Highway 288

[bcnet]

Another real world example of the HCTRA speeding up projects is the Katy Freeway expansion. Before they were involved to bring managed toll lanes down the center of the project, the expected timeline was 2003 - 2012/13 as the project would have to wait on slow moving federal highway funds. Bringing the HCTRA shaved 3-4 years off the total construction time as they can fund parts as the project as fast as the construction companies can move.

[CDeb]

Another real world example of the HCTRA speeding up projects is the Katy Freeway expansion. Before they were involved to bring managed toll lanes down the center of the project, the expected timeline was 2003 - 2012/13 as the project would have to wait on slow moving federal highway funds. Bringing the HCTRA shaved 3-4 years off the total construction time as they can fund parts as the project as fast as the construction companies can move.

This also brings to mind another example:

TxDOT is shutting down most of their projects right now due to a funding crisis. I don't know the specifics, but I do know that they are giving the "all stop" to engineering work that is ongoing, including the US 290 project (everyone in Cypress: call your legislator and your state senator).

But HCTRA will possibly build the Hempstead Managed Lanes regardless of what TxDOT does with US 290. They can bypass the FEIS process since they won't use federal dollars to pay for it. There are several complications, but there's a good chance it could be built quickly like Westpark.

[VelvetJ]

Operating costs are well below revenues. HCTRA takes the surplus money and puts it toward more rapid system expansion. Doesn't really bother me too much.

So basically money from the toll roads is being spent on the building of NEW toll roads? This bothers me much. Tolls from toll roads should be used to pay for themselves, then removing or reducing the tolls once that is done. Why should the toll I pay from 249 to Westheimer ($6 round trip per day + gas) go toward a new toll road on 288? I don't use 288. Why should the tolls my parents pay on the South Sam Houston tollway go to the accelleration of the expansion of the Katy Freeway, a freeway that neither of them ever use?

The HCTRA is out of control and something needs to be done.

[TheNiche]

So basically money from the toll roads is being spent on the building of NEW toll roads? This bothers me much. Tolls from toll roads should be used to pay for themselves, then removing or reducing the tolls once that is done. Why should the toll I pay from 249 to Westheimer ($6 round trip per day + gas) go toward a new toll road on 288? I don't use 288. Why should the tolls my parents pay on the South Sam Houston tollway go to the accelleration of the expansion of the Katy Freeway, a freeway that neither of them ever use?

The HCTRA is out of control and something needs to be done.

It's not perfectly equitable, there's no denying that, but the added flexibility that HCTRA has on account of having the capability to manage its toll roads as a system rather than as a set of independent facilities really does increase its effectiveness as an agency.

Heck, if anything, they ought to implement congestion pricing on many parts of their system and use those funds to expand even more quickly, and then just keep on expanding as such throughout the city to the furthest financial limit.

[westguy]

They don't put nearly as much time and money into impact studies. This is probably a big reason they build roads so quickly, with the tradeoff being serious problems down the road.

Anyway, don't you recall that the Hardy Toll Road was subsidized by drivers of BW8 for years because it failed to attract enough drivers? I don't know if its still true, though.

Edited December 8, 2007 by westguy

[bcnet]

It's not perfectly equitable, there's no denying that, but the added flexibility that HCTRA has on account of having the capability to manage its toll roads as a system rather than as a set of independent facilities really does increase its effectiveness as an agency.

Heck, if anything, they ought to implement congestion pricing on many parts of their system and use those funds to expand even more quickly, and then just keep on expanding as such throughout the city to the furthest financial limit.

The new Katy freeway HCTRA lanes will have demand pricing. Multi-rider cars and buses will be free, but single riders will be able to ride tolled with demand pricing adjusted enought to keep the traffic flowing in the lane. It will be interesting to see how high the tolls will get. There will be 2 full time lanes each way, then at the tolling facilities it will expand to 3 lanes so carpools will be in one lane with tolled vehicles in the other 2. Each booth will have an enformcement area.

