I guess free government money for your car to be stuck in traffic on a wider road is somehow exempt from complaint?

  • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s a similar thing here in Austin. Rather than expand the light rail system, the state is expanding I-35 through downtown.

    However, it’s not so cut and dry. See, the city has to fund the light rail expansion, while the Texas Department of Transportation funds the highway expansion. Both have access to the same data, but the latter is restricted by law to only spend money on expansions to alleviate traffic on highways. Alternative modes of transport aren’t even considered because it would be against the law to spend any money on it. So if the data says there’s too much traffic, the state has the money to fix it and they’re only allowed to fix it in precisely one way.

    It’s ridiculous.

      • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        Of course it would, but the state department of transportation is forbidden from spending any money on anything but roads. The people in cities are already taxed to hell and back, so it’s a tough sell for them to be taxed more for a light rail system that wouldn’t be finished for another 20 years.

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          could they get away with busways that curiously just so happen to be then converted into light rail routes? that way the state could fund the foundation work at least.