See TriMet’s press release about proposed service cuts:
http://trimet.org/alerts/servicecuts.htm
The cuts include service reductions on all MAX lines, numerous bus lines, and several bus line cancellations.
[Hat tip Jason B. via comments, Jeff F. via email]
70 responses to “TriMet Service Cut Proposal Detailed”
My comments from the other thread (which was getting old):
Well, they finally posted them. What I find shocking is cutting the 33. And not having the Green Line run every 15 minutes after 7 PM seems a little harsh too. Those waiting times will seem worse if there’s no Transit Tracker displays (though hopefully trains will run on-schedule). But what would affect me (though something I can live without) is the changes to the 17 (which would occur in NW Portland, not St. Johns).
I’ll go through the detailed PDF lists in another comment later.
That is a lot less painful than I thought it would be. Going to 2 cars trains all the time on the Yellow was something they needed to do a long time ago, and even if that means losing our extra train at rush hour, that is okay. And there are some cuts on the 17-St Helens that will annoy some people in St Johns, but those are the ONLY service cuts in North Portland. (If I lived in the suburbs I’d be upset, but I don’t, for a reason.)
I’m sad to see Saturday service on the 34 go away… An emotional reaction, as the #34 was the bus I rode most often as a kid.
But in practical terms, the route directly serves a number of retirement homes, including Willamette View Manor and Rose Villa. The larger facilities, of course, have their own shuttle buses, and the less-ambulatory users may rely on Lift service, but thinking back to when I was a regular rider, I don’t remember a trip that didn’t involve boardings at the retirement communities.
I figured the 37 would go. My wife used it frequently until she retired a year and a half ago. That ride was often on the lonely side.
I’ve already commented to TriMet that they should hold off realigning the 35 from Kelly & Hood to Moody. With 39 southbound trips each weekday, the extra four minutes plus would cost over $1,500 week. All this just so a very few riders wouldn’t have to take the arduous streetcar ride to 1st & Harrison.
i agree with jason… i’m concerned about the 33, 17 and Green line proposals. i can understand the other lines scaling back but these 3 need to be looked at further. how about then 20 mins on the green line after 7pm and before 7am?
[Moderator: Al’s multiple emphatic comments over a short period have been consolidated into one to improve the readability of the thread. Al, take it easy…]
I got a better idea, just cancel EVERYTHING on Sunday. PORTLANDER’S GET BACK IN YOUR CARS!
Don’t forget to post the fare less square proposals bob. THEY KEEP FARE LESS SQUARE! What a world, what a world, I’m melting….. ahhh,,,,,,,,,
You people are in PORTLAND so of course you don’t give on hoot what happens anywhere else. These proposed cuts ARE GOING TO DEVASTATE LOTS OF PEOPLE!
OPEN A CAR DEALERSHIP! This is gonna be a boom for the auto industry!
JIM KARLOCK AND TERRY PARKER CAN NOW DECLARE VICTORY! They have won the battle! MASS TRANSIT IS A FAILURE!
{if you live in downtown portland you’ll be ok} SURPRISE!
PEOPLE ARE GONNA GET CLOBBERED BY THIS! This is worse than anything I imagined!
Yes, cutting the Green to 20 minutes would be much better than 30. At the very least, they should take some half the red lines and instead of running them into downtown, run them south down I-205 It adds a transfer to some people’s trips, but going to 30 minute service on a MAX line at 7pm on weekdays seems pretty bad. My non-frequent service bus line is that good…
One place they haven’t looked at, that they probably should: Cut the red line service from Beaverton TC to downtown during off peak hours. I mean, is there really enough demand on that section of track to be running 8 trains an hour on Sunday? (There certainly is at rush hour, and even midday on weekdays, but…)
cutting the Green to 20 minutes would be much better than 30.
CUT THE [EXPLETIVE DELETED] THING COMPLETELY!
People are about to have their lives thrown into complete turmoil and this guy is talking about cutting the green line by 10 minutes..
[Moderator: Personally-directed remark removed. Al, seriously, take it easy, and give other people a chance to get involved. You’ve made 9 or 10 comments in a row.]
Most of the cuts seem to be the most logical ones available. Many of the cuts seem like they could be balanced with slight route changed to adjacent routes.
The one route change that made absolutely no sense to me was the complete removal of the 33 Fremont. From 33rd Ave west, there are numerous alternatives if you need to get downtown, but then from there all of the way to 72nd, there are none. Strikes me a bit odd.