Here is more info:

Katy Freeway Managed toll lanes

[crunchtastic]

Has anyone discussed congestion pricing at the destination, rather than the artery? I'm thinking of what London is doing, and could it work in the Galleria area, for example.

[TheNiche]

Has anyone discussed congestion pricing at the destination, rather than the artery? I'm thinking of what London is doing, and could it work in the Galleria area, for example.

Congestion pricing within a business district would merely reduce the attractiveness of that district to firms and developers. The unintended consequences over the long term could create more problems than are solved.

[crunchtastic]

Congestion pricing within a business district would merely reduce the attractiveness of that district to firms and developers. The unintended consequences over the long term could create more problems than are solved.

In the short term. Forward to the day when there really is density. It is a solution.

Edited December 8, 2007 by crunchtastic

[Subdude]

So basically money from the toll roads is being spent on the building of NEW toll roads? This bothers me much. Tolls from toll roads should be used to pay for themselves, then removing or reducing the tolls once that is done. Why should the toll I pay from 249 to Westheimer ($6 round trip per day + gas) go toward a new toll road on 288? I don't use 288. Why should the tolls my parents pay on the South Sam Houston tollway go to the accelleration of the expansion of the Katy Freeway, a freeway that neither of them ever use?

The HCTRA is out of control and something needs to be done.

It's been going on for decades. This was the great funding mechanism that Robt. Moses used to build all his major projects in NYC. Think of tolls as just a tax collected in a different way. Your parents pay tolls for the construction of a freeway they don't use for the same reason people without kids have to pay school taxes.

Congestion pricing within a business district would merely reduce the attractiveness of that district to firms and developers.

That certainly doesn't seem to have been the case in London. The congestion pricing there is considered quite successful, and the congestion zone was even expanded earlier this year. However, the reason it has been accepted is that the congestion charge is supposed to be spent on mass transit improvements.

[TheNiche]

In the short term. Forward to the day when there really is density. It is a solution.

The idea of congestion pricing is to make it less appealing to go somewhere. Under that policy, the demand schedule for trips to get to that place is unchanged; the supply schedule shifts outward (i.e. gets more expensive), so quantity of trips demanded is reduced. If this is done in one part of a region and not another, it creates a competitive advantage for greater commercial development to occur where total transportation costs are relatively lower. It stunts densification in the targeted area.The redeeming quality of a toll road is that people can use it to make origin-destination pairs that aren't even remotely close to one another, so that the cost of those improvements is borne out equitably. Only about 6% of our regional employment is downtown, yet commuters employed in the downtown area can be found on every single freeway in our region. They share the road with non-downtown commuters. So what is the impact, for instance, of a policy by which downtown commuters pay a toll to enter downtown if that toll funds projects designed to increase downtown accessibility? Its a free-rider problem; everybody benefits from downtowners' tolls. So again, the relative impact is to make it more desirable for firms to locate out of the tolled destination zone.

That certainly doesn't seem to have been the case in London. The congestion pricing there is considered quite successful, and the congestion zone was even expanded earlier this year. However, the reason it has been accepted is that the congestion charge is supposed to be spent on mass transit improvements.

London isn't an American sunbelt city.

[VelvetJ]

It's been going on for decades. This was the great funding mechanism that Robt. Moses used to build all his major projects in NYC. Think of tolls as just a tax collected in a different way. Your parents pay tolls for the construction of a freeway they don't use for the same reason people without kids have to pay school taxes.

I actually asked the previous question as a argument I often hear from those who support Houston being covered in toll roads. I personally view Houston's transportation system as a whole as a single entity that works together to the benefit of all Houstonians. Therefor, I do not mind my tax money going to a regional road project that I personally do not use everyday because I like to view things as Houstonians being in this together. So if expanding the Katy Freeway is going to help ease congestion, which will in turn help the entire region, how selfish of me to not want my tax money to go toward it simply because I personally do not use it. I'm not the only person who lives in Houston, and I am not the only person paying taxes.

I can't say I'm against toll roads themselves as much as I am against toll money I pay everyday going toward the building of NEW toll roads, whose toll fees will never be eliminated and will only continue to be increased with HCTRA using "easing congestion" as the sugar to the posion they are feeding the public.

