News:

why is this up in the corner now

Main Menu

Oregon

Started by Hurricane Rex, December 12, 2017, 06:15:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bruce

The coliseum there refers to the Veterans Memorial Coliseum, not the Washington State Coliseum in Seattle (aka KeyArena).
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos


mrsman

I think it's obvious that a sign for arena or coliseum or airport refers to the one in your own city, it's just disconcerting to see a sign that says Seattle coliseum but if it instead said coliseum Seattle then I think people would understand that you take the exit for the coliseum or north and if you stay on the freeway long enough you are at seattle.

Hurricane Rex

Quote from: mrsman on April 02, 2018, 11:38:54 PM
I think it's obvious that a sign for arena or coliseum or airport refers to the one in your own city, it's just disconcerting to see a sign that says Seattle coliseum but if it instead said coliseum Seattle then I think people would understand that you take the exit for the coliseum or north and if you stay on the freeway long enough you are at seattle.
I agree, and I did say that I knew what it meant back in the original post (Veterans Memorial Collesium.)

LG-TP260

ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

mrsman

Quote from: Hurricane Rex on April 02, 2018, 11:54:22 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 02, 2018, 11:38:54 PM
I think it's obvious that a sign for arena or coliseum or airport refers to the one in your own city, it's just disconcerting to see a sign that says Seattle coliseum but if it instead said coliseum Seattle then I think people would understand that you take the exit for the coliseum or north and if you stay on the freeway long enough you are at seattle.
I agree, and I did say that I knew what it meant back in the original post (Veterans Memorial Collesium.)

LG-TP260

True.  But I think the confusion that it might lead to has lead the future signs in the area to remove Coliseum completely from the BGS. 

Hopefully, there are supplemental signs on I-84 to tell people to use I-5 north for the coliseum.

Hurricane Rex

So at last nights city council meeting for Sherwood, the mayor mentioned that metro is working on a transportation bond to be released in 2020. The current number is, according to him, $20 billion. For reference, the one just passed by Oregon was $5.3 billion (although not a bond). It also apparently doesn't do much to fix congestion and a lot of it will go to trails out of what the mayor knows. I bet its for mostly light rail and public transit.

LG-TP260

ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

Sub-Urbanite

Quote from: Hurricane Rex on April 18, 2018, 12:24:00 PM
So at last nights city council meeting for Sherwood, the mayor mentioned that metro is working on a transportation bond to be released in 2020. The current number is, according to him, $20 billion. For reference, the one just passed by Oregon was $5.3 billion (although not a bond). It also apparently doesn't do much to fix congestion and a lot of it will go to trails out of what the mayor knows. I bet its for mostly light rail and public transit.

LG-TP260

Huh. I know that Lynn Peterson, the main candidate for Metro Council President, has been pitching a $20 billion transportation plan. Last I'd heard, though, Metro was thinking something much smaller than that. The point is, Seattle just did something like $50 billion, and Los Angeles did what, $100 billion? $150 billion? So $20 billion, proportionally, doesn't seem all that exorbitant, depending on how it's spent.

Hurricane Rex

Quote from: Sub-Urbanite on April 19, 2018, 11:27:45 AM
Quote from: Hurricane Rex on April 18, 2018, 12:24:00 PM
So at last nights city council meeting for Sherwood, the mayor mentioned that metro is working on a transportation bond to be released in 2020. The current number is, according to him, $20 billion. For reference, the one just passed by Oregon was $5.3 billion (although not a bond). It also apparently doesn't do much to fix congestion and a lot of it will go to trails out of what the mayor knows. I bet its for mostly light rail and public transit.

LG-TP260

Huh. I know that Lynn Peterson, the main candidate for Metro Council President, has been pitching a $20 billion transportation plan. Last I'd heard, though, Metro was thinking something much smaller than that. The point is, Seattle just did something like $50 billion, and Los Angeles did what, $100 billion? $150 billion? So $20 billion, proportionally, doesn't seem all that exorbitant, depending on how it's spent.
The new light rail line probably will take about $2 billion of that, if cost estimates turn out to be true.

LG-TP260

ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

Hurricane Rex

So, Portland has a decently new Vision Zero Commercial, and it seems weird how there is only one on speed slowing down and not on distracted driving. Also this seems to go against a majority of the data saying that higher speeds are safer in busier areas and especially on highways *cough cough* Division and Stark Street *cough cough*.  :pan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOPfdMO9ZVw
ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

sp_redelectric

Quote from: Hurricane Rex on April 19, 2018, 08:31:51 PM
The new light rail line probably will take about $2 billion of that, if cost estimates turn out to be true.

