I-5 Bridge Replacement - Formerly Columbia River Crossing | Proposed

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by davehogan

Not sure, but that also isn't a current rendering. Last planning document I read is much more compact, and wipes out the Safeway on the east side of the freeway. The linked rendering I think is from about 2009 or 2010 when it was going to be 22 lanes counting all the on/off ramps that were going to overlap on Hayden Island.

It's been significantly scaled back since then.

Nobody in the media can find any images. If you have access to more recent ones, please post them. Nobody outside of the so-called "planners" for the CRC have posted them in a publicly accessible way.

[MarkDaMan]

(Alternative Headline)
83-Year Old Self Appointed Leader of Light Rail Opposition On CRC Receives Oregonian Coverage to Go On Baseless Rant

Oregonian Headline
Columbia River Crossing light-rail critics in Clark County led by a retired Navy skipper

Full Story:
http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/i...html#incart_river_default#incart_m-rpt-2

Some gems from the article:


"Patella believes light rail to Clark County would be wasteful and would require subsidies forever. He also points out that Clark County voters have four times rejected light rail in measures either directly or indirectly."

---

"He retired as a commander after 31 years' service in 1978 and moved to Vancouver. For four years he ran a grocery store and then took a job running the Port of Portland's dredging operations, a job that lasted 21 years. He is currently executive director/secretary of the Western Dredging Association, an educational organization.

He also became a leading budget hawk criticizing wasteful spending."

---

"In a recent email, his headline was: "The dictators are coming. The dictators are coming." In his email, he said:"An ordinance to revise the Vancouver Municipal Code that will give them 'DICTATORIAL POWERS' to, in my opinion, remove dwellings, buildings, structures and premises out of the path needed for the CRC (Columbia River Crossing) and to bring Portland's Financially Failing Light Rail Gravy/Crime Train to our beautiful city," he wrote."

---

"He also said the current estimated cost of the new bridge, put at less than $4 billion, is too low. "I think it will actually cost about $10 billion," he said. He believes exorbitant tolls would be needed to support the bridge."

---

"He is not against bridge construction, he said in an interview at his St. Johns home. "I think they should build one probably east of the I-205 bridge at 192nd Avenue. I think it would be less expensive and it would relieve congestion."

[davehogan]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

Nobody in the media can find any images. If you have access to more recent ones, please post them. Nobody outside of the so-called "planners" for the CRC have posted them in a publicly accessible way.

That's a big concern for me, but still, I want both sides to be honest. I'm sick of the, "but he did something worse!" whining of politics. Using something that was thrown out two or three years ago is not more honest than just not releasing a rendering.

[tworivers]

^^^ I agree with you about the honesty. I think on the part of the opposition you're seeing some desperation, at least in Oregon.

There's simply too few smart people with power in Oregon and/or Portland who have the combination of concern, integrity, and guts necessary to stop this thing. Adams rolled. Metro rolled. Kitzhaber rolled. My elected representative in the OR Senate, Chip Shields, rolled big time and sacrificed his own constituents. Hiding behind the defense of toothless "conditions" and inertia. It's not the 1970's anymore. There's no insurgent political class with Big Ideas that is ready to go to battle with big business, big labor, and the DOT's... yet.

But... we have WA Republicans and a few WA Dems to hang our hopes on:
Bridge End: Oregon backers of the CRC think they’ve won the day. They haven’t met Ann Rivers.

[twofiftyfive]

Originally Posted by tworivers

But... we have WA Republicans and a few WA Dems to hang our hopes on:
Bridge End: Oregon backers of the CRC think they’ve won the day. They haven’t met Ann Rivers.

The CRC saga has become more confusing than a John le Carre novel. I hate the project, as do most Portland urbanists, environmentalists, and transit advocates. The Democrats I helped vote into office support it, presumably because of their ties to construction unions. The only people who will benefit from the the existence (as opposed to the construction) of the bridge are commuters in Clark County, yet their elected reps oppose it because it would bring them light rail.

Do the Oregon Democrats (and Obama administration, for that matter) even know that their ostensible supporters despise the CRC?

[zilfondel]

The worst part of it is there is no funding source for the bridge. That, and most of the project money is going to be funneled to Washington to expand 7 miles worth of freeway interchanges...

Also, why are we spending over $3 billion to help a $50 million failing mall on Hayden Island?

[dubu]

http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/mar/14/letter-keep-pushing-transit-system/

this is a good way, light rail on 205...

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by davehogan

Not sure, but that also isn't a current rendering. Last planning document I read is much more compact, and wipes out the Safeway on the east side of the freeway. The linked rendering I think is from about 2009 or 2010 when it was going to be 22 lanes counting all the on/off ramps that were going to overlap on Hayden Island.

It's been significantly scaled back since then.

Still haven't been able to track down any other images. Ran through the CRC website - I don't think they exist.

In fact, the Vancouver City Council agrees:

Dick Pokornowski, a former Vancouver city councilor who served on the crossing’s urban design advisory group, said the group never saw street-level renderings.

“We had requested different computer designs of how the bridge would look,” he said. “And some of that stuff they said they couldn’t do because it would cost too much."

Source: http://bikeportland.org/2013/02/26/will-the-real-crc-project-please-stand-up-83278

If you read the above article, Jonathan Maus specifically states that the image he uses was obtained through CRC Communications staffer Mandy Putney. The image was buried in one of the reports - "...appear in the appendix of the CRC's Urban Design Advisory Group final report."

Therefore, I think it is fair to say that it is a current, valid rendering.

Just like to give out an example-
If a construction company were to build a building that is 50% different than the original plans that were approved by the city, they would have their construction permits revoked and be forced to stop. I believe the same should hold true for public projects. The "we didn't have enough money to make new plans and project drawings" isn't a valid defense when designing ANY project, especially considering that they have spent $170 million (more than the replacement cost of the Sellwood bridge) on lobbying & PR.

Being in the architectural field, this is just flat-out criminal behavior.

[davehogan]

Originally Posted by dabom

http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/mar/14/letter-keep-pushing-transit-system/

this is a good way, light rail on 205...

The engineers at WSDOT, ODOT, and even the ones who designed it have said it's not sufficient for holding light rail unless a traffic lane each direction was removed. The extra weight of any additional structures on the bridge wouldn't work, and removing lanes isn't allowed without Congress agreeing and the local governments being okay with the changes as well.

zilfondel, he did use the most recent rendering, but it's not an accurate rendering of the current bridge. It is pathetic that after spending over a hundred million dollars there's not a single rendering of what's proposed, but that's where we're at with it.

[bvpcvm]

are you sure about that? i've read in the past (years ago) that the bridge's innermost shoulders were built to be converted to transit later - which goes along with the ROW they built all through Portland and later converted into the Green line.

[65MAX]

Yes, you're right bvpcvm. It was designed specifically to accommodate HCT, whether rails or wheels. I think if the far left lanes were converted to transit, both trains and buses could use it, and maybe allow taxis and carpools of 3 or more during rush hours as well to mitigate the loss of auto lanes.

[65MAX]

Another possibility is to keep 4 lanes each way, but the left shoulder becomes the rail ROW. Cars would still be able to use the shoulder but only in emergencies. Keep tow trucks stationed on each end of the bridge to scoop up disabled cars immediately, before the next train or bus comes.

[bvpcvm]

The Economist weighs in...

Bridge of sighs

Sometimes it’s a wonder anything gets built
Apr 6th 2013 | PORTLAND, OREGON, AND VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON |From the print edition

ON THE rare clear days in the Pacific north-west, snow-capped Mount Hood presents a spectacular sight to motorists traversing the Columbia river on the I-5. If they are driving in rush hour, they will have plenty of time to enjoy the view.

The mile-long bridge, which links Portland, Oregon with Vancouver in Washington state, is congested for four to six hours a day. Accidents that block one of the two three-lane carriageways can lead to epic traffic jams. Daily bridge lifts for maritime traffic block cars for up to 20 minutes. The I-5 runs the length of the western United States; this bit is often maligned as the only stop sign between Canada and Mexico.

http://www.economist.com/news/united-sta...-wonder-anything-gets-built-bridge-sighs

[Derek]

Off topic, but I hate stupid comments like "on the rare clear days".



Mini rant off.

[dubu]

the bridge there should be for light rail then just build the new bridge thats the same hight next to it. i wonder why that hasn't been the plan

[dubu]

Washington Legislator: CRC "May Not Happen"



http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-30019-washington_legislator_crc_may_not_happen.html

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is in Olympia today, doing all he can to help the flailing Columbia River Crossing—but even one of the project's biggest supporters says it might not be enough.

"We are using everything in our bag of tricks to bring everything to bear," says Washington State Rep. Jim Moeller (D-Vancouver), who has been the project's champion in Olympia. "If we could get the president himself, I'd ask."

But Moeller is also reading the tea leaves: this $3.4 billion megaproject is probably going to die in the next few weeks. It's the first sign that proponents are acknowledging that the political wrangling to push this project through may fail.

theres more

[twofiftyfive]

Originally Posted by dabom

...this $3.4 billion megaproject is probably going to die in the next few weeks.

If Willamette Week were Wikipedia, that would say "citation needed". Also, is all of the $3.4 billion megaproject going to die, or will we be stuck with ten lanes and a bunch of new interchanges but no light rail?

[NJD]

^ Any change in design would have to include light rail or they would have to redo the entire EIS due to Metro using the old North-South Light Rail land use decision. Which could lead to a automobile-only bridge IF they promise it in "phases" or federally fast-track a new EIS (much like the Tappen Zee bridge in NY).

[zilfondel]

Interesting update. Politicking still ongoing in Washington State...

http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/may/06/vancouver-council-denies-a-vote-on-light-rail/

Vancouver council denies a vote on light rail
Petition for a ballot initiative is rejected as legally flawed

[mcbaby]

Interesting. I heard that all that new development being planned west of the I5 bridge would include streetcars and is being promoted as eventually linked to Portland via light rail. It seems that people north of the river are not in agreement.