DOCSLIB.ORG

Transit Impacts and Travel Demand Forecasting Results Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transit Impacts and Travel Demand Forecasting Results Report Southwest Light Rail Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement Transit Impacts and Travel Demand Forecasting Results Report May 31, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 2. Affected Environment ........................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Public Transportation ................................................................................................................................. 1 2.2 Travel Behavior ........................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Transit Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 District-to-District Travel Demand and Mode Choice ........................................................................ 3 3.1.1. Total Person Trip Demand ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2. Transit Work Trip Demand ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.3. Total Transit Trip Demand ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Service Characteristics ...................................................................................................................... 4 3.2.1. Amount of Service ...................................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.2. Travel Time ................................................................................................................................................. 9 3.2.3. Reliability .................................................................................................................................................. 10 3.3 Transit Ridership ..............................................................................................................................10 3.3.1. Light Rail Ridership ................................................................................................................................... 11 3.3.2. Corridor and Systemwide Ridership ........................................................................................................ 11 3.3.3. Transit Trip Productions ........................................................................................................................... 12 3.3.4. Work and Non-Work Transit Trips and Mode Share ............................................................................... 14 3.3.5. Station Usage and Mode of Access and Egress ........................................................................................ 14 3.3.6. Light Rail Ridership Distribution ............................................................................................................... 15 3.3.7. Corridor Throughput ................................................................................................................................ 16 3.4 Light Rail Alternatives ......................................................................................................................19 3.4.1. Park and Ride Range ................................................................................................................................ 21 3.4.2. Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) ....................................................................................................... 21 3.4.3. Initial Route Proposal ............................................................................................................................... 21 Appendices Southwest Corridor Light Rail Transit Impacts and Travel Demand Forecasting results Reports| May 31, 2018 i 1. INTRODUCTION This Results Report addresses the effects on transit use and services that could occur with the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project. The report provides supplemental information to Section 3 of the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 2. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT This section summarizes the characteristics and performance of the existing transportation system in the corridor and in the region. 2.1. Public Transportation Transit service in the corridor features fixed-route, fixed-schedule buses operating in mixed traffic, and the Westside Express Service (WES) Commuter Rail operating during peak hours between Beaverton and Wilsonville. The major bus route is the 12 Barbur. The 96 Tualatin/I-5 bus runs peak hour, express service between Tualatin and downtown Portland. The Portland Aerial Tram connects the South Waterfront and Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU). Transit Lines, Operations and Facilities The Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) has a current fleet of 683 buses that serves 81 bus lines and seasonal shuttles with 6,591 bus stops and 980 bus shelters. There are 180 miles of frequent-service bus lines on 13 routes that provide 15-minute or better service 7 days a week. The 97-station Metropolitan Area Express (MAX) light rail system is 60 miles long and also operates at least every 15 minutes. In addition to fixed-route bus and MAX service, TriMet operates 268 LIFT vehicles, which provide door-to-door service for people with special needs. TriMet operates three bus operations and maintenance facilities and two rail operations and maintenance facilities. Table 2.1-1 summarizes TriMet’s fixed-route service. Overall, 90 percent of people within the TriMet district live within one-half mile of TriMet service. Table 2.1-1. 2016 Fixed-Route Service Summary Streetcar MAX LRT Frequent Bus Standard Bus Routes 2 5 13 64 Length (miles) 16 60 180 784 Current Ridership, Operating Revenue, and Operating Expenses On weekdays in FY2017, the TriMet system averaged 186,800 boardings on buses, 123,200 on light rail, and 1,800 on WES Commuter Rail. Streetcars averaged 15,000 boardings, the aerial tram averaged 11,000 boardings, and WES Commuter Rail averaged 1,700 boardings per day. Between fiscal year (FY) 2007 and 2017, TriMet annual fare revenue as a percentage of the cost of operation and maintenance improved from 33 percent to 37.4 percent and the average operations cost per boarding ride for the fixed route service increased from $2.34 to $3.16, reflecting inflation and service expansion to lower ridership areas and times. Cost per boarding ride for LRT, at $2.61, is lower than that for buses, at $3.43 (FY 2017). Southwest Corridor Light Rail Transit Impacts and Travel Demand Forecasting Results Report| May 31, 2018 1 2.2. Travel Behavior Metro’s travel demand forecasting model produced current estimates and future projections of travel behavior referenced in this report. The basic unit of measurement used in describing travel behavior is the “person trip,” which is a trip made by one person from a point of origin to a destination, via any travel mode. Several trip variables, including the origin, destination, mode and purpose of the trip, further describe travel behavior. Travel demand totals between districts or groups of transportation analysis zones (TAZ) help to discern travel markets and shifts in modes due to the differences between alternatives. The district-to- district travel demand totals are split into three groups: total person trips, transit work trips and total transit trips. Figure 2.2-1 shows the district boundaries used to summarize trip data for the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project modeling. Districts one through seven comprise the SW Corridor. For 2015, the base year for the Draft EIS, the transportation facilities in the Southwest Corridor were estimated to carry 64,500 person trips between the corridor and the Portland Central Business District (CBD) on an average weekday. Of these, approximately 10,300 (16 percent) were on the transit system. Of 16,000 daily work trips between the corridor and the CBD, 5,500(34 percent) were on transit. 3. TRANSIT IMPACTS This section presents the impacts that the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project would have on the transit system in the corridor. This section compares transit service characteristics, travel time, ridership, and reliability for the No-Build Alternative and the Light Rail Alternatives. Two full-length alternatives were modeled and analyzed for the transit analysis, one utilizing a Through Configuration, and one utilizing a Branched Configuration (see section 2.3.3 of the Draft EIS). The Through Configuration combines Light Rail Alternatives A1, B2, and C1; the Branched Configuration combines Alternatives A1, B2, and C5 (see Table 2.3-1 of the Draft EIS). The remaining light rail alternatives are addressed by geographic segment and are described in terms of change compared to the Through or Branched Configuration. 2 Southwest Corridor Light Rail Transit Impacts and Travel Demand Forecasting Results Report| May 31, 2018 3.1. District-to-District Travel Demand and Mode Choice 3.1.1. Total Person Trip Demand Total person trip demand indicates the total number of people traveling by auto, transit, bike, and walk between two areas. Identical person trip tables were used in modeling No-Build and Build alternatives, consistent with methodology used under
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study
    Portland Union Station Multimodal Conceptual Engineering Study Submitted to Portland Bureau of Transportation by IBI Group with LTK Engineering June 2009 This study is partially funded by the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. IBI GROUP PORtlAND UNION STATION MultIMODAL CONceptuAL ENGINeeRING StuDY IBI Group is a multi-disciplinary consulting organization offering services in four areas of practice: Urban Land, Facilities, Transportation and Systems. We provide services from offices located strategically across the United States, Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Asia. JUNE 2009 www.ibigroup.com ii Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1: Introduction .....................................................................................1 Introduction 1 Study Purpose 2 Previous Planning Efforts 2 Study Participants 2 Study Methodology 4 Chapter 2: Existing Conditions .........................................................................6 History and Character 6 Uses and Layout 7 Physical Conditions 9 Neighborhood 10 Transportation Conditions 14 Street Classification 24 Chapter 3: Future Transportation Conditions .................................................25 Introduction 25 Intercity Rail Requirements 26 Freight Railroad Requirements 28 Future Track Utilization at Portland Union Station 29 Terminal Capacity Requirements 31 Penetration of Local Transit into Union Station 37 Transit on Union Station Tracks
    [Show full text]
  • Light Rail Transit (LRT)
    Transit Strategies Light Rail Transit (LRT) Light rail transit (LRT) is electrified rail service that operates in urban environments in completely exclusive rights‐of‐way, in exclusive lanes on roadways, and in some cases in mixed traffic. Most often, it uses one to three car trains and serves high volume corridors at higher speeds than local bus and streetcar service. Design and operational elements of LRT include level boarding, off‐board fare payment, and traffic signal priority. Stations are typically spaced farther apart than those of local transit services and are usually situated where there are higher population and employment densities. MAX Light Rail (Portland, OR) The T Light Rail (Pittsburgh, PA) Characteristics of LRT Service LRT is popular with passengers for a number of reasons, the most important of which are that service is fast, frequent, direct, and operates from early morning to late night. These attributes make service more convenient—much more convenient than regular bus service—and more competitive with travel by automobile. Characteristics of LRT service include: . Frequent service, typically every 10 minutes or better . Long spans of service, often 18 hours a day or more . Direct service along major corridors . Fast service Keys reasons that service is fast are the use of exclusive rights‐of‐way—exclusive lanes in the medians of roadways, in former rail rights‐of‐way, and in subways—and that stations are spaced further apart than with bus service, typically every half mile (although stations are often spaced more closely within downtown areas). Rhode Island Transit Master Plan | 1 Differences between LRT and Streetcar Light rail and streetcar service are often confused, largely because they share many similarities.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Wilsonville Transit Master Plan
    City of Wilsonville Transit Master Plan CONVENIENCE SAFETY RELIABILITY EFFICIENCY FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY FRIENDLY SERVICE EQUITY & ACCESS ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY JUNE 2017 Acknowledgements The City of Wilsonville would like to acknowledge the following for their dedication to the development of this Transit Master Plan. Their insight and outlook toward the future of this City helped create a comprehensive plan that represents the needs of employers, residents and visitors of Wilsonville. Transit Master Plan Task Force Planning Commission Julie Fitzgerald, Chair* Jerry Greenfield, Chair Kristin Akervall Eric Postma, Vice Chair Caroline Berry Al Levit Paul Diller Phyllis Millan Lynnda Hale Peter Hurley Barb Leisy Simon Springall Peter Rapley Kamran Mesbah Pat Rehberg Jean Tsokos City Staff Stephanie Yager Dwight Brashear, Transit Director Eric Loomis, Operations Manager City Council Scott Simonton, Fleet Manager Tim Knapp, Mayor Gregg Johansen, Transit Field Supervisor Scott Star, President Patrick Edwards, Transit Field Supervisor Kristin Akervall Nicole Hendrix, Transit Management Analyst Charlotte Lehan Michelle Marston, Transit Program Coordinator Susie Stevens Brad Dillingham, Transit Planning Intern Julie Fitzgerald* Chris Neamtzu, Planning Director Charlie Tso, Assistant Planner Consultants Susan Cole, Finance Director Jarrett Walker Keith Katko, Finance Operations Manager Michelle Poyourow Tami Bergeron, Planning Administration Assistant Christian L Watchie Amanda Guile-Hinman, Assistant City Attorney Ellen Teninty Stephan Lashbrook,
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project: Health Impact Assessment
    Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project: Health Impact Assessment Program Partner Metro Funders US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Network of Public Health Institutes Oregon Public Health Institute www.orphi.org Prepared by: Steve White, Sara Schooley, and Noelle Dobson, Oregon Public Health Institute For more information about this report contact: Steve White, [email protected] Acknowledgements: This project relied on the time and expertise of numerous groups and individuals. Metro staff members Kathryn Sofich, Jamie Snook, Brian Monberg, and Cliff Higgins served on the Project Team and provided documentation, data, and input for all phases of the HIA. They also helped create and sustain interest within Metro for participating in this project. Other Metro staff members also provided valuable comments and critiques at the five brown bags held at Metro to talk about this project and HIA more generally. Substantial input was also provided by the project’s Advisory Committee which provided input on scoping and assessment methodology, and reviewed drafts at various stages. AC members included: Julie Early-Alberts, State of Oregon Public Health Division Gerik Kransky, Bicycle Transportation Alliance Scott France, Clackamas County Community Health John MacArthur, Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium Mel Rader, Upstream Public Health Maya Bhat, MPH, Multnomah County Health Department Brendon Haggerty, Clark County Public Health Joe Recker, TriMet Amy Rose, Metro Daniel Kaempff, Metro Special thanks are also due to Aaron Wernham, project director for Pew Charitable Trust’s Health Impact Project, for providing valuable insight and advice at the project’s outset regarding the coordination of HIA and Environmental Impact Statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transit a History of Public Transit in Portland
    Hilary Pfeifer Meredith Dittmar PUBLIC TRANSIT A history of public transit in Portland Melody Owen Mark Richardson Smith Kristin Mitsu Shiga Chandra Bocci trimet.org/history Traveling through time Dear Reader, Transit plays a critical role in providing options for traveling throughout the region. It connects people to work, school, recreational destinations and essential services. It’s not just a commuter service. It’s a community asset. And the benefits extend far beyond those who ride. TriMet’s transit system is recognized as a national leader for its connection to land use. By linking land-use planning and transit, we have helped create livable communities, vibrant neighborhoods and provide alternatives to driving. Transit is also a catalyst for economic development. More than $10 billion in transit-oriented development has occurred within walking distance of MAX light rail stations since the decision to build in 1980. Developers like the permanence of rail when investing in projects. Transit is also valued by the community. Most of our riders— 81 percent—are choice riders. They have a car available or choose not to own one so they can ride TriMet. With more than 325,000 trips taken each weekday on our buses, MAX Light Rail and WES Commuter Rail, we eliminate 66 million annual car trips. That eases traffic congestion and helps keep our air clean. TriMet carries more people than any other U.S. transit system our size. Our many innovations have drawn the attention of government leaders, planners, transit providers and transit users from around the world. We didn’t start out that way.
    [Show full text]
  • Informing Subterranean Transit Station Design from Existing And
    Portland State University PDXScholar University Honors Theses University Honors College 6-12-2019 Informing Subterranean Transit Station Design from Existing and Future Station Typologies; an Informative Exploration of how to Develop Underground Station Design for MAX Light Rail Antonio P. Ramos-Crosier Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/honorstheses Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Ramos-Crosier, Antonio P., "Informing Subterranean Transit Station Design from Existing and Future Station Typologies; an Informative Exploration of how to Develop Underground Station Design for MAX Light Rail" (2019). University Honors Theses. Paper 797. https://doi.org/10.15760/honors.815 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Informing Subterranean Transit Station Design from Existing and Future Station Typologies; an Informative Exploration of how to Develop Underground Station Design for MAX Light Rail Image 1: MAX Red line crossing the Steel Bridge, which is a key piece of infrastructure that the regional connector aims to avoid with the implementation of a new tunnel. Image taken by Antonio Crosier. By: Antonio Ramos-Crosier Advisor: Jeff Schnabel 1 MAX Regional Connector Ramos-Crosier Research Question: In anticipation of TriMet and the City
    [Show full text]
  • INFRASTRUCTURE CASE STUDY: Portland Airport MAX Red Line
    INFRASTRUCTURE CASE STUDY: Portland Airport MAX Red Line SUMMARY PROJECT TYPE YEAR DEAL STRUCTURE Light rail transit 2001 Design-build (plus transfer of development rights to public land) TOTAL COST $125.8 million construction cost FINANCING Private equity and TIF (Tax Increment Financing) FUNDING Airport passenger facility charge and TriMet general funds PUBLIC BENEFIT Connects downtown to the airport and encourages economic development of the Cascade Station area Background The Portland Airport MAX Red Line, located in Portland, Oregon, is a light rail line that connects downtown Portland to the Portland International Airport.1 It was financed and constructed through a private-public partnership (P3) agreement, and is operated by TriMet, Portland’s regional transit agency.2 It opened to the public in September 2001, and now provides more than 8 million trips per year, with 3,200 people getting on or off at the Portland Airport stop each weekday.3 Project Description The private-public partnership agreement for the Airport MAX Red Line came about through an unsolicited proposal from the private construction and engineering company Bechtel.4 Their proposal was $28.2 million in funding in return for sole rights to the $125 million design-build contract, and development rights for 85 years to 120 acres of land near the airport.5 This land would come to be known as Cascade Station. The original owner of the land was the Port of Portland, and the 120 acres were part of 458 acres earmarked for development as a mixed-use business park called the Portland International Center.6 TriMet’s unsolicited proposal policy allowed Bechtel to initiate the project.
    [Show full text]
  • White Paper: Urban Application of Aerial Cableway Technology
    WHITE PAPER: URBAN APPLICATION OF AERIAL CABLEWAY TECHNOLOGY WSP USA | June 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WSP USA is pleased to present the following white paper that summarizes the benefits and items for consideration of aerial cableway technology; outlines the project development process; and addresses advantages, costs and challenges associated with developing aerial cableway systems in urban environments. Urban applications of aerial cableway technology have been successfully integrated into transit networks in numerous cities around the globe, including the Portland Aerial Tram (Portland, Oregon) and Roosevelt Island Tram (New York, NY). Interest in aerial cableway technology has grown considerably in the United States in recent years, and initial feasibility studies have been completed in several U.S. cities, including San Diego, CA; Washington DC; and Brooklyn, NY. WSP is evaluating aerial cableway technology as an innovative first- and last-mile connection to regional transit in urban areas. Aerial cableway technology offers multiple benefits, including: relatively lower costs compared to other transportation modes, the ability to overcome significant changes in topography and other obstacles in natural and man-made environments, the ability to bypass congested roadways and transportation corridors, the ability to move high volumes of passengers: the equivalent of one city bus every minute, a streamlined design that fits into the urban environment, the potential to integrate transit-oriented development (TOD) near stations, and the ability to provide service between residential areas and key destinations. Many of these benefits have been realized in existing systems in La Paz, Bolivia, and Medellin, Colombia. Specifically, Medellin’s Line K transports more than 40,000 passengers per day between residential areas and the city center, reducing some commute times from more than an hour to approximately 10 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Service Alerts – Digital Displays
    Service Alerts – Digital Displays TriMet has digital displays at most MAX Light Rail stations to provide real-time arrival information as well as service disruption/delay messaging. Some of the displays are flat screens as shown to the right. Others are reader boards. Due to space, the messages need to be as condensed as possible. While we regularly post the same alert at stations along a line, during the Rose Quarter MAX Improvements we provided more specific alerts by geographical locations and even individual stations. This was because the service plan, while best for the majority of riders, was complex and posed communications challenges. MAX Blue Line only displays MAX Blue Line disrupted and frequency reduced. Shuttle buses running between Interstate/Rose Quarter and Lloyd Center stations. trimet.org/rq MAX Blue and Red Line displays page 1 – Beaverton Transit Center to Old Town MAX Blue/Red lines disrupted and frequency reduced. Red Line detoured. Shuttle buses running between Interstate/RQ and Lloyd Center. trimet.org/rq MAX Blue and Red Line displays page 2 – Beaverton Transit Center to Old Town Direct shuttle buses running between Kenton/N Denver Station, being served by Red Line, and PDX. trimet.org/rq MAC Red and Yellow displays – N Albina to Expo Center Red, Yellow lines serving stations btwn Interstate/RQ and Expo Center. trimet.org/rq. Connect with PDX shuttle buses at Kenton. MAX Red display – Parkrose Red Line disrupted, this segment running btwn Gateway and PDX. Use Blue/Green btwn Lloyd Center and Gateway, shuttles btwn Interstate/RQ and Lloyd Center.
