HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 4:31 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,129
^^^Agree 100%, and you forgot to mention the billions saved.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 4:33 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,150
James Bond posted an article from the Seattle Times in the NW Economy section about Washington's growth. This is the part on Clark

Quote:
CLARK COUNTY

For years, the Vancouver area has been dismissed as hip, eco-urban Portland's dowdy sibling — the repository for all the development that couldn't be contained within Portland's tight urban-growth boundary. Local officials have sought to turn that distinction to the county's advantage.

"Clark County is still filling up, and there's lots of developable land," said Scott Bailey, the state Employment Security Department's regional labor economist for Southwest Washington. "The land-use plans have continually allowed for as much residential development as we could take. It's been 'Come on in, homebuilders.' "

Now, Bailey said, the county's population has grown enough that it can support a level of retail and services that once could only be found across the Interstate Bridge — though Oregon's siren call of tax-free shopping continues to beckon.

People who bought into the stacks of newly built homes across from Legacy Salmon Creek, for instance, can now shop at a new Best Buy store a few miles down Interstate 5. (Clark County has added 2,400 retail jobs during the current boom.)

"Now we're getting all the stores Portland has, only ours are all brand-new," said Gretchen Amacher, manager of Legacy's Family Birth Center.

One industry that helped fuel growth in the late 1990s, semiconductor manufacturing, isn't much of a factor this time around. Chipmakers shrank or closed several of the newly built plants during the recession. Employment in computer and electronics manufacturing shrank from 5,300 at the end of 2000 to 3,000 at the depth of the recession, and the sector has added just 500 jobs since then.
I reaaaaly like this part:

"Clark County is still filling up, and there's lots of developable land," said Scott Bailey, the state Employment Security Department's regional labor economist for Southwest Washington. "The land-use plans have continually allowed for as much residential development as we could take. It's been 'Come on in, homebuilders.' "

fine bastards, build your own fucking bridge. I cannot support paying for a bridge that really, as long as we can still send our goods down south, our economy will be fine. In order for Sea-Tac to remain a major port, they need to get their goods to Califas as well, so if Washington would check Clark's sprawl, bring the MAX across the river and to SR500, and close down Pearsons and turn it into a massive new downtown, than I could support a joint partnership for a new bridge. It just incredible that the cost of the bridge could be up to $2B more because of flight restrictions at Pearsons.
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 4:52 PM
PuyoPiyo's Avatar
PuyoPiyo PuyoPiyo is offline
Puyo!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 627
Some of you might think repairing the Interstate Bridge might be very stupid idea, but HOLD ON. Have you ever drive through those bridges? How about during the morning from Vancouver to Portland, and then afternoon from Portland to Vancouver? It takes me 1 hour average to do that. I'd rather to drive to somewhere else for 1 hour. Also if Vancouver people don't work at Portland, then Portland will not have those kind of skylines.

The freeways inside Portland are doing fine, capping them might help Portland's downtown, but what about those (almost) 50 percent of Vancouver people works in Portland? They might want have a comfortable transportation to work at Portland.
__________________
Colorful Past, Bright Future.
My Diagram =====>> http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m21438
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 5:00 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo
Also if Vancouver people don't work at Portland, then Portland will not have those kind of skylines.
actually it could be argued if the 100,000+ Vancouverites that work in Portland didn't come across the bridge, the need for higher density housing would increase, leading to an even more spectacular skyline, since our UGB would prevent Vancouver style sprawl.
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 5:03 PM
PuyoPiyo's Avatar
PuyoPiyo PuyoPiyo is offline
Puyo!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgepdx View Post
Unfortunately I doubt this is a joke. The development interests in Vantucky have a lot riding on a new bridge and maybe more so the new interchanges. They want to spend a bunch of money improving the Delta Park interchanges not for the benefit of local residents, but so those folks living in cheapy houses up north of Battleground can zoom past Delta Park and North Portland on their way to work in downtown Portland.

Your Mt Hood Freeway analogy is fitting, same interests at work. Like I said before you could build 15,000-20,000 new houses or condos in Portland for the price of this freeway project. Which one would reduce traffic congestion more in the long term ?

I've always felt like Vancouver was sort of a parasite on Portland reaping all the benefits that we've built here on the Oregon side while having a development free for all on the Washington side. This bridge and highway proposal just reaffirms that in my mind.

I'm sure UrbanPDX will jump in here any minute to tell us why we all need to pay for new freeways so those folks up in La Center can have their property rights or whatever ...

Sorry for the angry rant it's just the more I think about this project the more it seems like a boondoggle with money that could be spent better else ware such as burying I5 on the east side of the Willamette.
Those properties at La Center, Battleground, Ridgefield, whatever are not cheap. You should consider more north than those, like Amboy, Woodland, Yale, Cougar, they are cheap just becasue nobody want to live there. There's nothing but forest there.

Check out at MSN Homes for sale in Battleground, I see no cheap price there. It's just the same as Vancouver.

Sorry, I live in Vancouver whole my life, have been looking for house for sale for a year, so I know.
__________________
Colorful Past, Bright Future.
My Diagram =====>> http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m21438
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 6:06 PM
Drmyeyes Drmyeyes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 384
Is it only Pearson that would require height limitations on a new bridge? Maybe they could relocate Pearson for say....1 bil....saves 1bil !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 6:28 PM
edgepdx's Avatar
edgepdx edgepdx is offline
No longer PDX
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hood River, OR
Posts: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo View Post
Those properties at La Center, Battleground, Ridgefield, whatever are not cheap. You should consider more north than those, like Amboy, Woodland, Yale, Cougar, they are cheap just becasue nobody want to live there. There's nothing but forest there.

Check out at MSN Homes for sale in Battleground, I see no cheap price there. It's just the same as Vancouver.

Sorry, I live in Vancouver whole my life, have been looking for house for sale for a year, so I know.
Actually I said "cheapy" not cheap, those houses are the typical 8000 sq. ft. McMansion's built of cardboard. Their not cheap to buy, but they are cheaply built to maximize profit for the developer.

I think the point we're all making here is if you work in Portland then live in Portland instead of expecting everyone to toss in a few $B for a new bridge and freeway project because you decided to live on the wrong side of the biggest river on the west coast from where you work.

Also, just wait until the new bridge and freeway project goes in and the developers start building the new "expensive" houses in Cougar and Woodland. That's how it works, buy some cheap land way out there where no one wants to live, build a freeway, a subdivision of McMansions and a Best Buy and sell at a huge profit. As the land prices go up and the freeway get clogged up, move out farther. Pretty soon your living in Houston.

I think the idea about upgrading the railroad bridge and adding a local access/freight bypass/LRT bridge is a great idea. I'll bet we'd be talking $1.5B tops.
__________________
Brawndo - The Thirst Mutilator
"It's got what plants crave!"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 7:21 PM
pdxman's Avatar
pdxman pdxman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,037
Amen! Thank you edgepdx
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 8:22 PM
Snowden352's Avatar
Snowden352 Snowden352 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 236
I disagree.

Last edited by Snowden352; Feb 27, 2007 at 8:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 9:48 PM
PuyoPiyo's Avatar
PuyoPiyo PuyoPiyo is offline
Puyo!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgepdx View Post
Actually I said "cheapy" not cheap, those houses are the typical 8000 sq. ft. McMansion's built of cardboard. Their not cheap to buy, but they are cheaply built to maximize profit for the developer.

I think the point we're all making here is if you work in Portland then live in Portland instead of expecting everyone to toss in a few $B for a new bridge and freeway project because you decided to live on the wrong side of the biggest river on the west coast from where you work.

Also, just wait until the new bridge and freeway project goes in and the developers start building the new "expensive" houses in Cougar and Woodland. That's how it works, buy some cheap land way out there where no one wants to live, build a freeway, a subdivision of McMansions and a Best Buy and sell at a huge profit. As the land prices go up and the freeway get clogged up, move out farther. Pretty soon your living in Houston.

I think the idea about upgrading the railroad bridge and adding a local access/freight bypass/LRT bridge is a great idea. I'll bet we'd be talking $1.5B tops.
Portland need Vancouver's workers to work in Portland, Vancouver need Portland's workers to live in Vancouver. They're cooperating for many years. Portland and Vancouver have the rivers, they just have to deal with it, rivers are just the nature part of the land.

Also northern Clark County already have I-5. Woodland is on the I-5, have good stores, like Safeway, Movie Gallery, etc and also it have cute little downtown. Woodland is fine actually, it don't need Vancouver/Portland's help. Cougars is very far northeast of Clark County and only use for vacation. Cougars have very strict laws on the lands up there, that's why nobody want to live there.
__________________
Colorful Past, Bright Future.
My Diagram =====>> http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m21438
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 10:49 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,150
time for a reality check for this cat^^^
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 11:09 PM
PacificNW's Avatar
PacificNW PacificNW is online now
"Native Born"
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 3,093
__________________
Native
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2007, 11:16 PM
360Rich 360Rich is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vantucky
Posts: 256
Where did the 2 - 6 billion dollar figure come from if there is no formal proposal as of yet? We don't even know what (if anything) will be included, so how can you estimate its cost?

That number sounds like a off-the-cuff estimate to me, but is so broad that it really serves no purpose.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 12:01 AM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,150
^you're right, someone from the task force said that out loud and the media has taken off with that number as if it was based on actual estimates.
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 1:47 AM
Snowden352's Avatar
Snowden352 Snowden352 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 236
just a note: according to the Task Force Meeting Materials of Feb. 27th (today), the draft has been approved.

Here's a link: http://www.columbiarivercrossing.org...mary_Draft.pdf

Next meetings discuss transit and design concepts. Here's a link: http://www.columbiarivercrossing.org...tiesin2007.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 5:17 AM
alexjon's Avatar
alexjon alexjon is offline
Bears of antiquity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Downtown/First Hill, Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,340
So they're more than likely including LRT? Or are they still listening to urbanpdx?
__________________
"The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion." -- George Washington & John Adams in a diplomatic message to Malta
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 5:26 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
where is he, anyway? did ti.org forget to renew his trolling grant?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 4:47 PM
Snowden352's Avatar
Snowden352 Snowden352 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 236
According to a recent article in the Portland Tribune, they (the CRC council) will also be considering only a supplemental bridge in addition to the other three options.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 6:14 PM
360Rich 360Rich is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vantucky
Posts: 256
Crossing group takes another step

Tuesday, February 27, 2007
By DON HAMILTON Columbian Staff Writer

PORTLAND — Clark County moved a step closer to getting a new Interstate 5 bridge Tuesday night, but plans for a third bridge remain alive.

After a four-hour meeting attended by more than 100 people, the Columbia River Crossing group voted 33-0 to launch its draft environmental impact statement (EIS), which will look in detail at replacing the Interstate 5 Bridge with a new bridge that includes mass transit.

But the panel also agreed to draft an additional alternative for inclusion in the draft EIS. It will be considered at its March 27 meeting.

Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart, who will be on the committee drafting the new alternative, said he expects to see it include lower cost ways to move more people and consider keeping the existing I-5 Bridge.

The compromise means the draft EIS can get started even with the new alternative under study. Henry Hewitt, the task force co-chairman, said he expects the new alternative will be included in the draft EIS.

That new alternative probably will include a third Columbia River bridge proposal, task members indicated.

The decision to launch the draft EIS came after an hour of public testimony followed by three hours of discussion among the members of the task force.

Despite the unanimity of the vote, uncertainty remained about the cost, the availability of federal money and the effectiveness of a new bridge. Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard at first opposed anything that would delay the project.

“We could be very well sitting here in six months or a year from now saying we need to know the cost. We need to get this process moving. You want to look at something else? We don’t have a lot of time.”

But adding the new alternative will be important to gaining public support and ensuring that the range of alternatives considered isn’t limited, members of the task force said.

“If we can get to a locally preferred alternative that people can get their arms around,” Stuart said, “we have a chance at finishing this. If not, we’re finished.”

“If we go forward without anything other than a big-build option, there won’t be public support,” said Serena Cruz Walsh, representing Multnomah County commissioners.

Stuart said he added up the width of the proposed bridge, counting three through lanes in each direction, shoulders, on- and off-ramps, mass transit and auxiliary lanes.

“That’s 228 feet wide,” he said, “two thirds of a football field wide. How do we take 228 feet of width and not further divide the city of Vancouver?”

Pollard echoed his concerns. The city has the Vancouver National Historic Reserve on one side of I-5, he said, and an aggressive economic development plans on the other.

“We’re working very hard to minimize impacts,” said Jay Lyman, consulting team project manager.

Doug Ficco of the Washington Department of Transportation, one of the project’s two directors, discussed the staff recommendation. He said building a third bridge without removing the existing bridge would complicate navigation for Columbia River shipping.

The draft EIS, he said, would fill in specifics on many other issues, including freight improvements, bike and pedestrian facilities, environmental effects, bridge appearance, cost, air quality, noise reduction and public transit. Cost, as much as $6 billion in some estimates, remains a big question, Ficco said.

“We really don’t know the cost,” he said. “It’s going to be hard to define.”

During public testimony, 26 people spoke and demonstrated the very personal ways the transportation system affects their lives. They spoke of their commutes, their cars, their bikes and their health.

Kristine Perry, representing Community Choices 2010 of Clark County, urged the task force to include state-of-the-art bike and pedestrian systems to help address obesity problems.

“We are very concerned about the lack of equitable attention to pedestrian and bikeway systems,” she said. “It’s critical these vital systems not be overlooked.”

T. J. Harrison, a Lewis & Clark College student, urged programs that encourage more use of bikes and mass transit. She carried a sign saying “No more lanes – clean air.”

“Adding more lanes and more congestion is a health issue and an environmental justice issue,” she said. “The residents of North Portland have to breathe that exhaust.”

The new bridge had its supporters as well.

“I’m one of the silly people who wants to ship things by truck,” said John Leber, owner of Swanson Bark and Wood Products of Longview. “There are going to be long-term problems if we don’t fix this,” he said. “Companies like ours, which does business in 47 states, will need to move if we don’t.”

Corky Collier, executive director of the Columbia Corridor Association, said I-5 on both sides of the Columbia River remains the most congested stretch on the freeway and needs to be addressed.

“It’s embarrassing,” he said, “and an economic hindrance.”

http://www.columbian.com/printArticle.cfm?story=109504
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2007, 6:15 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,150
Replacement bridge study will go ahead
Columbia crossing - An option to keep existing spans and build a supplemental bridge stays on the table
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
JAMES MAYER
The Oregonian

The 39-member Columbia Crossing Task Force gave the green light Tuesday to a detailed study of a new Interstate Bridge to replace the existing twin spans across the Columbia River.

But an option that would keep the existing bridges got only a yellow light, with its fate put off until next month.

The task force vote capped a tense four-hour meeting in Portland as members struggled to find a compromise that would satisfy those who wanted to move ahead without delay on the new bridge study and those who wanted other alternatives studied.

The project staff, made up of engineers from Oregon and Washington transportation agencies, as well as consultants, recommended that only the replacement bridge, with either light rail or a dedicated bus lane, be taken into the federal environmental impact study, together with an option to do nothing.

The task force voted 26 to 7 to support an amendment by Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder to add a supplemental bridge to the study and to appoint a subcommittee to come back with a specific proposal at the March meeting. Task force members then voted unanimously in favor of studying the amended staff recommendation. Six task force members were absent and did not vote.

The staff recommendation concluded that traffic volumes on the I-5 bridge will increase from about 130,000 vehicles today to about 180,000 in 2030, if no improvements are made. The current six hours of congestion would grow to 16 hours.

They argued that an additional bridge for local traffic would not significantly reduce congestion on Interstate 5 or improve freight travel but would create new traffic jams in Vancouver and Hayden Island.

But pressure has been building in recent weeks to keep a lower-cost alternative alive that would build another bridge for local traffic and transit and retain the existing freeway bridges. The Metro Council and the Clark County Commission have approved resolutions supporting this approach, and environmental groups have pushed for alternatives that don't pour more cars and trucks on the roads.

Henry Hewitt, task force co-chairman and a Portland lawyer, said it was critical that an alternative be found or support for the staff recommendation would unravel.

Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard, a strong advocate for extending light rail across the Columbia River, voted against the amendment, citing the political clout the region currently enjoys with Washington Sen. Patty Murray and Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio, both Democrats in positions of power over transportation spending.

"We could very well miss the only opportunity we will have to preserve the future of these communities," Pollard said.

But Dave Frei, a task force member representing the Arnada Neighborhood Association in Vancouver, argued that it will be worth taking the extra time to test the new bridge against something tangible other than doing nothing.

"I'd like to have a choice between quality of life in the corridor and capacity," Frei said.

Most citizen comment, much of it emotional, weighed heavily against building a large new bridge, citing the cost and environmental impacts.

"It's going to kill people, and kill businesses, and your children and grandchildren will be looking at this group and saying, 'You had a bunch of good bureaucrats, why couldn't you figure it out?' " said Paul Edgar, an Oregon City resident and vocal critic of the project.

But supporters urged the panel to get on with solving the problem.

"The fact that we have the most congested corridor wrapped on both sides with the strongest economic areas is shocking," said Corky Collier, executive director of the Columbia Corridor Association.

James Mayer: 503-294-4109; jimmayer@news.oregonian.com

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...870.xml&coll=7
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:24 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.