“BTW Gary, I’ll be glad to send the boom box assholes to your neighborhood, where you’re far more tolerant of bad behavior.”
I focus my antagonism towards those that deserve it. The shotgun approach has too much collateral damage. I understand the appeal of the island, just not the anger directed towards me personally as I try to get to and from work each day. Who did I ever piss off? That welcome doesn’t make my sympathetic to the plight of the local residents. I bet some people drive a Harley to work just because of this type of neighborly outreach.
The purpose of the tunnel would be to keep the NAS traffic out of sight, but it wouldn’t solve all the other problems you addressed. If the toll kept other undesirables away, reinstituting the toll only postpones the problem. It will be paid off again one day and the open access to the island will continue (as intended by the bridge in the first place).
BTW, what did the residents feel about the bridge when it was first proposed? Did they predict that easier access would result in more access by nonresidents?
Regarding the comment that the infrastructure I use to get to work is paid for by Coronado residents, doesn’t the federal government subsidize Coronado to mitigate the impact of the base traffic?
Not looking to cross swords, just providing a perspective from the other side. I think a tunnel would be awesome, personally, so maybe I wouldn’t mind paying the toll again. It would save about 20 minutes a day since there would be no light to back up traffic. Maybe we can get this in the next stimulus bill since it is for infrastructure. It could be like “The Big Dig” in Boston and be a viable depository for future rounds of stimulus spending.