Regarding the 33, an idea which would help a little is to route it up Vancouver/Williams instead of Interstate. I’ve seen some complaints online about the longer route (as well as the low midday service, which of course can’t be helped) And I mentioned this on a bus this evening, and a woman on it also wondered about it.
Also, I think Portland Building, Room C (vacant storefront) on this page might me wrong. If its the Room C that they normally use for meetings, that’s just a regular conference room. (I think the “vacant storefront” is actually regarding the Clackamas location).
And for the record, these are the specific changes:
Cancellation of Lines:
18-Hillside
63-Washington Park
33-Fremont
74-Lloyd District
37-Lake Grove
86-Alderwood
41-Tacoma
153-South End Rd Loop
55-Hamilton
156-Mather Rd
60-Leahy Rd
157-Happy Valley
Cancellation of weekend service on Lines:
1-Vermont
10-Harold
17-NW 21st Ave (only Sunday)
34-River Rd
39-Lewis & Clark
43-Taylors Ferry Rd
47-Baseline/Evergreen
48-Cornell (only Sunday)
51-Vista
58-Canyon Rd (only Sunday)
59-Walker/Park Way
67-Jenkins/158th Ave (only Sunday)
89-Tanasbourne
21 bus lines will start later or end earlier and 12 will come less often.
Jason, I think that review hits the nail on the head about why they are cutting the #33:
“The #33 is quiet and less frequented by people of incomes below $50k than the average bus line”
One of several possible things are going on here:
1) The riders are politically active and will lobby someone (the feds are the only people with money “left”) to give TriMet money to continue the route.
2) They are cutting that route because if they don’t cut it, Fairview (and others) will complain that the cuts aren’t spread around the region enough. Note: TriMet can add it back at the last minute after all the #33 riders complain to TriMet, (and they will, see part 1,) and cut a different route(s) instead.
3) Of all people, those people will be hurt the least from an economic standpoint by having to drive to work.
I’m hoping for 1. But I’d guess more 2 and less 3, (I’ll admit it, I’m jaded.)
I find it peculiar that TriMet isn’t eliminating the 84 Kelso/Boring line (TriMet’s second worst performing route, after the South End Loop line). (I know why it isn’t being cut, because TriMet would have to eliminate this area from its service boundary map – and thus lose the property tax revenue.) Or why TriMet isn’t considering running the 36 and 37 together as a loop, since the 37 is the only bus route that serves the Lake Grove commercial district.
As for MAX…I see that TriMet isn’t proposing going to 20 minute headways during the midday, or considering reducing service west of Willow Creek or east of Gateway where ridership drops off significantly where 15 minute service is not warranted, even at rush hour. Increasing headways to 20 minutes is a 25% reduction in operating costs, with little impact to riders – as opposed to eliminating an entire bus line like the 33 which makes absolutely no sense to me.
I also don’t see TriMet proposing cutting the subsidy to the City of Portland Streetcar. That should be #1 before a single TriMet service is cut – if the City of Portland wants it, the City can find a way to pay for it.
I also don’t see TriMet proposing cutting the subsidy to the City of Portland Streetcar.
Erik, I asked this specific question at the last CAC meeting.
From what we were told (and I haven’t researched this deeply to see if it is entirely correct), it appears that TriMet has a contractual commitment to the existing funding contribution. However, future contributions to the eastside loop project are not part of this commitment.
Nonetheless, TriMet doesn’t pay the full operating costs of the streetcar (the city kicks in too. From what I am told, TriMet’s contribution is roughly equivalent to running bus service in that corridor — TriMet would wind up paying that amount streetcar or no streetcar. And, the streetcar can hardly be considered a low-performing line. Ridership is quite high.
A percentage of the high ridership can be attributed to Fareless Square — well over 50% of the streetcar’s ridership is in Fareless Square, but this may change depending on what happens to the square in the near future.
Metro definitely was planning for the 36 & 37 to be combined into a loop. So maybe there are some possibilities there.
At least some parts of the 37 run are covered by the 78, 38, and 36. It’s not the same thing by any stretch, but it’s something.
I hadn’t been too keen on dropping Fareless Square, but now that Al brought it up -again- and Erik suggested TriMet dropping streetcar subsidies it seems like maybe there really should be some action in this area. If FS were to become history, streetcar ridership should drop precipitously, far more than other modes. Then maybe there might be some sanity in streetcar expansion discussions. It still might not be a good idea to hold one’s breath waiting for realistic projections from Metro and TriMet.
And, the streetcar can hardly be considered a low-performing line. Ridership is quite high.
Its [expletive deleted] Free for [expletive deleted] !!!
If FS were to become history, streetcar ridership should drop precipitously, far more than other modes. Then maybe there might be some sanity in streetcar expansion discussions. It still might not be a good idea to hold one’s breath waiting for realistic projections from Metro and TriMet.
AMEN BROTHER, AMEN
I read the national/international bus news and no other transit district that I am aware of has cut service like this!
Al, did you check the news about Eugene and Salem I posted earlier this week?
I just finished watching NOW on PBS which did a report on the current transit funding/cutback situation from a perspective on what’s happening in North Carolina. It was interesting and worthwhile, but not a huge eyeopener to people familiar with the issues involved. It’s scheduled to be repeated at 4:00 AM.
P.S. They have a program related interactive national map showing cuts/fare increases/etc. across the nation at http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/507/map.html
First of all, other transit agencies are hurting, many worse.
Also here’s info on the open houses later this month. And here’s the official news release, with specific details about which trips would be cut.
Overall I wish that we didn’t have to go through this. That instead low-density development and private vehicle use wasn’t so subsidized, resulting in more people being attracted to transit and less money spent on bus trips with many empty seats.
Ideally, TriMet could also consider replacing the to-be-canceled lines with lower-compensated operators driving mini-buses or vans. Operating a lowly-used suburban route using a small bus is a lot different than a heavily-used urban route using a 40-foot bus. However, I believe the union might fight this.
As for the 33, the argument may be that many people can walk to the north/south buses in the area. However, that can mean longer trip times.
As for the other cuts, some are minor, in that only a few trips will be canceled and riders will have to take an earlier/later bus. But others will end earlier or not run at all, stranding some riders. That, I believe, is what Al is upset about–he’s seen the people who depend on those lowly-used trips.
Specific interesting things:
–Lines 10, 17, 37, 41 and much of the 32 and 34 are not a terribly far walk from other lines, but those can result in longer trip times and that doesn’t help those e.g. at Willamette View Manor and Rose Villa who can’t walk far.
–But Lines 18, 60, the 59/67/89 combo, 156 and 157 are
–The 18 has been cut (as the 66) and brought back before
–Line 27 would start at 9:30 AM, and be unusable for AM commuters.
–If there’s no major classes at Lewis & Clark on the weekends, cutting its weekend service seems reasonable. Maybe someday L&C will cut its own buses and encourage people to ride it.
–Line 58’s 1:32 AM trip would be cut, but the 2 AM Line 57 trip that’s fed by it would not
Two things I would like to see considered are combining the 10 and the 70 and canceling the 65/combining it with the 64.
TriMet isn’t proposing going to 20 minute headways during the midday
My guess is that they want to keep Frequent Service intact. No bus lines are slated to loose Frequent Service earlier. Likewise, keeping the Red Line intact at all times keeps things simple for visitors coming from the airport.
[Moderator: Repetitive inflammatory comments consolidated and removed. This is not the place for one person to dominate the thread and rant and rave. Al has earned a temporary vacation from PortlandTransport.]
TriMet could also consider replacing the to-be-canceled lines with lower-compensated operators driving mini-buses or vans.
This isn’t about operators Jason.
This is about priorities and management.
MAX service is not going to be cut in half during times its well-used.
[Moderator’s note: This is a reply to a comment which was part of an inflammatory series which is now removed.]
As Jason notes, transit agencies all over the country are facing similar (or much worse) budget problems and raising fares and/or cutting service in response. Here is a map of those agencies coded by their response.
St. Louis might be the worst case of all.
WMATA has an operating budget shortfall of $137M, and are proposing $73M in service cuts. New York’s MTA has a budget shortfall of $1.2 Billion. With a B.
Cutting the MAX service to the airport during off-peak hours is going to hurt. Off-peak hours are when most people fly.
I am hurt significantly by this proposal. The service changes to the 9, 10, 19, and 17 are going to screw up our family’s ability to operate with only one car. SE looks like it is taking a fairly big hit.
I hate to say this, but this could mean we have to pick up a second car – if the service cuts are this big during off-peak times and weekends, we won’t be able to get around when we need to.
Which is something that I feel hasn’t been considered all that much – that when you cut off-peak service you hurt mainly the people who use transit instead of a car. On-peak service predominantly serves people who want to avoid rush hour traffic or people who are avoiding the $200 monthly parking charges downtown. Off-peak service serves primarily people who are not using cars to get around.
