 |
| The '99' today |
 |
| '99' after MLR (orange dotted line) |
Trimess
Friday, June 27, 2014
Bus 99 suffers major change
I originally thought that Trimet preserving the 99 bus was a good thing. But now after looking at the new routing I am having my doubts that the 99 riders are being well served. It appears that the 99 express is being turned into a local bus that will go over the Sellwood and into town via Mcadam and Corbett. That's a shame
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
So much for timekeeping, moving the 99 from a route that has little delay (McLoughlin is nice and wide, 3 or 4 lanes wide) and onto a horrendously congested two-lane Tacoma, and then the too-narrow, too-windy, too-many-traffic-signals Macadam Boulevard.
The 99 should just stay put - on McLoughlin - and restore the old 40-Tacoma line. If needed, create a new 40E line.
It said that it wouldn't be local but would have "limited stops". Also, the Line 99 riders today who use the Milwaukie Park and Ride or board in Milwaukie will be able to switch to using MAX. Yes, the riders who come from Oregon City will have to transfer.
a route that has little delay (McLoughlin is nice and wide, 3 or 4 lanes wide)
By saying 3 lanes wide, I'm assuming you mean per direction. McLoughlin is only 2 lanes wide per direction from Tacoma to Harold, and on the viaduct over the railroad.
And I've commuted on McLoughlin for months and I certainly wouldn't say there's "little delay" going north during the morning rush hour. And that's now and without a crash or other blockage.
The 99 should just stay put - on McLoughlin
How is that the best use of resources now that money is will be spent operating a parallel rail line?
How is that the best use of resources now that money is will be spent operating a parallel rail line?
Well, let's see, Jason (I am a suck-up to all things TriMet says and does) McHuff:
How about the $147 million dollar Eastside Streetcar, that DIRECLTY duplicates the 6-MLK Line? How was building a massive new streetcar line, with piss-poor ridership, a good use of resources, when that $147 million would have paid for a half-century of bus service?
Or, how about WES, that costs SIX times that as a bus, AND it directly duplicates the 76 line? $165 million (and counting) wasted construction cost, and $10+ million a year...
Or, how about that billion dollar Westside MAX, that duplicates the 46 and 48 lines (among many others)? Or was it a good use of resources to spend $350 million on Interstate MAX construction, that would have paid for decades of bus service?
Or the original Streetcar line, that duplicates all sorts of bus routes?
You sure have a way to kissing Neil McFarlane's ass when it comes to building expensive, duplicative rail lines, but oh God, how dare we allow a bus line "duplicate" rail service when the bus provides a service the rail service cannot offer.
Yes, the riders who come from Oregon City will have to transfer.
And it's a known, demonstratable, proven fact that transfers discourage ridership. There are countless studies (just do a simple Internet search) that proves this. Transfers = frustration = people getting back in their cars.
(I am a suck-up to all things TriMet says and does)
I thought you didn't like personal attacks.
How about the $147 million dollar Eastside Streetcar
For better or worse, the money spent to build it would not have gone to bus service. And the city is contributing a large chunk of the operating costs, as well as allowing TriMet fare holders to ride at no additional cost.
If you think money spent on that, WES, Interstate MAX, etc was wasted because they weren't needed, how about solving the real problem and having auto users pay for their parking, pollution clean-up, oil defense, etc and developers pay for the full cost of new development as well as not have the Federal government fund highway projects?
That way, there could be a rational discussion of what transit really deserves funding and there wouldn't be a need to "attract" riders and developers.
(And if the Federal government hadn't got into funding highways, I'd be OK with them not funding local transit projects.)
with piss-poor ridership
Let's see what happens in another 5-10 years once major developments in progress and planned on the east side are completed. Highways aren't expected to be jammed the year they're opened.
that DIRECLTY duplicates the 6-MLK Line?
Only for part of the way.
AND it directly duplicates the 76 line?
WES does not make local stops. Or do you think Line 94 "duplicates" Line 12 and therefore should be eliminated?
Westside MAX, that duplicates the 46 and 48 lines (among many others)
How is that so? How are those routes an acceptable substitute for the entire MAX ridership? Do the existing trips have tons of extra capacity and could handle the loads (like the Orange Line should be able to handle the loads of Line 99)? Do they parallel the route directly? What routes serve Beaverton Creek, Elmonica or Quatama?
Or the original Streetcar line, that duplicates all sorts of bus routes?
No route provides comparable service for the length of the line and has the capacity to handle the load.
a way to kissing Neil McFarlane's ass
Again, I thought you didn't like personal attacks. But as I said above, I do wish that there could be a rational discussion of transit choices.
the bus provides a service the rail service cannot offer
There will indeed be service from Milwaukie to Portland. It's not like Line 99 goes someplace that MAX won't (OK it won't go to Main and Milport, but it was the locals that insisted it shouldn't).
a known, demonstratable, proven fact that transfers discourage ridership
Even if it's to a mode that should be better and service is frequent (MAX is to run every 10 minutes when the 99 does)? How significant is the loss?
The topic of money is a strawman when it comes to transit service. All that matters: are people that depend on TriMet receiving good service and good customer service.
Post a Comment