I think you all should take a look at the Transit Investment Plan (
www.trimet.org/tip), which is updated annually. It has a relatively short (five-year) planning horizon and a set of four priorities - build the total transit system; expand high-capacity transit; expand frequent service bus lines, and; improve local service. The only thing they haven't been doing much of lately is improving local service, because the suburbs continue to experience low densities, poor urban form and street connectivity, and thus, are too costly to serve compared with other service enhancements closer in. Enhancing trunk line service, such as Line 57 through Washington County, is the best way to add service hours in places like that.
Given the fiscal constraints caused by increasing demand and cost of LIFT service (which is mandated by federal government), rising cost of fuel, and dealing with mechanics' and operators' unions, I think TriMet is doing quite well.
As for light rail, when it is added to a corridor, there is usually bus service enhancements that go with it, along with a steady commitment to maintaining frequent service on the MAX route. For example, a MAX line to Milwaukie would shift bus service enhancements further south, to OC and Clackamas County College, feeding into the Milwaukie line. Later this year and next, TriMet will increase feeder bus service to commuter rail and the I-205 Green Line, respectively. In the meantime, TriMet also continues to add service to increasingly busy routes on the inner eastside, such as Belmont and Division.
All the while, TriMet is maintaining service throughout the region, adding more frequent service lines, adding bus shelters, replacing 50 older buses a year with new low-floor buses, and adding automated stop announcements and displays to each bus line in the next couple years (I've noticed them on Line 75, which I use regularly).
In terms of efficiencies, TriMet bus planners are constantly pushing through efficiency improvements by consolidating stops that are too close, resulting in improved travel times and reliability. As for MAX service downtown, that's been around for 20 years and makes absolutely no sense to keep as is. It's a difficult discussion to have since some property owners will get less direct access to regional light rail than they have been getting all these years. However, as experienced by my friends, there is increasing reluctance for some people who work on the westside to live in the mundane westside suburbs, and thus must commute through downtown, not to downtown.
As for express bus service, MAX is the express service in most corridors. There's plenty of express bus service elsewhere, such as service in inner eastside (express lines to Lloyd-74 and Marquam Hill-64, 65, 66), southwest cities (92 on Beaverton Hillsdale, 94 on Barbur, 96 on I-5), and Clackamas County (McLoughlin-99). This is a fairly compact region. It doesn't make much sense to add express service in many more places, does it?
Lastly, I noticed a complaint that TriMet was reluctant to go with streetcar initially. I think the reluctance still exists. The high capital costs of fixed rail makes sense for high-capacity, faster service corridors. From the last time I rode the streetcar, it didn't seem high capacity OR high speed. In fact, it's the slowest damn people mover one could ask for. I applaud TriMet's reluctance to spend regional dollars on a development tool that will benefit a select few. Rather, that money should come from local property taxes for property owners who can claim the urban amenity for their gentrification/higher density development efforts.
The only major complaint I have with TriMet is their inattention to modern payment methods/systems. It's about time we moved to a cashless system where every rider can pay with cash cards that are simply swiped as people enter bus or max. It can save time and make riding less onerous to new riders. Last I heard, this is still 6-8 years away here.
Prev
Linear Mode
