Austin: IH 35 rebuild

[Some one]

I deleted my comments because I realized there's no point in me bringing up this boulevard idea again or arguing around the semantics of boulevards and caps and I'm not interested in arguing about it any further. We all have different opinions on it and that's fine. Either way, TXDOT has made it clear that they are not interested in converting I-35 into a boulevard. We may or may not see caps and stitches on I-35 in the future. All we can do now is just wait and see.

ETA: I do not, however, appreciate being made out to be a straw man.
ETA2: Especially when some of the arguments here are straw men of themselves but I'll rest my case.

[Bobby5280]

With a bunch of the I-35 Austin expansion project being built in a trench the possibility will remain open for deck parks and enhanced crossovers in various locations.

[Henry]

I deleted my comments because I realized there's no point in me bringing up this boulevard idea again or arguing around the semantics of boulevards and caps and I'm not interested in arguing about it any further. We all have different opinions on it and that's fine. Either way, TXDOT has made it clear that they are not interested in converting I-35 into a boulevard. We may or may not see caps on I-35 in the future. All we can do now is just wait and see.

I wouldn't move I-35 out of Austin either. And if they want to bury it in a trench, more power to them!

[MaxConcrete]

A new lawsuit has been filed against the project.

I think it is very unlikely the plaintiffs will change the plans. It's possible the federal complaint could delay the project and drive up the cost, which was the result of the opposition effort against NHHIP in Houston.

There was a lawsuit and a federal civil rights complaint against NHHIP. The two-year investigation by FHWA found that TxDOT complied with and/or exceeded all NEPA standards. As mentioned by TxDOT's Marc Williams in the article, TxDOT has followed all NEPA rules for I-35 in Austin.

To halt the project, the plaintiffs will need to get an court injunction against the project, or convince FHWA to put the project on hold for review. Otherwise, TxDOT will continue at full speed.

AUSTIN (KXAN) – Austin grassroots nonprofit Rethink35 joined several other area organizations last week and filed a lawsuit against the Texas Department of Transportation over its I-35 Capital Express Central project. At a Monday press conference, the plaintiffs called the litigation a "bold step forward" for community members opposed to the project.

Rethink35, Save Our Springs Alliance, PODER, Mueller Neighborhood Association, East Town Lake Citizens Neighborhood Association, Austin Justice Coalition, AURA and east Austin resident Bertha Rendon Delgado filed the lawsuit as well as a federal complaint to the U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and other federal officials.

That federal complaint alleges that "TxDOT has intentionally engaged in discrimination through its awareness of I-35's racist past and inequitable impacts and its unwillingness to address those impacts," plaintiffs said in a press release.

...

Work on the project is expected to begin in 2024. Concurrent with the project, the City of Austin and Downtown Austin Alliance are working on a supplementary, city-funded cap and stitch program. That initiative would add deck plazas over the sunken portions of the highway, with those plazas poised to hold community amenities, green space and possibly small structures.

TxDOT plans to start construction on the downtown I-35 expansion project later this year. On Saturday, TxDOT's executive director responded to the filings and said they are without "merit," defending the expansion effort.

"This is a project designed with the community and for the community," TxDOT Executive Director Marc Williams said in a Saturday release. "We have carefully followed and even exceeded the environmental and legal requirements to advance this project. We don't believe that the actions of these opponents have merit. TxDOT intends to continue to press forward to deliver the I-35 Capital Express Central project."

[Bobby5280]

It's pretty hilarious watching these "activists" complain about the impact of highways to worsen conditions of housing inequality and even institutional racism when that crap has already been going on in fashionable big cities like Austin for quite some time. It doesn't take a new highway project to cause gentrification or deliberately sinister plots against people whose demographics are in minority and/or low income categories. The level of hypocrisy on display is pretty staggering.

[Anthony_JK]

If the Rethink 35 lawsuit is anything like the original suit that was filed by opponents of the I-49 Lafayette Connector project back in 2002, it will be simply laughed out of court.

The legal standard used for cases like this is basically "Did FHWA and the state transportation agency follow all established protocols for the NEPA process and for public outreach in mitigating all impacts from the project?" It's pretty obvious that TXDOT and FHWA did, even to the point of modifying their proposals to address concerns. This attempt to impose their beautiful 4-lane boulevard onto I-35 will fall flat on its face, I predict.

