Bike and Pedestrian Acceess

[tefen]

Bike and pedestrian access to the new I-5 bridge has generally been proposed as part of the separate light rail bridge. Bike Portland apparently got an email from the CRCP team which showed them a new format.... the bike path cantilevered below the road bed. It's interesting, but I wonder how it would feel to actually use.


http://bikeportland.org/2008/01/21/new-i-5-bridge-whats-in-store-for-bikes/

[Waterbuffalo]

Bike and pedestrian access to the new I-5 bridge has generally been proposed as part of the separate light rail bridge. Bike Portland apparently got an email from the CRCP team which showed them a new format.... the bike path cantilevered below the road bed. It's interesting, but I wonder how it would feel to actually use.


http://bikeportland.org/2008/01/21/new-i-5-bridge-whats-in-store-for-bikes/

Looks like an interesting idea tefen.. Though is it going to have the same sway problem that the Tacoma Narrows bridge and many cantilever bridges have to relieve stress points?

Don't think I want to be under a bridge swaying in the COLD wind coming off the Columbia River..

Chief and I live in the SE of Vancouver and cold wind is our lively life goals here.

I don't think any one would want to be riding in a sway and being hit with cold rain or snow..

[Chief]

Well that's just dandy to toss sketches around and promise the bike crowd the frickin' moon, but I have a couple of questions...

1. How many bikes cross the Interstate Bridges right now?

2. What will the toll be for bicycles to use that bridge?

3. Just how much will this little perk cost, and how will we pay for it??

Fantasyland!

:rolleyes:

[tefen]

Chief, I think this is a cost saving measure. If the LRT is inside the bridge, and this is hanging off the bottom, they can eliminate that whole third bridge.

The comments on that page are interesting. One commentor mentions that it's likely to become a homeless shelter due to the fact that's covered from the rain (and with great sunrise views to boot!)

Oh, and can you fix my mis-spelling in the title? It doesn't seem that I can fix "Access" in the thread's title.

[Chief]

I tried to fix that but the system wouldn't let me. I'll get Louis to take a look at why, it may be a permissions issue.

Sure, you can call it a cost saving measure if you like, as long as nobody has to cough up real numbers yet...

Along with the points WB raised, I have to agree that this would be a natural Mecca for all kinds of human debris. I would imagine there would have to be jumper nets installed too to stop the suicides; at least on the Washington side...at least for a while yet...

:rolleyes:

[Waterbuffalo]

One of the things that was brought in on the meeting was some one who was new to the process and didn't understand why this wasn't a "trophy" bridge and why there wasn't more Bike and Pedestrian access.

I think this might have been a fill-in for Rojo-desteffi?? (Not sure who it was but his comments were near the end of the comment period.) And this kid, who hasn't been in the process very long basically doesn't understand what was going on. This was his second meeting and some one needs to teach him about the "Urban Design" Working Group and the Bike/Pedestrian group that have been meeting for more than a year on the subject. This kid was very young. Some one at Multnomah County needs to speak with him about these two options!

To tefen.

I'd love to see what comes of this and the Transit-in-a-box idea.

Though one thought crossed my mind. What would happen if the Water levels were very high, would one of the tug boats be able to get under the bridge with all of this low hanging fruit? (transit in a box, pedestrian/bike access.)

And Chief, to your concerns about jumpers, its a legitamite question. Not sure how they are going to lock in people. But its probably a good idea to include some mesh that can't be cut out with snippers that you can buy at home depot/lowes or use a torch to cut through.

Another thought, could a suicide bomber placed under the bridge in Transit in a box or the other option destabilize this bridge if he he hugged one of the piers?

[tefen]

What would happen if the Water levels were very high, would one of the tug boats be able to get under the bridge with all of this low hanging fruit? (transit in a box, pedestrian/bike access.)


WB, all this luggage would be hanging under there anyway. It's essentially making use of the existing shape of the bridge. Even the I-205 bridge has a box underneath it, it's just not used for anything, and has dividers all down its length.

Would it be worse to have a tug slam into the filled box or an empty box? That's hard to say. But, I think ship captains pretty much know what they're doing. I would think it'd be very hard to find an instance of a ship (other than someone's private sailboat) running into the underside of a bridge.

[Waterbuffalo]

"WB, all this luggage would be hanging under there anyway. It's essentially making use of the existing shape of the bridge. Even the I-205 bridge has a box underneath it, it's just not used for anything, and has dividers all down its length.

Would it be worse to have a tug slam into the filled box or an empty box? That's hard to say. But, I think ship captains pretty much know what they're doing. I would think it'd be very hard to find an instance of a ship (other than someone's private sailboat) running into the underside of a bridge."

Interesting.. Didn't know that I-205 has this low hanging fruit off of it. But my question now is, the I-205 bridge is higher in the air than I-5/CRCP because of airspace restrictions and Coast Guard rules that regulate its heighth. Add to it the low hanging fruit off the side and it worries me there might be an accident-waiting-to-happen.

Add in the the "low hanging fruit" and it worries me that the Tow guys are going to be able to take ships up the river when its water level is high during two seasons of the year when its bad. Spring thaw and fall months near November or so.

Just thinking of my Gramor ideas and how would the tow boat/shippers get up river if the river was high? Guess I need more information and need to consult the representative body on the subject.

[tefen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_disasters
It seems ships are more likely to hit the bridge supports than the under-side of a bridge.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_L._Jackson_Memorial_Bridge
144 ft of vertical clearance on the Glenn Jackson Memorial Bridge


http://www.debunkingportland.com/I-5+CRC/CRC/CRC070220/www.columbiarivercrossing.org/materials/projectDocuments/River%20navigation%20FactSheet.pdf
... the bridge would be built high enough
to not need a lift span. Surveys have indicated
that a height of 95 feet over the water will allow
nearly all vessels to pass.


Not sure how old that information is. It also has a great chart about bridge lifts and water level in each season.

So, it would appear, if the fact sheet is still accurate, that the bridge would be 50 feet lower than the Glenn Jackson Bridge. But again, I don't think ship captains are unaware of the height of their vessels versus the vertical clearance under the bridge. That's why they paint water lines on the bridge supports to show how high the river is flowing.

[Chief]

Again, what will be the toll for a bicycle?

Will there be a turnstile installed for all of those pedestrians to pay their share too??

Seriously.

[tefen]

Maybe the bike and ped tolls will be congestion based Chief. When there's enough bikes crossing that there's delays, they'll charge 'em each fifty cents.

[Waterbuffalo]

And probably enough Change to get a round of Starbucks Coffee at the local shop for every member of the toll team sitting at a booth collecting the toll.

Sorry but I'd rather see some one DOING reall work than on a bridge taking toll amounts. Utter waste of taxpayer resources to charge fifty cents or a dollar to cross a bike lane on the bridge.

Lets just dump them all on the Maxx with all the extra bike hooks they have and let them head there way over the bridge. Am I all hot water in my idea that putting a walkway or pike/bed under the bridge is a waste of money and adding a toll booth with a human is even more a waste of money?

Maybe they could have a electronic turnstyle type but how easy would it be to be defeated?

[tefen]

Honestly, I would have a hard time imagining a world in which I can't walk or bike across the river. Sure, I don't use that option often, but it seems so counter-intuitive for the option not to be there.

[Waterbuffalo]

With the way things are going, Clark County is going to have a vote on the subject.

Just thought of something Tefen.
People would like to be able to see out and look over the cascade mountains. How about put that trail-under-the-bridge under the East Side of the Replacement bridge or on the non-replacement bridge?

[Chief]

With the way things are going, Clark County is going to have a vote on the subject.

Just thought of something Tefen.
People would like to be able to see out and look over the cascade mountains. How about put that trail-under-the-bridge under the East Side of the Replacement bridge or on the non-replacement bridge?


One more try here....how much should we spend to make all of this happen, and how should we pay for it??

[Waterbuffalo]

" One more try here....how much should we spend to make all of this happen, and how should we pay for it??"

