I’ve been on blog-cation for the past month or so, but here is the open thread for August.
- The Southwest Corridor Steering Committee unanimously approved the draft recommendations published recently. This includes study of rapid transit (either BRT or LRT) from Portland to Tualatin via Tigard, along with other improvements to local service as well as improvements for other modes.
- TriMet has a new customer outreach program called Riders Club. and is soliciting feedback on improving rider experience.
- The Sunrise JTA project, the first phase of the long-planned Sunrise Corridor (and hopefully, the only phase), breaks ground.
- The launch of the GlobeSherpa mobile ticketing app will be delayed one week due to a cyber-attack on the Apple developer website.
As always, keep it clean and civil, and respect the virtual ride.
173 responses to “August 2013 Open Thread”
I’ve been tracking the active ODOT STIP Enhance funding process, keeping my eye on the Foster Road Safety project funding.
Personally, I consider ODOT to have an ethical obligation to making Foster Road safe, considering it is their connections to Powell, 82nd, and I-205 that has lead to so much dangerous traffic on the street.
Yesterday they presented a summary of public comments. Foster Road received over 150 comments in support. This is more than double the next highest supported project, and makes up almost 1/3 of all comments received across all 44 projects.
So is Foster going to get funded from ODOT? Sources say maybe not. I wonder if this massive showing of public support could help change their mind.
TriMet has a new customer outreach program called Riders Club. and is soliciting feedback on improving rider experience.
~~~>They just have to reinvent the wheel don’t they. Well I know how it is down there, if they can’t control it they won’t participate. Which is why Trimet won’t assign one of its highly paid ‘public affairs’ managers to regularly comment over at the most popular transit blog in PDX.
If they were serious about feeback (which they aren’t) all they have to do is watch the twitter feed on Trimet. You got the good the bad, and the ugly right there for the taking.
But Noooooooooooooooooooo! They have to have ‘the riders club’ which will obviously be subscribed by a whole bunch of Trimet supporters with just flowing reviews of everything that is Trimet.
I get sick of their never ending BS propaganda
Al, do you think TriMet doesn’t read that Twitter feed? You’d be wrong.
Al, do you think folks don’t tire of your never ending hyperbole?
Al, do you think folks don’t tire of your never ending hyperbole?
~~>I’m sure they do, but I’m just doing the opposite of what Trimet is doing. Somebody got to do it might as well be me.
Al, do you think TriMet doesn’t read that Twitter feed? You’d be wrong.
~~~>Ya I know they look at everything but acknowledge very little.
Hyperbole or no, it’s really hard to avoid being cynical of everything TriMet does. Having had opportunities to meet with them behind closed doors only confirms how much of a mindgame it becomes. This whole riders club really makes me see it as a way for people to think that they are making change, but TriMet has a streak of not listening to feedback. It may placate some people, but I can’t say it eases my mind.
Of course, there is also the question of where they get the money to afford the prizes and frivolity offered when supposedly the union is about to crash every single thing about TriMet short of the exec raises.
Nick says. “Personally, I consider ODOT to have an ethical obligation to making Foster Road safe, considering it is their connections to Powell, 82nd, and I-205 that has lead to so much dangerous traffic on the street.”
What would help Foster Rd? Just curious, I would like to see more specifics. (Not that I have any great fondness for the route: See below)
I would like to see SE Tacoma St be safe, too. But the major planning here ($300 million on Sellwood Bridge and 1.5 Billion on MLR) is not realistically going to change what people from Clackamas County, who drive through here, are going to do. Since I grew up on another SE Portland s—-e, SE Foster Rd., it’s not just ODOT’s connections, but also that METRO and Clackamas Co. are not seeing eye to eye. Plus there simply are a lot of dunderheads in the sticks who will drive, no matter what. (Or as in the case of the Springwater Trail, ride at night w/o lights, as required by Oregon law.)
If we are going to have mass transit, let’s do it so that it works financially—and get a little more creative on how to attract riders.
Nick Falbo: It’s not ODOT making the ultimate decision on which STIP Enhance projects to fund. It’s the Region 1 STIP Project Selection Committee (ODOT is just one of many at the table). You can see the committee reps at:
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION1/Pages/stip/stip_enhance.aspx
Foster has a severe safety problem. We’ve been seeing a traffic fatality every couple years.
The street environment east of 82nd is a total disaster (5 ft. sidewalks with telephone poles in the middle). West of 82nd the sidewalks are nice, but opportunities to comfortably cross the street are few.
The current plan for Foster is the 2003 Transportation and Streetscape Plan. But a committee has been meeting to update that plan in light of other recent citywide planning efforts, so some of the specifics there may change. In general, the old plan calls for:
The update has broadened the vision to include potential changes to the roadway. Possibilities include:
Better sidewalks east of 82nd are going to be one of the new big-ticket items, and since that stretch of Foster basically functions as an on/off ramp between 82nd and I-205, I wouldn’t mind if ODOT helped pay for it.
Bertha starts work.
http://www.gizmag.com/bertha-worlds-largest-tunnel-machine-seattle/28540/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=a5bdf65a67-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_65b67362bd-a5bdf65a67-90918165
(I know it sounds funny….I hope I didn’t write something that wasn’t P.C. But I think it’s interesting : )
Nice to see the Sunrise JTA break ground, and here’s hoping the proposed 6-to-8-lane monstrosity gets relegated to the same dustbin as Original Recipe CRC, especially now that Damascus won’t be densifying as earlier predicted. Ultimately, I’m thinking something akin to a 4-lane parkway between I-205 and Boring Jct would be sufficient.
Maybe it’s too early to address these, but I did have a couple of questions regarding this project (I emailed the the project’s ODOT contact but never got a response):
1) I’m glad 82nd Ave and 82nd Dr will be joined as a continuous thoroughfare, but will be there a direct connection between this thoroughfare and Milwaukie Expwy/Sunrise JTA? The Sunrise JTA map leads me to believe this won’t be the case.
2) Will the OR 212 or 224 designation (or both) be transferred to the new highway?
Regarding $1 Streetcar fares, doesn’t state and/or federal law require senior/disabled fares to be no more than half price?
direct connection between this thoroughfare and Milwaukie Expwy/Sunrise JTA?
Northbound, I think one could use the existing ramps on the north side of Milwaukie Expressway; southbound it appears it may not be possible to get onto 82nd Drive.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013/07/japan-20130729-1.html#more
Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Mitsubishi agree to joint development of charging infrastructure for plug-in vehicles in Japan
29 July 2013
The Powell-Division corridor was delayed till the Fall. First, the potential for this corridor to effect a much wider area is significant. If, for example a MAX line were to be built to 205, the green line to Clackamas TC would be significantly faster to downtown via Powell. Unfortunately, I don’t think this will be considered based on their limited map.
Running BRT from Gresham down Powell and Division to 205 would limit ROW acquisition and significantly increase access to E Portland, now served by a very infrequent Green Line and buses.
Why should ODOT pay for anything on Foster Road; and do you really want ODOT managing a city street?
Look at 82nd Avenue – it’s a state highway. Do you consider it a success because of ODOT funding?
Look at Sandy Boulevard; at M.L.K. Boulevard, at Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway. See all those projects that are being funded? They are being funded because those roads were removed from ODOT jurisdiction. Look at Powell Boulevard – still a state highway. And why is there a holdup on Barbur Boulevard? It’s a state highway too, and ODOT does not want to turn Barbur into a 20 MPH downtown street, yet Portland would be happy if there were speedbumps and two travel lanes along Barbur all the way to the Tigard city line.
The issue is that ODOT is not – and should not – be in the business of managing local streets. Portland can easily fix Foster Road. It just doesn’t want to, because it’s in East Portland and outside the “Streetcar District” and few of the bicyclist lobbyists live there (and those that do, ride the Springwater Trail anyways and don’t need Foster).
The bicycle community has been strongly supportive of the City’s Foster Road project precisely because the street is so unsafe.
If the DOT decides to end the bike lane at 82nd, perhaps they could at least allow the bike lane to first merge with the right turn lane, and then continue across the intersection to 83rd where cyclists can safely get on Woodstock a few blocks south. Bikes need a safe, dedicated and visible place to cross 82nd.
“The bicycle community has been strongly supportive of the City’s Foster Road project precisely because the street is so unsafe.”
