No matter what part of San Antonio you're driving in, chances are you're encountering a construction project. Though we have dozens of projects active right now, we needed to focus on the biggest jobs we have going.
If you've been bitten by the curiosity bug (or no someone who has), take a gander and share this with your friends. We're trying to keep each of these updates brief, so this should go pretty fast:
US 281
We ceremoniously broke ground on this project March 31 and have since been awaiting some paperwork that will allow Webber Construction to get rolling. That paperwork was resting with the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency, and we believe the paperwork is now on its way back to us. As soon as we get that paperwork in hand we'll be able to get working. Bottom line: we're hoping to be underway in June.
I-35 SAMMC
Some have called or emailed in regarding the southbound I-410 exit to Binz-Engleman, which has been closed since we moved traffic onto the new southbound I-35 connector to southbound I-410. Long story short we needed Lane Construction to rebuild the ramp to fit the new connector road, and that should be done here in the next few weeks (translation: mid-June).
1604-151
Work between Bandera and Culebra is long done, and now our work at the intersection of Hwy 151 and Loop 1604 is finished as well. In fact, lingering questions regarding the intersection of Alamo Ranch Parkway and Westwood Loop will not be addressed by our project; those will go to Bexar County Public Works instead. We are looking into some options for highway signs to get traffic from Hwy 151 to Culebra Road, though.
Loop 1604 Northwest
If you've not driven 1604 south of Hwy 151 lately ... well, you may be surprised by what you find. We've got Zachry Construction getting it done between Wiseman and Potranco, and Webber is at work between Potranco and US 90. Heck, they've been at it for six months already, and it's getting obvious. Webber is gearing up to set bridge support beams for what will be the southbound overpass at Potranco Road in the next few weeks, and Zachry continues to work hard to build those southbound lanes on the length of their project.
Potranco Road
The medians are intended to restrict left-turn movements, so if your top complaint is that you can no longer turn left where you wanted ... well, that means the median is doing its job. Yes, the cuts in the median were carefully thought out (read more on this here). We are very near finishing work here, and should be wrapped up and have a final product for you by the end of the month, weather permitting.
UTSA Boulevard
This is another project that's wrapping up. We're resurfacing the project between Ximenes and almost I-10 right now and hope to be out of there in June. The city's portion of the project (between Ximenes and Babcock) still has work to finish, but our end of things is nearly complete.
I-10 Leon Springs
The new eastbound exit ramp to Dominion Drive is open (as of Thursday last week) and traffic is finally in its final configuration between Ralph Fair Road and Dominion Drive. We still have a few minor things to wrap up, but we should be out of people's way. Expect to see Texas Sterling begin putting the final course of asphalt on the road later this week, if weather cooperates. That process should take no more than two weeks to wrap up.
151-410
Yep, we've got a ton of overnight closures in this area right now. Crews are working hard to get whatever bridge beams set they can and are working particularly hard on the bridge structures making up the new exit ramps along northbound and southbound I-410 around Culebra Road. The northbound ramp to Culebra that's been closed since late last year is progressing, and should be reopened in August. Overall completion for this project is still set for next year.
90-410
Williams Brothers is moving pretty darned fast on this project and are focusing on the foundational structures near the intersection of I-410 and US 90 itself. As this work ramps up (and work on US 90 between Loop 1604 and I-410 winds down over the next couple months) expect to see things hit the intensity we're now seeing at 151-410. The two projects are, after all, pretty darned identical. By the way, that mess on the southbound side between Hwy 151 and Marbach is something we're trying to get fixed. The redundant exit ramps will be a major item we address with the project.
Showing posts with label Potranco Rd. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Potranco Rd. Show all posts
Monday, May 15
Friday, April 21
An open letter regarding the Potranco Road medians
Full disclosure: The text below is pulled from an email conversation between our staff and an individual representing a conglomerate of business owners involved with a petition regarding the raised median being built on Potranco Road. It has been edited from its initial form to fit the blog format.
To those questioning the need and placement of the raised median along Potranco Road between Loop 1604 and Culebra:
Thank you, first of all, for your efforts to become engaged in the transportation planning process. We've heard your issues and do not take them lightly. It's unfortunate we couldn't discuss these issues before we reached the construction phase of this project - we could have had much more productive discussions had this outreach happened during our planning process or at our open house on this project.
How we reach out
We don’t send out mailers for our open house meetings because of the logistics involved. For starters, the cost of doing that would prove exorbitant - we couldn't limit mailers like that simply to those living or working along the corridor, and the sheer volume of mailers would be beyond our capacity (we do all that stuff in-house, after all). We know we'd miss people, and quite often we've found the owner of a property doesn't communicate these kinds of things to their tenants - which would leave us in a situation we have now with folks saying they never knew.
We try to be responsible stewards with the money we’re entrusted with, and seek the most effective and efficient means to communicate. We are required by law to post notices of public meetings in the "legal notices" section of the largest print news outlet in the area (in our case, the Express News). We also use traditional and social media channels to broadcast these meetings by sending out news releases to a very long media distribution list and tweeting about these meetings (not to brag or anything, but at more than 29,000 followers ours is the second-largest Twitter account in the department, behind only the statewide account).
We don't do Instagram or Facebook locally - this is a strategic communication decision we've made as an agency to help us control content and manage our messaging strategy. We do have a statewide Facebook account, though. It's got great stuff there. But we digress.
We also posted alerts of the open house with digital message boards strategically located along the routes. These message boards are placed ten days or more ahead of public meetings in the hope we're giving people ample opportunity to see the alert and take appropriate action. We also work with city council offices, who broadcast these meetings through their email blast lists where appropriate.
One thing we can do better about is utilizing this blog - which gets more than 20,000 reads every month - to broadcast these meetings.
The goal of the project
The ultimate reason for these medians is safety. Raised concrete medians are specifically designed to restrict left-turn movements that create what engineers call “conflict points” – a space on the roadway two opposing vehicles are competing for. These conflict points on high-trafficked collector routes like Potranco Road (and Culebra Road, for that matter – which got the same medians in 2015) often see a higher rate of catastrophic collisions. When these raised medians are installed, the collision rate drops dramatically.
For instance, the Potranco Road corridor saw a crash rate more than double the state-wide average because of these conflict points and some driver behaviors that favored risk and perceived convenience over safety and a few extra minutes. We’re seeking to improve that issue. You can see more about the pronounced safety benefits of these medians in our information page on the project located here.
But it's going to hurt our business/property value/lifestyle
There absolutely are some growing pains associated with any new roadway feature, and the growing pains with a raised median that restricts a particular movement are probably a little more pronounced. The improvement in safety is something we simply feel is worth the trade-off and is something we've thought long and hard about.
It’s much more important to us that, for example, a vehicle carrying children to a daycare facility re-route themselves to take much-safer (and, in many cases, faster and cheaper) right-turn approach and arrive or depart safely than it would be that same vehicle try rush ahead of a bloc of traffic and get into a catastrophic collision. We also don’t want people using the center left-turn lanes as acceleration lanes to merge with traffic; this behavior – particularly on developed and busy roads – tends to lead to other collision risks (such as head-on collisions or side-swipes). For more on this, see what the Texas Highwayman has to say in his primer on Texas road laws, specifically on the center turn lanes.
Here's the good news: this perception of inconvenience is short-lived and people generally get used to this new arrangement very quickly. We know this because we do this on similar roads across the state (and across the country, really) and others manage just fine.
Why does a neighboring driveway get a cut in the median and mine doesn't?
This is a terrific question. Before we delve into it, take a look at the planned layout of this new median (be sure to zoom in on the document so you get a good look). We'd post a jpg of it here, but it wouldn't give you the resolution needed to be effective.
We consider access to each location based on a master transportation and development plan. That is, when a property is platted for development it includes any access plans - including shared access easements - so a city can conduct proper urban planning to ensure order and efficiency. When this master plan isn't followed and the easement isn't utilized properly, this creates significant issues.
For example, a string of commercial properties west of Hunt Lane all have a shared access easement that would afford not only an additional driveway onto Hunt Lane itself, but a shared cut in the curb. That easement was never developed as a driveway, and some commercial tenants have used that easement space to perform alternate functions (one uses it to store a dumpster, another uses it as an outdoor recreational facility for kids).
Take a look:
Our plans are built with the master plans in mind - that's the sense of order that maintains a rhyme and reason to what we do. When the master plan isn't followed frustrations ensue and could potentially be perpetual. These issues can be solved by reverting back to the master plan and adhering to the strategy initially in place.
