Today's Oregonian editorial "Betting on the Wrong Bridge" issues a harsh critique of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance for speaking out against the 12-lane Columbia River Crossing:

It takes less strength to demolish a fragile political alliance than to cement and sustain one. Unfortunately, the 5,000-member organization has chosen exactly the wrong place to plant its flag. The alliance has decided to oppose what many freight, business and transportation advocates consider to be the No. 1 economic development goal for the region — replacing the Interstate 5 bridge. The alliance is urging its members to participate in a rally Sunday, April 5, to protest the $4.2 billion project. This is a very serious mistake. It shows an insularity in the thinking of the organization, just at a time when it ought to be broadening its reach.

Three paragraphs of the editorial is then turned over to a blog commentor from BikePortland who, amidst the dozens of supportive comments on BikePortland's post about the CRC, was upset with the BTA's outspoken stance.

This editorial shows a couple things. One is that the Oregonian is apparently interested in having random blog commentors write its editorial copy, so Blogtownies should maybe consider applying for a gig at the paper. The other is that the O is taking the opposition to the bridge seriously. Also, it's clear that having established advocacy groups like the BTA speak out against the bridge raises the mainstream profile of the "opposition and alternatives campaign" significantly.

The BTA and other groups that care about Oregon's environment and transit need to "plant a flag" on the CRC. Before investing $4.2 billion in the biggest single transit project in our region's history, it makes perfect sense to demand the smartest, cleanest, most bike, pedestrian and mass transit-friendly bridge possible. And it's also essential to speak out - loudly! - when it looks like the project will undermine Oregon's green goals. Since the BTA are strong allies with Mayor Adams (who proposed the bridge) and need to maintain good relations with transportation and business groups, the 12-lane CRC puts them in a tough political situation. But the BTA made the right choice. Their position isn't "extremist" or "out of touch with reality" as the Oregonian claims. Their position is well-founded, well-researched and strongly supported among cyclists in town.

The BTA publicly clarified their position on the bridge earlier this week, saying that politicians should consider alternatives to the 12-lane bridge because "expanding the freeway and constructing six massive new interchanges will do tremendous damage to the bike friendliness of communities around the project."

But impact on communities isn't the only reason to oppose the current bridge design. Even if the BTA sticks to bike-centric advocacy, the 12-lane bridge looks like a bad idea. "A 12-lane bridge is more likely to have an under bridge bike facility and that will certainly not be a world class bike facility," BTA educator & advocate Michelle Poyourow explained a few days after City Council voted to approve the 12-lane option in February. "A under bridge facility will be dark, it will be invisible, it will be under concrete."

The Oregonian says the BTA should support the bridge because Oregon and Washington governors promise that the CRC "will be the most environmentally friendly bridge ever built, providing vastly improved access for cyclists and walkers, in addition to light rail and tolling to control congestion." But none of these positive aspects are more than promises — and politicians have already come up short on those. City Council promised it would not approve the bridge without an in-depth environmental report, but voted 4-1 in favor of the bridge without that environmental report. And the CRC's own staff reports show that 12 lanes will increase greenhouse gas emissions.

The other people speaking at the rally besides the BTA's Poyourow? City Councilor Amanda Fritz, Metro Councilor Robert Liberty and Former Secretary of State Bill Bradbury. If the BTA is a group of out-of-touch extremists, they're in good company.