Yamhill County Rail study focuses on 3 options


Plans for linking Portland to Yamhill County by rail will likely fall short of Spirit Mountain and even perhaps McMinnville. The study currently underway by Portland-based IBI Group suggests that the line may go no further than Newberg due to low ridership estimates.

Randy Knapick of IBI Group said three options are getting a serious look. They include:

  • Train service between Newberg and Beaverton, operating as a branch of Washington County’s system, with stations in Springbrook, Sherwood and Tualatin and connections at existing stations in Tigard, Beaverton and Hall/Nimbus. Rough cost estimate: $72 million.
  • Diesel light-rail service from Newberg through Sherwood and Tualatin to Lake Oswego, and then along the Willamette Trolley right-of-way to the North Macadam area of Portland. Rough cost estimate: $98 million.
  • Rail service from Newberg to Tigard, where passengers could transfer to a Tri-Met bus or a MAX train. Rough cost estimate: $59 million.

All of the alternatives would enable passengers to connect, one way or another, with the Westside Express Service system now under construction.

The three project estimates under study all come in below $100 million since the right of way is still available. However, according to one Yamhill County commissioner, current ridership estimates aren’t much higher than they were ten years ago, which may limit the project’s ability to qualify for federal funding.

Several months ago many participants of this blog expressed optimism that a Yamhill rail line would be built, perhaps even to the coast, broadening the appeal beyond a commuter and winery tour train. With a route extending no further than Newberg, does this project still stand a chance as more than just a commuter line? Will McMinnville-to-Portland Metro commuters really bus it or drive to Newberg to take a train to work?

Continue reading Yamhill County Rail study focuses on 3 options


43 responses to “Yamhill County Rail study focuses on 3 options”

  1. I’m curious: what’s the difference between option 1 and option 3 that costs $13 million? WES already upgraded the tracks between Tigard and Beaverton. Wouldn’t the track upgrade (Tigard to Newberg) be the same in both scenarios? It looks to me like the only difference would be in operations: do you go from Sherwood all the way to Beaverton, or only as far as Tigard?

    What kind of ridership would we be looking at for $59 to $72 million? So far, the ridership projections for WES don’t impress me much at all.

  2. I think that this line really needs to go all the way to McMinnville; it has an extra 30,000 potential riders to Newberg’s 20,000. I think that actually providing a transport system and not just a token half-assed gesture to link communities in Oregon really needs to be pursued.

    In regards to ridership – isn’t the point of these rail projects to influence future development patters? It’s not like that principle only works in Hillsboro and Gresham.

    Besides, Rex Hill, the big expensive part of the project, would be crossed/tunneled in either case (looks like we’re going over, with this short budget).

    If the line was ran to Beaverton, it could share track with the WES commuter rail line and double the frequency on that section; these trains need to be viewed as more than just for commuting and run all day with decent headways (30 minutes?).

  3. ^ that should be “it has an additional 30,000 potential riders on top of Newberg’s 20,000.

    I’m sure a lot of traffic along 99 is local (Newberg to McMinnville, for instance). Train service between these towns outside of commuting hours could help to offer people a non-car way of getting around. Not that a bus couldn’t accomplish this.

    On the other hand, rail service may also bolster central-city real-estate prices and influence development a bit; there is a bunch of underdeveloped land in these towns that could be invested in by the community. Tourism, offices, and downtown residential.

    Also, some Portlanders would definitely take the train out there – I know I would!

  4. After looking at the study results and the “price-tags”, I can only come to the conclusion that the estimated prices are completely inaccurate, and underestimate all of the different options.

    Let’s take a look at WES, which is being built to a similar standard that a line out to Newberg or McMinnville would be constructed to:

    Distance: 14.7 miles
    Cost: $117 million
    Equipment: 3 powered vehicles, one unpowered vehicle
    Facilities: Five station platforms, three park-and-ride-lots, one maintenance facility
    Bridges: Three new bridges (the Tualatin River bridge replaced only the approach span from the north, and not the main span)
    Track: New sidings or second track from Beaverton to Hall Blvd., in Tigard

    Now, let’s look at Tualatin-Newberg, the shortest possible segment:

    Distance: 12.75 miles
    Equipment: would likely need the same amount of equipment as WES
    Facilities: A minimum of two stations (Newberg and Sherwood), likely a third station at Springbrook and possibly a fourth station somewhere in Tualatin. Almost all of these would require a park-and-ride facility. A maintenance facility would be necessary in Newberg.
    Bridges: Six tall trestles, each of which would require a rebuild at several million each (the trestles on the WES line were all short (less than 40′ tall) crossings of creeks, or the approach span to the Tualatin River over Cook Park. The trestles on the line to Newberg are in some cases approaching (if not over) one-hundred feet tall, and several hundred feet long.
    Track: Would require passing track in Tualatin-Sherwood and Newberg-Springbrook.

    Another MAJOR difference between WES and a Newberg-Tualatin route is that the line from Tigard-Wilsonville was already owned by ODOT and therefore helped minimize property acquisition costs. However, Washington County had to come in at the last minute as a “white knight” and pitch $24 million to Union Pacific to buy the line from Tigard to Beaverton. Unlike this scenario, the ENTIRE line from Tualatin to Newberg would have to be purchased from Union Pacific – and UP does not give anything away for free. So figure that your property acquisition budget has now doubled – that’s $48 million right there, and we haven’t even pulled up a single spike.

    WES came in at $8/million a mile. I fail to see how Tualatin-Newberg will be any cheaper than that. Just the short segment will be $102 million – and with that trains would still only go no faster than 35 MPH between Springbrook and Sherwood, because that budget would only provide for new ties/ballast/rail and bridges, and would not involve straightening the ROW or building a tunnel.

    By the way, the Newberg-Tualatin option would still require a junction to be built in Tualatin so trains could move onto the WES route, and would likely require a train transfer at Tigard (or the Beaverton station would have to be completely rebuilt to accomodate layover trains, which was not considered when designing the station). As has been stated in other discussions here, requiring a transfer limits the effectiveness of the system. Those who need to travel to Tualatin would have to back-track.

    For less than $10 million, Newberg could have an excellent commuter bus system that would link it with Beaverton/Hillsboro, downtown Portland (including OHSU), and possibly routes to the Airport and even to Salem, along with a park-and-ride facility. For this same $10 million, some busses could originate in McMinnville (i.e. Downtown Portland-McMinnville, but routes to Beaverton/Hillsboro would require a “cross-platform” transfer in Newberg), and include other bus services throughout Yamhill County. These same exact busses could be used on the weekends for services to the Casinos and to Lincoln City, thus increasing available revenue for the local transit system and reducing traffic on 99W/18. This system would include park-and-ride lots in Newberg and McMinnville (it would serve a stop in Sherwood but would not actively attract ridership because it would compete with TriMet – however it could stop at the existing Sherwood Cinemas Park and Ride) and smaller park-and-ride lots/improved bus stops in Lafayette and Dundee.

    This system could provide 30 minute service from McMinnville during the rush hour beginning at 5:00 AM until 9:00 AM and again from 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM, with hourly service during the day and on weekends, an early Airporter bus at 4:00 AM and some late night service on Friday/Saturdays.

  5. On the other hand, rail service may also bolster central-city real-estate prices and influence development a bit; there is a bunch of underdeveloped land in these towns that could be invested in by the community. Tourism, offices, and downtown residential.

    I don’t think so.

    Sherwood’s downtown is growing up quite nicely without rail (although I will say that a Sherwood-Tualatin “spur line” would be pretty neat, albeit expensive. Newberg’s downtown is well south of the rail line, and the area around the rail line is light industrial (and it is hardly “under utilized”, an uncle of mine owns a business located along the railroad in Newberg). Dundee…well let’s just say Dundee is a mess. Dundee would be greatly improved if 99W were four-laned through down, which would include a Streetscaping project, off-street parking, and a large park/public plaza to use the remaining space between the railroad and highway. New commercial buildings could be constructed like what has been constructed in downtown Troutdale. Lafayette is simply undesirable and no train station is going to improve it. McMinnville’s downtown has been strong, even despite Wal-Mart and a failed outlet mall. A new senior housing project is being built across the street from the old Red Electric depot that is still in use by the railroad; the old Water & Light powerhouse between 4th and 5th streets is now a winery, and the grainery complex between 5th and 8th Streets has been redeveloped into wine-related businesses, and a dayspa. The Buchanan Cellars business still exists in its grain elevator and has flourished. The grain elevator on the west side of the tracks has been removed (because it was collapsing) and makes a good location for a small railroad-based freight shipper. South of 3rd Street are a number of businesses and offices, including the local Post Office.

    If these are “underdeveloped”, I’d sure like to know what “developed” is. I see no reason to force out productive, successful businesses when what is there is fine. On the other hand if anyone has a plan to “revitalize” Lafayette, please come up to the podium. However, Lafayette is successful at allowing people who can’t afford housing in McMinnville to have a place to live.

  6. From 1967 to 72 I worked for Tualatin Valley Buses which ran to McMinnville. That service stopped under Tri-Met because Yamhill County is outside the district. Rather than talking high cost rail to begin service, how about an intergovernmental agreement allowing Tri-Met to provide bus service.

  7. Setting the price tag aside, I think it would be more efficient for a route to serve multiple connections, rather than just one tiny Tigard-to-Newberg segment.

    What if it went from McMinnville to Milwaukie, utilizing the existing ROW, and for kicks call it the M&M Train. :-p

    This would connect Milwaukie MAX, Lake Oswego/Macadam streetcar, WES, perhaps Tigard MAX as implied in the study… Wouldn’t this route be more useful?

  8. I’m having a hard time envisioning the differences, i’m not too familiar with the locations and distances involved. could a better man/person make a map of the proposed routes?

    I’d say, in general, the best option will be the one that leaves the most ‘hooks’ to an eventual regional passenger train network.

  9. The first option makes the most sense…expand WES a soon to be existing service. Share maintenance facilities, vehicles types, etc., get more frequently in the Tualatin to Beaverton stretch, and at least get rehabed rail over Rex Hill. Expansion to McMinnville or beyond can wait until ridership, need or money appear. We need to continue to think of this as three services…improved freight (so Schnitzer does not have to truck scrap to its steel mill), tourist…just as with the Mt Hood RR, and commuter, an extension of WES. Bus links can be extended from Newberg as needed.
    Not to restart the bus/rail thing, but this rail line would have its own ROW. Worth the added cost due to the inherent improved reliability which makes rail service more likely to attract essential choice riders.

  10. Not to restart the bus/rail thing, but this rail line would have its own ROW

    And, Lenny, exactly what benefit does having its own ROW actually provide in this scenario?

    Why could not TriMet institute BRT along Barbur Boulevard (which, again, could be done at a cost FAR, FAR less than $100 million, or even $50 million), of which Yamhill County busses would also have access to?

    Thus, you have a much cheaper solution with the SOLE benefit that you can identify with rail – plus busses will travel between Newberg and Sherwood twice as fast.

    $100 million would actually go a long ways towards creating a BRT corridor from Portland to King City that would also host various other bus routes that would only use a portion of the BRT corridor (i.e. all of the busses that travel between Portland and Hillsdale or Burlingame).

    I think it would be more efficient for a route to serve multiple connections

    Chris, you’re on to something – I’ve always thought that a Milwaukie-Sherwood route (not including Newberg) would serve this purpose, and provide service in a very valuable gap in current TriMet service that it would actually be somewhat difficult for TriMet to provide as a bus service. (Especially Lake Oswego-Milwaukie.)

    However I would envision such a system to be a “cost reduced” network, even compared to WES. For example, there would be no park-and-ride facilities, just simple platforms. Use rebuilt RDCs instead of expensive Colorado Railcar DMUs. (Actually I prefer another vehicle choice, but that is neither here nor there.) Rail would be improved but not to the cost that WES was rebuilt for (and much of the line from Lake Oswego to Lake Grove is in decent condition as is.)

    Of course, as the route becomes popular, the system would be incrementally improved upon. Just like, for example, a bus to Yamhill County could eventually become a rail route, if the ridership developed.

  11. Separate ROW = relability. Are you ready to take a traffic lane out of Barbur for BRT? Without the lane, you just have a fancy bus that still runs in traffic. Also, can’t haul scrap on a bus nor attrach many wine tourists.
    I know you are loathe to admit it, but there are lots of people out there who will not ride a bus (period), but jump at the chance to ride the rails. I think we both know why.

