9 Answers

• Reputation: 3429 Q&A: 66 0 19 2158 469 8 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 3

  10 3 These things don't build themselves and tolls are routinely used all over the world to pay for highway construction. The alternative is a surface street option that completely fucks up downtown. Everyone in the southwest parts of the city will be screwed. Making people in Spokane and Pullman pay is no more fair than expecting those who actually use the highway to pay. If you can not afford to pay the toll then don't use the highway. Kip Waddle answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 2398 Q&A: 49 0 8 1422 164 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 1

  6 2 The tunnel should have a toll. So should SR-520 and I-90 across Lake Washington. For that matter, it wouldn't break my heart to put a toll on I-5 too. Mahtli69 answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report 5 comments by James, Mahtli69, and Kip Waddle… 0 0 I don't agree with a toll on I-5. I've never heard of a primary interstate like that having a toll. There must be a reason, although I don't know what it would be. James commented over 2 years ago | Report 0 0 I've driven on I-90 in Massachusetts, aka Mass Pike, which has a toll. And, there is a bit of history regarding charging tolls on interstates. Check this out: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/tollroad.cfm Mahtli69 commented over 2 years ago | Report 0 0 the current plan is to have a toll on the 1-90 bridge so people don't abandon 520. Kip Waddle commented over 2 years ago | Report 0 0 I-75 is a toll road for part of it, or was when I drove it some years back. Geni commented over 2 years ago | Report 0 0 Well, if 520 is abandoned, then do we get to skip building some shitty replacement? No toll on 90 AND we don't have to build the stupid 520.2? Sounds like win-win. ;) Rev.Enant commented about 1 year ago | Report Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 1962 Q&A: 32 0 1 1965 663 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 2

  4 1 Toll, baby, toll! elenchos answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 1045 Q&A: 28 0 3 485 60 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 0

  2 0 Well just a second there, professor. Your question presumes a tunnel that doesn't exist yet. Let's see them complete the engineering studies and EIR before we worry about the toll price. capicola answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 263 Q&A: 0 0 9 106 28 1 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 0

  4 2 This question sucks because there should be a toll. This is one of many possible incentives for Seattlites to drive less. Of course, the city will need to follow through and improve public transit and carpooling options. Not to mention it's gonna cost a shit ton of money that we DO NOT HAVE. James answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 45 Q&A: 1 0 1 7 2 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 0

  1 0 Don't build it. No bullshit. That toll was in the plans from the beginning, of course many failed to mention that. Gerry answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 1627 Q&A: 33 0 3 1043 136 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 2

  2 2 It's awfully easy, although inconvenient, to drive around. $3.50 is a lot to pay for convenience. It seems like the state would be shooting itself in the foot charging that much. keshmeshi answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report 1 comment by elenchos… 0 0 The state is shooting Seattle in the foot by building it at all. The state's own surveys already show that even a $1 toll is enough for most viaduct users to take an alternate route. Which proves that the thing isn't needed anyway. They were smart to stick the city with the overruns. elenchos commented over 2 years ago | Report Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 3723 Q&A: 109 0 27 1716 713 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 1 Rev.Enant

  0 0 belated answer: At the total risk of getting a face full of Qlandia-brand tomatoes, I'm going to agree. We should stop the toll. But not in the way you might want. I also think Seattle's got a unique thing going in that we don't really have toll roads. It's kind of neat. And I also agree we gotta pay somehow, and the users should pay. But... - and this is radical idea time here - Let's do both: keep our freeways and in-city highways toll-free, BUT, raise the gas tax to cover it. And then some. Not some piddly pennies either. I'm talking about adding a full dollar on gallons of gas. It makes the (premium) service of having free roads fall right onto the ones who cause the most maintenance and added volume/capital expenses, like the tunnel. A huge gas tax spike also sends a clear message as a society: no thanks, we'd rather not have any more cars, thankyou. IMO, people (from truck drivers to governors) wouldn't be so damn flip about decisions on multibillion dollar budget items like road projects if the usual capitalist rule of supply and demand applied. Especially to road projects. Now, If you've got enough demand (read: support/need) to be able to raise the gas tax, then dear politicians, dig away (supply) to your tiny grinch-sized heart's content. But if you can't get the state to agree the tax is worth it, then, oddly enough, it's actually NOT WORTH IT. Rev.Enant answered in Trips & Travel about 1 year ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend:

• Reputation: 4 Q&A: 0 0 0 6 2 0 Classifieds: 0 0 what's this? Follow Following 0

  1 2 Not having a toll? That is total bullshit. Rose answered in Trips & Travel over 2 years ago | Report Comment on this answer Enter your comment or ask a new question preview THIS IS A PREVIEW: Click "Post" to submit it or "Edit" to make changes. edit Please wait… This could take a minute if the tubes are clogged.

  Share this answer with a friend: