Texas Begins a Huge Highway Project; Not All Are Happy

The New York Times ^ | January 1, 2005 | THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

[BobL]

I won't claim to know the ins and outs of I-35, but, having lived in California for 10 years, I can tell you first hand that there are very, very, creative ways to squeeze extra lanes out of a given right of way.

Anyway, the non-compete clause will be there, as it is in Canada, and it will be academic as to whether the state has any options, since Cintra will simply prevent improvements (or charge the state).

I just don't like that kind of sellout.

[BobL]

"Toll roads free up traffic and in most cases, improve commute times dramatically."

2 other ways to do that:
a. Allow odd/even driving days (as was proposed in 1973 during the gas shortage).
b. Raise the gas tax to prohibitive levels.

My point being that government should not be in the business of removing cars from the road. Rather they should provide the capacity that is needed.


"...and many 18 wheelers and other vehicles will take alternate routes."

Through who's neighborhood. In Ohio, just recently, they had to drastically reduce tolls, because truckers were bypassing the turnpike, in favor of small highways that ran straight through towns. In one case, the cause of a major truck accident was directly attributed to the driver avoiding the super-high tolls (the accident played a large factor in their reduction).

My point being here is that we WANT trucks on limited access highways, rather than driving through the center of town - so why punish that. I would be more in favor of charging people extra if they DON'T use limited access highways, and instead use surface streets. But, since it's easier to collect from limited access highways, that's where the huge tolls are applied.

[BobL]

"I use the Dallas North Tollway every day."

At 9 cents per mile (by my calculation - could be wrong), it is at least more tolerable than what Cintra is doing to Canadians (twice that rate).

You may not believe this, but there is a point where I will even use toll roads - around 5 cents per mile (as in most of the Northeast and Midwest). The part I don't like is being robbed at the same time, as they do in the Houston area and will do throughout Texas, once Perry gets through with his plan.

[FreedomCalls]

Check out those pictures of earth at night, and the bright lights in strings are the interstate highway systems.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/usanight_dmsp_big.gif

[Paleo Conservative]

Anyway, the non-compete clause will be there, as it is in Canada, and it will be academic as to whether the state has any options, since Cintra will simply prevent improvements (or charge the state).

Quite frankly I would prefer new highways built closer to me than I-35 is. Corpus Christi, the city I live in is just about due south of Dallas, but I currently have to go to as far West as San Antonio if I want to drive to Dallas on Interstate grade highways. Having a highway east of and parallel to I-35 would improve north-south traffic for people living on the Gulf Coast and the Rio Grande Valley.

Anyway, it isn't just a highway right of way. There will be a double tracked railroad right of way too. Most of Texas has really lousy single tracked rail connections like the ones connecting Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio (three of the ten largest cities in the US). Texas today has a 21st century population of over 20 million people but has a rail capacity that isn't any better than it had in the late 19th century. It makes sense to build a few concentrated multipurpose rights of way than to build a hodgepodge of poorly connected ones.

[BobL]

I agree on your point about having to divert to San Antonio (and then deal with its traffic) to get to Dallas. People going west out of Houston have exactly the same problem with San Antonio.

The solution: Build some cheap bypass sections to get around San Antonio (and Austin, as necessary). Five cents more of gas tax would easily cover both (but not too many other additional projects).

In other words, don't just trash and sellout the entire Interstate system in the State of Texas.

[Paleo Conservative]

In other words, don't just trash and sellout the entire Interstate system in the State of Texas.

The new corridors won't do that. They will interconnect with the existing Interstate system, but they will also add rights of way for rail, high speed transport, pipelines, telecommunications, water, electricity, etc. in addition to four lanes of truck traffic and six lanes of auto traffic.

[COEXERJ145]

I'm not exactly sure when it changed to 75mph but it was that way last March/April when I was traveling to and from New Mexico. I'm guessing it must have been changed during the 2003 legislature.

It was nice to run around 78 or so and every now and then be passed by a DPS cruiser. The best though was some idiot in a little blue sports car with one of those ugly bolt on spoilers blow past me probably doing 120mph or higher. Later we saw him pulled over by the DPS. About 30 minutes later, he blew past us again going close to Mach 2.

[BobL]

"I thought only liberals where into changing peoples habits via social economic engineering. Sigh..."

My point too - let the people decide where and when they need to drive, and then build the necessary capacity.

Toll Roads do just the opposite - they punish people for driving at any time and, particularly, the "wrong" times (again, now 70 cents per mile at the wrong times, on SH 91 in California). I don't want government or any private company doing that to me.

[BobL]

"The new corridors won't do that."

How can you know that? Have you read the fine print in the Cintra contract? I don't even think it's been completed.

But I did read and post the fine print in Cintra's contract with Ontario, and if that fine print is repeated here (which it will be, or Cintra will not sign), our interstates are condemned to a slow, agonizing death. While we drivers all bone up for Perry's vacation homes.

[BobL]

"Toll roads are supported by the Cato Institute, a conservative think tank, along with many other conservative groups."

Correction: ...a Libertarian think tank...

But the Heritage Foundation, true conservative think tank, also supports tolling and private roads (they must be well-paid). So your point stands.

I just happen to disagree with both of them, and I'm convinced that Perry is heading us right into a train wreck.

[Paleo Conservative]

I just happen to disagree with both of them, and I'm convinced that Perry is heading us right into a train wreck.

No if we still have to send hazardous cargoes through heavily populated areas, we'll have some train wrecks.

[BobL]

Agreed - bad analogy.

No argument with cleaning up transportation, and the corridors may be a good idea for commercial vehicles.

I just can't support the way his method punishes car drivers.

[Paleo Conservative]

No argument with cleaning up transportation, and the corridors may be a good idea for commercial vehicles.

I just can't support the way his method punishes car drivers.

One of the reasons for separating truck and auto traffic on these corridors is that it allows cheaper construction of the auto lanes. The truck lanes can be built to withstand heavy loads from 18-wheelers while the auto lanes are built lighter and less expensively. Interstates have to be built so all lanes can withstand heavy truck traffic. That's why they'll be able to build six lanes for auto traffic.

[BobL]

"One of the reasons for separating truck and auto traffic on these corridors is that it allows cheaper construction of the auto lanes."

I'm good with the separation and it makes sense, it's the other aspects (mentioned throughout this thread) that I can't deal with.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Paleo Conservative]