Another thing that bothers me about this whole deal, is that they will cut service now. But they will be very unlikely to add that service back in if revenues increase.
And when they DO add service back in, they will market it like they are being so generous, and that they are adding amazing new service – of course never mentioning that they are simply restoring service they used to have.
What I would like to see is funding levels, and the plan for reinstating the services if funding hits certain levels.
For example there could be a plan with tiers – noting that if revenues hit level 1 we restore service in these places. If revenues hit level 2 we restore in these places. So on and so forth, therefore making a commitment to restore service if money comes back.
I fear that this may end up being a simple ploy to cut service under the excuse that they “have to” and then re-allocate those dollars and time to other places in the future. All set up so they don’t look like bad guys – but in reality they are trying to shift focus to something else. Again, I have no evidence or indication of this – it just is a gut feeling.
L&C is talking about cutting back their shuttle which has much better (and faster) connection to downtown. Both organizations seem to assume the other will pick up the slack.
Granted, I don’t know exact figures of ridership but I always see people on the 55. The park and ride in my neighborhood (one of the only in outer SW) is full every day. If they can’t find riders I would argue that service should be extended to the BTC, rather than the awkward turn around at Zupans. Or maybe the 61 could be rerouted to run down Hamilton and then after OHSU into the bus mall. I will definitely be advocating for this line
Also, I think Portland Building, Room C (vacant storefront) on this page might me wrong. If its the Room C that they normally use for meetings, that’s just a regular conference room.
Jason’s right. Room C is on the second floor of the Portland Building. Conference room.
A few scattered comments:
For me the Redline span of service to the airport is more important than the frequency: If I can catch the Redline for an early morning flight, I don’t mind leaving 15 minutes earlier, especially with Transit Tracker letting me know when to head out the door.
Re: the severity of the cuts: I believe that TriMet is starting out with a comparatively high level of service in terms of frequency and room on the bus. The payroll tax is probably the best primary revenue source a transit agency could have, so we have extraordinary service for a small western city.
John Reinhold, I wonder if you are close enough in to have Zipcar nearby in lieu of buying a second car? If not, maybe you can entice them to place some cars in your neighborhood as a response to the transit cuts. Spreading out their fleet a little more might be something they need to do anyway during the downturn (there are tons of Zipcars in NW Portland!)
At any rate, offpeak service in SE might be a good topic to testify on. Sounds like you may live in a node of the network where the cuts have a disproportionate affect on your family’s mobility. The system is complex, so it makes sense that some unintended consequences might need to be tweaked as a result of the public comment phase. Mentioning the necessity of buying a 2nd car would certainly make an impact! Get the neighbors to testify too!
Restoring service: I suspect TM will use the data from the new service profile as well as historical data. Perhaps new patterns will emerge and service will be restored in slightly different ways. I also suspect that there are internal priority lists for restoring service, just as there were for cutting it.
TriMet has huge amounts of data these days for measuring all aspects of route performance. It’s been my observation that service planning is done very sensibly with careful & sympathetic attention to riders’ needs. At any rate, the public is also very sensitive and reactive to service levels, which hold TriMet accountable.
Jeff’s link to the national map: awesome!
Pseudonymously yours …
While I generally agree with “Grace” regarding span being more important than frequency regarding off-hour PDX service, a missing red line run could make the difference between being able to make a critical connection or not.
Example: A plane pulls up to the gate at 9:00 PM. Allowing just 15 minutes to get off the aircraft and to hurry to MAX with no checked baggage, a rider could easily make the 9:25 connecting with the 9:51 22 bus at Gateway. Since that is the last 22 run of the day, the 9:40 MAX is useless.
I’m getting a little fed up with TriMet…
In the course of 30 days, we have:
* opening of WES boondoggle
* trumpeting of planned opening of Mall boondoggle
* ridiculous planned changes to Fareless Square
* and now, a significant whack to local bus service
Yet, we have not had any:
* discussion of upper-managerial pay or headcount reductions to reflect budget constraints
* adjustment of the route structure to balance overwhelming downtown-centric structure
* consideration of higher fares for premium services (express routes, etc)
* demonstration that these service reductions are truly the last resort after significant cost cutting elsewhere
* vision as to how they’re going to handle the next budget gap, which (using the state economist’s comments as a guide) is almost certainly going to emerge
I’ve come to learn that I can’t trust TriMet because they’ve shown again and again that they are accountable to no one. I’ve yet to hear one TriMet commissioner stand up and fight for their supposed constituents (who aren’t really, considering that the commissioners are appointed by the Governor, not elected by the people). There’s not even a way to contact them from the TriMet website (at least one that I could find).
