Thursday, May 11, 2006
Tri-Met Buys New Light-Rail Cars
Although full funding for a new light-rail line along Interstate 205 has not yet been approved, Portland's transit agency, Tri-Met, has purchased $89 million worth of light-rail cars for that line. The agency is also moving ahead with plans to divert 28 bus routes from Portland's bus mall in anticipation of reconstructing the mall for light rail.
This reconstruction project is controversial because studies show the total capacity of the mall to handle transit passengers will be lower with light rail and buses interweaving than with buses alone. But downtown merchants made it clear that they would not accept light rail on any other streets. Since many of the merchants on the bus mall had already been put out of business by the mall, there were few there to protest. Tri-Met insists that mixing buses, light rail, autos, and pedestrians on the mall will be perfectly safe -- or, in any case, any accidents will be the auto drivers' or pedestrians' fault.
Such as the recent accident in which a Portland streetcar ripped off the door of an automobile when the motorist carelessly opened the door when the streetcar was coming by. According to the motorist, he looked for the streetcar, then opened the door, when suddenly "a speeding streetcar roared by, crashing into the door and tearing it off." But the city insists the accident was the motorists' fault because it is illegal to open your door in unsafe conditions. Besides, says a city official, the streetcars never go faster than 15 mph (7 mph average speed), which makes you wonder why anyone rides them. (Answer: few do.)
I suppose this accident is an example of what they mean when they say streetcars "calm traffic." For Tri-Met now wants to extend streetcar operations to the east side of Portland. The plan is to "cut through the heart of Central Eastside," thereby calming the traffic on busy streets such as King and Grand. Funds for congestifying, I mean calming those streets have been unavailable due to city budget shortfalls, but the streetcar should add plenty of congestion, I mean, calming.
I wonder how the motorists who use those streets will feel about that. As a cyclist, I am certainly glad I no longer live in Portland and have to deal with crossing lots of tracks in the streets. I am sure they would claim any accident was my fault. After all, they warned me:
In other news, Tri-Met plans to subsidize some transit-oriented developments on Interstate Avenue two years after it opened a light-rail line on that street. Early returns show the light-rail line carries fewer riders than the bus line it replaced.
Previous plans for one transit-oriented development fell through when the developer withdrew. But now, says a local resident, "suddenly things are beginning to pop," which I guess means that the city and transit agency have increased subsidies enough to attract some other sucker, I mean developer. It appears that this new development will be smaller but require more subsidies than the development that had previously been planned. No doubt it will be considered very successful, meaning vacancy rates will be no greater than 50 percent.
Another development of "affordable housing" will be on a site owned by Tri-Met. No doubt the agency will generously sell it to developers for less than Tri-Met's cost of purchasing it.
This reconstruction project is controversial because studies show the total capacity of the mall to handle transit passengers will be lower with light rail and buses interweaving than with buses alone. But downtown merchants made it clear that they would not accept light rail on any other streets. Since many of the merchants on the bus mall had already been put out of business by the mall, there were few there to protest. Tri-Met insists that mixing buses, light rail, autos, and pedestrians on the mall will be perfectly safe -- or, in any case, any accidents will be the auto drivers' or pedestrians' fault.
Such as the recent accident in which a Portland streetcar ripped off the door of an automobile when the motorist carelessly opened the door when the streetcar was coming by. According to the motorist, he looked for the streetcar, then opened the door, when suddenly "a speeding streetcar roared by, crashing into the door and tearing it off." But the city insists the accident was the motorists' fault because it is illegal to open your door in unsafe conditions. Besides, says a city official, the streetcars never go faster than 15 mph (7 mph average speed), which makes you wonder why anyone rides them. (Answer: few do.)
I suppose this accident is an example of what they mean when they say streetcars "calm traffic." For Tri-Met now wants to extend streetcar operations to the east side of Portland. The plan is to "cut through the heart of Central Eastside," thereby calming the traffic on busy streets such as King and Grand. Funds for congestifying, I mean calming those streets have been unavailable due to city budget shortfalls, but the streetcar should add plenty of congestion, I mean, calming.
I wonder how the motorists who use those streets will feel about that. As a cyclist, I am certainly glad I no longer live in Portland and have to deal with crossing lots of tracks in the streets. I am sure they would claim any accident was my fault. After all, they warned me:
In other news, Tri-Met plans to subsidize some transit-oriented developments on Interstate Avenue two years after it opened a light-rail line on that street. Early returns show the light-rail line carries fewer riders than the bus line it replaced.
Previous plans for one transit-oriented development fell through when the developer withdrew. But now, says a local resident, "suddenly things are beginning to pop," which I guess means that the city and transit agency have increased subsidies enough to attract some other sucker, I mean developer. It appears that this new development will be smaller but require more subsidies than the development that had previously been planned. No doubt it will be considered very successful, meaning vacancy rates will be no greater than 50 percent.
Another development of "affordable housing" will be on a site owned by Tri-Met. No doubt the agency will generously sell it to developers for less than Tri-Met's cost of purchasing it.
Comments:
Randal:
A few months after the startup of the MAX Yellow Line, I downloaded the Yellow Line ridership counts off their website done by some MAX opponents, a group I think Bob Tiernan is associated with. They thought they only counted about 5,000 riders, but they showed their IGNORANCE by forgetting for every boarding they counted, there was an alighting--mostly in downtown Portland, where they DIDN'T count.
So in the reverse direction there were also BOARDINGS they didn't count, about half of the actual totals, it turns out.
It turns out that read correctly, accounting for ALL boardings and alightings, the Tiernan et al counts CONFIRMED the numbers from TriMet, e.g., at the time about 10,500-11,000 daily riders on the Yellow Line.
The Yellow Line is NOW carrying around 12,000 daily passengers according to TriMet (whom I have ABSOLUTELY NO REASON not to believe!), which is somewhat more than double the bus route that was replaced on Interstate Avenue.
The quality of your information here is on-par with your Great Rail Disasters "study", Randal. In other words, worse than useless: just plain wrong!
Michael D. Setty
www.publictransit.us
A few months after the startup of the MAX Yellow Line, I downloaded the Yellow Line ridership counts off their website done by some MAX opponents, a group I think Bob Tiernan is associated with. They thought they only counted about 5,000 riders, but they showed their IGNORANCE by forgetting for every boarding they counted, there was an alighting--mostly in downtown Portland, where they DIDN'T count.
So in the reverse direction there were also BOARDINGS they didn't count, about half of the actual totals, it turns out.
It turns out that read correctly, accounting for ALL boardings and alightings, the Tiernan et al counts CONFIRMED the numbers from TriMet, e.g., at the time about 10,500-11,000 daily riders on the Yellow Line.
The Yellow Line is NOW carrying around 12,000 daily passengers according to TriMet (whom I have ABSOLUTELY NO REASON not to believe!), which is somewhat more than double the bus route that was replaced on Interstate Avenue.
The quality of your information here is on-par with your Great Rail Disasters "study", Randal. In other words, worse than useless: just plain wrong!
Michael D. Setty
www.publictransit.us
Michael:
You just convinced me that light rail (at least the Yellow line) is a horrible boondoggle. You joyfully exclaim that the Yellow Line is carrying 12,000 daily riders. Big deal. That strikes me as a pathetically low number, especially for a system that cost $350 million. I've ridden BRT systems that cost a fraction of that and carry many, many more daily riders.
The Orange Line BRT just opened in Los Angeles. It carries 22,000 daily riders and, like the Yellow Line, also cost around $350 million. Even though the Orange Line was extraoridinarily expensive for a BRT, it is still a much better bargain than LRT.
BRT's appear to be popping up all over the country. New Starts LRT projects continue to struggle. Hopefully, the continued success of BRT will put an end to wasting taxpayer money on boondoggles, and we can start investing in transit that actually accomplishes something meaningful.
Post a Comment
You just convinced me that light rail (at least the Yellow line) is a horrible boondoggle. You joyfully exclaim that the Yellow Line is carrying 12,000 daily riders. Big deal. That strikes me as a pathetically low number, especially for a system that cost $350 million. I've ridden BRT systems that cost a fraction of that and carry many, many more daily riders.
The Orange Line BRT just opened in Los Angeles. It carries 22,000 daily riders and, like the Yellow Line, also cost around $350 million. Even though the Orange Line was extraoridinarily expensive for a BRT, it is still a much better bargain than LRT.
BRT's appear to be popping up all over the country. New Starts LRT projects continue to struggle. Hopefully, the continued success of BRT will put an end to wasting taxpayer money on boondoggles, and we can start investing in transit that actually accomplishes something meaningful.
