Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Interstate Bridge Replacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Interstate Bridge Replacement update outlines $7.65B funded phase, $1.5B projected toll revenue and tight federal deadlines
Summary
Metro staff and IVR program administrators presented a phased delivery plan that bundles bridge replacement, approaches and pre-completion tolling; staff now project $1.5 billion in toll revenue, propose a $5.68 billion MTIP amendment and said $546 million in federal funds risk lapse if obligations are not in place by late September.
Carly Francis, interim IVR program administrator, briefed the Metro C4 committee on an updated, phased approach to the Interstate Bridge Replacement program that combines several packages into a first funded phase and adds bridge demolition to the package.
"The core set of projects ... are estimated to cost $7,650,000,000," Francis told the committee, describing the first-step scope as replacement of the Columbia River bridges with seismically resilient structures, connections into I-5, Hayden Island and SR 14, a shared-use path, and light-rail-ready width. She said the full five-mile corridor estimate is $14.4 billion.
Francis said program managers updated revenue and delivery assumptions and now estimate toll revenue of about $1.5 billion (up from an earlier $1.25 billion figure). She explained that combining packages into a single progressive design-build contract reduced certain risks and management costs, and added demolition of the existing bridges to the funded phase and the MTIP amendment.
The team plans to submit an MTIP amendment of roughly $5.68 billion to program the funded phase items (construction, program management, pre-completion tolling and a new transit-design project advancing light-rail design from 30% to 60%). Francis said program staff are targeting obligations for $2.1 billion in federal BIL/MEGA-type grants by the end of September and warned that $546 million currently requires timely programming to avoid lapse.
Committee members pressed staff on tolling assumptions, diversion risks and timing. A Clackamas County representative asked whether revenue forecasts were calibrated for scenarios that do not assume tolling on the Abernethy Bridge and whether diversion onto I-205 and local corridors had been fully analyzed; Francis said modeling and calibration work continues, that the EIS addresses diversion, and that financial modeling is updated as bond sales approach to remain conservative for lenders.
Members also asked about equipment interoperability for tolling and whether national protocols would accommodate out-of-state transponders; Francis said many systems use a 6C protocol in the region and that back-office account integration remains more complex.
Francis said the program intends a two-step local process (JPAAC introduction followed by Metro Council consideration) with scheduled JPAAC and Metro Council briefings and votes in the coming weeks and months. She noted an open public comment period that staff have extended and that staff will report public comments before final votes where feasible.
