HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted May 28, 2008, 6:06 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
when i've read comments on tribune articles in the past it does seem like there's a small group (maybe 10-15) people who comment all the time. they seem to have their own little agendas and take every opportunity to whine, loudly. well, fuck them. at some point gas will get expensive enough that they'll no longer be able to afford to drive from mom's down to 7-11 and they'll be screaming that the gubmint hasn't built enough transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted May 28, 2008, 6:08 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
also, wtf? i'm surprised to find myself agreeing with eric halstead, but why was tri-met planning to move that transit center to the middle of nowhere? the whole point is to get people to places where things are - not to parking lots on the edges of four-lane highways. i'm glad that project bit it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted May 28, 2008, 7:49 AM
IanofCascadia IanofCascadia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 69
Yeah, check out some of the comments on the older news stories from the newspaper of my hometown (www.tdn.com)... they are beyond ridiculous. Actually, in a way it is good that the comments became soooo idiotic since the editors had to step in. Now, in order to comment one has to register first... fixed the problem in a flash.

As to why Tri-Met is planning to the move the Transit center, I don't know. However, I would suspect...
1. Lower land values (reduced cost)
2. NIMBY Input (just look at the comments on the Tribune)
3. Perhaps to allow room for future transit oriented density (we can always hope)

Last edited by IanofCascadia; May 28, 2008 at 8:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted May 28, 2008, 8:21 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
^ they're actually no longer planning to move it there; the plan's been canceled. but i think you're right, now that i think about it, that NIMBYs wanted it out of downtown and pushed trimet into agreeing to southgate lot. all moot now, of course.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2008, 11:07 PM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
Thumbs up

Light rail steering committee chooses extension to Park Ave.
Metro likely to adopt reccomendation; One Milwaukie commissioner questions alignment choice

By Matthew Graham

The Clackamas Review, Jun 27, 2008


Regional leaders making up the Portland-to-Milwaukie light rail steering committee want the line to go behind the industrial area on north Main Street in Milwaukie, following the Tillamook rail already there, and to extend to Park Avenue in Oak Grove if the line is approved by Metro.

The committee, including Milwaukie Mayor Jim Bernard voted on the recommendation on Thursday.

Metro is likely to stick to the recommendation, Bernard said; two of the Metro commissioners were on the steering committee, and he said he’d talked to most of the others and was pretty confident in their support.

Bernard said most of Milwaukie’s desires were met, primarily the extension to Park Avenue. The alternative was a terminus on Lake Road in downtown Milwaukie.

Everyone on the steering committee was on board with [the Park Avenue extension],” Bernard said. “What I had to fight for was a commitment from the steering committee to make sure that the costs are kept in line so that the Park Avenue alignment isn’t taken away because they want a prettier bridge or another station here or there.”

He said he also fought to make sure that if the rail ends in downtown Milwaukie, it doesn’t do so for long.

“My other amendment really had to do with, if we don’t get to Park Avenue, that we make this a priority, that finishing the next project in line would be to get to Park Avenue or maybe to Oregon City,” he said.

City Council last month voted in favor of a single Milwaukie stop at Lake Road and an extension to Park Avenue. The city hasn’t, however, voted on an alignment choice. Bernard said he believed City Council would favor the Tillamook alignment over what is referred to as the 2003 Locally Preferred Alternative, which would have cut in front of the industrial area down McLoughlin and then through it near Mailwell Drive. The 2003 LPA would have directly impacted a number of businesses and probably disrupted freight access for the whole area, whereas the Tillamook alignment is only expected to impact one business.

“We haven’t really voted at City Council but I’m pretty sure that we intend to support the Tillamook branch because we had created a committee to study the affect on the industrial property at the north Main area, and the one alignment that goes through the industrial, we had looked at that and decided that the impact would be too great,” Bernard said.

City Councilor Joe Loomis, on the other hand, said he regretted having prematurely terminated the McLoughlin alignment proposed last year.

“A lot of the emails I received are kind of how I feel too, that McLoughlin would have been a better option, so that’s what I’m struggling with right now,” Loomis said. “To me the Mcloughlin alignment would have accomplished a couple of really huge things for our community, we would have had more parking at the Cash Spot site and they would have had to build a station that could cross over the to the riverfront park and I really thought that, if it didn’t have any fatal flaws, it would have accomplished that.”

Bernard told the Review two weeks ago that the alignment did have such a pitfall, though – ardent opposition from the Oregon Department of Transportation, which has invested a lot of money in refurbishing the highway in recent years.

Still, Loomis said it’s an important project and he would continue to study the reports to find the best alignment before voting on it in July.

“I’m hoping to move forward with it, because I think its an important project for then region, but its going to be a project that’s going to be here forever,” he said. “I want to put it in the right place.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2008, 12:25 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
awesome. the behind-the-industrial-area route will avoid any sharp turns, which means tri-met will have no reason to run the trains slowly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2008, 5:43 PM
RED_PDXer RED_PDXer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 771
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
awesome. the behind-the-industrial-area route will avoid any sharp turns, which means tri-met will have no reason to run the trains slowly.
I wish you were entirely correct. The schools and churches in downtown Milwaukie have been against light rail/transit for some time. It's likely the train will be limited to 25-35 mph through downtown to appease them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2008, 6:48 PM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,733
well, yeah, through downtown i guess, but that's a relatively short part of the whole route - probably equivalent to downtown gresham. except with only one or two stations. the rest of the route though should be a more or less straight shot. remember the route they wanted back in 1995? completely ridiculous - several sharp turns and a loop through downtown that would have completely slowed things down. this won't be too bad in comparison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2008, 1:39 AM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
TriMet endorses Vancouver, Milwaukie light rail projects
Posted by Dylan Rivera, The Oregonian July 09, 2008 12:42PM

TriMet's board of directors gave a limited endorsement Wednesday morning to a new $4.2 billion Interstate 5 bridge, with a light-rail extension from North Portland to Vancouver.

The board also endorsed a route for a $1.4 billion rail line from downtown Portland to Milwaukie, a separate project that once was envisioned as one continuous line from Milwaukie to Vancouver.

The favored Milwaukie route would connect Oregon Health & Science University with the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry. It also would have one Milwaukie stop at Lake Road near downtown and extend south of Milwaukie to Park Avenue in Clackamas County.

"I'm really excited about the potential for that line and the whole north-south coming together," said Rick Van Beveren, who represents Washington County on the board.

Milwaukie Mayor Jim Bernard and Clackamas County Chairwoman Lynn Peterson spoke in favor of the Milwaukie project.

The board's statement on the Columbia River Crossing, as the Vancouver project is known, only called for a new bridge with light rail and space for pedestrian and bike uses. It did not address the number of lanes in a new bridge or the route a rail line should take in Vancouver.

TriMet General Manager Fred Hansen said "it makes sense" to provide at least three lanes in each direction for through traffic, about what the bridge has now, and a shoulder for stalled vehicles. But he spoke against the design by Oregon and Washington bridge planners, which called for three auxiliary lanes in each direction. Those would be short lanes that would extend on and off ramps, bringing the bridge to 12 lanes.

