As the approximately $14.4 billion Interstate Bridge replacement project advances, officials are continuing to discuss tolling details.

A joint meeting of the Oregon Transportation Commission and the Washington State Transportation Commission on Friday provided results of the Level 3 Traffic and Revenue Analysis with the latest information on four tolling scenarios. The financial plan for the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) Program includes $1.5 billion in toll funding.

Julie Meredith, secretary of transportation for the Washington State Department of Transportation, said tolling the existing bridge would allow construction to start in Washington, because tolling revenue would provide up-front bonding capacity for the project.

The first phase of the first set of projects includes constructing the replacement bridge, adding bridge connections to Interstate 5, extending light rail infrastructure to Vancouver, and removing the existing bridge.

Currently, toll revenue is not expected to help pay for future project phases, according to interim IBR Program administrator Carley Francis.

Financing strategies currently being explored by the IBR team for the first set of projects include state toll-backed bonds or a toll-backed federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan. The project team plans to begin the application process for the TIFIA loan next year.

Washington State Transportation Commissioner Gael Tarleton requested a more detailed discussion comparing the benefits of a TIFTA loan with those of state toll-backed bonds.

The traffic and revenue analysis includes four toll scenarios, with toll rates ranging from $1.55 to $4.70 per trip and possible rate variability depending on time of day. Also, two scenarios would begin tolling at the start of project construction and the other two would begin when the new bridge opens.

“We do assume there is a low-income discount program in all scenarios,” said Stantec transportation engineer Liz Horta, who led the Level 3 Traffic and Revenue Analysis. “T��� timing of when that begins varies by scenario, with some scenarios offering this discount on day one and some scenarios offering it when the new bridge is online.”

Oregon Transportation Commissioner Phil Chang said he would support a low-income discount.

“It seems to me that if we’re trying to provide relief to low-income people, it should start sooner than later,” he said.

The discount would be 50 percent for eligible drivers, Horta said. The criteria would be household income within 200 percent of the federal poverty line. Eligible drivers would need to be registered and have a Good To Go! account, which is used for toll payments in Washington.

Possible toll exemptions under consideration include state maintenance vehicles, school buses, tow trucks, and emergency vehicles. There would be no exemptions for transit buses, rideshare vehicles such as vanpools, or private buses.

The four tolling scenarios being considered also include the existing Washington tribal preemptions of Yakama and Nez Perce tribes. The process for consultation with multiple tribes and any considerations of toll discounts will be made by the two state transportation commissions.

Washington State Transportation Commission Chair Debbie Young said Washington is also advancing a low-income toll discount for its entire tolling system.

“One of the things just in the tolling piece that kind of stuck out to me is that Washington has a lot at stake here as far as making decisions on what exemptions are given,” Oregon Transportation Commission Chair Julie Brown said. “That is because it impacts their entire state and their tolling system, whereas Oregon doesn’t have that system in place.”

Each state transportation commission will discuss separately in the next two weeks whether there is anything they would like to request the Bi-State Tolling Subcommittee to study further.

The two commissions will meet again later this year or early next year to receive a new report from the Bi-State Tolling Subcommittee and consider decisions that will support advancing a toll rate and policy proposal. Final toll rates and policies are expected to be adopted as early as late fall 2027.

Currently, tolling on the existing Interstate Bridge is anticipated to begin as early as summer 2028.

The post Tolling discussion advances for new Interstate Bridge appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Oregon Transportation Commission on Tuesday voted to approve an approximately $3.6 billion increase in funding for the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) Program.

The amendment to the 2024-2027 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program increases funding from approximately $2.05 billion to approximately $5.7 billion for a first set of Interstate Bridge projects. In total, they are expected to cost $7.65 billion, interim IBR Program administrator Carley Francis said. Those projects encompass program management, which includes right of way and utility relocation costs, preliminary engineering and construction for the new bridge, connections to Interstate 5 and State Route 14 and Hayden Island, removal of the existing Interstate Bridge spans, and pre-construction tolling. It will also include light rail infrastructure design north and south of the new bridge.

“We had not previously included bridge removal in the STIP amendment because of the time frame; it would occur outside of the STIP horizon,” Francis said. “However, in focusing on maintenance of traffic for river users, and considering opportunities both for combining contracts and also just managing that risk of river movement and having one entity be both constructing and removing the bridges and be responsible for that, it provided some opportunities.”

The cost to remove the current bridge is expected to be $390 million.

