Source
Highlevel365•

While we're at it, how about a MAX tunnel?

https://www.oregonmetro.gov/max-tunnel-study

11
Peak-Chungus•

This is badly needed. Not just East-West, but also North-South.

4
PC-LoadLetterOP•

While we're at it, how about a MAX tunnel?

I am on board with this, and have almost incessantly talked about it.

I actually think the route should be directed along Burnside street (kind of like Market Street in SF). Essentially, this is the geographic center of the core given the Pearl's development. The existing MAX lines going to Pioneer Square area, etc. could be streetcars.

Use the opportunity to do a cut/cover design along Burnside to reduce costs and get a new Burnside Street design with wider sidewalks.

3
urbanlife78•

I would love to see Portland build a subway line through the city center for MAX.

1
PC-LoadLetterOP•

This project has been talked about a lot recently so I dug this up from a while back in 2012 (during Sam Adams' tenure, who was likely an advocate). The plan here stops a bit short of the work going on at the Rose Quarter which seems to be most discussed area of I5 -- but no reason it couldn't be extended beyond what is indicated here. I like it because it buries I5 a very long way along the waterfront.

This would open up A LOT of real estate and connections to the Eastbank Waterfront. I5 is critical infrastructure. Yes it would cost a lot but this is such an opportunity wasted.

If I could make one amendment to this plan, it would be burying the railroad segment too and realigning alongside the highway. That would be immense for the neighborhood if it reduced railroad crossings at surface streets (has anyone every been stuck behind a train here before?), and who knows it might also bring a huge private stakeholder to the project who might put some money into it (if they got some upgrades too like maybe capacity or increased speed for trains through here).

If we're going to fix I5 in this area, let's do it right. We just need some Biden Bucks and we're good. This is not a pie-in-the-sky idea anymore.

5
jrod6891•

Regarding the rail comments:

Union Pacific likely wont put a dime towards any of this, they’re barely maintaining the infrastructure they have and constantly cutting costs and trying to increase that almighty “operating ratio” They already own the land and can run the trains they want to.

Closest thing to all of this is maybe securing some transportation dollars from Amtrak for route improvements or scheduling improvements but again, they’re not facing a capacity shortage at all

3
PC-LoadLetterOP•

Regarding the rail comments:

Thanks for the input. Was trying to look at the upside as a stakeholder. Maybe there's an angle in this argument to be had if it were looked at more seriously?

I still see the neighborhood benefiting from reduced train crossings. Imagine the central industrial eastside w/o trains blocking off the city from Downtown however many times a day? That'd be huge.

1
jrod6891•

Ya I don’t disagree with the benefits to the neighborhood but I guess you’d have to see about cost and viability with the railroad. There’s a definite issue with train lengths and brooklyn yard and it would make things interesting for sure

2
PC-LoadLetterOP•

I heard trains are only going to get longer. Not sure if true or not.

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
AutoModeratorMOD•

Thanks for your input. Mods have set this subreddit to not allow posts from newly created accounts for the time being. Please come back soon!

(⌐■_■)

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1
grantspdxBuckman•

Something's janky with the diagram regarding the Stark Street I-5 southbound ramp. The diagram implies both a new surface street to a new tunnel AND a redevelopment opportunity in the same location.

1
PC-LoadLetterOP•

Something's janky with the diagram regarding the Stark Street I-5 southbound ramp. The diagram implies both a new surface street to a new tunnel AND a redevelopment opportunity in the same location.

I'm not sure I see the issue? This is effectively a 30,000 foot view of the area. The "redevelopment opportunity" area is going to be fairly broad with its linework boundary otherwise it turns into a mucky unreadable mess.

The Stark Street turns acts as en entrance to the tunnel until it hits the intersection. I personally think the redevelopment linework boundary needs to move and encompass more area in this region than it's showing since it would remove the Morrison Bridge I5 north ramp.

1
urbanlife78•

It would be great to have the east bank open up for dense development.

1