[Rothman]

If the Rethink 35 lawsuit is anything like the original suit that was filed by opponents of the I-49 Lafayette Connector project back in 2002, it will be simply laughed out of court.

The legal standard used for cases like this is basically "Did FHWA and the state transportation agency follow all established protocols for the NEPA process and for public outreach in mitigating all impacts from the project?" It's pretty obvious that TXDOT and FHWA did, even to the point of modifying their proposals to address concerns. This attempt to impose their beautiful 4-lane boulevard onto I-35 will fall flat on its face, I predict.

Some judges have ignored that standard and DOTs have had to go through appealing their decisions, dragging things out.

What a country.

[Bobby5280]

Government of the lawyers, by the lawyers and for the lawyers.

[texaskdog]

Irony is in order to eliminate the above ground freeway they've evicted anyone within half a block of it.  lol.

[Anthony_JK]

More of that New Urbanist insanity:


Someone got the bright idea of replacing I-35 through the San Antonio-Austin corridor with HSR, and made a markup of it. Mass orgies by the usual folks ensued in the comments.

There was originally a plan to create an HSR line within the Toll 130 ROW, as well as a plan to create a standalone freight rail ROW within 130 that would free up the existing UP ROW within that I-35 corridor for some form of passenger/commuter rail. Apparently, though, that's not enough for our modern urban designers, who are not stopping until they ban cars and trucks and reduce roads to two-lane gravel so to force people to their beloved trains.


Ridiculous.


(If this is an inappropriate place, mods, please say so and I'll move it to where it's appropriate.)

[kphoger]

Not watching.  But the title "Taking back the streets" makes me wonder:  did trains run on I-35 at some point in the past?  If not, then what would be taken "back"?

[triplemultiplex]

Why get outraged over someone's fantasy? 

[Echostatic]

There's no point in letting urbanist plans get a rise out of you. They have no political power with TxDOT.

KUT's Nathan Bernier has an incredibly thorough article documenting the project and its construction plans that released this morning. Shovels will hit the dirt in just a few months. https://www.kut.org/transportation/2024-02-21/your-ultimate-guide-to-the-i-35-expansion-through-central-austin

[sprjus4]

More of that New Urbanist insanity:


Someone got the bright idea of replacing I-35 through the San Antonio-Austin corridor with HSR, and made a markup of it. Mass orgies by the usual folks ensued in the comments.

There was originally a plan to create an HSR line within the Toll 130 ROW, as well as a plan to create a standalone freight rail ROW within 130 that would free up the existing UP ROW within that I-35 corridor for some form of passenger/commuter rail. Apparently, though, that's not enough for our modern urban designers, who are not stopping until they ban cars and trucks and reduce roads to two-lane gravel so to force people to their beloved trains.


Ridiculous.


(If this is an inappropriate place, mods, please say so and I'll move it to where it's appropriate.)

I'd say this easily falls into "Fictional Highways" at the very least. It's not reality, is not proposed, and isn't going to happen.

...and if you would take one second to read the description, it's obvious even the creator sees it as unrealistic and "pie in the sky".

The radical idea of replacing freeways with high speed intercity passenger rail investigated more closely.  We're going to rip up Interstate 35 northbound lanes between San Antonio and both Fort Worth and Dallas. Impact of road vehicle traffic? Who cares?! This is a tongue-in-cheek presentation about what seems like a highly impractical and improbable scenario, but we'll keep that between you and me and let the people that don't bother reading descriptions figure it out. Is it pie in the sky? Is it actually not a bad idea? Is it somewhere in between? You decide!

[Some one]

More of that New Urbanist insanity:


Someone got the bright idea of replacing I-35 through the San Antonio-Austin corridor with HSR, and made a markup of it. Mass orgies by the usual folks ensued in the comments.

There was originally a plan to create an HSR line within the Toll 130 ROW, as well as a plan to create a standalone freight rail ROW within 130 that would free up the existing UP ROW within that I-35 corridor for some form of passenger/commuter rail. Apparently, though, that's not enough for our modern urban designers, who are not stopping until they ban cars and trucks and reduce roads to two-lane gravel so to force people to their beloved trains.


Ridiculous.


(If this is an inappropriate place, mods, please say so and I'll move it to where it's appropriate.)

Yeah, I watched the video and it's obviously a joke. The guy himself said not to take it too seriously. It's supposed to be tongue-in-cheek humor. It's one thing to not like new urbanists but to fearmonger and get worked up over a humorous video and a fictional fantasy is another.

[Anthony_JK]

More of that New Urbanist insanity:


Someone got the bright idea of replacing I-35 through the San Antonio-Austin corridor with HSR, and made a markup of it. Mass orgies by the usual folks ensued in the comments.

There was originally a plan to create an HSR line within the Toll 130 ROW, as well as a plan to create a standalone freight rail ROW within 130 that would free up the existing UP ROW within that I-35 corridor for some form of passenger/commuter rail. Apparently, though, that's not enough for our modern urban designers, who are not stopping until they ban cars and trucks and reduce roads to two-lane gravel so to force people to their beloved trains.


Ridiculous.


(If this is an inappropriate place, mods, please say so and I'll move it to where it's appropriate.)

Yeah, I watched the video and it's obviously a joke. The guy himself said not to take it too seriously. It's supposed to be tongue-in-cheek humor. It's one thing to not like new urbanists but to fearmonger and get worked up over a humorous video and a fictional fantasy is another.

I'm not necessarily saying that the author of that vid was being serious. I do acknowledge that.

One venture of the comments section, however, and it sure seems as some took it as real and desirable. That was my point about New Urbanism's extremism.

Since this is more urban design than highway, maybe the Urban Design sub-forum would be a more appropriate spot for this? I'd have no objection to moving it there.


moto g power (2022)

[Plutonic Panda]

More of that New Urbanist insanity:


Someone got the bright idea of replacing I-35 through the San Antonio-Austin corridor with HSR, and made a markup of it. Mass orgies by the usual folks ensued in the comments.

There was originally a plan to create an HSR line within the Toll 130 ROW, as well as a plan to create a standalone freight rail ROW within 130 that would free up the existing UP ROW within that I-35 corridor for some form of passenger/commuter rail. Apparently, though, that's not enough for our modern urban designers, who are not stopping until they ban cars and trucks and reduce roads to two-lane gravel so to force people to their beloved trains.


Ridiculous.


(If this is an inappropriate place, mods, please say so and I'll move it to where it's appropriate.)

Yeah, I watched the video and it's obviously a joke. The guy himself said not to take it too seriously. It's supposed to be tongue-in-cheek humor. It's one thing to not like new urbanists but to fearmonger and get worked up over a humorous video and a fictional fantasy is another.

You know in all fairness Anthony JK has every right to react the way they did because though maybe this author is joking there's a lot of people who take this shit serious and actually think like it. Want an example? I'm arguing with one of these people now on Facebook check it out: https://www.facebook.com/100064468338195/posts/pfbid0xuDGZXo4kT9f9jJPdUYAPqfGZavT1HNHFsC3MoczXWgP8HcSjSvDrfrc3rnBgMFwl/?mibextid=adzO7l

My name is Campbell.

[Some one]

Again, I believe the people are a vocal minority and it's not getting worked up over it. I think most (urban-like) people just want more options in transportation and don't actually want to get rid of cars or highways... at least outside the urban areas.

[Bobby5280]

True high speed rail anywhere within the United States is pretty ridiculous. It's all but impossible to build a city to city high speed rail line that has curve geometry to support speeds over 300 kilometers per hour. Even building HSR lines that go from one outer edge of a metro area to the outer edge of another metro area is going to be damned difficult. And if that's all we can do in the U-S-of-A then why bother. Airports already take passengers from one metro edge to another metro edge. Trains will just do that more slowly.

That I-35 video obviously is a joke. But if there really were serious proposals to build a "high speed rail" line in the median of the TX-130 toll road those proposals should have been laughed out of the room. TX-130 is pretty damned crooked. It's possible to drive a motor vehicle 85mph on it. But those curves won't allow trains to do 150mph. Maybe not even 100mph. Even if the toll road was built straight enough it doesn't cover enough miles to let a train reach true high speeds.

[Some one]

True high speed rail anywhere within the United States is pretty ridiculous. It's all but impossible to build a city to city high speed rail line that has curve geometry to support speeds over 300 kilometers per hour. Even building HSR lines that go from one outer edge of a metro area to the outer edge of another metro area is going to be damned difficult. And if that's all we can do in the U-S-of-A then why bother. Airports already take passengers from one metro edge to another metro edge. Trains will just do that more slowly.

