There’s also the more famous movie made after the book…
But I tend to agree, what exactly is a new giant bridge fixing? None of the numbers seem that compelling. $4.2b could be better invested in road repair and sidewalk construction in parts of town that have unimproved/horrible roads; badly needed repaving along Burnside; increased streetcar headway; extending the Milwaukie MAX to Lake Oswego and Oregon City, etc.
Willamette Week: The $4.2 billion he wants to spend could buy a $21,000 Toyota Prius hybrid and a year’s worth of gas, four new $1,000 bikes, and an annual $1,260 C-Tran pass to Portland for each of Clark County’s 150,000 households.
What’s ironic is that IF we spent the $4.2 billion for the Priuses, bikes, and C-Tran busses, we’d still need to build the highway bridge (largely to accomodate all of those Priuses coming across the river – a Prius requires just as much highway space as any other passenger car). While a Prius certainly has fewer emissions than a non-hybrid vehicle of similiar size/weight, it contribues to highway congestion on an equal basis.
If the point of debate over this bridge is because it encourages “sprawl” then building MAX doesn’t actually solve the problem either – in fact it contributes to the problem by giving MAX another far-flung destination that will develop and will continue to be auto dominated (just look at Orenco Village as a perfect example – the major “community centers” and shopping centers that are the destination of Orenco are far away from the MAX stop; and the MAX station itself requires a park-and-ride lot to attract light rail ridership.)
If the goal is to encourage people to live closer to work then the solution is “no build”, plus retaining the existing bus service.
Will busses still be impacted by traffic? To an extent, yes. But isn’t that a silver lining – if the busses are impacted, people will see that moving closer is the solution; not a light rail line that will simply encourage more growth (and thus more traffic on the parallelling roads, which has been proven with every MAX construction project south of the river?)
The plot is that the Japanese in WWII were trying to build a rail line to move troops/supplies in SE Asia, and they are using POWs to do the work. And the POWs, (who would rather that Japan doesn’t will the war,) are doing an awful job, but their POW officers were complaining that the Japanese aren’t treating the officers right, and so he convinces the Japanese to let the officers manage the men, and then they build the bridge, (and far better than the Japanese would have by themselves.) Of course, you are reading/watching the entire thing and thinking, ‘wait, these guys were willing to risk their lives fighting the Japanese, and now suddenly they are helping them.’ At the end of the movie, an Allied sapper team comes in and blows up the bridge on the day that it opens, and one of the officers that built the bridge tries to stop them but comes to his senses and helps.
It is a good reference. Rex is a lot like the main character, (one of the officers.) He spent his life fighting against the exact things that this bridge represents, and then after years of being captive to the project, he is standing around helping them build their bridge… The question is, is he going to come to his senses when the bridge is completed, and “blow it up,” (hopefully not literally,) or not?
There is a big difference between sprawl created by rail lines and sprawl created by highways.
“Sprawl” created by rail lines looks like Belmont and Hawthorne in inner SE, St. Johns, Multnomah Village, or Hollywood. The development encouraged – since this line would focus on central Vancouver – would look more like the redevelopment occurring in downtown Gresham, Hillsboro, and Beaverton – that is, walkable, mixed-use development where people have the option to walk, bike, take MAX, or drive. These types of households/businesses typically own/require fewer cars, take/encourage fewer trips, and contribute less to traffic congestion.
Highway sprawl, on the other hand, is a much different animal. When unconstrained by strict growth management laws, highway sprawl is large, disconnected subdivisions and shopping centers with large parking lots – making walking onerous, bicycling unsafe and uncomfortable, and transit much more costly. Clark County is a decent example of this, although they do an OK job connecting their streets, which helps.
Central Vancouver is a great walkable district, and would be a good fit for a light rail connection to central Portland.
Matthew, thanks for the plot synopsis, that makes more sense now….hopefully Rex will appreciate the reference. I think many of us have been wondering for awhile whether Rex will come to his senses in time….
I’m still amazed we’re talking about building a bridge. It really does go against everything Portland stands for these days.
If it is really needed, let Vancouver and the state of Washington deal with it. Portland I doubt has “that” much interaction with Seattle to really validate the cost for long distance.