Our commitment
While we are committed to seeing this critical safety project through and maintain it's design is planned to operate the same as any other similar road in the state (or the country, for that matter), we do consider each case. In the end we're all human and can miss something - but with the number of people that touch each project, those misses are extremely few and far between.
We've reviewed all outstanding requests to review this project already and are confident we got things right with the current plan sheets. Heck, we're only six weeks from being finished with the work - we're ready to wrap it up and be done with it!
Projects like these, after all, reflect our forward-thinking as these corridors grow and produce increasing challenges to safety and operational efficiency in the future. We're just trying to get ahead of tomorrow's issues today.
-TxDOTSanAntonio
To those questioning the need and placement of the raised median along Potranco Road between Loop 1604 and Culebra:
Thank you, first of all, for your efforts to become engaged in the transportation planning process. We've heard your issues and do not take them lightly. It's unfortunate we couldn't discuss these issues before we reached the construction phase of this project - we could have had much more productive discussions had this outreach happened during our planning process or at our open house on this project.
How we reach out
We don’t send out mailers for our open house meetings because of the logistics involved. For starters, the cost of doing that would prove exorbitant - we couldn't limit mailers like that simply to those living or working along the corridor, and the sheer volume of mailers would be beyond our capacity (we do all that stuff in-house, after all). We know we'd miss people, and quite often we've found the owner of a property doesn't communicate these kinds of things to their tenants - which would leave us in a situation we have now with folks saying they never knew.
We try to be responsible stewards with the money we’re entrusted with, and seek the most effective and efficient means to communicate. We are required by law to post notices of public meetings in the "legal notices" section of the largest print news outlet in the area (in our case, the Express News). We also use traditional and social media channels to broadcast these meetings by sending out news releases to a very long media distribution list and tweeting about these meetings (not to brag or anything, but at more than 29,000 followers ours is the second-largest Twitter account in the department, behind only the statewide account).
We don't do Instagram or Facebook locally - this is a strategic communication decision we've made as an agency to help us control content and manage our messaging strategy. We do have a statewide Facebook account, though. It's got great stuff there. But we digress.
We also posted alerts of the open house with digital message boards strategically located along the routes. These message boards are placed ten days or more ahead of public meetings in the hope we're giving people ample opportunity to see the alert and take appropriate action. We also work with city council offices, who broadcast these meetings through their email blast lists where appropriate.
One thing we can do better about is utilizing this blog - which gets more than 20,000 reads every month - to broadcast these meetings.
The goal of the project
The ultimate reason for these medians is safety. Raised concrete medians are specifically designed to restrict left-turn movements that create what engineers call “conflict points” – a space on the roadway two opposing vehicles are competing for. These conflict points on high-trafficked collector routes like Potranco Road (and Culebra Road, for that matter – which got the same medians in 2015) often see a higher rate of catastrophic collisions. When these raised medians are installed, the collision rate drops dramatically.
For instance, the Potranco Road corridor saw a crash rate more than double the state-wide average because of these conflict points and some driver behaviors that favored risk and perceived convenience over safety and a few extra minutes. We’re seeking to improve that issue. You can see more about the pronounced safety benefits of these medians in our information page on the project located here.
But it's going to hurt our business/property value/lifestyle
There absolutely are some growing pains associated with any new roadway feature, and the growing pains with a raised median that restricts a particular movement are probably a little more pronounced. The improvement in safety is something we simply feel is worth the trade-off and is something we've thought long and hard about.
It’s much more important to us that, for example, a vehicle carrying children to a daycare facility re-route themselves to take much-safer (and, in many cases, faster and cheaper) right-turn approach and arrive or depart safely than it would be that same vehicle try rush ahead of a bloc of traffic and get into a catastrophic collision. We also don’t want people using the center left-turn lanes as acceleration lanes to merge with traffic; this behavior – particularly on developed and busy roads – tends to lead to other collision risks (such as head-on collisions or side-swipes). For more on this, see what the Texas Highwayman has to say in his primer on Texas road laws, specifically on the center turn lanes.
Here's the good news: this perception of inconvenience is short-lived and people generally get used to this new arrangement very quickly. We know this because we do this on similar roads across the state (and across the country, really) and others manage just fine.
Why does a neighboring driveway get a cut in the median and mine doesn't?
This is a terrific question. Before we delve into it, take a look at the planned layout of this new median (be sure to zoom in on the document so you get a good look). We'd post a jpg of it here, but it wouldn't give you the resolution needed to be effective.
We consider access to each location based on a master transportation and development plan. That is, when a property is platted for development it includes any access plans - including shared access easements - so a city can conduct proper urban planning to ensure order and efficiency. When this master plan isn't followed and the easement isn't utilized properly, this creates significant issues.
For example, a string of commercial properties west of Hunt Lane all have a shared access easement that would afford not only an additional driveway onto Hunt Lane itself, but a shared cut in the curb. That easement was never developed as a driveway, and some commercial tenants have used that easement space to perform alternate functions (one uses it to store a dumpster, another uses it as an outdoor recreational facility for kids).
Take a look:
Our plans are built with the master plans in mind - that's the sense of order that maintains a rhyme and reason to what we do. When the master plan isn't followed frustrations ensue and could potentially be perpetual. These issues can be solved by reverting back to the master plan and adhering to the strategy initially in place.
Our commitment
While we are committed to seeing this critical safety project through and maintain it's design is planned to operate the same as any other similar road in the state (or the country, for that matter), we do consider each case. In the end we're all human and can miss something - but with the number of people that touch each project, those misses are extremely few and far between.
We've reviewed all outstanding requests to review this project already and are confident we got things right with the current plan sheets. Heck, we're only six weeks from being finished with the work - we're ready to wrap it up and be done with it!
Projects like these, after all, reflect our forward-thinking as these corridors grow and produce increasing challenges to safety and operational efficiency in the future. We're just trying to get ahead of tomorrow's issues today.
-TxDOTSanAntonio
Monday, March 27
Some full roadway closures coming up soon
We have three major closures - full closures, in fact - that missed Friday's lane closures post. We'll work through them chronologically.
Potranco Road
Tuesday-Friday, March 28-31. 9 p.m. until 5 a.m. nightly. All lanes of Potranco Road will close between Empressario and American Lotus while crews place concrete bridge beams at the Medio Creek Bridge. Traffic will use Grosenbacher and Military Drive to reach its destination.
This work is being done by crews working on behalf of Bexar County Public Works as they expand Potranco Road between Loop 1604 and Hwy 211.
I-35 - New Braunfels
Tuesday, March 28. 8 p.m. until 10 p.m. Northbound frontage road between Schmidt and Walnut avenues. The left lane will close while crews move barrier.
Tuesday, March 28. 9 p.m. until 11 p.m. Northbound main lanes between Schmidt and Walnut avenues. The right two lanes will close while crews move barrier.
Tuesday-Thursday, March 28-30. 11 p.m. until 6 a.m. Northbound main lanes between Schmidt and Walnut avenues. All lanes will close while crews move barrier and restripe the road. Traffic will exit Walnut Ave, continue through the intersection and use the next available ramp to re-enter the highway.
This work means Angel Brothers Construction has finished early that milestone reducing the northbound main lanes by one lane. Come Thursday morning - four days faster than promised - we'll have traffic back to full capacity.
Those who remember our earlier post on this work know we're going to turn around and do something similar on the southbound side right there at Walnut Avenue. We do not currently have that work scheduled, though we do expect it to start early in April - most likely on a Sunday night. That, too, will be a three-week milestone with the main lanes reduced around-the-clock to allow for road restoration.
I-35 SAMMC
You know that old southbound connector to I-410 that's being used right now? And how we've got a new connector that's been sitting - unused - for about a year?
Well, we're ready to let you use the new one. That means we're also demolishing the old one. Here's how it impacts traffic:
Thursday-Friday, April 6-7. 9 p.m. until 5 a.m. Southbound main lanes between Rittiman Road and George Beach. Alternating lanes will close while crews switch traffic onto the new connector ramp. Traffic headed to I-410 will exit George Beach and turn around, then approach from the northbound frontage road.
Friday, April 7 at 9 p.m. until Monday, April 10 at 5 a.m. Main lanes, both directions, between Rittiman Road and George Beach will close while crews demolish the old bridge. Traffic in both directions will exit the highway and follow frontage roads to the next available ramp to reach its destination. Please note we will have all lanes reopened between 6 p.m. and 11 p.m. Saturday night for a "Spurs Break".
