Tuesday’s Trib looks at commuting by car in our region from several points of view:
- Which commute is the worst
- Suburban traffic presents a few twists
- Traffic jams don ‘t stop the data flow
My favorite statistic from this collection of stories is quoted by Rex Burkholder: the average commute in 1990 was ten miles, in 2000 it was seven miles. It seems to me that our effort (i.e., the 2040 plan) to reorganize the region to let people lead their lives in a more compact and sustainable fashion is making some progress.
32 responses to “Trib Looks at Car Commuting”
I found it funny that they talked to two people with very long commutes. Vancouver to Portland and Hillsboro to Port of Portland. Ethically as a region do we really have to be resonsible for providing traffic free commutes for those who choose that life style?
Those who choose (the operative word here) to live at greater distance from where they work, pick their own poison, so to speak. Why award poor choices?
The best data on where folks live and where they work is from a study done for Metro’s Rideshare effort by UrbanTrans. Go to Metro’s website and work your way to Regional Travel Options, Rideshare study, etc. The analysis is from 2000 census data, so is already a bit out of date. The clustering is dramatic…most people who work in Hillsboro live in Washington county, etc.
The shorter commute distance should have been the lead item in this story, but the Trib is on a road building kick.
If you talk to anybody around the country they will tell you without a doubt that their city has the absolute worst traffic in the country. Portlanders are no different.
I know some people on this forum have said, supposedly with some evidence, that the city has the 3rd worst traffic in the country. I just find that very hard to believe. If you compare our congestion with Chicago or DC or SF Bay where their rush hours are much more severe and last for much longer, it’s really not bad. Many other cities have bad traffic at non-peak hours, which we cannot identify with here.
Even the slowest road at 22 MPH average speed is not that bad. I know we all can remember when there was less traffic, but that’s what happens in a dynamic, growing world.
This just reinforces my idea that the West Hills
MAX tunnel should be paved for dual-use operation,
giving (hybrid-type, of course) buses a direct
shot at downtown. The Beaverton-Hillsboro line
would remain rail.
From the Article:
“The average speed of vehicles traveling the six and a half miles on I-5 from the I-84 interchange to the Interstate Bridge is a snail’s pace 22 miles per hour between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. on weekdays.”
Is there anyone who uses city streets in Portland for their commute that comes close to a “snail’s pace” 22 mph average on their commute home? You are lucky if you ever get up to 22 mph, muchless average that speed.
The question of congestion is really a question of expectations. Those freeways promise 55 mph but they deliver a lot less than that at rush hour. If you reduced the expected speed to 35 mph the average speed would increase. But like kids with their arms caught in the jar, commuters continue to make the self-defeating demand to have it all.
The Trip article identified the evening commute on I-5 from the BanfieI-84 Interchange to the Interstate Bridge as being the worst. Coincidentally, this section of I-5 is the only freeway in Portland that has HOV lanes. The article also stated the Banfield Freeway, I-84, carries more traffic. Such data only demonstrates the discriminatory political motivated HOV lanes do not work to alleviate congestion.
From my own prospective, I had reason to go to Hayden Island several months ago, having to be there at just about the peak of the evening rush hour. I chose to go I-5 from the Banfield rather than waiting in the long lines at one of the closer metered on ramps. The HOV lanes were only half full, or should I say only half used. After passing cars in the other two lanes, vehicles in the HOV lanes would then cut over into the right hand lanes and cross over to take an exit. This created a stop and go travel in the regular travel lanes. The large semi-trucks using the regular lanes were slow to start up after being stopped by vehicles from HOV lanes weaving in front of them to take an exit thereby slowing all traffic down to crawl. It is plain and simple stupidity to have HOV lanes along this stretch of freeway. They actually create more congestion, generate a safety hazard and add to motorist fuel consumption.
Since all drivers pay the same amount of taxes per gallon of gasoline, the HOV lanes of discrimination should be converted back to regular travel lanes for all motor vehicles to use, as the freeway was designed to operate. If that does not happen, to reduce congestion, an additional regular lane of travel needs to be added to I-5 (to make three regular travel lanes) and the HOV lane should be separated from the rest of the freeway with barriers all the way to the Interstate Bridge. It would also help if semi-trucks were banned during peak rush periods.
Another interesting aspect the Trib article touched on was that peak period traffic on the Sunset Highway is for the most part equal in both directions, This data demonstrates that much of the regional job base is shifting from Multnomah County and downtown Portland to Washington County. It is also good to know the original subsidy to downtown Portland whereby all freeways, the Sunset, the Banfield, and I-5 all empty into the city center is now an investment that is working for other areas too. People should not have to make a regional living quarters move every time they change jobs.
