Posted on 03/07/2006 9:27:08 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Those details were in the proposal by the toll company CINTRA that the state accepted for this corridor. However it rarely gets reported by the media or the anti-toll groups. The agreement is actually available to the public, but I don't remember where right now. If you search these toll threads from last summer and fall, I posted a link to the agreement back then.
This article is pretty slanted and leaves out much of the pertinent information. Basically this corridor (and the future I-69 corridor) is experiencing big growth, both in population and trade. But the cost of expanding I-35 (and Hwy 59) enough to meet the future growth is far more than to build a parallel road (with connections along the way) that runs through low population areas. It will move a lot of the truck traffic around cities instead of through Dallas, Austin, San Antonio (and Houston.) The same concept as building a loop freeway for traffic to bypass congested downtowns, but on a statewide scale.
A lot of the numbers thrown out ($400 billion, 4000 miles, etc.) are based on a conceptual design of what might be built by 2055. In reality only the I-35 and I-69 corridors (about 1200 miles) and a few short connections will be built within the next 20 years, because those are where the demand will be in the next 2 decades. Bits and pieces might be built elsewhere, for example while a road might not be needed from central to west texas, the electric and pipeline portions of the corridor concept might be built if there is a demand for that. Rather than have as many as a dozen different electric, gas, oil, water, road, rail, etc. corridor strips of right-of-way between 2 areas, the Trans-Texas Corridor concept combines them into a single (albeit wider, but cumulatively much smaller) ROW, so less areas are affected.
Much of what is written here about it is pure bunk. I'd recommend researching both sides.
And guaranteed to stay crowded and longer so that government can take tax money from tolls collected and not spend the money on public roads. The example of the 91 freeway toll lanes in California was breathtaking, where they actually blocked side roads in order to force people to either sit in traffic, or paid tolls. After all, who would pay tolls if the free lanes weren't jammed?
And your claim of a 'virtual monopoly for travel between city A and B' is nonsense.
No one is stupid enough to pay tolls unless free roads are kept jammed and decrepit. That gives a "virtual" monopoly to a private company to operate the sole decent road from city A to city B.
Only the new routes will be tolled, or new mainlanes that don't exist right now.
"New" mainlines. Isn't that a genuine monopoly?
But if you want to legally drive at 85mph, you'll have to pay a toll.
You could drive 85mph legally tomorrow if they changed the signs. Many, perhaps most, do it illegally today, so what's the difference?
Hardly oppressive to have choices.
A choice between a deliberately screwed up public road and a private road isn't a choice, and I guarantee you public roads will be screwed up either deliberately or by benign neglect. No doubt money is already being allocated away from public roads right now to prepare the sheep to pay the money.
Bottom line, I suppose I should like this idea. Oklahoma, where I come from, and France have had way too many toll roads for decades that have screwed up their economies. It's high time Texas screwed up their economy too.
I bet it takes a much higher proportion of truck traffic. The ability to avoid local traffic in major cities, separated passenger car and truck lanes, and higher speed limits will allow truckers to cover more miles per day. Every truck taken off I-35 is worth several cars worth of congestion, and greatly decreased wear and tear on the road.
This is the first I've heard of it.
Dumbass author looking to use a flowery phrase.... Dumbass editor shoulda slapped him for trying to fob off such a lame sentence on the rest of us.
Anybody who's been there can tell you "what might lie beyond:" It's more and more "mostly flat" all the way up to the f***ing north pole. The dirt changes color occasionally, but that's about it.
Hmmmm. Was he perhaps referring to LTOWM ... "liberals, the other white meat?"
Talk nice.
Sorry.... I just have a low tolerance for reporters who try to be all literary.
Ok, so I'm assuming that this was the reason. The old highway, 4 lane undivided, was closed completely sometime before I started commuting on the 91.
Whatever the reason was that they closed it, it was far easier for them to allow building toll lanes that returned taxes than to reopen the old road. It was very telling that of all the "free"ways in California, the ones that got toll lanes were the ones that had natural choke points with no alternatives. I understand they've sold the toll lanes back to the government now, but it was an outrage to me that a private company was allowed to build in the center median of a public road in the first place.
There are a few things that government is the right entity to do a particular job. Providing for the national defense, maintaining a stable currency, and providing good navigable roadways and waterways are a few of them. If the government is screwing up that job, then we should pressure them to fix it, not turn it over to a ragtag bunch of private companies with even less accountability than government is today.
Once a private company has a virtual monopoly on travel between two points, there's even less incentive for them to provide good service than government. And that's pretty bad now.
Let me ask you something:
How would you replace the Tappan Zee bridge in New York? It's a crumbling behemoth that's over 50 years old and needs to be replaced or repaired. If they merely give it a makeover, that will cost 500 million dollars. If they replace the bridge entirely, that will cost them (supposedly) 14 BILLION dollars. I suspect that's larger than the entire transportation budget of New York state in one year. But if you want to keep the crossing "free", you're going to have to raise taxes somehow. I suspect just sealing off the transportation fund from legislative raids won't do it.
However, I suspect that private investors could provide the capital for a toll replacement bridge. Knowing that you loathe toll facilities, how would you handle the Tappan Zee?
Malone! Gad, I can remember when that was the closest place to drive to and get beer... Nowadays, hallelujah, they sell it in Brookshires and HEB along with the cabbage and eggs!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.