Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kkt]

But we don't really want to be pushing through traffic to take I-5, which is also congested and with some undesirably below-standard exits and entrances as well.

[jakeroot]

Portland could benefit from some toll lanes on area freeways, like those seen in Seattle.

Because that went well.

Toll lanes go well if you improve GP conditions as well. Either upgrading interchanges or building aux lanes, etc. The 405 didn't do enough to accomodate the GP driver so the PR didn't go well.

[compdude787]

Portland could benefit from some toll lanes on area freeways, like those seen in Seattle.

Because that went well.

Toll lanes go well if you improve GP conditions as well. Either upgrading interchanges or building aux lanes, etc. The 405 didn't do enough to accomodate the GP driver so the PR didn't go well.

Agreed. It was a bad idea to convert I-405's HOV lane to an express toll lane north of SR 522 without adding additional capacity to the freeway.

[Brandon]

Freeways become a luxury only when space becomes a luxury as well. If the 5 and 205 are suffering from severe congestion throughout the day, they could be tolled to combat congestion (i.e. a congestion charge of sorts). The 5 should be tolled, but I don't think the 205 should be. Congestion tolls work better when drivers have an alternative, and if the alternative is also tolled, they're just gonna keep using the primary road.

I'd love for drivers – particularly truckers – to think twice before taking 205. I live a couple blocks away and cringe when I think about how much in the way of fine particulates my neighbors & I are inhaling every day.

Why shouldn't truckers be taking I-205.  It's the bypass, is it not?

[compdude787]

Freeways become a luxury only when space becomes a luxury as well. If the 5 and 205 are suffering from severe congestion throughout the day, they could be tolled to combat congestion (i.e. a congestion charge of sorts). The 5 should be tolled, but I don't think the 205 should be. Congestion tolls work better when drivers have an alternative, and if the alternative is also tolled, they're just gonna keep using the primary road.

I'd love for drivers – particularly truckers – to think twice before taking 205. I live a couple blocks away and cringe when I think about how much in the way of fine particulates my neighbors & I are inhaling every day.

Why shouldn't truckers be taking I-205.  It's the bypass, is it not?

Because he's a NIMBY, that's why.

[sparker]

Freeways become a luxury only when space becomes a luxury as well. If the 5 and 205 are suffering from severe congestion throughout the day, they could be tolled to combat congestion (i.e. a congestion charge of sorts). The 5 should be tolled, but I don't think the 205 should be. Congestion tolls work better when drivers have an alternative, and if the alternative is also tolled, they're just gonna keep using the primary road.

I'd love for drivers – particularly truckers – to think twice before taking 205. I live a couple blocks away and cringe when I think about how much in the way of fine particulates my neighbors & I are inhaling every day.

Why shouldn't truckers be taking I-205.  It's the bypass, is it not?

ODOT and WashDot have signed the approaches to both ends of I-205 as THE through route through PDX metro; NB (Wilsonville area) is signed as the preferred Seattle/The Dalles (I-84 gets a mention) route; Salem is the control city SB on I-5 approaching the I-205 exit north of Vancouver.  Obviously, both agencies appear to prefer that through traffic use the bypass rather than the in-town route variants. 

[sp_redelectric]

ODOT...have signed the approaches to both ends of I-205 as THE through route through PDX metro; NB (Wilsonville area) is signed as the preferred Seattle/The Dalles (I-84 gets a mention) route

ODOT replaced all the signs on I-5 northbound leading to I-205 (in Wilsonville and south Tualatin) and "Oregon City" is now the one AND ONLY control city listed for I-205 northbound.  No mention at all of I-84, The Dalles, Seattle, etc.

The diagram sign has been replaced and is still there showing, and Portland Airport is given an auxiliary sign, but it's crystal clear with the recent ODOT sign replacement that I-205 is not "the" through route.  Why ODOT changed it, is beyond me...  Oregon City is hardly worthy of being a control city and frankly neither is The Dalles.

I do not understand ODOT's refusal to put Spokane or Boise or Salt Lake City as control cities for I-84 (Spokane might be a stretch given it would involve I-82, US 395 and I-90, but it is a major destination for I-84 traffic), but Caltrans considers Portland a control city for I-5 north of Redding, and WSDOT uses Spokane as a control city for I-90 in Seattle (and vice-versa).  Maybe it has to do with UDOT removing Portland as a control city at the I-80/I-84 interchange...who knows...

[corco]

I do not understand ODOT's refusal to put Spokane or Boise or Salt Lake City as control cities for I-84 (Spokane might be a stretch given it would involve I-82, US 395 and I-90, but it is a major destination for I-84 traffic), but Caltrans considers Portland a control city for I-5 north of Redding, and WSDOT uses Spokane as a control city for I-90 in Seattle (and vice-versa).  Maybe it has to do with UDOT removing Portland as a control city at the I-80/I-84 interchange...who knows...

Oregon is notoriously finnicky about that - the most egregious example is Hermiston/Umatilla as the control cities for I-82 from both directions (with a side-mounted sign for Kennewick/Yakima).

Idaho doesn't actually acknowledge Portland as a control city anywhere either - it used to sign Ontario everywhere west of Boise, but that's been phased out for Meridian and Nampa, so now Ontario doesn't consistently appear until west of Nampa. Besides a single mileage sign for Baker City, nowhere further into Oregon is signed on I-84 in Idaho.

[Bickendan]

Hmm, sounds like it's time to come up with viable control cities for ODOT to ignore...

[sparker]

ODOT replaced all the signs on I-5 northbound leading to I-205 (in Wilsonville and south Tualatin) and "Oregon City" is now the one AND ONLY control city listed for I-205 northbound.  No mention at all of I-84, The Dalles, Seattle, etc.

The diagram sign has been replaced and is still there showing, and Portland Airport is given an auxiliary sign, but it's crystal clear with the recent ODOT sign replacement that I-205 is not "the" through route.  Why ODOT changed it, is beyond me...  Oregon City is hardly worthy of being a control city and frankly neither is The Dalles.

I do not understand ODOT's refusal to put Spokane or Boise or Salt Lake City as control cities for I-84 (Spokane might be a stretch given it would involve I-82, US 395 and I-90, but it is a major destination for I-84 traffic), but Caltrans considers Portland a control city for I-5 north of Redding, and WSDOT uses Spokane as a control city for I-90 in Seattle (and vice-versa).  Maybe it has to do with UDOT removing Portland as a control city at the I-80/I-84 interchange...who knows...

After decades of listing Seattle as an I-205 control city they're just now deleting that reference?  I wonder who in ODOT got a bug up their ass about mentioning an out-of-state city?   You'd think that they'd want to divert through traffic away from the downtown gauntlet.  Maybe their priorities are changed -- give the driving public as little useful information as possible may be the new marching orders!  What I'd like to know is if WashDOT has reciprocated as to the use of Salem as a SB I-205 control city.  The whole thing sounds like a useless exercise in pettiness! 

[Sub-Urbanite]

I do not understand ODOT's refusal to put Spokane or Boise or Salt Lake City as control cities for I-84 (Spokane might be a stretch given it would involve I-82, US 395 and I-90, but it is a major destination for I-84 traffic), but Caltrans considers Portland a control city for I-5 north of Redding, and WSDOT uses Spokane as a control city for I-90 in Seattle (and vice-versa).  Maybe it has to do with UDOT removing Portland as a control city at the I-80/I-84 interchange...who knows...

Well, given that Salt Lake City is 760 miles and a metropolitan area away, I get that, but Boise should absolutely be co-signed with The Dalles. I even get Medford as a control for I-5 south through most of the state, but why doesn't any California city show up on a distance sign until you get to at least Ashland. Or why I-5 north can't be co-signed Vancouver / Seattle as a tongue-in-cheek way to get three cities signed in two words.

Redding should be on distance signs from Eugene south. Roseburg, Medford, Redding. Grants Pass, Medford, Redding. Medford, Ashland, Redding. Ashland, Yreka, Redding. Yreka, Redding, Sacramento.

And Boise should be on at least *one* of the distance signs in the Columbia River Gorge, instead of the weird amalgam of Pendleton / La Grande / Baker City / Ontario.

But, ODOT is not exactly known as the highest-functioning of state DOTs. So on we go.

[kkt]

ODOT replaced all the signs on I-5 northbound leading to I-205 (in Wilsonville and south Tualatin) and "Oregon City" is now the one AND ONLY control city listed for I-205 northbound.  No mention at all of I-84, The Dalles, Seattle, etc.

The diagram sign has been replaced and is still there showing, and Portland Airport is given an auxiliary sign, but it's crystal clear with the recent ODOT sign replacement that I-205 is not "the" through route.  Why ODOT changed it, is beyond me...  Oregon City is hardly worthy of being a control city and frankly neither is The Dalles.

I do not understand ODOT's refusal to put Spokane or Boise or Salt Lake City as control cities for I-84 (Spokane might be a stretch given it would involve I-82, US 395 and I-90, but it is a major destination for I-84 traffic), but Caltrans considers Portland a control city for I-5 north of Redding, and WSDOT uses Spokane as a control city for I-90 in Seattle (and vice-versa).  Maybe it has to do with UDOT removing Portland as a control city at the I-80/I-84 interchange...who knows...

After decades of listing Seattle as an I-205 control city they're just now deleting that reference?  I wonder who in ODOT got a bug up their ass about mentioning an out-of-state city?   You'd think that they'd want to divert through traffic away from the downtown gauntlet.  Maybe their priorities are changed -- give the driving public as little useful information as possible may be the new marching orders!  What I'd like to know is if WashDOT has reciprocated as to the use of Salem as a SB I-205 control city.  The whole thing sounds like a useless exercise in pettiness! 

 

[The Ghostbuster]

Does anyone share my belief that this proposal will go down in flames? Given the history of Portland's transportation policies, I don't see this proposal being implemented. I could be wrong, though.

[sparker]

Does anyone share my belief that this proposal will go down in flames? Given the history of Portland's transportation policies, I don't see this proposal being implemented. I could be wrong, though.

It'll probably pass muster with the City of Portland and PDX Metro -- despite a likely significant amount of complaints from lower-income urban residents.  ODOT might even issue a positive recommendation.  But it will most likely reach a dead end in the state legislature due to objections emanating from "downstate" (i.e., everything outside the Portland-Salem extended region).

[sp_redelectric]

What I'd like to know is if WashDOT has reciprocated as to the use of Salem as a SB I-205 control city.

No, at the southbound I-5/I-205 junction in Hazel Dell, the control city for I-205 is still "Salem".  (And NE 134th Street, because the ramp to 134th is off the I-205 ramp.)  However, the reference "TO SR 14/I-84" is removed from the current signage.

[sp_redelectric]

Hmm, sounds like it's time to come up with viable control cities for ODOT to ignore...

Maybe it's just because I live in Tigard...but control sign signage for Highway 217 has always bothered me.  Southbound, the control cities are Tigard and Salem (but not Lake Oswego or Tualatin).  It gets even worse on Greenburg Road, the ODOT signage tells motorists going "to Tigard" to get onto 217 southbound; when 1: you're already within the city of Tigard, and 2: it's much easier to keep driving straight on Greenburg Road to get to downtown Tigard.

At least ODOT tried to rectify it on Canyon Road and Walker Road, doing away with control cities and simply offering "Oregon 217 North to US 26" or "Oregon 217 South to I-5".

Then again, on I-405 ODOT actually uses "Seattle" and "Salem" as control cities...why even bother with listing a control city...  Whereas up north the signage for SR 500 on both I-5 and I-205 omit any kind of city, even though either Battle Ground (by way of SR 503) or Camas (albeit, a much slower route than SR 14) are valid control cities.

[andy3175]

Recent article on Portland-area Interstate highway tolling:

Where Will Portland Drivers Get Tolled on the Interstate Highway: Officials Have Five Options; City officials like the biggest one.

http://www.wweek.com/news/city/2018/03/07/where-will-portland-drivers-get-tolled-on-the-interstate-highway-officials-have-five-options/

Portland-area drivers could soon see tolls along much of Interstates 5 and 205, if city officials have their way.

Last summer, the Oregon Legislature approved a plan to begin tolling on Portland-area highways, seeking to reduce traffic jams during rush hours and raise money for road construction.

What lawmakers didn't decide: the location of tolls, the amount to be charged or which hours the tolling would be in effect.

But an Oregon Department of Transportation committee tasked with making a recommendation by this summer is reviewing five concrete options for which roads would be tolled.

And the city of Portland has weighed in, saying it favors a plan that would implement tolls along all of I-5 and I-205 from the Washington state line down to the junction of the two highways south of Tualatin.

Options:

Option 1: Priced lanes on a northern segment of 1-5.


Option 2: Toll all lanes on I-5.


Option 3: Toll all lanes on I-5 and I-205.


Option 4: Add a priced lane on I-205.


Option 5: Toll both directions on the Abernethy Bridge.

[US 89]

Let me guess: the money from the tolls will go to... transit projects.

[jakeroot]

Let me guess: the money from the tolls will go to... transit projects.

Even in Washington, the tolls go back into freeway improvement projects. Most recently, shoulder running on the 405: https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/congestion/peak-use-shoulder-lanes

[The Ghostbuster]

I agree with roadguy2. I see Metro using the toll money to fund new light rail projects. Given the way I've heard the roads are in Portland, this seems the most likely scenario.

[TheHighwayMan394]

I agree with roadguy2. I see Metro using the toll money to fund new light rail projects. Given the way I've heard the roads are in Portland, this seems the most likely scenario.

Isn’t this scenario a violation of federal law?

[jakeroot]

I agree with roadguy2. I see Metro using the toll money to fund new light rail projects. Given the way I've heard the roads are in Portland, this seems the most likely scenario.

Isn’t this scenario a violation of federal law?

I couldn't say, but vehicle registration taxes in Washington pay for transit improvements.

[Hurricane Rex]

Also, how soe of the options don't covet the entire highways. I-84 is more congested than I-5/I-205 more often in most areas. US 26 in the Vista Ridge Tunnel as well?

[sparker]

It figures that the City of Portland would favor the plan that would have the greatest (read most deleterious) effect on the general driving public (against which they seem to have now officially declared war).  Their position seems to be based on a twofold calculus: (1) encourage local traffic to stay off the tolled facilities, hoping this will result in increased congestion on nearby streets (82nd and 122nd, watch out!) resulting in movement toward public transit; and (2) to "soak" through traffic on both N-S corridors, since much of that will be coming from out-of-area/state drivers.   It seems as tolling facilities -- in general -- appeals to both politicized and polarized segments of public discourse; the nominal left sees tolls as a way to draw funds from primarily the commercial sector that would tend to use the tolled facilities for efficiency -- funds that can be used to support other aspects of the transportation arena; and at the same time render travel through a given area as onerous as possible.  OTOH, the nominal right sees it as a welcome move to more direct "user fees" rather than general taxation (i.e., replacing "progressive" taxation measures which may or may not be construed as resource redistribution).

Fortunately, with as many plans in the "hopper" as witnessed here, the Portland-favored plan likely will be an "outlier" and will probably not survive to the final round of determinations.  My guess is that there will be dedicated toll bypass lanes on I-5 in the areas such lanes would both physically feasible and economically viable:  between the I-205 south interchange and OR 99W merge, and between the I-405/north interchange and the Interstate Bridge, as well as on I-205 between OR 212/224 and the Jackson Bridge.     

[US 89]

Also, options 1, 2, and 3 above (including the plan favored by Portland) would make I-5 and I-205 ineligible for federal funding, since they would be adding tolls to existing lanes on an interstate. That's probably not something ODOT wants to pursue.