Austin Draft

0

No comments posted yet

Comments

Slide 1

ANewDallas (anewdallas.com) is a non-profit group we created to promote alternative modes of transportation and economic development in and around downtown Dallas neighborhoods

Slide 2

Out study area comprises 245 acres or what was once 54 city blocks of complete n’hoods: housing, businesses, theaters, etc – all since disaggregated and dispersed afield by the highway

Slide 3

Majority of downtown Dallas property is underdeveloped: vacant, surface parking, or tax exempt, effectively created a buffer of several blocks btw highways and the few blocks of true walkable urbanism that work. Also, while DFW grew by more than a million people, the city captured less than 1% of that growth.

Slide 4

The densest part of downtown is the jail. If density done well is a product of desirability, this is undesirable.

Slide 5

Our proposal leverages >$4billion in private investment from $60 million public investment. A form of reverse condemnation, taking public land, turning over to private development, for public and private benefit.

Slide 6

We also explored a burial option but found the capital costs, engineering gymnastics and reduced leveraged private investment less than ideal. However, both options instill signif more econ dvlpmnt than merely maintaining a maintenance burden

Slide 7

We also chose to pursue capacity reduction because we have too much infrastructure per capita, thus inducing car-dependence, seemingly creating the need for yet more highway infrastructure

Slide 8

In terms of just city proper, Dallas bears increased burden for a 6.5 million metro, with just 1.2 million in tax base. Meanwhile, many much more mobile cities have far less highway infrastructure. Highways are a 40 year proposition, what city do we want to be more like in 2050?

Slide 11

Madrid metro area is same size population but in 1/20th land area of DFW. Madrid at Dallas circa 1950s densities would consume 1/14th the land area we have since. More ag land, more natural area, more water recharge, less driving, more vibrant city

Slide 14

“Red” are the most connected areas mathematically. = desirability. If downtown is no longer the most connected place, it no longer has a competitive advantage over its surroundings. So if you’re not more mobile in and around downtown, why live there?

Slide 15

KWP qualitatively improved its surroundings, an effect felt on the real estate in the area (present and projected future) at 2:1 ROI, or about $220million

Slide 17

w/ prev slide – aggregated all property and development #s into a spreadsheet to examine effect proximity to 35 or congress had on land value and development

Slide 18

Anomaly along 35 makes it look like the highway brings dvlpment

Slide 19

However, when extracting built value from land value, there is a dip, which is effectively the service/parking for the peak areas.

Slide 20

Created both local and global before/after spatial integration maps…

Slide 21

Which show ripple effects of improved interconnectivity throughout downtown and East Austin

Slide 22

Improved integration increases land value the most closest to the intervention, 16% (plus the 20-25% in qualitative improvement from sociofugal highway to sociopetal greenspace?)

Slide 23

Improved integration flattens out the steep declination in value as you get away from Congress. (think skyline shapes)

Slide 1

AUSTIN CUT & CAP OF I-35

Slide 2

Downtown Dallas: Before

Slide 3

Underdevelopment: Today

Slide 5

345: Before/After

Slide 6

IH-345: Rebuild it, Bury it, or Remove it?

Slide 7

Charts

Slide 8

Charts

Slide 9

Highway Capacity Yields… …Lower pop. density …More Car Dependence …More Driving (VMT/cap.)

Slide 10

High Cost of Car Dependence Of top 25 metros DFW is most car-dependent based on private auto commuting If ½ of 1 car households, ½ of 2 car households, and every household w/ > 2 cars could give up one car, that equals $3 Billion would remain in local economy each year. Congestion Costs $110 Billion/yr, but… …Car dependence costs $2.108 Trillion

Slide 11

Madrid?

Slide 13

The 4 blind spots in transportation projections and planning: Fundamental Purpose – move cars? Or connect goods, people, skills, ideas, labor, etc.? Transportation planners focus on speed rather than expedience, ie a two block walk to the store is much worse than a 2-mile drive. Induced Demand – Studies show that more capacity brings more drivers. There is a 1:1 relationship between capacity and Vehicle Miles Travelled. Meaning every doubling of highway capacity has led to population driving double the distance over time. Reduced Demand via density/walkability - model by square footage, but we’ve found 20% reduction in vehicle trips in walkable suburban locations (legacy), 40% in more walkable urban locations (uptown) Rise of the mobile web – Internet reduces regional trips (online shopping, telecommuting), but won’t reduce simpler, easier, cheaper, more pleasant, walkable trips 5th Blind spot? Preference of Millennials -- 16-24 year olds getting their driver’s license has dropped 18% over last 30 years, while VMTs for all Millennials has dropped 23% What was considered “independence” to one generation might be the opposite to the next

Slide 14

Mobility = Value Value = Reach = local and global interconnectivity Long trip or global infrastructure often disconnects more than it connects In pure car-dependent places, all land is equal. Everything is equally connected, poorly. Ordered Disordered Dallas 1945 Dallas 2013

Slide 15

Klyde Warren Park – A case study in Qualitative Improvement

Slide 16

Austin I-35 – A case study in Qualitative AND Quantitive Improvement

Slide 19

Land Value Built Value -- Deflated to serve parking for the peaks

Slide 20

Austin Stuff (Quantitative and Qualitative)

Slide 21

Austin Stuff (Quantitative and Qualitative) Qualitative Quantitative (Global) Quantitative (Local) Spin-off effects ripple throughout the city

Slide 22

Improved Spatial Integration Value Increment by Capping and Restitching Grid Improvements most strongly felt closest to “cap” Increased Land Value Distance from 35

Slide 23

Congress Congress Interstate 35 Interstate 35 Global Connectivity Increment Local Connectivity Increment Value After Value Before Value After Value Before Value Declination is less steep as you move away from Congress (‘heart’), a smoother transition

Slide 24

High Cost of Car Dependence Nothing to be Gained (from simply maintaining – must re-envision the city to maximize desirability + mobility) What is true ‘Mobility,’ velocity or efficiency? Transportation Infrastructure/Development Paradigm Unsustainable Congestion, not the bogeyman, only if it’s all in cars Improve Grid Interconnectivity wherever you can – the grid disperses the bad, and aggregates the good “Smart” city is one that empowers choice, of route and mode

Summary: Brief presentation on why 345 chose to remove capacity; then exploring studies of improved land value in Austin due to qualitative and quantitative improvements in the area of 35

URL: