Newest I-5 bridge estimate $4 billion
Traffic - Bridge backers want to get the project organized soon, so they can acquire federal funding
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
DYLAN RIVERA
The Oregonian
A new I-5 bridge over the Columbia River on Monday edged closer to reality as Oregon and Washington officials estimated a cost of roughly $4 billion for a span that would soar high enough to clear river barges while carrying up to 12 lanes of traffic and a separate rail or bus line.
That would dramatically eclipse the current six-lane pair of lift bridges, which shut down to allow river traffic to pass, and whose narrow roadway creates the Portland-Vancouver region's worst bottleneck.
At stake are commuter nerves but also segments of the West Coast economy, which depends on free-flowing truck traffic on I-5. Some 135,000 cars and trucks are slowed each day at the Columbia crossing.
Top regional and national officials reckon that if nothing is done to fix the crossing, the weekday Portland-Vancouver rush hour could total 20 hours a day by 2030 -- this at a time when freight traffic is expected to double.
Monday's cost estimates carried key surprises:
**The bridge and related highway expansions would cost between $3.1 billion and $4.2 billion less than the maximum $6 billion forecasted earlier.
**A MAX light-rail extension across the bridge would cost just 5 percent more than bus rapid transit boosting the Portland-and-Vancouver-based hopes of rail supporters but working against bus transit advocates, most of them in outer Clark County.
**Building an entirely new span would cost about 5 percent more than reusing the existing half-century-old spans, a strategy that some officials had hoped would generate significant savings. That may throw more support behind a completely new bridge tall enough to clear river barges and sailboats.
**Construction of a new bridge could start by late 2010 if officials can settle on a plan by next summer -- and if they get approval from Congress in 2009. The first cars could cross in 2015, with demolition done by 2017.
The lower estimates came as a relief to Hal Dengerink, co-chairman of a 39-member Columbia River Crossing Task Force.
"We knew the original guesses people had out there were just that," Dengerink said. "But it does not displease me that they were lower than people had suggested before."
Miles-long congestion
Ideas for an I-5 fix have been floated over the decades, but only in the past few years have talks gotten serious. One complicating factor is that I-5 bottlenecks exist for a few miles on both sides of the river. Those need to be fixed as part of any bridge expansion.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters visited Portland to endorse the Columbia River effort and encourage private sector investment and tolling options. She suggested the federal government might pay as much as 80 percent of the project cost, but that is far from certain.
Planning now centers on five alternatives. They include: build nothing; replace the existing bridge with a new one, including either light-rail or bus lanes; use the existing Interstate 5 bridge spans to carry north-bound traffic and build a new narrow span to carry southbound traffic including trains or buses. All alternatives promise better pedestrian and bicycle access.
The public can hear details at two open houses this week, and the task force will meet next month to consider the information.
By February, planners expect to single out one bridge plan as the locally preferred alternative. A 60-day comment period will follow, when city, regional and state officials can offer amendments.
By August, transportation officials hope to have a package ready for the federal government -- a crucial time before Congress returns in 2009 to craft a six-year bill that authorizes transportation spending nationwide.
The impact of doing nothing could be staggering, officials say. Projections show weekday congestion could rise to seven hours a day southbound and 13 hours northbound in 2030, and the accident rate will get worse, compounding the congestion and safety problems.
Light-rail questions
The MAX light-rail system remains a sticking point. Vancouver-area voters rejected a MAX proposal in the late 1990s, but recent polls show support for light rail and City Council members have added their endorsement.
Monday's estimates showed building for bus rapid transit, with its own lanes to avoid car traffic, would cost between $460 million and $990 million. Building light rail would cost between $530 million and $1.17 billion.
The difference between the estimates on each amount to $70 million to $180 million -- or about 5 percent of a $4.2 billion project.
Both bus rapid transit and rail would need new lanes built, said John Osborn, co-director of the Columbia River Crossing. But a bus line would need eight transit stations, while a light-rail line would need only seven because it could use the existing Expo Center rail stop.
Buses would need wider, costlier lanes to make room for driver error that's not an issue with rail, Osborn said. Because buses carry fewer passengers than MAX trains, the states would have to buy more of them and hire more operators than with rail, he said.
Steve Stuart, a Clark County commissioner who sits on the task force, said the cost figures favor those who want light rail. But he has reserved judgment.
"There have been people on both sides of the river saying, 'It's light rail or nothing,' " Stuart said. "It's going to be really important to flesh out why those numbers are what they are, because there will be those who question it."
Some task force members insisted earlier this year that analysts consider reusing the existing spans, which were opened in 1917 and 1958. That would save $160 million to $220 million -- a relatively low figure, because the existing spans would need earthquake-proofing, Osborn said.
Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams, a task force member, said the estimates are still too preliminary. Engineers say they are based on less than "10 percent" engineering of the project.
"We're still in the infancy of figuring out the true total cost for this project," Adams said. "There are so many design and alignment considerations that have to be made that this gives us some shape, but we still have a long ways to go."
Dylan Rivera: 503-221-8532
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...l=7&thispage=1
Prev
Linear Mode
