HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2008, 2:58 PM
Snowden352's Avatar
Snowden352 Snowden352 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 236
I don't think you can expect too much of an incrase of federal monies. With the economy where it is, and where the government is poised to take it... a trillion dollars (or so) of additional debt might be too much for even our government to deal with...

I'm just trying to think realistically (hell, the CRC could be in trouble).

edit: looks like I was right...
http://www.oregonlive.com/environmen...says_scal.html
__________________
"Δεν ελπίζω τίποτε. Δεν φοβούμαι τίποτε. Είμαι λεύτερος"

Last edited by Snowden352; Sep 26, 2008 at 3:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2008, 3:09 PM
twofiftyfive twofiftyfive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowden352 View Post
I'm just trying to think realistically (hell, the CRC could be in trouble).
The CRC is in trouble.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 12:27 AM
JoshYent JoshYent is offline
=)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 164
Subway Portland to Tigard

Is TriMet ready for a subway-style light-rail system to Tigard?

Erik Halstead says the transit agency should at least consider it.

The 32-year-old Tigard resident is pitching his subway idea on YouTube. Viral, the video is not. So far it's got just 37 views. But a TriMet bus driver with a blog did link to the 4 minute 44 second clip.

Halstead's concept includes stops at PCC Sylvania, Multnomah Village, Hillsdale and Oregon Health & Science University, among others.

"If people talk about it as a good idea, great. If it makes a difference, great. Do I expect it will happen?" Halstead asked. "Probably not."

A MAX line between Portland and Tigard is among three high-ranking light rail concepts that could be built in coming decades. As it stands, Tigard -- population 47,460 -- is the largest city within Oregon's metro area not served by MAX.

Halstead says he's a daily transit rider and a regular TriMet critic. In recent years, he's written nearly a dozen letters to the editor of this newspaper, many if not all of them about TriMet.

Building a subway would be expensive, Halstead admits. But TriMet's already proven it will make its own path -- or tunnel -- on the Beaverton/Hillsboro line that runs through the West Hills.

More importantly, going underground wouldn't impact traffic along crowded Southwest Barbur Boulevard/Oregon 99W, Halstead says. That's a big concern because alternative routes for cars don't exist, as they do on existing lines to Gresham, Hillsboro and North Portland.

TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch shared the idea with some transit planners on Tuesday. Among their thoughts: "Subsurface alignments are very expensive, which is why they are often used just in dense downtowns (or through hills in the case with Westside MAX)."

TriMet says early planning may begin sometime next year.

Halstead, a customer service rep for Pacific Power, says he spent about 20 minutes looking at Google Earth to map his route. The video took about an hour to produce.

Said Halstead: "I think the subway makes perfect sense."

So, what do you think?

-- Brad Schmidt

http://www.oregonlive.com/tigard/ind..._a_subway.html


__________________
Suburban kid, wishing he lived in a urban jungle.

Stop building out, start building up, BUT DO IT RIGHT the first time....so we dont have to come back and fix our mistakes 50 years from now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 1:12 AM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
Funny, that's the exact same alignment and stations I created for an old thread in this forum years ago... glad I'm not the only one who sees this potential. I bet a lot of transit enthusiasts and urban planners have thought the same as well. Too bad Trimet doesn't have a dedicated funding mechanism for capital improvement projects, without proper funding a subsurface alignment will (likely) never happen.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 1:21 AM
JoshYent JoshYent is offline
=)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 164
hmmm so few stops......i definitely think there should be some more.....
__________________
Suburban kid, wishing he lived in a urban jungle.

Stop building out, start building up, BUT DO IT RIGHT the first time....so we dont have to come back and fix our mistakes 50 years from now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 2:37 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD View Post
Funny, that's the exact same alignment and stations I created for an old thread in this forum years ago... glad I'm not the only one who sees this potential. I bet a lot of transit enthusiasts and urban planners have thought the same as well. Too bad Trimet doesn't have a dedicated funding mechanism for capital improvement projects, without proper funding a subsurface alignment will (likely) never happen.
huh. me too.

