HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2013, 8:10 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Chapter 317 of the Texas Transportation Code has to do specify with railroads and railroad crossings. Chapter 314 is the appropriate chapter for highways construction and expansion. It has no limitations on property purchases or condemnations.

Just a listing of a few Chapter 300s.

Chapter 311. General Provisions Relating To Municipal Streets
Chapter 312. Control Of Highway Assets
Chapter 313. Street Improvements And Assessments In Certain Municipalities
Chapter 314. Purchase Or Condemnation Of Property For Highways By Certain Municipalities
Chapter 315. Artificial Lighting
Chapter 316. Use Of Municipal Streets And Sidewalks For Public Conveniences And Amenities Or For Private Uses
Chapter 317. Elimination Of Grade-Level Street Crossings By Railroad Lines In Municipalities With Population Of More Than 100,000

What a city can condemn legally or politically are two different ideas.

Last edited by electricron; Jun 22, 2013 at 8:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2013, 4:30 PM
AusTex's Avatar
AusTex AusTex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
You mistake the purpose of doing this. It's about creating a great city and to a small extent reclaiming what should have been, not moving the most amount of traffic. A substantial amount of traffic on IH35 could and should be rerouted onto 183 and SH130 - running a interstate through the center of downtown was a terrible idea to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by migol24 View Post
Agree.

I don't get why the majority of people in Texas just can't seem to wrap their minds around using public transportation. All the cities, including Austin, had it going very well before everyone started using cars. All my family are the same way. They can't envision their lives without owning a vehicle. I find that insane. This city or any city shouldn't revolve around vehicles, imo. It should revolve around using smart space and effectively getting people to where they need to go. When I lived in Austin, I owned a car but rarely drove it around. I feel you get to appreciate Austin more that way.

But that was something they should've thought about long before they started building freeways. The damage has already been done too long ago. I am very excited to see what Austin is envisioning for itself. I hope it all works out.
I agree.

The interstate is here and most folk traveling thru Central Austin will not take the bypasses. 183 does not even have a connection to the north on IH35. It could be built; however, TXDOT does not want to build one. People traveling thru Austin know the interstate and will stay on the interstate.

The history of American capitalism and law continues to favor the single family home warehouse districts that keep getting funded and built. These auto dependant districts are what get built. History has favored auto dependant development over long term societal benefit. If and When the cost of developing these developments is added to the purchase price of each new home/unit,...THEN these sprawl developments will stop being built. We all pay for the new roads, water lines, schools etc.

People in America drive autos. We mostly do not have options. Our cities and burbs are designed and built without travel options. I do not like it either. Even Austin has yielded to short term money/profit. The city has failed to insist that new developments have some sort of grid street system, connect to existing and future developments, have a mix of housing options, etc. The money interests have squashed nearly all far sighted changes to existing sprawl.

We must ATEMPT to accommodate more future traffic on the interstate...otherwise we are creating another short term mess. Four lanes in each direction downtown is simply "stupid" if we have the room to build six in each direction underground. Why do folk in Texas and especially in Austin keep spending big bucks on the wrong solutions only to create more problems and forgo the societies (social) long term health?!? Perhaps..."corporations are people too" and money driven elections are biting us. We the people and corporations with the money........
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2013, 5:04 PM
Komeht Komeht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by AusTex View Post
I agree.

The interstate is here and most folk traveling thru Central Austin will not take the bypasses. 183 does not even have a connection to the north on IH35. It could be built; however, TXDOT does not want to build one. People traveling thru Austin know the interstate and will stay on the interstate.

The history of American capitalism and law continues to favor the single family home warehouse districts that keep getting funded and built. These auto dependant districts are what get built. History has favored auto dependant development over long term societal benefit. If and When the cost of developing these developments is added to the purchase price of each new home/unit,...THEN these sprawl developments will stop being built. We all pay for the new roads, water lines, schools etc.

People in America drive autos. We mostly do not have options. Our cities and burbs are designed and built without travel options. I do not like it either. Even Austin has yielded to short term money/profit. The city has failed to insist that new developments have some sort of grid street system, connect to existing and future developments, have a mix of housing options, etc. The money interests have squashed nearly all far sighted changes to existing sprawl.