If TriMet wants people to embrace these strategies for balancing the budget, then they have to start showing that they’re really concerned about preserving access for those who depend on public transit. Right now, I suspect that their allegiances are elsewhere, and TriMet hasn’t shown me any reason to believe otherwise.
How about a fare increase? Someone (Bob?) mentioned it would take 40 cents to make up the lost payroll revenue, but how much service could we save for 10 cents?
But, no I think the real solution is a transit bailout. Lobby congress to save local family wage jobs in the communities by giving transit operations money, because that is what we are cutting: Operator hours. (Don’t mention the fact that you’ll have to buy another car in your line is cut, (well, except to Earl,) a lot of them like that idea even though most of the parts of most cars are actually made in China.)
Someone (Bob?)
Not me…
But just using quick math, TriMet has about 99,000,000 annual boardings. (A single one-way trip can include multiple boardings.) If the shortfall is $13.5 million, that works out to 13 or 14 cents per boarding.
It’s not clear to me if the $13.5 million in cuts includes Lift service, or if that’s for the primary bus/rail transit system, in which case the revenue-per-boarding figure would be lower than 13 cents.
http://pdxtrains.blogspot.com/2009/02/fw-img00006-20090213-1223jpg.html
A little bright spot in the doom and gloom… the stimulus can be used to buy new buses.
These service cuts change my opinion on Fareless Square. You can’t separate the two issues. I would kill Fareless Square, or perhaps charge a reduced fare. How do you justify free premium service downtown while cutting so much service elsewhere?
Also for anyone who thinks service will be restored when times get better. I live in SW Portland. The 1 Vermont used to run on Sundays. We used to also have the 46 Maplewood. There were cut during the ’92 recession and were not restored. If Saturday service is eliminated n the 1, it will not return.
John Reinhold wrote: Cutting the MAX service to the airport during off-peak hours is going to hurt. Off-peak hours are when most people fly.
Isn’t this an oxymoron? If most people flew during “off-peak” hours, wouldn’t it become the new “peak”?
On the other hand it raises quite the paradox – lowering MAX frequencies really doesn’t lower expenses. Much of the expense with MAX is sunk whether you run one train an hour, or ten trains an hour – the cost to maintain the system remains the same. Your electric bill is a little lower if you run fewer cars per hour (not fewer trains, but cars), and your labor cost is less. However, one thing that should be considered with regards to the Red Line is to run it in shuttle-mode during off hours – basically have one car shuttle back and forth between Gateway and PDX. This would continue a frequent service to/from the airport, but would effectively reduce service to points west (when the green line begins operations, the frequency between Gateway and Rose Quarter would remain the same, but service on the “old” alignment would effectively be reduced because only Blue Line trains would use it. This could be resolved by running 10 minute Blue Line service all day between Gateway and Beaverton, but 20 minute service west/east of those points.)
Aaron wrote: I’m getting a little fed up with TriMet…
Me too. Wait, I’ve been fed up with TriMet.
I’d vote for a 10 cent fare increase, removal of fareless square, and then make of the difference with service cuts, with a preference towards cutting frequencies rather than discontinuing routes. I’d be most Trimet riders would rather pay an extra dime a trip than see the type of service loss Trimet is considering.
Bob R. wrote: it appears that TriMet has a contractual commitment to the existing funding contribution.
I propose two solutions to settle that:
1. City of Portland agrees to let TriMet out of the contract. City then self-funds Streetcar as a separate entity.
2. TriMet eliminates/cuts back service that is duplicative to the Streetcar:
A. Line 77 terminates at Rose Quarter TC. No service into the Pearl District or to Montgomery Park (served by other bus lines).
B. Lines 15 and 17 would be affected – either 15 service frequency could be reduced with 17 trips running the same route as 15 to 23rd & Thurman, or 17 rerouted onto Naito (shared with the 16) to Nicolai (this routing would be affected by railroad traffic).
C. Line 18 would be discontinued (which is already proposed by TriMet.)
D. Line 43 would be rerouted as it enters downtown Portland to eliminate a short overlap with the Streetcar. (This is almost a symbolic option; there are few 43 riders on this stretch anyways. I’m not sure why the 43 is routed on Harrison instead of Lincoln or Arthur and Caruthers/Sheridan.)
