The Metro Council and a regional committee that controls federal transportation money in the Portland area will review the Columbia River Crossing project on Thursday, June 9, to ensure it has responded to community concerns. The council will also hear public comment Thursday afternoon.
The states of Oregon and Washington have proposed the $3.6 billion project, which would replace the I-5 Interstate Bridge, rebuild several highway interchanges, extend light rail into Vancouver, and build a much better bike and pedestrian network. Though it is not a Metro project, the regional government’s role is to ensure that all major transportation investments make the best use of our limited dollars, boost the region’s economic competitiveness and ensure the needs of low income communities are addressed.
"Interstate 5 is the backbone of our region’s economy and the major freight artery of the West Coast," Metro Council President Tom Hughes said. "We need this project to ensure the free flow of commerce, but we also need it to expand transportation options for Portland and Vancouver residents."
Improvements to the I-5 corridor across the Columbia have been studied since the early 1990s. The current proposal emerged from a 39-member, regionwide task force that Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder participated in from 2004 to 2008 and a draft environmental report published in 2008.
The Metro Council endorsed the Locally Preferred Alternative for the project, including a light rail extension, no more than three through lanes plus some auxiliary lanes for merging and weaving in each direction and using bridge tolls to manage rush hour traffic congestion. The Metro Council’s resolution was also endorsed by the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation, a 17-member panel of elected officials and agency leaders that controls federal transportation spending in the three-county Portland area.
Both the council and JPACT included a list of 11 concerns and considerations along with their endorsement of the preferred alternative. JPACT will consider whether the project has met its concerns at a meeting Thursday morning. No oral comment will be taken at that meeting. The council intends to hear public comment at its meeting, which begins at 2 p.m., but does not plan a formal public hearing.
Though five other area cities and agencies also endorsed the preferred alternative with concerns or conditions, the Metro Council, with advice from JPACT, appears so far to be the only one formally acting to review the project’s response to the concerns.
“We are committed to making sure the community’s concerns have been addressed or will be addressed in the next phase of the project,” Hughes said.
According to the JPACT Bylaws, most council actions recommended by JPACT cannot be revised by the council without first referring the item back for JPACT to consider. In the case of the crossing project, the Office of Metro Attorney has determined that changes to the Locally Preferred Alternative would require a referral to JPACT, but changes to the concerns attached to the alternative would not.
Metro is working to ensure the project charges tolls to speed the flow of freight, provides a fund to enhance surrounding neighborhoods and creates a world class bicycle and pedestrian facility. These are among the concerns the council expressed in July 2008 when it endorsed the Locally Preferred Alternative. As the project prepares to file a Final Environmental Impact Statement later this year, the council is looking to make a statement about which concerns have been addressed and which ones the project still needs to be resolved.
Since 2008, the project has made many refinements to address Metro’s concerns, including:
- Reducing the number of lanes on the proposed bridge from 12 lanes down to 10. Only three lanes in each direction would conduct cars through the region, others would simply extend on and off ramps.
- Saving more than $600 million by delaying expensive highway flyover ramps and reusing the highway bridge over North Portland Harbor.
- Planning a small bridge west of I-5 to give Hayden Island residents bicycle, pedestrian and car access to North Portland without requiring them to enter the highway. This will take traffic off interstate and improve local transportation options for a community that has been divided by the highway.
- Using Metro’s transportation modeling tools to study the potential for urban sprawl to result from the project. Metro’s study found that with I-5 bridge tolls and construction of the region’s other planned light rail projects, the crossing project will have only minimal impact on employment and housing growth in Clark County.
"This project has been a long time coming," Councilor Burkholder said. "The Metro Council has supported building the best project the region can afford, while making sure it responds to community concerns."
The council and the project staff have not resolved all the issues on the table. At a council work session last week, several councilors made it clear they want the project to establish a fund to mitigate for adverse human health impacts and for the impact of the existing I-5 highway, which divided neighborhoods when it was built. Precedents for such funds include a $1 million fund set up by the widening of I-5 near Delta Park and funds that Metro operates as mitigation for the former St. Johns landfill.
Columbia River Crossing staff have said that the project will enhance the community by providing better transportation access and sound walls to limit noise. They do not plan to set up a fund, but staff have agreed to work with Metro on the issue.
At a work session last week, councilors also expressed fear that state money spent on the project might take away from funding for other transportation priorities. Some councilors said they were disappointed in the recent selection of a flat double-deck bridge type, and they urged attention to architectural detail.
Some Metro concerns can only be fully addressed in subsequent phases of the project, when bridge toll rates, aesthetics and more precise financials will be worked out.
In addition to ensuring that those considerations are met, Metro is responsible for amending the land use actions related to the proposed light rail line. The land use decision will follow a separate process later this summer. It is a more narrow decision, focused on whether the rail and highway facilities comply with local land use plans and how the facilities could impact nearby landowners.