Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Study outlines $100M–$200M grade‑separation options for Sherwood Road; council asks for focused road‑over analysis
Summary
City staff and consultants presented a multi‑option Sherwood Road and rail separation study that estimated grade‑separated options at roughly $100–$200 million and at‑grade improvements at $10–$20 million, flagged floodplain and constructability constraints, and recommended further analysis of road‑over alternatives and funding paths.
TUALATIN — City engineering staff and consultant teams presented a high‑level study March 9 that lays out multiple ways to reduce the frequent vehicle‑rail conflicts at Sherwood Road, including multi‑hundred‑million‑dollar grade separations and smaller at‑grade improvements.
Mike, identified in the presentation as the city engineer, and Amy Griffin, a senior engineer with the consultant team, framed the study as an initial “10,000‑foot” analysis intended to test feasibility before advancing design. The team described four broad scenarios: sinking the rail into a trench, elevating the rail, dropping the roadway below the rail, or building the roadway over the rail, and a lower‑cost approach of widened at‑grade improvements with intelligent‑transportation systems.
“This is a generational project,” Mike said, noting tradeoffs between transportation benefits, construction impacts and property takings. The consultants warned that trenching the rail is unlikely because large portions of the corridor lie in the floodplain and would require expensive pumping and backup power, while elevating the rail would likely need space for a parallel track to keep trains moving during construction.
For the most robust grade‑separation options, the team presented an order‑of‑magnitude cost range of about $100 million to $200 million (expressed in a 2035 planning horizon). Major at‑grade improvements and widening were estimated at roughly $10 million to $20 million. Staff said federal railroad crossing elimination grants are a likely funding avenue but typically require a local match, and the city could combine regional and state funds with federal grants to meet match requirements.
Councilmembers and attendees questioned construction staging and detour impacts, potential eminent‑domain takings of businesses along the corridor, and the timeline. Presenters said construction will significantly affect adjacent properties and that some options would create temporary or permanent right‑of‑way impacts.
Staff recommended keeping multiple alternatives under study while focusing next on variants of the road‑over and road‑realignment options that minimize flooding and railroad‑operation conflicts, and to deepen traffic modeling, funding outreach and public engagement. The council asked staff to return with more detailed alternatives, refined costs and public‑engagement plans in the coming months.
What’s next: Staff will return with more detailed traffic modeling and sub‑alternatives for the road‑over family of solutions and will expand outreach to regional partners and affected business owners as the study progresses.
