Oregon Cascades budget cuts

Train route from Seattle to Eugene could be in jeopardy

The Oregon Department of Transportation may not have enough money next year to continue providing Amtrak rail service between Portland and Eugene, according to budget discussions in the Oregon Capitol.


Gov. John Kitzhaber had set aside $10.4 million to keep the "Cascades" route operating, even as the federal government phases out its funding for routes shorter than 750 miles.

However, the legislature's proposed budget includes just $5 million for passenger rail.

ODOT Assistant Director Travis Brouwer said it would very likely not be enough to keep the Cascades route operating, and it was a "distinct possibility" it would have to close.

Click to expand...

Aorta - Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates

Today at 3 pm the Ways & Means Joint SubCommittee on Transportation and Economic Development will be taking public testimony on Oregon Cascades funding. Please attend and testify. Explain why passenger rail, esp Oregon Cascades, is important to you.

Click to expand...

:angry2: :wacko: :angry:

We have a new governor since Kitzhaber left in a cloud of disgrace last month. Our new governor is Kate Brown. I'm sure she will do some budget revisions soon.

The new Talgo train we got is not getting much use compared with all the bus miles racked up every day between Eugene and Portland.

Thanks again, PRIIA!!

I would not be too concerned. I posted about this a few days ago in another thread linking to an updated Trains Magazine article on the issue: Cascades trains south of Portland could end if budget plan is approved. (available to all). The issue appears to be simply a question of which parts of the budget the $10 million needed to subsidize the Cascades service in OR is to come from. Excerpt of the update in the Trains Mag report:

Sen. Devlin told me on Friday afternoon that he feels passenger train advocates have misunderstood the Cascades funding situation. He noted that ODOT's original proposal was to fund Amtrak's entire $20 million request from the general fund, while other sources have contributed in the past, including taxes on non-automobile fuels (such as lawn mower fuel) and vehicle registration & license plate fees. (Note: Oregon's state constitution prohibits gasoline tax funds from being spent on anything other than roads.) "Basically, we're asking ODOT to find $5 million more" to complement $5 million from the general fund, Sen. Devlin said. "If [ODOT doesn't] find the money, the legislature will search for alternative ways of funding the Cascades. I don't believe there will be a reduction in service."

When asked his reaction to ODOT's statement before his committee's Transportation & Economic Development Subcommittee on Wednesday that the $5 million funding level would force a service shutdown south of Portland, Devlin said he was unaware of the statement and does not know the basis for it, but reiterated "our intent is not to diminish the service, but rather to minimize the use of general fund money."

Click to expand...

It's a bluff to see who blinks first. There's just no way that the Democratically-controlled Oregon legislature is going to let this service die on its watch.

As posted in the timetable thread, Cascades service is included in the new national timetable. See pp. 92-93. http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/809/144/Amtrak-System-Timetable-Spring-Fall-2015.pdf

A very good discussion of the Oregon Cascades situation from Seattle Transit Blog. Be sure to read the whole thing.

Portland-Eugene Cascades Service May Disappear

very well written,, although the editorial tag at the end really should be expected

Truly I am amazed that a train *out* of the city in the morning has not done well. Who could have ever predicted that? Here we see the reason why commuter railroads don't start reverse commute services until after they have a critical mass of trains in place already.

keelhauled said:

Truly I am amazed that a train *out* of the city in the morning has not done well. Who could have ever predicted that? Here we see the reason why commuter railroads don't start reverse commute services until after they have a critical mass of trains in place already.

Click to expand...

There are goodly number of people who commute daily from the Portland area to Salem (home to the state capitol, state government, most of which is within an easy 5-minute walk of the SLM station). So it's not entirely a reverse commute situation. The problem was that the morning departure, at 6 a.m., was far too early to be attractive. And of course it lost all of the feed-in traffic from north of PDX. In theory, a "reverse commute" train to Salem should work, but not with the current schedule.

There's actually a commuter bus from the southern PDX suburb of Wilsonville that runs down to Salem that does quite well (too well, in fact, it's often SRO). So the demand is there. But not for a train that leaves downtown Portland at 0600.

Oregon Lawmakers On Track To Renew Amtrak Funding

"An Oregon legislative panel has signed off on a plan that would ensure the state’s passenger rail service will run at least two more years along the I-5 corridor."

More at the link.

Thanks for the update. Glad to think that the money will be in place for the next two years.

The whole thing is a nothingburger.

In just two years from now, the Cascades route will be finishing up about a Billion of work before the Stimulus deadline of September, 2017. When the upgrades kick in, the effect will be substantial, even if the several projects don't sound like a big deal. Two or three areas of freight congestion will get sorted out with new track to bypass the worst of the delay-causing problems. So route's atrocious On Time Performance should greatly improve, perhaps allowing a few minutes to be squeezed out of the padding. At Point Defiance they aim to get 5 or 10 minutes saved from a new stretch away from the coastline and avoiding a single-track tunnel.

Meanwhile two new Talgo trainsets will allow two additional frequencies Seattle-Portland, from 4 to 6 a day (plus the Coast Starlight). Figure a 14-hour day, from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., with now 7 trains instead of 5. The average interval between departures will be cut from 3:30 hours to 2:15 hours. So for example, a hypothetical timetable of 6:00 a.m., 9:30 a.m, 1 p.m., 4:30 p.m., last train out at 8 p.m. would become much more convenient with 6:00 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:30 a.m., 12:45 p.m., 3 p.m., 5:15 p.m., and a last departure at 7:30 p.m.

The actual schedule will be tweaked from this hypothetical one, but having departures so much closer and more frequent should make this corridor boom. I'm expecting ridership to top a million in the first year, and the surge in revenues will slash the operating loss across the entire route.

Of course, Seattle-Portland isn't Portland-Eugene, but they are connected with the core route that will deliver more riders to the southern extension. And I think the new equipment will be enuff for another frequency on the Oregon route as well. If they need still more equipment, there's a large part of another Talgo trainset or two rumored to be available somewhere in Michigan, or perhaps it was Indiana. LOL.

Less than two years from now, the Cascades route will finish up a Billion worth of Stimulus-funded upgrades. The effect should be substantial. Ten minutes will be cut from the run time Seattle-Portland, a nice reduction for a trip that's only 3 hours 40 minutes already. On time performance should improve from a disgraceful 60 or 70ish number to 88%.

Two more departures per day on the core segment will mean more choice. And if you miss your trains, there will be another one in just a couple of hours. With the capacity improvements, probably the schedules can be tweaked to allow earlier morning departures and slightly later evening departures.

Ridership has slumped recently. But it should rebound to the 850,000 riders it was carrying before track work and other troubles hurt the performance. A surge in revenues should slash the operation loss across the entire route.

After some study at the site of the WA DOT, I realized that the Cascades route has not exactly been a route. It's been three corridors hinged at Seattle and Portland. Only one of the current five runs (two including the Coast Starlight) between Seattle and Portland continues down the Willamette Valley to Salem and Eugene. Only one Talgo starts in Vancouver,B.C. and ends in Portland. The other two Talgos are like shuttles, and the riders have to take the bus to get deeper into Oregon, or north beyond Seattle. No train goes end to end, Eugene to Vancouver, Canada.

The "shuttle" type schedule is as if few riders want to continue from south of Portland to north of it, to Olympia, Tacoma, or Seattle, much less Vancouver, B.C. It's as if few from Seattle or other Washington stations want to go to Eugene or even Salem.

When the Seattle-Portland core route goes to seven daily trains in 2017, surely they'll make more thru connections to the hinged corridors at either end. I expect that thru connections will deliver many more riders to the Oregon extension, and north to Bellingham and Vancouver, B.C. as well. More frequencies give riders more choice and build ridership.

