There is a river (the Columbia River, as a matter of fact) that divides Oregon and Washington for the majority of our shared border. If you live in the 'Couv and want to cross into Oregon you take one of two bridges - the I-5 bridge, which was built in 1917, or the Glenn Jackson Bridge, which was built much more recently but is on the complete opposite side of town.
Facts:
The I-5 bridge needs to be rebuilt. I'm sure there's some crazy person who doesn't agree with this statement, but most of the crazies will at least agree with this much.
Someone will need to pay to have the I-5 bridge be rebuilt. There are three basic places we can go to in order to get the fundage. Oregon, Washington and the Federal Government. This bridge is actually an issue of concern in the Feds eyes. It's a drawbridge that is still in use as such. Which means that there is a stop in Interstate traffic between Mexico and Canada and it's all this bridge's fault.
The Feds have said they won't help pay for the bridge unless mass transit is part of the plan. They can be expected to foot up to 33% of the bill. Oregon has said it won't help pay for the bridge unless mass transit is part of the plan.
So now the debates start, because someone has to come up with a plan that might actually work.
There are a number of alternatives at play here. The big questions, at least in a lot of Vancouverites minds, are whether mass transit takes the form of busses or light rail (building off of Portland's existing, successful system) and, especially if light rail, which route the rail should take.
One of the proposed routes cuts along the border of our neighborhood, and has the terminus at a park and ride within our boundaries. Me, I'm all in favor of this. I'll be upset if it's not the alternative selected. A lot of my neighbors don't feel the same way.
Last night was a neighborhood meeting on this very issue that I opted to attend. The issue had obviously been debated before, and this was information gathering so that the neighborhood association could form a statement that could be taken to the city council. There was a power point presentation with anonymous, electronic voting. Pretty cool technology at work.
To my neighbors' credit, there was only one moment where I wanted to disallow some of them from expressing opinions on any of the issues at hand. Once we'd weighed in on how we'd like the bridge to be rebuilt (use existing structure for part of it with a shorter lifespan, or start from scratch to last twice as long) we had to decide our preferred method of mass transit. We had already been presented with the facts: Feds won't pay without mass transit. Oregon won't pay without mass transit. There are people who actually said there should be no mass transit included on the bridge. And, based on the demographics of our neighborhood, I don't think any of them would have the funds to build this bridge themselves, so I'm really not sure what they were thinking there.
The general consensus in the room seemed to be "transit is OK, we just don't want it in our neighborhood."
There were two moments in the meeting where I got to make it obvious (even though things were predominantly done be anonymous, electronic vote) that there are some people who really WANT light rail in our neighborhood. The first was when a question was posed as to "What is your greatest concern if they put a park and ride at this one location in the neighborhood?" Options were increased crime, pedestrian safety, traffic, etc. There was also an "other(specify)" option. I picked that one. Once voting was concluded the moderator gave us others a chance to specify what we meant. My answer: "I'm in favor of it and don't feel any of the concerns can't be properly handled."
At the end of the presentation were a few blanket statements the neighborhood leadership had put together, to show us how this information would be put into the statement. One of the statements they had was "If light rail must come to our neighborhood...." I took issue with that, as the use of the word must to me implies "We really don't want it, but if there's no way around it" and that's not my feeling at all, so I asked for more neutral language to be used there.
After the meeting an older gentleman came up to me. Not totally surprising, since most of the people in the room were of the older variety.
"It seems you're in favor of the light rail"
I prepared myself for a vigorous debate with him "Yes, I am."
"Me, too! Whenever I go into Portland I drive into Delta Park and take it from there."
An ally! A friend! We had a lovely discussion about how good a thing it would be, and how we seemed to be in the minority in the room.
Next month's meetings we get to see what the leadership put together as a result of this meeting. I'll be there, but it may be a bumpy ride.
You rock!
Posted by: Joe | 15 April 2008 at 06:10 PM