That's right - the "Spurs Break" is back. While it attracted some small criticism (where else would a state highway department plan work completely around a basketball game?), it worked very well the last time we did this. Because of that success, we're bringing it back. Saturday night the Spurs play the Clippers, and while that's happening we won't be doing any demo work. As soon as the Silver and Black secure the win, though, we'll be back to work.
Potranco Road
Tuesday-Friday, March 28-31. 9 p.m. until 5 a.m. nightly. All lanes of Potranco Road will close between Empressario and American Lotus while crews place concrete bridge beams at the Medio Creek Bridge. Traffic will use Grosenbacher and Military Drive to reach its destination.
This work is being done by crews working on behalf of Bexar County Public Works as they expand Potranco Road between Loop 1604 and Hwy 211.
I-35 - New Braunfels
Tuesday, March 28. 8 p.m. until 10 p.m. Northbound frontage road between Schmidt and Walnut avenues. The left lane will close while crews move barrier.
Tuesday, March 28. 9 p.m. until 11 p.m. Northbound main lanes between Schmidt and Walnut avenues. The right two lanes will close while crews move barrier.
Tuesday-Thursday, March 28-30. 11 p.m. until 6 a.m. Northbound main lanes between Schmidt and Walnut avenues. All lanes will close while crews move barrier and restripe the road. Traffic will exit Walnut Ave, continue through the intersection and use the next available ramp to re-enter the highway.
This work means Angel Brothers Construction has finished early that milestone reducing the northbound main lanes by one lane. Come Thursday morning - four days faster than promised - we'll have traffic back to full capacity.
Those who remember our earlier post on this work know we're going to turn around and do something similar on the southbound side right there at Walnut Avenue. We do not currently have that work scheduled, though we do expect it to start early in April - most likely on a Sunday night. That, too, will be a three-week milestone with the main lanes reduced around-the-clock to allow for road restoration.
I-35 SAMMC
You know that old southbound connector to I-410 that's being used right now? And how we've got a new connector that's been sitting - unused - for about a year?
Well, we're ready to let you use the new one. That means we're also demolishing the old one. Here's how it impacts traffic:
Thursday-Friday, April 6-7. 9 p.m. until 5 a.m. Southbound main lanes between Rittiman Road and George Beach. Alternating lanes will close while crews switch traffic onto the new connector ramp. Traffic headed to I-410 will exit George Beach and turn around, then approach from the northbound frontage road.
Friday, April 7 at 9 p.m. until Monday, April 10 at 5 a.m. Main lanes, both directions, between Rittiman Road and George Beach will close while crews demolish the old bridge. Traffic in both directions will exit the highway and follow frontage roads to the next available ramp to reach its destination. Please note we will have all lanes reopened between 6 p.m. and 11 p.m. Saturday night for a "Spurs Break".
That's right - the "Spurs Break" is back. While it attracted some small criticism (where else would a state highway department plan work completely around a basketball game?), it worked very well the last time we did this. Because of that success, we're bringing it back. Saturday night the Spurs play the Clippers, and while that's happening we won't be doing any demo work. As soon as the Silver and Black secure the win, though, we'll be back to work.
Monday, March 20
Mail Bag: I-10 stuff, FM 1103, US 281 and more
Part two, as promised....
Regarding the ARP/WWL intersection, I know TxDOT San Antonio has received a lot of complaints about this project. I really don't have a complaint, but a suggestion. I have noticed a lack of signage directing traffic on the SB 1604 Access road to the Santiko's entrance off of the SB 1604 Access Road. The only sign is a small one liner next to the entrance. I would suggest that TxDOT place directional signage prior to Alamo Ranch Parkway to direct SB 1604 traffic to the 1604 Santiko's entrance. This may help alleviate some of the illegal left-hand turns that are occurring at the ARP/WWL intersection.
- Benjamin
You're right, Benjamin, we have gotten a lot of feedback about this intersection. We'll be making a brief post on the intersection in the next week or so.
In the meantime, you've asked a pretty common question - why not sign for Santikos off the southbound frontage road of Loop 1604? The short answer: we can't.
That little sign you're seeing was put up by Santikos. We are aware of its existence, and we're tolerating it for now. We can't put bigger signs up, and we can't direct traffic to a specific business. That's all called advertising, and TxDOT is not in the business of advertising private businesses on our right-of-way.
Santikos is welcome to do what they can to elevate the awareness of that entrance among their patrons through advertising - but cannot advertise in our right-of-way.
Why no closure info this week? Specifically looking for info on US90 Gen McMullen closure.
- Dave
Dave sent this note in to us a few weeks ago, for those wondering what he's talking about.
Dave, we're sorry we missed that post! The blog is run by a very small staff, and when we're out of the office we don't get a chance to post some of that info. The closures are sent to us by project staff and are due to communications staff by Friday at noon. That doesn't always happen. The result: we are unable to pre-load a post for next week's closures beyond getting it put together on Friday afternoons.
When we're gone on Fridays, we do what we can to get the post up as soon as we can. For instance: this week's closures were sent to media Friday early afternoon but not posted until earlier today.
We're sorry!
Y'all recently did repair work in the area of mile marker 194 on I-35 southbound. The outside lane has a section of repair that does not look like it was completed or was completed poorly. It has a rut in it that can catch a driver off guard and move a small vehicle especially, to the right unexpectedly. I drive the area everyday in a small car. Even knowing it's there it can be disturbing when I can't change lanes.
- Bob
We're still working on the rehab of the asphalt out there in that area, so we'll make sure that area gets an extra look for you, Bob. Hopefully we can address the pavement issue soon.
Do you have any updates on the FM 1103 project in Schertz & Cibolo? I have not seen the plans since the open house about a year ago. Will the bridge at I-35 get turnarounds? It would be great to see something nice similar to what TxDOT Austin did at Yarrington Road in Kyle. I like what they did, but there are a lot of busy exits that do not have turnarounds like that!
- John
For starters we're eyeing mid-2019 to get bids on the expansion of FM 1103 between I-35 and Rodeo Way. Those who missed the open house can see what we talked about online here. Heck, we've even got a summary and analysis of our public meeting there.
The quick answer to where things are at: we're busy in the right-of-way acquisition process. This can take a while, and we want to be sure it's all done before we bid the contract. Between now and then we'll make adjustments to the project as needed, but it looks like the bulk of the design presented at the open house will be what you see.
As for the bridge ... that's not part of the existing project. We'll get to that bridge reconstruction in the near future, but it's not currently included in the FM 1103 expansion. We have it on our radar, though, and as soon as we can afford to make it happen we will.
Has there been any studies on the traffic signals on UTSA Blvd and I-10 recently? Almost constantly, those turning left from the bridge of UTSA Blvd overpass towards the eastbound side will continue to keep turning for up to 15 seconds longer than the light allows. I've been at the intersection several times where I'll sit on a green for at least 20 seconds before even starting my accelerator (and the one time I didn't, I ended up in an accident). What can or should be done in this area?
- ReySounds to us, Rey, like you've got a law enforcement issue going on. Have you reached out to SAPD on this matter? Any time someone is running a light that would be a moving violation. To have them continue more than 20 seconds means your green time is completely shot (green lights at intersections like this typically only remain green 20 seconds or so). If that's what's happening, you've got a major law enforcement issue that needs addressed by law enforcement.
Now that the TTC has accepted the bid from Webber Construction for the expansion of US 281 north of Loop 1604 , when will we know more about the construction schedule including road closures and traffic diversions to the new frontage roads?
- Tom
We're planning to hold a groundbreaking ceremony March 31. We won't have details of closures until a few weeks prior to work actually beginning, which looks to be by early May. We'll post more about the overall project in an upcoming post.
Can you post a project summary of the expansion of FM 1957 (Potranco) from 1604 to 211? Specifically looking for an overall project plan and anticipated schedule. Thank you (we just moved into the area and want to know what to expect and when).
- Steve
Welcome, Steve, and thank you for your service to our nation!
The short answer to your question is that the expansion of Potranco Road is actually being done by Bexar County Public Works. We don't have updates here at TxDOT, but you can reach out to the folks at Bexar County for an update.
Where on the TxDOT web site can I find the plan for expanding I-10 from the Rim to Boerne. I see the intended closures on the blog but cannot find "the diagram/plan" for the on going work? Thank you in advance.
- Glenn
We have a few sets of schematics, Glenn. Pick your favorite:
The I-10 Kendall extension builds up I-10 between Fair Oaks Pkwy and Hwy 46, including a new overpass at Balcones Creek Road and conversion of the frontage roads to one-way.
Here's a look at the future HOV lanes on I-10 between Ralph Fair Road and La Cantera Pkwy.
This is our information on the current work at Scenic Loop Road (and NO we are not messing with the entrance and exit ramps as part of this project!).
We have the new overpass at Old Fred Road (with concurrent frontage road conversion between Ralph Fair and Fair Oaks) that's ongoing.
Finally, the work on I-10 between Ralph Fair Road and Dominion Drive - which is set to be done by the end of this month, by the way - has information available here.
Regarding the ARP/WWL intersection, I know TxDOT San Antonio has received a lot of complaints about this project. I really don't have a complaint, but a suggestion. I have noticed a lack of signage directing traffic on the SB 1604 Access road to the Santiko's entrance off of the SB 1604 Access Road. The only sign is a small one liner next to the entrance. I would suggest that TxDOT place directional signage prior to Alamo Ranch Parkway to direct SB 1604 traffic to the 1604 Santiko's entrance. This may help alleviate some of the illegal left-hand turns that are occurring at the ARP/WWL intersection.
- Benjamin
You're right, Benjamin, we have gotten a lot of feedback about this intersection. We'll be making a brief post on the intersection in the next week or so.
In the meantime, you've asked a pretty common question - why not sign for Santikos off the southbound frontage road of Loop 1604? The short answer: we can't.
That little sign you're seeing was put up by Santikos. We are aware of its existence, and we're tolerating it for now. We can't put bigger signs up, and we can't direct traffic to a specific business. That's all called advertising, and TxDOT is not in the business of advertising private businesses on our right-of-way.
Santikos is welcome to do what they can to elevate the awareness of that entrance among their patrons through advertising - but cannot advertise in our right-of-way.
Why no closure info this week? Specifically looking for info on US90 Gen McMullen closure.
- Dave
Dave sent this note in to us a few weeks ago, for those wondering what he's talking about.
Dave, we're sorry we missed that post! The blog is run by a very small staff, and when we're out of the office we don't get a chance to post some of that info. The closures are sent to us by project staff and are due to communications staff by Friday at noon. That doesn't always happen. The result: we are unable to pre-load a post for next week's closures beyond getting it put together on Friday afternoons.
When we're gone on Fridays, we do what we can to get the post up as soon as we can. For instance: this week's closures were sent to media Friday early afternoon but not posted until earlier today.
We're sorry!
Y'all recently did repair work in the area of mile marker 194 on I-35 southbound. The outside lane has a section of repair that does not look like it was completed or was completed poorly. It has a rut in it that can catch a driver off guard and move a small vehicle especially, to the right unexpectedly. I drive the area everyday in a small car. Even knowing it's there it can be disturbing when I can't change lanes.
- Bob
We're still working on the rehab of the asphalt out there in that area, so we'll make sure that area gets an extra look for you, Bob. Hopefully we can address the pavement issue soon.
Do you have any updates on the FM 1103 project in Schertz & Cibolo? I have not seen the plans since the open house about a year ago. Will the bridge at I-35 get turnarounds? It would be great to see something nice similar to what TxDOT Austin did at Yarrington Road in Kyle. I like what they did, but there are a lot of busy exits that do not have turnarounds like that!
- John
For starters we're eyeing mid-2019 to get bids on the expansion of FM 1103 between I-35 and Rodeo Way. Those who missed the open house can see what we talked about online here. Heck, we've even got a summary and analysis of our public meeting there.
The quick answer to where things are at: we're busy in the right-of-way acquisition process. This can take a while, and we want to be sure it's all done before we bid the contract. Between now and then we'll make adjustments to the project as needed, but it looks like the bulk of the design presented at the open house will be what you see.
As for the bridge ... that's not part of the existing project. We'll get to that bridge reconstruction in the near future, but it's not currently included in the FM 1103 expansion. We have it on our radar, though, and as soon as we can afford to make it happen we will.
Has there been any studies on the traffic signals on UTSA Blvd and I-10 recently? Almost constantly, those turning left from the bridge of UTSA Blvd overpass towards the eastbound side will continue to keep turning for up to 15 seconds longer than the light allows. I've been at the intersection several times where I'll sit on a green for at least 20 seconds before even starting my accelerator (and the one time I didn't, I ended up in an accident). What can or should be done in this area?
- ReySounds to us, Rey, like you've got a law enforcement issue going on. Have you reached out to SAPD on this matter? Any time someone is running a light that would be a moving violation. To have them continue more than 20 seconds means your green time is completely shot (green lights at intersections like this typically only remain green 20 seconds or so). If that's what's happening, you've got a major law enforcement issue that needs addressed by law enforcement.
Now that the TTC has accepted the bid from Webber Construction for the expansion of US 281 north of Loop 1604 , when will we know more about the construction schedule including road closures and traffic diversions to the new frontage roads?
- Tom
We're planning to hold a groundbreaking ceremony March 31. We won't have details of closures until a few weeks prior to work actually beginning, which looks to be by early May. We'll post more about the overall project in an upcoming post.
Can you post a project summary of the expansion of FM 1957 (Potranco) from 1604 to 211? Specifically looking for an overall project plan and anticipated schedule. Thank you (we just moved into the area and want to know what to expect and when).
- Steve
Welcome, Steve, and thank you for your service to our nation!
The short answer to your question is that the expansion of Potranco Road is actually being done by Bexar County Public Works. We don't have updates here at TxDOT, but you can reach out to the folks at Bexar County for an update.
Where on the TxDOT web site can I find the plan for expanding I-10 from the Rim to Boerne. I see the intended closures on the blog but cannot find "the diagram/plan" for the on going work? Thank you in advance.
- Glenn
We have a few sets of schematics, Glenn. Pick your favorite:
The I-10 Kendall extension builds up I-10 between Fair Oaks Pkwy and Hwy 46, including a new overpass at Balcones Creek Road and conversion of the frontage roads to one-way.
Here's a look at the future HOV lanes on I-10 between Ralph Fair Road and La Cantera Pkwy.
This is our information on the current work at Scenic Loop Road (and NO we are not messing with the entrance and exit ramps as part of this project!).
We have the new overpass at Old Fred Road (with concurrent frontage road conversion between Ralph Fair and Fair Oaks) that's ongoing.
Finally, the work on I-10 between Ralph Fair Road and Dominion Drive - which is set to be done by the end of this month, by the way - has information available here.
Monday, February 13
Mail Bag: Bandera Rd intersection, UTSA Boulevard
Please make your formal presentation available on your blog regarding the displaced left turn at Bandera road. The video doesn't really explain what we can expect to happen. I'm particularly interested in what impact it will have on 1604. I saw traffic lights on the video and the last thing we need is lights on 1604!
- Mike
The video to which you referred was a representative video of the basic concept of what we're doing, and was linked in our previous post on this topic. Let's be clear, Mike, for you and for your neighbors: we are not adding a traffic signal to the main lanes of Loop 1604. We're spending (literally) hundreds of millions of dollars to build overpasses. Adding a signal at the heart of where traffic congestion on Lp 1604 is the worst would be, well, a qualifier as the worst idea ever. We know that, which is why we wouldn't ever do that.
What is not the worst idea ever is looking at intersections like Bandera Road and Loop 1604 for new traffic innovations. These intersections are prime candidates for intersection designs we're seeing pop up across the country, like the diverging diamond intersection (or DDI, already used by North Carolina, Washington, Missouri, Utah, Florida and Michigan, and now used in Texas up in Round Rock).
Right now, though, we're looking at a displaced left turn intersection, or a DLT. These come with a ton of minor variations, as the FHWA shows. The major difference between a DDI and a DLT is in the number of lanes being diverted and removed from the equation of the intersection. With the DDI all lanes of the primary road are being diverted. With the DLT, we're only moving the left-turn lanes around. To be clear, in this application we're talking about Bandera Road as it crosses through the Lp 1604 frontage road intersections. We are not messing with the Lp 1604 main lanes. Here's a look from that presentation:
By the way, we've got a DLT just like the one we're talking about for Bandera Road working up in San Marcos. To your request, Mike, here's the full presentation for you. Let us know if you have further questions!
How about an update on Spur 53 expansion?
- Zane
It's probably easiest to cut right to the point: we're on pace to wrap up this summer. That's summer 2017, for those who like when we get super specific. It's also right on par with the anticipated completion date we had when we started out, so that's good.
Our section goes from I-10 to Ximenes, so the city's segment may still be working after we're finished. For now on our end we've got some concrete work remaining, and the last major thing we'll be doing is a final asphalt surface. When you see that happening you'll know we're knocking on the door of that completion date.
I’m new to San Antonio (from California) and have a challenging time figuring out the roads here. As I drive to appointments it is very frustrating when approaching an intersection not being able to find a sign identifying the cross street name. In California, when approaching an intersection, especially where there is a traffic signal, there is usually a cross street name sign located in the middle island at least 500 feet prior to reaching the intersection. Secondly, I live in the Alamo Ranch area and concerned about the Alamo Ranch Parkway (ARP) off-ramp from Westbound 1604. There is not enough road to first merge into the frontage road travel lanes, then cross over the multiple lanes of traffic to make a very hard right turn onto ARP. When drivers are bombing up the frontage road from Culebra it is extremely dangerous to cross-over and make a safe right turn. Why is there not a dedicated fly-over from 1604 to ALR?
Sorry, frontage roads are dangerous and this is coming from someone who has safely driven in Los Angeles for many years.
- Joan
Hi, Joan. Welcome to Texas! You're among the 1,000 people who move to Texas every day ... a trend that's continued for more than half a decade. You seem to have brought up three separate issues, so let's dig in.
We have cross street signs posted at each major intersection. These are often on the signal mast arms or span wires. Keep in mind we only control state-maintained roads. City roads may be a little different, though generally they follow the same pattern we do. The way this is set out is dictated in part by our Texas Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which can be read in its entirety here.
We do have some advanced-warning signs of major cross-streets along our highway frontage roads, and at times along our arterials. This isn't done for every cross street, but is typically reserved for major intersections. We try to minimize the number of signs out there to manage the risk of information overload. We've found drivers start tuning out signs when there are too many.
As for the frontage roads ... they're a distinctly Texas thing, aren't they? They take some doing to get used to, but if you remember to merge onto them the way you do an expressway you'll be fine. Most folks are pretty good about yielding right-of-way (where appropriate) to the exiting traffic, or letting you find a good merge point when you've got your own auxiliary lane coming off the expressway.
That Alamo Ranch Parkway question is multi-faceted, though. Adding a direct connector, besides costing a ton of extra money we don't have (those things are like $75 million apiece right now!), would have complicated an already frustrating situation at the intersection of ARP and Westwood Loop. Exiting Loop 1604 to get there isn't all that rough, though. The frontage road speed limit is 45 miles per hour, and you've got nearly a half-mile between that ramp and the ARP turnoff, and that far-right lane of the frontage road is a turn-only lane onto ARP.
A note about Hwy 151, Alamo Ranch Pkwy and Westwood Loop. I know you are in the process of adding a light and have installed a barrier so there are no right turns from 151 to Westwood Loop, people are still making that right turn in front of the cars from 1604 lanes almost causing an accident. I saw two cars in a row do that. You need a sign on the light to state NO RIGHT TURN from the 151 lanes. People nowadays have no common sense or know traffic laws.
- Jackie
Thank you for working the issues at ARP & Westwood Lp. Now that the paddles are up, another more dangerous issue is occurring. Every third driver coming off 151 into AR is still turning despite the paddles, crossing in front of drivers in the straight lane. Dangerous collisions almost occur daily! Can you get a Sheriff to issue tickets? Something needs to be done! Thank you.
- Roger
Jackie and Roger, your neighbor Carolyn also wrote in with this issue. Several others have reached out via Twitter. Some have understood the real problem is the driver behavior - which is absolutely the worst reflection on our great city. Others have tried to remove the shared responsibility by blaming roadway designers for causing these terrible drivers to make poor choices and violate laws. Such an approach is absolutely flabbergasting, but we'll leave that issue alone.
The signals are being built by Bexar County Public Works. We understand the county's contractor will be putting up lane designation signs as they get that project finished. We've also been working with the Bexar County Sheriff's Office to improve enforcement. It's ridiculous the delineators haven't solved this issue, and flabbergasting to our staff the way drivers have treated this intersection. Hopefully, despite the selfishness and impatience of drivers like the ones you're seeing (folks like the those driving this white car photographed by Kimberley's passenger this weekend), signs and signals and enforcement will help curb this issue once and for all.
What are they doing on Potranco by Granite Cliff and Seascape? I see cones everywhere but no activity. They even closed off middle lane to merge. Help!
-Ani
You should be seeing regular activity, daily activity. If not we'll be yelling at someone something fierce! The short answer to this question: we're adding a center concrete median barrier. In short, we're doing on Potranco what we've already done on Culebra Road between Lp 1604 and Tezel Road.
Braun Road is currently closed between Tezel Road and Old Tezel Road. How long will the road be closed? When should construction finish?
-Bryan
Great questions. Frankly, we don't have an answer - Braun Road is a city road and we don't monitor the progress of development there. Call the folks with San Antonio TCI and they should be able to help you.
What is the bridge that is going up on I-10 and Buckskin Dr going to be for?
- Tereri
We're adding a new overpass! Here's some more information on the overall project, and a post about the project as it got started.
Can you please have someone observing for potholes caused by the big trucks and have them filled.
- Jennifer
We're committed to addressing pavement failures as soon as we're aware of them; we do not, however, employ folks to drive around looking for potholes. We simply don't think that would be a wise way to spend your tax money - we can find more productive things for our staff members to do. If you have specific locations for potholes, let us know and we'll have our folks go check them out immediately.
- Mike
The video to which you referred was a representative video of the basic concept of what we're doing, and was linked in our previous post on this topic. Let's be clear, Mike, for you and for your neighbors: we are not adding a traffic signal to the main lanes of Loop 1604. We're spending (literally) hundreds of millions of dollars to build overpasses. Adding a signal at the heart of where traffic congestion on Lp 1604 is the worst would be, well, a qualifier as the worst idea ever. We know that, which is why we wouldn't ever do that.
What is not the worst idea ever is looking at intersections like Bandera Road and Loop 1604 for new traffic innovations. These intersections are prime candidates for intersection designs we're seeing pop up across the country, like the diverging diamond intersection (or DDI, already used by North Carolina, Washington, Missouri, Utah, Florida and Michigan, and now used in Texas up in Round Rock).
Right now, though, we're looking at a displaced left turn intersection, or a DLT. These come with a ton of minor variations, as the FHWA shows. The major difference between a DDI and a DLT is in the number of lanes being diverted and removed from the equation of the intersection. With the DDI all lanes of the primary road are being diverted. With the DLT, we're only moving the left-turn lanes around. To be clear, in this application we're talking about Bandera Road as it crosses through the Lp 1604 frontage road intersections. We are not messing with the Lp 1604 main lanes. Here's a look from that presentation:
By the way, we've got a DLT just like the one we're talking about for Bandera Road working up in San Marcos. To your request, Mike, here's the full presentation for you. Let us know if you have further questions!
How about an update on Spur 53 expansion?
- Zane
It's probably easiest to cut right to the point: we're on pace to wrap up this summer. That's summer 2017, for those who like when we get super specific. It's also right on par with the anticipated completion date we had when we started out, so that's good.
Our section goes from I-10 to Ximenes, so the city's segment may still be working after we're finished. For now on our end we've got some concrete work remaining, and the last major thing we'll be doing is a final asphalt surface. When you see that happening you'll know we're knocking on the door of that completion date.
I’m new to San Antonio (from California) and have a challenging time figuring out the roads here. As I drive to appointments it is very frustrating when approaching an intersection not being able to find a sign identifying the cross street name. In California, when approaching an intersection, especially where there is a traffic signal, there is usually a cross street name sign located in the middle island at least 500 feet prior to reaching the intersection. Secondly, I live in the Alamo Ranch area and concerned about the Alamo Ranch Parkway (ARP) off-ramp from Westbound 1604. There is not enough road to first merge into the frontage road travel lanes, then cross over the multiple lanes of traffic to make a very hard right turn onto ARP. When drivers are bombing up the frontage road from Culebra it is extremely dangerous to cross-over and make a safe right turn. Why is there not a dedicated fly-over from 1604 to ALR?
Sorry, frontage roads are dangerous and this is coming from someone who has safely driven in Los Angeles for many years.
- Joan
Hi, Joan. Welcome to Texas! You're among the 1,000 people who move to Texas every day ... a trend that's continued for more than half a decade. You seem to have brought up three separate issues, so let's dig in.
We have cross street signs posted at each major intersection. These are often on the signal mast arms or span wires. Keep in mind we only control state-maintained roads. City roads may be a little different, though generally they follow the same pattern we do. The way this is set out is dictated in part by our Texas Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which can be read in its entirety here.
We do have some advanced-warning signs of major cross-streets along our highway frontage roads, and at times along our arterials. This isn't done for every cross street, but is typically reserved for major intersections. We try to minimize the number of signs out there to manage the risk of information overload. We've found drivers start tuning out signs when there are too many.
As for the frontage roads ... they're a distinctly Texas thing, aren't they? They take some doing to get used to, but if you remember to merge onto them the way you do an expressway you'll be fine. Most folks are pretty good about yielding right-of-way (where appropriate) to the exiting traffic, or letting you find a good merge point when you've got your own auxiliary lane coming off the expressway.
That Alamo Ranch Parkway question is multi-faceted, though. Adding a direct connector, besides costing a ton of extra money we don't have (those things are like $75 million apiece right now!), would have complicated an already frustrating situation at the intersection of ARP and Westwood Loop. Exiting Loop 1604 to get there isn't all that rough, though. The frontage road speed limit is 45 miles per hour, and you've got nearly a half-mile between that ramp and the ARP turnoff, and that far-right lane of the frontage road is a turn-only lane onto ARP.
A note about Hwy 151, Alamo Ranch Pkwy and Westwood Loop. I know you are in the process of adding a light and have installed a barrier so there are no right turns from 151 to Westwood Loop, people are still making that right turn in front of the cars from 1604 lanes almost causing an accident. I saw two cars in a row do that. You need a sign on the light to state NO RIGHT TURN from the 151 lanes. People nowadays have no common sense or know traffic laws.
- Jackie
Thank you for working the issues at ARP & Westwood Lp. Now that the paddles are up, another more dangerous issue is occurring. Every third driver coming off 151 into AR is still turning despite the paddles, crossing in front of drivers in the straight lane. Dangerous collisions almost occur daily! Can you get a Sheriff to issue tickets? Something needs to be done! Thank you.
- Roger
Jackie and Roger, your neighbor Carolyn also wrote in with this issue. Several others have reached out via Twitter. Some have understood the real problem is the driver behavior - which is absolutely the worst reflection on our great city. Others have tried to remove the shared responsibility by blaming roadway designers for causing these terrible drivers to make poor choices and violate laws. Such an approach is absolutely flabbergasting, but we'll leave that issue alone.
The signals are being built by Bexar County Public Works. We understand the county's contractor will be putting up lane designation signs as they get that project finished. We've also been working with the Bexar County Sheriff's Office to improve enforcement. It's ridiculous the delineators haven't solved this issue, and flabbergasting to our staff the way drivers have treated this intersection. Hopefully, despite the selfishness and impatience of drivers like the ones you're seeing (folks like the those driving this white car photographed by Kimberley's passenger this weekend), signs and signals and enforcement will help curb this issue once and for all.What are they doing on Potranco by Granite Cliff and Seascape? I see cones everywhere but no activity. They even closed off middle lane to merge. Help!
-Ani
You should be seeing regular activity, daily activity. If not we'll be yelling at someone something fierce! The short answer to this question: we're adding a center concrete median barrier. In short, we're doing on Potranco what we've already done on Culebra Road between Lp 1604 and Tezel Road.
Braun Road is currently closed between Tezel Road and Old Tezel Road. How long will the road be closed? When should construction finish?
-Bryan
Great questions. Frankly, we don't have an answer - Braun Road is a city road and we don't monitor the progress of development there. Call the folks with San Antonio TCI and they should be able to help you.
What is the bridge that is going up on I-10 and Buckskin Dr going to be for?
- Tereri
We're adding a new overpass! Here's some more information on the overall project, and a post about the project as it got started.
Can you please have someone observing for potholes caused by the big trucks and have them filled.
- Jennifer
We're committed to addressing pavement failures as soon as we're aware of them; we do not, however, employ folks to drive around looking for potholes. We simply don't think that would be a wise way to spend your tax money - we can find more productive things for our staff members to do. If you have specific locations for potholes, let us know and we'll have our folks go check them out immediately.
Tuesday, December 6
New signal going in on Potranco Rd at Vista Pl/Arcadia Path
Earlier this year we posted about how we determine placement of traffic signals. At the time we were receiving a few different requests for traffic signals at specific intersections. Those requests continue, and we investigate each request to see if the location warrants a signal.
One location is getting their requested signal fairly soon - construction starts December 12. That location is at the intersection of Potranco Road and Vista Place/Arcadia Path - basically serving traffic at the subdivisions of Bella Vista and Arcadia Ridge. The installation of the signal will wrap up by the end of March.
The signals will be suspended from span wires held up by steel poles. The steel poles and the control cabinet for the signals are being supplied by us; they were salvaged from projects at other locations. The work itself is being paid for - 100 percent - by the developer of the Arcadia Ridge subdivision. The developer of the Bella Vista subdivision - the subdivision that initiated this signal request - has elected to not contribute to this effort.
A little history
In 2015 Texas State Representative Rick Galindo hosted a town hall meeting to discuss the development of Potranco Road, which is currently underway through the Bexar County Public Works Department. During that meeting members of the Bella Vista community presented a petition to have a signal installed at their intersection. As promised by Rep. Galindo, TxDOT engineers surveyed the intersection and placed it on a watch list to be investigated again in the future for a signal if a greater need arose.
The issue was pressed again earlier this year when members of the community again petitioned the representative and brought their cause to the public eye through contact with one of our local news stations. Again our engineers investigated the intersection - and found no major changes in traffic volumes, even with the development of the Arcadia Ridge subdivision.
To be clear, traffic volumes during a two-hour peak time period were sufficient to justify a signal, but district-wide best practices were employed to place the intersection on a list and wait until it reached a higher priority level. Why? Several intersections across our 12-county district have a two-hour peak traffic volume that's considerable, but during the remaining 22 hours of the day the traffic volumes are so light a signal would be extremely counter-productive - especially with the lofty price tags that can accompany the infrastructure for this sort of construction. That was the case at this location.
A compromise solution was brought forward that if the signal could be donated by the developer we would permit the signal installation based on the single warrant of the two-hour peak traffic volume. The developer of Bella Vista, Perry Homes, declined to make such a commitment. CTMGT Rancho Del Lago, the LLC developing the Arcadia Ridge subdivision, stepped up to provide the $158,000 in cash to have the signal installed. We (TxDOT) have donated the controller cabinets and steel poles at an additional $50,000 value.
Where we go from here
Work will start next week, if weather allows. The soggy ground from recent and upcoming rain may push this back a few days, but the bottom line is crews will be at work at this location this month to install the signals.
They'll have it all finished up by the end of March.
Those driving through the area should be aware of the overlap this work has with Bexar County's efforts to expand Potranco through this location, and the two projects may be tough to confuse. Simply put: if the contractor has a big "TSC" on their truck, hard hat or safety vest ... that worker is part of the county's project and issues need to be brought to Bexar County Public Works. If not, and the work is very confined to this intersection, there's a good bet it's signal work and issues need to be forwarded to TxDOT.
Note the crews working to install the signal are not hired by nor do they work for TxDOT; they work for CTMGT Ranch Del Lago under a permit given to them by TxDOT. Confusing? Perhaps ... but the delineation should be made. Still, TxDOT remains a good point of contact for issues that may arise.
While the work is ongoing folks driving the area should remain patient and know the work being done is to honor the request they've made. It'll be done soon enough, and we hope it provides the outcome so desired.
The issue was pressed again earlier this year when members of the community again petitioned the representative and brought their cause to the public eye through contact with one of our local news stations. Again our engineers investigated the intersection - and found no major changes in traffic volumes, even with the development of the Arcadia Ridge subdivision.
To be clear, traffic volumes during a two-hour peak time period were sufficient to justify a signal, but district-wide best practices were employed to place the intersection on a list and wait until it reached a higher priority level. Why? Several intersections across our 12-county district have a two-hour peak traffic volume that's considerable, but during the remaining 22 hours of the day the traffic volumes are so light a signal would be extremely counter-productive - especially with the lofty price tags that can accompany the infrastructure for this sort of construction. That was the case at this location.
A compromise solution was brought forward that if the signal could be donated by the developer we would permit the signal installation based on the single warrant of the two-hour peak traffic volume. The developer of Bella Vista, Perry Homes, declined to make such a commitment. CTMGT Rancho Del Lago, the LLC developing the Arcadia Ridge subdivision, stepped up to provide the $158,000 in cash to have the signal installed. We (TxDOT) have donated the controller cabinets and steel poles at an additional $50,000 value.
Where we go from here
Work will start next week, if weather allows. The soggy ground from recent and upcoming rain may push this back a few days, but the bottom line is crews will be at work at this location this month to install the signals.
They'll have it all finished up by the end of March.
Those driving through the area should be aware of the overlap this work has with Bexar County's efforts to expand Potranco through this location, and the two projects may be tough to confuse. Simply put: if the contractor has a big "TSC" on their truck, hard hat or safety vest ... that worker is part of the county's project and issues need to be brought to Bexar County Public Works. If not, and the work is very confined to this intersection, there's a good bet it's signal work and issues need to be forwarded to TxDOT.
Note the crews working to install the signal are not hired by nor do they work for TxDOT; they work for CTMGT Ranch Del Lago under a permit given to them by TxDOT. Confusing? Perhaps ... but the delineation should be made. Still, TxDOT remains a good point of contact for issues that may arise.
While the work is ongoing folks driving the area should remain patient and know the work being done is to honor the request they've made. It'll be done soon enough, and we hope it provides the outcome so desired.
Tuesday, August 16
Mail Bag: Potranco Road traffic, city and county projects, I-10
Could you tell me how many cars drive down Potranco Road daily? I mostly interested in the part of Potranco behind Redbird Ranch. Thank you!
-Kristi
Kristi, you're asking a question we typically get via phone. It's a great question! And, to help you really get the info you're wanting, I'll give you source material.
I see construction on 471 is to begin 8-15. Is there a map of the project and what's being done, and for how long? Also, what is the plan for connecting 151/Alamo Ranch/211? and when does that start?Thanks.
- Michael
You've got a few different questions going on here, Michael. So, one at a time.
First, the Culebra Road work (FM 471) that started this week is being handled entirely by Bexar County. They've got our logo up on the project sign boards because we approved the design and, when the county is done with the project, we'll buy it back from them. It's a funding option that gets projects delivered through local participation called pass-through financing, but we digress (to be clear, this application of pass-through financing does not involve tolls). Bottom line: the county has a project information page available here, and if you've got questions at all they can be reached here.
The county also has some information about the extension of Alamo Ranch Parkway on that same info page. The biggest thing to note is ARP is being developed by private developers as they continue to build up the area and add homes (and shopping options). This is not being built by your tax dollars. Though, when developers finish, they turn it over for public maintenance. Because it's being built by private folks, though, we don't have an exact timeline on when to expect ARP to reach Hwy 211.
Oh, yeah, and Hwy 211 needs to be extended so ARP can actually connect with it. That $24 million effort is also being done by Bexar County and isn't slated to start until next year, provided all the funds match up next year.
What will happen to the (I-10) access roads from Ralph Fair Road toward 46 going west? Will they switch to one way? Will they remain two way? Right now they are still working on them. Will they widen them eventually?
What will happen at Old Fredericksburg Road coming toward the access road from Village Green and Fallbrook? Will there eventually be and underpass or overpass? I have heard both stories. Will they improve the Fair Oaks Bridge across 10. It's shaky!
- Mike
So back in March we started work on a project between Ralph Fair Road and Fair Oaks Parkway. Basically we're converting the frontage roads to one-way (which requires some widening for shoulders, curbs and sidewalks) and adding an overpass on I-10 at Old Fred Road - it'll take I-10 over a new intersection that connects Old Fred with Buckskin Drive.
We're also reconstructing the bridge at Fair Oaks and I-10, basically expanding it a la Ralph Fair. That project starts here in the fall and will wrap up in 2018.
What about beyond Fair Oaks Parkway? Well, eventually we will have one-way frontage road. Our goal is to eliminate one-way frontage roads wherever we've got a developed, metro area. We're not quite ready to do that - we need more money first - but it is on the agenda. Once we're nearing that work beyond Fair Oaks Parkway, we'll host a series of open house discussions to show y'all what we've got.
Concerning the work activity at hwy 46 and hwy 281: There needs to be a sign informing east bound Hwy 46 traffic that two lanes will merge to one. The existing one was removed for construction and has not been replaced.
Thank you for addressing this matter. It will require a follow-up with the poorly performing contractor that is presently on site. With out this sign there will be a collision and a fair amount of road rage played out.
-Tom
I'll start with the really good news: we've only got a few really light items left to have this job finished (finally) and it looks like we should wrap up this month. We're seeing CRG on the site daily (with the exception of Monday, due to weather) and we're seeing good progress. Rest assured they'll be held very accountable for dragging this project out the way they have, but we're looking at a finish in a matter of days.
As for the sign? We checked the plan sheets and no such sign is called for in the plans. That said, we've made our maintenance guys and our operations guys aware of the issue so we can have it addressed as appropriately and quickly as possible.
-Kristi
Kristi, you're asking a question we typically get via phone. It's a great question! And, to help you really get the info you're wanting, I'll give you source material.
We have, posted online, a five-year record of our traffic counts. This will allow you to see what that segment of Potranco has been doing for five years, giving you an idea of what to expect in the future. (We don't house more than five years online for two reasons: first, records retention requires five years posted like this; second, we already host tens of thousands of pages of data online, and capping info at five years helps us minimize our IT expense.)
That said, it's worth noting there's a trick to using the data we've got posted.
When will UTEX from UTSA Blvd and the I-10 access road be completed?
-Tim
This question is really a question for the city of San Antonio - UTEX is a city roadway. That said, the work there may be more associated with private development than with city work. That's a question to ask the folks with the city's TCI group when you visit with them.
When will UTEX from UTSA Blvd and the I-10 access road be completed?
-Tim
This question is really a question for the city of San Antonio - UTEX is a city roadway. That said, the work there may be more associated with private development than with city work. That's a question to ask the folks with the city's TCI group when you visit with them.
I see construction on 471 is to begin 8-15. Is there a map of the project and what's being done, and for how long? Also, what is the plan for connecting 151/Alamo Ranch/211? and when does that start?Thanks.
- Michael
You've got a few different questions going on here, Michael. So, one at a time.
First, the Culebra Road work (FM 471) that started this week is being handled entirely by Bexar County. They've got our logo up on the project sign boards because we approved the design and, when the county is done with the project, we'll buy it back from them. It's a funding option that gets projects delivered through local participation called pass-through financing, but we digress (to be clear, this application of pass-through financing does not involve tolls). Bottom line: the county has a project information page available here, and if you've got questions at all they can be reached here.
The county also has some information about the extension of Alamo Ranch Parkway on that same info page. The biggest thing to note is ARP is being developed by private developers as they continue to build up the area and add homes (and shopping options). This is not being built by your tax dollars. Though, when developers finish, they turn it over for public maintenance. Because it's being built by private folks, though, we don't have an exact timeline on when to expect ARP to reach Hwy 211.
Oh, yeah, and Hwy 211 needs to be extended so ARP can actually connect with it. That $24 million effort is also being done by Bexar County and isn't slated to start until next year, provided all the funds match up next year.
What will happen to the (I-10) access roads from Ralph Fair Road toward 46 going west? Will they switch to one way? Will they remain two way? Right now they are still working on them. Will they widen them eventually?
What will happen at Old Fredericksburg Road coming toward the access road from Village Green and Fallbrook? Will there eventually be and underpass or overpass? I have heard both stories. Will they improve the Fair Oaks Bridge across 10. It's shaky!
- Mike
So back in March we started work on a project between Ralph Fair Road and Fair Oaks Parkway. Basically we're converting the frontage roads to one-way (which requires some widening for shoulders, curbs and sidewalks) and adding an overpass on I-10 at Old Fred Road - it'll take I-10 over a new intersection that connects Old Fred with Buckskin Drive.
We're also reconstructing the bridge at Fair Oaks and I-10, basically expanding it a la Ralph Fair. That project starts here in the fall and will wrap up in 2018.
What about beyond Fair Oaks Parkway? Well, eventually we will have one-way frontage road. Our goal is to eliminate one-way frontage roads wherever we've got a developed, metro area. We're not quite ready to do that - we need more money first - but it is on the agenda. Once we're nearing that work beyond Fair Oaks Parkway, we'll host a series of open house discussions to show y'all what we've got.
Concerning the work activity at hwy 46 and hwy 281: There needs to be a sign informing east bound Hwy 46 traffic that two lanes will merge to one. The existing one was removed for construction and has not been replaced.
Thank you for addressing this matter. It will require a follow-up with the poorly performing contractor that is presently on site. With out this sign there will be a collision and a fair amount of road rage played out.
-Tom
I'll start with the really good news: we've only got a few really light items left to have this job finished (finally) and it looks like we should wrap up this month. We're seeing CRG on the site daily (with the exception of Monday, due to weather) and we're seeing good progress. Rest assured they'll be held very accountable for dragging this project out the way they have, but we're looking at a finish in a matter of days.
