Replies

I didn't know it was a planned extension of the same I-69 in my state.

Good, bad or indifferent, the road systems have to be continually upgraded to carry the increased traffic load. And part of this system upgrade is designed to carry the load expected from NAFTA, assuming it materializes over the years. If you look a the TTC web site you'll see there are four major entry points from South America coming through Texas.... That is what this proposed system is about here in Texas.

I'm not sure what the final outcome will be. You'll read a lot of discussion back and forth but in reality it's mostly in the talking stages for much of it at this time. The existing Interstate system will remain in place so those that don't want to use the TTC system will still have that system to use. However parts of the Interstate system here in Texas is very congested and needs relief via some method.

Whether people will pay tolls to travel the roadway is yet to be determined. But the fact that tolls are to be charged doesn't force those that don't want use the roadway to do so.

Cintra just recently proposed to invest some $7.2 million in the I-35 phase of this system..

As a winter texan, I think the new roads are a good idea. Texas is well known to travelers as a highway friendly state. Don't know about tolls but with 5 axels I will get hit harder than cars, but I also doubt the roadway will be open very soon, who knows where I will be by then. But I would avoid LA and stay on good highways.
BTW, Texans are still free of an income tax, and toll fees if used on roads and not poured into the general fund are a form of taxation that at least makes sense.

"Whether people will pay tolls to travel the roadway is yet to be determined. But the fact that tolls are to be charged doesn't force those that don't want use the roadway to do so."

I think it's clear that we will pay tolls to use this new highway, unless you know of some other plan for paying Cintra.

But your second sentence is technically true, but ask yourself, if Cintra needs to charge, say 20 cents per mile, to make a reasonable profit, do you think that they will leave the state free to do whatever they want with I-35? If so, they could see a $7.2B investment wiped out simply by KBH being elected governor and adding 2 lanes each way to I-35. I cannot see any company leaving themselves exposed like that. Maybe Cintra will be the first - and if so, I'll publicly eat my words here at FR. But for now, I'm going to wait until I see the fine print of the contract before assuming that our (relatively) free interstate system will remain free, functional, and intact.