Brush Prairie resident Robert Mattilla shares the continued problems with plans for the I-5 Bridge replacement project
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and may not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
The last time I checked, The Coast Guard, in charge of river traffic, and The Federal Aviation Administration, in charge of the airports, one on both sides of the river, are ninety feet apart on the height of the bridge. If they have not compromised in the 15 years of planning the bridge, they never will.
The best option I see is to expand the I-205 Bridge with another bridge on both sides of the existing ones, as there is no height problem there, and expand the roads leading to I-205. The other alternative would be to make the new bridges lift bridges. Otherwise it is a waste of time and money to keep on planning something that CANNOT BE BUILT.
I am not in favor of light rail, but putting it on the new bridge is not a good idea. If we can’t have a new bridge without it, put it on the railway bridge a mile west, or on the newer one of the existing bridges, the southbound one. In the case of a bridge lift, buses could fill in.
Bob Mattila
Brush Prairie
Also read:
- Rep. John Ley’s new bill calls for an independent audit of Interstate 5 Bridge Replacement Project
Rep. John Ley introduced legislation requiring an independent audit of the Interstate 5 Bridge Replacement Project to review costs, management, and oversight. - Opinion: IBR’s evasive, misleading and dishonest excuses for higher cost
Joe Cortright argues the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program has withheld detailed cost estimates while offering contradictory explanations for rising costs tied to the I-5 Bridge project. - Rep. David Stuebe sponsors bill to strengthen enforcement of auto insurance laws and protect Washington drivers
Rep. David Stuebe has introduced HB 2308, a bill aimed at strengthening enforcement of Washington’s auto insurance laws and increasing accountability for repeat uninsured drivers. - Letter: Interstate Bridge Replacement’s Park & Ride insanity
Bob Ortblad criticizes the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s proposed Park & Ride garages, arguing the costs are excessive and unlikely to receive federal funding. - Letter: Interstate Bridge Replacement $13.6 billion estimate is too low!
Bob Ortblad argues the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s $13.6 billion cost estimate understates the true expense, citing comparable projects, construction challenges, and engineering assumptions.
250 million wasted on round one design failure. Fill me in on the cost for strike two? 192 Ave bridge is the best option as it serves east Multnomah County. That area is not looked at favorably by PDX Government because it bypasses the drain circling city.
Dean:
The current IBR effort has spent $219 million through June 2025.
Is that spending in 2025? What is the time frame for burning thru so many taxpayer funds?
This is a link to expenditures that IBR has made public so far.
June, 2025 expenditures, I clicked the ? symbol in the right corner, and expenditures thru March, 2025 popped up. A lag in accountability?
https://www.interstatebridge.org/accountability-dashboard
Updated through June 2025*.
Contracting and expenditure data is updated two times a year. The data takes longer to receive and compile and may not be available until after the reported timeframe.
This is a link to the expenditures that IBR has made public so far.
June, 2025 expenditures, I clicked the ? symbol in the right corner, and expenditures thru March, 2025 popped up. A lag in accountability it seems.
https://www.interstatebridge.org/accountability-dashboard
IBR clarifies, ” Updated through June 2025*.
Contracting and expenditure data is updated two times a year. The data takes longer to receive and compile and may not be available until after the reported timeframe.