AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Portland  (Read 50176 times)

bookem

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 34
  • Last Login: February 28, 2020, 12:09:25 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #50 on: October 16, 2009, 03:38:50 PM »

As much as I loathe the 8/10 interchange at times, I'll take it over the mess that is 43/405/Ross Island Bridge any day.  There's a proposal on the table to untangle the mess, which includes long-overdue direct connections between 405 and Ross Island and discontinuing the use of side streets as bridge entrances, but who knows when/if it's gonna be reality:
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?&a=87366 (fairly large PDF file)

Although I don't make it down that way too often, I've heard the I-5 Woodburn interchange is a nightmare.  There's also a proposal to deal with this problem, but again, it's anyone's guess when it'll be implemented:
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION2/Woodburn_Interchange.shtml
Logged

xonhulu

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1368
  • Location: Salem, OR
  • Last Login: April 16, 2022, 10:40:30 PM
Re: Portland
« Reply #51 on: October 16, 2009, 05:22:41 PM »

As much as I loathe the 8/10 interchange at times, I'll take it over the mess that is 43/405/Ross Island Bridge any day.  There's a proposal on the table to untangle the mess, which includes long-overdue direct connections between 405 and Ross Island and discontinuing the use of side streets as bridge entrances, but who knows when/if it's gonna be reality:
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?&a=87366 (fairly large PDF file)

I looked it over, but my computer didn't load many of the images, so I didn't get a lot out of it.  But I like the idea of direct connections between 405 and the Ross Island Bridge.

Quote
Although I don't make it down that way too often, I've heard the I-5 Woodburn interchange is a nightmare.  There's also a proposal to deal with this problem, but again, it's anyone's guess when it'll be implemented:
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION2/Woodburn_Interchange.shtml

I've seen this before.  While eliminating the left turns from OR 214/219 to get onto I-5 will help, they also need to get some traffic off this interchange by creating at least one more interchange for Woodburn at already existing overpasses, either at Butteville Road south of there or at Crosby Rd north.  I'd heard something about the second option being considered, in combination with improving/straightening Arney Rd, which is the street passing by the outlet mall.  But I'd also consider making a third interchange at Butteville Rd, then build a southern Woodburn Bypass to connect to OR 99E and maybe OR 214.  In fact, that would be a great route for 214 to connect directly to I-5, leaving the existing 214 to 211.
Logged

bookem

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 34
  • Last Login: February 28, 2020, 12:09:25 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #52 on: October 19, 2009, 07:07:36 PM »

Speaking of I-5, it's nice to see the bottleneck at Delta Park finally being eliminated.  Now if only they'd do something about the one at Rose Quarter/I-84...
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2822
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:02 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #53 on: October 19, 2009, 10:49:03 PM »

What say you to a tunnel going under the river from the Ross Island Interchange to about 7th Ave, going north toward the Lloyd District and NW toward the Fremont Interchange?
Logged

bookem

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 34
  • Last Login: February 28, 2020, 12:09:25 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #54 on: October 20, 2009, 03:10:08 PM »

I like it!  For years I've thought an I-5 tunnel would be an excellent alternative to the Marquam Bridge, which sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb among Portland's graceful spans.  It would also free up land on the east side of the river.
Logged

xonhulu

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1368
  • Location: Salem, OR
  • Last Login: April 16, 2022, 10:40:30 PM
Re: Portland
« Reply #55 on: October 21, 2009, 07:56:03 PM »

The Highway 8/10 interchange really does pose quite a challenge.  I think the best solution might be to double-deck the little "frontage roads" on either side of 217, and have some braided ramps going between the two levels.  The intersections at Highways 8 and 10 could also be converted into SPUIs, which would eliminate one traffic signal on each. 

As far as surface connectivity between 8 and 10, a new surface arterial could be built.  There's no real viable option on the west side of the freeway, as Fred Meyer is there, but if 110th were to be beefed up and re-aligned slightly, that'd be ideal.  110th could eventually be turned into an arterial and connected directly into Walker, which would perhaps cut some additional short-distance traffic out on 217.

