Whenever discussion about replacing the Interstate 5 Bridge comes up — and that means often — Clark County residents are quick to point to the bottleneck through Portland’s Rose Quarter area as a persistent and maddening problem.
Even on the rare occasions when motorists heading into Portland make it over the bridge unencumbered, they are almost certain to face slowing seven miles to the south, where I-5 meets with Interstate 84 and where the number of lanes is reduced.
The need to address the bottleneck would seem to be self-evident. As far back as 2010, when the Columbia River Crossing proposal was being formulated, Willamette Week wrote: “Last summer, the governors’ review panel said that failing to address the Rose Quarter congestion would be like hooking a garden hose to a fire hydrant. ‘Questions about the reasonableness of investment in the CRC bridge because of unresolved issues to the south threaten the viability of the project,’ the panel wrote in July 2010.”
But while the urgency for adding capacity to the Rose Quarter corridor is one of the rare transportation issues most Clark County residents can agree upon, it faces opposition on the other side of the river. A recent public meeting to discuss a $500 million improvement project through the area drew vociferous resistance.
According to OregonLive.com, one opponent spoke of “climate denialism,” while another sang a folk song about how adding capacity would simply invite more people to drive. Sarah Iannarone reportedly delivered a pointed message to Oregon transportation officials: “To ODOT, it’s not going to happen. We’ll lie on the highway before we let you build this.”
On one level, the meeting points out the Pollyannaish views of anyone who hopes for a third bridge across the river. Oregon is going to have difficulty simply increasing capacity through a troublesome stretch of highway; we’re guessing talk of adding a third interstate crossing would be met by apocalyptic opposition.
But on another level, the meeting points out the need for reasonable debate and for involvement from those who seek a balance between commerce, quality of life and environmental concerns. The Oregon Department of Transportation’s environmental assessment of the project is available online, and public comment is being accepted until 5 p.m. April 1.
One speaker at the public meeting reportedly said, “If you build a city for cars and traffic, all you get is cars and traffic.” This is, indeed, true. But it fails to recognize the reality that cars are already here, and they will continue to be. Having an efficient freeway system that reduces the time cars are idling at a standstill can be environmentally beneficial. ODOT’s assessment claims the project would slightly reduce emissions by 2045 compared with no improvement to that stretch of freeway. The project, if properly planned, also would help reduce time and fuel costs for businesses that transport goods throughout the region and would be essential to the economy.
Portland has a long history of blocking highway projects. In 1974, grassroots opposition to a proposed east-west corridor known as the Mount Hood Freeway led to the demise of the proposal and helped create the Portland we see today.
But the proposed Rose Quarter project is much different from carving an entire freeway through established neighborhoods, and it is one that would provide benefits for the thousands of Clark County residents who frequently cross the Columbia River. We should not be shy about voicing support for the project.