Here is the URL for the rideshare study:
http://www.metro.region.org/article.cfm?articleid=12130
This is the Travel options research library; the second item listed is Rideshare program market research and implementation plan, August 2005
Nick,
Sounds like a good idea, but I’d wait and see how that dual tunnel use works out for sound transit before portland jumps on the bandwagon.
Remember – commute distances are not always a complete choice. Recent flight of poorer residents from US urban areas due to rising housing costs show that housing policies need to be linked to transportation policies.
housing policies need to be linked to transportation policies.
I think you are right on there. There needs to be affordable housing available throughout the region. The old stereotype of wealthy suburbs and poor inner city is certainly dead in Portland. Affordable housing is disappearing int he city while concentrations of poverty are appearing in the suburbs.
The Trip article identified the evening commute on I-5 from the BanfieI-84 Interchange to the Interstate Bridge as being the worst.
With a 22 mph average speed. They apparently didn’t consider commutes that use local streets. You wonder if they considered how long people had to wait at the ramp meters in North Portland as part of the commute time.
Dan:
The problem with the Sound Transit project is
that there are half a dozen stations involved.
Thus, I feel that the light rail trains will clog
up the tunnel.
Here in Portland, there is only the Zoo station
involved (which IMHO should be closed anyway),
and the buses don’t have to stop there.
The point of my proposal is to give more people
in Wash. County a one-seat ride to downtown,
thereby increasing the attractiveness of transit.
The current feeder bus system to MAX is an
abomination, as even the mayor of Hillsboro has
implied in a previous Trib article.
Portland State University has done a good job identifying some of the problems and the Trib was just the messenger.
To many of the anti-motorized vehicle crowd just want to stick their heads into the sand and suggest that we can solve the problem with Light Rail, bikes and having the general public walking to work or going to the store without a motorized vehicle.
It is just not going to happen, even though its not bad to get as many people as we can not depending on motorized vehicles.
With the growth that we expect in our region, “if we do not start investing into creating dramatically more capacity with our roads and highways we will never be in a position to where we can catch up.”
Light Rail is servicing approximately 1% and if our growth in population is greater then 5% like in Vancouver and our suburbs, we are in trouble in “River City.”
The consequences are just to great and the radical agenda’s promoted by many on this blog site give little credence to the needs of 95% of population that have needs and limited choices.
give little credence to the needs of 95% of population that have needs and limited choices.
Actually, the problem is that the 5% of the public that chooses to spend 2 hours commuting each day in their automobiles is making demands on everyone else. Most people live a reasonable distance from work whether they commute by auto, transit, bike or as pedestrians or some combination of those.
When you identify the worst congestion as an average speed of 22 mph you are talking about people who live 20 miles from their job having less than a hour commute. That does not seem like a crisis to me.
Ross W.
For some and I hope it is not you, there is what appears to be as a communist/socialist interpetation of world where the government needs to dictates where we live, work and how we travel.
Please let the rest of us, the 95% who do not accept that world, to have the right to make the choices that we want for ourselves and our families so that we can live in Oregon too.
Paul Edgar, Make your personal choices, just don’t expect those neighborhoods in-between your choice and work to willing degrade itself so you can get home 5 minutes faster. Why does NE Portland bare the expense of a larger, louder, more offensive highway just so people can get out into the quiet boonies of Clark County faster? It really is a moral issue. If you personally choose a long commute, you should be respectful of those communities you travel through, not argue to cut larger highways into them.
I’m reminded of the Metro data that shows that a big new bridge across the Columbia will raise property values in Clark county and lower those in N. Portland. Why punish those who make good choices in order to reward those who make poor ones.
Then several years ago there was the guy complaining about the clogged freeways…he works at Intel and bought a house (at a great price) in Washougal. Well, I’m sorry, but I am not about to see my neighborhood in NE Portland put at risk to help this fool out.
If that is socialism, then Long Live the International!
Craig,
It is a moral issue and if all of us apply some common sense at the same time, we would not stand back and let the reality that approximately 135,000 vehicles are in the I-5 corridor everyday and not take reasonable steps to solve the problems that are found with this level of demand.
As a result in has been reported that this corridor has the 3rd worse air quality conditions in the nation. This air quality is hurting the health of the people of north and northeast Portland.
The congestion found in the I-5 corridor can be reduced and should be reduced.
In my mind this can be accomplished by developing new capacity in other places without expanding the I-5 corridor past its current 3-lanes.