*** (Does anyone know the effect the recent toll increase has had on congestion? I can tell you first hand it hasn't done much for the WestBelt. If it has, it is very little and I can only imagine it being back to pre-price hike levels before this time next year).

Another issue is I think the overwhelming focus on more roads for Houston is not wise. When I look into the future through my crystal ball , it is showing me we should probably move more aggressively in a direction that reduces the amount of cars on our roads and highways. Building more and more roads, free or tolled, is only making the area more convenient for the automobile. Gas is not going to get any cheaper, air quality is not going to get any better with more cars on the roads, and being at the mercy of Middle Eastern countries or South American Presidents is no longer fun. With these factors, aggressive building of more toll roads is wise for us?

To somewhat return to the subject at hand, I'm not opposed to a toll road down 288, but only with the promise to remove or significantly reduce the toll fee once the amount used to build it has been reached.

[TheNiche]

*** (Does anyone know the effect the recent toll increase has had on congestion? I can tell you first hand it hasn't done much for the WestBelt. If it has, it is very little and I can only imagine it being back to pre-price hike levels before this time next year).

The toll hike hasn't had much effect on West Belt congestion, but that's only because they didn't hike it high enough. HCTRA is clearly at fault, however, because this is something that they should've been doing with far greater regularity and consistency; they failed to manage toll road users' expectations. Had they done it propertly, they could've been rolling in dough and easily obtained financing to massively expand capacity.

Another issue is I think the overwhelming focus on more roads for Houston is not wise. When I look into the future through my crystal ball , it is showing me we should probably move more aggressively in a direction that reduces the amount of cars on our roads and highways. Building more and more roads, free or tolled, is only making the area more convenient for the automobile. Gas is not going to get any cheaper, air quality is not going to get any better with more cars on the roads, and being at the mercy of Middle Eastern countries or South American Presidents is no longer fun. With these factors, aggressive building of more toll roads is wise for us?

Building better highways is making the area more convenient for the form of transporation that the vast majority of us use. If the operating cost of a private automobile doubled overnight, it would reduce traffic volume, but at the same time, we'd have continuous population growth, so that before long, we'd be looking at the same level of congestion again. There are some cities, like Detroit, that could get away with not building any new roads, and over time an increase in gasoline costs would solve their congestion issues; we aren't Detroit. Besides, what do you suspect would replace the car? Do you suspect that it also might need a roadbed?

You made a statement about air quality not getting any better as more cars get on the roads. Not necessarily. Technology has improved dramatically in the past several decades so that air pollution was reduced even as aggregate miles driven skyrocketed.

[GovernorAggie]

The idea of congestion pricing is to make it less appealing to go somewhere.

I would agree with this and follow it up with "at certain times for people with certain income levels."

On a side note, I've seen (somewhere but can't remember) that the tolls on the Katy Tollway could go up to $5-$6 in the peak hour. I think that is what the cap was set to be in the agreement with TxDOT or something. A $6 toll goes to the notion of the "Lexus Lane", but you'll always hear managed lane and congestion pricing advocates use the day care example. In other words, a mom (or dad) running late picking a child up from daycare would be more than willing to pay the $6 to use the managed lanes instead of the $1 per minute late fee at their day care. I think a tollway in California may go all the way to about $9 for a toll.

Keep this in mind when you see "managed lane" or "HOT" lane projects listed for the area.

[marmer]

Several nights now, early evening, I've seen two or three (or more) cops -- Houston, constable, sheriff, shooting laser between 610 and BW8 on 288. A few more southbound, but some northbound, too. Some agency has a new Dodge Charger in white with the "Police" graphic subdued, and I've seen that one several times, too. What's going on with that? One thing you can say for 288 -- it doesn't seem to me to be full of people driving too _fast_!

[musicman]

it's just a speed trap. go down the gulf freeway in the morning. just about everyday there are 3 or 4 between 610 and the beltway.

