Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Bridge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County presents Stark Street Bridge replacement options; funding not yet secured
Summary
Multnomah County engineers told Troutdale council the 1914 Stark Street Bridge is seismically vulnerable and weight-restricted; the county is conducting environmental review, seeking federal grants, and soliciting community input through a survey open through June 30 while design and construction funding remain to be obtained.
Megan Neal, an engineering services manager with Multnomah County transportation, told the Troutdale City Council on May 26 that the Stark Street Bridge, constructed in 1914, no longer meets current load-carrying or geometric standards and is vulnerable to scour and seismic events.
"This project is really about creating a new seismically resilient crossing at this location," Neal said, adding the county is studying alternatives that balance structural needs, maintenance costs and historic character. She noted the bridge is a contributing resource to the Columbia River Highway Historic District and that preserving the existing structure for bike and pedestrian use is one option being explored.
County engineer Ryan Rucker summarized condition findings: the bridge has substandard cross-section (about 18 feet wide), deteriorating pedestrian walkways, and in-water wooden piles that would not be resilient in a major earthquake. Rucker said the county applied a 19-ton weight limit for semis and recounted a recent incident in which a semi struck the north wing wall; the bridge had been closed for about six months in 2024 for emergency repairs after a wing-wall collapse. "When you get a low rating like this, anything lower than a value of 50, it's recommended that a bridge be replaced," Rucker said.
Neal told council the county is in the environmental review phase and does not yet have design or construction funding. County staff said they have submitted a congressional appropriation request and a USDOT grant application (decisions expected in June) and planned a Bridge Investment Program grant application due at the end of June. Neal asked the community to complete an online survey open through June 30 to inform alternatives and evaluation criteria.
Residents and councilors expressed strong interest in preserving historic character and limiting large-truck impacts on the scenic highway; one longtime local history advocate urged the county to prioritize preserving the old crossing for nonvehicular use if possible. Neal said that is on the table: options include building a new vehicle-capable structure while retaining the old bridge as a recreational bike/ped facility, retrofitting the old span for bike/ped only, or replacing the bridge in the same alignment.
The county will return later this year with results from structural and aesthetic studies and updates on grant outcomes and funding opportunities.
