Jump to content

TX 288 Toll Lane To Start Mid 2016


cspwal

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ADCS said:

 

None of that follows in the least bit. The dislike for trains seems to be ideological primarily, as they chafe against a certain conception of "freedom" that's popular around here. Cars are seen as promoting "freedom", even though no one is proposing to abolish cars, and the implementation of more lanes and elimination of potential rail routes leaves us less free to choose modes.

 

You're the one projecting racism there - it's more classism in my mind. Just look at the Heights fight over beer and wine sales if you don't think it's there.

 

I wouldn't say "no one is proposing to abolish cars" with that much confidence, as some far-left publications really DO seem to support the "They hate private automobiles and force us to ride public transportation" fear that some train opponents have. However, I agree that is not the view of the majority. While rejecting trains on a purely ideological basis is wrong, it's equally just as wrong to push trains on an ideological basis.

 

Sometimes I have this sneaking suspicion that the only people who really like trains as public transportation (besides the fringe anti-car wingnuts, that is) are a grown version of the wide-eyed kid from a small town (or at least a city that lacks rail) riding the trains in the "big city" (or Europe) for the first time (or at least the first time in a while), and holding to ideals of public transportation instead of the realities that go along with it.

 

I'd be lying if I said that this sort of thinking didn't influence me on rail. So on 288, would rail be awesome? HELL YEAH! But is it practical and pragmatic? That's a harder question...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, IronTiger said:

 

I wouldn't say "no one is proposing to abolish cars" with that much confidence, as some far-left publications really DO seem to support the "They hate private automobiles and force us to ride public transportation" fear that some train opponents have. However, I agree that is not the view of the majority. While rejecting trains on a purely ideological basis is wrong, it's equally just as wrong to push trains on an ideological basis.

 

Sometimes I have this sneaking suspicion that the only people who really like trains as public transportation (besides the fringe anti-car wingnuts, that is) are a grown version of the wide-eyed kid from a small town (or at least a city that lacks rail) riding the trains in the "big city" (or Europe) for the first time (or at least the first time in a while), and holding to ideals of public transportation instead of the realities that go along with it.

 

I'd be lying if I said that this sort of thinking didn't influence me on rail. So on 288, would rail be awesome? HELL YEAH! But is it practical and pragmatic? That's a harder question...

 

I think many of them realize that cities develop around the infrastructure provided for them, and in ways influenced by that infrastructure. We put auto-centric infrastructure in (and always at a high capital investment), we will have an auto-centric city. Likewise, if there is a comprehensive rail system, development will take advantage of that system. The musculature builds around the bones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ADCS said:

 

I think many of them realize that cities develop around the infrastructure provided for them, and in ways influenced by that infrastructure. We put auto-centric infrastructure in (and always at a high capital investment), we will have an auto-centric city. Likewise, if there is a comprehensive rail system, development will take advantage of that system. The musculature builds around the bones.

For the most part, that's correct. Cities are built certain ways and infrastructure develops certain ways, and trying to patch in different transit systems isn't going to work. If you put in wide American-style highways into European cities, it won't magically resemble the urban/suburban divide like it does in the United States, nor will trains result in denser, anti-suburb development that fundamentally changes how we live and get around. In the early 1970s, Paris built the Boulevard Périphérique, which is a loop highway not too dissimilar from U.S. highways...but due to the way Paris is built, trains still rule.

Edited by IronTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts FWIW:

 

To my knowledge, this is a design-build project much like the southern section of SH130 south of Austin.... at least to the Brazoria county line. After that, its all on the Brazoria equivalent of HCTRA.

 

Therefore, no concessions were made to allow for HOV's to use the toll lanes. This is a large mistake and is worth derision.

 

However, I do feel as if this is a good deal for TxDOT and tax payers as they don't have to pay for the upgrade ... the engineering company has exclusive toll rights for like 60 years.

In addition, they throw in upgrades to the 610 and Beltway 8 interchanges. That's a pretty nice bonus. I say its probably the best use of this agreement because there is still a "free" option to drive on that not frontage roads and is actually grade separated highway.  The toll company can't "force" you to use the toll lanes as they could if a new highway was being put in. That reduces the likelihood of huge price increases on tolls and adds a downward pressure on pricing.

 

Full disclosure: I like trains. I like commuter trains and hope Houston eventually gets them. I like how when I go to Europe, DC, NY, etc that I don't need a car and train + uber seems to work well.

 

However, trains in the middle of freeways (and this one especially) don't work all the at well. Where would the stops be? How would people get to them?

 

Right now commuter trains don't make sense for Brazoria county. However, we need to preserve / start movement on the existing tracks along FM 521 and Mykawa Rd / Tx35. Maybe one day, those alignments can be used for commuter rail into the city with spurs to Hobby airport (for Mykawa) or the Medical Center (FM 521).

 

To be honest, TxDOT, METRO, Harris County, and Houston + surrounding municipalities should be incentivizing train companies to build newer train tracks in areas outside of the suburbs and city if / when possible. If that were the case, then older lines / ROW within the city could be used for commuter service.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, DNAguy said:

 

However, trains in the middle of freeways (and this one especially) don't work all the at well. Where would the stops be? How would people get to them?

 

 

 

 

On the Dan Ryan in Chicago, stops are at overpasses with major streets. People get there by walking or via bus stops at the train stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JLWM8609 said:

 

On the Dan Ryan in Chicago, stops are at overpasses with major streets. People get there by walking or via bus stops at the train stop.

 

I was actually thinking of that while reading his comment, as we had just made a trip to Chicago and went to a White Sox game.  The stop for the stadium is in the middle of the highway, and while walking to it wasn't too bad (traffic cops were at the intersections that are the highway on and off ramps), the wait for the train was one of the worst noise wise.  You don't realize how loud a highway with cars going "60" mph is until you're seated on a bench 12 feet away from it, separated only by low concrete walls.  Obviously, this could be solved easily (windows, trees) but I agree that while train stops can work in the middle of a highway, they are no where ideal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wild eyed idealist?  Classist?  Nuh uh.

 

The Daily Driver is a testament to my love of Our Blessed Lady of Acceleration (I am neither young nor compensating.  It's just fun, and nobody looks at the DD and thinks anything other but "geez that's small and not sleek").  Still, when living in The Streetcar Suburb it's aggravating that I could WALK the three mile drive to work more quickly than taking the bus (unless the timing is just perfect); even worse, getting on the train from home takes longer 'cause of the bike ride.  So, a bunch of horsepower gets driven just barely long enough to get half warm five days a week.  But, if there's an errand to be run from the downtown office to anywhere along the tracks, you bet your sweet bippy that the phone's getting whipped out and the Q-Ticketing app is getting stabbed.  

 

Sure, rail infrastructure takes time to build.  So do freeways.  While this isn't a zero sum game, one of them carries a ****ton more people, more efficiently, than the other... so perhaps that might be a place to put the investment.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mollusk said:

Wild eyed idealist?  Classist?  Nuh uh.

 

The Daily Driver is a testament to my love of Our Blessed Lady of Acceleration (I am neither young nor compensating.  It's just fun, and nobody looks at the DD and thinks anything other but "geez that's small and not sleek").  Still, when living in The Streetcar Suburb it's aggravating that I could WALK the three mile drive to work more quickly than taking the bus (unless the timing is just perfect); even worse, getting on the train from home takes longer 'cause of the bike ride.  So, a bunch of horsepower gets driven just barely long enough to get half warm five days a week.  But, if there's an errand to be run from the downtown office to anywhere along the tracks, you bet your sweet bippy that the phone's getting whipped out and the Q-Ticketing app is getting stabbed.  

 

Sure, rail infrastructure takes time to build.  So do freeways.  While this isn't a zero sum game, one of them carries a ****ton more people, more efficiently, than the other... so perhaps that might be a place to put the investment.  

 

Ahh... Our Blessed Lady of Acceleration, how I adore thee!

 

And lo, the Lord hath putteth His Cross upon us and it is Good.

456059.jpg

 

And, as He hath giveth His sign to the Brethren of the Loop, also hath he spread His Arms to the Unwashed heathens.

houstonmap.gif

And yea even unto those of the Land of Pears He hath spread His arms far and wide and it is Good.  And yea though the Unwashed undertaketh a lengthy diurnal Pilgrimage unto the Corazon to pay homage in the Towers of the Brethren, yet the Brethren looketh upon the Masses with scorn becauseth the Unwashed embraceth the Arms instead of the Cross. 