E. Line 35/36 run non-stop from Bancroft to Naito & Arthur, eliminating three northbound stops on Macadam in South Waterfront. Southbound buses eliminate stops at Kelly & Curry and Hood & Gaines (area still served by lines 43 one or two blocks west, or service on Barbur (lines 1, 12, 44) or Naito Parkway (lines 38, 45, 54, 55, 56) slightly further away.
re: Erik’s suggestion for the 35 & 36
The northbound stops are used by riders from Lake Oswego, West Linn, & Oregon City to get to SOWA. The advantage gained TriMet in dropping those stops really wouldn’t overcome the inconvenience to those riders considering that the buses still have to run on that alignment anyway.
The 35’s southbound alignment changes to Moody in just three months. So we’re left with only three runs of the 36 – not enough for any significant saving. That upcoming alignment change is not free. If TriMet cancels the change, it could save enough for one round trip a day on any of a number of lines.
Aaron: I’ve yet to hear one TriMet commissioner stand up and fight for their supposed constituents (who aren’t really, considering that the commissioners are appointed by the Governor, not elected by the people). There’s not even a way to contact them from the TriMet website (at least one that I could find).
Based on a recent conversation I had with Lynn Lehrbach (represents East MultCo on the board), I think he might be sympathetic to a lot of your points regarding the budget in particular and accountability generally–for instance, he responded favorably when I asked him about Fairview’s call for an elected board of directors. A Google search turns up this contact information at the Teamsters: 503-251-2337 or 1872 NE 162nd AVE.
More generally, though, does anybody post to the Internet detailed minutes from TriMet meetings or keep an easily located, searchable record of board votes? Lehrbach seemed receptive to rider/taxpayer concerns, but how do we know what he or any of the board members say at their meetings or how they vote? Attending the meetings is not an option for most of us.
does anybody post to the Internet detailed minutes from TriMet meetings or keep an easily located, searchable record of board votes
You have to bug them and ask them for those things. Specifically, try Kelly Runnion, Executive and Board Administrator, 503-962-4831 or runnionk@trimet.org (she told me that “people haven’t asked for doing that”)
Not thrilled to see the #63 go … but it probably didn’t carry many people anyway.
I suppose I can get to the Japanese Garden by taking the #20 and walking up from Burnside.
It’ll be a bit harder on older visitors, though. I occasionally run into out-of-town visitors at the Zoo MAX station trying to find the Rose Garden or Japanese Garden (being in Washington Park, after all). I guess I’ll have to tell them, sorry, ridiculously long walk, no direct route, and Tri-Met killed the bus that would get you there.
No, because their definition of “peak” is not tied to the airport. Tri-met’s definition of “peak” is tied to commuter traffic. It is incredibly hard to use the Red line MAX to fly as it is – because they do not run early enough in the morning or late enough at night, and just like R.A. Fontes mentioned – the fact that it is very very hard to make some connections at the extreme off-peak hours it complicates the use of transit for early or late flights.
We have access to lots of Zipcars. And we have thought about it a lot. Zipcar’s pricing model is terrible for our pattern of use. It would be cheaper for us to buy a second car than to rely on Zipcar. The problem is that cars have to be returned to their originating parking place. So when I have a family member who works 7am to 11:30pm on a Saturday and now will not have bus service to get him to where he needs to go it gets expensive. In fact, their best daily rate is $62 a day, just those 4 Saturdays a month would pay for a new car. Zipcar is only really good for running errands or something along those lines. They are not good for short one-way trips. How about during off-peak hours if we want to go see a movie? A Zipcar would be about $30 to do that (for the roughly 3 hours). Currently we can use the busses, but it will get much much harder when the cuts are made.
I have argued long and hard that our transit system does not serve the blue collar working families. Busses and trains do not run early enough for people to make 6am shifts at plants. Swing or Graveyard shifts are ignored. Transit does not run to industrial areas. So we force all of those people to own cars.
The “tourism” aspect to Washington Park has already been mentioned. Not to mention the fact that Trimet likes to trumpet to the world how great they are used on weekends and nights. But now they want to cut that service.
Don’t get me wrong, I love our transit system and it is very good – but it has loads of problems too.
