Most Recent Comments

I am opposed to the current design of the bridge because I do not feel it will do enough to mitigate risks related to the climate crisis. Specifically the bridge will not promote reduced traffic, and it does not include sufficient considerations for public transit—an essential planning considerations. The bridge should include stations to support four-car trains now. In addition the plan should be forecasting for even higher-capacity transit systems, such as Bus Rapid Transit or heavy rail, beyond 2045. This is a critical moment to be planning for our future—we can no longer put off today’s problems for future generations to deal with.

Additional comments from me. Please delete light rail because it is just too expensive to build, maintain , operate. We need & deserve more through lanes. At least one more in each direction. Tolls are unfair. The bridge is essential to whole state, so everyone should help pay. Use an efficient in place tax. People without kids ir grand kids pay a lot for public schools. The bridge and freeways are the same thing. Thanks, I have written earlier.

I am concerned that the current replacement plans for the I-5 bridge do not adequately prioritize sustainable and multimodal transportation options. The proposed designs lack dedicated pathways for bike users and fail to emphasize robust public transit infrastructure. To effectively alleviate congestion, the new bridge must provide viable alternatives to driving. This means incorporating safe and accessible pathways for cyclists, as well as dedicated infrastructure for public transit, such as bus or light rail systems. Without these, the project misses a critical opportunity to reduce car dependency and support long-term mobility solutions. Additionally, the project appears to be based on outdated data projecting significantly higher car usage than is currently anticipated. This has led to an oversized design that does not reflect present or future transportation trends. Oversized infrastructure may provide short-term congestion relief but, due to the phenomenon of induced demand, will likely worsen traffic in the long term. Such projects also burden local governments with excessive maintenance costs far into the future. I urge the project team to appropriately scale the bridge replacement to current traffic projections and prioritize alternative transit solutions. A right-sized bridge that supports biking and public transportation is essential for reducing congestion sustainably, fostering equitable access, and creating a resilient transportation network for the future.

It appears that much of the focus has been on long-haul trucking and auto excursions that are many hours in duration. However, I believe that if there is a focus on enabling rapid, easy transit between the Vancouver and Portland metropolitan areas for everything from pedestrian traffic to rail transit, this project will succeed in reducing overall congestion by incentivizing the local travel to utilize options other than automobiles. Thus, the project should focus on placing transit lines adjacent to multi-use paths allows for easy and efficient transfers between biking, walking, and public transit. This can significantly enhance the user experience by minimizing the distance travelers must cover to switch modes of transportation.

The IBR project must prioritize equity and justice in its implementation: 1. Tolling Equity Program: - Implement low-income toll discounts from day one of pre-completion tolling - Ensure program is accessible and well-publicized - Create clear qualification criteria and simple application process - Monitor and adjust program based on community feedback 2. Impact Mitigation: - Historically marginalized communities bear disproportionate impacts - Address noise pollution through design and mitigation measures - Ensure toll structure doesn't create additional burdens - Implement targeted solutions for affected neighborhoods The project scope requires careful reconsideration: 1. Second Auxiliary Lane: - DSEIS lacks adequate justification for this addition - Increased lanes may induce additional demand - Cost-benefit analysis appears incomplete - Alternative solutions should be explored 2. Project Focus: - Prioritize essential bridge replacement - Enhance transit and active transportation infrastructure - Limit unnecessary freeway expansion - Focus on cost-effective, sustainable solutions Each of these aspects deserves careful consideration to ensure the IBR project serves all community members effectively while promoting sustainable transportation options for future generations.

I am submitting this comment regarding the IBR project's transportation components. The current design requires significant improvements to ensure safety, accessibility, and seamless integration with transit: 1. Side-by-side Integration: The multi-use path and transit facilities must be located on the same side of the bridge. This would: - Enable seamless transfers between modes - Allow shared use of transit elevators - Enhance safety through increased visibility and activity - Provide emergency egress options - Support true multi-modal transportation goals 2. Vancouver Connectivity: The current design's "Vancouver dip" creates unacceptable barriers: - The half-mile spiral ramp adds significant out-of-direction travel - Forcing users to descend to the waterfront only to climb back up is inefficient and ableist - The path should remain elevated and extend to Evergreen Boulevard - This would eliminate unnecessary elevation changes and improve accessibility 3. Portland Connections: The project must enhance connectivity to existing networks: - Add direct connections to the Vancouver/Williams corridor - Improve integration with the Kenton/Denver Avenue link - Ensure seamless transitions to existing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure 4. Safety and Comfort: Position transit lanes as buffers between the multi-use path and vehicle lanes to: - Reduce exposure to traffic noise - Minimize debris from vehicles - Create a more comfortable user experience - Enhance overall safety for active transportation users The IBR project must prioritize forward-thinking transit design that accommodates future growth and changing transportation needs: 5. Future Capacity Requirements: - All stations should be designed to accommodate four-car trains - This aligns with planned downtown transit tunnel upgrades - Prevents costly retrofits in the future - Ensures seamless system integration 6. Long-term Transit Planning: - Design should accommodate future high-capacity transit systems - Consider potential for multi-lane Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) - Plan for possible heavy rail integration - Look beyond the 2045 EIS horizon to ensure infrastructure adaptability 7. Traffic Modeling Concerns: - Current models must accurately account for induced demand - Realistic projections are essential for proper transit system sizing - Better modeling will ensure appropriate capacity planning - Transit infrastructure must be sized for actual future needs

I believe the Interstate Bridge should be future proofed against the inevitable congestion and environmental impact that will come from adding highway lanes, by creating expandable infrastructure for public transit and multi-use Bike/LEV pathways, rather than prioritizing inefficient private car transit. Rail stations should be built with the expectation of future expansion to higher capacity four-car trains and heavy rail. Any plan with projections on the presumed use of the finished project that does not take into account the effects of induced demand is simply misleading the public. Portland needs to reaffirm a commitment to thoughtfully implemented public works and a design ethos that prioritizes humans rather than vehicles. Induced demand from highway expansion will not only mean congestion in the project area, but will inevitably flood more vehicles into adjoining areas that already suffer from insufficient capacity and dangerous speeding. The city needs to prioritize the average person being able to easily reduce the number of trips they take by car in a year rather than fueling an inexhaustible demand for vehicle space by continually prioritizing the mode of transportation least equipped to solve any of the city's broader transit needs.

The project needs to consider connections to nearby neighborhood hubs, leveraging the public transportation already active, thus extending the utility of a comprehensive transit system: - **Vancouver**: Extending the multi-use path to connect with the Evergreen area can eliminate the need for navigating challenging routes, such as a 100-foot high spiral. This extension can make the path more accessible and appealing to a wider range of users, encouraging more people to opt for cycling or walking. - **Portland**: Improving connectivity by adding links to existing popular corridors, such as the Vancouver/Williams corridor, can enhance the utility of the multi-use path network. These connections can provide users with more direct routes and improve access to key destinations. Additionally, incorporating the planned Kenton/Denver Ave. link can further integrate the path into the city’s broader transportation network.

