AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Austin, TX  (Read 43464 times)

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 325
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 10:04:28 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #325 on: October 08, 2021, 08:16:10 PM »

A short length route like the TX-130 tollway does not warrant burning a 2-digit Interstate designation. A 3-digit I-x35 designation would be just fine.

Besides, if there was going to be a "I-33" route designated, the US-281 corridor going North out of San Antonio would be a better candidate. In big picture terms the US-281 corridor could emerge as a relief North-South corridor for I-35, basically a Western bypass of Austin and DFW. The route could go up to Wichita Falls and even overlap the portion of I-44 Southwest of OKC before re-connecting back to I-35 in OKC. That would be a better "I-33" and it would be an actual Interstate, going across state lines. BTW I think US-277 should be gradually upgraded between Wichita Falls and Abilene. That could turn into an eventual extension of I-44 to I-20 (or even to San Angelo to meet up with a possible extension of I-27).
Okay, but why isnít I-12 I-410, or something I-x10? I-12 in LA is even shorter, and it connects to I-10 twice.

Actually, SH 45 & SH 130 could really be considered a new I-x35 bypass loop around Austin.

About US-281, Iíd prefer an extension of I-37.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2021, 08:19:37 PM by Thegeet »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3147
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:49:54 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #326 on: October 09, 2021, 01:31:35 AM »

Quote from: Thegeet
Okay, but why isnít I-12 I-410, or something I-x10? I-12 in LA is even shorter, and it connects to I-10 twice.

I-12 is a unique case. I-12 in Louisiana at least runs in a straight, direct path. It probably should have been called I-10 and what is currently I-10 bending down thru New Orleans should have been given a 3 digit I-x10 route. The treatment would be similar to how I-5 bypasses the SF Bay area rather than go through it.

Not that any of this matters. TX DOT is not big at all on designating new Interstate routes; they're perfectly happy converting state and US highways to freeways and maintaining those designations. I-69 and I-14 are exceptions driven in part by politics.
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 325
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 10:04:28 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #327 on: October 09, 2021, 01:51:47 AM »

Quote from: Thegeet
Okay, but why isnít I-12 I-410, or something I-x10? I-12 in LA is even shorter, and it connects to I-10 twice.

I-12 is a unique case. I-12 in Louisiana at least runs in a straight, direct path. It probably should have been called I-10 and what is currently I-10 bending down thru New Orleans should have been given a 3 digit I-x10 route. The treatment would be similar to how I-5 bypasses the SF Bay area rather than go through it.

Not that any of this matters. TX DOT is not big at all on designating new Interstate routes; they're perfectly happy converting state and US highways to freeways and maintaining those designations. I-69 and I-14 are exceptions driven in part by politics.
At least I-5 goes through Sacramento. I-12 doesnít go through any significant cities.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3147
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:49:54 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #328 on: October 09, 2021, 11:17:18 AM »

Good grief. Look at the map. I-12 isn't meant to go through any major cities. It is a DIRECT bypass of New Orleans. I-10 has to bend well out of the way to go through New Orleans. Cross country traffic on I-10 uses I-12 to SAVE TIME and MILEAGE.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7586
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:20:34 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #329 on: October 09, 2021, 11:31:33 AM »

Good grief. Look at the map. I-12 isn't meant to go through any major cities. It is a DIRECT bypass of New Orleans. I-10 has to bend well out of the way to go through New Orleans. Cross country traffic on I-10 uses I-12 to SAVE TIME and MILEAGE.
Thatís not what he was trying to say.

He was pointing out the fact that routing I-10 over I-12 wouldnít be an exact comparison to I-5 and it bypassing San Francisco, because it still goes through another major city - Sacramento - whereas I-12 does not.
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1575
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: June 23, 2022, 10:31:24 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #330 on: October 09, 2021, 11:35:52 AM »

I-10 was designated as such to directly serve NOLA with the most prominent southern 2di.

I-12 was designated as such to serve as the principal bypass of NOLA for I-10.

Both designations are totally warranted.



Also, Baton Rouge is the state capital of Louisiana. I wouldn't quite call it "insignificant". Maybe compared to Frisco, but hardly insignificant in relative terms.

« Last Edit: October 09, 2021, 11:38:32 AM by Anthony_JK »
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 325
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 10:04:28 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #331 on: October 09, 2021, 12:06:05 PM »

I-5 is supposed to bypass San Francisco in order to reach Sacramento.
I-10 was designated as such to directly serve NOLA with the most prominent southern 2di.