-Alex (Tarkus)

I just saw this on the Oregon Transportation Commission website (scroll down to page 8):

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMM/docs/otc/OTCFSCRP.pdf

Looks like they're considering some braided ramps between OR 10 (Beaverton-Hillsdale) and Allen.  Mind you, this is just a list of future projects, nothing imminent.  Still, an ambitious list of projects...
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2822
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:02 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #56 on: October 27, 2009, 03:52:58 AM »

I like it!  For years I've thought an I-5 tunnel would be an excellent alternative to the Marquam Bridge, which sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb among Portland's graceful spans.  It would also free up land on the east side of the river.
I'm rather fond of the Marquam. Also, define 'free up land'. It should be noted that the land was never 'free' to begin with, something that the eastbank riverfront access people don't seem to understand. Prior to a freeway, it was rail right of way. Prior to that, wharehouses, docks and quays.

Using the argument to remove the freeway to 'restore riverfront access' is a bunch of crap.

That said, removing the freeway to establish better riverfront access is a worthy goal, but. I-5 must remain as a functional highway through East Portland; I-405 cannot bear the burden alone. Hence, tunnel under the river. And I say keep the Marquam as a local arterial crossing.
Logged

bookem

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 34
  • Last Login: February 28, 2020, 12:09:25 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #57 on: October 29, 2009, 04:12:53 PM »

Quote
That said, removing the freeway to establish better riverfront access is a worthy goal...
Which is probably a better way of saying what I was trying to get across.  Moving I-5 (and possibly the railroad tracks) into a tunnel wouldn't magically make a ton of land available, but it would remove a major barrier to the east bank of the Willamette.
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2822
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:02 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #58 on: October 30, 2009, 05:21:42 AM »

Note that the Eastside Big Pipe would be an obstacle in putting I-5 and/or the railroad underground.

While we're on the I-5/405 Loop, I dug this out of my PDF folder...:
http://bickenland.lonaf.com/Maps/Freeway_Loop_St_PDX.pdf
Logged

rawr apples

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 230
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Beaverton(Portland), Oregon
  • Last Login: February 06, 2012, 11:56:46 PM
Re: Portland
« Reply #59 on: November 04, 2009, 03:44:26 PM »

Heard on KGW that ODOT is looking to remove some on/off rams on 217 to ease congestion. Widening the entire corridor would cost over $1 billion. can't find a link to an article or anything though
Logged
Now shut up and drivee

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 41
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Portland
« Reply #60 on: November 04, 2009, 04:10:46 PM »

it costs one billion dollars to remove on and off ramps?  Just toss a bunch of Jersey Barriers and a ROAD CLOSED sign or two on the pertinent roads.  One day, several thousand bucks.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 57
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Re: Portland
« Reply #61 on: November 04, 2009, 04:25:28 PM »

it costs one billion dollars to remove on and off ramps?  Just toss a bunch of Jersey Barriers and a ROAD CLOSED sign or two on the pertinent roads.  One day, several thousand bucks.

<sarcasm>
If I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times.  Stop expecting government agencies to make sense!
</sarcasm>
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 41
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Portland
« Reply #62 on: November 04, 2009, 04:31:00 PM »


<sarcasm>
If I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times.  Stop expecting government agencies to make sense!
</sarcasm>

this is outrageous, though.  a million dollars I'd accept as bloat, but this is like having the goodyear blimp sutured to one's asscheeks.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

corco

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5153
  • Just Livin' the Dream

  • Age: 33
  • Location: Manchester, Connecticut
  • Last Login: May 20, 2022, 10:07:39 PM
    • Corcohighways.org
Re: Portland
« Reply #63 on: November 04, 2009, 08:46:35 PM »

Quote
it costs one billion dollars to remove on and off ramps?  Just toss a bunch of Jersey Barriers and a ROAD CLOSED sign or two on the pertinent roads.  One day, several thousand bucks.

