Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsSan Joaquin Toll
IN THE NEWS

San Joaquin Toll

FEATURED ARTICLES
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 14, 1998 | YUNG KIM
Travelers who use the San Joaquin Hills tollway will need some extra change in a couple of months, highway authorities said Thursday. The San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency's directors approved an increase in the highway's toll for two-axle vehicles to $2.25 at the main toll plaza in Irvine. That will be an increase from $2. Peter Buffa, chairman of the board, said the Nov. 1 increase is part of an overall financial plan expected to bring in an additional $2.
ARTICLES BY DATE
BUSINESS
May 27, 2004 | Michael Hiltzik
I must admit to having felt a little queasy the other day when I heard that a bunch of Orange County politicians had meddled in an important public financing transaction and torpedoed the deal. After all, this is the county that won a permanent place in the Municipal Finance Hall of Shame for losing a couple of billion dollars in an investment debacle almost exactly 10 years ago.
Advertisement
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 27, 2000
Re "San Joaquin Tollway Gets $40-Million Transfusion," Feb. 11: Operators of the San Joaquin toll road system just don't seem to get it. If the toll road existed as a true business entity in the private business world, management would immediately take action to plug the hole in the dike. Perhaps some enhanced creativity and expedient action are in order. The toll road agency's plans to "step up consideration of variable pricing" is a good start. Why don't they "just do it"?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 27, 2000
Re "San Joaquin Tollway Gets $40-Million Transfusion," Feb. 11: Operators of the San Joaquin toll road system just don't seem to get it. If the toll road existed as a true business entity in the private business world, management would immediately take action to plug the hole in the dike. Perhaps some enhanced creativity and expedient action are in order. The toll road agency's plans to "step up consideration of variable pricing" is a good start. Why don't they "just do it"?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 16, 1994
Your Sunday editorial, "Agencies Must Clear Air Over Toll Roads" (Oct. 9) was a breath of fresh air to us who have labored against the San Joaquin toll road and the Orange County Transportation Corridor Agencies for its malevolences, half-truths and gross misrepresentations over the years since the days of the environmental impact reviews. Your article correctly states "the intention to collect tolls on the Newport Coast Drive, while there in fine print, was never fully or satisfactorily aired."
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 23, 2000
Your article of Feb. 17 indicating that the San Joaquin toll road is in financial trouble misses the point. The road was never intended to solve traffic problems or make money for its investors. It was intended to facilitate the permits to build more housing in South County. The dupes are 1) the bondholders who invested in the project; and 2) the taxpayers who will buy the road when its builders need to get their money back. TIM BRADLEY Irvine Question for our highly compensated toll road bureaucrats: Did you ever consider that perhaps the reason more people don't use the toll roads is that the users virtually are guaranteed not to have their cell phones work on these beautiful new boulevards?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 11, 1997
Within the May 1 article, "New Road's Tolls Not Up to Speed," were two interesting points. First, while Bob Muller, managing director, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., the toll road bond underwriters, mused that new toll roads routinely run 40% below projections during the first few months, we are past these first few months and the toll road performed at 51% below projections. Second, Muller's gleeful observation that growth in Orange County is likely to jam up the widened Santa Ana Freeway and his conclusion that "people will have nowhere else to go, so the toll road will really begin to gain ground" was disgusting.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
January 14, 1996
Michael Ellick is "right on" in his Jan. 7 commentary. The only thing I disagree with is the headline. It should have read: "When will the supervisors be mature enough to declare a moratorium on building?" Nothing that we in Orange County value is addressed by these people: quality of life now, and something left for future generations. Ellick isn't predicting gridlock, it's here! We said we did not want the toll roads and we were second-guessed on that one. They are here and we are going to pay for them.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 17, 1999
The Oct. 10 Times had three letters ("Blessings for Toll Roads") praising the personal convenience of the toll roads. What none of these writers mentioned was the destruction of prime open space that has occurred in placing these roads, and which would occur if the Foothill toll road is extended. Also missing from their letters is the obvious fact that the Foothill extension just adds more traffic--no more lanes--to I-5 going south, just as the San Joaquin Toll road did to I-405 going north from Newport Beach.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 15, 1988
If anyone happened to be wondering whether the Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC) is misnamed, all one had to do was pick up a copy of its good-looking, slick, May newsletter, "Newsline." A better name for the commission might be Orange County Development Commission. True, the paper does report quite a bit of its traffic goings-on. But look here: Commenting, alarmingly (to me), on the start-nowhere, go-nowhere San Joaquin toll road, it said: "Some portions of the route (San Joaquin Transportation Corridor)
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 23, 2000
