We stand at an important juncture in the future of our region’s transportation. In order to influence this critical moment it is important that we first understand where we are and how we got here.
The Columbia River Crossing (CRC) process has been long, complicated and contentious. Earlier this spring the governors of Oregon and Washington created a hand-picked “independent panel of experts”. The panel was announced after the four local elected officials on the Project Sponsors Council (which has overseen the CRC process) offered a joint letter outlining their opposition to the current proposal, to which they received no response. The “independent panel of experts” was composed of individuals professionally engaged in the the type large scale, auto-centric infrastructure projects favored by the Departments of Transportation, who are the lead advocates for the CRC. The panel was chosen to rubber stamp the process with a veneer of independence and while offering minor critiques to the current proposal it left the core components intact.
Also during the summer a study done for the City of Portland (the URS report) was released. This report was financed by the city due to the unwillingness of the project to examine alternative ideas about transportation solutions. It revealed the trade offs and necessary public transportation offsets for 10 and 8 lane bridges. While it began to advance a conservations about the possible tradeoffs and real consequences of the bridge it did not go far enough. Furthermore it did not deal with the 9 miles of highway expansion to the north and south of the Columbia river that are part of the CRC proposal.
After months of negotiating the two main voices of opposition, Portland Mayor Sam Adams and Metro President David Bragdon, caved and voted with the other members of the Project Sponsors Council to advance a 10-lane version of the bridge and the entire 9 miles of highway expansion.
At this point in time the situation is that both the local governments and the Project Sponsors Council have voted to move ahead with the 9 mile long highway expansion, including a 10 lane bridge. However, there remain majors issues that are undecided. These include funding, the inclusion of light rail and tolling among other things. These issues are non-trivial and could determine whether this project moves forward as proposed. Additionally, the provide a variety of opportunities to stop the project as proposed so that we can insure the inclusion of real solutions to our region’s transportation infrastructure in any future project.
In 2011 there will be several critical junctures in which to influence the project. These include:
- Several votes by the Metro Council on various land use allowances for construction of the bridge. Additionally the Metro Council will have to approve the final plan and incorporate it into its regional transportation plan.
- Approval of funding by both the Oregon and Washington state legislatures.
- Allotment of the necessary funding for this multi-billionaire dollar project by the federal government.
- A public vote by Clark County voters – as required by CTRAN – to approve or disapprove the inclusion of light rail in the project.
- Legal challenges to the supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS). The SEIS will reflect a project still in formation and one which has undergone major revisions.
We believe this is a difficult path for the current project and thus is an extremely favorable ground for those who want to see a forward looking, comprehensive solution to our region’s transportation infrastructure. Almost $100 million have already been spent on moving forward a fundamentally flawed process. This project, with a price tag in the billions, will starve our region of funding for a decade inhibiting other vital transportation projects. It will create gridlock on I-205 and move the congestion to the Rose Quarter and the heart of Portland. This will mean more asthma, worsening air quality, increased carbon emissions and generally more polluted air. This is an unacceptable outcome for our region.
Unfortunately, the current process is guaranteed to bring about such negative impacts in large part due to its narrow focus. What about the use of rail for both commuter, freight and long distance passenger traffic? There has been much talk about high speed rail corridors in our region, yet it has been excluded from this process from the beginning. This is but one example of how the narrowness of the project prohibited alternative thinking about providing the right transportation solution for the Columbia river corridor. We need a comprehensive transportation solution that is multi-modal, clean, green and forward looking, one which takes into account the changing world in which we live in. A 1950s project that is primarily about building a bridge and upgrading freeway infrastructure for single occupancy vehicles is not such a project.
We need real leadership to reset the current process such that comprehensive transportations solutions can be appropriately examined. For too long the state of Washington has driven this process. The DOTs and project staff have stonewalled independent and creative analysis. While the City of Portland analysis began to ask important questions, it is not enough we need much more of this. We need to remind elected officials that a “less bad” project is not good enough. Our communities demand a good project.
This is a once in a generation opportunity to shape the future of our region’s transportation infrastructure. It demands leadership, vision and an open public process that looks at the problem not as a question of what kind of highway expansion, but rather what kind of multi-modal transportation solution can we create that will fuel the development of our region as we want it to be.
Join us in this effort.