What is CRC?
Columbia River Crossing is a bridge, transit and highway improvement project of the Oregon and Washington transportation departments. The project is designed to improve safety and reduce congestion on a five-mile segment of Interstate 5 (I-5) between Vancouver and Portland.The CRC project will build a replacement I-5 bridge across the Columbia River with a wider pedestrian and bicycle path and extend light rail transit to Vancouver. The project will also improve seven highway interchanges between SR 500 in Vancouver and Columbia Boulevard in Portland.
Why do I-5 and the Interstate Bridge need to be improved?
There are significant congestion, safety, and mobility problems in the five-mile project area between SR 500 in Vancouver and Columbia Blvd. in Portland. If no changes are made, congestion will grow from today’s six hour daily traffic jam to 15 hours per day by 2030. This section of I-5 has an accident rate about double that of similar urban highways in the region. Narrow lanes, short on-ramps, and a lack of safety shoulders on the bridge contribute to accidents. Bridge lifts stall all traffic using I-5, add to unsafe driving conditions and increase accident potential. Trucks hauling freight and public transit buses get stuck in congestion, too. The project’s
problem definition details the specific congestion, safety and mobility problems addressed by the Columbia River Crossing project.
What are the project benefits?
Safer travel and improved design
• No bridge lifts
• Added shoulders and wider lanes
• Improved connections to and from I-5 at seven interchanges
• Increased earthquake protection
• Fewer collisions
More commuter choices and community connections
• Light rail extended from Portland to Vancouver
• Enhanced and wider pedestrian and bike paths
• Reduced travel times
Better freight mobility
• Congestion relief to keep goods moving
• Improved access to ports and highways
Enhanced environmental protection
• Expanded stormwater treatment
• Decreased highway noise in neighborhoods
• Fewer hours when cars are idling in traffic
• Fewer piers in the water to aid protected fish
When did CRC begin?
The project began in fall 2005. Using data developed by the
I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership, CRC worked with a 39-member Task Force, the public, tribal governments and partner agencies to define the primary problems in the project area. Once the problems were identified, ideas were proposed as potential solutions, and evaluation criteria was developed. Five alternatives were studied in the May 2008 Draft Environmental Impact Statement. One Locally Preferred Alternative was endorsed by local partner agencies in July 2008.
Detailed information on the CRC’s history can be found on the
Project History page.
What is the project schedule and when will construction start?
The project currently is refining the
Locally Preferred Alternative (replacement bridge with light rail) to best address the significant congestion, safety and mobility problems on I-5 and meet community needs. Through 2009, the project will work with its Project Sponsors Council,
advisory groups and the public to make decisions on key issues including:
• Number of lanes and design of the I-5 bridge
• Highway and interchange design
• Pedestrian and bicycle path location and design
• Light rail alignment on Hayden Island and in Vancouver
• Travel demand management strategies
• Sustainability plan
• Mitigation and community enhancement planning
• Financing and tolling plan
A Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is expected in early 2010. This document will respond to the comments received on the Draft EIS and present additional analyses on the potential community and environmental effects of the CRC project. The earliest construction could begin is 2012. Construction is anticipated to last five to seven years.
Why can’t we just build a new bridge?
In 2005, CRC with its partners and the public identified six transportation problems in its
Statement of Purpose and Need: congestion, impaired freight movement, limited public transit connectivity and reliability, high crash rates, substandard bicycle and pedestrian facilities and seismic vulnerability. To address the identified problems, CRC will use integrated solutions of high capacity transit, enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities, tolling, and bridge and highway improvements to meet project goals for reduced congestion, improved mobility for transit and freight, and enhanced safety conditions on I-5. The project’s goals would not be met unless multiple strategies are used.
What is the risk to the existing bridges during an earthquake?
The existing bridges do not comply with modern seismic standards and are vulnerable to damage or collapse in an earthquake. The piers of both bridges are built on top of wooden pilings that do not extend into the underlying bedrock of the river. Shaking associated with an earthquake could stress or damage the bridge structures. The loose, sandy layer of soil that supports the bridge piers could lose strength in an earthquake and may begin acting like a liquid. The soil could then suddenly stop providing support for the bridge.
Why does Pearson Field restrict bridge height?
Due to its close proximity to Pearson Field, the height of the replacement bridge must be low enough to allow safe navigable air space for aircraft landing and taking off from the field. The Columbia River Crossing project is working with design options that assume Pearson Air Field will continue to operate as an active air field in its current location. There are several reasons for this:
• Pearson is one of the nation’s oldest operating air fields, and, as such, has historical significance and is part of the national historic reserve.
• Pearson provides a public service for emergency preparedness. During the 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens, the facility was the base of air operations. Air services for Portland Police and Civil Air Patrol currently base out of Pearson.
• About 175 aircraft are based at Pearson and the field supports roughly 50,000 air operations per year. An operation is the combination of one take off and one landing.
The project and the project's
Urban Design Advisory Group (UDAG) are taking into consideration public concern for an aesthetically pleasing bridge. UDAG developed
draft design guidelines to meet these concerns within the constraints of navigational marine and aviation space.
Will the replacement bridge be high enough for boats to pass under without bridge lifts?
Yes, a replacement bridge will be high enough to allow marine traffic to pass underneath without a bridge lift. In consultation with the Coast Guard, the project established a vertical minimum of 95 feet clearance for the replacement bridge (most commercial vessels need 90 feet clearance).
How old is the existing I-5 bridge?
The I-5 bridge, formally known as the Interstate Bridge, is composed of two side-by-side bridges. The northbound bridge was built in 1917 and the southbound bridge in 1958. More information on the bridge’s history can be found in the
About the Bridge page.
Why not keep the existing bridges?
There are several compelling reasons to remove the existing bridges for interstate use:
• The bridge is a traffic bottleneck now and will continue to be in the future, even if a supplemental bridge was built.
• The “hump” in the middle of the bridge contributes to collisions because drivers cannot see if vehicles are stopped in front of them.
• Bridge lifts stop interstate traffic, contributing to congestion, poor transit reliability, collisions, air pollution and back ups to local streets.
• A costly upgrade to the bridge would be necessary to provide earthquake protection.
• Barges must make a difficult “s” turn in the river to avoid a bridge lift or wait until designated hours to call for a lift.
For these reasons, retaining the bridges would not solve the safety, congestion, and mobility problems on I-5.
Upon completion of the new bridge, can you salvage and re-use the existing bridge?
The CRC project does not currently have a plan for re-use of the existing bridge. As the project is further developed and construction plans refined, the project will consider options for the bridge when it is removed.
How will the project improve transit on I-5?
The project will extend light rail from the Portland Expo station across Hayden Island and the Columbia River to Clark College through downtown Vancouver. This extension of the
MAX yellow line would provide riders with transit access to stops throughout the Portland metro area. Existing local bus service and express bus service to downtown Portland will continue.
Will there still be express buses?
Yes. Light rail would be complemented with express bus service to provide direct access for Clark County residents to downtown Portland during peak commute hours. Representatives from TriMet and C-TRAN are working closely with project staff and the community on development of the light rail extension.
Where will the new light rail extension end?
Light rail being built by the CRC project will end at
Clark College.
Can increased transit take the place of a new bridge?
Even with increased transit ridership, travel demand on I-5 is expected to grow. There are safety issues with the existing bridges, interchanges and ramps that can’t be addressed by increased transit service. Safety improvements will lead to better traffic flow and benefit all types of vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists.
What’s the long term plan for high capacity transit to points north or east of the project area?
Information on future plans for high capacity transit in Clark County can be found in the
High Capacity Transit System Study conducted by the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council.
Isn’t the problem on I-5 caused by conditions around Delta Park?
Congestion around Delta Park is being addressed by the Oregon Department of Transportation. Construction began in April 2008 to widen I-5 to three lanes in this area. More information can be found on
ODOT's Web site.
Will CRC make congestion worse at the Rose Quarter and Delta Park?
Our traffic analyses show congestion will not worsen at the Rose Quarter or Delta Park as a result of the CRC project. Most rush hour trips crossing the Columbia River on I-5 get on or off within the project area itself. Between 68 and 75 percent of all cross-river trips enter and/or exit the highway between SR 500 and Marine Drive. Thus, improvements near the bridge will provide congestion relief and safety benefits for many travelers.
The southbound traffic congestion that currently exists near the I-5/I-405 split will not be improved by either the CRC project or the Delta Park project, which is currently under construction. For more information on the Delta Park widening project visit the Oregon Department of Transportation’s
Web site.
How will the project help freight?
Freight mobility and safety will be improved by reducing congestion for all vehicles and improving connections to and from interchanges.
The CRC project has an advisory committee called the
Freight Working Group, which is composed of leaders from various agencies and freight-related businesses. The group meets regularly to advise and inform project staff about freight issues. CRC staff will continue to use input from the Freight Working Group as it refines project design over the next year.
How will the project affect travel times and reliability?
Various bridge, transit and highway improvements made by the project will help increase safety and decrease the number of vehicles and collisions compared to doing nothing by 2030. These elements combined will help improve travel times and reliability. Some specific benefits include:
• Elimination of bridge lifts
• Up to 75 percent fewer collisions
• 5–15 percent less congestion on local streets
• Improved freight mobility
• 23 minute shorter round-trip commute between Clark County fairgrounds area and Rose Quarter
• 5,000 more transit trips over the Columbia River during rush hour each day
Will the project keep HOV lanes on the highway? Will the current ones be expanded?
Currently, the CRC project intends to keep the existing high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on northbound I-5 between the Going St. and Marine Dr. interchanges. Plans for additional HOV lanes would be made on a regional basis in the future.
How will you address all the conditions and desires related to refining the adopted Locally Preferred Alternative–some that are conflicting?
The selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) represents regional consensus on a comprehensive bridge, transit and highway solution for problems on I-5 between Vancouver and Portland. The project is working closely with its partners and the public to address LPA-related recommendations in 2009. Some of the project partner recommendations include:
• The project should create a formal oversight advisory committee.
• The project should continue to develop downtown Vancouver light rail alignment options and define impacts/costs in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
• Design of CRC should reflect principals of sustainability, cost efficiency and context sensitivity.
• An independent review of the greenhouse gas analysis found in the CRC Draft EIS should be conducted.
• An independent review of the travel demand model found in the CRC Draft EIS should be conducted.
The CRC Project Sponsors Council (PSC) will be advising the departments of transportation on how to address the recommendations and move forward.
Why was a replacement bridge selected instead of keeping the existing bridges and building a supplemental bridge?
Technical findings in the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) show that a replacement river crossing would provide greater congestion relief, more traffic capacity, safer highway features, greater improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians, safer river navigation, have less community effects on Hayden Island, and better accommodate future waterfront development compared to the supplemental crossing.
The six local project sponsors considered these findings along with the Task Force recommendation and about 1,600 public comments when they selected a replacement bridge as part of the project’s Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) in July 2008.
What alternatives were analyzed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement?
The alternatives studied were:
• No build
• Replacement bridge with bus rapid transit
• Replacement bridge with light rail
• Supplemental bridge with bus rapid transit
• Supplemental bridge with light rail
The results of the analyses are described in the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which was published on May 2, 2008.
What other bridge options were considered?
Many congestion relief ideas have been proposed and analyzed as part of the CRC project. Several were rejected because they did not address the project’s goals as identified in the
Purpose and Need. Others were dropped when a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) was selected. Some of the bridge options considered but not advanced include:
• Third highway river crossing
• Tunnel
• Arterial bridge
• Upstream bridge
• Supplemental bridge
More information on bridge options considered and why they did not advance can be found on the
Ideas Considered and Dropped page.
What other transit options were considered?
Many transit ideas have been proposed and analyzed as part of the CRC project. Some of the transit modes considered before selecting light rail include:
• Commuter rail
• Ferry
• Street car
• Bus rapid transit
Information on other transit modes considered prior to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement can be found on the
Ideas Considered and Dropped page.
Why did the CRC project study a "no build" alternative?
A no build alternative is required by the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and serves as a baseline for comparison with other alternatives. Under this scenario, the existing Interstate Bridge and public transit systems would remain. Only improvements likely to receive funding and be constructed in the Metro and southwest Washington regional transportation plans were considered.
Why not build a tunnel under the river?
Building a tunnel was one of the several river crossing options considered by the project. It is possible to build a tunnel, but it would be difficult to match a tunnel with the existing grades of the roadways on either side of the river. This would cause the tunnel to bypass at least two interchanges in the project area that provide access to: Vancouver City Center, SR 14 and Hayden Island. A tunnel would also require the creation of an intricate system of arterials east and west of the tunnel for vehicles to access the portals in and out of the structure. This arterial system would require more acquisition of right of way and result in more environmental and archeological effects than other alternatives considered.
Did the project study less expensive options than the replacement bridge with light rail?
Yes, less expensive alternatives were studied. The project considered four “build” alternatives and a “no build” alternative when selecting a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). Two of the alternatives would have retained the existing structures and were estimated to have a slightly lower construction cost. However, these alternatives didn’t address many of the safety problems with the existing bridge, provided less relief from congestion and would have cost more to maintain.
The five alternatives are analyzed in the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) released on May 2, 2008. The project’s six local partner agencies selected a replacement I-5 bridge with light rail as the LPA because it provides the best opportunity to meet the community’s needs and help address congestion, mobility and safety problems in the project area.
Information on other options considered can be found on the
Ideas Considered and Dropped page.
Do bridge cost estimates include operations and maintenance costs?
Current estimates are construction costs and do not include operations and maintenance costs. The financial scenarios outlined in the Financial Analysis chapter of the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement describe possible funding sources for expected capital costs. With a Locally Preferred Alternative selected, the project is now refining cost estimates and exploring potential funding sources in more detail. Cost estimates will be updated in 2009. Over the next year, tolling and financing plans will be developed.
How much will the project cost?
The November 2009 cost estimate range is $2.6 to $3.6 billion (year of expenditure dollars) to fund all three elements of the project: bridge, transit and highway improvements. Construction is assumed to begin in 2012 and last five to seven years. There are still many design decisions to be made that will inform the cost estimate and provide more certainty as the project development process continues.
How much would a toll cost?
A toll rate or policy has not been determined yet. The project is working closely with its partners on the next phase of project development. This phase includes making decisions on elements such as funding options and tolling. The toll amount will depend upon the cost of the project, the amount of revenues raised by other sources, and the type of operational activities funded by the tolls, among other things.
The toll modeled in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement is a variable toll that ranges from $1 during non-peak travel times to $2.50 during peak travel times. These figures were for study purposes only.
Would there be a toll for traffic in both directions?
A toll on the I-5 bridge is assumed to be for all vehicles on the highway traveling in both directions. No toll is expected for individuals crossing the Columbia River on transit, bicycle or by foot.
Will tolling the I-5 Bridge create more congestion?
There will be no toll booths on I-5. There are new electronic tolling technologies that allow drivers to pay a toll without slowing down or stopping. The project will study all the latest technology for automated tolling before selecting the option that best meets the needs of the region.
Can low income residents receive reduced tolls?
At this time, it is unknown if any reduced cost tolls will be made available. Discussions with the community about potential tolling scenarios will occur in 2009. Reduced tolls for some people is a suggestion that has been made to CRC.
What are add/drop lanes?
An add/drop lane, also called an auxiliary lane, is a dedicated lane between two or more highway interchanges that provides motorists with more time and extra room to speed up or slow down and merge when entering or exiting a highway.
How will CRC improve safety for the traveling public?
The CRC project includes a range of safety and design improvement projects. Some of those improvements include:
• New bridge structures high enough for marine traffic, eliminating the need for a lift span
• Addition of safety shoulders for stalled vehicles and incident responders
• Better sight lines so drivers can see over the crest of the bridge, reducing the potential for rear-end collisions during congested periods
• Add/drop lanes to allow drivers to safely merge into traffic, and improve connections between interchanges
• A wider and safer path for pedestrians and bicyclists
How will the project improve safety for people who walk or bike across the bridge?
A replacement bridge over the Columbia River will include an improved pedestrian and bicycle path at least 16 feet wide, meeting current design standards. Other improvements could include:
• Protection from traffic noise and debris
• More direct connections on each side of the river and better links to public transit
• New or enhanced sidewalks, bike lanes and crosswalks
What is the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee’s role on the project?
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PBAC) develops recommendations to enhance CRC facilities and connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. PBAC recognizes that a replacement bridge offers the best opportunity to create safe and direct bicycle and pedestrian routes and recommends construction of a “world class” facility to meet demand well into the future. The committee will continue to discuss recommendations for local streets, improvements to interchanges, and pathway and sidewalk connections.
Visit the PBAC page for information on when the committee meets and to view meeting materials.
What is CRC doing to ensure an attractive bridge will be built?
The project and the project's Urban Design Advisory Group (UDAG) are taking into consideration public concern for an aesthetically pleasing bridge. UDAG advises CRC on the appearance and design of bridge, transit and highway improvements. This bi-state group is led by Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard and Portland Mayor Sam Adams.
The 14 members from Oregon and Washington contribute diverse professional and community perspectives on a variety of topics including architecture, aesthetic design, cultural and historic resources, community connections, and sustainability. UDAG developed draft design guidelines to meet these concerns as well as the constraints of navigational marine and aviation space.
Visit the UDAG page for more information on the committee and to view meeting materials.
What are the recommendations of the CRC Urban Design Advisory Group?
The CRC’s Urban Design Advisory Group developed
draft design guidelines that will help inform project staff on continuing design efforts. Draft guidelines call for protecting views of natural resources, improving community connections and relating designs to their setting.
Will the project support transit oriented development?
The project supports transit oriented development, reinforcing areas where people want to live, work and shop, without having to rely on a car. Research suggests that light rail is likely to attract more investment around transit stations, which would better allow the cities of Vancouver and Portland to attain locally and regionally adopted land use goals for compact, transit oriented development. CRC promotes walkable, dense land uses by placing transit in the existing urban core of Hayden Island and downtown Vancouver.
What are the air quality effects?
The CRC Draft Environmental Impact Statement presents an analysis of the project’s effect on concentrations of the Environmental Protection Agency’s criteria pollutants and mobile source air toxics. The analysis found that all alternatives (including no build) would result in a decline of emissions in 2030:
• Carbon monoxide – 30 percent reduction
• Nitrogen oxides – 70 percent reduction
• Volatile organic compounds – 50 percent reduction
• Particulate matter – 90 percent reduction
These air quality improvements are primarily due to cleaner fuels, cleaner engines and more fuel efficient vehicles.
The CRC project will incorporate many features which are likely to further reduce emissions, including congestion reduction, highway safety improvements, tolling, more transit options and pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements.
How will the project affect greenhouse gas emissions?
The main way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions produced by the transportation system is to reduce the amount of carbon-based fuel consumed by drivers. This can be achieved by:
• Creating more efficient driving conditions
• Reducing the amount of driving
• Developing more fuel-efficient vehicles
• Reducing the carbon content of fuel
The reduction of vehicle use and congestion by eliminating bridge lifts, charging bridge tolls, adding transit, and improving existing infrastructure and pedestrian and bicycle facilities is expected to help the region reduce greenhouse gas emissions. An independent panel agreed with CRC’s conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced with the project. Estimates are currently being refined for the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
How are tribes involved in the project?
Several
Tribal Governments have an interest in the project due to the rich history and prehistoric settlements and activity in and around Fort Vancouver. Ultimately, the project will benefit from the expertise and knowledge the tribes bring regarding natural and cultural resources in the project area. The Columbia River Crossing project is consulting with eight Tribal Governments on an ongoing basis to learn and address any identified concerns: Yakima Nation, Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, Nez Perce Indian Tribe, Confederated Tribes of Umatilla, Cowlitz Indian Tribe, Confederated Tribes of Siletz, Spokane Indian Tribe.
What advisory groups provide input to the project?
Several citizen advisory groups provide ongoing input to the project’s planning process: Project Sponsors Council, Freight Working Group, Community and Environmental Justice Group, Urban Design Advisory Group, Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee and Vancouver Working Group. These groups ensure the values and interests of the community are reflected as the project makes decisions. Visit the
project partners page for information on each advisory group.
What is the Project Sponsors Council?
The Governors of Oregon and Washington formed the Project Sponsors Council (PSC) to advise the departments of transportation on project development. This 10 member committee includes representatives from each of the project partner agencies and is led by two citizen co-chairs.
PSC recommendations will be made after considering technical information, receiving input from advisory groups and reviewing public comments.
This group is charged with advising the project on these issues:
1. Completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement,
2. Project design, including but not limited to: examining ways to provide an efficient solution that meets safety, transportation and environmental goals,
3. Timelines associated with project development,
4. Development and use of sustainable construction methods,
5. Ensuring the project is consistent with Oregon and Washington’s statutory reduction goals for greenhouse gas emissions, and
6. A finance plan that balances revenue generation and demand management.
What happens with public comments?
As the project is further refined over the next year, public comment is encouraged and will be critical to the project development process. Comments can be submitted at any CRC-sponsored event or at any time in person, via e-mail, mail, telephone or fax. Click here for an online comment form.
Comments are presented to project partners on a monthly basis and help shape the project by informing local decision makers about public opinion and ensuring that community, natural and cultural resources and effects are fully identified and evaluated.
More than 1,600 public comments were received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). These comments were considered by the local partners when selecting the Locally Preferred Alternative and will be responded to in the Final EIS, expected in early 2010.
How can I get involved?
• Submit comments on the project
• Contact the project office to meet or talk one-on-one with a staff member
• Attend an advisory group meeting
• Invite CRC staff to an event or meeting to discuss the project
Ongoing public involvement is necessary for successful project development. As various project elements and design are refined, the project intends to keep the public well informed and will use input and comments received to ensure the project addresses transportation problems and meets community needs. Project staff welcomes your interest.
How can I contact the project?
• E-mail:
feedback@columbiarivercrossing.org• Mail: 700 Washington Street, Suite 300
• Vancouver, WA 98660
• Phone: 360-737-2726 or 503-256-2726 or 866-396-2726
• Fax: 360-737-0294
Will the current I-5 Bridge remain open during construction of the new bridge?
Yes, the current I-5 bridge will remain open during construction. Some short strategic closures will be necessary and will likely occur outside of peak travel times.
Will homes and businesses be affected by construction?
Because the exact alignment is not fully defined, construction effects on existing homes and businesses are not known. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identifies the potential impacts to homes and businesses in the project area as well as effects to community, natural and cultural resources. The project is working to stay within the existing right of way, but some temporary and permanent land acquisitions and easements will be unavoidable. Further analysis on property effects will be published in the Final EIS, expected in early 2010. CRC will work with the cities and residents to provide notice of unavoidable inconveniences and to work within city construction guidelines.
When would construction begin?
The earliest construction could begin is 2012. Construction is anticipated to last five to seven years.