The STIP funding comes from general obligation bonding via Oregon House Bill 5005 (2023), a Bridge Investment Program (BIP) grant from the Federal Highway Administration, toll revenue, a Move Ahead Washington grant, and a Mega grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Specifically, the STIP amendment includes an increase from approximately $554.6 million to $795.36 million for costs associated with preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and utility relocation; an increase from approximately $1.47 billion to $4.78 billion for preliminary engineering and construction work that will allow the completion of the new bridge adjacent to the existing one; an increase from $24.59 million to $51.9 million for pre-launch activities related to tolling; and an allocation of $50.7 million to advance design for light rail elements north and south of the bridge.

Meanwhile, Francis said, the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council is set to vote June 2 whether to amend the state’s 2026-2029 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Metro Council is slated to vote June 25 whether to amend the 2024-2027 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Plan. Both proposals would increase funding for the project.

If those proposals were to gain approval, federal agencies would issue an amended Record of Decision (ROD) and secure the obligation of the remaining $1.5 billion of BIP funding and $600 million of Mega funding.

“T���re is $546 million of BIP funds that would expire if we do not obligate them by the end of September,” Francis said.

The IBR Program team expects to receive an ROD this summer. That would allow the project to enter the construction phase, including the construction contractor procurement process. Design and cost negotiations would occur in 2027, and bridge construction activities would begin in 2028.

According to the IBR Program website, the entire project cost is estimated at $13.5 billion to $15.2 billion with a likely cost of $14.4 billion. It will remain an estimate until a guaranteed maximum price is determined, Francis said.

There will be a robust governance process from both states overseeing the project going forward, said Travis Brouwer, deputy director of revenue, finance and compliance for the Oregon Department of Transportation. It will likely include regularly updating the state transportation commissions and legislatures on construction costs.

Brouwer added that Tuesday’s vote commits funds that are available now and already committed. Any decision for additional funding would be brought before the Oregon Transportation Commission, he said.

The two states’ transportation commissions will meet June 5 to discuss toll rates and options for the project.

The post Oregon boosts STIP funding for Interstate Bridge to $5.7 billion appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon transportation commissioners on Thursday blasted leaders of the Interstate Bridge replacement program for keeping them in the dark for months as projected construction costs soared by billions of dollars.

Poor communication — and the massive cost increase itself — could jeopardize the push to build a new, seismically resilient bridge carrying Interstate 5 over the Columbia River, commissioners said.

“T��� narrative now is so negative that you guys could put the bridge in jeopardy simply because you’re not willing to have these conversations until the numbers are perfect,” Commissioner Jeff Baker said.

Thursday’s Oregon Transportation Commission meeting came only days after news broke that cost estimates for the project had more than doubled, to a range of $12.2 billion to $17.7 billion. The previous estimates, from 2022, were $5 billion to $7.5 billion.

The cost estimates were stated in an Aug. 15 document unearthed by City Observatory, a Portland think tank, through a public records request.

Oregon Department of Transportation and Interstate Bridge replacement (IBR) program officials have said the estimates were not shared publicly because they were not finalized, an explanation that seemed to exasperate commissioners who were working with years-old cost assumptions.

“You put all of us in a bad situation by having information that you may not have given to elected officials or to committee members or to others, and tried to contain it and tried to figure out what to do,” Chairwoman Julie Brown said.

Baker expressed frustration that he learned of the new cost estimates from media outlets and not IBR program officials.

“As commissioners, we’re not getting our information from you,” he said.

An official cost estimate will be available in March, IBR program officials said.

“It’s incumbent upon us to get information out, which obviously has been a breach of trust with folks,” said Carley Francis, the IBR program’s newly appointed interim director.

The commission had received assurances in October 2025 that a fresh cost estimate would be available in December 2025, Baker said.

“This is a moving target, and it’s been moving and moving and moving,” he said.

IBR program officials blamed some of the delay on an earlier-than-expected decision by the U.S. Coast Guard to approve a 116-foot navigational clearance, making a fixed span possible. With the approval in hand, more accurate estimates can be produced, officials said.

Yet IBR program officials did not dispute the 11-figure cost estimates that drew headlines, and Francis conceded the estimates and underlying document were “robust.”

The ballooning price tag could make the project infeasible, Commission Vice Chairman Lee Beyer said.

“If those numbers are correct, we can’t build this project,” he said. “T���re’s no way you’re going to get the money to do it at this point.”

The Interstate Bridge replacement project is broken into 29 different packages, including the bridge itself and seven interchanges on a 5-mile corridor spanning Oregon and Washington.

IBR program officials have discussed sequencing those packages, in part of logistical necessity and in part to spread costs. But Baker cautioned that sequencing should not be used to hide the true cost of the project, or its impact on other transportation infrastructure priorities in Oregon.

“I understand it’s a process that has worked in Washington, and we’ve been guilty of it here at times, but the direction of the Legislature and the feeling of this commission is that’s not the appropriate way to do it,” Baker said. “We should scope it. We should come up with a budget. We should put everything out there — because at $13.6 billion, what do you think that’s going to do to our ability to handle projects around the state if that bridge is draining that tank?”

With the Coast Guard’s approval, a supplemental environmental impact statement can be finalized and a record of decision made for the project. Oregon and Washington transportation leaders also face a Sept. 30 deadline to allocate $927 million of a $1.5 billion federal grant.

In the meantime, the project is moving forward. Engineers are testing ways to strengthen the soils around the bridge. They’re using a test site adjacent to the I-5 southbound Hayden Island exit.

“T���re are different techniques that have different results,” said Ray Mabey, assistant program administrator. “Each one of them is fairly expensive, and we want to make sure that we address and pick the right one.”

The IBR team is also looking ahead to bidding for the massive progressive design-build contract for bridge construction.

At least two teams, maybe three, are expected to bid on the contract, Mabey said. Other packages will be broken into parts small enough for local contractors to tackle.

IBR program officials are “making sure that we have packages that are sized appropriately for biddability, but also our local contractors,” Mabey said. “We’re not hearing a desire to have construction packages sized that only draw on the worldwide companies.”

The post Oregon policy group blasts Interstate Bridge cost secrecy appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

U.S. Coast Guard approval of a fixed-span design for a new Interstate Bridge marked a key regulatory step forward last week, but soaring costs have clouded the project’s outlook.

Cost estimates for the Interstate Bridge replacement program have more than doubled, with a high-end estimate for a fixed span rising to $17.7 billion, according to recently unearthed Oregon Department of Transportation documents.

The documents were obtained by City Observatory, a Portland-based think tank, through a public records request. ODOT hadn’t publicly updated its cost estimates since 2022, when it gauged the bridge’s cost at $5 billion to $7.5 billion.

“I was shocked,” said Joe Cortright, a Portland economist who runs City Observatory.

Cortright added that he expected the project’s cost to rise to $9 billion to $10 billion, far below the actual estimates, which range from $12.2 billion to $17.7 billion. The rise in estimated costs far outpaces overall inflation and construction cost indexes, he noted.

ODOT pushed back, saying the cost figures do not represent a complete cost estimate, which involves an in-depth examination of the costs of labor and equipment materials as well as the schedule.

“T��� IBR program has been clear with its partners and the public that the cost of the IBR program is going to increase, but since the cost estimating process remains under way, we do not have a final number to share at this time,” IBR program administrator Carley Francis stated in an email on Wednesday.

An official cost estimate is expected in March, according to ODOT.

Infrastructure projects across the nation “are currently experiencing significant price increases,” Francis stated. “We do not expect the IBR program to be immune to the cost increases we are seeing around the country.”

It’s unclear where leaders in Oregon and Washington will get all the funding needed to construct the bridge. In all, the program has more than $5 billion in identified funding, Francis stated.

The states have pledged $1 billion each, in addition to $217 million in existing state funding. Federal grants and toll revenues are also expected to help foot the bill.

“Ultimately, it’ll continue to be a mix of contributions from different levels of government,” said Mike Salsgiver, executive director of Associated General Contractors’ Oregon-Columbia chapter.

Ongoing state and federal sources will need to be tapped for the project, he said.

“With a project of this length, it will be an annual revisiting of federal appropriations and each legislature,” he said.

Salsgiver and other transportation advocates will visit Oregon’s congressional delegation in Washington, D.C., in April to push for continued funding.

“T��� region will have to continue to make sure those funding streams are open and able to get this project complete,” Salsgiver said.

Cortright cast doubt on federal willingness to pay for the project.

“Right now, the congressional Republicans and the Trump administration — they’re not really favorably inclined toward transit projects generally, and particularly not those in blue states and cities,” he said.

Project backers were buoyed by the Coast Guard’s determination that a fixed span with 116 feet of vertical clearance will provide adequate room for boats to pass underneath. A movable span would have been even more expensive, according to estimates.

“T���y’re portraying it as a big step forward,” Cortright said. “T���y dodged a bullet.”

