Light rail (I-5 Interstate Bridge)

Light rail (I-5 Interstate Bridge)

I-5 Interstate Bridge 

Introduction

The Interstate Bridge is also known as I-5 Bridge, Vancouver-Portland Bridge, Portland-Vancouver Interstate Bridge or Columbia River Interstate Bridge. It is made of a pair of almost identical steel vertical lift. The truss bridges carry Interstate 5 traffic across the HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_River” o “Columbia River”Columbia River between Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington, in the United States. It was first opened to traffic in the year 1917. It carries traffic across three lanes which are northbound and three other lanes which are southbound.

Replacement Of The Bridge And Integrating Max Light Rail.

The Columbia River Crossing Project addresses very important issues affecting almost everybody in the Pacific Northwest in regarding safety at the dangerous stretch of freeway in state of Oregon, the hindrance of freight mobility through along the interstate and the Port of Portland, and other issues in Oregon and Washington (Electric railway journal 2001).The solution proposed is replacement of both spans of the Interstate Bridge. A replacement is complicated by a railroad drawbridge which crosses the Columbia a short distance downriver, and which constrains the location of the shipping channel. It also constrains by approach paths to Portland International Airport in Portland and to HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_Field” o “Pearson Field”Pearson Field in Vancouver, limiting the height of any new structure (The Street railway journal 2002).

Other concerns over the 12-lane “Columbia River Crossing” (CRC) proposal are the failure to look at the environmental impacts, such as endangered fish habitat in the Columbia and air pollution in North Portland. The magnitude of the project alone has obviously brought to bring opposition but its advantages in on view outweigh other perception on bad effects on the environment and the cost that will be incurred on the project. The condition of the bride is fair but this perceptions disintegrates when the true cost of the bridges comes into play. Currently, the astronomical $8.4 million is spent annually on operations, maintenance and repair of the two bridges. When it comes to repair, the cost continues to go up with as the bridges age until no longer can their replacement is investable and has to be done. $50 million for urgent repair needs is not included here. Under the option of supplementing, which makes a third span of the bridge, the projected initial investment is $350 million and operations repair and maintenance costs are estimated $7.7 million annually. After pain from an initial investment of $350 million dies, there is abundance savings on operations repair and a maintenance costs which $0.7 million annually. These projected savings are there despite the fact that specific bridge is yet to be selected because 24-hour on-site operators will no longer be necessary, there will be minimal maintenance on a structure which is brand new , and repairs will be all eliminated. (Electric railway journal 2001)

Also an attempt to extended the life span of any structure beyond its functional span has dire consequences. This was the case at Minnesota when the I-35W Bridge collapsed, seven people died as a result. Another example is in the city of Tacoma, when the obvious warning signs, that its’ Tacoma Narrows Bridge was not stable was ignored. The structure collapsed when winds of only 44 MPH were blowing.  The collapse of both of the above bridges resulted in the closing of freeways until there was a quick and cheap a replacement original structure. The I-5 Bridge is aging, and it has less number of years left to survive. The Interstate Bridge’s eastern span remains one of the few existing bridges in use in America that are supported by obsolete wooden piers. It was completed in 1917 and its life expectancy was estimated eighty years and it plans the plans catered for a moderate rising in use. A supplemental bridge in the 1950’s was built to cater for the high rise in vehicular traffic, a rise that continues to swell as the growth of the region expands. As in the case of the old Interstate Bridge, the new one will contain. Many grumble about this, but fortunately the region has not paid toll in over fifty years. The toll would be used to the new bridge and Glen Jackson Bridge, as to reduce the about of interest which is incurred by quickly paying the debt. For those who commute frequently, the electronic will be there. This technology makes it possible for the commuters to fly by the toll plaza which is minimized without even slowing ( Municipal journal & public works2006).

Many residents of the region have never waited as the bridge is raised to allow boats to pass. There are selected off-peak hours which vessels may request passage, as there already are six hours in a day when traffic moves even slower than 30 MPH in each direction.  The bridge is raised on an average of one time everyday, with a time wait of about ten minutes. Many truckers and tourists are startled as the traffic comes to a sudden halt along Interstate-5, looking for a o construction until sight of one of the eight drawbridges out of the 55,000 bridges on the entire interstate system. (Consequences of the interstate highway system for transit 1998)

Not many people realize but automobiles are not the only ones which have been affected by the outdated infrastructure. The river traffic also faces a problem navigating around the alignment of the piers of the Burlington Northern Santa-Fe rail bridge and the piers of the I-5 Bridges which are a mile apart downstream. The Vessels must align in the middle of the river to pass through the interstate, and then align on the northern side of the river in order to traverse safely the widest span of the rail bridge. At times this may be easier for recreational kayaks and speedboats, commercial barges face an increasingly difficult time as the level of water rises in winter. This calls for decisions concerning which west coast port to bring inter-continental freight bound for any place in the United States continental. There is untold amount of commerce that is lost to the San Francisco and Seattle as a result of the tough navigates pilings and piers.

Vancouver has been tying for long time to rid off its reputation as Portland’s “red-headed step-brother.”  This was their reason for voting for the extension of the MAX yellow line to Vancouver in the year 2005 (It is understood that residents would want to live in their city and not to be known as a suburb from a city in which is in anther state another state. It was their grandfathers of Vancouver, who were so passionate about a bridge between Portland and Vancouver that they held a demonstration through Portland carrying placards with which said that they wanted a bridge. Their desire was so much such that when Governor Lister banned the bill for the bonds and held the bill until his bar could not be overturned, that Clark County sold its bonds all the same. The Clark County got bridge, without any financial support from the state of Washington (Electric railway journal 2001).

Sprawl is of concern by the residents of the suburb in any metropolis. Portland’s inventive Urban Growth Boundary has done a good job with a promise of limiting of its sprawl. It has encouraged re-growth in the areas that have severely collapsed. The border in the north of this imaginative line is the Columbia River. Vancouver doesn’t a have identical policy in practice, because it has received a share of sprawl of Portland. Though it is weak, it is against a new Columbia River bridge. Another area of concern which is contrasting Oregon’s aim to make a ten percent decrease of vehicle miles which are traveled per capita. Governor Kulongoski said that the way to achieve this decrease is to reduce the miles traveled. This is only true in theory because six hours in a day I-5 from the SR-500 to the I-84 is made of running engines (The Street railway journal 2002).

Opponents also say that the CRC Task Force’s own analysis display that a new and wider bridge will result to increase the number of vehicles that crossing the river. There is partial truth in this and, the CRC Task Force anticipates the number of motor vehicle crossing to increase in the years to come, but for them this number will increase, whether or not a new bridge is built, to cater for the million people expected to move here rapidly. To expect all these immigrants to use bicycles or walk is very unrealistic. A new bridge, with a MAX light rail which crosses the cross the river on another separate bridge, will alleviate some of the pressure from the main span. This is because it provides a chance for the people to get out of their cars and enjoy the view. 

River City is a perfect Portland’s nickname. When it comes to the Oregon on the interstate there are the options of coming across the Interstate Bridge or the giant slab of concrete which known as Glen Jackson Bridge or, neither of which gives any hint of the pride the city takes in the bridges. Over the Willamette, the Ross Island, the St. Johns, the Sell wood and the Fremont all span without having to interrupt the traffic (Consequences of the interstate highway system for transit 1998).

As the replacement becomes the better option, we have a chance to correct the past mistakes. While getting rid of the issues of traffic, we can also build a regional symbol worthy to cover the Columbia River. with their Golden Gate Bridge, In San Francisco it was found that a bridge could be beneficial for its economy, which generates more money that its planners could ever have foreseen.  Thousand and thousands of people of people from around the globe flock to view it, shopping, paying for hotels and eating. Portland will not encounter problems in replacing I-5 bridges, as the historic Ridgefield Airport and Portland International Airport flock the riverbanks, demanding height restrictions on height because the river City knows bridges, and can provide a aesthetical front door this time around.

In the past twenty years the Port of Portland has a number of attempts to improve its 826 acres of land on the western side of Hayden Island, which is direct to the Oregon side of the Interstate Bridge. They are aiming to place terminals for marine shipping, but the savage opposition by environmentalists and residents, time and again forced them to stop their efforts in 2000. Though unaffiliated but almost in tandem with the CRCP the Port has went back to their efforts to develop their land. If the port was to develop the whole Hayden Island, Portland would still be a leading in the United States for its per-capita parks which are mostly in the vastness Forest Park.  Portland’s marine industrial terminals in the port are already over capacity. Trade volumes are expected to double in the region and the proximity to BNSF, I-5, Union Pacific, and the Port’s land on the Columbia River Navigation is best for the development ( Railroad gazette2006).

There is also a debate as to whether or not a new bridge would include a MAX Light Rail line, express buses or bus rapid transit. There are arguments for and against integrating max- light rail in the new bridge. Whereas some people are in favor of the new bridge integrating the max light rail line other are in favor of express buses and others bus rapid transit. Arguments for max light rail line are mostly because it is believed that light trains don’t make any stop and that they cause no traffic jam. However it is argued against that they consume time and this is drawing back in the economy since it delays people building the economy. It is also argue as uneconomical as compared to building tracks for the buses. Those for the bus tracks argue that express busses spend the a lot of their time on Interstate 5 and don stop anywhere other than the Portland transit mall and a few other transit centers in Vancouver thus cause no traffic jam (Municipal journal & public works 2006)

CONCLUSION.

The structures age, as people do with time. Upgrades surgeries and repairs, can extend life span but all these later come to an end. The Interstate Bridge too has come to the end of its life span, time has come when it is important to honor its many years of service by a worthy replacement. Failure to do this might have catastrophic consequences which affect the whole nation.  A replacement is the way sustainability and the residents should accept that they cannot save everything within its borders. Most of the reasons here are very important and show that a replacement bridge alone warrants a project of this magnitude.  All of them call upon the citizens to offer a safe way for travelling over the Columbia River.

References

(2001) Electric railway journal, Princeton University, McGraw Hill publishers.

(2006) Railroad gazette edt 43, Princeton University, Railroad gazette.

HYPERLINK “http://www.google.co.ke/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=+inauthor:%22Parsons,+Brinckerhoff,+Quade+%26+Douglas%22&source=gbs_metadata_r&cad=7″Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, HYPERLINK “http://www.google.co.ke/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=+inauthor:%22John+R.+Pucher%22&source=gbs_metadata_r&cad=7″Pucher. R (1998) Consequences of the interstate highway system for transit. Washington. Transportation Research Board

(2006) Municipal journal & public works vl 50. Newyork. Municipal Journal & Engineer publishers.

(2002)The Street railway journal. united states. Railway University publishers.