The story of today’s Portland in the path of the No. 75 bus

riding against the grain

Screengrab from bus75.org, photo by Geoffrey Hiller.

We don’t often publish transit-only posts, but we’ll make an exception for this one.

Portland-based photographer Geoffrey Hiller is working on an all-year project to document the life of Portland through the lens of a single bus line: the No. 75 that runs between Milwaukie and St. Johns via Chavez, 42nd and Lombard.

For a post yesterday, he recruited Portland-based transit consultant and writer Jarrett Walker (who happened to be a teenage intern at TriMet in the 1980s, when the 75 bus was created) to write about the ways the 75 reveals this moment in Portland’s ebbing, flowing life.

The result is a short illustrated essay that is, somehow, both about our city and about good public transit network design. It’s something to behold:

Advertisement

Distance from the center has always been a statement about power, even if its significance has flipped every 50 years. In the 1960s, when power and wealth were fleeing the city, a five-digit house number meant you were remote and secure, while the historic inner city (except for a few enclaves) meant abandonment and crime. But the 2010s are more like the 1910s. A century ago, confident money built the fine Victorian and Craftsman homes of the inner city. Today, again, money rushes inward, pricing the inner city out of the reach of the artists and working people (including my own parents) who made it so interesting fifty years ago.

The marks of this pulsing oscillation are brutally obvious if you go inward or outward, but if you follow an orbital path, as the 75 does, you encounter more subtlety. History and power flow across the 75 more than along it, but as they do they surge and eddy in fractal patterns, even as a few rocks standing firm against their current.

It’s short. It mentions the Springwater Trail at one point. Just read it.

— Michael Andersen, (503) 333-7824 – michael@bikeportland.org

Our work is supported by subscribers. Please become one today.

Michael Andersen (Contributor)

Michael Andersen (Contributor)

Michael Andersen was news editor of BikePortland.org from 2013 to 2016 and still pops up occasionally.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

35 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Lester Burnham
Lester Burnham
7 years ago

Now a five digit house number means you’ve been forced out of the inner city via greed and gentrification.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

In his post, he says that the 75 is the busiest orbital route… but I could have sworn the busiest is the 72. Does anyone know where to find new ridership statistics?

I usually ride the 75 a few times a week and the 72 once or twice a week and the 75 is never as full as the 72.

Personally, I feel like the 75 is one of (if not the) best route for a MAX line that doesn’t go downtown. It would connect all of the MAX lines to each other, and it would be great for N/S trips on the Eastside and E/W trips on the North side.

Social Engineer
Social Engineer
7 years ago

Any chance you’d like to file another one? I really missed that feature from your Portland Afoot operation.

ChadwickF
ChadwickF
7 years ago

“Only on the Bus!” Loved that feature. Even read it on the bus once.

maccoinnich
7 years ago

According to Metro the busiest bus lines (by total ridership) are the 4, 72, 20* and 75, in that order:

http://www.oregonmetro.gov/news/you-are-here-snapshot-how-portland-region-gets-around

*Line 20 isn’t even frequent service, but I believe that there are plans to change that.

Eric
Eric
7 years ago
Reply to  ethan

Yeah, but that would mean a MAX line designed for the benefit of Portlanders and not suburban commuters.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

I’ve had the opposite problem more often (waiting for a SB 75 while 2 or 3 NB go by). I think the timing is hard, especially since there’s no bus priority anywhere along the route (IIRC). If there were more bus priority (or bus lanes) on 39th, I think the route would be much more reliable.

Adam
7 years ago

The 75 bus should be converted to a MAX line.

JeffS
JeffS
7 years ago
Reply to  Adam

In hopes of speeding it up?

It’s definitely slow, but the stop reduction that MAX brings would have negative impacts as well.

Social Engineer
Social Engineer
7 years ago
Reply to  Adam

Not a bad idea in theory, but this region isn’t even willing to pay for a tunnel to directly serve the city’s largest employer. There is no way a crosstown MAX line that will require significant sections of tunnel will ever be a regional priority (elevated is a complete non-starter).

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

It wouldn’t require a tunnel if the route were slightly changed and if parking were removed.

For example, rather than detouring to Dekum, it could stay on Lombard. Rather than going down 42nd, it could go down 33rd and avoid all of the tight turns. However, I’m not sure what would happen at the Southern end of the line, but I’m pretty sure there are a few solutions that don’t involve a tunnel.

Chris I
Chris I
7 years ago
Reply to  Adam

BRT would be a good fit, but it would be a major project, as 39th would need to be redesigned with 5 lanes (BRT, general, turn, general, BRT). Lombard is already overbuilt and has space for BRT lanes.

MAX priority should be as follows:
– SW Corridor
– Powell line in to 205 and re-routing of green line to relieve Steel Bridge
– Yellow line extension to Vancouver
– Division line from 205 to Gresham
– Tunnel to supplement Steel Bridge bottleneck

Then we can start talking about cross-town routes. A spur off of the yellow line down Lombard would make sense as a first phase. Building the rest of it is not easy.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

A Lombard spur is such a good concept with very few issues, yet I don’t see it in any planning documents.

Social Engineer
Social Engineer
7 years ago
Reply to  ethan

Well, there probably isn’t the ridership to support such a line, because the peninsula lacks the population and employment density (that could easily be served by fixed-guideway transit), and there isn’t a huge park-and-ride market from Scappoose or St. Helens that would park at a St. Johns terminus. Transit agencies often rely on these park and riders to pump up ridership numbers when competing for federal funds.

Also, if you branch the Yellow Line at Lombard, you are halving the frequency on both spurs, meaning 30 minute minimum headways on the St. Johns and Expo Center branches. Yellow Line frequency cannot be increased unless improvements are made to the Steel Bridge to increase maximum speeds on the bridge which would increase per-hour train throughput (or unless a new river crossing is built). The Columbia River Crossing plan would have included such improvements to the Steel Bridge, by the way.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

What improvements would the CRC have made to the Steel Bridge?

Also, a good way to increase frequency (and do without the SB bottleneck) would be to run from St. Johns to IRQ, then continue South to the Orange Line at between OMSI and Clinton. Sure, it would be fairly expensive, but it would allow people to connect N/S without going through downtown or transferring to a slower mode of transportation.

Social Engineer
Social Engineer
7 years ago
Reply to  ethan

From page 2-29 of the CRC FEIS:

Currently, all light rail transit lines within the regional MAX system cross the Willamette River in downtown Portland via the Steel Bridge. The Steel Bridge was built in 1912 and was retrofitted in 1984 to receive LRVs. When the first light rail line opened in 1986, 40 LRVs crossed the bridge during the 4-hour PM peak period; in 2007, with the Red and Yellow Lines opened, 116 LRVs crossed the bridge during the 4-hour PM peak period. In 2009, TriMet opened the I-205 South Corridor Project, increasing the number of vehicles that cross the Steel Bridge to 152 during the 4-hour PM peak period. With a “peak of the peak” headway of 7.5 minutes, the CRC project would increase the number of LRVs that cross the Steel Bridge in 2030 during the 4-hour PM peak period to 176 trains. To accommodate these additional trains, the CRC project would retrofit the existing rails on the Steel Bridge to increase the allowed light rail transit speed over the bridge, increasing the LRV throughput of the bridge.

The Steel Bridge has a lift span that requires lift joints in the MAX rails within the track bed. These lift joints limit the crossing speed of LRVs to no more than 10 miles per hour (mph). This limitation is because the vibrations at these joints disrupt the signaling and electrification system. Modifications to reduce the wheel rise from the lift joint would decrease the bridge vibration, allowing MAX trains a maximum speed of 15 mph on the Steel Bridge, thus improving the speed of all MAX lines crossing the bridge. There is also an existing signal case on the lift span that cannot withstand high levels of vibration. The overhead catenary system (OCS) that supplies electrical power to the trains is also not designed to withstand the high levels of vibration that are generated with speeds above 10 mph.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

I imagine that could be done much cheaper than the billions of dollars it would take to finance a bridge for Washington commuters.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

And I would say that the peninsula has plenty of people and jobs. 3 times more than Forest Grove, which is on the HCT plan.

Chris I
Chris I
7 years ago

That’s why I listed the Lombard Spur after a new downtown tunnel to supplement the Steel. It would be a new line that would share tracks with Yellow between downtown and Lombard. Similarly to what we saw along N Interstate, proper zoning changes and fixed transit on Lombard would spur dense development.

Teddy
Teddy
7 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

Blue Line into Washington?

Adam
7 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

Typically BRT is built center-running and left turns are banned. We’d only need four lanes for that.

Chris I
Chris I
7 years ago
Reply to  Adam

You need space for the island stations, at least. And the lanes on 39th are already fairly, narrow.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

Here’s an idea: Make 39th one-way for cars NB and make 82nd one-way for cars SB. Then you have plenty of room for much bigger sidewalks and full BRT.

John Liu
7 years ago
Reply to  ethan

A 43 block separated couplet? How . . . infeasible.

Jessica Roberts
7 years ago

I loved this essay. Thanks for highlighting it here.

Chris I
Chris I
7 years ago

On the subject of transit blogging: where do people go for Portland transit info now? The PortlandTransport blog is essentially defunct. I think I get more info about Portland transit from this blog and SeattleTransitBlog.

maccoinnich
7 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

I really miss Portland Transport. There is so much going on right now (TSP update including Central City 2035, Powell-Division, SW Corridor, parking meters in NW / CEID, TriMet Service Enhancement Plans, etc) that it’s a shame that we don’t have a news source covering those stories in detail.

Social Engineer
Social Engineer
7 years ago
Reply to  maccoinnich

Thanks for volunteering, gentlemen.

ethan
ethan
7 years ago

I honestly would, but my availability is sporadic, I spend too much time travelling and I honestly don’t know enough about transit.

Mark McClure
Mark McClure
7 years ago

Second what Jessica said. Thanks, Michael. PS: I miss Portland Afoot.

CaptainKarma
CaptainKarma
7 years ago

Thanks for the essay. I kept looking for the photos. Need about six more to get a good feel for what the words were trying say.

rev.j.p.rinehart
rev.j.p.rinehart
7 years ago

A book inspired by the riding almost the entire length on the 75 line for years.

https://www.amazon.com/Mass-Transportation-Scott-Tienken/dp/1257959298?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0

Jauna
Jauna
7 years ago

OMG that drove me crazy!