http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...630.xml&coll=7
Next I-5 chokepoint: $6 billion
Traffic - A deeply divided task force prepares to vote on a proposal for a big, new bridge over the Columbia
Sunday, February 25, 2007
JAMES MAYER
The decade-long search for a solution to the Portland area's worst traffic chokepoint -- one of the worst along Interstate 5 between Mexico and Canada -- will take an important turn this week.
The 39-member Columbia Crossing Task Force will vote Tuesday on whether to pursue a new $2 billion to $6 billion bridge and transit project to replace the Interstate Bridge as the only solution.
A final decision on what to build, if anything, is still two years away. But the vote will determine what path gets the time, money and resources to move closer to loosening the bridge's grip on commuters, commerce and development.
The task force is deeply divided heading into Tuesday's vote. Pressure is mounting to consider at least one lower-cost alternative that uses the Interstate Bridge's existing twin spans over the Columbia River. Panel members represent a wide spectrum of interests from government, business, neighborhoods and environmental groups.
"This has been a noisy process," said Hal Dengerink, chancellor of Washington State University Vancouver, and task force co-chairman.
The proposal from the task force staff boils down to a choice between committing the region's energy, money and political will to a single megaproject -- "Gargantua, the Bridge," according to one critic -- or doing nothing.
And regional leaders worry that the sheer scale and cost of the project could doom the entire enterprise politically, leaving a clogged, aging, accident-prone bridge in its wake.
Metro President David Bragdon said he doesn't want to narrow the bridge options too quickly. "It would be a fiscal mistake and a political mistake."
The economic consequences of doing nothing are staggering. According to projections, the rush hour will last 16 hours in 2030, leaving a narrow window of travel for freight traffic, which is expected to double. The accident rate -- about a crash a day on the bridge and its ramps -- will get worse, compounding the congestion and safety problems, the task force staff says.
The staff has recommended that three options be explored in the next step, the draft environmental impact study: a "no build" option, a replacement bridge with light rail, and a replacement bridge with a dedicated bus lane. The existing bridges would be removed.
Over the past two years, the task force narrowed the options from 23 river crossings, including bridges and tunnels, and 14 transit alternatives. John Osborn, project director for the Oregon Department of Transportation, said the replacement bridge does the best job of improving congestion, freight traffic, river navigation and safety.
The rough cost estimate breaks down this way: $1 billion to $2 billion each for the bridge, interchanges, and transit. No funding is in place for the project, and it is likely to involve users paying a toll.
Osborn told the Metro Council last week that building another bridge and reusing the existing bridges would not be any cheaper and would not solve the problems on I-5.
Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard is one of the strongest supporters of the staff recommendation. He sees the new bridge as the way to get light rail into his community. And Vancouver-area business groups see the bridge as a necessity.
Supporters worry about wasting more time.
"Spending more public resources to study failed alternatives will not have any other result than to waste taxpayer resources," said Bart Phillips, president of the Columbia River Economic Development Council, in a letter to the task force. Phillips is a task force member.
Despite Pollard's enthusiasm, the light-rail portion of the project remains a tough sell in Clark County, where voters rejected MAX in 1995.
The Metro Council approved a resolution Thursday directing Councilor Rex Burkholder, its representative on the task force, to support adding a supplemental bridge for local traffic and light rail and keeping the existing bridges for freeway travel.
Many of those who testified at Thursday's Metro hearing bemoaned the emphasis on a highway solution.
These critics say reducing the number of cars using the bridge would be cheaper and more effective. Options such as more transit, HOV lanes and planning that encourages jobs in Southwest Washington, rather than residential sprawl with jobs in Oregon, have not been adequately studied, they say.
The Clark County Commission pushes such a plan.
Only so many cars can be pushed through I-5, even with a new bridge, said Chairman Steve Stuart. The bottleneck will shift south to the Rose Garden area, highway officials concede. The only long-term solutions involve using the existing highway more efficiently, Stuart said.
Metro Councilor Robert Liberty said standards for the project have been set so high that only the huge replacement bridge qualifies. These include a requirement that the bridge be high enough to handle even the tallest ships, and that it be able to withstand an earthquake that might occur in the next 2,500 years.
"That's like earthquake-proofing your house by tearing it down and rebuilding a new one out of concrete 3 feet thick," Liberty said.
Consensus may be elusive, but that shouldn't kill the project, said Matt Garrett, ODOT director.
"Will we ever get to the point where everyone embraces it? No," Garrett said. "But at the end of the day, we have to have a thumbs up, thumbs down vote. We cannot delay this any further. It's too important."
James Mayer: 503-294-4109;
jimmayer@news.oregonian.com