  12. Rail to Newberg is better than no rail at all.

    I’m disappointed that Tri-Met has chosen to go the diesel route at all, however. Diesel trains are less regulated than other diesels; as a result, they’re dirty. People living near the tracks will not like the filth that they spew onto anything downwind of them.

    It would be better to start with electric train service to begin with, since train rolling stock can have a useful life of half a century (unlike buses).

    However, with that caveat out of the way, DMU service to Newberg is better than no commuter rail service at all. If the Feds kick in for the portion from Portland or Beaverton to Newberg, perhaps the state, the tribe and the cities/counties/LIDs can kick in to get the train the rest of the way to McMinnville. Or even Lincoln City.

    DMU service. It’s a start. It’s half-arsed, but it’s a start.

    What this state needs to have, however, is a conversation on how we’re going to electrify our statewide rail network, for the health of our communities and to allow the roll-out of faster enhanced rail service.

    IMHO, commuter rail to McMinnville could used EMD/DMU rolling stock. But, if it goes all the way to Lincoln City, something capable of higher speeds (~120mph, tilting technology, etc.) would be preferable, as would service directly to Union Station in downtown Portland.

  13. Lenny: Also, can’t haul scrap on a bus nor attrach many wine tourists.

    No, but improving 99W will do both, and you know that too.

    I know you are loathe to admit it, but there are lots of people out there who will not ride a bus (period), but jump at the chance to ride the rails

    And why is that? Is it because TriMet intentionally makes bus service suck so much, that there is a perception that the train is just better, just because?

    If TriMet and this region would get off their asses and invest in bus service, we would have bus service that is actually competitive, and it would attract riders.

    AND – I know you are loathe to admit it, but there are people out there that will refuse to ride a bus OR a train, but have no problem carpooling or calling a taxi or whatever…or just plain driving, even if a bus or a train were available, free of charge, in front of their door, etc. So under YOUR logic, since 85% of all trips in the Portland metro area are by auto, why are we even having any discussion of transit whatsoever?

    I think we should be expanding the accessibility of transit. Rail supporters (who claim to be “transit supporters”) only want a choo-choo train – even if it means cutting back transit, disinvesting in transit, etc.

  14. If the Feds kick in for the portion from Portland or Beaverton to Newberg, perhaps the state, the tribe and the cities/counties/LIDs can kick in to get the train the rest of the way to McMinnville. Or even Lincoln City.

    And what programs and services are you willing to cut? Prisons? Mental Health? Education?

    We’re talking billions of dollars – not to mention carving through the Coast Range and a National Forest. I thought this was supposed to be an environmentally-friendly program, not one to destruct the environment.

    I’m disappointed that Tri-Met has chosen to go the diesel route at all, however.

    I am, too.

    It would be better to start with electric train service to begin with, since train rolling stock can have a useful life of half a century (unlike buses).

    And what if that rail project is unsuccessful? We’ll have a huge scar across the Coast Range and equipment that can’t be used anywhere else, and has to be cut up for scrap (or sold as roadside novelties). Meanwhile, since Oregon had to cut numerous services to fund it, we’ll have a monument to government waste.

    I think, the episode of The Simpsons was called “Marge vs. the Monorail”, if anyone forgot what happened. Marge wants to fix potholes, the crowd wants a Monorail, the city gets a Monorail built by a greedy swindler, and the monorail is left to rot while the roads that everyone uses still has potholes.

    $5 million would buy a great bus fleet without disrupting any other services… Anyone that wants a rail, is welcome to start “Oregon Electric Rail Corporation” as an investor-owned company, unaffiliated with the State of Oregon, and invest THEIR OWN money into the scheme.

  15. If individual citizens had to budget their expenses the way these publicly funded rail transit systems are budgeted—-they would be sent to prison for extreme lengths of time on charges of fraud. $72 million? $98 million? $59 million? And this is cheap compared to the MAX systems being crammed down our gullets.

    Supposedly, we’re trying to emulate Europe. Not even in London, would I guess, they are spending those sums. And exactly how do impoverished Eastern European cities develop their streetcar systems? Not within these kinds of parameters.

  16. “The Crunch” writes: “Not even in London, would I guess, they are spending those sums.”

    Yes, they are.

    “And exactly how do impoverished Eastern European cities develop their streetcar systems?”

    A. By not ripping up all of the historic lines in the first place.
    B. By utilizing regional manufacturing facilities.
    C. By utilizing local labor and know-how.

  17. I’m a little confused how it can be so cheap. The San Diego County (Oceanside – Escondido) Sprinter cost almost $500m to use diesel trains on existing ROW.

    They did have to replace a lot of track and crossings to get it up to standards, but I really have to question the reality of any of these proposals.

    Maybe part of the problem for the Sprinter is the number of roads it crosses, and that the train tracks will still be freight tracks at night, but it seems like a similar idea in other aspects.

    For those not familiar, it connects suburban communities that have local traffic issues, and links to commuter rail on the west end and soon BRT on the east end. Definitely a very interesting re-use of existing resources, if nothing else.

    It’s technically light rail (according to NCTD), but it’s a different use of light rail than I’ve typically seen. Kind of like a Yamhill County/SW Metro train could be.

  18. And why is that [there are lots of people out there who will not ride a bus (period), but jump at the chance to ride the rails]? Is it because TriMet intentionally makes bus service suck so much, that there is a perception that the train is just better, just because?

    No.

    Rail supporters (who claim to be “transit supporters”) only want a choo-choo train – even if it means cutting back transit, disinvesting in transit, etc.

    Rules 2 and 4?

  19. Doesn’t PNWR railroad own these tracks, not UP?

    I agree with Garlynn that we need to develop a region-wide rail system that utilizes the existing tracks. We need to save them and improve them, not let them fall into disuse and get ripped up for scrap like so many lines already have. They offer a more efficient form of transportation than roads – you have to admit it – rails last longer than roads do. And trains use less fuel than rubber-tired vehicles.

    This railroad has a line that goes all the way down to Corvallis. Perhaps in the future, with incremental upgrades in conjunction with the freight company, we can get service all the way down south? It’s only an additional 45 miles from McMinnville to Corvallis.

    And Erik, bus service to start out would be a great idea. I wonder if it would only cost $10 million, tho. I think in the long run, however, that we need to get some of these old rail lines rebuilt for use, and additional intercity bus routes in operation. Not as mere commuter lines, but what they call in Europe Regional/Intercity rail.

  20. And why is that [there are lots of people out there who will not ride a bus (period), but jump at the chance to ride the rails]? Is it because TriMet intentionally makes bus service suck so much, that there is a perception that the train is just better, just because?

    As Mark Hendershott said, “…Yamhill County is outside the [TriMet] district…,” which makes comments about age of TriMet buses a moot point in this conversation.

    Additionally, Yamhill County already has bus service that you can ride *today*:
    yctransitarea.org

    This article from the News-Register archives explains why setting up an agreement with TriMet would be difficult:
    http://www.newsregister.com/news/results.cfm?story_no=219540
    “There’s no taxing authority,” said Commissioner Mary Stern. “If the district were to want to tax, we’d have to go out to the voters, and there are no plans that I know of to do that.”

    100% of their money comes from competitive state/Federal grants. According to materials I have from last year, they got 46% of what they requested for 2007-09.

  21. Doesn’t PNWR railroad own these tracks, not UP?

    No, Portland & Western entered into a 25 year lease of the tracks with then Southern Pacific in August 1995 for the trackage from Springbrook north into the Portland area, and two and a half years previously (February 1993) for the trackage south to Corvallis. Union Pacific still is the owner of the track, just as UP was the owner of the track between Tigard and Beaverton that sold to Washington County for $24 million.

    We need to save them and improve them, not let them fall into disuse and get ripped up for scrap like so many lines already have. They offer a more efficient form of transportation than roads – you have to admit it – rails last longer than roads do.

    “Saving” a railline doesn’t require putting passenger trains on it. And even if it does, it requires something minimal, like the Willamette Shores Trolley. It doesn’t require spending hundreds of millions of dollars just for the sake of using the train tracks.

    As for whether rails last longer than roads do…um…that’s not correct. A branchline railroad that has one train a day – yes, will last for a long time. So will a seldom-used country road or a cul-de-sac that sees a handful of cars and rarely sees heavy trucks. A mainline railroad requires CONSTANT maintenance, just like a busy street or freeway. Railroads retain massive armies of maintenance crews, high-tech ultrasound and X-ray detection equipment to look for flaws in rails, mechanized equipment to replace ballast and ties, and a significant industry of outsourced/contract crews provides similar services as well on a national basis. UP right now has several hundred employees and contractors working in Southern Oregon.

    UP was well known for its maintenance problems on the former Southern Pacific lines over the last decade – SP was known for deferring maintenace and having hundreds of “temporary” slow orders in effect between Portland and Los Angeles. Imagine driving down I-5 and having to slow down to 35 MPH every couple of miles – because of poor roadway conditions!!

    Right now the line over Rex Hill is not endangered – neither P&W nor UP are calling for it to be abandoned despite the disuse of the line. No adjoining property owners are calling for an adverse abandonment of the line. So using an argument like such is merely a scare tactic designed to engage people to act on a false notion (like George W. Bush and his “axis of evil???”) There is absolutely no reason to spend $50M+ on something, when the exact same (or better) service can be provided at between 1/5th and 1/10th the cost – not to mention that such a project would (gulp!) ENCOURAGE SPRAWL by encouraging bedroom community growth into Yamhill County where right now it is contrained and limited, in part because of transportation issues. Busses would go to serve those who are already commuting, while the rail proponents use development as a key reason for their proposal.

    I guess, if this plan is to be “officially approved” by PortlandTransport.com, then there shouldn’t be any further discussion of development patterns or “smart growth” or whatever it’s called, because now PortlandTransport.com is actively supporting non-urban growth in a rural area like Newberg (and then Dundee, and then Dayton and Lafayette, and then McMinnville). And, using taxpayer dollars to support growing Portland out into Yamhill County – that, ironically, widening 99W back in the 1960s/1970s did not successfully do (because the peak traffic patterns on the road occurs on Friday nights, Saturday mornings, and Sunday evenings – not during M-F commute hours (except for Friday).

  22. If by “improving” one means widening Barbur/99W, then we are really talking about throwing away money. More lanes = more trips = more congestion = more sprawl, etc.
    The whole point of rail here (and elsewhere) is dedicated right of way; its there, its available (at a price), why not use it to move commuters, freight and tourists? Start by branching WES from Tualatin to Newberg. With a MAX train leaving Beaverton TC every 5-10 minutes in the peak, transfers would be quick for travel to downtown or out to Hillsboro.

  23. I guess, if this plan is to be “officially approved” by PortlandTransport.com, then there shouldn’t be any further discussion of development patterns or “smart growth” or whatever it’s called, because now PortlandTransport.com is actively supporting non-urban growth in a rural area like Newberg (and then Dundee, and then Dayton and Lafayette, and then McMinnville).

    I hear what you’re saying Erik, but there are some simple truths that must be realized when making policy decisions. The simple fact is that some residents of Yamhill County work in the Portland area. Certainly the ideal scenario is that people will choose to live close to where they work, but we know that isn’t always the case. Different people have different metrics for measuring quality of life. Through policy we can reward those who make decisions that reduce their impact on infrastructure and the environment, but we still have many others for whom the inner-city or TOD lifestyle will diminish their perceived quality of life (I’m looking at you, GregT). That doesn’t mean that we should outright ignore these people; we should give them incentives and options to reduce their impact as well. If they choose not to utilize these options, they miss out on the incentives (thus sitting in traffic, paying tolls, and driving for 30 minutes to get a gallon of milk).

    In my opinion, providing transportation options for this class of citizen does not fly in the face of PortlandTransport’s mission because there is no one-size-fits-all solution. This is not a “black and white” or “good vs evil” (buses vs trains?) matter. Yamhill County wins because they get property taxes from these residents. The Metro area wins because of the payroll tax paid by these residents’ employers. Yamhill county stands to gain more by luring employment to locate within it’s borders, and you know they have to be trying to do so, but in the meantime we shouldn’t attempt to create an exodus of tax-paying citizens just because their lifestyle preference doesn’t equate to our own. There has to be a balance struck here. By simply choosing to support a transportation alternative for commuters living in a bedroom community does not mean that we cannot simultaneously support a compact, dense urban area in the central city and regional centers.

  24. Joseph,

    All your arguments are going to be moot when local governments, trying to acommodate every sort of transportation option and running up incredible debts to do so, steer the American economy off the cliff into bankruptcy. Some contributors to PT have come up with some cost effective alternatives—that don’t require incredible federal subsidiies—in previous discussions on this board, yet you seem oblivious to them.

    If these subsidized projects were only to occur in the Portland area it might be tolerable. But, no—politicos in Portland have somehow appointed themselves as mentors to the rest of the nation as well. So now we have replicated boondoggles appearing across the country. I saw one in San Jose a few years ago. A sort of left coast vesion of the Legend of Sleepy Hollow i.e the “Riderless light rail train.”

  25. Crunch,

    I’d hardly call myself oblivious to the suggestions made by other contributors to this site, nor do I beckon the governments of the world to jump off the cliff into bankruptcy. I’m not sure how my call for enabling and encouraging citizens to reduce their impact on infrastructure and the environment would lead you to this conclusion. My recent comment was simply to calm Erik down from his “hot or cold” stance: that somehow we cannot support both compact urban areas and provide bus/BRT or rail service to bedroom communities outside Portland. Personally I don’t see these two goals as mutually exclusive; instead they are two components of a balanced metropolitan region.

    Furthermore, I’m decidedly neutral on the Yamhill County rail project. If it makes good financial sense and the ridership is there, I think we should do it. If it doesn’t, then I think we should focus our resources on other needs. I will say that being able to take a train to the coast from Portland is on my personal wish list, but I’m not kidding myself into thinking of that as a financially viable project in this decade or even necessarily the next. I’m not sure how any of this makes me oblivious to the suggestions of others or how that puts me in favor of irresponsible government spending.

  26. If by “improving” one means widening Barbur/99W, then we are really talking about throwing away money. More lanes = more trips = more congestion = more sprawl, etc.
    The whole point of rail here (and elsewhere) is dedicated right of way; its there, its available (at a price), why not use it to move commuters, freight and tourists?

    Lenny, your argument could equally be applied to the highway.

    The highway is there, why not use it to put busses on the road to move more people using fewer cars?

    Unlike the rail option, it doesn’t require rebuilding the road from the ground up for it to work. All it requires is a $500,000 bus. The rail option requires at a minimum $50 million AND several years, before a single person can be moved.

    You suggest that improving 99W will introduce sprawl. Since rail is often seen as a development too, it very well will introduce more sprawl to Newberg, by encouraging growth and development in Newberg where it currently does not exist. Highway 99W has been an expressway to Newberg since the 1960s – yet its growth has been largely contained. If a rail line is built into Newberg, those trains will likely be weekday rush hour trains. If those same folks want to shop and play in Portland (given the very few shopping and entertainment options available in Newberg) – how do you suppose they will get to Portland? The trains will be parked! Do you honestly think those folks will just park their butts at home until the next train leaves – THREE DAYS LATER?!!!

  27. Thanks to Jason Barbour for the link to Yamhill County transit. I recognize the issues with funding, however the high cost of rail and the time to get it operating make buses a practical interim measure. The whole thing isn’t going to work unless Yamhill County decides to tax itself for whatever system may be put in place.
    I’m in Douglas County. Our transit system is about to be strangled because the funding is dependent on the timber safety net. No federal money from that source via the County to supplement the grants that we receive just as Yamhill County does will mean death or near death of a bus system just getting firmly established. The only answer for us that I can see is a transit district as provided by statute with the power to tax. See Rogue Vally Transit for one example.

  28. I hear what you’re saying Erik, but there are some simple truths that must be realized when making policy decisions. The simple fact is that some residents of Yamhill County work in the Portland area. Certainly the ideal scenario is that people will choose to live close to where they work, but we know that isn’t always the case. Different people have different metrics for measuring quality of life.

    That’s a perfectly fine argument – in fact one that I agree with 100%.

    However it seems that the “transit-advocates” that are really rail advocates don’t see it that way — it’s rail or nothing, busses are no good, they’re a waste of money, highways are the Devil, etc. Yet when it comes to paying for them, it’s all about “I don’t want to pay for it myself, I want to tax someone else because they don’t agree with my point of view.”

    Not everyone can afford to live in SoWa or the Pearl – we must provide transit alternatives to other regions. Unfortunately light rail is too expensive. Newberg, to use the example of this thread, has 20,000 residents spread out over five square miles – 4,000 residents per square mile. Is this a sufficient density for rail service? Newberg’s Central Business District is located five blocks south of the railroad – how will this be handled, or are we to believe the “pro-rail” faction that all industry is bad and needs to be re-developed (which is ironic, because that eliminates the freight aspect of rail, moves industry to areas that cannot be served by rail (and thus more trucks), and helps reduce the number of high-wage jobs in the area – as well as provides local jobs for local workers.) And what is the solution to get people to the train station – private auto trips? Newberg’s current transit service has but a single route using a mini-bus that makes a large loop through the town, instead of point-to-point routes that are easy for riders to understand as they go from point A to point B. (Newberg’s bus route only makes six trips a day, from 8:00 AM to 4:57 PM, and wouldn’t serve the early-morning commuter rail trips, so again – MORE AUTO TRIPS.)

    I have no problem with encouraging transit – I have a problem with this insane insistance of spending millions of dollars “just because it’s a choo-choo” – focused on the mode, not the need. The need is that people need to move from point A (Yamhill County) to point B (the Portland Metro area). What is the cheapest and most effective way to do this – a $50M plus commuter rail line that operates two or three trains in the AM rush, and two or three trains in reverse in the PM rush, with no mid-day, reverse-commute or weekend/holiday service? Or for $10 million, a comprehensive transit system using busses that provides both long-distance service, as well as a complete transit system serving all of Yamhill County – both Newberg AND McMinnville, plus routes to Dundee, Dayton, Lafayette, Carlton, Yamhill, Amity, Sheridan and Willamina – providing at least hourly service or better, with transit stations in Newberg and McMinnville to provide connections?

    $100 million for Newberg-Portland only? Or $10 million for ALL of Yamhill County PLUS Portland (and to multiple points in the Metro) PLUS Salem? After all, people in Yamhill County also commute to Salem.

    But, hey, rail provides “more service at less cost”. That is, if you have no problem with only two or three schedules a day, start in only one place, end in only one place, and have no transporation needs outside of commute to/from work. That’s “more service at less cost”. In Lenny’s world, it is. In my world, I have a life outside of my commute to/from work, but because I can’t depend on TriMet I have a car. (And, I have family in Yamhill County so I do drive to Yamhill County on a frequent basis. Commuter Rail wouldn’t serve me.)

