I find it interesting to see what I call extreme views on this issue. First of all to the Portland contingent that says a new bridge isn't needed, what planet are you on?

Fact. A good portion of I-5 through Portland is two lanes, which is ridiculous for a city this size.

Fact. The food you buy and the clothes you buy, which last time I checked are necessities, are delivered to stores in trucks , not bicycles.

Fact. To call the bridge 12 lanes is deceiving. There would only be three lanes of actual traffic in each direction. The rest are auxiliary lanes which are badly needed to divert traffic off to hayden island, etc.

Now before you go accusing me of only seeing this issue from one side. I am just as frustrated with part of the Clark County contingent that fights light rail tooth and nail. I think light rail is needed and will eventually connect the entire Portland metro area. People do need transportation alternatives where it makes sense.

I for one am tired of extremists on both sides trying to define this issue. While this bridge replacement may not be perfect, I think it's a good compromise to try and address our transportation needs.

I believe tolls are the future for NW transportation projects. We've already seen it on the new Tacoma Narrows Bridge, and there is a new toll lane on Freeway 167 in the Kent Valley south of Seattle. Increase gas taxes? Not gonna happen at current oil prices. Tolls work in major cities all over the U.S. And for the most part, they only tax the users. I think that's fair.

Critics of the proposed $4B bridge have suggested, for one, that current projections for future traffic across the bridge are based on $1.50 gas, and with $4+ gas driving will be reduced from that estimate. Also, some have suggested tolling the existing bridge now and see how that will reduce traffic, rather than building a brand new bridge then tolling that. They do have a point.

I have very mixed feelings about all of this. I hate the idea of tolls; that's something we had on the east coast where I grew up and I always loved living out here where there are no tolls. If we do have tolls, I hope new technology is used that doesn't require holding up traffic (there's "EZPass" but even that seems to slow traffic). And I'm baffled that there isn't $4.2 Billion to spend on this project, given how much money is being blown away in Iraq with so little thought.

I can't blame Clark County voters for being wary of MAX. It's a slow, difficult-to-expand system (trains limited to two cars, no express trains), and C-Tran already has fast express buses that would beat a MAX train even with traffic. MAX would guarantee you a slow commute every day.

The bridge does seem to be a bottleneck for traffic, however. How much of that traffic is Vancouver residents driving across the bridge to jobs in Portland? I know this will grate on Vancouverites, but I would propose the radical suggestion of taxing them even more if they work in Portland, since it does seem they are a significant cause of the traffic on that bridge. What if they were encouraged either to move to Oregon or get jobs in Washington (or their companies moved there)? Would we still need such an expensive bridge?

Andrew

Tolling the bridge today with no expansion will hurt the local economy. That's the result of "reducing" traffic. This is a solution that is typical of anti-car nazis in Portland that will do anything to take cars off the roads. They fail to realize that when people don't drive somewhere to buy something, there's a store owner not selling something!

I am also against tolls. They slow traffic down. Most of the money is coming from the Feds, so it seems to me that the best way to fill in the gap for the local portion of funding would be to increase the car registrations for those living in WA, Clack, Mult, Columbia, and Clark counties. Add a penny or two to the gas tax, and we'd be just fine. And as Andrew said, $4.3 billion is chump change! This is spent EVERY WEEK in Iraq.

With the technology available today, tolls do not have to slow down traffic. In the Chicago area the express I-Pass lanes are seperate from the regular toll booths and have a 55 MPH limit. You can buy the passes at grocery stores.

I don't like them for the simple reason that they are yet another avenue for collecting dollars. That's my core complaint. Others, such as time and hassle are already posted here.

Before we agree to a toll, shouldn't we demonstrate that this can't be funded in the usual ways we fund things?

Also, look at how tolls have evolved back east. A lot of that just isn't all that good! They are expensive, numerous, and many now are owned and paying profits to multi-national corporations.

Sorry, but that's a total loser, if it should come to pass here. The toll is supposed to support the infrastructure, not build profit for companies, who are going to to the least possible to maximize it for their toll earned.

Any toll here, should it be a good idea, should also be linked to strong regulation that prevents this kind of crap from happening.

Tell me, How in the heck will a 12-lae bridge do anything to help traffic flow when I-5 through downtown is necked down to 2 lanes? Sure it will look pretty but it will not help through traffic. I am in favor of the third bridge idea. Put it across at 164th st in Vancouver to connect up with East Portland/Gresham. Put light rail across there.

Don't forget that parts of the existing bridge are 100 years old, and that it is a drawbridge, so there are really two transportation corridors to consider.

And would a toll be used primarily as a disincentive to use the bridge, or as a source of revenue?

Thing is, people need to get across the river for one reason or another. You can't ask them to find another way to get across unless you provide another way, be it a more efficient bus system, or light rail, or an additional bridge somewhere else, or a replacement of the existing bridge.

I'd like to see them run a light rail line over the Glenn Jackson bridge with an express line down Portland Ave. to I-5. Would be easier then trying to get a line across at Hayden Island, and we could see how the light rail line would be used by Clark County residents. Plus, the population center of Vancouver has shifted eastward anyway, so it makes sense to me.

The cost of this project is going to explode -- so don't hold to the $4 billion dollar price tag. Tolls are a necessary component to the financing of a new interstate bridge. I can't imagine the government would support a project of this magnitude without placing tolls on it -- especially when you weigh the cost of this project. Look north to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and the plans for the 520 Floating Bridge in the Seattle area. The Narrows Bridge includes tolls and the 520 Bridge will indeed include tolls. If you use the bridge, you should be expected to help pay for it.

In nearly every major city in this country, tolls of one form or another exist. What makes us immune from tolling?

HEY, we could put in a TRAM from Vancouver to Portland. That other one is such a success we should just do that. And with the cost of gas what it is we should just clog up Vancouver atrerials like PDX did. Makes perfect sense if you are on the planning commission and a large shareholder in gas and electric!

Then there is looking at this bottleneck from a larger perspective.
The I-5 corridor from Mexico to Canada view. OK, with that in mind, let's revisit some key issues already mentioned:

Tolls: Quit your fucking whining. You have to charge the long haulers for using our infrastructure. The notion that the taxes hurt the local economy is ludicrous. All the tax will do is eliminate needless river hopping to the malls to beat the tax on consumables, another big mistake in this state. Traffic has already made that less of an option for Clark County residents.
Tolls no longer bring traffic to a halt. Sun pass, etc. and proper lane management keeps the high volume hours bearable and the cost to daily crossers reasonable. I grew up in NJ right near the George Washington bridge. Rush hour out hear is still nothing compared to that, especially when they began work to hang a second level on the bridge in the 60's. Every day traffic was backed up 5 to 8 miles at times. Remember, this includes tolling the Glenn Jackson bridge as well. These tolls are not only necessary in this day and age, they are a GOOD thing. Period.
Pull your nose out of Poplular Salmon Fishing and read up on urban history. Many cities have been through this and the Northwest needs to learn from previous mistakes, usually manifested as doing less than what is needed until it's a giant exercise in catch up.

Light Rail: MAX ain't perfect, but it is a whole lot better than not having it. Think about it. The more buses you put on the road, the worse the traffic and pollution are. When the extension down through SE to Milwaukie/Oak Grove is complete, the 35 year congestion on McLoughlin may finally subside. Maybe.
Clark County residents have for the large part woken up to the advantages of light rail. You can choose to criticize the system as it now stands, but it will only improve. Going to higher capacity requires more money and expanding the infrastructure.
Cities keep growing in spite of curmudgeons and naysayers and otherwise regressive types of lobbies. We can't go back to the way it was ... ever. Tom McCall's wish of keeping growth out of the state didn't work then, and it won't work ever. The success in light rail has spawned the commuter rail plan to Wilsonville. The security problems notwithstanding, we're in for a penny in for a pound with light rail. There is no turning back even if that was an option.

A third bridge in east county: 405 bottleneck: This is the only piece that I haven't seen a plan for. Darktemper is right about the limiting bottleneck on I-5 through central eastside. The addition of a third bridge out in Orchards is premature. The population has not shifted that far out, and those that do live there don't need to go to Troutdale. The next bridge needs to be in Columbia County in combination with a new outer loop on the West side from about where 205 intersects 5 around the west end of the valley up through Aloha and North Plains and cut through the hills to north of St. Helens and across the river there to meet up with I-5 south of Longview. That project is so big they are afraid to even talk about it because so many counties are involved directly. Not to mention the costs.

Doing nothing (tolling now): Ridiculous. You can't do nothing or we'll end up with another Sellwood Bridge fiasco. Tolling now constitutes charging people for nothing. That will never fly.

I would not be against a subway or elevated type of rail system in Vancouver but don't put it down the middle of the busiest surface streets like PDX did. Drive down interstate avenue from going to delta park between 4 & 6 pm and let me know what you think!!!!

And the HOV lane on the 5........what a joke of a cash cow for the portland police! VERY ineffective in promoting carpooling! It is usually backed up anyway due to the carpool cops ticketing people at delta park.

just a few comments for now . . .

"You have to charge the long haulers for using our infrastructure."

Actually, we need to keep the cost low for commerce. Truckers don't drive around because they like to truck. They're driving our economy.

Fact. A good portion of I-5 through Portland is two lanes, which is ridiculous for a city this size.

Fact: a portion of I-5 through Seattle (downtown) is two lanes which is just plain nutty for a city of that size.

Yes, the 2 lanes along the bank of the Willamette is nutty, but an alternate exists, as does one in Seattle. The problem in Portland is there are too many exits close together, hence even 8 lanes wont solve the Rose Garden/I-84 mess.



Let me throw this into the mix:

No new bridge, but lets make both Interstate bridges soundbound only (6 lanes) and change Columbia Blvd to 3 lanes, a no access Eastbound only link back to I-205. The Glenn Jackson Bridge, Northbound only, with an improved Hwy 14 a link back to I-5. (Seattle traffic, of course stays on I-205)

Cost? $500 Million.

Unfortunately, I-5 through Portland and Seattle was designed for the mid-1960's, with little forethought of the kind of volumes that would exist forty years later. Even if they had predicted the increased traffic, the thinking at the time was it would be easy to simply expand as time went by. Of course, it turned out to be very difficult to do that.

I-5 is poorly designed in both cities. As Skeptical mentions, too many exits close together near the Rose Garden, and not enough right of way north to the Interstate Bridge. If I'm not mistaken that section has not been improved since the freeway opened. When I was living in Oregon, I can't tell you how many times I was stuck on the Oregon side of I-5 only to have smooth sailing once I entered Washington.

In Seattle, yes I-5 does diminish to 2-lanes for a short stretch as part of the "express lane" configuration at the heart of downtown near Seneca. Then north of that it is a real zoo with left hand exits, and the "Mercer Weave", where motorists must weave across six lanes of traffic from SR 520 to Mercer Street, both north and southbound.

The point of all this is that as every year passes it becomes more and more cost prohibitive to fix the problems. In Seattle, procrastination has been the real problem. My conclusion is only tolls can solve the mess in both cities.

Taxing Washingtonians more if they work in Oregon. That would set a horrible precedent. Why then don't we encourage Multnomah County to impose a special income tax on all non-Multnomah County residents who work in Multnomah County but live in Oregon? Or perhaps Beaverton should impose the same sort of tax on all non-Beaverton residents who work in Beaverton. And if they're Washington residents working in Beaverton, the tax rate would be even higher. Seems rather draconian.

I like the idea of a 3rd bridge the best. 164th or 192nd would be a good place to cross and tie it into 84.

Although what the public thinks has very little if anything to do with what will actually happen. It all depends on what politician can get the most "donations" as to what will really happen.

If light rail is such a great idea, why not put it out for bid and let a commercial transportation company bid on it, build it, run it and reap the huge profits that it will make.

I've heard it said that they could have bought everybody a new car that rides the Gresham line and it would have been cheaper. I don't know if it's true or not but with the huge costs to build it and it operating at a loss (pronounced taxpayer subsidized) I have a tendency to believe it!

Light rail is a miserable failure based on the economics of money spent per car removed from the road. Trains will never replace the individual commuter, nor will they ever serve more than a mere niche of the commuter population. People need to drive places to conduct business. And when people conduct less business, our economy goes in the shitter.

^ Exactly. Well put Vitalogy.

There's another website that's gone into detail about this, which is portlandtransport.com.

I've been following this for quite a while, and the thing that makes quite a few people mad is that all these proposals for additional bridges elsewhere (RR corridor W of I-5, 33rd, 164th, 192nd, Camas/Washougal) were all rejected because they weren't specifically addressing the Interstate Bridges.
At the same time, the RTC is studying adding additional corridors within Clark Co., and additional Columbia River crossings. See for yourself:
http://rtc.wa.gov/studies/vision/
I haven't read the Study Report yet, that's new since the last time I went to their website.

One of the rationales they cited for light rail service vs. express buses is that supposedly in 20 years it will take more time to ride an express bus on the freeway due to the additional traffic (Yes, they predict that traffic will still be more congested than it is now, even with a new gigantic bridge) than it does to stop at every single light rail stop along Interstate Ave. Oh, and also risk getting assaulted just because you're riding MAX. (They don't include that, but I think safety/security issues must be included when thinking about this stuff.)

There are several problems with tolls:
1. If only the Interstate Bridge is tolled, most traffic will use the Glenn Jackson.
2. If both the Interstate and Glenn Jackson bridges are tolled, antecdotal evidence suggests that through Portland to Seattle traffic will use US 30 to the Lewis & Clark Bridge between Rainier and Longview, probably turning local roads and a local bridge into an unofficial freeway it wasn't designed for.
3. Most people believe tolls are the cure-all for funding the project, under the idea that people are choosing to live in Washington and work in Oregon, people are choosing to shop in Oregon to avoid the Washington sales tax, etc. (Is it also a problem that the local Washington Dept. of Revenue office is on the backside of Van Plaza? Yes, but that's a separate issue.) However, the group it would hurt the most are those working all the low-paying service jobs at Jantzen Beach and along Airport Way, who are already stuck dealing with Oregon's lower minimum wage, as well as income tax. For the low income folks who couldn't find jobs on their side of the river, we must assume that every additional dollar spent on "discretionary" tolls is a dollar they can no longer afford to spend on food. We must also assume that they are forced to drive due to the nature of the retail industry. (Even if their job doesn't require a drivers' license or driving for any reason. Do I think that in the post-peak-oil world that employers should be required to accommodate those who have to use transportation and it should fall under anti-discrimination laws? Absolutely.)
At a meeting I attended recently, a woman spoke out that she is forced to use public transportation, and she had to leave her house on Fourth Plain at 5:30 AM to make it to her job at the Portland Airport by 8 AM. She didn't even mention her afternoon commute times, but did say she really never sees her family because of it.

And as Andrew said, $4.3 billion is chump change! This is spent EVERY WEEK in Iraq.
Yes, but it's coming in the form of foreign debt. Nobody seems to care that their children and their children's children and beyond will probably be stuck in a life of indentured servitude to the Chinese and Saudis and such to pay off the debt plus hundreds of percent in interest, probably because many people these days are already under indentured servitude to their mortgage, car, and credit card debt.

You can't do nothing or we'll end up with another Sellwood Bridge fiasco.
That reminds me... the same process that's going on for this is also going on for the Sellwood Bridge... I've heard recently that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for that should be out in either late Summer or early Fall. So get ready for more action-packed transportation planning fun!

Either it hurts enough to put it in the budget, or it does not.

Placing a toll really does not change this fact.

There is the idea that out of towners would help pay for the project, but I don't think that's a significant portion of the revenue. People working and living here every day are.

Meaning, we can just budget the project, or not, just like any other project.

Hmmm... I guess I'm not quite done yet.

I've heard it said that they could have bought everybody a new car that rides the Gresham line and it would have been cheaper.
This assumes that everyone has the ability to operate a motor vehicle. What do the blind, epileptics, those who don't have use of their arms and/or legs, recovering alcoholics, and others who voluntarily give up their licenses (or don't have one in the first place) because they know they'd be a hazard to everyone on and off the road? Is everyone willing to pay for the additional public assistance (because they wouldn't be able to get a job), taxi fares (to/from medical appointments, grocery store, etc.), and forced institutionalization because they can no longer afford to live in their own homes, not to mention find a job that results in a total economic benefit because that transit ride is provided?
Or, does it seem better to provide something that's truly available to everyone, including those that don't think they need it until they become elderly and/or disabled?

People need to drive places to conduct business.
This is the other problem. As an example, businesses have adapted to conducting business over the internet, or died because they wouldn't/couldn't. Businesses need to learn how to conduct business using other methods - or they'll also die.

Additionally, individuals must learn how to show off their status using something other than a rapidly depreciating mass of metal. Additionally, this transit user and pedestrian has noted that some drivers of BMWs, Mercedes, SUVs, minivans, and Hummers; and their lack of regard for the rest of the people on the road, sidewalk, or trying to legally cross the street, make all motorists look bad.

When Bechtel built the Airport Max Line, they were able to achieve some successes in terms of cost and meeting construction time tables. The Bechtel arrangement allowed for it to play a role in the development of areas along the Airport Max Line, so they have incentive to make it work. Some people might find that troubling, but in this climate of escalating construction costs, we need to look outside the box. I say a good public/private partnership is healthy, as long as the public’s interests are well served.

As for commuting in the future, if the price of gas continues to skyrocket, then public transport is more essential than ever. People of comfortable means are looking to public transport as an alternative to driving their own vehicle to and from work. Unless incomes rise with the cost of gas and related items, then you’ll see fewer people driving. Just look at the ridership numbers on Tri-Met, they’re hitting record levels. My concern however is that Tri-Met will invest too heavily in MAX and not do enough to increase the number of buses/routes if ridership trends warrant. But we all know Tri-Met is HEAVILY invested in MAX. Unless the federal government were to stop helping financing MAX related projects, I expect they will continue for decades.

With the population in the region growing by leaps and bounds, and with gas prices at an all time high, we have to be smart – and prepared. People need alternatives – especially people who have never made public transport apart of their commuting ritual. In the end, it might be pretty exciting to see what we can come up with in this ever changing world.

Those of you who know me know I like St Louis. Well, lets just take a look at the St Loius Rail System. Very efficient and fast from the airport into downtown. It does not really disturb any vital surface streets and the stops are spread out very nicely so as not to stop every block as max does. The rail stops are strategically placed next to high demand areas. You may have to walk two or three long city blocks to get to it but it works very well. Just leave the driving to them!!!

This is the system I would like to see put in place in Clark County and not one similar to max!

Re: Gas taxes going away.

I don't think so. Really, what we've got is both the value of the dollars collected in the tax going away, combined with more efficient cars.

The dollar being devalued does not warrant an additional source of revenue. That's a systemic problem that needs to be fixed at that level, or we are just fooling ourselves.

(and that means building wealth here to compensate for that, period --nothing else will work)

As for the cars getting better, raise the tax to cover the road! This makes sense.

Also, consider the kinds of cars. To encourage people to make use of the lighter and more efficient cars, tax the guzzlers and heavy weights at a higher rate, through their registration or something.

---or just leave them alone and balance that with a gas tax increase that makes sense.

We are gonna be at $5 / gallon. If you think about it, a $0.10 bump in the gas tax is not that much in relation to the cost of the fuel. The damage has been done on that, so let's at least be rational about it.

For smaller cars, this is about $1.00, or 1/50th of the cost of filling that tank.

For larger ones, it's a bigger hit, but that's exactly why getting into better cars makes sense, doesn't it?