all of those stops, esp. pcc, would draw significant numbers of riders. and the topography is such that, at least from terwilliger to ohsu, choices are limited. i could see some surface running between terwilliger and capitol hwy, and then of course thru tigard, but that's about it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 8:09 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 6,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshYent View Post
Halstead, a customer service rep for Pacific Power, says he spent about 20 minutes looking at Google Earth to map his route. The video took about an hour to produce.
Yep. You can certainly tell.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 8:15 AM
JordanL JordanL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD View Post
Funny, that's the exact same alignment and stations I created for an old thread in this forum years ago... glad I'm not the only one who sees this potential. I bet a lot of transit enthusiasts and urban planners have thought the same as well. Too bad Trimet doesn't have a dedicated funding mechanism for capital improvement projects, without proper funding a subsurface alignment will (likely) never happen.
You know, we should really create a referendum to create dedicated funding for capital improvements. That is what the referendum system is for after all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2010, 9:16 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD View Post
Funny, that's the exact same alignment and stations I created for an old thread in this forum years ago... glad I'm not the only one who sees this potential. I bet a lot of transit enthusiasts and urban planners have thought the same as well. Too bad Trimet doesn't have a dedicated funding mechanism for capital improvement projects, without proper funding a subsurface alignment will (likely) never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshYent View Post
hmmm so few stops......i definitely think there should be some more.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
huh. me too.

all of those stops, esp. pcc, would draw significant numbers of riders. and the topography is such that, at least from terwilliger to ohsu, choices are limited. i could see some surface running between terwilliger and capitol hwy, and then of course thru tigard, but that's about it.
Im from Vancouver BC, and I can vouch for subways! During the Olympics, our ALRT system was at over 500,000 a day ridership - pushing against Philadelphia, DC, Toronto, etc.

Of course that number will drop back to about 175-200 million perday, which is normal for us.

Subways, are worth it, but (and I'm sure you all know this) the key is building them in dense areas (which Vancouver has more than Portland; although you can still do it successfully) and .... having an important main terminus.

One of ours is the airport, all three terminate downtown, and others go to the "town centres," satellite cluster cities, not unlike some cities in Northern Europe.

If you could that subway extended downtown, then to the airport, and the university, you'd be on your way.

I understand your LRT system is excellent also

Last edited by trofirhen; Mar 5, 2010 at 9:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2010, 4:35 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
Just to be clear, what we're talking about is LRT in a tunnel, not an actual heavy-rail subway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2010, 5:19 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,251
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
Of course that number will drop back to about 175-200 million perday, which is normal for us.

Subways, are worth it, but (and I'm sure you all know this) the key is building them in dense areas (which Vancouver has more than Portland; although you can still do it successfully) and .... having an important main terminus.
I didn't realize 175-200 Million people lived in Canada, much less in all of British Columbia or Vancouver.

I'll agree subways work in highly dense neighborhoods, but even New York City builds subway corridors at grade or above grade when there isn't that much density anymore....

The proposed rail line to southwest Portland has very little density. I can see building a tunnel through tall hills, but not all the way to Tigard and points west.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2010, 5:38 PM
rsbear's Avatar
rsbear rsbear is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Texas - Hill Country
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
Im from Vancouver BC, and I can vouch for subways! During the Olympics, our ALRT system was at over 500,000 a day ridership - pushing against Philadelphia, DC, Toronto, etc.

Of course that number will drop back to about 175-200 million perday, which is normal for us.

Subways, are worth it, but (and I'm sure you all know this) the key is building them in dense areas (which Vancouver has more than Portland; although you can still do it successfully) and .... having an important main terminus.

One of ours is the airport, all three terminate downtown, and others go to the "town centres," satellite cluster cities, not unlike some cities in Northern Europe.

If you could that subway extended downtown, then to the airport, and the university, you'd be on your way.

I understand your LRT system is excellent also
You don't have a clue...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2010, 7:00 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
I didn't realize 175-200 Million people lived in Canada, much less in all of British Columbia or Vancouver.

I'll agree subways work in highly dense neighborhoods, but even New York City builds subway corridors at grade or above grade when there isn't that much density anymore....

The proposed rail line to southwest Portland has very little density. I can see building a tunnel through tall hills, but not all the way to Tigard and points west.
That's my opinion, there is definitely portions along that route a tunnel would probably be needed, but not the entire distance. As much as I love subways, I am not sure Portland is or ever will be big enough to handle a subway system...plus our downtown is so small that we would only have 2, maybe 3 stations downtown. It would have to be used in a heavy rail sense and run out further than light rail currently does, but in our metro with the urban growth boundary, there isnt going to be that far off expansion of the metro's boundaries.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2010, 10:28 AM
MR. Cosmopolitan's Avatar
MR. Cosmopolitan MR. Cosmopolitan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 144
^Portland is more than big enough to have a subway.
Look at Rennes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rennes_Metro with only 588,684 inhabitants in its urban area it has aquired a subway system.
What Portland lacks of is urban density, especially in the suburbs, allow that to happen and Portland would be able to have it's own subway system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2010, 2:43 PM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
you're comparing apples and oranges, though. density aside, the political and social climates are entirely different. nothing rennes-like will happen here for a very long time, if ever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2010, 5:21 PM
MR. Cosmopolitan's Avatar
MR. Cosmopolitan MR. Cosmopolitan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 144
^you'r probably right about the apple thing, wrong example.
But Edmonton, that I think it's a good example, It's urban area population aproaches to only 1 mill and it has some sort of subway.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmonto...t_Rail_Transit
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2010, 12:26 AM
65MAX's Avatar
65MAX 65MAX is offline
Karma Police
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: People's Republic of Portland
Posts: 2,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR. Cosmopolitan View Post
Portland is more than big enough to have a subway.
Phew!! That's good to know, because we already have one. That would be really embarrassing if Portland had a subway before it was big enough to accommodate it.

OK, sarcasm *off*......

It's not the size of the city that determines whether or not a subway is feasible. It's the physical characteristics of the city itself. Challenging terrain, high density development, small and irregular blocks, constrained surface ROW's, large train size and high frequency schedules, etc. all make subways more desirable than surface alignments.

Also, trying to compare Portland to other cities is kind of pointless. Portland has a unique combination of characteristics that make it unlike any other city (form-wise, and to a certain extent, culturally as well).

Eventually, if TriMet wants to increase the capacity of the MAX in the future, it will have to go underground through downtown. Larger trains and higher frequencies can't be accommodated on the surface alignment through downtown, period. And the Steel Bridge is a major obstacle to both higher frequencies and reliability.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2010, 4:46 AM
rsbear's Avatar
rsbear rsbear is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Texas - Hill Country
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by 65MAX View Post
... And the Steel Bridge is a major obstacle to both higher frequencies and reliability.
And speed!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2010, 10:27 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by 65MAX View Post
Phew!! That's good to know, because we already have one. That would be really embarrassing if Portland had a subway before it was big enough to accommodate it.

OK, sarcasm *off*......

It's not the size of the city that determines whether or not a subway is feasible. It's the physical characteristics of the city itself. Challenging terrain, high density development, small and irregular blocks, constrained surface ROW's, large train size and high frequency schedules, etc. all make subways more desirable than surface alignments.

Also, trying to compare Portland to other cities is kind of pointless. Portland has a unique combination of characteristics that make it unlike any other city (form-wise, and to a certain extent, culturally as well).

Eventually, if TriMet wants to increase the capacity of the MAX in the future, it will have to go underground through downtown. Larger trains and higher frequencies can't be accommodated on the surface alignment through downtown, period. And the Steel Bridge is a major obstacle to both higher frequencies and reliability.
You are right, apples to oranges, but I will definitely say the Rennes subway like is a great find and would love something like that here, especially if the stations are designed by Norman Foster's firm.

But you are right, there is other things at play, Rennes is not a grid city, thus making it harder to have an effective ROW street lines running through the city.

I think Portland has a long way to go before the trains are at capacity, plus it would be just as easy increasing the number of runs than the number of segments to each train. If Portland ever gets a subway line, it would probably be more for users that are at the further ends of the metro.

I think trimet is trying to go in the direction of having more access to the train system rather than having a single core line like cities like SF. We have LRT running on two different lines, we have the streetcar on its own line, possibly having the streetcar running up and down 3rd and 4th (I remember that being talked about at one point.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2010, 2:09 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,415
Unhappy excuuuse me

Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
I didn't realize 175-200 Million people lived in Canada, much less in all of British Columbia or Vancouver.

I'll agree subways work in highly dense neighborhoods, but even New York City builds subway corridors at grade or above grade when there isn't that much density anymore....

The proposed rail line to southwest Portland has very little density. I can see building a tunnel through tall hills, but not all the way to Tigard and points west.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsbear View Post
You don't have a clue...
To clarify; in Vancouver, that is the number of FARES on the transit sytem, which shot up drastically during the Olympics have settled back to normal.
And yes, I made a real mistake: It's 150,000 per day, not Million!!
(Nevertheless, we do four times the business Seattle does with its LRT)

Secondly, I though this was going to be a heavier-rail subway, not just LRT in a tunnel.

Thirdly and most imprtantly .............. you're right!! I haven't got a clue,
and should have stayed out of your forum altogether! (Just trying to be neighbourly, as Vancouver and Portland have almost the exact same Metro populations, and are not too far from each other)

But it is better that you work it out for yourselves, so please excuse the foreign intrusion !!
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:59 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.