TxDOT to add two lanes to 35 through downtown (Dallas, Austin: real estate, how much)

[Trainwreck20]

How is the CoA going to make someone outside their domain pay anything?

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

How is the CoA going to make someone outside their domain pay anything?

It may be too late for the Domain and SPM. Nutty Brown is currently in the Austin ETJ.

Austin ETJ:
By using ETJ, the City of Austin wields its regulatory power to neighboring land “where development can affect the quality of life within the city.” The City claims that the use of ETJ will make certain that potential subdivisions that may be annexed by Austin in the future will adhere to minimum requirements for road access, lot size and utility infrastructure

[sojourner77]

The problem is that the CoA needs to grow a pair, and increase the "minimum requirements" as it pertains to developers. Not just access to the site, but the ramifications of adding vehicle miles to an entire area of town, like Oak Hill.

edit: I looked at the location for the NB development, and it's right outside the boundary of the ETJ. In this case, the cost of infrastructure expansion will need to be picked up by the users themselves (by tolling the "Y") as we can't hold developers accountable. If developers pass off the costs of infrastructure, then WE ALL are going to pick up the tab one way or another - either lost time in traffic, or paying tolls.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

The problem is that the CoA needs to grow a pair, and increase the "minimum requirements" as it pertains to developers. Not just access to the site, but the ramifications of adding vehicle miles to an entire area of town, like Oak Hill.

They do that, and developers move just a few miles down the road to outside of Austin. Then Austin gets the expenses (traffic impact, etc.) and none of the tax revenue. It's a balancing act.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Novacek

They do that, and developers move just a few miles down the road to outside of Austin. Then Austin gets the expenses (traffic impact, etc.) and none of the tax revenue. It's a balancing act.

Then toll the roads leading into town. If people choose to live outside the CoA (and it many instances pay MORE for their housing), make them pay for the "privilege". We shouldn't be subsidizing white flight in the first place.

[Trainwreck20]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

Then toll the roads leading into town. If people choose to live outside the CoA (and it many instances pay MORE for their housing), make them pay for the "privilege". We shouldn't be subsidizing white flight in the first place.

This is so incorrect in so many ways, but:
- City of Austin cannot (to the best of my knowledge) legal toll roads. Perhaps I am wrong. In any case, residents would end up paying the tolls, as well, and I think you need to leave non-toll routes available (if not as convenient).
- White flight? In Austin? I kind of thought it was the opposite currently.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

This is so incorrect in so many ways, but:
- City of Austin cannot (to the best of my knowledge) legal toll roads. Perhaps I am wrong. In any case, residents would end up paying the tolls, as well, and I think you need to leave non-toll routes available (if not as convenient).
- White flight? In Austin? I kind of thought it was the opposite currently.

City of Austin is turning Anglo, yes - but you still have some paranoid parents fleeing from the phantom menace of AISD - it's off topic though.

Added lanes into/out of Austin should be tolled. If the developers won't pay for it, then residents should. Most importantly residents should know WHY this is happening - the lack of accountability by the developers.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

Then toll the roads leading into town. If people choose to live outside the CoA (and it many instances pay MORE for their housing), make them pay for the "privilege". We shouldn't be subsidizing white flight in the first place.

Im all for this. Plus it shouldnt be too hard to muster to the votes since only people in the city could vote for it.

Variable rate tolls on all the roads coming into town (probably just the new sections as tolling existing roads is not legal).

$10 or $20/trip tolls will get people to carpool, drive during non peak hours etc.

There should always be a free option, but you pay by waiting on the free portion.

It will have the side effect of encouraging density which someday might make it worth it to expand the rail system.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Austin97

$10 or $20/trip tolls will get people to carpool, drive during non peak hours etc.

^^^ding*ding

This facet is lost on the anti-toll road crowd (and the anti-swap I-35/SH130 crowd). Provide the right incentives, and you can modify ANY behavior. When I drive I-35 (and while carpooling every day, btw) I see a lot of people driving in their cars by themselves. The bad traffic is not an incentive for them to carpool on I-35, and a lot of people I see on I-35 (driving alone) would appear to be financially sensitive to a toll.

Tolling new lanes on I-35 would have the most noticable impact of any roadway in the entire metro, as the demographic using I-35 has the most elastic demand - that is, price will have the most effect on their behavior, unlike tolling, say SH71 west, as that is inelastic demand. Austin-to-Bee Caves/DS toll could be $10 and the Range-Rover crowd will just pay it. The Buda or Dove Springs crowd will NOT pay a steep toll to drive I-35 alone, and traffic on I-35 will reduce substantially. I haven't even mentioned the truckers who just "tough it out" when driving straight through Austin. The results of a tolled I-35 would be amazing.

full disclosure: I live right off of I-35, I carpool downtown every day, and I want I-35 to become a tollroad. My demand for it is inelastic, and I'm willing to pay for it, as are other people like me who are moving to the I-35 corridor.

[Aquitaine]

The Buda or Dove Springs crowd will NOT pay a steep toll to drive I-35 alone, and traffic on I-35 will reduce substantially.

If the only problem here were 'we must get cars off of I-35' then this would be a perfect solution.

The type of distributed carpooling you'd need to get all the people who need to get somewhere to where they want to go won't happen until we have Google or Uber or Apple with driverless cars picking folks up. Otherwise, suggesting a $10 or $20 toll on a major arterial road with few (or no) alternatives is a non-starter. Gridlock on service roads and city streets is what will happen, and any politician who voted for it will be gone in the next cycle.

Has this type of social engineering ever worked? "Let's just force people to carpool through incentives" may sound great in a graduate seminar but there's a reason you don't see it very often. Even the 290 service road next to the new 290 toll road gets clogged pretty quickly and that's just people trying to save ninety cents!