HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #401  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2020, 5:59 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,171
Getting rid of bottlenecks IS increasing capacity. They're playing word games.

I'm on the fence about that sort of upgrade in theory (in my city up north). But a 36' widening would probably flip it to a "no" in my mind unless major non-car benefits were included, like new bike lanes and caps.

I imagine some of the widening would be due to federal highway standards, not just state. But reassigning fault doesn't make it a better project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #402  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2020, 6:36 PM
Rob Nob Rob Nob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 152
Are there any Interstates or modern via-duct style highways that have actually improved an urban area design wise? All I can think is how much better parts of the city I love would be without them.
Seems like a less and less "necessary evil" that we should really keep to a minimum moving forward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #403  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2020, 8:32 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Getting rid of bottlenecks IS increasing capacity. They're playing word games.

I'm on the fence about that sort of upgrade in theory (in my city up north). But a 36' widening would probably flip it to a "no" in my mind unless major non-car benefits were included, like new bike lanes and caps.

I imagine some of the widening would be due to federal highway standards, not just state. But reassigning fault doesn't make it a better project.
The problem with this is the bottleneck through the corridor would still exist. Only two lanes in each direction would continue through the corridor and connect to three lane highway on each side like it currently does.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #404  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2020, 3:45 PM
ltsmotorsport's Avatar
ltsmotorsport ltsmotorsport is offline
Here we stAy
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Parkway Pauper
Posts: 8,064
Totally agreed, urbanlife. Increasing overall capacity of the freeway system in this area would mean additional lanes through, which this project doesn't propose. Getting those vehicles that are transferring from one highway to another off the through lanes creates a smoother transition, but as has been pointed out, the bottleneck will still exist. The merits of keeping the bottleneck or making through-capacity consistent could be argued, but to say this project 'increases capacity for the corridor' is a bit of a red herring.

From my perspective in Sacramento, I would LOVE to see a project like this here, more in relation to the capping and bridge projects. We have some ramping issues at the 1-5 and US 50 interchange, and if we could cap more of I-5 downtown where it cuts off the city from the river, that would be huge win. Not holding my breath that Caltrans would ever take that bold and needed step though. While not knowing all the gritty politics (and I suspect no one here does either, unless someone has an inside scoop...?), ODOT appears to have a well balanced proposal of highway-focused and city-focused aspects to this project.
__________________
Riding out the crazy train
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #405  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2020, 2:05 AM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,149
https://www.oregonlive.com/commuting...ew-needed.html

Quote:
Rose Quarter freeway project does not need additional environmental review, state commission says
Updated 4:51 PM; Today 12:49 PM
By Andrew Theen | The Oregonian/OregonLive

A more than $715 million transportation project to widen Interstate 5 through the Rose Quarter, a 1.8-mile stretch that state officials call one of the nation’s worst bottlenecks, does not require a more extensive environmental study that would delay construction for three years.

That’s according to the Oregon Transportation Commission, the state’s top decision-making body for highway and freeway projects. The commission, which is comprised of volunteers appointed by the governor, voted unanimously Thursday against pursuing an Environmental Impact Statement, a lengthier federal review process that at one point was a key talking point pushed by Portland area politicians.

“I think we need to move forward with a decision,” Chair Bob Van Brocklin, a Portland attorney said before the vote in a meeting held by conference call and live-streamed through the state’s YouTube channel.

The five commissioners from all around Oregon agreed.
...(continues)
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #406  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2020, 4:08 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,239
Oh good, that's gonna be a great way to flush a billion dollars down the toilet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 3:13 AM.

     

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