I-5 Columbia River Crossing (OR/WA)

[Truvelo]

I assume this is the bridge in question. When I visited Portland last summer there was no problem with congestion on the bridge.

[ComputerGuy]

Just wait and see what happens when the bridge is closed to build the new bridge...

[corco]

I assume this is the bridge in question. When I visited Portland last summer there was no problem with congestion on the bridge.

I take it you haven't visited during rushhour.

I've been on that sucker when, no car accidents, it's taken me 20 minutes to get from downtown Vancouver to the Lombard Street exit

[DrZoidberg]

Just wait and see what happens when the bridge is closed to build the new bridge...

I'd be curious to see how they're going to work that. 

[Tarkus]

I'd be curious to see how they're going to work that. 

All the more reason to build a third bridge instead.  Heck, they could bring the US-830 designation back on SR-14.

-Alex (Tarkus)

[Mergingtraffic]

The same crap happens in Connecticut, all the bike people and mass transit people come out and complain about road projects.  It's not only in Portland. 

Howver, these people are the minority, but the press and the DOT cater to these people because it's "politically correct."  In fact, I think people have too much say in road projects and that's why most of them are either canceled or scaled down.

People are scared of a 12-lane bridge because of the way it sounds and looks on paper. 

[Bickendan]

I was at a Portland City Council meeting regarding the bridge in March or April. The City approved the 12-lane design with the caveat that it doesn't get striped as such until traffic counts dictated it; much of the testimony delivered was against the design.
Arguments included that it would only move the bottleneck to between the Banfield Freeway and Fremont Bridge; air quality/global warming issues; etc.

There is very much a 'Freeways are bad' mentality here in Portland.

[Chris]

air quality/global warming issues; etc.

There is very much a 'Freeways are bad' mentality here in Portland.

Yeah, we all know idling traffic is much better for air quality and the quantity of fuel burned... 

[Bickendan]

Hammer, meet nail.

[Revive 755]

Yeah, we all know idling traffic is much better for air quality and the quantity of fuel burned... 

Maybe once we switch to hybrids that shut off when idling and use an electric engine to move 10' and sit some more 

[KEK Inc.]

The crossing bridge would ruin traffic during the construction phases and remove historic value of the bridge.  I believe the eastern span is the original.  (There's minor differences between the two spans as far as width, rivets, railings, etc.)  I think a more practical way to relieve some traffic is to have a loop from OR SR-217 and essentially have another Interstate auxiliary route.  It can cut across Swan Island and connect north of Vancouver.  I'm not sure how it's going to go over the hills, though.   

[Bickendan]

Tunnel. And NIMBY would murder that before it could even get any sort of official interest -- particularly with your alignment of cutting across Swan Island; this alignment would also be far too close to the Minnesota Ave portion of I-5. The Willamette River crossing would have to be between the St John's Bridge and the Multnomah Channel. You also have the problem of OR 217 being far below Interstate standard, with no money available (and NIMBYs) preventing the mass widening that the Beaverton-Tigard Freeway desperately needs. As of this moment, only the norther end of the freeway is getting widened, from Exit 2 (OR 8 and 10) to 0 (US 26).

So no, even though the Rivergate Freeway was officially part of the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan pipedream, and it is on mine (complete with an I-x84 designation), it isn't going to happen.

As for the historic value of the current Interstate Bridge, its days are numbered. Once the new bridge is in place, it's unlikely the twin spans will remain, despite any efforts preservationists may exert. There are several problems that the spans pose: Their proximity to the new span (not that there wouldn't be any precedents; see the I-35W and Cedar Avenue bridges over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis) and the fact that the old spans are draw spans, which would still need to lift for Columbia River shipping. The close proximity to the new span may be a potential hazard for the shipping channel (and bear in mind that this is all off the top of my head without actually researching the issue; I've no interest in wading through the anti-CRC rhetoric).

Another point: Pearson Air Field, which has largely influenced the bland design of the new bridge. Once the new bridge is open, the FAA may use the old spans' height as a lever to bring them down.

As for the historical worth of the bridges, yes, I much prefer them over making a new Glenn L. Jackson Bridge (I-205) (that said, I do really like the Jackson Bridge as it is an imposing structure, particularly from the ground on the Washington side, and is wholly appropriate for its proximity to PDX). But bear in mind that they are draw spans, and as such not appropriate for a freeway, particularly in an urban setting. Vertical lift bridges are few and far between, but Portland still has the Hawthorne Bridge

[xonhulu]

The crossing bridge would ruin traffic during the construction phases and remove historic value of the bridge.  I believe the eastern span is the original.  (There's minor differences between the two spans as far as width, rivets, railings, etc.)  I think a more practical way to relieve some traffic is to have a loop from OR SR-217 and essentially have another Interstate auxiliary route.  It can cut across Swan Island and connect north of Vancouver.  I'm not sure how it's going to go over the hills, though.   

It's possible they might try to reuse the bridge spans for some non-motorized use.  It was proposed to use the old Sauvie Island bridge as a bike/pedestrian crossing over I-405, until public dissent and budget realities nixed the idea.

Your auxiliary route proposal sounds an awful lot like the pipe-dream Westside Bypass, yet another casualty of the Freeway Revolt.  It would've been farther west than OR 217, and crossed the Columbia near St Johns or the southern tip of Sauvie Island.

Lastly:  KEK Inc, why do I always get the weather report with your posts?  And is there any way you could make it a better forecast than 5 days of showers?

[andytom]

Lastly:  KEK Inc, why do I always get the weather report with your posts?  And is there any way you could make it a better forecast than 5 days of showers?

If you don't like rainy and crappy in March, you're living in the wrong place.   

--Andy

[KEK Inc.]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

It's possible they might try to reuse the bridge spans for some non-motorized use.  It was proposed to use the old Sauvie Island bridge as a bike/pedestrian crossing over I-405, until public dissent and budget realities nixed the idea.

Your auxiliary route proposal sounds an awful lot like the pipe-dream Westside Bypass, yet another casualty of the Freeway Revolt.  It would've been farther west than OR 217, and crossed the Columbia near St Johns or the southern tip of Sauvie Island.

Lastly:  KEK Inc, why do I always get the weather report with your posts?  And is there any way you could make it a better forecast than 5 days of showers?

I suppose it is similar to that bypass theory.  I'm new to this community, and I don't really know anyone to talk about roads with, so I didn't know of all of the pipe-dream theories out there.    Out of curiousity, how would the freeway cut through the Forest Park area? 

I used a signature.  It's a dynamic signature I designed with another forum buddy on a Nintendo community.  He is very familiar with pHp scripting and was able to use a user's IP address and run a script that will geoprofile it to a specific location and display the weather forecast for that location.  Your IP address depends on your ISP, so it may or may not be accurate.  And yeah, this area isn't really known for its fantastic weather. 

[rickmastfan67]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

I-95/I-495 crossing the Potomac River in Washington, D.C. is also a drawbridge.

[mightyace]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

I-95/I-495 crossing the Potomac River in Washington, D.C. is also a drawbridge.

There used to be one on I-280 in Toledo but it was replaced many years ago.  (I'm not sure exactly how many.)

[rickmastfan67]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

I-95/I-495 crossing the Potomac River in Washington, D.C. is also a drawbridge.

There used to be one on I-280 in Toledo but it was replaced many years ago.  (I'm not sure exactly how many.)

There was also another one on I-95, but in Jacksonville, FL over the St. John's River.  However it's been replaced by a much taller bridge as a prerequisite for the reconstruction of the I-10/I-95 interchange.

[Alps]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

I-95/I-495 crossing the Potomac River in Washington, D.C. is also a drawbridge.

There used to be one on I-280 in Toledo but it was replaced many years ago.  (I'm not sure exactly how many.)

Not many.  Last time I was there it was torn out and, I assume, getting rebuilt for local traffic.  Someone more local to Toledo will have to update us on what's going on.

Also, in I-280 news, there's very much still a drawbridge in NJ.  It was due to be replaced right around now but due to budget issues, the bridge was rehabbed and still has no definite replacement date.  Due to cultural icons on the Newark side and need to serve Harrison, it's entirely possible that the replacement will just be a higher drawbridge like the Wilson Bridge did to its predecessor.

[dfilpus]

There used to be one on I-280 in Toledo but it was replaced many years ago.  (I'm not sure exactly how many.)

Construction on the cable stayed replacement bridge started in 1999, but the bridge did not open to traffic until 2007. Early in construction, one of the two giant bridge building machines fell off the bridge, stopping construction for a few months. Construction resumed but at a slower rate with the remaining machine.

[deathtopumpkins]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

We have two here in Hampton Roads alone: I-64's High-Rise Bridge over the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River in Chesapeake, and I-264's Berkeley Bridge in Downtown Norfolk adjacent to the Downtown Tunnel.

[74/171FAN]

@Bickendan:  You do bring up a very valid point about the drawbridge.  It's the only drawbridge I know of on an Interstate route, and it probably doesn't meet federal requirements.

We have two here in Hampton Roads alone: I-64's High-Rise Bridge over the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River in Chesapeake, and I-264's Berkeley Bridge in Downtown Norfolk adjacent to the Downtown Tunnel.

Add in the Woodrow Wilson Bridge(I-95/I-495) near(and partially in) DC

[rickmastfan67]

Add in the Woodrow Wilson Bridge(I-95/I-495) near(and partially in) DC

I mentioned that back in post #40.

[KEK Inc.]

Add in the Woodrow Wilson Bridge(I-95/I-495) near(and partially in) DC

I mentioned that back in post #40.

That's interesting.  I thought that they built a new bridge to replace the old one for that purpose.  I didn't know the new span still has a drawbridge. 

[rickmastfan67]

Add in the Woodrow Wilson Bridge(I-95/I-495) near(and partially in) DC

I mentioned that back in post #40.

That's interesting.  I thought that they built a new bridge to replace the old one for that purpose.  I didn't know the new span still has a drawbridge.

They had to keep it as a drawbridge because they didn't have the space to make it even higher because of interchanges that were too close.  But at least now that it's at least a little bit higher, they don't have to open it as much as they had to open the old bridge.