What does it take to move a thoroughfare into the “unsafe” category? Every main street in the city is rapidly moving in that direction. And there will be more to come when the suburban governments up and decide that their tax base is too small, also.
Pretty pathetic.
Sean, how about MAX on Powell to East Portland and Gresham but also run a rerouted Red Line on Powell Blvd to I-205, then swing it north along existing Green Line track (Powell to Gateway) then onto the existing Red Line track (Gateway to Airport), this would also allow for the elimination of the crazy singletrack out of direction horseshoe at Gateway TC. You get 2 lines on Powell to I-205, and get the Banfield part of MAX down to 2 lines (3 lines is overkill there now).
jon,
Not a bad solution (to the Steel Br. problem). The reason I suggested a shorter MAX route with BRT from 205 concerns the nature of the Powell-Division Transit Project, which as its first objective states: “Develop a transit solution that effectively serves the high demand in the near term.”
http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=42315
This worries me as it could mean they may not even consider LRT. I think this is a mistake. With the opening of the Milwaukie LR Bridge, a line across the UP Brooklyn Yard, down Powell to Clackamas may lesson already congested traffic on the Banfield lines and shorten travel time significantly. I suppose we’ll find out how limited this project is in the Fall.
Why should ODOT pay for anything on Foster Road; and do you really want ODOT managing a city street?
Because ODOT is the state transportation agency, and oversees all transportation, not just that which occurs on state-owned facilities. Specifically, many of the grant applications listed have nothing to do with state highways, such as off-street city trails, bus barns and local park and ride lots.
“Why should ODOT pay for anything on Foster Road; and do you really want ODOT managing a city street?”
As Jason said, ODOT is managing the funding, which is available for jurisdictions all across the state, not just ODOT facilities. This funding opportunity doesn’t change who is responsible for a street. PBOT would still be the owner.
I am using ODOT’s name too loosely in my posts. There is indeed a selection committee convened to narrow down the awards. (Why they didn’t use JPACT for this decision, I do not know). Jason Tell is representing ODOT’s interests on the committee, and from what I can tell he did *not* include Foster Road on his initial 150% list. As the list is narrowed down more, we’ll need all the support we can get.
If I understand the process correctly, their recommendations will go to the Oregon Transportation Commission for final approval.
Sean’s comment about bicyclists being able to safely cross 82nd is perhaps where ODOT themselves come into play the most. 82nd *is* their street, and they will have significant control over how the operations at the intersection play out. PBOT has come up with an innovative, thoughtful solution involving a combined bike lane/turn lane. I wish it were a dedicated lane with an exclusive signal phase to prevent conflicts all together, but it’s better than nothing.
Bike thief at work, in front of Eco Trust building in Pearl!! Yesterday I rode to services held in the Eco Trust building. Being in a hurry, because it would take about three times longer than by auto, I failed to grab the keychain with the bike lock key on it. But, I thought, one time, and the bike tied with my helmet straps in front of where folks are coming and going, and there is a pizza place with sidewalk tables, it would be safe. Wrong. Came out 1 1/2 hours later and bike is gone. Since the Springwater Trail was established on my street I have had items taken: nylon tarp, bicycle (from back of house where it was put away, out of sight) Previously, local tavern goers had taken stuff from the front, even a large English walnut wardrobe, and Lord knows what they would do with just the middle section. I don’t feel safe leaving any object of value on my front porch, including folding chairs.
Of course, even though I think several DUI’s could be handed out per night on my street, with other tickets for loud exhausts and speeding, Portland Police do absolutely nothing. But we can have rusty metal sculptures that cost half a million and look like something out of a Transformer movie, installed on busy streetcorners; there are two of them across from Multco/Kremlin and another one in the works near the Morrison bridge..
Sometimes, Portland just sucks.
“But we can have rusty metal sculptures that cost half a million and look like something out of a Transformer movie, installed on busy street corners.”
Hey Ron, you owe some prop designers and some special effects artists an apology- “Transformers”
is hella cooler than the rusty re-bar on Hawthorne.
When see the re-bar so-called sculpture, I feel like there should be clothes drying on it. The sculpture would make Giocomatti cry it -is so ugly and static.
“The sculpture would make Giocomatti cry it -is so ugly and static.”
No, rust is in style, nowadays. That’s why Commissioner Kafoury wanted to replace the Lindenthal-designed Sellwood bridge with a $300 million weathering steel arch.
Gotta be in style, y’know…even if traffic on SE Tacoma St. will just continue to pile up—-since they didn’t figure on any express tunnel. underneath.
I’ve been digging through some old posts and came up with something interesting about why Trimet funds the STREET CAR!
Also while looking around the net at some past stuff I came up with THIS great video starring some of the personalities that have come and gone at Portland Transport.
Because ODOT is the state transportation agency, and oversees all transportation, not just that which occurs on state-owned facilities. Specifically, many of the grant applications listed have nothing to do with state highways, such as off-street city trails, bus barns and local park and ride lots.
ODOT does not “oversee all transportation” and the vast majority of transportation in Oregon is outside of ODOT’s jurisdiction. ODOT’s jurisdiction is generally limited (ODOT does have jurisdiction over speed limits, for example, so a city wanting to change a speed limit must apply for it through ODOT) and not all-encompassing.
ODOT does have a limited amount of funding that goes to local jurisdictions, yes. But why should that funding go to a city street, because the city refuses to invest in its street and reallocates its own money towards development projects? ODOT’s focus is – and should be – “highways of statewide importance”, or at a minimum roadways that cross city and county lines. The last time I checked, the Foster project didn’t extend into rural Clackamas County on its portion of Foster Road. The real issue is Portland using highway funding for non-highway projects (bike lanes, streetcars, MAX) and then crying poverty when vital safety projects are neglected in favor of unnecessary development-related projects.
ODOT’s focus is – and should be – “highways of statewide importance”, or at a minimum roadways that cross city and county lines.
While it isn’t correct to claim that ODOT “oversees all transportation” (there is much that it doesn’t oversee or participate in), it’s also incorrect to suggest that it’s mission is limited to “highways of statewide importance”. ODOT’s mission is a bit more complicated than that, and does include both non-highway modes and non-regional transportation–though as a practical matter, most of what ODOT actually designs and builds are state highways.
The STIP program, while administered by ODOT and funded in large part by state and/or federal funds, is not limited to highways or roads; nor is it limited to projects of statewide or regional importance. While you may disagree with the desirability of a Foster Road road diet, Erik–there’s no basis whatsoever for the suggestion that Portland is acting improperly by using STIP funds for that purpose.
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/STIP/documents/stipusers.pdf
Worst of all, even though a bus is a much more efficient use of crowded space than a private car, it ends up stuck in the same traffic jam as everyone else.
The best light rail systems avoid these pitfalls, giving trains dedicated lanes, a sensible way for customers to pay, and stations that are far enough apart that the train isn’t stopping every three blocks. But low-quality rail can have the exact same problems. The much-hyped H Street streetcar line being constructed in Washington, D.C., is beloved by real estate developers, but is going to leave riders with a train stuck in the exact same traffic jams as the existing buses on the corridor.(SEE PORTLAND ST CAR) Detroit’s M-1 streetcar project suffers from the same flaw, making it more of an exercise in civic boosterism than a real transportation improvement. But by the same token, it should be perfectly possible to construct bus lines that have the major virtues of light rail and just happen to run on roads rather than rails. This kind of so-called Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) can typically (though not always) be done at substantially lower cost than new rail construction.
Bus rapid transit: Improved buses are the best route to better transit. – Slate Magazine
The best light rail systems avoid these pitfalls, giving trains dedicated lanes, a sensible way for customers to pay, and stations that are far enough apart that the train isn’t stopping every three blocks. But low-quality rail can have the exact same problems.
~~~>I would say that Portland has the ‘low quality rail’ indeed!
“oversees all transportation”
I meant that in a general sense, not that ODOT controls every bit of transportation in Oregon. ODOT has a Public Transit Division, a bicycle/pedestrian program, etc and isn’t called the Oregon State Highway Department anymore for a reason.
“>I would say that Portland has the ‘low quality rail’ indeed!”
Boy, did you say a mouthful there!
“Worst of all, even though a bus is a much more efficient use of crowded space than a private car, it ends up stuck in the same traffic jam as everyone else.”
Unless you alleviate the cause of traffic jams: too many people, too little road space.
Then, in both systems there may be the odd failure now and then. But buses have infinitely more flexibility than rail. Yes, I said “infinitely.”
Let’s rename the blog “PortlandAntiRailFanatics.com”, eh?
“Groupthink, a term coined by social psychologist Irving Janis (1972), occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of “mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment” (p. 9). Groups affected by groupthink ignore alternatives and tend to take irrational actions that dehumanize other groups.”
Andarkos, sorry you have to share the earth with howler monkeys (aka Washington taxpayers) and the “fanatics” on this blog. I really respect the dehumanizing language in your discourse.
Oops.
Then, in both systems there may be the odd failure now and then. But buses have infinitely more flexibility than rail. Yes, I said “infinitely.”
Buses are only as flexible as the road system’s limitations allow them to be. I don’t argue with your basic premise – that there is potential duplicity in routing for buses – but calling it “infinite” is theoretical at best, and borders on hyperbole.
“Buses are only as flexible as the road system’s limitations allow them to be.”
>>>>> Which is almost always much much greater than a rail system’s limitations allow trains to be.
Buses routes are as flexible as pipe cleaners in comparison with the rigidity of light rail.
Yes, limits due to street capacity and the fact that people don’t particularly like to ride buses.
Buses are not considered enjoyable.
I say this in only half jest, but people love horses. Horse drawn wagons might pencil out.
You could get a wagon and draft horses for 150k.
Stable & food- 20k Vet- 5k.
The flexibility we are talking about here is re-routing and obstacle avoidance flexibility. There are other types of flexibility- like vehicle length that can be easier in rail systems.
If buses have stops that are spaced far apart, they have quite a bit of route flexibility, but if the bus needs to pass all of their stops then the amount of flexibility is quite limited, although they have lane flexibility.
“Let’s rename the blog “PortlandAntiRailFanatics.com”, eh?”
Who said anything about being anti-rail? We need to get interstate freight off the highways and on to rail. Then the highways would be safer, but the “American consumer (who) wants it now” (from what the truckers say) might have to re–figure their little calculus of consumerism.
And FYI, I have been pro MAX longer than anti-MAX. But living in a neighborhood where the MAX line has tripled in cost since first disclosed—-and the general traffic problems promise to be much worse—-has given me a lot of pause. And when we have examples, no more than 200 miles from here, of bus services duplicating MAX results at 5 percent of the costs, why shouldn’t someone be “anti rail?” And, then, Canada goes and starts the same type of express bus service in 6 of their cities. My gosh, Chicken Little, the sky is falling.
At Monday Clark Co. Commissioners meeting (that someone invited me to and where I repeatedly made clear I was not a constituent, but accepted the open invitation to adrress them anyway) someone name Paul M. whined that without the CRC the federal funding was gone, I suppose like a horse stolen out of the barn.
Gosh, I guess having a US House Transportation Chairman, Rep. Schuster, who came here and personally heard our grievances, just counts for nothing. Ya think????
Mamacita,
Did you see our recent April Fools article?
@Ron,
For the 87,000th time DoubleTalls != BRT != LRT. Express buses are great for the very limited application of peak hour commutation where HOV lanes already exist and have available capacity. They’re relatively cheap to implement and don’t stir up the visceral hatred of black and Hispanic people that ordinary transit excites among so many suburbanites.
Westside MAX served originally as a replacement for the Washington County expresses, so that’s what people think the purpose of LRT is. It still does that, but increasingly it has become an all-day crowded people mover west of Beaverton TC as it has shaped the development of Washington County. The Red Line is going to have to be extended west of BTC soon, simply to handle the loads, forget the advantages of a one seat ride from the tech corridor to the airport.
The MAX Green Line is (unfortunately) pretty much limited to being a commuter line, because nobody wants to do significant TOD right alongside freeways, although the terminus at Clackamas Town Center is a significant trip generator. People don’t like to live alongside freeways because of the noise and fumes, and traffic accessing the highway is always a hassle.
Because Milwaukee MAX was built “on the cheap” down the grassy strip between McLaughlin and the railroad, it too will not attract much TOD, and that’s a shame. Perhaps in the future the folks in northern Clackamas County will see the value of extending it along McLaughlin south of Park Street. There are lots of opportunities for TOD along it, although it is a hideously wide and fast street. It would be better if an extension paralleled McLaughlin about a block away, with significant development between the highway and rail line.
That’s a long time in the future, though.
So far as extending the Yellow Line to Vancouver, I’ve said for a long time that because of the cost of the necessary bridge, it does’t make sense. If it were three miles of solid ground the train would already be in Vantucky.
So, oddly enough, in the end result, I agree with the Howler Monkeys. I just don’t want what they want as an alternative: a honkin’ huge rubber tired freeway with the massive, uncontrolled and graft-ridden sprawl in Clark County it would bring.
To the geniuses at Portland who thought it was a great idea to put Division St. on a “road diet”:
My twice per week commute from 148th to 42nd, took a full 15 minutes longer and caused me to burn up an additional .9 gallons of fuel (round trip). Thats ~100 gallons a year of wasted fuel from one vehicle and on one project.
Multiple lanes make traffic move smoother, and enable one to pass that slow poke or bus that seems to stop at every single block.
Oh, but there are bike lanes!
Electric bus that charges when driven over magnetic fields created by electrical cables buried in the road.
“They’re relatively cheap to implement and don’t stir up the visceral hatred of black and Hispanic people that ordinary transit excites among so many suburbanites. ”
Glittering generality and some political grievance that has nothing to do with me….. where’s the moderator? So I didn’t even bother to read the rest of your BS.
Why don’t you let the inhabitants of Seattle-Everett tell us what THEY think.
Anthony say”Multiple lanes make traffic move smoother, and enable one to pass that slow poke or bus that seems to stop at every single block. ”
No…but with the way Portlanders drive (as in oblivious to ROW laws, not signaling, or giving you one sec before it’s like…”hey, I’m here!! Move over!!!) I’m sure this will induce a coping strategy, (one actually already in widespread use)namely: Just veer over the median line, and let the oncoming traffic move out of the way!!!
In Portland such coping strategies are cool, especially if you have to veer around a cyclist or a UPS truck, or a beer truck.
I love reading THIS stuff from around the country.
Anthony,
I wasn’t at any of the Division St. meetings, but the a similar reconfiguration is on the table for Foster Road. They assured us that traffic impacts start off bad (similar to a temporary construction zone), but they will mellow out with time as people adjust. Please come back to us in a month and let us know if you still have 15 minutes of added delay.
But you’re right that there will be some slowdown. Is it worth it? From what I remember about the Division St. discussion online the change was mostly about improving safety. How many minutes in delay is that safety worth? It sounds like 15 is too many. How about 10? or 5? or 2?
Settlements are reached in lawsuits that resulted from the 2010 accident in which a TriMet bus ran over and killed several pedestrians in Old Town. TriMet and bus manufacturer New Flyer will each pay plaintiffs $2M. The settlement “includes claims outside the Oregon Tort Claims Act”, which ordinarily limits the financial liability of public agencies in Oregon. Plaintiffs had sued in federal court, which would not be bound by the Oregon Tort Claims Act (and had advocated legal theories such as civil rights violations, designed to give the federal courts jursidiction; several months ago, the Federal court refused to dismiss the case).
That TriMet would be found liable is not surprising–its operator was clearly at fault (and was fired from the agency, as well as found guilty of several traffic violations, resulting in loss of her commercial drivers’ license). What is a bit surprising is that the settlement amount DID go above the OTCA maximum–and that New Flyer (who isn’t protected by the OTCA) also settled.
Beaverton planners have run into a bit of a problem in planning South Cooper Mountain: Much of the land they thought was buildable, isn’t. The question thus becomes–what to do about it?
* Stick with the original goal of >4500 homes in the parcel, building at higher densities than originally anticipated?
* Or reduce the number of homes to be built there, maintaining planned densities on the buildable parts, but deducting out those parts that cannot be built on?
And while we’re at it–can we get some all-day bus service out that way past Murray Road? Progress Ridge has to be one of the denser places in the entire metro area that is completely transit-free…
“as well as found guilty of several traffic violations, resulting in loss of her commercial drivers’ license).”
Sounds like someone hit the (safety) glass ceiling….
@Ron,
You’re clearly not a racist, and I don’t believe I stated or implied that you were. But many suburbanites are; maybe they believe in “equal opportunity” in a theoretical way, but they sure don’t want to sit with “those people”.
What do you think all the screaming about the “Crime Train” is about?
Express buses are popular with commuters precisely because they don’t stop anywhere in the inner city except the CBD. Obviously from a utilitarian point of view, that’s advantageous because a stop is a stop, regardless of the reason for it. But there’s also a heavy patina of “Oooh, those people [who might get on] are icky!” Just read the comments in the Columbian if you are still in doubt.
I don’t see anything wrong with plain speaking.
Anadakos,
You really throw the racism word around with little provocation. First of all, it is awfully rude to call your neighbors “howler monkeys” monkeys being the great racist meme.
And, when you demonize your opposition for
holding different (but mainstream beliefs) and
paint them as hating other people based on skin color, you have fallen into the ugly thinking patterns of an actual racist. I am not calling you a racist, I am calling you out for having
a way of thinking that is similar to that of a racist- you feel morally superior and those who disagree with you are monkeys.
“…. you feel morally superior and those who disagree with you are monkeys. ”
>>>> Right. You really greatly diminish your credibility by these sort of comments.
Move over, maglev. Elon Musk is proposing a hyperloop to provide a 38 minute ride from LA to SF.
While what Musk suggests is interesting–at this point it appears to be firmly in the category of “gadgetbahn”.
The question: Is Musk attempting to interfere with CAHSR, either to make a play for its revenue, or to derail it with the promise of futuristic new technology that he claims is a lot cheaper? This is completely different animal than building a better electric car (and Musk deserves every bit of praise and money he gets for Tesla).
I’d love to see him develop a prototype. That said, I doubt that construction of Hyperloop, were it to be shown to be feasible and buildable, would come in at a tenth the cost of construction of HSR–a mature technology that we know how to design and build. Much of the cost of such a line is the cost of the real estate, and much of the rest of the cost is good-old-fashioned political grease–costs that would still have to be incurred even if hyperloop instead of rails were installed on the right-of-way.
There is one way in which I can see hyperloop (or some future technology) reducing the cost: Getting trains over the San Bernadino mountains is expensive–and HSR, with much more stringent requirements for track curvature and gradient than conventional rail, would be particularly so. (A whole lot of structure-building and earth-moving is proposed). If hyperloop does function like a pneumatic tube at the bank’s drive-through window, and can simply run up the Grapevine alongside I-5 (or in the median), that would potentially save quite a bit of money.
One other issue. Hyperloop appears to be a point-to-point technology; one that needs to run nonstop between SF and LA. CAHSR also is intended to stop in other places, such as Fresno and Bakersfield; which is a big reason that IT isn’t being routed in the median of I-5 (in the Central Valley).
My reading of Musk’s hyperloop proposal is that its value is for extremely rapid transit between large cities a certain distance apart, so it’s definitely point-to-point with no stops. In fact, it won’t work if you put stops along the way. (Although it does leave open the possibility of branch lines that share the main tube.)
And yeah, he’s looking at reducing land costs by running most of the line in the I-5 right-of-way.
Assuming the idea has any merit, somebody will try it out. It doesn’t need to be in the USA.
Nick, Mamacita,
Thanks for the feedback. Even though the chances that it was meant in a constructive way are about one in a googleplex, I will act on it.
Scotty,
Elon has left one important feature of railcars out of his prototype: los Baños. Yes, it’s only 38 minutes, but……
P.S.
About the Grapevine; the curves are too sharp for the tube to follow I-5 in the median over the hill, so it’ll require quite a bit of tunneling. I’m pretty sure that is not in the $8 billion “estimate”.
Most urban transit gets by with no restrooms, and they frequently take people on trips of an hour or more. Restrooms at the stations would be sufficient for a hyperloop system.
Most urban transit gets by with no restrooms, and they frequently take people on trips of an hour or more. Restrooms at the stations would be sufficient for a hyperloop system.
Excluding a few express lines, most urban transit stops frequently, so if you really gotta go you can hop off the bus or train, do your business, and then get on the next.
That said–if a vehicle is travelling at 800MPH, and not maintaining a steady course, getting up to go to the john might well be fatal if the vehicle takes a sharp curve. You can safely get up and wander around an airplane going 500MPH simply because the plane maintains a more-or-less constant trajectory in level flight. But quite a few fatalities have occurred in airliners when the plane undertakes emergency maneuvers (or is subject to unexpected external forces such as extreme turbulence or windshear), and unbuckled passengers find themselves flung into bulkheads, walls, or the ceiling at relative speeds of 50MPH or more…
True enough about the risks of getting up on a high-speed vehicle. I expect you’d spend 38 minutes sitting down. Possibly wearing headphones and watching your choice of 30 minute programs on the TV screen mounted in front of you.
Generally, I expect passengers will (a) take a restroom break right before they leave, or (b) if they suddenly discover they need to go, hold it for fifteen or twenty minutes until they arrive. Those with known medical issues probably could wear an adult diaper.
I wonder if Musk has planned to accommodate passengers with disabilities in this proposal.
If I’m traveling 900 mph I’m pretty sure I’m going to pee myself in fear. Maybe we give everyone diapers.
Catheters. :)
Not suprising that the fear comment came up! I think the main failure in the proposal is that if the trip could be made in 38 minutes for $20, the demand would be huge and the system doesn’t seem to have proposed enough capacity to meet this demand. But I would love to see it get built and then complain about how popular it was
We can use it to ship large amounts of data from city to city via hard drives (talking terabytes or someday petabytes here that are impractical to upload on your home broadband connection), thereby fulfilling the infamous claim that the Internet is a “series of tubes”.
The Hyperloop concept is a joke. As an engineer, I admire the technology, and I think it is feasible, but he wouldn’t be able to use it to connect SF and LA for less than $30 billion. If you look at the proposal closely, the lines end at the edges of each city. The most expensive and politically challenging part of the project is completely gone. Musk is a genius when it comes to technology, but he has a very poor understanding of politics and public infrastructure. Just look at the challenges Tesla stores are having:
http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/2013/08/07/teslas-biggest-foe-car-dealers/
FORBES is running a piece saying that AV’s and conventional transport will kill ultra-expensive high speed projects:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/08/13/why-elon-musks-hyperloop-wont-work-googles-driverless-cars/
The argument is that business travel has traditionally driven expensive fast-travel modes, and that the availability of mobile electronic devices, making it possible to conduct business from slow passive travel vehicles, means it’s less worthwhile to spend extra money for speed.
Alon Levy, who is smarter than most of us here put together, takes Elon Musk (and Hyperloop) to the woodshed.
In Seattle, a King County Metro bus driver is shot and wounded by a passenger, who is subsequently shot and killed by police. Driver’s injuries are non-life-threatening.
http://seattletransitblog.com/2013/08/12/bus-involved-shooting-outside-benaroya-hall/
http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/shot-metro-driver-feels-lucky/nZNdb/
ROAD IS BLOCKED AT ST CAR IS USELESS
(st car is NOT a transit vehicle, this happens a dozen times a day)
Sounds like they need a dedicated ROW to keep the trains away from all of those dangerous cars.
Does anyone know what path buses are going to take after having crossed the PMLR bridge to the east side?
Looks like the OMSI station has the buses in the same ROW, but it’s unclear what they do from there. Will they turn on Water? Or will the dedicated ROW continue toward the Clinton station? I’ve looked at a bunch of renderings, but can’t seem to find this out, and haven’t seen it mentioned here. Thanks.
Public Transit Is Worth Way More to a City Than You Might Think
“Planning scholar Daniel Chatman of the University of California at Berkeley has been thinking a lot lately about “agglomeration.” Don’t let the technical word throw you. All it really means is more people in the same place. As more people collect in a city center, more jobs cluster there too, boosting both wages and economic productivity over time. And the key to it all, he believes, may be public transportation.
“To me it’s fascinating,” says Chatman. “It’s all about how people interact with each other. This is what could be happening by virtue of this densification near transit stops, which could happen from investments that draw people to use transit.”
In a new paper set for publication in Urban Studies, Chatman and fellow planner Robert Noland of Rutgers University use concrete numbers to make the case that transit produces agglomeration. They report that this hidden economic value of transit could be worth anywhere from $1.5 million to $1.8 billion a year, depending on the size of the city. And the bigger the city, they find, the bigger the agglomeration benefit of expanding transit.”
read the rest here:
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2013/08/public-transit-worth-way-more-city-you-think/6532/
TriMet publishes final ridership numbers for FY13:
http://news.trimet.org/2013/08/trimet-provides-more-than-99-million-rides-in-fy-2013/
* 99 million trips, 3% lower than last year, and in-line with agency predictions
* WES saw a small (5.5%) increase, though at 400k rides, is only 0.4% of the total.
* Bus ridership was flat, 60M bus trips last year.
* MAX was down 7%, according to TriMet, due to end of Free Rail Zone.
(Streetcar, not being a TriMet service, is not counted in the total).
99 million trips in a month?
That’s 3 million trips per day
Approximately 2,289,800 people live in the Portland metropolitan area
What’s wrong with this?
99M trips per year; these are the figures for the whole fiscal year from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013. 99M trips per month would be awesome, but no–TriMet doesn’t have that level of ridership. :)
3E, I asked your question to someone on the project. This is his response:
The buses will travel along the shared transit way, that is through the OMSI station, under the McLaughlin viaduct, and over to SE 7th Ave where they will leave the shared transit way on to the roadway network. Buses headed inbound will enter the shared transit way on SE 8th Ave.
Hey, Douglas K. thanks for the link to SmartPlanet. Hadn’t heard of that one before. I’ll check it out.
I wonder if anyone saw the article on there about “medical tourism” and how to save bundles by going overseas:
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/how-to-save-104802-on-heart-surgery/25248?tag=search-river
Of course, with Obamacare, and the possibility of a single payer system, the economic need for cost competitive healthcare kinda disappears. And then US doctors, as they regain a corner on the market, can continue to jack up prices.
Oh, well………
Seems off topic… it is my understanding that countries with socialized healthcare have lower costs per capita. The U.S. has the dubious honor of being the most expensive per capita, without topping the list in quality of care.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_%28PPP%29_per_capita
And then US doctors, as they regain a corner on the market, can continue to jack up prices.
Ron, do you know what a “monospony” is?
It’s like a monopoly, but where there are several vendors supplying a single buyer (or a single payer), as opposed to a monopoly, which is multiple customers buying from a single source.
WalMart and amazon.com function as retail monopsonies–and that is why prices are low at these places: they can dictate low prices to upstream suppliers, who have to eat it.
A single-payer system in the US would (in theory at least) be a monopsony in healthcare. There’s a reason the medical establishment is terrified of single-payer; healthcare costs would be reduced largely at the expense of their profits. Medicare is already a good example of this–there’s a reason many docs wont take Medicare, and that is because Medicare only pays a fraction of what they typically get from a private insurer or a patient who pays out-of-pocket. But if we had single payer, or Medicare for all, doctors would essentially have no choice than to accept the fees that the government is willing to pay.
The downside of this is that fewer people will become doctors–the main problem with single payer systems is not expense, but long waits for care, as there are fewer physicians willing to become specialists when doing so is no longer a golden ticket to a Ferrari in the driveway.
(One other problem, and this does affect healthcare delivery in the US: Often times, the monopsony power of a single payer is thwarted by legislation–I believe there is are provisions in US law limiting Medicare’s ability to negotiate down drug prices; something put in as part of the usual horse-trading that goes on when the sausage is made…)
Thanks Jeff F!
That routing makes sense. I guess the shared roadway will curve around by Division such that the buses will turn onto 8th instead of 7th. At 7th by Division, there’s a pretty big wall.
So I guess outbound buses will either make a left onto 8th and then a right onto Division, or a right onto 8th and then get onto Powell somehow. Does that make sense?
I would have thought this would have been in one of the planning documents, but I was never able to find it.
So I take it that if Trimet wanted to, it could run the #4 over the new bridge along with #9, 17, and 19?
I haven’t heard anything about the 4 going over the new bridge, but it certainly runs close enough to the shared roadway!
I’m more curious whether the 4 will alter its route in order to more directly intersect with the light rail stops. Right now it stops a few blocks north of where the Clinton stop will be. Close, but not direct.
So I take it that if Trimet wanted to, it could run the #4 over the new bridge along with #9, 17, and 19?
The problem there is the railroad tracks; UPRR frequently runs long, slow trains through the region. There’s a reason why only one TriMet route (the 70) crosses the tracks at grade.
It might be possible for the 4 to use the new bridge by driving on the streetcar overcrossing and then looping around when it reaches Grand/MLK, but I’m not sure that gives any advantage over the present routing–other than an interchange with PMLR at OMSI.
Long term, my hope is to see a new overcrossing of the UPRR tracks in the vicinity of Clinton Street, especially since the old one was demolished for PMLR and is not being rebuilt. Ideally, it would permit 11th and 12th to cross the tracks without being stopped by trains (and naturally include appropriate bike and ped facilities)
Long term, I would love to see the east bank freeway either buried or removed completely, and a trenched, 3 or 4-track UPRR ROW established. We are going to need this if we want the inner east side to see much higher densities.
Did anyone else see Jim Howell’s “Sensible” option for crossing the Columbia over on BikePortland? As usual Jim got things right…more options…transit, local bridge, cycle track, etc.
Between half and 1/3 of the traffic on I-5 is local trips that should not have to use an Interstate freeway.
Jim Howell’s “Sensible” option for crossing the Columbia
You mean THIS?
I think Lenny was referring to CSA II – http://bikeportland.org/2013/08/05/a-new-common-sense-vision-for-a-columbia-crossing-91540
I think Lenny was referring to CSA II
I think its the same thing in a different format
The Induct Navia eight passenger autonomous vehicle will be used to shuttle people two km between a university and a corporate park in Singapore:
http://phys.org/news/2013-08-trials-singapore-driverless-vehicle.html
These are the same types of vehicles used at the Circuit of the Americas in Texas.
Long term, my hope is to see a new overcrossing of the UPRR tracks in the vicinity of Clinton Street, especially since the old one was demolished for PMLR and is not being rebuilt.
I was disappointed the PMLR funding package didn’t include some sort of new overpass in the vicinity. A SE 7th Ave. crossing of the UPRR and PMLR tracks might be well worth pursuing — it would be less disruptive to build than 11th/12th/Clinton (it would need to cross over Division as well but the street network should allow for easy access between 7th and Division), and would serve as an easy bypass for the 70 bus if a long freight is rumbling through the area.
Originally, the PMLR project would have rebuilt the pedestrian bridge, but that was removed from the project for cost-cutting reasons.
Whatever its troubles, at least TriMet doesn’t have orcs.
TriMet has announced the opening of the process to name the new PMLR bridge. The bridge, long referred to in planning documents as the “PMLR bridge” or the “Caruthers Crossing” (being an extension of Caruthers Street), is more than halfway complete, and is now in need of a name. This is the first new Willamette River crossing in Portland since the Fremont Bridge (ignoring the Sauvie Island bridge replacement a few years back).
Public suggestions will be collected this fall, with candidates narrowed down in the winter, and a name announced in the spring.
The CSA has a few good parts: The local bridge from mainland North Portland to Hayden Island. A lift span would be an improvement on the BNSF, but I firmly believe there should be no further construction within the 600 foot wide deepwater navigation channel. This is a view from the marine commerce and recreational usage side—-one which land based planners tend to overlook.
And then, the rest of the CSA? —Sending light rail to Vancouver and a freight bridge: not really needed. One big flaw in the CRC plan was the “rump” MAX line—-a grand total of 1.5 miles on Washington land. Big deal. An honest discussion of that project would have been a REAL projected cost of taking MAX across Vancouver and then back south on I-205. Pretty sizable breach of public trust to not discuss that, and a good reason for opposing the project.
A third bridge alignment in the BNSF area, with a double through arch design and a large central pier, would at least leave land transportation infrastructure out of the navigation channel. And it could really help demarcate the dredged channel portion from the rest of the main Columbia channel.
“Ron, do you know what a “monospony” is?”
I’ll look that one up in the Stephen Wright Compendium of Important Knowledge. But why having medical business walk off to places where they will do something for a fraction of the US cost (because they want the work, too) wouldn’t have a controlling effect on prices to the US consumer I would like to understand better, then.
The Seattle metro area considers an elected Sound Transit board.
TriMet has announced the opening of the process to name the new PMLR bridge
~~~>We already went through this, where is the Portland transport post on it?
http://portlandtransport.com/archives/2013/04/name_that_bridg.html
That’s why today’s TriMet announcement was noted in the open thread, and not with a separate article. :)
I think it should be named after Sarah Palin.
I think it should be named after Sarah Palin.
Which side of the river–OMSI or SoWa–would be “nowhere”?
The bridge should only be named after Palin if it quits halfway through.
Sorry I have to play the role of the proverbial party pooper but the bridge won’t be completed till at least a year and a half from now and its name is irrelevant.
This is getting a ridiculous amount of press it has no news value at all but it’s certainly a nice distraction from matters that are important.
Mainstream media towing the line yet again.
That’s why today’s TriMet announcement was noted in the open thread, and not with a separate article. :)
Thanks Scott
ignoring the Sauvie Island bridge replacement a few years back
And that bridge technically crosses the Multnomah Channel and not the Willamette River
@AL M,
It’s “toe”, now “tow”. One “toes the line”, meaning one stands at attention with toes aligned to a line drawn by a stick in the ground.
It was for punishment.
“not”, not “now”.
“toes the line”
~~~>Thanks for the English lesson. I doubt I’ll remember any of it
Bus wins AGAIN!
Just like LINK in Seattle to the airport takes longer than the bus used to take. It just never ends, doesn’t it?
@AL M, Nick,
Well, what the f*!@ do you expect? A tram will always take longer than an EXPRESS bus! But it will serve more rides.
Maybe Edinburgh should keep the express bus to and from the center City for the business crowd and charge what it takes to pay for it, like a private operator would.
And the 174 takes longer than Link. Again it was an EXPRESS bus (the 194) which was faster.
Well, what the f*!@ do you expect?
I’ll tell ya what I expect Anandakos, I expect that
THIS will be the way of the future.
Sorry I don’t buy the ‘cattle car’ theory of transit which is to pack em in as many as you can.
Nope.
I’ll tell ya the other problem I have with light rail Anandakos
It destroys everything in its path!
Simple question:
How many passengers going to/from SeaTac does LINK currently serve? How much did the 194 serve prior to LINK?
People have a bizarre love for express buses that cost the most per-passenger to run and serve the fewest people. But they serve nice lovely suburbanites without bothering to pick up any of those urban riff-raff at other stops along the way. So I guess that’s a reason.
One persons’s “pack em in as many as you can” is another’s “serving large numbers of people rather than the elite few.”
WES is very similar to an express bus service, except that it has the costs of rail (which should be used for higher-capacity services) and the service model of a commuter express line. Thus the very high costs and lower ridership. But if it ran on rubber tires, it wouldn’t draw all the complaints. After all, on a cost-per-rider basis it’s not TriMet’s most expensive service, but it’s a very visible target.
Bonus points (nonbinding) to the person who identifies TriMet’s most expensive service on a per-boarding basis, and contrasts that with WES’s costs. Where’s the outrage?
It destroys everything in its path!
Wait, Al, I thought getting rid of high-density condominiums was supposed to be a good thing. Such confusion!
And electricity “running through the park”, oh no!
Next thing you know, they’ll be piping those hazardous currents directly into people’s homes.
Three insurmountable problems with the pneumatic tubes (which is why New York chose rails):
Switching (see “Seattle Monorail”)
Capacity (One car per tube drilled)
Waiting time. The longer the tube the longer between cars, because one has to wait for it to get to the farthest station and return. You can’t reduce the headways.
And you claim to be a transit professional?
WHAT….A….JOKE!
Bonus points (nonbinding) to the person who identifies TriMet’s most expensive service on a per-boarding basis, and contrasts that with WES’s costs. Where’s the outrage?
Counting LIFT? LIFT blows away any of the fixed-route services TriMet runs, when it comes to costing a lot of money.
If you exclude LIFT, then according to this page at Portland Afoot, WES was the most expensive service on a per-rider basis in FY12, at $15.20 per ride–twenty nine cents more expensive than the 84, at $14.91 per ride.
Of course, the 84 is no more. But there’s plenty of other routes that cost north of $7/ride; and most of them run in upscale west-side neighborhoods. Hopefully the reconfiguration of the 47 will make it a more useful route…
OK. I have to apologize. One could use a transfer table technology to move the cars from one tube to a parallel tube operating in the reverse direction.
I still wonder what WES would cost if they were allowed to run it with just one operator per train.
Yep, I was referring to Lift. A terrific and greatly beneficial service, though expensive to operate. I’m pleased that thus far TriMet has chosen to do better than Federal requirements in determining service area, rates, and issues such as curbside pickup vs. porch pickup.
The trick is that as our core transit system grows, to design it in such a way (low floors, wide platforms, wide and reliable ramp mechanisms) which allows for an aging population to continue to use the core services, rather than needing the more expensive Lift service to get around.
And you claim to be a transit professional?
Next thing you know, they’ll be piping those hazardous currents directly into people’s homes.
~~~>The tube thing was a joke but as always seems to be the case I am the only one that gets the humor.
And the cost per ride on light rail is extremely misleading. Light rail requires a HUGE support network of supervisor’s , track technicians, signal techs, controllers, mechanics, and police among other things to keep it running.
I’ve been listening to the actual operation via the scanner for some time now and believe me, its battle to keep the rail going. There is always some problem there, its constant.
The only thing that has more problems keeping it going than light rail is the st car. They seem like total junk.
(of course the buses are nothing to brag about either.)
Now don’t get all upset, I’m just telling you what I hear every day on the scanner when I am listening.
It’s incredible.
Like THIS for example that is happening right this second.
And the cost per ride on light rail is extremely misleading. Light rail requires a HUGE support network of supervisor’s , track technicians, signal techs, controllers, mechanics, and police among other things to keep it running.
Buses require a support network as well, and both modes are accounted for in the budget and when determining cost-per-ride numbers. There are no top-secret mechanics that aren’t reflected on a balance sheet somewhere.
How long has it been since the first incident till This one?
So that was 10 minutes in between serious incidents, it’s all day like this.
Bus service requires nowhere near the type of technical specialized support that the light rail does. Especially since its using already existing infrastructure.
What is the fascination with light rail? No place on earth that is actually thinking about cost is putting in light rail. It seems to be an American fixation.
Oh yea I keep forgetting, its about property development not transit.
It’s called the hijacking of transit funds so developers dreams can come true.
Oh look ANOTHER ONE
I think I have made my point.
What is the fascination with light rail? No place on earth that is actually thinking about cost is putting in light rail. It seems to be an American fixation.
Al, there’s this thing called Google. Try it once in awhile before spouting off on the blog.
List of tram and light rail transit systems
PS… Listening to the scanner all day can be entertaining and even educational, but it gives a false perspective as there is very little radio traffic among vehicles where everything is proceeding normally. Sort of like watching only TV news gives one a false perspective of violent crime – which has been on a steady decline nationwide for well over a decade.
“Sort of like watching only TV news gives one a false perspective of violent crime – which has been on a steady decline nationwide for well over a decade.”
I wonder how many people bother to report crime now, as compared to ten or twenty years ago? If you don’t think the cops will do anythings (such as on petty theft) why bother? Could be some of that attitude in violent crime statistics, too. How much violent crime is going on in the big cities today under the radar, or in populations where, because of some “fear,” won’t report it?
Since none of us are trained sociologists, what would we know?
Since none of us are trained sociologists, what would we know?
You could ask a sociologist or review the literature.
Ron, there’s plenty of criminologists out there and nobody is sounding any alarms (in peer reviewed literature) about systemic worldwide under-reporting of crime compared to previous generations.
(And with today’s computerized reporting and storage systems, it’s much more difficult for a crime, once reported, to get lost behind a filing cabinet.)
In fact, the best explanation for the multi-decadal reduction in violent crime I’ve seen thus far is the Lead Hypothesis.
See here:
Forbes: How Lead Caused America’s Violent Crime Epidemic
If true, we can largely thank leaded gasoline, plus ground and paint contamination, for the waves of violent crime across the globe (in countries not otherwise engaged in civil strife) during the 20th century.
If true, score one for the environmentalists and once again Big Oil messes with the whole planet. Externalized costs are a real thing.
There are independent ways to track crime beyond police reports. Death statistics (certification of cause of death by a physician or medical examiner) provide an independent way to measure homicides. Insurance claims provide independent verification of reported automobile thefts or burglaries. If there was a widespread drop in people reporting crime (and I’ve never heard any evidence that’s the case, other than right-wingers making up reasons crime is worse than it is because they FEEL it must be), then there would be a gulf between reported crime statistics and independent verification.
Crime is WAY down from its peak in the late 1980s. It’s been dropping for the past twenty five years. Surprisingly few people know it because local TV news stations love their ALL CRIME ALL THE TIME format. “HERE’S WHY YOU NEED TO BE AFRAID!!!” is easy to promote and draws ratings, and it’s a hell of a lot easier to put a talking head in front of a crime scene than to perform actual investigative journalism.
Locally, Portland routinely had between 60 and 70 murders a year in the 1980s. Today, with a larger population, we tend to hover around two dozen murders a year. Maybe some of that is due to improved trauma surgery (turning homicide into aggravated assault), but two thirds of it?
Remember New York in the 1980s, with those roll-down cages over practically every storefront? Fewer businesses do it nowadays, and those that do are mostly using the cages from years earlier. There’s a reason new businesses aren’t spending money to put them in, and it ain’t “well, we’re just not reporting break-ins anymore.”
A lot of inexpert opinion here. But since we have freedom of speech in the US, that’s pretty typical.
You know the saying: “It’s not what people don’t know that’s a problem. It’s what they know that just ain’t so.”
Time-Lapse video of this weekend’s phase of construction of the “Kellogg Bridge” over highway 99E / McLoughlin Blvd. in Milwaukie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI2NXr59qyw
Credit: Stacy and Witbeck, as complied by Rick Merina
(Used with permission – distributed by TriMet via press release.)
@Bob R.
Cool video. Thanks.
Time-Lapse video of this weekend’s phase of construction of the “Kellogg Bridge” over highway 99E / McLoughlin Blvd. in Milwaukie:
What’s the story of how this bridge was named? Did it have a ‘blue ribbon’ committee? Did they run contests for the name?
Al,
It crosses Milwaukie’s Kellogg Creek. As the name is in quotes, I suspect it is simply a descriptor, the viaduct won’t be given a formal name like the big bridge over the Willamette will.
(There are many viaducts and such on the existing MAX network, which don’t have names either…)
I suspect it is simply a descriptor, the viaduct won’t be given a formal name like the big bridge over the Willamette will.
~~~>Well that’s terrible, they should run nice little cute contests for all the naming rights to all the bridges, and all the crossings too for that matter!
And we could give the rolling stock names like Thomas, James, Henry, and Percy.
(Al would be given the honor of driving Bulgy the Bus).
hehe, funny Scott.
In all seriousness however this is one of the best ideas I have seen yet on transit management:
The Case for Letting Nonprofits Run Public Transit – Eric Jaffe – The Atlantic Cities
Al, then I assume you must love Portland Streetcar, Inc., as a non-profit transit operator.
Well, Portland Transport is a non-profit–but I doubt we’d have any particular expertise at running TriMet.
A few obvious questions about the idea of using nonprofits:
* Just how WOULD governance be arranged? Jaffe complains about elected transit boards (which we don’t have here). Many nonprofits have self-perpetuating boards, which can work well in some circumstances, but do lack accountability. Not a problem when its a blog/transit-appliance developer with an annual budget in the low four figures; a bit more dicey when you are talking about a metropolitan transit agency with a budget in the mid-to-high nine figures, and which oversees capital projects with billion-dollar price tags.
* All US transit agencies are “non-profit” in the sense that the farebox recovery ratio is less than 100%, and an operating subsidy is required. Given that non-profit corporations don’t generally have plenary taxing authority, they require a friendly local government to slip them some cash (PSI receives money from various government sources); revenue streams that can conceivably be taken away if the non-profit no longer pleases its patrons. Managerial independence generally doesn’t exist without financial independence; he who pays the piper calls the tunes.
Al, then I assume you must love Portland Streetcar, Inc., as a non-profit transit operator.
I think its a complete waste of transit funds but it is getting riders and it is only charging $1 which I fully support.
If the st car actually functioned independently then I would have nothing but good things to say about it. The fact that it is taking transit funds away from other services is my only objection.
Regarding non profits, obviously something is gonna have to give when it comes to administration of public transit. Public transit in Amerika is failing right now. It’s making lots of people rich but its failing its mission. So any change to the structure would be good. Of course no change is likely to happen and transit will continue to be a very distasteful option for most people.
Along the same line, some of the arguments in favor of rail and less frequency but more volume are disputed in this article. As I said a million times, all we need is reliable frequent service and people will ride. No boondoggles necessary, it can work immediately.
On the buses: It’s about frequency
In that particular location, “Kellogg Lake”, not just a creek.
This VIDEO of the transit workers fight at AC Transit is very interesting watching.
I think there may be a way to use non-profit structures to better serve public functions, but it’s not in Jaffe’s list. First a critique of the article’s pros:
A clearer mission Non-profits aren’t prone to mission creep or contradictory purposes? Lots of organizations, including even for-profits may confront conflicting goals. Short term vs. long term, sales (new customers) vs. customer service (existing customers), competing objectives aren’t rare. How well an organization manages those objectives depends on leadership, not which tax form they file.
Political Autonomy Whether from charitable donors or government agencies, there isn’t much money out there that doesn’t come with strings. And note the first example Jaffe cites is using political autonomy to blow off equity concerns and service the wealthy. Would the reverse ever be true?
Access to new revenue How many people would give an extra $10 to Trimet, and would this really change (or be enough to matter) if Trimet were a non-profit? What happens if the people with the most cash available for a donation happen to be developers- bearing in mind the point about strings?
I don’t see a lot there to like. But here’s something I might.
Over in health care Oregon is experimenting with CCOs, which dissolved a traditional separation between funding control and service providers. In theory that will encourage providers to use funding more effectively, spending more on care that works and less on care that doesn’t. What “works” is defined by a set of metrics based on population health. It is also intended to reduce the growth rate of overall spending as the budget is more or less fixed.
It’s a strong form of outsourcing, and I could imagine it being done in some other traditional public sectors, particularly where service providers can be self organized (like a union) and where the public purpose can be quantified by a specification list. How well would that kind of non-profit work with transit?
LIFT is a Federal requirement and not open to the general public. But what we should be unhappy with is suburban development designed in such a way (e.g. no safe or accessible access to bus stops) that riders who could potentially ride regular service are unable to do so.
LOL! Of course, it’s TRIMET
(ya ya not their fault as usual but its never their fault-big tease!)
Have you ever scratched your head trying to come up with a new use for a TRUCK AXLE?
http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1308/130815losangeles.htm
The FUTURE of transit fare collection methods.
Check it out!
SkyTran: World’s First Levitating Transit System Heads to Tel Aviv | Green Prophet
And what, exactly, is the stated capacity in terms of passengers-per-hour of the pie-in-the-sky (almost, but not quite, literally) proposal for Tel Aviv?
The only functioning modern (even by proponents’ standards) true PRT system in the world is at Heathrow airport, and it only serves a very limited number of stations, and wasn’t exactly delivered on-time or on-budget. But at least it doesn’t make the kind of ridiculous performance claims as this supposed Tel Aviv system.
100-150mph, just feet above street traffic, inches above freight trucks, really? And stops every 1/4 mile? Well, I’ll be impressed if they manage to pull off even half of that in each dimension (50-75mph, every 1/2 mile).
But hey, the article lists no published cost estimates, funding sources, capacities, independent reviews, timelines, or approvals. So yes, go ahead and call it “world’s first”. I’ll call it “yet another gadgetbahn idea” until it actually gets built.
Heathrow, to its credit, actually got built. It has a stated capacity (via one YouTube demonstration video) of 164 4-person vehicles per hour, or a theoretical maximum of 656 persons per hour in all directions (thus far) at peak. Little ol’ MAX already does way more than this. But kudos to Heathrow for at least doing something at all.
And, like the Tel-Aviv proposal/fantasy, it appeals to proponents because it requires so few of those pesky union drivers, right Al? Check it out! indeed.
Gee Bob, I’m glad you have become really good at spotting inept bungling…..Welcome to the team.
Look Bob I was just starting to feel benevolent about you and then I read your post here.
This is about innovation, I support innovation.
It’s not about unions. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need unions. I believe in ‘free markets’ that is to say totally free markets with zero interference by government goons.
There will never be any ‘free markets’ in this world as long as the corrupt banking system controls all the wealth propped up by its corrupt government sock puppets pretending to be ‘democracies’. Until that time we are all SLAVES!
@Al –
Innovation requires more than streamlined drawings of a SciFi idea. It requires figuring out how to actually make something work. Even unfunded pie-in-the-sky ideas that might work need to at least show some preliminary engineering sketches and some math. The Tel-Aviv article doesn’t come remotely close to “innovation”.
Elon Musk and his team, with their Hyperloop proposal, have at least done some very preliminary engineering. There have, in turn, been many responses from critics, and the Hoperloop plan appears to have numerous flaws that need to be addressed. But at the very least, Musk and co. have put their reputations on the line and have put their numbers and the reasoning behind those numbers out there.
@Ron –
Ron, you and I have disagreed about many things, but I would hope that we can at least agree that TriMet’s MAX projects have actually been constructed, and are actually operating in the world to some degree. We can argue about cost-effectiveness or meeting transportation goals, etc., but the projects themselves are least feasible from a technology standpoint and it can be argued that future transportation proposals (SW Corridor) at least have a shot at being buildable and operable, if funding and political concerns are worked out.
@Al –
totally free markets with zero interference by government goons
That’s called Somolia. If you want to kill someone in Somolia, you can take out a contract to do that with likely zero interference from government goons. Or by “zero interference” did you mean “some interference” based on things that the government ought to be doing.
If I buy tainted salad and die of food poisoning because there were no pesky health inspector goons at the packing plant, at least I’ll perish knowing that some others who may have heard of my plight will live on to switch to another brand. Freedom!
Now if we can just get rid of all the traffic lights that government goons have installed. And why should a government goon tell me which side of the road to drive on? Let the free market decide.
That’s called Somolia.
That’s called a third world country that has been exploited by the 1st world countries and left in the hands of tyrants who have been supplied weapons by the leading weapons manufacturers of the world all of which are headquartered in the USA!
THIS is the country and ‘government’ we live in BOB, live in your bubble, see how long you can get away with that!
Our ‘government’ is going to destroy us just like it has destroyed Greece and Detroit.
More on skyTran “the future of transportation” … they don’t have a factory, they don’t have an outdoor test track, they have exactly one prototype vehicle on an approx. 20ft “track” and it goes about 1mph, not 100mph. Their web site’s “team” page doesn’t list any team members, and the same graphics from the Tel Aviv story can be found foisted off on a number of cities, many of whom are actively trying to expand their light rail systems.
http://www.skytran.net/team.html
But people keep falling for the PR and being able to build a “rail system” for $5 million instead of $500 million. Yes, that’s what skyTran claims. This is nothing more than puff used to try and derail (pun intended) and gain publicity from legitimate transportation projects.
Their web site’s “team” page doesn’t list any team members, and the same graphics from the Tel Aviv story can be found foisted off on a number of cities, many of whom are actively trying to expand their light rail systems.
~~~>The story is a outright fraud? Is that what you are saying?
Regarding PRT it says HERE that there are two systems already running.
It’s not a fantasy or a fraud.
Al, if you would bother to scroll up, you would see that I already mentioned Heathow PRT. It is low capacity and goes 25mph. Far from the unsupported claims made by the skyTran folks you touted. Please read before responding, thanks.
I saw this Bob:
More on skyTran “the future of transportation” … they don’t have a factory, they don’t have an outdoor test track, they have exactly one prototype vehicle on an approx. 20ft “track” and it goes about 1mph, not 100mph.
It seems to me you are so attached to the THE CHURCH OF LIGHT RAIL that even the hint of some other technology sends you off the deep end!
Scroll up further, Al, please, try to put some effort in.
And show me a real technology, and we can debate the merits. Until then, please stop the hot air and fake-tech PR spam.
Fake tech spam? What r u talking about?
I’m talking about what you’ve posted, Al, for a few days now. If you can’t pay attention to what you’ve written and what others have bothered to treat at least semi-seriously, then maybe you should go elsewhere.
Ya ya Bob ya ya, well if you like you can throw me off if you think you need to….
This time i havent done anything to deserve that treatment but it is YOUR website so you can kick off whoever you choose I suppose.
I’m not sure what’s bothering you Bob but this does not look like some kind of joke to me!
Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) | Transportation and Parking | West Virginia University
About that Morgantown, West Virginia “PRT” system:
Think of it this way: An elevator in a large building is Personal and Rapid so long as you are the only person on it. Then you get to pick your own floor and zip right to it. If other strangers get on, it ceases to be Personal and it ceases to be Rapid if any of those people select floors other than yours. That’s Morgantown, except instead of going up and down, it goes horizontally between buildings.
Now do try to follow:
1. You posted a bogus article promoting a fake, never-built, never tested, never released engineering specs system called “skyTran” that claims to go 100mph+ in urban settings, such as Tel Aviv.
2. I pointed out that this was bogus and also mentioned that the only true PRT system in the world is at Heathrow (“UltraPRT”). That system works but it was late, is slow, low-capacity and expensive. They just might make it better and cheaper someday, but that’s the only working example on the planet right now.
3. You posted a link to the Wikipedia page on PRT, alleging that PRT was not fantasy or fraud.
But nobody here already made that claim. I already mentioned Heathrow, the only real system out there. You can’t use the existence of Heathrow as a defense against posting the original PR-spam for the non-existent skyTran.
Got it now?
And regarding that PRT page on Wikipedia, if you bothered to read it further, you’ll see that the 2nd supposedly operating PRT system in Masdar City has only 2 stations, hardly personal. It covers a distance of just 800 meters (2600 ft or about 10-12 Portland blocks), with a top speed of under 25mph. The Portland Streetcar does better than that along Moody Ave.
See:
Masdar City Abandons Transportation System of the Future
You know what else moves in the ballpark of 135,000 trips per day? TriMet’s light rail lines, covering a far greater area at a lower cost than that proposal which never had to encounter real-world obstacles.
But that makes sense, because: The Masdar “PRT” system was cancelled due to high costs and is reportedly being replaced with a Light Rail system, proven technology.
These PRT-dream PR-spam articles always pop up when a city or region is considering expanding beyond bus service into some kind of heavier infrastructure, such as streetcars, light rail, metro lines, etc. “See, we don’t need expensive light rail, we can just be the first to build this much cheaper sci-fi thing. It’ll be great.” And you fell for it.
And lest you think I’m responding so strongly because of some “Church of Light Rail” (are you with the “Church of Light Rail Haters”?), please note very carefully: PRT is brought up as an “alternative” even when a city or region is trying to upgrade to BRT – Bus Rapid Transit.
See here:
Forget the BRT — Princeton Needs PRT
“PRT”, thus far, is just a tool to try and distract from any serious public transit upgrade effort. You are being used.
OK BOB, I’ll drop it and never post another article about PRT to your site again.
Is that satisfactory?
You are perfectly welcome to post articles about real, functioning, PRT systems in the open thread. When they get around to expanding Heathrow, for example. What I’m asking you to do is take a few minutes to sort real from fake, and only post that which is real, and to avoid hyperbole such as “Church of Light Rail”. Thanks in advance.
hyperbole such as “Church of Light Rail”.
Life (comments) is boring without occasional “enhancement” of one’s point of view.
But you’re welcome
TriMet errs on promoting launch of Smartphone Payment option with photo of Portland Streetcar when, last I heard, the equivalent Portland Streetcar mobile app doesn’t yet have a publicized launch date. Please, please, TriMet and PSI, prove me wrong…
(And yes, TriMet fares are honored on the streetcar, but nonetheless the streetcar-dedicated app isn’t launching just yet. And yes, at multiple meetings I’ve brought up the importance of ultimately integrating these services into one app.)
I think the photo is supposed to be of the Urban Center where the event will be held, but good catch.
I’ve brought up the importance of ultimately integrating these services into one app
It shouldn’t be hard to have a streetcar-only fare in the TriMet app and have revenue passed on. But Streetcar could sell TriMet-compatible fares in theirs and keep the money. The only other positives I see in having a separate app are marketing (both Streetcar-specific branding and possible inclusion of sponsoring businesses), and possible integration with NextBus
Added service in September!
http://www.trimet.org/alerts/service-change/r012.htm
Trimet is finally adding a bus to outer Sandy Blvd before 6am. Most businesses out here start prior to 6am, so the existing service has been essentially useless. It will be interesting to see how much the ridership grows.