http://www.kvue.com/news/local/texas-lawmakers-explore-ending-toll-roads/110818422
Spanish company, overpriced empty roads. We can only hope...
I assume you are being sarcastic because that's a road you DO NOT want to go down, trust me on this. Do you want to deal with the potential extortion that this spanish company will use that they use here in Ontario with regards to renewing license plates....trust me, Cintra is the evilest corporation in the world in my books.
To de-toll the entire state, our local paper says it will cost $38 billion dollars. Sounds like a shake down to me.
Texas 130 is the only toll road that needs to be non tolled. It would be an immediate relief for I-35, or reroute I-35 itself.
Sounds like an early April Fool's joke to me!
The law required an analysis of the cost, but was not intended as a step to remove all tolls. In addition to better understanding the topic, it was hoped that they would find "low hanging fruit" for the toll removal.
The lowest hanging fruit of all is the southern part of SH 130. Due to the bankruptcy, TxDOT has the right to cancel the concession and take the road back immediately, with no compensation to the company. I know of no one who's talked about that. I saw an article today that mentions taking over the road and paying the company's debts, debts the state is not liable for and has no reason to pay. That's the worst possible way to deal with this situation. If there's money to be lost, let the bondholders lose it. I can understand if TxDOT doesn't want to appear eager to cancel the concession at the first opportunity, because it could make companies less willing to do business in the future, but if they do take back the road there's no reason to assume all the debt.
The big number is just context, not a realistic possibility. For comparison, the technical amount of the TxDOT loan to NTTA for Chisholm Trail Parkway was for the full cost borne by NTTA, over $800 million as I recall. This is just a technicality. For that loan to be needed, NTTA would have to take on the debt to build the road and then never collect any tolls to pay the debt, making TxDOT liable for all of it. That would never happen, just like removal of all tolls would never happen. At most, NTTA may need to borrow small amounts from TxDOT to make their bond payments during lean times. We have to distinguish between context and agenda. Full context is needed, even when the actual agenda is much smaller.
Besides southern SH 130, I get suspect that the El Paso toll lanes are a possible candidate for de-tolling. I seem to recall something about the tolls being removed if the revenue doesn't cover the cost of the lanes, so that possibility existed from the beginning. I also wonder about the cost and impact of removing tolls from Camino Colombia. Of all of them, I'd most like to see the northern part of SH 130 and SH 45 SE de-tolled, for a free Austin bypass. The part to the south is of much less importance, but since they can get it for free, I see no reason not to include it.
Quote from: longhorn on April 01, 2016, 09:23:47 AM
Texas 130 is the only toll road that needs to be non tolled. It would be an immediate relief for I-35, or reroute I-35 itself.
While I don't agree 100% with the sentiment that 130 is the
only current tollroad that doesn't need to be tolled, I do agree that it should be the 1st eliminated.
The state should buy that thing on the cheap and take the tolls off for at least all trucks.
The state cannot dream of a better ROI for reducing congestion on 35 than that.
Electronic toll roads seem like they always end up failing. Simply people don't know how they work. People that don't have the special sticker are afraid that they will be fined some outrageous amount for using the road, which may or may not be true. If you want a toll road that people will actually use (and not be afraid to use) then you need to add a couple of toll booths here and there along the route.
Quote from: US 41 on April 01, 2016, 11:52:14 AM
Electronic toll roads seem like they always end up failing. Simply people don't know how they work. People that don't have the special sticker are afraid that they will be fined some outrageous amount for using the road, which may or may not be true. If you want a toll road that people will actually use (and not be afraid to use) then you need to add a couple of toll booths here and there along the route.
I think the purpose of the road affects that. NTTA's roads are all regional. PGBT and SRT traverse the area between major roads, and DNT and CTP go out from the urban core and end at a distant outpost. They're mostly not useful for long-haul traffic. As a result, they're mostly used by people from the region, so most users either have tags or otherwise know about the billing system. SH 130 is more like an old-fashioned turnpike, intended to draw interstate or other long-distance traffic, meaning there are more people who could use it who don't know about the payment system. I can understand if that makes people more reluctant.
Quote from: wxfree on April 01, 2016, 12:03:38 PM
Quote from: US 41 on April 01, 2016, 11:52:14 AM
Electronic toll roads seem like they always end up failing. Simply people don't know how they work. People that don't have the special sticker are afraid that they will be fined some outrageous amount for using the road, which may or may not be true. If you want a toll road that people will actually use (and not be afraid to use) then you need to add a couple of toll booths here and there along the route.
I think the purpose of the road affects that. NTTA's roads are all regional. PGBT and SRT traverse the area between major roads, and DNT and CTP go out from the urban core and end at a distant outpost. They're mostly not useful for long-haul traffic. As a result, they're mostly used by people from the region, so most users either have tags or otherwise know about the billing system. SH 130 is more like an old-fashioned turnpike, intended to draw interstate or other long-distance traffic, meaning there are more people who could use it who don't know about the payment system. I can understand if that makes people more reluctant.
Of course the big concern here is if Texas lawmakers decide to eliminate toll roads, then the state would end up eating the outstanding costs for financing and maintaining those roads, which will make a lot of Texas taxpayers that don't use any of the state's toll roads (and by extension don't pay for them) very unhappy.
I recall the same debate in Connecticut about 30 years ago when lawmakers there decided to de-toll the Connecticut Turnpike, Merritt Parkway and the bridges around Hartford. The big difference between Connecticut's decision to de-toll versus the debate going on in Texas now is that the Federal Highway Trust Fund in the 1980s was flush with money, and following de-tolling, Connecticut ended up receiving more money each year from the Trust Fund than it sent as fuel taxes to Washington (IIRC, CT received $1.10 to $1.15 for every dollar of fuel tax sent to DC). On the contrary, the Highway Trust Fund today is broke, and even it if weren't, Texas has historically received less from the Trust Fund than the fuel taxes it sends to Washington (about $0.80 to $0.90 received for every dollar sent to Washington). So what worked in Connecticut 30 years ago won't work in Texas in today's fiscal environment.
Quote from: US 41 on April 01, 2016, 11:52:14 AM
Electronic toll roads seem like they always end up failing. Simply people don't know how they work. People that don't have the special sticker are afraid that they will be fined some outrageous amount for using the road, which may or may not be true. If you want a toll road that people will actually use (and not be afraid to use) then you need to add a couple of toll booths here and there along the route.
Not at all. The road has to be useful to people in order for it to be successful, and reasonably priced. I'm not hearing any issues about electronic toll roads in VA, MD, FL, CA and other places.
Gotta get rid of the 1960's thinking of toll plazas. There's no reason for them today. If it wasn't for toll agencies agreeing to keep them in place on the older toll roads where people have been used to paying cash and to appease unions, they would've ripped them out already.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 01, 2016, 12:28:41 PM
Quote from: US 41 on April 01, 2016, 11:52:14 AM
Electronic toll roads seem like they always end up failing. Simply people don't know how they work. People that don't have the special sticker are afraid that they will be fined some outrageous amount for using the road, which may or may not be true. If you want a toll road that people will actually use (and not be afraid to use) then you need to add a couple of toll booths here and there along the route.
Not at all. The road has to be useful to people in order for it to be successful, and reasonably priced. I'm not hearing any issues about electronic toll roads in VA, MD, FL, CA and other places.
Gotta get rid of the 1960's thinking of toll plazas. There's no reason for them today. If it wasn't for toll agencies agreeing to keep them in place on the older toll roads where people have been used to paying cash and to appease unions, they would've ripped them out already.
But there are people who are unwilling to deal with bill by mail fees. My parents, for example, wouldn't be caught dead on any road where they can't stop at a booth to pay in cash.
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2016, 01:14:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 01, 2016, 12:28:41 PM
Not at all. The road has to be useful to people in order for it to be successful, and reasonably priced. I'm not hearing any issues about electronic toll roads in VA, MD, FL, CA and other places.
Gotta get rid of the 1960's thinking of toll plazas. There's no reason for them today. If it wasn't for toll agencies agreeing to keep them in place on the older toll roads where people have been used to paying cash and to appease unions, they would've ripped them out already.
But there are people who are unwilling to deal with bill by mail fees. My parents, for example, wouldn't be caught dead on any road where they can't stop at a booth to pay in cash.
Like me. I might take 130 around Austin if it had a cash option, but I will never take it as long as it is electronic only. The electronic toll roads almost always have higher tolls than the cash roads, plus you have to pay a $1.15 pay by mail fee (which is stupid). Like for example TX 255 used to be $2 cash, now it is $4 for the day pass or I assume $5.15 for pay by mail. I don't have a debit or credit card so I can't do the day pass option. I can send checks, but I might as well drive 13 miles out of the way to avoid the $5.15 toll. Gas is only $2 right now anyways. What's so bad about having a cash option and giving someone a job?
How would any of you rectify the situation (that is, if you could)?
Quote from: US 41 on April 01, 2016, 04:25:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2016, 01:14:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 01, 2016, 12:28:41 PM
Not at all. The road has to be useful to people in order for it to be successful, and reasonably priced. I'm not hearing any issues about electronic toll roads in VA, MD, FL, CA and other places.
Gotta get rid of the 1960's thinking of toll plazas. There's no reason for them today. If it wasn't for toll agencies agreeing to keep them in place on the older toll roads where people have been used to paying cash and to appease unions, they would've ripped them out already.
But there are people who are unwilling to deal with bill by mail fees. My parents, for example, wouldn't be caught dead on any road where they can't stop at a booth to pay in cash.
Like me. I might take 130 around Austin if it had a cash option, but I will never take it as long as it is electronic only. The electronic toll roads almost always have higher tolls than the cash roads, plus you have to pay a $1.15 pay by mail fee (which is stupid). Like for example TX 255 used to be $2 cash, now it is $4 for the day pass or I assume $5.15 for pay by mail. I don't have a debit or credit card so I can't do the day pass option. I can send checks, but I might as well drive 13 miles out of the way to avoid the $5.15 toll. Gas is only $2 right now anyways. What's so bad about having a cash option and giving someone a job?
Because you're not giving one person a job. The toll plaza would have to have several people working, for shifts and breaks. Them you needs supervision. And cash pickups, and buildings, and toll lanes and storage areas and...(ok, I know i talked about all of this stuff before). Point being, it's not a $10 an hour were talking about; were talking tens of millions simply to impliment tolls, along with tens of millions of ongoing costs. And if you guys think people are avoiding the tolls because they can't pay cash, then a single booth ain't going to work...you'll need multiple booths.
For a group of people that pay attention to roads and such, it's almost funny how many don't understand the entire planning and engineering process of building a toll rosd, which is quite extensive.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 01, 2016, 06:26:22 PM
Because you're not giving one person a job. The toll plaza would have to have several people working, for shifts and breaks. Them you needs supervision. And cash pickups, and buildings, and toll lanes and storage areas and...(ok, I know i talked about all of this stuff before). Point being, it's not a $10 an hour were talking about; were talking tens of millions simply to impliment tolls, along with tens of millions of ongoing costs. And if you guys think people are avoiding the tolls because they can't pay cash, then a single booth ain't going to work...you'll need multiple booths.
For a group of people that pay attention to roads and such, it's almost funny how many don't understand the entire planning and engineering process of building a toll rosd, which is quite extensive.
We've had manned toll roads that have worked well since at least the 1940's. Only in very recent years have we had all electronic toll roads. Quite a few all electronic toll roads have or are failing. The PA turnpike, the Kansas Turnpike, the Oklahoma toll roads, and a lot of other toll roads that still accept cash are still doing very well. If we've have successful manned toll roads for the past 75 years, there's no reason why we can't still have successful ones.
Quote from: US 41 on April 01, 2016, 06:48:09 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 01, 2016, 06:26:22 PM
Because you're not giving one person a job. The toll plaza would have to have several people working, for shifts and breaks. Them you needs supervision. And cash pickups, and buildings, and toll lanes and storage areas and...(ok, I know i talked about all of this stuff before). Point being, it's not a $10 an hour were talking about; were talking tens of millions simply to impliment tolls, along with tens of millions of ongoing costs. And if you guys think people are avoiding the tolls because they can't pay cash, then a single booth ain't going to work...you'll need multiple booths.
For a group of people that pay attention to roads and such, it's almost funny how many don't understand the entire planning and engineering process of building a toll rosd, which is quite extensive.
We've had manned toll roads that have worked well since at least the 1940's. Only in very recent years have we had all electronic toll roads. Quite a few all electronic toll roads have or are failing. The PA turnpike, the Kansas Turnpike, the Oklahoma toll roads, and a lot of other toll roads that still accept cash are still doing very well. If we've have successful manned toll roads for the past 75 years, there's no reason why we can't still have successful ones.
[citation needed]
we never had personal computers, cell phones, cars, etc etc until they were all invented either.
There are plans in place to remove cash payments from the PA Turnpike, some of which have already begun taking place.
And there are some toll roads/bridges that didn't do well also. (US 9's Great Egg Harbor Bridge for one)
Dallas Morning News report http://transportationblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03/cost-to-remove-tolls-from-texas-roads-30-billion-give-or-take.html/ (http://transportationblog.dallasnews.com/2016/03/cost-to-remove-tolls-from-texas-roads-30-billion-give-or-take.html/)
The figure of $30 to $40 billion is part of a report being prepared for the 2017 legislature. So this data is for informational and planning purposes, not part of any policy to detoll turnpikes.
Realistically, all toll roads are not going to be detolled. More likely none will be detolled. Political leadership has already taken steps to lessen the need for toll roads, mainly proposition 7, but if they want to continue the anti-toll policy then we could see some token toll removals.
It would be easiest to detoll facilities already owned by TxDOT. That includes SH 130 and SH 45 in central Texas, SH 99 Grand Parkway sections E, F and G in Houston, and the SH 114 toll lanes through the DFW connector in North Texas (which is the only TxDOT-owned toll facility in North Texas). On the longer facilities, probably only a single section would be detolled.
A more reasonable approach would be to implement some sort of program to remove tolls from facilities which have paid for themselves, such as the Dallas North Tollway or the Sam Houston Tollway. Those highways are cash cows for NTTA and HCTRA, so those agencies would fight any such plan. And of course TxDOT would need to take over maintenance and future improvements on any facility it takes over, which is a financial obligation.
So we'll see in the 2017 legislative session if anything comes of this. Since the budget will be tight due to the collapse of oil prices, I'm not expecting much progress toward detolling.
Tolls are seen as fees, not taxes, which satisfies St. Grover's no-tax pledge. Tollways aren't going the way of the dodo bird anytime soon deep in the hearta'.
I think it would be a big mistake if Texas or any other state got rid of toll roads.
This is just my opinion, but I think they should de-toll 130 and any other toll roads operated by CINTRA. It seems like the other toll roads are doing fine, so no need to mess with those right now.
Based on design and planning, I've always thought 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.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 02, 2016, 02:35:12 PM
I think it would be a big mistake if Texas or any other state got rid of toll roads.
Let's stop driving on them and bankrupt them. B*st*rds sent me a bill for a plate that was nowhere near mine. They harass me all the time and I don't even drive on their roads.
LOL and [citation needed]
Quote from: Sykotyk on April 04, 2016, 11:50:57 AM
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.
Quote from: Sykotyk on April 04, 2016, 11:50:57 AM
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.)
Then go down the HOT and Express Lane path for congested inner-city freeways.
Quote from: mrsman on April 05, 2016, 12:56:54 PM
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.