This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on July 14, 2008 9:21 AM. The previous post in this blog was Really, couldn't get away too soon. The next post in this blog is It's a long day living in Reseda. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Monday, July 14, 2008

I-5 bridge? Too expensive!

We need to save our money for something important, like the Convention Center hotel.

Comments (13)

I’ll bet Wal-Mart would build it for free if we gave them some land on Hayden Island to build a super store.

4.2 billion dollar Gateway to Hooters.

I still don't get why it costs so much (and $4.2B is probably a low-ball number). In France, a new six-lane bridge that spans 2 miles, 800 feet over the Tarn River Gorge, cost $600M to build, financed by tolls. In Switzerland, the Loetschberg tunnel, opened a year ago, is 21 miles long under the Alps and cost $3.5 billion. I don't think we're getting value here.

According to Dave Lister, the current estimate of $4.2 billion for the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) is probably low by a factor of two or more. Maybe it's best if the CRC project is just shelved. The way discussions are going so far we'll be lucky if we can cross the Columbia via a boat.

Or neither.

Roberty Liberty and Carl Hostika both voted to spend over $600,0000 to further study the Convention Center Hotel, which we now know will cost over $2 hundred million dollars, paid for by the taxpayer.Yet they so piously argue over the costs of a functional bridge. Will they vote against the hotel, stay tuned. I'm sure they will come up with a sustainability argument justifying their votes on the hotel

It's way past too late, but the article also points out that our wise-head planners and their progressive supporters also put the kibosh on the very sensible and less expensive west side bypass....a solution which would have taken large volumes off I-5 through the Vancouver/Portland corridor.

Just keep diggin' that congestion hole deeper and deeper.

What will be interesting is if the CRC goes through in the projected form, as well as some form of work as outlined in this study from the Freeway Loop Advisory Group approved by Congress in 2010's reauthorization of the Omnibus Transportation Bill.

We could either get told to kick rocks by the Federal Government, or get an amazing amount of cash to make a major attempt at fixing the freeways altogether.

Give residents of Clark County / commuters to Oregon $2 billion to stay on their side of the river. If we assume there are 200,000 daily commuters, that's $10,000 apiece. They can buy themselves a boat (or a dingy, at least).

Who on this side of the river really wants to take MAX to the 'Couv? Eww.

You watch there will be a proposal to only build a light rail bridge and wait for the road bridge.

"Give residents of Clark County / commuters to Oregon $2 billion to stay on their side of the river."

Wow, what a parochial attitude. You realize we live in a region, right? You realize that those people are working in your community and sometimes providing you public services? You also realize that those people ARE paying their share of taxes to fund your infrastructure and infrastructure they benefit from too, right?

The bridge is more than just commuters. It is a major route for business all up and down the west coast. Just taking people to 1-205 doesn't solve that much of the business is at the Ports which are west of I-5.

I used to commute and personally I always felt it was my choice to battle the traffic. Traffic alone shouldn't be the reason to rebuild the bridge, and it isn't. The bridge is outdated and getting more and more dangerous. Do you really think it would be great for the bridge to fall down during the massive exodous north by Oregon residents every Friday afternoon?

I would argue that instead, they should build the bridge, make it look nice, but don't shoot for the moon (or the tram). Make it functional and decent to look at. Note that I look at the bridge every day. Put light rail on it and make sure the C-Tran bus system can get people to it. Prioritize freight and encourage people to car pool. I'm not thrilled with a toll, but if that is what it takes to get it built then so be it, because it needs to be built. Don't assume the bridge will decrease traffic...it won't, but it will keep it from getting worse and worse.

It is incredible that the parochial attitude that many complain about in Vancouver is just as strong in Portland. WE LIVE IN A REGION!!

The new Smart Car, which will go on sale in 2010, is one of two Mercedes models with the battery. While it only goes 100 miles on an overnight charge, it's considered adequate for city driving and commuting.

By Sean P. Murphy
Globe Staff / July 17, 2008

Massachusetts residents got a shock when state officials, at the peak of construction on the Big Dig project, disclosed that the price tag had ballooned to nearly $15 billion. But that, it turns out, was just the beginning.

graphic Cost of the project
Spiral of Big Dig debt
Now, three years after the official dedication of the Central Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel, the state is reeling under a legacy of debt left by the massive project. In all, the project will cost an additional $7 billion in interest, bringing the total to a staggering $22 billion, according to a Globe review of hundreds of pages of state documents. It will not be paid off until 2038.

Contrary to the popular belief that this was a project heavily subsidized by the federal government, 73 percent of construction costs were paid by Massachusetts drivers and taxpayers. To meet that obligation, the state's annual payments will be nearly as much over the next several years, $600 million or more, as they were in the heaviest construction period.

Clicky Web Analytics