« Portland's Stimson Lumber Fights Measure 49, Says "Tim-ber!" To Their Integrity | Main | Our Version of Charlottesville »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

stan

I think the new bridge will be a two lane bridge, the problem is even if you made it a four lane bridge, Tacoma is only a two lane street.So even with a larger bridge you would dump traffic into a bottleneck. My ideal bridge would be two lanes with with wide sidewalks(10' - 12') for pedestrians and cyclists.

DC

Since the city restriped Tacoma to be two lanes several years ago, and truck and bus traffic across the Sellwood Bridge has been eliminated, morning rush hour traffic has decreased considerably, and probably helped your Aunt's commute! The best option presented so far is one not on the approved list, but keeps the existing bridge for bikes and pedestrians, and locates a new span over the park to the north, avoiding all existing buildings. Incidently, who's the genius that that's been approving all the god-awful development on the east end of the bridge, effectively forcing condemnation?

Lance Lindahl

The City and the County have no legal ability to stop development from happening in this area. What is taking place now is merely a concept plan for what sort of bridge should be built in this area.

Once a plan is adopted, then public funds can be used to purchase the needed properties. Government can not prevent land from being developed just because a road or a bridge may be built here at a future date. There is the road dedication process, but this is used to limit the footprint of new structures once a transportation plan is adopted.

Here is another important footnote, even rehabilitating the existing bridge will require the purchase of several properties since a portion of the bridge is built on leased property. One building is actually built underneath the bridge and around some of the support beams.

The first two responders are correct about capacity and the desire to keep the bridge at two lanes. None of the East/West streets in this area can handle the added capacity from a four lane bridge. Congestion would simply move from the bridge to points to the east and to the west.

PDOT has an interesting solution. They have proposed a three lane bridge. There would be two lanes for through traffic, plus another lane for traffic heading eastbound. This lane would then serve those seaking to turn left at Oaks Park and at SE 13th Avenue. This proposal seems to balance overall system efficiency.

Brian Libby

I was clearly wrong about suggesting a four-lane bridge given the street conditions on Tacoma and elsewhere.

However, I think the three-lane bridge idea is a good one.

ws

As Lance Lindahl says, I think 3 lanes, rather than 2, the additional lane to enable driver access to Oaks Park, and Sellwood too, without backing up bridge traffic, is acceptable. That lane could also serve a streetcar.

For that purpose, an additional motor vehicle lane on the bridge is fine. On the other hand, if opinion remains strong that a bridge crossing in the general area is necessary to support considerable growth in out-of-neighborhood commuter traffic, then it seems like serious, ongoing effort should be made to site another bridge somewhere nearby that can better handle that kind of traffic.

The notion that it's reasonable for neighborhood livability to be seriously degraded by pressing needs of people that do not live in the neighborhood or do not benefit the neighborhood, but are only passing through day after day after day in single occupancy motor vehicles, is not one that the neighborhood should be obliged to accept.

DC

I'd be really interested in figuring out how we as the design community, as well as a neighborhood resident, can kick-start a discussion on what this bridge could look like. Can someone speak to the relative costs of a Calatrava-like design, vs a faux-historic look, or even an ODOT basic scheme "6b"? What level of design has the publicized budget ranges envisioned?

djk

As I understand it, the steel structure of the existing bridge is fine; it's the approaches, particularly on the west end, that are failing. Jim Howell suggested an interesting refurbishment option: simply rebuild the approaches, keep two lanes on the bridge, but add a lower deck for bicycle and pedestrian traffic. Instead of widening the entire bridge to three lanes, just add a left turn lane at the east end.

If extra lanes aren't needed, there's no particular advantage to replacing the bridge when the existing bridge can be rehabilitated instead.

potestio

As with all such projects, the issues are very complex.
The bridge should be designed for many modes of transportation and not solely for the automobile. It should prioritize movement of people, not vehicles...hence provision for pedestrians, bikes and rail should be included in the design. Unfortunately, whatever mode or modes the bridge is designed for, it will not serve the present adequately...and if designed for the present, it will serve the future less so..therefore, its design should be predicated on what we can achieve in the future, not what solves the circumstances of today....example...4 lanes would meet the load of autos...but Tacoma would need to be widened...Robert Moses would have condemned the buildings along Tacoma and widened the street. He would have built for his future vision. Providing for rail is a vision of another sort, but as we know, it may be years for rail to get there...but the developers achieved that goal years ago...our 50's/60's society dismantled it. Do we provide for the future of rail, make it more difficult to realize?
Pedestrians and bikes should always be provided for. Neither requires remaking of Tacoma...or substantial future investment.
I think reworking the existing bridge is not an option. Its west side approaches do not meet current design standards, the bike lanes are unacceptable, as is the pedestrian component.
I believe we need a design that will provide a rail line in the future. One that will not require widening of any streets. One that that provides safe space for bikes and pedestrians. I also believe that we need a design that is beautiful...one we can be proud of, one that transcends mere functionality and graces the unique place it crosses.

friendofbridges

It is time for Clackamas County to step up and build their own bridge. For years, homeowners and businesses have fled Portland for the cheaper taxes and wide open driving spaces there. The problem is the Clackamas NIMBY attitude. One Clackamas bridge alignment would cross into Lake Oswego's downtown grid, other similar alignments have been suggested.

whatabout

How about a 4 lane bridge, and making Tacoma two lanes one way, and one of the other parallel streets two lanes in the other direction.

With thoughtful attention to the design, you could open up some of the major bottlenecks at intersections east of the bridge, and it doesn't have to turn into a major artery for commuters that would destroy the local flavour of the area.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Lead Sponsors


Sponsors








Portland Architecture on Facebook

More writing from Brian Libby

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad

Paperblogs Network

Google Analytics

  • Google Analytics

Awards & Honors