Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
VinnyVincent

Why does everyone keep talking about toll roads like it's a positive thing?

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Ross said:

I am opposed to the private entities being involved, although that is somewhat lessened if the bonds the private parties iissue are non-recourse to the government.

 

Do you know of any private toll road developments where the bonds were not non-recourse to the government?  I'm pretty sure the 288 toll lane financing is non-recourse to the government.

Edited by Houston19514

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

 

What other options? I could think of a few, but the problem is everyone so stuck on tolls(lets face it that's the REAL EASY way out if you're a politician, but it makes the least sense for citizens.)

Heck, they aren't even willing to modify how toll roads are ran...For example I would be glad to invest some of my own money into the 288 project, and I'm sure others will...but instead guess what? It's only open to groups of private overseas investors. For some reason only they get to invest in something that has a guaranteed profit written into a contract. Why do you think that is?

 

Where did you come up with the idea that there is a guaranteed profit written into the 288 toll development contract? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2016 at 3:09 PM, VinnyVincent said:

 

You're telling me there's NO alternative?

I like to invest. I also commute on 288. Personally I don't see a need to expand 288 if you compare it to other roads around here...but at any rate, I would have been willing to invest 10,000 dollars if I got a guaranteed return on it, to expand 288 and make it a toll road. I'm a man of modest means so I am sure many others would also have been willing to invest for a guaranteed return(which is what is written into the contract for these overseas investors. If the road isn't profitable guess what? The county/state has to subsidize their profits)

 

 

 

Where did you see that the county/state has to subsidize the profits of the 288 toll developer if the road isn't profitable?

 

Here's the development agreement. Please direct us to the section(s) of the agreement that provide for this subsidization of their profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Do you know of any private toll road developments where the bonds were not non-recourse to the government?  I'm pretty sure the 288 toll lane financing is non-recourse to the government.

I am not aware of any that are not non-recourse to the government, but politicians can do stupid crap sometimes. If the bondholders are on the hook completely, and there's no way that tax dollars become a required part of the process, then I would accept private participation. I still prefer an entity like HCTRA to issue the bonds and build/run the toll road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Where did you see that the county/state has to subsidize the profits of the 288 toll developer if the road isn't profitable?

 

Here's the development agreement. Please direct us to the section(s) of the agreement that provide for this subsidization of their profits.

I think he's referring to the Trans Texas Corridor agreement, which was only for the TTC and an extremely unpopular idea.

 

To the OP: please give up, you asked a valid question, got valid answers, but since then you've just argued at every turn and haven't endeared yourself to others with false info and conspiracy theories.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, IronTiger said:

I think he's referring to the Trans Texas Corridor agreement, which was only for the TTC and an extremely unpopular idea.

 

To the OP: please give up, you asked a valid question, got valid answers, but since then you've just argued at every turn and haven't endeared yourself to others with false info and conspiracy theories.

I was referring to SH130.

You know it's funny- there don't seem to be any details available in the news about the contract witht he 288 investors. THere's nothing available that clearly discusses the funding details. WHy is that? We only seem to get these details after the road is built and it's too late.

 

Let's see...I've posted links to back up what I'm saying, have I not? The people who I'm "arguing" with have openly refused to read those links.

They've also refused to answer questions as to why they are blindly defending the roads and whether or not they are somehow affiliated.

 

Yes I may have mis-spoke a few times, which several of you have been quick to exploit. Tht's because there is a lot of info here and some of it is not fresh on my mind. I did not realize I was on trial here...Again this is why I posted links which ironically the guys accusing me of making things up are the same ones refusing to read.

 

 

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Where did you see that the county/state has to subsidize the profits of the 288 toll developer if the road isn't profitable?

 

Here's the development agreement. Please direct us to the section(s) of the agreement that provide for this subsidization of their profits.

HA! you expect me to sift through a 200 page contract to find something when you won't even read my news articles?

Look it's like I just laid out...they've intentionally made the information obscure and hard to read. There's nothing that clearly explains in plain english, how any of the funding will work.

It's just like the "It wasn't a lie about BW8 never being free, that was fine print"- spoken like a true greasy palmed politician!

 

So I ask, since you seem to have some inside info on this project; What exactly will happen in the event the road isn't profitable?

 

Since I'm spending time compiling info so you don't need to read the article, think you could just post the section that explains what happens in the event the road isn't profitable?

Or will you just respond instead and let everyone know I lied and the contract is "only" 180 pages. 

How are you affiliated?

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyways to anyone reading this that actually wants to look into the dark side of toll roads, I've found just a couple articles this morning(more to come. Don't want to present too much material at once)

 

http://www.urbanophile.com/2013/11/24/drop-in-traffic-means-rise-in-guaranteed-profits-for-private-road-investors/

 

http://www.texasturf.org/2012-06-01-03-09-30/latest-news/public-private-partnerships/1931-texas-for-sale-new-laws-sell-texas-to-highest-bidder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, IronTiger said:

Oh really, so after all that trying that all their lobbyists went through, they eventually WERE stuck with the bill? GReat news!

You are speaking as if it were setup that way from the get-go. Nothing could be further from the truth.SH130 video

Also keep in mind  who the person in the article is that you are quoting:  SH 130 Concession Company CEO Alfonso Orol.

yeah, he doesn't have any reason to lie, right? LOL

 

Shadow tolling isn't the only thing discussed in those links. You just picked out one topic that doesn't apply(YET) to Texas(and I never said all of the linked info did apply)  to try and discredit what I'm saying.

Shadow tolling isn't guaranteed profit? Maybe not, but the chance of it NOT being profitable would be slim to none.

 

 

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VinnyVincent said:

Oh really, so after all that trying that all their lobbyists went through, they eventually WERE stuck with the bill? GReat news!

You are speaking as if it were setup that way from the get-go. Nothing could be further from the truth.SH130 video

 

Shadow tolling isn't the only thing discussed in those links. You just picked out one topic that doesn't apply(YET) to try and discredit what I'm saying.

 

 

What are you talking about? 130 is only operated by a private company south of Austin to Seguin, and it's this quote that disproves what you're claiming:



Bob Kaufman, the chief communications and marketing officer at the Texas Department of Transportation, said that the company’s bankruptcy filing should have no impact on state taxpayers.

“No state money was used to build the portion from SH 45SE south to Seguin operated by the SH 130 Concession Company, and the state is not liable for any of its outstanding debt,” Kaufman said. “SH 130 continues to be a viable alternative for drivers who want to bypass Austin and avoid congestion on Interstate 35.”

 

Your argument hinged on the fact that the state WAS liable. As for your second link, shadow tolling applies for roads that nominally aren't tolled, and does not apply to roads actually tolled, even if TxDOT was to make a thing legal (which is just legality, no roads in Texas follow this). An example would be if they wanted to actually build out TX-35 to the current Spur 5, which was designed to be a full freeway. Rather than being built with taxpayer funds and operated as a fully free road, the shadow tolls build it with private funds and operate it as a "free" road that pays the company for every car that drives on this stretch of the new Highway 35. It doesn't guarantee a profit, if traffic patterns just don't work out, then the state either pays less or not at all. That money may or may not be enough to actually turn a profit.

 

In any case, for Texas roadways which is what are you talking about, that doesn't exist at all and is all theory (the link did talk about some European roads, but that's not really what you're arguing for).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2016 at 2:10 PM, VinnyVincent said:

Lol...are you trolling me? I think you know what I meant. No single person has billions of dollars to invest. They could have collected the money through bonds, but that would require too much effort on their part to get the money I guess...that or no one single private citizen  is paying off the people who were in charge of the bidding, the foreign investors are. You decide.

 

Was it publically announced that the bid was open? Because I didn't ever know they were thinking about expanding 288 until they had already secured funding from foreign investors.

 

You seem to have a lot of background info here. How are you affiliated?

http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2016 at 1:07 PM, IronTiger said:

What are you talking about? 130 is only operated by a private company south of Austin to Seguin, and it's this quote that disproves what you're claiming:

 

 

 

Your argument hinged on the fact that the state WAS liable. As for your second link, shadow tolling applies for roads that nominally aren't tolled, and does not apply to roads actually tolled, even if TxDOT was to make a thing legal (which is just legality, no roads in Texas follow this). An example would be if they wanted to actually build out TX-35 to the current Spur 5, which was designed to be a full freeway. Rather than being built with taxpayer funds and operated as a fully free road, the shadow tolls build it with private funds and operate it as a "free" road that pays the company for every car that drives on this stretch of the new Highway 35. It doesn't guarantee a profit, if traffic patterns just don't work out, then the state either pays less or not at all. That money may or may not be enough to actually turn a profit.

 

In any case, for Texas roadways which is what are you talking about, that doesn't exist at all and is all theory (the link did talk about some European roads, but that's not really what you're arguing for).

You suggesting that shadow tolling could be unprofitable if traffic patterns "just don't work out" is laughable. Of course they're going to work out if it's a "free" road. Especially with all the TOLL roads around. 

The only time it DOESNT work out is when some private company sees a business opportunity in building a road, in some cases where traffic isn't even bad to begin with,,,what happens is people see the road for what it is and they don't use it. That's not going to happen on "free" roads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2016 at 11:24 AM, Houston19514 said:

 

Not to mention, no one really needs "billions of dollars" to invest in order to accomplish a project that costs well under $1 Billion.  But we all know that facts are not high on VinnyVincent's priority list, to put it nicely.

I'm talking about local residents who actually use 288. Bonds could have been sold to everyday people who could afford thousands and not millions. I'd love to invest in local infrastructure if I would get a return and a 288 toll road is obviously going to give a return.

Again you are taking something I said and twisting it to suit your agenda of discrediting me and praising toll roads, for reasons I'm not quite sure of...

 

What's happening here is you're getting pissed all over and being told it's raining.

Property taxes are getting ridiculous, tolls on roads that have been paid off for years(BW8 anyone) just keep going up, the money is getting put into some massive cookie jar that no one can reasonably track...and you guys are all for it! Totally nuts...

 

You guys say the language in the ballot for BW8 was so clear? People should have understood they would be paying on beltway 8 FOREVER back when it was voted for?? REALLY?

 

Why was this on ABC13 news in 2012 then? 

null

Quote

Because Steve knows what we found downtown inside a building that looks on the outside like it should be torn down; newspaper accounts of the nasty political fight three decades ago over the idea of selling bonds to build toll roads. Seventy percent of you said OK, but all those cheering people...wonder if they'd be so excited today if they knew they had been scammed?

"You feel scammed?" we asked toll road driver David Sartis.

"Oh sure, of course," he said.

We found this brochure from the early days of the Toll Road Authority, printed just after we OKed building the West Belt and the Hardy Toll Road. The promise was simple: "When both roads combined have covered their costs, the roads will become free public highways."

"What'd you think would happen when we paid the roads off?" we asked Sartis.

"Well, you would think they'd take the toll booths away, right?" he replied.

Well, if you used the toll road today, you already know that didn't happen.

But the promise is there in black and white. They used it get us to vote.

"Well yeah, it does make you wonder well why they aren't free," one toll road driver said.

We've already made back the money we paid to build the roads and then plenty more. Take the Hardy. Toll road construction costs $287 million. We made that back by 2004. You've paid a total in tolls of $617 million.

"You sort of wonder what happened?" we asked another toll road driver.

"Yes," she said.

This stretch of the Sam Houston costs $72 million to build. You know how much you've paid in tolls? $865 million.

"Do you feel cheated?" we asked Malouf.

"Very much so," he said.

"The construction of that road has been paid for 12 times?" we asked Harris County Toll Road Authority Director Peter Key.

"It's one system, it's one system that funds all the needs out there," he said.

I didn't see that in the fine print. Did you? But leave it to politicians to welch on a deal. It happened in September 2001 at a Harris County Commissioners Court meeting, way down on the agenda. Look at H, a bunch of gobbygloop about bond stuff and then "a resolution for pooling of a list of toll road projects as component facilities." Translation: you're going to pay tolls forever.

If you were watching Eyewitness News back in 1983, you heard a prediction that was right on.

"These projects will more than pay for themselves, in fact, have money left over at the end," former County Judge Jon Lindsay said at the time.

"You guys are a cash cow," we told Key.

"This agency does take in a substantially amount of revenue," he replied.

"Take a guess," we asked toll road driver Devon Pedrick.

"I don't know -- $1.5 billion," he said.

"It's actually more than $5 billion," we said.

"Wow," he responded.

