Comments

1
Maybe they can take the new MAX train
2
Just take down the bridge and make them drive through Oregon City. THAT'LL LARN 'EM!
3
Easy: close the bridge as unsafe. In the subsequent howling, pols will actually have to make the hard choices they are elected to make without punting every unpalatable decision to voters, and will have to tell their constituents that they need to either a) pony up their share, or b) STFU.

This state's governance system is fucked up, to put it mildly.
4
Can we prohibit Clackamites from using the new bridge? That seems like the best option.
5
Make it a toll bridge that exempts Multnomah residents?
6
Woo hoo! New bike-only bridge!
7
@Commenty Collin: Electeds in Clackamas County DID what they were supposed to do. They enacted a modest vehicle fee to pay for their county's share of the bridge. The county commission voted and passed that into law.

It was the idiot teabaggers who forced the vote on the issue by collecting signatures to put it on the ballot.
8
I live in O.C. In addition to no bridge money, there is also no community college money and no K-12 money. I feel shame.
9
This is so mesed up. I'm sick of getting mowed down by cyclists and bitten by freaked out dogs when I'm jogging across that cunthair-thin strip of paving that passes for a sidewalk on the Sellwood Bridge.

Screw you, Clackamites.
10
Tear it down. We don't have the money to rebuild it ourselves, so I guess we'll have to concentrate on infrastructure that benefits Multnomah county residents.

Can we spend it on a Hawthorne/Foster streetcar line instead?
11
It's called a "free rider" problems. Politics 101. They voted no because they know that the bridge matters enough to everyone else that it'll eventually get built, thus they'll get to use it for free.

And, seriously, fuck you, Clackamas County. $5 fee. Like 85% of you don't spend 30x that much on meth every week.
12
Fuck that bridge. I've already dug out a Clackunnel under the river clear through to the other side. Come with me......to freedom!
13
Clack county drivers won´t pay 5 bucks for a new bridge they will be using? That´s less than 2 packs of smokes...are they crazy? (did I understood well???)

Apart from the 101 part someone who has some power in there can´t let that slip thru.

Men, sure are a lots of dogs and cyclists who attack grandmothers who then come here to the Merc comment section to nag about it. It must be horrible.
14
@Zed via Colin: Yes, and that's why it's so fucked up that voters can directly veto their elected officials' actions.

Seriously, Why the fuck am I even allowed to vote on whether teachers are paid and schools rehabilitated? What the hell is the point of having a representative government in the first place?
15
Raffle! 100 bucks a ticket. Winner gets to wear a cool hard hat and vest and detonate the carefully placed explosives that will blow up the Multnomah County side of the bridge on the Fourth of July. The money can be used to build the new bridge or a sign that kind of looks like the Made in Oregon/White Stag sign but says "Fuck You" towards the Clackamas side of the river. Multnomah County voters get to vote whether they want a sign or a new bridge.
16
Yet another reason to hate suburbanites.
17
The likely reason this measure failed in CC is that while CC residents make up the bulk of its use the majority of CC residents rarely, if ever, use it. It’s a big county. Also, why all the CC hate. There are some dodgy parts but the bulk of CC is pretty nice. Comparable to Portland anyway. The whole tri-county area really.
18
Not crazy. Voters know the funding game is played up down and sideways. When it comes to rail, you vote no, they build it anyway. Convention center, you vote no, they build it anyway. It's a recurring pattern, so voters quit giving an inch a long time ago.
19
Tear down the hazardous bridge and tell 'em to where they can stick it.
20
TSW for COTW.

Just one sporadic commenters opinion.
21
It's a stupid and unstable place for a bridge anyway. Tear it down.
22
Dear "number six," new to town? There is no "Clackamas side" of the Sellwood bridge.
23
Points to consider;
The Sellwood Bridge is 18 years newer than the Hawthorne, which has turned into a Portland icon. Age should not be a factor in the evaluation of this structure.
2. The Sellwood bridge has a high proportion of structural steel---because it is only two lanes. Like other bridges in Portland it has a truss on either side, but has far less capacity. The approaches, however, are substandard and probably should have a truss under each end.
3. The 'land movement' on the western end could probably be contained with the combinations of: new approach, new interchange, and streetcar or transit station. And if it cannot be, that means that even a brand new bridge could be threatened. It's amazing what can be done with steel pilings, concrete and reinforcing bar!
4. Portland is not, normally, in a highly dangerous seismic zone. That would be the Oregon Coast, and how damage from a coastal subduction quake would affect Willamette Valley structures can be questioned. The worst recorded event in Portland has been at Richter 6.8
5. People who have expertise in this subject have testified that the Sellwood Bridge could be rebuilt for far less than replacing it. How the federal money stream would be affected should be ascertained.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.