Austin raises concerns over I-35 expansion (Mart, Cesar Chavez: 2013, theater, construction)

[Need4Camaro]

https://www.kvue.com/article/money/e...1-cff8e7de1ceb

Admittedly I am kind of surprised it didn’t happen sooner than now.

I personally hope they expand it. If they don’t and we return to normal traffic volumes then I-35 particularly would be among the worst bottlenecks in the country. That plus while I completely advocate Project Connect, I heavily disagree with the cities projection of 50% transit ridership / alternative means of commuting. I don’t think that is realized in even the most transit enabled cities in America in general (with the exception of NYC which is approximately 67% ... but there’s a sharp drop after that, Chicago, DC, Boston, and SF are in the 30% range and all of them are much more dense and walkable than Austin.)

[ScoPro]

The CoA is demonstrably run by idiots, and anyone who thinks 50% of the population is going to ride on local mass transit is smoking more weed than Willie & Snoop Dogg combined.
And playing the “I-35 separates people of color from downtown” race card is soooo last century... because those who use it are the ones whose policies have driven that minority demographic out of East Austin over the past 30 years.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by ScoPro

The CoA is demonstrably run by idiots, and anyone who thinks 50% of the population is going to ride on local mass transit is smoking more weed than Willie & Snoop Dogg combined.
And playing the “I-35 separates people of color from downtown” race card is soooo last century... because those who use it are the ones whose policies have driven that minority demographic out of East Austin over the past 30 years.

Given I-35 technically belongs to the state of Texas and not the CoA (if I’m not mistaken) ... is the City Council alone able to stop them from going forward with it or do they need votes from locals?

[cheeva]

The CoA needs to recuse themselves from anything to do with I-35. It's not their decision to make.


I witnessed (during in-person meetings with city officials) the council using I-35 (and TxDOT) to dump the homeless, and say "the CoA is not responsible for maintenance, because the camps are in TxDOT's jurisdiction" in an effort to clean their hands of the problem.

NOW they want to take ownership of the I-35 corridor????

hypocrites.

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Given I-35 technically belongs to the state of Texas and not the CoA (if I’m not mistaken) ... is the City Council alone able to stop them from going forward with it or do they need votes from locals?

The Interstate belongs to the federal government. From the beginning the federal government tasked the states with the routine maintenance of the Interstate, including keeping the right of ways clean. In turn, the states have delegated the cleaning within the city limits to that local government.
Those crews we have seen for two generations picking up litter & garbage along the interstates and mowing the grass are not federal employees.

At least that is what I have understood since the Interstates were first built in the late 1950s.

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Given I-35 technically belongs to the state of Texas and not the CoA (if I’m not mistaken) ... is the City Council alone able to stop them from going forward with it or do they need votes from locals?

Locals have lots of pull in providing insight on plans. City Council could lobby for or against any plan. That's literally what the article you linked is about, the letter the city sent to TXDOT. Per the KVUe article here are some of the bigger concerns they addressed.

• Ensure East and Central Austin are better-connected “to correct for its historic role in dividing communities of color” as I-35 has long been a barrier between the two areas
• Consider the impact on homeless individuals along the underpasses during and after construction
• Better access to popular destinations, including Dean Keeton Street, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Sixth Street, and Cesar Chavez Street
• Launch a coordination effort with other jurisdictions in anticipation of future infrastructure projects, including Capital Metro’s Project Connect

Obviously, the first point is already been identified, within the forum, as a sore point. I'll let that debate rage on without providing statistics or a discussion of systemic racism and the continued impact it has on the eastside.

Homelessness will continue to be an issue. The city placed the ARCH right by the police station, for a good reason, easy response and access. But, that then causes the people who use those services but aren't able to get into the actual doors (and those preying on those looking for help) to be in the area. As someone in the social services field, I don't know how to answer this problem. And while I rarely agree with cheeva, the point made about the city shifting blame is completely accurate and it's dumb.

Better access to popular destinations, all the mentioned exits, aside from maybe MLK are HORRIBLE. Trying to get there from the highway is dangerous. The Sixth street exit comes up as a exit only and has a short lane. If you happen to be on the far left lane and need to get over, oh boy. The Dean Keaton exit, especially the north bound side, is even shorter and you can miss it very easily.

And a coordinated effort to help with Project Connect should be done. It passed. We all need to be on the same page, local, state and federal.

[cheeva]

If the CoA wanted to have control over the highway that runs through the city, they should have swapped I-35 with SH130 years ago, when people asked for it, and when they still had the chance to do it.

https://www.texastribune.org/2013/11...-highway-swap/

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/b...gain-some.html

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2...rail-transport

[Trainwreck20]

TxDOT seeks out input from local municipalities in most cases. It is a collaborative process. The city is not trying to control I-35. The city certainly has no ability to decide to 'swap' I-35 and 130. This is kind of a non-story, imho.

[Need4Camaro]

From the plans I’ve seen it looked like they were going to make connectivity between East and Central Austin a bit better than its current configuration (although by design and non intentional..Texas freeways with their access roads are generally not very pedestrian friendly) and more walkable (especially if the city goes through with capping it). Surely it couldn’t be much worse than it is now in that regard. There’s practically no connectivity currently without a car between the two precincts... which I agree historically is a racial barrier and has known to have been for some time (which is awful), but I don’t feel that is what TXDoT seems to intend. In either case it doesn’t matter in the end. I hope for the overall best regarding this plan.

[Westerner92]

Lol, 50% alternative transit is a pipe dream. The city has been trying and failing for decades to rezone for the density required to support such transit usage. My guess is that this is theater to either get federal funds for capping the freeway with parks or to get more US DOT funds for transit projects, but it would take quasi-cabinet level positions to get federal funds reallocated from the Interstate Highway System to the Federal Transit Authority.

Originally Posted by ScoPro

The Interstate belongs to the federal government. From the beginning the federal government tasked the states with the routine maintenance of the Interstate, including keeping the right of ways clean. In turn, the states have delegated the cleaning within the city limits to that local government.
Those crews we have seen for two generations picking up litter & garbage along the interstates and mowing the grass are not federal employees.

At least that is what I have understood since the Interstates were first built in the late 1950s.

The states own the interstates, but they come with federal funding (in large part financed by a trust fund from the federal fuel tax) provided they meet certain design criteria. The US highway system also has its own funding mechanisms and design criteria. States usually have to partly fund every project on these highways, and local governments can too if they have the funds and are willing to cooperate with the state DOT. Apart from special agreements on surface streets, the state DOT does not delegate maintenance or cleanup to municipalities. The people on highway litter cleanup are either employees for a state-contracted company or exceptions to the 13th Amendment.