ftd
Junior
"I think real leaders show up when times are hard." Trent Bray 11/29/2023
Posts: 2,553
|
Post by ftd on Dec 22, 2023 15:55:01 GMT -8
I was thinking on the 'too high' issue. The current bridges has four towers for the lift system. I can't imagine a new bridge would be anywhere near as the top of the towers...But maybe the rule is different for the overall structure vs any towers (towers are harder to hit as they are smaller) Many moons ago when bridge replacement was being discussed, I went to a joint presentation from ODOT and WSDOT. The question of height came up, similar to your post. Their response was that the current bridge towers are far enough south that they don't interfere with the flight path from Pearson. Because light rail can only climbed a certain grade, they have to raise the bed of the freeway to make it possible. Doing so puts it unacceptably close to the flight path of Pearson. I am not an engineer or in any other way competent to comment on the accuracy of what I posted, or my memory for that matter. So have at it. I believe the bridge solution gets much easier if you leave out light rail. That would be my preference, but politicians like it. I am 62 and live in Salmon Creek, so likely I will never have to worry about this. I rarely cross the bridge. Same boat here 63 and Hazel Dell...just retired so will only rarely go over the bridge. I seem to recall what you said is correct. Also some Federal Law says air ports have priorities over road vehicles..so we can't tell Pearson to move.. |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 22, 2023 18:48:58 GMT -8
Many moons ago when bridge replacement was being discussed, I went to a joint presentation from ODOT and WSDOT. The question of height came up, similar to your post. Their response was that the current bridge towers are far enough south that they don't interfere with the flight path from Pearson. Because light rail can only climbed a certain grade, they have to raise the bed of the freeway to make it possible. Doing so puts it unacceptably close to the flight path of Pearson. I am not an engineer or in any other way competent to comment on the accuracy of what I posted, or my memory for that matter. So have at it. I believe the bridge solution gets much easier if you leave out light rail. That would be my preference, but politicians like it. I am 62 and live in Salmon Creek, so likely I will never have to worry about this. I rarely cross the bridge. Same boat here 63 and Hazel Dell...just retired so will only rarely go over the bridge. I seem to recall what you said is correct. Also some Federal Law says air ports have priorities over road vehicles..so we can't tell Pearson to move.. And shipping traffic (Jones Act I believe) has more power than just about anybody. Well, except the railroads. Talk about design constraints! |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 22, 2023 18:56:42 GMT -8
If the planners had foresight, 40 years ago they would have started planning for a 3rd and 4th bridge. It would have been great to have another “west” freeway that split off, went down the Fruit Valley Rd alignment, through to Port of Vancouver, a bridge downriver of the existing I5 where the railroad bridge is, to the Port of Portland, and south rejoining I 405. Connect the Ports, traffic reduced on I5, seismic retrofit the current bridge. And finally, a new bridge from E Van/Camas to Gresham. Taking traffic off the 205.
Piece of cake!!
|
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Dec 22, 2023 22:42:42 GMT -8
I saw an ODOT fat line sketch of a western bypass roughly leaving I5 at north Wilsonville, cutting between Beaverton and Hillsboro around 205th, crossing the west hills, a bridge over the Columbia and reconnecting to I5 in the Hazel Dell area. I think those plans were finally trashed in the early 90's.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Dec 22, 2023 23:12:33 GMT -8
Same boat here 63 and Hazel Dell...just retired so will only rarely go over the bridge. I seem to recall what you said is correct. Also some Federal Law says air ports have priorities over road vehicles..so we can't tell Pearson to move.. And shipping traffic (Jones Act I believe) has more power than just about anybody. Well, except the railroads. Talk about design constraints! The Jones Act, named after Washington's Wesley Livsey Jones. His other claim to fame is that he was the one who acquired the funding for conversion of a small naval station into what is now the Puget Sound Navy Yard. The Jones Act makes many of the laws to the benefit of railroads also apply to American port to American port shipping. |
|
