Are new highways in the Plans for Austin or the upgrading of existing ones? (Houston: live in, costs)

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by buffettjr

It seems to me that Austin largely already solved its traffic problem; it built a whole new highway for all the Mexico <-> Canada freight to bypass downtown, which is exactly what the problem was.

Stupidly however, they decided to turn it over to a foreign private company and charge skyhigh fees for 18 wheelers -- the very vehicles we were trying to move over. As a result, no one uses the road and we're stuck paying them guaranteed profits (if I understand it correctly) while he traffic problem continues worse than ever, all while the solution has already been built and is sitting ready for use.

One thing I'm sure of is that metro rail for 1,800 people per day, some disconnected bike lanes in the 100 degree heat (104 today, 106 tomorrow) and/or even adding a lane to I-35 which runs right through the heart of downtown will do nothing to solve the problem of 40,000 18-wheelers per day passing through Austin on I-35. While I am not an expert, it seems to me that's the main source of our traffic nightmare...we have no "business district" route for local traffic so all of this interstate traffic clogs the same road needed by local residents.

They also built it too far east IMHO to be a viable bypass.
I remember the hearings they had on it. The problem was that over the years development happened along the ROW they had and it was all NIMBY from everyone up and down the line so they moved it further east.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by OpenD

I'll defer on this one to my friend who has lived in the neighborhood at the east end of the planned route for more than 10 years, who talks about how badly her neighborhood needs the traffic relief it would provide. For one thing, trying to get out of the neighborhood in morning rush hour is dangerous and subject to serious delays. It's work that was originally planned, then delayed, and is now showing signs of moving ahead.

I lived in the east end of that neighborhood for 8 years and we've used the house, off and on, when it wasn't rented, for our house in town, and my son lived there for some years very recently. So I guess that means we don't have a valid opinion on the matter?

There's a light for getting out of the neighborhood, by the way, if you take Barton Skyway - not really all that dangerous at all.

Heck, let's just pave the whole thing over right now so that nobody will be delayed at all. We're working in that direction as it is - why not just pull the bandaid off all at once! After all, nobody needs that much peace and quiet and green in the city!

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by Trae713

I didn't say put it in a tunnel, but under-grade...depressed, whatever. Adding a park or something over part of the freeway would be something extra (and really expensive). But you can't just leave the freeway the way it is, and I'm sure the City of Austin does want to demolish the upper deck lanes sometime. They are not nice to look at (unless you want views of the skyline). You can expand a freeway, while adding in other modes of transit along with it...

Ah, that's a little different, but not much. So, what you're advocating is virtually a repeat of the Trans-Texas Corridor debacle, only this time through Austin.

My points still stand. There are still issues with affordability, constructability and staging, environmental process (which could and likely would tie such a monstrosity up for decades...Rome, fiddle. Fiddle, Rome), and expansion capability.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by buffettjr

It seems to me that Austin largely already solved its traffic problem; it built a whole new highway for all the Mexico <-> Canada freight to bypass downtown, which is exactly what the problem was.

Stupidly however, they decided to turn it over to a foreign private company and charge skyhigh fees for 18 wheelers -- the very vehicles we were trying to move over. As a result, no one uses the road and we're stuck paying them guaranteed profits (if I understand it correctly) while he traffic problem continues worse than ever, all while the solution has already been built and is sitting ready for use.

One thing I'm sure of is that metro rail for 1,800 people per day, some disconnected bike lanes in the 100 degree heat (104 today, 106 tomorrow) and/or even adding a lane to I-35 which runs right through the heart of downtown will do nothing to solve the problem of 40,000 18-wheelers per day passing through Austin on I-35. While I am not an expert, it seems to me that's the main source of our traffic nightmare...we have no "business district" route for local traffic so all of this interstate traffic clogs the same road needed by local residents.

When SH130 is connected up to I-10 near Seguin, you may see some significant diversion from I-35 to SH130. As congestion grows on I-35 (which it does, every year - Austin is now the third most congested urban area in the US, on par with San Fran and NYC...source: TTI Urban Mobility Report 2011), the economics will reach a tipping point where it will make sense for truckers/trucking companies to pay the SH130 tolls rather than burn fuel, driver salary, and delivery delay penalties.

One of the issues, though, is that there are 100+ people moving to Central Texas each *day*. They will need to get from home to employment, school, etc. The data tell us (source: CAPCOG) that 50% of the residents of Central Texas cross a county line to get to work. That's not going to change overnight, in a year, or in a decade.

Further, NAFTA north-south trade grows at a 5% to 15% rate every single year, no matter what the economy is doing. SH130 is a good start, but that's all it is - a start.

The problem is not congestion. That's the symptom. The problem is a capacity deficit. We're way behind the curve as is, and it will not get better in the foreseeable future, SH130 or no SH130.

High-capacity transit could leverage existing rail and other rights of way to provide the equivalent of 12 highway lanes of capacity from the north into downtown, and the equivalent of 10 highway lanes of capacity from the south into downtown. There is actually a system planning effort going on as I type this to advance this: Project Connect

[OpenD]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

I lived in the east end of that neighborhood for 8 years and we've used the house, off and on, when it wasn't rented, for our house in town, and my son lived there for some years very recently. So I guess that means we don't have a valid opinion on the matter?

Lordy, I didn't say that at all.

What I did say is that my friend who has lived in that area for over 10 years, a friend who loves green spaces and parks and all, wishes they would put through the extension to Barton Skyway to help relieve the problems getting in and out of the neighborhood, which she says have gotten worse recently.

[robino2001]

Originally Posted by jb9152

When SH130 is connected up to I-10 near Seguin, you may see some significant diversion from I-35 to SH130.

I would agree if the connection were closer to San Antonio, but as it is now, it's ~30 miles east of the city... it really doesn't help much of anyone IMO. Now if they were able to make it hit 10 near 1604/UC/Schertz/Randolph/etc... that could have been a different story.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by robino2001

I would agree if the connection were closer to San Antonio, but as it is now, it's ~30 miles east of the city... it really doesn't help much of anyone IMO. Now if they were able to make it hit 10 near 1604/UC/Schertz/Randolph/etc... that could have been a different story.

That doesn't really matter, if you're talking truck diversion. It's an urban bypass highway, and the diversion of trucks from the I-10 to I-35 route to an I-10 to SH130 route doesn't really depend on how close it is to San Antonio. As long as the trucks coming west out of Houston (and vice versa) go via SH130 rather than I-35, where I-10 and SH130 meet isn't important.

[robino2001]

Originally Posted by jb9152

That doesn't really matter, if you're talking truck diversion. It's an urban bypass highway, and the diversion of trucks from the I-10 to I-35 route to an I-10 to SH130 route doesn't really depend on how close it is to San Antonio. As long as the trucks coming northwest out of Houston go via SH130 rather than I-35, where I-10 and SH130 meeting isn't important.

Apparently I'm a moron then... what trucks are coming out of NW Houston, down 10 and then up 35? Why wouldn't any truck from that area take 45, 290, 36, 71, or 183 to catch 35? The only people/trucks I see taking 130 are MAYBE the distribution centers on the east side of SA (410 out to and past 1604) and then those who live in Seguin, Nixon, Stockdale, Luling, etc down towards the coast... to bypass Austin because 130 is easy to catch. I travel to the Converse/UC/Schertz area double-digit times per year... the only time I will take 130 all the way is when I know 35 is shut down/heavily congested... and I live less than a mile from 130.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by robino2001

Apparently I'm a moron then... what trucks are coming out of NW Houston, down 10 and then up 35? Why wouldn't any truck from that area take 45, 290, 36, 71, or 183 to catch 35? The only people/trucks I see taking 130 are MAYBE the distribution centers on the east side of SA (410 out to and past 1604) and then those who live in Seguin, Nixon, Stockdale, Luling, etc down towards the coast... to bypass Austin because 130 is easy to catch. I travel to the Converse/UC/Schertz area double-digit times per year... the only time I will take 130 all the way is when I know 35 is shut down/heavily congested... and I live less than a mile from 130.

Ummm...probably because SH130 isn't finished all the way down to I-10 yet; they don't connect. And note - I didn't say they're coming from NW Houston. The trucks are coming in a westerly direction OUT of Houston. I misspoke.

Oh, and you're not a moron! :-)

[mayfair44]

The distance of traveling on SH-130/45 vs I-35 straight through is only around 13 miles. Currently, what is the speed limit(s) out there- 70-75mph? That's not a very far bypass in terms of time and distance. True, it hasn't caught on, but yeah, I didn't know the difference until mapping it out on my own just now.

"...in an effort to lure drivers away from IH-35 the Texas Department of Transportation has decided to allow the Highway to post limits of 85mph."

Texas Raises the Limits - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Ok, if I'm traveling completely through Austin, with a toll tag, and I can roll 80+mph legally on the 130/45 bypass for 13 more miles vs the I-35 corridor death-crawl (peak periods), I'm taking the bypass.

Bring on the 130 Autobahn!

TXDOT needs to step their game up on a new media campaign..."Don't mess with Downtown Austin; take the SH-130!" 18-wheelers need some access/incentives too!

Yes, the traffic and population crush isn't going to subside anytime soon locally. Not all traffic will deviate, however, any additional relief of interstate traffic simply passing through would greatly help.