Highway 288

[LTAWACS]

More toll roads??? Why can we not put an end to this madness?

[cspwal]

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

 

Here's an example from Toronto.

[Ross]

10 hours ago, LTAWACS said:

More toll roads??? Why can we not put an end to this madness?

Because the citizens of the great state of Texas hate taxes. Even when they are for something as useful as a freeway.

[VinnyVincent]

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

 

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 January 17, 2017 by VinnyVincent

[VinnyVincent]

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. 

[cspwal]

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 

[Houston19514]

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 January 17, 2017 by Houston19514

[VinnyVincent]

If HCTRA is not making a massive profit, then there is something seriously wrong with the way that organization is handling their money.

[IronTiger]

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.

[VinnyVincent]

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 January 17, 2017 by VinnyVincent

[IronTiger]

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.

[Houston19514]

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. 

[Houston19514]

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.

[VinnyVincent]

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.

[IronTiger]

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.

[VinnyVincent]

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.

[VinnyVincent]

1 minute ago, VinnyVincent said:

 

I don't care who we replace them with either. Mickey Mouse could do a better job engineering and planning some of these roads.

Edited January 17, 2017 by VinnyVincent

[VinnyVincent]

I also hope you guys realize that you will be sending your money to the developer, a private company this time around.

They are getting more brave with this crap and they are going to take it as far as we let them...

[SkylineView]

Has the project broken ground on 288?

[VinnyVincent]

10 hours ago, SkylineView said:

Has the project broken ground on 288?

Yes it's going up super fast near 610. I didn't know they could build roads like that.

Wonder why they couldn't get the same crew on 290...

[VinnyVincent]

Oh and taking a train is just stupid. By the time you find a way to the station and wait for the train to show up, you could've sat in traffic and not paid to use the road(although that is rapidly becoming less of an option with the proliferation of tolls)

[LTAWACS]

On 1/16/2017 at 8:34 PM, Ross said:

Because the citizens of the great state of Texas hate taxes. Even when they are for something as useful as a freeway.

 

Our schools have failed us.

[LTAWACS]

On 1/17/2017 at 1:24 PM, VinnyVincent said:

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.

 

 

I'm EFFIN surprised they havent started tolling RESIDENTIAL streets yet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

"well... there just isnt money in our 4.17 billion dollar budget so... lets start tolling residential streets.... "

[IronTiger]

16 hours ago, VinnyVincent said:

Yes it's going up super fast near 610. I didn't know they could build roads like that.

Wonder why they couldn't get the same crew on 290...

 

I'm sure 290 wouldn't be an issue if they had right of way ready to go from day one. Or if they didn't have to rebuild the entire highway as part of the project. Or if while doing that they also had to keep 7 lanes or so open for the freeway. Or if the highway was sunken and they didn't have to build new overpasses. Or if.........you see where I'm going, right?

[cspwal]

5 hours ago, IronTiger said:

 

I'm sure 290 wouldn't be an issue if they had right of way ready to go from day one. Or if they didn't have to rebuild the entire highway as part of the project. Or if while doing that they also had to keep 7 lanes or so open for the freeway. Or if the highway was sunken and they didn't have to build new overpasses. Or if.........you see where I'm going, right?

 

Or if the contractor doing part of it didn't go bankrupt

[kennyc05]

When are they gonna start on the mainlanes?

[VinnyVincent]

7 hours ago, IronTiger said:

 

I'm sure 290 wouldn't be an issue if they had right of way ready to go from day one. Or if they didn't have to rebuild the entire highway as part of the project. Or if while doing that they also had to keep 7 lanes or so open for the freeway. Or if the highway was sunken and they didn't have to build new overpasses. Or if.........you see where I'm going, right?

No I don't really see where you are going. See unlike some of the "experts" commenting on these threads; I actually live/commute not just in Houston, but on 290 and 288 daily.

Even AFTER they had 290 ripped up and started paving... it's taken them longer to simply flatten out the surface than it has for the 288 crew to pave the entire road.

 

[VinnyVincent]

1 hour ago, cspwal said:

 

Or if the contractor doing part of it didn't go bankrupt

I guess that's not an issue 1.4 million a day is the kind of money these guys paying the bills will be making...

 

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Toll-road-authority-doubles-as-bank-for-county-4083949.php

[Ross]

1 hour ago, VinnyVincent said:

No I don't really see where you are going. See unlike some of the "experts" commenting on these threads; I actually live/commute not just in Houston, but on 290 and 288 daily.

Even AFTER they had 290 ripped up and started paving... it's taken them longer to simply flatten out the surface than it has for the 288 crew to pave the entire road.

 

290 required far more work than 288 just to get ready. There were right of way issues and acquisitions, and the need to keep the freeway open while building the new lanes, which requires massive amounts of extra work. It's a good thing you weren't here when I-10 East was being rebuilt in the 70's and 80's, because it made 290 look like a cakewalk.

1 hour ago, VinnyVincent said:

I guess that's not an issue 1.4 million a day is the kind of money these guys paying the bills will be making...

 

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Toll-road-authority-doubles-as-bank-for-county-4083949.php

HCTRA would have had the same issues as TxDOT did on 290 with a contractor going bankrupt and being removed from the project. That set that particular stretch of road back by about a year, as the issues were resolved with the bonding company and the search for a new contractor.

[VinnyVincent]

2 minutes ago, Ross said:

290 required far more work than 288 just to get ready. There were right of way issues and acquisitions, and the need to keep the freeway open while building the new lanes, which requires massive amounts of extra work. It's a good thing you weren't here when I-10 East was being rebuilt in the 70's and 80's, because it made 290 look like a cakewalk.

HCTRA would have had the same issues as TxDOT did on 290 with a contractor going bankrupt and being removed from the project. That set that particular stretch of road back by about a year, as the issues were resolved with the bonding company and the search for a new contractor.

I understand that 290 was more work to clear and get ready. What I am saying is that even AFTER it was all cleared and "ready"...the process to simply level out the road has taken them longer than the 288 crew to level and pave the road. A lot longer.

 

You drive by the 288 construction zone and it's actively being worked on with a decent staff of workers.

In contrast 290 seems to have empty equipment sitting there for weeks at a time and overall the whole operation just seems totally unprofessional and amatuerish compared to the 288 job.