  29. Erik, I was not using “scare tactics” by implying that the only way to save a railroad’s infrastructure is to offer passenger rail on it.

    I think that it is a prudent use of an existing, underused asset. Sure, it might take some millions of dollars to keep up. Yet I remember just a few years ago the legislature passing a $1.5 billion fix for roads and bridges in Oregon. Why aren’t we investing in non-car transit?

    Trains can travel faster than tire-based vehicles and carry more passengers. They offer more room and comfort than buses. We used to have passenger service in these corridors. Why not bring them back?

    Additionally, in response to the idea that passenger routes would fail even if we invested in them – sure, you need to provide service to where it needs to go. That’s what studies are for!

    However, usage of transportation systems generally follows how much money you invest in them. Provide high quality, not just bottom-of-the-barrel cheap systems, and people will use them. But you have to make sure that the costs are kept reasonable and they offer a comfortable, quick, and convenient link to where they need to go.

    I would think this is just common sense, but virtually every thread on this blog degenerates into people nitpicking minutiae of transport options and championing your own transport ideal for Oregon, while trashing any alternative. It really needs to stop.

    If other countries can rehab older rail lines and provide mixed frequent passenger and freight service on them, there is no reason why we can’t (except outdated 19th century FRA regulations and not funding things properly).

  30. Why aren’t we investing in non-car transit?

    Like busses?

    Trains can travel faster than tire-based vehicles and carry more passengers.

    Yes, a train can carry more passengers – but is there a need for it? WES is expected to operate single-car trains for the most part, offering only slightly more capacity than a standard articulated bus. Will Newberg be able to generate sufficient originating traffic (keep in mind that Newberg does not have the developed bus system that Wilsonville has) to fill up these trains?

    Whether trains can travel faster than tire-based vehicles, well, yes AND no. In the context of this discussion, the train will actually be at a speed disadvantage between Newberg and Sherwood. Yes, a MAGLEV train can travel over 200 MPH, and how many of those are in operation (worldwide) today? And between Portland and Salem, Amtrak Cascades takes an hour and 10 minutes for what I can drive in 50 minutes (because of an out-of-the-way routing to Oregon City and a station stop) – and is frequently delayed due to running on a single-track mainline with freight traffic.

    Why not bring them back?

    Because IT COSTS MONEY THAT WE DON’T HAVE.

    you need to provide service to where it needs to go

    The problem is that by its very nature, rail cannot work like that. You don’t see ten Amtrak stations in the Portland metro area for the different possibilities that Amtrak passengers would want – you see three (and one of them is brand new and seldom used, but somehow Oregon City came up with a few million bucks for a “station”.) Amtrak doesn’t serve Gresham, or Beaverton, or Tigard – does that mean that people in Salem have no desire to travel to those locations? No, it means those people have to transfer, or they use another mode (i.e. private auto).

    Provide high quality, not just bottom-of-the-barrel cheap systems, and people will use them.

    I’ve been saying that a lot. Provide high quality busses, and people will use them. It’s a demonstrated FACT.

    I would think this is just common sense

    Fine. Then let’s stop the automatic pro-rail/bash the bus arguments too. Let’s look at the actual ridership demand, and the costs. I have yet to see a “fatal flaw” for bus service other than certain individuals don’t like busses, therefore we should not consider them at all.

    If other countries can rehab older rail lines and provide mixed frequent passenger and freight service on them

    The reason is that many of these “other countries” have branchlines that don’t carry much freight, and therefore passenger trains have the run of the line during daylight hours. Further they possess a social and economic climate that favors running trains because there is no question as to whether they are cost-effective. Unfortunately that is not the case here in America, save for a Socialist revolution that is unlikely.

    Does it make sense to run trains on a track because it’s there? Well, if you want to buy up the railroad and do it yourself, that’s fine by me. I’d love to run a tourist train from Banks into the Coast Range, using the POTB Railroad that is all but shut down (due to flood damage further west). But to use taxpayer dollars to run a limited-service commuter train in lieu of needed safety and capactiy improvements that are needed for more than just commute-to-work travel is not cost effective. This project would not reduce or eliminate the current traffic jams that occur on this route on Friday and Sunday nights and Saturda mornings. This train would handle only a very small percentage of trips out of Newberg, and would still require some type of a transit system (of which the pro-rail advocates have zero plan for) in Yamhill County that would have to be bus-based – thus creating a small transit system that would require two separate maintenance functions (one for rail and one for bus). (Despite what TriMet claims for “maintenance efficiencies with the CRC railcar – the railcars still can’t be maintained at a bus barn, and the maintenance facility is located 13.6 miles as the crow flies from either Center Street or Merlo Garages (never mind that Merlo Garage is located somewhat close to a railroad, and Center Street is right next to a railroad yard.) Lenny suggests combining the maintenance facilities – this would require an expensive non-revenue deadhead run from Wilsonville to Newberg, or a layover/light maintenance facility in Newberg regardless thus limiting any cost savings.

    Creating a bus system would save on maintenance costs, save on operating costs, save on capital costs… If Yamhill County doesn’t have the demand for public transit, the busses can easily be sold to other operators with minimal loss of investment – the railcars would likely have next to no willing buyers (considering that the only other operator of the Colorado Railcar DMU has not purchased any new DMUs, but has purchased new locomotive/bi-level coaches.) That, to me, seems like common sense.

  31. This is an interesting discussion. The reality is that there is no money available for this project. There is no local, state or federal money for this type of project. The federal standards have tightened considerably since money was allocated to the Washington County Commuter Rail project. Yamhill County does not come close to population density for funding. The real kicker is that there is no indication that Union Pacific would consider the project.

  32. I see from the Yamhill County Coordinated Human Services Public Transportation Survey (2000) that 3.2% of Mac residents were commuting to Salem – and 3.0% to Portland! Findings on page 39. Washington Co destinations (excluding Hillsboro) come to 6.4%; Newberg is 7.4%, Dundee .4%, to address the bottleneck problems. Wonder how that’s changed (=gotten worse) in the meantime.

    Trains can travel faster than tire-based vehicles and carry more passengers.

    Aw, we just need to build buses that can hold 200 passengers! But as I understand the matter at hand rail will only get to about 35 MPH up Rex Hill, unless we build a tunnel. Erik can elaborate on this in far more detail than I.

