AARoads Forum

From NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth:

Texas Wants to Know: When will construction on Interstate 35 be complete?

QuoteIf you're driving to San Antonio to see the Alamo, to Austin to go to a music festival, to Dallas or Fort Worth to see the Cowboys or visit the Stockyards, odds are you'll be on Interstate 35.

"Interstate 35 is Main Street, Texas," said Michael Morris, the director of transportation for the North Central Texas Council of Governments.

But "Main Street"  opened in the 1960s, which means parts of it are already more than 60 years old. The solution to those problems so far has been about two decades of major road work up and down the I-35 corridor, through four of the state's five largest cities.

FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://markholtz.info/2ri)

And, of course, we have Austin...  :spin:

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people," said Adam Greenfield, board president of the group Rethink 35, which advocates for a different use of the land. "Highways are actually very poor. Movers of large numbers of people because cars are very space inefficient. They lock up in congestion. That's a basic-level bug that they have."

Never.

Quote from: ZLoth on July 09, 2023, 10:04:45 AM


And, of course, we have Austin...  :spin:

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people," said Adam Greenfield, board president of the group Rethink 35, which advocates for a different use of the land. "Highways are actually very poor. Movers of large numbers of people because cars are very space inefficient. They lock up in congestion. That's a basic-level bug that they have."

How much of that percentage of traffic on I-35 through Austin is through traffic? And, you really think that they would sludge along a 4-lane boulevard loaded with traffic lights and bike lanes and cross streets, only to chose a bypass (SH 45S/SH 130) that is ALREADY loaded to the gills and would be even more so if the tolls are removed? But, just give people bikes and buses to stroll their way through downtown and everything will be OK, right?

"Rethink 35??" More like NOThink. Braindead.

And I generally support rehabilitation of downtowns AND more balanced transportation. But this is MADNESS.

Quote from: Anthony_JK on July 09, 2023, 10:31:03 AMHow much of that percentage of traffic on I-35 through Austin is through traffic? And, you really think that they would sludge along a 4-lane boulevard loaded with traffic lights and bike lanes and cross streets, only to chose a bypass (SH 45S/SH 130) that is ALREADY loaded to the gills and would be even more so if the tolls are removed? But, just give people bikes and buses to stroll their way through downtown and everything will be OK, right?

"Rethink 35??" More like NOThink. Braindead.

Yeah, please explain to me how vehicles idling in the middle of a downtown during the daytime because of congestion is more enviromentally friendly than having them flowing. Public transit has it challenges, especially in "keeping it affordable". If a city in the DFW area wants to be part Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), they have to dedicate 1% of the 2% available sales tax revenue to DART. (Texas has a state 6.25% sales tax, and allows cities to charge an additional 2% within that city). While the US-75 corridor is booming all the way up to Melissa, the DART light rail that parallels US-75 only goes up to Plano. The next city to the north, Allen, prefer to use that 1% for both the Allen Economic Development Corporation and Allen Community Development Corporation (https://www.cityofallen.org/1045/DART-Rail-Service).

How the fuck are bus and bike lanes supposed to replace the carrying capacity of an Interstate highway?

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 09, 2023, 11:39:30 AM
How the fuck are bus and bike lanes supposed to replace the carrying capacity of an Interstate highway?

They're gonna pack the bus and be able to accommodate all the origins and destinations of the current Interstate traffic, obviously.

The challenge is that, unless a city was public transit oriented from the beginning (eg. before cars were readily available), you aren't going to be able to change or force people's behaviors. Once a region becomes car centric, there's no going back.

You mean to say that 326 square mile city can't accommodate a mass transit first mindset?  What madness is this?

Quote from: Rothman on July 09, 2023, 11:43:02 AM

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 09, 2023, 11:39:30 AM
How the fuck are bus and bike lanes supposed to replace the carrying capacity of an Interstate highway?

They're gonna pack the bus and be able to accommodate all the origins and destinations of the current Interstate traffic, obviously.

And Route frequency no doubt?

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

First, I'm on the same page as you, so I'm purely addressing the last part as devil's advocate:

True, I-35 will never be turned into a boulevard, but hypothetically, if it did....it would be almost guaranteed that commercial truck traffic would be heavily restricted, with thru traffic moved to 130.

Vancouver BC, which has a similar metro population as Austin, has no freeway passing through their downtown. They have designated truck routes in the city for that very reason:

https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/truck-routes-maps-and-regulations.aspx

Vancouver is also about 44.5 square miles.  Being that much more densely packed helps a ton in regards to making mass transit options more viable.

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 09, 2023, 04:25:55 PM
Vancouver is also about 44.5 square miles.  Being that much more densely packed helps a ton in regards to making mass transit options more viable.

I know, that's why I compared metro areas. The metro population densities aren't too much different from each other.

The point is, both metro areas have a lot of commercial truck traffic moving through them.

Quote from: thisdj78 on July 09, 2023, 04:37:25 PM

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 09, 2023, 04:25:55 PM
Vancouver is also about 44.5 square miles.  Being that much more densely packed helps a ton in regards to making mass transit options more viable.

I know, that's why I compared metro areas. The metro population densities aren't too much different from each other.

The point is, both metro areas have a lot of commercial truck traffic moving through them.

The Greater Austin area also is substantially larger by land area than metro Vancouver (approximately 4,279 square miles versus 1,112 square miles).  Sure, the number of residents is similar but this is far from an apples to apples comparison. 

I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from. 

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PM
I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

What, someone else who partakes in distance running who doesn't understand how freeways are much of a physical obstacle?  Personally I've found railroads to be more troublesome on runs when I have to cross them at grade.  If a train comes unexpectedly usually the detour or wait is lengthy.  Most freeways usually have enough overpasses and underpasses that it makes getting around them at running speed pretty simple.

When I lived in Hanford freight trains along the BNSF line could be a significant problem.  The southbound trains often stopped in the middle of downtown which required I either detour on foot a mile to the west to find a clear crossing.  One aspect of the California HSR I really appreciate as a runner is that most of the roads that cross the line are being converted to have grade separations.  These have already allowed me to take chances with some new running routes in downtown and south of the city.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop.

Based upon your comment, my counter-question would be... how many of those people own high-density housing (read apartment buildings) right near those transit lines? Makes you wonder.

Although the Texas heat in the summer has nothing like the heat and humidity of Miami. I should know, I was there in September, 2018 and used their Metromover system.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PMI still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

There is a concept called psychological severance.  It is used to explain why, e.g., putting a deck park over a freeway does not restore the same sense of continuity in the urban fabric that would exist if the freeway were not there at all.

Quote from: J N Winkler on July 09, 2023, 07:14:34 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PMI still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

There is a concept called psychological severance.  It is used to explain why, e.g., putting a deck park over a freeway does not restore the same sense of continuity in the urban fabric that would exist if the freeway were not there at all.

It probably is also worth noting that in the context of being a distance runner that the deterrent obstacles aren't one for one with waking.  A single mile running is not unreasonable at speeds that take 6-9 minutes I've found.  I can certainly see how a mile would be a problem walking when it would take 20-30 minutes at a brisk pace..

Quote from: thisdj78Vancouver BC, which has a similar metro population as Austin, has no freeway passing through their downtown.

Vancouver has a very different geographic location compared to Austin. It's on the coast and functions as a dead end of sorts for the highway network. There aren't any major destinations farther West or Northwest of Vancouver.

Austin is an entirely inland metro with major destinations in all directions, but much more so via I-35. San Antonio, Laredo and commerce from Mexico is to the South and DFW and other points beyond are to the North. I-35 has run somewhat thru the middle of Austin for many years. Vancouver has never had a -thru- super highway running through its middle. It's definitely a big difference to remove (or severely down-grade) an existing major highway versus never having built the highway in the first place.

I-35 is a legit major Interstate highway in our national highway network. Turning I-35 into a surface street through Central Austin would be much worse than any "Breezewood" that exists in our highway network elsewhere.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.

Elevated freeways don't physically divide neighborhoods. But they do create a clear boundary for where real estate developers choose to build things and where a city government chooses to invest its services. It's more a psychological thing. And then there's the issue of how the property under the elevated structures is used. If the land gets covered up in homeless encampments, garbage or sketchy activity that does create more of a scary barrier no one wants to go near, much less cross.

Freeways built at-grade do more than elevated structures to create physical barriers since pathways to get over or under the freeway are more limited. If you're on foot you have to walk to the next major intersection, where there hopefully is a sidewalk and other signals to help cross frontage roads and all that other stuff. There are ways to solve those problems without freeway removal, like green space caps or enhanced street bridges over freeways.

Quote from: zlothBased upon your comment, my counter-question would be... how many of those people own high-density housing (read apartment buildings) right near those transit lines? Makes you wonder.

Well, yeah. A bunch of these rich policy-makers own a lot of real estate. In many cases it's a better place to "store" many millions of dollars than the stock market. They'll have their primary residence. But then they own all sorts of other properties as investments and then also probably have companies that buy up and manage commercial and residential real estate. Political party affiliation makes no difference. Most of the people elected to national office have a lot of real estate holdings. And they want to make even more money from that stuff. So, yeah, they look at things like super highways as enormous wastes of otherwise prime real estate.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 09:16:49 PM

Quote from: thisdj78Vancouver BC, which has a similar metro population as Austin, has no freeway passing through their downtown.

Vancouver has a very different geographic location compared to Austin. It's on the coast and functions as a dead end of sorts for the highway network. There aren't any major destinations farther West or Northwest of Vancouver.

Austin is an entirely inland metro with major destinations in all directions, but much more so via I-35. San Antonio, Laredo and commerce from Mexico is to the South and DFW and other points beyond are to the North. I-35 has run somewhat thru the middle of Austin for many years. Vancouver has never had a -thru- super highway running through its middle. It's definitely a big difference to remove (or severely down-grade) an existing major highway versus never having built the highway in the first place.

I-35 is a legit major Interstate highway in our national highway network. Turning I-35 into a surface street through Central Austin would be much worse than any "Breezewood" that exists in our highway network elsewhere.

I understand that and thought about that as well and my answer to that is: since there are no major cities to the north and west of Vancouver and it's a major commercial sea port, it would seem that there would be an above average amount of commercial truck traffic headed in and out of the central business and port areas with no freeways and physically limited route options. That's the only reason I use Vancouver as an example: they still have to find a way to manage a large amount of truck traffic in the central area without freeways.

But like I said, I'm in agreement with your original point.

What extra phase is being done Waco? The construction is finished.

Quote from: longhorn on July 10, 2023, 10:15:14 AM
What extra phase is being done Waco? The construction is finished.

I-35 Waco Project 4C - Waco South (http://www.my35.org/central-project-4c.htm). Currently unfunded.

Quote from: ZLoth on July 09, 2023, 10:04:45 AM
And, of course, we have Austin...  :spin:

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people," said Adam Greenfield, board president of the group Rethink 35, which advocates for a different use of the land. "Highways are actually very poor. Movers of large numbers of people because cars are very space inefficient. They lock up in congestion. That's a basic-level bug that they have."

The Rethink people are technically correct, but only about LOCAL movements.  A bus is more space efficient. Which is of no help to all the folks going between DFW and San Antonio or all the freight going back and forth to Mexico.

Quote from: ZLoth on July 10, 2023, 10:50:52 AM

Quote from: longhorn on July 10, 2023, 10:15:14 AM
What extra phase is being done Waco? The construction is finished.

I-35 Waco Project 4C - Waco South (http://www.my35.org/central-project-4c.htm). Currently unfunded.

So does the Valley Mills to I-35 North ramp stay? Hard to tell on the schematics.

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot-info/wac/notices/092012/jane_to_21st.pdf

Regarding the original question to this thread:  I'd be surprised if it's ever completed before the end of this century; it's been under construction at some point in Texas for as long as I've been alive.  And let's not forget south of San Antonio is eventually also going to need to be expanded with the ever increasing truck traffic down to Laredo, and I anticipate extending it south of Laredo is a real possibility.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PM
I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods. They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

WTF??? Most freeways have at least a few blocks between crossings if not up to a mile (typically) or more. Suddenly that friend who was only a block or two away is a mile away. It's even more of a problem in the Texas summer heat. There may have been a school district on both sides of that freeway. A fourth grader's best friend may now be on the other side of that freeway. Easy for you to walk or run that distance. But when the only way across is going down to the busy street and crossing under the freeway and across entrance and exit ramps, I bet mom isn't letting her fourth grader go visit his friend.

I lived near freeways, I-44 and I-55, in St Louis. They most certainly divided the neighborhoods I lived in. In one case it was actually a blessing because the neighborhood on the other side of I-44 in Shaw was Crack Central while I lived there. But in the other places it made for a challenge to get to the other side of the freeway and I sometimes drove even though it was physically only a few blocks away "as the crow flies." I'm glad you can run a marathon. Make sure to brag about it to the retired lady who can't drive since her cataracts that she can still walk to her church even though it's now on the other side of a freeway and is now an eight block walk instead of two. Or how about someone who is wheelchair-bound? That doesn't even get into the history of building freeways through poor (often minority) neighborhoods where many households only had one car and some had no car at all. Here's a word for you to think about. (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empathy) I hope you never have to experience what it's like on the other side of that health equation.

Quote from: jgb191I'd be surprised if it's ever completed before the end of this century; it's been under construction at some point in Texas for as long as I've been alive.  And let's not forget south of San Antonio is eventually also going to need to be expanded with the ever increasing truck traffic down to Laredo, and I anticipate extending it south of Laredo is a real possibility.