I would also prefer to see a fare increase, instead of cutting service. But we would need some sort of mechanism to ensure it’s temporary nature, to somehow tie it to payroll taxes and if they return the fare increases go away.
regarding the 63 and transportation in washington park, it would be great if the zoo train was made seperate from the zoo (at least the long route of the zoo train) so that it provided transportation between the two parts of washington park and didnt require zoo admission. then you could take max to washington park and hop on the zoo train to the japanese and rose gardens. you could also eliminate the 63 service in the park as a result.
I recommend contracting out the service as was done, in London, Stockholm and Helsinki. Better yet let anyone who wishes open a transit business. Maybe then we’ll get rid of the deadwood in the front office.
[Moderator: Rehash of previous comments removed.]
Listen to Wyden talk about this stimulus.
It’s Ridiculous!
http://rantingsofatrimetbusdriver.blogspot.com/2009/02/wonderful-stimulous.html
Regarding the 63, if you know the trails in Washington Park and are able to walk a ways, its not hard to get around on foot. I think I’ve walked from the zoo to the rose garden a least a few times.
Also, I’m curious if the Washington Park Shuttle would stay. If so, there would at least be seasonal service through much of the park. However, I’ve read that Line 10-NE 33rd Ave will be the 73 when it splits from the 10-Harold, which is the number that’s been used for the shuttle.
Lastly, I do think that the rose & Japanese gardens aren’t that far from Burnside.
[Moderator: Video critique of PortlandTransport moderator Bob R, and questions bout MAX Green Line and WES Operating Expenses… Al – Please post descriptions of your video links. Thanks.]
http://blip.tv/file/1782273
Video critique of PortlandTransport moderator Bob R, and questions bout MAX Green Line and WES Operating Expenses
http://blip.tv/file/1782273
if you know the trails in Washington Park and are able to walk a ways, its not hard to get around on foot.
I do. Out of town visitors don’t, and the trail system from MAX isn’t intuitive. Or paved.
And yes, I can walk from Burnside to the Japanese Garden. Someone who is elderly or disabled might find that a bit more of a challenge. Also, it isn’t obvious to the visitor trying to visit the Japanese Garden. (And yes, I’ve run into quite a few people at the Washington Park MAX station or on 63 who were trying to find their way to the gardens.)
Long term, I think the City should build a “straightest possible path” across Washington Park from the MAX station to the Rose Garden — wide, paved, well-lit and clearly signed. I also think the future Streetcar on Burnside should run into Washington Park and terminate just north of the Rose Garden. But neither of these projects are on the horizon right now. Right now, #63 is an important — if lightly used — link to a couple of significant local cultural destinations.
However, I’ve read that Line 10-NE 33rd Ave will be the 73 when it splits from the 10-Harold…
True, and on their page of May 24th Service Changes.
The thing I don’t get about all of this… something like 33% of all TriMet riders use it to get to work, and something like 15% are going shopping. This directly benefits businesses. At the same time, these businesses are slashing jobs left and right, instituting wage freezes, and even pay cuts, causing more and more to look to use public transit for necessary things like grocery shopping, and more to say ‘I have to save money going to work, so I have to use the bus now.’
But, when their job is lost, and/or their pay is frozen/cut, that directly affects the TriMet payroll tax! When TriMet makes the service cuts, it will be a negative thing for businesses, as less shoppers have access to their business, and less employees have the means to get to work in the first place.
I know that some on this site will cry “socialism!,” but I think the way around all of this is (get ready for this)… get some emergency bill going in the Oregon Legislature that says TriMet is entitled to the same amount of payroll tax as they received last year (meaning the percentage is temporarily increased). At the same time, institute a “TriMet Unemployment Payroll Tax,” with the idea that when someone is fired and/or laid off they still need transit service, too.
And before anyone says that the “poor businesses are hurting, too,” I’d simply cite articles such as the one in the same Oregonian section as their Saturday article on the TriMet service cuts… buried on page B8: “NW Natural earned $33.18 million… in the last quarter of 2008, compared with $29.17 million… in the same period the year before.”
Now we have an example of where all the money is going!
Now we have an example of where all the money is going!
Bravo Jason!
Go watch Wyden talking about the “woods in regards to this so called “bailout” nonsense.
And they are gonna give taxpayers a whopping $400/800 tax break, which comes out to $67 a month if your married!
GEE THANKS!
Jason McHuff Says:
Also, I’m curious if the Washington Park Shuttle would stay. If so, there would at least be seasonal service through much of the park. However, I’ve read that Line 10-NE 33rd Ave will be the 73 when it splits from the 10-Harold, which is the number that’s been used for the shuttle.