    I’d prefer a train all the way too but a bus seems much more feasible/effective at the moment, since the critical factor is addressing the needs of Mac commuters. As gas prices continue their inexorable climb upwards we’ll perhaps see the political will for an interurban train – read some of the articles I added to the Changing Railroads in the U.S.: Is now the time for a national electrification program? entry.

  33. “I know you are loathe to admit it, but there are lots of people out there who will not ride a bus (period), but jump at the chance to ride the rails. I think we both know why.”

    I was one of those people. Rail is the gateway transit mode. Regular people WILL take rail in the US, they will NOT take the bus no matter what. It’s considered dirty, unreliable, and frustrating… among other issues.

  34. The Dude,
    Interesting study that you mentioned (Yamhill County Coordinated Human Services Public Transportation Survey (2000). On page 67 it said, “RESULTS: Approximately $35,000 has been raised privately to do a rail feasibility study and an RFP is being prepared.”

    In fact, most of the $35,000 was taxpayer funded by the local governments.

  35. Regular people WILL take rail in the US, they will NOT take the bus no matter what. It’s considered dirty, unreliable, and frustrating… among other issues.

    So what you are saying, Adron, is that two-thirds of Portland’s transit riders, and all of Clark County’s transit riders, are not “normal” people?

    That only one out of three transit riders in Portland is “normal” – never mind that 85% of Portland commuters DRIVE to work?

    Maybe we should discuss the percentage of “normal people” that take Amtrak versus the people that won’t dare set foot on an Amtrak train but have no problem FLYING or DRIVING long distances. Or let’s look at Sound Transit’s ridership – 2.2 million Sounder riders compared to 10.7 million ST Express (bus) riders.

    What, Adron, is your definition of “normal”?

  36. I could see a case for some relatively minor public investment to get more people to use mass transit. There are other costs that come into the equation that are not quite so obvious at first glance—such as neighborhood livability, land use priorities, accident rates—that still present a case for public transit, beyond the cost-effective buses. The double decked rail vehicle that could run on existing rail tracks, though, would suffice for me. And this might even be self-supporting. I would even suggest that the SAMTRAK line could have one in just a short time as a commuter line.

    I am generally favorable to Transit oriented development–but enough of a realist to not think that any threat of ‘peak-oil’ will permanently eliminate the private automobile. We’ve already got lots of alternative fuel vehicles coming–and in 10 years the gasoline powered vehicle may just be totally out of fashion. But automakers will adapt; they are motivated to stay in business.

    My overall impression is that our general transportation strategy in this area is getting way out of whack. This country has other things it can do with federal dollars than building needless projects that stimulate the construction industry and attract illegal aliens looking for jobs. We need to make infrastructure improvements where the economy and industrial planning demands it—but too much expenditure will take money out of people’s pockets and weaken the economy.

  37. While there are a number of well-reasoned arguments both for and against rail passenger service to Newberg or McMinnville, it seems like no one who would be a potential user of the services is speaking.

    I only speak for myself driving from near Sheridan to Beaverton during the week.

    Personally, taking rail would be much more preferable than bus. Why? The bus will be hampered with the same restrictions that make driving suck.

    Bus thru Dundee will suck just as bad as driving. Then, add all the stops that will need to be added along the way, due to political considerations. There will need to be at least one stop in Dundee, but probably two or three. There will also need to be multiple stops in McMinnville, Newberg (definitely near George Fox Uni and Providence hospitals), Lafayette would need a stop, etc. Add the usual traffic constraints that would equally affect the buses, and that makes taking the bus suck. Being stuck in traffic as a passenger only marginally mitigates being stuck in traffic as a driver.

    Will I be utilizing WES this fall? Probably, if I’m still working at my current job (employer pays for full TriMet pass sticker, work is only a bit away from Millikan MAX station). Why? WES will make just 3 stops between Wilsonville and BTC. And, it won’t be hampered by traffic on I-5 and 217. Kind of a no-brainer in my book.

    Also, bus will quickly be viewed negatively on its own terms politically with the same exact arguments (if smaller order of magnitudes for the $$$ amounts) if it kills off the rail plans.

    At this point, the high operating costs of bus come into play: fuel prices, driver salaries (and pensions, because they’ll probably be Teamsters…), the needed government subsidies, taxes, and maintenance.

    I have this funny feeling that those advocating buses over rail currently would probably be amongst the voices grumbling about the costs and inefficiencies of the bus line if that were the only alternative versus driving on the table…

    Personally, I wonder why Portland & Western doesn’t try to do some sort of RDC service on the weekends and for OSU & OU football games…it’s not like they wouldn’t be able to coordinate things with their freight trains on the weekends, at least on the line going south to Corvallis…(through Newberg and McMinnville…)

    As far as tax money goes, the current Powers That Be (in and out of government) are doing far more to bleed this country than any state or regional tax entity could ever think of doing in 1000 years. We’re ALL going to be paying for that one one way or another.

    Disclosure: In the past, I lived in Chicagoland, and when working in downtown Chicago, there was no way in hell I’d commute between Grayslake and downtown Chicago. Metra monthly pass cost me $135/mo at the time. Parking downtown was $15-20/day. And… well, the train took 90 minutes each way. Driving took longer. Definite no-brainer.

    Only suckage with Metra was the occaisional ped that got x’d trying to cross the tracks, or the sudden snow storm that would essentially cause downtown Chicago to shut down by 3pm.

  38. Interesting information from the “Rail System Feasibility Study” yesterday. It was surprisingly candid and echoed much of the thought on this forum.

    Observations:(page 15)

    1. Travel patterns in corridor are not highly favorable to transit.

    2) Some modest growth expected in 2028 vs. 2015.

    3) Overall ridership is low for a rail transit system (unfavorable cost/benefit).

    4) Benefits in Washington County appear to exceed those in Yamhill County.

    Conclusions:(page 19)

    1) Rail solution does not appear to be feasible or cost-effective.

    2) Combination of high capital costs and relatively low ridership.

    3) Likelihood of Federal, regional funding is low.

    4) However, there appears to be a commuter market that may support increased express bus service.

    Other Challenges: (page 18)

    1) Project does not meet criteria for FTA Sec 5309 “Very Small Starts” transit funding:
    — Avg Weekday Ridership 3,000 +
    — Total Capital Cost: Under $50 m

    2) 50% Non-Federal Funding Match

    3) Jurisdictional/Institutional Issues.