If you read my other comments Chief, I think Portland and Oregon state is trying to weasel out of it as much as possible or are going to front load it with as much pork as possible?

Do you think Bike and Pedestrian is access is necessary? Honestly Portland is going to push for no tolls or financials on their side on any of it?

But this thread isn't about the discussion of the financing of the pedestrian/bike access. Its what options are going to be wanted for the bridge. Am I wrong in that sentiment Tefen or Chief? This thread is just about pie in the sky ideals, not how much one is going to pay to cross that bridge.

Honestly, it would be cheaper just to make the ped/bike free or nearest it and have a electronic turnstyle? But my point is, I don't think any of this is going to go any where on this thread or before the Task Force.

If you remember watching the Task Force meeting.. All of the subjects coming out of the Columbia River Crossing are advisory only and any of option of it could be killed by the Federals or the state Dots..

[Chief]

Frakly I've had a year of pie in the sky, and it's about time to come in for a landing. It's about the money boys and girls, and in case you haven't been paying attention, there ain't a lot of it around right now. For example:

** Sales Tax revenues in the City of Vancouver are well below projections.

** Gas Tax revenues for the State of Washington are down significantly as $3.00 a gallon gas forces people to do less driving.

** Bond measures and tax increases aren't real popular these days, besides, do you really think voting to raise the sales tax by 3/10ths will actually raise enough money to pay for anything, if sales tax revenues are already in the toilet??

** Bikes and Pedestrians need to pay their share as well. We are talking about what will certainly add Millions of costs (at least) to the bridge project for traffic that does not exist right now.

** There is no demonstrated regular foot or bike traffic across that bridge for good reasons, and it's foolish to keep trying to jam that kind of traffic onto an Interstate freeway birdge in the first place.

[Waterbuffalo]

""** Bikes and Pedestrians need to pay their share as well. We are talking about what will certainly add Millions of costs (at least) to the bridge project for traffic that does not exist right now.

** There is no demonstrated regular foot or bike traffic across that bridge for good reasons, and it's foolish to keep trying to jam that kind of traffic onto an Interstate freeway birdge in the first place."

Chief, I don't think I disagree with your whole last post. But if you listened to 75 percent of the contingent from Multnomah County and the Eviros and Health affect coalition from Portland say the bikes and pedestrian issues are what are driving their votes up or down.

Light Rail wasn't even a question on their minds that it WASN'T going to be on the bridge. They were wondering more on how to get more cars off that bridge and reduce traffic volumes and how to make this bridge palatable to the areas around them.

Now on our sides, our issues are quite the opposite and I do agree with you in some respects, why are we putting a Multi-million dollar effort into adding bike and pedestrian access when it could be offered as an amenity on the Rail or Bus transit access over the bridge.

But I also see Tefen's point that why are we not offering it and making it accessible in that form.

But in your last, you finally made another good point, Novembers meeting was really the last time one could have added elements to the bridge so they could have been cost estimated and the brought into line with the bridge.

This is one of Steve Stuart's hugest gripes and also a number of City of Vancouver council members problems and concern have said publicly and privately over and over and over again.

Now we're only 60 days away from a final vote up or down on the subject of an "ADVISORY" vote to the Dots and Federal officials of different stripes on whether this is how the locals want this bridge to come out.

[Waterbuffalo]

Honestly all the final dots, crosses on t's and dots on i's haven't been crossed off by the signatory agencies.

Also the final engineering plans, options on costs and construction materials and where they are going to stage all of this is still up in the air like you state Chief.


So really after the LPA is done, the real hard work and political gamesmanship starts. Steve said some very smart near the end of his blustering comments, that some one should bring a coalition of local governments to push and find funding options for this so that the local governments don't end up footing a good sized chunkable of it.

His reference was to a coalition that brought together many different sides to get the Columbia River Deepening Project to happen.

If you want to see his comments, watch on cvtv near the end of the Columbia River task force meeting when he starts blowing his top.

And I have to correct one thing I said earlier, he was red on his head from being embarrassed or ticked, it was because he went on vacation to a nice southern destination and soaked up huge amounts of sun.