Oregon Supreme Court Blows the Whistle on CRC and Metro

February 29, 2012

SHARE
Found in the Willamette Week, The $2.5 Billion Bribe Oregon’s Supreme Court says light-rail politics drove plans for a new I-5 bridge.
Of course, we in Clark County have known this, as CRC continues forcing us to accept the project with Light Rail, in spite of 3 past indications we did not want it.
In response to allegations filed by opponents to the Metro, the Oregon Supreme Court stated in their decision, “The massive Interstate 5 bridge and freeway project is a “political necessity” to persuade Clark County residents to accept something they previously didn’t want—a MAX light-rail line from Portland to Vancouver.”

The Willamette Week adds, “Chief Justice Paul De Muniz highlighted Metro’s land-use decision. In it, the regional agency explains the freeway bridge and associated improvements were necessary to get the light-rail line built after Clark County voters in 1995 overwhelmingly rejected funding for a new light-rail line.”

Or as Metro later summarized it: ‘There is no light rail without the freeway bridge[s] being replaced’.”

While the court decided in favor of Metro overall in the case, the glaring admission in the written opinion (pg 8, lines 9 through 12) is one many of us have stated and has been denied, that replacing the bridges is primarily to carry light rail from Portland to Vancouver. 


Perhaps not the intent, but Oregon’s Supreme Court unwittingly reveal the main reason the I-5 Bridges ‘must’ be replaced is to force Portland’s financially failing Light Rail upon us, whether we want it or not.
I urge all to read the Willamette Week article and the complete 18-page decision here
Ironic in timing, but Vancouver mayor Tim Leavitt wrote an op-ed that appears in the Reflector the same day where he claims to be “Setting the Record Straight.”
One claim he makes is, “The CRC has been driven by extensive citizen input over many years, thorough planning and scientific/engineering analysis, and the collaboration of local, state and federal agencies and representatives of the people.”
He also states, “The current bridge crossing is dangerous. Period.”
The spans are not listed on the WSDOT Structurally Deficient Bridges list.
Bridgehunter.com lists the ratings of the Interstate Bridge as of a 2009 Inspection as:

Deck condition rating: Fair (5 out of 9)
Superstructure condition rating: Satisfactory (6 out of 9)
Substructure condition rating: Fair (5 out of 9)
Appraisal: Functionally obsolete
Sufficiency rating: 31.5 (out of 100)

The definition of “Functionally Obsolete” found HERE is: “A functionally obsolete bridge is one that was built to standards that are not used today. These bridges are not automatically rated as structurally deficient, nor are they inherently unsafe. Functionally obsolete bridges are those that do not have adequate lane widths, shoulder widths, or vertical clearances to serve current traffic demand, or those that may be occasionally flooded.”

On needing replaced now, ODOT wrote in 2005 HERE
“The Interstate (twin) Bridges on Interstate 5 connect Portland, Oregon with Vancouver, Washington across the Columbia River. The bridges consist of northbound and southbound spans built in 1917 and 1958, respectively. The side-by-side steel structures have tandem lift-span capabilities to accommodate a national and international shipping industry.”

“The two bridges have a full-time crew on deck to keep the aging structures in top operating condition. Only three other Oregon bridges — all in Astoria — have a designated maintenance crew.”

“This personalized care, combined with large maintenance projects, has kept the spans healthy and free of weight restrictions. With ongoing preservation, the bridges can serve the public for another 60 years.”

“The Interstate Bridges continue to be a vital link between Portland and Vancouver and complement any long-range plans to manage and improve transportation in the I-5 corridor between the two states.”

On Seismic Vulnerability, a 2006 CRC Report where they commissioned a “panel of experts” to perform a seismic assessment and they reported it was “technically feasible” to upgrade the spans and at a much lower estimated cost than we are now facing.

Not addressed still is the impact on businesses during the upwards of 10 years construction or the increased congestion during the same time period as commuters will be navigating through a construction zone that entire time.
As I have said many times, this project needs to be brought to a screeching halt and redesigned to what we actually need and more importantly, can afford!
Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com