Assessing a toll, breaks out the cost of the bridge as a seperate thing, when the reality is the impact of it is not a seperate thing. Doing that has got to make sense on it's own merits, and I don't see that yet.

All I see is a dodge away from unpopular moves within our existing revenue collection structure. We are going to have to make those moves because Republicans hosed us.

So, let's make those first.

I'm quite happy to pay for a project that's gonna make a difference. Most people are.

I'm not so happy about a new revenue collection device without a solid reason for it. The positive impact of that bridge will benefit more than just commuters. It's going to make the region as a whole more competetive, as in capable of doing more business.

Infrastructure investments, in my view, should be as widely distributed as possible, and should not be profit items. Again, this can easily become the case with a toll.

Look at all the east coast states, suffering from the dollar being devalued and from lower revenues.

They sold their infrastructure that the public paid for, and now some multi-national is making a profit off of that public investment AND the state is still screwed once that quick money disappears.

(and it will)

That comes back to us not generating enough wealth to balance our consumption. That's the problem.

Until we fix that, jobs and wages are gonna continue to stagnate and or decline and with that comes tax revenue, and with that comes the inability to fund stuff like this because people are pinched too much as it is.

Pushing that off onto only some people, does not make sense, given the reason it's popular in the first place.

I pretty much have no concern for the citizens of Clark county. They KNOW they'll pay income taxes if they choose to work across the border. They KNOW there is a bottleneck on I-5 if they choose to work across the border. They increased residential development in Clark co KNOWING most of the jobs are through a bottleneck.

Now they want $4 Billion of everybody's money spent so they can drive their cars easily and TOLL FREE to work across the border to undo the burden of the now what looks to be a bonehead CHOICE they made in the first place.

Uh, no.

So raise their gas tax too.

Tolls are a reasonable expectation. The price of financing these projects are HUGE – and not like in the days of old. If we build a $4 billion dollar bridge, then you as a commuter should be expected to help pay for it. I don’t see how it’s one bit unreasonable to expect commuters to help offset the costs of projects by paying to use it.

In a perfect world, federal and state gas taxes would cover the costs of these projects. But with the price of everything in the constructions trades escalating because of global demand, we’ve got to be realistic. We’ve got trillions of dollars of infrastructure projects in this country that needs addressing – some will be seen as reasonable and some not. But in the end, something’s got to give. And the feds and states don’t have the money to pay for these projects out of hand like in the past. If you want the feds or state governments to pony up on a building project, then you should be expected to help pay for it. I don’t think that’s at all unreasonable.

In a perfect world, it would be great if gas taxes alone paid for the cost of these projects. But we're no longer at the point -- and we have to adjust accordingly. And too, the region’s population isn’t getting any smaller. The need to absorb all the new residents will require us to make changes to the current infrastructure or it'll be a massive clusterf*ck and we'll all want to move to the country. Ever been to downtown Seattle at 5pm trying to get to Bellevue on a Friday night? That’s what we don’t want, and should prepare accordingly.

...or put some incentives in place to locate jobs there.

I like that one, because it speaks to the systemic problem; namely, us not generating wealth to balance our consumption.

Light rail is a miserable failure based on the economics of money spent per car removed from the road.

Its a liveability issue. Portland is a better place than Dallas, Texas and Clark co. Washington, for many to live. Things weren't built strictly for the bottom line for a reason. Imagine how Portland would look with a bland "big box" style convention center, just a concrete sidewalk running along the eastbank esplanade and more flixable buses instead of MAX, city trollies and now, WES.

If you don't like these things and concerned with the bottom line, Dallas, TX and Clark co awaits you.

People need to drive places to conduct business.

We need to change that. We don't need to live 30 miles from work, and drive miles and miles for shopping and personal business. Alternative transportation access should be considered when business expansion is planned. Businesses that don't consider the changing thinking of the population deserve to die and replaced by others more in tune.

So raise their gas tax too.

I already support this. I think I said go ahead and tack on a buck per gal provided it was distributed fairly.

So give each state $2Billion extra federal funding for infrastructure projects. Oregon's and Washington's could pay for most of the cost of the bridge. The US Congress just spend $150 Billion on an "economic stimulus package" to give every taxpayer $300/$600/$900/etc. So $100B for infrastructure projects doesn't seem like a whole lot of extra.

Andrew

"Its a livability issue. Portland is a better place than Dallas, Texas and Clark co. Washington, for many to live. Things weren't built strictly for the bottom line for a reason. Imagine how Portland would look with a bland "big box" style convention center, just a concrete sidewalk running along the eastbank esplanade and more flexible buses instead of MAX, city trollies and now, WES.

If you don't like these things and concerned with the bottom line, Dallas, TX and Clark co awaits you."

Sorry Skep, I ain't going nowhere. It sounds to me like you're just another naive person who believes we can keep our economy going by just staying home and being angry about those damn Clark County folks. Love it or hate it, Portland needs them! So does the rest of the state that benefits from the economic activity generated in Portland that subsidizes the rest of the state.

And when it comes to spending tax money on toy trains, the bottom line had better be considered! All these various train projects are miserable failures and money losers!

"We need to change that. We don't need to live 30 miles from work, and drive miles and miles for shopping and personal business. Alternative transportation access should be considered when business expansion is planned. Businesses that don't consider the changing thinking of the population deserve to die and replaced by others more in tune."

Maybe in a perfect world we can all buy a house and live in it the rest of our lives and work at the same business that is next door to the house for the rest of our lives. Too bad that ain't reality. When cars come off the road, business loses.

I don't think tolls are a reasonable expectation.

Again, the increased infrastructure capacity benefits more than just commuters.

Set that aside though and ask why we can't fund our infrastructure?

Because we don't produce enough things here. That's the big problem in Clark County too. Lots of people living where they produce almost nothing. If there was more work there, you can bet many of those drivers would take it, rather than continue to pay higher fuel prices for the longer distance.

Maybe the better plan is to do what it takes to get that going, so that it funds other projects. Doing this will improve tax revenues, provide jobs, give people commute options, make the region more competitive.

Right. Something has to give. Well, that's why we are not gonna vote Republican any more.

Bitch isn't it?

Hurts when our future is sold for quick dollars today, doesn't it.

Well then suck it up and pay, and consider living smaller while you are at it.

And, BTW, that's exactly what I've done. Buying power per hour worked isn't so hot anymore. So, scale down, keep money as liquid as is possible, and build up from there (again), and remember who did it.

The GOP did it, for those following along at home.

I think a grim reality is going to set in over the next 4 years.

We are gonna have to pay off foreign debt, or be owned by them. One or the other. Too much ownership and we lose freedom.

We are gonna have to pay higher fuel costs.

