Opinion

Letter: Not too late for better I-5 crossing

Bob Ortblad believes preserving the current bridges for non-tolled local traffic and building an immersed tunnel solves several problems with the IBR’s tolled bridge design

By Bob Ortblad · August 29, 2026
Part of this storylineI-5 Interstate Bridge Replacement273 stories →
Listen to this story
A Better I-5 Crossing: The Case for an Immersed Tunnel
0:000:00
Letter: Not too late for better I-5 crossing

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

Not Too Late for Better I-5 Crossing

At the Aug. 26th Bi-state Tolling Subcommittee meeting, an Interstate Bridge Replacement Program (IBR) consultant said that approximately 45,000 vehicles (36%) enter and exit within the five-mile project area. These short trips should not use the freeway because frequent merging and exiting contribute to congestion and crashes.

inline image

Preserving the current bridges for non-tolled local traffic and building an immersed tunnel solves several problems with the IBR’s tolled bridge design.

  • Provide toll-free access to people who live and work on Hayden Island.
  • Reduce Interstate traffic and congestion by reducing 45,000 daily vehicles, 36%.
  • Reduce congestion and crashes due to less merging and existing.
  • Eliminate long, massive bridge approaches that are a visual blight and will rain down noise and pollution.
  • Eliminate elevated bridge approaches that are more prone to black ice and have a -3% grade with a sharp S-curve.
  • Eliminate a dozen 50-foot-wide bridge piers that will harbor salmon predators.
  • An immersed tunnel is more earthquake-resilient, and preserving current bridges adds redundancy.
  • Save $141 million in impact payments to upstream businesses.
  • Save $390 million by not demolishing the current bridges.
  • Avoid the high risk and cost ($250-$500 million) of 96 drilled shafts and 1,775 temporary piles.
  • Reduce construction time and cost because tunnel segments can be fabricated in local shipyards and are not as restricted by in-water work windows.
  • Protect both Fort Vancouver and the Vancouver Waterfront Public Market from the impact of bridge approaches.
  • Provide a better bike and walking path on modified current bridges.

The IBR has fraudulently disqualified a safer immersed tunnel alternative. It is not too late to reject IBR’s bridge and build an immersed tunnel. Citizens of Baltimore, Maryland rejected a freeway bridge design to protect historic Fort McHenry. Citizens of Vancouver, Canada rejected a bridge design to protect the Fraser River’s environment. Citizens of Antwerp, Belgium decisively rejected a massive bridge design via the first public referendum in the entire history of the city of Antwerp.

Bob Ortblad MSCE, MBA

Seattle

Related Coverage

Opinion: Stop rewarding fiscal mismanagement on the IBR; enough is enough
More on I-5 Interstate Bridge ReplacementOpinion

Opinion: Stop rewarding fiscal mismanagement on the IBR; enough is enough

September 6, 2026
Letter: Buyer beware (caveat emptor)
More on I-5 Interstate Bridge ReplacementOpinion

Letter: Buyer beware (caveat emptor)

June 2, 2026
Letter: Immersed tunnel & electric buses, a 1% alternative to light rail
More on I-5 Interstate Bridge ReplacementOpinion

Letter: Immersed tunnel & electric buses, a 1% alternative to light rail

July 27, 2026
Opinion: IBR program’s $13-17 billion fraud and mismanagement, perpetuated by Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle and Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek
More on I-5 Interstate Bridge ReplacementOpinion

Opinion: IBR program’s $13-17 billion fraud and mismanagement, perpetuated by Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle and Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek

June 8, 2026

Comments

Loading comments…