SW Corridor now has a “fact sheet”


The public process of the Southwest Corridor project is moving along, with publication of a project fact sheet, and the designation of committee stakeholders. The fact sheet is the more interesting bit, given that it comes with this map showing the corridor area (map courtesy Metro):

Screenshot.png

As you can see, in addition to the “obvious” areas close to OR 99W, the study area includes Washington Square, Lake Grove, and Durham/Bridgeport; however it does not include Tualatin, other than the northwest corner of the city.


11 responses to “SW Corridor now has a “fact sheet””

  1. Looking at the map a bit more carefully, it does appear to include a bit of north/downtown Tualatin–a curious boundary choice, assuming the contours of the corridor edge aren’t approximations.

  2. This is going to be a tough corridor to implement any sort of light rail or true BRT line–I don’t really see any good ROW on 99W available except southwest of Tigard. It could work as an elevated trackway, but it would be very expensive.

  3. …which is why many locals see a partial subsurface alignment or subway as necessary within the corridor. I just hope the alignment veers more toward PCC than Wash Square, as the WES alignment has a priority designation to be ‘upgraded’ to serve that area already.

    Regardless, this new branch will be testing the metro areas’ will to fund another big project.

  4. Here’s hoping that when the routing is decided upon it includes a tunnel under Marquam Hill with an elevator to OHSU or the VA, like at the Zoo. We sorely need another way to get to the medical facilities up there.

  5. I really doubt federal funding will be available for any grade-separated projects. Oregon will need to get serious about funding transportation on its own, or we need to go with less expensive options.

  6. Here’s hoping that when the routing is decided upon it includes a tunnel under Marquam Hill with an elevator to OHSU or the VA, like at the Zoo. We sorely need another way to get to the medical facilities up there.

    While the price tag for a tunnel would be mighty steep (especially given the current economic realities), I agree Pill Hill is too important a destination to not be served by anything more than the tram and bus lines on a winding two-lane road.

    Thinking about the potential location of the tunnel’s southern portal, it’d be interesting to see where the line would join the Barbur corridor. I agree with zefwagner’s post that a Barbur ROW would be problematic; it’s a far different animal than Interstate Ave. Might be more feasible to run it between Barbur and I-5 for at least a portion of the route.

  7. @ dan w:

    The answer is never. It should never join the Barbur corridor. The route should be on its own separated right-of-way for as long as it’s feasible. Whether it’s a tunnel under Marquam Hill and Hillsdale or a viaduct over I-5 to PCC-Sylvania or running along the OER tracks to Tualatin.

    Barbur is a traffic sewer that will never become something that is remotely pleasant to walk along. ODOT will also put up a large fight over any attempts by TriMet at reducing auto capacity. Plus between Downtown and Terwiliger there are grade issues and you are serving very few people or destinations.

  8. Well said, Reza, my thoughts exactly too.

    I dont think a bored tunnel is as expensive as its generally assumed (look at Robertson Tunnel) and likewise I dont think a surface alignment is as inexpensive as is generally assumed (look at Milwaukie MAX costs). It wouldnt surprise me if the costs are quite similar. The beauty of a tunnel is it can hit many important destinations that are in the corridor and lined up in almost a straight line: OHSU, Hillsdale, Multnomah Village, Barbur TC, PCC, then make its way over to Tigard which admittedly would be more difficult (though could also be a branch splitting at Barbur TC: one to PCC, one to Tigard via Barbur). Barbur is miles of auto-centric businesses blocked largely on the south side by I-5 so in my opinion it wouldnt be the best place for LRT or any improved transit infrastructure and should be avoided as much as possible unless alternative routing is just as bad. We are still waiting for Interstate Ave to transform, and yet Interstate Ave has much more existing urban assets to work with than Barbur Blvd.

    A tunnel could emerge around Barbur TC then run on the surface up Capitol Highway to PCC which I recall is currently 5 lanes wide.

  9. The local match for this one will have to be a property tax bond measure; not much need for urban renewal in SW. This was how the westside line was funded.

  10. A tunnel could emerge around Barbur TC then run on the surface up Capitol Highway to PCC which I recall is currently 5 lanes wide.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4OqDkzM5F8

    Start the tunnel at Duniway Park, just as 6th Avenue turns to the west and becomes Terwilliger.

    End the tunnel in Tigard, somewhere between I-5 and 72nd Avenue just east of the Tigard cinemas.

    No impact to Barbur Boulevard; serves all the major S.W. transit generators (OHSU, PCC Sylvania, Barbur Transit Center) and transit-friendly neighborhoods (Hillsdale, Multnomah Village).

    By having the tunnel exit and serve PCC Sylvania at grade you are requiring a steep grade and a 300-400 foot rise in track elevation (PCC is at 650 foot elevation; Barbur TC at 550 feet, Multnomah Village is at 460 feet, Hillsdale is at 500 feet, OHSU is between 350-600 feet. Duniway Park is at 200 feet and the Tigard Cinemas P&R is at 210 feet.)

    Barbur Boulevard would make an excellent “Rapid” bus route (akin to LACMTA’s Rapid Buses) but don’t count on TriMet to actually do a damn thing with the bus system. A $25 million investment would do wonders for the 12 line with all new high capacity buses, light rail-like stops, dedicated lanes and signal priority where appropriate and pedestrian improvements all up and down the corridor and on connecting streets. $25 million will buy maybe a half mile of light rail.

Leave a Reply

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