Pretty much all of I-35 between the Laredo and San Antonio metros is in a 2x2 lanes configuration. I'm sure all of I-35 from San Antonio on North to the Red River would be 3x3 or more before TX DOT starts upgrading the Laredo-San Antonio leg to 3x3. Quite a few segments from San Antonio thru DFW and North will have to go from 3x3 to 4x4 and even 5x5. Add in the usual "Lexus Lanes" for good measure.

Texas has been a very popular region for people relocating from the Northeast US, California and elsewhere. The "culture war" stuff could slow down some of that Lone Star population growth though. Still, Texas looks like it is struggling to improve its infrastructure to keep up with the growth.

Regarding I-35 South of Laredo, a lot of improvements need to happen on BOTH sides of the border in order for an I-35 quality freeway to extend South of Laredo into Mexico. A lot of Americans look down their noses at Mexico as some lawless region of anarchy. But us Americans are the drug-addled douchebags helping make that country so dangerous with our illegal party habits. Mexico could be far more of a global economic powerhouse if it wasn't for the vice market keeping it stuck where it is, with so much lost potential. A peaceful, modern Mexico could certainly have a far more advanced highway network with standards that rivaled those here in the US. With the situation stuck where it is the limited access highways in Mexico are stuck with obviously lower standards. The curve geometry of the autopistas doesn't seem on par with the first generation of US Interstates built more than 50 years ago. And the green signs are pretty atrocious, especially in the Laredo area (lots of squeezed and stretched default Arial shit type on the signs).

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PM
I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

Look at before and after pictures of neighborhoods cut by freeways and you'll see why.

Quote from: Some one on July 11, 2023, 01:38:22 AM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PM
I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

Look at before and after pictures of neighborhoods cut by a freeways and you'll see why.

It really just this mindnumbingly simple.  Closely built neighborhoods suddenly have a trench down the middle.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 10, 2023, 11:10:55 PM

Quote from: jgb191I'd be surprised if it's ever completed before the end of this century; it's been under construction at some point in Texas for as long as I've been alive.  And let's not forget south of San Antonio is eventually also going to need to be expanded with the ever increasing truck traffic down to Laredo, and I anticipate extending it south of Laredo is a real possibility.

Pretty much all of I-35 between the Laredo and San Antonio metros is in a 2x2 lanes configuration. I'm sure all of I-35 from San Antonio on North to the Red River would be 3x3 or more before TX DOT starts upgrading the Laredo-San Antonio leg to 3x3. Quite a few segments from San Antonio thru DFW and North will have to go from 3x3 to 4x4 and even 5x5. Add in the usual "Lexus Lanes" for good measure.

Texas has been a very popular region for people relocating from the Northeast US, California and elsewhere. The "culture war" stuff could slow down some of that Lone Star population growth though. Still, Texas looks like it is struggling to improve its infrastructure to keep up with the growth.

Regarding I-35 South of Laredo, a lot of improvements need to happen on BOTH sides of the border in order for an I-35 quality freeway to extend South of Laredo into Mexico. A lot of Americans look down their noses at Mexico as some lawless region of anarchy. But us Americans are the drug-addled douchebags helping make that country so dangerous with our illegal party habits. Mexico could be far more of a global economic powerhouse if it wasn't for the vice market keeping it stuck where it is, with so much lost potential. A peaceful, modern Mexico could certainly have a far more advanced highway network with standards that rivaled those here in the US. With the situation stuck where it is the limited access highways in Mexico are stuck with obviously lower standards. The curve geometry of the autopistas doesn't seem on par with the first generation of US Interstates built more than 50 years ago. And the green signs are pretty atrocious, especially in the Laredo area (lots of squeezed and stretched default Arial shit type on the signs).

Actually I meant keeping I-35 in Texas south of Laredo to Zapata and eventually connect with I-2.  In other words, an interstate quality highway connecting Laredo to the Rio Grande Valley.

Quote from: Rothman on July 11, 2023, 06:55:32 AM

Quote from: Some one on July 11, 2023, 01:38:22 AM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PM
I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

Look at before and after pictures of neighborhoods cut by a freeways and you'll see why.

It really just this mindnumbingly simple.  Closely built neighborhoods suddenly have a trench down the middle.

I think maybe both of you took what I said a bit too literal.  Yes, I understand the building of a freeway between two neighborhoods will have a n effect, but these people who cry about freeway building make it seem like it's a forcefield or a 300' high wall.  It's not uncrossable like many will make you believe.  Besides, why do you have to go to the other neighborhood to conduct your business if the idea of community and helping your neighborhood was so important.  You feel cut off from the other neighborhood, make your neighborhood great then!

I-345 Texas:

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.784343,-96.7900874,3a,75y,258.03h,95.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8uhIoqWA6oAW-Rv0aHmmig!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8uhIoqWA6oAW-Rv0aHmmig%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D105.64796%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7832384,-96.7905188,3a,75y,66.66h,90.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1so6CbFp4yuXDmZ4yQuApoNQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Do6CbFp4yuXDmZ4yQuApoNQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D65.028625%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7825039,-96.7901748,3a,75y,95.72h,79.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skuebhlvPbSFIdp90zpa9Iw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DkuebhlvPbSFIdp90zpa9Iw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D293.9395%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7818728,-96.7898395,3a,75y,100.67h,89.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1seI_QnsZIFbGsB2_A72AanA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DeI_QnsZIFbGsB2_A72AanA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D97.30217%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.781321,-96.7864098,3a,75y,352.32h,101.92t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ-OFNDUKrDp50_QDFy9ATQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DJ-OFNDUKrDp50_QDFy9ATQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D97.83726%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Looks much better than this: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8164335,-87.6281723,3a,75y,300.4h,92.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr_fK3OmH-2rYn-iD2uYHcg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Quote from: jgb191Actually I meant keeping I-35 in Texas south of Laredo to Zapata and eventually connect with I-2. In other words, an interstate quality highway connecting Laredo to the Rio Grande Valley.

The way the exits are numbered on I-2 it appears more like I-2 could be eventually extended to Laredo. In the near term extensions of I-2 around Rio Grande City and Roma seem likely. Loop 20 in Laredo will eventually be all Interstate quality and provide an outlet South. A freeway bypass of Zapata would be one of the last significant things to build along the way.

The South end of I-35 in Laredo plugs into the highway 85 corridor in Mexico, the main route to Monterrey. Laredo is the busiest inland "port" city on the US border. I'm sure the current I-35 terminus would stay put due to that.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 11, 2023, 03:30:58 PM

Quote from: jgb191Actually I meant keeping I-35 in Texas south of Laredo to Zapata and eventually connect with I-2. In other words, an interstate quality highway connecting Laredo to the Rio Grande Valley.

The way the exits are numbered on I-2 it appears more like I-2 could be eventually extended to Laredo. In the near term extensions of I-2 around Rio Grande City and Roma seem likely. Loop 20 in Laredo will eventually be all Interstate quality and provide an outlet South. A freeway bypass of Zapata would be one of the last significant things to build along the way.

The South end of I-35 in Laredo plugs into the highway 85 corridor in Mexico, the main route to Monterrey. Laredo is the busiest inland "port" city on the US border. I'm sure the current I-35 terminus would stay put due to that.

I also see a useless cosigning of I-2 with I-69W in the future from the Loop 20 and US-59 intersection north up to I-35 and maybe even all the way to the border crossing. 

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 11, 2023, 12:33:56 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 11, 2023, 06:55:32 AM

Quote from: Some one on July 11, 2023, 01:38:22 AM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 09, 2023, 05:17:35 PM
I still don't understand how a freeway divides neighborhoods.  They are still grade separated and there are overpasses and underpasses. Everyone complains about I-345 separating Deep Elum from downtown Dallas, but Pacific Ave. and Elm St. go under I-345.  I have run a half marathon on Elm St. and everyone didn't suddenly stop because they were going under a freeway.  Same concept in Austin.  Manor Road goes over (and under) I-35 and I have walked it and very continuously went from the UT campus to east Austin, and would argue I did it easier than I would have done it if there was a surface street there because the service roads carry a 10th the traffic where the surface street has 100% the traffic.  I don't understand where this is coming from.

Look at before and after pictures of neighborhoods cut by a freeways and you'll see why.

It really just this mindnumbingly simple.  Closely built neighborhoods suddenly have a trench down the middle.

I think maybe both of you took what I said a bit too literal.  Yes, I understand the building of a freeway between two neighborhoods will have a n effect, but these people who cry about freeway building make it seem like it's a forcefield or a 300' high wall.  It's not uncrossable like many will make you believe.  Besides, why do you have to go to the other neighborhood to conduct your business if the idea of community and helping your neighborhood was so important.  You feel cut off from the other neighborhood, make your neighborhood great then!

It may easily be that employment areas are now further away from residential areas, for example. That single service center (supermarket, community center, big church) is now much further away.
With that, I don't believe things wouldn't settle within 10-20-30 years until a really small sliver of the city is separated on all sides. Area may become different than it used to be, but that is another story.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14I also see a useless cosigning of I-2 with I-69W in the future from the Loop 20 and US-59 intersection north up to I-35 and maybe even all the way to the border crossing.

That definitely seems plausible, even though it would make more sense for I-2 to simply end where I-69W would divert off the Bob Bullock Loop heading toward Freer.

A short I-2/I-69W concurrency would make more sense if I-2 actually extended a bit farther North, via an elevated freeway built over Mines Road. With as much truck traffic Mines Road already carries it's kind of surprising TX DOT hasn't upgraded any segments of that to limited access yet. It looks like more industrial and logistical businesses are being built alongside that road. I-2 could actually extend up to the Camino Columbia border crossing.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Oh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks. Removing freeways and repurposing the rights-of-way for transit is one way to improve that experience. It's not hypocritical to dislike the state of something currently and want to make it better!

And yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

As for I-35... we can bypass the city? If your complaint is that the bypass has too much traffic... widen that?

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 02:16:58 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Oh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks. Removing freeways and repurposing the rights-of-way for transit is one way to improve that experience. It's not hypocritical to dislike the state of something currently and want to make it better!

And yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

As for I-35... we can bypass the city? If your complaint is that the bypass has too much traffic... widen that?

Lets make things worse in hope we can make things better someday maybe if we are lucky. Heard that many times...
The mindset of contribution towards positive change instead of forcible confiscation of resources is something significantly lacking for many wannabe do-gooders...

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 02:16:58 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Oh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks. Removing freeways and repurposing the rights-of-way for transit is one way to improve that experience. It's not hypocritical to dislike the state of something currently and want to make it better!

And yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

As for I-35... we can bypass the city? If your complaint is that the bypass has too much traffic... widen that?

Lets make things worse in hope we can make things better someday maybe if we are lucky. Heard that many times...
The mindset of contribution towards positive change instead of forcible confiscation of resources is something significantly lacking for many wannabe do-gooders...

The government choosing to replace a freeway with other transportation options is not "forcible confiscation of resources". Replacing I-35 with a boulevard with transit and dense development would be, in many people's eyes, already a positive change. It's not "making things worse". Traffic and cars are not the only things that matter to people!

Quote from: EllieOh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks.

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch. But I sure as hell remember how much it sucked when I did the experience for five years living in New York City. Everywhere else I rode buses, subways and light rail lines hasn't been much better either. The experience made me appreciate being able to use a personal vehicle -almost like it was a luxury.

It's bad enough standing out in the weather at a bus stop. It sucks even worse when you're trying to carry a couple bags of groceries and another bag or case with work/school stuff inside. Let's not forget this will be a almost daily experience. You can haul a week's worth of groceries in a vehicle. You can't do the same with your two arms riding a bus.

The advocates for mass transit always paint a rosy picture of how "convenient" it is when it really isn't so convenient in real life. As I said before, the rich people pushing this stuff don't use the service, but they expect us middle class and lower class people to do so.

Quote from: EllieAnd yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

Um, no. If they tore out I-35 and replaced it with a surface street the only kinds of apartments that would get built there would be the luxury variety with douchebag level pricing.

No one is building "affordable" housing anywhere. When anyone actually tries to do so all hell breaks loose politically. For instance I love how the Bricktown and Midtown areas in Oklahoma City look now. There's lots of new apartments and condos there. But none of the people waiting tables in restaurants or doing other service jobs in that area are living in those places. The swanky mixed use living spaces get bought up by wealthy people as 2nd, 3rd or 4th homes (or however many properties they own). If the downtown apartment isn't a crash pad or party spot then it sits empty just acting as an investment asset.

Hell, even here in my "shitty" military town, the only new homes being built are big-ass McMansions on the far East and West edges of town.

This broken system of housing we have in our greedy-ass nation is one of the key things that will worsen America's looming "baby bust." In another 20 years we're going to be even more screwed for generational demographic decline than China is now.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch. But I sure as hell remember how much it sucked when I did the experience for five years living in New York City. Everywhere else I rode buses, subways and light rail lines hasn't been much better either. The experience made me appreciate being able to use a personal vehicle -almost like it was a luxury.

It's bad enough standing out in the weather at a bus stop. It sucks even worse when you're trying to carry a couple bags of groceries and another bag or case with work/school stuff inside.

The advocates for mass transit always paint a rosy picture of how "convenient" it is when it really isn't so convenient in real life. As I said before, the rich people pushing this stuff don't use the service, but they expect us middle class and lower class people to do so.

I use buses with no problem other than lack of service on Sundays or after 7 PM.

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 03:37:43 PM

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 02:16:58 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Oh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks. Removing freeways and repurposing the rights-of-way for transit is one way to improve that experience. It's not hypocritical to dislike the state of something currently and want to make it better!

And yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

As for I-35... we can bypass the city? If your complaint is that the bypass has too much traffic... widen that?

Lets make things worse in hope we can make things better someday maybe if we are lucky. Heard that many times...
The mindset of contribution towards positive change instead of forcible confiscation of resources is something significantly lacking for many wannabe do-gooders...

The government choosing to replace a freeway with other transportation options is not "forcible confiscation of resources". Replacing I-35 with a boulevard with transit and dense development would be, in many people's eyes, already a positive change. It's not "making things worse". Traffic and cars are not the only things that matter to people!

If construction was to start tomorrow - what would happen to those 100 000 people who use existing highway? How would they get along with their daily business?  It will take minimum of 2-3, and realistically 5-7 years to build up the replacement. How that approach is different from Mr. R. Moses?
You know, The government choosing to replace a street  with other transportation option is not "forcible confiscation of resources". Replacing a street with a highway  has been, in many people's eyes, already a positive change.

Quote from: 1I use buses with no problem other than lack of service on Sundays or after 7 PM.

In small cities like mine the bus service is very limited. The ones here pass by on a given route about once an hour. There's only four routes. The buses don't run at night (service ends after 7pm M-F and 6pm on Saturday; no service on Sundays). The company providing the bus service can't get by without a lot of supplemental funding from state and federal sources.

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 03:37:43 PM

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 02:16:58 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Oh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks. Removing freeways and repurposing the rights-of-way for transit is one way to improve that experience. It's not hypocritical to dislike the state of something currently and want to make it better!

And yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

As for I-35... we can bypass the city? If your complaint is that the bypass has too much traffic... widen that?

Lets make things worse in hope we can make things better someday maybe if we are lucky. Heard that many times...
The mindset of contribution towards positive change instead of forcible confiscation of resources is something significantly lacking for many wannabe do-gooders...

The government choosing to replace a freeway with other transportation options is not "forcible confiscation of resources". Replacing I-35 with a boulevard with transit and dense development would be, in many people's eyes, already a positive change. It's not "making things worse". Traffic and cars are not the only things that matter to people!

It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin. 

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Quote from: EllieOh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks.

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch. But I sure as hell remember how much it sucked when I did the experience for five years living in New York City. Everywhere else I rode buses, subways and light rail lines hasn't been much better either. The experience made me appreciate being able to use a personal vehicle -almost like it was a luxury.

It's bad enough standing out in the weather at a bus stop. It sucks even worse when you're trying to carry a couple bags of groceries and another bag or case with work/school stuff inside. Let's not forget this will be a almost daily experience. You can haul a week's worth of groceries in a vehicle. You can't do the same with your two arms riding a bus.

The advocates for mass transit always paint a rosy picture of how "convenient" it is when it really isn't so convenient in real life. As I said before, the rich people pushing this stuff don't use the service, but they expect us middle class and lower class people to do so.

Quote from: EllieAnd yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

Um, no. If they tore out I-35 and replaced it with a surface street the only kinds of apartments that would get built there would be the luxury variety with douchebag level pricing.

No one is building "affordable" housing anywhere. When anyone actually tries to do so all hell breaks loose politically. For instance I love how the Bricktown and Midtown areas in Oklahoma City look now. There's lots of new apartments and condos there. But none of the people waiting tables in restaurants or doing other service jobs in that area are living in those places. The swanky mixed use living spaces get bought up by wealthy people as 2nd, 3rd or 4th homes (or however many properties they own). If the downtown apartment isn't a crash pad or party spot then it sits empty just acting as an investment asset.

Hell, even here in my "shitty" military town, the only new homes being built are big-ass McMansions on the far East and West edges of town.

This broken system of housing we have in our greedy-ass nation is one of the key things that will worsen America's looming "baby bust." In another 20 years we're going to be even more screwed for generational demographic decline than China is now.

There's no way to build an apartment in that part of Austin that you'd consider "affordable", because the demand is so high. Anything larger than a closet would have very high rent. That doesn't mean that those developments do not help with affordability, though! And no, these units would not just be empty.

As for getting groceries... you do realize that in a dense area, it wouldn't be a chore? Like this does exist in other cities.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM
It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I'm not necessarily in favor of this. I haven't studied the issue enough and don't live in the area. But I think a lot of the opposition to it here is misguided. If you think the tradeoffs here favor keeping the highway, that's a reasonable position. That doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a hypocrite, though.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 03:37:43 PM

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 02:16:58 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2023, 02:33:13 PM

Quote"A boulevard with bus lanes, bike lanes, and some car lanes would actually move a lot more people,"

Typical limousine liberal hypocrisy. And I'm saying that as someone with moderate, middle-of-the-road views.

These rich people love to wax poetic about the virtues of public transit. But none of these jerks actually live the bus-riding experience. They're not standing out in the rain, freezing cold (or brutal Texas summer heat) at a bus stop. They're not strap-hanging inside a bus that's packed like sardines with other passengers. No. They drive their own personal vehicles or use a car service. Yet they expect all us "ordinary" middle and lower class people to park our vehicles and burn up much more of our time using public transit. It's either that or pay all sorts of penalties to continue driving, whether it's wasting more and more time idling at traffic signals or paying high tolls and parking fees to enter a certain part of town.

The schemes to tear out I-35 and turn it into a surface street is really a ploy for selling commercial and residential real estate. If the Interstate is removed and replaced by a surface street all the extra space needed for ramps, frontage roads, etc can be redeveloped. The efforts have zero to do with helping "disadvantaged people."

The housing market in metro Austin is under-going a worsening affordability crisis. Where are the anti-freeway people on that? All these efforts to remove urban freeways and "repair damage caused by neighborhoods being disconnected" is really a bunch of crap. The damage was done decades ago. And freeways or no freeways, American housing is already very segregated by race and class. The real motivation for freeway removal is to spread gentrification. When the low income neighborhood no longer has a freeway between it and the "better" homes the real estate developers can move in and replace or renovate the low income housing with "luxury" apartments. And the people the anti-freeway activists claimed they were going to help can pack their bags and move as they get priced out of that "restored" neighborhood.

In the case of I-35 and Austin, I don't think there is any realistic chance at all of it being turned into a surface street. It would drop a traffic bomb onto the city. I don't know the breakdown of thru vs local traffic on I-35, but what I do know is a hell of a lot of commercial trucks move goods on I-35. If all of those semis had to slowly trudge through dozens of traffic signals to get thru Austin it would unleash all sorts of problems, some of them very dangerous.

Oh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks. Removing freeways and repurposing the rights-of-way for transit is one way to improve that experience. It's not hypocritical to dislike the state of something currently and want to make it better!

And yes, building more, denser apartments in the reconnected area would be a good thing to help with Austin's affordability crisis.

As for I-35... we can bypass the city? If your complaint is that the bypass has too much traffic... widen that?

Lets make things worse in hope we can make things better someday maybe if we are lucky. Heard that many times...
The mindset of contribution towards positive change instead of forcible confiscation of resources is something significantly lacking for many wannabe do-gooders...

The government choosing to replace a freeway with other transportation options is not "forcible confiscation of resources". Replacing I-35 with a boulevard with transit and dense development would be, in many people's eyes, already a positive change. It's not "making things worse". Traffic and cars are not the only things that matter to people!

It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I sort of agree that the very long term effect may be on a positive side. But the question is about the price to pay for those long term achievements.
And that is a big blind spot in the eye of many revolutionary-inclined optimists: price to pay in years and decades while things settle to a new (hopefully better, but you never can be 100% sure) normal.

For me, discussion of how things may work is interesting by itself - I spent a good half an hour staring at Austin topo and traffic maps. Looks like hydrology map would be another very important piece to look at, but I didn't have time for that. Now just tell me that I-35 removal advocates did as much of... not due diligence, but mere basic curiosity.

Quote from: 1 on July 12, 2023, 04:53:12 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch. But I sure as hell remember how much it sucked when I did the experience for five years living in New York City. Everywhere else I rode buses, subways and light rail lines hasn't been much better either. The experience made me appreciate being able to use a personal vehicle -almost like it was a luxury.

It's bad enough standing out in the weather at a bus stop. It sucks even worse when you're trying to carry a couple bags of groceries and another bag or case with work/school stuff inside.

The advocates for mass transit always paint a rosy picture of how "convenient" it is when it really isn't so convenient in real life. As I said before, the rich people pushing this stuff don't use the service, but they expect us middle class and lower class people to do so.

I use buses with no problem other than lack of service on Sundays or after 7 PM.

With my car, I have no such restriction.  Having to plan around such outages of service is frustrating, having depended on public transit in DC and San Francisco, myself.

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 05:22:51 PM

Quote from: 1 on July 12, 2023, 04:53:12 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch. But I sure as hell remember how much it sucked when I did the experience for five years living in New York City. Everywhere else I rode buses, subways and light rail lines hasn't been much better either. The experience made me appreciate being able to use a personal vehicle -almost like it was a luxury.

It's bad enough standing out in the weather at a bus stop. It sucks even worse when you're trying to carry a couple bags of groceries and another bag or case with work/school stuff inside.

The advocates for mass transit always paint a rosy picture of how "convenient" it is when it really isn't so convenient in real life. As I said before, the rich people pushing this stuff don't use the service, but they expect us middle class and lower class people to do so.

I use buses with no problem other than lack of service on Sundays or after 7 PM.

With my car, I have no such restriction.  Having to plan around such outages of service is frustrating, having depended on public transit in DC and San Francisco, myself.

Transit  may be workable, though; or it may be about a shrink from 2 to 1 car per family. Or reduced car mileage.
There is still taxi/Uber available if you really need to go.
Problem is making transit desirable and convenient - and preferably  not by making things worse for drivers, but making them better for transit riders. Which is a lot to ask, honestly speaking.

I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 05:22:51 PM

Quote from: 1 on July 12, 2023, 04:53:12 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch. But I sure as hell remember how much it sucked when I did the experience for five years living in New York City. Everywhere else I rode buses, subways and light rail lines hasn't been much better either. The experience made me appreciate being able to use a personal vehicle -almost like it was a luxury.

It's bad enough standing out in the weather at a bus stop. It sucks even worse when you're trying to carry a couple bags of groceries and another bag or case with work/school stuff inside.

The advocates for mass transit always paint a rosy picture of how "convenient" it is when it really isn't so convenient in real life. As I said before, the rich people pushing this stuff don't use the service, but they expect us middle class and lower class people to do so.

I use buses with no problem other than lack of service on Sundays or after 7 PM.

With my car, I have no such restriction.  Having to plan around such outages of service is frustrating, having depended on public transit in DC and San Francisco, myself.

Oh yeah, bus outages suck. Just this month, there was a strike in which Québec City was taken hostage by bus drivers making more than the national average.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Quote from: EllieOh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks.

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch.

That's because most of them don't actually use mass transit.

Quote from: GaryV on July 12, 2023, 05:40:21 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 04:50:26 PM

Quote from: EllieOh please. No one loves the current transit experience in most US cities; I'm sure any of these advocates would agree with you that it sucks.

Those advocates of mass transit say absolutely nothing of how the bus/train riding experience sucks. I never hear any of them mention the negative aspects of it in their sales pitch.

That's because most of them don't actually use mass transit.

I would make a horrible sales pitcher for mass transit, because I actively use it most days of my life.

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 05:17:26 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM
It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I'm not necessarily in favor of this. I haven't studied the issue enough and don't live in the area. But I think a lot of the opposition to it here is misguided. If you think the tradeoffs here favor keeping the highway, that's a reasonable position. That doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a hypocrite, though.

Take a heavily congested, overcrowded pre-existing freeway and instead of adding lanes to it, tear it down in lieu of a road with at grade intersections and endless access. The result will not only be a failure, but it might be the stupidest idea anyone has ever come up with.  We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have. 

If you look at a map, you will see that I-35 starts near the Mexico border in Loredo, TX. Going north, it passes through San Antonio, Austin, and Waco before splitting to become I-35E through Dallas and I-35W through Fort Worth. Continuing north, it passes through Oklahoma City, Whicita, Kansas City, and Des Moines before splitting again to become I-35E through St Paul and I-35W through Minneapolis, before ending in Deluth. In Minneapolis, however, you can take I-94 West to I-29 to the Canadian border, but the smarter route is to take I-29 from Kansas City. This makes it a major trucking route.

Maybe the people in Austin don't like through truckers rolling through their city, but as a reminder....
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/db/5d/8f/db5d8f467593178d4150cf9420381e86.jpg)

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:49:07 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 05:17:26 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM
It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I'm not necessarily in favor of this. I haven't studied the issue enough and don't live in the area. But I think a lot of the opposition to it here is misguided. If you think the tradeoffs here favor keeping the highway, that's a reasonable position. That doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a hypocrite, though.

Take a heavily congested, overcrowded pre-existing freeway and instead of adding lanes to it, tear it down in lieu of a road with at grade intersections and endless access. The result will not only be a failure, but it might be the stupidest idea anyone has ever come up with.  We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have.

Well, adding some rail instead of extra lanes may be an option.  So far, I may agree with transit folks.
  A bunch of  follow up questions to ask, though (I haven't been to Austin, so I know nothing about the city): Is there a concentrated enough business district to warrant commute to the same spot for many people? Is there a corridor to put such rail line? If underground, where is the water table (looks like Austin is pushed by terrain from one side and water from the other, please correct me if I am wrong)? Is I-35 the most efficient commute direction for the rail?  Just as conversation starters, you know...

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:49:07 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 05:17:26 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM
It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I'm not necessarily in favor of this. I haven't studied the issue enough and don't live in the area. But I think a lot of the opposition to it here is misguided. If you think the tradeoffs here favor keeping the highway, that's a reasonable position. That doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a hypocrite, though.

Take a heavily congested, overcrowded pre-existing freeway and instead of adding lanes to it, tear it down in lieu of a road with at grade intersections and endless access. The result will not only be a failure, but it might be the stupidest idea anyone has ever come up with.  We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have.

It depends on if improvements are made to the overall urban system.  You can't just tear down a highway and just expect things to be okay.  But, if consideration is made on how to deal with the expected traffic on the street system (e.g., adjusting signals, adding turn lanes, reconsidering one-way movements), it can work.

Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 05:27:51 PM
I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Depends on what form gentrification takes.  Absentee landlords and empty apartments?  Yep, bad.  But if it's just more affluent moving in, the affected streets could become a neighborhood again.  Rich people are people, too.

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:13:27 PM

Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 05:27:51 PM
I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Depends on what form gentrification takes.  Absentee landlords and empty apartments?  Yep, bad.  But if it's just more affluent moving in, the affected streets could become a neighborhood again.  Rich people are people, too.

and f&%k those loosers who would have to move out!

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 06:17:18 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:13:27 PM

Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 05:27:51 PM
I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Depends on what form gentrification takes.  Absentee landlords and empty apartments?  Yep, bad.  But if it's just more affluent moving in, the affected streets could become a neighborhood again.  Rich people are people, too.

and f&%k those loosers who would have to move out!

Move out from where?  We tore down the freeway; nobody lives on a freeway.

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:22:25 PM

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 06:17:18 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:13:27 PM

Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 05:27:51 PM
I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Depends on what form gentrification takes.  Absentee landlords and empty apartments?  Yep, bad.  But if it's just more affluent moving in, the affected streets could become a neighborhood again.  Rich people are people, too.

and f&%k those loosers who would have to move out!

Move out from where?  We tore down the freeway; nobody lives on a freeway.

From what would become a  luxury neighborhood. Gentrification is a real thing...

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:13:27 PM

Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 05:27:51 PM
I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Depends on what form gentrification takes.  Absentee landlords and empty apartments?  Yep, bad.  But if it's just more affluent moving in, the affected streets could become a neighborhood again.  Rich people are people, too.

Rich people are people who hate poor people simply for existing.

Quote from: EllieThere's no way to build an apartment in that part of Austin that you'd consider "affordable", because the demand is so high. Anything larger than a closet would have very high rent. That doesn't mean that those developments do not help with affordability, though! And no, these units would not just be empty.

Land used by freeways is hardly a difference-maker for housing affordability. The Austin region has all kinds of land through and around it where more modest priced housing could have been built. Zoning policies, politics and just plain greed have most real estate development nation-wide very biased toward high income customers. If the developers can't build living spaces for people with deeper pockets they're not going to bother at all. And they're sure not going to put up with anyone building lower cost properties near any of their stuff. These bad practices have been shored up by a great deal of money coming from global investors.

Down-grading I-35 to a city street pigged with traffic signals isn't going to change any of that situation with housing affordability.

Quote from: EllieAs for getting groceries... you do realize that in a dense area, it wouldn't be a chore? Like this does exist in other cities.

American cities aren't built in a manner where everyone can live right around the corner from a grocery store. Even if all the freeways were torn down this would not change. We live in a very economically segregated society. The New Urbanist downtown utopias where somebody's condo is within a short walk of everything are priced out of reach for most people. Most of us would still need a vehicle to take us to all the places we need to go.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have.

The city limits population of Austin is on the verge of passing 1 million (if it hasn't actually done so by now). The metro population of Austin is roughly 2 million. San Antonio is a short drive to the Southwest -all with rapidly growing suburbs (New Braunfels, San Marcos, etc) in between.

Quote from: kalvadoand f&%k those loosers who would have to move out!

That's pretty much the attitude for lower and lower-middle income people who get displaced by gentrification. In the same breath the douchebags complain "nobody wants to work" when they can't staff up a restaurant, grocery store or whatever in that gentrified location with low wage workers. The douches demand those "losers" commute in from a considerable distance to work those low wage jobs. They don't seem to realize low wage jobs can be found anywhere. And the low income from a shit job goes farther when it's away from a major city center.

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 06:25:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:22:25 PM

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 06:17:18 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2023, 06:13:27 PM

Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 05:27:51 PM
I'm getting beyond tired of new urbanists wanting to demolish freeways. Do they seriously think demolishing freeways will magically tie the separated neighborhoods back together? No, because the construction associated with transforming a freeway into a boulevard will inevitably push low-income inhabitants out thanks to gentrification, thus having the opposite effect of getting a neighborhood back together.

Depends on what form gentrification takes.  Absentee landlords and empty apartments?  Yep, bad.  But if it's just more affluent moving in, the affected streets could become a neighborhood again.  Rich people are people, too.

and f&%k those loosers who would have to move out!

Move out from where?  We tore down the freeway; nobody lives on a freeway.

From what would become a  luxury neighborhood. Gentrification is a real thing...

But...it's a freeway.  There is no neighborhood.  That's why it has to be brought back together. 

Are we just saying that any new construction causes values to rise?  If so, isn't rent control of some fashion the answer?

We've been kind of straying on the OP topic. Nobody is claiming that a deck park needs to be built in Troy or Salado.

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 06:06:24 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:49:07 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 05:17:26 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM
It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I'm not necessarily in favor of this. I haven't studied the issue enough and don't live in the area. But I think a lot of the opposition to it here is misguided. If you think the tradeoffs here favor keeping the highway, that's a reasonable position. That doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a hypocrite, though.

Take a heavily congested, overcrowded pre-existing freeway and instead of adding lanes to it, tear it down in lieu of a road with at grade intersections and endless access. The result will not only be a failure, but it might be the stupidest idea anyone has ever come up with.  We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have.

Well, adding some rail instead of extra lanes may be an option.  So far, I may agree with transit folks.
  A bunch of  follow up questions to ask, though (I haven't been to Austin, so I know nothing about the city): Is there a concentrated enough business district to warrant commute to the same spot for many people? Is there a corridor to put such rail line? If underground, where is the water table (looks like Austin is pushed by terrain from one side and water from the other, please correct me if I am wrong)? Is I-35 the most efficient commute direction for the rail?  Just as conversation starters, you know...

Short answer: No, there isn't concentrated enough businesses in a single area. Of course there's downtown, but then you have the Domain and major tech companies that are spread all over the Austin area.

We already have a commuter rail line that runs from north Austin to downtown and it's barely used except when there are major events (eg. SXSW or ACL).

Wasn't there a plan back in the 1990s and 2000's to build a freight/HSR rail line in the median of SH 130, which would have freed up the main rail line through Austin for a through commuter rail line?

That probably would have reduced the traffic volume a bit on I-35 enough to forego radical changes, but it still wouldn't be enough to warrant simply removing the freeway and replacing it with a surface-level boulevard. Even if SH 45S and 130 were made free, they would still have to face not only the through traffic diverted from the former I-35, but their own traffic using those thoroughfares for their own localized orgins and destinations. Therefore, most traffic going through Austin would continue to use the through route as the most direct path, and that would increase both noise and congestion, especially if you downgraded to a 4- or 6-lane boulevard.

The current plan of depressing I-35 with localized caps and a boulevard on top for local traffic is the best and most balanced solution. Combining that with removing tolls on 130 and SH 45 ultimately when the bonds are paid for would be the most ideal plan for balancing out traffic concerns.

I wouldn't mind I-35 being 8 lanes (2x4) continuous from San Antonio to Waco and starting just south of the 35W/35E split, with 6 lanes (2x3) otherwise.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2023, 07:23:33 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a(t) (sic) 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have.

The city limits population of Austin is on the verge of passing 1 million (if it hasn't actually done so by now).

I think we said the same thing, albeit my misspelling.

Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2023, 06:06:24 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:49:07 PM

Quote from: Ellie on July 12, 2023, 05:17:26 PM

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 12, 2023, 05:13:25 PM
It will make things worse.  Much worse.  Please trust me on this living and working in Austin.

I'm not necessarily in favor of this. I haven't studied the issue enough and don't live in the area. But I think a lot of the opposition to it here is misguided. If you think the tradeoffs here favor keeping the highway, that's a reasonable position. That doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a hypocrite, though.

Take a heavily congested, overcrowded pre-existing freeway and instead of adding lanes to it, tear it down in lieu of a road with at grade intersections and endless access. The result will not only be a failure, but it might be the stupidest idea anyone has ever come up with.  We need more freeways in Austin with a population almost a 1 million, not tear down the precious few we have.

Well, adding some rail instead of extra lanes may be an option.  So far, I may agree with transit folks.
  A bunch of  follow up questions to ask, though (I haven't been to Austin, so I know nothing about the city): Is there a concentrated enough business district to warrant commute to the same spot for many people? Is there a corridor to put such rail line? If underground, where is the water table (looks like Austin is pushed by terrain from one side and water from the other, please correct me if I am wrong)? Is I-35 the most efficient commute direction for the rail?  Just as conversation starters, you know...

No there are office buildings all over Austin in the far reaches of the town.  There are huge office complexes in the suburbs.  I laughed that at one point I used to commute from just south of downtown to the suburbs for work every morning because my office was in the suburbs. Government employees are the only ones with a downtown central business district anymore.  The rest of downtown is condos, overpriced restaurants, yoga studios, more condos, coffee shops and anything else that will make you feel like you are living in Los Angeles or New York.  They want you to live downtown, not work downtown.

We have one commuter rail line.  It is great if you live in Leander and work in east Austin or at the convention center but goes the opposite direction and doesn't service where I live so it does nothing for me.  Even with that, it still is never used.  I would love a subway system in Austin, but that would be so extremely expensive and disruptive to build, not to mention all the truck traffic on Mopac and I-35 won't be suddenly reduce by its presence if it showed up overnight.  The 18 wheelers and delivery trucks can't stop at the commuter station outside of town, put their trailer on the train and then take it downtown.  Besides most of that is through traffic. 

There are very limited things you can go to help Austin's traffic woes outside building more bigger roads.  That means more freeways. They have already taken a lane out of many city streets to include stupid bike lanes and all sorts of random crosswalks that are signal controlled.  Those crosswalks are like someone said "traffic is moving too well and too smoothly through here.  Let's add something to disrupt that."  Basically, the city is doing everything they can to make matters worse. 

Quote from: Anthony_JKWasn't there a plan back in the 1990s and 2000's to build a freight/HSR rail line in the median of SH 130, which would have freed up the main rail line through Austin for a through commuter rail line?

All sorts of concepts (or pipe dreams really) were tossed around in the 1990's for the "Texas TGV" rail system. None of it ever got off the ground.

The median of a freeway can work as a place to hold conventional railroad tracks, be it freight or normal speed commuter rail. Interstate highways and other kinds of super highways do not have the curve geometry at all to support trains running at true high speeds. That's especially true today considering just how crooked some new freeway segments are being built. Any true high speed rail lines have to be built on their own alignments.

Quote from: Anthony_JKI wouldn't mind I-35 being 8 lanes (2x4) continuous from San Antonio to Waco and starting just south of the 35W/35E split, with 6 lanes (2x3) otherwise.

Even though much of the 3x3 upgrades along I-35 in Central Texas have only been recently completed it does seem like a shame more of it wasn't built 4x4. Quite a bit of the route has room for fourth lanes to be added on the outboard edges, but slip ramps to frontage roads would have to be re-built. Just under the current traffic levels I-35 needs to be 4x4 or more from San Antonio up thru Austin.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14We have one commuter rail line.  It is great if you live in Leander and work in east Austin or at the convention center but goes the opposite direction and doesn't service where I live so it does nothing for me.

That one light rail line in Austin is very inadequate. It isn't even double-tracked its entire length. In order for Austin to have a functional rail transit network it would need several different lines reaching into various parts of the city. The hilly terrain would make engineering such a rail system a serious challenge. The end result would probably be a combination of tunnels and elevated structures. Not a lot of places in Austin where you can place pairs of rail tracks at grade. Even if there is room the tunnels and elevated structures would be necessary to even out the grades.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14They have already taken a lane out of many city streets to include stupid bike lanes and all sorts of random crosswalks that are signal controlled.  Those crosswalks are like someone said "traffic is moving too well and too smoothly through here.  Let's add something to disrupt that."  Basically, the city is doing everything they can to make matters worse.

There are places where so-called "traffic calming" measures can be a good thing. But "road diets" can't be applied just anywhere. Planners in Austin don't seem to be paying attention to that.

Quote from: ZLoth on July 12, 2023, 06:03:49 PM
Loredo...Whicita...Deluth

Sweet, I-35 got some new control cities! :D

500 miles is a hell of a lot of road to cover, so I'm tempted to say not in any of our lifetimes.

How about walking 500 miles? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbNlMtqrYS0

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2023, 11:14:57 PM
How about walking 500 miles? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbNlMtqrYS0

That song is actually about walking 1,000 miles...

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 13, 2023, 05:52:21 PM

Quote from: ZLoth on July 12, 2023, 06:03:49 PM
Loredo...Whicita...Deluth

Sweet, I-35 got some new control cities! :D

Those are the knock off control cities of I-33, I-35's cheaper brother. 

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 14, 2023, 12:45:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 13, 2023, 05:52:21 PM

Quote from: ZLoth on July 12, 2023, 06:03:49 PM
Loredo...Whicita...Deluth

Sweet, I-35 got some new control cities! :D

Those are the knock off control cities of I-33, I-35 cheaper brother. 

Now that you mention it, they do kinda look like brand names you'd see on Amazon.