Leaders for the Southwest Corridor Plan are exploring whether to pursue a light rail or bus rapid transit line for a missing spoke in the region's rapid transit network "wheel", a line that could carry tens of thousands of riders daily to work, colleges and other major destinations much more reliably than traffic-clogged I-5, Highway 217 and Pacific Highway.
Though originally scheduled for Feb. 29, the project steering committee's decision has been rescheduled to later this spring to allow more time for exploring the difficult question of how to improve transit service to Portland Community College's hilltop Sylvania campus – whether by light rail tunnel, a direct bus rapid transit link or one of several other connection options, including direct local buses, shuttles or a tram.
Details on the next steering committee meetings will be posted online as they become available, project staff said.
We asked several leaders from the corridor who sit on the plan's steering committee or represent major institutions in the area three questions about those decisions. Their thoughts, edited for clarity and length, are below.
What do you think? Add your thoughts via a survey open through Feb. 15. Or send an email to [email protected].
What do you think is the most important thing to consider when it comes to choosing between light rail and bus rapid transit for the corridor?
Metro Councilor Bob Stacey, steering committee co-chair: The key question for me is, “What’s the necessary capacity?” Not just the day it’s opened, but for the next 20 to 30 years thereafter, as our region grows. In Southwest Corridor, we’re serving a growing area, composed not only of Southwest Portland, but Tigard, Tualatin and adjoining cities. Each of them has some pretty significant growth expectations, and all of them are in a corridor that is now greatly taxing I-5 and Highway 99/Barbur.
Tualatin Mayor Lou Ogden: The most important thing to consider – for mode choice, for alignment choice, whether or not we go forward with this project – is return of investment. And return on investment takes a number of forms: it’s ridership, it’s cost per ride, both operational and long-term capital costs of building it. And it’s the actual demonstrated benefit we can have in communities from future redevelopment or development that will occur, in terms of assessed value and jobs as a result of the high-capacity transit.
Tigard Mayor John Cook: I think travel times, travel reliability and number of users are all important. But I also feel what the citizens want needs to come into play. We just had a statistically valid poll of Tigard residents, and it showed a leaning of favorites toward light rail.
Rian Windsheimer, Region 1 manager, Oregon Department of Transportation: The main question on my mind is whether the benefits of light rail, such as travel time and ridership, are worth the additional $1 billion in costs.
Elise Shearer, Tigard Downtown Alliance: My personal opinion is that we need to keep in mind long-term population growth in this area. The whole northwest area is becoming a climate change refuge. People are moving into Oregon at higher rate because we have water, jobs, a more mild climate. We need to keep in mind long term efficiency, including the cost of energy consumption and employee benefits and pay.
Brian Newman, OHSU associate vice president of planning (and former Metro Councilor): You need to distinguish between the mission of the project versus individual objectives. For example, which mode is more successful in helping us meet our land use and social equity goals?
Metro Councilor Craig Dirksen, steering committee co-chair: Capacity and quality of service.
What's most compelling to you about the high capacity transit options for the corridor? What's most concerning?
Stacey: We know that, today, there are frustrated motorists who would like to see an alternative, whether it’s for them or somebody else they’re sharing the road with. What’s concerning: Light rail is expensive. This is a long corridor. You can’t run a line that does everything – that hits every single desired destination. Cost will become a factor, and the ability to serve an entire corridor with one investment is a limiting factor. So, we need to be thoughtful about commitments we make along the way, how many stations, what locations we hit.
Cook: The most compelling thing is the development potential, and along with that, having another tool in the toolbox to relieve some of the increasing congestion. We're looking at new development in downtown Tigard and the Tigard Triangle. Those are areas we're looking into increasing density of housing and businesses so we can keep single-family housing in other areas of Tigard.
Durham Mayor Gery Schirado: We have a real urgent need to take cars off our limited auto venues. As long as we're utilizing cars as our primary mode of transportation, we're only going to continue to fill those limited venues, which obviously has negative impacts on how efficiently people can move around, on our clean city, clean air, clean water. That's really where I think the high capacity transit is the wave of the future. I know a lot of people would like right now just to have more auto capacity. But that's not going to happen, so we've got to look at what the alternatives are.