But I digress. Sam Adams will probably put the stomp on the bridge for the next X number of years anyway.
I encourage anyone who has concerns about this project to visit The Coalition for a Livable Future’s website Creating a Climate Smart I-5 Columbia River Crossing, get educated, and sign the Climate Smart CRC Pledge of Support.
If the sensationalism promoted by Al Gore is to be believed that man is the root and primary cause of global warming as opposed to it being a natural occurrence, then population growth and the development needed just to accommodate an increasing population creates global warming. Therefore, the first thing that needs to be done to combat global warming for Portland is to build a wall around the entire region and not let any of those one million new residents come in and live here that Sam Adams wants to plan for. Then within that wall place a global warming toll on giving birth. And yes, this is being a bit sarcastic about the problem of transportation planning to accommodate population growth. that currently lacks needed new road capacity. Activist Rob Kremer got it right when he stated and was noted in the WW article “Rex’s idiotic transportation dogma has caused congestion to grow more quickly [here] than [in] any other urban area,”
That said, after reading the WW article it becomes very clear, at least to me, that Rex came up with a pointless folly of an alternative specifically designed to be a failure so the middle ground sub-committee could recommend an alternative specifically for the purpose of politically eliminating any type of less costly option to compete with a big new bridge.
As I briefly described under this blog’s topic of Columbia River Crossing Action Alert (and have sent several pages of testimony to the CRC about) there is a logical, common sense and less expensive alternative that re-uses the existing historical bridges, and can meet the needs of growth including the regional economy. The reality check is that it must increase road capacity, the costs must be shared by all crossing users, and it must not just rely on transit and bicycle infrastructure.
I’m feeling really old and it’s Unit’s fault. Bridge on the River Kwai is “obscure”? Surely 1957 isn’t that long ago, especially for a film that won seven Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Actor and Best Director (same guy who directed Lawrence of Arabia, for god’s sake).
A lot of people are talking about GHG increases from increased traffic – a fair point, but what about ozone?
Ozone levels in Portland are generally about 90% of the legal limits and they dropped this year (From 80 ppm to 75 ppm). It wouldn’t take much to push us out of attainment.
I ask, not because ozone is a more serious problem than GHG (it kind of isn’t) but because we already have federal and state laws in place that say your transportation policy can’t violate your air quality laws.
Allison: we already have federal and state laws in place that say your transportation policy can’t violate your air quality laws.
So, TriMet’s policy of refusing to replace older, polluting, non-fuel efficient busses with newer, low pollution, fuel efficient, high capacity busses is not in violation with those federal and state laws?
At least C-Tran has purchased hybrid busses that resolves the fuel-efficiency and pollution question. I don’t know why C-Tran hasn’t purchased articulated busses, but two out of three ain’t bad.
If it is really needed, let Vancouver and the state of Washington deal with it. Portland I doubt has “that” much interaction with Seattle to really validate the cost for long distance.
You clearly have no idea how much freight is passed between Oregon and Washington. For an example of how critical this link it, look no further than when I-5 was shut at Chehalis due to flooding earlier this year. The only other route around was through Yakima, adding about 6 hours to the one-way trip.
For example, Portland’s own Fred Meyer stores operate three distribution centers – one in Clackamas, one in Chehalis, WA. and one in Puyallup, WA. Food products come from one logistics center, hard lines from the other two. This supplies all the stores in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Alaska.
I-5 is a critical link. Expect this bridge to get rammed through on commerce purposes alone. Also, a recent poll from FOX 12 and the Portland Tribune show that the majority of Clark, Multnomah, and Washington counties want the thing, even if people on this forum don’t. http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=121140887936132500
The poll was taken without cost specifics included. It’s easy to say you want a bridge when you aren’t dealing with the reality of paying a toll every time you cross it. Add that to the fact that you’ll pay a toll on I-205 as well and I suspect you’ll see that support dwindle.
The poll also showed that 82% want infill development instead of greenfield, more transit and the current road system maintained. Only 12 percent claimed that traffic congestion was the #1 or #2 issue facing the region. 59% liked the urban growth boundary; 12% hated it. 68% are driving less, 24% have begun using transit.
There’s no clear-cut conclusion you can draw from this poll that people will actually support the CRC when it comes time to start writing checks.
Yes, I’d like to see the poll of “Would you be willing to pay $2000/person to build a new bridge over I-5?” I suspect you might get very different results…
I haven’t seen these numbers before and this is outrageous! How can anyone think it is a good idea to spend SO much money on something that will have so little benefit!? Portlanders stopped the Mt. Hood freeway so I hope they can do it again. I’m a native portlander living on the east coast hoping that I won’t move back home to see that we’ve lost our spirit.
Hey the spend $3,000,000,000 a month in Iraq…
It’s too bad the people that say they like to track every single dollar the government spends and hold politicians responsible for unquestioned financial conservatism are also the ones that since 2001 have said, ‘the war is good. The war is necessary. The war will be a success. War deaths and dismemberment are inevitable. The war is the best thing to happen to America since Vietnam.’ They then try to claim that otherwise gas would cost $10/gallon right now, that there will never be an alternate fuel source, and there will never be another alternative to SOV trips in SUVs.
There, that’s off my chest.
Seriously, related to CRC, there was an article in the Oregonian a few weeks ago about increased transit ridership in the region even with increased unemployment and going through a recession, which had a blurb that with increased transit use, traffic volume was going down. I believe one of the main components of the CRC claimed that no matter what there would always be increased traffic and an increase in the number of vehicles on the road.
I ride the 199 C-Tran bus from the 99th street park and ride to downtown Portland.
Since I work in downtown and the park and ride is right on my way, riding the bus adds only a few minutes to my commute, so its worth the gas savings. Many people that live in Vancouver don’t work in downtown Portland. They need to drive to work because riding the bus downtown and transferring would add major time to their commute. If you live in Vancouver and work at 50th and Foster, Tri-Met doesn’t meet your needs very well.
Articulated buses aren’t needed on C-TRAN because the bus is currently not full. I know that fewer buses could be run if they had more capacity, but on the other hand, one of the major hold-ups in riding the bus is waiting for it. If there are fewer runs, there would be more waiting, which would decrease ridership and increase traffic as people switch to cars.
A new bridge has to be built in order to move freight up and down the I-5 corridor. The project was given some sort of “fast track” status from the US Transportation department because of the freight needs, not commuter needs. My wife works at a distribution firm in Vancouver – their drivers used to be able to make 3 deliveries a day to Portland several years ago. Now it’s down to 2 deliveries.
On a philosophical note – a lot of people claim that we Vancouverites live up here because houses are cheaper and they are. However, another big factor for people moving here is the school system. A child in the Vancouver school district gets 18 extra days of school a year compared to Portland Public. Going from 1st through 12th grade gives a student more than an extra year of school versus going to a Portland Public school. As long as this discrepancy exists, families are going to continue to move to Vancouver, traffic will get worse, the costs of moving freight will continue to increase and overall growth in the economy will be dampened.
BTW, I love the “Theme from the Bridge over the River Kwai” and like to whistle it while working around the house.
“A new bridge has to be built in order to move freight up and down the I-5 corridor. The project was given some sort of “fast track” status from the US Transportation department because of the freight needs, not commuter needs.”
The US Secretary of Transportation made some encouraging remarks about a new bridge when she was here last time. That is hardly “fast track.” If the bridge was really a problem for long distance trucking, they’d simply change the names of I-5 and I-205 and the problem would be solved. Right now it is faster to take I-5 than it is to take I-205, even at rush hour, (on most day. Some days, the curves and the 2 lanes at Rose Garden hold you up, not the bridge…)
On a philosophical note – a lot of people claim that we Vancouverites live up here because houses are cheaper and they are. However, another big factor for people moving here is the school system. A child in the Vancouver school district gets 18 extra days of school a year compared to Portland Public. Going from 1st through 12th grade gives a student more than an extra year of school versus going to a Portland Public school. As long as this discrepancy exists, families are going to continue to move to Vancouver, traffic will get worse, the costs of moving freight will continue to increase and overall growth in the economy will be dampened.