"Don't surprise me, fourth largest city in the nation -- sure, captive audience, it's awesome," Malouf said.

So much money has been made, the Toll Road Authority has to give some of its extra cash to Harris County commissioners every years -- nearly $900 million so far, not to pay off debts, but to pay to fix up other roads. So when you pay a toll, you're not just paying for the right to drive on a special road, you are paying to fix up roads for other folks who didn't pay a dime.

"Everybody should pay their own fair share and it seems like just a few of us are paying for what they should be paying for and it's just not right," Sartis said.

During that road party in 1989, The Bangles taught us to 'Walk Like an Egyptian.' Twenty-three years later, 13 Undercover has taught you something else.

"The whole free thing -- never going to happen?" we asked Key.

"From practical standpoint, it's hard to imagine the road going free," he replied.

And do you want to see how much money they've made from you on tolls? Just go to 13 Undercover Interactive, where you can see the evidence of a broken promise. Check out a particular road -- try the Sam Houston Tollway. You'll see the how much we've paid in tolls and how much they've made.

 

 
 

So don't act like I'm some nut job when I say we're being lied to...

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how you guys aren't outraged when you look at the facts.

BW8 has been paid for seven times over and apparently excess funds are going to free roads in the area. Really? Whens the last time you've drove on the free section of BW8? It's full of potholes, old pavement, damaged expansion joints, trash and debris all on the shoulder....looks like a totally different road. You can visually tell when you enter the free section. 

How much money does it cost to sweep the freaking trash off the road?! EVERY free road is like this! it's a joke. Trash and debris all over any non-tolled road...so where are the excess funds being used? I'm not seeing it anywhere in houston.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

I'm talking about local residents who actually use 288. Bonds could have been sold to everyday people who could afford thousands and not millions. I'd love to invest in local infrastructure if I would get a return and a 288 toll road is obviously going to give a return.

Again you are taking something I said and twisting it to suit your agenda of discrediting me and praising toll roads, for reasons I'm not quite sure of...

 

What's happening here is you're getting pissed all over and being told it's raining.

Property taxes are getting ridiculous, tolls on roads that have been paid off for years(BW8 anyone) just keep going up, the money is getting put into some massive cookie jar that no one can reasonably track...and you guys are all for it! Totally nuts...

 

You guys say the language in the ballot for BW8 was so clear? People should have understood they would be paying on beltway 8 FOREVER back when it was voted for?? REALLY?

 

Why was this on ABC13 news in 2012 then? 

null

  Quote

Because Steve knows what we found downtown inside a building that looks on the outside like it should be torn down; newspaper accounts of the nasty political fight three decades ago over the idea of selling bonds to build toll roads. Seventy percent of you said OK, but all those cheering people...wonder if they'd be so excited today if they knew they had been scammed?

"You feel scammed?" we asked toll road driver David Sartis.

"Oh sure, of course," he said.

We found this brochure from the early days of the Toll Road Authority, printed just after we OKed building the West Belt and the Hardy Toll Road. The promise was simple: "When both roads combined have covered their costs, the roads will become free public highways."

"What'd you think would happen when we paid the roads off?" we asked Sartis.

"Well, you would think they'd take the toll booths away, right?" he replied.

Well, if you used the toll road today, you already know that didn't happen.

But the promise is there in black and white. They used it get us to vote.

"Well yeah, it does make you wonder well why they aren't free," one toll road driver said.

We've already made back the money we paid to build the roads and then plenty more. Take the Hardy. Toll road construction costs $287 million. We made that back by 2004. You've paid a total in tolls of $617 million.

"You sort of wonder what happened?" we asked another toll road driver.

"Yes," she said.

This stretch of the Sam Houston costs $72 million to build. You know how much you've paid in tolls? $865 million.

"Do you feel cheated?" we asked Malouf.

"Very much so," he said.

"The construction of that road has been paid for 12 times?" we asked Harris County Toll Road Authority Director Peter Key.

"It's one system, it's one system that funds all the needs out there," he said.

I didn't see that in the fine print. Did you? But leave it to politicians to welch on a deal. It happened in September 2001 at a Harris County Commissioners Court meeting, way down on the agenda. Look at H, a bunch of gobbygloop about bond stuff and then "a resolution for pooling of a list of toll road projects as component facilities." Translation: you're going to pay tolls forever.

If you were watching Eyewitness News back in 1983, you heard a prediction that was right on.

"These projects will more than pay for themselves, in fact, have money left over at the end," former County Judge Jon Lindsay said at the time.

"You guys are a cash cow," we told Key.

"This agency does take in a substantially amount of revenue," he replied.

"Take a guess," we asked toll road driver Devon Pedrick.

"I don't know -- $1.5 billion," he said.

"It's actually more than $5 billion," we said.

"Wow," he responded.

"Don't surprise me, fourth largest city in the nation -- sure, captive audience, it's awesome," Malouf said.

So much money has been made, the Toll Road Authority has to give some of its extra cash to Harris County commissioners every years -- nearly $900 million so far, not to pay off debts, but to pay to fix up other roads. So when you pay a toll, you're not just paying for the right to drive on a special road, you are paying to fix up roads for other folks who didn't pay a dime.

"Everybody should pay their own fair share and it seems like just a few of us are paying for what they should be paying for and it's just not right," Sartis said.

During that road party in 1989, The Bangles taught us to 'Walk Like an Egyptian.' Twenty-three years later, 13 Undercover has taught you something else.

"The whole free thing -- never going to happen?" we asked Key.

"From practical standpoint, it's hard to imagine the road going free," he replied.

And do you want to see how much money they've made from you on tolls? Just go to 13 Undercover Interactive, where you can see the evidence of a broken promise. Check out a particular road -- try the Sam Houston Tollway. You'll see the how much we've paid in tolls and how much they've made.

 

So don't act like I'm some nut job when I say we're being lied to...

 

Vinny, you aren't really worth responding to, but I have to point out this example of the excruciatingly painful incompetence of Houston media. 

 

Per your quoted material, ABC13 told us this brochure they uncovered was "printed after we OKed building" the toll roads, and then proceeds to tell us that they used this to get our vote. HUH?  A brochure printed after the vote was used to get our vote?  It is possible that such claims were made in the campaign for the vote but there is nothing in this laughable "undercover" expose that even suggests, let alone proves, that such claims were made in the campaign.