So while I was dismayed to see the current schedule with the lousy connections, I'm optimistic that more riders soon will use the more frequent service.

+++++

​Meanwhile, Oregon planners are moving toward a formal decision on the Willamette Valley route. In a few years, the Oregon legislators won't be rummaging around for spare change for the operating subsidy, which will be smaller due to the coming upgrades. They'll be looking for serious money to pay for upgrades to the route to allow more and faster trains on that stretch.

They've been studying how common the through-traffic is, and Eugene-Seattle is pretty uncommon. Portland-Vancouver is more common, but it's just too slow (largely due to track in British Columbia).

neroden said:

They've been studying how common the through-traffic is, and Eugene-Seattle is pretty uncommon. Portland-Vancouver is more common, but it's just too slow (largely due to track in British Columbia).

Click to expand...

There's only two thru trains, so I expect the study will show they carry few thru passengers.

The other two Talgo runs require making part of the trip by bus and transferring to the train. I expect the study will show very few riders go for this. Word of mouth must be horrible, with consumer satisfaction scores dragging down the whole system.

Whatever the study shows, for political reasons I expect at least one and probably two more trains will make thru-runs from Oregon to points north when the two new frequencies are added to Portland-Seattle. Then I expect ridership will exceed the low-ball forecasts, because the forecasters most fear, tremble in dread actually, making estimates that turn out to be too high.

Anyway, adding frequencies and connections builds ridership, and those rules should hold here. Since any increases will be from a very low base, the current ridership that is, in % terms they will look pretty good and mollify some of the complaining legislators.

Here's hoping that Canada will step to help these trains on its end, under a new "Not Bush ally" Prime Minister. VIA has a long To-Do list, but add the Cascades to it. Another frequency or two, track upgrades, and at some point buying a few made-in-Spain Talgo cars or train sets for the pool to expand the services yet again.

How will we measure success here, anyway? Currently four Talgos and one Coast Starlight, for five trains. Add two more Talgos, that's a 40% increase by one measure of capacity. Cascades ridership was ~800,000 2013 and 2014. So 40% will mean 300,000 more riders. If it's only up half that, say, 150,000, not in the next year, just maybe the next*, and with any luck, the route will be almost a million pretty quickly. That will be shout about it good news.

* When Illinois added two more Lincoln Service trains to the STL-CHI corridor that included two Lincolns plus the Texas Eagle, that increased capacity by 40%. No upgrades for better OTP, no 10 minutes saved from the timetable, no smoother ride, just more frequencies. Ridership quickly outran that 40% capacity increase within a year or two. I expect as much with the Cascades.

VIA isn't going to even look at the Cascades service, which it doesn't have any role in operating. They really do have a lot on their plate: Toronto-Ottawa, Ottawa-Montreal, Toronto-Montreal, Toronto-London, London-Windsor, Toronto-Niagara Falls, Montreal-Quebec, Quebec-New Brunswick-Nova Scotia... improvement plans are being floated on all of them.

If British Columbia's government finally gets off its ass and decides it wants to improve the route, they probably will have federal support from the Trudeau government. The ball has been in BC's court for a decade or more now. If they do improve it -- with the White Rock Bypass -- I expect that ridership would *skyrocket*.

I'm not sure how much more traffic from Eugene to Washington state there will be even with improvements; Portland-Eugene is the low-population end of the route, a bit like the Detroit-Pontiac tail of the Wolverines, and until very big money is put in, it's got Union Pacific to deal with (sigh).

I'm expecting the big benefits to come from the Portland-Seattle improvements; I think the number of riders there will grow even faster than the other two segments, though it will help the other two segments.

VIA has nothing whatsoever to do with Cascades service, it is wholly an Amtrak operation. The BC provincial government has kicked in for some capital improvements and was instrumental in in influencing the CBSA to keep staffing for the "second" train without trying to charge Amtrak/Washington State $500,000 a year which neither Amtrak nor Washington would have paid.

Washington provides all the funding for the operational subsidy for the cross border Cascades.

zephyr17 said:

VIA has nothing whatsoever to do with Cascades service, it is wholly an Amtrak operation. The BC provincial government has kicked in for some capital improvements and was instrumental in in influencing the CBSA to keep staffing for the "second" train without trying to charge Amtrak/Washington State $500,000 a year which neither Amtrak nor Washington would have paid.

Washington provides all the funding for the operational subsidy for the cross border Cascades.

Click to expand...

Nobody said VIA had an operating role in the Cascades. I'm well aware that the two US states cover the costs. This thread began about Oregon legislators' concerns about the size of the subsidy.

"Hoping that Canada will step up to help these trains on its end, under a new "Not Bush ally" Prime Minister. VIA has a long To-Do list, but add the Cascades to it. Another frequency or two, track upgrades, and at some point buying a few made-in-Spain Talgo cars or train sets for the pool to expand the services yet again." Even here, where I ticked off possible help from the Canadians, I didn't suggest that B.C. should pick up part of the subsidy … tho now that you raise it … Hmmn.

Guess I should have left out the "VIA" and used the pronoun "he" for Trudeau. But note that VIA's trans-Canada trains do sort of connect with the Cascades at the Vancouver, so there's an obvious overlap of riders and interests. If I had written, "Improving Toronto's GO Transit is on Trudeau's To-Do list", would you have whined that most of its funding does not come from Ottawa but from the provincial government?

Anyway, I still see any help on Canada's end as being part of Trudeau's To-Do list, whether that means putting in some federal funds to entice and match British Columbia's investment or however. And he's gonna be better for rail under whatever banner than Bush's bestie was.

WoodyinNYC said:

Less than two years from now, the Cascades route will finish up a Billion worth of Stimulus-funded upgrades. The effect should be substantial. Ten minutes will be cut from the run time Seattle-Portland, a nice reduction for a trip that's only 3 hours 40 minutes already. On time performance should improve from a disgraceful 60 or 70ish number to 88%.

Two more departures per day on the core segment will mean more choice. And if you miss your trains, there will be another one in just a couple of hours. With the capacity improvements, probably the schedules can be tweaked to allow earlier morning departures and slightly later evening departures.

Ridership has slumped recently. But it should rebound to the 850,000 riders it was carrying before track work and other troubles hurt the performance. A surge in revenues should slash the operation loss across the entire route.

After some study at the site of the WA DOT, I realized that the Cascades route has not exactly been a route. It's been three corridors hinged at Seattle and Portland. Only one of the current five runs (two including the Coast Starlight) between Seattle and Portland continues down the Willamette Valley to Salem and Eugene. Only one Talgo starts in Vancouver,B.C. and ends in Portland. The other two Talgos are like shuttles, and the riders have to take the bus to get deeper into Oregon, or north beyond Seattle. No train goes end to end, Eugene to Vancouver, Canada.

The "shuttle" type schedule is as if few riders want to continue from south of Portland to north of it, to Olympia, Tacoma, or Seattle, much less Vancouver, B.C. It's as if few from Seattle or other Washington stations want to go to Eugene or even Salem.

When the Seattle-Portland core route goes to seven daily trains in 2017, surely they'll make more thru connections to the hinged corridors at either end. I expect that thru connections will deliver many more riders to the Oregon extension, and north to Bellingham and Vancouver, B.C. as well. More frequencies give riders more choice and build ridership.

So while I was dismayed to see the current schedule with the lousy connections, I'm optimistic that more riders soon will use the more frequent service.

+++++

​Meanwhile, Oregon planners are moving toward a formal decision on the Willamette Valley route. In a few years, the Oregon legislators won't be rummaging around for spare change for the operating subsidy, which will be smaller due to the coming upgrades. They'll be looking for serious money to pay for upgrades to the route to allow more and faster trains on that stretch.

Click to expand...

I think the key will be getting the Portland to Seattle time to 3 hours and even better if couple min under 3. Not sure what other improvements are in the works but if they can get the time down to 3 hours, then I can see the ridership surging. The closer any corridor service can match the average travel time by car, will greatly make the service competitive.

That might take a while, but they're getting close. The Point Defiance Bypass should get the scheduled runtime down below 3.5 hours (I'm not sure quite how much less than 3.5 hours, since it depends how much padding they remove) and it should make that time very reliably. I'm not sure about the time savings on the other improvements being made from Portland to Seattle -- most of them are designed for schedule reliability rather than speed -- but it should add up to something as well. We might hope for 3 hrs. 15 minutes in the near future.

P.S. I found the Mid Range Plan.

After Vancouver Yard Bypass (done), W 39th St (done) and Point Defiance Bypass are done, the plan was to add one more round trip

After the first two phases of Kelso-Martin's Bluff (done) were done, the plan was to add a *second* additional round trip (total of 6 Cascades each way + 1 Coast Starlight). This was supposed to require two more trainsets, or "reduction of service elsewhere"; I assume the Oregon trainsets serve this purpose.

After the rest of Kelso-Martin's Bluff was done (funded and under construction), along with the Centralia crossover (don't know), and a 3rd main track from Reservation to Stewart in Tacoma (NOT funded), the plan was to add *two more* round trips (total of 8 Cascades each way + 1 Coast Starlight), This was also supposed to require new locomotives (on order). This was supposed to require two more trainsets, beyond the Oregon ones.

WSDOT may have wimped out on this plan, but BNSF was apparently OK with it back in 2008. (Although they also asked for an extra track up Napavine Hill.) And they're very close to being able to implement it: buy the extra trainsets, put in the third track from Reservation to Stewart, and they should be ready.

There are a number of low cost things obvious to this armchair railroader which could help improve Cascades/Amtrak in the northwest. (Likely not as obvious to those who would have to implement them and find funding).

Oregon City: The Starlight does not stop here and only one Thruway bus does. Making this an all trains/bus stop could be a significant collector station for Clackamas County and eastern Washington County passengers who wish to avoid the congestion of Portland Union Station. (The bus routers would need to get off the I-5 mindset and route 99E or 99E/224/I-205 between PDX to ORC, then I-205/I-5 to SLM).

Starlight: The few times I have ridden there seemed to be A LOT of people traveling EUG-PDX-SEA which might be a capacity issue. This could be solved by adding a coach or two to be switched at EUG. Having a "Trackmobile" or such might be cost effective. The state purchase of bi-levels could become the beginning of a transition away from the Talgo's on high ridership runs.

EUG-VAC through train: We can only dream! However with only 2 trains a day this would require a layover and maintenance base at each end, with no scheduled set out at SEA in the middle. This should be a carrot to find funding for a third train, as ridership should increase a bunch. There are a great number of people who will consider a train trip, but WILL NOT RIDE A BUS (except for a single short connection)!

Talgo's: Great for start-up services before track improvements and for less than their capacity runs, as they seem to have high maintenance costs and require excessive on board personal (asst-conductors) they should be phased off of the high capacity runs by bi-level equipment (even with the marginal time loss).

Connectivity: A Mt Vernon/San Juan Island Ferry shuttle!. Bicycle rental at staffed stations. Just a couple of ideas.

How much of the tilting feature of the Talgo's add to the time savings to the route? What I mean is how much does it contribute to not having to slow down for curves which I'm sure adds up in terms of time savings. Not sure on what the rules on the number of asst conductors are but from what I can tell, from my observation is generally it is 1 conductor and 2 asst. Sometimes only 1 if short staffed but in general 3.

I was not too fond of the ride on the Talgo's when I was on it in May. Very noisy from people moving between cars. Its really amplified since the cars are short so you really can't sit far away from the doors which you can on a Superliner or CA Cars. The auto door make the "Star Trek" auto door like sound but MUCH LONGER drawn out.