• CRC cost overruns for planning at 300%
• Violations of rules and protocols are flagrant and continual
• Politicians and their cohorts in business and labor are feeding on the CRC
Since the CRC project office opened in May of 2005—there have been many ongoing and pervasive issues with how this organization has operated. Problems have been continual with heavy over spending, disregard for governing rules and laws, and an overall air of ‘leave us alone, as we know best’. Specifically:
- Mismanagement and Incompetence: Years of design and planning results in CRC project plans proven to be materially deficient in solving traffic/freight congestion problem. Examples are:
- CRC’s own studies estimate only one minute saved on morning southbound commute.
- The US Coast Guard rejecting the CRC’s permit application because the bridge is too low to accommodate river traffic as per United States law requires.
- The CRC’s earliest bridge design was deemed “unbuildable” by a team of outside experts. Necessitating a scrapped design and millions of dollars in re-work.
This lack of competence is persistently visible with CRC activities over the years. A lack of competence in planning and design can only lead to more of the same during a highly risky construction phase.
- Violating Rules: The CRC failed both United States and State of Washington standards in selecting its prime contractor David Evans and Associates. Of key interest, these laws required at least 3 firms to be considered. In fact, only one prime contractor was ever considered. The original budget called for David Evans to provide all Environmental Impact and Planning work for $50 Million. This $50 million contract has been increased to $131 Million, without a change in scope of work.
- Indefensible Costs: Planning costs now exceeding $160MM over a span of 8 years. These costs are arguably 2 to 4 times the legitimate costs and ineffective management has necessitated a time delay of more than 3 years. This planning has been executed with comprehensive disregard for public resources and has been infected with political and business cronies that will negatively affect future work.
- Arrogance: CRC is arrogant and uncooperative when challenged on all these matter. In the last 18 months, as citizen concerns have grown, the CRC has been very difficult to gain access to useful information and there are continual specious excuses made. What are they hiding?
For Further Details on CRC Mismanagement and Incompetence
Lack of transparency
- The Woman Behind the Bridge
- Will the real CRC project please stand up?
- Acuity Group forensic accounting analysis of the expenditures of the Columbia River Crossing project.
- David Evans and Associates, Inc. sued Washington State Department of Transportation to block the release of audited financial statements.
CRC Lack of vision and uses a mid-20th century freeway-only mentality
- On March 25th 2010, a panel of VIP experts discussion of the proposed CRC project on I-5.
- More people work from home than use transit and the trend is growing. US Census Bureau shows a 31% increase from 2000 to 2008 in employees that now work at home
- The CRC should suffer the same fate as the Mount Hood Freeway project.
CRC’s extremely high planning costs
- Where is our $2.3+ million a month going?
- The CRC has now spent over $160 million.
- The CRC wants to spend over $3.6 billion. With interest and cost-overruns it could be $10 billion.
Taxpayers for Common Sense report says the CRC project should be axed
- Report – See page 27
CRC design incompetence
- Transportation Secretary: Columbia River Crossing Not Designed For Speed
- The CRC plan will not solve traffic issues
- The I-5 replacement bridge was designed too low.
- Letter from Rep. Herrera Beutler to Coast Guard district commander
- The first bridge design was engineered so poorly that it had to be totally scraped.
- The I-5 replacement bridge would create a choke point for river commerce.
- The proposed new bridge would become the lowest clearance bridge from the Pacific Ocean to The Dalles.
- A Bridge Too Low- Willamette Week
- Letter from Washington legislators to Coast Guard
- Water transportation is the most fuel efficient, least polluting, safest, and least expensive means of moving cargo.
- Corp of Engineers concerns with bridge height
Conflicts of interests