Highway 130 - Seguin to Austin, what is the point?

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by Dopo

You call that a "big loop"?
It takes you from downtown to 4 miles North of where you started.

With the stoplights and now-reduced speed limit, I call it a headache. But I avoid Austin as much as possible, anyway.

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by wpme

Yes, compensation DOES make it just.

No, compensation makes it equitable.

Originally Posted by wpme

With enough compensation a land owner will WILLINGLY sign a sales document, therefore relinquishing all claims to a property so progress can happen.

In your fantasy world, government always pays what the landowner wants? Must be a nice world to live in.

Originally Posted by wpme

If the world worked as you fantasize it should, highways would dead end at fencelines, there would be no national power grid, nor any pipelines

No, highways, pipelines, power lines, etc. would berun on the property of those willing to allow them. No highway would end at a fenceline.

Originally Posted by Bo

I like being able to drive on a continuous, interstate highway between the major cities in Texas.

Occasionally, I drive to cities like Lubbock, that aren't accessible on a route like that. The experience of driving for hours on 2-lane roads through 1-stoplight towns makes me appreciate good highways. You can't have good highways without an active government that's acquiring right-of-way to build them.

Your convenience about the rights of others. I should've known.

[wpme]

Slowpoke, sorry but YOU are the crackpot living in a fantasy land, get off your holier than thou horse. Fact is, if your kind had their way we'd STILL be riding horses, only on zig-zag trails that skirted every property encountered

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by wpme

Slowpoke, sorry but YOU are the crackpot living in a fantasy land, get off your holier than thou horse. Fact is, if your kind had their way we'd STILL be riding horses, only on zig-zag trails that skirted every property encountered

Your use of an ad hominem attack against me, rather than an attempt to break my argument using logic, facts, and common sense, is noted.

And if people who think like me had their way, we'd have larger, better-maintained highways, built only on the properties of those who willfully signed, and funded solely by tolls OR taxes, but not both.



And some of us do still ride horses, BTW. You don't get out of the city much, do ya?

[wpme]

Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX

And some of us do still ride horses, BTW. You don't get out of the city much, do ya?

You got that part right, I don't get out of the city much, left it 30 years ago.

[kt2le]

I read an article not too long ago that, in my opinion, made an interesting observation: 130 should have been built as a FREE road and I-35 through the middle of town converted to TOLL. This might have forced bypassing traffic to use 130 instead. Of course, to accomplish this 130 would have had to be funded by the highway department, not a private company.

[Austinitegirl]

I live in the Round Rock area and have to frequently travel to San Antonio for business - I use 130 every. time.

Even if I'm in Austin proper (like on UT campus where I work), I will totally hop on MLK east to get to 130. It's SO MUCH faster than dealing with 35. Even though UT campus is bordered by 35... I still suffer through MLK for 10 minutes because I know I can FLY down 130/45 until it spits me out on 35 near Kyle.

I've also taken 130 all the way to Seguin if I'm meeting someone on the east side of San Antonio AND I've taken that way back to Round Rock after a San Antonio trip/meeting. It's WAY faster. Trust me... I've done the time trials.