Sharon Nasset says the congestion on our rail and roads are some of the worst in the nation
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 1999 I-5 Corridor Study stated we have fewer bridges than similar sized metropolitans do in the United States. The congestion from having an inadequate number of bridges does extreme damage to our economy and environment and that of several other states. The congestion on our rail and roads are some of the worst in the nation.
The 2002 I-5 Portland /Vancouver Transportation and Trade Partnership (I-5 Partnership) study
recommended adding capacity across the Columbia River road, rail, transit, and bike/pedestrian. The recommendation was to add multi-modal capacity across the Columbia River with a new supplemental bridge or if necessary a replacement bridge.
In 2005 The Interstate Bridges Electrical Upgrade Project with the Oregon State Seal on top gave glowing reviews of the bridges and the fine maintenance work of the crew. Currently no restrictions, with 60 years of serviceable life left, 4(f) Historical Resources of Significance protection, and are worth approximately 1-billion dollars. “ The Interstate Bridges continue to be a vital link between Portland and Vancouver and complement any long-range plans to manage and improve transportation in the I-5 corridor between the two states.”
The words continue to be a vital link and complement any long-range plans to not remove the bridges immediately or that the bridges must be removed before additional bridges for capacity. Completing any long-range plans is helpful in continuing to provide service without restrictions while we work on adding more bridges across the Columbia River in the I-5 Corridor which stretches from the confluence of the Columbia and Willamette Rivers to approximately a-mile east of the I-205 Freeway Corridor.
In 2005 Federal Register stated the starting of the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It listed a process that would thoroughly study a range of bridge alternatives including new highways for benefits and impacts including constructions and operations in relationship to the community and relieving congestion.
In 2005 the CRC started its process and a complete full and independent inspection of the bridges had not yet taken place between the ending of the I-5 Partnership 2002 and the starting of the CRC meetings 2005. That staff would have a full report on the bridges and their condition soon as a company was hired. After that every time the condition of the bridges came up, discouraging words flowed from staff and they would steer us back to focusing on a new bridge. In 2010 the CRC Independent Review Panel (IRP) of bridge experts asked staff in a public meeting where there was a full inspection of the bridges, a list of repairs, how much the repairs cost, and who decided to remove the bridges instead of fixing them? Silence. The question was repeated. I am missing paperwork on the bridge’s structural condition and any immediate repairs required on the bridges.
Silence before someone said there was no list of repairs with cost estimates because the bridges had not had a full inspection completed yet. As for who “decided” to focus on bridge removal “staff” liked the idea and that was why the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) is called the staff recommendation.
Take action
Freedom Of Information Act (FIOA) request needs to be made by lots of concerned citizens. For the complete independent inspection of the I-5 bridges to be made public immediately. Plus provide a list of repairs, cost estimates, and reasons to replace the I-5 bridges instead of repairing them. Send the FIOA request to the Washington Transportation Commission and WA Senator Cleveland and Representative Wylie who champion the project. Make sure to copy your elected officials.
Sharon Nasset
Vancouver
Also read:
- Opinion: Atmospheric River events mean even less clearance for vessels crossing under the proposed Interstate Bridge Plan
Neighbors for a Better Crossing argues that high river levels from atmospheric river events further reduce vessel clearance under the proposed Interstate Bridge design, creating long-term navigation risks on the Columbia River. - Letter: Worried about a replacement bridge?
Sharon Nasset raises concerns about congestion, bridge capacity, and unanswered questions surrounding inspections and decisions tied to the I-5 bridge replacement effort. - Opinion: IBR promotes ‘giving away’ historic interstate bridges while withholding cost estimate for replacement
Neighbors for a Better Crossing argues the IBR program is promoting demolition of the historic Interstate Bridges without releasing updated cost estimates or current seismic data to justify replacement. - Opinion: Bikes in crosswalks
Doug Dahl explains how Washington law treats bicycles as both vehicles and pedestrians, depending on where and how they are being ridden. - Opinion: The unpreferred and unaffordable Interstate Bridge replacement proposal
Rep. John Ley argues that the Interstate Bridge Replacement proposal is unpreferred, unaffordable, and failing to address congestion, cost transparency, and community concerns.