We must ATEMPT to accommodate more future traffic on the interstate...otherwise we are creating another short term mess. Four lanes in each direction downtown is simply "stupid" if we have the room to build six in each direction underground. Why do folk in Texas and especially in Austin keep spending big bucks on the wrong solutions only to create more problems and forgo the societies (social) long term health?!? Perhaps..."corporations are people too" and money driven elections are biting us. We the people and corporations with the money........
You seem to be given to grandiose statements and invoke 50 years of bad urban policy against thousands of years of successful urban development and totally discount the possibility of undoing the mistakes that have created the mess to begin with. Frankly I'd rather have these conversations with someone interested in pushing forward passed this auto-dependent era and talk about what are the best practices today and how can we fix what was handed down, not how do we bolster the mistakes of the last 50 years. So with that, good day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2013, 9:15 PM
BevoLJ's Avatar
BevoLJ BevoLJ is offline
~Hook'em~
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Austin, TX/London, UK
Posts: 1,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
Dang, I read the comments.

https://twitter.com/AvoidComments
__________________
Austin, Texas
London, United Kingdom
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2013, 4:26 AM
hereinaustin hereinaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
You seem to be given to grandiose statements and invoke 50 years of bad urban policy against thousands of years of successful urban development and totally discount the possibility of undoing the mistakes that have created the mess to begin with. Frankly I'd rather have these conversations with someone interested in pushing forward passed this auto-dependent era and talk about what are the best practices today and how can we fix what was handed down, not how do we bolster the mistakes of the last 50 years. So with that, good day.
Well, in that case, do the cut & cap and TOLL all lanes and possibly remove the tolls on SH-130. If you tolled I-35 between Buda and Georgetown this would discourage automotive traffic along the central I-35 corridor. It would also pay for the above-ground boulevard and park through downtown. Plus, any extra money from the toll could be used towards building a thorough public transit (i.e. gondolas, metro rail, commuter rail, etc) system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2013, 4:35 AM
Komeht Komeht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereinaustin View Post
Well, in that case, do the cut & cap and TOLL all lanes and possibly remove the tolls on SH-130. This would discourage automotive traffic along the I-35 corridor. It would also pay for the above-ground boulevard and park. Plus, any extra money from the toll could be used towards building a thorough public transit (i.e. gondolas, rail, etc) system.
Tolling 1H35 is a no brainer - should have been done years ago. Removing tolls on SH -130 would also be a no brainer - why aren't we doing everything possible to move traffic off IH35?

But - none of these projects, including Cut n' Cap are nearly ambitious enough.

IH 35 should be completely re-routed on a combination of SH 130 and 183.

Between BWB and 290 IH35 should be returned to an at-grade boulevard. Remove the upper deck completely, cap the lower deck for the entire length of it. Run light rail straight up the center from BWB to 290 and zone the entire the VMU with no set backs, no FAR, no parking requirements, no impervious cover limitations, no height restrictions at all. Fund the entire project with TIFs from the vast amount of the most valuable land in Austin becoming developable. Heal the divide of East Austin for the entire length, not just a few blocks in the CBD and open 1000s of acres, not a few dozen acres - to development. Create a world class downtown and world class grande tree-lined boulevard that would be the envy of other American cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2013, 5:39 AM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 3,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
Tolling 1H35 is a no brainer - should have been done years ago. Removing tolls on SH -130 would also be a no brainer - why aren't we doing everything possible to move traffic off IH35?

But - none of these projects, including Cut n' Cap are nearly ambitious enough.

IH 35 should be completely re-routed on a combination of SH 130 and 183.

Between BWB and 290 IH35 should be returned to an at-grade boulevard. Remove the upper deck completely, cap the lower deck for the entire length of it. Run light rail straight up the center from BWB to 290 and zone the entire the VMU with no set backs, no FAR, no parking requirements, no impervious cover limitations, no height restrictions at all. Fund the entire project with TIFs from the vast amount of the most valuable land in Austin becoming developable. Heal the divide of East Austin for the entire length, not just a few blocks in the CBD and open 1000s of acres, not a few dozen acres - to development. Create a world class downtown and world class grande tree-lined boulevard that would be the envy of other American cities.
Now you're talking!! This kind of vision would make Austin a truly great city. The problem is that so few in Austin are willing to contemplate anything other than band aid solutions to our problems. There are always a ton of people on this site and also out in the planning community that are ready to explain why this or that ambitious concept can't possibly be done. It could be that they are right, in which case Austin is just doomed to be another completely auto centric congested sun belt giant. The bones are here to turn this place into a truly important and impressive 21st Century city, but there will be no gain without a lot of necessary pain. I'd be willing to pay more in gas taxes and sit in bumper to bumper traffic in construction zones for a decade or more in order to see Austin transform into something truly special. I have a feeling that there are not a lot of other residents who are willing to put up with the expense and inconvenience. The sad truth is that we are all increasingly going to be stuck in hellish traffic regardless of whether we make drastic changes or just tinker with what we have now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2013, 6:40 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Sorry to chime in in a strange thread, but it seems like 8 lanes with left/right shoulders should be enough.

Most engineers know that highway congestion is not usually caused by sheer volume of traffic but by disruptions in the traffic flow that stem from entering/exiting cars. Therefore, a long stretch of urban freeway can handle an immense amount of traffic on relatively few lanes if there aren't any exits or pesky merging drivers.

Any sensible proposal would eliminate all downtown Austin exits except the first and last, forcing drivers to switch onto the frontage roads (East Ave) for access to downtown. If they "miss" the exit for the frontage road, they will zoom through downtown without any exits for 2 miles or so. The frontage roads would be widened into a boulevard wide enough to handle all downtown-bound traffic.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2013, 2:21 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,144
You know, I was driving back to Austin from Arkansas yesterday....and when I reached georgetown and 130 I thought to myself:

What if at that intersection and at 45/35 intersection had a sign and toll booth(I have NEVER received a "bill in mail" from Texas, in my 3 years of abusing tollways here) where cash is an option that's like 3.00 to go straight on 35 or they can take 130 for free. The highway sign would explicitly say San Antonio take 130 or 35 with toll. This would keep the people in Austin from having to pay the toll and a large amount of people would go ahead and take 130.

Any thoughts? ( sorry on iPhone, I apologize for grammar etc)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2013, 2:53 PM
MichaelB MichaelB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 3,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
You know, I was driving back to Austin from Arkansas yesterday....and when I reached georgetown and 130 I thought to myself:

What if at that intersection and at 45/35 intersection had a sign and toll booth(I have NEVER received a "bill in mail" from Texas, in my 3 years of abusing tollways here) where cash is an option that's like 3.00 to go straight on 35 or they can take 130 for free. The highway sign would explicitly say San Antonio take 130 or 35 with toll. This would keep the people in Austin from having to pay the toll and a large amount of people would go ahead and take 130.

Any thoughts? ( sorry on iPhone, I apologize for grammar etc)
Just to add fuel.
Toll 35 thru Austin with "resident" exceptions.
Push all other traffic to loop.

I know there are holes I could shoot in that already, but what the hell, lets
see the fireworks! LOL!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2013, 5:05 PM
hereinaustin hereinaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
Tolling 1H35 is a no brainer - should have been done years ago. Removing tolls on SH -130 would also be a no brainer - why aren't we doing everything possible to move traffic off IH35?

But - none of these projects, including Cut n' Cap are nearly ambitious enough.

IH 35 should be completely re-routed on a combination of SH 130 and 183.

Between BWB and 290 IH35 should be returned to an at-grade boulevard. Remove the upper deck completely, cap the lower deck for the entire length of it. Run light rail straight up the center from BWB to 290 and zone the entire the VMU with no set backs, no FAR, no parking requirements, no impervious cover limitations, no height restrictions at all. Fund the entire project with TIFs from the vast amount of the most valuable land in Austin becoming developable. Heal the divide of East Austin for the entire length, not just a few blocks in the CBD and open 1000s of acres, not a few dozen acres - to development. Create a world class downtown and world class grande tree-lined boulevard that would be the envy of other American cities.
I'm not gonna lie-- that would be pretty awesome. It would definitely free up a lot of land for redevelopment. Of course, I'm willing to bet that it would accelerate the gentrification of East Austin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2013, 7:06 PM
Komeht Komeht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereinaustin View Post
I'm not gonna lie-- that would be pretty awesome. It would definitely free up a lot of land for redevelopment. Of course, I'm willing to bet that it would accelerate the gentrification of East Austin.
If by gentrification you mean making it more connected and better integrated with the rest of Austin then, yes, I agree.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2013, 8:56 AM
DoubleC's Avatar
DoubleC DoubleC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Sorry to chime in in a strange thread, but it seems like 8 lanes with left/right shoulders should be enough.

Most engineers know that highway congestion is not usually caused by sheer volume of traffic but by disruptions in the traffic flow that stem from entering/exiting cars. Therefore, a long stretch of urban freeway can handle an immense amount of traffic on relatively few lanes if there aren't any exits or pesky merging drivers.

Any sensible proposal would eliminate all downtown Austin exits except the first and last, forcing drivers to switch onto the frontage roads (East Ave) for access to downtown. If they "miss" the exit for the frontage road, they will zoom through downtown without any exits for 2 miles or so. The frontage roads would be widened into a boulevard wide enough to handle all downtown-bound traffic.
1st Post!

Good point, but say we reduced IH35 to two lanes for the heck of it downtown. All traffic would be crammed into two lanes, so half of the drivers on the freeway would have to constantly deal with lines of cars driving into the one entrance ramp into the interstate (during rush hour for example). They would either slow down, speed up, or change into the left lane which probably has enough to deal with. Adding more lanes isolates more drivers from the entrance ramp, enabling them to just drive on through with little to worry about people entering the freeway. Even if just four are built both ways, they should at least leave some room for future expansion if needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2013, 11:31 PM
hereinaustin hereinaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
If by gentrification you mean making it more connected and better integrated with the rest of Austin then, yes, I agree.
Part of what has been keeping rents more affordable east of I-35 has been the psychological (and physical) separation created by I-35. If East Austin were no longer separated from the rest of Austin I'd be willing to bet that property values there would rise pretty significantly. Now, that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it might mean that some tenants will be displaced.

Also, completely eliminating I-35 through downtown would also mean even more traffic will clutter the few other freeways in Austin, especially Mopac.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 9:36 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 3,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereinaustin View Post
Part of what has been keeping rents more affordable east of I-35 has been the psychological (and physical) separation created by I-35. If East Austin were no longer separated from the rest of Austin I'd be willing to bet that property values there would rise pretty significantly. Now, that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it might mean that some tenants will be displaced.

Also, completely eliminating I-35 through downtown would also mean even more traffic will clutter the few other freeways in Austin, especially Mopac.
Property values east of IH 35 near downtown have already risen significantly. It is now a pretty pricey part of town with tear down properties selling for upwards of $200,000 and renovated/remodeled properties selling for twice that and sometimes more. The pace of change over in that part of town is pretty amazing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 10:25 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
I don't believe federal law allows tolling a free interstate highway built with federal funds. The federal law would have to change before tolling I-35. What is allowed is tolling new lanes while keeping the existing lanes free. That's why and what TXDOT is doing to several interstate highways in the DFW area. Additionally, federal funds aren't being used to fund building the toll lanes, those funds are coming from NTTA or private third parties companies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 10:26 PM
corvairkeith's Avatar
corvairkeith corvairkeith is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,476
If I-35 becomes a tree lined boulevard again can you imagine what will happen to the rents on the Western facing units at the Eleven Apartments which currently have balconies overlooking the access road.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 10:46 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 3,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by corvairkeith View Post
If I-35 becomes a tree lined boulevard again can you imagine what will happen to the rents on the Western facing units at the Eleven Apartments which currently have balconies overlooking the access road.
I wonder what the current noise levels are like in those apartment buildings built above and to the east of IH35. There seems to be quite a tradeoff between an amazing view of the city versus noise and air pollution from the almost 24 hour traffic jam down below. Does anybody actually know anyone who lives in one of those units?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2013, 3:37 AM
Komeht Komeht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by austlar1 View Post
I wonder what the current noise levels are like in those apartment buildings built above and to the east of IH35. There seems to be quite a tradeoff between an amazing view of the city versus noise and air pollution from the almost 24 hour traffic jam down below. Does anybody actually know anyone who lives in one of those units?
I would expect with decent construction, sound batting and double or triple pane windows it wouldn't be bad at all. But wouldn't be spending too many nights opening them for a breeze.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2013, 3:41 AM
Komeht Komeht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by corvairkeith View Post
If I-35 becomes a tree lined boulevard again can you imagine what will happen to the rents on the Western facing units at the Eleven Apartments which currently have balconies overlooking the access road.
This plan would open up may a 1000 acres or more in central Austin for development and with the highest densities in Austin it would be like building 3 or 4 Muellers. That's a lot of housing stock to offset rent increases. Not to mention it would make East Austin enormously attractive area for redevelopment.

I would think this would act like a relief valve for the Austin market. New units would be expensive, but make room for a lot of filtering down of housing stock that is currently artificially prevented.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.