News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-5 Columbia River Crossing (OR/WA)

Started by Tarkus, March 14, 2009, 04:18:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

vdeane

Quote from: Rothman on December 08, 2023, 06:18:36 PM
Quote from: kalvado on December 08, 2023, 12:09:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 08, 2023, 11:44:44 AM
Quote from: kalvado on December 08, 2023, 09:10:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2023, 02:20:25 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 06, 2023, 10:57:07 PM
It would be nice though if they would build it with a future bullet train in mind. Not track work or anything just designed where it can be added in the future if one ever happens.

Has this been talked about in any capacity?

All my exploring in Japan, I'm not sure I've ever seen a Shinkansen share any right of way with an expressway. The two need completely different levels of engineering, it just doesn't make sense for them to come near each other except when physically necessary, which seems to be almost never.
Keep in mind, getting new ROW seems impossible in US.
Too general a statement.  DOTs and even local entities acquire ROW all the time.

That said, whether an entity has either or both 1) access to eminent domain procedures and 2) the resources to purchase the ROW are the main factors, given the significant expense.
Genuine question - do you have a story of actually building a new road/rail on a new ROW corridor in NY?
(sorry for taking this too far out of northwest, mods - please  feel free to move/separate as you see fit)
I am not thinking about a new road in a new development or cutting someone's lawn by 2 feet for a smoother curve or a new ramp, but a really new corridor?
I assume Round lake bypass near me is a relatively recent, but pretty short one...

I've seen a proposed corridor map for high speed rail from Albany to Buffalo, but my impression it was presented with a tongue in a cheek.
Yep, Round Lake Bypass is the most recent upstate example.
Don't forget I-781...

Or I-99 and the Parksville Bypass (future I-86).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.


Bruce

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 08, 2023, 04:30:28 PM
Quote from: Bruce on December 08, 2023, 02:31:35 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2023, 02:20:25 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 06, 2023, 10:57:07 PM
It would be nice though if they would build it with a future bullet train in mind. Not track work or anything just designed where it can be added in the future if one ever happens.

Has this been talked about in any capacity?

All my exploring in Japan, I'm not sure I've ever seen a Shinkansen share any right of way with an expressway. The two need completely different levels of engineering, it just doesn't make sense for them to come near each other except when physically necessary, which seems to be almost never.

This bridge is the wrong location for HSR and there's definitely not enough available funding to cover plans to accommodate it. The focus would be on building a replacement for the downstream BNSF crossing or finding a different route into Portland given the constraints.
Not sure about the routing of the HSR just thought about it because ODOT did that in Tulsa with the I-244 bridge. It allows for a pair of future HSR tracks to be built in the future. I'm not sure about Japan but we aren't built anything like they are so I wouldn't use them as a good comparison though I would like to have their trains here.

WSDOT has experience building bridges with future rail use in mind, namely the Homer M. Hadley Floating Bridge for I-90 westbound and the express lanes until they were turned over to Sound Transit for light rail use. That bridge's design, all the way back to the 1960s, always intended for the center lanes to be switched over to rapid transit when the time was right. In 2025, we'll be able to ride trains on a floating bridge for the first time in U.S. history, assuming the plinth issue is sorted out.

The new SR 520 Evergreen Point Floating Bridge is also theoretically designed with future light rail expansion in mind, but would require extra pontoons and other work that would shut down the bridge for long stretches of time. Since the corridor has far less utility than I-90, it was not chosen.

HSR is a different beast from light rail or rapid transit/metro, though. It needs far smoother grades and curves and its stations need to be hubs in their own right, requiring more room. Downtown Vancouver probably doesn't want to be sliced up by a HSR vidauct.

Bruce

$600 million federal grant for the project, which covers about 10% of the expected cost: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/feds-pledge-600m-for-new-i-5-bridge-linking-washington-and-oregon/

Probably time to rename this thread since the program is just called the "Interstate Bridge Replacement Program".

Bruce

New cost estimate expected this year, and will be larger than the current $5 billion to $7.5 billion range. https://www.opb.org/article/2024/01/03/oregon-washington-transportation-bridge-interstate-five-i5-replacement-project/

At this point, WSDOT and ODOT should consider dividing the project up into two pieces: the bridge replacement and the approach widening/rebuilds. Let everyone argue about the latter (which is the major sticking point) while the most critical part (rebuilding the bridge before it crumbles in an earthquake) is done with little fuss. Light rail would be a given now that it's non-controversial with the sane people on both sides of the river.

Plutonic Panda

No what they need to do is get off their asses and pass a tax to get this thing fully funded and tell people if you don't pass this tax enjoy using the 205 from now on. This is beyond ridiculous.

Bruce

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 04, 2024, 09:45:32 PM
No what they need to do is get off their asses and pass a tax to get this thing fully funded and tell people if you don't pass this tax enjoy using the 205 from now on. This is beyond ridiculous.

1. Washington already passed its "tax".
2. The big holdup is federal funding once an EIS is completed, not the state contributions.
3. It's not "the 205". That is a bus route.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: Bruce on January 04, 2024, 11:33:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 04, 2024, 09:45:32 PM
No what they need to do is get off their asses and pass a tax to get this thing fully funded and tell people if you don't pass this tax enjoy using the 205 from now on. This is beyond ridiculous.

1. Washington already passed its "tax".
2. The big holdup is federal funding once an EIS is completed, not the state contributions.
3. It's not "the 205". That is a bus route.
They're going to have to pass another one or people are going to have to use the 205 to cross the river. Otherwise I guess we'll sit and enjoy this stupid thread discussing a project that needs to get underway much like the conversation over at the ICC Shreveport thread.

kkt

Every time we turn around the Columbia River Crossing suddently costs a lot more.  We'd better get it done soon before it becomes completely unaffordable and they have to shrink the project in some undesirable way.

Rothman



Quote from: Bruce on January 04, 2024, 11:33:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 04, 2024, 09:45:32 PM
No what they need to do is get off their asses and pass a tax to get this thing fully funded and tell people if you don't pass this tax enjoy using the 205 from now on. This is beyond ridiculous.

1. Washington already passed its "tax".
2. The big holdup is federal funding once an EIS is completed, not the state contributions.
3. It's not "the 205". That is a bus route.

Heh.  Saying the big holdup is federal funding is deceitful if that's the official statement from  WSDOT or ODOT whomever.  States have their standing federal apportionments.  To say that they're waiting around for some windfall from the feds would mean they're not really doing anything.  Earmarks rarely cover anything but a small percentage of projects.  Despite the proliferation of federal grant programs, FHWA was still reluctant to grant large amounts to a lot of megaprojects around the country.  So, what are they waiting for, exactly, when it comes to federal funding?  Other states carve out the bulk of highway megaproject funding out of their standing apportionments.

Still, if they're in the middle of developing an EIS, that tells me that this party line of federal funding not being secured is bunk.  You don't devote that kind of money without a plan in mind -- even one you may not being fully sharing with the public.  One reason you'd be reluctant to do so?  All the other cities and towns and whatnot thinking they're getting gypped because of the megaproject sucking up funding.

There's another option besides raising taxes, though:  Borrow the money through bonding to increase the state's contribution.  Rather popular option due to people not liking taxes raised.

Have to say I find the lack of movement on this bridge weirdly inefficient.  NY and its surrounding states have all sorts of standing agreements regarding funding of interstate (lower-case intentional) bridges.  If finding the funding really is an outstanding issue here, Washington and Oregon are simply incompetent...which tells me some sort of funding scheme is already in the works and they're just figuring out when and how to tell the public about it -- especially if the EIS is truly set to be completed.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Sub-Urbanite

They're not in the middle of developing an EIS. They're developing a Supplemental EIS to add to the prior EIS. Much simpler, thankfully.

Yes, there is still an expectation of further federal funding, but a lot of that is, say, FTA match for light rail. If that EIS gets approved, this thing is going.

Quote from: Rothman on January 05, 2024, 07:05:41 AM


Quote from: Bruce on January 04, 2024, 11:33:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 04, 2024, 09:45:32 PM
No what they need to do is get off their asses and pass a tax to get this thing fully funded and tell people if you don't pass this tax enjoy using the 205 from now on. This is beyond ridiculous.

1. Washington already passed its "tax".
2. The big holdup is federal funding once an EIS is completed, not the state contributions.
3. It's not "the 205". That is a bus route.

Heh.  Saying the big holdup is federal funding is deceitful if that's the official statement from  WSDOT or ODOT whomever.  States have their standing federal apportionments.  To say that they're waiting around for some windfall from the feds would mean they're not really doing anything.  Earmarks rarely cover anything but a small percentage of projects.  Despite the proliferation of federal grant programs, FHWA was still reluctant to grant large amounts to a lot of megaprojects around the country.  So, what are they waiting for, exactly, when it comes to federal funding?  Other states carve out the bulk of highway megaproject funding out of their standing apportionments.

Still, if they're in the middle of developing an EIS, that tells me that this party line of federal funding not being secured is bunk.  You don't devote that kind of money without a plan in mind -- even one you may not being fully sharing with the public.  One reason you'd be reluctant to do so?  All the other cities and towns and whatnot thinking they're getting gypped because of the megaproject sucking up funding.

There's another option besides raising taxes, though:  Borrow the money through bonding to increase the state's contribution.  Rather popular option due to people not liking taxes raised.

Have to say I find the lack of movement on this bridge weirdly inefficient.  NY and its surrounding states have all sorts of standing agreements regarding funding of interstate (lower-case intentional) bridges.  If finding the funding really is an outstanding issue here, Washington and Oregon are simply incompetent...which tells me some sort of funding scheme is already in the works and they're just figuring out when and how to tell the public about it -- especially if the EIS is truly set to be completed.

Rothman



Quote from: Sub-Urbanite on January 05, 2024, 04:14:40 PM
They're not in the middle of developing an EIS. They're developing a Supplemental EIS to add to the prior EIS. Much simpler, thankfully.

Yes, there is still an expectation of further federal funding, but a lot of that is, say, FTA match for light rail. If that EIS gets approved, this thing is going.

Then federal funding is not the holdup.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

ErmineNotyours

It ends abruptly.  Maybe there will be a part 2.




Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.