "Regional Centers" like WashSq,rather than run down Barbur.

Crossing I -405 from the downtown core is going to be fun.

And watching all the folks in those old Historical Register houses in South Portland who hate cars and bike into downtown are not going to be quiet when Tri Met and Metro start to talk about knocking down bunches of those houses.

Certainly interesting times ahead.

Nonny Mouse, I have to respectfully disagree with you on your contention that PBOT (City of Portland) has little to do with Barbur being upgraded to high priority for light rail. CoP sits on the same committee with all the other players you mention to designate which projects to advance and fund. In fact CoP has been the major proponent for Barbur's advancement.

OH NOES! Not the public transit! We can't have that nonsense in a critical artery in south Portland!

Nonny, my point about parallel arterials was focused more on the portion from downtown Portland to SW Taylors Ferry. There are no parallel streets to Macadam and Barbur. And many don't think of SW Lesser, SW Arnold, SW Pomona, etc. as parallel arterial streets in the farther south, southwest reaches of Portland and beyond.

Better mass transit from Tigard/Tualatin to Portland is a good idea, IMHO. But how?

The geography there makes any rail solution a really tough problem. 99W from Sherwood to Tigard's Main street would be (relatively) easy to cram rail into, but the rest... yikes. Where it's not narrow, it's steep. Any rail route which doesn't run between I-5 and Barbur would seem to require tunneling.

(While there is a certain attraction to putting a tunnel station at PCC Sylvania or OHSU, the expense...!)

So.... anybody have any better suggestions for moving people between Tigard and Portland?

but how is one seriously going to put MAX down the center of 99W from I-5 to Tigard - one of the busiest streets in the entire Portland metro area with over 50,000 vehicles per day - only a time amount of them could even be considered a possible MAX trip?

I think it would look almost exactly like Interstate, although where Barbur crosses I-5 going SW (and turns into Pac Hwy.), the grade might be a little steep for early 20th century-era rail technology. Might have to do some kind of elevated track section ending perhaps before the 217 interchange. That would mean more money and government make-work construction jobs, yay!

I think DT Tigard would be hit the hardest, that has always been a stagnant area for businesses until perhaps very recently (I've noticed a few new shops but alas Tigard Cycle and Ski is still going strong :) ) Traffic has always backed up both directions past Greenburg Rd. for as long as I can remember, what a parking lot that will be when loot rail starts chuggin' through! I don't know what pre-rail Rockwood/Gresham looked like (a little before my time), but I could see many parts of Tigard along 99W turning into similar transit-oriented slums in the next 15-20 yrs.

Light rail supporters might want to have a look at:

http://www.nolightrail.com/
And explore the many links there.

Light rail costs 2-4 times what driving costs, uses more energy than small cars and is slower (Vancouver will be 34 min by rail and 15 min by bus)
See PortlandFacts.com

The real reason for light rail is for the money give to political supporters. Here is a list of them:
nolightrail.com/page6aa.html

Thanks
JK

BTW, light rail realist, Randal O'Toole was in Portland last week and a video of one of his presentations will play on Portland Comcast channel 23 at 8:00 PM on Friday Feb 5

Also, Robert Bruegmann's presentation about his book, A Brief History of Sprawl will appear on Portland Comcast cable the following week at these times:
10:00 pm Sunday channel 11
7:00 pm Monday channel 22
8:00 pm Friday channel 23

This weekly series explores issues of traffic congestion, sprawl, land use, transportation, affordable housing and urban form.

Videos from many of these program can be found at :

http://www.portlandfacts.com/adc_videos.html

Thanks
JK

The question is, are we going to become a real city or remain an overgrown town that plays at being a city ?

Eons ago, when Frisco realized that they were growing into a large city with extensive suburban sprawl, they decided to install the BART, in order to supplement their aging surface train lines.

It cost a great deal of money, and whether or not Bay Area traffic is any lighter or not as a result is debatable...it's horrible anyway IMHO...but still, underground subway systems have their advantages.

The major ones are, lack of interference with surface street traffic, and controlled access stations. The latter come in handy for isolating violent criminals attempting to flee the scene of the crime, and (gasp !) making it somewhat more difficult for transit riders to avoid paying fares.

I'd support a tax to undo the massive traffic congestion our amateurish attempts at commuter rail have helped to create...worst in the entire West Coast I-5 corridor by some estimates...and run the whole damn thing underground. Never gonna happen, but I can dream...or just move to a real city.

Light rail costs 2-4 times what driving costs, uses more energy than small cars and is slower (Vancouver will be 34 min by rail and 15 min by bus)

For the sake of argument, I'll agree that everything you say is true.

I still support light-rail, because I don't have a car, and I would rather take light-rail than a bus.

"So.... anybody have any better suggestions for moving people between Tigard and Portland?"

Hating to be obvious but how about increasing bus service on Barbur and adding more Express (if they exist at all) runs ... what a radical and inexpensive concept....

This is a really DUMB idea, just like extending light rail out to Gresham via Powell Blvd. Unless major dislocation of properties is involved, I fail to see how this can be accomplished without huge extra costs. I used to have an office on Barbur near Hamilton; and not only is traffic heavy much of the day, but the buses that use Barbur are also full during commute hours. I fail to see how having yet another choo choo train will improve things in any way.

Milwaukie MAX must be stopped. It is $1.4 billion and rising, $190 million per mile.

The $250 million the legislature diverted from the lottery should be pulled back.

Barbur MAX is more insane than WES and Cabbie,,,,,,spending BILLIONS more putting a lousy sytem underground is even more insane. Putting it underground does not increase it's effectiveness.

You act like a little tax and common sense and bingo it's underground and traffic is solved.
Fantasy.

The tax would need to be enormous, devouring revenue for other needs and it would be worse than the Big Dig in Boston.

But without helping traffic at all.

You have to understand the planner mentality:

ANYTHING that makes driving harder is good.

Adding ANY alternative, no matter the impracticality or expense, is good.

Anyone who disagrees is a rightwing nut "who probably lives in the suburbs anyway."

Alan D: "So.... anybody have any better suggestions for moving people between Tigard and Portland?"

Yeah, they're called cars. If you had business in Tigard, would you take a train? Or drive? I would drive.

I still support light-rail, because I don't have a car, and I would rather take light-rail than a bus.

Lol, okay I guess if you like your trip to take twice as long. The first thing that will happen after LRT starts running is Trimet will cut express bus service and any redundant lines going that direction, meaning the #12 and 94 Express to Sherwood. LRT will probably be about as fast as the 12 (maybe even slower depending on the number of stops) and you'll no longer be able to take an express route with few stops (the 94 is reasonably fast) because there's no such thing as an "express" MAX train! That basically happens after every new MAX lines goes in.

Justin -

The real issue is higher capacity and higher speed transit. Its almost irrelevant (other than the contractor campaign contributions to the pols which are funded by the high construction costs) whether the wheels are steel rolling on stee rails or rubber rolling on asphalt.

The key to it is right of way.

I have fond memories of a real but low cost transit system in the Boston area, where through Cambridge, Summmerville, Watertown and similar areas, what we called "trackless trollies" served almost every arterial. Seattle also still has a lot of functioning electric bus routes. They ran off overhead electric wire, no stinky diesel, and real cheap to put up, or move, or add to, because no major roadbed construction for rail and no expensive separate signaling system for the Toonerville Trolley.

Buses, whether electric powered or fossil fuel powered, aren't bad at all, and they are amazingly flexible in dealing with changing population growth, shrinkage, residence patterns, and work patterns.

But Tri Met has made it clear it does not want to operate a bus system, both because of the relativey high operational costs for labor (3 busses, 3 drivers to equa the capacity of a two car Toonerville Trolley) and because of the relatively ow federal grants for bus stuff as compared to rail stuff.

And the feds will put a lot of bucks in to capital expenditures for rail (the WES joke is a great example), but nowhere near as high a percentage into bus equipment purchases, and nothing into dedicated right of way purchase for buses.

So the Portland area and so many other places are almost forced Toonerville Trolleys.

I don't know how they get away with calling it "high-capacity transit". MAX is low capacity even by LRT standards (the "light" stands for light/low passenger loads compared to heavy rail) since every train eventually crawls through the short blocks of DT Portland and can only be 2 cars in length. It might be like a couple "high-capacity" (albiet very slow) buses hooked together, but by train standards it's kind of a joke. And the headway/spacing between LRT vehicles has to be much larger than any kind of rapid bus line because the trains take so long to slow and come to a stop, especially if there are downhills.

"I still support light-rail, because I don't have a car, and I would rather take light-rail than a bus."

I'm glad that I get to support your billion dollar preference of toy trains that don't work as well as a bus to do the same job. I really am.

Vancouver will be 34 min by rail and 15 min by bus

I guess it would be 15 minutes if you get off at the city limits.

The sad story is that there are several friends who echo the same thing Justin said . . . the bus is "beneath them," but they would gladly take a streetcar or light rail. Not European enough, I guess?

Bring back the articulated buses!

Look folks, I don't have a car. This means I've taken the bus thousands of times. It's not beneath me, it's just not nearly as comfortable or reliable as taking a train. (not that trains are 100% reliable, just that I've had some horrible experiences with buses).

As for the cost, yeah, building light-rail is way more expensive. And clearly light-rail can't replace every bus route. But it can replace some of them. And I'm for that.

We're spending billions of dollars on Iraq/Afghanistan, and we're about to spend close to a Trillion dollars on health-care.

