• I just want to go 70.

    January 6, 2011 at 1:14 a.m.
  • people will complain if the city spends money, people will complain if the city doesn't spend the money to improve somehting

    so be it.

    January 5, 2011 at 11:19 p.m.
  • People gripe that the City is not being progressive enough to handle the population or the traffic, and then they gripe when money is spent. This decision will help keep the heavy traffic moving in this area and will save lives. The overpasses on Lower and Upper MV roads were built after several deadly accidents. Those overpasses have saved countless lives since being built, and so will these. Thank you Denise, Tom, and Paul.

    January 5, 2011 at 9:51 p.m.
  • Barry said: "With the installation of traffic lights, you essentially defeat the purpose of creating a loop in the first place..."

    Many would say (and have said) building a "loop" directly to the mall and creating the most congested intersection in town "defeated the purpose of creating a loop." How many bandaids will we need to put on the unintended consequences before we call it what it is -- 463 Blvd?

    January 5, 2011 at 2:54 p.m.
  • With the installation of traffic essentially defeat the purpose of creating a loop in the first place or at the very least greatly diminish its worth. This project does involve a lot of money, but it is something that will always be here and should pay dividends both in safety and business opportunities from completion date on. At some point this would have been done as long as the State is offering up money...I believe it was a wise move to go ahead with it now and save the taxpayers money in the long run.

    January 5, 2011 at 2 p.m.
  • I agee with 4rheels, this is a heart attack waiting to happen. The masssive debt is enourmous for this project! Dagind Hagar and Gaube Solenza are the only inteligent ones in the village government. The economy is in devastation mode!

    January 5, 2011 at 1:29 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    January 5, 2011 at 1:29 p.m.
  • 4reals, what are you talking about? spell it out for me because I can be pretty dense at times.

    January 5, 2011 at 1:22 p.m.
  • Just a guess, but the land owners vs the certain council members relationship, is just glaring at me. I believe that it's not in the interest of what's good for safety or the city.

    January 5, 2011 at 12:51 p.m.
  • 1. The article talks about 2 overpasses. You say for school on loop 463. Where is other.
    2. Where is overpass for Victoria West. One entrance for mid and high school. I believe they don't care about safety of children at those 2 schools.
    3. After overpass completed on loop get rid of all lights on loop and make it 70 mph for entire loop.
    4. Do you listen to what we say or "Do what you want and citizens be dammed".

    January 5, 2011 at 12:49 p.m.
  • approved work $$ listed. Move down to Loop463 project. Contact Paul it says w/ a number listed.

    January 5, 2011 at 10:06 a.m.
  • The loop does attract business. Haven't you seen that unsightly trailer dumping ground up where Airline and the loop intersect? What a message that is sending out to people passing thru. Definitely would need your boots there!

    January 5, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    January 5, 2011 at 9:03 a.m.
  • How much would a stoplight at Salem cost? We have to tighten our belts. Sounds risky considering the issues with state budgets and the coming cuts. I'm with Soliz on this one.

    The speed limit on that loop is 55 mph. Maybe we need to enforce that to help prevent some of the accidents. The drivers here are crazy.

    I understand the traffic near the high schools is really bad. Have other solutions been suggested? Is this the only way?

    January 5, 2011 at 9:01 a.m.
  • Well don't look to San Antonio for direction then. The last time I took "LOOP" 1604 there were more stop signs than you could shake a stick at. The toll roads in Austin, Houston, and Dallas are wonderful. I don't want to live there but it sure is nice when one is passing through or trying to get from one side of town to the other. I love my EZTag.

    January 5, 2011 at 8:53 a.m.
  • Where are the city funds acutally coming from?
    Where are the County funds actually coming from?

    TexasConstiotution Article 11 section 5 "But no debt for any purpose shall ever be incurred in any manner by any city or county unless provision is made, at the time of creating the same, for levying and collecting a sufficient tax to pay the interest thereon and provide at least two per cent (2%) as a sinking fund; "

    Why do our elected officals contuine to ingore the law and Why doesen't the new city attorney tell them this

    January 5, 2011 at 8:48 a.m.

