TriMet to Launch Commuter Rail Service
gl4...@yahoo.com
This week, TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of
Oregon) plans to "launch" construction of the Wilsonville to Beaverton
commuter rail project.
As reported in the Oregonian:
http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1161410116244120.xml?oregonian?lcfp&coll=7
(Note: the Oregonian makes all articles older than 2 weeks inaccessible
except by paid access, so if you have an interest in the subject and
haven't seen the newspaper article yet you should be aware that this web
site version of the article will eventually expire.)
Some interesting exceprts from the article:
"The 14.7-mile line between Wilsonville and Beaverton represents Oregon's
first foray into commuter rail. The $117 million project will be one of
the first rail lines in the nation to connect one suburb to another, and
it will use a self-propelled diesel rail car, common elsewhere in the
world but not seen so far in the United States."
(Apparently whoever wrote that wasn't around for the Budd RDC, or the SPV,
or New Jersey Transit's RiverLine, or the new line in southern California,
or the demonstration Colorado Railcar DMU that visited Beaverton about 2
years ago, or the service last year by the same Colordo Railcar
demonstrator at the front of Miami TriRail trains in place of a
locomotive.)
"The line will add transit service in the heavily traveled Interstate 5
and Oregon 217 corridors. Travel time by train between Wilsonville and
Beaverton is estimated to be 27 minutes, with stops every 30 minutes at
the five stations. TriMet estimates it will carry as many as 4,000
passengers a day by 2020. "
(I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
route that estimated ridership is so low.)
"The venture means sharing the track with Portland & Western, a short-line
freight railroad based in Salem that will retain power over dispatching
TriMet passenger trains. TriMet will pay Portland & Western about $1.5
million a year for the railroad's operating, dispatching and maintenance
costs.
Under its contract with the railroad, TriMet will pay an annual bonus of
$300,000 if the passenger trains meet their schedules 98 percent of the
time."
(Considering that the line only has several freight trains a day, and that
a considerable portion of that $117 million construction cost is being
paid to add sidings and otherwise make it easier to achieve that goal, I
don't think there will be too much of a problem here.)
--
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
now the spammers grab addresses for use as "from" address too!
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.
Jason McHuff
> This week, TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of
> Oregon) plans to "launch" construction of the Wilsonville to Beaverton
> commuter rail project.
>
> As reported in the Oregonian:
> http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1161410116244120.xml?oregonian?lcfp&coll=7
> (Note: the Oregonian makes all articles older than 2 weeks inaccessible
> except by paid access, so if you have an interest in the subject and
> haven't seen the newspaper article yet you should be aware that this web
> site version of the article will eventually expire.)
>
older articles.
> or the demonstration Colorado Railcar DMU that visited Beaverton about 2
> years ago, or the service last year by the same Colordo Railcar
> demonstrator at the front of Miami TriRail trains in place of a
> locomotive.)
>
I would not call the demo car enough for it "to be seen". But you are
correct on the Budd RDCs.
> (I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
> route that estimated ridership is so low.)
>
Well, its not planned to run that often...
> (Considering that the line only has several freight trains a day, and that
> a considerable portion of that $117 million construction cost is being
> paid to add sidings and otherwise make it easier to achieve that goal, I
> don't think there will be too much of a problem here.)
>
Note that they are also re-building the entire line, relocating a street &
adding track to it and putting in new stations.
http://www.trimet.org/commuterrail/construction.htm
Also, below is the text of the e-mail I sent to Oregonian columnist Jerry
Boone regarding his rather unenthusiastic opinion of the project
http://www.oregonlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/metro_west_news/1161561323114270.xml&coll=7
I generally enjoy reading your columns and almost look forward to them
(along with Back Fence). I believe it was you who noted how developers get
away from paying for schools that their developments need. I am personally
against this situation because I used to live in Salem, where a good portion
of a bond measure was used to build new schools, even though I lived in a
century-old house whose previous owners had probably already paid for the
neighborhood's schools.
However, I am disappointed in your most recent column on the Washington
County Commuter Rail Project. Here's why:
-When a freeway is congested, a small number of additional vehicles can make
a difference, resulting in slower speeds, bigger bottlenecks and additional
accidents. It is just like the difference between a full glass and an
overflowing one.
-As planned, all of the 3,000 to 4,000 trips will be taken during peak
periods, when they will help the most. It does not matter how many vehicles
are on I-5 or 217 at 8 PM if the roads are un-congested and commuter rail is
not running.
-Much of the capital expenses of trains, tracks, stations and
maintenance/storage facilities could be re-used for service at other times
with little additional cost, assuming the freight trains could still be
accommodated. Moreover, money spent on widening 217 would only really be
useful during the peak periods.
-Part of the money will go towards a place to park the trains. Motorists,
on the other hand, rarely have to pay for their parking. They also receive
other subsidies, including road expansions paid for by Washington County's
property tax-funded Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program and,
over the West Hills, a major sewer project to clean road runoff but funded
by sewer ratepayers.
http://www.co.washington.or.us/deptmts/lut/cap_proj/mstiphis.htm
http://www.commissionersam.com/node/238
-I wish that money for projects like this did not have to go through the
Federal government and back to us, but there are politicians in DC who like
to feed their egos and keep their jobs.
