Coast Guard hearing - June 5th 2013

Another moment where I’m not a politician, simply a concerned citizen with questions and feel there should be better direction.  Being nervous was not my intent, thus I did not read my statement, instead spoke clumsily from the heart.   

Only one gentleman touched on the law that summarizes no bridge shall limit commerce upstream. 

Here is what I wanted to say, however Brian Dunn chief of the Coast Guard office asked that we focus the comments on why the proposed project would hinder commerce or not abide by coast guard regulations.

My name is Brian Joseph Smith, I would like you to think about a couple items that are questions I’m still asking to help with direction and vision.  Not all pertain to Coast Guard regulations, but offer some insight to the lack of clear vision the CRC has offered

CRC spent 170M and the only example of the projects vision is a document or online 3-D video?  Where is that 3D scale model for people to get a real visual of the proposed project including BNSF and the port effected area’s We spent so much on Library children's toys, and some have little function. A scale model could have been built with the ability to incorporate change options over time and offer information like History…

Why has the CRC made this project dependant on Light rail?  Why not focus on getting traffic away from I-5 corridor and the heart of Portland.  What about building west, direct routes to Hwy 30, Portland NW industrial, and Beaverton.  Gas and power Utilities use these routes to help with diversity of their routes and increase access.  They go form Vancouver directly to Beaverton, why not People. 

Also the CRC seems to be unable to offer clear accounting of where the $170 million was spent, does that seem reasonable to you?

Even if there were 5 lanes across I5, what happens at Delta Park or the Rose Quarter, there are still only two lanes and no talks of making changes on their planning as documented through 2030.

On Monday June 3^rd the City passed a motion to do a land swap with BNSF.  This is to vacate Lincoln street between 11^th and 12^th to make room to support high speed rail.  Wouldn’t it be reasonable that if BNSF has plans to make changes to their rail system, which will most likely include a new bridge in the future that if light rails was to come to Vancouver it could use the same route.  Vancouver operates the third busiest train station in Washington and there is plenty of room for development and construction without demolition or any inconvenience to the citizens or business that use the current I-5 system and highway 14.  The estimated amount of job loss and commerce effected is mute if the Bridge and improvements were built west. Here is an opportunity for private money to work with public on a billion dollar project. Again I’m not for light rail, however since it would be government subsidized, wouldn't it be reasonable that it connect with the other government subsidized facility Amtrack ?

From the 3-5 Billion dollar estimate budget for the project, how much of that is towards deconstruction or paying off large businesses so they can move?  Building a bridge to the West will not have that adverse effect.

Everyone wants a new bridge everyone wants jobs, and the major hold up was light rail and where mass transit systems should be.  The biggest factor I see with the CRC proposal is the finances don’t work, especially considering one third is funded by tolls. The mayor suggests studies show light rail is lower cost to support over time for tax paying citizens. However he did not factor the toll fee burden to local residents, including citizens going to Oregon for work.

I want to see Vancouver as a smart city with clear direction and vision.  My name is Brian Joseph Smith and I’m running for City Council.  And I would like to encourage you tonight to deny the current CRC project as proposed.