2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

RE: the CRC

It seems like it would take political will to maintain tolling on the Columbia River Crossing in the future - what happens if that political will falters? Then there goes the one control valve on traffic congestion. 

Then I wonder, if tolling is an option for controlling congestion in the future, why is it not an option now? 

I heard Randy Leonard say we shouldn't take a laissez faire approach to traffic, but the approach he and Sam are taking in saying we need to be ready for 12 lanes of traffic in the future - as if there's nothing we can do to offset that future traffic - seems itself kind of laissez faire.

Developers will see those 12 lanes as a resource that adds value to their developments, and that'll be what fills up those lanes. 

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context