Talk:List of crossings of the Willamette River

message: Surely there are a couple more crossings of the river upstream of Springfield? At least a RR bridge or something? Katr67 (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless the two forks slightly upriver of the last bridge listed come back together at some point, there's nothing there between the source and that bridge.  See Google maps.  Or have they built something new since the Google images were taken? - Denimadept (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I scanned the entire river at high resolution with the four major mapping datasets provided by http://mapper.acme.com/:  Google satellite, Google street map, Topozone, and USGS aerial photography.  I didn't see anything not in the table.  —EncMstr 23:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interestingly, when I looked at your link, it lists the fork on the east as Santiam River.  If that's right and the Willamette continues on the west, then let's continue adding bridges and fix my "source" to be whatever it should be.  What's the deal with this "Santiam River" and why doesn't Yahoo Maps show it as such? - Denimadept (talk) 00:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

text: No, nevermind.  Error on my part.  Looks like I had it right in the first place. - Denimadept (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree that wire crossings do not really need to be included in the list, as there is nothing notable about a power line.  VerruckteDan (talk) 16:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: VerruckteDan, what's your position on the non-bridge entries I've placed in List of crossings of the Cuyahoga River?  I included them because they seemed relevant to me at the time, mainly to illustrate just how BUSY that river is. - Denimadept (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm copying your question and responding at Talk:List of crossings of the Cuyahoga River.  VerruckteDan (talk) 00:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completeness? 

message: Should the Sauvie Island Bridge be added to this list?  It crosses the Multnomah Channel, is that technically part of of the Willamette?Duckblazer (talk) 04:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's less a part of the river than any of the headwater forks.  That is, unless Multnomah Channel somehow counts as part of the river (its article says it's a branch) like a delta system.  —EncMstr 05:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sauvie Island Bridge

message: I've got a blurry pic of the P & W bridge (assume that's the one as I was traveling on Amtrak across the other bridge) that I'm about to upload to Commons. Does the bridge merit an article? Apparently it's one of the few Waddell vertical-lift bridges in Oregon, along with Union Street bridge in Salem, and Steel Bridge in Portland. Is there a good place to display the image in the meantime? Can we add an image field to the table like the at List of covered bridges in Oregon? Katr67 (talk) 06:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Where does it cross the river? Just wondering --RyanTee82 (talk) 06:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry--it's the one listed as "rail bridge" near Junction City (actually halfway between JC and Harrisburg: map). And I don't think I actually got around to uploading it... There is a list of the other W&H bridges at Union Street Railroad Bridge and the info is from its NRHP nomination form (pages 15-16). Here's a pic--doesn't show the lift span. Katr67 (talk) 16:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RR bridge near Junction City 

message: Can the list include instances where bridges were destroyed and no new bridge rebuilt in their place? Albany had a bridge from Calapooia Street that crossed the Willamette. It was dynamited in 1926 when the Ellsworth Street Bridge opened. --RyanTee82 (talk) 06:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would be interesting, but I would defer to the WikiProject Bridges folks. Katr67 (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Destroyed? 

message: Not really any such thing.  The proper word, used on Portland street signs and on almost all maps, is Broadway.  Reverted. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 04:00, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted right back. Try clicking on the coords next to the bridge, it takes you to a page of map options. Try the very first one for Google Maps. Notice something, its right there on the bridge? It says "N Broadway St" and I am assuming St stands for street and not Stutgart. Or you can look at this link. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely wrong call.  Mapquest and Yahoo maps have no street, and Google Maps only has it as Street in the east direction...on the west, the map clearly says Broadway.  So the score: Broadway 2 1/2, Broadway Street 1/2.  Also, from my experiences in Portland, I've never seen a Broadway Street, just Broadway.  Purplebackpack89 (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also says that on Bing.com and in the Thomas Guide.  So Broadway 4 1/2, Broadway Street 1/2.  If no one objects, I'll probably change it back to Broadway in the morning. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 04:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

text: The Library of Congress says street, and so does Structurae. As does Portland Bridges and Bridge Hunters. I don't know the reliability of any of those or the map sources. Yahoo and MapQuest say Broadway Brg, which is not really supporting either side, as if it were actually labeling it as a street it would add the street name without the Brg as it does on some of the other bridges (as in if it omitted the Brg then it would support just Broadway). The city's GIS maps also just label the bridges and not the streets crossing them, but yes later it does not label Broadway as either a street or avenue on either side. And yes, only the east half would have street, as Broadway runs E-W on the eastside and as such would have to be a "street", while on the westside it runs N-S and thus would have to be an avenue (or something like Blvd, which the city sometimes calls it). And unless the city has determined otherwise the code says what I said, though there is the ambiguous part about a street should have the same name its entire length (don't know if it means the proper name the whole length or if it includes any designations, which would create problems then for the directional portion of names on streets crossing into different sections of the city).  Which is likely why most maps omit any designation. But as recently as a few weeks ago they say Street for the eastside version and as recently as a few years ago have Ave for the westside. USPS will accept either with or without street added in their Zip Code look-up. So its a crap shoot. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we can label it Broadway Enigma.  South of the central downtown area, it becomes Broadway Drive.  —EncMstr (talk) 07:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What somebody has to do is drive downtown and take a picture of a Broadway sign on either side of the bridge.  My memory says they don't have street on either side, and are just "Broadway".  Also, Mapquest and Yahoo say "Broadway" without the street on either side of the bridge, and call the bridge the "Broadway Bridge". I would also note the zoning ordinance you cited is about 10 miles away from the Broadway Bridge, when Broadway is not a major street Purplebackpack89 (talk) 15:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Purplebackpack, taking pictures of the signs may help, but if the signs are short they'd just say "Broadway", no matter what. OTOH, if we're going down the WP:NOR road/boulevard/avenue, here's what Ginny Peckinpaugh, the mayor's "transportation public advocate" said to me via twitter: "Don't believe Google Maps. It's just Broadway, except from I-205 to the West Hills - that's 'Drive.'" That's the only confirmation I needed. tedder (talk) 16:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broadway Street 

message: The 1962 I-5 crossing has been completely demolished and is no longer a crossing.  In fact, the new bridge is almost done.  Adding to this, there is a construction causeway close to the water that may be considered a "crossing". Adam850 (talk) 04:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like they're both in there already. - Denimadept (talk) 04:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no.  The construction causeway is for cranes and equipment only and is not the temporary bridge.  I took the entry for the 1962 bridge and changed it to the new southbound replacement bridge, since they share the same coordinates and the bridge could be considered as "crossing" the river at this point.  Construction started in winter 2009 according to ODOT []  Adam850 (talk) 04:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glenwood I-5 bridge replacement bridge 

message: TriMet ready to name new bridge, making your 'Portland Bridges' swag -- and tattoos --obsolete Randal L. Schwartz (talk) 22:10, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Guten tag, I think you want to add the new bridge, and yes, go ahead. Aboutmovies (talk) 21:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Tri-Met bridge opens April 16, 2014 

message: I would suggest we move the former crossings to a new top-level section at the end. Keeping it in the subsections by area might confuse people to think it is in the correct order geographically. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:28, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I agree. Jsayre64 (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former