Road conditions Portland (Milwaukie: light rail, stations, bike)

[Daisy32673]

Portland has not accomodated for population growth when it comes to freeways and highways. We were driving 217 to 26 east yesterday as well (around 2pm on a Friday) and it was not bad at all. The problem with getting around the city is there are only a few major routes to take and if everyone else is stuck going the same way then traffic will always get bad. I take it you're a new resident? If so, wait til the weather gets really bad - then see how long your commute takes.

[derniss]

Originally Posted by The Cactus Leaguer

I have two responses to your post - specific, and general:

Specific - 217 to 26 W was significantly upgraded several years ago, and the loop is far, far better now. Yes the traffic backs up there at times but I honestly don't think it's any worse than what I've seen in other cities. Some of this is inevitable - traffic from two major employment hubs dumping their traffic together at rush hour at one spot. Remember also that there is still significant construction going on to fix 217 North between Walker Road and 26 East, and that is temporarily causing some headaches for Westbound traffic as well. I think it will improve once they finish construction. Furthermore, my guess is that some of the more closely spaced exits on 217 will be closed in the next 5-10 years to improve traffic flow.

General - Portland needs a westside bypass ("I-605") connecting Wilsonville, Sherwood, Hillsboro, and Clark County. They have needed this for 20 years. But it's not going to happen because its too expensive (especially the part where you have to cut through the West Hills), and the limited transportation dollars are and will continue to go repairing and replacing existing roads and bridges, along with continued expansion of mass transit. My personal opinion is that they should try to build it using tolls, but environmental and anti-tax groups would band together to kill it before it even got started. (Oregon hates regressive taxes)

As a result, US-217 and many other westside connections are overburdened.

605 would be a dream. Thanks for the information.

[hamellr]

Originally Posted by Daisy32673

Portland has not accomodated for population growth when it comes to freeways and highways. We were driving 217 to 26 east yesterday as well (around 2pm on a Friday) and it was not bad at all. The problem with getting around the city is there are only a few major routes to take and if everyone else is stuck going the same way then traffic will always get bad. I take it you're a new resident? If so, wait til the weather gets really bad - then see how long your commute takes.

You should go back and look at some of the late 50's and early 60's highway proposals. What is really interesting about most of them, is if you look critically at them and extrapolate for actual population growth, those plans would have put Portland as one of the worse traffic places around.

Keep in mind that even the current Freeway system in the Portland area was only projected to handle an "optimistic" population growth of 30% a year from 1960 to 2000. So the system was doomed to failure from the beginning.

I do think that everyone involved including Tri-Met, ODOT, Metro, Washington, Multnomah, Clackamas, and all the cities have done quite a good job with what they were handed both from an already exist infrastructure standpoint and from an economic standpoint.

We could have a much worse system. 26 could have never been widened, and still be a parking lot both along 217 and through the Sylvan hills. The 217 and I-5 interchange is really the best compromise they could come up with considering the geography and the businesses in that area.

The I-5 Bridge is still a major issue, but the amount of money we're planning on spending vs. the actual benefits (with the current front running designs) doesn't seem to make it worth while.

[derniss]

Originally Posted by hamellr

You should go back and look at some of the late 50's and early 60's highway proposals. What is really interesting about most of them, is if you look critically at them and extrapolate for actual population growth, those plans would have put Portland as one of the worse traffic places around.

Keep in mind that even the current Freeway system in the Portland area was only projected to handle an "optimistic" population growth of 30% a year from 1960 to 2000. So the system was doomed to failure from the beginning.

I do think that everyone involved including Tri-Met, ODOT, Metro, Washington, Multnomah, Clackamas, and all the cities have done quite a good job with what they were handed both from an already exist infrastructure standpoint and from an economic standpoint.

We could have a much worse system. 26 could have never been widened, and still be a parking lot both along 217 and through the Sylvan hills. The 217 and I-5 interchange is really the best compromise they could come up with considering the geography and the businesses in that area.

The I-5 Bridge is still a major issue, but the amount of money we're planning on spending vs. the actual benefits (with the current front running designs) doesn't seem to make it worth while.

What is I-5 Bridge going to accomplish? Sounds like it will simply replace a deteriorating/aging bridge. More lanes will help. I guess it would sense then to go to Vancouver and live there! I hope they add I-605. That would make Portland such a great place (in my view).

[Nell Plotts]

Back in the mid-70s a developer told me that 217 would be extended north and there would be a new bridge across the Columbia which would connect to I-5 north of Vancouver. Eh, he had no clue about the engineering difficulties of such a plan. It may happen, but not in my lifetime.

The I-5 interstate bridge needs replacement. As I said earlier either nature will remove it or DOT. Your guess is as good as mine who will do that job. If more lanes are added then where will the traffic go? The route through Portland would be very very expensive to widen and as usual Vancouverites don't want to pay for upgrades on their end.

[hamellr]

The "reason" the I-5 bridge is so expensive is that 50-75% of the Construction costs are going to include redoing I-5 a couple of miles on each side, plus all the on ramps and off ramps, plus include a Max Extension into Vancouver, plus include a newer "better" bike path.

The biggest argument against a new (besides the $4 billion dollar price tag,) is that all a new and larger bridge will do is increase congestion from the Vancouver Suburbs into Portland area.

Several other plans have come to light to address specific issues. Strengthening the current bridge, building an entirely separate Light Rail/Bike/Pedestrian Bridge across the Western Part of Hayden Island and developing that are into a better wildlife refuge/public access park.

Or doing nothing and saving the money. In the meantime we've already spent something like $100 million alone in just studying and planning. That amount of money could have bought us a new bridge, or significantly repaired the current bridge.

The problem is complicated by the fact that large ships do need to come through there occasionally, and tug/barge traffic happens quite frequently. But there isn't the room to properly build a very high bridge such as the Astoria-Metzger Bridge or the one between Longview and Rainer.

[Nell Plotts]

Yup.

[Daisy32673]

dont forget that the fact that while they dump all this time and money into repairing what seems to be an already fairly safe bridge, the Sellwood bridge is ready to fall to the ground anyday now. Seems like priorities are a little skewed here.

[Nell Plotts]

Different buckets of money. I-5 is state and federal, Sellwood bridge is county.

[hamellr]

Especially since Clackamas County (who benefits from the Sellwood the most,) declined via the last round of votes to not fund the Sellwood.