For some reason, route numbers are not as sacred as Stop ID numbers. The NE 33rd Ave bus will be numbered 73 because it’s essentially morphed into a cross-town bus.
The Washington Park Shuttle will be one of the generic 98 shuttles and it’s not going away anytime soon.
Jeff F says:
“For some reason, route numbers are not as sacred as Stop ID numbers. The NE 33rd Ave bus will be numbered 73 because it’s essentially morphed into a cross-town bus.”
FWIW: Stop ID numbers are sacred because they are unique primary key ID values in the database tied to geographic location information. They were originally never intended for use by the public. However, they have proven useful for Transit Tracker over the phone.
Route numbers by nature have to be changeable, since routes themselves change over time. It’s true that we tend to be nostalgic over our route numbers (kind of geeky, though, when you think about it!)
The Washington Park Shuttle will be one of the generic 98 shuttles and it’s not going away anytime soon.
What?
What are you saying?
Did I hear that right?
The Washington Park shuttle is actually not being canceled?
You’re (trimet) is just changing the route number?
Where does it say that ‘officially’?
And
BOB,
just so you know, I did a little more research on the green line and now can see that it obviously will carry plenty of people.
SO, they can cut some of the bus service along 82nd ave freeing up resources for other bus routes.
I still would like to know why does TRIMET need a marketing department?
al m Says:
Where does it say that ‘officially’?
Where does it say that Line 72 is not being cancelled, officially?
I think it is only fair to note at this point of the conversation that while the Portland metro area is 25th or so in size in the nation, its transit ridership ranks around 12-13th.
TriMet has its faults, but runs a pretty damn good system in a not very dense mid-size western city. And it is “choice riders,” that is riders who make a decision to use transit and leave their cars at home, that give the system its excellent numbers.
Service cut decisions should start with ridership and rider options. Routes with poor ridership where there are no alternative service should be spared. Ridership and cost per ride numbers tell us that MAX service is very cost effective and attracts “choice riders.” Ditto, Streetcar.
If TriMet were a business, it would be trying to figure out how to put a rider in every bus and train seat that is out there in service. And it would seek to eliminate service that is redundant and/or inefficient.
R.A. Fontes wrote: The northbound stops are used by riders from Lake Oswego, West Linn, & Oregon City to get to SOWA.
I wouldn’t propose eliminating the stop at Macadam & Moody. That would provide a transfer point between buses and Streetcar without a duplication of service (although it would require, as current, a three block walk to transfer northbound, and longer southbound).
John Reinhold wrote: No, because their definition of “peak” is not tied to the airport.
But isn’t the peak travel time at PDX about 6:00-8:00 AM, and 4:00-6:00 PM – about the same as rush hour for downtown Portland?
Yes, PDX operates near 24 hours a day (there are no scheduled flights between just after midnight and about 6:00 AM) but there are “rush” hours and outside-of-rush hours.
Just as, people live and work downtown 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. But TriMet bus service doesn’t run “frequent service” 24 hours a day (and neither does MAX nor the Streetcar). Just as I have compared with WES – WES might be “weekday rush hour” service, but for one of the major regional centers that WES supposedly serves – Washington Square – WES is utterly useless for the vast, vast majority of Washington Square workers, because of the schedules that don’t correspond with those of the workers there.
I can also attest to that, my wife works in the Nimbus Business Center on the west side of the WES station – not only do the WES schedules not correspond with her work schedule, but the bus connection between WES and her work is proposed to be broken with no alternative service, and it’s a long walk from the station to her building.
Your the official Jeff, not me.
al m: Your the official Jeff, not me.
You stopped driving?
You stopped driving?
No, but I have no idea what’s going on in the inner sanctum.
And you do!
Al (or is it “al”), i am no more or less “official” than you. I learned the specific cuts just about the same time you did.
The “official” sources would be Mary Fetsch and her staff, the GM’s office and the planners. I’m just here to help.
Can we PLEASE get Mary Fetsch to be a participant on this blog?
I thought you were a planner?
al m: I thought you were a planner?
NO!
Business Systems Analyst!
Oh!
I didn’t know that until now!
By the way, this new transit mall plan gets worse and worse every day!
Connections? HA! (unless you’re riding MAX)
Easy to use? NO! (unless you’re riding MAX)
Will people probably just say “forget about it, I’ll drive?” Probably!
Just look at what C-TRAN riders will have to put up with:
http://www.c-tran.com/alerts/detail/id/50