New Columbia River Bridge: My 2 cents, no tolls though! (Portland: sales, lease)

[Dignan]

Originally Posted by beenhereandthere

Folks, particulary those from out of town, will just see tolls (proably more on the WA side) and go around and use 205, which adds on to that. Again, a 3rd bridge is the best option, or at least a 3rd bridge with light rail only.

It's been my opinion that they could get a huge number of cars off the road by building a commuter express line (operating rush hours only) from Vancouver Amtrak Station over to Portland Union Station. I suspect that lots of Vancouverites who work in downtown Portland would much rather commute that way than fight traffic, and I suspect that they would happily pay for the priviledge.

It would need to be an express train, though. One of the problems with the MAX is that it takes forever to get anywhere. Build an express train that gets us to Union Station in 15 minutes, and we will come.

[Dignan]

Originally Posted by EnricoV

I'm not sure where they expect funding to come from, but if it's my Oregon tax dollars, I'm against it. Why should we pay so people can live in Vancouver and use Portland's resources without paying for them?

I keep hearing people say this, and I don't understand it. We pay Oregon taxes too. Thousands of us cross the river, work in Portland, and pay 9% Oregon income tax, even though we don't live in Oregon. How can you possibly say that we use Portland's resources without paying for them? Virtually all of the rush hour commuters on the new bridge will pay Oregon income tax.

[PNW-type-gal]

Originally Posted by Dignan

It's been my opinion that they could get a huge number of cars off the road by building a commuter express line (operating rush hours only) from Vancouver Amtrak Station over to Portland Union Station. I suspect that lots of Vancouverites who work in downtown Portland would much rather commute that way than fight traffic, and I suspect that they would happily pay for the priviledge.

It would need to be an express train, though. One of the problems with the MAX is that it takes forever to get anywhere. Build an express train that gets us to Union Station in 15 minutes, and we will come.

Have you ever been to the Vancouver Amtrak station? It's in the industrial district on the west side, and you have to travel a maze of streets and cross several active tracks. Not a good choice. And light rail that just goes to downtown Vancouver isn't all that useful - that's not where the majority of people live.

I'd like to see light rail go up I-5 to Hwy 500 and back down I-205 with several large park'n'ride lots (and bus hubs, like the current transit centers) along the way. Maybe spur lines out to Salmon Creek and Battle Ground and Camas/Washougal. It'd be a great investment in the future, and one I'm just about positive that Clark County voters would turn down by an overwhelming majority.

[BLAZER PROPHET]

If the new I-5 bridge becomes a toll road, then I-205 will also have to charge a toll. Otherwise, there will be a lot of additional traccif over the I-205 and that can clog city streets & I-80 with vehicles getting there.

The true answer is very tricky. By the time money is raised for the bridge (planning, funding...) gas will be $10-15 per gallon. Fewer people will be driving (unless the new 250-300 mpg vehicles become wildly popular and the roads are clogged again) and I guarantee you Vancouver will be ready to pay for light rail. But will we need so many lanes? Another thought is that if I-5 is going to be widened to a 3-lane freeway each direction, why do we need more than that on the bridge? I suppose there can be an extra lane for those entering or exiting SR14, but I can't see a bridge much wider than that and for MAX.

[EnricoV]

Originally Posted by SeeBee

This is interesting. When were tolls in effect across the Columbia? Just curious...

Hmm. Now your taxing my memory. Every bridge, until the I-205 bridge (I'm not sure about the bridge at Longview, maybe it, too) had a toll until "it was paid for." The I-5 bridge, maybe the mid to late 60s. The bridge at Astoria it's probably been 15-20 years since it had a toll.

[PNW-type-gal]

From a blurb on the WASHDOT site on the two spans that make up the present bridge:

"At first a toll bridge, the bridge became free in the 1920s when taken over by state government. The second bridge, downstream, was completed in 1958. Tolls were added back to the bridge in 1958 and removed in 1966."

[Nell Plotts]

Originally Posted by SeeBee

This is interesting. When were tolls in effect across the Columbia? Just curious...

The tolls were in effect when the 2nd bridge was built until the construction was paid for. Ah yes, I remember it well.

[John Shaft]

Originally Posted by bobmulk

John Shaft: Are you for real? You expect truckers to ride bikes? Where did that comment come from? How would they get goods and services to market? Remember, we are a consumer driven society; whether we like it not, that's not going to change. Suggesting truckers ride bikes is one of the most supremely ridiculous ideas out there.

Let me ask you something? Do you ever shop in a store? How do you think the goods got there? Not by bike, I can guarantee you that.

I'm absolutely for real. These truckers should bike...unless they can use light rail instead. The third alternative is to just quit doing business. Who needs new goods when you can achieve 100% recycling of everything?

[bobmulk]

JohnShaft: What's lilfe like on your planet?

[EnricoV]

Originally Posted by Dignan

I keep hearing people say this, and I don't understand it. We pay Oregon taxes too. Thousands of us cross the river, work in Portland, and pay 9% Oregon income tax, even though we don't live in Oregon. How can you possibly say that we use Portland's resources without paying for them? Virtually all of the rush hour commuters on the new bridge will pay Oregon income tax.

Surely you can see that's a drop in the bucket of the taxes a resident pays. And the road system is only a portion of the services you use.