This means tuning the current I-5 corridor to eliminate and smooth the current chock points that create congestion.
It means expanding the I-5 corridor out to 3-lanes in everyplace where it can be done that is reasonable and cost effective.
It also means taking advantage of Light Rail, Buses and TDM methods that are reasonable and not regressive.
It means taking steps and creating new capacity to redirect as many vehicles as possible out the I-5 corridor to other corridors and methods of transportation.
We have a moral obligation to not stick our collective heads in the sand and suggest transportation solutions that do not work and will not solve the the problems.
What I see is a need for responsible and pragmatic leadership that is not controlled by radical and special interests with hidden agenda’s.
95% of the people are compelled to use motorized vehicles. If we do not address this demand and needs, in my mind are making a mistake.
“95% of the people are compelled to use motorized vehicles. If we do not address this demand and needs, in my mind are making a mistake.”
They are “compelled” because mass transit is
poorly designed and operated.
this corridor has the 3rd worse air quality conditions in the nation.
People on this forum keep saying this. Simply saying it does not make it true. Someone please cite a source.
Part of the problem with the North South commute between the central city and the Columbia River is the City of Portland has reduced motor vehicle capacity and really screwed up many of the alternative routes to I-5. The half empty HOV lane is just one of the culprits. Interstate Avenue has become a total disaster for congestion since Max was added. The backward thinking anti-automobile forces that often dominate Citizen Advisory Committees and were unwilling to even consider retaining two lanes in each direction are responsible for this mess. On MLK where new aesthetics are a priority over the movement of people and traffic, busses now stop at curb extensions in travel lanes increasing congestion and the fuel usage for the drivers of cars and trucks. Any accident can foul up the whole North-South system because there is not enough total vehicle capacity to handle even the daily regular traffic. Clogged streets along this route will only get worse until those who oppose motor vehicle improvements reverse themselves and make the movement of cars and trucks a priority.
the City of Portland has reduced motor vehicle capacity and really screwed up many of the alternative routes to I-5. The half empty HOV lane is just one of the culprits.
How has the HOV lane reduced capacity?
Actually the HOV lane carries 50% more people than a GP lane, according to ODOT data.
Interstate MAX carries twice the # of riders as the old 5 bus; that number will double when it gets to Vancouver.
Don’t forget 90% of the peak hour trips are commuters, many just going to Rivergate or Swan Island for whom an arterial bridge would do just fine; they don’t even want to be on I-5, but there are no options.
That is the biggest failure in this corridor… the lack of options to driving alone…I operate 5 Clark county vanpools to Swan Island with a generous subsidy from Metro, but not one dime from the SW Washington MPO…which gets the same federal CMAQ funds.
A majority of commuters over I-5 do not go to Downtown Portland, but C-Tran only serves Downtown; bus bays were built for C-Tran at the Delta/Vanport MAX station, but have never been used…there is no C-Tran service to MAX.
But despite all this, 50% of the congestion in even this corridor can be traced to incidents, so there is a lot to be gained from better incident prevention and management.
95% of the people are compelled to use motorized vehicles. If we do not address this demand and needs, in my mind are making a mistake.
It seems to me the huge mistake is continuing to tolerate an environment where so many people are compelled to rely on cars. Being compelled to do something is not the same as demanding it!
Many people try to present figures and facts in a way to tell their story and I am no different.
So important information is now getting authincated by Portland State University transportation studies and that is that the I-5 corridor is the worse congestion corridor in our region.
I was once part of it, I have studied it and it’s time people like Lenny get called to the carpet on how they use there facts and numbers.
Lenny says: HOV carries 50% more people then the GP lane.
C-Tran directs buses on to I-5 away from their regular routes and pickups that take people into east Clark County to take advantage of travel time advantage gained in a longer far less direct route of I-84 and I-205. This skews numbers.
C-Tran directs buses on routes that their customers want and that gives the customer faster and more direct trips. That means bypassing MAX transit centers.
90% of the commuters in the Peak Period rush hours are not going to or traveling from Viver Gate or Swan Island they are caught in the I-5 corridor, sorry Lenny.
So important information is now getting authincated by Portland State University transportation studies and that is that the I-5 corridor is the worse congestion corridor in our region.
I think you are misreading the article referenced above unless you have another source for that claim.
According to the article the average speed on I-5 is 22 mph – and that is the worst in the region. This clearly is not considering local streets which are often slower than that during rush hour.
The article also says that the average distance of commutes has fallen from 10 miles to 7 miles. A 7 mile commute would take less than 20 minutes at 22 mph.
The problem is that its the people who live 20 miles, or more, from work who are the most upset about congestion and commute times. People who live close to work just don’t care that much. The difference between 5 and 10 minutes may be the same percentage as the difference between a half hour and an hour, but its still only 5 minutes. Nonetheless, the squeeky wheels get the grease – so all the attention is paid to those folks who choose to spend a couple hours a day commuting.
Which is why elected officials are willing to consider looting the gas taxes paid by everyone to subsidize building toll roads that only serve a few people. But they are unwilling to place tolls on congested stretches of existing roads to subsidize alternatives for people who choose to use those alternatives to reduce congestion for the folks paying the tolls.
“C-Tran directs buses on routes that their customers want and that gives the customer faster and more direct trips. That means bypassing MAX transit centers.”
You said it; it looks like C-Tran is doing it
right. Trimet just wants to force people onto
light rail, so it designs the bus routes
accordingly, and potential riders avoid them
in droves.
“How has the HOV lane reduced capacity?”
The HOV lane is half empty most of the time. Cramming the rest of the traffic into two lanes (the HOV lanes was originally a full service lane) and vehicles cutting across other lanes from the HOV lane to use exits slows all northbound traffic on the freeway. The slower the speed the longer vehicles are on that stretch of I-5 and therefore that lowers capacity. People will carpool and use C-Tran with or with out the HOV lane. It is tiome to get rid of this political boondoggle.
“It seems to me the huge mistake is continuing to tolerate an environment where so many people are compelled to rely on cars. Being compelled to do something is not the same as demanding it!”
However in Oregon, the government is demanding taxpayers subsidize transit to the tune of 80% of the operational costs and the majority of the capital costs. In addition, the government is currently demanding that bicycle infrastructure be 100% subsidized. At the same time the government is not meeting the demand of taxpaying motorists that subsidize these other modes and is not compelled to increase more road capacity for to meet this taxpayer demand. This is what should not be tolerated.
Governments don’t demand, the govern with the consent of the governed. Feel free to attempt to vote the pro-transit bums out, but let’s not cast government as “them”. Government is a reflection of “us”.
The slower the speed the longer vehicles are on that stretch of I-5 and therefore that lowers capacity.
That isn’t true. The peak capacity of a freeway is generally between 30 and 40 mph. At higher speeds the distance between vehicles reduces the capacity more than the speed increases it.
The HOV lane is half empty most of the time.
The question is whether you are moving people or vehicles. There are more people in the HOV lane, but they are in fewer vehicles. HOV, afterall, stands for High Occupancy Vehicle.
the HOV lanes was originally a full service lane
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but as I recall the freeway was widened to put in the HOV lanes, which were not originally full service lanes.
Issac, you are right the HOV lane was created with minimal improvements and narrowing of the shoulder area’s of the corridor. It was put in as a experiment to see what the effect would be.
The Delta Park widening project would formalize and correct sub-standard shoulders and eliminate the 2-lane section of the I-5 corridor in some are’s that were affected.
It has been my estimate that the HOV lane on I-5 has been a success in some ways and in others ways a terrible failure.
What it has shown that must be solved is that there is a greater need for more capacity in this section of the I-5 corridor.
We now have in the 2-GP lanes LOS conditions of “F” (almost as bad as you can get) for approximately 4-hours per day.
This has hurt the economies of both Washington and Oregon.
Trucks and freight mobility is to all effect shut down.
The congestion has added to the emission problems and is part of the reason that this section of the I-5 corridor was reported in the Oregonian as having the 3rd worse air quality in the nation.
We need to get more vehicles out of this corridor not into it like what the CRC Task Force is about to do with their new wide Interstate Bridge replacement project.
The current Interstate Bridges are like meters of the traffic/vehicles in this section of the I-5 corridor. They are a real TDM constraint and are part of retaining and maintaining the the 3-lane constraint of the existing I-5 corridor through Portland.
“The question is whether you are moving people or vehicles. There are more people in the HOV lane, but they are in fewer vehicles. HOV, after all, stands for High Occupancy Vehicle.”
High occupancy vehicles are allowed in all regular travel lanes. People will continue to carpool and use C-Tran with or with ut the HOV lane, so it makes far more sense and is fairer to the motoring taxpayers to make maximum room for all vehicles in all lanes.
“Somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but as I recall the freeway was widened to put in the HOV lanes, which were not originally full service lanes.”
Only in the Delta Park area was a lane added by removing the shoulder. The other parts of the HOV lane were full service lanes.