Skip to Content
Streetsblog Chicago home
Streetsblog Chicago home
Log In
Streetsblog Network

Oregon Justifies $3 Billion Highway Boondoggle With Made-Up Numbers

false

The project to replace and expand the I-5 bridge between Oregon and Washington, a.k.a. the "Columbia River Crossing," has been watched by transportation experts around the country as a case study in the dynamics of a highway boondoggle. Earlier this year, when state lawmakers in Washington State refused to fund their portion of the project, observers proclaimed the project dead.

But big highway proposals die hard. Groups invested in the concept recently revived the plans and are pressing again to build it, with some revisions.

Despite the recent setback, the new version has many of the same flaws that made the previous proposal so unpopular. Basically, the expense can't be justified. Aaron Renn at the Urbanophile points to a recent report by economist Joe Cortright, who flagged an analysis of the CRC for investors by project consultant CDM Smith. Those forecasts, obtained by Cortright through a public records request, predict that traffic on the bridge will actually decline after it is built and tolled -- an outcome that is completely at odds with what Oregon DOT claimed in its environmental impact statement.

Renn writes:

Oregon DOT director Matt Garrett released a letter in response in which he says, “This work is fundamentally different than the traffic analysis completed for the Final Environmental Impact Statement, and with very different goals in mind.” I agree. The FEIS was performed with the goal of getting this bridge the DOT wanted built approved. The toll study was designed to withstand financial scrutiny on Wall Street and be relied on in selling securities. I’ll let you be the judge of which is more likely to be closer to the truth.

Cortright's paper raises a host of other questions about the transportation impacts of the CRC and its financial viability. Renn says the whole scenario reminds him of a highway bridge debacle unfolding in the Louisville area so much, that it seems like state DOTs have the same playbook when it comes to manipulating data to justify wasteful projects:

Want to know how it is that we spend so much money on transport infrastructure and get so little value? It’s because far too many of our highway dollars go into boondoggle mega-projects ginned up through political pressure ... instead of into projects that make transportation sense.

Elsewhere on the Network today: World Streets outlines some of the trends emerging in the North American car-sharing industry. Systemic Failure explains one of the chief drawbacks of sharrows. And Urban Review STL ponders how to reduce conflicts between bus routes and major civic events on downtown streets.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog Chicago

First public meeting on advanced construction work for Red Line Extension covered demolition, utility relocation plans

Contractors will start tearing down properties and moving power and communications lines this year in advance of the official project launch in late 2025.

June 20, 2024

At Transport Chicago, experts discussed creative ideas to save the region’s transit system from looming fiscal cliff

One particularly intriguing idea is congestion pricing. While that strategy is on hold in NYC, one of the panelists thinks it would work here.

June 19, 2024

Tribune’s ridiculous editorial against creating a less car-centric DLSD: “Won’t someone please think of the drivers?”

While the Tribune called for coddling motorists by maintaining the status quo of an eight-lane highway, today's challenges call for a more walk/bike/transit-friendly lakefront.

June 18, 2024
See all posts