We are gonna have to pay for alternative energy build outs.

We are gonna pay much higher costs of ordinary goods.

Our wages will remain flat for a while yet.

We are gonna pay for new infrastructure too.

So we place a toll here, a fee there, a tax over here, steal from this program, that program, etc...

If we do that, without actually increasing our ability to produce things we can sell to balance our consumption, it's just a shell game. Marginalize this, so that gets done.

No thanks.

Let's just figure out what really makes sense, and do that using our existing revenue collection means. Adjust those, if needed.

If that adjustment is too high, either the project is not worth it, or it is and people just can't afford it.

Empower them to afford it then.

For me, it always comes back to this. Our general failure as a nation to actually produce is really hurting us. This discussion is a classic example of why it's hurting us.

That's gotta stop.

If that means no bridge, well then there is no bridge. Perhaps that money can be used to put people to work, who will then be happy to pay for a new bridge later on.

"All these various train projects are miserable failures and money losers! "

That may be true, but haven't you heard the reports about the dramatic uptick in ridership on MAX and on the buses in Portland? It takes time (and $4 gas) to build ridership, and it has taken time to build the infrastructure.

I can now have an inter-city shuttle in Sandy pick me up at my front door and take me to the local SAM (Sandy Area Metro) station, which will take me to the Gresham Transit Center, all for free. There I get on the train to Rose Quarter, where I can switch to the Yellow Line and get off at Portland Blvd (Rosa Parks now, I think) and walk a few blocks to the house of a good friend of mine in the Overlook neighborhood. Takes 40 minutes, and a hell of a lot better than trying to make bus connections.

MAX may not be what you want it to be, and it may even cost more money than you think it should, but it provides a great public service - for many, an essential public service. Just like police and fire, I don't plan to use MAX very often but I'm happy it's there when I need it.

Edselehr writes:
I can now have an inter-city shuttle in Sandy pick me up at my front door and take me to the local SAM (Sandy Area Metro) station, which will take me to the Gresham Transit Center, all for free. There I get on the train to Rose Quarter, where I can switch to the Yellow Line and get off at Portland Blvd (Rosa Parks now, I think) and walk a few blocks to the house of a good friend of mine in the Overlook neighborhood. Takes 40 minutes, and a hell of a lot better than trying to make bus connections.

Sorry, no chance in hell you can make that trip in 40 minutes as you described - more like 2X that, maybe more. Just the MAX ride from Gresham to Rose Quarter is 30+ minutes. For that trip I'd guess 1.5 hours with all the connections involved.

I don't have a problem with train projects, but I have problems with the basic design of MAX. As I noted, it is severely limited in future expansion. Trains can be only two cars total (size of a Portland city block). There is no provision for express trains. And in many parts of the line (especially downtown Portland) the train stops sometimes ever two blocks. It crawls. Imagine how Clark County commuters who now ride the express C-Tran buses feel about spending billions to replace them with slower, standing-room-only trains.

I just finished a four month experiment where I bought bus/MAX passes and cut back my driving severely, almost not at all in April. In the end, it saved me very little money given my driving habits but cost me hours and hours of extra time. MAX is very comfortable (when you can get a seat) and clean but it's frustrating how slow it is. From my house in NE Portland to a regular exercise class near Beaverton, my best TriMet time is about 50 minutes door to door, using buses and a nearly straight shot on MAX. With no traffic (which is surprisingly most of the time at the times I travel), I can usually drive in under 15 minutes. It's really, really hard to justify taking MAX especially when I am not really saving much money ($30/month-ish).

I wish Portland has a faster train system, one that had been designed better early on for future expansion. MAX should have only a few stops downtown (2 or 3 total) and allow for longer trains, etc.

Andrew

"Sorry, no chance in hell you can make that trip in 40 minutes as you described - more like 2X that, maybe more. Just the MAX ride from Gresham to Rose Quarter is 30+ minutes. For that trip I'd guess 1.5 hours with all the connections involved."

I'll admit, it was on a Saturday, but I honestly did that in about 40 minutes. Suprised the hell out of me, too. Your weekday travel times will vary.

Still, my point is that I have mass transit options all the way from Sandy into downtown Portland that are convenient, clean, and affordable. I don't mind that a bit. Plus, it clears quite a few people off the road so I can drive my Comet into work with less traffic to contend with.

How is paying a toll a Republican concept? Roads and bridges from coast to coast use tolling systems to help pay the cost of bridges and roads. It’s very progressive in fact. And I doubt they're exclusively "RED" states that require a toll. The Interstate Bridge was a toll bridge for decades. I’ve lived in the “BLUEST” city in America and paid tolls where required. It's part of the cost of traveling in the region. Every time you purchase a airline ticket, some of that money goes into a fund which helps finance projects related to aviation. I don't see how it’s any different.

As for "empowering" Clark County to produce ”something” and afford a new bridge. I guess if you live outside of the city of Portland, you don’t produce anything. I'm sure the residents of areas outside Portland would take issue with that statement. Why don't we ask the tri county region to "empower" itself to come up with the money to pay the real costs associated with the development of MAX -- or any other partially federally financed project for that matter. MAX alone would cost us tens of billions of dollars -- money I doubt we could ever afford. If we used the “empowerment” mechanism as a means test, hardly no infrastructure project would ever be approved. We are very dependent on each other -- and to try and demonize others because their project isn't worthy would fly in the face of how much of our current infrastructure was built. Why should I pay a dime for the Big Dig in Boston? I don’t live in Boston. We would not enjoy many of the wonderful things here in Oregon without federal dollars – including MAX or the Esplanade.

In the real world, you've got to pay to play. And that's not a liberal or conservative concept.

Riding public transit for me is a lifestyle. You learn to incorporate the travel time into your day. And you learn to cluster your stops accordingly. For the most part, I find it relaxing -- and it saves me a good deal of money each month.

Think of all the people around the world who travel by public transit. For them, a couple hours a day by public transit is nothing.

Edselehr: I'll admit, it was on a Saturday, but I honestly did that in about 40 minutes. Suprised the hell out of me, too. Your weekday travel times will vary.

No, MAX pretty much keeps the same schedule no matter what time it is. It's slightly slower at rush hour. Buses can do much better at off-peak periods because they don't need to stop so often and not as many people get on/off.

I am glad we have some good transit options in the Portland area, compared to many other US metro areas, but it's frustrating when you visit a European city and see how much better their transit systems are. In Rome, for example, they don't have an extensive subway system as in many other European cities, but they have an extensive bus system. In fact, all over Italy last year I found that the riders were not the same type we tend to have in the US; they were very middle class, whereas in Portland and many other cities, riding the bus is often considered an option for poor people who can't afford cars.

Andrew

Talpdx: Riding public transit for me is a lifestyle. You learn to incorporate the travel time into your day. And you learn to cluster your stops accordingly. For the most part, I find it relaxing -- and it saves me a good deal of money each month.

I love to read, and I can read on a train just fine but not on a bus; I get motion sickness. I can even use my laptop and tether to the internet via my cell phone while riding MAX but on a bus, forget it. Unfortunately, MAX doesn't go everywhere. So time on a bus is just idle time when I have to endure people yapping loudly on their cell phones, homeless people bringing on huge bags of junk and recycle cans, smokers who still wreak of smoke when they get on, etc. One day a few weeks ago, after enduring this a lot in one week, I just snapped and went home and started driving again. I could endure the extra transit time better if not for some of these other issues.

I'm sure I will start riding TriMet again soon but I need a break from it. I think I might finally have to break down and look into buying a Prius.

Andrew

"It sounds to me like you're just another naive person who believes we can keep our economy going by just staying home"

Damn, despite all the people who moaned over the years how PDX politicans hated business and downtown was dying, blah blah blah, Portland became the envy of many urbanists across the country. Heck Pearl district sprung up out of nowhere. The last LETS BUILD FREEWAYS EVERYWHERE mayor was Frank Ivancie and he got his ass whipped by a bike riding bartender. And now we have bike riding and landslide mayor-elect Sam "bridges for bikes" Adams.

I think we're doing just great over here in Portland.

Love it or hate it, Portland needs them [Clark co residents]!

No, we don't. Some border retailers that cater to tax dodging Washintonians will close, but the jobs vacated by Clark co residents will be sucked up by other Oregonians with the help of immigrants.

Keep in mind I had the unfortunate displeasure of having to live in Clark co for 7 years (Thanks Dad!). Clark co is so butt ugly development-wise that it gives Nampa ID a run for the money.

Well, anyway, I can appreciate that some people just like the way things are in Clark co, however, their ideas can stay over there.

Andrew sez: "I'm sure I will start riding TriMet again soon but I need a break from it."

Any comments on WES? It starts this fall and I'm looking forward to see how it works out.

I take riding public transit all in stride. Some things bother me, but I tend not to focus on the less desirable aspects of riding public transit. Because quite frankly, it isn't that bad. No system is perfect, but I get where I want to go. And honestly, our region has a great transit system.

As for the Pearl District coming out of nowhere, without millions in tax abatements, Homer Williams and Company would have never dumped money into the development of the Pearl (or the south Waterfront for that matter). It's wasn't done for free. For every area that gets special attention (i.e. tax breaks to developers) other areas of the city gets neglected. It’s as simple as that. Portland has hundreds of millions of dollars in projects that needs addressing -- and has yet to figure out how to pay for them. Sam Adams has focused on some of these items -- with good measure. But how will he get voters to pay for such a plan? It’ll be interesting to see. I do feel he will be the right person at the right time in the mayor's office. But not everything in Portland is cyclists and streetcars. There are lots of unattractive matters which need addressing. It's easy to look at one area with pride but forget that there are areas which are in dire need of attention. We hear repeatedly of problems on the east side and if they’re not addressed soon, we’ll be spending tons of money trying to undo further years of neglect.

Portland is not an island unto itself. And to dismiss Clark County residents sounds like rhetoric Robert Mugabe used when kicking white Zimbabwean’s off their farms. It makes no sense and seems rather small minded. I want people to feel welcome here, not disregarded.

WES is an incredible waste of money. $200 million to take a couple thousand cars off the road? 200,000 plus cars go through the I5/217 interchange daily. Please tell me how 198,000 cars instead of 200,000 will make any difference? That $200 million should have been spent on roads, which serve 98% of the tax paying, tax producing commuters.

I love trains in general. WES certainly looks kewl! And the trains will have free WiFi! I will certainly check it out sometime.

But, the WES project does seem like an incredible waste of money. WES will run at rush hours only, Mon-Fri. Are there really that many commuters who making that rush hour commute, between Wilsonville and Beaverton? I can see a train between Wilsonville and downtown Portland, just because there are so many jobs there, but how many are in downtown Beaverton? The MAX ride connection from Beaverton into Portland would be double again the commute time from Wilsonville to Beaverton, and even though there are bus connections at Beaverton TC, I doubt lots of people are going to want to ride them.

It's just like Portland Streetcar: it's great that we have a shiny, sleek looking vehicle that has a smooth ride, but it doesn't seem worth the money it cost. The idea of WES is fine, it's the cost vs the actual benefit I worry about.

Andrew

"And to dismiss Clark County residents sounds like rhetoric Robert Mugabe used when kicking white Zimbabwean’s off their farms. It makes no sense and seems rather small minded. I want people to feel welcome here, not disregarded."

Actually its a thing that works both ways. Clark co residents seemingly by and large take pride that they're NOT like Portland.

Portland is vibrant and exciting for a reason. I'd like to keep it that way. People that complain about the bottom line here while living in Clark co can just sit in traffic while trying to get to Battle Ground, or better yet, try to drive down 99th Ave without getting killed. You'll get killed for just even THINKING about riding a bicycle on many (most?) roads in Clark co.

Clark co is a place with more woes than Portland. Its certainly NOT vibrant and exciting. Whatever the heck they're doing there is NOT what what we want to be doing here.

This is not being small minded.

Yes, the jury is out on WES, however, it is something to try. If we never try out new ideas -- from MAX, the Tram to the killing of the Mt Hood freeway, we'd be just like Clark co.

I do agree that the city of Portland does have to eventually deal with many other things they've let go to the wayside as some have pointed out.

Portland, The City of Roses and Floaters on the Willametteee after a hard rain!

Skep, the problem I have with WES is that it seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Instead of someone looking at traffic from Wilsonville to Beaverton and asking, "What's the most practical way to solve this problem?", rail advocates were looking for anyplace to build a new project. Gee, there's this freight track between Wilsonville and Beaverton...we can put that project together. We can craft a proposal, get funding. Because rail is always great no matter where you build it. Call me cynical but that's really how I see WES and some of the other rail projects.

WES will have some built-in ridership, at least from Tualatin to Beaverton, because it will take riders from bus lines like the 76, 78, and the 96. But will it get people out of their cars regularly who aren't already riding the buses? Is it possible to be a rail advocate and at the same time ask, "Does this project really make sense?" I don't think we should build things just to try them out at such huge expense. And I don't think such practical-minded people are the ones making the decisions about projects like WES.

A more practical project might have been (still might be) an extension of the Portland Streetcar from South Waterfront all the way to Lake Oswego. There's already a limited-service trolley running that line. Suppose a larger train could be built along that line from downtown Portland to Lake Oswego and beyond, along the I-5 corridor? That project would have made more sense than WES.

It bugs me that no one seems to care about the speed of commuting via mass transit. Travel time always seems the lowest priority, as if everyone has so much extra free time that they just loovvvee riding the buses and trains and taking 2X or 3X longer to get place to place. And I see that as one issue regarding Vancouver light rail that no one else ever seems to mention.

Andrew

Speaking of WES, why isn't anybody talking about a commuter rail option from Clark County?

I work (in Hillsboro) with several folks who make the hellacious drive from Vancouver to Hillsboro every day. The rail infrastructure (rail bridge over the Columbia and Willamette, train tunnel near Cornelius Pass) is already in place, so adding commuter rail from Vancouver to Hillsboro (and to downtown for that matter) would be peanuts compared to a 4 (probably double that by the time we get around to building it) billion dollar bridge.

And speaking of the bridge, it seems like a massive waste to demolish TWO perfectly good bridges. Yes, they are old, yes they are drawbridges... but so what? How often do bridge lifts cause problems?

Wouldn't it be much cheaper to keep the existing bridges while adding a third (non-lift) span, which would carry light rail and three reversible express lanes?

I have mixed feelings about light rail though... yes, it's slow. Yes, it's full of smelly losers. It's completely ruined Interstate Avenue as a thoroughfare. However, it's a step in the right direction for getting us off of our car dependence.

When we're thinking about whether the project makes sense, we not only have to consider whether the project makes sense in terms of how many cars we're taking off the road now, but in future terms as well - whether it will promote "good" growth in the future.

What we really need is a grade-seperated (underground or elevated) rail option. I was riding the Skytrain in Vancouver BC last weekend and was very impressed with it's speed and efficiency - especially compared to the traffic nightmare they have up there.

Tadc, have you ever ridden Amtrak from Vancouver to Union Station in Portland? For whatever reason, the trains have to go very slowly through north and NW Portland. So perhaps it would cost a bundle to upgrade the tracks for a reasonable speed? Not sure. There are also RR bridges over both the Willamette and the Columbia that are pretty old...

But if you recall about 10 years ago, during the then-infamous Interstate Bridge maintenance project, when I-5 was supposed to backup from Wilsonville to Longview (never happened), there were some commuter trains temporarily in place from Vancouver to Union Station. I don't know what was required to make that happen but I would be curious to know why it can't be done now. Perhaps pro-MAX advocates realize that if such a project were ever done it would kill entirely their hopes of taking MAX itself directly to Vancouver.

Andrew

MAX is full of smelly losers? What sort of condescending remark is that? So if you utilize public transport because gas prices are $4.30 a gallon you’re a smelly loser? That's the sort of elitist and classist b*llshit that I find very offensive. I enjoy using public transport -- and most of the people I see are not "smelly losers". I use public transport because I’d rather spend my money on things other than $4.30 gas. Plus I've taken the time to learn how to utilize the area public transportation system -- and quite effectively I might add. As the price of gas continues to rise – there will be more “smelly losers” using public transport.

C'mon, you know what he meant: not that everyone who rides the MAX is a "smelly loser" but that there are a good number of riders (largely of the homeless type) who literally don't bathe. I find this even more true on the buses. Try taking the #20 through downtown sometime. Sometimes you can smell the body odor on the bus from the last person who rode - lingers on the seats. Yuck!

Andrew

As to the remark in question, it clearly states "smelly losers". There is nothing ambiguous about the remark.

Read into it whatever you wish. I took it to be a more concise wording of my earlier comment that some who ride TriMet are "homeless people bringing on huge bags of junk and recycle cans, smokers who still wreak of smoke."

Andrew

Speaking of WES, why isn't anybody talking about a commuter rail option from Clark County?
One claim that's been made is that the freight train traffic is now too high for commuter trains to run on the tracks.
The other claim is that since the trains wouldn't run parallel to I-5 on the bridge, that it's outside the project area.

Speaking of bus route 76 vs. WES, this is a video made by one of the drivers who drives the route:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kk8jdzxkRA

I'm glad that this thread has generated so much debate. However, I must take issue with some of the statements. How exactly are Clark County residents tax dodgers. Many of them live in Washington but work in Oregon so they pay income taxes plus sale taxes if they buy things in Washington. And I don't think Portland business owners are complaining about people coming from out of state to buy their products. If you use that logic than tourists are taxdodgers too! I think much of the problem when it comes to projects impacting both sides of the river is that it is an us vs them mentality. It really doesn't have to be that way. Anyway keep up the discussion!

The driver makes a valid point. It's hard to explain why TriMet has two classes of service; trains and everyone else (buses). Some of the buses are very bumpy, not to mention not air conditioned. What would it cost to upgrade the buses to something more comfortable?

But, to be fair, WES does seem at least intended to attract new ridership. Adding A/C buses to the #76 probably won't attract the same new ridership that is hoped for WES, even though it would make existing riders more comfortable. TriMet has a budget they must live within. It seems perverse, but when you are trying to get funding for a project, you are more likely to get it for a new train system that at least pretends it will take cars off of a freeway, rather than a project that will make existing riders more comfortable.

Metro does seem to hate buses. I think it's part of the anti-car bias in these parts. But part of the problem is that it's difficult to market the concept of a "city bus" to people to get them out of their cars. Buses have an image problem: people think they are dirty, bumpy, smelly, something for poor people. Trains seem more classy, something you aren't embarrassed to ride. Some people who wouldn't be caught dead on a bus use MAX fairly often.

What we need is a politically incorrect marketing scheme to re-brand and resign the "bus." Come up with quieter, cleaner, more comfortable vehicles that look and feel different but still drive on city streets. Call it something new that makes it clear it's not a "city bus." In Norfolk, VA a few years ago I rode a little natural gas bus that was quiet (if not exactly speedy) and fairly comfortable. But in Portland, no one seems to think in these terms. If it's not rail, they don't want to talk about it.

Andrew

How exactly are Clark County residents tax dodgers.

I'm pretty sure the Home Depots at the foot of Interstate and Glen Jackson bridges would close overnight if Oregon was to enact a sales tax. Let ask the Washington State Patrol about Washington residents and the license plates on some of their vehicles.

I think its a pretty fair guess that many of us Oregon residents were visited by their Washingtonian friends AFTER they itnitally crossed the border to make a purchase here. They may have not otherwise made the trip. Also, honestly, how many of us have been asked to make a large purchase here for Washingtonians using our addresses and/or drivers licenses? Hmm?

It happens. One knowingly pays a income tax by working here, but ducking Washington taxes is a different matter. Not such a big deal in the grand scheme of things but they're shifting the tax burden to upstate residents if just only a little bit. Fair? Hmm.

How about this idea . . .

Paying a few bucks more to ride an upscale "Greyhound" type non-stop TriMet express bus from Surburban centers to downtown Portland?

Will this fly?

Andrew, I must say I prefer the MAX to the bus, even if it's slower.

Not a reason to go rail only, but it's got some simple appeal that the bus just does not have.

I can't get anything solid done on the bus either.

Skep: Serve a snack on the thing and you are golden! (I'm actually half serious!) Pick up your goodie, when bording, munch your way there, drop it in the trash on the way out.

Skeptical: Paying a few bucks more to ride an upscale "Greyhound" type non-stop TriMet express bus from Surburban centers to downtown Portland?

Don't think TriMet would ever allow anything that competes with MAX. In a sense, C-Tran already operates such buses. Their express buses to Portland cost more than other C-Tran buses. (In a weird conflict with Trimet, C-Tran does not collect any fares in the state of Oregon; you pay when you get on in Vancouver or when you get off in Vancouver.) The express buses from downtown Vancouver to downtown Portland do seem a bit nicer than your typical TriMet bus, and since they have very few stops, they seem more comfortable.

Opponents of Portland "first class" bus service would probably shout it down even though we already have higher class service (trains) that costs the same. If you are lucky enough to live near a MAX or streetcar stop, you get a higher class of service.

Missing, I didn't mean to imply that MAX is slower than the bus; during regular operation it isn't although at non-peak times (early morning/late at night) when there's no traffic, the #6 I ride can make it from Convention Center to Goose Hollow faster than the MAX can. But as a train, it ought to be even faster than it is.

Andrew

Agreed. I think that's just perception on my part. THe darn thing really should be faster.

Bus annoyances aside, it's possible to do a lot on PDX public transportation and that's a good thing.

I've often wondered about interleaving stops. Every other one, to increase overall "peopleput" for the system as a whole. Riders would get used to it soon enough. Maybe use a simple number / color scheme, keyed to time of day.

Opinion: A new bridge is a foregone conclusion! The planners in Metro's basement decided on it long ago as they pushed light rail to the airport and out Interstate, knowing that eventually Vancouver would be pressured to climb aboard. They just weren't sure which river-crossing they could sell to other jurisdictions and the public. Subsequently, bureaucrats and politicians started talking up a new and splendid replacement at Hayden Island. And most folks are buying into it. Good luck!

They need to model it after this system:

http://www.metrostlouis.org/#

Very fast and efficient. Only 37 stops on two lines but it seems to get the job done for St Louis.

About 60 minutes from Lambert field all of the way to the far side of the city on the main line. And the other is only a 40 minute ride end to end.

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/slou/saint-louis.htm

Paying a few bucks more to ride an upscale "Greyhound" type non-stop TriMet express bus from Surburban centers to downtown Portland?

...C-Tran already operates such buses.

And, they already operate such bus fleet on those routes (hybrid diesel/electric with extremely comfortable cloth seats), namely on Route 105, which runs M-F even during the day. Well worth the $3 a ride. (Note that if you buy their $6 day pass, you can use that on any/all C-TRAN and TriMet routes, including MAX and the Portland Streetcar. And it's easier to fit a $1 and a $5 into the farebox than it is 3 $1 bills! With TriMet All-Zone fares going up to $86/mo. this September, someone who rides C-TRAN's express buses more than 6 times in a month will save money with their $105 Express Pass.)

...C-Tran does not collect any fares in the state of Oregon...
That ended on May 1, 2005, which is when the $3 fare started. Too many people thought that because the driver didn't ask for payment before leaving Downtown Portland that they thought the bus was free. And/or they knowingly did this because they were going across the river and there's very little that can be done to stop the fare evasion short of having the police on hand for each and every arrival to arrest them.

This is the system I would like to see put in place in Clark County and not one similar to max!
DT, they could've used that opinion during public comment at either the Vancouver City Council or the C-TRAN board meeting. The "Locally Preferred Alternative" light rail alignment winds along surface streets in Downtown Vancouver, crosses I-5 and ends at Clark College, where they would build a new Park & Ride.

How about this idea: WES-type service from Vancouver's Amtrak station to Portland's Union station? This must only be a 6 mile run, hmm?

Years ago, when the Interstate Bridge was being renovated and there were major traffic delays and closures planned for the bridge, I think Amtrak made available trains from travel between Vancouver and Portland. The details are a bit hazy, but I do recall some sort of arrangement.

Yes, Talpdx, that's what I said above.

Andrew

Andrew said: "there were some commuter trains temporarily in place from Vancouver to Union Station. I don't know what was required to make that happen but I would be curious to know why it can't be done now.

I see I missed that comment earlier.

I'm thinking the TriMet involvement of such a project ends at the Vancouver Amtrak depot. If one wants to extend it beyond that into Clark co., it'll be entirely a Clark co thing.

I'm seeing rumblings about somehow extending WES into Sherwood. The mayor is apparently behind it. I'm not sure how they'd configure that route, but Sherwood is a bedroom community with a capitol B in dire need of communting help.

I like the idea of a new bridge and better public transit solutions. If your commute is unsustainable, or unpleasant, or long, or stressful, or annoying, well -- tough shit. I have friends who commute to Portland from as far away as Rhododendron and Keizer. They do not complain at all because they love where they live and love where they work.

So, I say live near your work, or drive a long way because you want to and suck it up. Nobody told these folks that they had to live miles and miles from their job. They chose to live where they live and work where they work. Free will is not a free pass. In America, you pay to play, and if tolls are what it takes to find a sensible solution, then tolls it shall be.

It would be nice to live a world where those who used the highways paid for the highways. It would be nice to live in a world where urban growth was tempered with real planning for infrastructure. It would be nice to live in a world where each citizen took a little bit of responsibility for shared problems like traffic. Since we do not live in that world, I'll take the next best thing. A retroactive solution is gonna have to happen and soon.

LS sez: If your commute is unsustainable, or unpleasant, or long, or stressful, or annoying, well -- tough shit.

Wow, LS is on a common sense roll tonight!

No kidding.

Yeah it's either worth it, or it isn't, meaning you've gotta make some choices, or you don't. It's that simple.

Seems hard tho' Just got done making a few of those and I think I'm getting happier by the day. Seemed to be difficult at the time, but adjusting just does not take all that long.

Thought it would be longer, but it just wasn't. Already, the old neighborhood seems a different place. One I don't think I would pick now.

Damn tough to see it before hand. Go figure.