Jon DeVore has his own take about the Vancouver light-rail forum which I wrote about that took place last Wednesday. Jon brings about some good ideas, including this one:
“As I’ve stated before, I think the decision to bring light rail across the river is a tough one. The tipping point for me is that Portland already has an extensive system, meaning the potential benefit to the region is high. And let’s get real here. We’re talking about running LRT from the Expo Center to Clark College, a distance of several miles at the most.”
Very nice & comprehensive write-up!
6 comments ↓
This is the light rail they should be building, forget the green line.
Won’t the feds fund this line or is it just vacouverites don’t want the max?
Thanks for the kind words, TriMetiquette.
AL M–
A lot , but not all, of the opposition to light rail coming over the river comes from very conservative types in Clark County. On the other hand, it seems to be support has increased considerably since the failed 1995 vote here, when it was absolutely crushed at the ballot box.
The City of Vancouver has been pretty supportive of light rail, the county commission far less so.
Once CRC releases the draft DEIS we can get a better look at things. It could be a tough political battle over here to secure operating and maintenance funds through a sales tax increase. The figure I’ve heard is a one-tenth of one percent increase, but with the economy worsening people are already objecting to a similar amount on the ballot this month to pay for a new emergency radio system in Clark County.
As for the feds, what I keep hearing is that federal funding is tight and getting tighter. This needs to be a pretty ironclad proposal with robust local support.
Thanks to DeVore for tipping me to your informative blog.
As Jon says there’s been a marked change in voter demographics since the original defeat in 1995. As a commuter from Clark County to Portland myself, I’m highly interested in anything that gets me out of a single occupier vehicle and into functional mass transit or a working bike path (not the scary bike ride that is the I-5 bridge today).
The glaring difference between Oregon and Washington is the comparative structures between Tri-Met and C-Tran. Tri-Met is a chartered State of Oregon corporation, C-Tran is a county-level entity. The board of Tri-Met is composed of business and community leaders appointed by the Governor. C-Tran’s board is the Clark County Board and the mayors of incorporated towns in Clark County.
That’s a huge difference in political muscle. Unfortunately, this sets up a dynamic where the smaller entity opposes progress, even though it has the most to gain.
One thing I’m seeing on the Portland side is a valid concern that the CRC project does nothing to reduce overall carbon footprint, see SmarterBridge.org
Great discussion. Good, valid points brought up by all!
It’s hard to believe that Vancouverites would be this stupid in their own public planning process.
Why would anybody in their right mind vote against max to Portland?
That’s one place that max makes sense.
AL-M-
Logically one would expect support to be strongest within the city limits of Vancouver, especially the further west (and thus closer to the proposed line) one gets.
Aneurin hit the nail on the head–the problem is mostly outside Vancouver, in the small cities and unincorporated portions of the county. And since the Board of Clark County Commissioners has a big say in C-Tran, that is a big problem over here.
I personally would have been fine just running light rail to downtown Vancouver and calling it good, but there is something called a “Minimum Operating Segment” or MOS they have to do, so my understanding is that is why it would go slightly further, perhaps to Clark College.
Leave a Comment