By Christian Steinbrecher, Daily Journal of Commerce
Original publication date: Feb. 28, 2011

Portland, Ore. — When the Oregon Wireless Interoperability Network project was unveiled, approximately $600 million worth of needed wireless communications infrastructure improvements were identified. The recession forced a compromise, and the project will now meet the Federal Communications Commission minimum requirements for approximately 20 percent of that price.

Immediate needs of the project will be met, but the entire infrastructure must still be replaced. This approach will cost more in the long run, but the state simply cannot afford to pay for everything at this moment.

Can this lesson be applied to the Columbia River Crossing project? The existing CRC approach, similar to the original OWIN proposal, calls for replacing the entire Interstate 5 infrastructure crossing the Columbia River.

There is a pressing near-term need. The Interstate Bridge’s northbound span opened in 1917. Although Oregon Department of Transportation officials assure us that it is safe, and we have no reason not to believe them, the folks in Minneapolis also thought they had a safe bridge. Like the Sellwood Bridge, this bridge must be replaced. And it should be replaced before an unexpected event of some sort drives an emergency and expensive response.

The lesson from OWIN is that while the entire infrastructure across the Columbia River must be replaced, it can be done in parts. In a recession with high employment, the prospect of high tolls to pay for large projects appears to be unappealing. In addition to the federal government borrowing 40 percent of each dollar spent, this project would be subject to the shenanigans inherent in the federal budgetary process.

An alternative is to replace the bridges one at a time. Build a new six-lane span to the east of the northbound bridge. This structure would have reversible lanes and be able to accommodate bus rapid transit (substantially cheaper than light rail). The reversible lanes would provide additional capacity for rush-hour traffic. The new bridge should be tolled so that its costs can be recovered from users. In a second phase, the southbound bridge could be replaced with a structure sized for demand at the time of replacement.

The third phase would be to construct a transit-bike-pedestrian bridge for bus rapid transit. Tracks would be placed in the bridge roadway to allow for conversion to light rail when dictated by demand.

The long-term cost and time frame of final delivery for this proposal would be greater than the existing proposal. However, the initial costs would be less and the initial tolls for a single bridge also would be less. There is no need to toll the Interstate 205 bridge. Travelers would be able to choose between a moderately priced rapid crossing and a free one with some inconvenience.

Oregonians today are less willing to leave these issues to the experts. They want choice, inclusion and more control over major projects. This approach addresses the problem and provides additional checkpoints to let the public weigh in and determine its own fate.

About the Author
Christian Steinbrecher is the president of Ukiah Engineering Inc. and a senior consultant at Capital Project Consultants. Contact him at [email protected]. 

Copyright © 2011 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy