Mail Bag: Why we use asphalt and not concrete

What work is currently happening at the turnaround by Ramsgate? Currently seeing it closed daily during the day.
Also, huge props to whoever finds the gifs for the blog!
- Kevin

Well, shucks. Thanks! We have fun with the gifs (and other graphics and references). We hope all y'all do as well.
The work at Ramsgate is a maintenance job to repair the concrete retaining wall and the bridge rail at and near the turnaround bridge. The work should be wrapped up by the first part of June. We know it's throwing off a few folks and their commutes - all highway maintenance tends to have that effect - but we're working hard to stay in touch with the USAA communications team to keep them in the loop. They are the top contributor to the traffic at the turnaround, after all, so we're doing what we can to coordinate the work with the good folks over there.


I travel Wurzbach Parkway to work. I see signs that talk about road closures beginning May 14. Can you tell me what to expect next week. Should I use 410 to travel to work?
- Rebecca
Rebecca, we're sorry this answer didn't come in time. We understand the work on Wurzbach has wrapped up at this point.
The closure was on Wurzbach Road and was done by the city of San Antonio, not us. They did a heckuva job getting word out and tried to be sure folks knew in advance of the closure.


Have they determined what caused the longitudinal cracking on I-10? I'm no engineer, but from the photos, it looks like when the contractors excavated material from the roadway edge, they failed to support that edge as it bore the weight of the Jersey barriers. Recent heavy rains probably didn't help either, eroding the exposed base material and surrounding soils.
- Mark

You kind of hit the nail on the head, Mark. The contractor is using, per plans, soil nail walls to support the edge of our excavation. In this instance the equipment for those soil nail walls bogged down and Flatiron's excavation team got a little ahead of things. This is a gamble literally every contractor takes on a project like this, and more than 99 percent of the time it pays off and we see no problems.
As you pointed out the rain didn't help here, and we saw a failure. It wasn't catastrophic, but any failure has potential of becoming that way. We worked hard to prevent the catastrophic failures that could have caused safety hazards.
Here's the silver lining: the delay is extremely minimal. Flatiron lost about a day and a half of production and that's it. On a three-year project that's amazing.
The long-term, permanent fix for the issue is literally designed into the construction plans. When it comes to roadway failures on a construction project, this was pretty much the best possible scenario.


Regarding the nearly complete NE 410/35 project between George Beach and Walzam, I give the project an A-. I no longer fear for my life on south bound lanes as the Rittman traffic no longer tries to zip across 5 lanes of traffic to get to 410 South and traffic seems to move pretty well through that section (the clog is now between Walzam and O'Connor on Northbound).
My only complaints are minor and as you have pointed out before, not necessarily needed. That is the street lights. Many in that section still don't work and one pole in front of Texas Thrift blinks constantly. And having some sodium lights and some LED is kind of tacky. Other than that, great job on this project!
- Jeff
Thanks, Jeff! We'll take it!

It kills us the project took as long as it has to finish, and we've done some internal reviews to see how we can prevent a lot of the delays we've seen on the job for future projects.
Having the new lanes open has been a huge milestone for us - and the big reason for the job in the first place. Well, those and the ramp revisions we've done along the corridor. With a little luck we'll have everything in place and be done - like done done - by mid-summer.
The includes the lights which, as we've said, will be burning as soon as we can get them connected to power. Thanks for your patience on it!


I know there a lot of construction going on 1604 between 90 and 151. Same thing for almost every intersection that have lights except Wiseman. It looks like they are not working on it and look pretty much the same for like couple months. Any idea what going on?
- Daryl
We had some work on retaining walls and drain structures that kept us from digging into Wiseman the way we've done at the other intersections over the last two months.
That will change here in the next couple of weeks, and southbound Loop 1604 will switch onto the frontage road just south of Hwy 151 here in June. That will let Zachry Construction go nuts on the new overpasses. Once the new southbound overpass is ready we'll flip traffic over - Zachry has been working on ways to provide incremental improvements to traffic as they're available (Webber also) on this project, effectively fast-tracking an already aggressive schedule.


The WB I-10 frontage road closure at Old Fred has caused the traffic to back up at the Fair Oaks Ranch bridge almost a 1/4 a mile. Having one exit/entry for 4 major neighborhood was the worst idea ever. Please open up the frontage road M-F 7-9am and 4-6pm. What is being done to alleviate this? This cannot be the norm for a month or more.
- Christina
This closure HAS to be a constant closure. Opening intermittently as you've suggested simply isn't physically possible. To install the pipes we're putting in the ground the road itself was torn up for about 500 feet.
Sundt is working to get this work finished quickly and should have it open by the end of this month. We know it has been really, really rough this month and we thank everyone for their patience.


In your May 1 post, you talked about the traffic lights, but since you were talking about Buckskin, were the lights there? If so, what about the Fair Oaks Parkway lights?
Also, you talked about quadrants and stages, neither of which means anything to me without a definition. Also, the map showed some orange sections of roads with some white markings around them. What do they mean?
- Al Koppen
We are building traffic signals at Buckskin Drive. The construction contract doesn't have us turning them on - that will fall to our traffic operations folks.
Sounds convoluted, we know. It has to do with the warrant for the signal, which you can read all about here. Right now we don't have a warrant for the signal - mostly because the intersection doesn't completely exist. Once the intersection opens we're confident the warrant will be met, but we technically have to wait for that to happen.
Traffic signals are indeed being built at the Fair Oaks Parkway intersection and will become active here in June (based on the current schedule). The signal configuration will be identical to that of the current Ralph Fair intersection.
As for quadrants and stages, we apologize if that graphic wasn't clear enough. Here it is, once again, for your benefit:

The orange areas are the areas where work is being done. You'll note the white/orange markings are construction barricades, indicating the area is blocked off for construction.