As for the sign? We checked the plan sheets and no such sign is called for in the plans. That said, we've made our maintenance guys and our operations guys aware of the issue so we can have it addressed as appropriately and quickly as possible.
Tuesday, April 19
Mail Bag: Questions on city and county projects, work on northwest side
What are the plans and ETA of the Potranco Road expansion and connecting of Hwy 211?
- Noel (via Twitter)
Great question, Noel. The Potranco Road expansion between Lp 1604 and Hwy 211 is being done as a pass-through project and is overseen (actually, pretty much completely managed) by Bexar County Public Works. According to their project page the project just got going and will wrap up the end of 2018.
As for details on the project as it continues ... those questions should go to Bexar County. When the project is finished, TxDOT will maintain responsibility for upkeep.
Can you give us an update on the Tezel/Grissom construction?
- Jeremy (via Twitter)
If you're asking about the work Tezel Road, that's a city project and they have updates posted on their Web site. If you're asking about the work on Culebra Road ... well, that's ours.
On the Culebra project our crews are laying the final surface of asphalt. We're all done with the curbs and medians (and have been since around Christmas), and as long as we get some dry weather we could be done in as little as three weeks of solid work.
Yesterday on Blanco & Midnight Drive there was a long progression of traffic cones (3' high ones) that seems to stretch for miles north (didn't confirm but it was definitely more than a mile. I don't see any scheduled construction on your blog. Can you shed any light on this?
- Shawn (via Blog)
We got a few calls on this one, and we're still scrambling to find a clear answer. We checked with Bexar County, who maintains this segment of Blanco Road, and they don't have work at that location. That leaves possible suspects as utilities companies like CPS Energy and SAWS.
One thing we do know is the project isn't a TxDOT project - last year the state handed over control of Blanco Road north of Wilderness Oak to Bexar County Public Works.
Are there any plans for (FM 471 or FM 1560) or a signal on FM 471 at Stillwater Ranch?
- Pete (via Twitter)
The short answer: YES.
Longer answer ... well, we're working with the county on several options. For FM 471, we have plans that are more impending. That work will be done as a pass-through project (just as Potranco Road is being done) and Bexar County will manage that work. That expansion is a $16.8 million project set to start later this year and wrap up (most likely) early 2018. It'll expand FM 471 to match what's there by Taft High School and extend from FM 1560 almost to Talley Road. More info is here.
As for FM 1560, we're working on an expansion project to run from Galm to FM 471. A firm timeline isn't ready yet, but it'll expand FM 1560 to two lanes with a center left-turn lane. We also know there's a need for expansion between Galm/Shaenfield and Bandera Road, so we're looking at that. The biggest challenge for that will be right-of-way acquisition (which hasn't yet begun).
Once the new overhead connector between 1604 and 151 eastbound is complete, will cars using it be able to exit at Wiseman or will the first available exit be beyond that point?
- Bob (via blog)
In short, you'll use the next exit (Westover Hills) and turn around to get to Wiseman from Alamo Ranch Parkway. Because pictures are worth a thousand words, here's a look (it helps to click on the image and make it bigger):
So excited about the highway opening! Wondering if you know anything at all about what the process looks like for getting the addresses changed to 1604 now that it's complete. Thanks!
- Jamye (via blog)
We actually don't know the process - it's odd. We made several calls to the folks in our department and the overwhelming consensus was to work through your local Postmaster General. There is an interesting blog post on the topic, though.
Have surveys been done to figure out why the (morning) rush hour traffic eastbound I-10 from Fair Oaks Ranch Parkway to around Camp Bullis, and the (evening) rush hour traffic on the westbound side anywhere from UTSA Blvd to La Cantera through Camp Bullis is as terrible as it is? ...What is being done to alleviate that traffic?
- Gerard (via blog)
If you're asking if we've been conducting traffic studies along that corridor, the answer is yes. To put a not-too-fine point on the issue, the real cause here is a rapid increase in development and population along the I-10 corridor.
We've got an active project converting frontage roads between Dominion Drive and Boerne Stage Road, which includes some ramp rearrangements that will help traffic flow once the project is done later this summer.
But that's probably not going to fix everything you're talking about - which involves pinch points at Loop 1604 and at Camp Bullis. One fix that's coming for that is an expansion of I-10 between La Cantera Parkway and Ralph Fair Road. That's coming next year, if all goes well. As for improving the interchange at Loop 1604 ... well, we're working on that one.
- Noel (via Twitter)
Great question, Noel. The Potranco Road expansion between Lp 1604 and Hwy 211 is being done as a pass-through project and is overseen (actually, pretty much completely managed) by Bexar County Public Works. According to their project page the project just got going and will wrap up the end of 2018.
As for details on the project as it continues ... those questions should go to Bexar County. When the project is finished, TxDOT will maintain responsibility for upkeep.
Can you give us an update on the Tezel/Grissom construction?
- Jeremy (via Twitter)
If you're asking about the work Tezel Road, that's a city project and they have updates posted on their Web site. If you're asking about the work on Culebra Road ... well, that's ours.
On the Culebra project our crews are laying the final surface of asphalt. We're all done with the curbs and medians (and have been since around Christmas), and as long as we get some dry weather we could be done in as little as three weeks of solid work.
Yesterday on Blanco & Midnight Drive there was a long progression of traffic cones (3' high ones) that seems to stretch for miles north (didn't confirm but it was definitely more than a mile. I don't see any scheduled construction on your blog. Can you shed any light on this?
- Shawn (via Blog)
We got a few calls on this one, and we're still scrambling to find a clear answer. We checked with Bexar County, who maintains this segment of Blanco Road, and they don't have work at that location. That leaves possible suspects as utilities companies like CPS Energy and SAWS.
One thing we do know is the project isn't a TxDOT project - last year the state handed over control of Blanco Road north of Wilderness Oak to Bexar County Public Works.
Are there any plans for (FM 471 or FM 1560) or a signal on FM 471 at Stillwater Ranch?
- Pete (via Twitter)
The short answer: YES.
Longer answer ... well, we're working with the county on several options. For FM 471, we have plans that are more impending. That work will be done as a pass-through project (just as Potranco Road is being done) and Bexar County will manage that work. That expansion is a $16.8 million project set to start later this year and wrap up (most likely) early 2018. It'll expand FM 471 to match what's there by Taft High School and extend from FM 1560 almost to Talley Road. More info is here.
As for FM 1560, we're working on an expansion project to run from Galm to FM 471. A firm timeline isn't ready yet, but it'll expand FM 1560 to two lanes with a center left-turn lane. We also know there's a need for expansion between Galm/Shaenfield and Bandera Road, so we're looking at that. The biggest challenge for that will be right-of-way acquisition (which hasn't yet begun).
Once the new overhead connector between 1604 and 151 eastbound is complete, will cars using it be able to exit at Wiseman or will the first available exit be beyond that point?
- Bob (via blog)
In short, you'll use the next exit (Westover Hills) and turn around to get to Wiseman from Alamo Ranch Parkway. Because pictures are worth a thousand words, here's a look (it helps to click on the image and make it bigger):
So excited about the highway opening! Wondering if you know anything at all about what the process looks like for getting the addresses changed to 1604 now that it's complete. Thanks!
- Jamye (via blog)
We actually don't know the process - it's odd. We made several calls to the folks in our department and the overwhelming consensus was to work through your local Postmaster General. There is an interesting blog post on the topic, though.
Have surveys been done to figure out why the (morning) rush hour traffic eastbound I-10 from Fair Oaks Ranch Parkway to around Camp Bullis, and the (evening) rush hour traffic on the westbound side anywhere from UTSA Blvd to La Cantera through Camp Bullis is as terrible as it is? ...What is being done to alleviate that traffic?
- Gerard (via blog)
If you're asking if we've been conducting traffic studies along that corridor, the answer is yes. To put a not-too-fine point on the issue, the real cause here is a rapid increase in development and population along the I-10 corridor.
We've got an active project converting frontage roads between Dominion Drive and Boerne Stage Road, which includes some ramp rearrangements that will help traffic flow once the project is done later this summer.
But that's probably not going to fix everything you're talking about - which involves pinch points at Loop 1604 and at Camp Bullis. One fix that's coming for that is an expansion of I-10 between La Cantera Parkway and Ralph Fair Road. That's coming next year, if all goes well. As for improving the interchange at Loop 1604 ... well, we're working on that one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)