I-12 was designated as such to serve as the principal bypass of NOLA for I-10.

Both designations are totally warranted.



Also, Baton Rouge is the state capital of Louisiana. I wouldn't quite call it "insignificant". Maybe compared to Frisco, but hardly insignificant in relative terms.
Exactly. Yes. Baton Rouge is the only significant city it serves. Other than that, which is the western end, thereís no other notable cities it serves.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1689
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: June 21, 2022, 12:08:45 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #332 on: October 09, 2021, 05:53:44 PM »

I-5 is supposed to bypass San Francisco in order to reach Sacramento.
I-10 was designated as such to directly serve NOLA with the most prominent southern 2di.

I-12 was designated as such to serve as the principal bypass of NOLA for I-10.

Both designations are totally warranted.



Also, Baton Rouge is the state capital of Louisiana. I wouldn't quite call it "insignificant". Maybe compared to Frisco, but hardly insignificant in relative terms.
Exactly. Yes. Baton Rouge is the only significant city it serves. Other than that, which is the western end, thereís no other notable cities it serves.

At the western terminus which I-10 serves anyway, so I don't really consider I-12 going through Baton Rouge since you can also get there by staying on I-10.
Logged

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 409
  • Last Login: Today at 09:37:18 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #333 on: November 12, 2021, 09:47:39 AM »

Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 311
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 07:12:34 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #334 on: November 14, 2021, 07:46:06 PM »

Logged

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 409
  • Last Login: Today at 09:37:18 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #335 on: November 15, 2021, 10:10:35 PM »

Drove to COTA this weekend from Georgetown, when did they black top tollway 130 from 71 south? How far does the black top go? Is it on 45 too? I know a different consortium owns the southern Tollway.
Logged

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 409
  • Last Login: Today at 09:37:18 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #336 on: November 15, 2021, 10:11:47 PM »

The regroved Tollway 130 on the north side is heavenly, so quiet and smooth, till you get back to the ungroved concrete.
Logged

TheBox

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 72
  • Location: Houston, TX, United States
  • Last Login: June 21, 2022, 11:53:55 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #337 on: November 22, 2021, 11:31:57 PM »

I know they prioritized TX-71 much more than they prioritized US-290 in the past decade, but when are gonna update the US-290 @ TX-36 in Brenham intersection?

that was all apart of a freeway plan from decades ago (related to I-27), only for those plans to never happen anyway

EDIT: and yes, i'm aware this was around a time before Austin became the big developing and growing Texas metropolis is it today, cause back then (i wasn't born yet lol) it was just a college city that just so happens to be Texas' capital city
« Last Edit: November 23, 2021, 11:33:36 PM by TheBox »
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 311
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 07:12:34 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #338 on: November 23, 2021, 10:53:55 AM »

I know they prioritized TX-75 much more than they prioritized US-290 in the past decade, but when are gonna update the US-290 @ TX-36 in Brenham intersection?

that was all apart of a freeway plan from decades ago (related to I-27), only for those plans to never happen anyway

I think you meant 71.

But yes there are still plans to realign the 290 @ 36 intersection. There were schematics posted of the different alignment options several months ago somewhere on here.
Logged

TheBox

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 72
  • Location: Houston, TX, United States
  • Last Login: June 21, 2022, 11:53:55 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #339 on: November 27, 2021, 10:39:23 PM »

I know they prioritized TX-75 much more than they prioritized US-290 in the past decade, but when are gonna update the US-290 @ TX-36 in Brenham intersection?

that was all apart of a freeway plan from decades ago (related to I-27), only for those plans to never happen anyway

I think you meant 71.

But yes there are still plans to realign the 290 @ 36 intersection. There were schematics posted of the different alignment options several months ago somewhere on here.

If i were them i would pick either Option D or E, since those the most interstate-esque upgrades
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 311
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: Today at 07:12:34 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #340 on: November 28, 2021, 12:36:21 AM »

I know they prioritized TX-75 much more than they prioritized US-290 in the past decade, but when are gonna update the US-290 @ TX-36 in Brenham intersection?

that was all apart of a freeway plan from decades ago (related to I-27), only for those plans to never happen anyway

I think you meant 71.

But yes there are still plans to realign the 290 @ 36 intersection. There were schematics posted of the different alignment options several months ago somewhere on here.

