An article in Thursday’s Oregonian explains how the Bush administration’s rules attempt to prevent streetcar lines from competing with bus rapid transit for federal funds. To quote Peter DeFazio: “It’s set up to make streetcar never pencil out.”
Here’s how:
At stake is about $200 million in federal money that could provide the first national program for streetcars in cities across the nation. More than 60 cities nationwide have ideas for emulating the Portland Streetcar and the dense mix of housing and commercial development that accompanies its downtown route.
[snip]
The transit administration has published rules that would make cost-effectiveness the key test of whether a project should be funded. Zoning for high density and saving miles driven in cars would be combined with congestion relief under an effectiveness test. Together those would count for half the benefits allowed.
[snip]
“If you build 5,000 units of housing along that line and people walked from those units of housing and get on the streetcar, they would not count under their criteria,” DeFazio said.
The only riders that count are the ones that transfer from a bus or other transit to get to the streetcar line, he said.
Continue reading Federal rules prefer buses over streetcar expansion
153 responses to “Federal rules prefer buses over streetcar expansion”
Translation: FTA wants everyone in a vehicle that directly burns fossil fuels, period. According to the article, the FTA also tried to make this permanent.
Although I also question the worth of the Eastside Streetcar Loop routing, I see a point for having streetcar service exist. There should also be a point made that people who live along a streetcar or other rail line do decrease congestion since they’re not on the same road as everyone else who wants to live miles away from where they work.
I believe that in transpo-planner speak…this is referred to as “The Trip Not Taken” and is very hard to capture with current transportation modeling techniques. Since, umm, the trip is not taken.
If people in Portland want their extravagently expensive transportation systems, then they should take it out of property taxes or increase the fares. Don’t expect the feds and their welfare to subsidize your extravagant lifestyles.
Obviously the feds have figured out one thing;
Is this funding being used for transit or to provide incentives for developers.
They want it used for transit.
Nothing wrong with that.
Congressman DeFazio was quoted as saying; “If you build 5,000 units of housing along that line and people walked from those units of housing and get on the streetcar, they would not count under their criteria,”
If the people from those housing units are counted in, then too must all taxpayer paid subsidies, incentives or otherwise, including property tax abatements that were/are utilized to construct and/or entice that housing need to be calculated in as part of the total price tag of the streetcar to accurately calculate it’s cost true effectiveness. Furthermore, annual streetcar taxpayer paid operating subsidies and the impact streetcars have on creating additional traffic congestion by obstructing traffic flow, particularly when stopping to board passengers, must also be factored in.
I think they have it all wrong. They shouldn’t be giving abatements or incentives but it should be just the opposite. Make the condo developments pay for the streetcar, include a special tax for condo developments to fund the streetcar. If you want to live in a shoebox, then pay for everything yourself, why should the public at large be forced to give welfare to yuppies living in the Pearl District who have more than enough money to spend on this crap anyway?
I have one more rant… Last weekend I was walking around downtown Portland and was amazed at how many vacant storefronts and old buildings dilapidated. Why don’t Urban Renewal Agencies focus more on rehabbing existing infrastructure instead of building glitzy new developments?
Criteria used by the FTA to determine project worthiness has been obsolete all along. This example of divorcing land-use and development considerations from transportation planning is just a more recent and obvious failing.
It shouldn’t be too hard to make a legal case defending investment in streetcar lines. But, we shouldn’t stop there. All transit systems in the US are failing to live up to their potential mainly, one could argue, because land-use and development patterns favor SOVs (single occupancy vehicles), the destruction of American freedom, the spoiling of American apple pie, the sorrow of moms and steriod use in the MLB; also the regretable profusion of cranky ideologues.
I believe that… this is referred to as “The Trip Not Taken…”
That’s exactly my point. If people have the option to live above their grocery store, next door to other retailers, work in another building close by (or even in the same building), and are also next door to other public necessities like schools, parks, and libraries, then all those trips won’t be taken, since once again all these things are within walking distance. Fossil fuels won’t be burned going between here and there (or any other type of fuel). Single occupancy vehicle trips would probably be viewed by those folks as the luxury that it actually is.
I realize that not everyone wants to live this lifestyle, and that’s fine with me, too. But people shouldn’t be forced to live 10+ miles from where they work, accessible only by using clogged formerly country roads leading to a clogged 4-lane each direction freeway, with the nearest warehouse-style so-big-you-can’t-find-anything big box grocery store 5 miles the other direction, other shopping outlets another 5 miles past that in these “lifestyle” auto-centric shopping centers that definitely aren’t my lifestyle, with no public services for miles. That sums up exactly how a lot of people don’t want to live.
Part of the FTA standard is about saving time over SOV trips… One obvious way to make the streetcar meet the standard is to remove some of the streets so that they are slower, and the streetcar is faster by comparison…
(And apparently that is the policy of the Bush Administration. Wow…)
GTinSalem said:“I think they have it all wrong. They shouldn’t be giving abatements or incentives but it should be just the opposite. Make the condo developments pay for the streetcar, include a special tax for condo developments to fund the streetcar. If you want to live in a shoebox, then pay for everything yourself…”
I totally agree, however the reality has been that the current socialistic political powers would rather just add to the public debt that future generations, the children of today, will continually be paying for their entire lives. This type of totalitarian thinking would rather take dictatorial control to make all the lifestyle choices for you by using tax codes to spend “YOUR” money instead of allowing you to make your own decisions as to where and what type of housing you live in, how you choose to move about and be mobile, and even what you eat. Such controlling government thinking is one reason why the middle class is increasingly loosing ground financially to inflation, and why a true democracy in the future will only be available to the affluent that have enough money to escape the oppression. The movie “Doctor Zhivago” (1965) comes to mind as to what the future will hold for the middle class if government officials continue on their current course of domestic actions.
Terry,
You write “the current socialistic political powers”
Are you living in Cuba or Venezuala?
You write “this type of totalitarian thinking”
Perhaps you should read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism
before you go throwing words around so casually.
You write “by using tax codes to spend “YOUR” money instead of allowing you to make your own decisions as to where and what type of housing you live in, how you choose to move about and be mobile, and even what you eat”
You must be talking about the FHA here? I mean like how they make me pay for highways and roads when I don’t want more of those? And of course the huge tax payoffs that suburban housing developments get? And in terms of what I eat…you must be talking about the tremendous subsidies that corn producers reap resulting in a food economy based upon corn? I trust that you have read Michael Pollan?
You write “Such controlling government thinking is one reason why the middle class is increasingly loosing ground financially to inflation, and why a true democracy in the future will only be available to the affluent that have enough money to escape the oppression.”
Dude, where have you been during the Bush years? The middle class is losing ground not because of inflation but due to a huge transfer of wealth via the breaking unions, tax breaks, etc.
As for the Doctor Zhivago reference, were you expecting to score extra points for referencing this? Go back and read the book. Then write about how any of that applies here.
In the meantime, why don’t you prepare your next campaign for Metro- or better yet for Mayor- since you feel so strongly about your point of view. Let the ballot box and democracy (which you claim to care so much about) decide.
Oh, that’s right.
Thoughts on this development….
(1) After 20 years of riding Trimet buses, I’m through. They’re just way too slow and unreliable;
(2) I might ride a streetcar if one went where I want to go. My (subjective) perception is that management won’t let streetcars get as unreliable as buses, because the whole system runs on one set of rails, and if one operator bogs down the whole system bogs down;
(3) I don’t think I’m alone in my perceptions here;
(4) Assuming that a good portion of potential ridership shares my view, a good way to thwart public transport would be to favor buses over streetcars, thereby alienating all but those who have no choice;
(5) My understanding is that the man in the White House is no friend of public transport, notwithstanding the spins put on things by his minions.
Any thoughts, anyone?
my thoughts:
DON’T GET RID OF YOUR CAR ANYTIME SOON!
“I might ride a streetcar if one went where I want to go. My (subjective) perception is that management won’t let streetcars get as unreliable as buses, because the whole system runs on one set of rails, and if one operator bogs down the whole system bogs down.”
>>>> That’s why buses are better then streetcars:
if one bus gets bogged down, the following bus can just go around it.
There is no reason why Trimet cannot operate its’
busses more reliably, at least in non-rush hours, unless management is plain incompetent.
No surprise…R’s hate cities and most city dwellers return the affection. Time to throw the rascals out and get on with building a world that we can be proud to hand off to the next generations.
Hawthorne said “Are you living in Cuba or Venezuela?
Castro and the current progressive movement have the same underlying goal; to control the citizenry.
“this type of totalitarian thinking”
Like words to totalitarian include: authoritarian, dictatorial, one-party, oppressive and the opposite of democratic.
“by using tax codes to spend “YOUR” money instead of allowing you to make your own decisions as to where and what type of housing you live in, how you choose to move about and be mobile, and even what you eat”
I am talking about those who want force people to live in high density people-warehousing tenement districts by raising taxes on other properties to pay for services, provide property tax abatements and other taxpayer funded subsidies so people are packed into small areas like sardines in a can. I am talking about those who want force people out of their cars by over-taxing motor vehicles so transit can be heavily subsidized and pedal pushers can continue to freeload paying no infrastructure user taxes. And I am talking about those who want to legislate what types of ingredients are in our foods and what we eat.
“Such controlling government thinking is one reason why the middle class is increasingly loosing ground financially to inflation, and why a true democracy in the future will only be available to the affluent that have enough money to escape the oppression.”
The middle class is being taxed to disparity by the so-called progressive movement so subsidies can be provided for things like snail rail, super-sized sidewalks, and miles of bicycle infrastructure the freeloading users totally balk at paying for thereby poaching the funding from other taxing sources. “Excessive consumption” can actually define the tearing down of what is already in place; be it roadways, existing housing and structures, energy sources, etc. Bush may be protecting the affluent, but it is the progressives through taxation that are attacking the middle class lifestyle. Furthermore, our country through free trade agreements, etc, is being sold to the highest foreign bidder. Both industry and family wage jobs are being exported abroad. This country can not financially sustain itself on just service type jobs. People complain about our dependency on imported oil, however dependency is a much greater issue with imported electronics, imported vehicles, imported toys, etc, etc, etc. We need to re-industrialize this nation and build those products here. Therefore, if you are one of those complaining about our dependency on foreign oil, by all means, DO NOT buy a foreign car.
As for the reference to Doctor Zhivago; It has been a while since I have seen the movie; however what left the greatest impressions were how the government took control over people’s lives creating what could be called a form of mayhem and mass poverty, how the family was forced to live in a small over-crowed apartment having to scrounge for wood to burn in the fireplace for heat, how a beautiful home in the country was left un-lived in and to succumb the perils of the environment, and how a street scene with a streetcar seemed overly crowded with desperate people.
I am talking about those who want force people to live in high density people-warehousing tenement districts
I have never met such a person. Can you name any in local government?
It is easy to overlook that Streetcar had its origins in a very public planning vision for the Central City. It came to life when neighborhood residents (Steve Fosler) and developers (Bill Naito) got behind it, sold it to several major institutions…PSU and Good Sam…and got a major sponsor at City Hall…Charlie Hales.
In the end, it was built with no federal $, no URA $ (later that changed), but almost solely with LID $.
Is it a success? Well, lots of people ride it, lots of development has occurred within a stone’s throw…some explicitly due to Streetcars proximity, and neighborhood and business folks on the Eastside would like to join the party. Why not? If you love cities, you can’t not love Streetcar. Of course, some love neither, especially those holding the reins in Washington.
“If you love cities, you can’t not love Streetcar. Of course, some love neither, especially those holding the reins in Washington.”
>>>> Oh yeah? Well, I love cities, having lived in them almost all my life, and I love rapid transit systems, but I certainly don’t love the streetcar we have here in Portland.
And this ‘streetcar promotes development’ myth is something propogated to divert attention away from tax subisdies (whether you agree with them or not) given to developers, which DO promote development. So, a new rail operation is used as a ‘cover’, so people think it’s the new rail line instead of the tax subisides that are doing the trick.
Believe me, lots of folks are wise to game played here in Portland.
“There is no reason why Trimet cannot operate its’
busses more reliably, at least in non-rush hours, unless management is plain incompetent.”
Hmmmmmm?
I wonder?
Every project is different, but many…if not most…of those who put their money on the line to build new projects in the Central City will give Streetcar some (not all) of the credit for making them pencil. Of course there are public funds to encouage what the public wants are part of many funding scenarios. So what?
The buildout of the West End, Pearl, RiverPlace and NW offer real urban neighborhoods for people who will drive less, pollute less, bike more and walk more. We should be cheering them on, not belly aching. Streetcar is a key piece of the success in the Central City that only the blind would deny.
bike more and walk more. We should be cheering them on, not belly aching.
That’s great, so let the liberal Democrats who believe these types of asinine and far from “green” living conditions is humanity’s salvation pony up and pay for these things THEMSELVES. I still think they should make do with what they have, get out of URA frauds to build unnatural developments. They’ll still need to truck in food from far away places, especially during the winter. So much for your “think local” view – and since you live in a small shoebox you obviously won’t store up food during the summer because you’ll have no room for it! Rehab some of the downtown buildings before shoving even more taxpayer money into a rich developer’s pocket. I can’t wait till the economy goes south and the Pearl is transformed into section 8 housing after everyone defaults on their loans and the city of Portland goes bankrupt when nobody can afford their overpriced tax bills. I can’t wait!
I can’t wait till the economy goes south
Why do you want to hasten the arrival of bad times?
and the Pearl is transformed into section 8 housing
I thought you disapproved of Section 8 housing?
after everyone defaults on their loans
Why do you want for everyone to be in foreclosure?
and the city of Portland goes bankrupt
Will that be a good thing for the Salem-area economy, then?
when nobody can afford their overpriced tax bills.
That seems like a strange thing to wish for. Perhaps you were only kidding?
I can’t wait!
Or perhaps not.
Did you remember to ask Santa as well?
I think the key point here, whether one agrees with the merits of Portland-style streetcar projects or not, is that this legislation was originally crafted with funding of some streetcar projects in mind, and Portland was specifically invited to apply for one of the first grants, and now the rules are being manipulated in such a way as to prevent most (or any) streetcar projects from being eligible. The congressional intent for this bill is quite clear.
Money we want for the Streetcar: $200M
Portland’s (city limits, not metro area) expected contribution to the Iraq war in 2008: $190M
Unfortunately the Iraq war argument does hold water.
If they can waste money on that then who are any of us to be complaining about some lousy street car project.
That shouldn’t be a problem, then…. Portland is RICH, it can afford to build the toonerville trolleys by themself!
Sorry, that $200M isn’t just for Portland, the just for Portland number is $75M… (But I don’t think that changes my point.)
I don’t know what Portland is spending on that illegal/immoral war, but it doesn’t matter, its $8 billion a month of OUR TAX DOLLARS!
I’d rather they build streetcars on all the roads!
Better yet, we need to get rid of this fake democracy that we live in and install a government based on the original constitution!
Which of course means the end of federal control over our lives, and our tax dollars staying in Oregon where they belong!
In response to my comment: “I am talking about those who want force people to live in high density people-warehousing tenement districts,” Bob R said: “I have never met such a person. Can you name any in local government?”
Let’s start with a person who represents local government rhetoric and wrote the Small Starts Bill in Washington DC, Congressman Earl Blumenhauer. He travels the country using a lot of energy to trump for such controls. Then moving on to the Oregon State Capitol, it is full of so-called progressives that cultivate a control type attitude. Locally, most if not all the members of both the Metro Council and the Portland City Council qualify.
Bob R also stated in a later post: “now the rules are being manipulated in such a way as to prevent most (or any) streetcar projects from being eligible.”
This sounds like the pot calling the kettle charred. Manipulation of rules and manipulative funding is standard procedure for just about anything the Portland City Council gets involved with. Just look at the manipulated patchwork applied to come up with local matching monies and the manipulation of bus routes to even qualify for Federal funding. That was preceded by a manipulated process with a stacked deck Citizen Committee to recommend the project in the first place. Furthermore, the public is constantly being manipulated by the city with tax codes and policies to control behavior, including as previously expressed, where and what type of housing we live in, how we choose to move about and be mobile, and even what we eat.
Let’s start with a person who represents local government rhetoric and wrote the Small Starts Bill in Washington DC, Congressman Earl Blumenhauer. [sic]
Yes, let’s start there. What evidence do you have that Rep. Blumenauer “wants” to “force people” to live in “people-warehousing tenement districts” (your words.)
Can you point to the run-down “tenement district” that Rep. Blumenauer “wants” to force people to live in, and point to evidence which proves Rep. Blumenauer will “force” people (I’m assuming you mean the force of government … are guns involved?) to live there?
Bonus: Does a small-starts-grant streetcar run through those run-down tenements?
– Bob R.
Somehow Terry, the idea that government has encouraged sprawl development and auto-centric transportation systems doesn’t concern you in the least, does it?
Can’t you see the fallacy in your arguments? We’ve had our housing and transportation choices basically taken away from us for decades, thanks to trillions of dollars in highway spending and FHA housing policies favoring suburban sprawl.
thanks to trillions of dollars in highway spending and FHA housing policies favoring suburban sprawl
Well this current batch of buffoons running Portland haven’t done any better to prevent this so called sprawl you’re talking about. Their actions are also deindustrializing the area and encouraging manufacturing to take place elsewhere. NIMBYism is encouraging companies to pack up and go to China where they have free reign to pollute, slash and burn and destroy the environment. Well the mercury is raining down on us, are you happy? With regard to “Transient Oriented Development” — Just look at all the dilapidated buildings and half-way tenements all scattered throughout downtown. There are several in Old Town, along Broadway, all over! I even saw one dive RIGHT at the gates of Chinatown that had chicken wires in the windows and a couple of dead and dried up chickens hanging in the window as through they were in some voodoo ritual. Then again maybe they were raising chickens for the Chinese Food places or something… There’s a slum housing right next to that underground parking structure next to Nordstrom’s! They should fix up these dives first instead they are throwing money at STREETCAR, STREETCAR hoping to spur development. Streetcar shouldn’t spur development, development should spur streetcar. They have it all wrong and they just like to waste money. Being wasteful goes against so called “sustainable” practices. Then they go and waste money buying streetcars from communist countries in Eastern Europe. Oh that’s right they want to make Portland into a European city. Like I said before if hifalutin Liberal Democrats want to show humanity how to live, they should shoulder all the costs themselves to live in a shoebox and go on special outings a few blocks to the nearest locally owned coffee joint. The streetcar is so slow they should just walk instead. It should never have been built at all. These people who extoll the virtues of the dum streetcar seem to have all the money to entertain themselves and buy expensive crap at Whole Foods and New Seasons Markets. Then they should have ample money to spend on overpriced and ineffective transportation systems throughout all of Portland! I think they should put a moratorium on more LRT and Streetcar building and use the money to figure out how to improve the flow of traffic throughout the whole state. The food has to come from somewhere, not on “rooftops” in the Pearl!
Greg –
You seem to think Portland has it all wrong, and use all sorts of heated, yet fact-free rhetoric to air your views on how rotten it is here in Portland.
Somehow, though, I never read anything specific that you would do differently. You just listed a whole bunch of problems, but offered zero in the way of solutions to them.
So, there are crappy areas in downtown/Old Town. How, if you were an elected official, do you get rid of them? And, what’s your vision for replacing them?
How, with the tools and dollars you have at your disposal, do you go about developing a place where people want to spend time and money?
We already know what you wouldn’t do…tell us what you would do.
You seem to think Portland has it all wrong, and use all sorts of heated, yet fact-free rhetoric to air your views on how rotten it is here in Portland
It doesn’t have it **ALL** wrong… And certainly every city (don’t even get me started about Salem) has its issues. I do love Portland just not living there … I just think they are mismanaging it and lowering its potential. And, I did mention how I would go about sprucing up the place – closing down all the slum and halfway housing and bring businesses into the vacant storefronts in the existing part of town. Only after that’s done and is at capacity then would I allow for new developments.
Bob,
Like words to “tenement” include: apartment building, apartment house, apartment residence, dwelling, public housing, high-rise. No where in my previous post did I include the words “run down” when referring to tenement districts. Based on the use of similar words, The Pearl, the South Waterfront and the Auditorium District which started urban renewal in Portland can all be described as tenement districts. Any high density and/or multi-story apartment-condo neighborhood area can be called a tenement district.
nuovorecord,
For the most part, people choose to live in the suburbs rather than being financially forced to. One exception however is East Multnomah County where housing is much cheaper than close in Portland. Some of the positive aspects of suburban living include housing with open space yards, not living like sardines with no privacy, and a greater distance from controlling governments and the array of obsessive taxes they assess.
As for the money spent on highways, unlike freeloading bicyclists and highly taxpayer subsidized transit infrastructure, the majority of the money spent to construct highways (and maintenance at the state level) is user based. It comes from the taxes on motor fuels at the Federal level through the Highway Trust Fund, and at the State level through fuel taxes, weight and mile taxes on trucks, and motor vehicle registration fees. The fallacy is that funding for bicycle and transit infrastructure has yet to be paid for directly by the users.
Terry –
Any high density and/or multi-story apartment-condo neighborhood area can be called a tenement district.
Really? The Pearl District is a “tenement district” … and Rep. Blumenauer wants to “force” people to live in the Pearl District, is that it?
Oh the humanity.
Google around a bit and see how the word “tenement” has been used in the context of American cities. I think perhaps you’d be better off selecting a different word, or retreating from your original strong and thus-far unproven statements.
– Bob R.
Greg begins to form a plan: And, I did mention how I would go about sprucing up the place – closing down all the slum and halfway housing and bring businesses into the vacant storefronts in the existing part of town.
Greg, that doesn’t really answer the “how” question at all.
Some questions:
closing down all the slum and halfway housing
Would you do this by decree? Would you outlaw halfway housing? Would you zone them into other parts of town? How would you get the public and the council to go along with this? If they were to be closed completely and not relocated, where would the residents go? Out on the street, or would you chip in more government money to rent them nicer spaces?
bring businesses into the vacant storefronts in the existing part of town
How would you do that? Order existing businesses to move by some legal decree, or provide tax and financial incentives to get them to move there? Perhaps you could form some kind of quasi-governmental “development commission” to assist businesses in relocating to that part of town.
These are serious questions that you’ve never answered. You seem to have no shortage of off-the-cuff “solutions”, but you never seem to be remotely concerned about the consequences or implementation details.
At other times you’ve proposed other draconian moves, such as razing much of Dundee to make room for a wider 99W. You’ve advocated that the Feds completely override all local decision-making and start building the Columbia-River-Crossing right now.
You seem to have no problem with “big government” intrusion into people’s lives so long as it isn’t done by locally-elected Portland-style politicians.
Bob,
Check the thesaurus in Microsoft Word and see what you come up with – the words I posted. Personally I enjoy calling The Pearl a tenement district because it gives a reality check connotation to the somewhat snobbish name given the area that suggests affluent superiority and arrogance. As for Rep. Blumenauer’s rhetoric, he wants cities to develop with high density housing, even giving those types of developments tax breaks and taxpayer funded subsidies. If real market conditions exist for constructing mass amounts of such housing, tax breaks, taxpayer funded subsidies and property tax abatements would be totally unnecessary. That all adds up to forcing people to live in tenement districts, be it The Pearl or one that is considered less exclusive.
That all adds up to forcing people to live in tenement districts, be it The Pearl or one that is considered less exclusive.
That one sentence alone sums up the absurdity of your entire argument.
Pearl District = Tenements
Subsidies for certain types of development = Forcing people to live in tenements
Advocating for subsidies = “Wanting” to “force” people to live in “tenement districts”.
And the fact that you describe this kind of argument as a “reality check” is the icing on the cake.
Check the thesaurus in Microsoft Word and see what you come up with – the words I posted.
Terry, I don’t want to have to be the one to break this to you, but a thesaurus entries are not definitions. They are lists of related words, bound by similar concepts and definitions, but you can’t use a thesaurus to prove a point about a definition.