 

And lo the Brethren said unto the Unwashed, Ye shall hold the Cross before the Arms and casteth aside the Arms as you shall also casteth aside thy Home and liveth in Cells built for thee in the Towers of the Brethren.

 

But it came to pass that the Unwashed knew the Brethren for a small group and themselves for a large group and so cast aside the aspersions of the Brethren and said unto them that Unwashed and Brethren shall live as each likes, some with the Cross and some with the Arms and yet all as brothers.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 10/13/2016 at 10:49 AM, IronTiger said:

 

Sounds like you're implying veiled racism to me, but then following that same logic, are you seriously arguing that "If you don't like trains, you must be racist"? While I'm glad for you that you don't have any questions about who you're voting for, falling back on an argument like that just proves August's point...managed lanes are better and more efficient for transportation and transit.

 

Not racism, it's something just as bad: Classism.

 

A perfect example is that fight going on in uptown, somebody wants to build some housing units that include low income housing. People who live there are fighting it tooth and nail. Stating that the schools in the area are overcrowded and gosh, we can't possibly fit more kids into the area schools! Which is a valid argument until you consider how many other apartments are being built in the area simultaneously that no one is trying to stop. The only difference is that this series of units contain low income housing.

 

It's not race based at all, the rich white people in uptown (I prefer calling it upitytown btw) don't want any poor white people living there as bad as rich black people who live there don't want poor black people living there.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding 288, I can't wait for this thing to be up and running, though the tie-in with 59/45 frightens me greatly.

 

My opinion on Briargrove:  

1. It's not exactly on the River Oaks promenade... it's on Fountain View... and would replace a so-so office building... and is next to an [entirely] abandoned supermarket... and is about 800 feet from Smoke Alley (had to link this b/c it's so awesome).

2.  The real issue of this project was NOT community vitriol (though the community wishes they had that kind of pull), it was that the average unit cost was going to be $240,000 (link).  Stating it a different way... it wasn't cancelled b/c the city bowed to the community (though I think I read HUD is looking into that), it died because it was too expensive on a per-unit basis.  The guy in charge of the Houston Housing Authority resigned over the whole thing (link), and was shown to be ineffective at moving projects forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, SkylineView said:

and is about 800 feet from Smoke Alley (had to link this b/c it's so awesome).

 

Tobacco? Check. 

 

Firearms? Check. 

 

The only way that could've been any better would've been if alcohol had somehow been involved to complete the trifecta, and the clerk had been wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with "ATF - Keepin' It Real".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SkylineView said:

Regarding 288, I can't wait for this thing to be up and running, though the tie-in with 59/45 frightens me greatly.

 

 

The North Houston Highway Improvement Project will rebuild that interchange and have the managed lanes terminate via ramps to Chenevert. That's still a good 10-15 years down the line though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, LTAWACS said:

How can we stop this addition of toll lanes???? WE DONT WANT ANY MORE TOLL EFFIN ROADS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Convince the Legislature to raise taxes so there's non toll sources to pay the construction costs.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ross said:

Convince the Legislature to raise taxes so there's non toll sources to pay the construction costs.

Don't forget the extra taxes for maintenance of the highway

 

Are these going to be HOT/HOV lanes? Or just tolls?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/19/2016 at 4:55 PM, Ross said:

Convince the Legislature to raise taxes so there's non toll sources to pay the construction costs.

 

Why not just have the county (or whoever is responsible for roads) to balance their books and plan and budget for them????? 

 

 

Isnt THAT a novel idea....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, LTAWACS said:

 

Why not just have the county (or whoever is responsible for roads) to balance their books and plan and budget for them????? 

 

 

Isnt THAT a novel idea....

The County isn't responsible for roads like 288. That's a state road. Same thing with FM roads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On October 24, 2016 at 8:47 AM, cspwal said:

So far no real activity that I've noticed on 288 :/

 

Looks like they're removing trees / vegitation at the 288-610 interchange as of yesterday.

 

Sorry no pics. Traffic was actually moving well heading west yesterday at rush hour.

 

Sidenote: Is there a more mind-boggling bad stretch of freeway in Houston as 610 between 288 and 45/225?