Auxiliary lanes would be acceptable if they help meet safety and efficiency goals, but not adding car traffic, Hansen said. "Auxiliary lanes are not there for adding additional capacity for the bridge."
-- Dylan Rivera
dylanrivera@news.oregonian.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2008, 11:18 AM
RED_PDXer RED_PDXer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 771
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD View Post
TriMet endorses Vancouver, Milwaukie light rail projects
Auxiliary lanes would be acceptable if they help meet safety and efficiency goals, but not adding car traffic, Hansen said. "Auxiliary lanes are not there for adding additional capacity for the bridge."
-- Dylan Rivera
dylanrivera@news.oregonian.com
Auxiliary lanes DO increase traffic capacity. Imagine if SE Division Street had a third lane for left turning vehicles. The third, auxiliary, lane is not a through lane, but does take turning traffic out of through lanes, allowing through movements to proceed uninterrupted. More traffic capacity is thus provided without vehicles blocking the roadway all or some of the time. CRC's argument that providing 3 through lanes is not increasing capacity is totally bogus and all traffic engineers should recognize that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2008, 8:14 PM
tworivers's Avatar
tworivers tworivers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Portland/Cascadia
Posts: 2,569
Quote:
Auxiliary lanes would be acceptable if they help meet safety and efficiency goals, but not adding car traffic, Hansen said.
Sounds like Trimet is ready to roll over.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2008, 2:47 PM
Sekkle's Avatar
Sekkle Sekkle is offline
zzzzzzzz
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland area
Posts: 2,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by RED_PDXer View Post
Auxiliary lanes DO increase traffic capacity. Imagine if SE Division Street had a third lane for left turning vehicles. The third, auxiliary, lane is not a through lane, but does take turning traffic out of through lanes, allowing through movements to proceed uninterrupted. More traffic capacity is thus provided without vehicles blocking the roadway all or some of the time. CRC's argument that providing 3 through lanes is not increasing capacity is totally bogus and all traffic engineers should recognize that.
Technically, from a traffic engineering standpoint, auxiliary lanes do not increase capacity. They do improve operational efficiency. Thus, when the argument needs to be made that certain highway improvements will not increase capacity (there are various reasons why this argument would need to be made - opposition like we're seeing to this project is just one), auxiliary lanes are a way around that. I understand what you're saying, though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2008, 4:18 AM
RED_PDXer RED_PDXer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 771
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForAteOh View Post
Technically, from a traffic engineering standpoint, auxiliary lanes do not increase capacity. They do improve operational efficiency. Thus, when the argument needs to be made that certain highway improvements will not increase capacity (there are various reasons why this argument would need to be made - opposition like we're seeing to this project is just one), auxiliary lanes are a way around that. I understand what you're saying, though.
In the end, the operational efficiency results in greater road carrying capacity during periods of peak demand. I suppose if there were no on- and off-ramps in this section of the highway, the point would be moot, but there are. Thus, the proposed 12-lane bridge with on- and off-ramps can accommodate much greater traffic flows than the current 6-lane bridge with on- and off-ramps, increasing speeds and making this route much more attractive to commuters, which will in turn overload other parts of I-5, and North Portland arterials. Vancouverites will be able to get across the river and onto North Portland streets to avoid the congestion around I-405 and the Rose Quarter.

All this for the bargain basement price of 4.something billion dollars.. As Councilor Liberty says, it'd be cheaper to buy out the dozen or so river users that need to have the drawbridge raised than to build this monstrosity..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2008, 6:10 PM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
Milwaukie endorses light-rail line
Commissioners raise concerns about downtown terminus; say they want Park Avenue extension

By Matthew Graham


The Clackamas Review, Jul 15, 2008,

The Milwaukie City Council Tuesday night endorsed the Tillamook alignment for the Portland to Milwaukie light-rail line, supporting the route that cuts behind the city’s north industrial sector, through downtown, and extends to Park Avenue. Council endorsed a single downtown Milwaukie stop at Lake Road.

The 4-1 vote of support mirrored the option already endorsed by both the project steering committee and the Oregon City City Commission.

The proposed 6.5-mile line would run from Southwest Jackson Street in downtown Portland south to Portland State University and the South Waterfront district, would cross the Willamette River near Oregon Museum of Science and Industry and travel south through parallel to Highway 99E/McLoughlin Boulevard.

At the northern edge of Milwaukie's north industrial area it would follow the heavy rail tracks of the Tillamook branch behind the industrial area, cutting through downtown Milwaukie and extending to Park Avenue in Oak Grove.

The project, which has been in the works for more than a decade, is expected to cost around $1.4 billion, with 60 percent coming from the federal government and $250 million from the state. Milwaukie has tentatively been asked to contribute $5 million, but Metro will continue looking for funding sources and solidifying overall cost estimates once it adopts the plan.

The city did not support the full project report pushed forward by the steering committee. Commissioners took issue with a clause in that report stating that if funding levels didn’t allow them to reach Park Place, the line would terminate at Lake Road in downtown Milwaukie.

Councilors Greg Chaimov and Susan Stone said they felt that would be a betrayal of much of what they’d heard from constituents who said they didn’t want the line to end downtown, which requires three tracks for a turnaround, a much larger impact than a single station.

Still, city and TriMet staff said the endorsement of the line gave the project enough momentum to keep pushing forward.