Nonetheless, since you state you enjoy this sort of thing so much, I tried it out to see if I could derive similar pleasure. I have Office 2007 installed (out of necessity, but that’s not such a pleasurable story), and the thesaurus lists the following words:
“apartment building”
“apartment house”
“apartment”
“residence”
“dwelling”
“public housing”
“high-rise”
Interestingly, the word “condominium” is absent from that list, although I suppose one _could_ stretch that thesaurus list to apply “residence” or “dwelling” to “condominium”, but one _would_ be wrong to do so.
Also, Word 2007’s Encarta Dictionary lists an actual definition of Tenement, with two entries:
1. Urban Apartment Building. A large residential building in a city, usually of three or more stories and with only basic amenities, where a large number of people live in self-contained rented apartments.
2. Item of Rented Property. A piece of property, e.g. land or houses, held by one person but owned by another.
Neither definition applies to condominium buildings.
Note also that the primary definition, from your very own source, says “with only basic amenities”. Say what you like about the Pearl District, but you cannot make a reality-based argument that the area has “only basic amenities”.
If you want to stretch the definition of the word “tenement” into bland, meaningless territory, and further stretch the definition of “force” to similar broad levels, you’re not really bolstering your argument, you’re just softening it into goo.
Consider that a “reality check”. Hey, I did enjoy this after all. Thanks, Terry!
In an attempt to steer this back closer to the original topic, a question:
Shouldn’t opponents of Portland-style streetcar development be lobbying for the repeal or modification of the Small Starts program, and/or supporting candidates which want to repeal/modify Small Starts?
Why not openly revolt rather than support rule-making processes which clearly subvert the original intent of the program?
Thanks for the reply, Greg. Pretty much what I thought you’d say. Bob did my dirty work for me, so there’s not much to add in pointing out the emptiness of your “plan.”
The reality is that there are few investors interested in putting money in run-down areas. The risk is too great. Which is why governments get involved in helping to incentivize development by providing infrastructure like a streetcar.
It is worth noting that there currently are efforts to clean up downtown. The Grove Hotel was recently purchased by HAP. From the Mercury: “HAP is trying to make the building safe and livable for the next five years while it works with other local agencies to find somewhere else for the existing tenants to go.”
Building inspections are also being carried out for other older buildings with “shady” business. This will ultimately cause relocation for some whose landlords don’t want to/can’t afford to get it up to code and so they sell.
Think about how far downtown has come in the past 20 or 30 years. I think they are on the right track as you can’t just close these places down. We don’t want even more people on the streets, do we?
If they had dedicated lanes along this route, it would go faster and therefore attract more riders. Somewhere recently I saw the projected times for this route and it was some ridiculously long travel time to go from the Pearl to OMSI. MLK and Grand are wide one ways, is there any way they can have a dedicated lane along this portion? Or at least have extensive signal pre-emption and fewer stops.
While I hope they can build the streetcar, if it doesnt work out hopefully they will look into electric trolley buses for this route. Portland re-introduced the non-tourist streetcar to the US now maybe they can re-introduce the trolley bus. It would satisfy the FTA bus bias, has the fixed guideway visability and are green.
BTW its worth checking out the brand new South Lake Union Streetcar in Seattle to see that new walkable urban development is not just a Portland thing. There are many projects completed and many more under construction. They even have a “discovery center” building just like the SoWa.
http://www.columbian.com/opinion/news/2007/12/12282007_Light-railline-to-Clark-gains-speed.cfm
from our discussion over at trimet operators:
trimetoperators@yahoogroups.com
From: al m
Date: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:34 pm
Subject: Re: heres one for you jeff
In this big debate;
buses or streetcars/light rail;
one solid point cannot be avoided!
“““““““`
WHAT EQUIPMENT IS USED WHEN THE LIGHT RAIL/STREET CAR FAILS?
Answer:
A-buses;
ergo-BUSES ARE THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE, not rail, buses are
more dependable, more versatile;
BUSES ARE THE WAY TO GO, screw the yuppie set.
They don’t like it they can walk!
— In trimetoperators@yahoogroups.com, “Jeffrey Rose”
wrote:
>
> With all the focus here directed at the problems that we have on the
lightrail (perhaps
> erroniously) I’m not too concerned. There is also a huge emphasis
coming from more of a
> conservative crowd that busses are where we should be investing ALL
our transit dollars-
> and screw lightrail and streetcars! This is a huge debate; how
should the work be divvied
> up between busses, lightrail, streetcars, commuter rail, etc? More
and more, busses are
> being used almost in a support role to the lightrail- maybe they
will eventually compete
> with streetcars within this role? I don’t know. In any case, when
it comes to the narrower
> issue of security on lightrail and on busses, busses actually have a
huge advantage over
> lightrail- the presence of the operator! In most of the news
stories involving busses you
> hear about cases of drivers not intervening in or reporting
incidents or even being
> involved IN incidents. For the most part this is sensationalism.
You might read or even
> see on TV something like some bus driver in Montreal throwing some
old lady off the bus
> and spitting on her or something! Well, that’s one in probably
several hundred thousand
> busdrivers in the US and perhaps millions in the world. I am amused
by the spectacle, but
> this is one person in a million, literally.
>
> More commonly, busdrivers find themselves guilty of simply not
acting when perhaps they
> should. Why do busdrivers not act when, say, a passenger is being
harrassed or even
> assaulted??? This is a question that needs to be asked. There
could be many answers.
> Maybe bus drivers need an easier way to communicate when problems
are in their early
> stages. When has a situation escalated to the point where a driver
needs to act? Do
> drivers usually just sort of wait and hope that the situation will
work itself out? Sometimes
> problems DO just sort of go away/get off a few stops down the road.
Do we need more
> training in dealing with problems on the bus, and a clearer outline
of what to do in certain
> situations? Can I bring EOL time into this? If an operator is
looking at a 8 minute break at
> bewteen a couple of hour and a half long trips- is he less likely to
stop the bus to deal
> with an emerging issue that to just keep plowing towards the end of
the line hoping for
> enough time to take a piss?
>
> Jeff
>
> — In trimetoperators@yahoogroups.com, “Erik Halstead”
wrote:
> >
> > With all these reports of bus-related problems, this could be fodder
> > for the light rail and Streetcar supporters that busses are the crime
> > problem, and they should be eliminated.
> >
What can go where SUVs cannot? Mules! Ergo, mules are the vehicle of the future.
Buses absolutely have more flexibility than rail. Which is why buses will always be around. But that does not make them better for all applications.
well chris;
your entitled to your opinion.
Light rail makes sense for connecting cities, as in the blue line.
Sorry, I don’t see it for local service.
Your pal;
Al
and i’ll take a mule any day of the week when going up the mountain!
(or down for that matter!)
}:>
Look at the streetcar.
That was an obvious duplication of already existing services!
So why did they spend however many millions of dollars to put in a service that was already there?
Because the yuppies like it, these people won’t ride buses but will ride street cars.
SORRY, no soap, tough titties as they say, no more catering to special interests in the provision of transit services. Buses aren’t good enough for you then don’t ride transit.
btw;
my favorite thing about the streetcar is how the bus 77 IS IMMEDIATELY tailing it!
right behind it, in both directions!
talk about government waste!
So why did they spend however many millions of dollars to put in a service that was already there?
There was no N-S service in the Pearl and no service at all to RiverPlace or South Waterfront.
But the more important answer is because the private sector stepped up with $3B of investment along the alignment. Can you point me to a bus line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment?
“Can you point me to a bus line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment?”
Right, that’s exactly the point,
its all about economic development;
NOT TRANSIT.
And I’m also against turning this city into another Seattle, which is where we are heading.
It’s probably too late now to stop that from happening anyway.
my favorite thing about the streetcar is how the bus 77 IS IMMEDIATELY tailing it!
Great, we’ll run the Streetcar out to Troutdale, then we can drop the 77.
The two lines have completely different purposes and are only parallel for 13 blocks.
its all about economic development
OK, but it’s still a great investment, no matter what you call it :-)
lol,
ok chris;
its your blog, you deserve the last word on the subject!
“OK, but it’s still a great investment, no matter what you call it :-)”
*:o)
“The two lines have completely different purposes and are only parallel for 13 blocks.”
To put that into perspective, the new mall MAX line is parallel to a lot of bus lines for 28 blocks…
“the new mall MAX line is parallel to a lot of bus lines for 28 blocks…”
yea, and parallel to the street car also.
ya think they got enough service in downtown yet?
ya think trimet may be somewhat tilted towards portland in its service delivery mission?
and its all free for those that live downtown too!
ya know Chris;
When the original streetcars dominated American cities the automobile was still a scarcity, Streetcars had the streets pretty much to themselves, along with horses.
Now that the automobile has become the dominant mode of transport in america (and the world actually) bringing back the street car is a pretty unusual concept.
How come there is never any discussion about bringing a street car up ne 15th avenue? Or east sandy blvd.?
Or Grand avenue?
I think you know the answer to that.
The street car is a little trendy cute mode of transport for the trendy crowd among us.
They go with a Pearl district or a Lake Oswego so the trendy people can feel ok about riding transit, and they wont have to sit on a bus with “those” people.
Street cars are the responsibility of DEVELOPERS, not transit districts or transit funds!
Al asks: How come there is never any discussion about bringing a street car up ne 15th avenue? Or east sandy blvd.? […] Or Grand avenue?
Al, I think you stepped in it just a tad this time.
The Eastside Loop streetcar project, which is the very subject of the Oregonian article which prompted this post, is currently seeking federal funds and is otherwise ready to go. It runs on Grand and MLK for much of its route.
The Streetcar System Plan is evaluating a number of possible corridors, including central and eastern portions of Sandy Blvd. Even before the Streetcar System Plan began, central Sandy was discussed as a possible component of a Burnside streetcar alignment.
Your assertion that such alignments are “never” discussed is simply untrue — these options have been discussed in a variety of forums, along with numerous other possibilities.
OH,
well,
never mind!
(remember Emily Latella, or that was before your time?)
Gilda Radner used to do this whole shpeel on the original Saturday night live where she would do a commentary on a subject only to find out that she had the thing wrong to begin with. And then she would end it with:
OH, well, never mind.
I guess I’m old, seems like yesterday to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afi2xeM5ZSI
Chris Smith: But the more important answer is because the private sector stepped up with $3B of investment along the alignment. Can you point me to a bus line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment?
JK: Can you point me to a light rail line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment without massive subsidies to the developers? It sure wasn’t Portland before the subsidies because they were started after no development occurred. (If you claim the development would occur without the subsidies, then they are a waste of money – lets get rid of the subsidies!)
See: DebunkingPortland.com/Transit/LightRailDevelopment.htm
Light rail costs too much & does too little.
Thanks
JK
“JK: Can you point me to a light rail line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment without massive subsidies to the developers? ”
YEA!
What he said!
“Buses absolutely have more flexibility than rail. Which is why buses will always be around. But that does not make them better for all applications.”
>>>> Here in Portland, but not everywhere, buses ARE BETTER for all applications.
The reality is that there are few investors interested in putting money in run-down areas
Well its not hard to see why businesses aren’t relocating to the “vibrant” downtown area. There are run-down and vacant buildings – totally empty storefronts and for sale and for lease signs popping up everywhere, which I think is a dirty shame – they are historic and downtown could be something magnificent. Instead it is a magnet for all sorts of vagrants drug dealers and the like. Tonight I was riding the MAX from Lloyd Center to downtown. I was with my older friend (in her 60’s) and she was actually frightened when we were at the Skidmore stop and a bunch of drunk vagrants bragging about eating out of dumpsters got on board and immediately started harassing all the passengers for change. We detrained at Pioneer Square and walked around and were panhandled several more times and I noticed garbage everywhere, even in those beautiful fountains next to Pioneer Courthouse. It even looked like someone had vomited in one of them! When we got back on the MAX to Hillsboro there were 3 cops on board and it was interesting to see the number of people who started to walk into the train after galleria then after seeing the cops got off immediately. Lots of ticket machines with blinking lights tonight one of the cops mentioned. What it all boils down to is Portland liberal attitude and tolerance of vagrants and lawbreakers in and around on the transit system is going to hurt it economically. They need to put the foot down or more people are going to get scared to come downtown. My friend said she would probably stick to Beaverton and Hillsboro and not venture downtown anymore. I would put a moratorium on all new construction until they clean up what they already have. This is what I would consider “sustainability” instead of wasting federal tax money on trolleys and overpriced condos. in Pearl district. When the housing bubble finally bursts in Portland it will not be pretty.
“What it all boils down to is Portland liberal attitude and tolerance of vagrants and lawbreakers in and around on the transit system is going to hurt it economically.”
BINGO BINGO BINGO!
That is EXACTLY the problem:
http://amargul.blogspot.com/2007/12/willamette-week-use-for-trash-can.html
never mind!
I remember! (It is not a crime to be old enough to remember when Saturday Night Live was both good and relevant. :-) )
– Bob R.
AL M Says: “JK: Can you point me to a light rail line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment without massive subsidies to the developers? “
YEA!
What he said!
JK: The development he talked of (the Pearl, RiverPlace and South Waterfront.) were virtually all subsidized, either directly (low interest loans, discounted land discounted system development fees, property tax abatements, etc.) and/or indirectly through being in an urban renewal district.
So I again ask: Can you point me to a light rail line that has catalyzed even $1B in private investment without massive subsidies to the developers?
Thanks
JK
The development he talked of (the Pearl, RiverPlace and South Waterfront.) were virtually all subsidized, either directly (low interest loans, discounted land discounted system development fees, property tax abatements, etc.) and/or indirectly through being in an urban renewal district
So what happens when these property tax abatements suddenly expire in the Pearl? If I was a taxpayer in other areas throughout town I would be irate about this discrimination and favortism toward single yuppies with no families. Why should residents in new developments pay little to no property taxes while older established areas are paying through the nose? It doesn’t sound fair, and even bordering on fraudulent to me.
So what happens when these property tax abatements suddenly expire in the Pearl?
The City has more general fund revenue to spend on services like police, fire and parks, as the result of the investment made in incentivizing this development.
Why should residents in new developments pay little to no property taxes while older established areas are paying through the nose?
If you actually look at where these abatements are applied, they go to:
1) Affordable Housing
2) Rental Housing (which the market was until very recently not producing)
With the exception of a few special cases (which include some affordability component), owner-occupied (condo) developments have not received tax abatements.
With the exception of a few special cases (which include some affordability component), owner-occupied (condo) developments have not received tax abatements
Well I used to live in one of these so called “affordable” apartments (Cornerstone) on 7th and Halsey and play the work close to your work game. Cornerstone gets a property tax abatement and yet found excuses (last one I heard was “we have to raise rent because Streetcar is coming in and they are charging more property taxes to pay for it”) to raise my rent so high I gave up on the Portland Metro area completely after living there for 12 years and so I moved back to Yamhill county and got a job in Salem with the state. Plus they (City and landlord) made owning a car next to impossible and I wasn’t going to give up a car and be forced to rely on transit. It isn’t exactly a cake walk getting to where my family lives in the Salem and McMinnville areas anyway. These new urbanists need to come up with sustainable plans if they are going to get more people to buy into their vision. Living amongst druggies, vagrants, criminals and high pollution in claustrophobic living conditions isn’t exactly my idea of “livability”. If I wanted that I’d move to Newark N.J. or the Bronx projects. Maybe Vera and all her cronies want to convert Portland into a NYC style slum.
I guess we’re no longer talking about the FTA rules trumping streetcar applications, but since Chris is up for talking about this, I’ll add to the current conversation.
Greg, I understand that you like where you are now. There are many others in McMinnville and Salem that also like it, and I’m glad it works for them. Not everyone wants to (or can) live that lifestyle, however.
At the same time, I understand that not everyone wants to live the lifestyle that I live.
I’m perfectly happy with agreeing that we disagree on the subject. Both should exist… which is why there are different cities and different areas within cities, so that those who like one or the other can do so… or in some places it’s a mix between the two.
Maybe one of the things we should be looking at is what type of units are being built where… perhaps luxury homes are being built where those people are uninterested in buying, and low-cost homes are being built where those people don’t want to (or can’t) live.
Maybe if the apartment towers and other such dwellings had rents of, say, $500-$800/mo., with the lower end for 1 bedroom units and the upper end for 2 bedroom units, it would better attract those who would be more likely to use transit, and increase the value of transit for them, since they would be along a high-capacity bus route of some sort… such as streetcar, MAX, or Frequent Service bus line – or be within distance of two or all of them.
Then, there’d be more room to build higher-end housing in an area where transit is either lackluster, unreliable, or non-existent; rather then building the low-cost homes there and forcing people to use a feeder bus that runs hourly during rush-hour, virtually requiring them to own a car and have all the added expense associated with that.
Lastly, and I don’t know if Chris will be able to answer this here since he’s running for City Commissioner, but more of a application-type question: should transit options spur development, or should development spur transit options? Meaning: should the transit go in first in places like the Pearl District and South Waterfront to give developers options; or should we be looking at things like: ‘alright, retail development happened privately at Bridgeport, jobs happened in Northern and Eastern Hillsboro and Beaverton, and people are living in unsubsidized units in, say, Outer SE Portland. These people absolutely refuse to use existing bus service connecting these locations, so should we see if direct rail service pencils out to these locations, and would people be more likely to support increased rail transit (streetcar/MAX) if it were serving destinations they already go to, versus new destinations we want to create on paper?’
These people absolutely refuse to use existing bus service connecting these locations, so should we see if direct rail service pencils out to these locations
Why is it that when “existing bus service” doesn’t make sense that the answer is automatically build a choo-choo line?
Why not, oh, I don’t know, IMPROVE BUS SERVICE?!!!!!!!!!!!
The only reason Portland is so hung up on the “rules favor busses over Streetcar” is that Portland REFUSES to invest in bus service.
Look at Seattle – they are building light rail AND a Streetcar line. Oh, and they are HEAVILY investing in bus service AT THE SAME TIME – to the tune of some 700 hybrid-electric busses, many of which are high-capacity articulated busses.
Seattle’s bus fleet has in the last few years been completely renewed; the only busses over 15 years old, the Breda duo-modes, have been completely rebuilt inside and out as straight-trolley busses.
I’d like to know why “Portland favors Streetcar Expansion over Busses”. I will support a Streetcar or MAX line when it makes sense – but to placate developers while screwing over existing transit riders does not make sense. There is no reason that a new Streetcar line should be built while my transit service suffers, becomes more unreliable and the government agencies that are responsible for any part of transit don’t give a damn.
Let’s look at the Bridgeport Village example. Why don’t more Tualatin area residents use transit? Well, let’s see.
The 76 line runs every 30 minutes during peak commuting hours. It runs on a slow route to Tigard and then to Washington Square and Beaverton.
The 12 line, that serves northwest Tualatin, runs every 30 minutes, forces riders to make a dangerous run across five lanes of 99W in a high-speed area, and is very unreliable.
The 96 line is essentially a park-and-ride route (meaning it doesn’t serve anything but parking lots) and is a rush-hour only bus. So much if you want to go downtown on the weekend.
Nevermind that Tualatin’s population of 26,025 is greater than:
Forest Grove (population 20,775 – served by “frequent service” 57)
Cornelius (10,895 – served by “frequent service” 57)
Milwaukie (20,920 – is receiving a MAX light rail line – despite what some frequent contributors to this forum claim that Tualatin doesn’t have enough of a population base to support more transit, yet it has 5,000+ more residents than this soon-to-be MAX destination!!!)
Gladstone (12,200 – served by “frequent service” 33)
Need to get from Tualatin to Sherwood? You can’t, at least not by bus, unless you ride the 76 to Tigard and wait for a 12 bus that serves Sherwood. It’s a 10 minute drive by car; 10 minutes will get you from downtown Tualatin to Bridgeport Village by bus.
How about service from Tualatin to Lake Oswego? The 36 is an hourly service route; it’s last run is at 5:38 PM leaving Bridgeport. It also does not really serve Tualatin, save for the Tualatin P&R at Bridgeport.
The 37 runs essentially the same schedule; last bus at 5:34 PM. Neither bus runs weekends/holidays, either.
The 38 is a rush-hour only bus. It’s last run is 5:39 PM to Portland.
So, is the reason that “nobody rides the bus” because “it’s a bus” or because the existing bus service needs to be improved?
If you had a choice between riding a 15 year old, non-air conditioned bus that frequently runs 5-15 minutes late; or a new bus with modern amenities and is reliable, what would you choose? In Portland, unfortunately, you don’t get a choice.
should transit options spur development, or should development spur transit options?
Someone once asked Wayne Gretzky why he was such a great hockey player, his answer: “Skate to where the puck is going, not to where it is.”
Transportation and land use are of course a virtuous cycle (or a descending spiral if you get them wrong). But since government more often provides the transportation side of the equation, I believe that we should be making transportation investments to support the land use pattern we want in the future, not to try to ‘catch up’ to demand from past land use choices.
Jason,
I actually did enjoy certain aspects of living in Portland but the getting priced out and dealing with vagrants sent me over the top, so to speak. I think “affordable” housing needs to mean more than housing for the absolute destitute. Like somewhere between destitute and middle class, such as recent college graduates who are just starting out their careers. I also think mass transit should be available valley wide, not just a luxury afforded to the inner city core where walking is even faster than trolley.
If they are going to put in these streetcars put them in where they are needed most.
The highest density corridors OR service areas that are UNDER SERVED;
As in the bus service is doing a damn lousy job filling the needs.
The Pearl district is very nice and all that, but come on, transit funds are limited, the money needs to be used were it is needed most. Providing free service for the upper class condo owners of the Pearl is an abomination to god. (to use a quote from another blog topic)
Erik Halstead points out a reality of bus service as provided here in Portland: it sucks! Now, I don’t care whether they run antiquated unreliable bus service, or up to the minute de luxe unreliable bus service, I’m not having any. And come to think of it, how much of the huge price tag for brand-new, purportedly more comfortable buses—how much of this price tag does anything at all for the passenger, who’s still sardine-packed in some unreliable conveyance? Sorry guys and gals, but if the bus service has demonstrated anything to me as a rider for several decades, it is that it fails to earn any new investments at all.
I favor rail transit because of my perception that it can’t possibly fail as totally as rubber-tired, internal-combustion buses. Prove to me that Trimet can do as abysmally with rail vehicles as it now does with buses, and I might change my views.
“I favor rail transit because of my perception that it can’t possibly fail as totally as rubber-tired, internal-combustion buses.”
YEA. except when there is a problem along the line, THEN THE WHOLE LINE IS KAPUT!
Have you ever been stuck in the tunnel?
I HAVE!
Gimme a bus any day of the week, at least they let you out!
In my opinion, the streetcar is a very intelligent investment. For examples:
When I lived in Tualatin, I worked in the NW Industrial area. From there, I could drive a few blocks, park in one spot, play pool nearby, stop for a beer at Henry’s, take the streetcar somewhere else to have dinner, then take it back to my car to drive home.
A lot of driving was eliminated and it made it more convenient to spend time in the city than going back to the suburbs.
Then, I moved to the NW area, and now I can walk to it if I feel like it, or jump on one of the plentiful buses of the area. It’s very convenient having it, since it runs more reliably than most of the neighborhood’s buses, and is a simple way to shuffle myself around downtown and back to 23rd without worrying about parking, gas, etc.
Plus, I can transfer to/from it with the buses and MAX, so it’s a good connector as well.
Better yet, when my family visited my brother would take the MAX to the streetcar from Hillsboro to meet up with myself or my parents, both of whom were places with easy access. We were all over the west side of the Willamette, but it was easy to find and reliable.
My parents rented a car, and drove it from the airport to the hotel, out to Mt Hood and back, and back to the airport. They never used a bus, just streetcar and MAX cause they were easy to remember.
Yes, buses could help tourists effectively as well, but the streetcar had a unique appeal to people from a city without it. It’s easy to use, has frequent stops so it’s good for people who just want a short trip after a lot of walking around the Pearl and Downtown, and it serves some real destination areas.
I’m not sure they went anywhere but Mt Hood, Kennedy School (I drove) and Washington Park (they were already in the car) without using trains.
I’d rather support it with buses. They both have a great purpose; the streetcar indicates something different like an experience, more of a people mover than a being simply utilitarian like a bus.
Long post, I know, just wanted to address some of the points made by other posters with my personal experiences.
Al M said,
The Pearl district is very nice and all that, but come on, transit funds are limited, the money needs to be used were it is needed most. Providing free service for the upper class condo owners of the Pearl is an abomination to god.
Well, this is all tied up in the question of whether Fareless Square should continue to exist. Remember that Fareless Square was started in 1975, 20 years before the Pearl existed as such. It was designed to cover what we now call Old Town, and the central business district south of Burnside.
So the Square covers the Pearl by accident — it’s not like it was designed intentionally for the condo owners, there were no condo owners (or any other residents) in 1975.
Actually, the Square only covers the south half of the Pearl — it ends at Hoyt St., because north of Hoyt was nothin’ but railroad yards. The Pearl will run many blocks north, to the river.
Most of the Square covers Old Town, the rest of downtown, and the Lloyd District — the Pearl is just a little piece of it.
There are inequities in the TriMet fare structure, which I’ll write up one of these days soon. But meanwhile, the Fareless Square issue is worth discussing but is is much bigger than the Pearl.
The “rich condo owners” some of you love to bash are sending millions in property taxes to the city/county (around a million or so just from the building I live in). It’s hard to know how much we’re getting back in services, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the “subsidies” were going in the other direction — from the Pearl, not to it.
Also remember that 1000 units in the Pearl, or about 20% of the housing units in the Pearl, are below-market rentals, and all new construction. It’s not all condos, and it’s not all upper-class.
I’ve started a contributor thread on the whole Pearl thing, which you’ll see as soon as Chris publishes it here. He says that’ll be Wednesday, then we can talk. I’ll be interested in everyone’s reactions. Meanwhile, please find something else to bash.:-)
Mike
Chris Smith Says: So what happens when these property tax abatements suddenly expire in the Pearl?
The City has more general fund revenue to spend on services like police, fire and parks, as the result of the investment made in incentivizing this development.
JK: You are forgetting that those are urban renewal districts, so any property tax that is actually collected goes mostly to pay off the bonds that built the nice new streets and parks for the yuppies. The only part of the tax payments that go to actual city services is the same dollar amount that was collected at the start of the district. All increases, including inflation, is assumed to be due to the urban renewal scheme. In the case of the Pearl and North Macaddam, that amount is pennies on the dollar because that was more or less derelict buildings and land with little value. It’s amazing what a billion of taxpayer funds can do to land that just happened to be owned friends of city councillors.
Chris Smith Says: Why should residents in new developments pay little to no property taxes while older established areas are paying through the nose?
If you actually look at where these abatements are applied, they go to:
1) Affordable Housing
2) Rental Housing (which the market was until very recently not producing)
With the exception of a few special cases (which include some affordability component), owner-occupied (condo) developments have not received tax abatements.
JK: Lets review the categories of abatement from saveportland.com:
…….Category…………………………………….Exempt Value
CORE AREA MULTI-UNIT………………. 163,420,010
RESIDENTIAL REHAB PROPERTY…… 28,690,530
HISTORIC PROPERTY…………………….. 603,743,370
ENTERPRISE ZONE………………………….. 83,732,270
NEW HOUSING DISTRESSED NH…… 148,326,100
STRATEGIC KEY INVESTMENT……. 295,113,110
VERTICAL HOUSING DEVEL……….. 0 (permitted by state law)
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVEL………….. 50,739,370
TOTAL………………………………………… 1,373,764,760
These are the value of the property, not the tax. The lost tax is around $25-30 million (2002-03 tax year)
Urban renewal districts are a much bigger tax loss, about $60,289,219 from division of tax. And a special levy for PDC’s five Existing Plan Areas of $14,514,833. The total amount imposed for PDC, $73,547,737, represents more than 98.3% of the total urban renewal taxes imposed in Multnomah County for 2006-07. (from TSCC annual reporr 2006-07t, page 58)
Thanks
JK
Mikey, Mikey, MIKE!
Hopefully your not taking any of this personally!
I actually love the pearl. Thanks the the condo conversion craze that has finally topped out here in NW Portland I got to jack up my rents 30% just this past 6 months because the rental stock has dwindled thanks to the condo craze.
SO AS A LANDLORD, I LOVE THE PEARL.
AND..
I love the people that live in the pearl! THE PEARL DISTRICT IS GREAT. I really believe that.
BUT:
On the subject of transit, the streetcar was put in for the pearl. Now that “transit option” doesn’t benefit anybody other than the people that live along that line. It was a duplication of already existing services.
SO:
When I discuss transit, the pearl is really a thorn in my side. While they cut service to Washington County, they continue to talk about putting in more streetcars on Portland streets that are already served by buses.
Why does the pearl qualify for extra service while Washington County gets service cutbacks?
The reason of course is that PORTLAND runs trimet and gets what it wants while the rest of the service area sucks wind.
BUT I LOVE THE PEARL, I REALLY DO!
your pal;
al
so any property tax that is actually collected goes mostly to pay off the bonds that built the nice new streets and parks for the yuppies.
I think you meant to say “for the citizens.” Because in case you haven’t noticed, everyone gets to walk, bike or drive on those streets and use those parks. They aren’t just for “the yuppies.”
I probably should’ve done a better job of explaining that the places I used were examples that were the best I could think of off the top of my head as I wrote the comment. It was not meant to be an endorsement of providing rail transit service to any area. I’m very aware of the routes that serve Tigard, Tualatin, and Sherwood, as I lived out there from 1995-97 and 2000-02, and especially in the second stint used 12, 76, 78, and 95X all the time.
I favor rail transit because of my perception that it can’t possibly fail as totally as rubber-tired, internal-combustion buses. Prove to me that Trimet can do as abysmally with rail vehicles as it now does with buses, and I might change my views.
Look back into history, the 1930s-1950s, to be specific.
That was a time that many trolley/streetcar/interurban operators wanted out of the rail business, and equally disinvested in their systems.
You claim that rail cannot have a “total failure” like a bus can, exactly how is that?
In an almost ideal world, should a bus “fail” a dispatcher can simply dispatch a relief bus right away, pick up the passengers and carry on with the route; or a following bus will do the same while the dispatcher sends the relief bus to a point where it can then run on schedule for the remainder of the run.
Should a bus not be able to make a portion of the run, due to a vehicle acccident, construction – whatever – the bus can detour.
Just today, Blue Line MAX operations were shut down because of a bomb threat in Hillsboro. Trains couldn’t lay over, departing trains couldn’t leave, and the problem snowballs eastward.
Just a few months ago I was on a Yellow Line MAX train to the Expo Center, when some idiot of a bicyclist decided that he was better than a train and got smacked at Interstate & Greeley. (Where is the “ghost MAX train”??) I was well north of the incident, at PIR. Yet my train was halted and I had to walk the rest of the way to the Expo Center. Why – because once there is a break in the MAX system, everything starts to shut down in sequence.
Another incident a month or two ago – a problem prevented the Steel Bridge from lowering properly. MAX and Trolleys were backed up to every station. However the busses could simply detour using the Broadway Bridge and get around the problem.
Is that sufficient evidence, or:
I’m not having any
So you just hate the bus, then.
AL M Says:
Mikey, Mikey, MIKE!
Hopefully your not taking any of this personally!
No, I just don’t like stereotypes. After more than 20 years of participating in (and sometimes moderating) internet discussions, listservs, blogs, yahoo groups, etc., I’m bored with stereotypes and group bashing. So I figure I can try to keep putting facts out there.
Take it personally? Nah, I have a VERY thick skin. But I can give as good as I get.:-)
I actually love the pearl. Thanks the the condo conversion craze that has finally topped out here in NW Portland I got to jack up my rents 30% just this past 6 months because the rental stock has dwindled thanks to the condo craze.
SO AS A LANDLORD, I LOVE THE PEARL.
Well, I’m glad the boom is helping you do well.
(Aside: I read recently that Portland is one of only 3 big cities where housing prices are still going up slightly. The other two are Seattle and Charlotte. Charlotte just became a light-rail town a couple of weeks ago.)
AND..
I love the people that live in the pearl! THE PEARL DISTRICT IS GREAT. I really believe that.
BUT:
On the subject of transit, the streetcar was put in for the pearl.
Well, it happened before I moved here, but from what I read, the relationship was symbiotic. The Pearl and the Streetcar fed off each other. Homer Williams had a lot to do with both.
Streetcars and development have been happening symbiotically for at least 100 years, here and abroad. That shouldn’t surprise anyone. In the old days — here in Portland, too, I think, but certainly in many other cities — the electric utilities and developers and streetcar companies and amusement parks were all one big happy symbiotic relationship. That’s how the outer districts and suburbs got built, in many cities.
Now that “transit option” doesn’t benefit anybody other than the people that live along that line. It was a duplication of already existing services.
I’m too new here to know about the pre-Streetcar service. The service is surely good now, 10-12 minutes most of the day. And the trains are generally full, not just with Pearl yuppies, but a pretty good cross-section of the population. For example, nearly every time I take the streetcar, at least one person in a wheelchair is riding, and they’re not dressed like Pearl yuppies. People of all ages and ethnicities and classes ride that thing. We have no way to know whether they’d ride the equivalent buses, but they certainly fill the streetcars.
SO:
When I discuss transit, the pearl is really a thorn in my side. While they cut service to Washington County, they continue to talk about putting in more streetcars on Portland streets that are already served by buses.
…which is what this thread was about — it started with a discussion of the Feds and the Eastside streetcar.
Why does the pearl qualify for extra service while Washington County gets service cutbacks?
Well, I don’t see any more service coming to the Pearl than it already has. If the Eastside line is built, it will connect to the Westside one over the Broadway Bridge, but that doesn’t give the Pearl more service, it just provides a connected network. It makes no sense to bash the Westside streetcar any more — it’s here and it’s not going away.
I have no quarrel with Washington and Clackamas Counties getting better transit service, bus or rail. I’d applaud it — I might even be willing to pay higher taxes to help it happen.
The reason of course is that PORTLAND runs trimet and gets what it wants while the rest of the service area sucks wind.
You and I are in violent agreement that the whole 3-county area ought to be served well. Five of the seven TriMet board members are from Portland and a sixth is from E. Multnomah (Gresham?). Oddly, there is no member from Washington County. I know the Board is appointed by the governor, but it ought to be reasonably representative. What’s the process there, or is it just the guv’s buddies?
What’s the history here? How is it that the land of Nike and Intel isn’t represented on the Board? The business community contributes about half the TriMet budget via the payroll tax, so shouldn’t the big suburban businesses have more influence? So who speaks for the other two counties in the Tri?
BUT I LOVE THE PEARL, I REALLY DO!
That’s good to know.:-)
your pal;
al
Cheers and happy new year,
Mike
djk Says:
so any property tax that is actually collected goes mostly to pay off the bonds that built the nice new streets and parks for the yuppies.
Hey, how come you’re only bashing the yuppies? I represent the Geezers of the Pearl, and we demand equal time!:-)
Seriously – are you referring to the Pearl? There are two 1-square-block parks here, like so many other 1-block parks in this town. They certainly aren’t disproportionate to the number of built-up blocks.
And there are a few blocks of new streets, where the old railyards were and the new housing was built, but the vast majority of Pearl blocks are the same old paving. (Or else they’ve deteriorated VERY rapidly.:-)) Right near my place is a sidewalk containing a medallion from the paving company, showing the construction date as 1904.
A lot of the streets look that old, too. Many of the blocks are old cobblestones with remnants of the railroad tracks that served the breweries and factories here. I don’t know how much the 2 parks and few newly-paved blocks cost, but it can’t be as much as you’re implying.
Mike
Aside: I read recently that Portland is one of only 3 big cities where housing prices are still going up slightly
Yeah, look at history and you’ll find that recession hits Portland later and once it fully takes hold it hits Portland STRONGER than in other areas …. AND … It always takes Portland longer to get out of it than other areas. So here’s my prediction for 2008 – A bunch of Pearl yuppies are unemployed after rapid stagflation and huge layoffs in Oregon – They can’t afford their property tax bills and they go belly up to the banks and their property is foreclosed then Portland will lose this revenue stream and they’ll probably sock it to the other areas to bail out the “poor” Pearl dwellers. Then there will be terrible whining “oh the kids, the kids” and Mult. Co. or COP will instate a special income tax to make up the shortfall. Sounds like 2002 all over again, doesn’t it?
OK MIKE:
No more pearl bashing from me!
The streetcar is in and its not going anywhere!
People that live along that line must be in transit heaven! I sure as hell would be!
That being said, lets start looking at other places besides downtown Portland for extending transit services, be it buses, streetcars, or light rail!
Al M—-If you lay off the Pearl bashing, and GT quits bashing Portland in general, this will be a much less interesting place!
Seriously Al, thanks for ending this year on a positive note…..presumably we’re all here to make things better, and your note is a good reminder.
…..& now a reply to Erik H, and in part to Al M also:
You claim that buses are preferable to rail because, if one bus “fails,” either the following driver can “go around,” or the dispatcher can send another bus.
I guess you’re absolutely right, in theory.
In real life, if one bus “fails,” the following bus (or two, or three, I kid you not) will amble along behind and devise all sorts of reasons for not passing. Manage to milk every red light for every possible second. Suddenly become astonishingly solicitous about sparing passengers any unseemly accelerations or decelerations. Discover a pressing need to fidget around with the ticket books and the rearviews and review the paddles and double-check all the operating lights. I’m not making this up, how many three-bus parades have you had occasion to watch?
And when some “event” fouls things up, do the drivers or the dispatchers or the expensive computers or Fred Hansen cause any buses to mobilize for the stranded would-be passengers? When’s the last time anyone can remember this happening? Not too long ago an operator acknowledged, on another thread, that the usual result of this scenario is that the passenger stands at the bus shelter, sometimes for an hour, without so much as a projection of when someone might send a bus around. But then when a bus does come around, there are usually two or three all at once…..
So “I just hate the bus then,” as long as present management is operating it. All the points about flexibility, &c &c, are very good in theory but don’t work in reality, because Trimet management doesn’t care if a bus line goes to hell for an hour or two, it’s all in a day’s work, what the hell, but I believe that Trimet management would/will/does work harder to keep its rail lines operating, and actually tends to succeed much better at quasi-reliable operation of rail lines than bus lines.
oh elee;
here is the latest cause of max shut down yesterday:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/al_margul/2151660217/
and also this morning the airport max is shut down..
guess what? there is no bus following the max in 15 minutes.
no they have to “mobilize” the highly inefficient “bus bridge”
DONT GET RID OF YOUR CAR ANYTIME SOON!
As has been said, the streetcar serves areas that were unserved or underserved by transit before. Sure there will be some parts of the route with duplicate service or where other routes cross the streetcar line but on the whole the streetcar route serves unserved territory. TriMet contributes the same amount of money to operate the line as it would have to run a bus along the same route. Sure TriMet has an obligation to serve all areas in its district but considering the density along the streetcar route it is a wise investment for a transit agency to focus on serving these dense areas where they can capture more riders as opposed to serving a low density area on the fringe of town which even with the highest quality transit service would still be dominated by auto trips.
What happens when urban renewal expires is all that money that went into the urban renewal district now goes into the general coffers. And when the Pearl District (or River District) urban renewal district expires the rest of the city will benefit greatly considering the huge property values in the Pearl.
Why does everyone here think Portland’s bus system is terrible? Have you ridden other bus systems in the country? I have and in my honest opinion Portland’s is one of the best if not the best. In a lot of cities youre lucky if theres even sign that indicates a bus stop let alone a route number or destination. Yet in Portland not only is there full information at the bus stop but you can call a phone number and get a real-time arrival. It seems some people here have dreams that the local city buses should have plush massage chairs on board with personal video players and that streetcars are standing in the way of this vision.
Yea JW:
I want that!
Message chairs and personal video players.
I’ll trade the streetcars for that!
Now thats:
v-i-s-i-o-n !!!!
Why does everyone here think Portland’s bus system is terrible? Have you ridden other bus systems in the country?
I think Portland’s bus system is pretty good. A little on the uncomfortable and stinky side (it stinks as much as the Streetcar – dirty sock smell) but it runs frequently, which I think is great! I wish TriMet came out to Yamhill County. I can even ride on a combination of buses and get all the way from Salem to Portland – it takes two hours but I tried it out on Friday night and you really CAN do it! For $4.05 (two on Cherryrots and 2.05 on TriMet, not bad) and only a single transfer in Wilsonville.
it stinks as much as the Streetcar – dirty sock smell
I guess experience is relative. When I entertain out-of-town visitors from cities with transit, including Chicago and New York, the common reaction when riding MAX, Streetcar and (yes) Buses in Portland is “it’s so clean!”.
The exception being a friend from Berlin, who good-naturedly critiqued the use of inferior (his assessment) eastern-European plastics for the interiors of the original batch of Skoda streetcars.
I wish someone would “force” me to live in the Pearl…
“I wish someone would “force” me to live in the Pearl…”
Damn! I wouldn’t live in a dump like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/al_margul/2152868088/
That being said, lets start looking at other places besides downtown Portland for extending transit services, be it buses, streetcars, or light rail!
Like maybe the Commuter Rail/LRT/Streetcar projects to Milwaukie, Clackamas, Vancouver, Wilsonville, and Lake Oswego?
“Like maybe the Commuter Rail/LRT/Streetcar projects to Milwaukie, Clackamas, Vancouver, Wilsonville, and Lake Oswego?”
LAST COMMENT FOR TODAY, i promise:
jee;
Every place on that list HAS SERVICE ALREADY!
Including Wilsonville btw. (smart bus)
Is any of that service being improved? I dunno.
I don’t see the green line, sorry.
The only thing I see as an improvement will be the yellow line to Vancouver.
Living in the Pearl is great if you want to live stacked directly on top of your neighbors and hear them making all sorts of noise in the night. People who live in ultracramped dwellings have shorter life spans, higher crime and suicide rates and psychological problems, further the exposure to toxic chemicals like exhaust fumes is very high. We’ll probably see lots of jumpers when the economy gets even worse than it already is. The only time I had to use sleeping pills and antianxiety meds. was when I lived in “livable” downtown Portland! This type of living runs completely contrary to Northwest living at its finest.
elee Says:
Al M—-If you lay off the Pearl bashing, and GT quits bashing Portland in general, this will be a much less interesting place!
Seriously Al, thanks for ending this year on a positive note…..presumably we’re all here to make things better, and your note is a good reminder.
I second that emotion!:-)
Mike
So “I just hate the bus then,” as long as present management is operating it. All the points about flexibility, are very good in theory but don’t work in reality, because Trimet management doesn’t care if a bus line goes to hell for an hour or two, it’s all in a day’s work, what the hell, but I believe that Trimet management would/will/does work harder to keep its rail lines operating, and actually tends to succeed much better at quasi-reliable operation of rail lines than bus lines.
OK, THAT I can agree to. TriMet manages to take every benefit handed to it, and throws it away. TriMet could make the bus system first class, but chooses not to. TriMet could be customer focused, but chooses not to.
I always thought Portland strived to be a leader in urban transportation, but when it comes to TriMet’s bus network, Portland is vying to be last place.
As has been said, the streetcar serves areas that were unserved or underserved by transit before.
Untrue.
The South Waterfront area has been served for a long time by lines 35 and 36.
Riverplace was served by the 95 and 96 lines, although TriMet was nice enough to cancel the 95 line without public comment.
SW Harrison is served by the 43 bus.
PSU is served by 1, 8, 9, 12, 17, 19, 44, 68 and 94.
The area near the Portland Art Museum is served by the 6, 38, 43, 45, 55, 58, 63 and 68 busses.
The Galleria/Library area is served by MAX, as well as the 15, 18, 51 and 63 busses.
Burnside is served by the 20 bus.
Glisan/Everett is served by the 17 bus.
Northrup/Lovejoy is served by the 77 bus.
NW 23rd Avenue is served by the 15 bus.
If that’s “underserved”, I’d like to know an area of Portland that is “served”. I count that the Streetcar area is served by 21 busses and three MAX lines. Of the bus lines, eight of them are “Frequent Service” lines.
but on the whole the streetcar route serves unserved territory
Uh, 21 bus lines and three MAX lines? Unserved? Let me show you an area that is “unserved” – Tualatin-Sherwood Road.
In a lot of cities youre lucky if theres even sign that indicates a bus stop let alone a route number or destination. Yet in Portland not only is there full information at the bus stop but you can call a phone number and get a real-time arrival.
I don’t know of a major metropolitan transit agency that does not sign its bus stops. Please, name one of the “lot of cities” that doesn’t mark bus stops/routes.
Also, please show me where every bus stop in Portland that provides “full information”. In fact just two weeks ago I was at a transit center where the posted signs made multiple references to the 95 bus line.
In case you’ve forgotten, the 95 line was cancelled a year ago. If TriMet’s transit stops provide “full information”, then why won’t my 95 bus show up?
And what good is a phone number without a phone? Is it now the law that every transit rider in Portland must carry a cell phone? Is Portland going to subsidize this, too? What if I happen to forget my cell phone or the battery is dead, am I simply not worthy of obtaining accurate bus information? (And, why is the Portland Streetcar worthy of having NextBus displays at every single stop????)
It seems some people here have dreams that the local city buses should have plush massage chairs on board with personal video players and that streetcars are standing in the way of this vision
No, that’s just a misguided and completely inaccurate statement made by bus bashers and Streetcar advocates.
I’ve made my position very clear about how Portland should invest in its bus network; yet once again another Streetcar advocate feels like twisting my opinion. And never once did I state that TriMet should buy plush massage chairs and personal video players, or even anything remotely similar; nor do I recall any other bus supporter suggesting anything of the like.
In fact I don’t even necessarily support TriMet installing wi-fi internet on its vehicles, something that many transit agencies are starting to install.
If, as you state, TriMet spends as much on the Streetcar as it would bus service, then explain why the Streetcar route is already served by transit, plus gets an additional $3M a year for a dedicated route.
If this is the case, I’m sure that the Streetcar supporters will have no problem demanding TriMet spend a minimum of $3,000,000 per 3.75 mile segment of the 12 line. The 12 line, from Sherwood to Gresham, is 31.75 miles; or roughly 8.5 times the distance of the Streetcar. Therefore, TriMet should – if it spends an equal amount on the Streetcar as it does a bus – spend no less than $25.5M annually on the 12 line.
Since TriMet’s total bus operations & maintenance budget is just a tad over $150M – essentially TriMet would spend 1/6th of its budget on one bus line. Clearly, that is not right.
Clearly, TriMet spends MORE on the Streetcar than it would, if the Streetcar were equivalent bus service.
Erik –
If the bus lines you mentioned, especially the #35 and #36, were diverted to serve the developments that the streetcar served, people would be clamoring to have a new, separate route serve those areas. You can’t directly compare the streetcar route to those lines.
Indeed, you yourself have criticized proposals to extend the streetcar to Lake Oswego because such service, in your opinion, might degrade the #35 in particular. Therefore, even by your own previously-expressed standards, the streetcar route is a different animal.
– Bob R.
PS: Happy New Year everybody.
HEY ERIK!
check your yahoo e-mail!
Erik H: if GT is correct, and Trimet is actually running one of the best bus systems around, that would seem to tell me that something about buses causes management to underperform. You’ve stressed the intrinsic advantages of buses in your earlier posts; might you now apply yourself to whatever the intrinsic disadvantages of buses might be, that seem to cause other bus systems to fail even more completely than ours? I’ve got some ideas here, but I’d like to hear yours first. Anyone else, please jump in. Even GT!
Happy New Year all.
Erik said,
…I count that the Streetcar area is served by 21 busses and three MAX lines. Of the bus lines, eight of them are “Frequent Service” lines.
Erik, I moved here after the Streetcar started operation, so I don’t know what buses were running here earlier. I did think you’d mention a bus line that was replaced by the Streetcar, but didn’t see any.
Correct my facts if they are wrong, but in your list I see a lot of bus lines that hit some of the Streetcar stops. I’m not familiar with all those lines, but as a Pearl resident I do know the 17, 20, and 77. They run east-west. The 20 and 77 cross the river without turning north-south; the 17 crosses downtown on the Mall. I think I’m correct here.
What I do not see is a line running north-south through the west end of downtown and the area we now call the Pearl. Recall that the Streetcar traverses downtown using the 10th/11th couplet. Did it replace a bus that followed the same path?
The Streetcar cuts across all those bus lines, but does not duplicate them. It gives me and other central-core riders a 1-seat ride to
– Good Sam Hospital
– the west end of downtown – library, art museum, theater district, etc.
– PSU
– River Place
– South Waterfront
None of these are in the Pearl.
Whatever the other costs and benefits of the Streetcar, no other Portland route (as far as I can tell) covers the whole central area as well as it does, with really frequent service to boot (every 10-12 minutes at most hours).
Was there an equivalent bus? I like the electric-powered Streetcar, but what I really like is the convenience of its 1-seat ride. It really is a central circulator that serves Portland well. A bus on the same route might serve the purpose, but would have to use artic buses on 10-minute headways to match the Streetcar, which is nearly always packed along most of its route.
Mike
AL M Says: “I wish someone would “force” me to live in the Pearl…”
Damn! I wouldn’t live in a dump like this: ( flickr.com/photos/al_margul/2152868088/ )
JK: Neither would I. Wouldn’t you rather live in this Portland area:
DebunkingPortland.com/Smart/sprawl/sprawl3.htm
Thanks
JK
JK –
I’m sure number of people would love to live in multimillion dollar homes with acreage and three-car garages like the ones you picture, but why you’re comparing them to what are mostly sub-$500K(and even sub-$250K) properties is bizarre.
Incidentally, I know someone who lives in one of the “skinny lot” types of detached homes you show in your right-hand column (presumably the column showing residences you don’t like.) He loves his home and there’s no way he could afford the mansions you have shown in your left-hand columns.
None of this, of course, diminishes the fact that many people _do_ like to live in places like the Pearl District, and welcome the _choice_ they have in housing types in the Portland area. Rather than everyone being forced to live in single-family detached suburban housing, there are choices available from a broad spectrum of housing types and neighborhood types.
– Bob R.
JK:
how about a dump like this:
http://portlandroseapartments.org/default.aspx
cause thats all i get!
one bedroom in that dump!
how about a dump like this:
Well, Al, clearly nobody would ever want to live there … I’ve heard interesting things about the management of that place (ahem) … oh, according to the web site, there are no vacancies. I guess it’s not such a dump and management is doing OK after all. My bad. :-)
Of course, none of these distractions about real estate types changes the fact that Congress passed a law clearly intended to fund streetcar systems as part of the mix, and the current administration appears to be doing what it can to avoid implementing it as intended. Maybe they have good reasons to do what they are doing, and maybe they are doing it within the bounds of their authority, but clearly Congress wanted funding for some streetcar systems, and that isn’t getting done.
lol, yea bob,
the management is suspect, but what the hell, at least there aint no management company to deal with!
and there are streetcars getting built, like in Portland for example.
And I am sure there will be more, since the majority of Portlanders agree with you.
Its true, people do prefer streetcars, as ridiculous as that sounds.
People are ridiculous. More than half of voters actually voted for bush twice, proving my point.
but would have to use artic buses on 10-minute headways to match the Streetcar, which is nearly always packed along most of its route
Why does the Streetcar neighborhoods get a new route when existing service doesn’t serve their needs; while Tualatin and Sherwood can’t get a bus line connecting the two cities (never mind the very busy quasi-highway connecting the two cities?) If TriMet sees it fit to provide Streetcar service to add a “north-south route” then I believe TriMet is about ten years overdue in starting Tualatin-Sherwood bus service – and this route should be added by next Monday.
BTW – I should add that I work along the Streetcar route (and I am neither in SoWa or the Pearl); I never see the Streetcar “crowded” despite being able to watch the streetcar pass by my building throughout the day; and the Streetcar doesn’t allow me to do anything that a bus (which also stops right in front of my building) can’t do.
In fact the ONLY times I see the Streetcar operating anywhere near peak capacity is on Saturdays.
the fact that Congress passed a law clearly intended to fund streetcar systems
Was it also Congress’ intent to defund bus systems and degrade my transit experience?
Was it also Congress’ intent to defund bus systems and degrade my transit experience?
No, Erik, Congress has not defunded bus systems, and neither has TriMet or the City of Portland for that matter.
Nothing in the Small Starts bill mandates defunding of bus systems, and nobody has yet defunded a bus system as a result of a small start grant.
Where do you get this stuff?
More than half of voters actually voted for bush twice, proving my point.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
Year 2000 official federal results, total votes:
Bush: 50,456,002
Gore: 50,999,897
The “more than half of voters” remark is untrue. Tip: Look up electoral college, and “Bush v. Gore” in the Supreme Court.
might you now apply yourself to whatever the intrinsic disadvantages of buses might be
A bus does have limited capacity, yes. An articulated bus has greater capacity than a 40 foot bus but at a certain point a train can haul more passengers.
However, in the Portland metro area there are two further constraints:
1. The only way that MAX has been able to accumulate enough passengers is through building new park-and-ride lots (thus requiring passengers drive to transit rather than use transit “door to door” or by reducing bus service – especially through bus service – to consolidate rides.
2. Even MAX has been artifically constrained. While a LRV train consist could theoretically be as many cars as desired, TriMet’s implementation of light rail supports a maximum of two car trains. Further, Streetcar vehicles cannot be coupled into trains; so a Streetcar has absolutely no benefit of a “train” in this regard. In fact, because of the stopping distance of a Streetcar vs. a bus, more busses can be grouped together vs. Streetcars which must maintain a certain separation distance to maintain safety.
As for whether a train is more “environmentally-friendly” than a bus, a trolleybus negates this difference; a hybrid-electric bus minimizes the difference. If Portlanders flock to their Toyota Priuses (instead of relying 100% on public transit) then the use of hybrid-electric busses should be seen as an extension towards Portland’s acceptance of motor vehicles that use hybrid electric technology – and a priority for funding through the City of Portland, Metro and TriMet.
Further, Streetcar vehicles cannot be coupled into trains;
Actually, the Skoda/Inekon cars can be equipped with couplers and operate as multiple-unit trains. We haven’t hit that need yet … it would be less expensive in the near term to add one or two more cars and improve headways than it would be to purchase enough additional cars to run 2-car trains consistently. We’re only at 5 streetcars per hour per direction right now. (12 minute headways). Adding/funding 3 cars to get us to 8 per hour (7.5 minute headways) would do much more to improve capacity (60% capacity improvement) and service than merely doubling train lengths at current headways.
It appears that people would rather critique the value of having streetcars at all. That’s fine, but I suggest you write to your congressional representative and let them know not to defend and not to renew Small Starts. But otherwise, I’d rather see the federal government implement the program that congress passed.
I said the ‘second’ election bob!
i know he stole the first one.
and he probably stole the second one too.
Ohio actually went to kerry.
the democrats are just as guilty anyway.
they could stop all this nonsense.
Rather than everyone being forced to live in single-family detached suburban housing, there are choices available from a broad spectrum of housing types and neighborhood types
Yeah, check out some places in Salem. For what you would pay for a $250,000 “luxury” shoebox in the Pearl you can get a huge house with a large yard in the Salem area!
I said the ‘second’ election bob!
No, you actually said, precisely: “More than half of voters actually voted for bush twice”
Please read what you write! :-)
For what you would pay for a $250,000 “luxury” shoebox in the Pearl you can get a huge house with a large yard in the Salem area!
That’s absolutely fantastic, Greg, but it doesn’t change the fact that a sizable percentage of the population actually enjoys living in an urban environment. I’m absolutely thankful that we have widespread availability single-family detached homes with big yards. I’m also quite happy to see that we have other choices as well.
oh god bob;
do you have to be so friggen accurate all the friggen time!
it doesn’t change the fact that a sizable percentage of the population actually enjoys living in an urban environment
Then that sizable percentage of the population can pay their own way instead of relying on federal subsidies to prop up an otherwise UNdesirable way to live.
Erik said,
Why does the Streetcar neighborhoods get a new route when existing service doesn’t serve their needs; while Tualatin and Sherwood can’t get a bus line connecting the two cities (never mind the very busy quasi-highway connecting the two cities?) If TriMet sees it fit to provide Streetcar service to add a “north-south route” then I believe TriMet is about ten years overdue in starting Tualatin-Sherwood bus service – and this route should be added by next Monday.
We’re in violent agreement here. What’s the process in this town for getting a given bus route beefed up? Petitions? Neighborhood associations? Business community? In this process-driven city, there must be some way for activists to round up enough support to get needs met for better bus transit in the outlying areas. Complaining on a special-interest blog (even if it’s an influential one like this one:-)) isn’t likely to get much action.
The Streetcar is getting 10,000 riders a day. The current timetable shows about 80 departures from 23rd Ave and about 80 more from SoWa. That’s an average of about 62 riders per run. So clearly a need is being met.
TriMet gets roughly 300,000 riders a day; MAX accounts for roughly 100,000. That’s 200,000 riders who are taking the buses. So the system is not exactly failing, even if some areas are getting inadequate service.
Don’t commit a false-dichotomy fallacy, Erik. Some of the ‘burbs need better service AND the downtown needs a circulator. If there’s an unmet need for Tualatin-Sherwood service, the people there need to get together and figure out how to get it met.
About how many riders do you think it would draw? My concern is that if it’s not a huge number, then people would complain about TriMet wasting money driving empty buses back and forth.
Mike
people would complain about TriMet wasting money driving empty buses back and forth
I’ve seen TriMet as well as other bus agencies driving buses and even nearly completely empty trolleys back and forth. This seems very wasteful to me. Why don’t they use short buses or have a taxi cab service during times when there aren’t very many riders?
GTinSalem Says to Bob R:
>>it doesn’t change the fact that a sizable percentage of the population actually enjoys living in an urban environment
then that sizable percentage of the population can pay their own way instead of relying on federal subsidies to prop up an otherwise UNdesirable way to live.
Well, you might think it’s undesirable; that’s your right, and it’s my right to live in the Pearl. I’m not asking for any Federal subsidies to live here — I’m paying my US and OR income tax and my county propery tax just like you are.
I’m inclined to agree that if we want another Streetcar line, we ought to do it without Federal help, just as we did the first one.
By and large, I think we ought to save the Federal transportation money for providing a balanced intercity transportation network, including all the modes. That means road, rail, air, and water. And purely local transportation really could be left to localities, maybe with state help.
I think the basic TriMet regional model is a good one. I’ve seen much, much worse in the Philly and DC areas. And while we can debate the payoffs and drawbacks of streetcars, that’s really a local debate.
I do support the Federal grant to Oregon Iron Works to kick-start the domestic streetcar manufacturing industry. That’s a very small chunk of seed money that could have a large payoff. Once it’s kick-started, I think it ought to stand or fall on its merits and the Feds ought to get out of the way. I’m looking forward to seeing the prototype car running past my building this year!
Mike
“The Streetcar is getting 10,000 riders a day.”
How many of those people would be riding if they had to pay.
Less than 1/2 I bet.
Free service is not measurable for effectiveness since many users don’t actually need to use it.
Whereas Tulatin/Sherwood folks have no choice and have to travel much farther.
Plus there are many modes of service available for people that are using the streetcar, for example, the 17 bus, the 77 bus, the 15 bus, transfer to any bus along the mall.
Karlock asks on his silly web site:
“Aren’t You Glad That You Don’t Have to Live in Sprawl Like This? [huge detached homes on big lots] When You can Live Here [attractive apartments and rowhouses]”
The answer is “yes.” You would have to pay me to live in one of those isolated monstrosities. I’d need to own a car and drive it pretty near everywhere, and then put a ridiculous amount of time into yardwork.
News flash, jk: The reason places like the Pearl District are so freakin’ expensive is that lots of people WANT to live there. Astonish as it may be to you, the majority of the people in Portland disagree with your view of the ideal life. That’s why the voters keep electing people who support smart growth.
Erik said:
Why does the Streetcar neighborhoods get a new route when existing service doesn’t serve their needs; while Tualatin and Sherwood can’t get a bus line connecting the two cities (never mind the very busy quasi-highway connecting the two cities?) If TriMet sees it fit to provide Streetcar service to add a “north-south route” then I believe TriMet is about ten years overdue in starting Tualatin-Sherwood bus service – and this route should be added by next Monday.
Why are you bringing Tri-Met into this? Tri-Met doesn’t “see fit” to provide Streetcar service: the Streetcar is a City of Portland project, planned and built by the City, which also provides operating subsidies. Portland is building a streetcar system for Portland’s use, not Tualatin’s. Instead of complaining about Portland having its act together, why not rally the government of Tualatin to start pressing for more bus service — or, if necessary, to follow Wilsonville’s lead and drop out of Tri-Met altogether, so they can create their own bus system?
The Streetcar is here because the City of Portland wanted it, paid for it, and built it, and so far the people of Portland have been very supportive. Notice that nobody who supported the Streetcar was turned out of office. As far as I can tell, only a handful of people are even bothered by it. Oh, and as for this:
I should add that I work along the Streetcar route (and I am neither in SoWa or the Pearl); I never see the Streetcar “crowded” despite being able to watch the streetcar pass by my building throughout the day;
Maybe not on your segment of the route, but when I ride it (generally between the library and NW Portland), I frequently find it’s standing room only. The only time I find cars running mostly empty is late at night.
Hey, I’ve got an idea.
Maybe we could persuade Chris, and Amanda, and the other Council candidates, to give us some campaign statements on how they propose to make sure the whole city’s public transport needs are met.
(The Mayoral candidates too, but let’s start with the Council candidates.)
What do y’all think? Chris, how ’bout it?
Mike
This reminds me of the argument I was having with Bob R about the max yellow line statistics, where he was arguing that the ridership had doubled since they put that in over there, and I said, well, thats not possible.
Obviously the reason why that line doubled is because it was a
REDISTRIBUTION
of riders around the system, not new riders coming into the system.
The same thing holds true for the streetcar.
It siphoned off riders from the other bus lines which makes it look better than it actually is.
OH YEA MIKE;
Erik will be at the debates, I will be there, and you should be there too!
We can make them discuss it!
al
Why don’t they use short buses or have a taxi cab service during times when there aren’t very many riders?
Why divert a bus that was popular earlier in the evening or is popular in a certain route segment, only to wast valuable operator hours, to swap it out for a smaller bus? The combined logistical problems and additional staffing required would cost more than the fuel savings, and on top of that you’d have to own/maintain additional buses without providing any additional service.
Put another way: Suppose you are driving your car, along with 3 or 4 friends, from Salem to Eugene and plan to stay an evening. Along the way you drop off your friends in Albany, Corvallis, and Springfield. When you get to Eugene, the hour is late and you discover that you don’t need such a big vehicle. Why not drive back to Salem and swap it out for a smaller car, and then drive back to Eugene? Doesn’t make much sense, does it?
In a similar way, the logistics of transit dispatching disfavor switching vehicles in the middle of a shift.
It siphoned off riders from the other bus lines which makes it look better than it actually is.
And your evidence for this is… ?
Forgive me if I’ve lost track, but I thought that the argument previously being levelled against the streetcar was that it was a toy for the Pearl district yuppies, right? Well, if so, those Pearl District Yuppies (PDYs ™) didn’t live there at all before the streetcar went in, so they couldn’t possibly be “siphoned” riders.
In the case of both the streetcar and the Yellow Line, ridership has continued to grow quite substantially since the initial operating years. If the initial riders were “siphoned”, where is the growth continuing to come from?
“Why are you bringing Tri-Met into this? Tri-Met doesn’t “see fit” to provide Streetcar service: the Streetcar is a City of Portland project, planned and built by the City, which also provides operating subsidies. ”
OH DJK PAL
(http://amargul.blogspot.com/2007/12/pin-heads-of-portland-transportcom.html)
I suggest you get out the STREET CAR BUDGET so you can see that most of the operating revenue COMES FROM TRIMET!
Bob R;
Nice try but you don’t hear what you don’t want to hear…
goodnight bob, (and you too djk)
Maybe we could persuade Chris, and Amanda, and the other Council candidates, to give us some campaign statements on how they propose to make sure the whole city’s public transport needs are met.
Tricky to do that here, since I would hardly be an unbiased moderator :-)
I’m also trying hard to keep my non-profit hat here from getting mixed up with my political hat, as exploiting the [501(c)(3)] blog for my campaign would risk the tax status of the blog.
You might suggest it to the Mercury, they’re running questions for all candidates on their blog.
http://www.costaustin.org/jskaggs/?p=81
Mike is right on on the bus service issue. It is locally driven. One would hope that the cities along the new commuter line are doing all they can to:
*re-align existing bus service hours to maximize ridership on bus and rail and justify the public investment in WES,
*build out the sidewalk network within 1/4 mile of WES stations
*stripe bikelanes for better access to same.
Getting a new line takes a strong alliance of public and private folks, some compelling data and a lot of patience.
It was a few years from my first letter to TriMet regarding bus access to Swan Island…around 1991-2 until the 85 Swan Island began to run, September ’95. It was eight more years before the 85 went to all day service.
Public agencies, TriMet included, are for the most part risk adverse…you need to figure out how to reduce that risk. Employer commitment to annual pass programs for employees can be a huge step in that direction.
Once you get a bus running, you better have a strategy for growing ridership; its tough to tell riders in inner SE Portland who are being passed up by full buses that TriMet is running empties out in the burbs.
Back to Streetcar… its hardly fare to rag on neighborhood leaders and business owners in inner Portland who decide that they want a streetcar instead of a bus, especially if they are willing to put up some serious money for a product that has proved itself beyond question. More power to ’em. The Feds should cut the check and get out of the way.
As to “how to start a transit line”…
It wasn’t “local citizens” that wanted a Streetcar – it was “developers”. There were no “local citizens” in the Hoyt Street Yards (now the “Pearl District”), unless you count the homeless folks who were squatting in the old BN warehouses. There were no “local citizens” in what is now called the South Waterfront, save for those who lived under the I-5 viaducts. And Portland State University is not a “voting citizen”; PSU is not entitled a vote in a popular election.
It is the role of TriMet, as part of its role in transportation planning, to establish where services should go. If the job of demanding service is left up strictly to citizen activists, then there is absolutely zero need for TriMet and Metro to even engage (or fund) transportation planning. Part of my taxes goes towards paying for a bunch of TriMet employees sitting in an office off of Multnomah Street, where they have a fleet of various TriMet logoed vehicles at their disposal for their various “service planning” activities (which apparently doesn’t include riding the bus and interviewing passengers; the one time I witnessed said event, there was 100% unamimous opposition to TriMet’s plan yet TriMet cancelled the route anyways in what was widely derived as a plan that was already a “done deal” but that TriMet had to go through the motions for legal purposes.)
There have been people who have called for better transit in Tualatin/Sherwood. Right now the Tualatin Tomorrow visioning plan actually is considering splitting off from TriMet in part or in whole (much as Wilsonville has done, as have Canby, Molalla and Sandy) because TriMet is simply uninterested in providing its legally mandated role in providing regional mass transportation.
As for “leaving TriMet out of the Streetcar discussion” then I suggest that TriMet remove the EIGHTY-ONE instances in which the word “Streetcar” appears in the 2008 edition of the Transit Investment Plan.
As for citizens becoming involved – I believe that citizens are involved each time they board a bus. Each time that a group of passengers are left at a bus stop as the bus passes by without stopping because of an overcrowding situation, that is TriMet failing to live up to its obligation. Every time a bus runs late, and passengers abandon waiting for the bus and call for a friend to pick them up (or in the case of the morning commute, walk back to their car and drive into work), that is TriMet failing to live up to its obligation. Every time someone complains that “I’d take the bus, if there was a bus line that would get me there”, that is TriMet failing to live up to its obligation.
What else does the citizens have to do to get better bus service – making official comments to TriMet gets nowhere. Making complaints gets nowhere. Posting on blogs and attempting to communicate with officials gets nowhere. Creating complaint websites gets nowhere. Having letters published in the Oregonian gets nowhere.
And simply riding the bus (using my employer paid annual passport…that gets nowhere too. What else should I do to improve bus service?
What is the population density (or rider density) for the two areas that I am seeing disputed: Tualatin-Sherwood Highway and the Portland Streetcar?
I was surprised to learn as well that there was not even hourly bus service along Tualatin-Sherwood when we needed to get there once… It took a mile and a half walk to get from the bus stop on 99W to our destination on T-S highway…
But to compare the almost-zero-density and ridership potential of Tualatin-Sherwood highway to NW Portland – Pearl – Downtown – Riverplace – SoWa routes is almost rediculous.
I 100% support improving transit service in the burbs. My personal sore spot is the 217/Kruse Way corridor.
I expect we all have personal transit sore spots. But seriously, comparing T-S highway to the streetcar route is just a terrible comparison.
But how the heck did we get here in this discussion? Wasn’t the OP about some sort of federal money? I have forgotten after the last seven hundred and eighty two posts about the Pearl and Tualatin…
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080103/COL05/801030325/1009/EDIT
The original Streetcar runs from NW 23rd thru the Pearl district, the West End to Portland State.
There is probably not a stronger neighborhood association than NWDA, Pearl NA is a close second, not to mention the Downtonw NA…lots of intense community input from the start, and it continues. Developers agreed to build more density than required in exchange for Streetcar.
re Tualalin, there was a TMA there, and the Chamber still runs a shuttle into the industrial area using Job Access grants that TriMet administers. The key to getting somewhere with transit service is data…how many potential riders, shift change times, job density, business willingness to subsidize. The shuttle ridership is not much, which means you have two strikes against you…why run a full price bus when a half price van is half empty. The TMA died due to lack of support from the City of Tualatin and area employers. Nobody wants transit down that way, they want a new highway.
How many people knew about that van?
Did that van run like a bus, with regularly marked stops, improved stops, a schedule, and span-of-day service?
Was the van obivious to riders that it was a public transit service?
Ironically, we are getting to the same argument that Streetcar/MAX supporters use against bus – that the Streetcar/MAX “invites” passengers and makes it easy to use. A plain white van with virtually no markings, few if any signed stops, and lack of knowledge is not going to “invite” passengers.
So you’re comparing a system that was set up to fail, and use it as a strike against improved transit service. OK, then let’s expand this further. Bus ridership is down in Portland, so that must mean people don’t want transit in Portland. So let’s stop investing in MAX/Streetcar too.
almost-zero-density and ridership potential of Tualatin-Sherwood highway
Really? So all those businesses, have no ridership potential?
I seem to recall that up until the late 1990s, there was zero ridership potential in the Hoyt Street Railroad Yards, too.
I seem to recall that up until the late 1990s, there was zero ridership potential in the Hoyt Street Railroad Yards, too.
Fortunately, the streetcar project was coupled with land-use decisions. The transit infrastructure supported higher density uses, which also therefore supported greater transit utilization. This is the “virtuous circle” that advocates refer to.
It would not have been wise to implement the streetcar plan without a strong and complementary land-use component.
This gets right back to the Federal controversy: The current rules simply do not adequately assess the value of a dense, walkable community centered on streetcar line.
http://www.masstransitmag.com/web/online/Top-Transit-News/Federal-Rules-Prefer-Buses-over-Streetcar-Expansion/3$5086
Bob said:
It would not have been wise to implement the streetcar plan without a strong and complementary land-use component.
This gets right back to the Federal controversy: The current rules simply do not adequately assess the value of a dense, walkable community centered on streetcar line.
I wasn’t here when the Pearl/Streetcar symbiosis came about, but obviously the original Westside Streetcar ran from an established, dense neighborhood (Nob Hill) that includes a major hospital (Good Sam), to an established neighborhood (PSU, South Auditorium), passing through a well-established central business district. On the way, it passed through an industrial district that became the Pearl. So one could show that the “circulator” was connecting a number of groups of people who would actually circulate, even before the Pearl was built. The extensions to River Place and SoWa have provided even more.
… which brings us back to the Eastside Streetcar proposal. Is there a document out there which spells out the land-use plan for the Eastside line? Who will the likely riders be, and which neighborhoods will it connect? How much circulation will there be up and down the Grand/MLK couplet? From where to where?
Mike
Is there a document out there which spells out the land-use plan for the Eastside line?
The Streetcar alignment was designed to catalyze the current zoning in the Central Eastside, so there is no rezoning plan (there’s already lots of capacity in the current zoning). But there is a development strategy document that is currently under development as part of the work plan for the project that was approved by City Council.