I don't care about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think they were a mistake. And I don't think Americans have a right to health care. I do, however, love trains. So, I support light-rail.

I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind. And that's fine. I just believe people should vote their interests. And my interests is fast/comfortable/reliable mass-transit... or trains.

For the record, I am not in favor of a surface line along Barbur, nor am I in favor of a new transit bridge to Milwaukie. However, many Bus Rapid Transit systems actually cost the same per mile as light rail lines.

The line in Cleveland and LA cost $25-30 million a mile.

As usual, the discussion came to buses vs. light rail. Which is usually a very, very stupid argument because they are very different in nature. One cannot live without the other.

The only thing less expensive about buses are capital cost. It takes more bus drivers to move as many people as a LR line would. But even so, LR capital costs from 1986 (the first LR line) have been about 1.6 billion dollars and that includes the east line, blue line, yellow and red lines.

How much does a new bridge across into Vancouver cost minus the transit part?

The real issue is people try to combat congestion with transit and new highways. No city in the world has ever had no congestion, and no city in the world has ever conquered congestion.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make it better, but there are some simpler solutions to this problem than more money.

Justin, why doesn't TriMet honor your "I just believe people should vote their interests"? Let's vote on whether we should have light rail along Barbur and beyond vs. enhanced bus service and lower carbon bus equipment at less cost.

We need a reality check. And all citizens that in any way will pay part of the bill should be voting on this issue.

For the record, I am not in favor of a surface line along Barbur, nor am I in favor of a new transit bridge to Milwaukie. However, many Bus Rapid Transit systems actually cost the same per mile as light rail lines.

And this is relevant... how? Who said we need an expensive BRT system, we have (well had) good bus service w/ the #12 and 94 express. The "frequent service" has just been on the chopping block for quite sometime since we built, guess what, so much light rail (well and WES).

The line in Cleveland and LA cost $25-30 million a mile.

We're not talking about Cleveland or LA, we're discussing Barbur Blvd., which is in Portland and Tigard.

As usual, the discussion came to buses vs. light rail. Which is usually a very, very stupid argument because they are very different in nature. One cannot live without the other.

Are you even paying attention? Of course we're talking about buses vs. light-rail, because that's... uh, precisely the point of discussion and the topic of this article. We have buses now, but some people want LRT. So we're discussing it. If it's such a stupid discussion, then just leave and let us stupid people keep discussing it.

Buses are as expensive as LRT... hmmm, which kind of buses are you talking about? For one thing, there are many different ways to implement a bus rapid transit line, I guess BRT has come to mean the bus version of LRT (exclusive ROW but with buses in separated tracks/lanes instead of rail vehicles on rail). I guess if you try really hard, with expensive exclusive ROW and custom-ordered buses at $1 mil+ a pop, then sure, you can make a BRT setup as expensive as LRT. But our existing bus lines have done a pretty good job, that is when service isn't being cut and I think they're pretty cheap. Sure maybe the operating costs are somewhat higher, big deal, I doubt it even comes close to the hundreds of millions LRT will cost (or some uber-expensive BRT system).

Justin, why doesn't TriMet honor your "I just believe people should vote their interests"? Let's vote on whether we should have light rail along Barbur and beyond vs. enhanced bus service and lower carbon bus equipment at less cost.

No deal. See, Portland is not a pure democracy. It's a representative democracy, which means you get to vote for who represents you, but you don't get to vote on every single issue.

If you don't like all the money going to MAX, then you're more than free to vote in someone else to the Metro board or the Portland City Council.

"As usual, the discussion came to buses vs. light rail. Which is usually a very, very stupid argument because they are very different in nature. One cannot live without the other."

Buses can live very well without light rail.

Justin, I don't like subsidizing every one of your trips on the train. Why don't you pay your own way in life, leech?

Justin, I don't like subsidizing every one of your trips on the train.

There are thousands of things I subsidize that I hate as well. So, I completely understand how you feel.

Justin-

Pay attention.

TriMet runs Max and the buses.

Who did you vote for in the last Tri Met election?

I'll wait.

Still waiting.

Justin, its a trick question. The TriMet board is appointed by the Governor, subject to Oregon Senate confirmation. There are no Tri Met elections.

Look at the Tri Met Board. Developers, union officers, and construction folks.

Not a daily "goes to an 8 to 5 job" person among them.

There is a hideen provision in the Metro Charter which would alow Metro to take over TriMet under certainn conditions, including a vot by the Metro Board. A push was made back in the '80s or '70s to do so. A friend, Jim Gardner, was a Metro Commissioner at the time. The Metro Commissioners were inundated with both threat and campaign donations from the unions and the developers to vote "No" on the takeover.

Still no TriMet elections.

For the record, I am not in favor of a surface line along Barbur, nor am I in favor of a new transit bridge to Milwaukie. However, many Bus Rapid Transit systems actually cost the same per mile as light rail lines.

The line in Cleveland and LA cost $25-30 million a mile.

I've done the math myself and you are not comparing apples to oranges.

The Los Angeles BRT project was expensive, true. Now, compare a MAX line to the Los Angeles light rail line. You'll find that L.A.'s light rail lines are also exorbanately expensive to build - because ANYTHING in Los Angeles costs more to build than anywhere else (same for New York). And $30/million per mile for a LRT line - that's the CHEAP end of light rail. For that matter, we can use TriMet's 72 bus line to prove that light rail is expensive (since the 72 line is the cheapest line for TriMet to operate - cheaper than any light rail line; the Red, Green and Yellow Lines, plus the Streetcar, have operating costs that are comparable to the bus system average. Only the Blue Line is "cheap" - and the 72 bus still beats it.

Other BRT lines have come in much, much cheaper - I believe Snohomish County built their new BRT line for about $1 million per mile - all inclusive (vehicles, stops, maintenance facilities, etc.) And I found one BRT line that has an operating cost of less than $1/boarding ride.

Unfortunately my data is at home and I'm not but I'll post it later.

Justin, you wrote:

See, Portland is not a pure democracy. It's a representative democracy, which means you get to vote for who represents you, but you don't get to vote on every single issue.

How is the TriMet Board determined?

Election? Nope.

A vote of the City Councils of the metro region? Nope.

A vote of the County Commissioners? Nope.

Metro? Nope.

The TriMet Board of Directors is appointed by...drumroll...the GOVERNOR!

Yes - that means some resident in po-dunk Jordan Valley, or Brookings, or Lakeview, or Joseph, or Parkdale, or Keno, or Otis, or Ontario, or Ashland, or La Pine, or Arlington - have an equal "vote" in TriMet's management as someone in Portland, Forest Grove, Sherwood, Gresham, Troutdale, Oregon City, Tualatin, Tigard, Milwaukie, Gladstone, Beaverton or Hillsboro.

How do you feel about that?

I did not know that Trimet was appointed by the Governor. So theoretically, Trimet could be stacked with folks from Pendleton. That is interesting. But it doesn't change my position, because I like what Trimet is doing.

My whole point is that I like light-rail. And I vote my interests. And I encourage everyone else on this site to vote your interests as well.

Justin :I just believe people should vote their interests. And my interests is fast/comfortable/reliable mass-transit... or trains.
JK: All I ask is that you pay the real cost of MAX when you ride it - close to $20 each ride. Then you can tell us if you like the bus at 1/2 that cost. Or decide to get a car at 1/4 the cost.

Thanks
JK

All I ask is that you pay the real cost of MAX when you ride it - close to $20 each ride. Then you can tell us if you like the bus at 1/2 that cost. Or decide to get a car at 1/4 the cost.

As a single guy making a fairly nice living, I pay a lot in taxes. And I don't see nearly the return in services that I would like to. So, I am quite happy to have someone else subsidize my $2.00 a ride.

Justin is the reason that some people are leaving this city, Multnomah Co., and this state. I appreciate his comments to make this point.

I guess from his comments that he thinks it's not democratic for any political body to put any issue up for a vote. Nor would he agree that it is democratic for any referendum vote, even though it's provided by bodies statutes.

My whole point is that I like light-rail. And I vote my interests.

And I don't see nearly the return in services that I would like to.

Well, I like Ferraris, so will you subsidize my Ferrari? I don't see the return in services (by riding the bus) that I would like to, so I should get a Ferrari.

Wow, that is a great argument. I want...so I should get. Did it occur to you that every time a light rail line opens, the "winners" are special interest developers who get tax breaks to build developments and sell them at above-market rates, while existing bus riders are left with less and less service? Look at the Green Line and WES: Since that time, "Frequent Service" has been eliminated, several bus routes eliminated, other bus routes saw Saturday and Sunday chops, and others saw less service. Several lines were re-routed to force more transfers, or force a transfer to MAX (so TriMet can keep the MAX ridership nice and "high") to continue a journey that used to be a one-bus-ride.

I have had my own bus service chopped, cut, diced...you name it - all in the name of expanding MAX. Except that MAX doesn't come anywhere near my house, and when MAX does come to Tigard it'll be a mile away - so should I drive (adding another car onto 99W) to access MAX?

But, that's OK, because Justin has his precious light rail. Justin, do you manage employees? I hope you give all of your bus riding employees extra time to get to/from work, on company time, to make up for YOUR convenience. I hope that when you call a company in Portland that you don't mind if it takes 10 more minutes to talk to someone, because the person you need is held up on a bus somewhere. (Note: I work for a power company here in Portland.) I guess it's all about Justin and what HE wants...maybe Justin ought to pay for it.