“The message should be council supports the project moving ahead,” said David Unsworth, TriMet’s project development manager.

He said the vote “absolutely” gives Metro and TriMet the momentum they need to push forward and to go out for funding for the project.

“This is a once in a century opportunity for Milwaukie and Milwaukie gets that,” said Kenny Asher, Milwaukie’s community development director. “With this action I have no doubt that the Metro council is going to push this on to the [Federal Transit Administration].”
Lone dissenting vote

The vote was not a final decision on light-rail line, it was merely an advisory vote for Milwaukie to tell Metro its preferences for and support of the project. Metro will make the final decision on whether the line will be built on July 24.

The dissenting vote came from Commissioner Susan Stone, who has argued that city-wide votes on light rail in the past had failed, so she felt a yes vote would betray her constituents; that such a large expenditure of transportation dollars should go to a public vote; that the rail would come through neighborhoods in defiance of a list of 14 points the community said it wanted if light-rail came through; and that the city would be better served by a streetcar system.

Some residents at the meeting echoed her concerns, saying the rail would come through neighborhoods and pass within a block of three schools and that other alignments or transit options ought to be studied.

But Mayor Jim Bernard and other commissioners have discussed the benefits of the rail. Bernard said it would be an economic boon and would help the city attract new businesses and leverage money to continue its redevelopment of downtown.

A large number of community members, including residents and representatives from the north industrial area, Dark Horse Comics and more, voiced strong support for the Tillamook alignment.

The final resolution adopted by council also contained a caveat highlighting concerns for schools, neighborhoods, parks and businesses and making a point that means of mitigating those concerns should be addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2008, 6:22 PM
alexjon's Avatar
alexjon alexjon is offline
Bears of antiquity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Downtown/First Hill, Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,340
Sweet!

September 10, 2014! Downtown Portland to Milwaukie! I'll be there

I wonder if that shop that has the really cheap computers is there still? If not, I'll just grab grub and swing on over to the comic shop.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2008, 8:36 PM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
Metro OKs Portland-to- Milwaukie light-rail line
Vote means work begins in earnest on $1.4 billion project


By Matthew Graham
The Clackamas Review, Jul 24, 2008,


A $1.4 billion light-rail line connecting downtown Portland with Milwaukie got the green light Thursday afternoon.

Metro’s Council voted unanimously to approve the project’s land-use final order, putting the 6.5-mile line on track to be built mostly along existing rail track south through Portland’s redeveloping South Waterfront area, across the Willamette River on a new alternative transportation bridge, down Southeast 17th Avenue and then paralleling McLoughlin Boulevard to downtown Milwaukie.

Metro councilors said the project was necessary to the region’s public transportation system that could become more vital as fuel prices increased in the future.

“The heart and soul of Milwaukie has overwhelmingly supported this project,” said Metro Councilor Carlotta Collette, a former Milwaukie City Councilwoman who has worked on the light-rail project for nearly a decade.

“I want to see people taking light rail to our beautiful Riverfront Park,” she said. “I want to see people taking light rail to our new farmers market. I believe this will help revitalize downtown Milwaukie.”

Along the Tillamook line

The Portland-to-Milwaukie light-rail line has already received approval from several jurisdictions, including Portland, Milwaukie and Oregon City. Although they were just advisory votes, each jurisdiction expressed support for the project and hopes that it would boost the region’s economy.

Prior to Metro’s vote, 15 people testified on the project, nearly evenly split between those favoring the work and those opposed. Milwaukie Mayor Jim Bernard said he has long advocated for the light-rail line and urged Metro to find money that would extend it from Lake Road, where it could end, to Park Avenue, the city’s preferred terminus.

The planned 6.5-mile line would run from Southwest Jackson Street at Portland State University to the South Waterfront district, would cross the Willamette River near Oregon Museum of Science and Industry and travel south parallel to Highway 99E/McLoughlin Boulevard.

At the northern edge of Milwaukie’s north industrial area it would follow the heavy rail tracks of the Tillamook branch behind the industrial area, cutting through downtown Milwaukie and extending to Park Avenue in Oak Grove.

The project has been in the works for more than a decade. About 60 percent of the project’s funding (an estimated $750 million) would come from the federal government and $250 million from the state lottery funds.

With the vote of approval, Metro will start seeking definite funding for the project. Milwaukie has tentatively been told that its share will be $5 million. The adopted Tillamook alignment is also expected to cost $25 million less than what is referred to as the 2003 LPA, which would have run in front of and then cut through Milwaukie’s north industrial area.

The line is expected to have 25,000 trips a day by 2030.

Locally preferred alternative

Milwaukie’s main sticking point in its vote of approval was an extension to Park Avenue in Oak Grove, rather than the line terminating in downtown Milwaukie. That would cost between $100 million and $110 million because of the difficulty of crossing Kellogg Creek. Oregon’s Department of Transportation has said it opposes any road-level crossing of the creek along McLoughlin Boulevard.

But Bernard and representatives from TriMet said all of the parties at the table want the line extended to Park Avenue. TriMet plans a regional park-and-ride lot in the area with about 1,000 parking spaces.

A “locally preferred alternative” report, however, included a stipulation that if funding for the extension isn’t found, the line would end at Lake Road in downtown Milwaukie.

Metro: 'Yes' to Milwaukie light-rail line
Transit - The vote allows for a study and a request for $750 million in federal funds
Friday, July 25, 2008
DYLAN RIVERA and PETER ZUCKERMAN
The Oregonian Staff


After more than a decade of debate and a failed referendum, the Metro Council has unanimously endorsed plans to extend light rail from Portland to Milwaukie.

The $1.4 billion project would build the first Willamette River bridge in downtown Portland since 1973 and extend light rail to the growing southeast section of the metro area. The line would have a stop in the South Waterfront and the bridge would carry the Portland Streetcar, buses, bicyclists and pedestrians -- but no cars.

The vote clears the way for a more thorough study of the line and a request for $750 million in federal money.

The project also received unanimous though less-enthusiastic support Thursday from Clackamas County commissioners, who expressed concern about public outreach.

Regional leaders see the Milwaukie line as the fulfillment of a decades-long promise to connect the southeast metro area to downtown with mass transit. The line would put more than 22,000 households and almost 89,000 workers within walking distance of a rail station, Metro estimates.

Most Milwaukie-area elected officials have endorsed the rail line and worked to get money for it, including $250 million from the Legislature last year that gave the project a massive boost. That's a big change from the late 1990s, when voters there rejected it and recalled the mayor and two council members over rail and other concerns.

Carlotta Collette, a former Milwaukie City Council member who represents the area on the Metro Council, said the city's feelings have turned around. "The heart and soul of Milwaukie has overwhelmingly supported this project -- at farmers markets and neighborhood meetings."

The bridge would connect Oregon Health & Science University with the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, and each plans to expand its campus beside the rail stations.

The line also would connect Southeast Portland neighborhoods such as Hosford-Abernethy, Brooklyn and Sellwood, and speed bus lines that now cross bridges farther south.

About a dozen people testified at the Metro Council. Some were skeptical that rail would reduce congestion but others were hopeful it could reduce dependency on cars.

At its southern reaches, the preferred route would run through Milwaukie beside a freight railroad known as the Tillamook Branch, stop at Lake Road in Milwaukie and end at Park Avenue in the Oak Grove section of Clackamas County.

Paul Savas, echoing complaints from other county residents at the commissioners meeting, said Clackamas County "failed Citizen Involvement 101." He and others said planners ignored concerns from Oak Grove residents and pooh-poohed worries about crime and lost business.

Commissioners noted that the county, TriMet and Metro have sent fliers and held open houses and public meetings about the proposed rail line.

Next week, transit planners expect to apply for federal permission to start preliminary engineering, a key step in landing federal money. If all goes well, the line could open in 2015.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2008, 8:54 PM
alexjon's Avatar
alexjon alexjon is offline
Bears of antiquity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Downtown/First Hill, Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,340
Bob Pampl-- I mean Robert Pamplin Jr. is devoting literal HOURS of airtime on KPAM each day to opposition.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2008, 1:06 AM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
nothing new...

