Bob Ortblad suggests elected officials and community leaders should take a field trip to Seattle’s Chinatown

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com

The Interstate Bridge Replacement Program (IBR) has intentionally concealed the impact of its bridge approaches by providing misleading graphics. The 16 legislators on the Joint Committee on the I-5 Bridge, the Vancouver City Council, and the Hayden Island Neighborhood Network should take a joint field trip to Seattle’s Chinatown. This will help them visualize the IBR’s devastating plans for Vancouver and Hayden Island.  

They should take Amtrak to Seattle’s Union Station and walk five blocks up South Jackson St., then walk another 100 yards under an elevated I-5 freeway.  Walk one more block to 12th Avenue South to visit Seattle’s largest drug market. 

In 1968, WSDOT cut I-5 through Seattle’s historic Chinatown. For six decades the impacts of this concrete nightmare have been inflicted on Chinatown with no relief in sight.  

The South Jackson St. underpass is about 100 yards long. The IBR plans a Columbia Way 130-yard underpass. Vancouver’s $21 million “Main Street Promise” will end at an ugly underpass, and it will be a dark 200-yard walk under the freeway to get to the riverfront. The IBR plans three separate 100-yard underpasses for Hayden Island covering a dozen acres with a forest of concrete pillars. 

The IBR fraudulently disqualified an immersed tunnel alternative design with no underpasses and that would enhance both riverbanks with waterfront parks.  

Bob Ortblad MSCE, MBA 
Seattle, WA 

---

Also read:

• 
  Opinion: Don’t fall for the illusion of voter control on income tax expansion
  A House amendment requiring a referendum before any income threshold change was voted down 45-51.
• Opinion: Don’t fall for the illusion of voter control on income tax expansion
  A House amendment requiring a referendum before any income threshold change was voted down 45-51.
• 
  POLL: The IBR project is described as only 30% designed and 30% funded after more than six years of work. How confident are you in the current management of the IBR program?
  IBR’s cost has climbed from $3.2–$4.8B to $15.2B while the project remains 30% designed and 30% funded.
• 
  Opinion: Two bridges, one expanding bill
  Bracchi traces how the IBR’s estimated cost grew from roughly $3B to $14.4B as Vancouver’s Bridge Shelter adds millions in annual operating costs alongside existing homelessness programs.
• 
  Opinion: WFSE demands a ‘fair’ contract — but workers and taxpayers can’t see the numbers
  Elizabeth New (Hovde) argues neither state workers nor taxpayers can evaluate what is “fair” when wage proposals and their costs remain undisclosed.