The Most Interesting North American Rail Networks: #9 – Portland, Ore.

Portland, Ore.

Providers: TriMet; City of Portland; Amtrak
Modes: light rail, streetcar, intercity rail 
Unique routes: 10, 1 pending (4 TriMet MAX light rail; 3 Amtrak; 2 City of Portland Streetcar; 1 TriMet WES regional rail)
Distinctive stations: Portland Union Station
Equipment: TriMet MAX light-rail vehicles; City of Portland Streetcar vehicles; TriMet WES DMU trainsets; Amtrak Cascades trainsets; Amtrak Superliner trainsets

In my Runners-Up post, I explained that a number of West Coast regions were difficult omissions from this Top 10 list: San Diego; Seattle-Tacoma; Vancouver. Portland is the reason why. It doesn't have the number of unique modes as Seattle-Tacoma, nor is its light-rail network as old as San Diego's or as efficient as Vancouver's SkyTrain system. But the reason why Portland earns a Top 10 spot is the degree to which passenger rail is seen as a force of innovation in the PDX area. It coined the concept of the modern American streetcar in the early 2000s and serves as the case study for the power of urban transit-oriented development. 

Portland earned its progressive transit bona fides when it opened its original MAX line from downtown to Gresham in 1986, opting for the nascent rail mode over highway expansion. The concept caught on and led to the westward extension of the line to Beaverton and Hillsboro in 1998, followed by the Red Line to Portland International Airport (PDX), which debuted the day before September 11th, 2001. Just months earlier, the Portland Streetcar re-introduced the long-dormant rail mode to the urbanism playbook and urban transit planning hasn't been the same since. To see MAX trains and Portland Streetcars interact with the many signs of vitality in the city's downtown is to experience a place unlike any non-traditional rail transit region in North America.

MAX lines now fan out in all directions and a second route was added to the Portland Transit Mall through downtown to relieve congestion with the opening of the Green Line in 2009. This fall, the launch of the Orange Line to Milwaukie will open the signature Tilikum Crossing transit/bicycle/pedestrian-only bridge, which will also complete the circuit of the Streetcar's Central Loop route. That project – opened in 2012 – complements the initial Streetcar line (now dubbed the North-South Line), bringing the mode's accessibility to neighborhoods on the east side of the Willamette River. The city used to run a historic vintage trolley service through downtown, first on MAX tracks and a short spur to Holladay Park (which still exists) and then the Streetcars' but the vehicles are now set to head to St. Louis for the Delmar Loop Trolley project there. 

Back on the west side, the Westside Express (WES) route south from MAX's Beaverton Transit Center to Wilsonville is one of those quirky lines that helped push Portland into the Top 10. Your blogger attended its opening day festivities in 2009 which introduced Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) trainsets built by Colorado Railcar that could operate on the same tracks at the same time as freight trains. Colorado Railcar has since gone out of business, leaving WES' DMUs the only operating example of that model. Like a number of other DMU-operated regional rail lines (namely, New Jersey' Transit's RiverLine and NCTD's Sprinter), WES does not reach downtown Portland, instead connecting passengers with MAX's Blue and Red lines. Future extension's to Salem and Eugene along the route's former Oregon Electric Railway line are possible. 

In downtown Portland, Union Station is a fitting anchor for the region's passenger rail network. With both MAX and Streetcar lines in close proximity, the 1896 facility hosts Amtrak's exemplary Cascades service north to Tacoma, Seattle and Vancouver and south to Eugene. As I noted in the Runners Up post in this series, Cascades offers among the finest – if not the finest – intercity passenger rail equipment in the Americas as well as decent frequency. Capital projects supported by Washington and Oregon are improving the speed and reliability of the route to add additional trips. Meanwhile, the long-distance Coast Starlight and Empire Builder routes reach as far as Los Angeles and Chicago, respectively. Union Station's iconic Go By Train sign is mirrored by a similar Go By Streetcar version positioned among the Pearl District developments fueled by the Streetcar's presence.  

And although it's technically not a rail operation, the Portland Aerial Tram – served by the OHSU Commons stop on the Streetcar's North-South Line – is one of the most unique mobility applications in North America. The two cars transport more than 3,300 passengers a day a horizontal distance of 3,300 feet and 500 vertical feet up to connect the Streetcar and South Waterfront District with the main campus of the Oregon Health & Science University. 

The Most Interesting North American Rail Networks Series

#10: Baltimore-Washington

Runners Up

Analysis: The Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2014

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives – led by Rep. Bill Shuster (Pa.), Chair of the House Transportation & Infrastructure (T&I) Committee – introduced legislation to reauthorize the nation's passenger rail legislation. The full House referred the measure – known as the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2014 – to the T&I Committee for markup, scheduled for tomorrow.

Although the bill outlines a four-year authorization period for investment in the operation of Amtrak's national network and capital projects for the Northeast Corridor, those annual investment levels are well below Amtrak's requested funding levels. And while a number of key elements – ranging from restoration of Amtrak service between Florida and the Gulf Coast to allowing domesticated pets onboard trains – could ultimately benefit the nation's passenger rail network, it falls short of the sort of comprehensive investment befitting a mode of travel that has carried record number of riders for 10 of the last 11 years and can shape local and regional economies like few others.

The co-sponsors of Shuster's bill are significant, given that they represent both the strongest advocates and opponents of federal passenger rail programs in the House: California Rep. Jeff Denham – an outspoken critic of Amtrak and the California's High-Speed Rail (HSR) project – joins Shuster from the Republican majority, while Shuster's Democratic counterpart – West Virginia's Rep. Nick Rahall – joins frequent and vocal passenger rail proponent Rep. Corrine Brown of Florida. The combination of those four key representatives suggests the measure could enjoy strong bipartisan support in the House – no small achievement given the body's current gridlock and one that speaks to Shuster's perceived role as a moderate on the issue.

The most recently-passed version of the legislation – the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 – expired on September 30, 2013, and is considered a reasonable and stable source of federal investment for Amtrak and intercity rail across the nation. That it was approved by a Congress controlled by the Democrats at the time and signed by President George W. Bush demonstrates recent precedent for bipartisan agreement on passenger rail authorizations.

Our allies at the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) recently released an assessment of the bill here.

RAIL Magazine's assessment of the bill's provisions are similar, although not identical.

As NARP outlines, the measure does include a number of valuable reforms to contribute to more efficient, responsive operations by Amtrak, including:

• A comprehensive, ongoing approach to upgrading the Northeast Corridor (NEC) – defined in the legislation as the rail line owned and operated by Amtrak between Boston, Mass., and Washington, D.C. – to the tune of a $14 billion loan to Amtrak over the bill's four-year authorization period along with a $300 million grant requiring corresponding matching investment from the states served by the NEC [for our thoughts on the NEC, see our post here];
• An effort to restore intercity rail service between Florida and New Orleans that was suspended after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, but never restored;
• Studying and developing recommendations for rail-oriented development around Amtrak stations, as well as opportunities for Amtrak to leverages its assets by allowing private sector entities to install utility infrastructure such as power transmission, telecommunications systems and other activities, thereby generating ancillary revenue to support its operations;
• Creating a Route Advisory Committee for state-supported routes to ensure their viability and investigate opportunities by which operators other than Amtrak may be contracted with to operate the service – a nod to efforts in Indiana and Oklahoma to explore contracts with service providers other than Amtrak. This provision includes fairly strong protections to avoid abandonment of service at all costs;
• Allowing Amtrak passengers to travel with domesticated animals, such as cats and dogs;
• Evaluating the railroad's boarding procedures in comparison to best practices within the rail transport industry; and
• Reform of Amtrak's food and beverage program. Although Amtrak's food and beverage operations are a small-minded bugaboo of Amtrak opponents in Congress, the program's continual – and significant – operating losses distract the Congress from properly investing in the railroad's capital and operating needs. By introducing some measures to direct Amtrak towards a more sustainable food and beverage operation, perhaps some hostile opposition can be reduced by political opponents the next time Amtrak requires decisions on overall operating support. While RAIL Magazine supports the continuation of the kind of hospitality that's unique to passenger rail passengers among other modes of travel (see our post here on the charm of dining aboard a train), this program has become too easy a target to avoid some reform measures.  

However, a number of elements in the proposed legislation are more concerning:

• The overall investment levels for both operation of the national route network and capital investment in the NEC top out at just under $1.5 billion in the final year of the bill, fiscal year 2018. Amtrak's budget request in those same categories for fiscal year 2015 is $1.62 billion. Although Amtrak's record ridership in recent years have made its operations more efficient via greater revenues, its capital needs have grown. The authorization levels proposed in PRRIA barely keep pace with inflation;
• A total lack of capital investment beyond the NEC. While it's true that the overwhelming majority of the rail miles owned by Amtrak directly are contained within the NEC, routes across the country have benefited from capital investment supported by the current PRIIA of 2008, which established a series of capital grants across the nation. This legislation profoundly constrains Amtrak's ability to grow ridership on its state-supported corridors and long-distance routes;
• Tightening on the screws on potential high-speed rail projects. Although some analysis of this proposed legislation argued it prohibits HSR investments outside the NEC, that's not quite the case. What the bill does do is place tighter checks and approvals required for Amtrak to either purchase new rolling stock for procurements in excess of $1 million [Sec. 24318, (f)] or to advance capital projects in excess of $1 billion [Sec. 304, Large Capital Projects]. While not referencing HSR projects directly, those would likely be only types of projects that would be subject to this heightened litmus test

Ultimately, we agree in large part with NARP that the PRRIA does not substantially improve investment levels or regulatory benefits for the long-term betterment of the nation's passenger rail network. The lack of a substantial re-imagining of federal passenger rail investment is likely driven by strong opposition to federal spending – in general, or for Amtrak and HSR, in particular –  large majorities in the House of Representatives. In many cases, House members oppose any ongoing support for Amtrak, so Shuster's ability to draw co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle might be the absolute best this iteration of the Congress can achieve. As a result, the PRRIA – as underwhelming as it is – may be the most plausible mechanism for a predictable level of support for Amtrak, while advocates can hope that alternative mechanisms emerge in coming years to make a more significant investment in the nation's passenger rail network.