In his recent opinion column, Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance takes a critical look at the $7.5 billion I-5 Bridge replacement project, raising key concerns about its impact and effectiveness. Many in the community question whether the current plan will truly reduce traffic congestion, while others believe the high cost is unjustified. The inclusion of TriMet’s light rail into Vancouver remains a controversial element, and some argue that a third Columbia River crossing would be a better long-term solution.
As the debate continues, we want to hear from you! What do you think is the biggest issue with the current plan? Vote in this week’s poll and make your voice heard!
More info:
Opinion: Hope for those of us looking for common sense on I-5 Bridge replacement project
Ken Vance discusses growing opposition to the $7.5 billion I-5 Bridge replacement project, highlighting concerns over tolling, traffic congestion, and funding priorities.
Read more
Also read:
- 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. - Opinion: ‘The drama and the waste of taxpayer money continues’
Rep. John Ley outlines his objections to the approved fixed-span I-5 Bridge design, citing cost concerns, engineering standards, funding uncertainty, and opposition to light rail and tolls. - Coast Guard approves fixed-span design for new Interstate Bridge
The U.S. Coast Guard has approved a fixed-span design for the new Interstate Bridge, clearing a major hurdle for the Interstate Bridge Replacement project. - Opinion: When fast feels slow
Doug Dahl explains why drivers often misjudge their speed, especially when using cruise control or transitioning from freeway to city streets. - Opinion: WSDOT secretary and I ‘obviously have very different definitions for the term cost-effective’
Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance sharply criticizes WSDOT Secretary Julie Meredith’s defense of the Interstate Bridge Replacement project, arguing the escalating cost estimates undermine claims the project is cost-effective.
All of the above….
Absolutely…. all of the above.
Indeed, you should have included an “all of the above” choice for this poll. Each and every one of the suggestions show that this is a bridge that shouldn’t be built. Too few lanes (and Portland/Oregon will not widen freeways through Portland). TriMet rail is a total waste of money. Trolley Cars will never provide any reasonable transportation in Clark County — it’s much cheaper to use busses (and they’re not being used as they once were). A third bridge with a bypass to the west of Portland would make the most sense.
the residents of clark county do not need portlands busses and light rail. in my opinion it’s a boondoggle to help trimet. i’m old enough to realize i’ll never see the new bridge but that doesn’t mean my children and grandchildren should have to foot the bill for portlands “mass transit”. yes we need the new bridge but not light rail.
I don’t trust the state of Oregon to not use Washington commuters as their cash cow. They already do by making those who work in Oregon pay income tax, and adding various other taxes for PLO, homeless, preschool, transit taxes etc. Taxation without representation and no accountability for where all that money goes. As people move out of Oregon due to cost of housing, crime and school issues, it will only make things worse. The cost will be so much more to address issues that come up, the lack of transparency, and lack of plans to address congestion etc……I just don’t trust Oregon with how they manage their budget.