-Lines 76 & 78 that currently serve the corridor are slow, crowded and
compete poorly with the freeways. In fact, some Tigard/Tualatin-Beaverton
transit riders go through Portland rather than take these buses. A bus line
using 217/I-5 would get stuck in the same congestion as motorists do and
have to get off the freeway and back on to serve stops. Commuter rail, on
the other hand, is a viable alternative.
http://www.trimet.org/schedules/w/t1076_1.htm
http://portlandtransport.com/archives/2006/10/washington_coun_2.html#c54058
-There will be "something to recognize" when the money is spent: That
people (who could take the train) do not have to idle on Oregon 217. They
will have an option, a way to avoid I-5 and 217--one that does not cause
increased congestion, pollution, possibility of crashes and wear & tear on
roads & commuters. Having people live closer to their jobs would be better,
but given multi-income families, desirable neighborhoods and job switches
this is not always possible.
If you have further issues, I invite you to go to the ground-breaking
tomorrow and ask about them.
--Jason McHuff, transit advocate and enthusiast, Portland
jmei...@aracnet.com
Hans-Joachim Zierke <Usenet...@Zierke.com> wrote:
>
>At 8 million per mile, it should be possible to doubletrack the whole
>line.
One would like to think that they could just slap down track from point
A to point B, drop some trains on it and be done. But that money doesn't
go far when you consider that it's a freight line, so they'll need to
construct passenger stations, parking facilities and associated
roadways, bus facilities, lighting, plus pay for associated design
costs, environmental impact studies, etc., etc.
I wonder if the ridership figures were based on car capacities and route
schedules rather than some sort of guestimate.
--
John Meissen jmei...@aracnet.com
Michael Finfer
> "The line will add transit service in the heavily traveled Interstate 5
> and Oregon 217 corridors. Travel time by train between Wilsonville and
> Beaverton is estimated to be 27 minutes, with stops every 30 minutes at
> the five stations. TriMet estimates it will carry as many as 4,000
> passengers a day by 2020. "
>
> (I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
> route that estimated ridership is so low.)
That may have something to do with the need to change trains to get into
Portland. A one seat ride would do much better.
Did anyone consider making that line a branch of the MAX light rail?
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
Lobby Dosser
> Moreover, money spent on widening 217 would only really be
> useful during the peak periods.
>
Peak period is now close to 24x7. Same on 26.
bay_bri...@yahoo.com
> >
> > (I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
> > route that estimated ridership is so low.)
>
> That may have something to do with the need to change trains to get into
> Portland.
The 37mph average speed doesn't help either.
>
> Did anyone consider making that line a branch of the MAX light rail?
>
Would require enough separation between the freight and LRT tracks
to satisfy screwball US regulations.
Stephen Sprunk
news:gl4316-2310...@69-30-11-15.pxd.easystreet.com...
> "The 14.7-mile line between Wilsonville and Beaverton represents
> Oregon's
> first foray into commuter rail. The $117 million project will be one
> of
> the first rail lines in the nation to connect one suburb to another,
> and
> it will use a self-propelled diesel rail car, common elsewhere in the
> world but not seen so far in the United States."
>
... which are still used for commuter rail service in Dallas today.
Then again, what real reporter lets the truth get in the way of the
story they want to tell?
> (I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
> route that estimated ridership is so low.)
You can only pack so many people into small trains that run every 30
mins, and peak traffic (where transit would be useful on that route)
only lasts a few hours per day. 4,000/day may be optimistic; it's hard
to say without knowing the location of the stations, connecting
services, population and employment density around the stations,
relative commute times vs. freeways, etc.
"Michael Finfer" <fin...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:gux%g.9425$RN1....@newsfe08.lga...
> Did anyone consider making that line a branch of the MAX light rail?
I'm sure they did, but the P&W is still running freights, and they
probably wouldn't agree to the time segregation needed to allow LRT
cars. Plus, using MAX LRT trains would require catenary, power
substations, etc. and the cost of implementation would end up much
higher than quoted. It sounds like a reasonable solution for the
ridership level being discussed, probably the best possible under FRA
rules.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Nobody
As a recent visitor to Greater PDX (late Sept) from Vancouver, British
Columbia, I was surprised by the LACK of traffic on area freeways.
Arriving from Seattle ~4 p.m. on a Thursday afternoon, I was the only
(yes, only) car crossing the High Level Bridge west-bound after
turning off I-5 south-bound onto I-405 to go into Downtown.
In several runs across/through Downtown PDX on I-405 and I-5, and out
onto I-84 through Gresham and back, I was seldom moving slowr than 40
mph.
Friday afternoon ~2 p.m. west-bound along I-84 into the I-5
interchanges was congested but not slow.
My worst traffic was an unexplained total stop Fri ~ 2.30 p.m. on Hwy
26 west-bound right on the Beaverton-Hillsboro boundary. As quckly as
it happened, whatever caused it disappeared.
If only driving in Greater SEA and YVR (in BC) were so easy!
Lobby Dosser
gl4...@yahoo.com
<n...@jasonmchuff.net> wrote:
> > or the demonstration Colorado Railcar DMU that visited Beaverton about 2
> > years ago, or the service last year by the same Colordo Railcar
> > demonstrator at the front of Miami TriRail trains in place of a
> > locomotive.)
> >
> I would not call the demo car enough for it "to be seen". But you are
> correct on the Budd RDCs.
Maybe in Beaverton it wasn't, but it was in regular service in Miami for
about a year. Apparently it would still be in service now if it hadn't
been for being destroyed by a fire.
> > (Considering that the line only has several freight trains a day, and that
> > a considerable portion of that $117 million construction cost is being
> > paid to add sidings and otherwise make it easier to achieve that goal, I
> > don't think there will be too much of a problem here.)
> >
> Note that they are also re-building the entire line, relocating a street &
> adding track to it and putting in new stations.
> http://www.trimet.org/commuterrail/construction.htm
They are also putting in concrete ties, and converting the line to operate
with automatic train stop. This means that if they really wanted to they
could operate above 90 mph in places, but that is likely to be politically
unpopular in Washington County due to perceived "safety problems".
gl4...@yahoo.com
<fin...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > (I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
> > route that estimated ridership is so low.)
>
> That may have something to do with the need to change trains to get into
> Portland. A one seat ride would do much better.
>
> Did anyone consider making that line a branch of the MAX light rail?
The problem is that the traffic on highway 217 doesn't go downtown, and
traffic problems on this road are what this line is aimed at solving.
That particular route, weather by car or by train or bus transit, is not
one that would be used by those going to downtown. Either way it is just
way too time consuming to go that far north. Drivers take I-5 all the way
or I-205 to highway 43 in West Linn or 99E in Oregon City. Or, highway
99W or Boones Ferry Road or any number of other options that are a more
direct route.
The traffic problems on highway 217 are caused by the large employment
centers that have developed in Beaverton and Hillsboro, the huge new
housing developments around Sherwood, King City, Newberg, and Wilsonville,
plus such things as traffic going to the coast on highway 26 from the
southern Willamette Valley and from residents of Beaverton and Hillsboro
going to the casinos and vinyards that are accessed from highway 99W.
You might be able to upgrade highway 219 between Newberg and Hillsboro,
but only with expending vast sums of money due to the topography of the
ridge that separates the Tualatin River Valley from the western Willamette
Valley. Most likely you would wind up building at least one tunnel.
Highway 47 through Gaston is just too far west to attract many drivers
traveling between these areas, so 217 it is, even though it is horribly
crowded during the rush hours.
I don't agree with Lobby that the traffic problems are 24/7 on highway
217, but traffic is quite heavy during most hours of the day and halfway
into the night. Most of the time it moves reasonably fast, but during
rush hours it can slow to a near stop. Even early on Saturday mornings it
is heavy due to people headed for Seaside and Tillamook, but that traffic
isn't going to be solved by local transit projects.
gl4...@yahoo.com
<ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:
> > (I find it difficult to believe that as crowded as traffic is on that
> > route that estimated ridership is so low.)
>
> You can only pack so many people into small trains that run every 30
> mins, and peak traffic (where transit would be useful on that route)
> only lasts a few hours per day. 4,000/day may be optimistic; it's hard
> to say without knowing the location of the stations, connecting
> services, population and employment density around the stations,
> relative commute times vs. freeways, etc.
Actually, connecting services in Wilsonville may be one of the big
problems. SMART only runs a very few bus routes and operates free of
charge so their resources for expansion are rather limited. This isn't
helped by one of their busier transit routes (sometimes standing room
only) operating the 40-some miles over Interstate 5 to Salem. They could
probably charge for that service only and subsidize an expansion of their
lines to cover a greater area of Wilsonville, if it weren't that SMART is
supposed to provide its services free of charge.
Lobby Dosser
> I don't agree with Lobby that the traffic problems are 24/7 on highway
> 217, but traffic is quite heavy during most hours of the day and
> halfway into the night. Most of the time it moves reasonably fast,
> but during rush hours it can slow to a near stop. Even early on
> Saturday mornings it is heavy due to people headed for Seaside and
> Tillamook, but that traffic isn't going to be solved by local transit
> projects.
>
Two spots where it is particularly bad are southbound from Farmington to
Scholls and the northbound to 26 east interchange. The latter has improved
somewhat since the construction was completed. The former is just a Bear!
Lobby Dosser
> Actually, connecting services in Wilsonville may be one of the big
> problems. SMART only runs a very few bus routes and operates free of
> charge so their resources for expansion are rather limited. This isn't
> helped by one of their busier transit routes (sometimes standing room
> only) operating the 40-some miles over Interstate 5 to Salem. They could
> probably charge for that service only and subsidize an expansion of their
> lines to cover a greater area of Wilsonville, if it weren't that SMART is
> supposed to provide its services free of charge.
