Paying a toll on a freeway we already own
I know the idea sounds kind of absurd, and in fact it is absurd. You’ve already paid for Interstate 5. You pay for it every time you drive up to the gas pumps and diesel pumps.That freeway is already paid for. Yet, Tim Leavitt, the Mayor of Vancouver, a man I voted for, is now talking about what they call a “corridor toll”.
They can’t stomach the idea of just putting tolls on the I-205 and I-5 bridges. Now they want to charge everyone who wants to drive on the freeways. The problem is the people who drive on those freeways shouldn’t have to pay a toll. They’d be renting space on a freeway they already own and that’s just not right.
There is a solution to this bridge problem. The solution is to build the kind of bridge Minnesota built. Build it quickly. Build is simply. And, let’s leave the federal government and light rail out of it.
That’s the solution and we can pencil that out any day of the week.
“For more Lars click here”
That’s the solution and we can pencil that out any day of the week.
“For more Lars click here”
We need to stop taking auto and truck taxes (the Federal match) and spending it on transit and instead spend it on road capasity.
We can build our way out of congestion as our population grows. Cars don't cause congestion, population growth and density does.
What we really need are planners that solve our congestion problems, instead of telling us we need to give up our fast door to door service, that takes us to where we need to be, when we need to be there.
By the way, the state isn't spending your gas tax money on light rail (the feds are, but that's another matter) and right now the state lacks the funds to maintain the existing road net satisfactorily, let alone expand it. User fees in the form of congestion prices is a good source of funds. They are also harder to divert to other purposes. Residents of the Portland metro area pay over half of state gas taxes, but get back less than 40 percent. Congestion charges tend to stick where they are paid.
Lars sounds like the granolas that object to paying for wilderness parking permits because they already own the national forests. They use wilderness facilities, but want the rest of you to pay for their maintenance.
Before we toll auto users or raise taxes of any kind on auto and truck users. We need to make transit self supporting by way of the fair box and bike riders should pay a tax for all the special paths, stripes and amenities they demand.
Most importantly, politicians are simply defying the market and the will of the people. Less than 3 percent of all trips are taken on any form of public transit. It simply is not wanted.
One example: We (the taxpayers) own the major electric power utility distribution grid yet government sells power at very low rates to benefit private individuals while the average ratepayer (taxpayer) pays more to benefit certain private individuals.
Another example: With land-use laws the government takes away your freedom but if you're a winegrower and you spend enough money on lobbyists and politicians you get to buy some of your freedom back.
in the Portland urban area
For every new transit user their are more auto users moving and living in the Metro area
1980
97.2% auto miles traveled
2.8%transit miles traveled
2007
97.9% auto miles travled
2.1% transit miles traveled
see
http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-porshare.pdf
If not for strategic negotiation purposes, Leavitt is yet another spineless politician. Anyways I wish the governors of Oregon and Washington as well as the federal government would remove the city of Portand and city of Vancouver from the negotiating table. This bridge isn't just theirs. It belongs to the whole West Coast.
The ideal bridge would be a complete westside bypass of Portland city altoghether, linking the Silicon forest and Hillsboro to Vancouver.
Another point. No light rail, no bridge. That is the deal on the table. Metro and Portland will not support the project absent light rail. So deal with it or stay stuck in traffic.
If Metro and Sammy can't live with that, we can start over. Should be quick & simple. Use existing studies, DEIS and just edit out all references to toy trains.
see http://www.nobridgetolls.com
Thanks
JK
Light Rail is the Pyramids. A senseless project that enthralls because of its size and scope, not its utility.
Light Rail is Sasquatch - An idiotic belief that some just simply cannot drop even though all evidence contradicts their belief - excessive costs, low utility and abysmal ridership even at absurdly subsidized levels.
If you are talking to a Light Rail believer, you are essentially dealing with the same mentality as UFO abductees or a Sasquatch slighter.
We can build our way out of congestion, as we grow the population, if we wanted to.
Light rail has never reduced congestion, anywhere in the Metro area.
Actually you ride it because the fair subsidy exists not Light Rail itself. Were it to exist without the fair subsidy, you'd probably just simply hire a limo.
>You may think that unfair or unwise, but it doesn't matter unless you can elect politicians who will give up on it.
Which is exactly what I was saying.
Light Rail is demonstrably idiotic - it makes no sense to build it.
Politicians who support it need to be pointed out as the fools they are - Sasquatch believers.
The fact is Light Rail makes no sense to build. It has zero impact on traffic, costs a fortune, and even with absurd subsidy cannot attract ridership.
