CliffordK

So how many drawbridges will this ferry go under?

A few bridge lifts, and it could surely claim to beat traffic congestion.

fietsbob

Hayden & Mohawk island , Island , length is across a channel along most of North Portland..
main shipping channel is on the north of it..

to directly cross the river east of that and you're almost to the PDX airport..

CliffordK

I wonder what the cost would be to build a bridge like the Tilikum bridge, but across the Columbia instead.

Design it to take buses, trams, bicycles, pedestrians, horse carts... everything but cars & trucks.



A lot of north east Portland and St. Johns historically has struggled with economics, but such a crossing would likely give a significant economic boost to the region on both sides of the river.

I'm seeing the Tilikum bridge cost about $134.6 million (estimate). A Columbia crossing is longer, of course, but could one drop the cost down to say $300 Million? Much cheaper than replacing both I-5 spans, and likely could help with local commuter needs, perhaps quite significantly.

Of course, the other option would be to move one of the I-5 bridges further East to be used as a multi-modal transport bridge. The city moved the Sellwood bridge, so such a move is likely possible. I'm a little disappointed they didn't repurpose the old Sellwood bridge after construction.

Seattle Forrest

Even if it takes as long, a lot of people will prefer it. You can read, work, etc. And be on a boat.

fietsbob

I've Been on the Interstate I-5 bridge when it's lift span was up.

Jeff Wills

You can't replace the I-5 bridge with a suspension bridge- it would project into the flight paths of both Portland International Airport and Pearson Airpark in Vancouver. That's one of the big constraints of that location: the bridge has to be high enough to allow river traffic to pass while be low enough to not get in the way of airplanes.

CliffordK

Hmmm, I see the flight path comes almost straight down the Columbia. So, probably not much building between I5 and I205 either.

No fancy towers, but the current bridges do have 2 towers, and aren't exactly flat. One could likely raise the elevation somewhat with a structural concrete bridge replacing the truss segments.



How much does Janzen Beach contribute to I-5 traffic? It looks like a pretty silly place to put a shopping mall. Perhaps one should evaluate connecting Interstate Avenue as well as the Yellow tram to Janzen Beach. Forget about Vancouver.

I'm not convinced the current RR bridge is in all that bad of a spot going into Vancouver. I think it dumps pretty close to downtown West Vancouver. The problem is that it doesn't capture the residential areas of Vancouver very well.

It is more inconvenient in Portland, but from the Yellow line, one could catch either Columbia Blvd or along Expo road to pick up the RR bridge.

The big question is whether everyone could work cooperatively with sending a bunch more passenger trains across the bridge.

One could also send a subway line underwater. Less interference with shipping or existing infrastructure. Imagine all the golf courses that could be saved!!

Jeff Wills

I think the current I-5 bridge gets a pass because it predates the existence of the FAA.(The northbound span was built in 1917.) Any new bridge has to be built to much tighter restrictions, which is why the concepts for a replacement bridge always end up looking like flat slabs.

Submerging rail or auto traffic means the entrances to the underwater portion need to be far enough away from the river that the entering/exiting slopes are acceptable. I like the idea, but it's a tough sell since you have to incorporate auto and truck traffic into any replacement scheme. That means ramps into downtown Vancouver, Hayden Island, and then North Portland. After what Boston went through putting Interstate 93 under the harbor (aka The Big Dig) I think you'll find burying roads to be a very hard sell.

Seattle Forrest

Seattle is putting a highway tunnel under the city. So far I think it's 3 years behind schedule.

fietsbob

Lacking space, the elevated roadway spirals up to a height allowing international shipping
under the 101 bridge , to be quite near the southern shore of the river..

But it is just 2 lanes, I - 5 may likely need 6 or 8..

some added width was not considered needed 54 years ago
3 lanes would have been able to have wider shoulders at least along side the traffic 2..

Head on crashes, close the bridge for a few hours, as it is..





....

Medic Zero

Not a whole lot of folks live on Hayden Island (where Jantzen beach is), so much so that the only grocery store there closed recently, but it kind of functions as a duty free area since Oregon doesn't charge sales tax, a lot of Vancouver folk will pop over, do some shopping and head back to WA. That's why there's a mall there though. I rarely do it, but there is a Home Depot there, that is basically equidistant to my home in Vancouver as the WA Home Depots, so if I'm going to drop a chunk of change, it makes sense to spare my impoverished self another 10%. I suspect there are a number of Vancouver residents that have a mania for avoiding taxes and make a habit of going there for a good portion of their shopping though. I stop at a fast food place on my way in to work there sometimes, and that part of the mall area the parking lot is almost always full or near full.

It's been mentioned, but it bears repeating; two of the biggest issues with any bridge spanning the river is that the (lack of) height needs to accommodate air traffic from the airport, which flies right up and down the river, AND allow shipping upriver. There's a fair amount of jobs east of the I-5 span that require tall ships to be able to pass. A bicycle/pedestrian only bridge over the Columbia would be a wonderful thing, but I don't see it happening, not just due to the usual costs, but because of the conflicts with air and river travel complicating the design it'll cost more, if it's feasible at all. Actually, one wonders if it'd be miserable if they could pull it off, because the only solution may be a very long climb with a hair raising descent on the other side. I have to say, I'm very glad I ended up getting a place a little closer to the I-5 bridge, because I HATE it when I have to take the 205, that's a miserable trek across that bridge. Windy, noisy (you're between the two fast lanes, with just jersey barriers between you and 70 MPH+ traffic), and no pay off from the climb, due to the wind stealing your momentum.


.

Jeff Wills

Yeah, my usual loop is to descend the I-205 bridge, head west along Marine Drive, and cross back over the I-5 bridge. That makes I-205 a big downhill plus you tend to get a tailwind on the Columbia River.

FWIW: I organize the clean-up days on the path that connects the north end of the I-205 bridge with the city streets for the Vancouver Bicycle Club. If you see something, drop me a PM.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ohpv/a...57691816534430
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ohpv/a...57703389984224

Medic Zero

Funny thing is, I've never experienced the bonus of that downhill. Every time I've taken it, it's been windy enough that I worked almost as hard going down! That said, I've only gone that way a few times, but given the location and height of the bridge and the presence of wind warning road signs, I figured it was always that way.

Will do! But, I almost never go that way, usually only when there's a marathon/fun run/whatever at the fort complicating my usual ride through there to the I-5 bridge.

Thanks, and keep up the good work!




.

Jeff Wills

And the saga continues:
https://www.columbian.com/news/2018/...nt-1-5-bridge/

I hope this gets the ball rolling but I'll bet that there won't be a new bridge in place before I retire.

(There's a personal precedent for this: my dad commuted from Pasadena to downtown L.A. for forty years. He always wanted to use light rail. One was opened from Pasadena to L.A. about a year after he retired.)

Rollfast

That's because boring machines are anything but.

Rollfast

I'm thinking the bridges were there before the planes, no?

Jeff Wills

Nope. The first span of what would become the I-5 or "Interstate" bridge was completed in 1917. The first airplane to land in what become Pearson Airfield landed there in 1905: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_Field

Pearson Airpark and the adjoining Officers Row and Fort Vancouver are National Historic Sites. There's lots of history here that people from as close as Portland don't have a clue about.

Every once in a while someone suggests routing a ramp for I-5 or SR-14 through the Fort Vancouver grounds. I think "yeah, that ain't gonna happen".