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Vinny, you aren't really worth responding to, but I have to point out this example of the excruciatingly painful incompetence of Houston media.  Per your quoted material, ABC13 told us this brochure they uncovered was "printed after we OKed building" the toll roads, and then proceeds to tell us that they used this to get our vote. HUH?  A brochure printed after the vote was used to get our vote?  Then they quote Judge Jon Lindsay as saying at the time of the vote that "These projects will more than pay for themselves, in fact, have money left over at the end," as if that is some kind of false statement.  Both parts of his statement are absolutely true and do not in any way say that the tolls will be removed when they have paid for the road construction.  It is possible that such claims were made in the campaign for the vote but there is nothing in this silly

So it's all just some big media conspiracy to rally people against toll roads? Who's paying them off? Did you put on your tin foil hat this morning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VinnyVincent said:

 

Again why is this NEWS in 2012? How long ago was the road paid off and the general public is just now being made aware that they will be paying tolls forever?

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Vinny, you aren't really worth responding to, but I have to point out this example of the excruciatingly painful incompetence of Houston media.  Per your quoted material, ABC13 told us this brochure they uncovered was "printed after we OKed building" the toll roads, and then proceeds to tell us that they used this to get our vote. HUH?  A brochure printed after the vote was used to get our vote?  Then they quote Judge Jon Lindsay as saying at the time of the vote that "These projects will more than pay for themselves, in fact, have money left over at the end," as if that is some kind of false statement.  Both parts of his statement are absolutely true and do not in any way say that the tolls will be removed when they have paid for the road construction.  It is possible that such claims were made in the campaign for the vote but there is nothing in this silly

On a more serious note lets dissect what you just said;

according to your timeline the road was voted on and the brocure came out saying it would be free AFTER the road was voted on.

 

but if I am reading this part right, the part where the road would "never be free" didn't come into effect until 2001...

 

Quote

I didn't see that in the fine print. Did you? But leave it to politicians to welch on a deal. It happened in September 2001 at a Harris County Commissioners Court meeting, way down on the agenda. Look at H, a bunch of gobbygloop about bond stuff and then "a resolution for pooling of a list of toll road projects as component facilities." Translation: you're going to pay tolls forever.

 

 

But there's not convincing you...I'm simply showing people reading this that your opinion on the matter is apparently skewed and biased for unknown reasons.

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VinnyVincent said:

Again why is this NEWS in 2012? How long ago was the road paid off and the general public is just now being made aware that they will be paying tolls forever?

 

I have no explanation for the news judgment of ABC13.  That was kind of my point. There was no "news" in that so-called story and the whole story was based on an apparent lie.  They are the ones who said the brochure was printed after the vote.  If a rochure that hadn't even been printed was indeed used to get us to vote for the toll roads, that is one powerful magic brochure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VinnyVincent said:

On a more serious note lets dissect what you just said;

according to your timeline the road was voted on and the brocure came out saying it would be free AFTER the road was voted on.

 

but if I am reading this part right, the part where the road would "never be free" didn't come into effect until 2001...

 

 

 

That's not my timeline.  That's what the ABC13 story said. 

 

As to your second sentence... so what? I suspect it was just a vote that was required for the issuance of some bonds, so that the revenue from several (or all) roads was pledged in support of some bonds.  It does not in any way prove or even suggest that the initial vote was premised on a campaign promise that the roads would become free when paid off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VinnyVincent said:

I don't understand how you guys aren't outraged when you look at the facts.

BW8 has been paid for seven times over and apparently excess funds are going to free roads in the area. Really? Whens the last time you've drove on the free section of BW8? It's full of potholes, old pavement, damaged expansion joints, trash and debris all on the shoulder....looks like a totally different road. You can visually tell when you enter the free section. 

How much money does it cost to sweep the freaking trash off the road?! EVERY free road is like this! it's a joke. Trash and debris all over any non-tolled road...so where are the excess funds being used? I'm not seeing it anywhere in houston.

 

We're not outraged because we are looking at facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

That's not my timeline.  That's what the ABC13 story said. 

 

As to your second sentence... so what? I suspect it was just a vote that was required for the issuance of some bonds, so that the revenue from several (or all) roads was pledged in support of some bonds.  It does not in any way prove or even suggest that the initial vote was premised on a campaign promise that the roads would become free when paid off.

So what? So your whole point was that the public was not lied to since the brochure came out AFTER the road was voted on. However the public WAS in fact lied to because the road was secretly made to where "you'll be paying tolls forever" in 2001, long after the public voted on a road that would eventually be free and long after the brochure came out, buried in a ballot about unrelated issues.

If the original ballot said ANYTHING about the road never becoming free, why was it amended in 2001 to never become free? Ironically at about the time people were starting to wonder why it's still being tolled.

Hmmm...I wonder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

We're not outraged because we are looking at facts.

What are the facts?

Was it in the original ballot language that the road would be free and if so why did it get changed in 2001 to where it will no longer become free? You can't unfree something if it were never going to be free to begin with, as you claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Houston19514;  the Houston media is a group of bought and paid for liars, but the Houston politicians are totally on the up and up and would never lie:unsure:

It's just that damned general public and the houston media making up stories about why they apparently voted for a toll road they would pay for over and over again where fees just keep increasing over time.

You think anyone would vote for that???? Yeah me either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

What are the facts?

Was it in the original ballot language that the road would be free and if so why did it get changed in 2001 to where it will no longer become free? You can't unfree something if it were never going to be free to begin with, as you claim.

The ballot language apparently did not include any claim the road would be free at some point. Ballot propositions never say that. They say things like "approve sale of bonds to fund road construction projects"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ross said:

The ballot language apparently did not include any claim the road would be free at some point. Ballot propositions never say that. They say things like "approve sale of bonds to fund road construction projects"

That's what I'm trying to get across here.

Surely if anyone would have done a news broadcast at the time saying something along the lines of the reality that we are supposed to just shut up and pay to use this road for eternity, there would have been mobs with pitch forks.

 

Lets be realistic, certainly at the time it would have been reasonable to expect that the toll would be to fund that road and that's it. The fact that they released the brochure demonstrates that there was an attempt to cover up the truth from coming out on a massive scale.

