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 19681 times)

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #100 on: October 27, 2021, 10:40:14 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.
I didnít realize how intolerant Reddit was as I just joined a month ago. Lots of great content there but Iím still weeding out the good threads from the bad ones. Infrastructure Porn is a great sub if you donít read the comments. Post a picture of a highway and youíll immediately get comments about how it would better if it were rail or why Kernals(the poster here who they are obsessed with) would love it if he is wasnít the one who posted it. Itís comical.
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 317
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:59:17 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #101 on: October 27, 2021, 12:49:04 PM »

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.

I was in college nearby when those roads were still surface streets in the 90s, so I remember it vividly. The Austin area was also half the population it is now.
Logged

ski-man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 61
  • Location: Wyoming
  • Last Login: September 30, 2022, 02:59:22 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #102 on: October 27, 2021, 03:02:33 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

Good one....... :-D
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #103 on: January 14, 2022, 12:17:12 PM »

Hereís an update that TxDOT provided for new ďimprovementsĒ

Removal of upper decks
Cap/stitch accommodations
Reduced speed limits
Lance Armstrong Bikeway crossing
Enhanced bike/pedestrian connections at Lady Bird Lake
Relocation of managed lane ramps in the vicinity of Airport Blvd. to reduce impacts on surrounding properties and improve operations
Expanded opportunity for inclusion of aesthetic treatments, community art, and placemaking

Yet another example of a project that would be widely successful if we could do what ever other modern country does and build tunnels but nooooooo thatís to extreme here. Blah blah

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/txdot-reveals-updated-i-35-expansion-plans-but-congestion-still-a-concern?fbclid=IwAR1qMYCEa9Vj5eFNOK9iM9CKEtt3_BbBmCOc90AzXTIgUx8Q-xRgIjOT4Qg
Logged

DenverBrian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 170
  • Location: Las Vegas
  • Last Login: Today at 09:56:48 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #104 on: January 14, 2022, 02:16:45 PM »

A bikeway named for Lance Armstrong?!? Seriously?
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #105 on: January 14, 2022, 02:36:01 PM »

A bikeway named for Lance Armstrong?!? Seriously?
More interesting than that thereís apparently a guy whose quote in this article is stating that an act grade Boulevard would move traffic faster through downtown then a fully controlled access facility would.
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Age: 17
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:24:47 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #106 on: January 14, 2022, 02:50:37 PM »

Quote
Greenfield has pushed to stop the expansion of I-35 and get rid of the interstate that runs through the city altogether. He believes creating a boulevard through Austin will get more cars through faster than the interstate does now.

Sure, bud.

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #107 on: January 14, 2022, 02:55:07 PM »

Quote
Greenfield has pushed to stop the expansion of I-35 and get rid of the interstate that runs through the city altogether. He believes creating a boulevard through Austin will get more cars through faster than the interstate does now.

Sure, bud.
I mean pushing to stop the expansion is somewhat understandable and I say that as someone that generally supports an expansion of the road. Suggesting to remove it and then convert it to a Boulevard claiming that traffic will move faster. How do you even take that seriously?
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3441
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 05:17:47 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #108 on: January 14, 2022, 03:26:58 PM »

Quote
Greenfield has pushed to stop the expansion of I-35 and get rid of the interstate that runs through the city altogether. He believes creating a boulevard through Austin will get more cars through faster than the interstate does now.

Sure, bud.
I mean pushing to stop the expansion is somewhat understandable and I say that as someone that generally supports an expansion of the road. Suggesting to remove it and then convert it to a Boulevard claiming that traffic will move faster. How do you even take that seriously?

Why not extend the upper deck with NO entrance ramps?  You can get off but can't get on. Therefore it would only serve to funnel cars through town. 
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Age: 17
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:24:47 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #109 on: January 14, 2022, 03:48:56 PM »

I mean, that's basically the current proposal. They'll be adding two lanes in the center with limited access to downtown and only a select few exits and entrances in the city as a whole. The current upper decks are an enormous eyesore and only carry two lanes each way themselves.

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #110 on: January 14, 2022, 03:52:59 PM »

Quote
Greenfield has pushed to stop the expansion of I-35 and get rid of the interstate that runs through the city altogether. He believes creating a boulevard through Austin will get more cars through faster than the interstate does now.

Sure, bud.
I mean pushing to stop the expansion is somewhat understandable and I say that as someone that generally supports an expansion of the road. Suggesting to remove it and then convert it to a Boulevard claiming that traffic will move faster. How do you even take that seriously?

Why not extend the upper deck with NO entrance ramps?  You can get off but can't get on. Therefore it would only serve to funnel cars through town.
I long wondered why we donít ever see something like this proposed for major cities that are so sprawled out like DFW a bypass would be too long and wouldnít save time. Like build express lanes through Dallas on I-35E that have extremely limited on ramps maybe in downtown but have an abundance of off ramps. Of course such a road would have to be elevated but there doesnít seem to be too much uproar against elevated viaducts in the DFW area.

In the new I-35 central proposal TxDOT eliminated the upper decks and made no mention of more lanes at grade level to substitute for the loss. So it seems to me the new proposal is less lanes, lower speed limits, and instead of having a one way frontage road system on each side of the freeway they moved the frontage road to only one side and it will be two way. Unless I missed something, weíre going to spend billions to do that and likely wonít improve traffic that much?

If thatís all they propose, why not just use that money to buy out SH-130 and make it free? Iím sure that some people would use it. Kick the can down the road regarding I-35 in central Austin.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #111 on: January 14, 2022, 03:54:16 PM »

I mean, that's basically the current proposal. They'll be adding two lanes in the center with limited access to downtown and only a select few exits and entrances in the city as a whole. The current upper decks are an enormous eyesore and only carry two lanes each way themselves.
I thought the center four lanes were proposed anyways along with keeping the upper deck?
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Age: 17
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:24:47 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #112 on: January 14, 2022, 04:11:19 PM »

The upper deck is not staying in any proposal - there isn't enough room to widen the existing below-grade roadway from 2x2 with the support columns of the upper deck. Any reconstructed freeway through that portion of Central Austin will be solely at-grade or below-grade. This means there will be a minimum of 6 lanes each direction - 4 mainlanes and 2 controlled access lanes, which is why there will be significant land acquisition needed in the area. No mainlanes will be lost on any portion of I-35 as part of reconstruction, lanes will only be added.

The portion of I-35 being discussed will look something like this in any design considered currently.


The very narrowest portion, between a cemetery and the UT Austin campus, will briefly shift all frontage road traffic to the Northbound side of the freeway. However, 7 lanes of traffic in each direction will be maintained on I-35 and frontage road capacity will not be compromised.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2022, 04:17:29 PM by Echostatic »
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #113 on: January 14, 2022, 05:04:33 PM »

Okay thatís good to know.
Logged

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 835
  • Last Login: September 26, 2022, 10:58:45 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #114 on: January 17, 2022, 10:00:53 AM »

All things considered, it's a fairly decent compromise if tunnels are completely off the table. I know some people are opposed to even this, but they're mostly chasing clout in urbanist circles.
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1595
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 06:02:49 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #115 on: January 17, 2022, 10:36:38 AM »


[...]

The very narrowest portion, between a cemetery and the UT Austin campus, will briefly shift all frontage road traffic to the Northbound side of the freeway. However, 7 lanes of traffic in each direction will be maintained on I-35 and frontage road capacity will not be compromised.


Ooooh, I like this proposal.

If they would cap this section completely and do a linear park for the covered section, it would be perfect.

Anything better than downgrading to a boulevard.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3250
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:11:24 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #116 on: January 17, 2022, 12:28:20 PM »

I think the concept looks pretty good. 4-5 freeway main lanes and 2 express lanes in each direction might work reasonably well. Some of that depends on how well traffic can enter or leave the superhighway. I like that the express lanes are 2 lanes in both directions, as opposed to some of these silly single lane configurations popping up in various cities around the state. All you need is one slow poke in a single express lane to ruin the purpose of using it.

