AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Austin, TX  (Read 52316 times)

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 927
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: November 30, 2022, 11:56:40 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #375 on: May 31, 2022, 07:37:15 PM »

Also, this is Austin's first new controlled access facility without tolls in-- how long?
The recently-opened south extension of MoPac at Slaughter qualifies as a new freeway section. But before that, it was probably SH 71 near the airport. But you are correct, that Austin has been victim of toll road hegemony since the mid-2000s.

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1899
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 02:04:15 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #376 on: June 01, 2022, 11:02:48 AM »

^ I donít think they are upgrading the road to a freewayÖ from what Iím seeing itís a couple of intersections being converted.

Eventually they will convert all of them

They are "supposed" to. 
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2414
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 09:49:41 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #377 on: August 22, 2022, 08:42:01 AM »

https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/projects/studies/austin/fm973-realignment.html

TxDOT held a public hearing on August 11 for their plan to shift FM 973 to a new 6 lane alignment outside of Manor. This will serve the traffic to be generated by the Tesla plant.

I can't imagine this is going to be good for the toll revenues on 130 or 290
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 345
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 12:01:35 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #378 on: August 23, 2022, 09:11:28 AM »

https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/projects/studies/austin/fm973-realignment.html

TxDOT held a public hearing on August 11 for their plan to shift FM 973 to a new 6 lane alignment outside of Manor. This will serve the traffic to be generated by the Tesla plant.

I can't imagine this is going to be good for the toll revenues on 130 or 290

This looks like it will tie into a series of long planned highways in and around Taylor. I live right off 130, itís starting to get consistently backed up during rush hour, so I donít think theyíll lose much traffic:

https://www.wilco.org/Portals/0/Departments/CountyEngineer/2021-09-29%20-%20LRTP_Arterials_v2.pdf?ver=2021-10-06-135408-783
Logged

bing101

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4527
  • Last Login: November 29, 2022, 10:40:48 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #379 on: August 26, 2022, 11:00:59 PM »


Here is Interstate Kyle taking a tour of Austin.


Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 345
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 12:01:35 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #380 on: September 07, 2022, 09:24:59 AM »

Final section of SH 45 Southwest enters engineering and design phase:

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/hays/final-section-of-sh-45-southwest-enters-engineering-and-design-phase/

Itís about time!!
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1899
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 02:04:15 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #381 on: September 07, 2022, 12:52:32 PM »

Final section of SH 45 Southwest enters engineering and design phase:

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/hays/final-section-of-sh-45-southwest-enters-engineering-and-design-phase/

Itís about time!!

Not quite the last section.
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 927
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: November 30, 2022, 11:56:40 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #382 on: September 07, 2022, 04:10:56 PM »

Final section of SH 45 Southwest enters engineering and design phase:

That's good news. But the article's word choice is not consistent with regular project progression. Title is "Final section of SH 45 Southwest enters engineering and design phase". Usually a project goes into the engineering and design phase after the route alignment has been determined and environmental studies are complete. That seemed like good news, because environmental studies can take years.

But then the article says "Jones said they are in the design phase which is the part of the project where the route for the highway is mapped out."

So it appears that the alignment still needs to be determined, which means environmental clearance is still needed. I think this project is outside the Barton Creek watershed, which should make it easier to get clearance as compared to the adjacent section to the west. But it's still probably going to take 2-3 years to get the alignment and environmental clearance done.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2022, 04:14:51 PM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 10:51:13 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #383 on: September 08, 2022, 02:01:24 PM »

Quote from: ethanhopkin14
Not quite the last section.

After filling in the gap from FM-1626 to I-35 I think they should extend TX-45 farther West from its current SW dead end at FM-1826 over to US-290. That would do so much more to make TX-45 function as an effective bypass route around the South side of the Austin metro.

US-290 itself needs to be upgraded into a freeway farther West as well. The 3.5 mile freeway extension thru the Oak Hill area to Circle Drive will be helpful. But they really need (somehow) to get the freeway extended West past Dripping Springs and even as far as the US-281 corridor.
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 345
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 12:01:35 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #384 on: September 10, 2022, 11:20:37 AM »

Final section of SH 45 Southwest enters engineering and design phase:

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/hays/final-section-of-sh-45-southwest-enters-engineering-and-design-phase/

Itís about time!!

Not quite the last section.

True, but itís the last section that has a realistic chance of being built. I donít see them building the western ďringĒ along or parallel to FM620.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 10:51:13 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #385 on: September 11, 2022, 06:48:29 PM »

TX-45 at best will be a half loop. There's no way further extensions will be able to made along/near FM-620. The only North-South corridor in the Western, high-priced reaches of Austin that has any chance of freeway upgrades is TX-360. Right now it's kind of a "parkway," but over time more intersections will likely be converted into freeway style exits. There is room to add frontage roads along much of TX-360 in order to cut off driveways and side streets from the main lanes of the highway.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3547
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 08:48:37 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #386 on: September 28, 2022, 12:49:19 PM »

Quote from: ethanhopkin14
Not quite the last section.

After filling in the gap from FM-1626 to I-35 I think they should extend TX-45 farther West from its current SW dead end at FM-1826 over to US-290. That would do so much more to make TX-45 function as an effective bypass route around the South side of the Austin metro.




US-290 itself needs to be upgraded into a freeway farther West as well. The 3.5 mile freeway extension thru the Oak Hill area to Circle Drive will be helpful. But they really need (somehow) to get the freeway extended West past Dripping Springs and even as far as the US-281 corridor.

Hays County wants 45 completed but Travis County is fighting it.

I'd like to see 290 straightened from Dripping Springs past Johnson City and the freeway can drop in just west of Johnson City.  After that you wouldn't really need one.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1899
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 02:04:15 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #387 on: October 01, 2022, 06:38:23 PM »

Final section of SH 45 Southwest enters engineering and design phase:

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/hays/final-section-of-sh-45-southwest-enters-engineering-and-design-phase/

Itís about time!!

Not quite the last section.

True, but itís the last section that has a realistic chance of being built. I donít see them building the western ďringĒ along or parallel to FM620.

Not really.  The main lanes need to be built between Mopac and FM 1826.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 10:51:13 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #388 on: October 02, 2022, 01:52:09 PM »

Quote from: texaskdog
Hays County wants 45 completed but Travis County is fighting it.

That figures. It's some property owners in that immediate area versus the bigger travel/commerce interests for the rest of Texas. TX-45 needs to meet up with the US-290 corridor West of Austin.

Quote from: texaskdog
I'd like to see 290 straightened from Dripping Springs past Johnson City and the freeway can drop in just west of Johnson City.  After that you wouldn't really need one.

If/when a US-290 freeway is extended West past Dripping Springs the freeway will almost certainly need to be built along a new terrain path. If the new highway bypasses Dripping Springs to the North it will be natural to direct it toward Johnson City rather than the current Y intersection of US-290/US-281 by Miller Creek.

I disagree with there being no need for a freeway West of Johnson City. I strongly believe the US-290 corridor should be an Interstate-class facility going West out of Austin all the way to I-10. Austin is more than big enough a metro to justify having its own East-West Interstate corridor on the national system. This gets into that "second I-12" idea, one that could start on I-10 at Exit 477 (US-290 going East toward Fredericksburg & Austin) go thru Austin and then end in Houston at the colossal interchange at I-610 and I-10. Or it could go even farther East, maybe using the Grand Parkway and US-90 corridor to end near Beaumont.
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2414
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 09:49:41 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #389 on: October 02, 2022, 07:12:08 PM »

Quote from: texaskdog
Hays County wants 45 completed but Travis County is fighting it.

That figures. It's some property owners in that immediate area versus the bigger travel/commerce interests for the rest of Texas. TX-45 needs to meet up with the US-290 corridor West of Austin.

Quote from: texaskdog
I'd like to see 290 straightened from Dripping Springs past Johnson City and the freeway can drop in just west of Johnson City.  After that you wouldn't really need one.

If/when a US-290 freeway is extended West past Dripping Springs the freeway will almost certainly need to be built along a new terrain path. If the new highway bypasses Dripping Springs to the North it will be natural to direct it toward Johnson City rather than the current Y intersection of US-290/US-281 by Miller Creek.

I disagree with there being no need for a freeway West of Johnson City. I strongly believe the US-290 corridor should be an Interstate-class facility going West out of Austin all the way to I-10. Austin is more than big enough a metro to justify having its own East-West Interstate corridor on the national system. This gets into that "second I-12" idea, one that could start on I-10 at Exit 477 (US-290 going East toward Fredericksburg & Austin) go thru Austin and then end in Houston at the colossal interchange at I-610 and I-10. Or it could go even farther East, maybe using the Grand Parkway and US-90 corridor to end near Beaumont.

With the planned Interstate 14, there is definitely no need to build a US 290 interstate out to I-10.

A limited access 4 or 6 lane divided highway will do the job perfectly fine.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 10:51:13 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #390 on: October 02, 2022, 08:43:49 PM »

Quote from: kernals12
With the planned Interstate 14, there is definitely no need to build a US 290 interstate out to I-10.

By that "logic" there is zero need to build out I-14 since people in the Killeen/Fort Hood area can drive North to pick up I-20 in Dallas Fort Worth.

