Austin Transportation & Roadways

[Godzillatron 292]

In order to have increase coordination and correlation with regional partners. Although, I'm not sure what crossover there is with CTRMA but I don't doubt it.  I've only been following Austin transit for about 16 years but I have to say that this is in the best position that is has ever been in. The region is getting lot of development money and there is a lot of good work being done. I think people are going to be really happy with the corridor project once construction starts and I would be happy to share the plans near whatever part of town you are in.  Cap Metro is doing a good job building a consensus to make sure we get a transit bond passed in 2020 and it isn't married to expensive light rail. 

CAMPO is the federally-mandated regional planning agency for the region. Effectively, they manage regional planning and administer federal funds. Their board is comprised of representatives from each of the 6 counties in their boundaries, each city over 50k population in the area, a small cities rep, TxDOT and Cap Metro.

CTRMA is a state-chartered agency formed by Travis and Hays County. Their board is comprised of representatives appointed by each county and a chair appointed by the Governor.

CapMetro is a state-chartered agency with
representatives on the board appointed by city of Austin, Travis County and I believe CAMPO. Almost all of their service area is in those two jurisdictions.

I think this reinforces the overlap, but in my opinion there are reasonable policy reasons for the overlap.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pasken 1309]

35 Closure this weekend to demolish the other half of the old St. Johns bridge.

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by Pasken

[Orange&White 5516]

Leander to set a ballot item to withdraw from CapMetro. Mayor says no weekend service is the main reason.

According to the article, they saw an average of 472 weekday morning riders. Double that to 944 to cover the round trip back home and multiply it by 260 workdays a year, and that is 245,440 riders per year. Divide the $5,133,277 per year that Leander pays to participate by that total ridership number and every single one of those rides is being subsidized by Leander citizens by $20.91. So if you are a Leanderite and commute to and from Austin M-F all year, you are receiving an annual subsidy of $10,873 from your fellow Leanderites.

 

https://communityimpact.com/austin/leander-cedar-park/editors-pick/2019/07/15/leander-city-council-to-consider-withdrawing-from-capital-metro/

[Pasken 1309]

2 hours ago, Orange&White said:

Leander to set a ballot item to withdraw from CapMetro. Mayor says no weekend service is the main reason.

According to the article, they saw an average of 472 weekday morning riders. Double that to 944 to cover the round trip back home and multiply it by 260 workdays a year, and that is 245,440 riders per year. Divide the $5,133,277 per year that Leander pays to participate by that total ridership number and every single one of those rides is being subsidized by Leander citizens by $20.91. So if you are a Leanderite and commute to and from Austin M-F all year, you are receiving an annual subsidy of $10,873 from your fellow Leanderites.

 

https://communityimpact.com/austin/leander-cedar-park/editors-pick/2019/07/15/leander-city-council-to-consider-withdrawing-from-capital-metro/

It could improve service to the red line by knocking off 10 miles from the route but you're putting all those people back in cars and putting them on the highway.

[Orange&White 5516]

Just now, Pasken said:

It could improve service to the red line by knocking off 10 miles from the route but you're putting all those people back in cars and putting them on the highway.

Are 472 more cars on the road from 6 am until 9 am really that big of a concern?

[Pasken 1309]

3 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

Are 472 more cars on the road from 6 am until 9 am really that big of a concern?

472 and growing.

[Orange&White 5516]

9 minutes ago, Pasken said:

472 and growing.

Not really. The ridership figures on that entire red line have been very consistent since it started and there is almost no means to grow it without adding more track. If the number at the Leander station were to grow higher, it would be at the detriment of ridership numbers at closer stations because there are only so many spaces available on the train.

Edited July 16, 2019 by Orange&White

[Pasken 1309]

57 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

Not really. The ridership figures on that entire red line have been very consistent since it started and there is almost no means to grow it without adding more track. If the number at the Leander station were to grow higher, it would be at the detriment of ridership numbers at closer stations because there are only so many spaces available on the train.

I don't think that's true about red line stagnation. The Red Line has become standing room only in the last 2 years. There are also other ways to grow it without more track.  The under construction downtown station will allow frequency to go to every 15 minutes during the morning and afternoon commutes once it opens in 2021. They can also elongate the station platforms and combine 2 trains together into 4 cars to increase capacity.  Hopefully the line could accommodate more riders from Leander if that station use grows. However, elongating the station after increasing frequency would require purchasing more trains.