No offense, but that's a limited type of thinking. I do agree that high-speed rail that runs on highway medians is a just a "higher-speed" rail. It's why Brightline, even though it's sleek isn't high-speed rail. It's just a conventional rail that goes a bit faster. At the same time though, Americans are so unfamiliar with high-speed rail that this rail line's become so popular for going "fast." And with flying, you fail to account for TSA, long lines, boarding, and de-boarding. Whereas with a train you can just get on and board within 10 minutes and unlike an airplane, you can do your work throughout the entire trip. Plus more people on the train means fewer people on the road which means more room to drive. I do believe that high-speed rail is possible. Difficult with the political and geographic climate of our environment, but I think it's doable.

For the record, I don't believe in demolishing rural highways for rail cause that's a ridiculous statement. But I'm in favor of more intercity rail, high-speed, median-running, or regular.

That I-35 video obviously is a joke. But if there really were serious proposals to build a "high speed rail" line in the median of the TX-130 toll road those proposals should have been laughed out of the room. TX-130 is pretty damned crooked. It's possible to drive a motor vehicle 85mph on it. But those curves won't allow trains to do 150mph. Maybe not even 100mph. Even if the toll road was built straight enough it doesn't cover enough miles to let a train reach true high speeds.

Yeah if they DO decide to have high-speed rail they should run it near I-35.

[DNAguy]

In regards to highspeed rail, connecting San Antonio, Austin, Houston, and Dallas metros makes sense.

Outside of that, I don't see it.

I mean, maybe eventually Laredo and Oklahoma City.... but the investment just isn't there.

If the Houston to Dallas does get made, then any expansion of rail should use that as the backbone.

The 'Texas T-bone' makes sense in that it limits # of miles of track without sacrificing the major stops needed to provide ridership.

A San Antonio to Austin to Shiro line would likely only be 'achievable' if SA had a City center-ish station, the line run east along I10 to either SH130 or to US183 and then jump north to Austin. Austin's stop would need to be at the Airport or Airport adjacent. Then the line would have to run east / northeast along Texas 71 / Texas 21 to College Station / Shiro.

Some pretty straight shots if you follow those corridors.

But with as much difficulty as the Houston-Dallas line has gotten, I just don't know where an additional $10-20 billion is going to come from to fund that portion of the line.

A regular speed commuter rail along the 35 makes more sense.... with stops at all the various mid-size cities / large suburbs along the way. However, this has been a crazy battle with UP for decades now.

Maybe a Downtown SA stop if costs permit (they likely won't), a SA Airport stop, New Braunfels, San Marcos, Buda / Kyle, Downtown Austin, North Austin / RR / Pflugerville, Georgetown, Belton/Temple/Kileen, Waco, potentially Hillsboro, Waxahachie, Desoto / I-20, and Downtown Dallas (likely the same as HSR station)

You'd want an express option every so often ... maybe morning and evening at first... that only hits SA, Austin, Belton/Temple/Kileen, Waco, and Dallas to make it more of a viable intercity option..... but likely not the air traffic replacement that HSR would be.

It would reduce load on 35, however, by taking the more 'regional' trips off the road Dallas to Waco trips, Kileen to Austin, SA to Austin, NB to Austin trips, etc.

One would think we try that out first or try and upgrade that corridor to improve speed along it.

[kphoger]

I mean, maybe eventually Laredo and Oklahoma City.... but the investment just isn't there.

I don't imagine the demand being nearly enough to justify it for those two.

Every time I've driven between OKC and Laredo on I-35, the stretches south of Von Ormy and north of Gainesville have always been the "Ah! finally the traffic is gone!" stretches.

22,071 = 2019 AADT south of Cotulla
77,267 = 2022 AADT south of Eddy

[Bobby5280]

No offense, but that's a limited type of thinking.

It's NOT "limited thinking." All I'm doing is acknowledging reality of building transportation infrastructure in the United States. This nation's legal and political structure is not the slightest bit friendly at all to development of high speed rail. That is a fact.

There isn't anything "sexy" at all about "faster-speed" rail lines. It's just conventional passenger rail. And us Americans can't even built those kind of rail lines without it breaking the damned bank account.

Yeah if they DO decide to have high-speed rail they should run it near I-35.

Way too many existing properties sit in the way of such a thing. China can lay down hundreds or even thousands of miles of new, true high speed rail track in a short amount of time because China is a totalitarian police state. They can secretly place people who don't want to move in front of a firing squad and get away with it. Here in America we're on the other polar extreme. We can't build anything significant anymore without 20 or more years worth of lawsuits and political theater before shovels start turning up any earth. And then the finished product is often underwhelming.

