The Columbian | Serving Clark County, Washington

Eliminating freeway exits in downtown Vancouver and on Hayden Island should be considered under a refined Columbia River Crossing project, local officials on both sides of the river suggested Thursday.

Top elected officials from Portland and Vancouver also aired other suggestions — including the possibility of a smaller bridge across the Columbia — during a meeting Thursday that was free of probing television cameras and irate citizens. Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart allowed a Columbian reporter to listen in.

“We want to have a different level of engagement,” Metro council President David Bragdon told the two state transportation directors.

The behind-the-scenes meeting was an attempt to revive consensus on the multibillion-dollar project, which stirs controversy each day closer it moves to its planned construction start date in 2012.

In January, Bragdon, Stuart, Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt and Portland Mayor Sam Adams declared the crossing project “unacceptable” as currently designed and financed. Govs. Chris Gregoire and Ted Kulongoski responded by ordering state transportation agencies to move ahead without delay.

State officials agreed to consider some of the ideas, and local elected officials agreed to continue the dialogue.

Cutting out interchanges at downtown Vancouver and Hayden Island could theoretically reduce the project cost, improve traffic flow on the freeway and reduce accidents caused by vehicles weaving on and off I-5. Portland officials say the idea could narrow the bridge’s footprint on Hayden Island, minimizing damage to the existing business district. However, it would force Washington shoppers into a circuitous route on a new arterial roadway bundled with a planned light-rail bridge from the south.

In Vancouver, motorists heading into and out of downtown would be funneled onto Mill Plain Boulevard.

That worries Leavitt, who noted that the Port of Vancouver plans to more than double truck traffic with its plans for industrial expansion.

“We can’t further burden the Mill Plain interchange,” Leavitt said by teleconference from Washington, D.C., where he was meeting with members of the region’s congressional delegation.

A single span?

Adams broached the possibility of a single bridge.

If the project eliminates interchanges on each side of the bridge, the Portland mayor suggested, it’s worth looking into the possibility of trimming the river crossing from two separate spans to just one. The current plan calls for twin five-lane spans carrying light-rail tracks below the southbound bridge deck and a pedestrian and bike path below the northbound traffic deck.

“I’m assuming a key driver for cost is the fact that you have to build two decks,” Adams said.

Washington Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond and Oregon director Matthew Garrett both bristled at the suggestion of a single span.

Hammond and Garrett are both keenly aware of Adams’ since-aborted plan to have the city of Portland design its own bridge as small as six lanes in both directions. That would be no bigger than the existing twin spans, and state officials maintain that a bridge that small would fail to alleviate congestion.

“This point concerns me the most,” Garrett said. “It looks like we’ve thrown out the process we’ve already gone through.”

Adams: “Matt, come on here.”

Garrett: “I’m being serious.”

Adams: “I’m serious, too. The proposal on the table is for a 14-lane structure, double decked. Is there a way to save money by not having to build the double deck?”

After more debate over the width of spans as currently designed — and the need for a 10- or 12-lane structure to address the original purpose and need for the project studied in an environmental study produced two years ago — Adams said he’s merely looking for ways to get a maximum benefit for the least cost.

“Nobody jump to any conclusions here,” he said. “These are requests to analyze some scenarios, so we feel comfortable that we’ve exhausted all creative thought.”

Afterwards, Adams’ transportation director further clarified Portland’s thinking.

“The City of Portland is not proposing to remove any interchanges; nor are we saying that a new bridge must include a specific number of lanes,” Catherine Ciarlo wrote in an e-mail. “Mayor Adams simply wants to ensure that due diligence is done to make sure we get the maximum amount of benefit — for all bridge users — at the lowest possible cost.”

Who pays?

Two decades in the works, the project is currently estimated to cost between $2.6 billion and $3.6 billion. Local elected officials say they believe their questions and suggestions could be studied and answered by July, without delaying state and federal officials’ plan to produce a final environmental study and adopt an official record of decision by the end of this year.

The overall project replaces two existing three-lane drawbridges over the river, improves four miles of I-5 and extends Portland’s light-rail system into Vancouver.

Planners expect bridge tolls to generate the local financial contribution.

Leavitt, elected last November after making his opposition to tolls a centerpiece of his campaign against incumbent Mayor Royce Pollard, said he won’t broach the issue until the project design and costs are better defined.

“There’s nothing further to talk about with tolling right now,” Leavitt said in a follow-up interview.

Planners are looking for $400 million in federal highway funding, along with $750 million in federal money to build the light-rail extension. Tolls, along with gas tax revenue contributed by the two states, would make up the rest of the funding picture.

Erik Robinson: 360-735-4551, or erik.robinson@columbian.com.

Print this article