Having a kid go to school for 12 years is a bloody waste to begin with. Not that Portland is doing the right thing, but compared to successful schools in this country, and in Europe, good schooling does NOT equal longer years and days.
For the higher IQ and higher capabilty students, sending them to school MORE is merely a vulgar waste of time.
They would be much better off spending time themselves in the work force, working together at the library, or something of that nature instead of plodding about in public schools.
Excuse my bias, but I’ve seen many a good mind waste away into PURE MEDIOCRITY at public schools.
You want good education for your child as parents, do something about it. Don’t shovel the responsibility onto Government either, because I PROMISE you WILL NOT get an improvement worth time, money, and effort given.
I’d even venture to say, if you’re a bright enough parent, home school your kids, get them their ACT and GED, and send em’ to college by the time they’re 15 or 16.
Many home schoolers do just that. These aren’t even “gifted” kids. They’re, dare I say, average human beings. But because they took a superior route they’re either in college, or off doing something they seek to do and love to do instead of plundering about extra years in public schools.
I’ll excuse myself now. Public schools digust me more than the state of our auto based transportation in the US. But I rarely comment, but that last statement just roiled my feathers.
I still say the State of Washington has two critical highway mega-projects of higher priority: the Alaskan Way Viaduct (AWV) and SR520 Floating Bridge over Lake Washington. I’ll go so far as to say that both Washington and Oregon have transportation projects that are higher priority. I suspect some political interest is pulling strings. I can see someday building an CRC I-5 replacement bridge, but not now. Put it on the back burner.
0 responses to “Willamette Week Takes on the CRC”
Apparently the title is a play on words of the 1957 book “The Bridge over the River Kwai”. A pretty obscure reference I think – I had to look it up.
There’s also the more famous movie made after the book…
But I tend to agree, what exactly is a new giant bridge fixing? None of the numbers seem that compelling. $4.2b could be better invested in road repair and sidewalk construction in parts of town that have unimproved/horrible roads; badly needed repaving along Burnside; increased streetcar headway; extending the Milwaukie MAX to Lake Oswego and Oregon City, etc.
Willamette Week: The $4.2 billion he wants to spend could buy a $21,000 Toyota Prius hybrid and a year’s worth of gas, four new $1,000 bikes, and an annual $1,260 C-Tran pass to Portland for each of Clark County’s 150,000 households.
What’s ironic is that IF we spent the $4.2 billion for the Priuses, bikes, and C-Tran busses, we’d still need to build the highway bridge (largely to accomodate all of those Priuses coming across the river – a Prius requires just as much highway space as any other passenger car). While a Prius certainly has fewer emissions than a non-hybrid vehicle of similiar size/weight, it contribues to highway congestion on an equal basis.
If the point of debate over this bridge is because it encourages “sprawl” then building MAX doesn’t actually solve the problem either – in fact it contributes to the problem by giving MAX another far-flung destination that will develop and will continue to be auto dominated (just look at Orenco Village as a perfect example – the major “community centers” and shopping centers that are the destination of Orenco are far away from the MAX stop; and the MAX station itself requires a park-and-ride lot to attract light rail ridership.)
If the goal is to encourage people to live closer to work then the solution is “no build”, plus retaining the existing bus service.
Will busses still be impacted by traffic? To an extent, yes. But isn’t that a silver lining – if the busses are impacted, people will see that moving closer is the solution; not a light rail line that will simply encourage more growth (and thus more traffic on the parallelling roads, which has been proven with every MAX construction project south of the river?)
I haven’t read the book, but I’ve seen the movie.
The plot is that the Japanese in WWII were trying to build a rail line to move troops/supplies in SE Asia, and they are using POWs to do the work. And the POWs, (who would rather that Japan doesn’t will the war,) are doing an awful job, but their POW officers were complaining that the Japanese aren’t treating the officers right, and so he convinces the Japanese to let the officers manage the men, and then they build the bridge, (and far better than the Japanese would have by themselves.) Of course, you are reading/watching the entire thing and thinking, ‘wait, these guys were willing to risk their lives fighting the Japanese, and now suddenly they are helping them.’ At the end of the movie, an Allied sapper team comes in and blows up the bridge on the day that it opens, and one of the officers that built the bridge tries to stop them but comes to his senses and helps.
It is a good reference. Rex is a lot like the main character, (one of the officers.) He spent his life fighting against the exact things that this bridge represents, and then after years of being captive to the project, he is standing around helping them build their bridge… The question is, is he going to come to his senses when the bridge is completed, and “blow it up,” (hopefully not literally,) or not?
There is a big difference between sprawl created by rail lines and sprawl created by highways.
“Sprawl” created by rail lines looks like Belmont and Hawthorne in inner SE, St. Johns, Multnomah Village, or Hollywood. The development encouraged – since this line would focus on central Vancouver – would look more like the redevelopment occurring in downtown Gresham, Hillsboro, and Beaverton – that is, walkable, mixed-use development where people have the option to walk, bike, take MAX, or drive. These types of households/businesses typically own/require fewer cars, take/encourage fewer trips, and contribute less to traffic congestion.
Highway sprawl, on the other hand, is a much different animal. When unconstrained by strict growth management laws, highway sprawl is large, disconnected subdivisions and shopping centers with large parking lots – making walking onerous, bicycling unsafe and uncomfortable, and transit much more costly. Clark County is a decent example of this, although they do an OK job connecting their streets, which helps.
Central Vancouver is a great walkable district, and would be a good fit for a light rail connection to central Portland.
Matthew, thanks for the plot synopsis, that makes more sense now….hopefully Rex will appreciate the reference. I think many of us have been wondering for awhile whether Rex will come to his senses in time….
I’m still amazed we’re talking about building a bridge. It really does go against everything Portland stands for these days.
If it is really needed, let Vancouver and the state of Washington deal with it. Portland I doubt has “that” much interaction with Seattle to really validate the cost for long distance.
But I digress. Sam Adams will probably put the stomp on the bridge for the next X number of years anyway.
I encourage anyone who has concerns about this project to visit The Coalition for a Livable Future’s website Creating a Climate Smart I-5 Columbia River Crossing, get educated, and sign the Climate Smart CRC Pledge of Support.
If the sensationalism promoted by Al Gore is to be believed that man is the root and primary cause of global warming as opposed to it being a natural occurrence, then population growth and the development needed just to accommodate an increasing population creates global warming. Therefore, the first thing that needs to be done to combat global warming for Portland is to build a wall around the entire region and not let any of those one million new residents come in and live here that Sam Adams wants to plan for. Then within that wall place a global warming toll on giving birth. And yes, this is being a bit sarcastic about the problem of transportation planning to accommodate population growth. that currently lacks needed new road capacity. Activist Rob Kremer got it right when he stated and was noted in the WW article “Rex’s idiotic transportation dogma has caused congestion to grow more quickly [here] than [in] any other urban area,”
That said, after reading the WW article it becomes very clear, at least to me, that Rex came up with a pointless folly of an alternative specifically designed to be a failure so the middle ground sub-committee could recommend an alternative specifically for the purpose of politically eliminating any type of less costly option to compete with a big new bridge.
As I briefly described under this blog’s topic of Columbia River Crossing Action Alert (and have sent several pages of testimony to the CRC about) there is a logical, common sense and less expensive alternative that re-uses the existing historical bridges, and can meet the needs of growth including the regional economy. The reality check is that it must increase road capacity, the costs must be shared by all crossing users, and it must not just rely on transit and bicycle infrastructure.
I wrote in Joe Cortright for Rex’s Metro 5th District seat and encouraged all my friends to do the same.
I’m feeling really old and it’s Unit’s fault. Bridge on the River Kwai is “obscure”? Surely 1957 isn’t that long ago, especially for a film that won seven Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Actor and Best Director (same guy who directed Lawrence of Arabia, for god’s sake).
What was Lawrence of Arabia?
(ducking)
I dunno I dunno………
I AM SO CONFUSED!!!!
ps: sorry Chris about the election, we tried.
A lot of people are talking about GHG increases from increased traffic – a fair point, but what about ozone?
Ozone levels in Portland are generally about 90% of the legal limits and they dropped this year (From 80 ppm to 75 ppm). It wouldn’t take much to push us out of attainment.
I ask, not because ozone is a more serious problem than GHG (it kind of isn’t) but because we already have federal and state laws in place that say your transportation policy can’t violate your air quality laws.
Adron writes: “Sam Adams will probably put the stomp on the bridge for the next X number of years anyway.”
Any idea on how many of those crossing the bridege are Oregon or Portland government employees?
Allison: we already have federal and state laws in place that say your transportation policy can’t violate your air quality laws.
So, TriMet’s policy of refusing to replace older, polluting, non-fuel efficient busses with newer, low pollution, fuel efficient, high capacity busses is not in violation with those federal and state laws?
At least C-Tran has purchased hybrid busses that resolves the fuel-efficiency and pollution question. I don’t know why C-Tran hasn’t purchased articulated busses, but two out of three ain’t bad.
If it is really needed, let Vancouver and the state of Washington deal with it. Portland I doubt has “that” much interaction with Seattle to really validate the cost for long distance.
You clearly have no idea how much freight is passed between Oregon and Washington. For an example of how critical this link it, look no further than when I-5 was shut at Chehalis due to flooding earlier this year. The only other route around was through Yakima, adding about 6 hours to the one-way trip.
For example, Portland’s own Fred Meyer stores operate three distribution centers – one in Clackamas, one in Chehalis, WA. and one in Puyallup, WA. Food products come from one logistics center, hard lines from the other two. This supplies all the stores in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Alaska.
I-5 is a critical link. Expect this bridge to get rammed through on commerce purposes alone. Also, a recent poll from FOX 12 and the Portland Tribune show that the majority of Clark, Multnomah, and Washington counties want the thing, even if people on this forum don’t. http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=121140887936132500
The poll was taken without cost specifics included. It’s easy to say you want a bridge when you aren’t dealing with the reality of paying a toll every time you cross it. Add that to the fact that you’ll pay a toll on I-205 as well and I suspect you’ll see that support dwindle.
The poll also showed that 82% want infill development instead of greenfield, more transit and the current road system maintained. Only 12 percent claimed that traffic congestion was the #1 or #2 issue facing the region. 59% liked the urban growth boundary; 12% hated it. 68% are driving less, 24% have begun using transit.
There’s no clear-cut conclusion you can draw from this poll that people will actually support the CRC when it comes time to start writing checks.
Yes, I’d like to see the poll of “Would you be willing to pay $2000/person to build a new bridge over I-5?” I suspect you might get very different results…
I haven’t seen these numbers before and this is outrageous! How can anyone think it is a good idea to spend SO much money on something that will have so little benefit!? Portlanders stopped the Mt. Hood freeway so I hope they can do it again. I’m a native portlander living on the east coast hoping that I won’t move back home to see that we’ve lost our spirit.
Hey the spend $3,000,000,000 a month in Iraq, this project is chump change.
Hey the spend $3,000,000,000 a month in Iraq…
It’s too bad the people that say they like to track every single dollar the government spends and hold politicians responsible for unquestioned financial conservatism are also the ones that since 2001 have said, ‘the war is good. The war is necessary. The war will be a success. War deaths and dismemberment are inevitable. The war is the best thing to happen to America since Vietnam.’ They then try to claim that otherwise gas would cost $10/gallon right now, that there will never be an alternate fuel source, and there will never be another alternative to SOV trips in SUVs.
There, that’s off my chest.
Seriously, related to CRC, there was an article in the Oregonian a few weeks ago about increased transit ridership in the region even with increased unemployment and going through a recession, which had a blurb that with increased transit use, traffic volume was going down. I believe one of the main components of the CRC claimed that no matter what there would always be increased traffic and an increase in the number of vehicles on the road.
I ride the 199 C-Tran bus from the 99th street park and ride to downtown Portland.
Since I work in downtown and the park and ride is right on my way, riding the bus adds only a few minutes to my commute, so its worth the gas savings. Many people that live in Vancouver don’t work in downtown Portland. They need to drive to work because riding the bus downtown and transferring would add major time to their commute. If you live in Vancouver and work at 50th and Foster, Tri-Met doesn’t meet your needs very well.
Articulated buses aren’t needed on C-TRAN because the bus is currently not full. I know that fewer buses could be run if they had more capacity, but on the other hand, one of the major hold-ups in riding the bus is waiting for it. If there are fewer runs, there would be more waiting, which would decrease ridership and increase traffic as people switch to cars.
A new bridge has to be built in order to move freight up and down the I-5 corridor. The project was given some sort of “fast track” status from the US Transportation department because of the freight needs, not commuter needs. My wife works at a distribution firm in Vancouver – their drivers used to be able to make 3 deliveries a day to Portland several years ago. Now it’s down to 2 deliveries.
On a philosophical note – a lot of people claim that we Vancouverites live up here because houses are cheaper and they are. However, another big factor for people moving here is the school system. A child in the Vancouver school district gets 18 extra days of school a year compared to Portland Public. Going from 1st through 12th grade gives a student more than an extra year of school versus going to a Portland Public school. As long as this discrepancy exists, families are going to continue to move to Vancouver, traffic will get worse, the costs of moving freight will continue to increase and overall growth in the economy will be dampened.
BTW, I love the “Theme from the Bridge over the River Kwai” and like to whistle it while working around the house.
“A new bridge has to be built in order to move freight up and down the I-5 corridor. The project was given some sort of “fast track” status from the US Transportation department because of the freight needs, not commuter needs.”
The US Secretary of Transportation made some encouraging remarks about a new bridge when she was here last time. That is hardly “fast track.” If the bridge was really a problem for long distance trucking, they’d simply change the names of I-5 and I-205 and the problem would be solved. Right now it is faster to take I-5 than it is to take I-205, even at rush hour, (on most day. Some days, the curves and the 2 lanes at Rose Garden hold you up, not the bridge…)
Correlation does not equal causation.
On a philosophical note – a lot of people claim that we Vancouverites live up here because houses are cheaper and they are. However, another big factor for people moving here is the school system. A child in the Vancouver school district gets 18 extra days of school a year compared to Portland Public. Going from 1st through 12th grade gives a student more than an extra year of school versus going to a Portland Public school. As long as this discrepancy exists, families are going to continue to move to Vancouver, traffic will get worse, the costs of moving freight will continue to increase and overall growth in the economy will be dampened.
Having a kid go to school for 12 years is a bloody waste to begin with. Not that Portland is doing the right thing, but compared to successful schools in this country, and in Europe, good schooling does NOT equal longer years and days.
For the higher IQ and higher capabilty students, sending them to school MORE is merely a vulgar waste of time.
They would be much better off spending time themselves in the work force, working together at the library, or something of that nature instead of plodding about in public schools.
Excuse my bias, but I’ve seen many a good mind waste away into PURE MEDIOCRITY at public schools.
You want good education for your child as parents, do something about it. Don’t shovel the responsibility onto Government either, because I PROMISE you WILL NOT get an improvement worth time, money, and effort given.
I’d even venture to say, if you’re a bright enough parent, home school your kids, get them their ACT and GED, and send em’ to college by the time they’re 15 or 16.
Many home schoolers do just that. These aren’t even “gifted” kids. They’re, dare I say, average human beings. But because they took a superior route they’re either in college, or off doing something they seek to do and love to do instead of plundering about extra years in public schools.
I’ll excuse myself now. Public schools digust me more than the state of our auto based transportation in the US. But I rarely comment, but that last statement just roiled my feathers.
“Excuse my bias, but I’ve seen many a good mind waste away into PURE MEDIOCRITY at public schools.”
ADRON AT HIS BEST!
And you know what?
HE’S RIGHT!
I still say the State of Washington has two critical highway mega-projects of higher priority: the Alaskan Way Viaduct (AWV) and SR520 Floating Bridge over Lake Washington. I’ll go so far as to say that both Washington and Oregon have transportation projects that are higher priority. I suspect some political interest is pulling strings. I can see someday building an CRC I-5 replacement bridge, but not now. Put it on the back burner.