News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Austin: IH 35 rebuild

Started by MaxConcrete, April 25, 2019, 12:03:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

TXtoNJ

Quote from: kernals12 on September 15, 2021, 09:06:53 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.


Bobby5280

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.

ski-man

Quote from: TXtoNJ on September 17, 2021, 11:08:39 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on September 15, 2021, 09:06:53 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!!

Plutonic Panda

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 I'm 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-35

Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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.

jadebenn


thisdj78

Quote from: I-35 on September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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 "I-x35"  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 isn't going to get done.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: thisdj78 on October 20, 2021, 04:52:22 PM
Quote from: I-35 on September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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 "I-x35"  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 isn't going to get done.
It's not impossible to do it. It's 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.

thisdj78

#83
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 20, 2021, 05:57:02 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on October 20, 2021, 04:52:22 PM
Quote from: I-35 on September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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 "I-x35"  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 isn't going to get done.
It's not impossible to do it. It's 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 it's possible....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.

DenverBrian

Quote from: thisdj78 on October 20, 2021, 04:52:22 PM
Quote from: I-35 on September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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 "I-x35"  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 isn't 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.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: thisdj78 on October 20, 2021, 06:34:23 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 20, 2021, 05:57:02 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on October 20, 2021, 04:52:22 PM
Quote from: I-35 on September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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 "I-x35"  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 isn't going to get done.
It's not impossible to do it. It's 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 it's possible....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.

Ryctor2018

Quote from: DenverBrian on October 20, 2021, 07:46:29 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on October 20, 2021, 04:52:22 PM
Quote from: I-35 on September 28, 2021, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda 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 I'm 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 "I-x35"  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 isn't 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.
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

^ SH-130 is fully interstate standard. It's 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 that's privately owned would be harder, IMO, to see tolls go since it's 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.

Thegeet

Quote from: sprjus4 on October 23, 2021, 03:02:48 PM
^ SH-130 is fully interstate standard. It's 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 that's privately owned would be harder, IMO, to see tolls go since it's 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 it's safe to say SH 130 is higher than interstate standard.

thisdj78

Quote from: Thegeet on October 23, 2021, 06:36:22 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 23, 2021, 03:02:48 PM
^ SH-130 is fully interstate standard. It's 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 that's privately owned would be harder, IMO, to see tolls go since it's 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 it's 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.

cbalducc

Wasn't I-35 through Austin a double decker at one point?

MaxConcrete

Quote from: cbalducc on October 24, 2021, 08:10:02 PM
Wasn't 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.
www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

thisdj78

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.

Great Lakes Roads

#93
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcUx5r_ksk8

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

longhorn

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on October 25, 2021, 03:49:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcUx5r_ksk8

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.

ski-man

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on October 25, 2021, 03:49:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcUx5r_ksk8

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.

triplemultiplex

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

kernals12

Quote from: ski-man on October 26, 2021, 02:20:02 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on October 25, 2021, 03:49:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcUx5r_ksk8

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

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: triplemultiplex 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!
Well welcome to a world where they proposed that but found it's too expensive so they scrapped it while other countries find a way to build it. You're living in it.

longhorn

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.



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.