The future of IH-35W
by BernieA West and Clear reader used the email link above (Whisper in a Panther’s Ear) to pose a couple of questions to the West and Clear crew. One of the questions was about Fort Worth’s first freeway-
“…what’s the deal with I35W, are they ever going to fix it? It’s the biggest clusterf*&k going though our city.”
First, I’ll give you the news reporter answer (probably the part you want to hear): Yes, they are going to try to fix it. TXDOT has completed a study of IH-35W between IH30 and North Loop 820, and they have proposed some upgrades. Basically, what they’d like to build is a 12-lane road: 4 regular lanes and 2 barrier-separated “managed” (read: pay a toll, suckers) lanes in each direction.
Of course, none of this means that you should look forward to the end of traffic backups on IH-35W any time soon. They’re basing the design of the road on projected 2030 traffic levels, if that tells you anything about when they think they’ll finish the road…For a pdf presentation from TXDOT about the 35W proposal, click here.
Now, for the part of my answer you probably don’t want to hear: The proposal isn’t a very good idea, because it’s built on two false assumptions. It assumes that the best way to alleviate traffic is to build more roads, and that the “personal automobiles for everyone!” transportation model is here to stay.
First of all, wider roads are not the healthiest way to relieve congestion! As Kevin enjoys pointing out when we discuss this subject, to believe they are is like believing the way to control obesity is to loosen your belt and/or buy bigger pants. There is a proven phenomenon (that old-school state transportation planners like to ignore) called induced traffic. Laymen like me call it the “if you build it they will come” syndrome.
The point is this - increased highway capacity leads to an increased number of cars on the road. That naturally leads to an increase in emissions, and thereby another 25 years of air quality nonattainment in the Metroplex. Capiche?
What TXDOT should be doing, of course, is getting off the antiquated highway-building program of traffic management, and starting to look at state-wide rail. The I-35 corridor would be a great place to start… build a high-speed passenger rail line from Mexico to Oklahoma, of course stopping in San Antonio, Austin, Fort Worth, and Denton along the way. Then, just maintain our highways at their current sizes. Let them back up with traffic, so rail travel becomes attractive to folks. I’d certainly never drive to Austin again if there was a train going there.
Finally, what TXDOT and all the other bureaucratic agencies that push for more roads haven’t caught on to yet is that “Happy Motoring” isn’t sustainable. Why are we making it easier for folks to live in sprawling communities, far flung from their jobs, grocery stores, and other life necessities, when the evidence is pretty clear that we can’t live this way forever?
Peak oil is right around the corner, folks. In fact, it may be here already…worldwide oil production has stayed right around 85 million barrels per day for a few years now, and worldwide demand has skyrocketed as developing countries continue to pursue their own versions of the American dream (a personal car for everybody! Huzzah!).
Oil prices hit record highs this week, at over $93/barrel. Famed Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens predicted this week that it would hit $100 before it went back down to $80. And before you dismiss Mr. Pickens as an agitator, please note that he’s made predictions like this before, and he’s been right. He predicted a rise to $60 in ’05, and a rise to $80 in ’06.
My point is this: the motor-based lifestyle we’ve been living in this country is reaching its limit. $4 or $5/gallon gas is not that far off…We may as well quit dumping money into roads, encourage people to move back into real, sustainable communities, and start working on alternative transportation. Give me some trains!
Tags: reader questions
15 Comments, Comments or Pings
Chewy
I’m all for public transportation, but I don’t think you’re considering all the issues associated with the I-35 expansion. Before I get into the things I think you forgot about, I want to explain what a big proponent I am for public transportation. I work in Downtown Dallas and take the TRE back and forth every day. In fact, if the TRE didn’t exist I would have never moved to Fort Worth. I occasionally have to drive due to late hours or meetings and when I do, I hate it. In the last three months I’ve driven 600 total miles on my truck. I’d die without the TRE. You’re preaching to the choir about public transportation as I can’t wait for the day when I can hop a train from my neighborhood to the airport.
With that, I think you’ve forgotten about two main things and one other thing related to your reasoning for not wanting I-35 expansion:
1) Truck/Commercial Traffic.