The Southwest Corridor light rail line is currently estimated at $2.8 billion.

The Ghostbuster

Surely there are better things to spend that $2.8 billion on than useless light rail lines? Maybe they could revive replacing the Interstate Bridge across the Columbia River, only hold the light rail line this time.

Hurricane Rex

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 27, 2018, 05:03:32 PM
Surely there are better things to spend that $2.8 billion on than useless light rail lines? Maybe they could revive replacing the Interstate Bridge across the Columbia River, only hold the light rail line this time.
Washington wants it, Oregon only if its tolled and it has light rail... That's metro for you.

LG-TP260

ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

Bruce

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 27, 2018, 05:03:32 PM
Surely there are better things to spend that $2.8 billion on than useless light rail lines? Maybe they could revive replacing the Interstate Bridge across the Columbia River, only hold the light rail line this time.

Vancouver wants light rail, just FYI. It's Clark County that is holding back the bridge replacement, mostly out of spite.

The Southwest Light Rail doesn't look like a good rail corridor at all, especially since the route options use I-5 or adjacent streets without much potential for real development. That money could be better spent on a tunnel for MAX through downtown, or other improvements to the existing lines (which are terribly slow).
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

Bickendan

#62
Quote from: Bruce on April 27, 2018, 07:59:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 27, 2018, 05:03:32 PM
Surely there are better things to spend that $2.8 billion on than useless light rail lines? Maybe they could revive replacing the Interstate Bridge across the Columbia River, only hold the light rail line this time.

Vancouver wants light rail, just FYI. It's Clark County that is holding back the bridge replacement, mostly out of spite.

The Southwest Light Rail doesn't look like a good rail corridor at all, especially since the route options use I-5 or adjacent streets without much potential for real development. That money could be better spent on a tunnel for MAX through downtown, or other improvements to the existing lines (which are terribly slow).
One of the options the SW LR corridor had, but was shot down due to NIMBYism in the Hillsdale area, was a tunnel under OHSU to Sylvania via Hillsdale and Multnomah Village.

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 27, 2018, 05:03:32 PM
Surely there are better things to spend that $2.8 billion on than useless light rail lines? Maybe they could revive replacing the Interstate Bridge across the Columbia River, only hold the light rail line this time.
I would not classify it as 'useless'. There will be a point where the investment will pay off, even if we're currently at the point where investing in LR to the detriment of roads and highways is frustrating. I don't believe Portland and Metro have a balanced approach, but those light rail lines will become more and more important as time goes on. (The bottlenecks of downtown and Lloyd District will need to be addressed, however, and attention should be focused there while LR is the darling child of the area).

KEK Inc.

Quote from: Bruce on April 27, 2018, 07:59:24 PM
Vancouver wants light rail, just FYI.

Citation needed.
Take the road less traveled.

Bruce

A decade ago, the city council endorsed light rail by a 5-2 vote. More recently, Vancouver voted in favor of the 2012 sales tax increase for CRC light rail that was rejected due to non-Vancouver voters. Instead, C-Tran is building a bus rapid transit network that funnels into downtown Vancouver, with the hope of someday feeding light rail.
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

sp_redelectric

Quote from: Bickendan on April 27, 2018, 08:50:30 PMOne of the options the SW LR corridor had, but was shot down due to NIMBYism in the Hillsdale area, was a tunnel under OHSU to Sylvania via Hillsdale and Multnomah Village.

It wasn't NIMBYism, it was Metro realizing the project was getting too expensive.

I've heard rumblings that they may not even be able to afford pushing the line south of downtown Tigard; which IMO is utterly pointless anyways.  Who else builds a light rail line to serve a luxury "lifestyle shopping center" most often frequented by people who own $80,000 SUVs, and even IF they wanted to use the light rail, they couldn't because the light rail line travels north but they live east or west in Lake Oswego, Bull Mountain, Tualatin or Sherwood?  The line won't even serve Tualatin, nor most of Tigard, nor Kruse Way, nor Washington Square, nor PCC Sylvania, nor any other schools (south of Portland State University)...it's just a big long parking lot shuttle for downtown government workers and folks going to Blazers games.

And Highways 99W and 217 will continue to be as congested, if not MORE congested, than ever, thanks to the required and necessary cutbacks to bus service in the area.

Hurricane Rex

Quote from: sp_redelectric on May 01, 2018, 11:56:40 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on April 27, 2018, 08:50:30 PMOne of the options the SW LR corridor had, but was shot down due to NIMBYism in the Hillsdale area, was a tunnel under OHSU to Sylvania via Hillsdale and Multnomah Village.

It wasn't NIMBYism, it was Metro realizing the project was getting too expensive.

I've heard rumblings that they may not even be able to afford pushing the line south of downtown Tigard; which IMO is utterly pointless anyways.  Who else builds a light rail line to serve a luxury "lifestyle shopping center" most often frequented by people who own $80,000 SUVs, and even IF they wanted to use the light rail, they couldn't because the light rail line travels north but they live east or west in Lake Oswego, Bull Mountain, Tualatin or Sherwood?  The line won't even serve Tualatin, nor most of Tigard, nor Kruse Way, nor Washington Square, nor PCC Sylvania, nor any other schools (south of Portland State University)...it's just a big long parking lot shuttle for downtown government workers and folks going to Blazers games.

And Highways 99W and 217 will continue to be as congested, if not MORE congested, than ever, thanks to the required and necessary cutbacks to bus service in the area.
They also plan to take out a lane of Barbur Blvd in the process however the jury is still out whether it expands to Tigard 99W or not. If it does, we are in trouble.

LG-TP260

ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

Sub-Urbanite

A healthy combination of the two. NIMBYism in Multnomah Village and Hillsdale, and concern over the price tag of the faster, more useful option.

As for Bridgeport — I don't think it's about people shopping at West Elm as much as it is serving people who work at West Elm. (Is there even a West Elm at Bridgeport? Seems like there would be. I don't actually know what West Elm is.)

Quote from: sp_redelectric on May 01, 2018, 11:56:40 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on April 27, 2018, 08:50:30 PMOne of the options the SW LR corridor had, but was shot down due to NIMBYism in the Hillsdale area, was a tunnel under OHSU to Sylvania via Hillsdale and Multnomah Village.

It wasn't NIMBYism, it was Metro realizing the project was getting too expensive.

I've heard rumblings that they may not even be able to afford pushing the line south of downtown Tigard; which IMO is utterly pointless anyways.  Who else builds a light rail line to serve a luxury "lifestyle shopping center" most often frequented by people who own $80,000 SUVs, and even IF they wanted to use the light rail, they couldn't because the light rail line travels north but they live east or west in Lake Oswego, Bull Mountain, Tualatin or Sherwood?  The line won't even serve Tualatin, nor most of Tigard, nor Kruse Way, nor Washington Square, nor PCC Sylvania, nor any other schools (south of Portland State University)...it's just a big long parking lot shuttle for downtown government workers and folks going to Blazers games.

And Highways 99W and 217 will continue to be as congested, if not MORE congested, than ever, thanks to the required and necessary cutbacks to bus service in the area.

Hurricane Rex

One of the most redundant speed limit signs I've seen ever has just been posted. I-5 SB to I-205 EB has a speed limit 65 sign posted at the very end of the onramp followed by the Speed 65T60 sign a half a mile away. ODOT has had the second sign in its current location  it since the last time 205 has had construction last (2007) and its been fine. Also there was no ODOT crew out to remove the other one. Seems like a waste of money to me. No truck limit was posted with that sign.

LG-TP260

ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

bing101


Hurricane Rex

It has been 2 months since I mentioned my intent to propose 55 mph on 99W through Sherwood. As of today, the proposal is dead, mainly due to lack of City of Sherwood executive support. The main reasons why it was declined at the city level was:

1. OR 99W is planned to be a more pedestrian friendly highway in the future. I knew improvements were going to happen but not on the entire corridor (confirmed findings on city website). Also with the new high school coming in almost next to OR 99W, they are worried that an accident at 55 mph would kill someone (they did also say 45 mph would too). Also, 5 intersections (out of 5) have crosswalks crossing the highway. There still has been talks on a pedestrian overpass to alleviate this chance.                    Personal opinion: 99W is closest to an urban expressway with a design speed of 50-55 mph according to the ODOT design manual chapter 6 (I believe, could be wrong), adding sidewalks decreases it to 45 mph if it is curbside. While I can see the concern, 99W being transformed into a pedestrian friendly highway is not ideal, unless the speed limit is dropped to a more ridiculously low 40 or 35. If anything, it should be more like an expressway with pedestrian overpasses at 2-3 points and exits at the busy intersections (yes TSR can support one if the road is re-aligned). Even if it doesn't get to expressway status, I did explain to the that the signals would need to be re timed for 55 mph and it wouldn't have an impact then if a pedestrian is crossing because all intersections have a pedestrian signal to minimize impacts. I would argue the risk is lower because of the longer yellow light time.

2. ODOT's process will take a lot of time and they likely won't accept it 100% agree, I can't argue back. ODOT sucks when it comes to setting speed limits (90% of the time) and is reluctant to increase anything. It took the Oregon leglislative branch to force it down their throats to get I-84 to 25% reasonable (should be 80 IMO between mp 87 and 216 for instance), and only did the truck study after a representative threatened to introduce a bill to increase truck speeds on interstates. I haven't seen a single location where they were glad to raise a speed limit.

3. Number of vehicle trips will increase if the speed limit is raised to 55 I'll let you decipher what that means.

4. Future Commercial development In the same city plan I mentioned above, there is also a plan for a frontage road from Meinecke rd. to Elwert road, which will act like Langer drive and Borchers road in Sherwood. you can do the rest of the info from there. The Sherwood West plan barely includes OR 99W except for a Brookman signal and a gateway shopping center. I don't know how it will turn out. Valid concerns, as much as I disagree with them (unfortunately).

I am only speaking on the major points here. If you want to see the full plan for Sherwood's future, it is on the city website.

The only way I can see this section being raised is forcing through the house and senate like what happened with HB 3402/4047, and that still likely won't happen (but a better chance than going strait to ODOT). I will probably make that move in 2021 if I don't delay myself like I do in almost everything nowadays. It can be 2019 but I don't feel a bill will be ready in time (yes I know about the one that I posted in my fictional plans. I've edited it but haven't posted the edits yet).

As always, your input is appreciated.






2nd and more minor thing. Re-watching a safety presentation in Sherwood with a Professor from the University of Portland, he stated that the 85% speed of I-5 is closer to 74 mph, and 76 mph near Corvallis. I believe this much more than ODOT data (really ODOT? 62 is the AVERAGE in the Rouge river valley, and 64 in the Willamette Valley, even though everyone (and I mean everyone) has cruise on at least 67, and 85% is 68 through there but 70 in Roseburg?). Thought it was interesting to note.
ODOT, raise the speed limit and fix our traffic problems.

Road and weather geek for life.

Running till I die.

Tarkus

Leah Treat just resigned as PBOT director . . . apparently, it's to take some job with some transportation consulting firm.  The 9-day Snowpacolypse shutdown and the continued disaster that is Vision Zero were under her command, so she really needed to go.  My only concern (especially since it is Portland we're talking about) is that PBOT somehow ends up with a director who is much the same, if not worse.

Speaking of which, "(SE) Division by (Vision) Zero" continues to rack up fatalities after the speed limit reduction and speed/red light cameras.  There's now been two pedestrians killed within the new 30 zone on Division in the past two months, the latest in the 16900 block at the east end of the zone on May 9th.  The previous one was March 12th in the 11500 block.


Bickendan

That 30 on Division really irks me, especially since PBOT also wants to ram it down Stark east of 108th.

Sub-Urbanite

Quote from: Bickendan on May 14, 2018, 09:08:33 PM
That 30 on Division really irks me, especially since PBOT also wants to ram it down Stark east of 108th.

I mean, either enforce it or don't, right? I feel like the 1% of really bad drivers who threaten lives don't have any fear of actually getting a ticket in this city. And then when people die because someone drove like a shitbag, it's the road's fault.

If you want to have 4-lane boulevards in East Portland, then commit to making them as safe as possible and enforce the crap out of speed limits and crosswalk laws. And if you can't commit to that, then you might as well road diet them, too.

US 89

Quote from: Sub-Urbanite on May 15, 2018, 11:48:25 AM
If you want to have 4-lane boulevards in East Portland, then commit to making them as safe as possible and enforce the crap out of speed limits and crosswalk laws. And if you can't commit to that, then you might as well road diet them, too.

The only time road diets actually work is when they’re done on a 4-lane road with no shoulders and no center turn lane. From a quick GSV, it looks like both Division and Stark and most of the other collector roads in that area have 4 lanes, a center turn lane, and a decent shoulder. The only effect of a road diet on that kind of road is to increase congestion, while the safety improvement is little to none.

Also, I’m surprised that Powell Blvd is only 2 lanes between I-205 and Gresham, even though it carries US 26 and looks to be a major arterial.



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.