281/1604 back to tolls again...

[CosmicCowboy]

San Antonio, TX) - It's apparent that the fix was in before a single citizen ever walked into the Bexar County San Antonio Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) meeting Monday. The tumult and chaos surrounding transportation decision-makers in Bexar County has hit a feverish pitch and it's getting plain ugly for taxpayers.

After several hours of debate, Bexar County Commissioner Kevin Wolff gave the board his blessing to adopt a plan that includes toll lanes along 36 miles of Loop 1604 and 7.8 miles of the US 281 corridor, parts of which were completely new and were never discussed, presented, or properly posted for the public prior to today's meeting.

"Why let a little thing like the Open Meetings Act get in their way? The MPO has always operated as if it were above the law. Nearly every agenda is so vaguely worded, they could vote on a field trip to Tahiti at taxpayer expense and the public would never know it," fumes Terri Hall, Founder/Director of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom.

"They voted to adopt an un-vetted plan for dedicated bus-toll lanes along 281, to shift 3-4 different pots of money around, including stealing money from 281 and handing it to 1604, to convert existing free lanes into toll lanes, and to take the toll roads away from the RMA and give them to Via, and it was posted as 'Action on additional Federal and State funding opportunities.' They even claimed local ATD tax revenues fit under 'federal and state funding.' By anyone's definition that's a violation of the Open Meetings Act."

Four elected officials, Commissioner Chico Rodriguez and Councilmen Cris Medina, Rey Saldana, and Carlton Soules, were notable no-shows for such a critical vote that allows the unelected Advanced Transportation District (ATD) Board (one in the same with the Via Transit Board) to control who will operate the toll lanes, who can use them for free (buses and 'registered carpools' only), and, hence, who will have the power to collect and spend the tolls.

"Moms in minivans need not apply, ditto for business colleagues headed to lunch or to the airport. Unless some government agency pre-approves you as a registered carpool, you'll still have to pay to use these lanes, even though your sales tax money built them," Hall notes.

The ATD Board put specific conditions on the deal, making a very public swipe at the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority (ARMA) by requiring TxDOT, not ARMA to build the toll lanes. Why? The ATD Board telegraphed at its meeting Friday that it plans to use toll revenues to fund a myriad of mass transit projects.

"The war against cars is alive and well in San Antonio. This fight has always been about who gets the pot of 'toll gold' at the end of the rainbow," Hall contends.

First it was TxDOT, then Spanish toll operator Cintra, then ARMA (which just got absorbed by Bexar County who also wants the pot of toll revenues), now the ATD Board.

Though Wolff negotiated and authored a resolution specifically to add new non-toll main lane capacity to US 281 from Loop 1604 to Stone Oak and Loop 1604W from Bandera to Wiseman, it's pretty clear that Wolff never intended to fix 281 non-toll nor to hold TxDOT accountable for what it's proposing (its diagram was vague & misleading). They've never been made to explain, in plain English, where every existing lane is and what the corridor will look like with the proposed improvements, much less to explain why they can fix Loop 1604 for $25 million/mile compared to $37 million/mile on US 281.

"If Wolff and the MPO had insisted this basic information be presented prior to any vote, then the board would have seen without a shadow of a doubt that TxDOT's plan does not ADD a single new lane of added non-toll capacity and, in fact, converts an existing free main lane into a transit-toll lane," insists Hall. "Stone Oak isn't clamoring for bus lanes or toll lanes, it's demanding the non-toll fix that's been funded and promised to congestion-weary commuters in hearings since 2001."

Now you see it, now you don't
TxDOT claims the free lanes will remain in place, when, in fact, they count the frontage roads as 'what's there now,' not the freeway main lanes. Therefore, the plan adopted Monday expressly defies the MPO's March 26 resolution to add non-toll capacity to 281 -- and Wolff not only allowed it, he encouraged it, despite telling TxDOT just over a week ago (at a June 15 MPO special meeting), in rather heated tones, that he's made it clear he wants added non-toll capacity -- all non-toll, no toll elements. He even threatened that he wouldn't take a vote on it until they changed the proposal to be consistent with the resolution.

My, what a difference 10 days makes.

Overwhelming public opposition
The public testimony emailed in to the board opposed the plan, 130-3, and the three in favor were area Chamber of Commerce organizations and industry shills.

"The fact that the elected officials for the US 281 corridor, Wolff and Senator Jeff Wentworth, voted to adopt a proposal that steals $58 million in non-toll funds for US 281 to build a Via direct connect to a Park-N-Ride only three percent of the population will ever use (that amount of money would build roughly 6 overpasses on US 281), the fact that this plan will steal another $20 million in non-toll funds from US 281 and hand it to Loop 1604 for a free overpass and non-toll expansion over there, and the fact that the plan beyond Stone Oak would convert every existing free main lane into a toll lane (again trying to count frontage lanes as the free lanes), is beyond comprehension," said an incredulous Hall.

North of Stone Oak could be fixed non-toll using the remaining $88 million in Texas Mobility Funds (TMF) already allocated to US 281. Now, that's not possible since the plan adopted Monday steals nearly every penny of the remaining TMF money, and gives it to Via and Loop 1604.

The fact that the ONLY dissenting vote was by a Democrat, State Rep. Joe Farias, who cited DOUBLE TAXATION as his reason for voting against (and the fact that this was in no way properly posted under the Open Meetings Act), is an indictment of today's establishment Republican Party.

"The GOP is NOT for the public's right to know, for transparency, for accountability, for limited government, or for the taxpayer. It's of, by, and for the special interests," observes Hall.

We don't buy it
Advocates of the plan say, but 'we took $500 million in planned toll lanes and made them non-toll,' when what they did in reality was renege on a promise made March 26 to add non-toll capacity only.

In truth, the toll plan for US 281 should never have been adopted by the MPO in July 2004 in the first place. The gas taxes to fix US 281 without tolls were already there and disappeared in 2008, well after the MPO vote to convert it to a tollway in July 2004. With the arrival of $246 million in new money ($146 million from TxDOT's recent $2 billion windfall, $100 million in ATD), plenty to fix a measly 3 miles on US 281 without ANY tolls, it unfathomable that NOT one new non-toll main lane will be added to 281 under this plan, yet a 10-mile stretch of four new non-toll lanes are being added to Loop 1604 with an 8-10 year delay in toll lanes being built.

"The excuse that we have to toll US 281 because 'we're out of money' or can't get clearance doesn't hold muster anymore. Anyone with a pulse can see this whole scheme is fraud," Hall points out.

The elected officials who voted to toll US 281 & Loop 1604:
State Senator Jeff Wentworth (in a run-off against anti-toll Dr. Donna Campbell July 31)
Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson
Bexar County Commissioner Kevin Wolff
Leon Valley Mayor Chris Riley
Selma Councilman William Weeper
San Antonio City Councilman Ray Lopez
(plus 8 unelected appointees, including two votes from TxDOT and two votes from Via)

"The commuters along US 281 and Loop 1604 won't ever forget who voted to do this to them, because they'll be forced to pay a DOUBLE TAX in PERPETUITY," Hall predicts.

However, none of this is yet set in stone until the MPO's short and long-range plans are officially amended.

"There is still time to redeem the March 26 resolution. What board members do after today's fiasco, will determine whether they'll face retribution or redemption," promises Hall.

[Blake]

It's hard to take an article seriously when the first line claims that a fix is in.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's hard to take you seriously when you don't read the article.

[spursncowboys]

Wolff owns alot of land on the southside. Hopefully people like him and the Bill Miller family will be able to increase the land worth of the southside.

[coyotes_geek]

Sorry SA, but you're getting toll roads.

That being said, there's a lot of rhetoric and disinformation in that OP.

[Blake]

It's hard to take you seriously when you don't read the article.

Do you take Terri Hall seriously?

Would you also please link the source?

[Blake]

Sorry SA, but you're getting toll roads.


Probably sooner than later.

[leemajors]

Do you take Terri Hall seriously?

Would you also please link the source?

http://www.examiner.com/article/board-reneges-on-promise-votes-to-toll-anyway

[Blake]

http://www.examiner.com/article/board-reneges-on-promise-votes-to-toll-anyway

So Hall originally wrote the piece and then later put her own statements in quotes in the OP?

hilarious. :lol :lol

[coyotes_geek]

":lol" according to Spurstalk poster coyotes_geek.

[leemajors]

dunno just googled the first sentence

[clambake]

how much is the toll? did i miss it in the article?

[CosmicCowboy]

Do you take Terri Hall seriously?



Any particular reason I shouldn't?

Are you really advocating taking existing "free" 1604 lanes and turning them into toll lanes?

Any time VIA gets involved you know we are about to get a royal fucking.

[Blake]

Any particular reason I shouldn't?

I myself find her to be a loud mouthed, misinformed soccer mom.

