1864-S AMH PIKE BALL 036

SHB 1864 - H AMD 423

By Representative Pike

FAILED 04/16/2013

    On page 31, line 38, after "(400506A)." insert "The funding provided may only be spent on preparing a supplemental environmental impact statement."

    On page 32, beginning on line 1, after "(b)" strike all material through "July 1, 2014" on page 33, line 20, and insert "The legislature finds that the design alternative selected by the state department of transportation, the federal highway administration, and the federal transit administration for a new Interstate 5 bridge that connects Vancouver, Washington to Portland, Oregon is not acceptable as currently designed. As stated by an independent review panel of the Columbia river crossing project, "Complexities in design and construction produce great uncertainties in ultimate costs required and, even under full available funding, the time to construct will by lengthy, further increasing risk of affordability." The legislature further finds that:

    (i) The United States coast guard has not approved the design alternative due to a lack of clearance between the Columbia river and the bridge deck, which will adversely affect the free movement of maritime freight and future economic development;

    (ii) The inclusion of light rail in the design alternative results in a cost increase to the project of over nine hundred twenty-five million dollars for taxpayers, while imposing a commute time penalty of one hundred twenty-five percent for Vancouver transit riders;

    (iii) The citizens of Clark county voted in November 2012 not to fund the costs of operating and maintaining light rail;

    (iv) The current design alternative will not reduce congestion as it only offers three full span vehicular lanes in each direction, which is the same as the current Interstate 5 bridge; and

    (v) The current contractor responsible for the environmental impact statement has repeatedly exceeded the deadlines and budgetary constraints.

    (c) Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature that no funds be spent to further the selected design alternative as described in the December 7, 2011, record of decision.  Within the amounts provided for the Columbia river crossing project, the department must prepare a new design alternative and a supplemental environmental impact statement, that should be completed in not more than twelve months, that includes the following:

    (i) A clearance height between the bridge deck and the Columbia river that accommodates all existing and future river users and accommodates those river users' reasonable and foreseeable future needs;

    (ii) A third bridge in addition to the Interstate 5 and Interstate 205 bridges to accommodate additional lanes of traffic.  The design alternative must not include light rail. Any new design must either expand general lane capacity or create a measurable improvement of congestion and commute times; and

    (iii) Consider the inclusion of a reversible span that will help move traffic during peak commute hours.

    (d) The department is prohibited from utilizing the current contractor on the Columbia river crossing project to complete or assist with preparation of the supplemental environmental impact statement.

    (e) The department shall maximize federal funds available for the design, construction, or other costs relating to the bridge structure, general purpose lanes, and bridge landings.

    (f) It is the intent of the legislature that Washington and Oregon have equal funding commitments and equal total expenditures to date on the shared components of the Columbia river crossing project.  The department shall provide quarterly reports on this project, beginning June 31, 2013.  The report shall include: 

    (i) The status of the supplemental environmental impact statement, which must include updated expenditures and project timeframes;

    (ii) Identification of shared and non-shared portions of the project; and

    (iii) Amounts expended to date by the state of Washington and the state of Oregon on each respective states' non-shared obligations. 

    (g) It is also the intent of the legislature that Washington and Oregon have equal funding commitments and equal total expenditures on any the portions of the Columbia river crossing project which have not already been designated as shared project responsibilities.   It is further the intent of the legislature that Washington state shall in no way be obligated to pay, either directly or indirectly, for improvements or construction to any interchanges, roads, or any other part of the project within the state of Oregon, other than those portions including the bridge and approaches which have to date been designated as shared project responsibilities"

    Renumber the remaining subsections consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly.

EFFECT:   Prohibits the department from spending any further money on the bridge as currently designed, requires the department to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement with a new design that does not include light rail, and reiterates the intent that Washington and Oregon must contribute equal amounts of money to the project and that Washington must not pay for any part of the project in the state of Oregon other than the bridge structure and landings. 

FISCAL IMPACT: No net change to appropriated levels.

--- END ---