Do you have an idea to replace the Interstate 5 Bridge? Thoughts on including transportation options? Preference for the design of the new span across the Columbia River?

Of course you know. Everyone in these areas has their own views on the new bridge, tolls, light rail, and the number of lanes.

Now, as leaders in Washington and Oregon continue to envision and build alternative bridges, there are many opportunities for the public to participate. As the organizers consider the appearance of the bridge, a virtual community briefing will be held at 6 pm on Wednesday. In the next two weeks, three additional meetings will be held at different times of the day.

Interested citizens can visit interstatebridge.org/calendar for information about the conference, and can submit questions in advance via info@interstatebridge.org.

The current theme is basic design, with three cutting-edge options: curved double-span; straight double-span; or stacked route, where the upper and lower decks carry traffic in opposite directions. Other issues in the coming months will involve projects such as high-volume traffic and the number of lanes.

All of this is reminiscent of a fallacy in the previous Columbia River crossing proposal. Critics claimed that the project was destroyed in 2013 and did not include sufficient public input. In fact, they solicited a lot of opinions. If the public believes that they are not included, it is the organizer's fault for not publicizing these opportunities — and the fault for citizens not to take advantage of these opportunities.

Now, the leaders of the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program are emphasizing public opinion and directly addressing the myths surrounding the project. The organization’s homepage answers common false statements, such as "a replacement bridge has been designed" and "a third bridge will eliminate the need to replace interstate bridges."

It also addresses the belief that tunnels should be the preferred solution: "If important connections to Hayden Island, downtown Vancouver and SR-14 are not eliminated, it is impossible to build tunnels within the footprint of I-5. It also brings It has more operational, environmental and historical resource impacts, and the cost will be higher than replacing the bridge."

A link is provided to "Tunnel Concept Evaluation" on page 39, where the public can read "Dredge and Excavation Risks" and "Road Ventilation".

The fact that the tunnel under the Columbia River cannot connect to Highway 14 or downtown Vancouver makes Clark County intolerable. It also pointed out the need for the public to understand the bridge project and adopt a reasonable approach.

Governor Jay Insley has for years touted the need for residents of southwest Washington to reach a consensus when replacing bridges. Indeed, we don’t want to waste years and millions of dollars just to ruin the plan.

Consensus does not mean agreement; there is room for disagreement in the details. But public consensus depends on whether the public knows and forms opinions based on facts.

The development plan for the new Interstate 5 Bridge involves two states, two cities, two counties, two transportation agencies, a regional government in Oregon, and ultimately the federal government. But the most important factor in the equation is the people of Clark County and Portland. They have many opportunities to participate.