It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I-35E redo between Dallas and Denton ramps up... With 75 Cent Plus Per Mile Toll Lanes

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 11:36 PM

Texas plans to begin buying nearly 200 pieces of private property along Interstate 35E north of Dallas early next year as it moves to deliver on the long-promised reconstruction of the heavily traveled route to Denton.

At nearly $5 billion, the mix of paid and free lanes would be the area's largest highway project ever.

The reconstruction would add just one free main lane in each direction to the famously traffic-clogged stretch. But it also would create continuous frontage roads that supporters say would help ease traffic.

You have to be kidding me!?!?!?

Only 1 "free lane" each way, while adding "toll lanes" that could reach more than 75 cents per mile!!!....and the entire thing costs around 5 billion!!!

Dont our tax dollars pay for infarstructure? They are going to spend 5 billion, of our tax dollars, and then charge us 75 cents or more, per mile?

Does this confuse anyone else? I dont really understand....

Mod Edit: You need a source when quoting from external sources.

edit on 2010/11/22 by GradyPhilpott because: added source and edit excessive quote

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:11 AM
reply to post by buni11687

It's a shame the government decided to simply ignore one of the provisions of the constitution.

Article One. Section 10. Paragraph 2.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

Why was this important to highway tolls. Because those highway tolls were exactly one of the taxes that this clause of the Constitution was supposed to regulate.

Read the Federalist paper #42.

The pertinent section.

The defect of power in the existing Confederacy to regulate the commerce between its several members, is in the number of those which have been clearly pointed out by experience. To the proofs and remarks which former papers have brought into view on this subject, it may be added that without this supplemental provision, the great and essential power of regulating foreign commerce would have been incomplete and ineffectual. A very material object of this power was the relief of the States which import and export through other States, from the improper contributions levied on them by the latter. Were these at liberty to regulate the trade between State and State, it must be foreseen that ways would be found out to load the articles of import and export, during the passage through their jurisdiction, with duties which would fall on the makers of the latter and the consumers of the former. We may be assured by past experience, that such a practice would be introduced by future contrivances; and both by that and a common knowledge of human affairs, that it would nourish unceasing animosities, and not improbably terminate in serious interruptions of the public tranquillity. To those who do not view the question through the medium of passion or of interest, the desire of the commercial States to collect, in any form, an indirect revenue from their uncommercial neighbors, must appear not less impolitic than it is unfair; since it would stimulate the injured party, by resentment as well as interest, to resort to less convenient channels for their foreign trade. But the mild voice of reason, pleading the cause of an enlarged and permanent interest, is but too often drowned, before public bodies as well as individuals, by the clamors of an impatient avidity for immediate and immoderate gain. The necessity of a superintending authority over the reciprocal trade of confederated States, has been illustrated by other examples as well as our own. In Switzerland, where the Union is so very slight, each canton is obliged to allow to merchandises a passage through its jurisdiction into other cantons, without an augmentation of the tolls. In Germany it is a law of the empire, that the princes and states shall not lay tolls or customs on bridges, rivers, or passages, without the consent of the emperor and the diet; though it appears from a quotation in an antecedent paper, that the practice in this, as in many other instances in that confederacy, has not followed the law, and has produced there the mischiefs which have been foreseen here. Among the restraints imposed by the Union of the Netherlands on its members, one is, that they shall not establish imposts disadvantageous to their neighbors, without the general permission.

They passed this code specifically to stop states such as Texas or originally New York from placing obnoxious tariffs and taxes on the import and export traffic of other states.

Highway tolls are supposed to be unconstitutional when applied to commercial traffic. Unless the revenue is given to the federal treasury. And that traffic is the intended victim of these highway tolls. A 80,000 lb tractor trailer would probably pay 5 to 10 times what a car would be charged for the same length of tollway.

edit on 23-11-2010 by ntech because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 12:32 AM
reply to post by ntech

When I first moved to Texas, me and my family didnt understand the reason for toll roads, and we still dont understand today. I think its just a way to take more money from the people, even though our tax dollars help pay for the roads.

I just shake my head when I read stories like - Man Recieves $44,000 Toll Fine

PFLUGERVILLE, Texas (KXAN) - Charles Ackridge was told he owes $44,000 for passing through TxTag tolls without a prepaid pass and not paying the higher rate to use them.

Ackridge said the court offered to lower his fine to $7,000 if he agreed to make payments. But since he said the cost of his toll usage would only have been $1,350, he decided to take the next step.

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:21 AM
I think you may have misread the article.. it will ADD 1 free lane, which for the most part of that stretch will mean a 3 lane freeway each direction.

Still, this is getting rediculous.. first the expansion of the DNT to Frisco, then the construction of 190, then talk of toll lanes on I-30 (did they do that? I never go down there), construction is about to start on a mixed toll/free conversion of I-635 and NOW i-35 with the same concept.

But hey, at least we don't have security check points. *dry laugh*

new topics

top topics

log in