“Johnson emphasized that they are tied to the previous Record of Decision (ROD), and therefore his team has less flexibility in order to avoid going through a new Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process.”

Hmmm. Alternatives, basically to the resurfaced CRC, aren’t on the table because of this? Concerns about a new Environmental Impact Statement!? This would be more than sad. So what would all of these listening session exercises really have been for? Maybe it would be really good to have a new EIS, taking into serious consideration the best alternatives. Things have changed in the area since the last time. I think that we need and deserve the best decisions possible to be made. Bridges can be around for a long time. The existing I-5 bridge is great proof of that.

Hi Tom:

Thanks for the feedback!

Here’s the link to the entire recording at TVW.

watch – TVW, Washington State’s Public Affairs Network

There are a host of details to be followed up on, especially your question about “who’s 500 year event”.

The issue becomes how much shaking on the ground, how much lateral acceleration, will they design the bridge to withstand? Does that equate to a Magnitude 7.0 earthquake or a 7.5 earthquake?

As information, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake is 900 times more powerful, more “energy” being released than a 7.0 earthquake. Each 1.0 is 30 times greater, so a 9.0 is 30 times 30 or 900, compared to a 7.0 quake.

My reading of the entire situation is that we are simply back to “a light rail project in search of a bridge”, once again.

All the politicians and transportation planners are preparing for, is a “platform” for light rail. They don’t know if the light rail will happen immediately, or in 10-20 years. Both Metro and the RTC (in SW WA) have a light rail extension in their transportation plans for 2040.

The reality that people want to drive their privately owned vehicles is ignored. The PEMCO 2018 survey reported 94 percent of Portland and Seattle area drivers preferred to use their cars. And that was BEFORE the pandemic, where transit ridership declined by 70-80 percent.

You are right to ask “have the horses already left the barn?”

For the most part — “yes”, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do something about it.

Greg Johnson and his WSP team pay the most attention to the ODOT and WSDOT leaders. They, after all, are writing his pay check.

The special interest politicians driving this “light rail project in search of a bridge” believe they have a “one time” opportunity right now. They’re right.

The 2022 election cycle will elect a new Governor in Oregon, who may not push this project as hard.

The makeup of both the Oregon and Washington legislatures will change, more likely moving back towards the middle and less likely to support this.

At the federal level, many believe control of the House and the Senate will go to the republicans, so federal money to “help” on this and the expensive Rose Quarter project are a “must have” if Congress can muster the votes for a transportation package this year.

There are a lot of moving parts. I’m always happy to meet over coffee and chat. Thanks!

Richard — thanks for the “catch”. It’s a partial interchange”. It’s been corrected!

😀
John

As we have asked our governors and United States senators, are we managing the process correctly if we piecemeal this bridge, the NE Portland I-5 refurbishment, etc., without looking at the entire corridor from Wilsonville to Woodland including the railroad and ports?

So the decisions have been made to have three through lanes each way in order to not have to update the environmental impact and then expect tolling to reduce congestion, pollution, etc. and surely we will have more people use alternative transportation even though we are eliminating light rail because people will not use it? I am confused. Is our sole purpose to replace this bridge before there is a major earthquake and hurry to do it before the political climate changes?

Have the horses already left the barn?