Although I'm guessing that you don't know who she is, I really don't know what your criteria is for taking someone seriously.


Are you really advocating taking existing "free" 1604 lanes and turning them into toll lanes?

Any time VIA gets involved you know we are about to get a royal fucking.

I've heard a number of different proposals over the years. Some I think suck, others I don't really have a problem with.

I'll wait for the official plan to be laid out before I advocate or oppose it.

[CosmicCowboy]

I know who Terri Hall is.

You don't have a problem with VIA kicking in 100 million to fund the toll lanes when that 100 million came from our sales taxes? That is indeed, double taxation.

[CosmicCowboy]

Not that it really affects me. I avoid that traffic nightmare at all costs. Hell, I'll drive I10 to Boerne and cut across to 281 on 46 just to stay out of that clusterfuck.

[coyotes_geek]

how much is the toll? did i miss it in the article?

Tolls usually don't get determined until construction is almost complete.

[clambake]

i thought cowboy said some free lanes would be converted to toll. constructions not complete?

[Blake]

I know who Terri Hall is.

So you do take her seriously.

Roflmao.


You don't have a problem with VIA kicking in 100 million to fund the toll lanes when that 100 million came from our sales taxes? That is indeed, double taxation.

It's hard to take you serious when you throw out ambiguous assertions.

[coyotes_geek]

Are you really advocating taking existing "free" 1604 lanes and turning them into toll lanes?


i thought cowboy said some free lanes would be converted to toll. constructions not complete?

That's not going to happen. Added capacity would be tolled. Existing capacity would remain free.

[CosmicCowboy]

So you do take her seriously.

Roflmao.



It's hard to take you serious when you throw out ambiguous assertions.

Whats ambiguous about VIA throwing in 100 million of our taxes that will be used for the toll roads?

It's hard to take someone as intentionally ignorant as you seriously.

From the Express News:


Farias, who opposes toll roads, said he wanted to table the vote until the board could more carefully consider a resolution made by the Advanced Transportation District board at a special meeting Friday regarding the 1604/281 plan. At that meeting, the board of the ATD — which oversees a quarter-cent sales tax for transportation projects — approved allocation of $100 million in ATD revenue, but with several conditions, including that managed lanes on U.S. 281 also be free for buses and directly connect to a planned VIA Metropolitan Transit park-and-ride. The VIA and the ATD board are one and the same.

Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Plan-with-tolls-on-expanded-1604-281-approved-3661808.php#ixzz1yuyOYvdi

[scott]

There should be toll lanes, needs to be toll lanes, must be toll lanes.

If the "fix was in" then that's good, because it means we're no longer letting morons like Terri Hall stall the process.

[scott]

I know who Terri Hall is.

You don't have a problem with VIA kicking in 100 million to fund the toll lanes when that 100 million came from our sales taxes? That is indeed, double taxation.

Actually, that sounds a lot like single taxation.

[CosmicCowboy]

There should be toll lanes, needs to be toll lanes, must be toll lanes.

.

Unlike Blake, you are a smart guy...want to explain why there MUST be toll lanes?

And I am a guy that has a txtag and uses the toll road around Austin all the time...I just have a philosophical problem with them taking the tax money we have already paid to build roads that they will then charge us to drive on them...

[Blake]

Actually, that sounds a lot like single taxation

Me too, but unlike me, you are a smart guy.

[CosmicCowboy]

Uhhhh what?

We have a 1/4 cent sales tax dedicated to funding transportation projects.

We have already paid that tax.

Now, they use that money to build a road that we can't drive on unless we pay another tax (toll) to use it.

We pay once, then once again. We pay the tax to use the road twice.

Pretty simple math. Even Blake should be able to do it.

[scott]

I just have a philosophical problem with them taking the tax money we have already paid to build roads that they will then charge us to drive on them...

To elaborate as to not be flippant (my apologies), how is it any different than them using the tax money you already paid to buy buses that they then charge you to ride?

(Broader response to your other question forthcoming)

[CosmicCowboy]

To elaborate as to not be flippant (my apologies), how is it any different than them using the tax money you already paid to buy buses that they then charge you to ride?

(Broader response to your other question forthcoming)

Because the minimal fee charged and low ridership has no chance in hell of paying for the bus and bus driver. If they raised the cost enough to pay for operating the buses then nobody would ride them. It is a tax funded self perpetuating bureaucracy.

The 100 million to build the road was taxes we already paid. The road is paid for now. Why charge us to use it?

[coyotes_geek]

I know who Terri Hall is.

You don't have a problem with VIA kicking in 100 million to fund the toll lanes when that 100 million came from our sales taxes? That is indeed, double taxation.

VIA buses will get to use the facility for free, so essentially they're making an upfront down payment on a facility they'll get to use for free. I doubt that adds up to $100 million of value, but on any toll road project there's more than just the toll lanes being constructed. The money could be going to fund improvements along the free frontage roads, for example.

Also, a large factor in determining how toll rates get set is how much revenue is needed to repay the bonds that get sold to finance the project. VIA kicking in money up front lowers the amount that needs to be borrowed which allows for a lower toll rate.


want to explain why there MUST be toll lanes?

There's not enough money to build free lanes.

[CosmicCowboy]

VIA buses will get to use the facility for free, so essentially they're making an upfront down payment on a facility they'll get to use for free. I doubt that adds up to $100 million of value, but on any toll road project there's more than just the toll lanes being constructed. The money could be going to fund improvements along the free frontage roads, for example.

Also, a large factor in determining how toll rates get set is how much revenue is needed to repay the bonds that get sold to finance the project. VIA kicking in money up front lowers the amount that needs to be borrowed which allows for a lower toll rate.



There's not enough money to build free lanes.


Sure there is. They have 146.8 million of state money, add the 100 million VIA money and you can build a lot of damn road.

[ChumpDumper]

Tolling existing lanes is bad. Nuts to that. The toll roads here in Austin are a mixed bag. They are great where there were no roads before (1, 45), but getting stupid at places that should have been taken care of without tolls a long time ago (183/290 interchange). The Mopac toll plan might actually work a little, though the stupidest problems still remain.

[coyotes_geek]

Uhhhh what?

We have a 1/4 cent sales tax dedicated to funding transportation projects.

We have already paid that tax.

Now, they use that money to build a road that we can't drive on unless we pay another tax (toll) to use it.

We pay once, then once again. We pay the tax to use the road twice.

Pretty simple math. Even Blake should be able to do it.

But that's not what's happening. On 1604 there are 4 free lanes out there today. The plan is to add 4 more lanes and to just toll those new 4 lanes. The existing 4 lanes will still be free.

[scott]

Uhhhh what?

We have a 1/4 cent sales tax dedicated to funding transportation projects.

We have already paid that tax.

Now, they use that money to build a road that we can't drive on unless we pay another tax (toll) to use it.

We pay once, then once again. We pay the tax to use the road twice.

Pretty simple math. Even Blake should be able to do it.

So there are two parts to a toll road discussion:
1) Why to build it
2) How to fund it

And this is that second part (I'll respond with my answer to the first part after this).

FUNDING A TOLL ROAD

Quite simply, that 1/4 cent sales tax doesn't buy all the groceries. Only 1/3 of TXDOT's revenue comes from taxes collected, and they are still running a budget deficit funded by bonds and the sale of capital assets. So, to say we are going to be charged to drive on a road we already paid for is anywhere from misleading to flat out false, for the following reasons:
1) The roads haven't been built yet
2) They haven't been funded yet
3) Tax revenue is only a part of the general transportation fund, so how can you say that your taxes paid for any road? Which roads were paid for with taxes and which ones with other revenue sources?

From a the perspective of how to fund, my personal opinion is that they should be funded in these manners (I haven't seen how this proposal will be funded, these are just my opinions of the ideal ways to fund).
A) a bond to cover the interim construction of the toll road, paid back through the toll, and then after the bond is paid off, the tolls are then used for maintenance or paid back into the general transportation fund
B) a private company funds, builds, and operates the toll road with oversight and jurisdiction from the state so that applicable transportation laws are applied, with the private company responsible for maintenance and able to keep the profits from the road

From a consumer perspective,allowing a natural monopoly (the state) to fund and operate as in option (A) would result in a lower toll as there would not have to be a private return on equity priced into the toll.

Response on "WHY A TOLL" coming up, then I need to get back to work

[coyotes_geek]

Sure there is. They have 146.8 million of state money, add the 100 million VIA money and you can build a lot of damn road.

Expanding 1604 between I-10 and 281 is easily a $500 million dollar project. Maybe even closer to $750 depending on what you want to do with regards to the interchage at 1604/10.

[scott]

Because the minimal fee charged and low ridership has no chance in hell of paying for the bus and bus driver. If they raised the cost enough to pay for operating the buses then nobody would ride them. It is a tax funded self perpetuating bureaucracy.

The 100 million to build the road was taxes we already paid. The road is paid for now. Why charge us to use it?

It doesn't exist, so how can it have been paid for?

[CosmicCowboy]

But that's not what's happening. On 1604 there are 4 free lanes out there today. The plan is to add 4 more lanes and to just toll those new 4 lanes. The existing 4 lanes will still be free.

We already paid for those existing 4 lanes. We have ALREADY HAVE 200-300 million to build more free roads.

There is absolutely no justification for USING OUR TAX DOLLARS THEY ALREADY HAVE IN HAND to build toll roads.

[johnsmith]

Funny part about this is that had Hall just shut the fuck up 9 years ago. This project would already be done along 281.....at about a 1/3 of what it will cost today.

[CosmicCowboy]

It doesn't exist, so how can it have been paid for?

The 100 million is taxes already collected and currently "sitting in the bank" waiting to be used on new transportation projects.

[johnsmith]

There is absolutely no justification for USING OUR TAX DOLLARS THEY ALREADY HAVE IN HAND to build toll roads.

The justification is that they don't have enough money to complete the projects without the tolls paying for them.

Or they have a private company flip the bill (CINTRA/Zachry) and collect the tolls for a while.

[johnsmith]

The 100 million is taxes already collected and currently "sitting in the bank" waiting to be used on new transportation projects.

Well, that will cover about a 1/6 of the cost. Where should we get the rest of the money?

[johnsmith]

much less to explain why they can fix loop 1604 for $25 million/mile compared to $37 million/mile on us 281.


lol

[MannyIsGod]

The 100 million is taxes already collected and currently "sitting in the bank" waiting to be used on new transportation projects.

Is that money earmarked for 1604 or all new projects?

[coyotes_geek]

We already paid for those existing 4 lanes. We have ALREADY HAVE 200-300 million to build more free roads.

There is absolutely no justification for USING OUR TAX DOLLARS THEY ALREADY HAVE IN HAND to build toll roads.

We have already paid for those existing 4 lanes to get constructed. There's still two problems. 1) Those 4 lanes aren't enough capacity and 2) it still costs money to operate and maintain those existing 4 lanes.

Also, when you're dealing with a major urban freeway, $200-$300 million doesn't get you nearly as much road as you think. I'm in this business and I hear the gossip. I promise you the dollars being talked about to improve both 281 and 1604 is well in excess of $200-$300 million.

As a benchmark, that same SH 130 toll road you're using to bypass Austin cost about $30 million a mile. And that was rural construction on a new facility that wasn't in the Edwards aquifer recharge zone. An urban reconstruction project under heavy traffic in the recharge zone will cost much, much more.

[CosmicCowboy]

Is that money earmarked for 1604 or all new projects?

ATD sales tax generates 50 MILLION a year. We have the money to pay for it.

[johnsmith]

ATD sales tax generates 50 MILLION a year. We have the money to pay for it.

No, no we don't.

You're wrong.

[scott]

WHY A TOLL ROAD

So, why would you want a toll road? Really, this case is just another example of the classic tragedy of the commons in which a dilemma arises from multiple individuals, each acting rationally in their own self-interest, deplete a shared limited resource even when it is in nobody's long-term rational self-interest to do so. In this case, so much congestion on the highway that it is no longer achieves what it was built to (get you from point A to point B faster). As Cosmic Cowboy stated earlier, he would rather drive all the way to Boerne to take 46 than to take 1604 between I-10 and 281 - a textbook example of the tragedy of the commons at work.

So, the problem we have is that we need to some way ration the use of the shared limit resource as to preserve it's original intent. One non-toll way of doing so is to give everyone rights as to when they can use the highway. Maybe if your SSN ends in an odd number you can drive during odd numbered hours. Something like that. You can see how this is not practical already.

There is one mechanism for rationing scarce resources that has proven ultimately effective at achieving the task at hand (rationing - that is the only goal the mechanism is concerned with) in every circumstance in which it has been applied: prices.

In economics, we learn early on that prices are a rationing mechanism, used to balance the dilemma between unlimited wants and limited resources. In the same vein, this is why you hear some folks saying we need HIGHER prices on thinks like oil, tobacco, etc. Because the goal is to ration their use.

Why not just build MORE HIGHWAYS?!?!? Well, to be fair, I admit that there is SOME capacity of highway space that will accommodate the total demand for highway use while not having congestion. But that highway is probably 30 lanes and will cost $10 trillion. Not practical. You might say, "if we only had ONE more lane!" but the truth is that one more lane will not alleviate traffic. When you open one more lane, all the people who have been avoiding the highway due to congestion will get on the highway and the supply and demand for highway usage will balance at the equilibrium: congested highways.

So, to sum up, toll roads allow you to use the only tried and true, proven mechanism for rationing scare resources: prices.

There is a third element to toll road discussions that I'll only touch on briefly: what to charge. I'll just say, it is important that the price be set at the level that clears demand while maintaining congestion-free flow. If you set the toll too low, then everyone will use it and it will be just like the other road, thus not achieving anything. If you set it too high, no one will use it and you won't find the toll road to be economically viable.

I'll probably read responses for a few more minutes then it's back to work, so sorry if I don't respond. I'll check back tonight.

[MannyIsGod]

ATD sales tax generates 50 MILLION a year. We have the money to pay for it.

But thats not what I asked. Also, someone who makes 50k a year can't necessarily afford a 50k car. There are other projects needed as well which is why I asked if the money was meant for 1604 or any new project.

[scott]

BTW, this is the same economic foundation for things like Cap & Trade (which came from Republican think tanks in the 60s) and any other pricing models for negative externalities.

If you guys will just let us economists take care of things without lawsuits, we can get this shit figured out :)

[johnsmith]

But thats not what I asked. Also, someone who makes 50k a year can't necessarily afford a 50k car. There are other projects needed as well which is why I asked if the money was meant for 1604 or any new project.

But Manny, if we take that 50 million a year, plus the 100 million they already have, we could ignore every single other road project in San Antonio and construct 2.5 miles per year of new highway on 1604 and along 281.

We could realistically have a free, non toll new highway by the year 2050 or so.

Of course, since construction costs seem to be doubling and tripling every ten years or so......make it 2075.

[CosmicCowboy]

No, no we don't.

You're wrong.

Exactly how am I wrong? Less than half of the ATD revenue goes to support VIA...the rest could be used for highway improvements.

Are you claiming the cost of the project is 600 million?

[CosmicCowboy]

So everyone else in here is a proponent of toll roads?


:lmao:lmao:lmao

[admiralsnackbar]

One more pro-toll vote here.

[johnsmith]

Exactly how am I wrong? Less than half of the ATD revenue goes to support VIA...the rest could be used for highway improvements.

Are you claiming the cost of the project is 600 million?

Here is what I know. The original cost (back in 2004) to just begin this construction which included a bridge over redland road, a bridge over evans road, and expansion of the existing highway from 1604 to Stone Oak cost 84 million. That didn't include anything at the interchange of 1604/281 just yet.

The new plan calls for construction well past stone oak, several more bridges, and none of this would even include 1604 yet. Furthermore, construction costs since 2004 have pretty much doubled. So, just for the portion that they were gonna do back in 2004, you are probably now looking at roughly 150 million or so.

So your 50 million a year isn't even putting a dent in the overall project.

[johnsmith]

So everyone else in here is a proponent of toll roads?


:lmao:lmao:lmao

Honestly, I don't even live there anymore, but since TxDot isn't going to build anything that actually helps congestion without the assistance of private companies because they don't have any money, then yes, I think a reasonable person would support the toll road construction because they are tired of being stuck in traffic for an extra hour per day.


And don't get me wrong here, non toll roads would be preferred, but since the powers that be were so brilliant in the 60's and didn't think anyone would ever move way out to 1604, we now have a problem that can't be fixed without them.

Oh, and TxDot can go fuck itself. That's the most poorly run organization I've ever dealt with. There is a reason they're broke, and it's not a tax issue.

[Oh, Gee!!]

So everyone else in here is a proponent of toll roads?


:lmao:lmao:lmao

we figure if you're against it, then the smart thing is to be for it.

[CosmicCowboy]

we figure if you're against it, then the smart thing is to be for it.

I figured that was why...:lol

[johnsmith]

I figured that was why...:lol

I'd root against puppies and children if it meant rooting against that queen of all soccer moms, Hall.

[Useruser666]

My two cents:

I hate the idea of toll roads for several simple reasons.

1.Why create another system of taxes to fund something that already has multiple pre-existing means of revenue? I rather pay a higher gas tax, more for vehicle registration, more for inspections, a higher sales tax, or any other CURRENT tax method. Why is necessary to create a new department with all of the overhead, salaries, facilities, and bureaucracy? To me, that is a waste. Why build a toll booth that I have to pay for, rather than raise the existing tax?

2. Why build roads that will not be fully utilized by the public? As in, only people that can afford the tolls can drive there. I would understand this only if the road is new and only if it were used by only a small portion of the population, like a bridge to an island. To me, adding lanes is not a new road. A new road is one that links areas that were not previously connected.

3. To me, it is a hassle. Having to keep track of toll account, the passes, even the tiny amount of inconvenience of having to switch to the proper toll/non-toll lane is too much.

4. If a private company is made responsible for the toll system, then the publics (toll payers) are forking over for the profits for what traditionally (at least locally) was tax payer funded.

Minor issues I have with tolls are that I don’t drive but a mile on 1604 every day to work. I believe one of the proposals includes adding toll lanes to that stretch. I can already foresee the construction headaches caused by this just to add toll lanes that aren’t needed in the area.

[Drachen]

I haven't kept up with this too much (I'll admit), but is it still true that they are going to completely bypass Encino Rio with this construction? I know that this was the deal back in 2005 or so. This would force everyone in Encino Park (my parents included) to go up to evans and enter there. That would be a royal clusterfuck.

On the other hand, my parents have been talking about moving to lake LBJ anyway, so that might finally push them to do it.

[johnsmith]

I haven't kept up with this too much (I'll admit), but is it still true that they are going to completely bypass Encino Rio with this construction? I know that this was the deal back in 2005 or so. This would force everyone in Encino Park (my parents included) to go up to evans and enter there. That would be a royal clusterfuck.

On the other hand, my parents have been talking about moving to lake LBJ anyway, so that might finally push them to do it.

I'm not sure either, but it would have just made encino rio folks drive up and do a turnaround under a bridge at Evans.

Having said that, didn't the solution of how they have it set up now with all the traffic lights do the same thing to your parents?

[Drachen]

I'm not sure either, but it would have just made encino rio folks drive up and do a turnaround under a bridge at Evans.

Having said that, didn't the solution of how they have it set up now with all the traffic lights do the same thing to your parents?

No, you can turn left onto 281 S from encino rio even after they installed those ridiculous lights.

[johnsmith]

No, you can turn left onto 281 S from encino rio even after they installed those ridiculous lights.

Got ya.

I never did quite understand the logic behind an entrance at Redland instead of Encino Rio. Maybe it was a spacing issue because Evans has to have it's own entrance.

Not positive though.

[CubanMustGo]

My two cents:

I hate the idea of toll roads for several simple reasons.

1.Why create another system of taxes to fund something that already has multiple pre-existing means of revenue? I rather pay a higher gas tax, more for vehicle registration, more for inspections, a higher sales tax, or any other CURRENT tax method. Why is necessary to create a new department with all of the overhead, salaries, facilities, and bureaucracy? To me, that is a waste. Why build a toll booth that I have to pay for, rather than raise the existing tax?


Because our collective representatives don't have the balls to increase the nearly two decade-stagnant gas tax (or any of the others you mention) for fear that the right-wing "NO NEW TAXES" mob will kick them out the next election. And not enough people support the requisite higher gas taxes to eliminate this threat. I'd gladly pay 2-3x more state tax per gallon but everyone wants to scream about the 20-40 cents per gallon that would cost because BY GOD I HAVE A RIGHT TO NEVER EVER PAY HIGHER TAXES NO MATTER WHAT.


2. Why build roads that will not be fully utilized by the public? As in, only people that can afford the tolls can drive there. I would understand this only if the road is new and only if it were used by only a small portion of the population, like a bridge to an island. To me, adding lanes is not a new road. A new road is one that links areas that were not previously connected.The existing lanes will continue to be free and available to those who cannot or will not pay tolls.


3. To me, it is a hassle. Having to keep track of toll account, the passes, even the tiny amount of inconvenience of having to switch to the proper toll/non-toll lane is too much. It's a breeze. You get a transponder that goes on your car and debits your account whenever you go through a toll booth. After driving a route a few times, the new driving behavior gets engrained.


4. If a private company is made responsible for the toll system, then the publics (toll payers) are forking over for the profits for what traditionally (at least locally) was tax payer funded. At least if you have TxDOT building/maintaining it, this won't be a concern. And the least expensive toll roads in Austin are those that TxDOT built.

Look, I'm not crazy about having to pay for toll roads, either, but the simple fact of the matter is that our government doesn't have the guts to do it the right way. You can either not build anything, and suffer like Austin does downtown where I-35 hasn't changed in 30 years, or address some of the problems with toll roads.

San Antonio has been MUCH more fortunate with its highway system than any other major metro in the state. Look at what has been done with 35 and 10 downtown, with 410 on the northside, new interchanges at 410/281 and 281/1604, and you haven't had to pay tolls for any of it. Congratulations! The rest of us in Austin, in Dallas/Ft. Worth, in Houston, and even some smaller metros (Tyler, Brownsville, etc.) are stuck with toll roads as the only way to get almost any improvements. It's simply time for you to do what the rest of us have been forced to do since the Perry administration took over state highway planning.

[Blake]

No, you can turn left onto 281 S from encino rio even after they installed those ridiculous lights.

Whatever engineer designed that stoplight system should have his license revoked and be forced to live on the east side of Evans or TPC Parkway.

just stupid.

[johnsmith]

Because our collective representatives don't have the balls to increase the nearly two decade-stagnant gas tax (or any of the others you mention) for fear that the right-wing "NO NEW TAXES" mob will kick them out the next election. And not enough people support the requisite higher gas taxes to eliminate this threat. I'd gladly pay 2-3x more state tax per gallon but everyone wants to scream about the 20-40 cents per gallon that would cost because BY GOD I HAVE A RIGHT TO NEVER EVER PAY HIGHER TAXES NO MATTER WHAT.

The existing lanes will continue to be free and available to those who cannot or will not pay tolls.

It's a breeze. You get a transponder that goes on your car and debits your account whenever you go through a toll booth. After driving a route a few times, the new driving behavior gets engrained.

At least if you have TxDOT building/maintaining it, this won't be a concern. And the least expensive toll roads in Austin are those that TxDOT built.

Look, I'm not crazy about having to pay for toll roads, either, but the simple fact of the matter is that our government doesn't have the guts to do it the right way. You can either not build anything, and suffer like Austin does downtown where I-35 hasn't changed in 30 years, or address some of the problems with toll roads.

San Antonio has been MUCH more fortunate with its highway system than any other major metro in the state. Look at what has been done with 35 and 10 downtown, with 410 on the northside, new interchanges at 410/281 and 281/1604, and you haven't had to pay tolls for any of it. Congratulations! The rest of us in Austin, in Dallas/Ft. Worth, in Houston, and even some smaller metros (Tyler, Brownsville, etc.) are stuck with toll roads as the only way to get almost any improvements. It's simply time for you to do what the rest of us have been forced to do since the Perry administration took over state highway planning.

I don't disagree with you, but I'm not convinced that raising taxes would do it. If the money that the government collected in existing taxes now would be put to use where it was all originally intended to be put to use, and it still didn't work, I'd be all for raising taxes, but since that is never going to happen.....

Also, they need to fire every single TxDot employee and start over.....wait, scratch that, just fire the guys in charge and start over with them, it would be a good start.

[johnsmith]

Whatever engineer designed that stoplight system should have his license revoked and be forced to live on the east side of Evans or TPC Parkway.

just stupid.

I heard from people that still live around the area that the light system helped some.

Guess not.

[Blake]

I heard from people that still live around the area that the light system helped some.

Guess not.

I don't live out there, so if they say it helps rush hour traffic, I won't argue.

I would however, like to hear or see how when turning south on to 281 from Evans or TPC that being forced to go north first helps traffic flow.

I have some business that takes me out that way on a semi regular basis, and I just don't get it.

[Drachen]

Whatever engineer designed that stoplight system should have his license revoked and be forced to live on the east side of Evans or TPC Parkway.

just stupid.

The company who installed them is based out of the building I work in. I used to see one of the main guys on smoke breaks and I asked him WTF are they thinking and basically he told me that the guy who sold them to the state kept showing how well the system works on some road in NC, but didn't talk about how that road has less than half the traffic of 281. He went on to say that he thought it was a stupid idea, but didn't mind the money rolling in. He also had suspicions of "intrigue" surrounding the approval of that project, but who wouldn't have such suspicions about something so stupid.

He is currently in charge of that project over on bulverde road going to 1604. FWIW he told me (about 1.5 or 2 years ago) that it was a 2-3 year project. I said, "Great! I will let my parents know that they will be able to use Bulverde road again in about 8 or 9 years".

[Agloco]

:cry Toll Roads :cry

SA Town is growing up finally.

[Das Texan]

In other news,


Why then fuck is there still construction on DeZavala?


How got damn long does it take to do work on a fucking surface street? If this were being done by a private company they would have been fired long before. Its always fun in that you can determine what is a public and what is a private project due simply by time it takes to get the shit down.

The mother fuckers that run these transportation agencies are fucking corrupt mother fuckers who could care less about actually getting shit done in a timely manner. Fucking stupid.

[admiralsnackbar]

It's simply time for you to do what the rest of us have been forced to do since the Perry administration took over state highway planning.
Much as I dislike Haircut and his governance (fiscal and otherwise), toll roads as a necessary by-product of rapid growth have been a TX reality for decades.

[CosmicCowboy]

In other news,


Why then fuck is there still construction on DeZavala?


How got damn long does it take to do work on a fucking surface street? If this were being done by a private company they would have been fired long before. Its always fun in that you can determine what is a public and what is a private project due simply by time it takes to get the shit down.

The mother fuckers that run these transportation agencies are fucking corrupt mother fuckers who could care less about actually getting shit done in a timely manner. Fucking stupid.

They came in with city crews about 4 years ago to install curbs on my street. It was only about a quarter of a mile long. They had millions of dollars of really nice equipment on the job that they never fired up before 9am and quit before 3. It took them a fucking year and a half!

[MannyIsGod]

I don't live out there, so if they say it helps rush hour traffic, I won't argue.

I would however, like to hear or see how when turning south on to 281 from Evans or TPC that being forced to go north first helps traffic flow.

I have some business that takes me out that way on a semi regular basis, and I just don't get it.


The company who installed them is based out of the building I work in. I used to see one of the main guys on smoke breaks and I asked him WTF are they thinking and basically he told me that the guy who sold them to the state kept showing how well the system works on some road in NC, but didn't talk about how that road has less than half the traffic of 281. He went on to say that he thought it was a stupid idea, but didn't mind the money rolling in. He also had suspicions of "intrigue" surrounding the approval of that project, but who wouldn't have such suspicions about something so stupid.

He is currently in charge of that project over on bulverde road going to 1604. FWIW he told me (about 1.5 or 2 years ago) that it was a 2-3 year project. I said, "Great! I will let my parents know that they will be able to use Bulverde road again in about 8 or 9 years".

I haven't been up there in years, but if its the same as the new system on 1604 out by Bandera then it makes compete sense to change traffic flow. There are so many places in the US where you can't make left turns in high traffic areas because of the amount of slow down it causes.

[Das Texan]

They came in with city crews about 4 years ago to install curbs on my street. It was only about a quarter of a mile long. They had millions of dollars of really nice equipment on the job that they never fired up before 9am and quit before 3. It took them a fucking year and a half!

how they allow these fucking contractors to not have a set deadline is beyond me.

corrupt mother fuckers.

[Blake]

I haven't been up there in years, but if its the same as the new system on 1604 out by Bandera then it makes compete sense to change traffic flow. There are so many places in the US where you can't make left turns in high traffic areas because of the amount of slow down it causes.

I live out near Bandera/1604 but I don't know what system exactly you are referring to.

I don't know of any freak system like the one out by Encino Park.

Nice neighborhoods off of Evans, but you'd almost have to pay me to live out 281n past 1604.

[Th'Pusher]

A "superstreet" is a roadway where the signalized intersections have been modified to eliminate left turns and straight-through traffic on the cross street.Luck_The_Fakers_ Doing this reduces the number of traffic signal phases required to move traffic through the intersection thereby allowing for longer green times on the major roadway and thus reducing congestion caused by the signals.
The San Antonio area currently has two sections of superstreets: one on US 281 North (four intersections) and one on Loop 1604 West (two intersections).Luck_The_Fakers_ In both cases, the superstreet provides a transition between the freeway and non-freeway sections of those roads and both are considered to be "short-term" improvements while planning is completed and funding acquired for more substantial upgrades.Luck_The_Fakers_ A superstreet has also been proposed along Bandera Rd. between Eckhert and Loop 1604.

http://www.texashighwayman.com/superstreets.shtml

[MannyIsGod]

I live out near Bandera/1604 but I don't know what system exactly you are referring to.

I don't know of any freak system like the one out by Encino Park.

Nice neighborhoods off of Evans, but you'd almost have to pay me to live out 281n past 1604.

See the link above. I knew they had implemented that out on 1604 before Culebra and after Bandera but I haven't been on 281 in years so I didn't know if it was the same out there. Those systems make a lot of sense for a very low cost.

[Th'Pusher]

Yeah. Everyone I know that lives north of 1604 off 281 says the super street has helped emensely but traffic still sucks hard.

[Drachen]

See the link above. I knew they had implemented that out on 1604 before Culebra and after Bandera but I haven't been on 281 in years so I didn't know if it was the same out there. Those systems make a lot of sense for a very low cost.

They just have regular stoplights on 1604 between bandera and culebra (and beyond). Not sure what you are talking about.

Basically on 281 it goes like this: If you are travelling up 281 N and want to turn left onto stone oak parkway (or evans, etc), then you have to travel about a half a mile to a mile past stone oak parkway then take a lighted turnaround and come back down to take a right. Realize that this creates another light that the southbound traffic must stop at to let those on the other side of the street turn around.

[Drachen]

the really crappy thing right now is the interchange construction. I drove over there today at 11:30 and needed to go from 1604 E to 281 N. I approached the exit and the traffic was backed up to the exit... fuck that shit, I went to gold canyon, turned around and cut through those shops to get to sonterra parkway and down to the highway.

[Blake]

They just have regular stoplights on 1604 between bandera and culebra (and beyond). Not sure what you are talking about.

Basically on 281 it goes like this: If you are travelling up 281 N and want to turn left onto stone oak parkway (or evans, etc), then you have to travel about a half a mile to a mile past stone oak parkway then take a lighted turnaround and come back down to take a right. Realize that this creates another light that the southbound traffic must stop at to let those on the other side of the street turn around.

Actually, you can turn straight left onto Evans heading N on 281. Not sure about Stone Oak Pkwy (TPC Parkway).


Before if you were on Evans heading East to West, trying to go south on 281, you simply turned left at the stop light and were heading south.

Now if you are on Evans trying to go south on 281, you have to turn right [no right turn on this red light, btw], head north for couple hundred feet, then get in the left lane to make a u-turn........at the stop light.....to head south with your fellow 281 southbound commuters.

Where does the congestion gets straightened out? The amount of vehicles is still the same but there are no extra lanes.

[Drachen]

Actually, you can turn straight left onto Evans heading N on 281. Not sure about Stone Oak Pkwy (TPC Parkway).


Before if you were on Evans heading East to West, trying to go south on 281, you simply turned left at the stop light and were heading south.

Now if you are on Evans trying to go south on 281, you have to turn right [no right turn on this red light, btw], head north for couple hundred feet, then get in the left lane to make a u-turn........at the stop light.....to head south with your fellow 281 southbound commuters.

Where does the congestion gets straightened out? The amount of vehicles is still the same but there are no extra lanes.

yeah, you are right. It is so messed up I can't even explain it correctly.

[MannyIsGod]

They just have regular stoplights on 1604 between bandera and culebra (and beyond). Not sure what you are talking about.

Basically on 281 it goes like this: If you are travelling up 281 N and want to turn left onto stone oak parkway (or evans, etc), then you have to travel about a half a mile to a mile past stone oak parkway then take a lighted turnaround and come back down to take a right. Realize that this creates another light that the southbound traffic must stop at to let those on the other side of the street turn around.

Dude they have the same thing on 1604. Its not very long, but its right there by that shell station between Braun and before the Walmart. Well I don't know if its the same thing since I've not been on 281, but I knew they had the system that limits turning.

[MannyIsGod]

http://www.texashighwayman.com/lp1604ss.shtml

[Th'Pusher]

Actually, you can turn straight left onto Evans heading N on 281. Not sure about Stone Oak Pkwy (TPC Parkway).


Before if you were on Evans heading East to West, trying to go south on 281, you simply turned left at the stop light and were heading south.

Now if you are on Evans trying to go south on 281, you have to turn right [no right turn on this red light, btw], head north for couple hundred feet, then get in the left lane to make a u-turn........at the stop light.....to head south with your fellow 281 southbound commuters.

Where does the congestion gets straightened out? The amount of vehicles is still the same but there are no extra lanes.

The Duration of time the light remains red is reduced for drivers heading north and south on 281. This time savings comes at the expense of people heading north coming from the west side of 281 and heading south coming from the east side of 281 as the are forced to do a turnaround.

[clambake]

manny, i thought you were living in new mexico.

[MannyIsGod]

Actually, you can turn straight left onto Evans heading N on 281. Not sure about Stone Oak Pkwy (TPC Parkway).


Before if you were on Evans heading East to West, trying to go south on 281, you simply turned left at the stop light and were heading south.

Now if you are on Evans trying to go south on 281, you have to turn right [no right turn on this red light, btw], head north for couple hundred feet, then get in the left lane to make a u-turn........at the stop light.....to head south with your fellow 281 southbound commuters.

Where does the congestion gets straightened out? The amount of vehicles is still the same but there are no extra lanes.

The congestion gets lessened because you're able to run the traffic through are more optimal levels. Left turns take longer and thus have an affect on the rest of the traffic at an intersection than a system like this does.

[MannyIsGod]

manny, i thought you were living in new mexico.

I am. The last couple of times I've been home I've gone through the area on 1604 several times though and I noticed the lane changes immediately. I used to drive that stretch of 1604 to go to work on a daily basis back around 2000 and it was already hell then. I can't imagine how bad it is now.

[clambake]

good thing you moved. you guys in new mexico ride burro's, right?

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

Might as well. I can get (almost) anywhere in Santa Fe faster on my bike than by driving because of how poorly the lights here are timed. Its seriously some retarded shit. Its pretty much the level of incompetence you come to expect from NM in most areas.

Then again, I'm on a computer train as I type this going through an area a lot less congested than I35 between Austin and San Antonio (Albuquerque to Santa Fe is pretty much the same distance). So maybe TX could learn something from NM in this regard.

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

Might as well. I can get (almost) anywhere in Santa Fe faster on my bike than by driving because of how poorly the lights here are timed. Its seriously some retarded shit. Its pretty much the level of incompetence you come to expect from NM in most areas.

Then again, I'm on a commuter train as I type this going through an area a lot less congested than I35 between Austin and San Antonio (Albuquerque to Santa Fe is pretty much the same distance). So maybe TX could learn something from NM in this regard.

[MannyIsGod]

http://www.texashighwayman.com/superstreets.shtml

Really cool info and it includes a table at the bottom regarding the improvements. Not bad for the cost actually.

Also I guess what I was thinking about earlier is actually called a Michigan Left and its not exactly what the Superstreet system is but pretty similar.

[Blake]

before:

this was your typical 4 way intersection with stop lights.

the major commuter traffic is heading right to left, the light turns red and the up traffic can head left.

http://www.texashighwayman.com/h_imgs/std_base_sigs.png

after/ what it looks like today:

http://www.texashighwayman.com/h_imgs/ss_left.gif

http://www.texashighwayman.com/h_imgs/ss_straight.gif


I'm still not following why forcing the cars going up to turn right before heading left increases speed. There is still a stop light that halts the left bound traffic so that the up traffic can also go left.

[Blake]

....as the are forced to do a turnaround.

at a red light.

[MannyIsGod]

Well it doesn't benefit cars on those roads. IE if you're on Evans the new system isn't going to help you get across 281 faster but there is fr more traffic on 281 than on Evns to whom is DOES benefit because they no longer have to wait for the light cycle that would have allowed you to go straight through.

[Drachen]

:lol

Might as well. I can get (almost) anywhere in Santa Fe faster on my bike than by driving because of how poorly the lights here are timed. Its seriously some retarded shit. Its pretty much the level of incompetence you come to expect from NM in most areas.

Then again, I'm on a computer train as I type this going through an area a lot less congested than I35 between Austin and San Antonio (Albuquerque to Santa Fe is pretty much the same distance). So maybe TX could learn something from NM in this regard.

I am getting to the point where I could potentially get to work faster on my MTB than in my car, with one major drawback... No shower at work.

[Blake]

Well it doesn't benefit cars on those roads. IE if you're on Evans the new system isn't going to help you get across 281 faster but there is fr more traffic on 281 than on Evns to whom is DOES benefit because they no longer have to wait for the light cycle that would have allowed you to go straight through.

The 281 cars have to wait for a light cycle at turnaround for the Evans cars.

I guess it's the shorter light duration? I dunno. I guess it's why I'm not an engineer.

Apparently it's working:

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/leroyalloway/2011/06/281-super-street-%e2%80%93-the-after-study/

[MannyIsGod]

I am getting to the point where I could potentially get to work faster on my MTB than in my car, with one major drawback... No shower at work.

Yup, one of the biggest advantages to living in a much drier place is that you don't really sweat nearly as much. When I worked for a doctor my first year here I would ride 5 miles to work and not even have broken a sweat. Took me 10-15 minutes depending on traffic on the bike trail (another big plus, actually). The way back was significantly uphill (my elevation gain was even more than San Antonio's total elevation above sea level LOL) so I sweat a lot more but coming home thats not a problem.

Albuquerque has a fantastic set of bike trails that allow you to get around that city as well.

[Twisted_Dawg]

Here is what I know. The original cost (back in 2004) to just begin this construction which included a bridge over redland road, a bridge over evans road, and expansion of the existing highway from 1604 to Stone Oak cost 84 million. That didn't include anything at the interchange of 1604/281 just yet.

The new plan calls for construction well past stone oak, several more bridges, and none of this would even include 1604 yet. Furthermore, construction costs since 2004 have pretty much doubled. So, just for the portion that they were gonna do back in 2004, you are probably now looking at roughly 150 million or so.

So your 50 million a year isn't even putting a dent in the overall project.

Actually, back in 1999, TxDot had plans to spend $99 million to construct three bridges: Encino Rio, Evans & Stone Oak. Then in 2001, they changed the plan and wanted the three bridges and to add one two additional lanes (one north/one south). The the tolling forces jumped in and in 2003-4 it went to $250 million. Recently the toll forces estimate a cool $500 million.

Keep in mind Obama's stimulus money was suppose to pay for those connectors.

The entire tolling road arguement all boils down to money, and a lot of money to be made by all the people and groups at the feed trough. The Terri Brechtel's and Bill Thorton's at the RMA, the ADT, the MPO. Now Henry Munoz and Nelson Wolfes dumb fuck kid are squeezing them all out in a power play. A power play thay will hand out millions to lawyers, enginners, and road contractors, all to be regrouped 100X by the motorist who use the roads.

[MannyIsGod]

The 281 cars have to wait for a light cycle at the turnaround.

I guess it's the shorter light duration? I dunno. I guess it's why I'm not an engineer.

Apparently it's working:

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/leroyalloway/2011/06/281-super-street-%e2%80%93-the-after-study/

Yeah, but that's only one cycle compared to the 3-4 before. You still have the lights but instead of waiting through 5 total cycles before that were described on that page, you now only have 2.

[MannyIsGod]

Actually, back in 1999, TxDot had plans to spend $99 million to construct three bridges: Encino Rio, Evans & Stone Oak. Then in 2001, they changed the plan and wanted the three bridges and to add one two additional lanes (one north/one south). The the tolling forces jumped in and in 2003-4 it went to $250 million. Recently the toll forces estimate a cool $500 million.

Keep in mind Obama's stimulus money was suppose to pay for those connectors.

The entire tolling road arguement all boils down to money, and a lot of money to be made by all the people and groups at the feed trough. The Terri Brechtel's and Bill Thorton's at the RMA, the ADT, the MPO. Now Henry Munoz and Nelson Wolfes dumb fuck kid are squeezing them all out in a power play. A power play thay will hand out millions to lawyers, enginners, and road contractors, all to be regrouped 100X by the motorist who use the roads.

Those people are going to make millions regardless of whether they build toll roads or not. Expansion has to be done.

[CuckingFunt]

after/ what it looks like today:

http://www.texashighwayman.com/h_imgs/ss_left.gif

http://www.texashighwayman.com/h_imgs/ss_straight.gif


I'm still not following why forcing the cars going up to turn right before heading left increases speed. There is still a stop light that halts the left bound traffic so that the up traffic can also go left.

That's what most major intersections are like in New Orleans. The worst thing is watching people try to manage a legal/safe left turn at the few intersections where they're allowed.

[Drachen]

Yup, one of the biggest advantages to living in a much drier place is that you don't really sweat nearly as much. When I worked for a doctor my first year here I would ride 5 miles to work and not even have broken a sweat. Took me 10-15 minutes depending on traffic on the bike trail (another big plus, actually). The way back was significantly uphill (my elevation gain was even more than San Antonio's total elevation above sea level LOL) so I sweat a lot more but coming home thats not a problem.

Albuquerque has a fantastic set of bike trails that allow you to get around that city as well.

You climbed 600 ft on a 5 mile ride?? Holy shit! (also, I agree who cares if you sweat on the way home).

Also, to your second part, San Antonio is starting to pay attention to bike trails. It is cool. The greenway project is going to pretty much create a loop for bikes between 1604 and 410. (Yes I realize this is probably nothing compared to what you have, but still nice nonetheless.

[MannyIsGod]

BTW MySA mentioned the toll roads would be free for multi occupant vehicles. I just don't see much of a problem with this situation other than San Antonio voters have had this belief that they can avoid toll roads. Its just not going to happen.

[MannyIsGod]

You climbed 600 ft on a 5 mile ride?? Holy shit! (also, I agree who cares if you sweat on the way home).

Also, to your second part, San Antonio is starting to pay attention to bike trails. It is cool. The greenway project is going to pretty much create a loop for bikes between 1604 and 410.

Yeah, Santa Fe is pretty much at the base of the southern tip of the Rockies so you have a lot of elevation change rapidly. The climbs suck, but coming back down is nice as shit. The elevation change also made for strange weather differences. Sometimes in the Winter I'd have 6-10 inches at my apartment and go to work to see barely 1 inch or so.

[Blake]

Yeah, but that's only one cycle compared to the 3-4 before. You still have the lights but instead of waiting through 5 total cycles before that were described on that page, you now only have 2.

I read the part that said less phases and it still didn't click.

Now it did. :sombrero:

[Das Texan]

I really dont understand having them free for cars with multiple passengers and then pay for single passenger cars.

Its like they are trying to do both at the same time and logically I dont see how the fuck its going to work.

Its one thing to not charge ambulances and buses and what not. That's easy to do. I dont see how they are going to enforce this.

[Drachen]

I really dont understand having them free for cars with multiple passengers and then pay for single passenger cars.

Its like they are trying to do both at the same time and logically I dont see how the fuck its going to work.

Its one thing to not charge ambulances and buses and what not. That's easy to do. I dont see how they are going to enforce this.

The only thing I read was in the OP that said that it had to be pre approved vehicles. I would be completely fine with the idea of all multi passenger vehicles getting to skip the toll, but like you, I can't see how they would enforce it.

[Das Texan]

The only thing I read was in the OP that said that it had to be pre approved vehicles. I would be completely fine with the idea of all multi passenger vehicles getting to skip the toll, but like you, I can't see how they would enforce it.


The way they are pushing it is that any car with more than one person in it will be exempt.

That's just stupid and pointless really.

Pay the got damn tolls, its not the end of the got damn world. If you dont want to, drive on the soon to be feeder roads. Its not a fucking difficult concept.

People in this town are fucking morons way too often. For way too fucking long this city has been fucking itself over in terms of progress because of stupid, petty issues.

Build the fucking thing and lets move on to the next thing.

[clambake]

don't you guys already have HOV lanes?

[Drachen]

The way they are pushing it is that any car with more than one person in it will be exempt.

That's just stupid and pointless really.

Pay the got damn tolls, its not the end of the got damn world. If you dont want to, drive on the soon to be feeder roads. Its not a fucking difficult concept.

People in this town are fucking morons way too often. For way too fucking long this city has been fucking itself over in terms of progress because of stupid, petty issues.

Build the fucking thing and lets move on to the next thing.

why is that pointless? it promotes a favored behavior.

[Drachen]

don't you guys already have HOV lanes?

no

[scott]

The way they are pushing it is that any car with more than one person in it will be exempt.

That's just stupid and pointless really.

Pay the got damn tolls, its not the end of the got damn world. If you dont want to, drive on the soon to be feeder roads. Its not a fucking difficult concept.

People in this town are fucking morons way too often. For way too fucking long this city has been fucking itself over in terms of progress because of stupid, petty issues.

Build the fucking thing and lets move on to the next thing.

It's trying to compromise to the Terri Hall's of the world, but all you do is built a glorified HOV lane that does little. But, isn't this par for the course for San Antonio? Bow to local pressure and then do something half ass (like putting the ATT Center in some industrial park on the East Side, for example)

[Drachen]

It's trying to compromise to the Terri Hall's of the world, but all you do is built a glorified HOV lane that does little. But, isn't this par for the course for San Antonio? Bow to local pressure and then do something half ass (like putting the ATT Center in some industrial park on the East Side, for example)

why is this a problem, you are still aleviating pressure on the existing lanes while promoting a favorable behavior (which ultimately puts money into the pockets of people who can then spend it elsewhere). BTW, I agree with you about the att center.

[Blake]

(like putting the ATT Center in some industrial park on the East Side, for example)

luckily the County stepped in or there's no telling where the thing would have been built, if at all.

[scott]

why is this a problem, you are still aleviating pressure on the existing lanes while promoting a favorable behavior (which ultimately puts money into the pockets of people who can then spend it elsewhere). BTW, I agree with you about the att center.

I don't think HOV lanes are a bad idea, and combining them with a toll lane isn't the worst idea either, though it does undermine the philosophical and fiscal foundations of a toll lane (outlined on page two).

I think having an HOV lane and toll lanes are a smart solution, but not combining the two (otherwise you run the risk of congesting your toll lane with free HOVers, at which point you've not alleviated traffic and now you have a highway you can't pay for).

[Drachen]

I don't think HOV lanes are a bad idea, and combining them with a toll lane isn't the worst idea either, though it does undermine the philosophical and fiscal foundations of a toll lane (outlined on page two).

I think having an HOV lane and toll lanes are a smart solution, but not combining the two (otherwise you run the risk of congesting your toll lane with free HOVers, at which point you've not alleviated traffic and now you have a highway you can't pay for).

I am not sure how you can claim that you haven't alleviated traffic. You have four extra lanes. If the toll lanes are congested with free HOVers, then the free lanes are, well, free.

As to your second point, this does create an issue. You forget though, that we don't normally do things that are good for us. I doubt that you get enough people to change their behavior to clog up these lanes. If by some miracle people act in their own self-interests and carpool, then I am sure that they will change it so that half the lanes are toll and half are hov (which is what I expect to happen anyway).

[scott]

I am not sure how you can claim that you haven't alleviated traffic. You have four extra lanes. If the toll lanes are congested with free HOVers, then the free lanes are, well, free.

Not the case. The free lanes, until you build a 30 lane highway, are always going to be congested during rush hour. Bumper to bumper traffic is the equilibrium of supply and demand of highway usage. Every car you move off a free lane is just creating another spot for someone who has been avoiding the highway for years. This is the problem with the idea that we can just expand the free lanes to fix the problem. The quantity demanded for highway usage at peek times is not static. [see explanation on Page 2].

[Das Texan]

It's trying to compromise to the Terri Hall's of the world, but all you do is built a glorified HOV lane that does little. But, isn't this par for the course for San Antonio? Bow to local pressure and then do something half ass (like putting the ATT Center in some industrial park on the East Side, for example)

Exactly my point.


Its beyond fucking retarded just like 75% of the major projects in this city. And I'm probably being very conservative.

[leemajors]

I am getting to the point where I could potentially get to work faster on my MTB than in my car, with one major drawback... No shower at work.

sheeeit, get you a road bike and really haul ass then

[Das Texan]

why is that pointless? it promotes a favored behavior.

Its pointless because its not being billed that way.

If you are pushing an HOV lane (which is essentially what they are yammering on about), then push that.

Don't play this dog and pony show with people, there isnt one HOV lane I've seen that legally allows people on there driving alone.

Aka pointless and stupid.


You cant say you are going to toll lanes and have them essentially be HOV lanes. Retarded bullshit.


Wolff needs to fucking grow a sack and tell the got damn truth.

[Das Texan]

luckily the County stepped in or there's no telling where the thing would have been built, if at all.


The Spurs would be in Oklahoma City or Kansas City is what would be happening at this point.

[MannyIsGod]

sheeeit, get you a road bike and really haul ass then

Yeah I feel bad for everyone I see in a heavy ass MTB when I go past them. Then again I feel like shit when the guy in the MTB blows past me. :lol

[Drachen]

Not the case. The free lanes, until you build a 30 lane highway, are always going to be congested during rush hour. Bumper to bumper traffic is the equilibrium of supply and demand of highway usage. Every car you move off a free lane is just creating another spot for someone who has been avoiding the highway for years. This is the problem with the idea that we can just expand the free lanes to fix the problem. The quantity demanded for highway usage at peek times is not static. [see explanation on Page 2].

I read your explanation. However, you are not only taking a car off the free lane and putting it on the HOV/toll lane, but you are also taking a second (or third) car off of the free lane.

You are still exacting a "cost" from the person on the highway, you are just not exacting a financial cost. Talk to 10 people at random and ask them if there were an HOV lane if they would find a friend or coworker to carpool with. You would probably get 8 or 9 "no's".

So both ways one has to pay a price. One is in dollars and one is in (I don't know) comfort? Dollars saved?

[Drachen]

Its pointless because its not being billed that way.

If you are pushing an HOV lane (which is essentially what they are yammering on about), then push that.

Don't play this dog and pony show with people, there isnt one HOV lane I've seen that legally allows people on there driving alone.Aka pointless and stupid.


