A Comprehensive Look at San Antonio's (soon-to-be) Toll Road System

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/h_imgs/tollsystem.gif

Things of interest: Both interchanges (1604/281;1604/10) are going to be tolled. But I had no idea that they've proposed:

A) Tolling a section of Wurzbach Parkway and the interchange of 281/Wurzbach Parkway

B) Turning Bandera Road into a toll road from 410 to 1604. Why in gods name would you toll Bandera? I know the traffic is insane but what would they do to Banera Rd? Turn it into a freeway? A Parkway?

[scott]

Are they talking about turning existing roadways into toll roads, or adding toll portions (or maybe having a toll lane?)?

[T Park]

nothing like paying money to drive on roads

that your taxes pay for.


Nice.

[Das Texan]

i didnt know they could turn an existing road into a toll road.

[Shelly]

How the hell could they turn Bandera into a Toll Road? My devlopment ends at Bandera.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

It's not exsiting roads being turned into toll roads.

The rods that are currently non-toll roads will stay that way.

What is construction as toll roads will be... toll roads.

The two five stack interchanges at 1604/281 and 1604/10 will be tolled in order to pay for the construction.

Bottomline:

With these toll roads, you'll have two options, you can drive freely or drive the toll roads.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

How the hell could they turn Bandera into a Toll Road? My devlopment ends at Bandera.

That's what I wanted to know.

I mean traffic is a nightmare on Bandera but turn it into a toll road?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

they're going to rob you all blind
blind i say

[Das Texan]

someone tell me where the hell there will be a toll road on bandera?


as a second level to bandera road?


in sum, really the only place in san antonio that you can really make a toll road would be 1604, and I'm not really convinced how much sense that really makes, as its simply an outer loop to the city. I know Dallas and Houston have toll roads, but as far as I know, they arent the loops.

We arent a big enough metro area to really warrant toll roads.

[Shelly]

I'm assuming the toll would be at the 410 exit and 1604 for Bandera, but that would back traffic up even more. Since there are plenty of way to get to Bandera instead of these two exits, I can't imagine it would work.

[1369]

I love the part where they (whoever "they" are) are proposing a toll on Wurzbach Pkwy where they haven't even bought the easement or filed the impact statement for Salado Creek.

I like tolls on make believe roads.

And another thing, if the city fucks this up and doesn't let the toll be privatized (Cintas/Zachary), I guarantee it will be 2030 before the interchanges are done.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

someone tell me where the hell there will be a toll road on bandera?


as a second level to bandera road?


in sum, really the only place in san antonio that you can really make a toll road would be 1604, and I'm not really convinced how much sense that really makes, as its simply an outer loop to the city. I know Dallas and Houston have toll roads, but as far as I know, they arent the loops.

We arent a big enough metro area to really warrant toll roads.

The Sam Houston toll road in Houston is a outer loop.

And if you've driven 1604 in the afternoon (4-7) you'd know the damn thing needs to be expanded.

But because state funding is less then it should be for SA, it would take a long time before construction to expand highways that need it.

The toll roads will help San Antonio with funding and using this financing method will allow several roads to be built as many as 24 years ahead of current schedules and substantially cheaper.

[scott]

So basically what you are saying is that T Park has once again showed his idiocy?

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

I love the part where they (whoever "they" are) are proposing a toll on Wurzbach Pkwy where they haven't even bought the easement or filed the impact statement for Salado Creek.

I like tolls on make believe roads.

And another thing, if the city fucks this up and doesn't let the toll be privatized (Cintas/Zachary), I guarantee it will be 2030 before the interchanges are done.

If it's privatized, Cintas/Zachary keep all the money generated from the tolls.

That means 20 years from now when SA needs funding for a freeway or expansion of a freeway and the state doesn't have it, we're screwed while Cintas and Zachary keep rolling in the toll money.

It's stupid.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Das Texan was right, Bandera would be an elevated toll road.


Types of toll roads the San Antonio system will have:


http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/h_imgs/281tollway.jpg

Tolled mainlanes: The mainlanes of the highway would be tolled, while the access roads would remain free.

http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/h_imgs/1604tollway.jpg

Tolled managed lanes: The existing mainlanes remain free, but additional lanes built in the median of the freeway would be tolled. These lanes would be barrier-separated and would have limited entry and exit points. It might be possible for these lanes to also double as HOV and/or bus lanes (known as HOT [High Occupancy/Toll] lanes.)

No pictures
Tolled elevated lanes: A tollway would be built elevated over an existing free roadway.
Tolled interchange: Direct connect ramps between the tollway and an intersecting freeway are tolled.

The map below shows which type of tollway is currently being considered for each tollway segment.
http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/h_imgs/tollsystem2.gif

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

One of the more interesting of the current toll proposals is that for tolled interchanges on Loop 1604 at US 281 and I-10. In both cases, new tolled direct-connect ramps would be constructed. The existing ramps and connections would remain free.

http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/h_imgs/160410tollint.gif

http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/h_imgs/1604281tollint.gif

So the cloverleaf interchange at 1604/10 would remain but stacks would be built as well. Cool.

And since 1604/281 has no interchange, one will be built but you can still use the access roads to connect.

[1369]

You're right, don't let it be privatized and it will won't get built on time and the $450 million earmarked for the initial toll (which would now be carried out with private funds) which could go to funding other roads, could be spent on overruns and extras.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Cin/Zach said they'd pay to build the entire starter system. Not else and would keep all profits from that.

So there wouldn't be overrun or extras. Not with the starter system.

[1369]

If the starter system is privatized, yes, there would be no overruns and the original $450M earmarked for the starter toll system could be used elsewhere on other roads. Which is what I originally said.

Let TxDOT run it and the original $450M won't paint the lane markers.

[3rdCoast]

i love the development

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Trust me, as a Dallasite you will come to love this. Just be sure to get the toll tags or whatever they are going to be called (a pre-charged tag that you keep in you car that lets' you through without slowing down to throw change).

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Also about Bandera Rd.

From 1990 to 2003, traffic volume for Bandera Road at 1604 has grown +537%

That's insane.

[3rdCoast]

i love development. i love increases in traffic. i love the growth. bring it on

[Shelly]

Trust me, as a Dallasite you will come to love this. Just be sure to get the toll tags or whatever they are going to be called (a pre-charged tag that you keep in you car that lets' you through without slowing down to throw change).


In So. California, it's called FasTrak. I use it when I go to my parents house (they have the transponder). But on some freeways, you have to pay a toll several times. It's not just where you get on or where you exit.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

I think what SA will have, I read this somewhere, is a sticker you place on your car and then when you pass the toll area your charged and at the end of the month you pay what you owe.

[scott]

I don't like the"tolled mainlines" part of it... hmmm.

[T Park]

So basically what you are saying is that T Park has once again showed his idiocy?

You know what Scott, im letting that go cause in in a good mood, youve been nothing but a prick to me from day 1, but thats cool.

But, Im wrong, that, my tax money goes to maintain and pay for roads, now, Im gonna get charged for driving those same roads???

Thats ok??

alrighty...

[Das Texan]

actually genius you arent going to be charged to drive on these same roads you have always driven on.


the toll roads would be for new yet to be built roads genius.



here is a shocker...tpark doesnt have his facts straight.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Here's another shocker...T Park is fucking loser.

[Uncle_Rico]

so new lanes will be added to 1604, correct? and those lanes will be the toll roads?

well this should be fun at 1604 and 281n. lets see all the land around there will be condemned so they can build the interchanges. sacu, half of heb parking lot, barnicle bills/bill miller, las palapas, etc. all torn down.

[TheTruth]

guys, I think it is high time that we leave TPark alone.

[scott]

so new lanes will be added to 1604, correct? and those lanes will be the toll roads?

well this should be fun at 1604 and 281n. lets see all the land around there will be condemned so they can build the interchanges. sacu, half of heb parking lot, barnicle bills/bill miller, las palapas, etc. all torn down.

Don't worry about that.

Signed,

The Supreme Court

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

From renderings I've seen, no buildings will need to be razed.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Also, from 1990 to 2003, daily traffic on 1604 from I-35 to I-10 (Starter System for Toll roads) increased by 471,400 vehicles.

[Mark in Austin]

Also, from 1990 to 2003, daily traffic on 1604 from I-35 to I-10 (Starter System for Toll roads) increased by 471,400 vehicles.

link?

[timvp]

link?

Yeah, no kidding.

:lol

[3rdCoast]

who needs a link? no one would make up that kind of shit

[atlfan25]

between 1998 and 2005, weekly traffic between 1604 and walzem in I 35 increased by 231,326 vehicles.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Yeah, no kidding.

:lol

http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/l1604.htm

I only used the numbers for the starter system of the toll road.

