a bridge too far or why left wing media hates left wing projects

[Eastoff]

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-17566-a_bridge_too_false.html

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

EXCELLENT article.

 

[maxiep]

As an Oregonian, I'm not particularly interested in helping people who work in Portland move to Clark County to save money. It would seem to me that this bridge would be a half measure. What Portland really needs is a global upgrade to I-5 from Vancouver across the Marquam. If Packwood wouldn't have gotten busted for messing around, the solution would have already been under construction (a tunnel to replace the Marquam with I-5 buried past the Rose Quarter).

 

[tlongII]

I have to give props to Willamette Week. They're a pretty liberal paper, but they produce excellent articles.

 

[barfo]

I would like to see the current bridge torn down and not replaced. We could then remove the Marquam bridge too. Relabel I-205 as I-5, and let the thru traffic go that way.

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

Isn't there already enough congestion on the Banfield to be a total cluster if that was tried?

 

[barfo]

Isn't there already enough congestion on the Banfield to be a total cluster if that was tried?

Yes, I guess those FromWA would commute to town via the Banfield in that case. I suggest that we make the Banfield eastbound only during the hours of 5am-10am, and westbound only during the hours of 3pm-8pm. That should solve that problem.

And no, I didn't get the directions backwards

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

those of us FromWA that only go into Portland on the holidays to visit Grandma in Beaverton or the aunties on the far side of 205 think your plan has merit.

 

[Eastoff]

Maybe we could just set up a toll booth on I-5 and I-205 and not build a new bridge. Then eventually use that money to make a tunnel on I-5 to allow more traffic along the rose quarter.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Why not just overhaul the bridge as it is.

 

[Eastoff]

why not just live in Oregon and work in Oregon?