« From Satyricon to Macdonald Center with LRS Architects | Main | More strikes against the Boardman coal plant (and not just environmental) »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Allan Rudwick

I think that the Cost/Benefit would be higher on a different line. I selfishly want a streetcar in my neighborhood (the MLK segment from Broadway to Killingsworth) instead of to Lake O because I think it would be better utilized and would calm traffic on MLK.

If the folks down south don't want it we can spend that money elsewhere. Without the Willamette Shore Line ROW we wouldn't be having this conversation, so I'm wondering if it is really a good idea.

Grrreat

LO doesn't want it, so don't spend the money, for goodness sakes; why do people continue hitting their heads on the wall?

This is a no-brainer...go with Belmont and MLK spurs instead. Go where people support the streetcar, not where people oppose it -- let them pay for their own transportation needs on their own.

R A Fontes

Perhaps the most significant misunderstanding about this project is that "no transit improvement at all", as Mr. Libby characterizes it above, is an option. It is not.

The FTA's official label "no-build" actually refers to no-build beyond budgetary constraints. In other words, what local jurisdictions would do on their own without extra feeding time at the federal trough.

In this case, Metro's Regional Transportation Plan and TriMet's Transit Improvement Plan include the provision to bring the route 35 bus up to the Frequent Service standard. Metro project number 10940 allocates $3.6 million 2007 dollars for the capital expenditures necessary to provide 605 more service hours each week, more than doubling the route's capacity.

Besides 15 minute headway, Frequent Service includes bus stop improvements, signal prioritization, and surgical stop consolidation. It significantly shorten bus trip times, particularly outside of peak.

While streetcar and the pathetic official proposal for "enhanced bus" would take access away from current riders while adding costs and increasing total trip times, only no-build improves service for each and every rider without exception.

Portland Streetcar Executive Director Rick Gustafson pointed out at the recent Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce project debate that streetcar is not a tool for eliminating traffic congestion but one for development. He specifically acknowledged that streetcar added 14,000 cars to Portland streets.

The proposed Foothills development which proponents say is fostered by streetcar will definitely add thousands of motor vehicles to Highway 43 in Lake Oswego, bringing its traffic volumes up to those of Canyon Road in Beaverton and 99W in Tigard.

No thank you.

Dennis L

I think your last paragraph of the article describes why we shouldn't be building a streetcar to Lake O. I am a huge fan of rail and its expansion, but I want to see it being expanded to areas that has a high ridership possibility, not to areas that enjoy being far removed from the urban infrastructure of the city.

If Lake O wants a streetcar or even a LRT line to their city, I say the metro needs to see some serious moves on Lake O's part to redevelop their downtown and create target areas for urban redevelopment. Until then, I say let them sit in their own traffic, it isn't really bothering anyone other than them.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Lead Sponsors




Sponsors














Portland Architecture on Facebook

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad

Paperblogs Network

Google Analytics

  • Google Analytics

Awards & Honors