From I-35 west to I-10.

[timvp]

http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/l1604.htm

I only used the numbers for the starter system of the toll road.

From I-35 west to I-10.

I'm no city planner, but if you add up all those numbers, you'd be counting people like five times if they have to commute to work. There's not 500K drivers in San Antonio period and they're certainly not all driving in the same area.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

There are over 700,000 registered cars in the city of San Antonio.

You also have to include out of town drivers passing thru or visiting.

And here are the numbers:

http://void02.xs.to/pics/05272/1604.png

Dissect them however you want.

[timvp]

So if I drive all the way through in a day, would I count as seven cars?

[Kori Ellis]

Okay so if there's 700,000 cars TOTAL, then how was there an increase daily of nearly 500,000 just in that stretch on 1604 from I-35 to I-10?

You are saying that 70% of the cars in San Antonio drive that stretch everyday (in addition to whatever cars drove there before)? Or are you counting each car many times?

[Snickers]

There are over 700,000 registered cars in the city of San Antonio.

You also have to include out of town drivers passing thru or visiting.


You must jerk off to a road map every night :lmao

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

I get what you're saying.

Of course many cars are counted twice or even five times.

But counting traffic is done the same way everywhere.

I know I presented the increase of traffic oddly.

Per section though, the numbers do increase.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

You must jerk off to a road map every night :lmao

Yeah mouse, I do. You got me.

[Smackie Chan]

Kori and LJ must be bored as shit to be talking about roads in a Buddy Holly topic :lmao

[timvp]

So this toll road that will be over Bandera, when will it open? Sounds sweet.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

So this toll road that will be over Bandera, when will it open? Sounds sweet.

It's a future proposed project.

Like someone earlier stated, it would probably be done sooner if the tolls were privatized.

[Troll]

So this toll road
sorry I thought you said Troll road

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

My idea is, all toll roads should have a built in rail line for future rail transit.

The rail line would be built in the median.

[TheTruth]

man, your midget video gets me every time. :lmao

[TheTruth]

My idea is, all toll roads should have a built in rail line for future rail transit.

The rail line would be built in the median.
A rail line would be a dream come true. I spend a lot of time in Denver and their rail line has been a freaking god send.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Redid the math because I totally fucked up. Forgot about the median.

Anyway, between 1990-2003 the avg. daily traffic count on 1604 between 10 and 35 increased by 65,000 cars.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

A rail line would be a dream come true. I spend a lot of time in Denver and their rail line has been a freaking god send.

This city would already have one if it wasn't for some very stupid and misinformed voters.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

San Antonio's proposed light rail system:

http://www.lightrail.com/maps/sanantonio/sanantoniomap.gif


Fucking voters!

[timvp]

Redid the math because I totally fucked up. Forgot about the median.

Anyway, between 1990-2003 the avg. daily traffic count on 1604 between 10 and 35 increased by 65,000 cars.

Much better.

:tu

[JoePublic]

I don't need a survey to tell me that traffic around the 281 and 10 area sucks and is only going to get worse. That shit takes a toll on me already.

[TheTruth]

fucking voters

[Horry For 3!]

Toll Roads are lame. :|

[Mark in Austin]

http://void02.xs.to/pics/05272/1604.png

Dissect them however you want.


Great job directing growth away from the aquifer, San Antonio.

[Useruser666]

Toll roads are stupid. Now perfectly good freeways are going to become construction zones for 10 years just to add roads that make you pay to use them. I definately think there should be a tax payer exemption from this crap.

[Troll]

To hell with the Toll roads, make some Troll roads.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Great job directing growth away from the aquifer, San Antonio.

Yeah, it's the cities fault people decided to move to the northside. It's funny, because the reason there's no interchange at 1604/281 is because planners and the city never thought there'd ever be enough traffic to warrent one. Miragtion they thought, would go south. Well, that was completely wrong.

It's not the cities fault people want rolling hills as their landscape.
It's not the cities fault companie locate there.

The city already has as strict as heck restrictions over the aquifer.

[1369]

It's funny, because the reason there's no interchange at 1604/281 is because planners and the city never thought there'd ever be enough traffic to warrent one.

Try again, the reason there isn't a decent interchange there is (if I remember correctly) that to add an interchange would have exceeded the budget for the widening of 281, which was the original project.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Try again, the reason there isn't a decent interchange there is (if I remember correctly) that to add an interchange would have exceeded the budget for the widening of 281, which was the original project.

No. Money was a reason a interchange at 410/281 was never built. Ironically, construction on a four stack interchange at 281/410 will finally begin tomorrow and take 3 years to complete.

Lack of traffic and thought of no foreseeable traffic growth was the reason a interchange at 281/1604 was never constructed.

[MannyIsGod]

The city already has as strict as heck restrictions over the aquifer.
Yeah, you go ahead and argue this point with Mark. We'll see who wins.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Go look up the restrictions.

Not to mention the recent vote that added even stricter restrictions to the aquifer.

Can you go get my car Manny?

[MannyIsGod]

No. Money was a reason a interchange at 410/281 was never built. Ironically, construction on a four stack interchange at 281/410 will finally begin tomorrow and take 3 years to complete.

Lack of traffic and thought of no foreseeable traffic growth was the reason a interchange at 281/1604 was never constructed.
Wrong.



When planning for the North Expressway (US 281) was going on in the late '50s and early '60s, there were heated debates over the route that the new freeway should take. After evaluating several routes including San Pedro and Broadway, the route skirting Brackenridge Park, slipping between the Zoo and Alamo Stadium, and continuing north over the Olmos Basin was chosen. This route also caused great protest, but construction on the northern and southern thirds of the freeway began anyway. Opponents of the route got a federal court order halting construction on the grounds that the freeway violated a new federal rule disallowing freeways from crossing parklands and saying the freeway would cause great disturbance to the animals at the zoo. Meanwhile, the City, which had been charged with obtaining the right-of-way for the project, was in the midst of condemning land for a planned 410/281 interchange (http://home.att.net/~texhwyman2/hist_diags.htm). The injunction stopping the freeway construction caused the City, uncertain as to the future of the project, to stop dead in its tracks as well. The court battle dragged on for several years. Before long, with development booming along the Loop, owners of the condemned property demanded that the City either buy the land or release it from condemnation. At that time, the freeway looked doomed, so the City lifted the condemnation. New buildings sprang-up at the interchange site almost overnight. When the freeway eventually did come through several years later, the cost of the land was prohibitively expensive and the interchange was scrapped. (For more information on the history of 281, see my "US 281 North (http://www.texhwyman.com/us281n.htm)" page.)


It had more to do with the way 281 was built and the problems that went along with it.

I understand you enjoy seeing the city grow, and thats fine. But a lot of what you propose and suggest is just flat out wrong.

The stuff with the aquifer above is wrong. The restrictions really aren't all that tough to begin with. Secondly, due to whats known as grandfathering those restrictions are easily sidestepped by most developers out there. The only reason the PGA village was ever able to happen was due to grandfathering. Had there been no vested rights for that project, the developer would never have been able to hold the threat of building a subdivision over the the city's head.

[MannyIsGod]

Go look up the restrictions.

Not to mention the recent vote that added even stricter restrictions to the aquifer.

Can you go get my car Manny?
You know, the vallet thing is played out, espeically considering I'm not a vallet anymore. But would you like to tell us what you do for a living?

As I just said, the restrictions are pretty damn useless due to vested rights, also known as grandfathering. Would you like to go read up on that? Go look them up.

Don't try to be a smartass with me, Buddy. Not when you're so blatently wrong.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

What I have said about the interchanges is correct.

You posted info about the 410/281 interchange which had to do with money and land rights.

1604/281 was about traffic count and TXDOT not foreseeing growth.

And grandfathering has nothing to do with the currect restrictions. Grandfathering is what it is, a clause, a crack in the current rules. Just like KG's contract is grandfathered and doesn't apply to current CBA. Doesn't mean the current CBA isn't a good one.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

You know, the vallet thing is played out, espeically considering I'm not a vallet anymore. But would you like to tell us what you do for a living?

As I just said, the restrictions are pretty damn useless due to vested rights, also known as grandfathering. Would you like to go read up on that? Go look them up.

Don't try to be a smartass with me, Buddy. Not when you're so blatently wrong.

Take away the grandfathering rights and the current restrictions are pretty damn strict.

P.S. The whole make fun of Buddy for his ideas and plans is way more played out.

[MannyIsGod]

What I have said about the interchanges is correct.

You posted info about the 410/281 interchange which had to do with money and land rights.

1604/281 was about traffic count and TXDOT not foreseeing growth.