>
>
Why free?
Jason McHuff
>> correct on the Budd RDCs.
>
> Maybe in Beaverton it wasn't, but it was in regular service in Miami for
> about a year. Apparently it would still be in service now if it hadn't
> been for being destroyed by a fire.
>
Still, I maintain that it wasn't in regular production, though if it stayed
in service it might be enough "to be seen". In fact, I remember watching
the PSU seminar that Joe Walsh gave about the project and him saying that it
was not yet FRA-compliant. See towards the bottom of
http://www.cts.pdx.edu/seminars.htm
Moreover, I should point out that at least one speaker at the event also
called it "innovative" or something. I pointed this out to Ed Immel
(formerly rail chief with ODOT, which had 2 RDCs) and he said "maybe the new
ones".
>
> They are also putting in concrete ties, and converting the line to operate
> with automatic train stop. This means that if they really wanted to they
> could operate above 90 mph in places, but that is likely to be politically
> unpopular in Washington County due to perceived "safety problems".
I didn't know about the ATS. Now wonder this project isn't cheap...but 90
MPH would be something!
Jason McHuff
news:OfE%g.4143$Wp3.1991@trndny05...
Because fares discourage people from riding transit, especially in suburban
settings like SMART runs in and because with small systems the cost of
collecting the revenue negates any fare revenue.
However, this is moot as SMART has implemented, and doubled, a fare on the
Salem service. They also added fares to other places they serve that are
outside the city (Tualatin/Barbur Blvd and Canby). Oh, and the Salem bus is
only full on trips that serve commuting state employees.
--
--Jason McHuff, http://www.jasonmchuff.net
Lobby Dosser
>> Why free?
>
> Because fares discourage people from riding transit, especially in
> suburban settings like SMART runs in and because with small systems
> the cost of collecting the revenue negates any fare revenue.
>
> However, this is moot as SMART has implemented, and doubled, a fare on
> the Salem service. They also added fares to other places they serve
> that are outside the city (Tualatin/Barbur Blvd and Canby). Oh, and
> the Salem bus is only full on trips that serve commuting state
> employees.
>
Who pays for the service?
Paul J. Berg
217 & I-5 are still going to be jam packed with traffic. TriMet's Light
Rail has done little for the traffic mess on the Minnesota and Banfield
freeways. And, the new 205 LRT will do little for the traffic mess on
I-205. But, it does make the contractors rich and the politicians
happy.
.
Sancho Panza
All the putzes who don't ride it.
randee
Hans-Joachim Zierke wrote:
>
>
> At 8 million per mile, it should be possible to doubletrack the whole
> line.
>
Possibly it is a misprint, but the latest issue of Railroad magazine
says that the one mile light rail line finished this summer connecting
Newark Penn Station with Newark Broad St. Station cost $208 million. NJ
Transit must have had to buy a lot of expensive real estate for the
R-O-W for that price.
--
wf.
Baxter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Sancho Panza" <otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ehp0i...@enews2.newsguy.com...
They should - it benefits them as it takes cars off the roads. Kind of like
war - if you're not willing to go yourself, you pay someone else to go in
your stead.
Baxter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Jason McHuff" <n...@jasonmchuff.net> wrote in message
news:_e6dnbOivugkeaLY...@comcast.com...
I noticed that, contrary to transit-critic mythology, the new commuter line
between Wilsonville and Beaverton will take less time at rush hour than
driving by car - 27 min versus 40 min.
http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=5588901
Philip Nasadowski
wrote:
> Possibly it is a misprint, but the latest issue of Railroad magazine
> says that the one mile light rail line finished this summer connecting
> Newark Penn Station with Newark Broad St. Station cost $208 million.
It's not.
> NJ Transit must have had to buy a lot of expensive real estate for the
> R-O-W for that price.
No:
* Stations? No, these things are mini palaces - we're talking well
beyond the simple sign and maybe bus shelter design in a few places.
Most entertaining will be the one near the NJ PAC with the *glass*
partition between the road and the station platform.
* Excessive construction overhead - the Newark subway has a simple
trolley wire arrangement, this thing's got weighted catenary, etc etc
etc. BTW, we're talking speeds that pretty much never exceed 30mph.
heck, they rarely exceed 20 or even 15.
* Excessive construction below - The ROW is semi private, which is a
polite way of saying it's next to the street, but paved like a road (for
some reason I don't get - cars aren't supposed to be on it, but NJT
likes this for some rerason).
* Arts for transit. No, they can't just build a station, it's gotta be
a mini art expo, too. This is one of the many 'little things' that
added up.
* Excessive stations. It's a mile long (not even). It's 2 or 3
stations along the way, some so laughably close that you can walk it
faster than the train moves.