Austin is a giant metro of 2 million people. That metro needs its own major East-West highway corridors regardless of the porky I-14 efforts.
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2414
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 09:49:41 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #391 on: October 02, 2022, 10:24:40 PM »

Quote from: kernals12
With the planned Interstate 14, there is definitely no need to build a US 290 interstate out to I-10.

By that "logic" there is zero need to build out I-14 since people in the Killeen/Fort Hood area can drive North to pick up I-20 in Dallas Fort Worth.

Austin is a giant metro of 2 million people. That metro needs its own major East-West highway corridors regardless of the porky I-14 efforts.

You're right, it does. An interstate connecting Houston and Austin is greatly needed, but one further out to I-10 is just a road to nowhere.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3547
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 08:48:37 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #392 on: October 02, 2022, 10:58:27 PM »

Loop 360's conversion into a freeway starts tomorrow
https://www.newsradioklbj.com/austinlocalnews/ground-to-break-wednesday-on-loop-360-mobility-improvements/



Finally. Austin slowly but surely will have somewhat of an inner loop. Hopefully thereís plans to remove that one stop light on 360 between Mopac and Lamar and add a few direct connectors between 360 and 183.

The worst part of that stretch is NB 360 to NB Mopac, with the lane backing up for several minutes with all the budgers cutting in.  Needs a flyover
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 10:51:13 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #393 on: October 03, 2022, 11:54:49 AM »

Quote from: kernals
You're right, it does. An interstate connecting Houston and Austin is greatly needed, but one further out to I-10 is just a road to nowhere.

Wrong. An Interstate going West out of Austin is no more a "road to nowhere" than I-10 going West out of San Antonio. The Austin metro is just as heavily populated as San Antonio. Austin deserves its own high speed outlet toward El Paso just as much.

Furthermore, upgrades along US-290 between Austin and Houston as well as US-90 between Houston and Beaumont would create a high speed relief route of sorts for people to bypass the busiest parts of Houston and San Antonio. With a completed TX-45 route out to US-290 West of Austin that would create a good bypass route around the South side of Austin.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7706
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:20:58 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #394 on: October 03, 2022, 08:14:56 PM »

Wrong. An Interstate going West out of Austin is no more a "road to nowhere" than I-10 going West out of San Antonio. The Austin metro is just as heavily populated as San Antonio. Austin deserves its own high speed outlet toward El Paso just as much.
Would a 4 lane divided 75 mph highway not be as high speed as a 4 lane divided 75 mph highway with access control?
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3547
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 08:48:37 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #395 on: October 04, 2022, 12:55:44 AM »

I just spent the night in Fredericksburg.  I was staying on 290 just a mile west of town.  I went to the store across the street and it was pretty desolate at 8 pm.  I'd love a freeway there but there's just not a lot of traffic out there.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7706
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:20:58 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #396 on: October 04, 2022, 01:17:46 AM »

^ Which arguably is why a 4 lane divided highway with town bypasses would be more than adequate for the desolate traffic volumes.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 10:51:13 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #397 on: October 04, 2022, 01:26:34 PM »

Have you guys considered the possibility hardly anyone chooses to drive on that stretch of US-290 because it's a dinky, desolate, potentially dangerous 2-lane road? Lots of people who drive long distance go out of their way to stay on major routes.

I'm absolutely positive if that portion of US-290 between I-10 and Austin was limited access there would be a lot more vehicles using it.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2022, 06:06:12 PM by Bobby5280 »
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7706
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:20:58 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #398 on: October 04, 2022, 01:50:54 PM »

^ I seriously question this. Not to mention, traffic volumes on I-10 west of US-290 drop to around 7,000 once you get out. And theyíre only around 12,000 near US-290.

And remember, those two figures are on Interstate 10 itself, not US-290.

Those volumes donít warrant building a four lane limited access highway. Especially when maybe 3,000 - 5,000 would actually be on it.

Iím absolutely positive there would not be much of an increase in traffic.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1899
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: December 01, 2022, 02:04:15 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #399 on: October 04, 2022, 04:55:25 PM »

^ I seriously question this. Not to mention, traffic volumes on I-10 west of US-290 drop to around 7,000 once you get out. And theyíre only around 12,000 near US-290.

And remember, those two figures are on Interstate 10 itself, not US-290.

Those volumes donít warrant building a four lane limited access highway. Especially when maybe 3,000 - 5,000 would actually be on it.

Iím absolutely positive there would not be much of an increase in traffic.

I don't question it at all.  The drive is very busy, and all the people moving here from California would probably like a freeway to Austin.  It has a lot of traffic now and would have more if there was a freeway from I-10.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.