Texas ending toll roads?

[mrsman]

Based on design and planning, I've always though it stupid that a bypass to be tolled while straight through a city is free. To alleviate traffic, you need the opposite. Make those wanting to go to the city pay for it, and those not to have a financial incentive to route around the city, even at the cost of extra miles in exchange for no toll.

I've been through I-35 from Austin to San Antonio many times and I consider it one of the worst stretches of interstate in the country. And I've been on about 90% of the interstate mileage. I hate it with a passion. sure, Austin elevated part of I-35 with an upper an the old lower sections, but still dumps you into a bottleneck just at the south end. And yet, they built a perfectly good bypass to remove all the through traffic, but put a toll on it that defeats the entire purpose. One, it is too high of a toll. Secondly, they make it difficult for someone to use. Especially the infrequent or out-of-state user.

My car has an EZ Pass in it, being in Ohio and Pennsylvania frequently with some trips into Indiana, Illinois, or New Jersey or New York.  When I road trip, especially to Texas, I'm stuck with either PBM (where allowed) or avoid the toll roads. Generally, I opt for avoiding the tolls.

Chicago has the same thing.  The mainline interstates through the city are free, the bypass roads (I-355, I-294) are all toll. 

NYC has the same thing.  To go westbound from Brooklyn/Queens to New Jersey, you would pay a toll on a bridge to head through Staten Island or the Bronx via  expressways.  But if you head directly to the heart of Manhattan on the Queensboro, Williamsburg, Manhattan, or Brooklyn bridges you pay nothing.

As far as the problems with TX having their own transponders, that's what we hope national interoperability will help.

[jbnv]

Based on design and planning, I've always though it stupid that a bypass to be tolled while straight through a city is free. To alleviate traffic, you need the opposite. Make those wanting to go to the city pay for it, and those not to have a financial incentive to route around the city, even at the cost of extra miles in exchange for no toll.

Your logic is backwards to me. The bypass should be tolled. You're paying for the privilege of avoiding the congested ingress/egress route. You're not going to alleviate traffic by tolling the ingress/egress route. Most of that traffic is commuting into/out of the city during the day.

(I personally think that all of our major highways should be tolled, so that they are paid for by the people who actually use them and to make them self-sufficient.)

[The Ghostbuster]

Then go down the HOT and Express Lane path for congested inner-city freeways.

[Rothman]

NYC has the same thing.  To go westbound from Brooklyn/Queens to New Jersey, you would pay a toll on a bridge to head through Staten Island or the Bronx via  expressways.  But if you head directly to the heart of Manhattan on the Queensboro, Williamsburg, Manhattan, or Brooklyn bridges you pay nothing.

It's messier than that.  Coming into NYC from the west is all tolled (GWB, Holland, Lincoln, Goethals, Outerbridge).  Harlem River bridges aren't tolled, though (I like taking the 3rd Ave Bridge in), so people coming in from the North don't necessarily have to pay up, depending on where they're going. Henry Hudson Bridge is tolled in both directions.

But, then again, Throgs Neck, Bronx-Whitestone are all tolled both directions.  Triborough gives me a headache (thou shalt pay one way or another).

Anyway, with NYC, it's not just a matter that bypasses are tolled and feeder routes into Manhattan are not.