2) It’s Texas – At some point we have to drive.
3) Possibilities for cleaner fuels.
1) I-35 is chock full of truck traffic and it’s only going to get worse. By refusing to expand the roadway, it’s inevitable that you’re going to choke the traffic to a completely miserable for anyone in Fort Worth. Commercial vehicles don’t really have an option other than rail and it’s somewhat limited. By limiting your argument to passengers only I think you’re being pretty short sighted. Transportation will always be a key driver of any economy and by not allowing it to move you could be limiting a region’s development. I don’t see us ever having a truly knowledge based society and we’ll always consume products of some kind. Those products have to get to and from somehow. I know the Trans Texas Corridor is out there but I think it’s a foolish plan as I don’t know if you’re ever going to get traffic off 35 due to all of the development so you better get ready for it. 35 is a major artery for Texas so we have tons of non-FW traffic coming through. If we don’t expand it we’re going to choke this city regardless of what we try and do from a passenger standpoint.
2) Our families live in South Texas so every Holiday we get to make that brutal drive from Hillsboro to Waco until we can get off on 77. The cost to put infrastructure across Texas for public transportation will never be attainable. If you don’t embrace the pending population growth then once again you’re just going to choke the population because you’re opposed to expanding major arteries that people have to drive on. No matter how much you want to back traffic up, you’re not going to keep me off the roads to see my family. I don’t think I’m alone in that one. There’s certainly merit to your argument about creating wide open freeways encouraging more driving, but I don’t think it’s going to encourage it as much as you think. Texas is a growing state and we need to deal with it. Certainly make it more urban but please don’t advocate choking existing major arteries that have existed for decades. Provide alternatives but please don’t choke what already exists because your ideally opposed to it.
3) I truly believe in a free market and believe there is a topping point at which oil can go. The increased cost per barrel will ultimately lead to more energy efficient vehicles. I know it’s been talked about for a long time now, but I think it’s becoming more and more realistic with the price of oil continuing to go up. If alternative energy methods don’t develop then people will rely more on public transportation not because they’re choked in traffic but because they can’t afford it. You should see the increase of people that hop on the train the closer gas gets from $2.50 a gallon to $3.00 a gallon. The economic factor will be a much larger reason for people using public transportation rather than time. Let the market work itself out rather than trying to dictate it. Sure there should be limitations to help encourage alternative developments but please don’t advocate clogging up an existing roadway to move it along.
If you want to look at something related to this, look at how roads should be funded. The fuels tax is the perfect tax when allocated properly. It’s a perfect consumption tax as if you don’t drive you don’t pay anything. The more you drive the more you pay. If you want to limit driving, crank that fuels tax up to a level that deters driving so people think more about it. Hell, earmark some of that fuels tax for public transportation although that would mean it’s not a perfect consumption tax anymore since it would be funding people that don’t drive. I’m okay with that since I believe in public transportation. I guess you could argue that it ultimately helps drivers out as it keeps others off the road.
In reality the fuels tax really needs to be upped regardless of how you feel about public transportation as I don’t think it’s been increased since around 1986. Since then construction costs have increased dramatically while cars have become more fuel efficient so you have less money to pay for roads and cars consuming traveling more miles on a gallon. That’s where I think the real issue is.
Driving is not inherently bad provided it’s properly balanced but the situation on 35 between Downtown FW and 820 doesn’t even lend itself to driving – it lends itself to sitting.
Oct 30th, 2007
chris
I think we should start thinking in terms of maximum highway width, understanding the law of diminishing returns, and build our urban and arterial highways to that width. Then stop.
There’s no reason why 35W between NE 28th and 820 to be four lanes, nor is there any reason for 820 to be that way between 35W and Grapevine Highway. Widen those suckers so they can be useful. Then put any and all transportation infrastructure buildout into rail, be it high-speed long-haul, commuter, light, or streetcar. The right-of-way is already there for most of this, so the cost per mile is actually cheaper than highways.
Urban sprawl was an artifact of post-WWII prosperity that frankly no longer exists. Economics are going to force us back to saner land use, and public policy should be cognizant of the upcoming shift. The good news is that the absurdly distant construction schedule provides time to get with the program.
Oct 30th, 2007
Bernie
Thanks for the comments, Chewy. Let me address your three points quickly:
1. You’re right, this argument should be extended to transportation of goods and services. A much bigger percentage should be carried by rail, or else rising fuel prices will make all of our goods, especially things like bagged salad trucked in from California, too expensive for less advantaged families to afford.
2. It’s not folks on the road to visit family that clog up the freeway here in Fort Worth; keep in mind that we’re just talking about the stretch of 35W between I30 and 114. It’s the folks that have chosen to live in unsustainable developments far north of town that are clogging the freeway on the way to and from work. I’m not advocating clogging up the freeways… I’m advocating encouraging development to happen in areas where sufficient infrastructure already exists.
3. You know, I’m all for increasing the fuel tax; I have to disagree with you that the financial cost is far more compelling than the time delays, though. I think they’re probably of about the same importance to most commuters.
I also believe that alternative fuels are not the answer; they’re just a bandaid, a quick fix to keep the economy humming along until we realize the problem is actually that we have a system built around a single mode of transportation that becomes less practical every day. I’m not naive enough to think that we can magically fix the problem overnight. It will be a long, difficult process. To get started on that process we’re going to have to acknowledge the problem.
Ethanol and biodiesel are renewable but not really sustainable, and the hydrogen economy is a pipe dream.
No, driving is not inherently bad… but there’s not really anything inherently good about it either. It gets somebody from point A to point B as wastefully as possible. I’m sorry if the folks on I35 have to sit in traffic; perhaps they should take up their complaints with D.R. Horton, who has built excessive amounts of housing on a freeway that couldn’t handle the extra traffic.
Oct 30th, 2007
peteg
This is an interesting discussion. This is clearly a complicated issue with a lot of nuances that only reveal themselves through discussion like this. Thanks for all the comments…and keep ‘em coming.
Oct 31st, 2007
Jeremy
First off, a big thank you to Bernie for discussing this issue.
Coming from someone who has lived in Fort Worth for all of his short 25 years, it always seems this topic is at the tip of everyone’s tongues. Though its funny that you rarely hear the politicians in our city bring it to the table. It seems like such a large undertaking that it is just brushed off so far into the future (ie, 2030) that we all give up on it.
This next part may sound down right stupid, but I never thought about the “core” issue at hand here. You guys are right, it isn’t the fact that the road needs to be twelve lanes wide or a stacked four lane highway, hello Austin. The issue is bigger than expanding a road. It’s about changing the way we think about getting around. If we had a better public transit system it would alleviate a large portion of the traffic currently on the road, plus it would have a positive impact on our environment. However this is north Texas, not New York, New York. We aren’t ever going to rid ourselves of cars, but there is no doubt that we could lessen our dependence on them as a part of our daily grind.
Fort Worth isn’t just my favorite city, it’s my home. It feels good to know there are others around with the passion and desire to make it better.
Nov 1st, 2007
Bernie
Yes, Texas may never rid itself of personal automobiles completely. That probably shouldn’t be the goal anyway; I expect if we do things right, we can have a city where cars still exist as a luxury for those who must have them, but car ownership is no longer a necessity for getting around the city.
Thank you, Jeremy, for posing the question and for coming back to discuss it with us. And thanks to Chewy and Chris for joining the conversation as well.
I think all of us at West and Clear are encouraged by how readily our readers have joined in with comments and debate. This is exactly how we hoped it would happen. People questioned whether Fort Worth was ready for a community-oriented blog… I think you guys are proving that it is.
Like PeteG said… keep those questions and comments coming.
Nov 1st, 2007
Suzette
Just heard that TXDOT wants to hear your thoughts — express them at http://www.keeptexasmoving.com
Nov 14th, 2007
Walker
Bernie,
Statements like “unsustainable developments far north of town” shows your internal-biased thoughts about those of us who live in communities that were built for a reason. In a free market, they would not survive if there was not a need for it. We all can’t live in the TCU area.
I used to, but quit renting the house to buy one. I had a 2 bedroom 950 sq ft house (built in the 1940’s with a 8 gallon hot water heater and appliances that couldn’t spell Energy Star if you spotted them the letters) that was offered to me at 176K in 2005. I went to North Fort Worth and got a 2100 brand new 4 bedroom house for about the same money. My old electric bill was $150 a month and my new one is about $150 a month for double the size.
I would ride a downtown train that stopped at 1709, Tarrant Parky, Meacham, 27 street every single day. But the option is not there. Riding a bike to work is not a practical and feasible soultion to the vast transportation problems we face. Neither will the thinking that everyone should live in the Hemhill/20/Hulen/White Settelment bubble. Populations grow, areas change. They would not build the houses if they were not needed.
Affordable (safe) housing near downtown SW Fort Worth would be nice if we are asking the solutions fairy to fix all our problems.
Dec 4th, 2007
Bernie
Walker, rest assured I am not biased against you personally for living where you do. I am biased against the type of development that’s going on up there, though, and not without reason.
Riding a bike to work may not be the solution for everybody. I never said it was; I do it, because I think it makes a difference. I would like other people to try to make a difference, too, whether it’s by riding a bike, taking a train or bus, or choosing to live in a place where they don’t have to drive 5 miles to buy groceries.
And I stand by my statement that much of the development north of town is unsustainable; sure, housing is needed, but building the housing without providing for transportation first is unwise, and those developments are largely responsible for creating the traffic issues people now complain about.
And I have to disagree that “they would not build the housing if it were not needed.” Case in point: D.R. Horton just posted its first financial loss in a long time. Their houses aren’t selling, but they’re still building. They don’t know how to do anything else.
Dec 4th, 2007
Walker
As a person with a Urban and Regional Planning degree, I think I have a decent grasp of and understand the issues.
Sure, not all the houses built north of 820 have a need at this time, but overall, the north Fort Worth housing market does not have vast number of houses sitting empty.
Focusing on the problem of the roads is misleading. We need to focus on why the power brokers in Fort Worth don’t want support this effort, not the people who choose to move to an area that is both affordable and needed.
Dec 4th, 2007
Bernie
Walker, buddy… again, I’m not questioning you personally. Congrats on the degree. It’s OK to have a difference in opinion, right?
If I’m guilty of focussing on the roads in this post, it’s just because that’s the subject matter of the question to which I was responding.
I agree with you 100% that the local power brokers need to get on board with solving transportation and air quality issues. I think they’re oblivious to the problem. I mean, I’m sure they’re mindful of it… I just don’t think they “get it.”
Dec 4th, 2007
Walker
Wow, that sounded like I was crazy and angry. Neither is true. I know you are not attacking anyone, I just took exception to the comment because that’s were they deliver my mail to. All things considered, I would rather live by TCU than in the burbs.
Know anybody looking to buy a house in North Fort Worth, send them my way.
Dec 4th, 2007
Suzette
Further south on I35 is no better than I35 in Cowtown. See Austin’s car share program — for all the people who only need a car a few hours per month, you can split the ownership and reserve the car when you need it. Perhaps Fort Worth should look into a similar program. http://www.austincarshare.org
Jan 20th, 2008
simeon
Agreed. Bring rail to FTW!
Jan 21st, 2008
Marcus
For all the Texas bashing does anyone realize Texas is the biggest producer of wind energy in the USA?
And while we are at it, how about those New England Kennedys? They believe in alternative energy sources, but just not on their property.
But yes we need rail. I used to work downtown Dallas and rode the TRE every day. It was great. Fort Worth needs it within the city. As with the domestic oil and gas business, we knocked out passenger rail service in this country for the most part because of cheap energy and now we are having to rebuild the old infrastructure all over AGAIN. Ever hear of the old Interurban Railroad that used to connect Dallas and Fort Worth? By the time TXDOT expands a highway the traffic count increase has already made it obsolete.
Apr 10th, 2008
Reply to “The future of IH-35W”