It would be nice if they could cap over parts of the highway to improve access for pedestrians and bicyclists. I'm guessing the blue lines on the map fringing the frontage roads and other connecting surface streets are sidewalks.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #117 on: January 17, 2022, 01:01:19 PM »

All things considered, it's a fairly decent compromise if tunnels are completely off the table. I know some people are opposed to even this, but they're mostly chasing clout in urbanist circles.
Yeah this is a better proposal than the last ones I saw. I could live with this.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #118 on: January 17, 2022, 01:04:05 PM »

I like that the express lanes are 2 lanes in both directions, as opposed to some of these silly single lane configurations popping up in various cities around the state. All you need is one slow poke in a single express lane to ruin the purpose of using it.
CDOT just did this same stupid fucking setup on I-25 on a large section between south Denver and Colorado Springs. I just don't get it. Either just add a damn lane to highway or make it two express lanes each way. Such a waste. But they didn't use concrete dividers like Texas has been, just bollards which I'm not sure if reinforced or not.
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Age: 17
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:24:47 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #119 on: January 25, 2022, 10:44:54 PM »

Alternative 3, which is the option that the City of Austin is angling for and TXDOT has moved forward, has received substantial changes as part of local workshops. Alternative 2 has received some, but fewer changes; I won't post those here. The new Alternative 3 Modified is posted below in its entirety.









If built as proposed, this will be one of the most impressive highways in the nation.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2022, 10:48:03 PM by Echostatic »
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 897
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 10:33:01 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #120 on: January 26, 2022, 12:35:55 AM »

As Echostatic mentioned, changes to Alternative 2 are minimal and changes to Alternative 3 are substantial. I'm inclined to think Alt 3 will be favored, since it provides more deck opportunities and revives the original East Avenue through downtown with the frontage roads together like a street. Unfortunately the new Alt 3 has more downsizing than Alt 2.

Alternate 2. Minimal changes.
Northbound bypass lanes minimized or eliminated in downtown area

Alternate 3.  Major changes. This option has reduced ROW right of way requirement. Comments go from north to south.
Elevated structures for managed lanes are eliminated and brought to ground level north of 38th. Managed lanes are reduced from 4 to 2 lanes north of Airport blvd.
Two Flyovers for HOV access eliminated at 41st street
MLK: SB frontage road shifted to the east side of corridor, right next to NB frontage road in urban street configuration.
15th street: frontage roads (both directions together) cross over to the west side of corridor
Bypass lanes eliminated through downtown, generally 1-2 less lanes each direction
South of Riverside: Elevated structures for managed lanes eliminated. Bypass lanes eliminated
Woodland Avenue bridge over IH 35 eliminated

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3250
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:11:24 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #121 on: January 26, 2022, 01:02:54 AM »

Yeah, I'm not a fan at all of those single express lanes in Alt 3. As much as Austin and points North are growing I think it's very short-sighted to downsize managed lanes and other elements North of Airport Road.
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Age: 17
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:24:47 AM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #122 on: January 26, 2022, 10:44:19 AM »

I'm fine with the downsizing north of Airport if it gets this thing built. Even if they didn't add a single lane on this stretch, the traffic would be massively improved by just road design alone.

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3005
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:50:29 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #123 on: March 17, 2022, 09:57:22 AM »

Apparently according to this article TxDOT didnít realize a building existed right next to the central part of this project because they only use Bing and Google:
Quote
Thatís because the transportation agency officials said they rely on Travis County Appraisal District maps, Google images and Bing. When reviewing those maps, Aria Grand did not exist. It was just a vacant plot of land. The 70-unit housing complex opened in early 2020

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/concerns-surrounding-future-of-buildings-lining-i-35-as-txdot-moves-forward-with-expansion-plans/

Is this really a thing? A multi billion project is to be built and when planning they donít even send surveyors in person or drones to to see whatís nearby?
Logged

DenverBrian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 170
  • Location: Las Vegas
  • Last Login: Today at 09:56:48 PM
Re: Austin: IH 35 rebuild
« Reply #124 on: March 17, 2022, 01:58:08 PM »

Apparently according to this article TxDOT didnít realize a building existed right next to the central part of this project because they only use Bing and Google:
Quote
Thatís because the transportation agency officials said they rely on Travis County Appraisal District maps, Google images and Bing. When reviewing those maps, Aria Grand did not exist. It was just a vacant plot of land. The 70-unit housing complex opened in early 2020

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/concerns-surrounding-future-of-buildings-lining-i-35-as-txdot-moves-forward-with-expansion-plans/

Is this really a thing? A multi billion project is to be built and when planning they donít even send surveyors in person or drones to to see whatís nearby?
In the 2000s, there was a brand new set of townhomes built near I-25 in Denver between Broadway and University. I actually considered one of these to buy.

The T-Rex project demolished these townhomes about three years after they were built.
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.