You cant say you are going to toll lanes and have them essentially be HOV lanes. Retarded bullshit.


Wolff needs to fucking grow a sack and tell the got damn truth.


San Diego has a system of HOV/HOT lanes. This also has the added benefit of using that lane space to its full efficiency.

[scott]

I read your explanation. However, you are not only taking a car off the free lane and putting it on the HOV/toll lane, but you are also taking a second (or third) car off of the free lane.

You are still exacting a "cost" from the person on the highway, you are just not exacting a financial cost. Talk to 10 people at random and ask them if there were an HOV lane if they would find a friend or coworker to carpool with. You would probably get 8 or 9 "no's".

So both ways one has to pay a price. One is in dollars and one is in (I don't know) comfort? Dollars saved?

My response is that there is enough unsatisfied demand (people who aren't using the highway now, that would if there were spots), that you could double the size of the highway and it would still be congested.

If your argument is that there won't be enough people HOV'ing it to add congestion to Toll Lane, then that might be the case. It's a dangerous set of dice to roll though. You're either right, and that's great. Or you're wrong and you either A) have the scenario I described or B) deal with the political shit show of removing the HOV rights.

[Drachen]

Yeah I feel bad for everyone I see in a heavy ass MTB when I go past them. Then again I feel like shit when the guy in the MTB blows past me. :lol

I would love a road bike, but my MTB was free and it's all I have. Also, I assume it is accelerating my endurance/getting in shape, since it is 40 lbs and has 2 inch wide tires with knobs. LOL

Once I get on a road bike I should be able to fly.

[scott]

San Diego has a system of HOV/HOT lanes. This also has the added benefit of using that lane space to its full efficiency.

Like I said, I like HOV lanes. I really like toll lanes. I think the ideal solution incorporates both (and I agree about the benefits of an HOV lane encouraging preferred behavior).

[scott]

I would love a road bike, but my MTB was free and it's all I have. Also, I assume it is accelerating my endurance/getting in shape, since it is 40 lbs and has 2 inch wide tires with knobs. LOL

Once I get on a road bike I should be able to fly.

Road biking on an MTB is one of the best ways I can think of to lose weight or get/stay in shape! My first bike was an MTB and I didn't know much about actual MTB riding, so I was road riding. Lost about 30 lbs (which has all come back since then, and more). Then I got in to MTB and now I think road riding is boring as hell. :\

[MannyIsGod]

Its hard to forecast future traffic. If the price of gas goes up, then that has a huge effect etc etc.

San Antonio has some of the worst history with traffic. See 410 and 37 interchange.

[Drachen]

My response is that there is enough unsatisfied demand (people who aren't using the highway now, that would if there were spots), that you could double the size of the highway and it would still be congested.

If your argument is that there won't be enough people HOV'ing it to add congestion to Toll Lane, then that might be the case. It's a dangerous set of dice to roll though. You're either right, and that's great. Or you're wrong and you either A) have the scenario I described or B) deal with the political shit show of removing the HOV rights.

Or you just raise the price.

[Drachen]

Like I said, I like HOV lanes. I really like toll lanes. I think the ideal solution incorporates both (and I agree about the benefits of an HOV lane encouraging preferred behavior).

With the San Diego reference I was just giving him an example of a place that has HOV lanes which are allowed to be used by single occupant toll-paying drivers.



Road biking on an MTB is one of the best ways I can think of to lose weight or get/stay in shape! My first bike was an MTB and I didn't know much about actual MTB riding, so I was road riding. Lost about 30 lbs (which has all come back since then, and more). Then I got in to MTB and now I think road riding is boring as hell. :\

I have lost 33 so far (since march) and am essentially road riding (though on a paved trail). I don't mind the idea of taking it off road, but I still feel like my strength and endurance should be up a little further before I try to do anything like that.

[MannyIsGod]

I would love a road bike, but my MTB was free and it's all I have. Also, I assume it is accelerating my endurance/getting in shape, since it is 40 lbs and has 2 inch wide tires with knobs. LOL

Once I get on a road bike I should be able to fly.

You're definitely working harder so I have no doubt that it gets you into shape faster. I just like to go fast. I don't think I could ever hit the speeds I hit on my bike on a MTB.

I do want a MTB too, but I don't have space for it.

[scott]

Or you just raise the price.

That won't do anything to push free HOV'ers off the lane (which would be the presumed problem).

[scott]

You're definitely working harder so I have no doubt that it gets you into shape faster. I just like to go fast. I don't think I could ever hit the speeds I hit on my bike on a MTB.

I do want a MTB too, but I don't have space for it.

I've maxed out at 46 mph on a road bike, only 24 mph on a MTB on the same hill.

[Drachen]

You're definitely working harder so I have no doubt that it gets you into shape faster. I just like to go fast. I don't think I could ever hit the speeds I hit on my bike on a MTB.

I do want a MTB too, but I don't have space for it.

Yeah I love to go fast, and lately I haven't been able to go past 14 mph (average over my whole ride), but I have been concentrating on increasing distance, rather than to increase my speed. I actually just got finished doing 100 miles over 4 days yesterday. Let's just say I am glad I gave myself the day off today.


That won't do anything to push free HOV'ers off the lane (which would be the presumed problem).

Once again, price isn't always financial. Raise occupancy from 2 to 3

[scott]

Once again, price isn't always financial. Raise occupancy from 2 to 3

That's a good solution. Comes with a political shit show, but, it would help.

[Drachen]

That's a good solution. Comes with a political shit show, but, it would help.

You are right about that, but I really think that it is much ado about nothing (because I don't think it will be an issue) and that this is the most efficient use of lane space.

Also, I don't want ever expanding lanes, the very first time I voted was for a light rail system right after I turned 18 (I lived in berlin for a year and it was wonderful). I think it has to be done right and possibly slowly to combat slow adoption rates, but I want it done. Its the only way to stop this.

[scott]

You are right about that, but I really think that it is much ado about nothing and that this is the most efficient use of lane space.

Also, I don't want ever expanding lanes, the very first time I voted was for a light rail system right after I turned 18 (I lived in berlin for a year and it was wonderful). I think it has to be done right and possibly slowly to combat slow adoption rates, but I want it done. Its the only way to stop this.

Sadly, I think light rail makes about 3492043423x more sense than San Antonio is able to fathom.

[Drachen]

Sadly, I think light rail makes about 3492043423x more sense than San Antonio is able to fathom.

:lol It does seem to be beyond the comprehension of many.

Shoot, I went to germany 6 months after I got my license, thought I was going to miss my truck soooooo much.

I didn't care.

I did, however, miss my bike/the train/etc when I came back even though I had my truck.

If you can make a 16/17 year old be willing to give up his vehicle, you are doing something right.

[ElNono]

What part of 281 is getting tolls? I normally drive that to-from the valley and traffic never been a problem, IIRC.

[scott]

The rail system in Berlin blew me away. Probably the best I've experienced outside of New York (which wins simply by account of the sheer scope of the system, number of stations, etc.).

[Das Texan]

The only problem with the San Diego system (never been on it), is that it would take 1000000000000000x more coordination to make it all happen correctly than this city has ever done.

[MannyIsGod]

I've maxed out at 46 mph on a road bike, only 24 mph on a MTB on the same hill.

Downhill the extra mass will give you higher speeds but good luck on flats.

[MannyIsGod]

Sadly, I think light rail makes about 3492043423x more sense than San Antonio is able to fathom.

Yep.

[MannyIsGod]

What part of 281 is getting tolls? I normally drive that to-from the valley and traffic never been a problem, IIRC.

Thats south of SA. 281 just north of town would be where this would take place. Has been a traffic shit show as long as I've been driving (98)

[MannyIsGod]

I'll try to never live in a place without good public transit in the future. Its just awesome to have everything in a centralized layout with options that don't involve a fucking car.

[Drachen]

I'll try to never live in a place without good public transit in the future. Its just awesome to have everything in a centralized layout with options that don't involve a fucking car.

Would allow for so much more disposable income and this coming from someone who hasn't ever bought a car for more than 12k.

[leemajors]

You are right about that, but I really think that it is much ado about nothing (because I don't think it will be an issue) and that this is the most efficient use of lane space.

Also, I don't want ever expanding lanes, the very first time I voted was for a light rail system right after I turned 18 (I lived in berlin for a year and it was wonderful). I think it has to be done right and possibly slowly to combat slow adoption rates, but I want it done. Its the only way to stop this.

dun dun dunnnn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

[MannyIsGod]

Would allow for so much more disposable income and this coming from someone who hasn't ever bought a car for more than 12k.

Not only that but what about time? How many people spend 2 hours in their car daily just go to a place in the same city?

[ElNono]

Thats south of SA. 281 just north of town would be where this would take place. Has been a traffic shit show as long as I've been driving (98)

thanks