An open letter to Governors Kitzhaber and Gregoire from the Columbia Crossing's Urban Design Advisory Group [updated]

Cable-stay bridge concept sketch (courtesy ColumbiaRiverCrossing.org)

BY ED CARPENTER, JEFF STUHR, WALTER VALENTA, DAVID SMITH, CARRIE STRICKLAND, MARK MASCIAROTTE, JANE HANSEN, & RICHARD POKORNOWSKY

Editor's note: the following is a copy of a letter sent February 18, 2011 from the Columbia Crossing's official Urban Design Advisory Group to the governors of Oregon and Washington. The DAG is urging an end to top-down decision making in favor of listening to citizens and experts. It's an unfortunate commentary that this blue-ribbon panel has to resort to a public open letter just to get a meeting with these elected officials.

As a backgrounder, in its latest report, the Columbia River Crossing Bridge Review Panel was asked to evaluate the open web box girder replacement bridge type "...  

and other bridge types and alignments that could  

work if the constraints were reduced or removed," says the CRC latest update report."

The panel offered three  

bridge types for consideration that panel members believe would have less construction 

risk and be potentially less expensive to construct than the current open web bridge type 

under review. As a result of this recommendation, the

governors have directed the CRC to discontinue further design work on the open web 

box girder and begin an expedited review of the panel’s three options. These include a 

composite deck truss, cable stayed and tied arch bridge type. The governors said the  

analysis must consider cost, schedule, environmental impact, commitments made to 

communities and stakeholders in both states, and overall risk." 

If you'd like to make your voice heard, contact Governor Kitzhaber here.

 

Dear Governor Gregoire and Governor Kitzhaber:

We represent Portland and Vancouver citizens who have participated in the Urban Design Advisory Group (UDAG) for the Columbia River Crossing. 

 

Our group of design professionals has spent many years supporting the CRC and trying to build regional consensus through excellence in design.

Arch bridge concept sketch (courtesy ColumbiaRiverCrossing.org)

We supported the Governors' appointment of the Bridge Review Panel and also recommended experts to be part the panel. A few of us were asked to serve as subject matter experts and were present while the experts discussed our situation.

We agree with the Bridge Review Panel Final Report that states, "the new Columbia River crossing represents the most dramatic river structure in the northwest and may be one of the last major crossings ever to be built along the West Coast."

Because this is such an important decision for our states, We, the members of the UDAG, formally request to be heard by our Governors prior to the decision being made on the bridge type for the Columbia River Crossing.

Composite truss bridge concept sketch (courtesy ColumbiaRiverCrossing.org)

As a group we believe the composite truss bridge will have little public support. Without support from affected neighborhoods, costly and lengthy project delays will occur. While improvements in constructability have been achieved, it is visually indistinguishable from the former, flawed local-preferred option. Likewise, the apparent short-term benefit of lower cost is outweighed if efforts to maintain the current curved alignment are retained. We agree with the Bridge Review experts that significant cost-savings to the project can be achieved overall without compromising the bridge structure itself. We have only one chance to build the structure over the river, while other project components can be phased or redesigned.

In the past we have seen the tendency to make top-down decisions to try to force through a critical decision without meaningful public input. As the various independent reports of Bridge Panel experts have repeatedly confirmed, this has led us down the wrong design path. It did not work in the past, and we feel strongly that we should not repeat that mistake again.

We support a cable-stayed bridge for a number of practical and beneficial reasons. This bridge type performs best in a major seismic event, while fewer bridge pylons in the river is preferable for fish habitat. And the record now shows that Pearson Airfield aviation concerns are manageable and solvable particularly with strong guidance and support from our elected officials.

But perhaps most importantly, we have already observed this design helps galvanize public support for the project. We believe that selecting the right design now will bring the region together in a way that will finally make the bridge a reality.

Because we know time is very important on this project, we will make ourselves available in Olympia and Salem at your first, earliest appointment.

Respectfully,

Ed Carpenter, artist

Jeff Stuhr, Holst Architecture

Walter Valenta, PBAC/PWG

David Smith, Washington State University

Carrie Strickland, Works Partnership Architecture

Mark Masciarotte, marine & aviation consultant

Jane Hansen, Lango Hansen Landscape Architecture

Richard Pokornowsky, Vancouver Center Redevelopment Board

Comments

[Brian Libby]

A comment passed on to Portland Architecture via email by Jim Lee:

Nice work, architects!

But there is another design that better satisfies constraints for
maritime clearance, airway traffic, highway gradients, stream
environment: a deck arch of three spans. Not so stylish as the
cable-stayed option, but equally aesthetic and structurally more
efficient.

This would be a “McCullough triplet,” a central arch of 1,200 foot
span, two side arches of 750 foot span, proportioned according to
the “golden mean,” all in structural steel. Conde McCullough
literally wrote the book on design of elastic arch bridges--take a
look in Multnomah County Library.

McCullough on bridges: “In Oregon our engineers have been trained to go to the stream, build a bridge for utility and economy, and at the same time design it to blend with the terrain.” Arches
blend with the terrain; cable-stays stick out like sore thumbs.
Different aesthetic principles, but there you have it.

Deck arches have gone out of fashion, but have lost none of their
technical and aesthetic attributes. Fortunately we have a modern
master of the form not far away: David Goodyear. Let us give him
the job.