AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[KevinFromTexas]

I actually think it would make more sense to have SH-71 be redesignated as an interstate. It would give us an interstate for our airport, plus, while 71 doesn't connect to I-10, you could designate it an interstate from I-10 at Columbus all the way to Brady, then US-83 the rest of the way to Big Spring where it would meet up with I-20. It's kind of odd that we don't have an east/west interstate up through the middle of the state.

[llamaorama]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I actually think it would make more sense to have SH-71 be redesignated as an interstate. It would give us an interstate for our airport, plus, while 71 doesn't connect to I-10, you could designate it an interstate from I-10 at Columbus all the way to Brady, then US-83 the rest of the way to Big Spring where it would meet up with I-20. It's kind of odd that we don't have an east/west interstate up through the middle of the state.

I think Houston is the largest city to not have an interstate connection to its state capital.

71 between Columbus and Austin is ripe to be upgraded to an interstate, IMO. There are only a handful of locations which are currently insufficient(at-grade intersections, not wide enough) and all of those locations currently justify improvements to a freeway standard whether or not interstate designation was ever the ultimate goal. At some point growth will necessitate building overpasses between Bastrop and 130. While the section between Smithville and La Grange is rural, that also means it should be very cheap to expand the road there.

Beyond Austin to points west it is harder to visualize because of the expense and eminent domain required to plow a freeway through NIMBY and environmentalist hill country Travis County suburbia and beyond that towards Brady or Junction I think traffic counts would just be too low to justify expansion.

To link west Texas to the central and eastern parts of the state I think I-14 will do the job. US 190 was signed as I-14 between Temple and Copperas Cove recently. I think the goal is go from I-45 at Huntsville, past Bryan, then up to Temple. Then from Copperas Cove make 190 an interstate 14 through Brady up to Big Spring and then north up to Lubbock to meet I-27. That would set the stage for the more big-picture and long-distance interstate link between Denver and the southern states and their ports, which currently doesn't exist.

Austin could tie into this by having an upgraded 195 from Georgetown to Florence and then hook around the south end of Fort Hood to the Copperas Cove bypass.

[drummer]

I'm not sure I see a problem with the 71 portion east of Austin, as already mentioned. To the west, it wouldn't be much of a problem either...follow Ben White, 290/71 to the Y, and then simply follow 290 all the way to I-10 west of Fredericksburg. This would require a few creative solutions, however:

1. How to get through or around Dripping Springs (environmental and developmental concerns)

2. How to connect with 290 beyond 281 (odd connection around Johnson City)

3. How to get around Fredericksburg itself rather than cutting it in half

Other than these three, it would be relatively simple (as simple as building a new interstate can be, of course).

Another option would be to follow 290 to 281, and then veer south and west to meet up with I-10 around Kerrville, which kinda makes sense. Kerrville is a decent size town, and that would allow folks from I-10 west of the area, Kerrville, and Fredericksburg to have more regular access to the Austin metro area. That wouldn't fly well with a lot of ranchers and farmers in the area, however...

Side note: I wouldn't be surprised to see 281 upgraded from San Antonio to the Killeen/Fort Hood area at some point - probably way into the future, but who knows?

[Novacek]

Capmetro's board meeting yesterday had a little bit of Project Connect updates.

http://capmetrotx.iqm2.com/Citizens/...g.aspx?ID=1736

I can't find a direct link, but follow the above and then open the link 10-22_BoardPresentation_Mockup_DRAFT_v7

Some more info about each proposed corridor. Calls out a new station at Braker Lane (yellow line/brt-light/upgraded 803) by the MLS stadium.

[ATXboom]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

71 does not intersect with I-10 west of Austin...so, no on that one. 290 does, however. Nonetheless, I don't ever seeing that road, west of Austin, being turned into a freeway.

But, a spur of one of the interstates could be envisioned...something like I-110 or I-145 or I-169, etc. I think I-110 is already in use.

Sure... 71 runs from I-10 into Austin and seamlessly connects with 290 west linking back up with I-10 west of Fredricksburg. Works well for an I-10 north, and is essentially already interstate grade through Austin (except for the Y)

[lzppjb]

This talk of upgrading 190 and 281 just reinforces my thoughts that Lampasas is going to grow very quickly in the coming years. It sits on the junction of 190, 281 and 183.

[drummer]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

This talk of upgrading 190 and 281 just reinforces my thoughts that Lampasas is going to grow very quickly in the coming years. It sits on the junction of 190, 281 and 183.

I've had similar thoughts, but I think it'll be a while - even if those roads are all upgraded. It's on the fringes of everything and doesn't have much going on other than being a county seat. At best it will still be a distant suburb of Killeen.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by drummer

I've had similar thoughts, but I think it'll be a while - even if those roads are all upgraded. It's on the fringes of everything and doesn't have much going on other than being a county seat. At best it will still be a distant suburb of Killeen.

Lampasas is already a distant suburb / exurb of Killeen. The county is part of the MSA. A good comparison is this:

Austin is to Killeen as are Georgetown and Round Rock in Williamson County are to Lampasas and Copperas Cove in Lampasas County.

My personal opinion is that if there is ever a spark of economic or population growth in any of the cities just north of Austin (Waco, Killeen, Temple, and Belton) that the whole region would consolidate into a single MSA. I’d wager Waco would anchor the area while Killeen would be the lonely suburban military outpost on the outskirts. I’ve come to believe this is more likely than Austin and Killeen ever forming a CSA.

Edit: this last comment is an “If and only if” statement and even then it’d take decades for in growth.

[NYC2ATX]

An interesting discussion, I too always wondered why Austin and Houston didn't have an interstate connection, but then again, I wouldn't put it past the state of Texas to just go ahead and gradually upgrade the unimproved portions in-between to freeway standards whether or not an interstate designation comes along with that. Also, if it only runs between the two cities and not further west of Austin, it could theoretically get an auxiliary (or 3-digit) interstate designation, as was mentioned above. The current longest auxiliary interstate is I-476 in Pennsylvania at 132 miles, whereas the distance between Austin and Houston is approximately 165 miles. It's not outside the realm of possibility.

The idea of a Waco-Killeen urban corridor also definitely seems like a likely event in the future as well, but then I sort of feel like everything within, along or beside the greater Texas Triangle region can expect to grow and meld into larger metros as the entire megalopolis becomes the primary urban, developed region of the state. It's going to be interesting to see what other towns and cities emerge as major players in the coming years.

[drummer]

That's why I'm unsure about Lampasas seeing significant growth - growth over time for sure, but significant, not so sure. I think most of the significant growth would keep to I-35 and just west and east of it, even if there were to be an interstate cutting through Killeen, Lampasas, etc., as has been proposed or at least talked about. I-35 is the dominant player, even more so than anything between Austin and Houston. I do think the roads need to be upgraded, of course, but significant growth outside of the metro areas will be slower along that route.

[Azul]

If we're feeling wild, why not a new I-14 and a I-210/I-18 auxiliary split?

[KevinFromTexas]

I got an email about a notice for the public meeting about the new pedestrian/bicycle bridge at Longhorn Dam:

City to host public meeting on new pedestrian, bicycle crossings on Longhorn Dam Bridge

The City of Austin is conducting a preliminary study for construction of a new pedestrian and bicycle bridge crossing Lady Bird Lake near Longhorn Dam.

Staff is asking for feedback on what the new crossing should accomplish and what potential interim improvements could be made to Longhorn Dam.

This process will kick-off at a public meeting. See details below:

What:
Public Kick-Off Meeting Longhorn Dam Multimodal Improvements

Where:
Fiesta Gardens 2101 Jesse E. Segovia St.

When:
Tuesday, Nov. 13 6 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.


At the meeting, Public Works and Austin Transportation staff will introduce the project and identify the needs and issues it is intended to address. This will include an overview of the project and the planning history surrounding it, along with existing conditions and considerations that will affect the alternatives analysis that will ultimately result in a proposed solution.

This will be the first of three meetings about this project. Staff will present alternatives for the final design of the bridge at the second meeting, followed by a final recommendation at the third meeting. Material from all of the meetings will be posted online at AustinTexas.gov/LonghornBridge.

Members of the public are encouraged to submit feedback at the meetings or by emailing pwdUrbanTrails@austintexas.gov. Staff will take all feedback into account throughout the process, including during development of interim improvements to Longhorn Dam and development of alternatives and final recommendations for the proposed crossing.

The study will take approximately one year and is expected to be complete in fall 2019. This study is estimated to cost $500,000 and is being sponsored by Public Works and Austin Transportation.

If you have any questions, please contact Public Works at (512) 974-7111 or pwdUrbanTrails@austintexas.gov, or Marissa Monroy with Austin Transportation at (512) 974-6584 or Marissa.Monroy@AustinTexas.gov.

[ahealy]

Random Question: Does anyone have photos of the old rail/pedestrian bridge render that was supposed to go up across town lake with the failed 2014 plan?? I cannot seem to find that anywhere online.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Random Question: Does anyone have photos of the old rail/pedestrian bridge render that was supposed to go up across town lake with the failed 2014 plan?? I cannot seem to find that anywhere online.

I don't believe they ever got that far. They didn't get into design. I think what they sometimes showed in their material (and what you might be remembering) is using Portland's recent one just as an example.

https://trimet.org/pdfs/pm/PMLR_Brid...anuary2011.pdf

[loonytoony]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Random Question: Does anyone have photos of the old rail/pedestrian bridge render that was supposed to go up across town lake with the failed 2014 plan?? I cannot seem to find that anywhere online.

There was a pontoon bridge idea being floated (hardy har har!) around during Waller Creek discussion. It starts on page 3 on this link: http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=191323

I've not heard anything recently.

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by Novacek

I don't believe they ever got that far. They didn't get into design. I think what they sometimes showed in their material (and what you might be remembering) is using Portland's recent one just as an example.

https://trimet.org/pdfs/pm/PMLR_Brid...anuary2011.pdf

Nono! It was the bridge with the giant angled arch. It seemed to be mostly pedestrian oriented, but also would serve as a rail bridge. It seemed to connect at San Jacinto? I swear I'm not crazy

[ahealy]

THIS
Felt like I was taking crazy pills.....is this dead? Or, will this happen without the dead bad 2014 light rail route?

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by ahealy

THIS
Felt like I was taking crazy pills.....is this dead? Or, will this happen without the dead bad 2014 light rail route?

Of course it's dead. Even if that light rail bond referendum passed, this would have been valued engineered into a boring bridge. But it is/was awesome.

[H2O]

Originally Posted by ahealy

THIS
Felt like I was taking crazy pills.....is this dead? Or, will this happen without the dead bad 2014 light rail route?

That rendering was nothing official. It was a UT Architecture student concept. And no, I wouldn't expect to see any bridge there (except maybe Waller Creek Conservancy's pontoon bridge) without rail.

[We vs us]

Because we've been having a conversation about the Red line in another thread, here's a new slide deck from CapMetro, re: Project Connect. It highlights some changes they've made to the plan since they've been doing community engagement. One of those changes is to bring the Red (and new Green) lines across downtown to Guad.

https://t.co/GXawyKxyhM