SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
Last week, a new report (pdf) laid out some of the best and worst things about the way the I-5 bridge project has developed thus far. The independent report also makes some recommendations, which Oregon and Washington's governors seem to be taking to heart. The multi-million dollar Columbia River Crossing project requires input from many different players in both states. So, it's no surprise that not everyone is on board with the report's recommendations. Portland Mayor Sam Adams, for example, would like to see more control handed to the Project Sponsors Council (a group which includes Adams and Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt). The report recommends consolidating leadership rather than making key decisions with an unwieldy committee that crosses state lines.
One of the bright spots in the process appears to be Hayden Island, where business owners and residents recently reached consensus on a key part of the bridge's infrastructure. The latest design for the Hayden Island Interchange will be discussed at a public meeting Thursday night. It's just one more step in the long journey towards finalizing the entire project, something the departments of transportation in both states hope to complete in time to apply for federal funding. The federal dollars would come through the reauthorization of the national transportation law which takes place approximately every 6 years. The last bill was authorized in 2005 and expired in 2009.
Do you use the current I-5 bridge? What would you like to see in a new Columbia River Crossing? Who should have control of this project?
GUESTS:
- Tom Warne: Chairman of the Independent Review panel on the Columbia River Crossing and president of Tom Warne and Associates
- Erik Robinson: Reporter for The Columbian newspaper
- Richard Brandman: Oregon project director for the Columbia River Crossing
- Pam Ferguson: President of the homeowners association for the manufactured home community on Hayden Island, board member of HINooN and board member of the Hayden Island Livability Project
Tagged as: columbia crossing · economy · politics · transportation · washington
Photo credit: tinatinatinatinatina / Creative Commons
-
I have a hard enough time stomaching 3.6 billion for the bare bones option, we are in tough economic times and while the bridge will endure for a long time and may be a solid investment, I just think about all the goof looking art that the city spent tax payer money on to make the Max tracks trendy.
I dont want to look at a bridge that Sam Adams has any input on, He may find a way to make the bridge resemble a teenage boy.
-
I-5 is the Aorta of the Northwest. It is our single most important trade corridor. We must replace it. We owe it to future generations to make it aesthetic and great, not adequate and the 'lowest possible bid.' This bridge may be around for 150 years...don't just think narrowly about the budget for the next 5-10 years. I would gladly pay a toll for a landmark bridge. Make it worth visiting, and it will become a tourist draw like Mt. Hood, Powell's Books, and PDX Street Cars. No one I know has walked across the Columbia River; build it right and they will.
jacob — Thu July 22nd 8:55a.m.
-
The Independent Review Panel has reiterated three critical points:
1) a new Columbia River Crossing is critical to the economy and sustainability of this region's future;
2) It is a hairy, big project that requires top level attention both technically and politically; and
3) current governance structures are inadequate and under-represent the interests of the communities directly affected. They call for a new bi-state authority to build and operate the bridge.
These are very similar to the conclusions reached by the 39 member CRC task force in its report of 2008. Since then we seem to have been rehashing concerns (will a wider bridge cause sprawl in Clark County: answer, again, no. Are the existing spans obsolete and dangerous: answer, again, yes.)
The question isn't about build or not to build, but how to do it in a sustainable, low-risk way.
Let's answer the challenges posed by the IRP and start work right away to put people back to work and meet our generation's responsibilities.
-
Rex Burkholder,
Thanks for weighing in on the thread. It's always nice to get to folks who are on the policy table at our TOL table.
I'm curious: how do you respond to Jacob's above pleas for grandeur, beauty, and design? He's willing to pay more, he says. Are other folks? Are the states? The Feds? Where do aesthetics fit into your — and the task force's — thinking?
Best,
Dave
-
Vincent van Gogh sold one painting in his lifetime. The Bureau of Reclamation tried to dam the Grand Canyon. Which is to say that concepts of beauty change. The bridge design that Jacob is commenting on is not the latest proposal which I think is rather striking when seen from below and afar (I know I don't pay much attention to bridge structure when traveling 55mph). It also includes covered, substantial bicycle and pedestrian ways with overlooks facing east, which would definitely make it a destination. As someone who crosses the bridge by bicycle about once a month, it is spectacular despite the narrow sidewalks and traffic noise.
There are severe vertical constraints--high enough to allow ocean-going ships to pass underneath and low enough not to get in the way of airplanes from the airfield in Vancouver--that make many bridge designs, like the St Johns, unusable. Again, I think that we should be considering how the bridge appears from Hayden Island, the River and the Vancouver riverside which does allow for pleasing form of pier and arch even with a flat top.
-
Sorry Dave, sometimes you have to have a second bite of the apple.
If you have never been on the Portland Bridge Pedal Event, I urge you to ride or walk this Sunday, 8 Aug10. Experience the Fremont Cable Suspension Bridge from the upper deck. Look at the view, marvel at the engineering and the handsome material components of the bridge.
If you want to see what a slab bridge looks like, walk or bike across the I-205 Bridge. I would say it is adequate, but definitely NOT stunning like the Golden Gate, Tacoma Narrows, Brooklyn Bridge. or the Fremont. The 205 bike path is like being stranded on a freeway median…miles of concrete, Jersey barriers, blinding dust, deafening Semi Trucks roaring by at 70mph, Diesel fumes filling your lungs, and no view water or wildlife. It is like being on any other freeway overpass! Bridges should be the highlight of a trip.
YOU WILL EXPERIENCE the difference in beauty between a freeway slab overpass and a towering cable suspension bridge. One is definitely more breathtaking and magical and memorable. 99% of observers are from the bridge deck or adjacent shore. We have to take this into account.
The major obstacle to towering bridge architecture is the adjacent Vancouver barracks airfield. This is a private plane airfield and has less than 20 planes permanently based. Some are not even flyable. None are commercial. None are jets. The major regional airfield is PDX airport, a scant 3 miles upriver.
Should the interests of 50 people who might use the airport in the course of a month, OVERRIDE the interests of 380,000 people who use the I-5 Bridge EVERYDAY? Decommission the airfield. We have a Multi-Billion Dollar Project for the entire Northwest , vital to our Economy, blocked by selfish NIMBY interests.
-
You make perfect sense; letting the glide path control either the height or alignment of this thing is pure madness.
So how'd it get this far? Why doesn't Vancouver's eminent domain apply?
So far, bridge proponents seem at the brink of putting a whole lot of slow moving and cumbersome institutional momentum behind a drab, unworkable, unproven, and very expensive white elephant.
-
From what I see, the vast majoity of traffic using the I-5 and I-205 bridges are commuters working in Portland but living in Vancouver and surrounding areas because at one time it seemed an easy way to evade higher taxes, and housing costs; to live in Washington, but evade sales tax by shopping on Oregon.
I believe a new bridge over the Columbia built as wide as practicle to accomodate future needs especially of alternative methods of transportation like light rail, bicycles, etc., should be built as soon as possible.
The best way as well to help limit or force more use of smarter alternative transportation methods is to impose a toll of at least $5 one way on both major bridges to make those who use the bridges car pool or use other methods to commute, or to force them to live close to where they work as they should. This would make those who use the bridges pay for the bridges. Why should I or anyone else who do not abuse our government or transportation methods pay for this project?
-
I think a one way toll is an excellent idea.
-
I live in North Portland and DO NOT WANT ANOTHER freeway coming through my bneighborhood so that commuters living in Washington can get home 30 minutes ealier. Pollution, noise, and cost are some of my concerns. These things kill neighborhood, what if we end up on the 'wrong side' of the freeway?
And, I don't want to have to then pay for it-- Washington should pay for it. Not North Portland. If you want to commute, then you can pay in money or time. Why inflict this on other people?
-
The CRC bridge should be tunneled under the river. A see-through bike path under the river would be neat, but probably too murky to see anything interesting except fish carcasses, the occassional corpse, and scuttled shopping carts.
Portland should have subways instead of traffic snarling surface rail. Portland has shown mad skillz tunneling under stuff with the big pipes sewer project.
The push for the CRC bridge is more for businesses to transport goods than relieving the bottleneck caused by Vancouverties working in Oregon and versa vice. If a larger bridge or tunnel is built, more traffic will occupy it. The CRC doesn't address the need to diminish individual-occupied car traffic.
Are we using too many trucks and not enough trains to transport goods through Portland and Vancouver? Perhaps the rail infrastructure needs improvement in addition to a new CRC.
Will I-5 be widened to handle increased traffic flow or will the rush hour bottleneck remain? Seems stupid to build the CRC if the bottleneck issue is not resolved.
Nothing as complex as the CRC can be built without adequate funding. Oregon and Washington need to make the Federal government pay for the CRC since it will enhance the Fed's bottom line with more taxation.
If there is a toll bridge I will stop traveling to Vancouver twice a week to consume goods and services. I don't need to go to Vancouver, especially with Washington's sales tax.
-
The recently opened Millau Viaduct in southern France was apparently built for less than a billion dollars. A long, high, beautiful, spectacular bridge.
The CRC budget is over 3 billion...
It might be cheaper to move the river...
-
The clouds in the picture add to the effect, but this is striking. Much nicer than the old Glenn Jackson.
Moving it wouldn't have less regard for the river than what I've heard about so far. Basically, that's just paving it over.
-
Borrowing billions to build a 10-12 lane super highway to the most sprawling suburbs in the area to encourage a 20-century unsustainable lifestyle is silly. Plugging a 10-lane super highway into a six lane connection at the rose quarter is foolish. Fighting to add 1.5 miles of light rail to a city that does not want it is embarrassing.
This is Portland Oregon; we're suppose to be transportation and planning leaders, not clowns.
According to CRC engineers the bridge can be repaired for 5% of the project costs. Let's do that and move on.
-
Build a wide simple bridge like the Glenn Jackson so the engineering and costruction is proven and then add a top deck that is a park like setting with bike and ped lanes. It would draw thousands of visitors to enjoy the view and be a green entry to the state. As for tolls, look up the river, and around the world, toll bridges work.
-
"I've lived in North Portland since 1979. Instead of treating traffic like a liquid, and building more and more space for cars and trucks, let's build a structure that also encourages and makes it easy and comfortable for people to switch to transit and bikes. Ivan's previous comment has the essence of tha, a park-like setting for walkers and cyclists. I'm also in favour of the 'pay as you go' idea of tolls."
-
The Portland Climate Action Plan of 2009 clearly addresses the future of driving in the region. In the plan, 2030 Object 6 (p42) says:
Reduce per capita daily vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) by 30 percent from 2008 levels.
Reduce.
If the climate plan is going to be taken seriously and successfully implemented, the amount of traffic on roads in the areas will be declining steadily starting promptly, and continuing for decades.
Do the panel and Tom Warne think the planned new bridge will help reduce VMT, or more likely, support increasing VMT business as usual?
Do the panel and Tom Warne think the plans for the new bridge accurately take into account a future of decreasing VMT, both total and per capita?
-
With the revitalization of downtown Vancouver, I find myself going across the bridge less and less. I believe laying more pavement is an old way of thinking. More thought should be spent on why commuters cross the bridge and how to keep them closer to home.
-
Question: Has anyone given consideration to having a Toll/No Toll crossing on the I-5 bridge?
Benefit: The huge cost could be paid for, and toll payers could have quicker access across bridge by having more lanes available. No Toll payers would still be able to cross, just a bit slower. Both would benefit in their realm of choice.
This could be set up in either direction, and at critical times of the day.
And, the program could be changed/ended at any future time. -
These views regarding the Oregon-Washington border are bizarre. As if you live in Gresham you are doing nothing wrong, but if you live in Vancouver well then you’ve crossed the line, are ruining the environment and are some kind of pariah. Localism is not cool! How do even many liberal people fall into this trap? They advocate for immigrants, and perhaps looser immigration policies, and are generally against overt nationalism, but apply the same backwards concepts to people who live the next state over? I love Oregon, and I don’t like the aesthetics of Vancouver, but we don’t have some moral ground to shut the doors. There is a fine line between encouraging responsible behaviour and xenophobia.
-
The ideas of Paulo Freire totally apply here, the oppressed can never start violence it has already begun.
That being said people from Vancouver are Evil.
-
The thing that may tweak Oregonians a bit is that Clark County has slack planning (i.e. encourages sprawl) and, of course, no income tax. So perhaps people move over there to enjoy cheap housing and sheltered income while demanding a big, free bridge to the sales-tax-free big box stores on Hayden Island.
-
Take a look at the membership of the "independent review panel". It is completely dominated by engineers and other transportation professionals.
