Why do people want to work and live in Austin if it is already overcrowded, expensive to live there ? (Houston: to live in, moving)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by ctk0p7

That may effect projects within Austin, but would not stop the state from building needed roads around the city itself, like an I-35 bypass to the east of the city that would have kept I-35 in town from being the mess it is today. There is a lot of blame that can be spread around upon many agencies. I suppose traffic will just be one of those prices we pay for living in the area. At some point traffic is going to be a reason that people stop moving here, which might not be a bad thing.

Roads construction in the Austin area are in conjunction with the plans approved by the federally mandated Metropolitan Planning Organization, formerly the Austin Transportation Study, now known as the Capitol Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. The 1994 council appoint two vocal opponents to ATS who joined with a similarly aligned Travis County rep to basically shut down new road construction by amending the approved plan to end all planned limited access highways in the Austin area.

[sxrckr]

Originally Posted by ctk0p7

The quality of life in Austin is the main reason for growth. Things like parks, trails etc are a large contributing factor to that quality of life, otherwise Austin would look like Dallas or Houston. Yes I agree that the city needs to make transportation improvements on city streets, but that does not address the over crowded state highways in the area. I believe TXDOT has failed to provide adequate funding to expand state roads in the Austin area for decades now. They could have routed an I-35 bypass east of Austin a long time ago, but somehow now all we can get are more toll roads. Even with all the transportation problems, Austin is still an awesome place to live.

As long as there are jobs, people will keep flocking here.
The rest is an exaggeration, as those other places also have high growth and decent marks on QOL, parks/trails etc.

[gpurcell]

That map makes me so mad, Scm. And the same yahoos who kept us from having a proper road system are blaming traffic on everyone but themselves.

[atx1626]

Capacity upgrades alone rarely solve problems. Just kicks the can down the road.

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by atx1626

Capacity upgrades alone rarely solve problems. Just kicks the can down the road.

Creating a proper ring road system isn't merely "creating capacity". And that's the nonsensical attitude that led to us having a completely inadequate road system in the first place.

[atxcio]

Here are aerial photos of Dallas and Houston:
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/744692.jpg
http://www.metroviews.com/images/720...ERIAL_3440.jpg

And here is Austin:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

I'm fine with a ring road, but personally I think we dodged a bullet by avoiding the typical highways carving up downtown and central neighborhoods (as the 1985 plan would have done). Dallas is already trying to bury some of those close-in highways to create the kind of urban continuity Austin has.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by ctk0p7

That may effect projects within Austin, but would not stop the state from building needed roads around the city itself, like an I-35 bypass to the east of the city that would have kept I-35 in town from being the mess it is today. There is a lot of blame that can be spread around upon many agencies. I suppose traffic will just be one of those prices we pay for living in the area. At some point traffic is going to be a reason that people stop moving here, which might not be a bad thing.

They did build it...it's called Texas 130.

[ctk0p7]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

They did build it...it's called Texas 130.

That is a private built toll road. I-35 should have be re-routed that way a long time ago to get the through traffic out of Austin. Obviously the toll road isn't working, the company that built it is in financial trouble.

[atx1626]

Originally Posted by ctk0p7

That is a private built toll road. I-35 should have be re-routed that way a long time ago to get the through traffic out of Austin. Obviously the toll road isn't working, the company that built it is in financial trouble.

Most of the roads in that plan were to be tolled.

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Creating a proper ring road system isn't merely "creating capacity".

That 1985 plan is a joke. The cross-town freeways would have met with revolt and the other roads don't answer any of the following questions:

How did the 1985 plan upgrade 35 and MoPac from their antiquated designs? Even at 50-100K AADT less, those roads would still be massively congested.

How does the proposed outer ring in the 1985 plan aid the dominant, longitudinal commute patterns in the area in 2014?

We've seen the eastern half of the ring road (SH 130) fail to keep through trucks off of 35 due to a combination of distance (15 miles or so) and tolls. Why would the western half of that loop, one of similar length and also heavily tolled, fare any better?

The Manor and future Bergstrom Expressways, in combination, are a far more effective use of transportation dollars than blowing a road through some hills in Lakeway (and trust me, I'm not shedding a tear for anyone in Lakeway). That would have failed like every other beltway in this state has failed either due to sprawl or lack of use. People like to compare traffic in San Antonio to traffic here, but outside of traffic on the northeast side up to New Braunfels, the traffic patterns aren't at all analogous.

You can't just snap your fingers and say "more roads will solve Austin's woes", much like you can't just snap your fingers and say "we need a train!". Road upgrades and mass transit options, as part of a nuanced plan, are needed and both are coming.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by atxcio

I'm fine with a ring road, but personally I think we dodged a bullet by avoiding the typical highways carving up downtown and central neighborhoods (as the 1985 plan would have done). Dallas is already trying to bury some of those close-in highways to create the kind of urban continuity Austin has.

The only inner city highway in the '85 plan is one I probably would have opposed as well - the Koenig freeway. But 360 should be a freeway as was always envisioned, 183 should already be freeway from 290 to 71, and we should have a ring road because of our growth in jobs in the outer ring (10-35 mi from downtown), where we had the third largest percentage growth in the nation. We are a polycentric job market, with a unicentric road network.

The bastardization of the "induced traffic demand" argument is interesting. What's has happened is that that urban religionists have taken that theory - where added road capacity in static populations is filled because of:

• Diverted traffic that changes its route onto the improved capacity.
• Rescheduled traffic that previously used the facility at a different time (spreading or contracting the peak).
• Shifts from other modes -- which may or may not have used the facility before -- including changes in occupancy.
• Destination shifts resulting from the improvement of the facility.
• Additional travel by persons already using, or in the market for, the facility.

They have perversely used this theory from static populations, to falsely argue against added road capacity in growing populations - because not adding capacity in Austin has worked so well, right?