Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-27-2009, 07:29 PM
 
16 posts, read 34,036 times
Reputation: 25

Advertisements

he didn't say anything about himself being professsonal..just said others weren't. Sometimes it works that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-27-2009, 07:30 PM
 
872 posts, read 1,856,964 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by scuba steve View Post
So how about tolling Hwy 1604? I heard they were going to do that on the far west side?
That is part of the toll plan...from Potranco Road up 1604 for 33 miles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2009, 09:44 PM
 
824 posts, read 1,816,743 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmac12 View Post
Well I can tell you one thing ...if you think that having toll roads on 281 will just affect mostly Stone Oakers-- don't breathe a sigh of relief just yet- This has now set a presedent that may affect every congested road in San Antonio!
I know it's counter-intuitive, but I think it's a great precedent to set. People who choose to live in suburban sprawl should deal with the true costs of moving to a part of SA that is low-density, auto-dependent, and where most daily activities are separated by significant distances.

Conversely, people who choose to live in close-in, walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods can (continue) to bring sighs of relief, and enjoy a lifestyle that doesn't revolve around traffic/commuting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2009, 09:49 PM
 
18,131 posts, read 25,300,410 times
Reputation: 16845
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvlpr View Post
I know it's counter-intuitive, but I think it's a great precedent to set. People who choose to live in suburban sprawl should deal with the true costs of moving to a part of SA that is low-density, auto-dependent, and where most daily activities are separated by significant distances.
One problem is that by having tolls, you'd be forcing relatively poor people (not rich) out of the suburbs where they went to make sure that their kids could go to good schools, and now they are forced to move to the inner city.

That's just one reason I disagree with toll-roads.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2009, 10:53 PM
 
Location: That's pretty obvious
1,035 posts, read 2,340,770 times
Reputation: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo View Post
One problem is that by having tolls, you'd be forcing relatively poor people (not rich) out of the suburbs where they went to make sure that their kids could go to good schools, and now they are forced to move to the inner city.

That's just one reason I disagree with toll-roads.


Psst....don't tell anyone, but there are actually other roads up around these here parts. I visit businesses up and down the 281 North corridor, but rarely drive on 281 itself. The threat of a toll road is not the dire, do or die tragedy many are trying to make it out to be. Highly doubt there is going to be this mass of people marching south of 1604 because a 17 cent per mile toll that no one has to pay unless they want too has subsequently forced them from their homes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2009, 04:47 AM
 
872 posts, read 1,856,964 times
Reputation: 441
It is a matter of point as much as anything...why would you be willing to pay for a road again? Money was designated in years past to build overpasses and thus eliminate traffic lights on the main corridor but that money was siphoned off to be used on other things, not necessarily related to roads or traffic at all. Both 281 and 1604 on the west side could be greatly helped just by adding some overpasses. Look at 281 inside 1604. Look at 1604 at Culebra (overpass) compared to 1604/151 (traffic light). Tolls should be a last resort as a way to pay for roads. Use the tax money for what it was designed instead of on whatever other pet project that pops up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2009, 07:47 AM
 
52 posts, read 126,062 times
Reputation: 46
Am I the only one who is in favor of this project? As a property owner in Timberwood park, I actually look forward to this being built. Every toll road I have ever driven on has been exceptionally nice and relatively traffic free. I have no problem paying a premium to drive on a nicer road and get home to be with my family more quickly... plus, people seem to forget that money collected from tolls isn't just to pay for the building of a road; it also pays for maintnance. I would use that toll road constantly. To get to and from work... oh, and lets not forget that if you have to drive on a toll road to get to work, you can deduct what you spend on tolls from your taxes.

This will raise property values, improve quality of life, and most importantly decrease traffic. BTW we are talking about still having 3 or 4 lanes each way as free access roads. That is better that what we have now!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2009, 07:49 AM
 
824 posts, read 1,816,743 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by wc2005 View Post
It is a matter of point as much as anything...why would you be willing to pay for a road again? Money was designated in years past to build overpasses and thus eliminate traffic lights on the main corridor but that money was siphoned off to be used on other things, not necessarily related to roads or traffic at all. Both 281 and 1604 on the west side could be greatly helped just by adding some overpasses. Look at 281 inside 1604. Look at 1604 at Culebra (overpass) compared to 1604/151 (traffic light). Tolls should be a last resort as a way to pay for roads. Use the tax money for what it was designed instead of on whatever other pet project that pops up.
So you're claiming that TXDOT utilized the monies it had collected for other pet projects? Which ones?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2009, 08:11 AM
 
337 posts, read 826,676 times
Reputation: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousFive View Post
Am I the only one who is in favor of this project? As a property owner in Timberwood park, I actually look forward to this being built. Every toll road I have ever driven on has been exceptionally nice and relatively traffic free. I have no problem paying a premium to drive on a nicer road and get home to be with my family more quickly... plus, people seem to forget that money collected from tolls isn't just to pay for the building of a road; it also pays for maintnance. I would use that toll road constantly. To get to and from work... oh, and lets not forget that if you have to drive on a toll road to get to work, you can deduct what you spend on tolls from your taxes.

This will raise property values, improve quality of life, and most importantly decrease traffic. BTW we are talking about still having 3 or 4 lanes each way as free access roads. That is better that what we have now!
We also live in TWP and I would pay 100 a week if it meant I didn't have to waste 2 to 3 hours a day in traffic just trying to get to and from 1604 (it is less than 7 miles from our house).

I mean the city planners have done a really bad job out here-sure Mr. builder go ahead and build a 1000 + homes but, no change in the roads. It has become a nightmare out here over the last 5 years.

This city has the worst infrastructure of any "big city" I have ever been to and I have been to them all. Most cities do have a toll road system for those that choose to use them. I will gladly choose to drive on it and save myself some time in the car. I just don't know what I will do with the extra hour I have to plan into my morning just for Blanco or 281.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2009, 08:30 AM
RGJ
 
1,903 posts, read 4,736,157 times
Reputation: 855
I really don't think it was the builder's or developer's responsibility to take care of 281 or Blanco Rd. The city, county and state should have seen the problem coming long ago. But then, they should have seen the problem with the intersections of 410/IH 37 and 1604/281. They waited too long and the more they waited, the costlier it got to fix the problem. Now we can all enjoy the 100' overpasses.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top