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

[skluth]

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. I hope you never have to experience what it's like on the other side of that health equation.

[Bobby5280]

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.

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).

[Some one]

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.

[Rothman]

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.

[jgb191]

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.

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.

[ethanhopkin14]

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!

[ZLoth]

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

[Bobby5280]

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.

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.

[ethanhopkin14]

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.

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. 

[kalvado]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

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.

[Ellie]

"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?

[kalvado]

"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...

[Ellie]

"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!

[Bobby5280]

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.

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.

And 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.

[hotdogPi]

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.

[kalvado]

"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.

[Bobby5280]

I 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.

[ethanhopkin14]

"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. 

[Ellie]

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.

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.

And 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.

[Ellie]

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.

[kalvado]

"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.

[Rothman]

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.

[kalvado]

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.

[LilianaUwU]

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.

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.