If i were them i would pick either Option D or E, since those the most interstate-esque upgrades

Even B would be acceptable. I donít know what they were thinking with C 👀
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 87
  • Age: 16
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 06:20:34 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #341 on: November 28, 2021, 10:54:14 AM »

Definitely would go with E, D, or B (in that order.) Given budget concerns I think B is most likely to happen, though. But it's fine! It still provides continuous flow of traffic on 290.

armadillo speedbump

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 83
  • Location: texas
  • Last Login: June 22, 2022, 02:32:07 AM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #342 on: November 28, 2021, 02:34:20 PM »

Why was the idiotic Option A even included?  Expensive, disruptive construction for no time improvement or worse, since it adds an extra light to 290 movement.
Logged

CoolAngrybirdsrio4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 178
  • just looking at roads and stuff

  • Age: 20
  • Location: Ann Arbor
  • Last Login: May 25, 2022, 04:15:06 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #343 on: December 06, 2021, 01:56:38 AM »

Quote from: Thegeet
Okay, but why isnít I-12 I-410, or something I-x10? I-12 in LA is even shorter, and it connects to I-10 twice.

I-12 is a unique case. I-12 in Louisiana at least runs in a straight, direct path. It probably should have been called I-10 and what is currently I-10 bending down thru New Orleans should have been given a 3 digit I-x10 route. The treatment would be similar to how I-5 bypasses the SF Bay area rather than go through it.

Not that any of this matters. TX DOT is not big at all on designating new Interstate routes; they're perfectly happy converting state and US highways to freeways and maintaining those designations. I-69 and I-14 are exceptions driven in part by politics.
At least I-5 goes through Sacramento. I-12 doesnít go through any significant cities.

It does go through a few midsize cities such as Hammond, and it is a bypass of New Orleans.
Logged
Renewed roadgeek

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 409
  • Last Login: Today at 09:37:18 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #344 on: December 30, 2021, 02:34:42 PM »

TxDOT plans to fix Ďdipí on new NB US 183 flyover at NB I-35

https://www.kxan.com/traffic/txdot-plans-to-fix-dip-on-new-nb-us-183-flyover-at-nb-i-35/
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3439
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: May 26, 2022, 03:45:42 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #345 on: December 31, 2021, 02:29:03 PM »

TxDOT plans to fix ‘dip’ on new NB US 183 flyover at NB I-35

https://www.kxan.com/traffic/txdot-plans-to-fix-dip-on-new-nb-us-183-flyover-at-nb-i-35/

It was ridiculous to build with only one lane.
Logged

TheBox

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 72
  • Location: Houston, TX, United States
  • Last Login: June 21, 2022, 11:53:55 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #346 on: January 09, 2022, 06:17:33 PM »

Again, i know they prioritized TX-71 over US-290 so much for the past decade that they they're almost down with it making it a expressway (from I-10 in Columbus to Austin).

I just still wish they at least do some work around US-290 between Houston and Austin (like a freeway with overpasses in Manor and Elgin, the Giddings bypass, and the Brenham realignment, or at the very least the latter two suggestions) sooner than later.

but Texas has other plans, like I-69 and eventually I-27
« Last Edit: January 10, 2022, 12:40:32 PM by TheBox »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3147
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:49:54 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #347 on: January 10, 2022, 12:04:35 PM »

The Austin-San Antonio metro is growing fast enough TX DOT will be forced to upgrade more and more segments of both TX-71 and US-290 to Interstate quality until both are 100% limited access. They'll also have to improve the San Marcos-Luling and New Braunfels-Seguin corridors.

If TX DOT re-builds the US-290/TX-36 interchange in Brenham as a DDI they'll have to come back later and build a separate freeway spur off the existing US-290 bypass around Brenham. It's inevitable US-290 will need to be Interstate quality between Hempstead and Brenham. Then the upgrades will have to proceed farther West toward Giddings. Likewise, US-290 will have to get upgraded thru Manor, Elgin and farther East.

TX-71 needs a bunch of work. Near term, it needs to be Interstate quality from the TX-130 intersection down to Bastrop. Some TX DOT projects in the works will accomplish some of that. Farther Southeast any highway upgrades should be easier.

As for the I-69 and I-27 projects, parts of those will be in danger delayed indefinitely. There is much more of a push happening for I-69 since several segments are in progress. The only things new potentially related to I-27 are the loops around Amarillo and Big Spring.
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2233
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 09:46:55 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #348 on: January 10, 2022, 12:53:31 PM »

Don't forget I-14
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3147
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:49:54 PM
Re: Austin, TX
« Reply #349 on: January 10, 2022, 04:47:08 PM »

The Killeen/Fort Hood area is a different metro than Austin. I-14 does nothing to help move traffic in the Austin metro.
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.