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

[bvpcvm]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

What do you know about ideas? I see that you completely ignored my comment about hiring Bugs Bunny to dig the tube for us. Oh, how very convenient the way you totally skipped over that - perhaps because you know I'm right. Once Bugs gets here and starts digging, then we'll see which one of us is the smart guy. We'll have to find somebody to grow the carrots to pay him with, but still... that'll be easy.

See, this is where I get VEWWY VEWWY nervous: who's going to pay for all those carrots? They don't grow on trees, you know. Once again, you liberal gubmint types are going to stick it to honest working folk like me and leave us with the bill to pay for your harebrained ideas.

[2oh1]

...harebrained? Did you really mean harebrained? Or were you cleverly implying hare-brained?

AHAHAHAHHAHAAHAAAA!!!

...I can't top that.

Trees don't grow on trees either, btw. But wouldn't it be awesome if they did?

[davehogan]

This thread got quite strange quite quickly.

[MarkDaMan]

Oregon Legislature considers new CRC special session
by JONATHAN J. COOPER, Associated Press
Posted on October 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Updated today at 2:50 PM

http://www.kgw.com/news/Talks-of-ano...226512271.html

SALEM -- Oregon lawmakers have barely gotten home from Salem after a legislative session on pensions and taxes, but they may be returning soon.

Proponents of building a new Interstate 5 bridge over the Columbia River are still pushing for another special session to get that project going.

Lawmakers who finished a three-day special session this week say they'll turn their attention to the bridge next week. No session has been scheduled, and steps such as a financial analysis are still to be completed.

...

[NewUrbanist]

Originally Posted by MarkDaMan

Oregon Legislature considers new CRC special session
by JONATHAN J. COOPER, Associated Press
Posted on October 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Updated today at 2:50 PM

http://www.kgw.com/news/Talks-of-ano...226512271.html

I have recently changed roles and am now working fulltime for a suburban infill real estate developer. The word on the street is that residents of downtown Vancouver (only DT), want to see light rail, commercial property owners fear and loathe the train and it's costs to Clark County, and home owners are woefully absent from the dialogue - or are crazed and uninformed. The costs are large, and they all suffer from sticker shock. In other words, if Oregon doesn't pay for it, Clark County will actively work to strike it down.

Remember, Vancouver DT and especially the Waterfront area is a bastion for retirees looking for a tax break on their retirement funds.

[twofiftyfive]

This looks like good news: Peter Courtney spikes CRC Special Session

[dubu]

i think down i 205 would be better for the light rail bridge. have stops a mile apart instead of a half mile apart like for the yellow line. i dont think ships go past i205, that would be another a plus.

its not close to downtown though. maybe that area around gateway would get developed and be like a 2nd downtown.

[bvpcvm]

The 205 bridge has a lot of advantages... for one thing thrre wrre transit-ready lanes built into it, any height issues have been resolved long ago, and it would feed into Gateway. However, 1. Gateway has been "shovel ready" for highrr density projects for years and little has happened, and, 2. There's dt vancouver, which is relatvely transit friendly, oh, and 3. It would make sense to leverage our investmentin the yellow line by extending it instead. Or best of all, just extend both!

[philopdx]

Originally Posted by twofiftyfive

This looks like good news: Peter Courtney spikes CRC Special Session

The CRC is dead, long live PAW!
The CRC is dead, long live PAW!
The CRC is dead, long live PAW!

Today is a good day.

[tworivers]

And the saga (sort of) continues...

[hat]

http://www.friends.org/crc-facts

[davehogan]

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

The 205 bridge has a lot of advantages... for one thing thrre wrre transit-ready lanes built into it, any height issues have been resolved long ago, and it would feed into Gateway. However, 1. Gateway has been "shovel ready" for highrr density projects for years and little has happened, and, 2. There's dt vancouver, which is relatvely transit friendly, oh, and 3. It would make sense to leverage our investmentin the yellow line by extending it instead. Or best of all, just extend both!

It would need to be replaced or lose a lane to support light rail. It wasn't engineered to have LRT across it. At least, the ODOT engineers involved in construction said so.

[MarkDaMan]

Columbia River Crossing: John Kitzhaber says without legislative action, project will die in March
By Christian Gaston | cgaston@oregonian.com
on January 27, 2014 at 11:33 AM, updated January 27, 2014 at 11:52 AM

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/i...incart_m-rpt-2

Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber told legislative leaders Monday that if they don’t approve an Oregon-led plan to replace the Interstate 5 bridge connecting Portland and Vancouver during the February legislative session, he will shelve the $2.8 billion plan.

Known as the Columbia River Crossing, the project went off course last year when Washington lawmakers declined to fund their $450 million portion.

The project was retooled last fall without Washington’s contribution, but for that plan to move forward, officials in Oregon need to sign an agreement with Washington Gov. Jay Inslee to allow them to build the bridge and related facilities across the border.

In his letter to the Legislature, Kitzhaber said lawmakers don’t need to wait for that intergovernmental agreement, or IGA.

...

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by MarkDaMan

Columbia River Crossing: John Kitzhaber says without legislative action, project will die in March
By Christian Gaston | cgaston@oregonian.com
on January 27, 2014 at 11:33 AM, updated January 27, 2014 at 11:52 AM

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/i...incart_m-rpt-2

I still think we should build this bridge and just stick up a toll on the Washington side that charges Washingtonians that use it and gives Oregonians a free pass on it with their Oregon license plates.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

I still think we should build this bridge and just stick up a toll on the Washington side that charges Washingtonians that use it and gives Oregonians a free pass on it with their Oregon license plates.

I don't. Changes need to be made, but this whole project has been a disaster since day one. I have yet to ever see anyone fully address what would happen if that huge traffic bottleneck were fixed. Being able to handle more traffic means sending more traffic straight into the heart of Portland (and Vancouver... but that's their problem).

Addressing one bottleneck without recognizing the problems doing so will create is terribly short sighted.

I hate this whole mess.

[tworivers]

I hate this whole mess.

+1!

The fact that this whole dastardly plan advanced so far and is (still) being pushed by Democrats is a bad sign in and of itself. I will never, ever forgive Tina Kotek and Chip Shields for their roles in this. Shields represents my district in NE and he cravenly sold his own constituents down the proverbial river.

[tworivers]

I think we can now officially start sending love notes to Washington State Republicans and declare this project DEAD (at least as currently conceived). I'd also like to take this moment to give a very large F U to the Oregonian editorial board.

Key Columbia River Crossing backer says he won't support Oregon-led plan in 2014 session

Christian Gaston | cgaston@oregonian.com
February 20, 2014 at 5:32 PM, updated February 20, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Sen. Bruce Starr, R-Hillsboro, a key supporter of an effort to revive the Columbia River Crossing, issued a statement Thursday saying he won’t support the bridge without the Washington Legislature’s support.

Starr’s statement could mark the death of the project.

....

On Monday, the Washington Senate passed Senate Bill 6125, which would prevent Vancouver’s transit agency from transferring property to TriMet. Without that authority, the Oregon-led CRC couldn’t be built.

Starr said the bill’s passage made it clear the Washington Legislature won’t support the bridge.

“Based on the Washington legislature's demonstrated unwillingness to engage in a bi-state process, as seen by the Washington Senate's recent passage of Senate Bill 6125, it is clear that the co-operation we need to build this bridge is not going to materialize,” Starr said. “Because of that, I will not be supporting House Bill 4113A if it comes to the floor.”

Full story here.

[hat]

Re-rejoice! (tentatively).

http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-3...egislativ.html

[2oh1]

The CRC is like a political version of The Walking Dead. I'm not convinced there aren't any more walkers.

Also: Dear Deja; Meet Vu. See ya next time around? This thing will be back, though hopefully never again in its most recent mega-bloated form.

[tworivers]