It would appear that whatever alternative gets chosen for the Sellwood Bridge, some private property must be taken and buildings removed.
It would appear that whatever alternative gets chosen for the Sellwood Bridge, some private property must be taken and buildings removed.
9 responses to “Sellwood Properties at Risk?”
Portland “planning” at work.
I see the same kind of junk going on just about everywhere.
A good example is Powell Blvd [east of 205], a major US Highway and major thoroughfare that still designed as a 2-lane rural road. Since “infill” has got popular [thanks METRO], a bunch of row houses and apartment complexes have gone up sitting close to the edge of the roadway. When Powell is finally widened into a modern 5 to 7 lane roadway, most of these developments will need to come down.
That’s not quite the situation for the Sellwood. Even if the bridge follows the current alignment, there is property directly underneath that will need to be cleared.
The original bridge was built on the cheap, the County couldn’t even afford to buy the complete right-of-way, so buildings were constructed around the piers.
also, i am willing to bet that powell will not be widened for the next 30 years. $20 in 2007 dollars?
George–
30 years to widen a street that should have been widened 20 years ago? Sounds like Portland “planning” to me!
A good example is Powell Blvd [east of 205], a major US Highway and major thoroughfare that still designed as a 2-lane rural road.
The U.S. highway route numbering system has absolutely no bearing as to whether a highway is a “major US highway” or not.
Legally, U.S. 26 from Gresham west to I-405 is not part of the National Highway System, so it’s “U.S.” designation is a name, and nothing else. In fact, Cornell Road from Hillsboro to Shute Road, and Shute Road to U.S. 26 (the Sunset Highway) in Hillsboro, in the eyes of the federal government, is more closely defined as a “major US highway”, because it is included in the National Highway System. Same with Oregon 212/224 from Boring to Milwaukie. In fact even Kruse Way is considered an NHS component.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/nhs/maps/or/portland_or.pdf
Why isn’t Portland widening Powell Blvd.? Because it’s a state-jurisdiction highway. Why isn’t ODOT widening it? Because ODOT sees the road as a local street, and that there are plenty of other routes. Until recently, U.S. 26 eastbound traffic from I-205 was actually directed to use Division Street. Today, signs that point to “Gresham” still direct you to Division, however ODOT has changed the signs to point that U.S. 26 is actually routed on Powell.
Since there is a dotted-line connecting U.S. 26 to I-84 in Gresham along 242nd Avenue, my guess is that ultimately ODOT will reroute U.S. 26 onto I-84, and Powell Blvd. will be abandoned to the City of Portland for maintenance (just as Sandy Blvd. (former U.S. 30), Interstate Avenue (former U.S. 99W, M.L.K. Blvd. (former U.S. 99E) have been.) At that point, whether Portland will care to upgrade Powell, or just direct people to use Division…
I’m wondering how many properties would need to be demolished if ferry service were used to provide interim river crossings during the construction period, and the new/refurbished bridge were simply built in the exact same place as the existing bridge?
If construction were to use a scalpel instead of a pickaxe, so to speak, I think that building losses could be minimized. Also, there are some pretty large parking lots directly north of the bridge on the eastside landing. Couldn’t these parking lots be used to rebuild some of the lost building space?
And, couldn’t the new bridge include some “troll buildings” of its own, once completed?
I’m wondering how many properties would need to be demolished if ferry service were used to provide interim river crossings during the construction period
I wish I could say this as a joke, but ferries are not light rail. Dead on Arrival.
However we’ve studied water-transit, and it always dies because of some “complication”. (Usually involves money, however LRT costs much more and money never seems to be a problem all of a sudden.) $500K for a dock seems to be a problem, but $5M for a MAX station and it’s “How can we make it $6M?!! $5M isn’t enough!”
Erik:
Spare me your silly “facts.” It impedes me blindly lashing out at my vague and primitive notion of what “planning” is!
Thanks
NC
The original bridge was built on the cheap, the County couldn’t even afford to buy the complete right-of-way, so buildings were constructed around the piers.
This is true; there is a building where the piers were actually driven through it. The bridge technically is on the property as an easement.
I hope to see many tonight at Sellwood Middle School for our Public Workshop!