AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by nixcity

Agreed, but I think atxsnail is primarily referring to the large population of transit dependent people that live along that stretch of Lamar.

Yup. I worry about the possible narrative that the Orange Line will be a train primarily for rich people who find the bus too icky unless we also include people north of 183. The commuters from Tech Ridge would certainly also be a counter to that narrative. As an added bonus, it would directly connect a lot of people who otherwise might not venture up that way to the most diverse set of businesses anywhere in Austin.

I agree the NW suburbs are all pretty well served by transit already. I'm actually unnaturally excited about what's going to be a massive increase in the Red Line ridership once the Orange/Blue Lines are up and running and the Red Line is double tracked. It would definitely help liven up the Crestview Station area.

[freerover]

Looks like CTRMA is making a

-CTRMA is officially underway with a study to extend the Manor Expressway to Elgin. Phase 1 of construction would extend the tollway to FM 973 and phase 2 would go to Elgin.

-Construction will start late this year on the 183A extension from Hero Way to 29 in Liberty Hill

-Construction on the additional general purpose lane and 2 toll lanes on 183 from Mopac to 35 will start early next year. This will also include big improvements to the mopac toll lane as well as direct ramps from the mopac toll lanes to 183 toll lanes.

-Mopac South costs are being updated and environmental assessment still underway

-CTRMA is proposing widening the SB mainlanes near Barton Skyway to ease merging congestion. Seem like smart short term changes. Long term those 2 on ramps in a row have to go.

-TxDot will start Oak Hill Parkway construction towards the end of the year.

[DanielG425]

Originally Posted by atxsnail

Out of curiosity, why do you mention Dallas' rail system as a model? To me, it's such a commuter/suburban oriented system that it's not very useful within the city itself. Admittedly, I don't live there so I'm not familiar with the daily routines of DART riders. But to me that system looks like it only exists to get suburbanites between their jobs and park & rides and that's it.

The coverage map looks nice from far away though.

I much prefer a more compact system that is designed to serve a full spectrum of needs: work commute, retail and grocery shopping, parks and recreation, dining out and entertainment. It's not cost effective to build frequent service out to the outlying areas. Tech Ridge, Southpark Meadows, and the Airport are as far as I'd ever vote to extend the proposed LRT lines.

I'm guessing the Red Line expansion (which I favor) and the Green Line are kind of approaching the Dallas model? I'm not convinced we need the Green Line yet, but I'm not quite as adamantly opposed to it as some others are. I would just prefer it to be primarily regionally funded.

I doubt we'll ever get rail to southern suburbs like Kyle and Buda. But when we get Mopac South toll lanes, express buses will do really well.

I think the Dallas DART route map woos people into thinking its this amazing light rail mass transit option that is super useful, but in reality it isn't. It isn't useless by any means and I applaud Dallas for actually getting it done, but it is really just a slow connection between the many small towns and cities in the DFW metroplex. After extensively using DART and Houston's METRO, I have to give the crown to METRO for actual utility. It doesn't come near DARTs coverage which is a HUGE negative (not to mention the connection to DFW Airport), but it connects the urban inner loop of Houston with many stops and an efficient route map that makes accessing different parts of the city realistic in a short period of time. I would love for Austin to copy Metro within the urban core while copying DART with expansion/service into the suburbs. Just my two cents

[freerover]

I-35′s $7.5B expansion more of a reality after securing full funding

https://www.statesman.com/news/20200...tm_term=022620

A massive proposed expansion of Interstate 35 aimed at handling the influx of traffic as the Austin area grows is poised to move forward after the Texas Transportation Commission brings forward a plan Thursday that will fill a $4.3 billion funding gap.

The commission, which guides the Texas Department of Transportation’s construction priorities, will propose fully funding the $7.5 billion expansion of the interstate that could include multiple levels of tunnels through parts of central Austin and the demolition of the two deck system that has come to characterize the highway in Austin.

On Thursday, the Transportation Commission will begin its first public discussions of bridging the financial gap. The proposal pumps $3.4 billion into the I-35 project in Austin, dedicating the full allotment of the commission’s discretionary fund in its Unified Transportation Fund.

