No, there is no rail line between the two. There is no reason for there to be a rail line between the two. There is little if any bulk commodity movement between the two. Which is the only viable reason to discuss new rail services to begin with.
It’s fine if someone is willing to pay for the doodlebugs to run over existing underutilized trackage. Preferably those who would feign to use such service. This is not a project worthy of funding from the State of Montana, let alone the nation’s taxpayers. If it happens at all then let the folks in Ravalli and Missoula counties pay for it.
And no, they don’t need it, since US Highway 93 is a fine thouroughfare. The only glitch for users of US Highway 93 is that Missoula is a bit congested. All they need is a nice north-south freeway through Missoula and all will be fine.
Progressives are very high on light rail, commuter rail, and a host of other lifestyle changes that come under the banner of New Urbanism. These transit alternatives don’t have to make economic sense. They are a green fashion statement made by people who often use the word, sustainable.
The city of Minneapolis has just spent $250 million for a study on the feasibility of bringing back the streetcar system. I don’t mean light rail. We are talking streetcars on many of the city streets replacing the buses. City leaders want to get people out of their cars and into transit, so they want people to live next to transit routes. They reason that streetcar tracks appear as a symbol of a permanent route, whereas buses have no such symbol of their permanence. And the sense of permanence is key to comfort people into the commitment of building and living along the route.
Montana or any other under-populated red state is about the last place I would expect rail transit to take hold, but if the area in question is populated by a bunch of Hollywood types, it makes perfect sense. As far as paying for it, they are always mostly paid for by the people who don’t use them. And it’s not just the cost of construction and capital equipment that needs to be paid for. There is also a huge cost of operation.
Good point. Our Greens decided we needed a bus system. Very expensive, little used. The buses produce horribly noxious diesel fumes, far more toxic compounds, per user, than produced by the average car. The system costs more per rider than the average car, uses more fuel per rider than the average car, takes up more space per rider than the average car, produces far more pollution per rider than the average car, and … it is pronounced a roaring success by the “progressive” community!
I was just wondering how extensive this plan was going to be. If some organization were proposing Commuter Rail on the Montana Rail Link, who knows where they would stop with proposals for adding tracks just to get something built.
Ravalli and Missoula counties are even less interested in paying for a nice north-south freeway. But a freeway would definitely solve our problem. Understand that US Highway 93 is only a fine thouroughfare between Missoula and the Ravalli County line. And beyond that, Hwy 93 has exceeded capacity.
Our conundrum is that altho DMUs would be filled, that wouldn’t necessarily off-load Hwy 93. A large share of DMU riders would be non-commuters. Trust me on that one.
It’s not so much that Missoula is congested, as that Hwy 93 is. And yes, altho it’s the only solution, no one here will tolerate a freeway thru the Bitterroot Valley.
Well, US 93/12 is divided four lanes from Missoula to Lolo (where US 12 diverts over the mountains into Idaho). All you guys need is a bypass or a throughpass to fluidize traffic from Missoula’s southern burgs to the I-90 interchange. Isn’t there still room west of Missoula for such a project?
It’s already there. It’s called “Reserve Street.” It’s 5 lanes, and it’s tolerable. But south of Lolo the traffic on 93 is quite heavy. And south of Florence it’s primarily a 2 lane road. That’s where capacity is really lacking. The road needs widening all the way to Hamilton. Arbfbe and I both know people who commute the entire distance. And on weekdays it’s a nightmare.
Michael ol. You are the last person I would expect to complain about a community’s subsidized bus system. There are pollution free buses, and all modern buses have boarding arrangements to accommodate the elderly and handicapped. The bus sytem gives the elderly and handicapped access to the entire community. In crowded cities, public transit is an economic necessity, In Montana it might best be regarded like your schools’ and threatre’s hard-of-hearing audio system, ramps and exit-entrance arrangements to accomodate the handicapped.
Bus systems can provide those important services. In this instance, there is a separate bus system to provide those services – much smaller buses, handicapped access equipped. Those buses make sense. You see one, if often has two or three people on it, while the bus 3-4 times its size roars past – smog-a-belching – carrying one passenger.
The little buses respond on demand, so their “clients” don’t have to get down to the bus stop, of struggle with snow and rain, and the bus isn’t spending most its day “huntng” for business.
Rather than the general bus system, it would have been cheaper to simply supply taxis to people that needed them and, less pollution, congestion, lower fuel cost per rider, etc.
Well, as a soon-to-be new resident of Missoula, this is an interesting development. But my question (which may be answered by the newspaper articles, when I get around to reading them…) is How will the folks get from the “Terminal” to their work or shopping locations? A question lots of light rail advocates seem to gloss over…but, everall, this is the kind of positive approach to growth that attracted us to Missoula, in the first place.
The train schedule would tie in with the “Mountain Line” city bus system. Mountain Line is quite extensive, and has served the Missoula area for decades. They made test runs to Lolo in '99. They loved the bus down there, but were unwilling to help pay for it.
…Should’ve used golf carts.
Michael, I wasn’t aware of local conditions. A lot of bus systems are run very inefficiently, because they are subsidized, there is no incentive to make them efficient. It would seem that if there is a separate system for the elderly and handicapped, and the regular system is underused, then some consolidation with better service for both classses of customers and overall fewer vehicle miles seems long overdue. Can you offer your services to perform the necessary study as to how combining the two services could improve service and reduce costs?
Sounds like four lanes Hamilton to Missoula would be the obvious solution. Isn’t Montana DOT planning for such an eventuality?
My comments on Missoula is related to the odd street layouts, at least on the east side of town. You basically have three distinct layouts: The streets parallel to the original NP alignment in northern Missoula, those parallel to the Milwaukee alighment in central Missoula, and those running the usual north-south/east-west in south Missoula. Makes it rather convaluted for the US 12 route through town.
Besides, a north-south expressway would make it easier for those poor ol’ grain trucks to get from I-90 to Lolo Pass on their way to Lewiston.[;)]
The little buses do a good job, and serve a vulnerable portion of the community quite well. The big buses simply fulfill an ideological requirement of a politically influential portion of the community that taxing other people to pay for their agendas is a suitable governance endeavor, even if it makes no sense at all.
The big buses are further compromised by the fact that they don’t work very well for the student population of the University here, and so the student government, of all things, operates yet another bus system with great big buses that are full during the expected times of the day, and nearly empty all the rest.
It may be in the long run that it just takes time for people to get used to using the bus. With higher gas prices, people might see some advantages. But for the past 10-15 years, they have just been a boondogle, offering consistently to worsen every measure that they proposed to improve – congestion, pollution, efficiency, etc.