See page 10 at:
http://governor.oregon.gov/Gov/docs/IRP_report_072410_lowres.pdf
The outcome of this particular report appears to have been predetermined by the composition of the panel.
To present the issue as an administrative problem with getting the job done is pure tunnel vision. The real issue is defining what job actually needs to get done here.
Yes, there are issues with the crossing. But in 2010, to spend billions now, and leave it to figure out the climate change impacts sometime later - as the "indepdent panel" recommends - verges far too close to engineering malpractice.
Kevin Matthews, Editor in Chief, ArchitectureWeek
-
Yes, yes, yes, and yes. There has been a focused effort from the start of the CRC to manage how people look at it. It is a super highway project that happens to include a bridge. A new super freeway is not going to improve our lives.
-
I understand that tolls are likely to happen. As one of the daily working commuters to portland, I pay Oregon State taxes. Is there a way to earmark tax payments from Washington State residents to help fund this project?
-
CRC studies confirm that serious I-5 bridge congestion is almost entirely a result of local traffic. Why are we using a interstate freeway as a local bridge? It makes as much sense as replacing Portland's Willamette River bridges with one 30-lane bridge.
I look forward to an improved crossing -- one that is socially, environmentally, and, especially, financially responsible. The current plan is none of these things. Robert Moses would love it.
-
Why, improve the economy in Oregon? Why, try to have a green economy in Oregon? Why, try to grow Oregon at all? Any growth is growth. If any of it is bad, isn’t it all bad? Even if it is growth we think is morally superior. Why, be involved in Architecture at all, any new architecture is conceptually antithetical to ecologism, or it is at least the lesser of two evils. Oh, we build, but we build responsibly, so we are not as bad. Oh, we will take part, and have our cake, because it is on our terms. Well, great, do things responsibly but don’t pretend the very act of doing them is not also part of the problem. Oh, but, I am going to open a green business---well news-to-you---the only green business, is no business at all! The only green building, is no building at all. To focus myopically against this one bridge makes no sense. Yes, let us inconvenience everyone because we have decided they should not be there in the first place. But us over here, we are fine, we are doing all the right things, we are okay. We text our friends in Belgium, go to the TBA festival with artists from all over the world, and buy our crap clothes at H&M, but gosh those thick commuters from Vancouver are ruining the world.
-
It remains puzzling that so much of the public dialog surrounding the CRC continues to be about number of lanes, tolling and expediency. Yet the issues of land use, overall transportation and environmental impacts and responsible energy choices for the future appear to be lacking. After all, the current CRC proposal is not just "a bridge" but 5.5 miles of widening and rebuilding a number of very complicated interchanges. This massive project actually involves nearly 50 bridges with its spaghetti of viaducts.
Given the CRC project is at a critical crossroads, there is now opportunity to examine a viable alternative that would solve a number of current issues including cost savings, freight movement and improved safety.
The Project Sponsors Council and the CRC staff owe it to the public to seriously consider a new, scaled-back, simple, straight bridge alignment east of the current I-5 bridge. This two-level deck proposal would stack a through-traffic state-to-state freeway connection over a slower speed arterial for convenient shore-to-shore connections. It would include light rail and pedestrian/bike facilities on the lower deck.
This concept would free up about six blocks of land in downtown Vancouver, allowing a meaningful connection to the river. It would provide a much smaller interchange to Hayden Island and allow about six more blocks of land for transit-oriented development adjacent to the light rail station.
Under this alternative alignment scenario, several attractive bridge types can be considered that fit the marine clearances and the Pearson Airport glide slope restrictions. One bridge type could include a classic 5-arch bridge that, if designed well, would become a new landmark structure worthy of its world-class setting over the Columbia River.
-
As long as the CRC is run by highway engineers, thoughtful ideas like this will not be heard.
-
Scott,
Manhattan, a borrough of NYC, is physically an island 3 miles wide and 12 miles long. There are people born on the island who have never left in their entire lifetime. Everything is here, my favorite coffee shop, Macy's, Central Park--why should I leave? For them, New Jersey is part of the Western Frontier including the Midwest, Colorado and Canada(it's cold there and they have Grizzilies).
There are people in Portland who have never been to Vancouver, WA which is 6 miles away. They are aware there is a state north of them but it charges sales tax and why go to Seattle when I have a neighborhood Starbucks. And plus Stumptown Fairtrade Westside Roast is the best in the world.
Some Oregonians have never left the state in their lifetime. And their imagination and sense of belonging does not extend beyond the Columbia River. We are turning inward and cocooning. Our culture is regressing into small minded villagers.
-
Yes, everyone is so pro-Stumptown, even though their coffee is average and most of their staff, beyond suck---oh, but they are local. Yes, but, now they have locations in New York and Amsterdam. So if I am in New York why would I support a non-local business from Portland, Oregon? Why would I support a business that is small, only because it isn’t, yet, big---that clearly has intentions of grandeur? The main problem with ‘us’, myself included, is that everyone is an expert on everything, everyone is too good for everything, everyone is entitled, everyone else is an enemy, and everyone is a hipster but us---we live with a kind of communism for elitists. We have hippie ideals and rock-star ambitions---and how do you reconcile the two?
-
Why should residents of Portland subsidize a manufactured home community (trailer park?) and some crappy mall in Hayden island? And its especially ridiculous to pay 3 billion dollars to help tax-evaders from Vancouver come over and take our jobs easier and more swiftly. Oregon jobs should go to people from Oregon. $10 minimum south-bound toll or wait on the bridge you already have. Thanks!
-
Interstate 5 is the ONLY Highway that connects the West Coast of America from Canada to Mexico. IT Connects ALL the Major Cities on the West Coast- Vancouver, BC, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San Diego. In the whole length the only stop sign you will encounter is the Draw Bridge when ships cross the Columbia. This is a major bottleneck that weakens the whole network. It is like having a superfast internet connection and a super CAD computer and a slow 28K Dial up modem.
To reguard it as an exclusive PDX-Vancouver, WA commuter freeway, is like saying the aorta only supplies blood to the left kidney, and not the rest of the body.
And three billion dollars is not much in Highway Infrastructure. The newest Federal Interstate is I-105 built in LA, measures 17 miles with NO bridges, cost $2.3 Billion in 1993. Today it would be over $ 7 Billion.
http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Interstate_105/
-
I have driven the entire length of I 5 several times. I doubt the that the Columbia bridge makes the top ten list for slow points. That whole Mexico-Canada economic lifeline schtick is pretty funny.
-
We need to start building the replacement bridge asap. The present bridge is not safe in my opinion. Too many accidents on the on and off ramps, and it is sitting on wood pilings that would give way should we have an earthquake. What would happen to Vancouver and Portland, should mother nature do something.
-
Comments are now closed.
I am disappointed with the proposals of the I-5 Columbia River Crossing Replacement Bridge. IT is one of the BEST VISTAS on the most famous river west of the Mississipi, the Legendary COLUMBIA RIVER.
From the current bridge you have an unrestricted view of Mt. HOOD, the start of the Columbia Gorge, the mouth of the Willamette River, downtown Vancouver, the Historical First Settlement of Fort Vancouver with its sharpened battlements, the High Speed Cascade NW Rail, natural bird flyover migratory wetlands and the broad Mile Wide Waters of the Columbia River with sailboats, houseboats, salmon fisherman, transoceanic cargo ships and sometimes even Huck Finn children fishing. The Columbia is calm and sometimes foaming but always beautiful. Very few state borders have such a wonderful crossing.
The current bridge proposal is described as a concrete single level slab like the deck of an Aircraft Carrier. It would resemble the current I-205 bridge. It is utilitarian and has a broad back for 8 lanes, but probably because of budget, will be as plain as any freeway overpass or freeway bypass junction. The Current Old Bridge with its Green Box Gider Steel Tresses has more character than the post and lintel slab proposed.
I think this is an unsurpassed opportunity of 3 Generations to shape the beauty of the vista for the next 150-200 years. WE NEED A BEAUTIFUL BRIDGE CROSSING ON THE COLUMBIA. A suspension bridge, a modern bridge, a towering bridge, a landmark that defines the Northwest. Think of the GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE IN San Francisco. Where thousands of photographers would descend to see the bridge in all aspects of weather, light and in sunrise and sunset. We should light it up in changeable high effiiciency floodlights and Christmas string lights to make it a nightime landmark. Let it be the focus of fireworks on the 4th and New Year's Day. A bridge to the 21st Century.