I would think it far better to not build the bridge - than be extorted by idiots intent on wasting taxpayer money.
Were the current bridge project to dissolve because of the Light Rail demands - those politicians who insisted on it should rightfully be blamed.
People shouldn't have to accede to idiocy to get a simple bridge built. You might not think thats fair, but it is logical.
If we must pay to keep things safe and sound, then pay we must.
I personally believe the better way to fund this situation would be an increase on the state gas tax.
Anyway, all these people who hate our government should consider moving to Costa Rica or some other third world hell-hole and see if they like it any better.
The cost then gets low enough that we don't need tolls.
Thanks
JK
We also would not need the bridge, because cars would be stacked up so deep at either end a new bridge wouldn't matter. Now THAT would save a LOT of money!
We also would not need the bridge, because cars would be stacked up so deep at either end a new bridge wouldn't matter. Now THAT would save a LOT of money!
JK: Are you under the impression that a Billion dollar light rail line replacing buses that carry 1650 daily commuters will somehow reduce congestion?
Or are you thinking that the interchanges are a source of congestion? For example, the Marine Drive interchange is a major congestion point, but only because it merges into the existing lanes. With 3 more lanes across the bridge, there is no need to merge. End of problem. 1/2 Billion saved! Just that simple.
As usual you need to do your homework.
See http://www.nobridgetolls.com/
Thanks
JK
Our founding fathers recognized the nature of government and put in protections against it's excesses. It's not the people necessarily but the institution that is corrupt.
They killed the west side bi-pass 20 years ago, that would have cost about billion dollars and include a new bridge across the Columbia river, for the billion dollar west side light rail, that solved nothing.
Thanks Metro planers
-----------------------
The automobile started out as a converted wagon and has become one of the best inventions. Automobiles have changes the way we live and allowed everyone to travel, not just the rich. Before the automobile is was not unusual for a person to live their entire life with in fifty miles from where they were born. The automobile made it possible for the poor and middle class to move out of smoke filled and polluted downtown areas by allowing them to live in a clean suburb. Away from the horse, sewage and garbage problems in the cities.
Transit was very popular as we moved away from horse power, but the Automobile made it possible to go to where you wanted to be, when you wanted to be there, carrying the things and people you wanted.
Bikes and transit were very popular and easier to use as we moved away from horses and before the automobile became affordable.
for me to commute back and forth from my $10 an hour job cost me roughly$200 a month just in fuel.
Now using Lar's example on the toll cost of $3.50 per trip roughly seven dollars a day or $140 a month.
Now for me to get back and forth to my $10 an hour job, I immediately have to shell out $340.
In a state that is already suffering from high unemployment and a serious recession how is that even economically feasible?
It wouldn't be if we were all working for $10 an hour. I'm not being rude, but might I suggest you move somewhere closer to your employment, or find employment on the same side of the river you live on?
The larger issue is whether we can afford to NOT build this bridge. I-5 is a pretty important west coast freight route, and a lot of jobs that pay more than $10 an hour are dependent on efficient transport. I would think you would support actions that help create more better paying jobs.
JK: Typical progressive - telling others how to live! (Because they would be hurt by a progressive’s social engineering scheme.)
Dean Apostle: The larger issue is whether we can afford to NOT build this bridge. I-5 is a pretty important west coast freight route, and a lot of jobs that pay more than $10 an hour are dependent on efficient transport. I would think you would support actions that help create more better paying jobs.
JK: Finally we agree. We need to build a bridge.
Now tell us why you think we need to add a Billion dollar toy train for 1650 daily transit commuters.
And tell us why we need to spend another Billion on interchanges?
Thanks
JK
Scrap the bridge project and use its demise as a polticall tool
Buy bill board advertising at congestion bottlenecks in the area. "If So and So hadn't insisted on Light Rail - You'd be home now!"
Campaign ads could be run poointing out the economic absurdity, how much a quarter billion dollars per mile really i, and linking those who insisted on Light Rail or nothing to something so ludicrous.
The question could be raised at every news conference "Mr. So and So - could you explain the reasoning behind killing a bridge unless you got a quarter of a billion dollars a mile choo choo that carries virtually no one?"
Frankly I think it would be a terrific campaign issue as corrupt and excessive government spending is something politicians are loath to be linked with right now.
It would be far better to kill the bridge and do nothing than to give further incentive for to extortionists.
Look at it this way - it started with siphoning off gas tax money to build bike paths. The extortionists were not satisfied.
Now we are up to quarter billion dollar a mile toy trains.
You think they wont be back with even more idiotic and expensive projects if the people give into to them?
No way.
If the choice is kill the bridge or accept extortion the choice is clear. Kill the bridge.
I had a hell of a time just finding this job. As far as moving, I own a home and I had to file bankruptcy this year throwing away a 800 credit score in order to take ANY job that I could find.
in addition, it takes money to move which I don't have, and as I pointed out in an earlier post, make it more expensive to go to and from work isn't helping.
besides, after living over 45 years in Oregon, my family and I decided that if we are going to move, it's going to be out of state.
One final point... I did apply for work all over the state of Oregon and MOST employers would not consider you unless you live in the same city that they are in.
as for supporting actions that would help create more jobs...in my opinion, there are a lot more feasible things that you can do than light rail which a small percentage of the population would use.
For example, I used to own a business. And unless you've actually own a business you really have no idea of the taxes and fees that you have to pay,including personal property taxes on everything in that business including toilet paper [seriously]. It has been proven that if you cut taxes to put more money into circulation which creates more demand, more jobs, more businesses and creates more revenue for the government.
although I will not argue the point that the I-5 could be wider to handle the traffic... based on my experience traveling the corridor I'm not totally convinced and that it is the bridge itself which is causing the bottleneck.
Its not a "toy" train. Its a passenger train, and the reason I support it is because it moves people across the river without them having to drive. Duh!
Its not an extra billion to provide the space for the train. Its more like 1/2 billion. As for interchanges, a bunch of them were already dropped to save costs. The total cost estimate is now between 2.5-3.5 billion. The interchanges remaining are presumably essential to having the traffic flow and local access required.
Rupert writes: "Scrap the bridge project and use its demise as a polticall tool"
My man Rupert. What a strategy! Trade 20 more years of stuck in traffic to win a few political points perhaps. Brilliant. Pop the champagne on that one.
Robinwonders writes: "in addition, it takes money to move which I don't have" and then "besides, after living over 45 years in Oregon, my family and I decided that if we are going to move, it's going to be out of state."
So you can't afford to move but you can move out of state? The light rail part of the project is not about "jobs." Its about alternative ways for people to get around the region without having to drive. A way for people to get to jobs.
"based on my experience traveling the corridor I'm not totally convinced and that it is the bridge itself which is causing the bottleneck. "
The bridge itself causes massive bottelnecks every time it is raised to allow ships to cross underneath, which I think is more than once a day. And it takes a long time for those bottlenecks to clear. The proposed new bridge is fixed span high enough to allow ships to cross under.
Its not a "toy" train. Its a passenger train,
JK: It’s a toy because it costs too much & does too little.
Dean Apostle: and the reason I support it is because it moves people across the river without them having to drive. Duh!
JK: All 1650 of them every day for 3/4 BILLION. That’s right, just 1650 people use transit accross the river every day!! Compared to 81,000 people in cars for the same money. Which makes sense?
And what is wrong with driving? It costs less than the toy train. It is faster than the toy train. With a small car, it uses less energy than the toy train.
Dean Apostle: As for interchanges, a bunch of them were already dropped to save costs. The total cost estimate is now between 2.5-3.5 billion.
JK: Dropped? Which ones?
Dean Apostle: The interchanges remaining are presumably essential to having the traffic flow and local access required.
JK: Wrong. The intersections are the nice to do, instead of critical to do. To do non-essentials at the cost of bankrupting families with punitive tolls (up to $7.80 daily)in just plain evil. Such proposals show how little Portland’s progressives really care about people’s well being. They care more about some nutty scheme to attempt to force their vision of how people should live on us. They are evil.
Dean Apostle: The light rail part of the project is not about "jobs." Its about alternative ways for people to get around the region without having to drive. A way for people to get to jobs.
JK: A slow, expensive, dangerous way to get around. A totally useless way to get around, compared to alternatives. It is more expansive, slower and uses more energy than small cars. What is its purpose other than to make its builders rich and to suck in ignorant fools who hate cars?
It is not a good way to get to jobs, because most jobs are no where near the toy train line.
Thanks
JK
-------------------
STUDY OF THIRD COLUMBIA BRIDGE CLEARS ANOTHER HURDLE
Oregonian, The (Portland, OR)
November 4, 1988
Author: BILL STEWART - of the Oregonian Staff
---cut-------
At the present rate of growth, transportation officials expect the two existing
Columbia River highway bridges to be clogged before the year 2010. Traffic
volumes are growing faster than previously anticipated, IRC figures show.
---------------------------------------------------