The article I posted also mentions an old ran down building in town that houses all kinds of articles and documents showing the arguments about the bonds. I'd like to see if anything on those articles even remotely mentions that the tolls would never go away...when in fact the only thing I hear about that was written in plain everyday english that most people can understand was this brochure.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

You suggesting that shadow tolling could be unprofitable if traffic patterns "just don't work out" is laughable. Of course they're going to work out if it's a "free" road. Especially with all the TOLL roads around. 

The only time it DOESNT work out is when some private company sees a business opportunity in building a road, in some cases where traffic isn't even bad to begin with,,,what happens is people see the road for what it is and they don't use it. That's not going to happen on "free" roads.

Well, again, shadow tolling doesn't exist in Texas, nor have they released any plans to do so. The most that's happened is a vaguely-worded change that may make it legal to. Either way, if it doesn't exist, why are you complaining about it?

 

 

9 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

I don't understand how you guys aren't outraged when you look at the facts.

BW8 has been paid for seven times over and apparently excess funds are going to free roads in the area. Really? Whens the last time you've drove on the free section of BW8? It's full of potholes, old pavement, damaged expansion joints, trash and debris all on the shoulder....looks like a totally different road. You can visually tell when you enter the free section. 

How much money does it cost to sweep the freaking trash off the road?! EVERY free road is like this! it's a joke. Trash and debris all over any non-tolled road...so where are the excess funds being used? I'm not seeing it anywhere in houston.

 

Beltway 8 was funded by HCTRA, which was created in 1983 by a voter referendum. The free section was created in 1982 before HCTRA. I believe TxDOT maintaining it and not HCTRA, and even if it is, your comparison about it looking "like a totally different road" is correct, because it was created nearly 15 years (at least) before much of the rest of the highway. The whole "Beltway would be free after paid off" is an urban legend, and there's no proof that there was even "fine print" that said it wasn't (the 1983 referendum creating HCTRA allegedly contains the provisos). I could've sworn it was explained in Houston Freeways by @MaxConcrete, but I scanned through it and didn't see anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, IronTiger said:

The whole "Beltway would be free after paid off" is an urban legend, and there's no proof that there was even "fine print" that said it wasn't (the 1983 referendum creating HCTRA allegedly contains the provisos). I could've sworn it was explained in Houston Freeways by @MaxConcrete, but I scanned through it and didn't see anything.

Okay so there was no mention of what would happen once they're paid off at all then?(with the exception of the brochure released to the public stating it would be free? Honestly how many of us are reading ballots?)

Because according to that news article we were never "paying forever" until 2001 when it got lumped into some random ballot and signed in the middle of the night.

 

Either way at the beginning of this thread you guys stated with such conviction that "we all voted for this" and it was presented that way from the get-go, which now you guys don't seem so sure...

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VinnyVincent said:

Okay so there was no mention of what would happen once they're paid off at all then?(with the exception of the brochure released to the public stating it would be free? Honestly how many of us are reading ballots?)

Because according to that news article we were never "paying forever" until 2001 when it got lumped into some random ballot and signed in the middle of the night.

 

Either way at the beginning of this thread you guys stated with such conviction that "we all voted for this" and it was presented that way from the get-go, which now you guys don't seem so sure...

 

By 2001, most of the Beltway had already been built. First you're saying this was signed off by voters in 1983, now it's 2001? Well, which is it? This ballot you refer to never existed. It did for other cities, but not Houston.

 

This is like someone asking a seemingly legitimate debate question on if Hillary Clinton is a decent person or not, then hinging your entire argument against her and why she was not fit for Presidency because she's a lizard person from Alpha Centauri and then when everyone calls you on bullshit (whether they like Hillary or not, just like how not all of us actually like the idea of toll roads), you immediately accuse them of being in on the fact that she is in fact a lizard person (or you are one of the lizard people as well). That's what this feels like.

Edited by IronTiger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, IronTiger said:

 

By 2001, most of the Beltway had already been built. First you're saying this was signed off by voters in 1983, now it's 2001? Well, which is it? This ballot you refer to never existed. It did for other cities, but not Houston.

 

This is like someone asking a seemingly legitimate debate question on if Hillary Clinton is a decent person or not, then hinging your entire argument against her and why she was not fit for Presidency because she's a lizard person from Alpha Centauri and then when everyone calls you on bullshit (whether they like Hillary or not, just like how not all of us actually like the idea of toll roads), you immediately accuse them of being in on the fact that she is in fact a lizard person (or you are one of the lizard people as well). That's what this feels like.

Bro what are you talking about? Way to derail the conversation with random ramblings and twisted accounts of the info I posted...

 

Did you read the article from ABC13? Here it is again:

 

Quote

I didn't see that in the fine print. Did you? But leave it to politicians to welch on a deal. It happened in September 2001 at a Harris County Commissioners Court meeting, way down on the agenda. Look at H, a bunch of gobbygloop about bond stuff and then "a resolution for pooling of a list of toll road projects as component facilities." Translation: you're going to pay tolls forever.

That's their news article, not mine:rolleyes:

 

While they may have signed the ballot to build the road and pay it off in the 80's, apparently we weren't "paying tolls forever" in spite of the fact that it's been paid off for years and years until 2001...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

Bro what are you talking about? Way to derail the conversation with random ramblings and twisted accounts of the info I posted...

 

Did you read the article from ABC13? Here it is again:

 

That's their news article, not mine:rolleyes:

 

While they may have signed the ballot to build the road and pay it off in the 80's, apparently we weren't "paying tolls forever" in spite of the fact that it's been paid off for years and years until 2001...

 

Yeah, I did read the news article. The 2001 referendum is irrelevant, because that's not what the 1983 ballot said. You can't go back on a deal you never made. And who made this alleged brochure anyway that was published AFTER November 1983?

 

You're continuing all of your allegations on a false premise, which sadly why my "Hillary Clinton as lizard person" comparison is accurate. Someone could cite a million reasons why Hillary Clinton is in fact a real person and not a reptilian extra-terrestrial, and the subject in question could state that the counter-argument is not true because Hillary Clinton is a lizard person from Alpha Centauri. See where I'm going with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, IronTiger said:

 

Yeah, I did read the news article. The 2001 referendum is irrelevant, because that's not what the 1983 ballot said. You can't go back on a deal you never made. And who made this alleged brochure anyway that was published AFTER November 1983?

How is it irrelevant? It's the reason why the road never went free. It was intentionally lumped with a bunch of unrelated mumbo jumbo.

You and others claimed that the toll road is voters fault, but it's not.

It's the fault of crooked politicians and special interest groups who intentionally buried it inside another ballot.

 

The false premise here is that you all seem to think it was voted in and people knew what they were voting for when that's total malarkey. NO ONE in their right mind would have voted for the current beltway 8 system as it is now.

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, IronTiger said:

 your comparison about it looking "like a totally different road" is correct, because it was created nearly 15 years (at least) before much of the rest of the highway.

SO has the trash and debris been sitting all on the shoulder since 1970? Are the same potholes there from 45 years ago?

 

They don't even clean the road. almost a billion dollars a year and apparently excess funds go to maintain "free" roads, yet they can't even maintain the free section of their own toll road? Sounds like a crock to me. 

I think they either need to do some seriously trimming down in their operations cost or someone is stealing massive amounts of money if they're bringing in almost a billion a year now and can't even clean trash up off the free section of BW 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2016 at 9:35 PM, IronTiger said:

The whole "Beltway would be free after paid off" is an urban legend, and there's no proof that there was even "fine print" that said it wasn't (the 1983 referendum creating HCTRA allegedly contains the provisos). I could've sworn it was explained in Houston Freeways by @MaxConcrete, but I scanned through it and didn't see anything.

 

I cracked open my (PDF) copy of Houston Freeways to the Beltway 8 section.

 

The origin of the toll road solution:

Quote

As TxDOT was backing away from new projects and seemed willing to let Beltway 8 die from neglect, responsibility for saving the Beltway shifted back to Harris County. TxDOT couldn’t afford to build it. Harris County couldn’t afford to build it. The only remaining option was a toll road. In May 1975 Harris County asked the Texas Turnpike Authority to study the west and northwest sections of the Beltway as a potential tollway. The Turnpike Authority concluded that the route was financially infeasible as a tollway. Harris County Judge Jon Lindsay was starting to doubt that the Beltway would ever be built, and was considering reallocating funds set aside for right-of-way acquisition.

 

Quote

As early as 1977 [County Judge] Lindsay had begun to realize that Harris County would need to take matters into its own hands if it wanted to see a tollway constructed in the foreseeable future.

...

The legal authority for Harris County to form a toll road authority came with Texas Legislature Bill SB970, signed by Governor Mark White in June 1983. Harris County then set a $900 million bond election for September 13, 1983, to launch the Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA). The bonds were passed with 69.7% of the vote.

Link to Bill: http://www.lrl.state.tx.us/legis/billsearch/BillDetails.cfm?legSession=68-0&billTypeDetail=SB&billnumberDetail=970&submitbutton=Search+by+bill

 

 

It looks like, at least early on, the tollroad had the opposite problem that Vinny has been talking about

Quote

By mid-1989, one year after the opening of the first section of the Sam Houston Tollway and the completion of the Hardy Toll Road, toll revenue was less than 50% of original projections. A revised projection predicted that long-term revenue would be 40% less than the original estimates. During 1989 there was frequent talk of the possible need for a subsidy from Harris County’s general tax revenue to meet toll road bond payments.

 

After it was continuous to IAH though the BW 8 had more traffic, but Hardy Tollway was still struggling.  So the surplus from BW 8 went to Hardy Tollway

Quote

The Sam Houston Tollway traffic boom had begun. Traffic and revenue surged ahead of projections during the 1990s, making the Sam Houston Tollway a cash cow for HCTRA. In the meantime, traffic and revenue on the Hardy Toll Road still lagged behind projections.

 

 

I did read the whole section on BW 8, and there was nothing about the toll roads being free after they were paid for.

 

The language of the authorizing bill is a bit thick, but I didn't see anything in there saying that the toll road would be free after the bond was paid for.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cspwal said:

 

I cracked open my (PDF) copy of Houston Freeways to the Beltway 8 section.

 

The origin of the toll road solution:

 

Link to Bill: http://www.lrl.state.tx.us/legis/billsearch/BillDetails.cfm?legSession=68-0&billTypeDetail=SB&billnumberDetail=970&submitbutton=Search+by+bill

 

 

It looks like, at least early on, the tollroad had the opposite problem that Vinny has been talking about

 

After it was continuous to IAH though the BW 8 had more traffic, but Hardy Tollway was still struggling.  So the surplus from BW 8 went to Hardy Tollway

 

 

I did read the whole section on BW 8, and there was nothing about the toll roads being free after they were paid for.

 

The language of the authorizing bill is a bit thick, but I didn't see anything in there saying that the toll road would be free after the bond was paid for.

Did you see anything explicitly saying it would be tolled for all eternity with and ever increasing fee? Because I'm doubting that's in there.

That's what the news article I posted has spelled out very clearly. That didn't happen until 2001.

A lot of the other points you made seem irrelevant.

SO what if they lost money on another road? Why do they keep aggressively pining away for more toll roads before the current ones are paid off? Why can't we expand 249 or 290 without it being HEAVILY crammed down our throat that the road needs to be tolled?

290 came VERY close to having a three lane toll road in the middle. Luckily we have a lot of concerned tax paying citizens on the NW side who got involved and said "NO!".  I know because I attended a few of the meetings before construction started.

 

Why are they doing this? Job security? Lobbyist and special interest group bribery? 

Whatever the reason, me and you as general citizens, our best interest is not in their minds and I have e a huge problem with that. Either HCTRA needs to disappear or it needs to be HEAVILY regulated.

 

Your first quote says 

Quote

TxDOT couldn’t afford to build it. Harris County couldn’t afford to build it. The only remaining option was a toll road.

 That is NOT the only option! Are these people kidding me!?

"oh the state won't fund it and the county can't afford it right out. Gotta sell off some bonds to private investor groups!"

That's not only the easy way out, but I suspect it had to do with private interest groups and campaign financing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vinny, so far you have not offered an alternative to selling bonds to pay for roads that are needed, but where taxes are not sufficient. And, who are you going to sell bonds to if not investor groups. That's who buys bonds.

 

You also have no clue what it was like to get from I-10 to 59 prior to BW8 being constructed. I was here then, and frequently wished for the toll road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in order to even start considering options I think we need to take the toll option off the table. It's too easy for the people running the show to use that as a solution and half of them are probably getting a kickback for pushing toll roads, so why not right? It's not skin off their back since most politicians are pretty well off....they like having a road with outrageous tolls so they don't have to share with the rest of us peasants.

 

Something I keep mentioning is at least they could maybe sell the bonds off in smaller chunks to individuals like myself. Plenty of private individuals are interested in investing one's or ten's of thousands, but not hundreds of thousands or millions all in one lump sum.

While I may not have been around prior to 1983, I have driven from I10 to 290 quite frequently and have taken eldridge pkwy, hwy6 and fry road as an alternative. It's really not much slower than BW8 is during high traffic times, when people are paying 1.75 every few miles to STILL sit in traffic.

Oh yeah the road was engineered with traffic! you know that right? The thing was designed to have you eventually be sitting in traffic while paying toll. It's a way to generate money, not make you life easy.

Maybe you had a relief for a while(those were the years when someone mentioned that "traffic was less than projected") but keep in mind BW8 as it exists today with stop and go traffic along with all the ADDITIONAL traffic it has attracted to the area was DESIGNED that way. The people who engineered the road actually engineered it intentionally to make traffic worse on the surrounding roads. Think about that for a moment...

 

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those roads you mention? Back before BW8, they were either non-existent of were very narrow and very crowded. To get from I-10 to 59 before the Beltway meant you pretty much had to take Gessner, as the other North/South roads didn't have capacity, or didn't go all the way through. Taking Gessner wasn't fun, as it took up to an hour.

 

Selling bonds in small amounts is inefficient and costs more. Bonds have underwriters who buy the entire amount of the bond and then sell them off to smaller investors. This maximizes the amount the bond seller gets, while making the bonds available to anyone who wants to invest.In addition, entities like HCTRA have no expertise in actually delivering bonds to investors, especially since they are all in book form today, with no certificates or paper coupons to clip. That means an electronic agent is requried, which is osmehting the issuer pays for, rather than reinventing the wheel.

 

The main point, which you are ignoring yet again is that without tolls, those roads do not get built. There is no money for those roads without tools. And it is foolish to claim that the toll roads are designed to make traffic worse.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, VinnyVincent said:

Well, in order to even start considering options I think we need to take the toll option off the table. It's too easy for the people running the show to use that as a solution and half of them are probably getting a kickback for pushing toll roads, so why not right? It's not skin off their back since most politicians are pretty well off....they like having a road with outrageous tolls so they don't have to share with the rest of us peasants.

 

Something I keep mentioning is at least they could maybe sell the bonds off in smaller chunks to individuals like myself. Plenty of private individuals are interested in investing one's or ten's of thousands, but not hundreds of thousands or millions all in one lump sum.

While I may not have been around prior to 1983, I have driven from I10 to 290 quite frequently and have taken eldridge pkwy, hwy6 and fry road as an alternative. It's really not much slower than BW8 is during high traffic times, when people are paying 1.75 every few miles to STILL sit in traffic.

Oh yeah the road was engineered with traffic! you know that right? The thing was designed to have you eventually be sitting in traffic while paying toll. It's a way to generate money, not make you life easy.

Maybe you had a relief for a while(those were the years when someone mentioned that "traffic was less than projected") but keep in mind BW8 as it exists today with stop and go traffic along with all the ADDITIONAL traffic it has attracted to the area was DESIGNED that way. The people who engineered the road actually engineered it intentionally to make traffic worse on the surrounding roads. Think about that for a moment...

 

 

Again with the whole "kickbacks" theory and "designed to be congested", etc.

 

If it was "designed to be congested", then it would've been built like the Hardy Toll Road (and no, before you answer--it was built that way because they didn't have a lot of space to work with): a narrow road with few lanes. The southern part was underbuilt due to it just not having a lot of traffic at the time. It's the same reason why the northeast segment took so long to get ready, and even now, traffic on there is quite light compared to the rest of the Beltway.

 

Furthermore, your "designed surface streets to take the traffic" is hogwash. One of those roads that you mentioned, Fry Road, didn't even connect I-10 to 290 until around 2005--many years after the Beltway was built. Secondly, if you were that dead-set against paying tolls, consider actually taking the frontage road for the Beltway, as it is free and well-maintained (concrete in sound condition, no trash)—which blows a hole in your "no tolls, no maintenance" theory.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 7:56 PM, VinnyVincent said:

Not in the mainlanes, but HCTRA will be taking control of the center HOT/HOV lane from metro once the expansion project is complete. They're also widening the lane and adding a shoulder.(apparently for emergencies but we all know the real purpose is to post constables there to enforce tolls) It should be similar to the managed lanes on I 10.

 

point is they get their greazy crooked little hands on everything they possibly can in our county and turn it into a beauracracy which o can no longer stand idly by and watch. It's sickening.

 

This is incorrect.

 

HCTRA has a financial agreement with TxDOT that they receive a portion of the toll revenue from 290.

 

Originally HCTRA agreed to contribute ~ $400 mill to the 290 project to speed up its competition. For this $400 mill, HCTRA would own and operate 3 bi-directional managed lanes (HOT/HOV) with 100% of the maintenance cost being the responsibility of HCTRA and 100% of the revenue going to HCTRA.

 

However, the state's financial situation changed after the agreement was reached. Subsequent bond measures were passed that "freed" up $$ for TxDOT. TxDOT no longer needed the money so badly to get the project completed in the expedited timeframe. In addition, mounting issues with building / engineering a 3 reversible lane configuration led HCTRA to try and find a more tenable deal with TxDOT.

 

TxDOT and HCTRA came to agreement that:

1.) Halved HCTRA's contribution to the 290 project ($200 mil instead of $400)

2.) Reduced the managed lanes from 3 to 1

3.) Ceded control of the 290 managed lane to TxDOT and therefore shifted maintenance / upkeep to TxDOT

4.) Ensured a HCTRA a percentage of the tolled revenue (IDK what the final % was, though)

 

In addition / as part of the agreement, HCTRA also:

5.) Ceded control of the I10 managed lanes to TxDOT and therefore shifted maintenance / upkeep to TxDOT

6.) Locked in 1/3 of the I10 managed lanes revenue in perpetuity

 

So now HCTRA doesn't manage or control any tolled lanes outside of the southern tolled section of 249, the northern part of the Fort bend tollway, and most of the Westpark tollway. And of course the entire Sam Houston and the Hardy tollroads.

 

I don't think the facts support your representation of HCTRA as being a malignant force or the tollroad offshoot of SPECTRE

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2016 at 1:02 PM, DNAguy said:

 

This is incorrect.

 

HCTRA has a financial agreement with TxDOT that they receive a portion of the toll revenue from 290.

 

Originally HCTRA agreed to contribute ~ $400 mill to the 290 project to speed up its competition. For this $400 mill, HCTRA would own and operate 3 bi-directional managed lanes (HOT/HOV) with 100% of the maintenance cost being the responsibility of HCTRA and 100% of the revenue going to HCTRA.

 

However, the state's financial situation changed after the agreement was reached. Subsequent bond measures were passed that "freed" up $$ for TxDOT. TxDOT no longer needed the money so badly to get the project completed in the expedited timeframe. In addition, mounting issues with building / engineering a 3 reversible lane configuration led HCTRA to try and find a more tenable deal with TxDOT.

 

TxDOT and HCTRA came to agreement that:

1.) Halved HCTRA's contribution to the 290 project ($200 mil instead of $400)

2.) Reduced the managed lanes from 3 to 1

3.) Ceded control of the 290 managed lane to TxDOT and therefore shifted maintenance / upkeep to TxDOT

4.) Ensured a HCTRA a percentage of the tolled revenue (IDK what the final % was, though)

 

In addition / as part of the agreement, HCTRA also:

5.) Ceded control of the I10 managed lanes to TxDOT and therefore shifted maintenance / upkeep to TxDOT

6.) Locked in 1/3 of the I10 managed lanes revenue in perpetuity

 

So now HCTRA doesn't manage or control any tolled lanes outside of the southern tolled section of 249, the northern part of the Fort bend tollway, and most of the Westpark tollway. And of course the entire Sam Houston and the Hardy tollroads.

 

I don't think the facts support your representation of HCTRA as being a malignant force or the tollroad offshoot of SPECTRE

 

 

 

I'd like to know where you are getting your info from because it seems questionable at best.

Okay so first the story is that "WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE THAT 400 million otherwise we can't fund the project! We just need that 400 million otherwise we won't be able to expand the road and wait for it...add in three toll road lanes!!!"

 

So wait is the 400 million to build toll lanes, or to expedite the expansion? because I don't think it's for both...

 

Okay so now it's deemed that TxDot has all the money and doesn't really need to ad the toll lanes so now it's time to renegotiate(why is the government negotiating with themselves to begin with?)

 

So the renegotiated  deal is 200 million and they retain control of one lane??(BTW my info was not false as you stated, just out dated)

 

How about they stick their 200 million up their ass and metro retains control of the lane and the profit...perhaps we wait a bit longer for completion but why get them involved? What's wrong with that plan?

Why does TxDot have to negotiate with them like they are competing companies or something??? It's freaking ridiculous the way the whole thing sounds...

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

I'd like to know where you are getting your info from because it seems questionable at best.

Okay so first the story is that "WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE THAT 400 million otherwise we can't fund the project! We just need that 400 million otherwise we won't be able to expand the road and wait for it...add in three toll road lanes!!!"

 

So wait is the 400 million to build toll lanes, or to expedite the expansion? because I don't think it's for both...

 

Okay so now it's deemed that TxDot has all the money and doesn't really need to ad the toll lanes so now it's time to renegotiate(why is the government negotiating with themselves to begin with?)

 

So the renegotiated  deal is 200 million and they retain control of one lane??(BTW my info was not false as you stated, just out dated)

 

How about they stick their 200 million up their ass and metro retains control of the lane and the profit...perhaps we wait a bit longer for completion but why get them involved? What's wrong with that plan?

Why does TxDot have to negotiate with them like they are competing companies or something??? It's freaking ridiculous the way the whole thing sounds...

The HOT lanes (which are not necessarily "toll lanes", by carpooling you can do it for free...I know a few times we've taken family vacations through Houston and utilized the lane). The single lane set-up is dangerous and often slow (if someone stalls, then everyone's SOL), but they couldn't widen the center HOT lane without completely rebuilding the five stack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2016 at 9:48 AM, IronTiger said:

The HOT lanes (which are not necessarily "toll lanes", by carpooling you can do it for free...I know a few times we've taken family vacations through Houston and utilized the lane). The single lane set-up is dangerous and often slow (if someone stalls, then everyone's SOL), but they couldn't widen the center HOT lane without completely rebuilding the five stack.

"not necessarily toll lanes"???:lol:

Dude get real. I commute on 290 for it's entire congested section on a daily basis and I can tell you the you are way off on that brother. Let me break it down for you; read closely since you have now made it known that you don't even live in Houston but somehow know what's best for our local transportation...

The single lane that it currently has is under-used during HOV only hours as it is.

TO suggest that it "needed" two MORE lanes is totally absurd. There simply aren't that many people driving multi passenger vehicles during congested hours. It's about revenue plain and simple.

THat's ALL and HOT lane is folks...it's a GLORIFIED TOLL ROAD

 

 

Since you don't even live here you probably don't know the people who legitimately use the HOV have pushed back more than once when the HOT hours were being extended far into rush hour and causing the HOV drivers to have to sit in traffic caused by people paying the HOT toll. That should clue you in right there. The lane started as strictly HOV and motorcycles, then they saw an opportunity to make some money so made it an HOT, then they started expanding the hours to effectively make the lane a glorified toll road.

Further more look at the I-10 lanes which are managed by HCTRA. They don't allow motorcycles on for free. Why is it that metro allows motorcycles on for free on the 290 HOT, but HCTRA charges motorcycles like cars on the I-10 lanes?....guess they don't care if motorcyclists die is the way I see it. They'd rather make that five dollars each way than save someone life. Can you believe that?

 

 

 

As it stands, they are only expanding the main lanes by one lane in each direction. Adding two more HOT lanes would have effectively troubled the expansion efforts, correct?... why we they only contributing 400 million if the proposed effort was doubling the amount of development? Gee something is funny there. Wonder what the real reason they backed out was lol!

Edited by VinnyVincent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toll roads are good. That way I don't have to pay for roads I don't use. The people who actually use those roads can pay for them. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...