Your article of Feb. 17 indicating that the San Joaquin toll road is in financial trouble misses the point. The road was never intended to solve traffic problems or make money for its investors. It was intended to facilitate the permits to build more housing in South County. The dupes are 1) the bondholders who invested in the project; and 2) the taxpayers who will buy the road when its builders need to get their money back. TIM BRADLEY Irvine Question for our highly compensated toll road bureaucrats: Did you ever consider that perhaps the reason more people don't use the toll roads is that the users virtually are guaranteed not to have their cell phones work on these beautiful new boulevards?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 17, 1999
The Oct. 10 Times had three letters ("Blessings for Toll Roads") praising the personal convenience of the toll roads. What none of these writers mentioned was the destruction of prime open space that has occurred in placing these roads, and which would occur if the Foothill toll road is extended. Also missing from their letters is the obvious fact that the Foothill extension just adds more traffic--no more lanes--to I-5 going south, just as the San Joaquin Toll road did to I-405 going north from Newport Beach.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 14, 1998 | YUNG KIM
Travelers who use the San Joaquin Hills tollway will need some extra change in a couple of months, highway authorities said Thursday. The San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency's directors approved an increase in the highway's toll for two-axle vehicles to $2.25 at the main toll plaza in Irvine. That will be an increase from $2. Peter Buffa, chairman of the board, said the Nov. 1 increase is part of an overall financial plan expected to bring in an additional $2.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 4, 1997 | JEAN O. PASCO, SPECIAL TO THE TIMES
The $2 charge on the San Joaquin Hills toll road could drop during weekends and evenings to entice more riders to the road, where traffic is running about 43% behind its anticipated use. A ridership study released this week shows the road will not carry as many cars as was predicted in 1992, when those projections were used to sell $1.4 billion in construction bonds. The bonds were sold anticipating 94,500 a day by April 1997; the road is handling about 54,000 cars daily.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 11, 1997
Within the May 1 article, "New Road's Tolls Not Up to Speed," were two interesting points. First, while Bob Muller, managing director, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., the toll road bond underwriters, mused that new toll roads routinely run 40% below projections during the first few months, we are past these first few months and the toll road performed at 51% below projections. Second, Muller's gleeful observation that growth in Orange County is likely to jam up the widened Santa Ana Freeway and his conclusion that "people will have nowhere else to go, so the toll road will really begin to gain ground" was disgusting.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 22, 1996 | DAVID HALDANE, TIMES STAFF WRITER
After years of protests and legal battles, the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor opened shortly after midnight Wednesday, drawing thousands of Thursday-morning commuters who took advantage of the introductory free ride. Despite a handful of sign-toting opponents and rain that contributed to at least 14 accidents, most of the motorists sliced through at high speed--in dramatic contrast to fellow travelers crawling bumper-to-bumper along the waterlogged San Diego Freeway.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 19, 1994 | RUSS LOAR
It was a bicyclist's dream come true when the $67-million Newport Coast Drive opened in November, 1991, creating a rural 6.3-mile route for bicycles as well as vehicles from Irvine to the beaches of Newport. But cyclists have now joined critics of the San Joaquin Hills Toll Road which will intersect Newport Coast Drive and bring the demise what they say is one of the county's premier bike routes.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
January 9, 1994
Your editorial ("Have a Heart--Build a Toll Road Bypass," Jan. 2) concerning the Transportation Corridor Agencies' plan to charge a toll on a portion of Newport Coast Drive when it becomes a part of the San Joaquin Hills Toll Road addresses a problem that is only the tip of the iceberg. Assemblyman Gil Ferguson (R-Newport Beach) and others are rightly upset that this previously free ride will soon begin to cost drivers a dollar or so per round trip. But what your commentary neglects to mention is the reason the TCA so adamantly insists the tolls be assessed: Toll revenues from Newport Coast Drive make up a significant portion of the monies budgeted to support the near-junk-level bonds issued to finance the ill-conceived San Joaquin Hills Toll Road project.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 10, 1996 | DAVID HALDANE, TIMES STAFF WRITER
When one of the most controversial projects in Orange County history, the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, opens next week, it will mark the beginning of an era for transportation planners but the end of a long fight for environmentalists. "A lot of people have been waiting for this," said Michele Miller, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Corridor Agencies, which built the toll road scheduled to open completely Nov. 21.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
January 14, 1996
Michael Ellick is "right on" in his Jan. 7 commentary. The only thing I disagree with is the headline. It should have read: "When will the supervisors be mature enough to declare a moratorium on building?" Nothing that we in Orange County value is addressed by these people: quality of life now, and something left for future generations. Ellick isn't predicting gridlock, it's here! We said we did not want the toll roads and we were second-guessed on that one. They are here and we are going to pay for them.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|