I read that as it costs a billion dollars to widen the corridor, so they're going to take the cheaper option and remove the ramps

Tarkus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 361
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Oregon
  • Last Login: March 17, 2022, 05:37:10 AM
    • SimCity 4 Devotion
Re: Portland
« Reply #64 on: November 04, 2009, 09:13:05 PM »

According to this article in the Portland Tribune, they're apparently only going to be closing certain on/off ramps during rush hour traffic. 

I'm not sure that a rush hour closure will really do much.  They need to spend the money to actually fix the darn thing, instead of total and outright boondoggles like the WES Commuter Train.  And the Denney Road interchange probably needs to go away, period.  I'm kind of surprised ODOT didn't try to get stimulus funds for 217--it would have been a very deserving project.

Interestingly, I read an interesting comment over at Jack Bog's Blog on the entry about the 217 plan there.  Apparently, the current alignment of 217 (after it was moved off Hall Blvd) used to be a signal-controlled expressway much like the Milwaukee Expressway (OR-224), and was retrofitted later, with interchanges going where the signals were once located.  It sounds like it was a pretty haphazard affair.

-Alex (Tarkus)
Logged

xonhulu

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1368
  • Location: Salem, OR
  • Last Login: April 16, 2022, 10:40:30 PM
Re: Portland
« Reply #65 on: November 04, 2009, 10:27:51 PM »

Interestingly, I read an interesting comment over at Jack Bog's Blog on the entry about the 217 plan there.  Apparently, the current alignment of 217 (after it was moved off Hall Blvd) used to be a signal-controlled expressway much like the Milwaukee Expressway (OR-224), and was retrofitted later, with interchanges going where the signals were once located.  It sounds like it was a pretty haphazard affair.

That would explain a lot, but it's on an elevated alignment near downtown Beaverton, so how could there have been signalized intersections there?  Unless that was also added later.
Logged

Tarkus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 361
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Oregon
  • Last Login: March 17, 2022, 05:37:10 AM
    • SimCity 4 Devotion
Re: Portland
« Reply #66 on: November 05, 2009, 04:00:01 PM »

That would explain a lot, but it's on an elevated alignment near downtown Beaverton, so how could there have been signalized intersections there?  Unless that was also added later.

That's a very good question.  My initial guess was that it might have been routed along those frontage roads between Canyon and Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway, at least temporarily, but that doesn't quite explain the 5th Street overpass.  I'm inclined to think that 5th Street didn't extend all the way through to Western when 217 was initially built in the 1970s, meaning an overpass would have been unnecessary.  Of course, it's possible that this stretch may have even been elevated to start with.  There's rail just south of 5th, and I would imagine ODOT would have been keen to avoid an at-grade crossing.

I have to say, though, my curiosity about the history of the current 217 alignment is piqued.

-Alex (Tarkus)
Logged

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5038
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: May 02, 2022, 07:34:52 AM
    • AARoads
Re: Portland
« Reply #67 on: November 29, 2010, 03:10:07 PM »

Found this blog covering early Portland freeway construction while looking for info on something completely unrelated. The 1960s aerial showing the old Harbor Drive freeway is compelling.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2010, 03:39:42 PM by AARoads »
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2822
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:02 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #68 on: November 29, 2010, 06:30:19 PM »

Bookmarked, thanks.
Logged

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5038
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: May 02, 2022, 07:34:52 AM
    • AARoads
Re: Portland
« Reply #69 on: December 01, 2010, 01:52:01 PM »

What were the stubs on the two flyovers between I-84 west to I-5 north and I-5 south to I-84 east intended to connect with?

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2822
  • Last Login: Today at 01:05:02 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #70 on: December 01, 2010, 03:40:50 PM »

US 30 west: Hook back to OR 99E.
I-84/US 30 east: The Steel Bridge.

Both got taken out sometime between 90 and 94.
Logged

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5038
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: May 02, 2022, 07:34:52 AM
    • AARoads
Re: Portland
« Reply #71 on: December 01, 2010, 04:11:32 PM »

US 30 west: Hook back to OR 99E.
I-84/US 30 east: The Steel Bridge.

Both got taken out sometime between 90 and 94.

Thanks! I loaded up historical imagery on Google Earth and the ramps show up in the 1970 aerial.

Also looking at Google Earth, I also see more of the stubs at the Marquam Bridge east end for the Mt. Hood Freeway connection in the 1990 aerial. By 1994 the upper deck stub was absorbed in a wider bridge.



Did the partial "Y" interchange at Multnomah Boulevard have anything to do with the scuttled Multnomah Freeway?

What is the deal with Oregon 10 (and 99E for that matter)? The GIS files show only portions of the road under state control. Does Oregon have signed routes on locally maintained roadways? From what I have read, that is the case with some of U.S. 26 between I-405 and the Ross Island Bridge.

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14292
  • fuck

  • Age: 14
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 05:57:48 PM
Re: Portland
« Reply #72 on: December 01, 2010, 04:13:08 PM »

Does Oregon have signed routes on locally maintained roadways?
Yes, and they have some state highways without signed route numbers.
Logged
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

I agree to indemnify Belkin against unauthorized use of its MiniVak vacuum.

Tarkus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 361
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Oregon
  • Last Login: March 17, 2022, 05:37:10 AM
    • SimCity 4 Devotion
Re: Portland
« Reply #73 on: December 01, 2010, 04:55:47 PM »

Neat find there with that blog--thanks for the link!

What is the deal with Oregon 10 (and 99E for that matter)? The GIS files show only portions of the road under state control. Does Oregon have signed routes on locally maintained roadways? From what I have read, that is the case with some of U.S. 26 between I-405 and the Ross Island Bridge.

Yes, that's a very common arrangement with highways routed along surface streets in the Metro Area.  I know with reasonable certainty that OR-10 west of Murray Blvd, all the way to the terminus at OR-219 is under the control of the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation.  The county completely funded the widening projects between Murray and Kinnaman that occurred between the mid-1990s and now.  I believe the section between there and OR-217 is under City of Beaverton control. 

OR-210 (SW Scholls Ferry Road) is also almost entirely under Washington County control.  OR-8 in Forest Grove, between OR-47 and B Street (the old alignment of OR-47) is under City of Forest Grove control, and the section west of B Street out to OR-6 is under county control as well.

One of the best ways to tell who controls what road is by looking at the fonts, size and text alignment on the "limitless" speed signs, believe it or not.  ODOT's speed signs have a distinctive style that the counties and cities generally don't use. 

-Alex (Tarkus)
Logged

rmichael87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6
  • Last Login: September 03, 2013, 01:34:00 AM
Re: Portland
« Reply #74 on: February 18, 2011, 06:26:38 PM »

Portland has several highway needs. Among those:

-Better access to I-5 southbound from the Central Eastside. This is a huge concern for the freight community. Right now trucks need go north to Broadway or go across Morrison Bridge and head south on Naito Parkway to reach I-5 SB.

-Fix the whole tangle at I-5/I-405/US 26 in South Portland. Connections between Ross Island Bridge and I-5 are laughable at best. Having to drive through neighborhoods to get to the RIB slows traffic down and has adverse impact to the residential communities there.

-Better signage. ODOT recently put up new signs that have improved the situation but signs like "Oregon City/Central Eastside Industrial District" for the I-5 SB exit to Belmont Street/99E are confusing. Same with "Rose Quarter/City Center" for the Broadway exit. How about just "Broadway/Weidler Street" like they have for NB I-5 now?

-Substandard weaving distances between interchanges, especially on I-405 in both directions between 6th Avenue and US 26/Vista Ridge Tunnel. I have had many near-misses trying to get on or off the freeway in time.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.