Oregon owes a lot of its strengths to rail infrastructure, much of which unfortunately no longer even exists (including the Oregon Electric and Red Electric Interurban Passenger Railways, an elaborate and extensive streetcar grid they interfaced with as well as an integrated bunch of trolley lines.) The turncoat auto industry lobbied to have our taxpayer dollars funded passenger interurban and municipal routes torn out and paved over or else neglected into failure after privatization in acts of premeditated sabotage and treachery; this is before they further betrayed the nation by moving manufacturing out of country decimating the American workforce only to be rewarded for this subversion by being subsidized by our taxes along with being bailed out multiple times only for the executives to pocket the money we were taxed for their personal profits of plunder and pilfering pillage. The further we move away from the logical layout provided by intricate streetcar grids and electric commuter interurban railroads the uglier and less livable the city and its suburbs become. An intelligent coastal city would take advantage of this limited time of people crowding in to install city assets that will benefit us for generations such as a rail route beneath the Willamette meaning the Steel Bridge won’t break the light rail circuit interrupting all MAX lines every time it lifts, and railway going between Vancouver and Portland when the new bridge is finally finished. I-5 should be buried on the inner east side stretch to make the area tolerable and reclaim space for the Black community to rebuild their community they had stolen from them. The WES should expand to extend at least down to Salem reuniting the Portland metropolitan area with our capital. It makes perfect sense to build the full Southwest Corridor (Purple) MAX Line (which will connect with the WES dramatically increasing ridership) with railway stations on Marquam Hill and at Portland Community College Sylvania Campus, for example, and zero sense not to. Electric cars destroy the environment as ICE cars do through resource mining, manufacturing processes and ultimately going to the landfill in mass droves. The pollution they cause is simply unnecessary as is the amount of urban space squandered on parking and other paved over autocentric wastes. MORE VEHICLES ON THE ROAD MEANS MORE AVOIDABLE DEATHS WILL CONTINUE TO CONSTANTLY OCCUR! They also perpetuate redlining, urban sprawl, the food deserts that come from that invariably, along with cities that are not navigable as a pedestrian or bicyclist and are, in fact, hostile to humanity along with being lethally horrendous towards animals. They add to traffic congestion. Commodification of societal needs and normalization of trying to substitute rampant consumerism where we need standardized, regulated and uniform public utilities doesn’t work. Profit motive always hurts the public in such cases. Putting the financial burden of transportation inefficiently and directly on the individual citizen is simply not wise or fair and hasn’t been the norm for even 80 years. We need to invest in commuter rail that’s properly implemented as it typically is overseas. A commuter rail system is an engineering marvel while buses are just buses. The most reliable predictor of a neighborhood being impoverished is if it has no commuter rail connection. The American people are apathetic through decades of disenfranchisement and a lot of that marginalization (eg Robert Moses’s racist urban renewal) is through divestment of public infrastructure, utilities and programs to help the American people. We can’t undo the social inequities inflicted upon and retained by redlining until we transcend the highway robbery carcentric built habitat that physically structurally reinforces them. We’re past the point of car dominated transportation being anything better than a tragic hindrance or an outright travesty. Public works projects materially improving life for the taxpaying citizenry will bolster civic pride.  Transcontinental High Speed Rail should integrate seamlessly with commuter rail networks so it can evenly function as one cohesive system and this will convert flyover country (CONUS flights should be virtually eliminated) back into a thriving heartland by functioning as an artery of commute and commerce which will reduce clustering on the coasts. Similarly, wholly integrated circuits of commuter rail blended with interurban routes, light rail lines, street car grids, subways, and even trolleys along with electric ferries functioning together as a comprehensive, coherent series of interwoven systems would prevent people from having to live on top of each other in city centers in order to have quick access to urban cores and downtown areas so this would stimulate our local economies and prevent gentrification from demolishing  cherished heirlooms of our historicity, destroying our classic neighborhoods, shredding the fabric of our communities and toppling our civic landmarks and architectural heirlooms along with other social capital such as venerable culture generating venues. We lost so many marvelous structures for nothing more than mere surface lots as our city was hollowed out on the heels of white flight to the lily white, poorly planned suburbs. Whole swaths of communities were obliterated in a racist/classist attack on the people of Portland and we lost entire neighborhoods along with cultural centers such as the Jazz District, our Italian and Jewish neighborhoods as well as other minorities who weren’t even assisted with any sort of fair, decent assistance to relocate. Proud people were disdainfully discarded as a diaspora of detritus. The absolute annihilation of our city still adversely hinders us collectively to this hamstrung day, particularly the groups targeted intensely, even if so many folk don’t know enough to connect the dots of cause and effect. Numerous studies show that built environments of homogenously bleak and bland duplitecture dreck that profiteering developers push on us for their privatized gains to our public loss for the riches of themselves and corporate slumlords not only cause homelessness from being financially inaccessible to most Americans, but also cause depression from creating such a devastatingly sterile, cold, unloving urban habitat that’s too congested and overcrowded to work properly as a correctly engineered built environment. Our roadways are overcrowded and no amount of widening them and adding lanes will do anything to help it because it just leads to induced demand that inevitably grinds to a halt at snags and bottlenecks down the road. Shouldn’t American cities be thriving centers of culture and character rather than austere and chintzy morasses of mediocrity?  I believe that we can design the cities of our nation to reflect a future that embraces humanity and that we also must for America to have any sort of a bright future ahead of it. Right now we are mired in the destruction of our cities from the inward attacking neocolonial oppressors who weaponize their clout of wealth against the nation for their own off-shore un-American gains of privileged, parasitic, private profits. This greed fueled anti-social exploitation is present day feudalism driving us into another gilded age. Tons of new petrochemical building  “luxury living” housing units remain empty serving only as financial assets in investment portfolios of hedge fund, “private equity” and permanent capital firm cretins sheltering dubiously acquired wealth instead of as direly needed shelter for humans. We deserve a landscape we can be proud of and country should come first before corporate looting and exploitation. Legacies are important and live on forever.  With space opened up in our cities we could rebuild beloved structures now gone missing from economic and environmental disaster utilizing new technologies such as hempcrete and 3-D printing. We could create vertical agriculture, green pocket areas, etc. on spots currently now just serving as paved over squares and nothing more. 20% of Portland is parking lots and paved over area not even suitable for that inefficient usage. We can extend democracy into offering the taxpayer residents democratic say in what their city consists of, how it looks and how it operates promoting civic engagement and participation.

I would like to see higher tolls during times of peak use. Specifically, I would like to have real time pricing that keeps going up whenever there is too much traffic. Ideally, with no cap on maximum tolls.

Based on the information in the DEIS, there is no clear need for a second auxiliary lane. Please consider eliminating this lane to save resources and reduce the already significant environmental effects of the project.

As someone who drives, bikes, and takes transit across the Columbia River, I think it's important that the new crossing better handle connections between active transportation and public/mass transportation. This is a huge investment of public resources and must align with our long term climate and mobility goals and not just short term congestion. Active transportation like walking, biking, scooters, etc. need to have easy and efficient connections with public/mass transit to make the system function as a whole and to provide options for people who can't or opt not to drive. From what I can tell the current plan would add a considerable distance and elevation gain to my bike ride across the bridge. My guess is that this will act as a deterrent to people who would otherwise be interested in walking, biking, or using other active means to cross the river. We should be incentivizing these modes or travel, instead of deterring them! Thank you for your consideration in developing a crossing that matches our region's values and is a good use of public funds given the numerous challenges we face.

I would very much appreciate it if you could minimize the amount of land that you take for this freeway widening plan. Along these lines I would prefer no auxiliary lanes.

The currently proposed Beam style bridge is hideous!!! Why would anyone want such an ugly, outdated looking monstrosity in the midst of such a beautiful landscape? In this day and age there are many preferable options and engineering feats possible that both Portland and Vancouver and the Columbia River deserve. You have got to do better than this unacceptable eyesore! American Infrastructure should look to designs worldwide that offer beauty and creativity, affordability and reliability. We are very behind the rest of the planet and need to catch up when it comes to world class design and engineering of bridges. Cable-Stayed Bridges– Fast construction time compared to other bridge types. More rigid than suspension bridges. Cost-effective. Can be aesthetically pleasing. Multiple design options: (e.g., side-spar, cantilever-spar, multiple-span, cradle-system designs). Suspension Bridges – The best bridge type for creating the longest spans with minimum piers. Regarded by many as aesthetically pleasing – creating a landmark for the community. The waterway can be left open while the bridge is under construction – (almost all of the work takes place on the top of the bridge). Flexibility – design allows for deck sections to be replaced. Can be built with a high deck, allowing plenty of clearance for passing ships. The rest of the world has been building highly functional and esthetically pleasing bridges for decades while the US has allowed it’s infrastructure to crumble. We deserve a stunningly beautiful and superbly designed and engineered bridge crossing at the magnificent Columbia River that drivers will be willing to pay crossing fees for and be proud of for many years to come. I strongly suggest contacting European and Asian bridge design companies for help as they are decades ahead of American design in this field.

Wetlands and floodplains are essential to maintaining water quality, flood resilience, absorption of excessive heat, and wildlife. The Willamette Valley has already lost nearly 60% of its wetlands, and this has vastly increased the metro area's vulnerability to flood events. Accordingly, it is highly concerning that this project will result in the permanent filling of over a half-acre of wetlands, and over 7 acres of wetland buffers (with at least 2.56 acres experiencing temporary effects). It is notable, too, that the Vanport wetland will lose 3.5 acres of its wetland buffer--this is an existing wetland mitigation site and is very important to wildlife. The full impacts of these lost acres should be analyzed and mitigation ratios and practices consistent with the National Marine Fisheries Service's 2016 Biological Opinion should be implemented, even where these mitigation requirements exceed the City of Portland's.

With the rise of e-bikes a 25' shared-use path is insufficient. At the very minimum you should provide three 6' lanes in each direction. This will allow pedestrians, slow cyclists, and fast cyclist to be separated from each other. Obviously, 3x6x2 = 36'

Hi, Thank you for accepting comments on the Interstate Crossing. I live in NE Portland close to the I-5. I fully support tolls but I am worried about how they will impact the most vulnerable members of our community. We MUST implement a low-income toll discount program from day one -- working families cannot wait for this. You must talk with these communities to figure out how to meet their needs otherwise the plan won't be successful. I also want to emphasize how important easily accessible public transport and bike transportation is to me. In order for families and older people to feel comfortable using bike lanes, they MUST have physical barriers from traffic. Also, it needs to connect to popular bike corridors like Williams / Vancouver without any dangerous segments. Finally, climate change is here and only going to get stronger. We must future proof this bridge to accommodate more and better multimodal transportations as we (hopefully!) move away from car-centric transportation. thank you, Sarah

I have reviewed the lengthy Interstate Bridge Draft Environmental Statement and accompanying supplemental materials. After studying the documents, I have several concerns regarding the project’s impact on pedestrians, bicyclists, local businesses, and the environment. First, the design of the bridge and associated roadway expansion prioritizes motor vehicle traffic at the expense of accessible and convenient options for pedestrians and cyclists. While the project significantly increases capacity for cars—adding four additional motor vehicle lanes (expanding from 10 to 14 lanes) under Evergreen Blvd. in Vancouver—there is little consideration for enhancing active transportation infrastructure. This expansion of concrete will displace green spaces, destroy local businesses, and disrupt the character of the downtown Vancouver area, including the historic Fort Vancouver region. The addition of four motor vehicle lanes represents a 28% increase in the highway’s width, which will not only consume more land and vegetation, but will also contribute to higher levels of air pollution, tire byproducts, and noise, all of which will negatively affect the core of Vancouver. I am also concerned about the design of the bicycle and pedestrian pathways, which are both cumbersome and impractical. On the Vancouver side, the access ramps for these pathways are awkwardly designed, forcing active transportation users to navigate convoluted routes to reach the bridge's elevated pathway, which is 100 feet (10 stories) above the ground. This will create a tall and exposed crossing with significant wind, noise, and temperature challenges—likely deterring people from choosing walking or biking as viable options. The lack of shading and greenery along these pathways will exacerbate the impact of the elements, making the crossing uncomfortable, especially in summer months. Additionally, the wider motor vehicle lanes on Hayden Island will displace thriving local businesses, increase air and noise pollution, and elevate the cost of maintenance. This expansion will also worsen congestion throughout the I-5 corridor in Vancouver and Portland, ultimately creating a more polluted and less efficient transportation environment for everyone. Another issue is the bicycle and pedestrian access to North Portland. The route provided for non-motorized traffic is circuitous and indirect, making it significantly harder to navigate compared to the direct path offered to motor vehicles. This undermines the goal of providing efficient, equitable access for all modes of transportation. As someone who works in active transportation within city government, I’ve seen firsthand the many benefits that walking, biking, and rolling can bring to a community. These modes of transport help improve public health, reduce congestion, lower carbon emissions, and provide more equitable access to essential services. I have witnessed how communities thrive when people have safe, convenient, and accessible routes for walking and biking. Investing in active transportation infrastructure is a crucial step toward creating healthier, more sustainable, and livable cities, and it’s disheartening to see these needs sidelined in favor of more car-centric solutions. Furthermore, it’s important to note that expanding highways and adding more lanes rarely leads to reduced congestion in the long run. History has shown that instead of easing traffic flows, wider roads simply encourage more people to drive, until the expanded capacity fills up again, leading to gridlock just as bad—if not worse—than before. The addition of more lanes only serves to attract more cars, ultimately clogging up the roadway and failing to solve the core problem of traffic congestion. In conclusion, the current design of the Interstate Bridge project negatively impacts human health, local development, and environmental sustainability. It expands motor vehicle use, increases pollution, and undermines climate goals, while offering minimal improvements for active transportation. The project should be reconsidered and scaled back to provide safer, more efficient options for pedestrians, cyclists, and public transit users.

I'm strongly in favor of more pedestrian, bicycle and mass transit options for the Interstate Bridge Replacement. As a native Oregonian, bike rider since age 6 and current bicyclist, walker and mass transit rider in Portland as often as realistically possible, this is of utmost importance. I'm also in favor of any plans that will lessen the burden on people of low incomes, people commuting to low pay jobs via the Interstate Bridge. For the sake of our precious environment, our lead resourced citizens, please make the right choice on valuing these aspects. Thank you, Mary Scott, ND

Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon is a state-wide association of faith groups dedicated to serving Oregon’s disadvantaged communities through our direct service programs and advocacy. We recognize the need for seismic improvement projects like the IBR, especially in such an important transportation corridor. However, we do not support the project as it stands. The current plan would misallocate billions of dollars to an unnecessary freeway expansion. The potentially disastrous health and climate impacts of the project would be disproportionately borne by disadvantaged communities. Our programs like the Northeast Emergency Food Program, and HIV Day Center serve thousands of BIPOC, immigrant, and low-income clients throughout Portland and the IBR must consider the needs of these communities. For that reason, we support the ODOT Equity and Mobility Advisory Committee's recommendation for a 50% toll discount for low-income households and share the Just Crossing Alliances' disappointment that such a 50% discount is not assumed to be in place at the inception of pre-completion tolling. Lastly, as a state-wide organization, we believe that the $3 billion freeway expansion would disproportionately benefit wealthy Portland residents. It is our position that anything more than the $2 billion necessary to replace the Interstate Bridge would be better invested in communities around the state. The current IBR is a freeway expansion disguised as seismic resilience. Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon joins the Right Crossing Alliance in calling for a downsized IBR that benefits all Oregonians.

As a Portland resident living in the Alberta neighborhood close to I-5 and who regularly uses the I-5 bridge I feel strongly that and bridge replacement project should incorporate and prioritize accessible and pleasant paths for people walking, biking and rolling. This means; multi-modal paths should be accessible to the MAX and public transportation, the grade of such paths should be reasonable and not an outrageous climb, and this path should have regular bump outs for people to rest and take in the magnificent view of the river. Accessibility for multi-modal transportation also means features like protective barriers, well-lit routes and rain/shade protection on paths. A commitment to inclusive design prioritizes the safety and comfort of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds, especially underserved and vulnerable groups. Prioritizing these features instead of continuing to subsidize single passenger vehicles makes the most sense for the climate, and long term economics.

This is a grotesquely oversized fossil-fuel-centric project that reflects the deep corruption and rot that has infected our society and culture. The ossified and un-democratic political system pushing this project on us must be destroyed by any means necessary to protect what is left of the web of life that is necessary for our survival. In the meantime we need the people involved in this project, who surely in many instances have children of their own who are facing a bleak future, to show some principle and resign immediately. You should all be ashamed of yourselves for your spineless complicity in such a destructive boondoggle and I wish you a lifetime of dreamless sleep. There is no planet B.

I'm opposed to expanding the I-5 bridge project. It has gone way over budget and will not solve traffic congestion. If it must come into the state, I would prefer mass-transit be a significant part of the project.

We need a better way for Active Transportation User will gain access to the Multi-use path. The cork screws ramps are not the best solution. See attachment

Please make sure the new Bridge Architecture is something the public will be proud of for the next 100 years.