Putting the Ferry Back in Taylors Ferry

e-w bus route 1

Jim Howell of AORTA passed on this proposal they have forwarded to the Sellwood Bridge task force.

April 16, 2007

To: Sellwood Bridge Citizen Task Force and Policy Advisory Group
From: Jim Howell
Re: Bridge Concepts

It might be seven to ten years before the Sellwood Bridge is repaired or rebuilt. In the meantime traffic congestion will continue to grow in this east-west travel corridor between Clackamas and Washington Counties on Johnson Creek Blvd., Tacoma Street and Taylor’s Ferry Road, crossing the Willamette River at the Sellwood Bridge. Good transit service, if available, would help to relieve this congestion.

A bus route running along this corridor, with frequent daily operation, could provide this service (see attached map).

Unfortunately, weight restrictions on the Sellwood Bridge now preclude buses from operating on the bridge. In the interim, a ferry for buses could be established long before the bridge is repaired or rebuilt.

A small ferry, similar to the Canby Ferry (see attached photos) could carry a bus, plus pedestrians and bicycles, across the river using the old Spokane Street Ferry ramps at the end of Spokane Street and the public boat launch at Staff Jennings.

The ferry could easily make the round trip in 15 minutes, providing crossing service for buses running every 15 minutes in each direction.

The route we are proposing here would be 15 miles long, extending from the Clackamas Town Center to Washington Square and its nearby Commuter Rail Station. It would provide transfer connections to 28 other bus routes. Within two years it would also connect to light rail and commuter rail lines.

Long cross-town bus routes that do not go downtown but cross many other routes are very popular and are some of the most efficient TriMet routes. For example, the #72 Killingworth/82nd Ave. bus, an 18-mile long route stretching between Swan Island and the Clackamas Town Center provides transfer connections to 28 other bus routes and two light rail lines. It carries over 17,000 passengers a day and is the most productive bus route in the TriMet system.

The timely establishment of a strong transit ridership in this crowded commuter corridor would greatly relieve traffic congestion when the Sellwood Bridge is under construction. It would encourage motorists to become better acquainted with, and conditioned to use, public transportation. It would also add some “character” and “entertainment value” to Portland’s transportation system, somewhat like the tram does but at MUCH lower cost.

I request that the above description of a ferry and cross-town bus service be included as a component to be combined with other width, interchange, and alignment concepts currently under development. This is not intended to be a complete bridge concept, but rather to provide the best means for implementing the following specific “needs” listed in the project’s “Purpose and Need Statement”:
1.Accommodate… transit vehicles;
3.Provide for existing and future travel demands between origins and destinations served by the Sellwood Bridge; and
4. Provide for connectivity, reliability, and operations of existing and future public transit.

This proposal can serve to mitigate impacts during construction, and can provide a “relief valve” during the pre-construction phase in which funds for construction are being assembled. It will enhance the value of the entire Sellwood Bridge project by building service and ridership that will effectively utilize whatever option is finally chosen. With the above understanding, please include this proposal in the upcoming analysis of alternatives.

•Route Map
•Ferry Photos

Jim Howell

43 responses to “Putting the Ferry Back in Taylors Ferry”

  1. That maps got some other markings on it – i’m interested in the dots the parallel, at least, the proposed MAX “Howell Line”/Yellow Line extension…

  2. While a cross-town bus service might make sense; I have to wonder about two significant “negatives”:

    1. Cost. The cost of a vehicle ferry that will carry only TriMet busses, emergency vehicles, passengers and bikes; yet will be the same as a Canby Ferry or Wheatland Ferry which serves cars. A smaller pedestrian-only ferry will likely cost much less – to purchase, maintain, and operate.

    2. Time. A larger vehicle vessel will take longer to cross the Willamette. A smaller, pedestrian-and-bike only vessel, could cross the river much faster. With a direct transfer at either end, both ends of the Sellwood Bridge would become de facto transit centers, connecting multiple bus routes with a ferry inbetween.

    Instead of a 15 minute “sailing”, a smaller vessel might be able to do it in just a couple minutes each way, plus about the same amount of time to load and unload.

    3. Productivity. Since the bulk of the Sellwood Bridge’s traffic will not be able to use the proposed ferry (autos), how productive will the ferry be? It’s already known that most Sellwood Bridge users aren’t simply getting from one side of the river to the other, many if not most are through commuters trying to reach downtown Portland or outer Southeast/Clackamas County. (In reality there isn’t much of a draw on the west end of the bridge, except Macadam Avenue to downtown.) The #43 bus is not a major ridership bus (judging from the times I have ridden it; it serves a limited population base, no employment centers other than downtown, and there are many better routes that serve Washington Square).

    Finally – once the Sellwood Bridge is rebuilt, what happens to the ferry? There isn’t a market for vehicle ferries in general – a pedestrian ferry could be re-used on the Willamette River (if there’s interest); there is also a water taxi service in Seattle that is operated in conjunction with King County Metro.

    On a sidenote, it should be noted that when the Wheatland Ferry was replaced, the Daniel Matheny IV was an electric boat; the Daniel Matheny V is diesel. In environmentally-conscious Portland, such will be a concern, however some will object to the overhead electric wires required by an electric ferry.

  3. TriMet, according to a presentation given to Metro TPAC, does not have the money to add additional bus service until after 2011 with current budgetary forecasting.

    This is a huge problem.

    According to the same presentation, LIFT service costs Tri-Met $24.95 per ride. Fixed route service costs Tri-Met $2.22 per ride.

    We need to improve the Fixed route service, including new routes like the ones mentioned in this proposal, to get the current and future LIFT customers to use the fixed route service.

    LIFT service is forecasted to increase at 6% a year, and if it does that puts Tri-Met in a 6 million dollars per year operating deficit.

    Tri-Met soreley needs more cross-town (non-downtown) capability. The 217 corridor is another place, from Boones Ferry/Kruse Way to 217/Barnes Rd., that could use bus service.

  4. there is a ferry moored at Goble, believed to be the old Astoria-Megler boat, do you suppose it could be brought up to operating condition [cheaply]????? drlive the Columbia River Highway to Rainier and see it..

  5. I’m not sure that a passenger ferry would be cheaper than a bus ferry. A bus ferry is basically a powered barge. A passenger ferry might, paradoxically, require more amenities. However, some investigation would seem to be useful. If the buses were waiting for the ferries at either end — so as to eliminate the “transfer penatly” — it might not matter.

    Is 15 minutes the faster crossing time achievable, however? That seems slow.

    On the other hand, gas prices have blown past $4/gallon in downtown San Francisco (most expensive spot on the West Coast) this week, according to the SF Examiner. Check out this photo for proof:


    This is just the leader of the pack. The rest of ’em will likely catch up soon, as we head into the summer driving season. If gas stays above $4/gallon for long, people will be willing to make a lot more compromises… like paying $1.50 to ride the bus, and just using the additional trip time to relax or do whatever.

    I’ve advocated for a ferry to replace the Sellwood Bridge crossing during the construction period. Adding a new cross-town bus line to synch up with it just makes good sense.

    And hey, if a good used boat can be salvaged from the one moored at Goble, so much the better — re-use is sustainable!


  6. Is 15 minutes the faster crossing time achievable, however? That seems slow.

    I’ve seen a couple of people make comments about the 15-minute figure… just to clarify (without commenting on the validity of the original claim), Jim’s proposal posits a 15-minute round trip, which would indicate two crossings in a 15 minute interval.

    – Bob R.

  7. Bob-

    Thanks for the clarification. You make a good point. Jim is really saying that the boat can make it across the river and back again within 15 minutes, more than he’s saying it will take any specific time to cross.

    The boat could, theoretically, make the crossing in 4 minutes, with a minute at each end to load and unload, and still have wiggle room to meet the schedule.

    Point taken.

  8. If a passenger ferry is simply to move people from the west bank of the river to the east bank of the river, few amenities are needed – basically just like the OHSU Aerial Tram: a place for people to stand (and hang onto something), a few seats for those who absolutely need a seat, and a door to enter and exit.

    Assume that the ferry is built for a capacity of 100 passengers (about two-three 40′ bus loads), such a ferry need not be very large.

    On the other hand, a vehicle ferry would be several times larger, and would require ferry landings (instead of a simple dock).

    I agree that the busses need to be waiting so that passengers don’t have a long wait, so that a “crosstown” route from west to east would be timed so that a bus would drop off passengers at the ferry, and another bus would be waiting to continue east; however the ferry would keep running for passengers who would continue on other routes (i.e. 35/36/38, 40, 70).

  9. Interesting idea. Personally, I think the Willamette is a treasure trove of additional capacity for our region’s transportation network, not only across it, but also along its length. I would love to see high-speed river transit one day. The hurdle to capitalizing upon it, as I understand it, lies in getting the passengers to the river.

  10. I am waiting for ferry service to Vancouver, Hood River, etc…

    But I like the idea of a passenger ferry at the Sellwood Bridge. Pedestrians could use it instead of the dumb bridge, even bicyclists would probably use it.

  11. I am waiting for ferry service to Vancouver, Hood River


    Vancouver has plenty of transit options, from various C-Tran routes and TriMet’s line 6; plus there are bikeways on both the I-5 and I-205 bridges, and if you really wanted to you could also take Amtrak.

    Hood River… What is the need? Based on ODOT’s own traffic counts (from 2005, 2006 numbers should be out within one or two months), here’s the traffic counts at various points along I-84:

    MP 0.49 (east of I-5): 142,800
    MP 5.07 (west of I-205): 143,200
    MP 7.20 (east of I-205): 108,500
    MP 13.44 (east of 181st): 81,100
    MP 17.71 (on Sandy River Bridge): 28,500
    MP 22.40 (east of Corbett): 24,300
    MP 31.89 (east of Multnomah Falls): 23,200
    MP 45.45 (east of Cascade Locks): 20,800
    MP 61.86 (west of West Hood River): 21,400
    MP 69.59 (west of Mosier): 21,800
    MP 75.93 (Rowena): 19,900
    MP 87.31 (east of US 197, east of The Dalles): 16,200
    MP 104.86 (east of Biggs, US 97): 11,800

    Other ODOT reports show that the vehicle mix east of Troutdale is just above 50% passenger autos; so a large number of vehicles are trucks, busses or recreational vehicles – which wouldn’t be reduced by some sort of public transit (whether it be water ferry, bus or passenger train). Given that Greyhound operates a measly two schedules east of Portland; that Amtrak cancelled its Pioneer service (however the Empire Builder does operate along the Washington side of the river) and that the highway is operating well below-capacity (a four lane freeway has a theoretical capacity of somewhere around 50,000 ADT) and a limited population base – a water ferry (especially one operated as a government service) simply is not necessary. Hood River, however, might find it beneficial to follow in the steps of Tillamook County and operate a Hood River-Portland bus service – both to provide a transportation option for Hood River residents to access PDX and Amtrak services to Seattle and to California; as well as to bring Portland area residents to Hood River without the need of their car.

    Back to Sellwood, a water taxi demonstration project would be beneficial to see if Portland is ready for a water taxi spanning the river from St. Johns to Oregon City. King County Metro even contracts the service to the operators of the Argosy Cruises; I could see TriMet contracting out to the Spirit of Portland operators (and gives them “free advertising” – If you like this three minute ride, how about a dinner cruise?)

  12. Many Sellwood residents believe,, and the consensus of the SMILE general meetings is, that a bridge is needed between Oak Grove and Lake OSwego. Perhaps delays in reconstructing the Sellwood Bridge will make this need more apparent.

  13. Sounds this bus is made for me! Today I commute from (approx) SE 82nd & Johnson Creek to Barbur TC to take SMART to Wilsonville.

    If there were a bus, I’d take it. If the route were reasonably bikeable, I’d bike it. But neither is true, so I’m stuck in my car for the first leg. :(

  14. Jim – weren’t you suggesting running passengers trains on the Tillamook Branch (the railroad between Milwaukie, Lake Oswego, and Tualatin)?

    I’d like to see a DMU service run from Milwaukie to Sherwood – connecting with MAX/bus in Milwaukie, bus (and maybe Streetcar) in Lake Oswego, Commuter Rail and bus in Tualatin, and bus in Sherwood, and provide a reasonable cross-town service for the southern suburbs.

    Of course, given how expensive Washington County Commuter Rail has become, I would expect that such a line could be done cheaply but it wouldn’t be (in part because the entire line would have to be purchased from Union Pacific, who would probably want top dollar for its route to and alongside Lake Oswego), and someone would probably determine that the bridges would need significant upgrading/rebuilding (in particular the wood trestle east of Sherwood, and the Willamette River bridge).

    Maybe an express bus connecting Tualatin and Oregon City might be a good idea as well.

  15. I’m a very frequent user of Washington State ferries. You’re trip times and loading/off loading times are far off base. Ask our past PoP Chairman Mike Thorne who briefly ran the WA ferries. He’d probably laugh at your times and cost. I will.

  16. lw – no one is proposing a ferry system on the scale of Washington State Ferries.

    However my experience with the Wheatland Ferry shows that a vehicle ferry (previously a six-car ferry, now a nine-car ferry) cannot be unloaded and loaded in less than about three minutes; part of the problem is the ferry landing itself. Unlike WSF that uses large, mechanical lifts, a vehicle would have to drive down to the ferry that literally beaches itself at the landing – which means a severe slope that a car must drive down and up. Smaller vehicles with close ground clearances must drive extremely slowly – so I would even have to wonder how a TriMet bus would do (unless a special – and more expensive – landing with an easier grade is built).

    A pedestrian ferry would be easier to implement at the least, and because of the short distance I don’t see a need for many seats, so upon landing at the opposite shore passengers would be ready to unload. (Again, a key difference with WSF – on most routes passengers aren’t even in their cars due to the sailing time, whereas on the Wheatland Ferry (or Canby Ferry) there is no need to leave your car; the crossing is only a couple of minutes.)

  17. which means a severe slope that a car must drive down and up.

    I don’t think the actual approaches suggested are that steep:

    “using the old Spokane Street Ferry ramps at the end of Spokane Street and the public boat launch at Staff Jennings.”

    A pedestrian ferry would be easier to implement at the least, and because of the short distance I don’t see a need for many seats, so upon landing at the opposite shore passengers would be ready to unload.

    A bus ferry wouldn’t require any seats or even any shelter. And unloading a single vehicle would be pretty quick. And how do the passengers get to and from the ferry?

  18. A bus ferry wouldn’t require any seats or even any shelter. And unloading a single vehicle would be pretty quick. And how do the passengers get to and from the ferry?

    No, as I ALREADY pointed out – a bus ferry would have to be a much larger vessel – which directly relates to 1: the boat would be more expensive to build; 2: the boat would move slower, and 3: the boat would require a larger engine – and thus greater fuel (or energy) consumption.

    Secondly, do TriMet busses drive up and down Spokane Street? What about the sudden gradient change that would occur while entering/exiting the ferry – an abrupt 0% to 10% grade? Can a TriMet bus do that?

    Pedestrians would simply walk onto a dock (and how many docks are there in Portland? I think Portland knows how to build a boat dock) which is cheaper to implement, could also incorporate a fishing or a public mooring dock as well (how many public docks are located near the Sellwood Bridge? Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to go to Sellwood Park if you had a boat of your own?) but certainly neither is required. Bus stops would then be located at a more convenient location (for the busses) without the need of the ferry landing and slope issue.

    And, as I’ve already pointed out (this is getting tiresome), each end could incorporate a transit center, that would connect to multiple bus lines instead of just the 43 bus. The 35, 36 and 38 busses pass within close proximity to the west end, and the 40 and 70 busses to the east end. So a total of seven bus routes (including a new east-side crosstown route that would end at the eastside ferry dock) would serve the ferry, instead of one crosstown route (and offer poor connections to points that are alongside the river that are served by the 35, 36, 38, and 70 busses).

  19. Here’s a few “concepts” that I can imagine that a Sellwood Ferry would look like:


    http://www.hybrid-vehicles.net/images/Canal/canal-hybrid-ferry-boat.jpg (a hybrid!)

    http://www.thebeijingguide.com/francais/summer_palace/ferry_boat.jpg (keeping with Portland’s Dragon Boat tradition)

    http://pages.interlog.com/~wwhite/gifs/imgzin42.jpg (a little bigger than my concept but still workable)

  20. A few more…


    http://www.portsmouthva.gov/portspix/3/FERRY1_sm.JPG (a sternwheeler)

    http://www.cycletourist.com/Scenes/Austria/Durnstein-Rossatz-Fahre.jpg (this one is a little smaller)

    http://www.frontbeach.co.nz/assets/intro/ferry300px.jpg (at a dock)

    http://www.latitude38.com/LectronicLat/2001/May2001/May22/ferry.JPG (for comparison purposes, here is a two car ferry)

    http://www.stratford-upon-avon.co.uk/images/ferry_1122.jpg (very plain, no roof, but this boat doesn’t need to change direction – it unloads/loads at either end)

  21. Curious, but why does there never seem to be discussion of appropriating the rail line that runs from Oaks Bottom to the Central Eastside along the Springwater Corridor for some mass transit use?

  22. Feralcow:

    It’s an active, privately-owned freight line. Other thoughts: On top of that, until reaching the Sellwood Bridge it is largely inaccessible to any residential or commercial properties and runs through a wildlife refuge, making the environmental impact study, shall we say, onerous.

  23. I realized that wasn’t as clear as I meant it to be. Of course, heavy-rail transit runs on several private, active freight lines, but in this case the other things I mentioned make it not-so-worthwhile. The line terminates across McLaughlin from ghd former Southgate Theater in a light industrial area, and on the other end connects to the UP near OMSI and the MLK viaduct. You’d either have to deal with UP to try and get access to Union Station, or you would have to work out a transfer station with future bus/streetcar/max service at OMSI. But the resulting service would only really serve the extreme west portion of Sellwood south of the bridge and the Garthwick neighborhood.

    In other words, there are better options to be had. At least, such are my observations.

  24. Erik – primarly for the scenic value. I’d pay a couple bucks extra to be able to do it, that’s for sure… drop me off on the new waterfront development they’re going to build up there, or even the riverfront Mcmenamins.

    Perhaps what I’m asking for to Hood River is the river cruise – and it probably already goes there, right?

    So never mind on that one!

  25. The Oregon Pacific Railroad, formerly known as the East Portland Traction Company and Portland Traction Company, is a one-time trolley/interurban line that once stretched as far east as Boring and Estacada. In later years it terminated in Gresham, and today it is just over four miles from East Portland (OMSI) to the Milwaukie industrial area.

    In the 1990s, the owner of the railroad ran an excursion train known as SamTrak (a play on his last name Samuels, and “Amtrak”). It operated for a few years until being discontinued for various reasons. In recent years a number of excursions have run on this line.

    My understanding is that through Oaks Bottom, the right-of-way is actually owned by Metro when the Springwater-on-the-Willamette trail was built; the railroad was shifted to the east, and the railroad has a permanent easement. Of course further east the old PTC is now the Springwater Trail Corridor, so turning it back into a railroad would be difficult at best (engineering wise, easy to do; politically, next to impossible.)

    Given that numerous cities have built heritage trolley systems that function as a part of the mass transit system (Seattle’s Waterfront Streetcar comes to mind; Portland has the Vintage Trolley, and the Willamette Shores Trolley has the potential of being such, considering the track is “managed” by TriMet; New Orleans, Santa Monica, San Francisco and Memphis also have successful systems) – it would be easy to construct such a system on the OP.

    However, the line doesn’t really go anywhere now, and since there is the Springwater Trail right next to the tracks, the “scenic” aspect of the line can already be had by walking/running/biking the route.

    However I would encourage all of you to participate in one of the excursions if they run later this year; they ran each of the last two years at Christmas, and also last June. Nice way to ride on this scenic line and to watch one of Portland’s two operating steam engines at work.

  26. Pedestrians would simply walk onto a dock

    They have to walk from somewhere. So you unload the bus, they walk to the ferry (in the rain?), load the ferry, cross the river, unload the ferry, the passengers walk to the bus and finally load the bus. Put a wheel chair lift or two into that scenario and it will be a very long trip across the river.

    Whether the boat is cheaper would depend in part on what level of passenger comforts are required. If you are going to provide shelter, which I think you would have to for bus riders, then it may be more expensive to build a boat with appropriate facilities than it would to have a barge with a deck that the bus drives onto. You could still provide space for pedestrians and bikes, but presumably this would be used by people who expected to be out in the elements.

    I don’t know whether the buses can load onto the ferry. Wouldn’t that be a question of the grade leading immediately to the ferry? That is something there is control over. Or is there some other fixed problem with how vehicles load onto ferries?

  27. A covered walkway is cheap compared to an expensive vehicle landing.

    Look at the massive structures that are used in Seattle’s ferry terminal – essentially they are large cranes that manipulate a ramp that connects the ferry to the dock, and can adjust for tides. Expensive and requires maintenance.

    Now look at the landings used by the Canby and Wheatland Ferries. Cheap and simple, but have that grade problem. What happens when the river level is low – the grade increases. Unlike the Columbia River where there is a whole system of dams that generally maintain the river level, the Willamette River doesn’t have any dams until you get into the tributaries south of Eugene. So the river level rises and lowers throughout the year.

    Not so much a problem for smaller cars, and even trucks with trailers (since they have inherient vertical flexibility). A rigid 40′ bus is a different story.

    Now, the cost of building a covered walkway? Well we could be as cheap as canvas roofs (that could be removable in the summer) or have a fully enclosed walkway (similar to an airport jetway). Or something inbetween. But I still don’t see what the fuss is, because the vast majority of TriMet’s bus stops don’t even have shelters; even many MAX stops don’t have adequate shelters (Pioneer Courthouse Square comes to mind) – why would the ferry all of a sudden be a problem?

    The ferries don’t need much “amenities”, after all it’s only a two or three minute ride across the river. The Aerial Tram is similar in trip time; it doesn’t have much.

    As for the passenger-ferry vs. bus-ferry, keep in mind that a passenger ferry need only be rated to safely support the weight of the people. Figure, 75 people at 200 pounds each, or 15,000 pounds – add a safety cushion and you have a boat with a load limit of 20,000 pounds.

    A TriMet bus, light weight, is 28,500 pounds (source: New Flyer website). The rated vehicle capacity is 39,630 pounds – so you’d need to design a boat that can carry at least 50,000 pounds – or two and a half times that of the passenger-only boat. Secondly, a passenger only boat would be much smaller.

    Given the cost of steel today (and most of a vehicle ferry is going to be steel), do you want to build a boat that is going to be at least twice as wide and twice as long, and carry 2.5 times the weight, as the smaller option? And require a much more expensive landing at either end?

  28. lw –

    Nobody is suggesting that the bridge not be repaired/replaced… the plan outlined above is a suggestion for a service that could augment the current bridge and provide a substitute means of travel during the rebuild period.

    – Bob R.

  29. Solution: just build or repair the bridge after, of course, due process

    Some of the Sellwood Bridge replacement options require demolition of the existing bridge first, and the construction of a temporary bridge.

    The ferry option, regardless of which form that it takes, would certainly be less expensive than building a temporary bridge that would be removed once the permanent, new Sellwood Bridge is finished.

  30. Love the service idea connecting two of the largest if not the largest shopping malls in the State. Really helpful for shoppers/teens/workers who can’t afford a car or choose not to use/need a car.

    I think exploring more ways of moving the riders over the river is in order since a ferry system would then be unused after the bridge is certified for larger buses (see my last comment though).

    Can the Sellwood handle smaller buses? Could we have two tranfer points for a shuttle bus between 99E and 47(?)? Or could the Bus Barge be moved to another river crossing down the road (say Camas to Troutdale to support a link between the two growing East Counties ten years from now?

    Ray Whitford

  31. The ferry option, regardless of which form that it takes, would certainly be less expensive than building a temporary bridge that would be removed once the permanent, new Sellwood Bridge is finished.

    I don’t think the idea of a temporary bridge is to serve transit, bikes and pedestrians. Its to serve automobiles.

  32. I am all but 100% positive that even a temporary bridge will be equipped with at least a sidewalk that could be used by bikes and/or a bike lane, and will probably be built to support heavier vehicle weights (i.e. fire trucks and TriMet busses).

    The bridge is well used by bicyclists and pedestrians; what would be the point of building a temporary bridge if a significant portion of the traffic would be barred from using it? Why not just forget the idea of a temporary bridge/crossing, just implode the dang thing and build new? (The project might actually be done faster and cheaper; and it might even permanently discourage the “Clackamas County Commuters” that many of the Sellwood residents despise.)

  33. lw:

    The Sellwood bridge won’t be repaired or fixed until the year 3022, due to political processes and the time it takes to secure federal funding. In the meanwhile, we should have a backup system that can actually operate in a meaningful manner in transporting people. I have personally met many a bus commuter who faced a 2+ hour trip each way from SW to SE Portland, because of the downtown transfer requirement.

  34. I am all but 100% positive that even a temporary bridge will be equipped with at least a sidewalk

    I am sure it will. But comparing the cost of a ferry, whether for transit or just people, to a temporary bridge which also serves autos is apples and oranges. They are really separate discussions.

  35. You’re right.

    But the questioner asked why we couldn’t just build a bridge; I answered the question, and you rebutted it by saying a bridge would only be for auto purposes (with no provision for pedestrian/bike/transit use) which is incorrect.

    Obiviously, a temporary bridge is going to cost more than a ferry. However there are many who rightfully will disapprove of any option that closes the crossing for an extended period of time and causess significant inconvenience to them.

  36. Temporary Bridge? My, aren’t we quick to spend tax money?

    If the Sellwood Bidge gets shut down, and it takes a long time to get the money to fix it, Clackamas County commuters might start taking the I-205 MAX, buses or even build their own darn river crossing in Clackamas County.

  37. FYI
    The Sellwood Bridge Task Force meets tonight at 5:30 at the SMILE Station, 8210 SE 13th Avenue
    (1 block south of Tacoma).

  38. I am reading a record of a trip taken in 1908 from Massachusetts to California and back by my mother, at age 16, and grandparents. My Grandmother kept a meticulous daily record of interesting events. At one point she writes about their trip on the S.P.R.R. from Oakland, CA., to Portland. She mentions taking a large train ferry at Port Costa to Portland, but I find no record of a “Port Costa” in Oregon. Was there such a place in 1908, or what was the Willamette River terminal from which that ferry departed? Thank you for your help.

Leave a Reply

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