Prop 1 Open Thread (Austin, Riverside: homes, tax, buses)

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Austin97

sure, or managed lanes on I35 as someone expected.

Because they are tolls we can get a company to lease the toll rights and it will cost taxpayers little to nothing.

If taxpayers want to pay for it via taxes and tolls thats fine too.

High capacity toll roads pay for themselves unlike rail.

Tolling I-35 will also pay for the cut-and-cap of I-35 downtown - as it should!

[je4xff]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

They haven't paid for the improvements and flyovers.

Taxpayers have already paid for the establishment of those roads (360 and 620) to use for public transportation.

If you only wanted to use tolls to pay for the improvements (like the Mopac project), that's one thing. If you're suggesting to confiscate the entire public resource in order to add improvements and then turn the whole road into a members-only club, that's completely different. Let's hope you mean the former, but from what I understand 360 isn't wide enough in most places to support a partial toll system - it would have to be a toll road in its entirety. This was a bad idea 10 years ago and remains the same.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by je4xff

Taxpayers have already paid for the establishment of those roads (360 and 620) to use for public transportation.

If you only wanted to use tolls to pay for the improvements (like the Mopac project), that's one thing. If you're suggesting to confiscate the entire public resource in order to add improvements and then turn the whole road into a members-only club, that's completely different. Let's hope you mean the former, but from what I understand 360 isn't wide enough in most places to support a partial toll system - it would have to be a toll road in its entirety. This was a bad idea 10 years ago and remains the same.

false dichotomy. There are many more alternatives than confiscating the entire public resource or only doing minimal improvements.

also even if toll was the only option it hardly makes it a members only club.

[Roadking2003]

Originally Posted by Novacek

That cup of sugar is 5% of the size of the ocean?

It's about as effective.

[Roadking2003]

Originally Posted by je4xff

Taxpayers have already paid for the establishment of those roads (360 and 620) to use for public transportation.

If you only wanted to use tolls to pay for the improvements (like the Mopac project), that's one thing. If you're suggesting to confiscate the entire public resource in order to add improvements and then turn the whole road into a members-only club, that's completely different. Let's hope you mean the former, but from what I understand 360 isn't wide enough in most places to support a partial toll system - it would have to be a toll road in its entirety. This was a bad idea 10 years ago and remains the same.

I haven't seen a study regarding toll lanes for 360, but I support the general concept of toll roads. Today, it takes decades for the politicians to improve anything. If going the toll road route speeds up the process, I'm all for it.

And I suspect most of those people who sit in stop and go traffic every day on MoPac and 360 would be glad to pay a toll for a fast trip.

[je4xff]

Originally Posted by Austin97

false dichotomy. There are many more alternatives than confiscating the entire public resource or only doing minimal improvements.

Like I said, if there was a way to keep the already paid for portion of the roadway available for all to use toll free, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

Originally Posted by Austin97

also even if toll was the only option it hardly makes it a members only club.

If it excludes people who aren't willing to purchase a membership, then yes, it's a members only club.

[ericsami]

I am not in favor of the plan because it benefits very few in Austin.

if we had Chicago style 5-6 lines that would all meet somewhere around 54th street.
I could support because it would benefit all communities.

but frankly such a plan is not politically viable.

[capcat]

Originally Posted by Austin97

620 = highway toll road
360 = highway toll road
183 highway toll road connecting with a flyover to 71
mopac = toll lanes + expanded
Flyovers from 620/360 to 71 on the south, 183 on the north.
2222 should be highway and should have flyovers to 620, 360 and mopac
2244 should be a highway and should have flyovers

That will give us multiple loops around town plus east west corridors to mopac.

Would that leave your neighborhood intact? One would likely destroy mine.

[je4xff]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

I haven't seen a study regarding toll lanes for 360, but I support the general concept of toll roads. Today, it takes decades for the politicians to improve anything. If going the toll road route speeds up the process, I'm all for it.

I could be ok with toll roads too, if there were alternative routes. In the case of 360 and 620, there are absolutely no alternative routes in or out of most parts of them. The hills make it impossible.

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

And I suspect most of those people who sit in stop and go traffic every day on MoPac and 360 would be glad to pay a toll for a fast trip.

Mopac is getting improved, and they're doing it properly. I live off of 360 and I know a bunch of my neighbors who would also be super pissed if 360 became a toll only road. It would be really annoying to have to pay extra just to go out for groceries, gas, or anything else. The Pennybacker bridge, again something already paid for, would become a literal troll bridge.

I don't mind toll roads that are newly constructed, but I have a major problem with throwing up tolls on existing roads, without other options. It would be like if we wanted to add a computer lab to a public library, and then suddenly started charging admission at the entrance to get into the entire library. Fine if you want a computer lab and you want to pay for it with admission fees, but don't lock everyone else out of the rest of the library to do so. Charge them at the door of the computer lab instead.

[texan2yankee]

Why pay for trains very few people will use and ask all of us to pay for those trains? We are opposed to Prop 1. I know no one who supports this boondoggle.