Marianne Fitzgerald, Southwest Neighborhoods Inc. transportation chair: Everyone is really excited about getting better access to jobs, services and educational opportunities. … (But) the other thing critical to Southwest Portland is that we get good access from the neighborhoods to the transit station. If you can't walk to a station then what's the point? I speak from 35 years of experience of having to drive to a park and ride because I have such poor transit service and no sidewalks in my neighborhood.
Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, Community Housing Fund executive director: I think it’s compelling that we might be able to get out of our cars more often, for those who have a choice, and for those that don’t have a choice, that their lives might be enhanced with a little bit of additional time. … What concerns me most is how we can maintain equity. Just seeing what’s happened to other transit corridors that have emerged, it’s both exciting and frightening, compounded by what’s going on with the overall housing market in the Portland area. Those burdens of growth that disproportionately affect people at low income levels are the concerning to me.
Phil Wu, Westside Transportation Alliance: The high capacity transit plan is an opportunity to design a system that meets the needs of growth in this corridor. If short-term issues drive the decision too much, that may limit the potential for this to be a visionary project. Because it's increasingly hard to do these kinds of transportation plans, if we're committed to doing it, then do it right from the outset. Try to be visionary and forward thinking and not limited to short-term thinking.
Shearer: The Southwest Corridor community deserves the same quality of transit as the rest of the metro area. We've long been paying into light rail built in other communities. The long-term plan was to have light rail in the Southwest area as well. We deserve it. I am concerned that we make sure we have plenty of affordable housing and mixed-use housing near all the station locations. Some of the highest costs people have are housing and transportation. Coming from a social justice perspective, we need to serve all the population.
Frank Angelo, Angelo Planning Group: On the compelling side, transit can be used as an organizing tool for land uses along the route and public facility improvements along and near the corridor. My major concern will be the impact on the existing vehicle capacity in the area and if it will be diminished a lot. It’s a pretty major road and it needs to provide capacity.
What's most important to consider when it comes to serving PCC Sylvania?
Dirksen: It’s a primary destination in the corridor. It must be served well and it must be served better than it is.
Ogden: For me, it’s got to be based on total ridership. How many more people are we able to provide with access to PCC that we can’t provide with additional transit. Secondly it relates to the cost per ride and return on investment. And lastly, what would high capacity transit do for the long term future of PCC’s capacity to serve its students?
Schirado: If I had to condense it down to just a bullet point I would really like to see PCC step up and get some skin in the game… This is not in any way to be taken as ruling out access to PCC in the SW Corridor Plan. I'm 100 percent in favor of the role PCC plays in our metropolitan area. It's a crucial role and I hope it continues to grow. But this is a publicly funded program and outside of a few appearances, I haven't really seen anyone from PCC stand up and say, "we're willing to do this or we're willing to do that."
Greenlaw-Fink: For me, as someone who’s most focused on affordable housing development and people having access to opportunities to improve their lives, PCC is a touchstone for the whole Southwest Corridor – it’s really the most important piece we have for education and career training. One of the key things we have to think about, in my opinion, as we develop the corridor: how can we make increased accessibility to PCC affordable, equitable and manageable for the neighborhoods it cuts through?
Fitzgerald: We've got to be able to serve PCC well. I think that they could do a better job with transit today; we don't need to wait for the Southwest Corridor. We could do it today. (Fitgerald noted that only one SW Portland neighborhood has taken an official position on the options to serve PCC Sylvania. The Far Southwest neighborhood opposes a light rail tunnel to the campus.)
Angelo: I think it absolutely needs to serve the campus, because it’s a major attractor in the corridor. Having said that, the cost is pretty critical as well and this should not cost half the entire project to get to PCC Sylvania.
Newman: I think it would be a huge missed opportunity if we don't provide a direct connection to PCC Sylvania. If it was a 4-year university there would be broad consensus among everybody that we have to serve that site. Unfortunately because it's a community college it doesn't seem to have the same sense of priority or opportunity among a lot of folks and I think that's a mistake.
Wu: Ultimately whatever method is selected to meet that campus has to meet the needs of those who are on the campus – students, staff, faculty and visitors. Their needs have to be met. That's No. 1. No. 2 is making sure the neighborhoods and communities around it aren't disengaged or left out, because it's their neighborhood.
Interviews by Craig Beebe and Justin Sherrill.