AUSTIN | Transportation Updates - Page 402

drummer · #**8021** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by valhalla

^WTF. I'm generally in favor of the i-45 rebuild, but there are some parts of this that are just downright unacceptable. Look at what is proposed for the area next to UT. It looks like its taking away a substantial chunk of the UT campus. I can't imagine that UT is fine with that. Given all the political power the university has, I'm hoping they can get TXDOT to redesign this proposed section of the new highway.

Man, this looks like they took 635 in Dallas and just stretched it out as wide as they could go.

Edit: By the way, I can't find schematics on the project website listed from the article. Am I missing something?

ATX2030 · #**8022** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 2:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

Man, this looks like they took 635 in Dallas and just stretched it out as wide as they could go.

Edit: By the way, I can't find schematics on the project website listed from the article. Am I missing something?

That's gonna take 20 years to build! What a nightmare during construction.

sjk · #**8023** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 4:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

Man, this looks like they took 635 in Dallas and just stretched it out as wide as they could go.

Edit: By the way, I can't find schematics on the project website listed from the article. Am I missing something?

Here are the links to schematics:

Alternative 1 (already off the table): https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse...ld-Alternative-Schematic-ALT1-080621.pdf

Alternative 2: https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse...ld-Alternative-Schematic-ALT2-080621.pdf

Alternative 3: https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse...ld-Alternative-Schematic-ALT3-080621.pdf

drummer · #**8024** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 5:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjk

Here are the links to schematics:

Alternative 1 (already off the table): https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse...ld-Alternative-Schematic-ALT1-080621.pdf

Alternative 2: https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse...ld-Alternative-Schematic-ALT2-080621.pdf

Alternative 3: https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse...ld-Alternative-Schematic-ALT3-080621.pdf

Thanks!

dilliam · #**8025** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 6:02 PM**

What are the odds that TXDOT would throw us a bone and build just one of the caps that the Urban Land Institute proposed? The ULI/DAA proposal was by far the most feasible, so I feel like if TXDOT is going to take any ideas from the community alternatives it would likely be that one, right? Building one of the caps and including the necessary infrastructure along the central part of I35 would be a relatively huge win and would help if we decide to scrape together the cash to build more in the future.

https://downtownaustin.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/ULI-ASP_Report_Austin_I-35_FINAL.pdf

freerover · #**8026** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 7:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dilliam

What are the odds that TXDOT would throw us a bone and build just one of the caps that the Urban Land Institute proposed? The ULI/DAA proposal was by far the most feasible, so I feel like if TXDOT is going to take any ideas from the community alternatives it would likely be that one, right? Building one of the caps and including the necessary infrastructure along the central part of I35 would be a relatively huge win and would help if we decide to scrape together the cash to build more in the future.

https://downtownaustin.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/ULI-ASP_Report_Austin_I-35_FINAL.pdf

The answer was there is no additional funding available. It was proposed that the CAMPO money could pay for the caps but Txdot already allocated that campo money to the highway which in retrospect looks like it was a trap.

resansom · #**8027** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 7:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dilliam

What are the odds that TXDOT would throw us a bone and build just one of the caps that the Urban Land Institute proposed? ...

Try a zillion-to-one. If the Urban Land Institute has Austin's best interests in mind, then TXDOT will be steering clear of anything they recommend...

H2O · #**8028** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 7:58 PM**

TxDOT has pledged to build some of the stitch concepts of the ULI proposal into the bridges, but they say their funding cannot legally be used to fund caps, since they are non-transportation improvements.

freerover · #**8029** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 8:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

TxDOT has pledged to build some of the stitch concepts of the ULI proposal into the bridges, but they say their funding cannot legally be used to fund caps, since they are non-transportation improvements.

No but the CAMPO money can. However, if they did that it would leave a hole in the budget.

Maximusx1 · #**8030** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 8:58 PM**

What does one block of cap cost? Surely Austin can get its act together to pass a bond in the next TEN years and pay for it.

Novacek · #**8031** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 10:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maximusx1

What does one block of cap cost? Surely Austin can get its act together to pass a bond in the next TEN years and pay for it.

Could we, sure (though it's pretty expensive).

But "Austin" already gave TxDot ~$1B because they said they were going to build us a $8B highway.

Now they say they're only going to build a $4B highway, by saving money by condemning a bunch of property.

freerover · #**8032** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 11:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

Could we, sure (though it's pretty expensive).

But "Austin" already gave TxDot ~$1B because they said they were going to build us a $8B highway.

Now they say they're only going to build a $4B highway, by saving money by condemning a bunch of property.

It really does feel like Txdot swindled CAMPO.

valhalla · #**8033** Posted **Sep 2, 2021, 11:14 PM**

Yea I've been wondering why TXDOT is all of sudden saying they can't afford a $8B plan. Wasn't that the budget they had to work with? Did they lose the other billions in a vegas trip or something?

StoOgE · #**8034** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 12:31 AM**

I just want I35 to be put underground. No one asked for an L.A. style freeway in the middle of central Austin.

mtb_jeremy · #**8035** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 1:37 PM**

I haven't followed all the discussion on I-35, but has there ever been a proposal for a complete over-under design where one direction (ex. northbound) is on top and the other direction (ex. southbound) is on bottom? This seems like an efficient setup that offers space for lanes and not having to widen the footprint. Example being the San Francisco Oakland bridge:

With the current discussions, it may not be ideally lined up with desires to connect East and West Austin. Personally, I feel like that is an perfect scenario that just may not be 100% feasible. Historically it has racial ties to segregation, but with gentrification the east/west areas of downtown don't exactly have the same vibe of 20+ years ago.

freerover · #**8036** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 1:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtb_jeremy

I haven't followed all the discussion on I-35, but has there ever been a proposal for a complete over-under design where one direction (ex. northbound) is on top and the other direction (ex. southbound) is on bottom? This seems like an efficient setup that offers space for lanes and not having to widen the footprint. Example being the San Francisco Oakland bridge:

With the current discussions, it may not be ideally lined up with desires to connect East and West Austin. Personally, I feel like that is an perfect scenario that just may not be 100% feasible. Historically it has racial ties to segregation, but with gentrification the east/west areas of downtown don't exactly have the same vibe of 20+ years ago.

lol yea you havn't been paying attention. They literally DQEd the option for stacked lanes because it would cost 8 billion and they only wanted to pay for 4 so this isn't really helpful. Or at least you don't seem to understand the problem.

mtb_jeremy · #**8037** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 2:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freerover

lol yea you havn't been paying attention. They literally DQEd the option for stacked lanes because it would cost 8 billion and they only wanted to pay for 4 so this isn't really helpful. Or at least you don't seem to understand the problem.

I am really sorry that I am not as versed as you on this topic. Please forgive my complete incompetence.

I have seen proposals with lowering lanes (in both directions), but I would like to read more about the proposal I was describing and how it went down. Can you provide some links? Or guidance (ex. name of the proposal) on where I could find the specifics?

JAM · #**8038** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 7:31 PM**

Is this actually one of the proposals near the downtown area? How is a pedestrian supposed to get to the other side? Those feeders look scary???

Echostatic · #**8039** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 9:58 PM**

That rendering of the frontage roads does not include any of the crosswalk markings, bike lanes, and street trees included in the actual project schematics.

sjk · #**8040** Posted **Sep 3, 2021, 9:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtb_jeremy

I am really sorry that I am not as versed as you on this topic. Please forgive my complete incompetence.

I have seen proposals with lowering lanes (in both directions), but I would like to read more about the proposal I was describing and how it went down. Can you provide some links? Or guidance (ex. name of the proposal) on where I could find the specifics?

There is a ton of information available on this website and also allows you to share your input.

https://capexcentral.mobility35openhouse.com/