ODOT recently told transportation commissioners that the project is marching ahead.

The IBR program team “will continue working to ensure a successful transition from environmental and planning to delivery and construction,” ODOT interim Director Lisa Sumption wrote in a Jan. 15 letter to the Oregon Transportation Commission ahead of a meeting on Jan. 22. “This includes coordinating with partners to update the construction sequencing and funding strategy to advance the first set of investments towards delivering the full program.”

Tools to address costs could include value engineering, seeking additional federal, state and local funding, and construction phasing. That would mean “building portions of the investments that have adequate funding and working to secure funding for remaining investments in the future,” Sumption wrote.

Cortright has been critical of ODOT for what he describes as a pattern of beginning work on projects that have not been fully funded.

“T���y basically turn the sunk-cost fallacy into a management strategy,” Cortright said. “T���y want to create the sense that hey, we’ve started this and we need to finish it.”

2026 is likely to prove a decisive year for the project. Looming ahead is a Sept. 30 deadline to obligate a significant portion of grant funds from the Federal Highway Administration bridge investment program.

Project officials also expect to complete a final supplemental environmental impact statement this year. That will be followed by an amended record of decision that will include an updated cost estimate and financial plan.

IBR program officials are conducting a tolling study for those documents. The study will examine how much tolls will cost, and how much revenue they will raise.

Both project supporters and opponents point to tolling as a potential political vulnerability. Opposition to tolling has been intense, causing Gov. Tina Kotek and legislators to backtrack from a portion of the 2017 transportation funding bill that called for tolling on interstates 5 and 205.

Drivers are unlikely to look kindly on paying tolls for a new Interstate Bridge, either.

“Tolling is a broader challenge,” Salsgiver said.

ODOT’s toll scenarios range from $1.55 per crossing before the bridge is completed to $4.70 post completion, with some offsets for lower-income drivers.

The bridge has been tolled before. Salsgiver recalled as a child that he would throw a quarter into a toll box to cross the existing Interstate Bridge; its second span was completed in 1958.

Today’s drivers have become unaccustomed to paying tolls, Salsgiver said.

“It’s unfortunate,” he said. Removing tolls “taught a generation of Oregonians — and more — that we don’t do tolling here.”

The post Interstate Bridge project cost estimates soar up to $17.7B appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The city of Portland is preparing public comments to submit on the proposed Interstate Bridge‘s design by the end of September.

On Thursday, the Portland Design Commission sought consensus on what changes they would like to see in the early bridge designs.

Chairman Brian McCarter focused on how the bridge will connect with the Vancouver Waterfront at the north end. A shared use ramp from the bridge to the waterfront appears to be “quite a journey,” he said.

“I’m having a struggle with the configuration being this long,” he said. “Is this the only way to do this, or could this be enhanced by some stairs, some elevators at strategic locations?”

Brenda Martin, major projects and transit manager for the Portland Bureau of Transportation, said a connection should be made between the light rail and a shared path for bicycles and pedestrians, given their close proximity.

Commissioners also discussed whether the design details of the bridge landings should differ on the Oregon and Washington sides. Commissioner Zari Santner said the bridge doesn’t need to look the same on both sides.

McCarter agreed, as long as it’s cohesive, he said. “Variety is great as long as it’s within an overall story,” he said.

McCarter also pushed for transparency in the bridge railings, so users can see outside the bridge.

Commissioners will consider and likely vote to approve a letter to the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program at their Sept. 18 meeting.

Construction on the bridge is expected to last 15 years, with 24 construction packages up for bid. The total project was estimated in 2023 to cost $5 billion to $7.5 billion. That range is expected to grow when Interstate Bridge project officials release an updated cost estimate later this year or early in 2026.

The post Portland weighs early design changes for Interstate Bridge appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Metro Council last week added three Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) projects to the 2024-2027 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) to meet federal project delivery requirements. The Interstate Bridge replacement project is in the design phase; construction is expected to begin next year.

The council voted 6-1 on Thursday to approve the amendment (Mary Nolan voted no). The item will next go before the Oregon Transportation Commission on July 31. The commission’s approval is required for authorization of the funding for the three projects. If the commission were to deny the amendment, the Metro Council’s decision would be considered invalid and would not be sent to the Federal Highway Administration for final approval.

The June 2025 MTIP contains three projects related to the effort to replace the Interstate Bridge and improve related interchanges. One is a modification to the I-5 Columbia River (Interstate) Bridge project and two new projects are related to tolling and the construction of the replacement bridge. The combined amendment is $1.9 billion, said Ted Leybold, Metro transportation policy director.

The I-5 Columbia River (Interstate) Bridge project contains the nonconstruction phases for the IBR program. Funding for the planning and initial preliminary engineering phase was obligated prior to development of the 2024-2027 MTIP. Planning and design are under way; the work includes right-of-way and utility relocation activities for early construction packages, as well as continuing overall program management and development work. The total MTIP programming cost has increased from $103 million to approximately $554.6 million.

One new project for pre-completion of tolling infrastructure calls for installing signage, related structures, and electrical systems in preparation of new tolling operations on and near the Interstate Bridge. The total MTIP programming cost is approximately $24.6 million.

The other new project added to the MTIP is for the replacement of the Interstate Bridge. It will advance post-NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) design and construction activities for the new bridge over the Columbia River between Oregon and Washington, downstream of the existing structure. The work will support the construction of two new bridges to accommodate highway, transit and active transportation modes. The total MTIP programming amount is approximately $1.5 billion.

Tolling rates will be set by the Oregon Transportation Commission and the Washington State Transportation Commission. Pre-completion tolling on the Interstate Bridge is expected to start in 2027.

Ray Mabey, assistant program manager for the IBR program and the state bridge engineer for the Oregon Department of Transportation, said tolling rates will be variable depending on time of day. IBR program staffers are studying possible tolling rates; all scenarios include a discount for low-income drivers.

According to the , the total estimated project cost is from $5 billion to $7.5 billion.

Full project completion is expected to require 10 to 15 years.

The post Metro adds $1.9 billion of I-5 bridge projects to MTIP appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

New renderings have been released for the Interstate Bridge Replacement project.

Greg Johnson, Interstate Bridge Replacement program administrator, presented the new visualizations at Monday’s Executive Steering Group meeting.

“In today’s Executive Steering Group meeting, we presented new visualizations of some of the design options being considered as we continue to work through the environmental phase of the program,” Johnson said during Monday’s meeting. “These new images show each of the bridge configurations (single-level, double-level and moveable span) being analyzed in the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement from different viewpoints close to the proposed structure or while traveling on the shared use paths in these areas.

“The images include one example bridge type for each of the bridge configurations: extradosed bridge for single-level, truss bridge for double-level, and girder bridge for a moveable span. They do not represent a complete range of bridge types being considered. No decision has been made on the bridge type or configuration at this time,” Johnson added.

(Renderings courtesy of the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program)

The post New renderings released for Interstate Bridge Replacement project appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Women in engineering have always faced numerous hurdles their male counterparts do not.

Growing up in India, I was never allowed by my parents or family to have any doubts about pursuing the career that I wanted. When I opted to pursue civil engineering, a predominantly male-dominated field around the world, there was no hesitation in their support for me. It was great; and this acceptance was something I took for granted when I was a student. I never questioned what I wanted to do. But my experience is far from the norm.

Today, I am the deputy design manager for the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) program, a $6 billion bistate project that will see the replacement of one of the most important interstate bridges on the West Coast. Getting to this point, however, took a lot of perseverance and determination.

As we celebrate Women’s History Month in March, it’s the perfect time to reflect upon the challenges facing women and women of color in the architecture, engineering, and construction industries, and how we might transform them into careers where women feel just as welcomed as their male counterparts.

The numbers don’t lie. The Society of Women Engineers estimates that as of 2016, just 13 percent of professional engineers in the U.S. were women and just 19 percent of undergraduate engineering students were women. Of the women who become engineers, 1 in 4 ultimately leave the field for other careers. My home country of India is doing a little better – 29.7 percent of engineering undergraduate students were women in 2018 – but there remains a long way to go to achieve equality in representation, regardless of the country.

After graduating from the University of Delaware with a master’s degree in civil engineering, I entered the professional world and experienced firsthand the perceptions about women that persist in this field. I faced doubts about my abilities and was told certain jobs – including leadership roles – were not meant for women. Unfortunately, these kinds of attitudes are not unique to engineering.

Fortunately, my first job at RK&K Engineering in Delaware blessed me with an opportunity to work with two outstanding managers and mentors who gave me the confidence to excel in designing transportation projects that really make a positive difference in peoples’ lives. They were very humble and valued doing the right thing – for employees, clients, and most importantly, the people and communities that our work impacts daily. They always emphasized that working with the public was an important responsibility. And there was never a situation where I couldn’t walk into their offices and ask questions.

It’s a good thing, too, because I was thrown into community engagement from the very beginning. Within a month of joining the firm, I was engaged in working group meetings in communities, where I quickly realized that transportation engineering was about much more than just geometry or design; it’s about how to best transform what the public wants into a concept that can be realized in the real world. I found that I loved that aspect of the work, something that continues to this day.

I joined the Oregon Department of Transportation in 2021 and took on a leadership role in the IBR program. In my role as deputy design manager, I find myself using all of those early lessons and experience to help guide this project into the National Environmental Policy Act phase.

Too often people say they feel their input into transportation projects is not important and that decisions have already been made for them. With the IBR program, we are working diligently to avoid that perception. Our program-wide commitment to equity means we absolutely want a project that reflects the desires and needs of all communities on both sides of the Columbia River. It’s not optional.

Centering equity also means we have women in a host of leadership roles throughout the program. The design, environmental, communications, permitting, and public affairs teams, among others, all have women in leadership roles.

But equity is not a one-and-done process. It’s a continual effort that requires being intentional about being inclusive of diverse voices, thoughts, and ideas. This is why both inside and outside of the IBR program I’m also busy working to ensure that the ranks of female engineers continue to grow with a support system in the Pacific Northwest and beyond.

For instance, I’m involved with professional organizations such as Women’s Transportation Seminar (WTS) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). I’ve taken on mentorship roles with these organizations, serving as a board member and co-chair of the mentoring program for WTS’ Portland chapter, and serving as chair of the diversity and inclusion committee for ITE International in 2021 and 2022. In this way I’m trying to do my small part to change how the civil engineering industry sees women and women of color.

Ultimately, if I had one piece of advice for women entering transportation engineering, I would say, “Do not let anyone convince you of what you can or cannot do.” Question your doubters and challenge their thinking. You’ll be standing up for yourself and proving them wrong, which is essential to growth and change.

Editor’s note:

The IBR program will host its fourth equity roundtable, “Women Paving the Way,” from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 23. Panelists, including Shilpa Mallem and other women leaders in transportation and infrastructure, will discuss how they navigate challenges and contribute to what has traditionally been a male-dominated field. This event will take place virtually via Zoom, with a live stream available on the IBR program’s YouTube channel (). The discussion will be followed by a Q and A session. Learn more at .

Shilpa Mallem is the deputy design manager for the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program. Contact her at shilpa.mallem@interstatebridge.org.

The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the preceding commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the Daily Journal of Commerce or its editors. Neither the author nor the 91��Ƶ guarantees the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein.

The post Women in transportation engineering should question their doubters | OP-ED appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The new projected total cost of the project to replace the Interstate Bridge is $6 billion, according to Greg Johnson, Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) program administrator. The estimate of $5 billion to $7.5 billion was created by internal and independent experts, including a rigorous process that considers cost escalation and inflation factors affecting transportation projects across the country. Those factors include historically high inflation rates, workforce shortages, materials cost increases due to supply chain issues, and other market conditions.

The previous conceptual cost estimate identified a high end of $4.8 billion when it was developed in 2020, based on the scope of the previous Columbia River Crossing project. The new cost estimate for the IBR program covers the components of the Modified Locally Preferred Alternative, which in July 2022 was discussed with the Bi-State Legislative Committee and endorsed by the regional program partners of the Executive Steering Group.

The Modified Locally Preferred Alternative includes: replacement of the Interstate 5 bridge over the Columbia River; inclusion of one auxiliary lane southbound and northbound, and three through lanes; extension of light rail from Portland to Vancouver, Washington; addition of three light rail stations; replacement of the North Portland Harbor Bridge; construction of a partial interchange on Hayden Island; construction of a full interchange on Marine Drive; and construction of a bridge from Marine Drive to Hayden Island.

The new cost estimate sets the foundation for development of the program’s financial plan, anticipated in early 2023, which will include additional details on potential funding sources and a financing approach. Funding will require money from a diverse range of sources, including the federal government, Oregon and Washington state governments, and tolling.

The anticipated cost falls within the range of confirmed and potential funding sources currently identified. Amounts include: $100 million in existing state funding, $98 million from the Connecting Washington transportation package (Mill Plain Interchange), $1 billion from the Move Ahead Washington transportation package, $1 billion in anticipated Oregon funding, $1.25 billion to $1.6 billion in toll funding, $860 million to $1.6 billion in federal grants, and $900 million to $1.1 billion in Federal Transit Administration grants.

The post Bridge replacement project could cost up to $7.5 billion appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.