And grandfathering has nothing to do with the currect restrictions. Grandfathering is what it is, a clause, a crack in the current rules. Just like KG's contract is grandfathered and doesn't apply to current CBA. Doesn't mean the current CBA isn't a good one.
The current restrictions mean jackshit because developers constantly go around them with vested rights! You don't seem to grasp that. You need to go read up on the history of things and how they happen.

To add to that, the TX legislature added more to the vested rights laws this past session so it's only gotten easier for developers.

Don't take my word for it. I've only worked for an engineering firm that handles this kind of thing. Take Mark's word for it, he still works for a firm that does this kind of thing.

[MannyIsGod]

Take away the grandfathering rights and the current restrictions are pretty damn strict.

P.S. The whole make fun of Buddy for his ideas and plans is way more played out.
Take away a dick and a man is pretty much a woman.

But the fact is grandfathering is there and getting stronger.

Where did I make fun of your ideas or you?

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Vested laws for the owners of the property.

But the restrictions are still strict.

I guess you can't seem to grasp that.

Again, take away the vested rights and the restrictions are still strict.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Where did I make fun of your ideas or you?

I'm talking about in general.

[MannyIsGod]

Vested laws for the owners of the property.

But the restrictions are still strict.

I guess you can't seem to grasp that.

Again, take away the vested rights and the restrictions are still strict.
And what good exactly are strict (which is argueable, speak to any geologist about how strict and how effective they actually are) regulations that aren't enforceable?

[MannyIsGod]

I'm talking about in general.
Yeah dude, havne't made fun of your ideas in quite some time. I made fun of you when you made fun of Tpark, but if you throw stones don't be suprised to have them come back.

[scott]

Toll roads are stupid. Now perfectly good freeways are going to become construction zones for 10 years just to add roads that make you pay to use them. I definately think there should be a tax payer exemption from this crap.

Toll roads, when effectively utilized, have a tremendous effect of reducing traffic congestion.

[Shelly]

Toll roads, when effectively utilized, have a tremendous effect of reducing traffic congestion.

I'm gonna have to agree with this having witnessed this first hand with Orange County, CA (http://www.thetollroads.com/home/images/visor_map_marshall.pdf) traffic.

The only toll road on that map that gets bumper to bumper traffic is the 91 freeway going out towards Riverside and that's because only one lane is toll. The rest is just regular freeway. The toll land eventually turns into a carpool lane.

I've never been in bumper to bumper traffic on the other ones and in that area it's always bumper to bumper.

[Mark in Austin]

Yeah, it's the cities fault people decided to move to the northside. It's funny, because the reason there's no interchange at 1604/281 is because planners and the city never thought there'd ever be enough traffic to warrent one. Miragtion they thought, would go south. Well, that was completely wrong.

It's not the cities fault people want rolling hills as their landscape.
It's not the cities fault companie locate there.

The city already has as strict as heck restrictions over the aquifer.



Okay... I'll hit these briefly; I need to get up early tomorrow.

First, anybody with half a brain can look at hill country (recharge zone) land or flat treeless land in other areas of the city and realize that the hill country land is more desireable; and that all things being equal, individuals and companies will both prefer the recharge zone land. Let's assume for a moment that your supposition that city staff and politicians didn't think that there would be growth in that area. (Despite the fact that major major growth drivers were already set up prior to the late nineties explosion: UTSA; USAA; the medical center; LaCantera and Fiesta Texas. These aren't infill projects; they are the economic engines that drive growth at a city, hell a regional level.) Assuming you are right and the City just didn't think any growth would happen just proves my original point - that the city did nothing to help steer growth away from the most sensitive areas, despite the fact that the evidence was clear as day that there would be growth there.

Second, as a proponent of planning/development, terms which it seems to me you often use interchangeably, I would think that you would be familiar with the concept of planned growth and desired development zones. The "it's not the city's fault people want to live there" argument doesn't hold a drop of water. In fact, that is the kind of trite, insipid rhetoric that comes out of the mouths of state Legislators at the same time they are trying every legislative session to weaken or dismantle the most effective tools cities have to control growth. Your arguement is akin to people saying "It's not our fault kids want to eat junk food all the time and stay up late - we might as well just let them do it." That statement would be called out by most responsible parents as a complete abdication of parental responsibilities. Sometimes you have to make your kids eat their vegatables and go to bed. Sometimes the kids throw a fit about it. That doesn't mean you give up, because you know that children need to eat right and get enough sleep to develop into healthy adults. There are plenty of ways the City can get growth and development forces to "eat their vegatables" - try to funnel growth away from the recharge zone or limt it. Will it work all of the time? No. But it would work a whole lot better than none of the time, which is what the City had been doing untill recently.

1. A stated policy of discouraging major employers locating on or near recharge zone land, coupled with an identified desired development zone where development is welcomed and encouraged with incentives for major employers like waivers of permit and impact fees, and most importantly, reduced taxes.

2. The science has been around for at least fifteen years that reductions in impervious cover limits are the only 100% effective ways to limit development's effects on the Edwards. The City should have acted fifteen years ago to limit impervious cover in all watersheds that drain to the recharge zone. The City should also have established that sedimentation/filtration water quality ponds be built to catch and treat the stormwater runoff from parking lots prior to the runoff leaving a site and filtering down and recharging the aquifer.

3. The city should ban the use and sale of certain types of fertilizers in the recharge zone and in a five mile buffer around it. Excess fertilizer and pesticied runoff from neighborhoods contribute as much or more to aquifer pollution that your HEB or Wal-Mart parking lot runoff.

Third, with respect to the new strict restrictions: last I heard, there hasn't been a single significant project built that has complied with the new ordinances. And it was San Antonio's city staff playing fast and loose with the ordinance that made such a mess in the legislature this session with expanding grandfathering bills. For instance, San Antonio's very own Jeff Wentworth sponsored legislation that was passed and signed into law that made it much easier to grandfather out of tree preservation ordinances. The staff needs to be able to go by the letter of the ordinance, not the individual review's interpretation of what the ordinance intended. Plus, the San Antonio's new ordinances, while stricter on issues of design standards, walkability, etc. are actually not strict enough in certain key environmental areas, and are also lacking in certain common sense areas as well. For instance, right now you don't get credit towards trees you are required to plant for preservation of existing trees on a site.

[Useruser666]

Toll roads, when effectively utilized, have a tremendous effect of reducing traffic congestion.

Of course they reduce congestion, everyone AVOIDS them because they don't want to pay the toll! I never said they didn't. The negatives, which are enhanced greatly do to the charateristics of San Antonio, far out weigh the positives.

Many more poeple who live in SA wil avoid the tolls than is average. That leads to alternate roads and pathways being influxed with traffic. These roads won't be able to handle that traffic. I'm talking about short cuts though neighborhoods and commercial streets that will be severally damaged. Who will pay for those repairs? Who wants their area to be cut through by everyone avoiding the tolls?

Why do we not have enough funding for road improvements? Are taxes not high enough? Could we pass bonds or raise taxes to pay for such improvements? How about another "VIA" tax?

Is there not enough construction in San Antonio right now? Instead of having just the roads that actually need repairs stifled with construction clogs, miles of perfectly good roads will be sufficated with toll road construction for the next 15 years. I know that nothing's better for the enviroment than tons of traffic slowed to a halt at a construction zone. There is also nothing better than people slowing down and speeding up to stop at toll booths.

I don't like this toll proposal one bit.

[MannyIsGod]

Why do you think more people on average in San Antonio are going to avoid the Toll Roads?

[Useruser666]

Why do you think more people on average in San Antonio are going to avoid the Toll Roads?

The same reason why more people in SA don't have car insurance. We have more people living below the poverty line. I doubt that someone that doesn't get their vehicle inspection sticker is going to want to have to start paying tolls. SA is a big city in small city clothing.

[MannyIsGod]

The same reason why more people in SA don't have car insurance. We have more people living below the poverty line. I doubt that someone that doesn't get their vehicle inspection sticker is going to want to have to start paying tolls. SA is a big city in small city clothing.
Well sure, But I wonder what the demographics are north of IH10, the same place they are putting most of these toll roads. I don't see many hoopties using 1604 on the northside.

[SWC Bonfire]

I doubt that many people would mind paying tolls until the project is paid for, but it almost never works out that way. Once a government finds a flow of $$, they don't let it go.

I think that there were some tollways in Dallas that were funded by tolls and became public roads once paid for.

[MannyIsGod]

I doubt that many people would mind paying tolls until the project is paid for, but it almost never works out that way. Once a government finds a flow of $$, they don't let it go.

I think that there were some tollways in Dallas that were funded by tolls and became public roads once paid for.
I thought it was Texas law that once a Toll Road has it's construction costs paid for it is made into a regular public road?