  39. Corey wrote: Bus thru Dundee will suck just as bad as driving. Then, add all the stops that will need to be added along the way, due to political considerations. There will need to be at least one stop in Dundee, but probably two or three. There will also need to be multiple stops in McMinnville, Newberg (definitely near George Fox Uni and Providence hospitals), Lafayette would need a stop, etc. Add the usual traffic constraints that would equally affect the buses, and that makes taking the bus suck. Being stuck in traffic as a passenger only marginally mitigates being stuck in traffic as a driver.

    The highway through Dundee needs to be improved, period. For that matter, so does the railroad – TODAY, no train can move faster than 10 MPH through Dundee. That’s no better than the current situation on Highway 99W in poor traffic.

    Why would there need to be so many bus stops for an express bus? This is not TriMet’s line 12 – this would be an express bus, likely making only one stop in Lafayette and Dundee. Likely only two stops in Newberg (one downtown and one further east on Portland Road), and likely only two or three stops in McMinnville.

    Throw in the number of red lights you hit through those towns and what’s the difference?

    At this point, the high operating costs of bus come into play: fuel prices, driver salaries (and pensions, because they’ll probably be Teamsters…), the needed government subsidies, taxes, and maintenance.

    How would rail be better in this corridor? You’d be replacing one bus with a Colorado Railcar diesel car that has TWO bus engines, twice the fuel consumption, etc. Each of those DMUs require two people (engineer and conductor) to operate. Plus you have to pay for maintenance of the railroad track. So one DMU actually has the operating costs of two busses, and carries – two bus loads – of passengers. Plus track maintenance costs. There is no cost savings; even TriMet projects that WES will cost more than the bus average cost per passenger.

    I have this funny feeling that those advocating buses over rail currently would probably be amongst the voices grumbling about the costs and inefficiencies of the bus line if that were the only alternative versus driving on the table…

    I have this funny feeling that this is a personally directed statement that has no basis in fact. I would have liked to see improved bus service in this corridor since the early 1990s when I was growing up in McMinnville.

    Personally, I wonder why Portland & Western doesn’t try to do some sort of RDC service on the weekends and for OSU & OU football games…it’s not like they wouldn’t be able to coordinate things with their freight trains on the weekends, at least on the line going south to Corvallis…(through Newberg and McMinnville…)

    I can tell you why. Because P&W is a for-profit company whose job is to make money.

    Historically, P&W would run an occassional excursion train on behalf of the Pacific Northwest Chapter of NRHS, but those excursions have stopped. They will run a private passenger train for their own self-serving purposes, but not a publc excursion. The only reason they are running WES is because TriMet pays P&W a fixed fee to run the trains, no matter how full or empty the trains are. TriMet assumes 100% of the financial risk of those trains. P&W is guaranteed a PROFIT. (And it doesn’t help that the good folks of the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon spent a pretty penny to upgrade P&W’s track, and will pay to maintain the track, while P&W gets practically a free ride for use of the track, so P&W’s expenses actually will go down.)

    Do you want to run an RDC train to Corvallis? Tell me: How much will it cost to obtain $100,000,000 in liability insurance? That’s a requirement. There’s a reason a lot of railroad excursions no longer operate today. Is your equipment ADA accessible? Do you have boarding stations to load passengers? What if someone gets hurt? Where are you going to park your train in Corvallis? Do you have a shop to fix your RDC? What if the car breaks down en-route back to McMinnville, then what is your plan?

  40. Bob R.,
    The information was from slide presentation yesterday to the Yamhill County Commissioners. I have the PDF of the presentation. The study itself should be available within a week, or so.

  41. Report puts brakes on local rail

    Published: June 21, 2008

    By DAVID BATES
    Of the News-Register

    Yamhill County’s latest study of commuter rail options to relieve traffic congestion between here and Portland is basically finished. And to put the best face on it, the results are decidedly mixed.

    The $35,000 study by the Portland-based IBI Group was unveiled earlier this week to local officials and stakeholders. And while it still has to undergo another round of editing before it’s declared complete, the conclusions are pretty clear.

    The passenger component outlines problems that may not necessarily be deal-killers, but certainly present rail advocates with plenty of challenges. Findings include:

    n Several factors would inhibit ridership, including door-to-door travel time, poor conditions for pedestrians at suburban stations and a lack of disincentives to use a car – parking fees, for example.

    n With an average weekday ridership of around 3,000, the project would not meet federal criteria for transit funding.

    n Although the project would rely largely on upgrading existing lines rather than building new ones, it would still have a high capital cost without a correspondingly high ridership potential.

    Passenger rail to the metro area, the study concludes, “does not appear to be feasible or cost-effective.” Freight use would also face problems, including the prohibitive cost of upgrading the Rex Line near Newberg.

    That may sound like a lot of bad news, but asked point blank by State Sen. Gary George whether the conditions in Yamhill County might eventually improve sufficiently to make commuter rail work, the study’s author, Randy Knapick, said, “Yes.”

    “We clearly have a lot of work to do,” said Randy Simek of Newberg, who has formed a nonprofit group with George and many others to advocate for rail transportation.

    In 1998, a similar study determined that potential ridership would only work for routes terminating in Newberg, which lies closer to the Portland metropolitan core.

    That means many residents would have to take a car or bus to Newberg to catch a northbound train. In fact, the latest IBI report indicates market conditions might support increased bus service.

    Simek took issue with some of the report’s findings, saying the study didn’t appear to take into account the tourist market and appeared to overestimate the amount of local track that would need upgrading to handle passenger trains. For him, he said, the bottom line was that a lot more information is needed.

    “The pent-up demand for alternate transportation is going to be huge,” Simek said. “The economic potential for Yamhill County in the addition of passenger rail could be just staggering.”

    The county still doesn’t have a hard copy of the IBI report. Knapick said he expects to submit one within two weeks.

    http://www.newsregister.com/news/story.cfm?story_no=236191

  42. This is a “one-sided” article from the Newberg Graphic concerning the Rail System Feasibility Study presented to the Steering Committee last week.There was a gross error in the article concerning projected ridership, however. The Study said there was an anticipated weekday ridership of 200 to 400. The article misstated the information as 3,000 per day.

    http://www.newberggraphic.com/NBGLocal1.shtml

Leave a Reply to Erik Halstead Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *