Cost cutting, no tolls, no light rail, and not enough lanes highlight councilor’s preferences

John Ley
For Clark County Today

Members of the Clark County Council received an update from the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program (IBR) during their Council Time meeting Wednesday. IBR team member Frank Green shared updates on bridge financing as well as the release of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) which the public can now comment on through November 18. The nearly 12,500 pages of the document contains a great deal of information, with specific details often hard to find.

Councilor Karen Bowerman criticized all the comparisons with the “No Build” alternative. “No one supports the no build alternative,” she told Green. She prefers comparisons with legitimate alternatives the people of Clark County would like to see, like a bridge without light rail or even better, a third bridge that would reduce traffic congestion. Bowerman wanted more details of traffic diversion, mentioning people are already talking about “the I-205 parking lot” since it will not be tolled.

Councilor Glen Yung noted that no mega project ever came in on budget. “If the project comes in over budget, what gives?” he asked. Would the program raise tolls or cut parts of the proposal, he inquired? 

Councilor Michelle Belkot asked for the status of discussions with the U.S. Coast Guard, which is demanding a bridge clearance for maritime traffic of at least the current 178 feet of clearance. Belkot also pushed back on replacing a 3-lane bridge with another 3-lane bridge.

Green responded with answers that for the most part, have been heard before. Negotiations with the U.S. Coast Guard are going well, as they hope to reach agreements with three up river fabricators and one vessel owner over mitigation, so they can proceed with their planned 116 foot clearance for marine vessels.

“Tolls wouldn’t be the only source” of revenue he told Yung, if costs go up. Green said the program would look for additional sources of federal money, while not eliminating going to the state legislatures for more funding.

On replacing the congested three-lane bridge with another three-lane bridge, Green indicated the auxiliary lane will allow the through lanes to actually act like through lanes. He said the current bridge without auxiliary lanes only effectively has one to one and one half through lanes, because of all the merging and weaving.

The IBR is sticking with the previous Columbia River Crossing (CRC) adopted Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The pitch was to save time and funding, starting with where the previously failed project left off.

That’s where Councilor Gary Medvigy pushed back. “The CRC failed for good reasons,” he said. He lamented that the IBR is pursuing a project “with all the bells and whistles” that adds multiple billions to the cost. It’s possible to build a more simple project at a much lower cost. He noted the people do not want tolling and a lower cost project would avoid the need for tolls.

He mentioned asking a question at an RTC meeting a while back. “What did you learn from the CRC failure?”  The answer was telling, Medvigy said. “We learned to talk to people in different ways,” was the response.

Medvigy lamented that the IBR team members say they’ve interacted with 100,000 people, but appears to have ignored and not acted on the people’s concerns. He hopes the program staff would actually act on the people’s concerns and modify their proposal to better align with what the people want.

He began his remarks about light rail. “There’s so much angst over it,” Medvigy said. “In part it’s legitimate because people are afraid of it,” referencing safety concerns related to crime happening on or near MAX stations. 

“The sheer cost – we’re hearing a billion dollars per mile, the most expensive in the world,” he said in likely reference to a recent Clark County Today article.  He noted people in East County and North County won’t likely use it. Medvigy says light rail is a whole project, in and of itself, and should therefore be separated from the IBR proposal and done later. 

Councilor Gary Medvigy provides a list of issues and feedback to Frank Green of the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program during an hour-long workshop discussion regarding the proposed project. Video courtesy ClarkCoWa via YouTube

Medvigy noted “$2.5 billion of swag” that could be spared from the project in order to save money. He prefers a simple bridge replacement for around $1 billion, or saving the current, “iconic bridges” and using them as a local connection with Hayden Island.

“We need additional crossings,” he stated emphatically. Medvigy noted all the numerous agencies had caveats, or disagreements with the proposal. He emphasized the TriMet demand for Clark County to pay for operations and maintenance of the light rail.

Medvigy closed by encouraging people to make the most of the opportunity to make comments on the DSEIS. They can click here and enter comments, or send them via email to DraftSEIS@interstatebridge.org. People can also mail them to 500 Broadway Suite 200, Vancouver, WA 98660.