Edited July 16, 2019 by Pasken

[Orange&White 5516]

3 minutes ago, Pasken said:

I don't think that's true about red line stagnation. The Red Line has become standing room only in the last 2 years. There are also other ways to grow it without more track.  The under construction downtown station will allow frequency to go to every 15 minutes during the morning and afternoon commutes once it opens in 2021. They can also elongate the station platforms and combine 2 trains together into 4 cars to increase capacity.  Hopefully the line could accommodate more riders from Leander if that station use grows. However, elongating the station after increasing frequency would require purchasing more trains.

So lets say they exceed all expectations and DOUBLE the ridership. That is less than 1000 cars off of 183 during a rush hour that moves over 40k vehicles. Is 1000 cars off the road worth giving riders a $20 subsidy to ride it? If it is worth $20 dollars for those people to ride it, they can certainly pay for it rather than making the other 60k Leander citizens pay for it. Is it worth the half a billion dollars that was spent on it? 

[Godzillatron 292]

Not really. The ridership figures on that entire red line have been very consistent since it started and there is almost no means to grow it without adding more track. If the number at the Leander station were to grow higher, it would be at the detriment of ridership numbers at closer stations because there are only so many spaces available on the train.

Cap Metro right now is limited by the physical constraints of the Red Line, they have limited locations where trains can pass one another. Current ongoing projects are working on eliminating these bottlenecks. When complete they will be able to increase frequencies, assuming they have equipment to do so. Will that increase ridership from Leander? Don’t know... but Cap Metro thinks so given the $$$ they are investing.

The service hours are more problematic. They can’t run passenger vehicles and freight at the same time, and they have existing freight contracts for the evening hours. They make pretty good money on those too, I’m told.

FYI 472 cars is about 30% of a lane. A freeway lane carries 1800-2000 vehicles per hour.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Orange&White 5516]

9 minutes ago, Godzillatron said:

 

Cap Metro right now is limited by the physical constraints of the Red Line, they have limited locations where trains can pass one another. Current ongoing projects are working on eliminating these bottlenecks. When complete they will be able to increase frequencies, assuming they have equipment to do so. Will that increase ridership from Leander? Don’t know... but Cap Metro thinks so given the $$$ they are investing.

The service hours are more problematic. They can’t run passenger vehicles and freight at the same time, and they have existing freight contracts for the evening hours. They make pretty good money on those too, I’m told.

FYI 472 cars is about 30% of a lane. A freeway lane carries 1800-2000 vehicles per hour.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Do you honestly think that 472 cars during rush hour on 183 is 30% of the traffic? Breaking that down over three hours of rush hour,  that is 157 cars per hour. If that is 30%, your math makes it that there are only 267 vehicles per hour on 183? 

 

I just found a TxDot report an hour ago showing that on 183 at Burnet, there are 44k vehicles during morning rush.

Edited July 16, 2019 by Orange&White

[Pasken 1309]

3 hours ago, Orange&White said:

So lets say they exceed all expectations and DOUBLE the ridership. That is less than 1000 cars off of 183 during a rush hour that moves over 40k vehicles. Is 1000 cars off the road worth giving riders a $20 subsidy to ride it? If it is worth $20 dollars for those people to ride it, they can certainly pay for it rather than making the other 60k Leander citizens pay for it. Is it worth the half a billion dollars that was spent on it? 

I don't think you should judge the worthiness of the line based on it's terminus. I also don't see a problem with the tax making it possible for people who might not be able to afford the expense of driving their car every day the ability to use public transit. 

[Pasken 1309]

Newly completed double tracking in East Austin between Plaza Saltillo and the MLK station. The Green line track is on the right.

 

 

In the last couple months, they've also done double tracking at Howard, 183/Burnet, and Lakeline.

[Deej 76480]

I may be wrong, but looks like they've been working on that between Morrow and the Lamar Station, as well. Lots of work going on just south of Morrow. 

[bolverk 29356]

11 hours ago, Orange&White said:

Leander to set a ballot item to withdraw from CapMetro. Mayor says no weekend service is the main reason.

According to the article, they saw an average of 472 weekday morning riders. Double that to 944 to cover the round trip back home and multiply it by 260 workdays a year, and that is 245,440 riders per year. Divide the $5,133,277 per year that Leander pays to participate by that total ridership number and every single one of those rides is being subsidized by Leander citizens by $20.91. So if you are a Leanderite and commute to and from Austin M-F all year, you are receiving an annual subsidy of $10,873 from your fellow Leanderites.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/leander-cedar-park/editors-pick/2019/07/15/leander-city-council-to-consider-withdrawing-from-capital-metro/

Isn't the proper nomenclature Leanderthal?

[Godzillatron 292]

Do you honestly think that 472 cars during rush hour on 183 is 30% of the traffic? Breaking that down over three hours of rush hour,  that is 157 cars per hour. If that is 30%, your math makes it that there are only 267 vehicles per hour on 183? 
 
I just found a TxDot report an hour ago showing that on 183 at Burnet, there are 44k vehicles during morning rush.

Reading comprehension - I said a single lane can carry about 1800-2000 vehicles per hour, and that 472 cars was about 30% of that. Multiply that by the number of lanes and by the length of rush hour and see what you get. At Burnet you’ve got a pretty large number of lanes and a fairly even N-S distribution.

Of course you could criticize my analogy for assuming all 472 of our Leander riders would be on the road at the same time. If they are actually spread over the 3.5 hours of rush hour you aren’t even going to notice the additional traffic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The People’s Elbow 707]

The mention of a downtown station got me intrigued until I looked it up: it’s a glorified bus stop. It’s a concrete platform with some awnings. What am I missing here? 

[Guest Lobo]

5 hours ago, The People’s Elbow said:

The mention of a downtown station got me intrigued until I looked it up: it’s a glorified bus stop. It’s a concrete platform with some awnings. What am I missing here? 

The cost.  

[Pasken 1309]

6 hours ago, The People’s Elbow said:

The mention of a downtown station got me intrigued until I looked it up: it’s a glorified bus stop. It’s a concrete platform with some awnings. What am I missing here? 

It has 3 tracks/boarding platforms which allow multiple trains to be between the MLK station and downtown which allows the frequency to increase. Right now, a train can't leave the MLK station until the one in front of it returns from the downtown station. 

 

In terms of future proofing, two of the platforms are also extended to support a double train but money is still needed to extend the other station platforms and the agency would have to purchase more trains. 

Edited July 17, 2019 by Pasken

[Guest Lobo]

Amazing that fact didn't come up at the half-billion dollar meeting about all of this a decade ago.  

[Pasken 1309]

5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Amazing that fact didn't come up at the half-billion dollar meeting about all of this a decade ago.  

What come up? And how did you get the half a billion figure? I thought the construction cost at the end of the day was 105 mil.

[Texas Jeff 1932]

Crazy idea:  Move those 472 jobs to Leander, where the people who have the jobs live.  What is the point of having everyone get up every day, move halfway across the county, sit for eight hours, and then move back to where they started?

[CooterBrown 17869]

Crazy idea:  Move those 472 jobs to Leander, where the people who have the jobs live.  What is the point of having everyone get up every day, move halfway across the county, sit for eight hours, and then move back to where they started?

How about moving to where the jobs are? It wasn’t the business’s bad decision to be in Leander.

[Orange&White 5516]

42 minutes ago, Pasken said:

What come up? And how did you get the half a billion figure? I thought the construction cost at the end of the day was 105 mil.

That was an egregious lie, which in the world of commuter transit is pretty much the norm.

[Texas Jeff 1932]

3 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

How about moving to where the jobs are? It wasn’t the business’s bad decision to be in Leander.

Either way works for me...  If it costs more to have people living close to the job site and the business is willing to pick up that cost by paying employees more, that's great.  If the business wants to save money by moving to where the people are, that's great.  But right now we are subsidizing the cost of having low cost housing in one area and higher paying jobs in another area.

[SquishMitten 10394]

I’ll go out on a limb and say many of those 472 riders don’t have a vehicle. So if you take away their means of transportation you probably do “move a lot of those jobs back to Leander” since those folks will have to find employment locally. But this is getting into a cost of living vs wages argument, so I won’t go any more...off the rails.

It always seemed to me that we have to accept these projects/improvements to operate at a loss for an extended period of time. The more we build the lines out, the more useful they become to the general populace, and ridership should increase exponentially. Right now, they aren’t a viable option for most people because the lines don’t go enough places. Once you have legitimate options to change trains to go all over town, they become far more attractive. It’s why the bonds always piss me off. They always fail because they only get votes from the people who will benefit from them immediately, but we have to start somewhere. We have to stop being so selfish and demanding the first lines for our own areas. They will come, but we have to accept it’s a long term growth plan that might be years before each of us can benefit.

[Texas Jeff 1932]

17 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

I’ll go out on a limb and say many of those 472 riders don’t have a vehicle. So if you take away their means of transportation you probably do “move a lot of those jobs back to Leander” since those folks will have to find employment locally. But this is getting into a cost of living vs wages argument, so I won’t go any more...off the rails.
 

I would be willing to listen to actual data on who these riders are, what options they have for transit, where they work, etc.  There is a park and ride near the Leander station.  During the day, is it full of cars or empty?  Could these folks live closer to work or did they move to Leander to trade a longer commute for "better" schools?  I suspect many of them drive to the park and ride and get on the train to go downtown, rather than drive downtown, but I could be wrong.

There is lots of empty land around that station.  We have some employers (for example, the state of Texas) that can build offices anywhere.  Could they build on land near the station rather than asking folks to get on a train for a long trip downtown?  Could we have a train system where most people take it for just a few stops rather than coast to coast from Leander to downtown, maybe by building some new, high density office and residential developments in Robinson Ranch?

You are correct that we should accept that these projects will initially operate at a loss (and probably will always operate at some loss).  I voted for the Red Line because I thought it was a reasonably low cost way of trying rail transit in Austin.  After a number of years, I don't see a plan to ever significantly reduce the cost.

[Orange&White 5516]

3 hours ago, SquishMitten said:

I’ll go out on a limb and say many of those 472 riders don’t have a vehicle. So if you take away their means of transportation you probably do “move a lot of those jobs back to Leander” since those folks will have to find employment locally. But this is getting into a cost of living vs wages argument, so I won’t go any more...off the rails.

It always seemed to me that we have to accept these projects/improvements to operate at a loss for an extended period of time. The more we build the lines out, the more useful they become to the general populace, and ridership should increase exponentially. Right now, they aren’t a viable option for most people because the lines don’t go enough places. Once you have legitimate options to change trains to go all over town, they become far more attractive. It’s why the bonds always piss me off. They always fail because they only get votes from the people who will benefit from them immediately, but we have to start somewhere. We have to stop being so selfish and demanding the first lines for our own areas. They will come, but we have to accept it’s a long term growth plan that might be years before each of us can benefit.

They operate at a loss FOREVER. Even in NYC, the ridership is subsidized.

The obvious difference between the two is that in NYC, there are millions of riders and each ride is subsidized by a a few cents. In this example, because it was a shit plan that was thrown together not out of need, but by convenience, it will never operate efficiently and therefore, very few riders are subsidized massively for every ride.

[Pasken 1309]

CTRMA is going to vote to raise the max speed limit on the moped express lanes to 70mph and institute a minimum speed of 55 mph. Express lane speed limit is currently set at 65 MPH (same as the General Purpose Lanes). Speed study conducted in December 2018 results support a minimum speed of 55 MPH and maximum speed of 70 MPH.  Minimum speeds help Express Lane operate as intended by ensuring individual motorists do not unreasonably impede flow of traffic.

 

The first section of 183 south is set to open August 1st from 290 to Techni Center. This is the first toll project in Austin that I think isn't a screw job to the community given how much in free community benefits are coming from toll money. All toll projects should be required to have this level of benefits to the area.  

 

 

Lastly, Mopac South project is unfrozen. It would make a shit ton of improvements to the entrances/exits, widen the bridge over the river and add 2-4 toll lanes in the middle of the highway.  This would be a much more meaningful project than the mopac north project because it would make a lot of mobility improvements that mopac north couldn't because of a lack of ROW space.

Edited July 22, 2019 by Pasken

[Pasken 1309]

BALLSUCKING SAVE OUR SPRINGS SUES TO STOP OAK HILL Construction. 

Quote

Austin environmental group the Save Our Springs Alliance sued the Texas Department of Transportation Monday aiming to halt work on an Oak Hill highway expansion they say could threaten local salamanders.

The federal lawsuit, against both TxDOT and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, accuses the entities of abandoning due diligence in their environmental mitigation planning. It questions TxDOT claims that the project will actually decrease sediment runoff. It says it fears runoff will increase and harm the Austin Blind Salamander or Barton Springs Salamander, which are both federally protected endangered species.

The alliance is asking a judge to halt the Oak Hill project until TxDOT’s compliance with the Endangered Species Act can be proven in more detail.

BACKGROUND: Major interchange project ahead for the “Y” in Oak Hill

The $550 million Oak Hill “Y” project has been long planned to build an interchange at the oft-congested intersection of U.S. 290 and Texas 71. After years of being stalled, the project has moved quickly forward this year with a financial push from the city of Austin to help TxDOT begin acquiring right-of-way and picking a contractor.

TxDOT ranks the intersection the 53rd most congested in Texas. Plans call to turn U.S. 290 there into an elevated road similar to Texas 71 along Ben White Boulevard in south-central Austin. After breaking from Texas 71, U.S. 290 would go west along a sunken trench. Two flyover bridges would connect U.S. 290 to Texas 71 where the highways merge, and frontage roads will flank both highways. In spots there would be up to 12 lanes of roadway.

Austin City Council member Paige Ellis, whose district includes the roadway, did not immediately return phone calls to comment on the lawsuit. Ellis voted with the majority of her council colleagues earlier this year to kick in $3.3 million to help the highway project get started faster.

The alliance argued ground excavation, as well as runoff from more lanes of concrete, is sure to harm the area’s sensitive Edwards Aquifer recharge zone and and send more sediment downstream to the salamanders.

“In terms of environmental sensitivity, there couldn’t be a worse location for this amount of excavation,” alliance attorney Kelly Davis said in a news release Tuesday. “The Recharge Zone is highly vulnerable to pollutants, such as silts and fuels, which can impact the underground water quality upon which the endangered salamanders depend.”

TxDOT spokeswoman Veronica Beyer said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.

The Save Our Springs Alliance has been vocally opposed to the highway expansion in general, arguing that instead of a highway expansion, the region should build a secondary meandering boulevard offset by parks.

 

 

Also, The Lacross bridge at South Mopac is delayed due to finding recharge shit. Not a huge deal since the Slaughter bridge is done.

Quote

Construction along a stretch of MoPac Boulevard is facing delays after crews discovered dozens of fissures and holes in the ground along the freeway that help recharge the Edwards Aquifer and Barton Springs.

The discovery of 72 so-called karst features has forced the Texas Department of Transportation to redesign the La Crosse Avenue bridge over MoPac (Loop 1) and push its opening to late this year at the earliest. TxDOT has not given a firm timeline on how much of a delay the finding will have on its overall plans to upgrade the highway’s intersections with Slaughter Lane and La Crosse Avenue.

TxDOT is building underpasses at the two intersections. Already in place at Slaughter Lane is the novel “diverging diamond intersection,” which forces eastbound and westbound motorists to, in effect, switch sides just before getting to MoPac.

La Crosse Avenue will have a conventional intersection.

The $53.5 million project was slated for completion in early 2021, according to TxDOT.

“Construction has experienced a delay, due to the discoveries, but we continue to work diligently to get the project completed as quickly as possible,” TxDOT spokeswoman Alex Navarro said in an email.

Karst refers to the limestone that prevails in the ground in the Austin area, especially in Southwest Austin. Karst features are fissures, holes or caves in the rock that can serve as intakes for rainwater, which eventually makes its way to the Edwards Aquifer and Barton Creek.

TxDOT will have to spend roughly $600,000 to mitigate the holes. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has oversight of proposed mitigation plans, which could include filling the holes in with a gravel mixture.

The impact of filling in any of the karsts to continue construction was not immediately clear. However, any mitigation efforts must first be approved by TCEQ. The Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Conservation District is also involved in discussions.

The holes need to be filled to ensure the structural integrity of the highway.

Many of the features lie in the direct path of MoPac’s freeway extension. The agency will not reroute the highway project but has to halt when a new fissure is found.

“Each time a unique feature is discovered, they pause construction in that area and barrier it off with hay bales and caution tape,” said Vanessa Escobar, senior regulatory compliance coordinator with the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Conservation District. “They just kind of isolate the area, and everyone can kind of discuss it together” with TCEQ.

Similar limestone fissures forced the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority to reroute part of the Texas 45 Southwest tollway flyover to MoPac, which opened last month.

Escobar and the district had an oversight role on that project as part of a legal settlement. Their participation in the MoPac project is less formal, but staffers at the district have been involved in mitigation discussions.

“It is very common to see these kind of features at any point in the Edwards recharge zone,” Escobar said. “The overall big picture is, (the karsts) take in the water, rainwater, and that ultimately makes it to the aquifer and Barton Springs. You have municipalities and rural folks that depend on groundwater.”

Environmental concerns have been at the fore of the MoPac intersection project since at least 2016, when the Save Our Springs Alliance sued TxDOT to force the agency to submit to a federal examination of the project’s effects on endangered species, such as the Barton Springs salamander and the golden-cheeked warbler.

 

 

 

[Armybrat 40678]

If SOS is successful in delaying the Oak Hill project several more years, the cost will almost double when it is finally built. Not to mention generate tons more air pollution from vehicles sitting at those lights. That project should’ve been completed 30 years ago.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Armybrat

[Chet Steadman 940]

I miss when SOS was nearly dead due to the counter lawsuits a decade ago.  

Edited July 30, 2019 by Chet Steadman

[clapclapclap 9000]

Counter sue 'em again!  KOSOS

[Pasken 1309]

Phase 1 of 183 South is opening today (NB) and tomorrow (SB & Loyola Overpass).

Edited July 31, 2019 by Pasken

[Paper_jam 828]

Plans to build a diverging diamond interchange at I-35 & Parrmer Ln. Construction expected to take two years. Gonna suck for me, I have to use this intersection every day.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/divergent-diamond-traffic-project-coming-to-hectic-north-austin-intersection/

 

[swraith 336]

The Oak Hill project could be as wide as 12 lanes wide? Holy shit that is huge.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

7 hours ago, swraith said:

The Oak Hill project could be as wide as 12 lanes wide? Holy shit that is huge.

Is it? That’s highway AND frontage roads in both directions.

[Armybrat 40678]

5 hours ago, The People’s Elbow said:

Is it? That’s highway AND frontage roads in both directions.

Which is already inadequate.

[Pasken 1309]

On 7/30/2019 at 1:12 PM, Armybrat said:

If SOS is successful in delaying the Oak Hill project several more years, the cost will almost double when it is finally built. Not to mention generate tons more air pollution from vehicles sitting at those lights. That project should’ve been completed 30 years ago.

Also the people who might be killed on 290 between the Y and 1826 which will be rebuilt and given separation and overpasses as a part of the construction. 

[drewlaws 126]

Does the Mopac south project include flyovers to/from 360 or will that intersection remain traffic lights?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Longhorn Al 440]

Should be starting soon.  TXDOT uploaded this video August 7.

 

[Longhorn Al 440]

Slaughter Lane @ Mopac closed all weekend, 8/16 - 8/19.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/southwest-austin/top-stories/2019/08/15/slaughter-lane-to-close-through-the-weekend-at-mopac-intersection/

[Longhorn Al 440]

 

 

[Texas_Rocks 346]

http://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/area-under-ben-white-blvd-will-be-transformed-into-transit-center/1185252793
 
Area under Ben White between Manchaca and Pack Saddle Pass to be a transit hub with 200 park and ride spaces.

More like 200 “smash and grab” park and ride spaces. Easy pickings.

[HOOKEM4 5012]

14 hours ago, Longhorn Al said:

 

 

In 4 more years when this is done they will need 4 additional lanes.

[Guest Lobo]

Flyovers at Walsh tarlton & 360?   Somebody with engineering prowess wanna explain where that’s gonna fit there?

[Pasken 1309]

4 hours ago, Lobo said:

Flyovers at Walsh tarlton & 360?   Somebody with engineering prowess wanna explain where that’s gonna fit there?

It's all here: http://loop360project.com/walshtarltonvirtualworkshop/

 

Cap Metro is opening up the new contra lane to get buses from Lavaca to the drag. It'll cut a lot of time from routes now that buses can avoid the Lavaca light.

 

[Guest Lobo]

decades long battle to protect the environment in that barton creek area?  It ruined the ecosystem but at least it moved tens of thousands of cars.  Same city council do-gooders are now going to obliterate the same area all in the name of a left-hand turn lane that apparently needs to be 100 feet above the surface?  Oh yeah, can't wait to see what District 8 thinks about this.  

[Pasken 1309]

37 minutes ago, Lobo said:

decades long battle to protect the environment in that barton creek area?  It ruined the ecosystem but at least it moved tens of thousands of cars.  Same city council do-gooders are now going to obliterate the same area all in the name of a left-hand turn lane that apparently needs to be 100 feet above the surface?  Oh yeah, can't wait to see what District 8 thinks about this.  

This is Txdot. Not city council.

[Biff Tannen 45473]

3 hours ago, Pasken said:

It's all here: http://loop360project.com/walshtarltonvirtualworkshop/

 

Cap Metro is opening up the new contra lane to get buses from Lavaca to the drag. It'll cut a lot of time from routes now that buses can avoid the Lavaca light.

 

So if I have the code can I use the lane?  It’s burned in my brain FOREVER