JPACT has voted to slow down the process for the Regional Transportation Plan update. Instead of being adopted at the end of 2007, the planning will go through June 2008.
In general this is good news, allowing more time for scenario development and modeling (we were at real risk of being forced to pick from very rough scenarios to meet the timeline). It will however create some hoops to jump through, as the Federally-mandated version of the plan will still need to be adopted on schedule to avoid losing eligibility for transportation funds.
20 responses to “A Slower RTP”
Chris: sorry for repeating a question, but has anybody ever petitioned TriMet for Bus Rapid Transit? Is that going to be a part of TriMet’s future plans?
TriMet doesn’t really get “petitioned”, different options get evaluated during corridor studies. I believe BRT was evaluated for an earlier phase of the Milwaukie planning. I’m assuming it was evaluated for other corridors that are now LRT has well, but that was before my time.
I’m sure other readers have more info.
I think it’s important to be very clear on what exactly “Bus Rapid Transit” means, why it’s desired, where it’s desired, and if it’s the only possible solution.
For instance, Eugene is currently constructing a true Bus Rapid Transit system to connect downtown with Springfield.
In Oakland, CA, however, AC Transit is running something called Rapid Bus Service. Los Angeles has something similar. Neither is true Bus Rapid Transit (and, most would argue, AC Transit’s service really isn’t much of anything), but both have caused ridership increases and have slashed travel times within their corridor and operating hours.
Tri-Met runs something similar to Rapid service on some of its lines, and could make improvements to other lines (queue-jumping and signal priority at signalized intersections, stop intervals at 10 blocks rather than 2 blocks, running the line as fast as possible w/o waiting for the schedule to catch up, etc.) to bring them closer to this model.
Tri-Met currently has no plans for true Bus Rapid Transit (dedicated bus-only lanes outside of bus malls & transit centers, fare payment prior to boarding, stop frequency closer to light rail or streetcar). It generally has been studied as an alternative to light rail service in various corridors, and has lost out in the comparison.
I think that some hybrid version of BRT/Rapid might be useful for consideration in some corridors, however — like Hillsboro to Forest Grove, Barbur Blvd, Powell Blvd, Division (especially out near/in Gresham) as a way to make bus service better NOW without needing to wait for the funds for light rail to arrive — or to improve bus service in corridors that, for various reasons, will probably never receive light rail service.
Still, Tri-Met’s operational decisions seem to be made largely internally. I’m not sure how much sway Metro has, if any, with regards to these sorts of things?
FYI, Eugene’s service is up and running. Started on the same day the Portland Mall closed, I believe. I’m not exactly sure how its going.
TriMet doesn’t really get “petitioned”, different options get evaluated during corridor studies. I believe BRT was evaluated for an earlier phase of the Milwaukie planning.
The Coalition for Livable Future’s and the Transportation Reform Working Group initially advocated Bus Rapid Transit as the alternative to light rail in the Milwaukie corridor. But the evaluation of that option and the problems with it was part of what caused the neighborhoods in Milwaukie and Southeast Portland to ask that light rail back on the table as an option.
So there has been some advocacy around BRT, it just hasn’t measured up when compared to other solutions.
I think that some hybrid version of BRT/Rapid might be useful for consideration in some corridors, however — like Hillsboro to Forest Grove, Barbur Blvd, Powell Blvd, Division (especially out near/in Gresham) as a way to make bus service better NOW without needing to wait for the funds for light rail to arrive — or to improve bus service in corridors that, for various reasons, will probably never receive light rail service.
I think if you throw out the dedicated busways and do a lot of the other improvements there are some real improvements in both service and ridership that could be obtained by BRT.
But I don’t think it is very likely to win out over rail options in the mega-project competition. The dedicated ROW costs compared to the benefits just don’t pencil out. I also think there is a mistaken assumption by some that BRT will eliminate transfers by having local buses use dedicated ROW that just doesn’t usually work operationally.
I think it’s important to be very clear on what exactly “Bus Rapid Transit” means, why it’s desired, where it’s desired, and if it’s the only possible solution.
There are several “true” definitions of Bus Rapid Transit, but not just one.
Generally speaking, BRT must have the following:
1. Dedicated route with upgraded stops/amenities,
2. Dedicated, high capacity busses (almost always articulated busses, but not always – there are 40′ and 45′ “BRT” busses), with high capacity entrances/exits (generally wider than typical coach entrances), and busses are almost always low floor
3. Frequent service throughout the day
4. Devices to expedite bus travel, including signal preemption, dedicated lanes, a “bus way” (part or all).
BRT does not require a dedicated busway. Many BRT systems are formed using bus lanes on existing roadways, or have devices on existing roads to expedite the BRT vehicles. Such a system would work on Barbur Blvd.
Dedicated bus lanes would have been sufficient on McLoughlin; the road is three (and in some cases four lanes) wide per direction, and the road is operating well below capacity. Between Brooklyn Yard and Johnson Creek/Tacoma, the roadway would need to be widened by at least one lane in each direction, however.
Whether a EMX style BRT system is needed in Portland (or where it would go) is questionable; LTD clearly wanted something that emulated light rail but at a lesser cost. Other cities/areas, such as Orange County (California) wanted something better than conventional bus but not busways or LRT.
Regardless, such will not happen here in Portland, so long as Portland (TriMet, Metro, etc.) have a pro-light rail bias, and are against any and all other forms of transport – and as such any RTP will be hampered by such biases, contributing to further problems into the future when the metro area fails to invest in all forms of transport, but rather the mode of their choosing.
I should add, that BRT can also be used to consolidate various outlying busses on a single corridor. Such would have been very workable between Portland and Milwaukie, where numerous busses use the same route.
Beyond Milwaukie, each bus can then travel on its own, non-BRT local route – but each of the lines are timed so that on the BRT corridor there is frequent/reliable service. Such also makes transfers easy, should one get on the “wrong” line and need to transfer at, in this example, Milwaukie TC.
Such a system would work on Barbur Blvd.
Supposedly, way back when they had a dedicated bus lane on Barbur. But even today, there is signal preemption (I believe), as well as queue bypasses at places like Capitol Hwy and the Tigard Cinemas.
There are a few queue-jumpers, but the problem is that traffic backs up from I-5 pretty much through Tigard, but especially northeast of the core area (Greenburg/Main). In fact that’s why Tigard is taking the lead on a study to widen 99W to three through lanes in each direction.
The largest problem (especially on Fridays) is the merge between Barbur Blvd. and I-5 onto 99W southbound on the Portland/Tigard city line. The traffic signal is timed to prefer traffic off of I-5, causing long backups on Barbur – this is why the 94 Express takes I-5 the short distance from Capitol Highway back onto 99W.
NB, the problems start on Main Street, because the signals at Greenburg/Main and Hall are not synchronized. So traffic routinely backs up, even well after the morning rush hour.
This is the main reason I am 100% OPPOSED to a Barbur Blvd. MAX route – there is no room, and this is a vital transportation route for which TriMet and Metro offer absolutely, positive ZERO solution to. Few in Yamhill County or outer Washington County are going to voluntarily park their cars (and I doubt a massive, 600+ car parking garage would be built in downtown Tigard to accomodate it anyways) and ride MAX in. (Yes, SOME will. But most won’t, and therefore MAX would not reduce congestion.)
That is why I do support the Garden Home/Multnomah Village routing of a southerly MAX route, but the RTP ignores it and all of the advantages it offers, rather forcing people to choose more congestion (by reducing capacity), especially people that don’t have a say in it (namely, Yamhill County). 99W/Barbur is a state owned/maintained highway, therefore to suggest that Yamhill County doesn’t have a say in it, is to equally suggest that the rest of the state should have veto power over Portland’s highway decisions. (i.e. the City of Portland can pay for their own Interstate Bridge, because it doesn’t benefit anyone in Burns.) And for those Yamhill County/outer Washington County/Tigard/Tualatin residents that do want to ride MAX in, they would have that option in Tigard (or even Tualatin, or Washington Square) – while 99W would be maintained, and even expanded per the City of Tigard’s plans which are sorely needed, and have been for at least a decade.
Most of the BRT route in Eugene uses the existing clogged Franklin Boulevard, the rest of it includes a SINGLE bi-directional busway they built into the median. With service at every 10 minutes, I bet it runs fairly slow due to each bus having to wait for the oncoming bus to clear the section of busway in front of it…
but I haven’t ridden it yet; when I was in Eugene last it was undergoing testing. I am kind of interested…
But Eugene is a small enough town in which you can bicycle from one end of it to the other in 30 minutes…
Few in Yamhill County or outer Washington County are going to voluntarily park their cars (and I doubt a massive, 600+ car parking garage would be built in downtown Tigard to accomodate it anyways) and ride MAX in. (Yes, SOME will. But most won’t, and therefore MAX would not reduce congestion.)
If I understand the traffic studies, there really aren’t that many trips all the way from Yamhill County to downtown in any case. The traffic on 99W is a combination of trips from Yamhill county to destinations in Washington County and trips originating closer in that go downtown and points in between.
So the question is how many people in Tigard, Tualatin, Beaverton ans Southest Portland will use Max. The folks in Washington County seem to use the existing MAX line, I am not sure why they won’t use a Barbur Boulevard line.
There are several “true” definitions of Bus Rapid Transit, but not just one.
I thought that was Garlynn’s point. People use the the same term for a number of quite different systems. So when someone says BRT they really need to define what they mean.
The traffic on 99W is a combination of trips from Yamhill county to destinations in Washington County and trips originating closer in that go downtown and points in between.
