Do You Support The I-5 Bridge Project?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
B

BLAZER PROPHET

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
18,725
Likes
191
Points
63
http://www.kgw.com/news/CRC-project-gets-first-green-light-191771241.html

Although studies state the current bridge can be retooled at a fraction of the cost I suppose I get why politicians want the shiny new project.

I have a couple of concerns...

The first is how will it be paid for. The most common is a toll of $4-6 each way. In one of the reports I read the issue was raised about how so much traffic would shift to the I-205 bridge and how then to stem that traffic. The answer was the same toll there. A tax lie that for those of us who commute is going to be too costly.

The second issue was brought up in the article. Oregon will have to take a lot of money away from other areas of the state (as an example, money for Tri-Met is siphoned from monies that used to be designated for all over the state) and to draw away yet more money from rural areas for schools, services for children and elderly... for an unnecessary political project seems foolish and very uncaring for those it will hurt.
 
It's never been about the bridge. It's about forcing Max right up the ass of you earth hating Vancouver people! Cars are evil! You people need Max! Love the planet!

You need to be more like Portland. All of us bike everywhere all of the time. We hate cars. We spit on them.

And plastic bags. We hate those too.
 
And you're so late to the party it's not even funny. $300 million has already been spent on planning.

And the Coast Guard rejected that plan because the bridge is too low for river traffic.

But, and I'm not making this up, the bridge has to be low otherwise bicyclists won't be able to pedal over it.

Anyway, doesn't matter what you say or want. The bridge is getting built!
 
Wait, I thought government could create money out of thin air and it didn't ever have to be repaid?
 
Well then I would chip in a big $16 a year. Works for me FAMS!
 
SlyPokerDog said:
It's never been about the bridge. It's about forcing Max right up the ass of you earth hating Vancouver people! Cars are evil! You people need Max! Love the planet!

You need to be more like Portland. All of us bike everywhere all of the time. We hate cars. We spit on them.

And plastic bags. We hate those too.
Click to expand...

HAHAHA!!

I do get it, however.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
And you're so late to the party it's not even funny. $300 million has already been spent on planning.

And the Coast Guard rejected that plan because the bridge is too low for river traffic.

But, and I'm not making this up, the bridge has to be low otherwise bicyclists won't be able to pedal over it.

Anyway, doesn't matter what you say or want. The bridge is getting built!
Click to expand...

No, I'm aware of all that as I've been following it.

But both sides have to agree before it can be built and the WA voters have placed a cap on what they will spend, forcing OR residents to pay what will be the massive overcosts. Also, the Clark County voters have rejected Max such that it too may have to be paid for by OR residents.
 
HCP said:
Well then I would chip in a big $16 a year. Works for me FAMS!
Click to expand...

I second this notion! Put a toll on both bridges! We all know who uses the bridges, vancouver residents.
 
A toll would cost me about $125 a month. I cant afford that! And then add in the ridiculous price of gas and it would cost me about $265 a month just to get to work and back. F___ THAT!
 
BoBoBREWSKI said:
A toll would cost me about $125 a month. I cant afford that! And then add in the ridiculous price of gas and it would cost me about $265 a month just to get to work and back. F___ THAT!
Click to expand...

Probably closer to $200 per month on tolls.
 
The bridge exists solely to allow Washington residents to sponge off Oregonians while avoiding taxes in Washington.

When the day comes that Washington wants to pay for the entire cost, I say let them. Until then we have 2 very good bridges that more than handle any traffic that occurs.
 
BoBoBREWSKI said:
A toll would cost me about $125 a month. I cant afford that! And then add in the ridiculous price of gas and it would cost me about $265 a month just to get to work and back. F___ THAT!
Click to expand...

First of all...... you bike to work. Secondly they need Denny's cooks in the 'Couv as much as they do Portland. PSF!
 
I think the bridge is a perfect example of politicians being in love with things that are "green" and despite the studies saying it won't lessen bottleneck traffic (some say a bit and some say not at all) it has expanded bicycle and mass transit uses so it makes no matter the cost and the massive cost overruns or even the fact people in rural areas will have to suffer in some ways for the big city- it'll be done and let everyone worry about the mess afterwards. Same principle applies to Obamacare and how he has raised the debt... 'let''s just do it and let others after us suffer and pay for it'.
 
On the flipside, imagine how much less traffic there'd be at those kind of tolls.
 
MARIS61 said:
The bridge exists solely to allow Washington residents to sponge off Oregonians while avoiding taxes in Washington.

When the day comes that Washington wants to pay for the entire cost, I say let them. Until then we have 2 very good bridges that more than handle any traffic that occurs.
Click to expand...

Clueless
 
We need a new bridge. Some dumb shit decided it would be a good idea to pass by the bridge at 6pm this evening on my way home from work and I sat in traffic for almost an hour at a standstill. A lot of pissed off people.
 
MickZagger said:
We need a new bridge. Some dumb shit decided it would be a good idea to pass by the bridge at 6pm this evening on my way home from work and I sat in traffic for almost an hour at a standstill. A lot of pissed off people.
Click to expand...

But why do we "need" a new bridge? Studies show it won't lessen gridlock. Oregon has no idea how it will pay for it. All it does is allow for Max to cross over into Vancouver. Does that justify the costs?
 
westnob said:
I second this notion! Put a toll on both bridges! We all know who uses the bridges, vancouver residents.
Click to expand...

As I've heard, because the Glenn Jackson (205) was built with federal money, it cannot be tolled. Can you imagine the gridlock on 84 everyday though if this passes? That thing is already crazy at rush hour!
 
bigbailes said:
As I've heard, because the Glenn Jackson (205) was built with federal money, it cannot be tolled. Can you imagine the gridlock on 84 everyday though if this passes? That thing is already crazy at rush hour!
Click to expand...

What's it like living in a state with no water......thus no bridges? #desert
 
MickZagger said:
We need a new bridge. Some dumb shit decided it would be a good idea to pass by the bridge at 6pm this evening on my way home from work and I sat in traffic for almost an hour at a standstill. A lot of pissed off people.
Click to expand...

you have missed the point alltogether, again. The "new" bridge is a replacement,not an additional bridge.
 
I think we should get rid of the bridge and build some ferrys
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top