The remainder would come from a $300 million allocation from the commission when it updates its Unified Transportation Plan in August and from reprioritizing $600 million TxDOT previously sent to the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, Texas Transportation Commission Chairman J. Bruce Bugg Jr. said.

In May, CAMPO’s board voted to kick $400 million toward the interstate after TxDOT staff unveiled a preliminary plan that included lowering the highway below ground throughout the central city as well as adding managed lanes.

What we’re going to talk about ... will directly benefit the folks in Austin,” Bugg said in an interview with the American-Statesman. “We believe that it is a statewide strategic priority.”

Bugg called I-35 “Main Steet Texas,” noting that mitigating the slowdowns in Austin — a notorious bottleneck along a highway that runs through four of the state’s five largest cities — benefit all Texans.

While the funding plan’s approval appears to be a mere formality at this point, many questions remain about the future of Interstate 35. Bugg said it was too early to begin to provide a timeline for the project′s completion, but landing the full funding should expedite a lengthy planning and public input process that accompanies all major TxDOT projects.

What I-35 looks like at the end of the process also is an unknown even with preliminary plans. But creating two managed lanes on each side of the highway through most of Austin remains the plan. Those lanes will not be tolled, but could be reserved for high occupancy vehicles, Bugg said.

“This project will relieve traffic congestion for all those who travel on I-35 through Austin, while helping our capital city meet the needs of a growing population,” Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement.

How the interstate’s expansion interfaces with the Austin City Council and Capital Metro’s regional transportation plan Project Connect is unknown. All major projects in the multi-billion dollar transit plan through Austin remain focused away from the city’s other highways.

“I-35 through downtown Austin is a state and regional strategic priority. It must be. Today’s proposal to invest an additional $4.3 billion in funds to address I-35 is the kind of bold investment we need,” said Sen. Kirk Watson in a statement.

That's shocking.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by freerover

I-35′s $7.5B expansion more of a reality after securing full funding

https://www.statesman.com/news/20200...tm_term=022620



That's shocking.

This is big news and long overdue. Now let's hope that the light rail bond passes.

[Syndic]

Would this include the cost of burying 35? I've said it before that I don't care if we expand 35 in that stretch as long as we're burying it. My guess is that not enough of it would be buried, however, so it'd still be an eyesore. However, this idea of dismantling the upper deck seems kinda wild to me. I've never known Austin without an upper deck.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Syndic

Would this include the cost of burying 35? I've said it before that I don't care if we expand 35 in that stretch as long as we're burying it. My guess is that not enough of it would be buried, however, so it'd still be an eyesore. However, this idea of dismantling the upper deck seems kinda wild to me. I've never known Austin without an upper deck.

Tunnel where the decks are and below grade downtown like 71 is in south austin.

[Echostatic]

Hell yeah! This is about twenty years too late.

Originally Posted by Syndic

Would this include the cost of burying 35? I've said it before that I don't care if we expand 35 in that stretch as long as we're burying it. My guess is that not enough of it would be buried, however, so it'd still be an eyesore. However, this idea of dismantling the upper deck seems kinda wild to me. I've never known Austin without an upper deck.

The plan last I saw it was to build I-35 in a trench like Ben White, but the city would have to pay for any cap structure. It would be built with the potential to be capped.

The upper deck will not be missed.

[Syndic]

Originally Posted by freerover

Tunnel where the decks are and below grade downtown like 71 is in south austin.

This is incorrect, right?

I thought the whole point was to hide it downtown and connect the eastside and westside? TXDOT isn't paying for a tunnel, right?

[Echostatic]

This is South of the decks. Pretty sure this is still the plan to be built.


This is where the upper deck exists today. It is a trench/tunnel combo. The frontage road is at street level.

[papertowelroll]

Would like this a lot more if those four lane access roads were only 2 lanes. As is 35 is still a massive barrier between east and west, even if caps are installed.

[The ATX]

We don't know what the final plans will be. This is from the Statesman Article:

What I-35 looks like at the end of the process remains an unknown even with preliminary plans. But creating two managed lanes on each side of the highway through most of Austin remains the plan. Those lanes would not be tolled, but could be reserved for high-occupancy vehicles, Bugg said.