[Jekka]

All I can say is that there had better be an EZPass system for all this shit.

[SWC Bonfire]

I thought it was Texas law that once a Toll Road has it's construction costs paid for it is made into a regular public road?

I don't think so... shouldn't Sam Houston Tollway/Loop 8 around Houston already be paid for? I think that they are planning on putting the income into a construction slush fund (probably that they can raid for other purposes).

[Useruser666]

Well sure, But I wonder what the demographics are north of IH10, the same place they are putting most of these toll roads. I don't see many hoopties using 1604 on the northside.

Even so, the people who don't want to pay will clog up the non-toll lanes and then what? We have lanes that are clogged causing smog, and other new lanes that have few cars on them being used inefficiently. Sounds great?

[Jekka]

I don't think so... shouldn't Sam Houston Tollway/Loop 8 around Houston already be paid for? I think that they are planning on putting the income into a construction slush fund (probably that they can raid for other purposes).

No kidding - Sam Houston tollway is a joke - I've watched the tolls get more and more expensive as the years go on - and now it's up to $1.50 if I remember correctly. I know it's at least $1.25.

[MannyIsGod]

Even so, the people who don't want to pay will clog up the non-toll lanes and then what? We have lanes that are clogged causing smog, and other new lanes that have few cars on them being used inefficiently. Sounds great?
How so? They are adding new lanes to the highways and making them toll. So the existing highways will still be there.

There will be an increase of traffic in other areas, but what you can expect is a better distrobution of it.

Either Capitalism works or it doesn't. You people can't champion it when you want and then ignore it when you don't want it. Value is being assigned to these routes for a reason.

[SWC Bonfire]

I have the feeling that in the end some existing lanes will be used as toll lanes. Obstructions such as overpasses, proximity of existing lanes, etc. will make addition of extra lanes not cost effective. Of course, they won't say this up front, and may do everything to avoid it, but the $'s they hear calling their name will cause them to do it.

And having the government involved in capitalist enterprizes for profit is similar to "national socialism". Exhibit A : GBRA (Guadalupe & Blanco River Authority), who runs Canyon Lake, fucks everyone downstream, and is taking steps to be in the private water business.

[Useruser666]

How so? They are adding new lanes to the highways and making them toll. So the existing highways will still be there.

There will be an increase of traffic in other areas, but what you can expect is a better distrobution of it.

Either Capitalism works or it doesn't. You people can't champion it when you want and then ignore it when you don't want it. Value is being assigned to these routes for a reason.

They are adding new lanes that will only be barely used. Toll lanes that aren't bridges or tunnels are hardly ever used at an efficient capacity. So now we will have over crowding on the existing lanes, with toll lanes right next to them that are hardly used. Get the picture? And by the time that the toll lanes are ready to be used, traffic will be even worse!

I doubt traffic will be distributed better. How will people forcing their way through side streets and alternate routes be better for traffic? How does slowing down the flow for all, just so a few can ride unimpeeded on a toll lane help? The rich will the ones with their own private highways, while poor will be shoved onto the older existing roads. Sounds even better.

[SWC Bonfire]

The rich will the ones with their own private highways, while poor will be shoved onto the older existing roads.

You forgot to include the cheap bastards. :lol

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

rich and poor.

Sorry man, it's not black and white like that.

It's not just rich and poor. There's classes inbteween.

North of 410, where these tolls are going up, you have a avg. income of about 60,000. That's middle class. Then you get further north past 1604 and that's upper class with Stone Oak, Sonterra Park, The Dominion, Shavano Park (although south of 1604), and all the little upper-class subdivions.

This isn't I-35 by Burbank. That place gets gridlock with cars at rush hour, but TXDOT doesn't even have plans to widen that freeway, let alone add tolls. Wonder why?

I know your cynical, and you think the toll is bad. But for the northside, it's a damn good thing next to lightrail.

[MannyIsGod]

You're right Chris. I have no clue why Toll Roads are successfull in other places. Must be just luck.

[Shelly]

I dunno, Chris. It's working in Orange County where the traffic is a gazillon times worse than it will ever be here. If it can work there, it can work anywhere.

[Lady Marmalade]

they're going to rob you all blind
blind i say


i'm already poor!!!


and i love this little guy :depressed

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

The 410/281 Fourstack Interchange is finally under construction.

-------------------------------------

Patrick Driscoll
Express-News Staff Writer

Work began today on a four-level interchange at Loop 410 and U.S. 281 on the North Side, an infamous crossing that has fueled tales of boneheaded road planning for almost three decades because it never had an interchange.

The $155 million project is expected to take three years.

“The congestion at this intersection is legendary and has been a barrier to economic development," said John Montford, chairman of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce.

"This will be a vital project for improving mobility," said Mayor Phil Hardberger.

[Useruser666]

You're right Chris. I have no clue why Toll Roads are successfull in other places. Must be just luck.

Now you're having reading comprehension problems. :p I never said toll roads don't work elsewhere, I said they wouldn't work well here. The IH35 sections that are proposed are going to cause construction headaches in an area that hasn't had that problem for years. The 1604 area around 35 works just fine and is hardly a congested area. So why make it one for years while these toll roads go up and only take part of the traffic burden? Overall tax increase would allow the creation of more lanes/road alternates that everyone can use and can be implemented during stages when they are needed.

The other part of this issue that burns me is that these toll roads will never go away. They are not used to simply fund themselves, but will be held onto tightly by government as a revenue stream. It's the same story as the lottery supposedly helping finance education. How has that worked so far?

Sorry if I don't sound too excited about paying and extra $1.50 to $3.00 EVERYDAY to my way to work and back. I don't even have that long a commute and I would still be screwed by this toll road plan. It actually would most likely encourage me to drive farther than pay the toll since that would be more cost effective for my daily drive. I know that;s not the case for everyone, but it seems like backward thinking to me.

[GrandeDavid]

Oh fvcking great. Those are the two main thoroughfares I drive on in San Antonio. Sweet.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Sorry if I don't sound too excited about paying and extra $1.50 to $3.00 EVERYDAY to my way to work and back.

Who has the comprehensive reading problem?

How many times does it need to be said before it's beaten into your skull.

All freeways being tolled and the interchanges being tolled will also have free lanes.

With 1604 it will be the current mainlanes, while the grassy median is then turned into toll lanes.

With highways that doesn't have toll roads, the access roads will be free.

With the interchanges, the current ramps and roads used will be free while new ramps are built that will be tolled.

[SpursWoman]

Oh fvcking great. Those are the two main thoroughfares I drive on in San Antonio. Sweet.


And I'm at the 410/281 area everyday ... I'm really looking forward to that, too, but that's been a mess for a few years anyway. It'll be cool when it's done.


So on that projected map, we'd have to pay to go to a GTG at Kori's, too.... :flipoff :lol

[SWC Bonfire]

Who has the comprehensive reading problem?

How many times does it need to be said before it's beaten into your skull.

All freeways being tolled and the interchanges being tolled will also have free lanes.

With 1604 it will be the current mainlanes, while the grassy median is then turned into toll lanes.

With highways that doesn't have toll roads, the access roads will be free.

With the interchanges, the current ramps and roads used will be free while new ramps are built that will be tolled.

There are also free roads along the tollways in a lot of places. And they're great, especially if you like to drive 30 mph with stoplights instead of 65-70.

Don't think that these toll lanes will be entirely new. Some of the lanes may be cannibalized from existing highways.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

There are also free roads along the tollways in a lot of places. And they're great, especially if you like to drive 30 mph with stoplights instead of 65-70.

Don't think that these toll lanes will be entirely new. Some of the lanes may be cannibalized from existing highways.

Tolled managed lanes: The existing mainlanes remain free, but additional lanes built in the median of the freeway would be tolled. These lanes would be barrier-separated and would have limited entry and exit points. It might be possible for these lanes to also double as HOV and/or bus lanes.

Those are the type of toll roads most of 1604 is getting and the entire I-35 north of Downtown is getting.

Mainlans stay open while the median is turned into toll.

[SpursWoman]

Who has the comprehensive reading problem?


Apparently you. You must have been so caught up with the opposite side of town to realize that the sections of 35 that User is referring to DON'T HAVE A BAD TRAFFIC PROBLEM to begin with, and adding all of that construction will only MAKE a problem...that's going to cost people money, time and frustration unnecessarily.

[SWC Bonfire]

Tolled managed lanes: The existing mainlanes remain free, but additional lanes built in the median of the freeway would be tolled. These lanes would be barrier-separated and would have limited entry and exit points. It might be possible for these lanes to also double as HOV and/or bus lanes.

Those are the type of toll roads most of 1604 is getting and the entire I-35 north of Downtown is getting.

Mainlans stay open while the median is turned into toll.

I hope you're right... but the easy way out is to steal lanes in places. Also, going over intersections is going to be expensive, so count on a lot of crossroads getting cut off.

[Useruser666]

Who has the comprehensive reading problem?

How many times does it need to be said before it's beaten into your skull.

All freeways being tolled and the interchanges being tolled will also have free lanes.

With 1604 it will be the current mainlanes, while the grassy median is then turned into toll lanes.

With highways that doesn't have toll roads, the access roads will be free.

With the interchanges, the current ramps and roads used will be free while new ramps are built that will be tolled.

You have a reading problem. According to your map the section of 1604 East of 35 will be tolled, right? Well there are no access roads at certain parts, so they will be either be tearing up the middle grassy area, or as your map indicated making the main lanes toll lanes and the access roads free. What happens where there are no access roads and 1604 is just one lane in each direction? Does that mean more construction? Well that's just great. Now I will spend more time on back roads avoiding that for the next 10 years while it is being built. All this for an area that doesn't even have that much congestion. They could add another lane each way and that would solve any traffic woes there for years, instead they want to do this.

And exactly how will the toll fees be added to 35 from 1604 to 410? There is no room to add anything but an upper deck or making current lanes toll lanes. Both of those ideas suck salty lemons!

[SpursWoman]

Salty lemons are good. :wtf :lol

[Useruser666]

EDIT: Sucks broken beer bottles.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Apparently you. You must have been so caught up with the opposite side of town to realize that the sections of 35 that User is referring to DON'T HAVE A BAD TRAFFIC PROBLEM to begin with, and adding all of that construction will only MAKE a problem...that's going to cost people money, time and frustration unnecessarily.

I-35 North doesn't have traffic problems?

Have you even driven the damn thing in traffic? Two years ago I had to drive the stretch of I-35 just past BAMC and up to Walzem at around 5 o'clock each day. And it sucked.

Here are the 1990-2003 daily traffic stats for 35:

http://void02.xs.to/pics/05274/35traffic.png

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

An avg. of 83,000 cars per mile.

[Useruser666]

Maybe you should look at your chart and see that traffic actually decreased from 2002-03! :lol

Also a 50% increase over 13 years is nothing. Now taking 1 of 3 lanes and reducing it's efficiency by 30%, that is something.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

You have a reading problem. According to your map the section of 1604 East of 35 will be tolled, right? Well there are no access roads at certain parts, so they will be either be tearing up the middle grassy area, or as your map indicated making the main lanes toll lanes and the access roads free. What happens where there are no access roads and 1604 is just one lane in each direction? Does that mean more construction? Well that's just great. Now I will spend more time on back roads avoiding that for the next 10 years while it is being built. All this for an area that doesn't even have that much congestion. They could add another lane each way and that would solve any traffic woes there for years, instead they want to do this.

And exactly how will the toll fees be added to 35 from 1604 to 410? There is no room to add anything but an upper deck or making current lanes toll lanes. Both of those ideas suck salty lemons!

The entire starter system will be tolled through the median. The grassy median will be turned into toll lanes while the current mainlanes stay free.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Maybe you should look at your chart and see that traffic actually decreased from 2002-03! :lol

Also a 50% increase over 13 years is nothing. Now taking 1 of 3 lanes and reducing it's efficiency by 30%, that is something.

50% over 13 years is something.

And only 3 of those 11 sections monitored had reduced traffic.

One section downtown. And one section near 1604. And another way the fuck past 1604.

I'd blame the one near 1604 on Wurzbach Parkway finally being complete in the northeast side during that time. The one downtown and one by the Bexar county line I have no clue why traffic reduced.

8 sections increaced by 77,000.

3 sections decreased by 14,000.

[scott]

Of course they reduce congestion, everyone AVOIDS them because they don't want to pay the toll! I never said they didn't. The negatives, which are enhanced greatly do to the charateristics of San Antonio, far out weigh the positives.

Many more poeple who live in SA wil avoid the tolls than is average. That leads to alternate roads and pathways being influxed with traffic. These roads won't be able to handle that traffic. I'm talking about short cuts though neighborhoods and commercial streets that will be severally damaged. Who will pay for those repairs? Who wants their area to be cut through by everyone avoiding the tolls?



If what you describe is true, then the toll isn't being effectively implemented, and thus voilates the only qualifier I placed on my statement. The toll should be set at the level that optimizes congestion across the entire system.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

That leads to alternate roads and pathways being influxed with traffic.

Then would those people want to then drive in a congestion free lane?

Because I know if I was on fire, and the water was clogged in my house, I wouldn't mind buying a bottle of water at the store to put myself out.

[SpursWoman]

Then would those people want to then drive in a congestion free lane?

Because I know if I was on fire, and the water was clogged in my house, I wouldn't mind buying a bottle of water at the store to put myself out.


But what if that bottle of water cost you an extra $60-$75/mo you couldn't afford...but were still on fire?

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

60-70 dollars a month?

Isn't it going to be like 50 cents per toll booth.

And you still have the free lanes. If you don't want to pay, you don't have to.

[Uncle_Rico]

With the interchanges, the current ramps and roads used will be free while new ramps are built that will be tolled.

keeping that clover on i-10/1604, if that works ill be amazed.


shit wouldnt happen, if sa knew how to build interchangers on highways the right way, in the first place.

proposing only to have a center section wurzbach parkway tolled doesnt make sense. nothing like having wurzabach parkway end on oconner road then go through lights when the whole point of it was to take you to 35 and i-10.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Wurzbach Parkway isn't even finished yet.

Which is why I think Wurzbach would be tolled. To get funding quicker to complete the damn thing.

[Mr. Ash]

60-70 dollars a month?

Isn't it going to be like 50 cents per toll booth.


Depends on if it will be fifty cents to "enter", or if it's fifty cents per section like some toll roads. If I have to pass through several segments, then yeah, it's easily $60 a month for a work commute alone - much less personal travel.

[Shelly]

In CA, it's per sections.

I didn't realize the rates (http://www.thetollroads.com/home/visormap.pdf) were that high! Would San Antonio be that costly?

[SpursWoman]

I especially love the ones where you have to pay TO GET OFF THE FREAKING HWY. :flipoff :lol

They have some sections like that in Houston. :fro

[MannyIsGod]

It's funny, when I bring up things to help out college students such as financial aid etc, I get hammered by some of the same people who are sitting here today complaining about having to pay for the roads they use.

Everyday tax dollars by the average person don't add up to what it takes to build these roads. In otherwords, the average person gets more use from the roads than they pay for.

The fact is that there is already bad traffic congestion on many of those roads and that traffic congestion will only get worse without proper planning. Toll roads place the burden of paying for the road and maintenance on the actual users of the road. There really is no fairer way of doing things.

The reason there are so many delays in the construction projects around town is because there is a severe lack of funding. The state simply can't keep pace with the rate of growth in certain places.

I understand that this is going to mean we spend more money at certain times to get certain places. I also understand that sometimes 1 extra dollar a day can mean a lot over the course of time. But you have to take a step back and figure out how the State can manage to actually keep it's head above water financially.

There are going to be alternatives to the Toll Roads. They may not be as conveniant as the Toll Roads are, but nobody ever said convenience was free.

Now, as for the environmental aspect of these projects, there will be more traffic on other roads, and there will be more traffic on those highways. But there will be more traffic with or without toll roads. With the toll roads, there is an opportunity to properly and intelligently manage things to maximize the efficency. Also, in the future we should also see cars that have much better emissions and the like. That is definetly something to consider.

[scott]

Alternative solution to congestion problems: Monster Trucks.

[Useruser666]

I pay for the roads I use already in the taxes I pay. I wouldn't mind even paying a slightly higher tax rate than I already do if that's what is needed to keep the city's infrastructure in good condition and able to meet my demands. I DO NOT BELIEVE toll roads are the solution to our problems. This is especially true in areas that don't even have problems that are supposedly fixed by toll roads.

Manny, your logic is tragicly flawed. If I were to take that way of thinking and apply it broadly, then you would see it's short comings. What types of government provided services are currently underfunded? Education? Maybe public schools should start charging to educate each kid by the day? Maybe fire departments should charge you to put out your house when it's on fire by charging per gallon of water used.

I don't see anyone but the rich gaining anything from toll roads. They get private highways to themselves and the less well off get shoved onto the current aging system of roads. The tolls won't be a drop in the bucket to someone earning 6 digits, but to the guy working two jobs to support his family, and extra 60 bucks a month is hard to come up with.

We have to go through all the fun of driving through construction zones and traffic jams just to earn the right to PAY for the use of the road after it's completed in 10 years. Then, even when complete, will these new toll roads be utilized at peak efficiency? NO!

What is the point then?

[scott]

I don't see anyone but the rich gaining anything from toll roads. They get private highways to themselves and the less well off get shoved onto the current aging system of roads. The tolls won't be a drop in the bucket to someone earning 6 digits, but to the guy working two jobs to support his family, and extra 60 bucks a month is hard to come up with.

If only the rich use them, then it will be only the rich paying for them - so what do you care?

[Useruser666]

If only the rich use them, then it will be only the rich paying for them - so what do you care?

Uh...

See inefficiency argument....

See construction headaches....

See enviromental damage......

See doesn't solve current traffic problem....

[scott]

I think you are overreacting on some of the issues. Just my opinion.

PS: Not the construction one... SA & TX definitely suck in that area

[Useruser666]

I think you are overreacting on some of the issues. Just my opinion.

PS: Not the construction one... SA & TX definitely suck in that area

Maybe, but I have seen nothing around here to tell me that.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Umm... the people driving 1604 on a daily basis for work aren't the kind working two jobs and living hand to mouth.

Jesus.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Maybe, but I have seen nothing around here to tell me that.

Every single one of your posts.

[Useruser666]

Umm... the people driving 1604 on a daily basis for work aren't the kind working two jobs and living hand to mouth.

Jesus.

Uh, it's more than just a toll road to Stone Oak! Look at your own freaking graphics! It's 1604 from almost the entire West to east side. Then it's a proposed section of 35. Do you think that all those people are millionaires that travel there? I don't want to pay it, or live through the construction, and I'm not even living pay check to paycheck.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, I'm poor as all hell, but I'd use a toll road a fair amount of time. All the time? No. But I think you're equating your dislike of toll roads and refusal to use them to everyone who doesn't make six figures not using them.

[MannyIsGod]

BTW, if you apply the logic torwards almost everything that is government funded in an appropriate way and implement it correctly, it fits. It is standard capitalism.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Uh, it's more than just a toll road to Stone Oak! Look at your own freaking graphics! It's 1604 from almost the entire West to east side. Then it's a proposed section of 35. Do you think that all those people are millionaires that travel there? I don't want to pay it, or live through the construction, and I'm not even living pay check to paycheck.

Everything besides the Starter System is P-R-O-P-O-S-E-D.

And I'm pretty sure a few millionaires drive on I-35 from 1604 to downtown but then again it doesn't even fucking matter because millionaires aren't the only ones going to use the toll roads.

And a lot of out of towners use I-35 from 1604 to Downtown on a daily basis.

And again, you don't want to drive the toll roads, you don't have to! You can drive the roads for free as well.

[spurschick]

Umm... the people driving 1604 on a daily basis for work aren't the kind working two jobs and living hand to mouth.

Not quite sure what you're getting at there.
From the looks of things, I would either have to cough up the toll money daily to get to and from my house, or find some back road route. Either way, it will suck.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Well, I'm poor as all hell, but I'd use a toll road a fair amount of time. All the time? No. But I think you're equating your dislike of toll roads and refusal to use them to everyone who doesn't make six figures not using them.

You don't even have to make six figures a year to drive the damn things. I make between 25,000 and 30,000 a year and I'd use them.

[BadlyDrawnBoy]

Not quite sure what you're getting at there.
From the looks of things, I would either have to cough up the toll money daily to get to and from my house, or find some back road route. Either way, it will suck.

This was said by Useruser666:


The tolls won't be a drop in the bucket to someone earning 6 digits, but to the guy working two jobs to support his family, and extra 60 bucks a month is hard to come up with.

[MannyIsGod]

Credit-based value pricing
A recently completed TTI project, sponsored by TxDOT, examined the use of traveler credits as a means of helping to address transportation problems such as traffic congestion and excessive vehicle emissions. Termed credit-based value pricing (CBVP), this application involves travelers receiving an allocation of travel credits for a certain time period. Based on these predetermined factors, using a freeway or roadway would then cost the traveler different numbers of credits. These factors include:

* level of congestion,
* time of travel,
* mode of travel, and
* route chosen.

If the traveler used all of his or her allocated credits prior to the end of the period, he or she would have to purchase credits from travelers who had not used all of their credits. The cost of credits in this scenario is not fixed but rather set in a free market system similar to the stock market. "If you charge more for peak period driving in an automobile than transit use, then folks taking transit will have credits available to sell to people driving alone in the peak period," says Mark Burris, assistant research scientist with TTI. "Therefore, people have more of an incentive to use transit."

"With the increasing traffic volumes and inability to construct highways 'fast enough' to meet the need, new methods like value pricing need to be researched to alleviate the decreasing capacity and level of service of our roadways," explains Andrea Cheng, design supervisor with TxDOT and project director.

"The results of the research show that the idea is promising," says Cheng. "The research focused on whether value pricing is feasible, which it is, but additional research will need to identify possible implementation scenarios."


I'd love to see something like that.

[AlamoSpursFan]

I'd love to see something like that.

That makes one of us.

Credits? WTF is this? Battlestar Galactica?

[Uncle_Rico]

well be prepared cause the interchange at 1604/281n starts next year...let the fun begin

[Useruser666]

You don't even have to make six figures a year to drive the damn things. I make between 25,000 and 30,000 a year and I'd use them.

That's great then for you. But like I ACTUALLY SAID, there are people who don't have throw away income.

[Useruser666]

BTW, if you apply the logic torwards almost everything that is government funded in an appropriate way and implement it correctly, it fits. It is standard capitalism.

Then we should stop welfare right now. Or medicaid for the poor. Or how about how about we just hve a slight tax increase and build roads that wil be used to their full capacity?

[Useruser666]

Everything besides the Starter System is P-R-O-P-O-S-E-D.

And I'm pretty sure a few millionaires drive on I-35 from 1604 to downtown but then again it doesn't even fucking matter because millionaires aren't the only ones going to use the toll roads.

And a lot of out of towners use I-35 from 1604 to Downtown on a daily basis.

And again, you don't want to drive the toll roads, you don't have to! You can drive the roads for free as well.

You take out a single section of my argument and rebute that one part. It's not any one thing that makes toll roads in SA a bad idea. It's the total of all of these factors together.

I use 35 from 1604 to 410 on a daily basis. There is hardly a traffic problem there right now. How are tolled lanes going to help that any? Tolled lanes will simply shift some of the cars from one lane onto the remaining lanes, making them more congested while the tolled lane will see less use. Does that make sense? Are they going to construct and upper deck along 35 thrtough that route just for toll lanes? I could see if there was a highway that bypassed SA with ver limited exits that was tolled. Then trucks and tourists that were just passing by could pay to avoid any SA traffic. I understand tolls being placed on bridges or tunnels to help foot the bill for them, but we don't have the same types of structures here.

I have driven the toll roads in Dallas and Houston, and from that I just don't see that fitting here. It's simply a way of government extracting money from us in a different way. This is not the proper solution for building an efficient infrustructure in SA.

[Clandestino]

fuck toll roads... EVERYONE uses the roads either directly or indirectly... Everyone should help foot the bill

[MannyIsGod]

Then we should stop welfare right now. Or medicaid for the poor. Or how about how about we just hve a slight tax increase and build roads that wil be used to their full capacity?
So now you're equating roads with providing food for people? :lol

Right.

Ok, I get it, you hate toll roads. I'll wave to you from them when they're built.

[Useruser666]

So now you're equating roads with providing food for people? :lol

Right.

Ok, I get it, you hate toll roads. I'll wave to you from them when they're built.

You say it's capatilism, that's not true at all. If it were, we would pay by the number of miles we drive. But guess what, we aren't! I already pay taxes, now I have to also pay to use these new roads or some of the roads I already use? Pffft!!!

You'll wave from them only after 5-10 years of construction and hassels. Until then, I'll wave to you sitting next me stuck in toll road construction traffic.

I don't get you Manny. Toll roads seem go against every cause you usually preach about here and yet you support them? Tell me how anything I said is wrong? Or maybe this is you just you wanting to pay your $1.25 and feel superior to the other drivers on the free highways?

[MannyIsGod]

You say it's capatilism, that's not true at all. If it were, we would pay by the number of miles we drive. But guess what, we aren't! I already pay taxes, now I have to also pay to use these new roads or some of the roads I already use? Pffft!!!

Did you bother to read the credit information I posted? Also, they have the ability to vary prices per mile and in other formats, which they will probabbly do. In fact, the prices right now are supposed to be calculated at about 15 cents per mile

The fact is that a small tax raise that you keep proposing isn't going to be able to meet the funding needs of the states highways.

And another thing, when paying state taxes, why should I have to pay for roads being built in Dallas or Houston that I'm rarely going to use?

Toll Roads put the payment for those roads right in the hands of the users. It assigns more value to alternate options and routes. They work Chris. I know you don't like them, but for you sit there and act like they don't work is ridiculous. There are examples of how well they work in all parts of the world.






You'll wave from them only after 5-10 years of construction and hassels. Until then, I'll wave to you sitting next me stuck in toll road construction traffic.

As opposed to 10-15 years of construction hassles because expansion of the highway keeps getting delayed due to a lack of funding from the state. Ok!



I don't get you Manny. Toll roads seem go against every cause you usually preach about here and yet you support them? Tell me how anything I said is wrong? Or maybe this is you just you wanting to pay your $1.25 and feel superior to the other drivers on the free highways?
You're completely off base with that. Overall, I'm for a privatization of many government services because the government seems to fuck most things up. How in the hell is this going against that?

[SpursWoman]

And another thing, when paying state taxes, why should I have to pay for roads being built in Dallas or Houston that I'm rarely going to use?


Same reason people who don't have kids have to pay the school district portion of their property taxes, I'd imagine.

[Useruser666]

Again Manny, I have said toll systems work elsewhere. I have never argued that they don't work. But fo SA they are a poor fit. Wait untill we have been paying tolls for years and we still don't have any money to maintain our infrastructure or expand it's capacity. By building conventional use roads, everyone can use them to their fullest efficiency. Toll roads are simply not utilized in that same way.

[MannyIsGod]

Again Manny, I have said toll systems work elsewhere. I have never argued that they don't work. But fo SA they are a poor fit. Wait untill we have been paying tolls for years and we still don't have any money to maintain our infrastructure or expand it's capacity. By building conventional use roads, everyone can use them to their fullest efficiency. Toll roads are simply not utilized in that same way.
Based on WHAT Chris? Give me some actual facts or long term analysis to back this up.

[MannyIsGod]

Same reason people who don't have kids have to pay the school district portion of their property taxes, I'd imagine.
Exactly why that was struck down by a judge. Next?

[SpursWoman]

Exactly why that was struck down by a judge. Next?



I know it was struck down, and why. Do you also know how they plan on replacing that money? An increase in sales tax is one of them ... are parents with kids in public school the only ones that pay them?

[Clandestino]

Exactly why that was struck down by a judge. Next?

what was stuck down and when?

[1369]

One nice thing, that since the commission seem sto be leaning toward privatizing the "starter" toll road on 1604/281, Zachary will have an incentive to complete the project as soon as possible so that they can begin to recoup their investment.

[Useruser666]

Based on WHAT Chris? Give me some actual facts or long term analysis to back this up.

I have already given actually facts. Look at the Writer's maps. How long does it take to build these toll additions? Read the reports. Hmmm... the people who want it build are making the reports. Wow, I wonder what they will say?

Show me where what I have said is wrong.

[SpursWoman]

what was stuck down and when?


The school district portion of your property taxes. As soon as they figure out how to replace the revenue lost they will no longer be included as part of your tax bill.

[MannyIsGod]

I know it was struck down, and why. Do you also know how they plan on replacing that money? An increase in sales tax is one of them ... are parents with kids in public school the only ones that pay them?
You're acting as though I support that SW. I don't.

[SpursWoman]

You're acting as though I support that SW. I don't.


So by the same logic, parents should be billed directly for their child's primary education?

[MannyIsGod]

I have already given actually facts. Look at the Writer's maps. How long does it take to build these toll additions? Read the reports. Hmmm... the people who want it build are making the reports. Wow, I wonder what they will say?

Show me where what I have said is wrong.
What part is wrong? The part where you base your entire arguement on San Antonio being excempt to economic law because you see people driving around with expired tags.

That part.

[Clandestino]

The school district portion of your property taxes. As soon as they figure out how to replace the revenue lost they will no longer be included as part of your tax bill.

wow, it'll be good to save that big chunk of change... however, we all benefit from education... just like we all benefit from roads...

there has to be a better solution than toll roads...

[MannyIsGod]

So by the same logic, parents should be billed directly for their child's primary education?
Privatization. How it is handled by the private entity is debateable. Also, you are comparing apples and oranges. You're comparing the right to an education with the right to a certain route.

[MannyIsGod]

wow, it'll be good to save that big chunk of change... however, we all benefit from education... just like we all benefit from roads...

there has to be a better solution than toll roads...


Well, not all roads are going to be tolled. But certain roads where expansion is needed will be tolled. There really is no other way to go.

Doing it with raising taxes is never going to fly. You can't raise taxes for anything without a large backlash. Secondly, the amount the taxes would have to go up would be rather large.

[Useruser666]

What part is wrong? The part where you base your entire arguement on San Antonio being excempt to economic law because you see people driving around with expired tags.

That part.

Where did I say SA should be exempt from economic law beacause of expired tags? Dude, what are you reading? I said the toll system won't work here. It will cause more problems than it will solve. I also stated it doesn't fit SA well because of the large number of people who fall below the poverty line who can't afford to use a toll system. I would be in favor of raising taxes if it meant improving roads and reducing construction delays. That would actually help things not hurt them.

One other thing, where does the money come from to foot the bill for the cost of these toll roads? I know it will get paid back, but where does the initial funding come from? What conventional projects get put on hold or shelved for this toll system? Please answer that.

[Useruser666]

Well, not all roads are going to be tolled. But certain roads where expansion is needed will be tolled. There really is no other way to go.

Doing it with raising taxes is never going to fly. You can't raise taxes for anything without a large backlash. Secondly, the amount the taxes would have to go up would be rather large.

There are places where existing roads will be tolled and new ones will NOT be built. What of these places? How does it help to shift some traffic off lane 3 onto lanes 1 and 2?

We already have in place a system of taxing people for goods and services. It's called sales tax. Why be forced to create an entire new system of goverment to tax people in a different way? It's unnecessary.

[MannyIsGod]

Where did I say SA should be exempt from economic law beacause of expired tags? Dude, what are you reading? I said the toll system won't work here. It will cause more problems than it will solve. I also stated it doesn't fit SA well because of the large number of people who fall below the poverty line who can't afford to use a toll system. I would be in favor of raising taxes if it meant improving roads and reducing construction delays. That would actually help things not hurt them.

One other thing, where does the money come from to foot the bill for the cost of these toll roads? I know it will get paid back, but where does the initial funding come from? What conventional projects get put on hold or shelved for this toll system? Please answer that.
Ok, who here is in favor of a 300% tax hike?

[Clandestino]

Well, not all roads are going to be tolled. But certain roads where expansion is needed will be tolled. There really is no other way to go.

Doing it with raising taxes is never going to fly. You can't raise taxes for anything without a large backlash. Secondly, the amount the taxes would have to go up would be rather large.

no shit...the school district portion is over half the cost of my property taxes... where will the funding come from to cover that??? no fucking idea...

[Useruser666]

Ok, who here is in favor of a 300% tax hike?

So we are talking about a 300% sales tax increase or did you just pull that figure out of your ass? Show me facts, figures, and studies Manny! Come on now!

[MannyIsGod]

So we are talking about a 300% sales tax increase or did you just pull that figure out of your ass? Show me facts, figures, and studies Manny! Come on now!
The state can only fund 1/3 of the projects right now Chris. In order to generate the appropriate revenue, how much would the taxes need to be raised?

[1369]

One other thing, where does the money come from to foot the bill for the cost of these toll roads? I know it will get paid back, but where does the initial funding come from? What conventional projects get put on hold or shelved for this toll system? Please answer that.

From what I've read, the funding of the initial "starter" toll lanes is from public funds available. If Zachary is allowed to privately fund the toll road, it would free up $450M that was earmarked for the initial toll road to be used on other road projects ($1.2B total cost).

[SpursWoman]

no shit...the school district portion is over half the cost of my property taxes... where will the funding come from to cover that??? no fucking idea...


One of the proposals is an increase in sales tax and franchise tax...that's what they are currently trying to resolve.

[Useruser666]

The state can only fund 1/3 of the projects right now Chris. In order to generate the appropriate revenue, how much would the taxes need to be raised?

How much does 2/3rds of the fund compare to revenue from the state sales tax?

[MannyIsGod]

Chris, the bottom line is that you're looking at a 300% increase in funding that you want to come from a sales tax increase. How easy do you think that is going to be?

[MannyIsGod]

Chris, the biggest indicator that these toll roads will work is the private investors chomping at the bit to make them.

[SpursWoman]

Chris, the biggest indicator that these toll roads will work is the private investors chomping at the bit to make them.



Because once they are in place, they are never going away. I'd be chomping at the bit to build them too.

[MannyIsGod]

But whats the point if people aren't going to use them?











