Mar 2, 2008

Washington Legislator Pushes 3rd Columbia River Crossing

In today's Columbian,Washington State Senator Don Benton (R-Vancouver) continues his advocacy of a third corridor across the Columbia River instead of the Columbia River Crossing which would replace the current I-5 bridge.

Excerpt's from Sen. Benton's opinion piece in the Columbian:

"The only real long-term solution to measurable congestion relief is a new corridor over the river, either from Camas to Troutdale or Ridgefield to St. Helens.

A third bridge would have a far greater impact on congestion and travel time and would save taxpayers in the long run. A replacement bridge will provide only minimal benefits, while putting us in the same position we are in now 10 years or less down the road.

I deeply regret that the Columbia River Crossing project is becoming a boondoggle. And if the plan finally approved includes light rail, then the process has been a total waste of time and precious taxpayer resources. I want to champion a solution that benefits our community, but I cannot support a $6 billion project that we know will not reduce congestion."

You can read the Columbian's editorial response here.


Boliver-S said...

Since most of the future growth to our north will be east of I-5, why not?

Anandakos said...

What trips would be served by a bridge between Camas and Troutdale? There are no arterials of any size leading north from Camas or south from Troutdale.

Ditto Ridgefield to St. Helens. Who would be traveling from north Clark County to St. Helens or vice versa? Without some grandiose western loop around Portland near Hillsboro, this would serve very few people.

If you want to improve connections between Clark County and Washington County -- a good idea -- a tunnel through the ridge at the south end of the St. Johns bridge or a new CR crossing linking to Cornelius Pass road would be a more cost effective way to accomplish it. St. Helens is very much too far north.