[TJones]

They are merely making sure you are wearing your seatbelt, have proper registration on your car, and not going over the posted speed limit. They are just doing their jobs, imagine that. Making sure you get home safe and sound to your family, my gosh, what nerve those doughnut eaters have.

[marmer]

They are merely making sure you are wearing your seatbelt, have proper registration on your car, and not going over the posted speed limit. They are just doing their jobs, imagine that. Making sure you get home safe and sound to your family, my gosh, what nerve those doughnut eaters have.

OK, I almost didn't respond because I didn't want to start an argument. You certainly didn't speak to the intent of my post, which was asking if anyone knew a reason for the suddenly greatly increased speed enforcement on 288.

First of all, although wearing seatbelts and having proper registration are certainly good things, they have little to no effect on my getting home safely. Not arguing against seatbelts, and I could be wrong, but in heavy traffic at highway speeds it doesn't seem very easy to see if someone is wearing a seatbelt. And I haven't seen any reports of major accidents with significant injuries which might (maybe) cause a higher priority on seatbelt enforcement.

Registration doesn't even come into play until the traffic stop. Same with the inspection sticker, which actually has some, though in today's world, minor, effect on safety.

I drive it every day, and I haven't seen a bunch of wrecks. I haven't seen a bunch of people driving way faster than the flow of traffic. I do think people driving way faster than the flow of traffic should be stopped. But this is usually heavy enough traffic that driving faster than the speed limit is not possible. Of course they are doing their job and doing what they are told to do. But it sure looks to me like they have been told to sit there with laser and cherrypick cars until they get lucky enough to catch someone going barely fast enough not to get laughed out of court. And I do have a problem with that. EDIT: I have never been stopped on 288 or in the Pearland area.

Edited April 24, 2008 by marmer

[N Judah]

It's the MONNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

[editor]

[N Judah]

Egads, I am caught! C'est la vie.

Edited April 24, 2008 by N Judah

[marmer]

And another thing, if it is for revenue purposes, which is what it sounds like, isn't there fairly significant cost to the county/city to have that many assets (cars, officers, laser guns) tied up to catch a handful of relatively small-potatoes speeders? I would think you'd get more bang for the buck, so to speak, with one cop, in light traffic, catching the occasional leadfoot going 20+ over up where the fines get big and there's actually some safety benefit...

Just asking. I could be all wrong. I'm not anti-cop, this just seems weird.

[20thStDad]

You can't get more bang for the buck than being able to pull over one after the other, which I see them do all day, both ways, on 288.

Personally I'd feel safer if they did a damn thing about catching people who steal things, but according to them it's pretty much not possible.

Edited April 25, 2008 by 20thStDad

[CoolBuddy06]

It's the MONNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Yep, it's the $$$. And you have many PDs looking for it on 288: HPD, Harris County Sheriff, Pearland Police, Brazoria County Sheriff, Manvel Police (a little to the south), and Troopers all have some juris on 288!!! Go figure.

Solution?

[CoolBuddy06]

I read sometimes past that 288 will get four more lanes between 59 and CR 56. I've been looking for more info since then but couldn't get anything. Any news, links, timeline on this?

[memebag]

Solution?

1. Never speed.

2. Keep inspection, registration and insurance up to date.

3. Wear seat belts.

If they can't write tickets, they'll have to do something else.

[ToryGattis]

Well, I went to the TXDoT public meeting on this, but I don't have any links other than my own blog post on it. They had comprehensive drawings, including some innovative entrances and exits near the Medical Center. The 4 lanes will be a congestion priced toll road. Current plan is construction start by 2010, with completion in stages between 2012 and 2014

Edited May 3, 2008 by ToryGattis

[njvisitor]

Wow, fantastic post!

While I'm disappointed in their decision to build a toll road, at least it'll get some people off the free highway. Also, I imagine buses will use the toll as some sort of psuedo-HOV lane...

[Trae]

I am sure buses would use it.

Was hoping some sort of commuter rail could be built down the middle. Too many tollways going up in Houston.

[cottonmather0]

You must not drive much down southbound 288!