Fully burying the highway, similar to what was done for a stretch of Interstate 635 in Dallas, is not part of the plan. Bugg said such a project would require local funding.

[Syndic]

Damn, that's kinda wild; fully buried express lane tunnels. But I see no trucks in there. Wouldn't it make more sense to let the trucks use those and get them off our main roads, since their goal is to just bypass Austin entirely?

[urbancore]

i'm so confused.....and it has nothing to do with the Guinness I've been drinking.....

what are we going to wind up with....fo realz?

[lzppjb]

Depressed lanes from the river north to the split. It won't be capped unless Austin plans it and pays for it. The State is funding this because it affects the rest of the state and commerce. They don't care if it's considered ugly or a barrier. That's a local issue.

Around the split, the corridor narrows. That's why it's going underground, and why the managed lanes will be under the highway lanes. It's just too narrow through there to get all 5-6 lanes side-by-side.

I actually drew something very similar to this years ago.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Depressed lanes from the river north to the split. It won't be capped unless Austin plans it and pays for it. The State is funding this because it affects the rest of the state and commerce. They don't care if it's considered ugly or a barrier. That's a local issue.

Around the split, the corridor narrows. That's why it's going underground, and why the managed lanes will be under the highway lanes. It's just too narrow through there to get all 5-6 lanes side-by-side.

I actually drew something very similar to this years ago.

Thank you for that....so do we like this? I can't think right now.....def not the Guinness, or that I've been at the office since 8am.

cheers.

[Syndic]

If the city of Austin pays to bury the stretch by downtown, I love it. If they don't, I just like it.

However you slice it, tunnels are fuckin' cool. And express lanes on 35 could really help.

[H2O]

The ULI experts brought in by DAA will be presenting their recommendations tomorrow morning at Huston-Tillotson: https://downtownaustin.com/blog/pres...entral-austin/

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by Echostatic

This is South of the decks. Pretty sure this is still the plan to be built.

It will be a shame if there really isn't going to be a 5th street crossing. East 5th has a lot of great stuff going on, it's too bad if we go to the trouble of tearing down that concrete hill that separates that from downtown but don't bother to connect both sides. If we ever get a deck park there, that Saltillo Whole Foods might be one of the busiest in the country.

I hope the rail crossing for the Red Line will include a wide path for pedestrians and cyclists at 4th along with a pedestrian beacon or something.

I'm not crazy about HOV lanes b/c I think we'll be spending lots of money for underutilized capacity. Dynamic tolls would be better and help save tax money - why can't it be at least HOT? One side benefit I guess is that the HOV lanes will look pretty interesting during ROT Rally time.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Syndic

If the city of Austin pays to bury the stretch by downtown, I love it. If they don't, I just like it.

However you slice it, tunnels are fuckin' cool. And express lanes on 35 could really help.

It'll be below grade no matter what. The city can pay to cap it from Cesar to 8th and from 11th to 12th.

Originally Posted by atxsnail

It will be a shame if there really isn't going to be a 5th street crossing. East 5th has a lot of great stuff going on, it's too bad if we go to the trouble of tearing down that concrete hill that separates that from downtown but don't bother to connect both sides. If we ever get a deck park there, that Saltillo Whole Foods might be one of the busiest in the country.

You need an area for the braided entrances/exits to keep congestion off the frontage roads which everyone wants to be like neighborhood like streets. You could prob cap it if you didn't do braids but the braids also reduce unnecessary congestion and is just smart design.

I hope they modify the last design though and put dedicated U-Turns at 6th and the red line bridge.

Originally Posted by atxsnail

I hope the rail crossing for the Red Line will include a wide path for pedestrians and cyclists at 4th along with a pedestrian beacon or something.

Of course it will. The red line bridge is huge!

Originally Posted by atxsnail

I'm not crazy about HOV lanes b/c I think we'll be spending lots of money for underutilized capacity. Dynamic tolls would be better and help save tax money - why can't it be at least HOT? One side benefit I guess is that the HOV lanes will look pretty interesting during ROT Rally time.

I completely agree but it's a thorny political issue for Abbot. I would love to pay extra if I'm late or only using 35 for a non-regular commute. Plus, less public money.