Print

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

[TXtoNJ]

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]

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]

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]

Another article on this project.

[thisdj78]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[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]

^ 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]

^ 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]

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.

[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]

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

[longhorn]

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]

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!

[kernals12]

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]

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.