Macquarie Bypasses Dundee


According to the Saturday O, Australia-based Macquarie has thrown in the towel on the Newberg-Dundee bypass project. Apparently ODOT has concluded that there is too much opposition to tolling Highway 99, which parallels the proposed new facility, and without tolls both routes, there is insufficient revenue to make the project fly.


82 responses to “Macquarie Bypasses Dundee”

  1. In the meantime, we can widen 99W to 4 to 6 lanes for the entire stretch. That should help things in the short term, be far cheaper then a freeway, and wont require ultra high density and development subsidies like a rail line would.

  2. Anthony,
    I agree, and the cost would be $450 million less than the bypass. The next effort should be directed toward a regional bypass (99W south of Dundee to I-5) that would help the Tigard, Tualatin Sherwood, Newberg, Dundee and coast traffic.

    The Newberg-Dundee Bypass needs to have a fork put in it because it is done.

  3. In the meantime, we can widen 99W to 4 to 6 lanes for the entire stretch.

    Well, no you can’t. You see there are towns where people live in the way. Making people’s trips to the casino and beach faster just isn’t all that important.

    What the Newberg-Dundee bypass tolling discussion has demonstrated is that there is not a sufficient economic justification to pay the cost of a new facility.

  4. Ross,
    Why can ODOT widen Highway 99W through every other town, but not Dundee? 99W is four to six lanes all the way from Portland. It is four lanes past Dundee. What is so special about Dundee that warrants a traffic jam every day with traffic backed up for a mile?

    Dundee is empty at present. Are you suggesting to wait until it is built up before the highway is widened?

  5. Ross,
    You are correct. Good catch. I meant from Portland to Dundee. Perhaps you could respond to the rest of the statement.

  6. Well, no you can’t. You see there are towns where people live in the way. Making people’s trips to the casino and beach faster just isn’t all that important.

    So, McMinnville (which has a population of over 30,000 people) is rendered insignificant as a transportation origin/destination point? While I agree that building a highway to a casino is, well, stupid, I’m sure many would argue the same point about building a light rail line to an Ikea store, or a shopping mall (Clackamas Town Center or Westfield Vancouver).

    As to the argument that many people would be displaced in Dundee, that depends on the definition of “many”. Assuming that the roadway widening (of 99W through Dundee) is built exclusively to the east (towards the railroad track), there are exactly TWO homes that would be directly impacted. TWO. And one of them is used as a business (an auto repair shop).

    If I recall, more homes were impacted by Westside MAX construction, but that didn’t raise a ruckus. So the solution is to tell McMinnville residents that their needs are insignificant, but that the needs of tiny Dundee (one-tenth the size of McMinnville) or Sherwood (at half the size of McMinnville) are much more valuable?

    What the Newberg-Dundee bypass tolling discussion has demonstrated is that there is not a sufficient economic justification to pay the cost of a new facility.

    True, but it’s also based on a faulty design that is so bloated and full of excess, plus renders previous state investments on 99W in Newberg city limits worthless; and demands that one road be held to a separate standard than every other road in the state of Oregon for absolutely no justifiable reason despite the fact that ODOT receives no revenue other than state and federal gas tax receipts (except for the $5M annual appropriation to support the Amtrak train between Portland and Eugene.)

    This paves the way for a passenger rail line to be extended in the 99w corridor. It was there once. The R-O-W still exists. It could run again.

    The right-of-way still exists? The railroad still exists. In fact it’s still used (except over Rex Hill, which is embargoed due to track conditions and a lack of overhead traffic). The problem is that the railroad between Sherwood and Newberg is hardly suitable for high speed (i.e. greater than 35 MPH) operation. Even ODOT acknowledges in its statewide passenger rail studies that while running a passenger train is technically possible over Rex Hill, it wouldn’t be competitive unless it were tunneled through Rex Hill. This would be a roughly three to four mile tunnel, at a cost of roughly $300-400 million, just to get the 7.5 miles between Sherwood and Newberg (not including any other costs such as rail, signals, equipment, etc.) This alone makes the Newberg-Dundee bypass seem cheap in comparison.

    If there is such a demand to electrify this line, why not the Beaverton-Wilsonville Commuter Line? It too was originally electric.

  7. ^ Yea, and any major transportation project these days costs money. $300 – 400 million isn’t too bad of a price, either – and a suburban intercity rail line might just help focus growth within the towns along the line. And we’d get a separate, relatively un-congestable transportation option for people in those towns.

    For comparative purposes, how much is the state paying for the widening of I-5 from Salem to Albany? And do we know how many miles/lanes they are doing?

  8. So the solution is to tell McMinnville residents that their needs are insignificant,

    Perhaps the solution is to tell those McMinnville residents who work in Tigard and Beaverton that if they want to work in the Portland region, they should live in the Portland region. If they choose not to, the public is not going to pay for a huge new investment to make their trip to work faster. An investment they are unwilling to pay for themselves, as the tolling studies have demonstrated.

    Perhaps you could respond to the rest of the statement.

  9. Ross,
    I think the misunderstanding revolves around the movement of the vehicles. There are about 30,000 vehicles per day through Dundee. The problem is caused when four lanes are quickly choked to travel two lanes in Dundee. By adding two more travel lanes in Dundee, the vehicles will move more than twice as fast and without congestion. The traffic, after Dundee, opens to four lanes almost the entire way past McMinnville. By then the congestion is fairly diluted between 99W and Highway 18. Dundee is the bottleneck and a relatively painless, cheap fix. By adding two more travel lanes in Dundee there would be no impact on congestion in McMinnville or Newberg. There would not be an increase in the number of vehicles going through these other cities.

  10. It’s been years since I’ve driven through Dundee, so I can’t recall what the road is like. But if it’s only two lanes, turning it into a four lane road sounds pretty reasonable. I can understand why residents of Dundee wouldn’t want six lanes through the middle of town, but four lanes (with proper speed and traffic controls) doesn’t really seem much of a problem. Most communities deal with much worse. Would that displace any buildings at all?

  11. djk,
    Very few buildings would be displaced (as Erik has mentioned previously). That is the primary reason for putting the two additional lanes in now, rather than wait. All of the players (ODOT and handpicked “stakeholders”) have suppressed all discussion in favor of the bypass. Everyone was to get on board the momentum train. The problem is that they waited until late in the planning stage to consider the unreasonable economic problems. Now, $millions have been spent and the project is evaporating.

  12. there would be no impact on congestion in McMinnville or Newberg. There would not be an increase in the number of vehicles going through these other cities.

    It is totally unrealistic to suggest that if you widen the road through Dundee there would not be an increase in traffic. But even the same amount of traffic would increase congestion in Newberg when it started arriving there all at once because it was no longer “metered” in Dundee.

    I see what you mean about McMinnville, the traffic disperses in that direction and it has an effective bypass for the coast traffic anyway.

  13. Maybe people want to live in that area because they grew up there, and want the much higher quality of life than the Portland area offers. Not to mention the sky high rents here due to the artificial land shortage Metro has forced upon us. I think they just need to enlarge the UGB to include everything down to South of Salem and then build several more bridges and highways across I-5 to Polk and Yamhill Counties. Then call this entire area “Portland Region”.

  14. Ross,
    Your comment is interesting because I don’t understand it.

    You said, “It is totally unrealistic to suggest that if you widen the road through Dundee there would not be an increase in traffic. But even the same amount of traffic would increase congestion in Newberg when it started arriving there all at once because it was no longer “metered” in Dundee.

    Why would 30,000 vehicles going through Dundee per day change traffic for these same 30,000 vehicles as they reach Newberg three miles away. The flow would be the same whether or not they go 5 mph through Dundee, or 30 mph through Dundee. There would still be the same number of vehicles going through Newberg during the day. These are two independent actions.

  15. 5 mph

    This state likes to encourage pollution and waste through cars idling. Remember, “congestion is good”. You can “window shop” through your car window as you go crawling by shops and places of business! At least that’s what Metro wants….

  16. I always find it interesting how certain types want urban services (light rail, tri-met) etc. to be ‘self-sufficient’ but still want to live outside the UGB but still take advantage of living in the ‘Portland Region’ and the higher standard of living.

    I mean, if you don’t want to put up with the UGB, move to Clark County.

  17. I mean, if you don’t want to put up with the UGB, move to Clark County.

    So, Manzell, when did you move to Portland from out of state?

  18. Greg,

    I’m not sure what “higher” quality of life you are referring to. I honestly look at lifestyle outside of hierarchies. It’s a collection of choices that any given individual/family unit makes. No one decision is “higher” or “better” than another. Of course, some people have reasonable demands and base their choices on the available resources, while others are unreasonable and make choices expecting others to accommodate their demands.

    I grew up in a rural environment, and I understand the benefits of living in that environment. I also understand and appreciate the limitations. Now, I live in the city and likewise understand the benefits and limitations of living in an urban environment.

    Where the folks that live in rural areas and work in urban areas run into conflict is that they expect to have all of the benefits of working in an urban environment (competitive jobs, higher salaries, urban culture and amenities) while only paying the cost of living in a rural environment (lower taxes, lower property cost/values, municipal utilities, less density etc). Where these rural commuters are forced to make up for the difference in the cost of living is in transportation costs, both/either in actual realized dollars spent, or time spent/ convenience of travel.

    And, while I currently am an urbanite, and appreciate the transportation system and its improvements, here in Portland, I am also preparing to relocate (long range plan) to an extremely rural area. Part of my relocation plan is budgeting for transportation costs, and making the necessary adjustments to my lifestyle to limit those costs. I may have to live a “lower” quality of life than a person who draws a salary to support the cost of living in a city, and then exports it to live a “higher” quality of life among their lowly rural neighbors, but at least I’ll be living the appropriate lifestyle for my chosen community.

  19. There would still be the same number of vehicles going through Newberg during the day.

    Sure, except more of them will be doing it at the same time. Which, after all, is what causes congestion, too many cars in the same place at the same time. Now, maybe there isn’t any congestion in Newberg. Maybe it has excess capacity. But that isn’t my understanding. So if you have twice as many cars leaving Dundee at the same time, you are going to have twice as many cars caught in congestion when they reach Newberg.

    As a practical matter, the total amount of traffic will also increase if the trip is quicker.

  20. Ross,
    I hope someone else weighs in on this. I am not arguing, but I find it interesting. I think you are wrong. The same 30,000 vehicles will be flowing through Newberg (disregard for the momentthe possibility of increased numbers)daily. The flow will be more uniform. I could buy your explanation if Dundee held the cars until lower flow rates when they were released, but that isn’t the situation. Newberg is handling without problem, the cars feeding into Dundee from Newberg. It certainly wouldn’t create a problem, or congestion, for those cars to continue on past Dundee to the coast (or wherever).

  21. I mean, if you don’t want to put up with the UGB, move to Clark County.

    So, Manzell, when did you move to Portland from out of state?

    This is out of line on both sides. We don’t question the motivation of folks who contribute to the conversation, or tell them how to lead their lives.

    Let’s be civil, people!

  22. Newberg is handling without problem, the cars feeding into Dundee from Newberg.

    Obviously, Dundee effects traffic headed into Newberg, not the other way around.

  23. Ross,
    Yes, but if Newberg can handle the volume leaving Newberg toward Dundee, then it can handle that equal volume coming toward Newberg from Dundee (after the additional two lanes are added).

  24. Yes, but if Newberg can handle the volume leaving Newberg toward Dundee, then it can handle that equal volume coming toward Newberg from Dundee (after the additional two lanes are added).

    No. It doesn’t work that way. If twice as much traffic is leaving Dundee at the same time, twice as much is reaching Newberg at the same time. Unless Newberg has extra capacity to handle it, that traffic will create more congestion. The fact that the total traffic volumes for the day are the same is irrelevant.

    And, as we both know, the total traffic volumes will not be the same with four lanes through Dundee as it is with two.

    This is not an engineering puzzle, those vehicles are controlled by sentient people who change their behavior depending on the conditions you create.

  25. Ross,
    I’m not following your logic. You said, “If twice as much traffic is leaving Dundee at the same time, twice as much is reaching Newberg at the same time. Unless Newberg has extra capacity to handle it, that traffic will create more congestion.

    1) There isn’t an increase in traffic volume leaving Dundee just because there would be an additional lane. There is the same number of vehicles whether it is one lane, or two lanes. The volume leaving Dundee does not change just because it is going slowly through Dundee. The volume doesn’t double just because the number of lanes are doubled. With one lane they are bumper to bumper leaving Dundee. With two lanes they would not be bumper to bumper

    2) Help !!!!!! I think we have beat it to death unless new blood shows up.

  26. Dundee is empty at present

    The people who live in Dundee would argue otherwise. As would, say, Argyle winery…or Ponzi, who would both be impacted by a widening of the road.

    The other thing is…part of the reason there is congestion is that there are traffic signals. So people who live there can actually pull out onto the highway.

    99W is not a limited access freeway…it’s the spine of a lot of neighborhoods.

  27. Frank,
    So what are you suggesting? Leaving the congestion as it is? There is about three thousand population in Dundee. There are 30,000 who drive through Dundee. The congestion in Dundee is caused by the two travel lanes, and not the one traffic light. Also, the congestion (stopped traffic) is worse for the city than any negative effect of four lanes. Four lanes hasn’t hurt any other 99W city. Contrarily, the areas seem to thrive with the easier traffic flow.

  28. No. It doesn’t work that way. If twice as much traffic is leaving Dundee at the same time, twice as much is reaching Newberg at the same time. Unless Newberg has extra capacity to handle it, that traffic will create more congestion. The fact that the total traffic volumes for the day are the same is irrelevant.

    Actually the data available publicly at ODOT’s website completely refutes this argument. Here are the 2005 traffic counts for Oregon Highway 1W (Route 99W):

      MP 7.61 (Washington/Multnomah County Line/Portland/Tigard City Line): 52,900
      MP 9.21 (P&W Railroad Overpass, downtown Tigard): 44,000
      MP 11.50 (South of Durham Road): 43,200
      MP 15.13 (North of Six Corners): 38,200
      MP 19.86 (Washington/Yamhill County Line): 34,500
      MP 25.52 (East city limits Dundee): 30,400
      MP 26.46 (South city limits Dundee): 24,400
      MP 29.59 (North of Highway 18): 22,900

    In other words, the added traffic impact placed upon 99W by Newberg and Sherwood is about 4,000 ADT each; Dundee adds 6,000 ADT despite the fact that Dundee’s population is just a tad over 3,000, and Newberg’s population is 20,570.

    Meanwhile, to suggest McMinnville is part of the problem is also debunked by the data; in fact there is more traffic on both 99W and 18 south/west of McMinnville, than there is on 99W north of McMinnville. In other words, whatever traffic volumes being outputted by McMinnville north on 99W (and Highway 18 traffic coming back onto 99W at McDougall’s Corner) is exceeded by traffic volumes inputted into (and terminating at) McMinnville from points west and south (i.e. Sheridan, Willamina, Amity). McMinnville does have the benefit of having Highway 47 as an alternate route to the west side of the Metro area; however traffic volumes on Highway 47 north of 99W is only 4,800 ADT. Even when you include McMinnville, Dundee’s contribution towards traffic on 99W is still greater than a city three times the size of it – plus Lafayette and Dayton.

    Back to 99W, there is only a 12% reduction in traffic between Rex Hill summit and Dundee City Limits, but a 50% reduction in highway capacity. It’s clear that this is the cause of congestion – not because of all of the traffic to the coast, or because of McMinnville.

    Furthermore, if we are to demand that McMinnville residents be held to a separate standard, and the basic reply of “well, they should just move to Portland and we shouldn’t pay for their decisions” – I’m sure the entire state feels the same way about Portland (don’t you remember the time the state voted down paying for MAX, and the time that the state’s Constitution was amended to prohibit using gas tax revenues for transit projects? That was because of PORTLAND.) I’m sure that same standard should be applied to Portland area residents too; after all every trip to the Oregon Coast for the weekend, or the Columbia Gorge, or to Mt. Hood, is an entirely preventable trip. Certainly, we shouldn’t invest in the safety improvements on U.S. 26 (the Mt. Hood Highway) or the completely unnecessary repairs to Highway 35 (also part of the Mt. Hood Highway) to repair the washed out portion of the road. Nor should we maintain I-84 to the standards for which it’s maintained, because after all we can mandate all that traffic be given to the two railroads. And I’m sure that all of those trips taken on MAX on the weekends for pleasure can be eliminated too, after all if we reduced every MAX train to one car that’d be an immediate reduction of 50% of the energy usage, and a corresponding decrease in carbon output put out by the Hermiston Generating Plant, as well as a diminished need for sidewalks (and their nonpourous surfaces that require the Big Pipe), park and ride lots on the Westside, etc.

  29. “There isn’t an increase in traffic volume leaving Dundee just because there would be an additional lane. There is the same number of vehicles whether it is one lane, or two lanes. The volume leaving Dundee does not change just because it is going slowly through Dundee. The volume doesn’t double just because the number of lanes are doubled. With one lane they are bumper to bumper leaving Dundee. With two lanes they would not be bumper to bumper”

    There will be an increase in traffic volume at the peak hour. At 5 mph, the capacity of a road, (and therefore the volume when it is running at capacity,) is quite a bit less than at 30 mph. That is why we use ramp meters on freeways: Adding more cars slows down the freeway AND lowers the capacity of the freeway at the same time. If it just slowed down traffic, there wouldn’t be any reason to spend a bunch of money backing the traffic up on ramps… Think about it like this: imagine the cars are water, and the road is a pipe. If you turn a small, slow moving pipe into a big, fast moving pipe, you are going to use a lot more water.

    And if traffic wasn’t so bad, my coworker that lives in McMinnville wouldn’t work 6am to 3pm, but would switch to 8am to 5pm. And a lot of other people would do the same, raising peak hour volume.

    On a daily basis, of course traffic volume will go up with faster speeds. If someone who lives in McMinnville can get to Portland quicker, then they will go more often, (how much more often would you visit your friends/go to the store/etc if it was 10 minutes instead of 30?) which will raise the volumes… Likewise, in the long run, more people will move to the area if it is easier to commute.

  30. The volume leaving Dundee does not change just because it is going slowly through Dundee. The volume doesn’t double just because the number of lanes are doubled. With one lane they are bumper to bumper leaving Dundee. With two lanes they would not be bumper to bumper

    Yes they would, they would just be bumper to bumper in both lanes or traveling at faster speeds. Either of which increases the amount of traffic reaching Newberg at the same time.

    If you get the same amount of traffic through Dundee at the same speed with one lane as with two, then why bother adding a lane?

    Frankly this is how we got into the mess with congestion. We kept adding capacity to “fix” congestion and it mostly just moved the congestion somewhere else.

  31. ink about it like this: imagine the cars are water, and the road is a pipe.

    Mathew, unfortunately that analogy is one of the reasons we are in this mess. People think if they make the pipe bigger their problems will be solved. As the rest of your post makes clear, unlike water, motorists are sentient beings. If you make the trip faster, some will decide to drive further. If you make the road safe at 75 instead of 55, some will drive 90 instead of 70. etc.

  32. Frankly this is how we got into the mess with congestion. We kept adding capacity to “fix” congestion and it mostly just moved the congestion somewhere else.

    Where did we keep “adding capacity”, and how did it “just move the congestion somewhere else”?

    Highway 99W from Dundee to Tigard was widened in the late 1950s/early 1960s. That was 40 years ago. Around the same time, the Dayton Bypass (Highway 18) was built, extending Highway 18 from McMinnville to Dayton using Three Mile Lane – which was in the city limits anyways (as the airport was out there).

    Since that time, I can count the number of capacity improvements throughout Yamhill County on one hand:

    1. Center Left-Turn Lane, 99W east of McDougall’s Corner (near the weigh station).
    2. Center Left-Turn Lane, 99W in Dundee.
    3. New westbound lane (for a total of three lanes), 99W in Newberg between Villa Road and Main Street/Highway 240.

    No other new roads have been built, no new passing lanes have been constructed, nothing. So this repeated myth of adding capacity all over the place and building new roads is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

    In fact, here’s an interesting document from the proudly open government of ODOT:

    http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/docs/orhwyplan/analysis/12analysis.pdf

    It shows that from 1982 to 1997, traffic volumes increased by a mere 3,000 ADT – over a 15 year period! Today, 15,900 ADT are measured at the west end and 9,900 ADT are measured at the east end (this can easily be attributed to the Hospital having been built on Highway 18, plus the medical offices in the former Tanger outlet mall.) Unlike what all of the critics of roads have claimed, much of the land along 18 is still undeveloped; the air museum occupies a large tract of land held in reserve that currently houses a vineyard, only a few small residential neighborhoods have been built all near the existing Kingwood subdivision, and the threat of major shopping centers has not materialized (except for the Tanger mall, which failed and is now mixed-medical/office space.)

    Frankly, the argument that “we’ve overbuilt capacity” is simply a last-ditch effort by the anti-road people who have absolutely no concept of the local traffic conditions along this highway, and offer no meaningful solution other than the pipe dream to put passenger trains on the W&P line – and fail to recognize that the only way that commuter rail would be remotely successful on the line is to subsidize 100% of its costs and to run it with Streetcar like frequency. And build a new line from Fort Hill to Lincoln City. Or, we can just use the existing road that works fine – except in Dundee.

  33. Ross and/or Matthew,
    Your answers are interesting. You seem to be suggesting that congestion is a good thing. Am I understanding your position correctly? You seem to suggest that it is better to have traffic at 5 mph (or stopped) in Dundee, rather than freely flowing. What am I missing in your logic? Are you suggesting that it would be better to spend $500 million on the Bypass? Or what?

  34. Are you suggesting that it would be better to spend $500 million on the Bypass? Or what?

    The reason the bypass was an attractive idea is that it would free both communities from the negative effects of the heavy traffic on Highway 99W. You seem to think widening the highway through Dundee is an alternative for accomplishing that. Can you explain how? You seem to think that it is better to have traffic backing up in Newberg, rather than in Dundee.

  35. Ross,
    You seem to be ignoring the fact that Newberg has six travel lanes through half of the city and four travel lanes and turnout lanes in the other half. All of the traffic can be handled in Newberg that passes through Dundee.

    I ask again, are you suggesting that congestion is a good thing? That 5 mph (or stopped) in Dundee is better than freely flowing traffic? I am interested in your reasons if I am understanding your position as it is appearing.

    I am interested in solutions to this situation. At first blush it seems there is one of three solutions:

    1) $500 Million Bypass, which in all probability can’t/won’t get funded.

    2) Four travel lanes through Dundee.

    3) Keep the congestion and 5 mph (or completely stopped) traffic through Dundee on a daily basis, with the condition worsening every year.

    If you have other practical solutions, what are they? Ideally there would be a regional bypass that would connect to I-5 south of Dundee to alleviate the growing congestion in Sherwood, Tualatin and Tigard. You can’t just ignore that the Portland area is increasing in population and commerce, and yet profess to keep capacity levels stagnant. That just doesn’t make sense.

  36. “You seem to be suggesting that congestion is a good thing.”

    I’m sorry, but this makes about as much sense as: “You are either with us, or you are supporting the terrorists.” I can’t really help you here, this isn’t a black and white discussion, no matter how much you try to make it one.

  37. Other ideas:

    4) Use the center turn lane as a reversible peak-hour lane during heavy demand hours.

    5) Creation of a one-way pair (requires ROW acquisition)

    6) Instead of the standard 5-lane section, construct a 4-lane low-speed boulevard with community enhancements including sidewalks, crosswalks, traffic calming, etc, similar to A Avenue in Lake Oswego.

    All have their challenges, but still cost (a lot) less than a bypass, and could better support the community. Volume is not the major problem with the 5-lane section – speed is.

  38. All of the traffic can be handled in Newberg that passes through Dundee.

    If you are suggesting that there is currently no congestion northbound on 99W in Newberg, I think you are wrong. And widening the road through Dundee will make that congestion worse by moving it to Newberg.

    are you suggesting that congestion is a good thing?

    Are you suggesting the congestion in Newberg is more acceptable than congestion outside Dundee? Because the congestion will exist either way, the question is where.

    I am interested in solutions to this situation.

    I understand that. But you are defining the “situation” in very narrow terms and ignoring the community impacts of your proposed solution.

    You can’t just ignore that the Portland area is increasing in population and commerce, and yet profess to keep capacity levels stagnant. That just doesn’t make sense.

    We aren’t talking about the Portland area. We are talking about Yamhill County. And there are plenty of good reasons not to encourage and/or subsidize the development of more bedroom communities for Portland along Highway 99W.

    But if that is your objective, then I can see why you propose the “solutions” you do. But I think it is important to understand that the Newberg-Dundee bypass was a solution to a differently defined problem that included the impacts on those two communities from the existing traffic as well as future growth.

  39. Ross,
    I still think you evaded the question. You seem to be saying that doing nothing (letting traffic idle through Dundee) is your favorite option. Is that correct? There is no two travel lane highway in Oregon that has this much congestion. All others with similar congestion/traffic have been widened.

  40. Matthew,
    It has become a “black and white” issue. It has been a gray issue for 50 years.

    What are your suggestions for improving the congestion. As it is now, the people of Dundee and most passing through the area have had it with standstill traffic.

    Are you also advocating nothing be done? What do you suggest? There is room for the improvements.

    Anthony B,

    I appreciate your suggestions. I didn’t mean to exclude the divided highway in my list. I think that would be the best solution and also benefit the City of Dundee. The divided highway was meant to be a possibility when I mentioned the four travel lanes.

  41. I still think you evaded the question.

    No, I think you are evading the question. The question is how do you deal with the impacts on Dundee and Newberg of the current and projected traffic going through those communities.

    There is no two travel lane highway in Oregon that has this much congestion.

    So your argument is that every two lane congested highway should be made 4 lanes? Because once this one is four lanes, there will still be a “two travel lane highway” somewhere in Oregon that has the most congestion.

    As a practical matter, the reason there is so much congestion on this particular highway in Dundee is that living south of Dundee and working in the Portland region is a very attractive alternative for people. Not attractive enough apparently for them to pay the cost of a new road. But attractive enough that there are plenty of people willing to participate in the congestion at Dundee.

    Peoples’ willingness to tolerate congestion is its only limiting factor. What happens when you reduce the congestion in Dundee is the traffic moves up the road and participates in creating more congestion in Newberg. And the Newberg will be the “most congested …” because living in Yamhill County will still be just as desirable and people who are willing to tolerate the congestion will continue to move there.

    You seem to be saying that doing nothing (letting traffic idle through Dundee) is your favorite option.

    If the choice is between spending a lot of money to make matters worse and doing nothing then I would choose nothing. Anthony suggests there may be some solutions that will actually reduce the problem and benefit the communities. Those are worth exploring.

    But the idea that a four lane highway through Dundee addresses the same problem as the bypass is simply off-mark.

  42. Ross,
    Why did those stupid people build 99W in the first place? They just opened up areas that would let people travel a little faster. We should still have them on horseback, then there wouldn’t be any commuter traffic.

    I find your logic remarkable. You are suggesting total stagnation of traffic rather than freely flowing traffic. Your suggestions might work if everyone wanted to be stacked up in Portland. You are suggesting that nothing should be done until people are miserable enough with traffic to change their lifestyle and move to Portland. It is the Portland/metro people that are causing the traffic problems in Dundee. There is the huge volume of coast traffic and casino traffic that contribute greatly. It is not just a McMinnville commuter problem.

    So would you be on board to support a regional bypass that would alleviate the congestion in Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood, Newberg and Dundee?

    You said, “But the idea that a four lane highway through Dundee addresses the same problem as the bypass is simply off-mark.”

    Why? It would be $500 million cheaper and would have the dampening effect that you cherish.

  43. Ross,
    Sorry, didn’t want to evade your question. You asked, “The question is how do you deal with the impacts on Dundee and Newberg of the current and projected traffic going through those communities.”

    That is an easy answer. A regional bypass. The problem now is that Dundee is hemorrhaging from traffic that is not generated by them. They are the first group wanting something done to solve the congestion. Newberg can easily handle the resulting traffic from Dundee.

  44. “It has become a “black and white” issue. It has been a gray issue for 50 years.”

    As I said, I can’t help you. Until you see this as a non-black and white issue, there is no point in discussing it. (And 50 years? That road didn’t have problems 50 years ago and you know it.)

    (I should point out that the people that were unwilling to pay for a toll road “think congestion is a good thing” by your logic too…)

  45. Matthew,
    They have been talking about bypassing/rerouting Newberg since 1964. Dundee has been in the discussion for almost that length of time. They even had money allocated for a bridge across the Willamette in 1964 for a regional bypass.

    What about this that is “gray”?

    Are you suggesting that nothing should be done?

  46. You are suggesting total stagnation of traffic rather than freely flowing traffic.

    Actually no, I’m not. I am suggesting that the “freely flowing traffic” you think you can get with an extra lane through Dundee is unattainable since the traffic will stop again when it gets to Newberg.

    For most of the people caught at Dundee there are several other other congested points beyond Newberg, you are just spreading the congestion around and pretending you are alleviating it.

    You are suggesting that nothing should be done until people are miserable enough with traffic to change their lifestyle and move to Portland.

    I am suggesting that we should not subsidize a “lifestyle” that requires someone to drive 100+ miles to and from work every day.

    But aside from that, I am suggesting that there are plenty more people who would choose to live out in the country if you eliminate the misery of that commute. And they will continue to move there until the commute becomes miserable enough again except now there will be twice as many of them. People suffer in congestion in direct proportion to their willingness to create it.

    Your suggestions might work if everyone wanted to be stacked up in Portland.

    You mean if there weren’t people who want to take Portland pay scales and live at small-town prices. But they aren’t willing to pay for the facilities that would allow them to do that. Its not really that surprising that the toll won’t work if you consider that the decision to live in Yamhill County is often less about lifestyle, than about money. If you want to save a buck by living in the country, you don’t want to spend it to get to work.

    t the idea that a four lane highway through Dundee addresses the same problem as the bypass is simply off-mark.”

    Why?

    Because widening the highway through Dundee does not relieve the problems created by traffic in the communities of Dundee or Newberg. Which is the problem the bypass addresses. The bypass will eliminate the congestion for people driving through Dundee and Newberg, but that isn’t its only purpose.

    That is an easy answer. A regional bypass.

    Thus moving the congestion onto I5 and Highway 217.

  47. Ross,
    You said, “the traffic will stop again when it gets to Newberg.”

    I still don’t understand your reasoning. Newberg has considerably more capacity than the two lanes through Dundee. The congestion that occurs in Dundee has already passed (heading toward the coast) freely through Newberg. That traffic that freely flowed through Newberg is then congested to a crawl in Dundee. A very low percentage of the congestion can be attributed to the people of Dundee.

    Can you give a concise answer to what you would do about the congestion in Dundee? You seem to continue to say “just live with it”. Is that correct?

  48. “I still don’t understand your reasoning.”

    Ross’s reasoning is something that has been proven time and time again in the real world, and I’m actually I’m not understanding why YOU don’t understand him! His reasoning appears eloquently clear to me. Increasing capacity to eliminate congestion through Dundee will only motivate more people to drive 99W as the commute is “easier.” More development, more cars, and eventually….more congestion. Widening highway 99W through Dundee may appear to solve a congestion problem, but Ross is right; it will simply shift elsewhere. But even IF it doesn’t shift elsewhere and congestion is alleviated, it is only a short term solution and we will simply be back to square one in just a few short years.

    That being said, while I agree with Ross’s reasoning, I have a different take on this specific topic and one that I’ve actually posted here before. I view Dundee’s 99W status as a fundamentally in-efficient barrier to a transportation infrastructure that HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT. As you note, there are multiple lanes on either side of Dundee, but only a two lane road through the town itself. Personally, I advocate adding an additional lane in each direction through Dundee, not because it will relieve congestion, but simply because it will help to make a road infrastructure that has already been built out become a more efficient product. As it stands 99W is not working as efficiently as it could be. I want to re-iterate however, this will not solve congestion, it will just improve efficiencies of an existing product.

  49. DAn,

    I agree with your statement completely. What is your suggestion for a long range solution? Do we let Dundee and Newberg just choke themselves to death while traffic flows at 5 mph (or less)? Do we quarantine the area to put them to a slow death? Do we isolate McMinnville and allow no growth? Do we prohibit Portlanders from going to the coast and casino? I am seeing absolutely no solutions presented by those not wanting additional capacity. Our population is increasing and commerce is increasing. WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?

    You said, “That being said, while I agree with Ross’s reasoning, I have a different take on this specific topic and one that I’ve actually posted here before. I view Dundee’s 99W status as a fundamentally in-efficient barrier to a transportation infrastructure that HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT. As you note, there are multiple lanes on either side of Dundee, but only a two lane road through the town itself. Personally, I advocate adding an additional lane in each direction through Dundee, not because it will relieve congestion, but simply because it will help to make a road infrastructure that has already been built out become a more efficient product. As it stands 99W is not working as efficiently as it could be. I want to re-iterate however, this will not solve congestion, it will just improve efficiencies of an existing product.

  50. I advocate adding an additional lane in each direction through Dundee, not because it will relieve congestion, but simply because it will help to make a road infrastructure that has already been built out become a more efficient product.

    And I reluctantly supported the idea of a bypass because it balanced that efficiency with an improvement that benefited two communities. Anthony had some suggestions for alternatives that might create a similar balance. But I think a solution which simply fixes the “inefficiency” while leaving the communities to deal with the consequences is unacceptable. Widening the highway through Dundee is really not a solution to anything. Its just moving the problem around.

  51. Ross,
    You said, “I am suggesting that we should not subsidize a “lifestyle” that requires someone to drive 100+ miles to and from work every day.”

    The worst congestion occurs on weekends in the summer. This is not commuter traffic. Are you suggesting that we in Oregon shut down tourism? Limit population growth? Shut down commerce? Shut down the wine industry (I would have no problem there)? Everyone live and work in Portland? Or, do your ideas extend beyond to illegal immigration? I still am trying to get a grasp on your ideas for a solution.

    So far, I understand you would rather have congestion, rather than freely flowing traffic. I assume growth limitations on population and commerce. Limitations on tourism. Tight mobility of people within their own area. No more road building. What am I missing? I am having difficulty understanding how this reconciles in our expanding civilization.

  52. Ross sorry I was posting at the same time and didn’t see your last post.

    Somehow I missed your support for the $500 million bypass. This would seem contradictory to many of your previous statements of just moving the congestion to another location.

    Now that the bypass appears to be imploding from its lack of financing, what do you suggest for “Plan B”? The Newberg-Dundee Bypass was three times more costly than the largest ODOT highway project.

  53. Are you suggesting that we in Oregon shut down tourism?

    No. Are you suggesting closing 99W? The fact is this is entirely about how long it takes, not about whether you can get there.

    The Newberg-Dundee Bypass was three times more costly than the largest ODOT highway project.

    It was an ODOT highway project wasn’t it?

    the bypass appears to be imploding from its lack of financing

    Its imploding because the people who would benefit from it aren’t willing to pay for it. Essentially I see the tolling proposal as a test of the real value of a faster trip to Portland. And its failure says the value is not all that high. I think there are a lot more important investments for public money than speeding up the commute to Portland, or people’s trip to the beach.

    If someone comes up with an alternative that helps Newberg and Dundee deal with the impacts of the traffic, great. But just “fixing” the congestion is a waste of money.

  54. No more road building. What am I missing?

    I think a couple things:

    1) Transportation is not an end, but a means. It provides people with access. There often are other, better, cheaper means of achieving that same purpose.

    2) There are other values than moving vehicles. The livability of the towns highways go through should be the first priority. The people traveling through those towns need to accommodate that.

    3) We already have a road network that provides an alternative for almost every trip. In many locations, we have reached the limit to the quality (how fast and convenient) of that alternative during the times of peak use. Each effort to speed up trips results in more people making the trip so that the “quality” quickly degrades back to the same level.

    4) So long as employers prefer large cities, which concentrates employment, most people will be traveling to a densely developed employment areas at the same time. That guarantees there will be congestion as they all arrive and at various points along the way. Eliminating one “choke” point will simply move the congestion somewhere else.

    That is how we got into the current mess with congestion. We pretended the congestion was going was going away. When we were really just spreading it around. Now we are a point where there are many places with congestion and there is nowhere to spread it to.

    That means we need to reduce the amount of traffic, even as we grow. The only way I know to do that is to provide people with attractive alternatives to driving for more trips and stop investing in making driving the only attractive alternative for most trips.

  55. Thank you Ross,

    You said, “If someone comes up with an alternative that helps Newberg and Dundee deal with the impacts of the traffic, great. But just “fixing” the congestion is a waste of money.”

    Does this mean that you would support a regional bypass that would take traffic off from 99W and relieve congestion in Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood, Newberg and Dundee? It is only 11 miles across to I-5 from Dundee. And yes, better on I-5 than 99W. Wouldn’t that be the best long range solution? There will be continued buildup along the 99W corridor. These mentioned cities are going to continually congest over time.

    This forum closely mirrors the ODOT meetings. No one has a workable idea, and little gets accomplished. It must have been nice 50 years ago when they needed a highway, they built it instead of just talking about it.

  56. Sorry, again my post was while you were posting. I guess I’m back to square one in this discussion, but I appreciate your viewpoint. I have put up with the congestion in Dundee for the last twenty years, I guess I can put up with it the rest of my life. The next twenty years will definately be worse than the last twenty for people living in Dundee and Newberg.

    Looking back, the biggest mistake of these small towns was that they built their downtown right on these highways. Only natural, I guess, that was where the commercial action was.

  57. Sorry, again my post was while you were posting. I guess I’m back to square one in this discussion, but I appreciate your viewpoint. I have put up with the congestion in Dundee for the last twenty years, I guess I can put up with it the rest of my life. The next twenty years will definitely be worse than the last twenty for people living in Dundee and Newberg.

    Looking back, the biggest mistake of these small towns was that they built their downtown right on these highways. Only natural, I guess, that was where the commercial action was.

  58. Sorry, again my post was while you were posting. I guess I’m back to square one in this discussion, but I appreciate your viewpoint. I have put up with the congestion in Dundee for the last twenty years, I guess I can put up with it the rest of my life. The next twenty years will definitely be worse than the last twenty for people living in Dundee and Newberg.

    Looking back, the biggest mistake of these small towns was that they built their downtown right on these highways. Only natural, I guess, that was where the commercial action was.

  59. they built their downtown right on these highways.

    I suspect it was the other way around. The roads between towns connected to the town centers because that is where people wanted to go.

    No one has a workable idea,

    Not surprising, when there isn’t even agreement on what the problem is.

    It must have been nice 50 years ago when they needed a highway, they built it instead of just talking about it.

    Unless you happened to live in one of the neighborhoods in Portland they stuck a freeway through. I think there has always been a problem when there are people living where someone wants to put a road. Thankfully we are starting to give the people who live there priority over the people who just want to travel through.

  60. As a practical matter, the reason there is so much congestion on this particular highway in Dundee is that living south of Dundee and working in the Portland region is a very attractive alternative for people. Not attractive enough apparently for them to pay the cost of a new road. But attractive enough that there are plenty of people willing to participate in the congestion at Dundee.

    Ross, ODOT proves you dead wrong. There is more traffic south/west of McMinnville that leads to McMinnville, than exists north/east of McMinnville. Dundee contributes to a greater number of new vehicles entering 99W per population than any other community between McMinnville and Sherwood inclusive. Unlike McMinnville, Dundee exists solely as a bedroom community; it has virtually no major employers of its own (another fact you conveniently gloss over, especially with McMinnville which is a government seat and home to a number of medium sized employers.)

    Why is the congestion suddenly McMinnville’s fault? Under your logic, why did TriMet/Metro build a light rail line to Gresham and Hillsboro; when those citizens who work in Portland should just live in Portland closer to their work; instead a massive new infrastructure was built to support them. Maybe those outlying suburbs should pay back the cost of that unnecessary, suburb supporting light rail system. And why should we even discuss the Streetcar loop – all those people who live on the east side of the Willamette River but work downtown; they can just find housing downtown and walk to work, why should we build an expensive Streetcar for them to ride (and not pay for, given the Streetcar’s farebox recovery that is one of the most pathetic among U.S. transit systems and its insistence upon a regional subsidy for a city project.)

    Why should McMinnville residents be uniquely denied the benefit of their state and federal tax dollars, unlike any other community in Oregon? Why do you see no problem in T.V. Highway being five laned from Sylvan to Forest Grove; I-84 being widened to Troutdale; U.S. 26 being widened from Sylvan to Cornelius Pass; U.S. 30 being widened to St. Helens, U.S. 26 being a freeway to Sandy; and the list goes on and on? You have no problem with Portland residents having the freedom to travel to the Gorge, to Mt. Hood, to the Coast – but you single out McMinnville residents; the majority of whom don’t work in Portland, mind you. What’s your beef with McMinnville? Do you support making McMinnville a gas tax free zone, given that you explicitly support denying McMinnville the same rights to statewide transportation dollars given to every other city? Or do you feel that they should pay, but not get any benefit?

    And then you come up with this statement:

    If you are suggesting that there is currently no congestion northbound on 99W in Newberg, I think you are wrong. And widening the road through Dundee will make that congestion worse by moving it to Newberg.

    Once again, you have this belief that if 99W in Dundee is widened, that cars will asexually produce themselves and create congestion in Newberg. Can you point to Newberg on a map? I drive through it on a regular basis – I can assure you that once traffic proceeds past the traffic light on 5th Street in Dundee (northbound) that there is no further significant delay to traffic anywhere in Newberg – despite the presence of not one traffic light, but EIGHT of them. In fact I frequently bypass Dundee by using Highway 240, Kuehne and Hendricks Road, which eastbound ends up in Newberg – and the only “congestion” I encounter are the dumb idiots that don’t know how to drive a car on an uphill grade (but have no problem on the downhill side of Rex Hill). Which, by the way, is outside of Newberg city limits. (I guess since I’m not the only person that is aware of that bypass, that congestion only forces travellers to use alternate routes, but proper investment in the right roads allows traffic to be consolidated on the main roads, thereby relieving pressure on local access roads.)

    Widening 99W in Dundee doesn’t extend capacity south of north of Dundee. Nor will it cause a population boom in Dundee (after all, Dundee residents travelling to Portland will still have the same capacity). What it will do is improve capacity within Dundee, and allow for a safer stretch of road in Dundee. But, I’m sure you didn’t review the ODOT report on the McMinnville bypass, because you are closed-minded to anything that proves your concept wrong.

  61. Ross,
    Just to get a firm fix on your position/transportation philosophy, I would guess that you would be opposed to any widening of 99W including:

    “The City of Tigard is currently participating in the preparation of a traffic improvement plan for Highway 99W through the City from its intersection with Durham Road at the south City Limits to the I-5 interchange at the north end of the City.”

    “Widening the highway to seven lanes from Interstate 5 to Greenburg Road (currently the road is two lanes each way with a center turn lane) is estimated to cost $27.27 million. Widening the entire highway 99W to seven lanes all the way to Durham Road is estimated to cost $32.14 million .” (Oregonian 04-18-07)

  62. Ruh –

    I start out skeptical, but 99W in Tigard serves a lot of different purposes. I would want to see how it plays out and what the options are and how it relates to other proposed changes on I5 and 217. Its not clear to me that stretch of 99W isn’t just a bowl that collects traffic and overflows. Making the bowl deeper won’t necessarily make any difference. You may get a few more cars in before the overflow starts, but the problems around it will remain.

  63. To be clearer about what I mean. I think a lot of the trips on 99W in Tigard start and end within the 99W corridor in Tigard. And I think there is a lot of latent demand there, where people choose not to make trips at certain times because of the traffic. The “bowl” will fill up with those trips and the congestion will remain the same.

  64. Ross,
    Still trying to get a fix on your traffic philosopy. Feel free to ignore, but I find it interesting because many traffic meetings boil down to these differences.

    1) Do you discount that there is increasing populations/commerce? Consequently the need for more traffic lanes/capacity? What is/are your alternative choice(s) given more people, more commerce, and more vehicles?

    2) You seem to favor gridlock to force social change? Would you change your idea concerning gridlock/congestion in Dundee if the residents wanted four travel lanes? The majority of testimony at the last Dundee ODOT meeting (01-12-06) supported four travel lanes through Dundee.

    3) What is/are your preferred choice(s) following gridlock? Rail? Bicycles? Buses? Are these choices realistic in Oregon? Are there situations where you are fine with building more lanes to add capacity (you seem fairly rigid about this)? Clearly many people are preferring suburb living to congested city life. Is this a problem for you?

  65. Do you discount that there is increasing populations/commerce?

    No. But the growth in traffic is largely driven by increased driving, not more drivers, and is actually a burden on commerce. The goal should be to reduce traffic by providing attractive alternatives for as many trips as possible. If providing people with attractive options is “social engineering” then so be it.

    You seem to favor gridlock to force social change?

    I don’t see how encouraging more people to move to Yamhill County and drive to work in Portland, Beaverton and Tigard reduces gridlock in Beaverton, Tigard and Portland. Dundee hardly has a grid, much less gridlock.

    What is/are your preferred choice(s) following gridlock?

    When did you stop beating your wife?

    Clearly many people are preferring suburb living to congested city life.

    If you prefer that, stop complaining about the costs. No one is causing congestion in Dundee other than the people who are caught in it. But what you really seem to be demanding is that the rest of us organize our communities to make your choice as convenient as possible. And that we pay the cost of the extra infrastructure to boot.

  66. Ross,

    You said, “No one is causing congestion in Dundee other than the people who are caught in it.”

    This is a momentary tangent, but are you a Libertarian? State parks should be paid for directly by those who use them (and no one else?)?

    The bridges in Portland should be paid by those who use them (and no one else?)?

    The roads in Portland should be paid by those who use them (and no one else?)?

    What do we do about all of those people who live in Portland and visit the coast, casino, wine country, or just want to get out of the city? 50 percent of traffic through Dundee is pass through traffic.

    Yamhill County is growing and the coast activity is expanding. Why should 99W be left as it was in the 1950s through Dundee? 99W with four lanes through McMinnville has a traffic count of 32,600 AADT and is never congested. Dundee with two lanes and 30,400 AADT is congested to less than 5 mph on a daily basis. Four lanes through Dundee would have a positive effect for Dundee, rather than your perceived detrimental effect.

  67. are you a Libertarian?

    No.

    What do we do about all of those people who live in Portland and visit the coast, casino, wine country, or just want to get out of the city?

    No one is stopping them. But if they choose to go at the same time as everyone else, they are going to face lines at some of the wine tastings and a line of auto’s in Dundee.

    McMinnville has a traffic count of 32,600 AADT and is never congested. Dundee with two lanes and 30,400 AADT is congested to less than 5 mph on a daily basis

    Daily traffic counts are misleading. Many of those trips in McMinnville are local and spread out during the day. The problem in Dundee is a very large number of trips concentrated during the morning and evening rush hours. Its not at all clear that four lanes in Dundee would change anything except to have two bumper to bumper lanes in one direction instead of one. Maybe Dundee needs a reversible one lane tolled bypass.

    Are there situations where you are fine with building more lanes to add capacity

    Theoretically, yes. As I said, I reluctantly supported the Newberg-Dundee bypass because it provided benefits to those two communities. But mostly I am extremely skeptical and “congestion” is almost always a terrible reason for adding capacity.

  68. Thank you for the interesting comments.

    I think there has been a mixing of ideas that are invalid in the Dundee situation. Ross, I agree that building roads and travel capacity can (in some cases) have unintended negative consequences. I disagree that the Dundee congestion coincides with that line of thought. The Dundee traffic is more about efficiency than social engineering. It is very similar to synchronizing traffic lights to optimize the flow of traffic. The reduction of almost any well-traveled highway from four lanes to two lanes in one isolated area will produce congestion, and should be addressed. Congestion in Dundee will have increasingly negative impacts on the city.

    I agree with DAn almost completely in this statement. I do think that through greater efficiency, congestion will be alleviated in Dundee. Congestion will never be solved completely, but efficiency will contribute greatly.

    DAn said, “Personally, I advocate adding an additional lane in each direction through Dundee, not because it will relieve congestion, but simply because it will help to make a road infrastructure that has already been built out become a more efficient product. As it stands 99W is not working as efficiently as it could be. I want to re-iterate however, this will not solve congestion, it will just improve efficiencies of an existing product.”

  69. The Dundee traffic is more about efficiency than social engineering. It is very similar to synchronizing traffic lights to optimize the flow of traffic.

    Well, I think Dundee is about Dundee. I am sure people are tired of the traffic. But I think you need to realistic about what four lanes means. It means bumper-to-bumper traffic in two lanes, instead of one. I suppose you can say that is more efficient.

    But if the expectation of people in Dundee is that going from two to four lanes means they will not have congestion through town at rush hour, then they are going to be disappointed.

  70. My only motivation to push for widening 99 is that even on weekends I have almost always been stuck in traffic in Dundee. When gridlock-like conditions occur on a Saturday morning just trying to get to McMinnville, there’s something that isn’t right.

  71. Ross,
    Can you explain this statement? It seems to be poor math. Is there something I am missing here? Are you talking about future induced traffic here? On both sides of Dundee there is not “bumper-to-bumper” traffic in the four travel lanes.

    You said, “It means bumper-to-bumper traffic in two lanes, instead of one. I suppose you can say that is more efficient.”

  72. I just did the Dundee congestion at 12:30 and at 4:30. The four lanes on either side of Dundee were wide open and 55 mph. It was 5 mph through Dundee (1 1/2 miles) going both ways, both times.

  73. I just did the Dundee congestion at 12:30 and at 4:30. The four lanes on either side of Dundee were wide open and 55 mph. It was 5 mph through Dundee (1 1/2 miles) going both ways, both times.

  74. I’m sorry Ruh, I hadn’t realized you intended for the traffic to go 55 through the middle of Dundee.

  75. Ross, thanks for the heartfelt concern. I would have been happy to go through Dundee at 25-35 mph. It is a highway.

  76. Matthew: And if you’re destination is Newberg, going 55 in Sherwood can be good for Newberg. It’s all relative.

  77. It’s all relative.

    I think that is exactly right. Its always better to drive faster through someone else’s neighborhood or community.

  78. They need to widen 99W all the way through Dundee to where it intersects with 18. Then widen it to four lanes through Lafayette and put an overpass on the lafayette highway/18 interchange. I would also widen 18 to four lanes all the way to its intersection with 22/101.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *