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

[Danbo1957]

Good idea. A major part of my daily life and routine has been due major adjustments to traffic.

I live and work in the core of Austin. I only drive on Mopac after 7pm. I haven't driven on IH35 between Ben White and 183 more than five times this calendar year. It's interesing, all my daily driving is east to west (1st to the airport, 5th to downtown, 15th/Enfield to Brackenridge, 24th to campus, 35th to Seton, and Northland/Koenig to go to Dallas or Houston). I use Pecos and Balcones or Shoal Creek from 35th to go north-- all like I did before Mopac was built! And I never go through, visit, or do any businees in South Austin anymore; just a occasional restaurant visit on S. Lamar or South 1st; and I rarely use 360 or 71 except to go to the lake via Bee Caves Rd. Hmph...

It's like I've reversed my daily Austin footprint back to 1975!

[Trae713]

If someone is going to bring out false statements and pretend that Austin is the only city growing in its core and is somehow different from the other metro areas sprawl wise...I'll correct them.

[BevoLJ]

Originally Posted by Trae713

LOL, yet Houston and Dallas are both denser than Austin, especially in their cores and both of them have a ton more apartments going up in the core areas. Let's not get carried away. Austin is sprawling with or without expanding the freeways...

Houston and Dallas are much much larger cities than Austin. What they have, that I believe you are talking about is a better density outside the core. Dallas and Houston maintain a greater density outside the main central core better than Austin does, which for many is one of the desirable aspects of Austin. But your statement that the cores themselves are denser than Austin is not true, nor do I believe your statement that there are more apartments currently under construction in those areas that that in Austin's core.

Lets look at how many people are in the central parts of these cities. I'll use neighborhood mentioned, but it is very easy for me to add or subtract any you wish. Below is a link to a site you can find the info for the census tracts, census block groupings, and even down to each individual block in the city if you want. I have most done for the cities so can easily add areas you want me to and it wouldn't take but 5 mins, so just tell me areas and the street's that they are bordered by. [note: If you want me to add the Co. Jail in Houston, I'm not going to do that.]

In another of your post you stated, and were absolutely right, that Austin's more vibrant area is smaller than Dallas' or Houston's. Now if we included SoCo, S 1st and the rest of S Austin, or E 6th then that could be debatable. No one is going to argue that South or East Austin aren't vibrant areas, but there are plenty of vibrant areas like that outside the parts of Houston and Dallas that are mentioned below so hopefully we could all just agree your right in that respect. However, in the much smaller area (2.6 sq miles vs. 4.24 for Houston and 4.2 for Dallas) for Austin below it has just as many people as the much larger areas of the larger cities. (~37.7k for Austin and ~34.4k for Houston and ~39.3k for Dallas) Your statement that Houston and Dallas has a greater density for those areas is not true.

Houston:

CBD: [Between I-45, Buffalo Bayou, 59]
Size- 1.23 sq miles
Population- 4690
Density- 3,813

CBD + Midtown: [CBD + 59, 527 up to Gray back to 45 & CBD]
Size- 2.13 sq miles
Population- 12131
Density- 5,695

CBD + Midtown + Montrose: [CBD + Midtown to Shepherd] I thought about including Kirby, and can if you want, but Kirby and the neighborhoods off it only have a density of 4k.
Size- 4.24 sq miles
Population- 34467
Density- 8,129

Dallas:

CBD: [Woodall Rodgers, Central, 35, 30]
Size- 1.36 sq miles
Population- 6074
Density- 4,466

CBD + Uptown: [CBD + up 35E to Turtle Creek up to Blackburn]
Size- 2.31 sq miles
Population- 18,342
Density- 7,940

CBD + all Oak Lawn: [CBD + the above Uptown plus up to Hawthorn to the Creek up Katy Trail to 75]
Size- 4.2 sq miles
Population- 39330
Density- 9,364

Austin:

CBD: [I-35, Town Lake, Lamar, MLK]
Size- 1.38 sq miles
Population- 7,677
Density- 5,563

CBD + UT: [CBD extended to Dean Keeton - 29th and Lamar]
Size- 2.25 sq miles
Population- 33,233
Density- 14,770

CBD + UT + North Campus: [CBD + UT extended to 38th Street]
Size- 2.6 sq miles
Population- 37,751
Density- 14,519

Source: TIGERweb (beta)

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by MoNative34

When they get Barton Skyway connected between Lamar and MoPac, that should help. 2014 is when its slated to begin.

Oh, lord, no, I thought I read recently that that one was dead. I own a house in Barton Hills, right off Barton Skyway, and while it would be extremely convenient (and perhaps make the house even easier to rent), the LAST thing we need is a bridge over the greenbelt that close in. Talk about ignoring the environment and the jewels that make Austin what it is!


It didn't kill me to have to go around the greenbelt to get to Mopac. Didn't even take that long. Destroying our birthright for a mess of pottage just isn't worth it.

That's not being no-growth; that's recognizing that if you kill the goose that laid the golden egg there will be NO growth because no one will want to live here. Is that your ultimate goal? Because for someone who was truly no growth at all, it would be a brilliant stroke.

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by Trae713

If someone is going to bring out false statements and pretend that Austin is the only city growing in its core and is somehow different from the other metro areas sprawl wise...I'll correct them.

I just don't like a thread turning into city vs. city density when it was actually a civil discussion about Austin's highway network, so if someone tries to take it that direction...I'll correct them.

[BevoLJ]

Totally agree THL! I had no idea there was even talk of building a bridge there. It just seems like a terrible idea to me. Like a bridge to nowhere. It would just connect Lamar and Mopac. The other side of Mopac it doesn't go anywhere but to Intel Corp. It just sounds like something that would be a huge waste of money plus destroy a beautiful area, and I really can't imagine it getting much use at all. If true it looks like Sandy is selling her house just at the right time! lol.

It would be much better to just upgrade the 360 / Mopac intersection than build that bridge.

[OpenD]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Oh, lord, no, I thought I read recently that that one was dead. I own a house in Barton Hills, right off Barton Skyway, and while it would be extremely convenient (and perhaps make the house even easier to rent), the LAST thing we need is a bridge over the greenbelt that close in. Talk about ignoring the environment and the jewels that make Austin what it is!

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.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by MoNative34

When they get Barton Skyway connected between Lamar and MoPac, that should help. 2014 is when its slated to begin.

Haha, now that's a blast from the past! Here's an article about how that bridge to nowhere got nixed... in 1978:
Bridge to somewhere went nowhere: the story of Barton Skyway

Ultimately, the engineering didn't happen, nor did the bridge, and the right of way where it would have run eventually became dedicated parkland.

If you were trying to stir things up with a little humor, kudos

But otherwise you are probably thinking about the bicycle bridge over Barton Creek/360 slated for 2014:
Bicycle and pedestrian bridges to be built over Barton Creek and Loop 360

[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.

[owlman]

Well, people aren't going to take 130 if I-35 is flowing, which it is most of the time.
There needs to be a way to get vehicles off 35 right before that rush hour breakdown--that point when throughput drops significantly and the road jams up. Maybe TXdot can fudge the numbers on the 130 exit Travel Time signs before peak hours to get more vehicles to take 130

Originally Posted by buffettjr

some disconnected bike lanes in the 100 degree heat (104 today, 106 tomorrow)

Good point. Since it's over 100 degrees in the afternoon some days during the summer, nobody will ever want to use a bicycle to get anywhere in this city.