That is not correct.
There are plenty of routes that connect Yamhill and Washington County, and I’d be hard-pressed to find someone that would choose to endure Tigard traffic to get from Yamhill County to Beaverton, when there are better alternatives available. However there’s no good alternative for Yamhill County-Portland traffic (other than detouring out to I-5 via Donald or Wilsonville, which takes just as long as heading straight in even with traffic. The former “back road” routes such as Tualatin-Sherwood Road and Durham Road/Upper Boones Ferry Road are no longer desirable alternates.)
Not to say that it doesn’t happen, but to also state that few people go to downtown – I have worked with quite a few people (actually my ride home tomorrow is with one) who commute from Yamhill County downtown.
I have worked with quite a few people (actually my ride home tomorrow is with one) who commute from Yamhill County downtown.
I am sure there are some people. The question is how many and what percentage of the traffic that might use a light rail instead of 99 or I5 comes from Yamhill County. The studies I remember showed not very much of it.
Its not surprising people are frustrated with the region’s transit solutions if they rely solely on their own anecdotal experience to evaluate them.
Wouldn’t commuter rail be a more convenient choice for commuters from Yamhill County than light rail? It might make a rather circuitous route to get there, however, given that it’d need to either go to Beaverton Central or over to the Eastside and then back across into Union Station…. but I wonder what the travel time would look like, vs. light rail? Is there a regional rail study in the works that could answer these sorts of questions?
As for BRT, Ross, that was exactly my point. (Thanks!) Further, I was suggesting that several of the not-quite-full BRT options, which seem to becoming know as “Rapid Bus” as opposed to “Bus Rapid Transit” (subtle distinction there) might be rather promising interim fixes for many of Tri-Met’s routes. At least, it would seem worth looking into!
^ Not only would commuter rail be more convenient, but it is a lot cheaper to implement than a full-blow MAX system. Not to mention fewer stops, higher speed…
MAX is essentially a mini-metro system, and its frequency is more appropriate within a city’s limits than extending out to another town, unless there is a significant amount of traffic.
There needs to be a better transportation network in Wash County ‘burban areas to connect people to their ultimate destinations, however…
Zilfondel-
Well, I agree with you in principle, but that’s why I brought up the regional rail plan. There are all sorts of complications of geography, especially between Yamhill County and Downtown Portland specifically, that could complicate a commuter rail route and remove its inherent efficiency advantage (fewer stops, higher allowable operating speeds) such that MAX might actually provide the faster trip.
Not to say that commuter rail to Yamhill County wouldn’t work; just curious whether it would be MAX with regards specifically to the commute to Downtown P-Town.
I’m positive that commuter rail would prove to be successful at connecting outlying areas like Yamhill County’s community centers, the communities up Hwy 30, the communities out the Columbia River Gorge, the further-flung communities in Clark County, and the communities down the central Willamette Valley.
I’ve heard that a statewide rail plan has been proposed (again). One would hope that this might be one of the issues that it might address? A regional rail plan would need a lot of extra-regional coordination to make it happen, given that all of these communities tend to fall outside of Metro’s jurisdiction (now that I think about it).
With regards to Yamhill County:
We can sit on our asses for 10, 15, 20 years and have wet dreams about commuter rail, OR
We can buy ten MCI D4500 coaches and start an intercity commuter bus route with frequent service NOW.
If, under the new rules for the forum, we’re supposed to advocate a reduction in ADT – does planning reduce ADT, or does providing transit reduce ADT? Both busses and rail (whether it be Streetcar, Light Rail, Interurban, Commuter or Long Distance Rail) both serve a function to allow for mass transit. One can be implemented right away and another cannot.
I’d rather build something today, and if it builds support and becomes rail later, at least we’ll know there is demand for the service, because the busses can be used elsewhere (or in 10-15 years will probably have lasted their full service life).
The studies I remember showed not very much of it.
Ross, what studies?
I’m a 13 year resident of Yamhill County, and have numerous personal ties to the county.
Yes, many do go to Washington County, but to suggest that Yamhill County doesn’t contribute to jobs to other locations is similar to suggesting that almost everyone in Clark County works in North Portland (certainly C-Tran and traffic counts don’t support that theory).
If we are to only plan for transit options half way, is to not plan at all. If I-5 went from Portland to Centralia, let’s just say I-5 would be a waste of money.
I really don’t think a rail of any type to Yamhill County would be a realistic venture any time soon. Maybe a 94 type “express” bus service originating in McMinnville, a stop in Newberg, Sherwood and then downtown and Lloyd would be a good test to even see if enough people would ride that. Only then consider a train solution. I would bet that people would pay at least $5 a ride for such a service. I know I would. It’s at least $5.80 to ride from Salem to Portland on Amtrak (if you buy a 10 ride pass). I don’t think a $5 ride from Mac (as the locals call it) to Portland would be too steep.