* The 'make the area fit the mode' mentality - LRVs ring bells and
whistles and all at cross streets, busses next to them don't. Broad
Street has a crossover approaching it, and a pocket track at the rear
end, which has nice thick walls around it, making rerailing a derailed
LRV more fun. It's a useless track (the service frequency barely
demands a two track terminal, let alone storage beyond it) and fancy in
ground switch (see above on why a regular one isn't good enough).
* The 'cost is no object' attitude of NJT in general. I dealt with this
with HBLRT - the simple, rational, sane solution tended to get discarded
for some odd reason. The end result was more PLC power than exists in
complex water treatment plants, all being used to flip breakers remotely
(a stupid idea in the application), turn on and off fans (albeit large
ones - the amount of I/O that could have been remoted is insane), and in
general not do anything than an AB SLC 5/03 and remote I/O couldn't do.
Hell, a GE Versamax could have done what they wanted (though the
origional idea was GE 90-30, NJT didn't want that and elected to get a
far far far far more expensive top of the line Siemens system).
The scary thing? SEPTA, of all agencies, managed to do far better
(though hardly outstanding). Route 15, IIRC, was 80 million to rebuild
(ok, the wires and track were more or less there, but it all needed
extensive work). And a lot more down to earth:
NJT's useless stubby at Broad:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?51370
Broad itself - apparently NJT thinks the fact that they tore up 1/2 of
downtown for this extension is some sort of secret...:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?54023
Note that cars aren't even allowed there, but the tracks are paved.
great fun for the cops and a ticket for out of towners:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?51318
NJT PAC - once again, the track area's off limits. Note the glass walls:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?53683
Riverfront Stadium, the most conservative of the new stops. The tower
right behind the pan is Broad Street, and cat bridges are the Hoboken
Division, 27.6kv, Arrows, and all:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?53684
Now, let's look at the stupid and simple Route 15 in Philly:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?48827
The PCC was designed for street running, these rebuilds add AC
propulsion (!):
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?45045
Stations are simple:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?45032
Unlike NJ, cars and trollies live in harmony in Philly:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?45035
Yes, those cars behind the trolley will drive 'through the station'
PCCs can corner well. BTW, these are broad gauge units (PA trolley
gauge):
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?42968
Fan trip:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?47090
Simple, less expensive, yet fully functional station design on a wide
street:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?45029
Septa's approach to private ROW:
http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?50624
(Of course, SEPTA's lines were built by the for profit trolley companies
in the early 1900's. This may be why they're not total overkill)
randee
Philip Nasadowski wrote:
>
>
> > NJ Transit must have had to buy a lot of expensive real estate for the
> > R-O-W for that price.
>
> No:
>
> * Stations? No, these things are mini palaces - we're talking well
> beyond the simple sign and maybe bus shelter design in a few places.
> Most entertaining will be the one near the NJ PAC with the *glass*
> partition between the road and the station platform.
>
> * Excessive construction overhead - the Newark subway has a simple
> trolley wire arrangement, this thing's got weighted catenary, etc etc
> etc. BTW, we're talking speeds that pretty much never exceed 30mph.
> heck, they rarely exceed 20 or even 15.
>
> * Excessive construction below - The ROW is semi private, which is a
> polite way of saying it's next to the street, but paved like a road (for
> some reason I don't get - cars aren't supposed to be on it, but NJT
> likes this for some rerason).
>
>
<<snip much>>
Hmm, that would be about 150 million Euro per km, Hajo where are you?
Looks like Mayor Daley in Chicago needs to visit NJ Transit to learn how
to keep construction unions busy.......
> PCCs can corner well. BTW, these are broad gauge units (PA trolley
> gauge):
> http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?42968
Gives new meaning to the phrase 'Corners as if on rails'.
Lobby Dosser
> -
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
Bet I can beat it. I can get from Beaverton to the Airport in that time.
Jason McHuff
news:8756-454...@storefull-3235.bay.webtv.net...
traffic if the rail lines were not built. According to TriMet, 26% of
people using the Banfield corridor ride MAX. As long as there are more
people moving into the region and motorists get subsidies like "free"
parking, Big Pipes, etc, it will not be feasible to decongest roads.
MAX and commuter rail give people a viable alternative to 217 and I-84. As
I noted in another post, current transit service compares poorly with
driving. Also, it is not surprising if the Yellow line is not helping I-5
north, since it must go slow on Interstate Ave and does not go to Hayden
Island or Vancouver.
Richard Mlynarik
> In article <slrnek2vje.tjp...@odysseus.Zierke.com>,
> Hans-Joachim Zierke <Usenet...@Zierke.com> wrote:
>
>
>>f'up set to misc.transport.rail.europe
>
>
>
> Nice. Can I have one for Ridgecrest, California (population 25,000)?
> Well, how about Los Angeles?
You can have one for Lechmere, in Boston.
It's a bit underwhelming at present
<http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?23445>
<http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?23433>
but if you look at page 35 of
<http://www.northpointcambridge.com/download/EastCambridgePlanning_10-11-06.pdf>
you'll find they have quite a "Vision" of what it might be.
gl4...@yahoo.com
<n...@jasonmchuff.net> wrote:
> However, this is moot as SMART has implemented, and doubled, a fare on the
> Salem service. They also added fares to other places they serve that are
> outside the city (Tualatin/Barbur Blvd and Canby). Oh, and the Salem bus is
> only full on trips that serve commuting state employees.
Ah, I'm glad to hear it. While it is true that charging a fare creates
lower ridership, the fact is this is an intercity route. In 2004 and 2005
I was romantically involved with a woman in Salem. As she did not have a
car at the time and if the afternoon northbound Amtrak or intercity bus
schedules didn't work out, she would be able to take the SMART service
north to Wilsonville where I could pick her up much faster than driving
all the way to Salem and back.
Providing a free transit service on a route where Amtrak charges $9.50
(Salem-Oregon City) and driving it cansumes at minimum $3 just in
gasoline, seems quite silly.
Though, it was quite nice of the dear citizens and local businesses of
Wilsonville to subsidize my long distance romance.
Though, because SMART's Salem-Wilsonville bus service was frequently
standing room only, she much preferred the $9.50 to get to the Oregon City
Amtrak station if she could leave in the morning, or take an afternoon
Amtrak Thruway bus when that worked out time-wise. She didn't regard
Greyhound as an option due to uncomfortable seats and the state of some of
the other passengers.
gl4...@yahoo.com
<lobby.dos...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > I noticed that, contrary to transit-critic mythology, the new commuter
> > line between Wilsonville and Beaverton will take less time at rush
> > hour than driving by car - 27 min versus 40 min.
> > http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=5588901
> >
>
> Bet I can beat it. I can get from Beaverton to the Airport in that time.
During rush hour on 217 and I-5? In a private car? In your own aircraft
maybe, but in an automobile?
Look, they ran a test train over the line in 1998. I was part of the
volunteer hosting crew because I happen to know a little about railway
passenger cars. I followed the train, on a Saturday, to take some
photos. Even on a Saturday morning, I could not beat the train to any of
the locations along the route, and mostly just waited for the next run
coming the other direction. This was with freight locomotives hauling
older passenger cars at a maximum of 50 mph, and a horrid 20 minute delay
in Beaverton due to a reverse move that will not exist in the new line.
The new line will have a maximum speed of 79 mph (though it will have
automatic train stop, which means they could operate 90 mph or more if
they eventually want to go that direction).
In order to get between Wilsonville and Beaverton in less than 27 minutes
during rush hour, you would have to drive like all the people that make me
glad I have easy transit access.
Lobby Dosser
> In order to get between Wilsonville and Beaverton in less than 27
> minutes during rush hour, you would have to drive like all the people
> that make me glad I have easy transit access.
Where do the start in Beaverton and where do they finish in Wilsonville?
If you mostly use transit, I expect it would take you longer to drive it.
The other issue is that the train only takes you from station to staion in
27 minutes. How long to get to and from the station on each end, timed to
ensure you catch the train? When all is said and done, your trip time
probably increases by 50% or more.
Lobby Dosser
> She didn't regard
> Greyhound as an option due to uncomfortable seats and the state of
> some of the other passengers.
>
HA! Airline bused me on Greyhound from Detroit to Toledo. NEVER AGAIN!
jmei...@aracnet.com
Ha. I don't think so. I've been doing that on a more or less regular
basis for months, and leaving Beaverton around 8-8:30AM, by which time
most of the rush-hour traffic has hopefully finished, it takes me
45 minutes to an hour to get from Cedar Hills Blvd and 26 to the
economy lot at the airport. Heaven forbid there should be any
actual traffic issues to deal with along the way. It may be quicker
to take Barnes Rd/Burnside all the way in and pick up I84 on the other
side of the river, but I haven't tried that yet.
--
John Meissen jmei...@aracnet.com
Baxter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Jason McHuff" <n...@jasonmchuff.net> wrote in message
news:HvSdndBOy_EKktzY...@comcast.com...
>
> MAX and commuter rail give people a viable alternative to 217 and I-84.
As
> I noted in another post, current transit service compares poorly with
> driving. Also, it is not surprising if the Yellow line is not helping I-5
> north, since it must go slow on Interstate Ave and does not go to Hayden
> Island or Vancouver.
>
The issue with I-5 North is that InterstateMAX does not go to Vancouver.
The bottleneck is at the Interstate Bridge.
Baxter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
<jmei...@aracnet.com> wrote in message
news:ehtgl...@enews4.newsguy.com...
When you deal with imaginary "reality", like Lobby does, you can do
ANYTHING.
Paul J. Berg
Baxter wrote:
> -
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.bxacode.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "Jason McHuff" <n...@jasonmchuff.net> wrote in message
> news:HvSdndBOy_EKktzY...@comcast.com...
> >
> > MAX and commuter rail give people a viable alternative to 217 and I-84.
