Friday is D-day! This from the Coalition for a Livable Future:
Protest and Testify at the CRC Project Sponsors’ Council meeting
When: Fri, Dec 4
9:30 am – action before the meeting
10am – public testimony
Where: Port of Portland
121 NW Everett St, Portland
Cuts have been made to the Columbia River Crossing megabridge project, but the total cost is still a whopping $3.6 Billion. The project is still taking an approach that harms our communities and fails to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect health, or support vibrant, walkable, livable communities.
The Project Sponsors Council is meeting this Friday to discuss and possibly vote on these changes. (See the cost-cutting recommendations at the first bullet here).
What We Can Do
Join grassroots opposition group Stop the CRC! on December 4 at the CRC Project Sponsors’ Council meeting to demand that we start over with a smarter project built upon shared goals.
Some Things To Consider for Testimony During the Hearing
About the project
- We shouldn’t waste more time and scarce transportation funds cutting elements one by one from an unpopular plan that we can’t afford.
- This region deserves a real choice about how to fix I-5, not a false choice between nothing at all and this still-a-megabridge project.
- This project still does not advance regional goals on climate, livability, transportation and equity.
- There has been no real, proactive engagement of the public about what average citizens want from this project.
About the project changes
- Ten lanes is still a major expansion that fails to meet our needs, and the new design is still wide enough to restripe at 12 lanes at any time.
- The project has also made major changes that appear to harm livability on Hayden Island, plus several other significant changes.
- Major project decisions should be based on what leads to the best outcome for the region, not avoiding environmental review. The project has admitted that they decided the hundreds of millions of dollars in changes based on what they thought would get them out of having to do additional environmental impact analysis. That’s just wrong.
- The project needs to do an environmental analysis of these changes. The changes may lead to additional impacts, and the public deserves to know and comment on them.