 

I'm not talking about traffic (but it sure does get bad.... Just not as bad as other stretches) per se, but the design. You can really tell that it was built to older and lower standards of freeway design. The short on ramps and off ramps, the discountinuous frontage roads, the relatively sharp curves / obstructed sight lines, and the terrible 45 interchange all create massive backups everyday that just wouldn't be there with a properly designed highway.

 

Outside of the 45 interchange, there is some real low hanging TxDOT fruit when it comes to reducing congestion. Maybe the traffic count and the demographics of the area just don't support it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ross said:

The County isn't responsible for roads like 288. That's a state road. Same thing with FM roads.

 

I think you understand his point though, Ross. It's stupid that they have to implement tolls when the people in charge of dispersing funds for projects don't know how to do math.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, werdserf 99 said:

 

I think you understand his point though, Ross. It's stupid that they have to implement tolls when the people in charge of dispersing funds for projects don't know how to do math.

They know how to do the math. The Legislature refuses to fund roads to the extent required to keep up with growth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, werdserf 99 said:

Then they're idiots in that regard. I guess they have more pressing issues than this,a peripheral need that stems from the growth they want.

 

No foresight at all.

 

 

The lege is full of idiots who do not understand the role of government. All they understand is that their rich donors do not want to pay any taxes, and the non-rich think roads appear magically, without any money changing hands.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 11/12/2016 at 6:05 PM, Ross said:

The lege is full of idiots who do not understand the role of government. All they understand is that their rich donors do not want to pay any taxes, and the non-rich think roads appear magically, without any money changing hands.

Well money does change hands seeing how we've paid for BW8 more than seven times over, but the only new roads appearing are somehow more toll roads.

So if we pay tolls on a road that been paid for, in order to have money to build new roads, why are all new roads tolled?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2016 at 2:48 AM, werdserf 99 said:

Then they're idiots in that regard. I guess they have more pressing issues than this,a peripheral need that stems from the growth they want.

 

No foresight at all.

 

 

No they're not idiots, we are for continuing to elect them. Instead of figuring things out the easy thing to do is just keep building toll roads since people like you and me are stupid enough to believe their story about how there's no other way to fund the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Activity has ramped up on this project. Segments 1 and 4 seem to be where they've started off (BW and 610 respectively). They're already in the process of widening the 288 overpasses at the Beltway, and the Beltway mainlanes are being widened too, though I believe that was part of a separate project that started before the 288 project. They're removing paint from the direct connector ramps at 610 and have put down asphalt for a temporary ramp from 610 W to 288 N.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I just read some info that would suggest that our elected officials have pushed for existing roads to be converted into access roads for the toll lanes that have been added.

I understand this would be way off in the future for 288, but to me seems like that would be their eventual goal.

 

Quote

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/13/2017 at 0:35 PM, VinnyVincent said:

I just read some info that would suggest that our elected officials have pushed for existing roads to be converted into access roads for the toll lanes that have been added.

I understand this would be way off in the future for 288, but to me seems like that would be their eventual goal.

 

 

Before you start to drag this topic away, that's not "way off in the future" or "their eventual goal". They're not talking about taking existing freeways and adding arbitrary stoplights to make them toll roads, they take existing non-controlled access highways, which often have driveways, small roads, and (sometimes) stoplights on them already, and then converting them to freeways, but the freeway part is toll, and the stoplights aren't added until they need to be. There's no stoplights at say, Antioch Drive and Beltway 8 because that's a tiny stub road because it only provides access to a recycling center and the back entrance to a subdivision. (Stoplights cost money)

 

As it turns out, there are few highways like that outside of Harris County, because everything is already a freeway, except 288 south of Manvel, 90 east of Crosby, 290 west of Hempstead, and 249 north of Tomball, all of which (except for maybe Tomball) are safely outside of the core Houston commuter patterns.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The free lanes aren't going away; they are adding additional capacity and tolling it to pay for it and control congestion in it.  How well those two will work will remain to be seen.

 

288 was always designed for something like this in mind (at least inside 610) - with local lanes serving the area and express lanes going to downtown

Highway_401.png 

Here's an example from Toronto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, cspwal said:

The free lanes aren't going away; they are adding additional capacity and tolling it to pay for it and control congestion in it.  How well those two will work will remain to be seen.

 

288 was always designed for something like this in mind (at least inside 610) - with local lanes serving the area and express lanes going to downtown

Highway_401.png 

Here's an example from Toronto.

Considering the profit they make on BW 8 alone, I just don't see how it's not possible to slap some concrete down on the land that was already cleared and paid for years ago and call it a day. We wouldn't have to build any toll booths or maintain any equipment. No billing department. No customer service. No nothing except for a road that everyone can drive on.

How is tolling the new lanes really helping traffic overall? Wouldn't it be far more efficient to not build/maintain a toll road?

Lets say they build three tolled lanes, but it costs 5-10 dollars to go any good distance down 288 now, so there's 3X less traffic. Could we not have just added one lane in each direction and gotten the same traffic relief? Something tells me the cost of doing that is doable with tax dollars, where of course building a super highway down the center is not feasible or currently necessary.

 

I do realize that 288 was initially designed to have express lanes with less exits/on ramps going down the center. 

Express lanes does not mean TOLL road. Were tolls even a concept when 288 was initially designed?

Edited by VinnyVincent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if they absolutely had to just build a super highway right down the center, why not one more lane in each direction and a "managed lane"(toll road) in the center? That seems more moderate to me. At least have something to encourage car pooling, but no, no...it's just a straight up three lane reversible toll road.

 

It's just really beyond me how people pay 1.75 every few miles on BW 8, but they are somehow too broke to simply add a single lane in each direction on 288. Instead they had to opt for a three lane super highway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long distance roads in the US started as turnpikes, which were a toll roads.  Long distance publicly subsidized roads are the newer invention.  And BW 8 may make money, but the other toll roads in the system don't.  Harris county is pumping millions in to HCTRA to make up the difference - you can look at the financial disclosure for Harris county if you don't believe the toll road authority's disclosure.  

 

Also, a toll tag only system has lower maintenance cost than the toll booth model, and is really a small amount of how much it costs to maintain a road.  

 

Just making the existing freeway wider isn't as effective as adding the express lanes.  It would be nice to know if they did explore making the express lanes free and rejected it because of price, or that they were just wanting to copy/paste the Katy managed lanes on to 288 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, cspwal said:

Long distance roads in the US started as turnpikes, which were a toll roads.  Long distance publicly subsidized roads are the newer invention.  And BW 8 may make money, but the other toll roads in the system don't.  Harris county is pumping millions in to HCTRA to make up the difference - you can look at the financial disclosure for Harris county if you don't believe the toll road authority's disclosure.  

 

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure HCTRA does make money.  In the early years BW 8 had to subsidize the Hardy but I'm pretty sure those days are past.  I think the Hardy is self-sustaining now.  And HCTRA contributes money to Harris County every year.  HCTRA transfers millions of dollars every year to the county for non-toll transportation projects.

 

From HCTRA's FY 2016 report:

 

"Transfers consisted of transfers out of $124,031,107, which was for funding a county thoroughfare

program to increase general mobility."

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cspwal said:

Long distance roads in the US started as turnpikes, which were a toll roads.  Long distance publicly subsidized roads are the newer invention.  And BW 8 may make money, but the other toll roads in the system don't.  Harris county is pumping millions in to HCTRA to make up the difference - you can look at the financial disclosure for Harris county if you don't believe the toll road authority's disclosure.  

 

Also, a toll tag only system has lower maintenance cost than the toll booth model, and is really a small amount of how much it costs to maintain a road.  

 

Just making the existing freeway wider isn't as effective as adding the express lanes.  It would be nice to know if they did explore making the express lanes free and rejected it because of price, or that they were just wanting to copy/paste the Katy managed lanes on to 288 

The express lanes were originally designed to be free, as per Houston Freeways. Remember, 288 was the very last urban freeway TxDOT was able to do until budget restraints and environmental overhead put the nails in the coffin of highways of that magnitude. I'm not sure when it was switched over from "free future planned" to "toll future planned" though I would say there's an 85% chance it happened under the Perry Administration.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

"Transfers consisted of transfers out of $124,031,107, which was for funding a county thoroughfare

program to increase general mobility."

I'd like to know exactly what that money was spent on because I don't doubt that it was used to build more toll roads.

 

It also seems that no one here is even sure as to whether or not HCTRA clears a profit. These are all some serious questions that need cleared up before we just go slapping down superhighways all over the place and paying insane tolls.

Edited by VinnyVincent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, VinnyVincent said:

I'd like to know exactly what that money was spent on because I don't doubt that it was used to build more toll roads.

 

It also seems that no one here is even sure as to whether or not HCTRA clears a profit. The are all some serious questions that need cleared up before we just go slapping down superhighways all over the place and paying insane tolls.

The HCTRA is a division of the Harris County Public Infrastructure
Department so I would assume that a real budget summary could be acquired through the Texas Open Records Act, so if you were truly convinced that HCTRA is up to something shifty, you can try to write to HCTRA asking about the budget and be sure to mention the law. No guarantees it will work (they'll at least mail you a denial if nothing else), but you might find your answers that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, VinnyVincent said:

I'd like to know exactly what that money was spent on because I don't doubt that it was used to build more toll roads.

 

It also seems that no one here is even sure as to whether or not HCTRA clears a profit. The are all some serious questions that need cleared up before we just go slapping down superhighways all over the place and paying insane tolls.

 

It's clear for anyone interested in looking at the facts.

 

https://communityimpact.com/houston/cy-fair/news/2016/12/19/north-houston-association-calls-on-harris-county-to-use-more-toll-road-revenue-on-mobility-projects/

 

https://www.hctra.org/reports#overviewsection

 

 

 

With regard to the $120 Million + transferred from HCTRA to the county every year, of course specific projects cannot be identified on which THAT particular money was spent.  The money goes into the county's mobility fund, which is spent every year on roads, bridges and other non-toll mobility projects.  There is zero reason to assume it is spent to build more toll roads. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IronTiger said:

The HCTRA is a division of the Harris County Public Infrastructure
Department so I would assume that a real budget summary could be acquired through the Texas Open Records Act, so if you were truly convinced that HCTRA is up to something shifty, you can try to write to HCTRA asking about the budget and be sure to mention the law. No guarantees it will work (they'll at least mail you a denial if nothing else), but you might find your answers that way.

 

Or one can just go to the HCTRA website and the Harris County websites and look at their audited financial statements.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

It's clear for anyone interested in looking at the facts.

 

https://communityimpact.com/houston/cy-fair/news/2016/12/19/north-houston-association-calls-on-harris-county-to-use-more-toll-road-revenue-on-mobility-projects/

 

https://www.hctra.org/reports#overviewsection

 

 

 

With regard to the $120 Million + transferred from HCTRA to the county every year, of course specific projects cannot be identified on which THAT particular money was spent.  The money goes into the county's mobility fund, which is spent every year on roads, bridges and other non-toll mobility projects.  There is zero reason to assume it is spent to build more toll roads. 

What makes you automatically assume it was spent on non-toll projects? I'd say there's zero room to assume that it's NOT being spent on toll roads considering the lack of oversight and public interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, VinnyVincent said:

What makes you automatically assume it was spent on non-toll projects? I'd say there's zero room to assume that it's NOT being spent on toll roads considering the lack of oversight and public interest.

 

Of course there's not "zero room to assume" (why do YOU assume otherwise?), and there IS oversight and public interest, so if you don't like what newspapers tell you, just specifically request an Open Records Act inquiry about where that money is going. Open a text editor or get out a piece of paper that says something like "Dear HCTRA, I am concerned about the amount of money going into toll road projects, per the Texas Public Information Act of 1973, I am requesting further budget information on where the surplus of HCTRA's budget is going, whether it is toll road projects like the 249 tollway and the Grand Parkway, or non-toll projects... ...Signed, Vinyard Vincent III" (or whatever your real name is) and send it off.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cspwal said:

Just making the existing freeway wider isn't as effective as adding the express lanes.  It would be nice to know if they did explore making the express lanes free and rejected it because of price, or that they were just wanting to copy/paste the Katy managed lanes on to 288 

Get real. Have you overheard any of the discussions our officials have regarding road construction?

The idea of making a non-tolled road is not even remotely on the table. 

 

IMO they all need to be replaced with their kind of thinking.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to TX 288 Toll Lane To Start Mid 2016

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...