'Far out' report suggests renaming I-35 segment between Georgetown and Buda

The draft report, in perhaps its loftiest flight of fancy, suggests that the tolls likewise be removed from the extension of Texas 130 between Mustang Ridge and Interstate 10 near Seguin, a segment under construction right now by a private consortium at a cost of more than $1 billion

Note: For you commuters and road and transportation wonks, here's an update from the Austin American-Statesman's Ben Wear on some of the 'way out there' discussions taking place about the future of I-35. Thanks to an alert RoundUp reader for forwarding the story. Here's the link to Mr. Wear's report.

Taking it one fun step further – if a contest were launched for the renaming of a segment of 35 running through Austin, what you name it?

Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Mr. Wear at bwear@statesman.com or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story

Ben Wear: Getting There

Updated: 5:17 a.m. Monday, Jan. 31, 2011
Published: 8:47 p.m. Sunday, Jan. 30, 2011

So a state report last week suggested that Interstate 35 and the Texas 130 tollway swap names and roles and, to some degree, tolls. You've heard the expression "out of the box."

austinpost.org

This one is an area code removed from the box. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It isn't like the box dwellers have been boring us silly with ideas for fixing I-35's traffic congestion.

The 122 pages from the I-35 Corridor Advisory Committee, the fruit of months of hearings and other discussion up and down the interstate corridor, suggest that the federal interstate designation be stripped from I-35 from north of Georgetown to Buda. Give it to Texas 130 instead, taking away the tolls from that road. And call what is now I-35 ... well, the report doesn't say. East Avenue? I welcome your suggestions.

There's more. The report recommends taking two of I-35's six to eight lanes (it varies through Austin), one on each side, and making them "dynamic" toll lanes, with prices that would go up and down depending on traffic. Fewer free lanes, in other words. But the authors want two lanes added to Texas 130, which would be I-35 by then. Got it?

Doing all this (and many other complicated, expensive things included in the report) is actually harder than its sounds. For instance, this might require as many as two elections: a local vote to allow free lanes to be converted to tolls and another Central Texas vote to perhaps raise fees to help pay the $2 billion or so of debt remaining on Texas 130 and its two partner toll roads. The Legislature would have to pass some laws, including one allowing that local vote on fees.

Someone would need to find the money to add those lanes to Texas 130 (and, oh, yes, the seven miles of Texas 45 Southeast that completes the eastern loop of Austin). Politically, you'd have to convince a still toll-skeptical public that it's OK to take away free lanes and put tolls on them and that enough people would be diverted around Austin on the new I-35 to make it better on the old I-35.

In fact, you'd have to find an elected official willing to advance such an idea. I'm not saying it couldn't be done — this is Austin, after all — but such a thing could shorten someone's time in office.

The draft report, in perhaps its loftiest flight of fancy, suggests that the tolls likewise be removed from the extension of Texas 130 between Mustang Ridge and Interstate 10 near Seguin, a segment under construction right now by a private consortium at a cost of more than $1 billion. They plan to toll it, and profit from it for 50 years, and send a small percentage of the toll money to the Texas Department of Transportation.

Taking the tolls off those 40 miles "ain't gonna happen," as one key official told me. There's a good chance that recommendation, said to have originated from Lockhart, will fall out of the final report.

So, is this just some tasty pie in the sky or the first glimmer of a long-awaited solution for I-35? Sorry to raise a question I can't answer, but no one knows at this point. It's well to remember, however, the let's-bury-I-35-through-Austin plan that was splashed all over the Statesman's front page about a decade ago. Haven't seen the bulldozers out there yet.

For questions, tips or story ideas, contact Getting There at 445-3698 or bwear@statesman.com.