    [Show full text]
  • MAG Regional Commuter Rail System Study Update Final Report
    2018 REGIONAL COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM STUDY UPDATE Maricopa Association of Governments | May 2018 APPENDICES MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM STUDY UPDATE Appendix A: Methodology for Cost Estimating May 2018 Page intentionally left blank. Table of contents 1.0 METHODOLOGY FOR COST ESTIMATING __________________________________ 1 1.1 Purpose __________________________________________________________ 1 1.2 General __________________________________________________________ 1 1.3 Cost Estimate Format _______________________________________________ 1 1.4 Capital Cost Estimates ______________________________________________ 2 1.5 O&M Cost Estimates ________________________________________________ 2 2.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND BASIS OF ESTIMATE _________________________________ 3 2.1 General __________________________________________________________ 3 i Page intentionally left blank. ii 1.0 METHODOLOGY FOR COST ESTIMATING 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this document is to present the methodology that will be used to estimate the capital and the annual operating and maintenance (O&M) costs for the MAG System Study Update commuter rail corridors. The cost estimates will follow the methodology discussed below to the maximum extent practical given that no conceptual engineering has been completed to date. Where no detail for cost estimating is available, unit costs on a major level such as route track mile, complete station, or other lump sum will be utilized. 1.2 General The cost estimates for the MAG System Study Update are based upon: Conceptual level design or less. Recent costs experienced or estimated for the commuter rail and freight railroad industries. Costs experienced on recent commuter rail projects. Unit costs obtained from major vendors, as appropriate. Federal funding sources and will follow Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration procedures. In addition, the following will be included with the cost estimates: A comprehensive list of assumptions and all supporting documents supporting line item costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F-1: Westside Service Enhancement Plan
    Appendix F-1: Westside Service Enhancement Plan The following pages are an excerpt from the Westside Service Enhancement Plan showing the direct reference to the Red Line Extension. The full plan is available at https://trimet.org/future/pdf/westside-report.pdf. • Merlo to Progress Ridge/Tigard Extension of service south of the Merlo Rd/158th Ave MAX station connecting with South Beaverton, the Progress Ridge Townsquare, and the Tigard Transit Center. • Willow Creek to the North Hillsboro Industrial Area Extension of service to Cornell Rd., Orenco, Intel Ronler Acres, and the North Hillsboro Industrial Area via Shute Rd. and Brookwood Parkway. Downtown Portland to Progress Ridge Opportunities for action • Extension of peak period express service from Realign bus routes to strengthen a more complete downtown Portland to Progress Ridge north-south and east-west grid, extend MAX Red Townsquare. Line service to Hillsboro and provide frequent or • Downtown Hillsboro to Downtown Beaverton express services on key north- south corridors. New bus line running between Hatfield Complete the grid of bus lines Government Center and Beaverton Transit Extend or change eight bus routes so they better Center via Baseline Rd. and Jenkins Rd. connect with areas of current development and connecting downtown Hillsboro, Willow Creek future growth–residential and employment—and Transit Center, Nike, Cedar Hills Crossing and with MAX and Frequent Service Lines, especially Beaverton Transit Center. going north-south. Improvements include: • North Hillsboro to South Hillsboro Realigned bus service running from Intel Jones Farm to the future South Hillsboro via Brookwood Ave. and TV Highway and connect- ing with MAX at the Fair Complex/Hillsboro Airport Station.
    [Show full text]
  • Streetcar Plan Posters
    WELCOME Welcome! The purpose of this open house is to present draft recommendations from the Bicycle Master Plan and the Streetcar System Plan to the public. City sta! and citizen volunteers are here to present the material and to answer questions. The room is divided into three sections: one for the Bicycle Master Plan, one for the Streetcar System Plan, and one called “Integration Station,” where we tie the two concepts together. Refreshments and child care services are also available. The bicycle and streetcar networks will play a key role in Portland’s future. Together, they will reduce reliance on the automobile for daily tasks, they will reinforce urban land use patterns, and they will help the City achieve its goals to combat climate change. This is the beginning of a transportation transformation. WHY PLAN? PORTLAND HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESSFUL LONG-RANGE PLANNING In 1904, landscape architect John C. Olmsted produced a report for the City Among the parks that resulted from the Olmsted Plan are Holladay Park, Irving Parks Board. The plan served as a blueprint for development of the highly Park, Mt. Tabor (shown above), Overlook Park, Rocky Butte, Sellwood Park, valued park system we enjoy today. Washington Park, and several others. Interstate MAX Opened 2004 Airport MAX Hillsboro MAX Opened 2001 Opened 1998 Portland Streetcar Opened 2001 MAX to Gresham Opened 1986 Clackamas MAX Opens fall 2009 Westside Express Service Opened Feb. 2009 In 1989, three years after the "rst MAX line opened from downtown to Gresham, 20 years later the regional rail system is well on its way to being constructed as planners laid out a vision for a regional rail system.
    [Show full text]