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: IH 35 rebuild  (Read 19135 times)

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 833
  • Last Login: Today at 12:23:48 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #75 on: September 17, 2021, 11:08:39 AM »

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?

What are you even talking about. Mopac between 183 and 290 is free. 183 east of downtown also has free-flowing frontage roads - there are bypasses for every stoplight.

I swear, the funniest thing about this board are the people making grand determinations on why people do something or another in cities they've never visited, much less lived in.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3204
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 02:09:07 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #76 on: September 17, 2021, 01:29:50 PM »

The other thing even more funny (or more annoying) is they want to force some kind of ideal on a community, such as ripping out I-35 and reducing it to a mere surface street completely infected with traffic signals. They want to see that happen, but they don't live there to experience the consequences.
Logged

ski-man

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 60
  • Location: Wyoming
  • Last Login: Today at 06:07:42 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #77 on: September 17, 2021, 01:57:38 PM »

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?

What are you even talking about. Mopac between 183 and 290 is free. 183 east of downtown also has free-flowing frontage roads - there are bypasses for every stoplight.

I swear, the funniest thing about this board are the people making grand determinations on why people do something or another in cities they've never visited, much less lived in.
BINGO!!
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2920
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 12:34:23 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #78 on: September 27, 2021, 09:20:22 PM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say
Logged

I-35

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 55
  • Location: Dallas
  • Last Login: August 05, 2022, 09:57:05 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #79 on: September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.
Logged

jadebenn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24
  • Last Login: August 10, 2022, 12:14:15 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #80 on: October 20, 2021, 09:11:15 AM »

Another article on this project.
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 314
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 02:07:05 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #81 on: October 20, 2021, 04:52:22 PM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.

I think the cost and time it would take to do what would make it nearly impossible to tunnel. I think the best solution is focus on making 130 free and an ďI-x35Ē route.

If they re-construct (or even remove) some exits from the existing 35, I think that could help. Also maybe even adding a lane to the upper deck could be done.

But it seems that a complete tear down or expansion isnít going to get done.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2920
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 12:34:23 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #82 on: October 20, 2021, 05:57:02 PM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.

I think the cost and time it would take to do what would make it nearly impossible to tunnel. I think the best solution is focus on making 130 free and an ďI-x35Ē route.

If they re-construct (or even remove) some exits from the existing 35, I think that could help. Also maybe even adding a lane to the upper deck could be done.

But it seems that a complete tear down or expansion isnít going to get done.
Itís not impossible to do it. Itís the fact we as a country are unable to build great things mentality is what stops it. It can and should be built. The it costs too much and takes too long argument is malarkey.
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 314
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 02:07:05 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #83 on: October 20, 2021, 06:34:23 PM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.

I think the cost and time it would take to do what would make it nearly impossible to tunnel. I think the best solution is focus on making 130 free and an ďI-x35Ē route.

If they re-construct (or even remove) some exits from the existing 35, I think that could help. Also maybe even adding a lane to the upper deck could be done.

But it seems that a complete tear down or expansion isnít going to get done.
Itís not impossible to do it. Itís the fact we as a country are unable to build great things mentality is what stops it. It can and should be built. The it costs too much and takes too long argument is malarkey.

Costs and time is a significant barrier (here in the US). Believe me, I know itís possibleÖ.I just got back from a vacation in Europe a few months ago and tunnels are numerous and easily built there. Someone pointed out in another thread that the costs to build tunnels here is astronomical compared to Europe.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2021, 06:38:01 PM by thisdj78 »
Logged

DenverBrian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 163
  • Location: Las Vegas
  • Last Login: Today at 03:43:42 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #84 on: October 20, 2021, 07:46:29 PM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.

I think the cost and time it would take to do what would make it nearly impossible to tunnel. I think the best solution is focus on making 130 free and an ďI-x35Ē route.

If they re-construct (or even remove) some exits from the existing 35, I think that could help. Also maybe even adding a lane to the upper deck could be done.

But it seems that a complete tear down or expansion isnít going to get done.
Agreed. Make 130 I-835 or some such, or actually sign it as I-35 and re-sign the route through Austin as I-135 or some such. Require all through trucks to use the loop. Solves 75% of the problem for 0% of the cost.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2920
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 12:34:23 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #85 on: October 21, 2021, 12:12:30 AM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.

I think the cost and time it would take to do what would make it nearly impossible to tunnel. I think the best solution is focus on making 130 free and an ďI-x35Ē route.

If they re-construct (or even remove) some exits from the existing 35, I think that could help. Also maybe even adding a lane to the upper deck could be done.

But it seems that a complete tear down or expansion isnít going to get done.
Itís not impossible to do it. Itís the fact we as a country are unable to build great things mentality is what stops it. It can and should be built. The it costs too much and takes too long argument is malarkey.

Costs and time is a significant barrier (here in the US). Believe me, I know itís possibleÖ.I just got back from a vacation in Europe a few months ago and tunnels are numerous and easily built there. Someone pointed out in another thread that the costs to build tunnels here is astronomical compared to Europe.
My issue is that we just accept it and move on with not improving our infrastructure while other countries find a way to do it.
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 157
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: July 12, 2022, 02:08:51 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #86 on: October 23, 2021, 02:38:44 PM »

Article about the proposal in downtown. The expected irrational argument to not widen it because induced demand repeating the same crap. I will beat this horse again and say Iím willing to side with the opposition on this given the fact I was for the tunnel option to reduce the footprint.

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2021-09-24/expanded-i-35-could-induce-demand-and-make-pollution-worse-transportation-experts-say

I think they've got to tunnel it.  It's a hundred year decision, do it right.  This isn't Waco or Lubbock, it's through some of the highest priced real estate in Texas.

I think the cost and time it would take to do what would make it nearly impossible to tunnel. I think the best solution is focus on making 130 free and an ďI-x35Ē route.

If they re-construct (or even remove) some exits from the existing 35, I think that could help. Also maybe even adding a lane to the upper deck could be done.

But it seems that a complete tear down or expansion isnít going to get done.
Agreed. Make 130 I-835 or some such, or actually sign it as I-35 and re-sign the route through Austin as I-135 or some such. Require all through trucks to use the loop. Solves 75% of the problem for 0% of the cost.

Is TX-130 Interstate standard, or compatible? If not, then it's cost millions to upgrade it. The same for tying back to I-35 north of Austin near Georgetown, TX. Plus, making this switch would definitely involve the Tex legislature and the Feds since I-35 is so important to the nations infrastructure. Not against this move, just pointing out that it would probably more 0.
Logged
2DI's traveled: 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 49, 55, 57, 59, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 85, 87, 88, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7631
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:13:21 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #87 on: October 23, 2021, 03:02:48 PM »

^ SH-130 is fully interstate standard. Itís not a substandard facility, especially given it holds a higher speed limit than I-35.

A more realistic (but still not) bet would be to eliminate the tolls on the TxDOT owned portion of SH-45 (south) and SH-130 (the 80 mph segment), and widen the entire facility to a minimum of 6 lanes. Mandate through trucks use that route.

The southern 85 mph portion thatís privately owned would be harder, IMO, to see tolls go since itís privately owned. But it still could help, if it went through too. I-10 would need a minimum of 6 lanes before it did, or it would overload.
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 333
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 02:46:23 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #88 on: October 23, 2021, 06:36:22 PM »

^ SH-130 is fully interstate standard. Itís not a substandard facility, especially given it holds a higher speed limit than I-35.

A more realistic (but still not) bet would be to eliminate the tolls on the TxDOT owned portion of SH-45 (south) and SH-130 (the 80 mph segment), and widen the entire facility to a minimum of 6 lanes. Mandate through trucks use that route.

The southern 85 mph portion thatís privately owned would be harder, IMO, to see tolls go since itís privately owned. But it still could help, if it went through too. I-10 would need a minimum of 6 lanes before it did, or it would overload.
I think itís safe to say SH 130 is higher than interstate standard.
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 314
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 02:07:05 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #89 on: October 23, 2021, 08:49:13 PM »

^ SH-130 is fully interstate standard. Itís not a substandard facility, especially given it holds a higher speed limit than I-35.

A more realistic (but still not) bet would be to eliminate the tolls on the TxDOT owned portion of SH-45 (south) and SH-130 (the 80 mph segment), and widen the entire facility to a minimum of 6 lanes. Mandate through trucks use that route.

The southern 85 mph portion thatís privately owned would be harder, IMO, to see tolls go since itís privately owned. But it still could help, if it went through too. I-10 would need a minimum of 6 lanes before it did, or it would overload.
I think itís safe to say SH 130 is higher than interstate standard.

Yep, 130 could be made I-X35 tomorrow without any changes needed but the signage.
Logged

cbalducc

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 103
  • Last Login: August 16, 2022, 07:13:39 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #90 on: October 24, 2021, 08:10:02 PM »

Wasnít I-35 through Austin a double decker at one point?
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 884
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 09:51:49 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #91 on: October 24, 2021, 08:24:53 PM »

Wasnít I-35 through Austin a double decker at one point?
It still has the upper deck north of downtown. All options still under study for the rebuild will remove the upper deck and place all lanes below grade.

The option for a double deck tunnel has been eliminated, mainly due to extremely high cost and also due to difficult constructability and less access for emergencies.

The remaining two options under study both require right-of-way, which is contributing to controversy.

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 314
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 02:07:05 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #92 on: October 25, 2021, 12:39:05 PM »

I wonder that the feasibility would be for them to add a lane to the upper decks similar to how they added lanes to the 130 toll bridges when they expended to 6 lanes? And also eliminating exit/entry ramps in multiple spots?

Really there only needs to be exits for Airport, MLK and Cesar Chavez. The others are unnecessary and contribute to the congestion downtown.
Logged

Great Lakes Roads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 785
  • Ain't nobody got time for that!!

  • Age: 22
  • Location: La Porte, Indiana
  • Last Login: Today at 04:10:57 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #93 on: October 25, 2021, 03:49:23 PM »


Here's a video of the I-35 in Austin by City Beautiful.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2021, 03:51:34 PM by Great Lakes Roads »
Logged

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 421
  • Last Login: August 17, 2022, 04:32:43 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #94 on: October 26, 2021, 09:21:24 AM »


Here's a video of the I-35 in Austin by City Beautiful.

That was a waste of 8 minutes. The powers that be want I-35 expanded, it will happen. And I will add 130 to that expansion list too.
Logged

ski-man

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 60
  • Location: Wyoming
  • Last Login: Today at 06:07:42 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #95 on: October 26, 2021, 02:20:02 PM »


Here's a video of the I-35 in Austin by City Beautiful.
Still cannot believe the tree lined boulevard is still in there. Talk about a cluster F***, even if 130 becomes 35 with no tolls. It is not like all the traffic on 35 currently is just passing through. It would make it tough just getting into downtown/Lady Bird Lake from the north or to t.u. from the South.
Logged

triplemultiplex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3210
  • "You read it; you can't unread it!"

  • Location: inside the beltline
  • Last Login: August 17, 2022, 04:02:48 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #96 on: October 26, 2021, 03:11:36 PM »

In a world where a 10 lane I-35 is tunneled beneath it, that parkway option looks great!
Logged
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2315
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 08:39:02 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #97 on: October 26, 2021, 03:57:06 PM »


Here's a video of the I-35 in Austin by City Beautiful.
Still cannot believe the tree lined boulevard is still in there. Talk about a cluster F***, even if 130 becomes 35 with no tolls. It is not like all the traffic on 35 currently is just passing through. It would make it tough just getting into downtown/Lady Bird Lake from the north or to t.u. from the South.

By turning i-35 into a Boulevard, driving will become so difficult that you'll just walk or bike downtown.

I am very smart
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2920
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 12:34:23 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #98 on: October 26, 2021, 04:27:42 PM »

In a world where a 10 lane I-35 is tunneled beneath it, that parkway option looks great!
Well welcome to a world where they proposed that but found itís too expensive so they scrapped it while other countries find a way to build it. Youíre living in it.
Logged

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 421
  • Last Login: August 17, 2022, 04:32:43 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #99 on: October 27, 2021, 09:59:54 AM »

Read a comment on Reddit about this same topic and the person brought up the point 183 from Lakeline to I-35 and 290/71 from I-35 to Mopac used to be Boulevards. How did that work out? I remember both being boulevards with lights, do not think we want to go back to there with today's traffic counts. I think these people must not have cars that come with these brilliant ideas.
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.