In regards to highspeed rail, connecting San Antonio, Austin, Houston, and Dallas metros makes sense. Outside of that, I don't see it.

I'm skeptical about high speed rail lines just connecting the Texas Triangle cities as being something feasible.

Yeah, the cities of Dallas, Houston and San Antonio all have city limits populations over 1 million people. Austin is on the verge of cracking the 1 million mark in city limits population. Fort Worth is nipping at Austin's heels with 935,000 residents (2021 estimate). Nevertheless, all of those cities are very car-oriented. It's not like you're going to take a high speed train to the city center and then be able to take mass transit anywhere else in the metro area like you can in many European cities, or Japan or other parts of the Far East.

Even in places that have multiple layers of mass transit, such as New York City, driving a personal vehicle is still faster and more convenient than commuting via a combo of bus and train travel. I know this from personal experience. It's not cheap to drive a vehicle from a place like Staten Island into Manhattan. But it's often much faster than taking the bus, ferry and subway.

[Some one]

It's NOT "limited thinking." All I'm doing is acknowledging reality of building transportation infrastructure in the United States. This nation's legal and political structure is not the slightest bit friendly at all to development of high speed rail. That is a fact.

If you reread what I said I never said it was easy to build high-speed rail. Just that I don't think it's entirely impossible.

There isn't anything "sexy" at all about "faster-speed" rail lines. It's just conventional passenger rail. And us Americans can't even built those kind of rail lines without it breaking the damned bank account.

I think the idea of boarding a sleek modern train and not having to deal with traffic or TSA is sexy in of itself no? Plus shinkansen trains are very sexy. As for the "damned bank account", infrastructure projects are going to be overpriced and delayed regardless so I don't understand why we suddenly care when it comes to trains.

Way too many existing properties sit in the way of such a thing. China can lay down hundreds or even thousands of miles of new, true high speed rail track in a short amount of time because China is a totalitarian police state. They can secretly place people who don't want to move in front of a firing squad and get away with it. Here in America we're on the other polar extreme. We can't build anything significant anymore without 20 or more years worth of lawsuits and political theater before shovels start turning up any earth. And then the finished product is often underwhelming.

Not that I agree with it, but eminent domain is a thing no? But I do agree how hard it is to build infrastructure. Brightline for example, was supposed to be high-speed rail but was watered down to what it is now.

In regards to highspeed rail, connecting San Antonio, Austin, Houston, and Dallas metros makes sense. Outside of that, I don't see it.

I'm skeptical about high speed rail lines just connecting the Texas Triangle cities as being something feasible.

Yeah, the cities of Dallas, Houston and San Antonio all have city limits populations over 1 million people. Austin is on the verge of cracking the 1 million mark in city limits population. Fort Worth is nipping at Austin's heels with 935,000 residents (2021 estimate). Nevertheless, all of those cities are very car-oriented. It's not like you're going to take a high speed train to the city center and then be able to take mass transit anywhere else in the metro area like you can in many European cities, or Japan or other parts of the Far East.

I always wonder why people say we can't have high-speed or even faster rail line because "you still have to drive at the endpoints." Airports exist. People drive to the airport to board a plane and head to another city, even if it's within the state or an hour away. Park and Ride exist, and those seem to be popular with commuters. Hell Brightline, which is in car-oriented Florida is extremely popular with Floridan travelers. And FWIW, the endpoints of the Texas HSR are in areas with decent or (in the future) expanding transit to get around.

Even in places that have multiple layers of mass transit, such as New York City, driving a personal vehicle is still faster and more convenient than commuting via a combo of bus and train travel. I know this from personal experience. It's not cheap to drive a vehicle from a place like Staten Island into Manhattan. But it's often much faster than taking the bus, ferry and subway.

See, that's why its good to have OPTIONS to get around the city. You might prefer to get around NYC using a car but someone else might prefer getting around using public transportation. And I believe the flaws of public transportation comes moreso from it being horribly underfunded and politicians and nimbys doing anything in their power to keep it that way. Also, it may be faster, but traffic in NYC can be HORRENDOUS.

Again, I am not for forcing people to get on the train, but I am FOR giving people the option to drive, fly, or take a train.

[Some one]

Also, I feel like this should be moved to another topic, cause this has almost nothing to do with the planned I-35 expansion.