Metro Council gives final land-use approval for S.E. light rail project

The Bee, Aug 6, 2008


On Thursday, July 24th, the Metro Council unanimously approved two decisions intended to make way for more detailed engineering work and environmental analysis on the Portland-Milwaukie segment of the “South Corridor Light Rail Project”.

The Council approved the Land Use Final Order, which finalizes light rail routes, station locations, and park-and-ride facilities. Additionally, its approval of the “Locally Preferred Alternative” affirms intent finally to construct light rail in this transportation corridor.

The approval confirms the light rail route from the downtown Portland Transit Mall into South Waterfront, across the Willamette River, through southeast Portland and into Milwaukie and north Clackamas County. It also identifies stations and park and rides along the route. A Metro spokesperson commented, “The project will provide reliable transit options and enhance the regional light rail system.”

The long-delayed Inner Southeast light rail project will initially consist of a 7.4-mile run of track, originating in downtown Portland and ending just south of Milwaukie at Oak Grove.

Specifically, the new line will run between S.W. 4th and 5th Avenues near Portland State University in Portland, and Park Avenue in Oak Grove, and will follow the Tillamook Branch railroad alignment in the North Milwaukie Industrial area through downtown Milwaukie.

The project includes a Willamette River crossing between S.W. Mead and S.W. Porter Streets to an eastern landing near S.E. Sherman Street, just south of the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI). The bridge will carry light rail, busses, and any future Portland Streetcar route, and includes a 12-foot pathway for cyclists and pedestrians.

“This light rail line will provide numerous benefits,” said Metro Councilor Robert Liberty, who represents Inner Southeast Portland. “More than 22,000 households or 50,000 people live within walking distance of the stations, 14,000 riders per day will have a less time-consuming commute, and drivers on the Ross Island Bridge will see less congestion, because busses will be diverted to the new structure.”

Though the specific light rail stations on the line are yet to be finalized, it includes up to eleven stops. Stations will likely be located in the area of S.W. Lincoln Street and S.W. Harbor Drive; in the South Waterfront development; at OMSI; at S.E. Clinton Street; S.E. Rhine Street; S.E. Holgate Boulevard; S.E. Bybee Boulevard; S.E. Tacoma Street; Lake Road in downtown Milwaukie; and at the line’s terminus at Park Avenue in Oak Grove.

Some controversy and much local support centered on the longest gap between the stations on the line — between Holgate and Bybee Boulevards — where planning in the early 1990’s had indicated a station would be sited to serve the north end of Westmoreland. Although considerable local interest revived what is now proposed as a Harold Street station, with positive support from the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Sellwood-Moreland Improvement League (SMILE), and Reed College, the Harold Street proposal was thought by Metro and Tri-Met to be too costly to include in the initial construction plans.

Due to the prediction of a computer model, there also was concern that the one-minute delay to the transit time of trains occasioned by stopping at Harold Street could discourage Clackamas County riders from using the service.

However, the plan adopted by Metro includes an official plan for “a future station at Harold Street on McLoughlin Boulevard”, which reportedly will mean that the tracks will be constructed south of S.E. Harold on the east side of McLoughlin Boulevard in such a way as to have the necessary spacing and configuration to allow construction of a future station there.

The Metro Council vote follows approvals from Clackamas and Multnomah counties, the cities of Portland, Milwaukie, and Oregon City, and the Oregon Department of Transportation.

The line is expected to cost between $1.25 and $1.4 billion. Funding will come from the Federal Transit Administration, lottery-backed bonds approved by the Oregon legislature, and local shares, with contributions from Metro, Tri-Met, Clackamas County, and the cities of Portland and Milwaukie.

Metro is leading the Portland-Milwaukie project in partnership with Tri-Met, the Oregon Department of Transportation the cities of Milwaukie, Portland, and Oregon City, and Clackamas and Multnomah Counties.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2008, 5:31 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,474
What? The bridge will only have a single 12' ped+bike way?

We're going to have major pedestrian traffic jams on the bridge!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2008, 7:09 PM
JordanL JordanL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
What? The bridge will only have a single 12' ped+bike way?

We're going to have major pedestrian traffic jams on the bridge!
From all those people walking to the south eastside industrial area?
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 3:11 AM.

     

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