Sellwood Bridge Stays in the News


The Trib begins looking at the interchange designs on either side of the river, while the Business Journal focuses on funding (unfortunately the full version of the online article requires a subscription – I read the old media version at the library).

The speculation is that we may get the Feds to cough up half the price tag. But that may still mean $100M+ in local contribution.


17 responses to “Sellwood Bridge Stays in the News”

  1. What’s most important for this project is to keep the capacity in sync with Sellwood’s main street, Tacoma and with capacity on Macadam, i.e. the bridge…new or rebuilt…needs to be one travel lane each way with generous bike/ped facilities.
    Connections at both ends should be grade level with signals…let’s not be lured into an overbuilt project by federal money or its community compromising “standards.”
    This bridge is not and should not be a surrogate for a Clackamas county crossing somewhere between Sellwood and Oregon City.

  2. Lenny makes an excellent point. There are two lanes at the east end of the bridge. There’s no point in spending vast amounts of money on a brand new four-lane bridge when it feeds into two lanes.

    The rehab option proposed by (I think) Jim Howell simply rebuilds the bridge approaches, strips the sidewalk off the upper deck, widens both traffic lanes, and adds a sheltered pedestrian/bike path underneath the bridge. It’s the lowest-cost solution and improves the bridge for every mode (private car, bus, freight, bicycle, walking), with minimum impacts to private property and to the environment.

    As for the folks who use the Sellwood Bridge to get from Milwaukie or Clackamas to Lake Oswego or Tigard — if we need more bridge lanes for those drivers, put those lanes somewhere further south. Let Clackamas County sort out exactly where that “somewhere” will be. Because the bridge will stand to cut miles off of people’s trips, it could be a toll bridge, and would pay for itself over the course of a decade or so.

  3. enopugh of Sellwood bridge already, the existing bridge is adequate for the current and near future demand.. when I travel that area I remain on McLouglin and turn right on 17th and Ross Island Bridge…

  4. the bridge, fix it, or blow it up, how much traffic passes daily that could not use other routes. migth make it topugh for LO residents to reach Oaks Park if they indeed go there…

  5. the bridge, fix it, or blow it up, how much traffic passes daily that could not use other routes. might make it tough for LO residents to reach Oaks Park if they indeed go there…

  6. The Sellwood bridge is about to fall down, and it needs to be either saved or replaced.

    I don’t think the bridge is about to fall down. If it were Multnomah County would close it. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be fixed because, at some point, if it isn’t fixed it will have to be closed. And that would be a hardship on a lot of people.

  7. “I don’t think the bridge is about to fall down. If it were Multnomah County would close it” to heavier vehicles like buses and stuff… Ohh, wait…

    There are degrees of “danger of falling down.” I mean, I-5 is in danger of falling down according to the CRC, but only if it gets hit by a 8.0 earthquake or we stop maintaining it for the next 50 years, where as Sellwood or Sauvie Island bridges are in danger of falling down if a big truck goes over them… By the time the Sellwood is in so much danger of falling down that they ban cars from it entirely, they need to start demolishing it, so that it doesn’t fall on top somebody/boat/condo/etc, or at the very least, so that it doesn’t make a mess in the river…

  8. Isn’t most of the problem at the west end, where the approaches are set on land that is slipping?
    The primary structure is OK as I recall.
    A new bridge is OK, but don’t elevate it to a key regional link; keep it small to conform to the roadway/community needs at both ends.
    Note that ODOT’s 1969 Portland freeway network “vision” had a Johnson Creek expressway crossing at Sellwood, continuing up thru Burlingame and continuing west as the Multnomah Expressway. What a glorious thing we are missing!

  9. I’m not a bridge expert,

    Neither am I, but the folks that are don’t seem to think it is “about to fall down.” The problem, as has become apparent as the discussion of the I35 bridge collapse has moved forward, is that the terminology used in bridge evaluations is highly misleading to the layperson. Almost half the bridges in the United States are “about to fall down” by some of the measures.

  10. Lenny and djk

    Wouldn’t it be wise to provide for potential future developments, particularly transit?

    My preference is for a three lane bridge painted with only two wide lanes for now, perhaps with a generous curb. Then we can use the third lane in the future for dedicated bus, left turn alternatives, light rail, etc.

    Let’s not make the same mistake we did in the past, letting development butt right up against a bridge and then having to move the whole bridge as a result years down the road. We’ll have to sacrifice part of Sellwood park.

    And please, whatever we do, please provide safe ped and bike options. That bridge right now is a nightmare to run or ride over.

  11. Paul –

    Wouldn’t it be wise to provide for potential future developments, particularly transit?

    What transit alternatives are you talking about? Streetcar can operate in the lane with traffic across the bridge. No one is turning off the bridge (and into the river). It seems the only reason for a third lane on the bridge itself would be as a reversible traffic lane for commuters.

  12. I like having buildings right next to bridges; that’s why the Burnside is my favorite one. More capacity = more vehicles/more speed = lower Q of Life for residents of Sellwood. Portland needs to protect its neighborhoods and its citizens.

  13. I have to weigh-in on this one. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the bulk of the traffic crossing the Sellwood Bridge is headed either to/from downtown or Hwy 26 and Washington County. So, a new bridge crossing south of the Sellwood won’t reduce much traffic on the Sellwood Bridge.

    The bulk of the Sellwood Bridge traffic should use McLaughlin Blvd and cross on the Ross Island Bridge. Improvements to both the Mclaughlin Blvd and the Ross Island Bridge may effectively handle both existing and additional capacity.

    McLaughlin Blvd interchanges at Ochoco and SE 17th would eliminate the stoplight jam-up. A southbound underpass to eastbound Holgate would eliminate that stoplight. Improved entrance ramps to westbound Ross Island Bridge and an exit ramp direct to I-405; Badda-bing Badda-boom. ODOT has some of these concepts on the books. If McLaughlin Blvd speed limit remains 45mph, its capacity will nearly double and traffic move smoothly.

    Development potential adjacent to the McLaughlin interchanges increases because pedestrian crossings of McLoughlin there become safer and air pollution is reduced. At Ochoco, I think McLaughlin should be cut into a trench and Ochoco a level bridge across with a simple “H- pattern” exit and entrances.

    The Sellwood Bridge (rebuild or replacement) should remain 2-lanes to match the traffic pattern on Tacoma, with either wide sidewalks on both sides or a separate pedestrian/bicycling crossing.

    Just my 2-cents worth. This is the basic proposal I submitted to Metro about 8 years ago.

  14. Ok, you guys—-

    1. We, the residents of Sellwood Moreland, want a two lane bridge. At least most do. I don’t know who has come up with these other options.

    2. The “2” rating stems from a number of considerations, not just structural integrity. The piers and steel are in fine shape; the top deck is not and the design has been inadequate for many decades.

    3. We also want Clackamas County to build a crossing. There are a number of possibilities as reflected in Metro’s 1999 South Willamette Crossing study. In my mind the best solution woould be the shortest bridge, would link to the middle of the hub of highways that come into Lake Oswego, and would take a lot of traffic underground below downtown LO. That would be a bridge from SE Oak Grove Blvd. to SW Foothills Drive in Lake Oswego. A tunnel could then take westbound traffic to A Avenue and Scholls Ferry Rd. underground for about a half mile. North and Southbound traffic on Hwy 43, traffic to McVey Ave and to the Terwiliger Extension could go on the surface. The Oak Grove side is already served by a grid of main streets so I don’t think any new, enlarged highway is needed. That should keep the inevitable outcries down.

    4. The west end of the Sellwood Bridge is unstable. However, there are three projects that, together, might solidify that area unless the line of slippage is really deep. Between improving the approach to the bridge, redesigning the intersection and putting a streetcar station there it might make a large enough obstruction to keep the land from slipping further. It might take a fair amount of structural steel but I think it is doable.

    5. A streetcar track on the Sellwood Bridge makes a lot of sense to me, since it could link other proposed lines. Personally, I don’t care if cars have to stay in line behind it.

  15. I just don’t believe the demand is there for a new crossing between Lake Oswego and Oak Grove (or wherever), nor for widening the Sellwood Bridge to 4-lanes.

    In my previous post, I make the claim that the BULK of Sellwood Bridge traffic starts at McLaughlin Blvd and ends downtown or enters I-405 and Hwy 26. It finished with the claim that major interchange improvements to McLaughlin Blvd (at Ochoco, SE 17th, Holgate), and Ross Island Bridge entrance and connecting ramps to I-405 is the ideal solution, and with this follow-up post add the caveat of extending MAX to Milwaukie which should reduce traffic volume on the Ross Island Bridge. Oh well. Whatever.

Leave a Reply

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