Meet the new gridlock, worse than the old gridlock. (Portland: home, transfer)

[KJoe11]

Originally Posted by urbanlife78

Your own article backs up my claim. Click on the interactive link and you will see only I-5 northbound ranks in the top 20 for bad traffic, every other traffic point in Portland doesn't even make the top 100.

If you don't want to sit in the worst traffic in the city, don't live on the Washington side of the metro. That traffic is Vancouver's problem, which they seem incapable of fixing and expect Oregon to do all the work for them.

No, the article does not back up your claim at all. It does, however, refutes your opinion.

The comments of "if you don't like it leave or don't live there" offers no value. I think it is great that you defend Portland if you feel there is invalid criticism. But not every remark is a personal attack on your 'beloved' city.

[Deezus]

Originally Posted by oldtintype

I think Portland is great, however living right by the Fremont bridge and seeing the traffic outside my window on 405 every day in BOTH directions I agree--it's terrible. And while I like to say stick it to Vancouver too and blame them for their own commute because they choose to live there, unfortunately that back up messes it up for just about everyone, even if you're not trying to get to Vancouver. And if 5 is particularly bad MLK, Interstate, Williams, etc. become bumper to bumper too.

Yes, the problem is that as the Clark County commute becomes worse and worse(and it's still growing up there) everything adjacent to I-5 or 205 gets backed up too with drivers avoiding the freeway. And a lot of these streets shouldn't be alternate commute routes(like N. Williams) but they end up since people who live in North Portland aren't going to take I-5 at rush hour(just like how I live in SE Portland and always avoid 84) so you have more drivers on surface streets--along with commuters looking for a slightly quicker alternative to the freeways. Same thing happens on Burnside and Cornell with people skipping the Sunset Highway.

I'll even see people zooming through the little residential streets on Mt. Tabor that I live on that look like they're coming from outside the neighborhood. Much of Portland wasn't built in the auto era as well--you have streets that were built for streetcars not 21st Century commuter traffic. I see people treat the windy two lane stretches of E. Burnside through residential Laurelhurst like a freeway occasionally.

In the end you have several extremely vulnerable traffic chokepoints in Portland--and not a lot of funds or political support for highways that go around them or cross at new places. At this point building a new freeway or lanes doesn't guarantee that existing freeways still won't be crowded, though it might alleviate pressure on surface streets.

I feel lucky right now that my commute is only about 20 minutes either by bus or car and that I work and live in Portland and don't need to travel further out in the metro during rush hour(usually). Even going to the Barbur World Foods market in SW can be a problem after work though...

[KJoe11]

Originally Posted by jjpop

Traffic is bad on Portland area freeways. To deny that means you don't drive the freeways at busy times.

The length of time it takes to go 10 miles in Portland during rush hour is the same length of time it would take to go 30 miles in many other cities.

And based on this survey (How do Portlanders want to live? Planners' survey finds complex picture of housing preferences | OregonLive.com), more people that are coming to Portland want to live in the suburbs than urban neighborhoods. Those of us who live here now may grumble about what a bad idea it is to expand freeways (on one side) or how Trimet is a boondoggle and we shouldn't waste any more money on it (on the other side), but the fact of the matter is that something will need to be done.

Or we just leave it like it is. I guess I wonder what all of you think would happen if we just kept bumping along on our infrastructure as we are now while our population of (apparently) suburban-loving newcomers continues to grow?

Now, this interesting. I am going throw a thought out there and say.. the reason why influx of people are moving to the suburbs is not out of love of suburbia living but of a necessity. And perhaps, they just don't want to live in Multnomah county.

[VTHokieFan]

This has always been my idea for a new traffic pattern



Abolish "405" and turn it into I-5 and make the portion between the I-5/405 interchange and I-5/84 interchange an exit to 84/from I-5. Likewise, make the Marquam bridge an exit to 84/From I-5 as well.

[Deezus]

Originally Posted by VTHokieFan

This has always been my idea for a new traffic pattern



Abolish "405" and turn it into I-5 and make the portion between the I-5/405 interchange and I-5/84 interchange an exit to 84/from I-5. Likewise, make the Marquam bridge an exit to 84/From I-5 as well.

If I'm reading that right--how would one get from I-84 to I-5? It just looks like traffic goes to I-84 from I-5 but doesn't go from I-84 to I-5 in that drawing?

[bler144]

Originally Posted by urbanlife78

I was just driving through that area and it wasn't that bad. I wasn't sitting through light cycles to get through intersections.

From my experiences with different metros, Portlanders tend to complain about the traffic because this is all they know.

You posted this early afternoon, so I'm not particularly surprised it wasn't too bad at 1:30 pm. Try it at 4:45 going north from the Steel Bridge to Lombard and I'd wager it will be at least twice as long.

As Deezus notes, the issue is chokepoints, particularly when you add congestion. Most of the day Interstate isn't that bad, but during rush it is because you get sufficient traffic trying to turn left that it clogs up all the traffic trying to go straight, particularly when you miss a cycle or two for MAX running through north and south. Most notable on the stretch south of Rosa Parks before it opens up to 4 lanes. Conversely, Greeley is actually pretty smooth south of Rosa Parks, but it's not unusual to miss a cycle where the road tightens up and more drivers are trying to turn west towards Univ. Park.

And even if you're not sitting through cycles, if you're bypassing I-5 because of traffic onto Interstate/MLK, you're still accepting that it's going to take you 10-15 minutes to cover a stretch that would have taken 2-3 minutes if the interstate were moving at posted speed. So you're impacted, even if it's a concession you're willing to live with.

And the more I-5 is clogged up, the more cars shunt off I-5 onto those local roads creating more congestion for the local traffic. As North portland becomes more dense over time, frankly I think it's likely to get worse still.

[VTHokieFan]

Originally Posted by Deezus

If I'm reading that right--how would one get from I-84 to I-5? It just looks like traffic goes to I-84 from I-5 but doesn't go from I-84 to I-5 in that drawing?

Basically, the current I-5 (between the Fremont Bridge to the Marquam bridge) are now exits for I-84 to get to and from I-5. People Driving on the blue are now there simply to get to I-84 from I-5, or away from I-84 onto I-5. There's no more thru traffic

[bler144]

Originally Posted by VTHokieFan

This has always been my idea for a new traffic pattern



Abolish "405" and turn it into I-5 and make the portion between the I-5/405 interchange and I-5/84 interchange an exit to 84/from I-5. Likewise, make the Marquam bridge an exit to 84/From I-5 as well.

I'm not clear on how that would help anyway. Because it passes through the city center certain types of commercial traffic is barred from that which is now 405, but many auto passengers already take 405 as a bypass.

In this scenario at best I think you'd be easing the congestion for traffic trying to reach 84, but not really improving the overall north-south flow all that much. You'd just move the congestion across the river.

Hard to say much for sure from a drawing that's really 10,000 foot level rather than detailed, but it doesn't strike me as a magic solution. And routing more north-south through traffic (trucks with hazardous load, e.g.) onto 84 and out to 205 doesn't really help much either. It's not like 84 and 205 have ample untapped capacity.

[VTHokieFan]

Originally Posted by bler144

I'm not clear on how that would help anyway. Because it passes through the city center certain types of commercial traffic is barred from that which is now 405, but many auto passengers already take 405 as a bypass.

In this scenario at best I think you'd be easing the congestion for traffic trying to reach 84, but not really improving the overall north-south flow all that much. You'd just move the congestion across the river.

Hard to say much for sure from a drawing that's really 10,000 foot level rather than detailed, but it doesn't strike me as a magic solution. And routing more north-south through traffic (trucks with hazardous load, e.g.) onto 84 and out to 205 doesn't really help much either. It's not like 84 and 205 have ample untapped capacity.

Simplifying traffic would make things better IMO.

[bler144]

Originally Posted by VTHokieFan

Basically, the current I-5 (between the Fremont Bridge to the Marquam bridge) are now exits for I-84 to get to and from I-5. People Driving on the blue are now there simply to get to I-84 from I-5, or away from I-84 onto I-5. There's no more thru traffic

Personally I think that's a misread of the problem. I don't think 84, per se, is the core issue. It's the terrible way the 84 interchange is designed.

Southbound the interchange isn't ideal, but northbound the interchange is frankly, flat-out horrible design. You have 1-2 lanes on the right hand trying to merge left to stay northbound crossing multiple lanes merging right to get on 84. Even on a Sunday afternoon it's an annoyance - add the congestion of rush hour and you get several miles of backup because the operation just can't be done at speed with higher volumes.