In April, the Spanish company Cintra and its San Antonio partner Zachry American Infrastructure offered to take over the first 47 miles of toll roads in San Antonio. The lanes would be added to the northern half of Loop 1604 and on U.S. 281 from Loop 1604 to Comal County.

Private money would fund the $1.3 billion construction job, speeding up work and freeing up $630 million in tax subsidies. But the companies would collect toll fees of 15 cents or more a mile for up to 50 years, money that San Antonio officials hoped to reinvest in other toll projects.


Private money will fund the construction and it would end at some point.

[1369]

Because once they are in place, they are never going away. I'd be chomping at the bit to build them too.

Not always SW. The old Dallas tollway is no longer there (I think it's Hwy 75), and the one I used to drive in Virginia Beach was reverted once it was paid off. That being said, if the initial tollway in San Antonio is done with private funds, I think the guarantee is that it would be tolled for at least 50 years.

[Useruser666]

Chris, the biggest indicator that these toll roads will work is the private investors chomping at the bit to make them.

What is the amount of the fund you're are talking about? HOW MUCH WOULD THE STATE INCOME TAX NEED TO BE INCREASED TO PAY FOR THAT? Is the toll system going to solve these problems? Do you know these figures? Sounds like a bunch of promises to me.

Private investors doesn't don't care what is good for the public. They care only about money, and how much of it they will make. Would you think it was still a great idea if Walmart were going to run the whole thing?

[Useruser666]

But the companies would collect toll fees of 15 cents or more a mile for up to 50 years, money that San Antonio officials hoped to reinvest in other toll projects.

So they could set the tolls at whatever they wanted, AND the money would go to pay for OTHER TOLL projects? I thought the money was going to go to improving all roads?

[MannyIsGod]

What is the amount of the fund you're are talking about? HOW MUCH WOULD THE STATE INCOME TAX NEED TO BE INCREASED TO PAY FOR THAT? Is the toll system going to solve these problems? Do you know these figures? Sounds like a bunch of promises to me.

There is no state income tax. Is the Toll Road going to solve the problems? Well, projects are going to get done that woudln't otherwise get done. What do you think?



Private investors doesn't don't care what is good for the public. They care only about money, and how much of it they will make. Would you think it was still a great idea if Walmart were going to run the whole thing?
I understand what motivates private investors, but you're saying that toll roads aren't going to be used because of San Antonio's demographics. So how are the private companies going to make money? If nobody uses them how will they make money? What is making them think that people will use them enough to invest over a billion dollars into the project?

Your argument is based on the assumption that nobody will use these roads. I simply think you're wrong in that assesment.

[MannyIsGod]

So they could set the tolls at whatever they wanted, AND the money would go to pay for OTHER TOLL projects? I thought the money was going to go to improving all roads?
Why would the money go to imrpove our roads? If a company funds the construction of these roads, they would get a return on that investment. They have to set the tolls at a price that works with the market or else nobody will use the roads.

[MannyIsGod]

So they could set the tolls at whatever they wanted, AND the money would go to pay for OTHER TOLL projects? I thought the money was going to go to improving all roads?
That quote is basically saying that SA officials wanted to control the tollways so that they would have money to reinvest in other tollways. Personally, I'd rather have the private companies manage them. Local officials will find a way to screw it up.

[Useruser666]

Sorry I meant to say sales tax, not income tax. I didn't say NOBODY would use them, just that they won't be used efficiently compared to conventional roads. They will set the price to make a proffit no doubt. But again, where does that leave those in SA who fall below that margin?

[Chevy Tahoe]

I will use these son of a bitches!

[Useruser666]

That quote is basically saying that SA officials wanted to control the tollways so that they would have money to reinvest in other tollways. Personally, I'd rather have the private companies manage them. Local officials will find a way to screw it up.

I take it as they will use the profits to fund other toll ways. That sucks! If we have to have them, then there should only be the bare minimum number of them to fund other projects. 50 years is too long. I could even see if roads were made toll until they paid off, but not for the long term.

[MannyIsGod]

Chris, Toll Roads suck or the people in this city who are poor because they probably won't use them for a significant percentage.

I agree.

But thats probably one of the reasons Highway 90 is never mentoined as a toll road and north 1604 is. We could go back and forth all day, but the bottom line is that I think this is prefferable to a tax increase.

[Useruser666]

I will use these son of a bitches!

This has to be mouse or mookie! :lol

And I never heard of a z71 two wheel drive Chevy truck before?

[mookie2001]

its not me
LOL
chodes
its clandestino

[MannyIsGod]

I take it as they will use the profits to fund other toll ways. That sucks! If we have to have them, then there should only be the bare minimum number of them to fund other projects. 50 years is too long. I could even see if roads were made toll until they paid off, but not for the long term.
You can take it however you want, but the context of the article is what I posted above.

If the state wants to put up the money up front and then collect the tolls to pay the project off, then it'll only be a toll road untill it is paid off. But then the problem arises of where to get the money, because once again they're running super low right now.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao It has to be Clandestino. That's funny shit.

[Useruser666]

You can take it however you want, but the context of the article is what I posted above.

If the state wants to put up the money up front and then collect the tolls to pay the project off, then it'll only be a toll road untill it is paid off. But then the problem arises of where to get the money, because once again they're running super low right now.

I could mybe see that, I think it's way cheaper to maintain something than fund it outright. Keep it toll for a time longer than it's paid off and use that as a maintaince fund.

[Das Texan]

Look there are positives and negatives to both sides of the story.

I simply find it a bit riduclious in some ways to add toll lanes to existing roadways. if the toll isnt overly costly, it will be used. if it is..then it will be a white elephant.


in other news...the 410/281 interchange will be stupid simply because they are using 2003 figures for the interchange instead of projecting it out to 2020 or something intelligent. i will yap more on this and other later.

[MannyIsGod]

I went to the meeting at the Via Center today regarding the Toll Roads. Well, before going I was pretty happy about the ideas being put forth by TXDOT but after listening to some comments by the people who were there to speak, I am increasingly leary about the idea because of the circumstances around it such as:

TXDOT already had funding approved for the section of 281 now slated for Toll Expansion. Why the hell did they shelf that in favor of tolls?

The possible contract for the roads is being kept private. Uh, fuck that?

We have a tax in San Antonio I was unware of that goes directly for highways. This sales tax is unique. There's no way we should have to pay both a sales tax that no other city in Texas pays and be faced with the proposition of toll roads.


I'll try to get some more specifics on it later, it was an interesting meeting. They were also slated to discuss the Austin/San Antonio Rail Project but I left before then.

[MannyIsGod]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA072605.01B.mpo.d851f6c.html





Toll opponents also said state documents from a public meeting in 2001 show that proposed freeway lanes on 281 from 1604 to Stone Oak Parkway had already been funded with gas taxes and that construction was supposed to have started by this year.

And as plans for those freeway lanes morphed into tolled express lanes, the cost ballooned from $48.1 million to $78.6 million, they pointed out.
What the fuck do they need tolls for then? Where did the funding go? And what the fuck about a toll road makes it more expensive or was that just done for the purpose of selling the (unnessecary)toll road solution to the public?

There definetly needs to be an independent review before this gets shuttled under the rug like a bunch of other city politics.

If I were you guys reading it, I woudn't be shy about dropping a council man, the county commishiner, or members of the MPO a call or a letter.

[SWC Bonfire]

This is starting to smell badly. Who would be the independent investigators? The Texas Rangers? Probably not. Since it probably involves federal dollars, maybe we can get federal agencies to become involved, but I would imagine that they would be reluctant to get involved. The governor damn sure isn't going to do something about it, I wouldn't be surprized if he isn't behind/involved in it somehow.

[MannyIsGod]

This is starting to smell badly. Who would be the independent investigators? The Texas Rangers? Probably not. Since it probably involves federal dollars, maybe we can get federal agencies to become involved, but I would imagine that they would be reluctant to get involved. The governor damn sure isn't going to do something about it, I wouldn't be surprized if he isn't behind/involved in it somehow.
Oh, Rick Perry is at the heart of toll roads in Texas. He's in love with the idea of the Trans Texas Corridor. I like toll roads, but the key to them working is proper management and implimentation and I left with a bitter taste in my mouth yesterday.

The Texas Toll Party rep Terri Hall really impressed me. She spoke incredibly well and got her point across in very limited time. I had read parts of her website and took them with a grain of salt but she had actual information to back up what she was saying yesterday. She had old meeting minutes as well as official TXDOT forms, so I know what she said wasn't BS.

[SWC Bonfire]

Rick Perry would sell his mother's gravesite for a tollroad if he thought it would get him a higher office. There needs to be a serious investigation, but I don't know who would have the power to do so other than possibly the Railroad Commision or the Lt. Gov.