Here's a sampling of some costs to build certain Light Rail lines, and Bus Rapid Transit lines:

Eugene EmX Franklin Corridor: $6.3 million/mile
Eugene EmX Pioneer Corridor: $4.7 million/mile
Community Transit Swift: $1.7 million/mile
UTA MAX: $700,000/mile
Kansas City MAX: $3.8 million/mile
Kansas City MAX Troost Line: $2.4 million/mile
Las Vegas MAX: $3.1 million/mile
South Miami-Dade Busway: $3.4 million/mile
South Miami-Dade Busway Extensions: $9.4 million/mile
Los Angeles MTA Orange Line: $25.3 million/mile (this is the example used by the anti-bus crowd).

Here's some light rail/DMU construction costs:

WES: $11.3 million/mile
MAX (Portland-Gresham): $27.7 million/mile
MAX (Westside): $70.4 million/mile
MAX (Airport): $27.7 million/mile
MAX (Interstate): $68 million/mile
Max (Clackamas): $69.4 million/mile
MAX (Milwaukie): $191.8 million/mile projected cost
Portland Streetcar: between $28.1 million and $37.5 million/mile
Tacoma Link (streetcar): $57.1 million/mile
S.L.U.T.: $20.2 million/mile
Sound Transit Central Link: $186 million/mile
South Transit Central Link (extention to Sea-Tac): $168 million/mile
Los Angeles MTA Gold Line: $150 million/mile (this is 600% the cost of the "just as expensive as light rail" BRT line!)
UTA Trax: $23.1 million/mile (this is 33 times the cost of "just as expensive as light rail" BRT)
UTA Trax to SLC Int'l Airport: $48.3 million/mile
UTA Trax to West Valley City: $56.9 million/mile
Houston: $48.9 million/mile
NCTD Sprinter (Diesel Light Rail): $21.7 million/mile

In fact, the ONLY light rail line to have a "low" building cost is San Diego Trolley's original line, at $10.7 million/mile. However dollar figures for later trolley extensions are unavailable to find, and surely nowhere near as "cheap" given that the original Trolley line was built on top of an existing railroad line still used by freight trains (which is illegal to do today).

Erik H:

Yes, there have been some very nicely priced BRT systems. Snohomish's SWIFT line looks great...it cost about 2 million per mile.

However, it's not a true BRT system throughout. 7 miles of the system is only dedicated to a bus-only lane. The other 10 miles is for general use.
Snohomish's SWIFT can carry at max 100 people...standing.

It's low cost might also be reflected in the fact that its stops are about 1-2 miles apart from one another. Yikes! That is a far distance and its not going to capture many riders.

It also has dedicated lanes on the far right lane, I do believe, which limits cars from turning right. It should be in the center.

Portland's MAX (total of two cars) carries about ~340 at capacity, though I've seen more. What's interesting is more capacity is needed at peak times, but that can't occur on Portland's small block system.

BRT will not move more people than LR will. It might be a good option for certain areas, however. And I have seen, as I mentioned, some very expensive BRT development out there -- not just LA's.

The question is:

How do you implement a true BRT system w/o taking lanes away from cars and w/o expanding the roadway (which will take away land from businesses)?

Lane expansion will be key here, because Snohomish's SWIFT line had 6 existing lanes of traffic to work with plus a suicide turn lane!

That's easy to implement and very low cost. Add the cost of roadway expansion for Barbur and the costs are going to soar.

A decent express service might work. Who knows?

So.... anybody have any better suggestions for moving people between Tigard and Portland?

Yes, yes I do.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=105939017853465830090.0004548a6ed6a75b5acdf&z=12

Had TriMet never built the boondoggle called WES, there was a perfect way to get light rail all the way to Tualatin, on the old grade of the Oregon Electric Railroad:

Start in downtown Portland, run on Barbur to Burlingame (where much of the road is five or six lanes). At Burlingame, then follow Multnomah Boulevard west to Garden Home. Then follow the old grade to Washington Square. Cross over 217 and join the abandoned (for WES) freight rail alignment from the intersection of Tiedeman/North Dakota south through downtown Tigard and to Tualatin. End route.

The linked map shows the route along with proposed station locations. The stations would serve:

Duniway Park (the former YMCA Metro Center)
Hamilton (major bus transfer point)
Burlingame (Freddy's, major bus transfer point)
Capitol Hill (Safeway)
Multnomah Village (One of Portland's original "Streetcar Neighborhoods")
Garden Home (another original "Streetcar Neighborhood")
Washington Square (a Metro designated "Regional Center", the largest shopping center in Oregon, and numerous office parks and towers)
Tigard Transit Center (a Metro designated "Town Center", plus a transit center and downtown
Durham Road (Durham, near Bridgeport, various office parks)
Tualatin (a Metro designated "Town Center")

This route would serve both Tigard and Tualatin, but would only use a tiny portion of 99W/Barbur Boulevard from Portland to Burlingame - and would have zero impact on 99W through Tigard (where most of the traffic conflicts are). It would largely use existing right-of-ways or under-utilized streets that are wide enough to support light rail. It would also have far greater ridership potential than both Barbur Boulevard MAX, or WES, combined.

(If anyone is asking, freight trains would be diverted southwest of Tualatin on a short track near the UPS sort facility and onto another west-east railroad track, the "Newberg Branch", which then provides connections back to Tigard as well as east to Portland.

You're forgetting Cleveland's BRT system which cost about $30 million per mile.

You might want to reconsider what is a "BRT" system. Often times they only run partly on their own ROW. They are considered part BRT, and not full BRT. Eugene, OR has a part-BRT system, as I mentioned, Snohomish Co. has a part BRT system.

This reduces costs and but does not give the full transit benefits. Something to consider, too.

And I do invite you to consider what it would cost to expand the lanes of Barbur Blvd for BRT service?

I say do nothing.

Erik:

Not a bad route for a LR system, I might add. Better than WES and better than a Milwaukie line, too.

WS: Good questions.

However, it's not a true BRT system throughout. 7 miles of the system is only dedicated to a bus-only lane. The other 10 miles is for general use.
Snohomish's SWIFT can carry at max 100 people...standing.

With traffic signal preemption, ITS technologies - you can still get better throughput without the need for dedicated lanes in many areas.

Yes, a BRT vehicle will carry less - but that's actually the beauty of BRT. A BRT vehicle can recover its hourly operating costs with only 50 boarding rides. So if you get 100 people on the bus - so what? It's already making money. Light rail takes many more people to cover the costs. Further, another beauty of BRT - especially on the Barbur Boulevard corridor - is that you have other buses (i.e. 1, 44, 45, 54, 55, 56) that can still take advantage of the BRT route and stops, and then split off the BRT line and run normally. You can't do that with light rail, it requires a transfer (and if TriMet runs the system, the bus usually leaves just as the train pulls in, or vice-versa).

It's low cost might also be reflected in the fact that its stops are about 1-2 miles apart from one another. Yikes! That is a far distance and its not going to capture many riders.

So does MAX; and so would MAX on Barbur (just like on North Interstate, where numerous bus stops were eliminated. Much of the "growth" in ridership actually came from Clark County residents using one of the two free (for users) park-and-ride lots at Vanport or Expo Center.

It also has dedicated lanes on the far right lane, I do believe, which limits cars from turning right. It should be in the center.

EmX operates in a center alignment.

Portland's MAX (total of two cars) carries about ~340 at capacity, though I've seen more. What's interesting is more capacity is needed at peak times, but that can't occur on Portland's small block system.

You pointed out a good drawback of light rail, at least in its implementation in Portland (light rail trains can operate far more than two cars, but not in Portland.) While it's true that a single bus requires an operator (and you can couple multiple LRVs together) - if you have the ridership, it doesn't matter. TriMet's 72 bus runs every 6-7 minutes for much of the day, and has the lowest cost of any TriMet service, including MAX. Now if TriMet used hybrid-electric articulated buses (like Seattle) the costs would be even lower.

BRT will not move more people than LR will. It might be a good option for certain areas, however. And I have seen, as I mentioned, some very expensive BRT development out there -- not just LA's.

BRT in Los Angeles has actually been - on a ridership basis - a smashing success. Of course the question is "why wasn't light rail built?" but the cost to build light rail is even much higher than the already high cost.

Of course, the reason is because LACMTA got slapped with a big lawsuit for favoring rail lines, and discriminating against poorer neighborhoods with bus service only. So LACMTA was under a court order to improve the bus system. Since then they've refreshed the entire bus system, made other new improvements...and now LACMTA is again able to talk about expanding the rail system - in harmony with the bus system. I'd hate to see TriMet fall into the same path...

Another thing to keep in mind is that Tigard's population isn't even 50,000. Beaverton, Hillsboro and Gresham all have populations close to 100,000. A MAX line to Tigard would not touch much of Tigard and NONE of Tigard's major destinations (Washington Square, Bridgeport Village, Kruse Way, King City); there are no major population centers on 99W. Getting MAX to OHSU and PCC Sylvania will make this line into the billions of dollars - making this another $100 million/mile line if not more. A "BRT-Lite" line (without dedicated lanes, but with queue-jumpers, signal preemption, and limited bus lanes) would cost no more than $50 million - TOTAL. $50 million, one billion...huge difference! Bus service to PCC Sylvania would still exist with the 44 line, and possibly a new bus that would run on the BRT route to Barbur Blvd. TC, and then use Capitol Highway for the last mile to PCC Sylvania - without an expensive tunnel. OHSU? There's a lot of ways one can create a system to get OHSU workers down to Barbur from the campus - without a $500 million tunnel. A "mini-tram", a funicular, even just a simple elevator - would provide the same function, at a tiny fraction of the cost.

Erik H --

The beauty of your routing from the A Boy at Terwilliger and Barbur westward / southward is that it would actually conform to the requirements set up by Metro ordnance years ago -- that HCT routes like Max go through areas which Metro has designated as "Regional Centers", such as Washington Square. There are no "Regional Centers" along Barbur at all, and the Barbur / Capitol / I - 5 intersection is a "Town Center" in Metro-speak, and is not supposed to be the locus for HCT.

Interestingly your routing is almost the same as the old Southern Pacific Red Electric route. That line used the grade of what is now I-5 to get south of Portland and up to the Burlingame area.h

Not that Metro or TriMet will pay any attention to pre existing ordinances.

And I don't see the capacity for HCT along Barbur without very expensive ROW additions either by carving into the cliff face north of old Slavin Road, or building trestles on the east side and buying up a ot of not cheap residential real estate.

Why? Does anybody go into downtown Portland these days unless forced to pass through it by TriMet? Aside from panhandlers and Portland City Commissioners, I mean? Oh, but I repeat myself....

As a long time advocate of trolleys and light rail, and a member of Portland's Planning Commission I will strongly be advocating for light rail on SW Barbur. It meets the mass transit goals of Metro and our city. I have thoroughly studied the issue. I have not been influenced by any mass transit lobbyist.

Disclaimer: Even though Kari Chisholm has contributed to my past political campaigns and endorsed my appointment to the CoP Planning Commission, he did not write this comment.

Ryan:"Buses are as expensive as LRT... hmmm, which kind of buses are you talking about? For one thing, there are many different ways to implement a bus rapid transit line, I guess BRT has come to mean the bus version of LRT (exclusive ROW but with buses in separated tracks/lanes instead of rail vehicles on rail). I guess if you try really hard, with expensive exclusive ROW and custom-ordered buses at $1 mil+ a pop, then sure, you can make a BRT setup as expensive as LRT."

ws:My point was if you're trying to move a lot of people in a corridor, don't go with BRT because you'll be disappointed as it takes that many more buses to move as many people (800 LR capacity vs 100 BRT bus capacity). If you're trying to move small/medium amounts of people, BRT is a great choice. It's dependent on the scenario.

Nonny Mouse:"And I don't see the capacity for HCT along Barbur without very expensive ROW additions either by carving into the cliff face north of old Slavin Road, or building trestles on the east side and buying up a ot of not cheap residential real estate."

ws:Yep. The ROW is not conducive to transit whilst maintaining car lane capacity. They'd just be taking away lanes instead of adding new ones and giving people a somewhat faster transit option.

A bus service with 10 minute headways would do wonders for this corridor. Test the market and see what happens.

Chris Smith: As a long time advocate of trolleys and light rail, and a member of Portland's Planning Commission I will strongly be advocating for light rail on SW Barbur. It meets the mass transit goals of Metro and our city. I have thoroughly studied the issue. I have not been influenced by any mass transit lobbyist.

Why don't you just find another part of the city where this fits. Taking Barbur down to 2 lanes is going to turn SW Portland into gridlock. This project will bypass Washington Square, PCC Sylvania, OHSU and other major employment centers. This is just an excuse to add to this nation's multi-million dollar deficit. Why don't you mind your own business and find some other part of time to destroy. You may be well meaning but dude you are out of your mind if you move forward with this project as is.

Chris,

That's like telling someone you're doing something because it's your policy.

Adding MAx to Barbur would acheive exactly the same thing as MAX through Beaverton did or WES did or the Streetcar and Tram to SoWa or MAX to the now big box strip mall at Cascade station.

So if the "objective" is insanity, you're right.

Besides stopping this Barbur insanity the citizenry should halt Milwaukie MAX and YOU.

In looking closely at Barbur Blvd, I think it is wide enough to have four traffic lanes and still have light rail down the middle, or to the side, or back and forth. Perhaps minor right of way is needed.

Now the part through Tigard is pretty heavily traveled, but along this stretch I think that a little additional right-of-way on each side could facilitate redevelopment along this corridor, which has a lot of junky commercial uses along it.

As for the old Oregon Electric route, it actually passes south of Washington Square, through a wetland area.

It is also interesting to note, through probably irrelevant, that both Barbur Blvd, between downtown and Bertha Blvd, and I-5 between downtown and Multnomah Blvd. were both once rail lines.

Carve out a dedicated middle lane on I-5 that runs from downtown Portland to Salem. A diesel bus runs that lane, stopping every couple miles (conveniently where there are overpasses) to spill the passengers out into the outlaying areas and park-n-rides. Done and done.

WS: My point was if you're trying to move a lot of people in a corridor, don't go with BRT because you'll be disappointed as it takes that many more buses to move as many people (800 LR capacity vs 100 BRT bus capacity). If you're trying to move small/medium amounts of people, BRT is a great choice. It's dependent on the scenario.

The question is: What is the right mode? Light rail is relative low capacity, and Portland's two-car limit even makes it lower capacity. And WES? WES is the worst example of "commuter rail" there is, when Seattle and Los Angeles (among other cities) run nine car, double-deck car trains with each train carrying 1,000 passengers.

BRT is still an improvement over what we have now - 40 foot buses running inconsistently because of poor planning by TriMet. We could have a fully functioning BRT line on Barbur for $50 million. For $50 million, we'll get ONE mile of light rail. For $600 million, we could have 12 BRT routes in Portland - almost all of the formerly Frequent Service lines. For $50 million BRT would go to King City; but TriMet's MAX proposal ends at Tigard TC. Likewise, Milwaukie MAX ends at Milwaukie but we could keep pushing out BRT all the way to Oregon City.

MAX can move more people; so can a Boeing 747-400 in domestic configuration. But you don't see Southwest (or any other airline, for that matter) buying up 747s. Just because a MAX train CAN move more people than a bus doesn't mean it WILL move more people -- MAX frequently runs well under capacity, especially west of Beaverton and east/north/south of Gateway.

Admittedly, the MAX line to Beaverton was a good idea because you had a dozen bus lines running from Beaverton to downtown Portland; likewise MAX to Gresham replaced a good number of long bus hauls. But the Yellow Line replaced one bus line; the Red Line didn't replace any bus lines (although it resulted in the re-routing of the 12 bus to Gresham and away from PDX) and the Green Line couldn't replace any buses - so what is the value of those investments? And WES...it simply did not meet any goal whatsoever, even "land use development" goals, or "trip not taken" goals.

Gordon: In looking closely at Barbur Blvd, I think it is wide enough to have four traffic lanes and still have light rail down the middle, or to the side, or back and forth. Perhaps minor right of way is needed.

Barely if that, and by removing the bike lanes. That isn't going to happen. There are a few places where there is extra right-of-way but it's so fragmented that the road narrows in other places.

In Tigard...a LOT of right-of-way would be required.

As for the old Oregon Electric route, it actually passes south of Washington Square, through a wetland area.

True, because Washington Square didn't come into existence until the early 1970s. However the route is close enough to Washington Square that the line could easy deviate from the original OE alignment, serve Washington Square (a Metro designated "Regional Center"), and then fly over 217 and return to the OE alignment heading into Tigard.

That would still be a better option than WES which doesn't adequately serve Washington Square, and TriMet completely forgot about the necessary WES-bus transfer until the last second. To this day, the northbound 43/76/78 bus stop at the Hall/Nimbus WES station is actually located in the middle of an ODOT construction yard driveway. One would have thought that since TriMet already blew the WES budget by 200%, that actually spending money to install a decent bus stop wouldn't have been a big deal, but as always TriMet has a blank checkbook for rail riders, and pinches pennies for bus riders (considering there are two bus shelters on the WES platform.)

Gordon:: It is also interesting to note, through probably irrelevant, that both Barbur Blvd, between downtown and Bertha Blvd, and I-5 between downtown and Multnomah Blvd. were both once rail lines.

Southern Pacific Red Electric: Union Station, 4th Avenue, Barbur Boulevard, Bertha Boulevard, private ROW to Beaverton, existing railroad tracks along T.V. Highway to Forest Grove, and then south to McMinnville.

Second SP Route: From 4th & Jefferson, east to where Riverplace is now. South along what is now Portland Streetcar route to Gibbs, then follow Willamette Shores Trolley route to Lake Oswego, then existing P&W line west to Tualatin, Sherwood, Newberg, Dundee, and Lafayette - join 1st Red Electric route at St. Joseph and into McMinnville. Line then continues south on existing P&W to Corvallis.

Oregon Electric: I-5 to Multnomah Boulevard, to Garden Home - junction, one line NW along the OE Right-of-Way Trail to Beaverton, one line SW to North Dakota/Tiedeman intersection, unused grade through Tigard to Hall Boulevard, existing freight railroad (WES) to Tualatin and Wilsonville and continued all the way to Eugene.

"So.... anybody have any better suggestions for moving people between Tigard and Portland?"

I-5? Both Erik H's suggestion of following old rail lines and Guilty Carnivore's of running a high speed train on I-5 to Salem with drop off points to spur regional transit (buses, what have you) have merit.

Unfortunately they make too much sense.