Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kphoger]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

[Plutonic Panda]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

[thisdj78]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

I think it was the “We don’t need” part that raised eyebrows.

[Plutonic Panda]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

I think it was the “We don’t need” part that raised eyebrows.

So then why wasn’t that quoted? I can easily defend that argument if you want to quote it and debate me over it but be more specific.

[Rothman]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

I think it was the “We don’t need” part that raised eyebrows.

So then why wasn’t that quoted? I can easily defend that argument if you want to quote it and debate me over it but be more specific.

You don't remember what you yourself said?

[armadillo speedbump]

Well he's a Californian, so there's a 30% chance he'll eventually move to Texas.

Plus it's an interstate.  Plus most of the clowns from the usual anti-road and enviromarxist organizations that always submit comments in opposition are from out of state.  Let him weigh in.

Anyways, if the usual city idiots block this much needed expansion, the legislature needs to remove tolls from the 130 bypass and slap them on the portion of I-35 inside Austin city limits.  Let the city pay for their once again inconveniencing the rest of the metro, region, and state.

[kphoger]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

Well, what I was really wondering is why TxDOT would even care what you or I think about it.

[Plutonic Panda]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

Well, what I was really wondering is why TxDOT would even care what you or I think about it.

Well they do have public input to add comments to the project. My opinion will almost certainly make difference but I'm still going to give it.

[Plutonic Panda]

And then there’s people that think I-35 should be downgraded to a six lane road. It’s like a comedy show lol

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-08-12/txdot-slams-brakes-on-proposals-to-shrink-i-35-footprint

[Anthony_JK]

And then there’s people that think I-35 should be downgraded to a six lane road. It’s like a comedy show lol

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-08-12/txdot-slams-brakes-on-proposals-to-shrink-i-35-footprint

Yeah, right.

Convert a 10-lane freeway and the main traffic generator that carries nearly 130K VPH into...a six-lane surface boulevard.

So, do they also pay the costs of diverting I-35 mainline traffic to SH 45 and Toll 130, or do they call for removing the tolls on 130 and diverting I-35 there?

These freaks have lost their Goddess dang minds.

I'm way Left of center politically, and for more public transport. But, this is MADNESS.

[achilles765]

Wow, that's a surprise. It was listed as a "Potential update to the 2020 Unified Transportation Program" in the agenda.

The presentation is now online (but the meeting video is not yet online as of this writing).

http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/commission/2020/0227/4-presentation.pdf

The political powers probably realize the importance of Austin to the future of Texas, since Austin is a tech hub and is growing by leaps and bounds. Other sectors of the Texas economy, mainly oil & gas, face an uncertain future and Houston especially is facing a grim future as the fossil fuel sector permanently declines.

I don't think we face a grim future here in houston.  Yes, fossil fuels are still a major driver of our economy, but its far from the only one. We also have one of the largest medical research districts in the world, banking and finance, and green energy jobs. 

[TXtoNJ]

Wow, that's a surprise. It was listed as a "Potential update to the 2020 Unified Transportation Program" in the agenda.

The presentation is now online (but the meeting video is not yet online as of this writing).

http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/commission/2020/0227/4-presentation.pdf

The political powers probably realize the importance of Austin to the future of Texas, since Austin is a tech hub and is growing by leaps and bounds. Other sectors of the Texas economy, mainly oil & gas, face an uncertain future and Houston especially is facing a grim future as the fossil fuel sector permanently declines.

I don't think we face a grim future here in houston.  Yes, fossil fuels are still a major driver of our economy, but its far from the only one. We also have one of the largest medical research districts in the world, banking and finance, and green energy jobs. 

Houston's problem (saying this as someone who grew up there), is that without oil and gas, it has relatively few geographical advantages that would make it globally prominent. Banking, finance, and corporate headquarters much prefer D/FW to Southeast Texas, mainly for the more amenable climate. Look at Baltimore if you want to see what a port and medicine get you alone. Green energy execs want to live in more environmentally pleasant, or culturally prominent areas (I think Austin/San Antonio are going to be the big winners there).

Houston has a Detroit problem that I think many are in denial about - many people will continue to live there (largely from inertia and international immigration), but I think there's going to be a long-term decline in good-paying jobs.

[Scott5114]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

Well, what I was really wondering is why TxDOT would even care what you or I think about it.

Well they do have public input to add comments to the project. My opinion will almost certainly make difference but I'm still going to give it.

Given the average Texan's opinions of both places, I wonder which address of yours would cause them to chuck it in the garbage faster, the California one or the Oklahoma one?

[Plutonic Panda]

In all likelihood, I’ll be sending a comment to TxDOT ...

Are you even a Texas resident?

Please show me where being a resident of Texas is a requirement to provide feedback for a project in Texas.

Well, what I was really wondering is why TxDOT would even care what you or I think about it.

Well they do have public input to add comments to the project. My opinion will almost certainly make difference but I'm still going to give it.

Given the average Texan's opinions of both places, I wonder which address of yours would cause them to chuck it in the garbage faster, the California one or the Oklahoma one?

There’s plenty of addresses in Austin to choose from lol

[MaxConcrete]

The Austin Business Journal has an article about potential parks built on decks above the planned modernized freeway
https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2021/09/08/i-35-cap-and-stitch-feedback-wanted.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_21&cx_artPos=8#cxrecs_s

City leaders are gathering community input on a future "cap and stitch" project proposed for I-35 in downtown Austin.

The goal of capping and stitching the interstate is to mend the historic cultural divide between downtown and East Austin. The proposal includes building large decks, or caps, over I-35 to "stitch" the two sides together and improve mobility. Nothing has been finalized yet, and the city has launched surveys to garner community feedback to inform the design processes. Funding would be identified at a later date.

The link to the site is https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.austintexas.gov%2Fatxcapstitch&data=04%7C01%7Ckhardison%40bizjournals.com%7C0f7abd09de9a44b585fd08d972440a9d%7Cc8f302bab2fe4389b720e285f4fe1b2a%7C0%7C1%7C637666458841559248%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=03d5rF3YgqvMVyPzO4fuw%2B4OrW9%2BtfR24zt%2FKPr3cxM%3D&reserved=0

This map shows possible deck locations https://app.e-builder.net/public/fileview_fileview_act.aspx?portaltype=7&f={614752ed-2eb1-42ca-a9c3-a11c998125a8}

Decks are expensive and the overall cost becomes very expensive when a large area is covered. The deck for Klyde Warren park was $44.5 million in 2009, at the depths of the recession when costs were low. It is 1100 feet long. At today's prices, it would probably be around $70 million. The fully-developed Warren park cost $110 million when opened around 2013. The distance from 8th Street to Cesar Chavez is 2500 feet. Using 50% inflation since Warren park was built, the cost would scale to around $375 million.  Creating three single-block parks from 5th to 8th probably would have little benefit. The section from 4th to Chavez is around 1000 feet and could probably be done for $150 million.

The opposition may be more willing to accept the IH-35 project if the some deck parks are included.

[Bobby5280]

Deck parks can be nice. But, yeah, they're expensive. One alternative is dressing up the intersections where major streets cross I-35 to kind of hide the highway and make the crossing more friendly to pedestrians.

In Seattle on WA-520 in the Clyde Hill area the exits for 84th Avenue and 92nd Avenue are interesting. The streets cross over WA-520 as mini deck parks. The caps are big enough to hold something like a roundabout and a decent amount of green space. The 520 highway is mostly hidden to anyone walking or biking across the highway at those locations.

The only drawback with that approach is it requires the super highway to be depressed down into a trench. But so does any plan for building big deck parks.

[kernals12]

Austin has 3 north south freeways bypassing downtown (soon to be 4 once Loop 360 loses its signalized intersections). People don't use them simply because they're tolled while 35 is not. How does the cost of this project compare to the cost of de-tolling 130?

[kernals12]

And then there’s people that think I-35 should be downgraded to a six lane road. It’s like a comedy show lol

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-08-12/txdot-slams-brakes-on-proposals-to-shrink-i-35-footprint

Yeah, right.

Convert a 10-lane freeway and the main traffic generator that carries nearly 130K VPH into...a six-lane surface boulevard.

So, do they also pay the costs of diverting I-35 mainline traffic to SH 45 and Toll 130, or do they call for removing the tolls on 130 and diverting I-35 there?

These freaks have lost their Goddess dang minds.

I'm way Left of center politically, and for more public transport. But, this is MADNESS.

Muh Embarcadero Freeway

[bwana39]

Austin has 3 north south freeways bypassing downtown (soon to be 4 once Loop 360 loses its signalized intersections). People don't use them simply because they're tolled while 35 is not. How does the cost of this project compare to the cost of de-tolling 130?

130 is 2 or 3 lanes each direction. There is little possibility that it could replace I-35's volume. It isn't like there is no one out there now.

[DenverBrian]

Austin has 3 north south freeways bypassing downtown (soon to be 4 once Loop 360 loses its signalized intersections). People don't use them simply because they're tolled while 35 is not. How does the cost of this project compare to the cost of de-tolling 130?

130 is 2 or 3 lanes each direction. There is little possibility that it could replace I-35's volume. It isn't like there is no one out there now.

it wouldn't have to replace ALL of IH-35's volume, yes? And it's already at interstate standard. De-toll it and bring it into the Interstate system as IH-235, then sign the heck out of it as "avoid congestion, use the bypass to Dallas/San Antonio" or some such.

[sprjus4]

SH-130 would need to be at least 6 lanes wide throughout to handle being a re-routed I-35, with 8 to 10 lanes in many areas.

Leave it how it is. SH-130 is an effective toll bypass route, a lot of it recently expanded to 6-8 lanes in its busier portion, I-35 remains the existing main, toll free through route.

[Anthony_JK]

[redacted]

Yeah, right.

Convert a 10-lane freeway and the main traffic generator that carries nearly 130K VPH into...a six-lane surface boulevard.

So, do they also pay the costs of diverting I-35 mainline traffic to SH 45 and Toll 130, or do they call for removing the tolls on 130 and diverting I-35 there?

These freaks have lost their Goddess dang minds.

I'm way Left of center politically, and for more public transport. But, this is MADNESS.

Muh Embarcadero Freeway

I have no problem - well, maybe a little bit, but not much -- with San Francisco leveling the Embarcadero, because it was proven to not be earthquake proof, and it wasn't a major corridor.

I-35 in Austin, OTOH, is something else altogether. You simply do not undercut a major freeway corridor and reduce it to a six lane boulevard. You just don't.

[thisdj78]

SH-130 would need to be at least 6 lanes wide throughout to handle being a re-routed I-35, with 8 to 10 lanes in many areas.

Leave it how it is. SH-130 is an effective toll bypass route, a lot of it recently expanded to 6-8 lanes in its busier portion, I-35 remains the existing main, toll free through route.

That would only be assuming the original I-35 is no longer viable. The key is directing proper traffic once it was toll-free. All “thru” traffic including trucks would need to use 130 (aka the newly designated *35) and all local traffic on the original 35. I think 130 can handle it…it only needs to be 6 lanes in the sections where they are already adding lanes. Yes in the future it will need expansion and luckily it is built to easily do that.

[kernals12]

14% of all traffic on I-35 in Austin is just passing through, neither starting or stopping in the Austin region. Diverting just that would make an enormous difference in congestion. And of the remaining 86%, surely a large proportion is not going downtown and could use 183 or the MoPac.

Honestly, this just illustrates why toll roads are stupid. Texas needs to add 10-15 cents to the gas tax and get rid of tolls.

[I-35]

14% of all traffic on I-35 in Austin is just passing through, neither starting or stopping in the Austin region. Diverting just that would make an enormous difference in congestion. And of the remaining 86%, surely a large proportion is not going downtown and could use 183 or the MoPac.

Honestly, this just illustrates why toll roads are stupid. Texas needs to add 10-15 cents to the gas tax and get rid of tolls.

Are you under some assumption that rural Texans aren't the ones running the state legislature?  The ones that don't live within 300 miles of a toll road?  We won't see a gas tax hike anytime soon.