    January 5, 2011 at 8:40 a.m.
  • Ummm, let's see here...isn't this called a loop...
    Why should we slow traffic down to 35 mph....these are HIGH schools and these kids should be aware of highways, if THAT is the issue!
    People let's get on the modern train here, lots of BIG CITIES have schools on major highways and they don't have have reduced speeds on those roads.

    I read these articles daily and it is funny how, yes, it is the same people with the same BS!!

    Let's get modern here in this 1 HORSE TOWN already!!!!
    Hey, good ole boys....time for growth here!!!! Let's DO IT!!! What are you going to do when big business want to set up shop on a whimpy loopy with stop & go traffic......things that make you go hummmm?!

    January 5, 2011 at 8:37 a.m.
  • The "smart" remarks would likely disapear if the City Council would restrict their actions to maintaining City streets, sidewalks, sanitation and providing for public safety. Rather, Council seems to feel the desire to fill some "need" of the citizen or interest group while ignoring their basic functions of local government.

    January 5, 2011 at 8:28 a.m.
  • Agree... I think all these sarcastic remarks wouldn't appear if the city would have approved another new marketing campaign such as the "Bring your boots to Victoria" that went over so well.

    January 5, 2011 at 8:07 a.m.
  • I would enjoy reading these comments more if they weren't so predictable.

    January 5, 2011 at 6:53 a.m.
  • On one side you can drive 70mph on the loop. Cost-just under 25 million dollars. On the other side- Post a lower speed limit (35mph) to prevent the accidents. Cost- under $1,000. Which one is the best for the children? Save them money and slow the cars down to a managable speed makes the most sense to me. Why spend the millions of dollars just to go 70mph for a half of a mile to a mile instead of 35mph. I am againist the overpasses. They are a waste of money that could be used elsewhere. Housing the homeless, feeding our hungry, clothing our naked, etc.. how much was it to repair Laurent or will it cost to repair Red River or Sam Houston?

    January 5, 2011 at 6:43 a.m.
  • Building parking for a cafe and running an idiotic ad campaign are priorities for this councils. Issues of public safety such as the sidewalks surrounding schools (planned a year too late) and the overpasses are on the lower runge and barely garner their blessings.

    Another WTF moment in Victoria politics.....

    January 5, 2011 at 6:35 a.m.
  • GOP. Your statement implied that state money is diverted from poor sick babies to pay for this overpass.

    January 5, 2011 at 1:24 a.m.
  • A project of this magnitude and absent were Mayor Will Armstrong and Council Member Joe Truman? Does this mean their lack of concern r their votes don't count? Please correct if I'm at a lack of understanding.

    January 4, 2011 at 11:21 p.m.
  • Where did I say Medicaid doesn’t cover sick poor children.

    January 4, 2011 at 11:04 p.m.
  • GOP,
    Poor sick babies are taken care of in this country. Have you ever heard of Medicaid?

    January 4, 2011 at 9:51 p.m.
  • Where are the outraged citizens that show up at the town square for the TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY rallys?

    This is different, it's not like this money is being spent on medicine for poor sick babies.

    January 4, 2011 at 8:56 p.m.
  • 18 to 24 months for such a small project is ridiculous

    i dont understands hagan's concerns with cost overruns. cost overruns are always an issue, regardless of the project size and the timing of the project.

    soliz seems to have more valid concerns, if the state backs out with their funding then who is left holding the check book ?

    January 4, 2011 at 8:45 p.m.
  • Way to go Soliz and Hagan, you are saying what everyone else
    won't. This is a waste of Money.

    Post a 35 mph sign and it is no longer dangerous. period.

    "From my perspective, they're bringing money to the state to help us build a major safety improvement," said District Engineer Lonnie Gregorcyk with the Texas Department of Transportation. "It's a joint effort."

    Just who are "They"? I am wondering. These vague references couldn't mean that the Federal Govt is helping, could it?

    My God you better not take any of the Obama Stimulous money because then you would be one of them.

    Where are the outraged citizens that show up at the town square for the TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY rallys? Oh yea, they are at city hall waiting to take the money for these projects that they complain about later.

    January 4, 2011 at 8:23 p.m.