> As
> > I noted in another post, current transit service compares poorly with
> > driving. Also, it is not surprising if the Yellow line is not helping I-5
> > north, since it must go slow on Interstate Ave and does not go to Hayden
> > Island or Vancouver.
> >
> The issue with I-5 North is that InterstateMAX does not go to Vancouver.
> The bottleneck is at the Interstate Bridge.
Vancouver (Washington, USA) politicians and business people did not
want to set a portion of their downtown area aside as a Park n' Ride
for TriMet's LRT. They felt they were being asked to provide an
suburban parking lot for commuters to downtown Portland, with no
benefit to them. All they could see was that a TriMet Park n' Ride
would cause a increase in traffic and parking problems on their
downtown streets.
At the time, Vancouver and Clark County (Washington) politicians were
pushing for TriMet to run its light rail over the I-205 bridge instead.
With a Park n' Ride in the east portion of Clark County instead. TriMet
rejected this option. It should be noted here, that the I-205 bridge
was built with space available for a future light rail line, the I-5
(Interstate) bridge has no such space available.
Anyone familiar with the TriMet Gateway Park n' Ride will tell you that
the majority of cars in the lot have Washington plates on them. The lot
is inadequate, parking overflows onto the nearby Gateway Shopping
Center and neighborhood streets. During the evening rush hour, traffic
from the Gateway Park n' Ride to I-205 is a virtual parking lot itself
jammed with Clark County commuters.
Just think of what could have been, if light rail had been built over
the I-205 bridge instead. Most likely less auto traffic on both the I-5
and I-205 bridges.
Also, with the revitalization of downtown Vancouver over the past few
years, I think the City of Vancouver would be even more opposed to
TriMet light rail today.
gl4...@yahoo.com
J. Berg" <pjb...@webtv.net> wrote:
> Vancouver (Washington, USA) politicians and business people did not
> want to set a portion of their downtown area aside as a Park n' Ride
> for TriMet's LRT. They felt they were being asked to provide an
> suburban parking lot for commuters to downtown Portland, with no
> benefit to them. All they could see was that a TriMet Park n' Ride
> would cause a increase in traffic and parking problems on their
> downtown streets.
I'm not so sure that was the majority opinion of the time. The problem
that I saw, (if I were a Clark County citizen anyway), with the rejected
"North-South" light rail line was that it ran light rail deep into the
northern reaches of Clark County. It really had no business going where
it was supposed to go in that proposal, as best as I can tell trying to
read the mind of the Clark County voter.
C-Tran is a separate transit agency. It seems to me that the light rail
line should have been built to the downtown Vancouver transit center, and
no further. This brings TriMet service to the same spot as its existing
bus service. If C-Tran wants to run light rail further than that, then
they can do their own thing.
> At the time, Vancouver and Clark County (Washington) politicians were
> pushing for TriMet to run its light rail over the I-205 bridge instead.
> With a Park n' Ride in the east portion of Clark County instead. TriMet
> rejected this option. It should be noted here, that the I-205 bridge
> was built with space available for a future light rail line, the I-5
> (Interstate) bridge has no such space available.
Actually, it does. Look at the bridge carefully. There is enough space
between the north and south spans for a light rail line. You could
probably use the existing concrete columns in the river too. The I-205
bridge has no space at all, and a completely new bridge would have to be
built. That one is quite a bit longer than the I-5 bridge. The
advantage, though, is that it is possilbe to build a bridge there that
isn't a draw span because the airport approaches aren't in the way of the
navigation channel.
Because east Clark County is so spread out, I'm not sure that having light
rail go over the I-205 bridge would work that well. On the other hand, if
the Ikea store they are building at the Airport Cascades station can be
convinced to allow for park & ride use of their parking lot, that might be
a good place. You might have to come up with a parking permit system
though, so that doesn't get used as airport parking instead.
Lobby Dosser
I've done it. Both 217S at Hall to I5N or 217N at Denny to 26E. NOT as a
regular commute. The I5 route seems a bit faster.
Lobby Dosser
> -
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
You live in Beaverton Bax? I didn't think so.
Peter Schleifer
Now they'll tell you there is a bus and invite you to take it at your
own expense, with no refund for the canceled flight, or put you on a
flight leaving 20 hours later - at least that was my recent experience
with American.
--
Peter Schleifer
"Save me from the people who would save me from myself"
lein
Sure if you live at the station in Wilsonville and work at a coffee
shop at the Beaverton station.
gl4...@yahoo.com
<boomer_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > I noticed that, contrary to transit-critic mythology, the new commuter line
> > between Wilsonville and Beaverton will take less time at rush hour than
> > driving by car - 27 min versus 40 min.
> > http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=5588901
>
>
> Sure if you live at the station in Wilsonville and work at a coffee
> shop at the Beaverton station.
Of course it is highly location specific. There's lots of space between
Beaverton and Wilsonville with no transit service at all.
However to use the existing service to travel between Wilsonville and
Beaverton one must now:
1. Take SMART route 201 to Tualatin, paying $1.25 in fare
Example trip: leaves Wilsonville City Hall at 6:29am and arrives in
Tualatin at 6:49am, http://www.ridesmart.com/Routes/Route201.htm
2. Transfer to TriMet bus route 76 in Tualatin, pay an additional $1.70 in
fare for using the TriMet system, http://www.trimet.org/fares/index.htm
Continuing the Example trip: leaving at 6:58am means an arrival in
Beaverton at 7:36, http://www.trimet.org/schedules/w/t1076_1.htm
In short, someone without a car must consume at absolute best (assuming
everything is on time, the transfer can be make OK, and that the 76
doesn't get tangled up in traffic for very long) slightly over an hour to
make this same trip. Chopping over 30 minutes from this is going to make
a fairly significant difference in making transit attractive in areas
where transit is at least available. The current system wouldn't even be
time attractive to those going directly from one point to the other.
Lobby Dosser
> Now they'll tell you there is a bus and invite you to take it at your
> own expense, with no refund for the canceled flight, or put you on a
> flight leaving 20 hours later - at least that was my recent experience
> with American.
>
>
And service has improved. Flew Allegheny Airlines - AKA Allegheny
Scarelines - from Philadelphia to Cleveland one time. We get to cruising
altitude and the stewardess starts down the aisle throwing boxes
(literally throwing) and anouncing "box lunch!". I opened mine to find a
half sandwich and a cookie. "Say miss" I said, "there's only half a
sandwich in here.", "That's right" she says, "box lunch! - box lunch!".
On another Allegheny flight into Cleveland after dark and mid-
thunderstorm, the clown driving bounced us off the runway so hard I would
have thought we crashed, had he not pulled the same stunt earlier while
landing in Pittsburg. The second time I stuffed my tie in my mouth to
protect my tongue.
Peter Schleifer
<lobby.dos...@verizon.net> wrote:
>And service has improved. Flew Allegheny Airlines - AKA Allegheny
>Scarelines - from Philadelphia to Cleveland one time. We get to cruising
>altitude and the stewardess starts down the aisle throwing boxes
>(literally throwing) and anouncing "box lunch!". I opened mine to find a
>half sandwich and a cookie. "Say miss" I said, "there's only half a
>sandwich in here.", "That's right" she says, "box lunch! - box lunch!".
How has it improved now? You don't even get the half sandwich
anymore, unless you are saying it was so bad that getting nothing is
an improvement.
Philip Nasadowski
Peter Schleifer <psch...@speakeasy.org> wrote:
> How has it improved now? You don't even get the half sandwich
> anymore, unless you are saying it was so bad that getting nothing is
> an improvement.
Somehow, I got possession of an old Mohawk Airlines handbag (remember
when airlines had those?). Anyway, someone I know saw it, and pointed
out the slogan ("The Specialist Airline"). His comment was "Specialist
Airline? Yeah right, they were specialists at crashing!"
I think they merged in with a few others and became UScare.
Jason McHuff
news:gl4316-2910...@69-30-11-13.pxd.easystreet.com...
live/work right next to the station. At Beaverton, you could connect to
MAX, which goes near many Silicon Forest businesses. At the other end,
SMART goes right through the grounds of Mentor Graphics, Xerox (formerly
Tektronix) & others and goes past many other major employers. I am pretty
sure that they are going to re-configure their routes for the rail line.
Moreover, for about a week or two before I got moved up here, I was actually
doing a transit commute using the above mentioned lines from Salem to West
Beaverton. The commuter rail would have been nice as it took me ~2 hours to
take the Cherriots/SMART 1X, SMART 201 and TriMet 76 & 62 (or MAX). And
this was before 7 AM using one of the few 201 trips that got on I-5 at
Wilsonville Road instead of meandering through town.
Lobby Dosser
> On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 08:15:25 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> <lobby.dos...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>And service has improved. Flew Allegheny Airlines - AKA Allegheny
>>Scarelines - from Philadelphia to Cleveland one time. We get to
>>cruising altitude and the stewardess starts down the aisle throwing
>>boxes (literally throwing) and anouncing "box lunch!". I opened mine
>>to find a half sandwich and a cookie. "Say miss" I said, "there's only
>>half a sandwich in here.", "That's right" she says, "box lunch! - box
>>lunch!".
>
> How has it improved now? You don't even get the half sandwich
> anymore, unless you are saying it was so bad that getting nothing is
> an improvement.
>
Yep.
Baxter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"lein" <boomer_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1162103358.6...@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Baxter wrote:
> > >
> > I noticed that, contrary to transit-critic mythology, the new commuter
line
> > between Wilsonville and Beaverton will take less time at rush hour than
> > driving by car - 27 min versus 40 min.
> > http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=5588901
>
>
> Sure if you live at the station in Wilsonville and work at a coffee
> shop at the Beaverton station.
>
That's another anti-transit stance - 'if it doesn't serve, and save time
for, everybody, then it's worthless'.
Lobby Dosser
> -
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
If it can't pay for itself, it probably is.