Can Austin survive without swapping I-35 and SH130? (San Antonio, West: houses, to live)

[749]

Originally Posted by Paddy the Plasterer

You can't toll existing lanes on Mopac, or any other already built and paid for highway. It is against federal law to do so. Only new lanes, and new highways can be tolled.

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/24/55/06.../0/622x350.jpg

[austinnerd]

Originally Posted by Paddy the Plasterer

You can't toll existing lanes on Mopac, or any other already built and paid for highway. It is against federal law to do so. Only new lanes, and new highways can be tolled.

From the DOT itself:

Under Title 23 of the United States Code (Highways), there is a general prohibition on the imposition of tolls on Federal-aid highways. However, Title 23 and other statutes have also carved out certain exceptions to this general prohibition through special programs. These programs allow tolling to generate revenue to support highway construction activities and/or enable the use of road pricing for congestion management. If Federal funds have been used or will be used on the highway, then the public authority responsible for the facility must qualify for toll authority under one of these Federal toll programs.

So it certainly is possible given that the tolls would be used for "congestion management". And notice that is says "Federal-aid" highways, not Federal highways, another key distinction. The law really is in place to prevent municipalities from imposing tolls on existing highways/lanes as a means to simply increase revenue.

[CptnRn]

From this mornings Statesman article:

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...atesman_launch

It looked at eight scenarios of what might happen with the area’s transportation system. That included the much-discussed swapping of I-35 and Texas 130 on the metro area’s eastern edge, making I-35 through Austin a tollway while making Texas 130 free and redubbing it I-35.

Aside from being legally impossible at this point and politically unfeasible at probably any point in the future, the study shows that such a flip-flop wouldn’t even help.


Trips home to northern and southern suburbs on the former I-35, paying tolls, would still take two and three hours. The reason: 86 percent of all trips on I-35 are locally generated, the study says. No one looking to go from Travis Heights to the Highland Mall area, for instance, would travel miles to the east and take the current Texas 130 even if it were free.
“There would appear to be no fix to I-35 congestion that includes (Texas) 130,” wrote Mike Heiligenstein, executive director of the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, in a letter to the report’s authors this summer after seeing their findings. “All the exhaustive discussions that have centered on moving trucks to 130 are simply not realistic or attainable.”

[gpurcell]

Link is bad. Full article is available on their Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/MobilityAuthority

I take issue with this, though:

"86 percent of all trips on I-35 are locally generated"

The 14 percent that aren't are going to be heavily slanted towards semis and large tractor trailers have a LOT more effect on a a transportation system than a simple car. If 130 could divert, say, 5 to 10 percent of trips and those trips are large trucks I don't see how that couldn't be beneficial.

[10scoachrick]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Link is bad. Full article is available on their Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/MobilityAuthority

I take issue with this, though:

"86 percent of all trips on I-35 are locally generated"

The 14 percent that aren't are going to be heavily slanted towards semis and large tractor trailers have a LOT more effect on a a transportation system than a simple car. If 130 could divert, say, 5 to 10 percent of trips and those trips are large trucks I don't see how that couldn't be beneficial.

There ya go! Also, I've never heard of a sedan jack-knifing and shutting down IH35. Get the through trucks onto 130 !

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Link is bad. Full article is available on their Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/MobilityAuthority

I take issue with this, though:

"86 percent of all trips on I-35 are locally generated"

The 14 percent that aren't are going to be heavily slanted towards semis and large tractor trailers have a LOT more effect on a a transportation system than a simple car. If 130 could divert, say, 5 to 10 percent of trips and those trips are large trucks I don't see how that couldn't be beneficial.

two other issues:

1. Although I haven't seen it confirmed, I'm quite sure that "locally" is defined as everything from as far south at Buda to as far north as Georgetown. Folks living in Georgetown, Round Rock Pflugerville and far north Austin can easily be diverted onto either SH 130 or 183. 183 has more than sufficient capacity and can easily be re-engineered to be a freeway.

2. Removing 15% of the existing traffic off of IH35 would reduce congestion far in excess of 15% because IH 35 would be operating within its design capacity and can move much more traffic this way.

[Uberguber]

The remaining 86% of traffic on I-35 will also undergo behavior modification in the form of consolidated trips and carpooling. It could take another 10% of the cars off I-35. Imagine the remaining 85% of traffic contracting into say, 75% because they have to pay tolls? Swapping I-35 would reduce traffic by 25% or more as a net result. I guarantee that a 25% reduction in traffic would create a free-flowing I-35.

What irks me is that the long-term outlook isn't good, but what they CAN do, they refuse to do. At this point, if swapping I-35 and SH-130 is the best option we have, THEN DO IT!!!!!

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Uberguber

The remaining 86% of traffic on I-35 will also undergo behavior modification in the form of consolidated trips and carpooling. It could take another 10% of the cars off I-35. Imagine the remaining 85% of traffic contracting into say, 75% because they have to pay tolls? Swapping I-35 would reduce traffic by 25% or more as a net result. I guarantee that a 25% reduction in traffic would create a free-flowing I-35.

What irks me is that the long-term outlook isn't good, but what they CAN do, they refuse to do. At this point, if swapping I-35 and SH-130 is the best option we have, THEN DO IT!!!!!

And your justification for this prognostication is what, exactly? It might be what you would LIKE to see happen, but what makes you think that people will modify their behavior in this way just because the two roads are swapped?

[Uberguber]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

And your justification for this prognostication is what, exactly? It might be what you would LIKE to see happen, but what makes you think that people will modify their behavior in this way just because the two roads are swapped?

Make people pay to use a road, and you'll see carpooling. It's not rocket science.

You live along SH130, don't you? Getting protective of it, aren't you?

[Uberguber]

To the area, and it's development?

Would it go downhill? I get the feeling that people living along SH130 are being protective of the tollroad because they know it's desirable, and that a paying toll helps keep out riff-raff out of their area. This talk off swapping the two probably infuriates them.