Every intersection mimics the x-and-y axis planes we learn about in math class growing up. Each intersection has four quadrants. In the graphic to the left, these are labeled as Quadrant I (quadrant 1), Quadrant II (2), Quadrant III (3) and Quadrant IV (4). The first quadrant is where the X and Y axes both have positively valued coordinates. The second quadrant is where the Y axis coordinate is positive but the X axis coordinate is negative. The third quadrant features two negative coordinates and the fourth quadrant features a positive X axis coordinate and a negative Y axis coordinate.
Most of the time, when we talk of intersection quadrants, we talk in terms of direction so we can keep things simple
 For the intersection of Old Fred/Buckskin Drive and I-10 that means a north quadrant (where the work is happening right now as noted with the long horizontal orange mark), a south quadrant (basically between Buckskin Drive and Indian Hills), an east quadrant (the one that was closed for like four months) and a west quadrant (the one we opened up most recently).
We're sorry this description wasn't clear enough in the first post and hope this explanation helps you keep everything straight.


Regarding the 10 east frontage rds. In particular the frontage road intersection with FM 1516 and Green Rd:
It seems this one-way conversion has greatly inconvenienced people that live and work on Green Road. I often see people going the wrong way on the access road the short distance to 1516 so they can use the underpass to go west on 10. There is also a large dirt area in front of the truck dealership that has become an impromptu thoroughfare to cut over to 1516 from Green Road in addition to cutting through the truck dealership parking lot.
Is there a solution or idea in place to alleviate this inconvenience?
- Marshall
First of all, shame on all those drivers who are making illegal and, more important, unsafe driving decisions. Seriously - all that is to save what, two minutes of drive time? Five?
The long-term fix is to complete the project. That'll open the frontage roads to two lanes (still one-way) and an increased traffic volume here will prevent this heinous behavior. The wider frontage roads will mean effective turnarounds and an easier path to get to the main lanes.
In the meantime, stepped up law enforcement may help those sacrificing the safety of everyone around them for their own convenience make better choices.


I noticed all the new overpass additions/reconstructions have been done with concrete main lane approaches (Old Fred Rd/Buckskin and Boerne Stage/Scenic Loop. Why isn't the entire project from Ralph Fair to La Cantera not being completely converted to concrete? It lasts so much longer with less maintenance. This patchwork appearance looks cheap and out of date.
- Pete
You're absolutely right, Pete. Concrete paving has a better lifespan, requires less maintenance and has a bit simpler repair than traditional asphalt roads.

They're also exponentially more expensive up front.
There's a definite case to be made the cost for concrete paving is lower in the long run - say, over a period of 30 or 50 years - but that doesn't help us get the project done today.
The business savvy folks out there can see the difficulty here. In many industries it might make sense to go with the larger up-front expenditure to save money over the course of time. If we met our break-even point in the next three to five years the concrete option would probably make sense on all our roads.
That's not the case, though. Right now, as inexpensive as asphalt is, the break-even point is decades away.
Bridges and approaches have been and will continue to be done with concrete for a number of reasons. On stretches of road built on top of ground we can use the traditional asphalt, so that's what we're doing.


What happened to the project guide tour for the 410 to 151 flyover that was supposed to be out on Thursday per the report?
- Chris
We did it! We have it posted on YouTube as well. Take a look - although everything you're seeing is now wide open and in use (Chris wrote us a couple of weeks ago).


Someone posted this question on nextdoor.com, and I am curious as well (and would like the correct info instead of people's opinions on social media):
Anyone know why the several miles of asphalt that was laid down between Boerne Stage and La Cantera mall was all ripped out? Also, any idea how far back that puts the construction timelines?
- Leslie

We asked our project staff about this question and they said they don't have a long stretch of asphalt we've torn out on the main lanes of the highway. We think he question is likely a reference to asphalt laid down during a previous project. We've taken out parts of the shoulders to tie the existing road with the expansion to the inside and the outside of the road.
We've also got some spots we're putting some temporary pavement on each side of the road so we can shift existing traffic lanes over to give our crews some elbow room to safely build what we're building.
This project - to widen I-10 between La Cantera Parkway and Ralph Fair Road - is still running on pace to finish up early 2020. We've not had anything that's pushed our construction timeline back - not even the asphalt issue from earlier in the month.

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.

Mail Bag: Lots of 1604 questions, 410-151, frontage roads and more

On Loop 1604 South between Wiseman and Potranco, there is only one left turn lane onto Wiseman heading east and Potranco heading east. Can you make the middle lane a left turn/ straight ahead option lane? There is a big backup on 1604 because there is only one left turn lane onto the these two streets.

- Jaime
The short answer to your question ... is no, we can't make that left through lane an optional left/through lane.

But we're not always about brevity here. We like to explain things, and you're here because you want to hear (ahem, read) what we have to say. Right?

The biggest reason for not going with the optional left-through lane (which do exist on Wiseman and on Potranco, by the way) is signal phasing. There's a whole manual for this (which you can read, if you want). These intersections are currently five-phase intersections, meaning the signals change five times each cycle. It works to maximize the flow of traffic in all directions. The five phases are:

1. Southbound Lp 1604 (with left turn)
2. Southbound and Northbound Lp 1604 (no left turns)
3. Northbound Lp 1604 (with left turn)
4. Eastbound Wiseman/Potranco (with left turns)
5. Westbound Wiseman/Potranco (with left turns)

The cross streets have that optional left-turn lane ... the major street does not. That's by design! If we were to add the optional lanes to Loop 1604, we'd have some issues and you'd actually see greater delays. Here's why:

1. Southbound Lp 1604 only
2. Northbound Lp 1604 only
3. Eastbound cross street
4. Westbound cross street

By doing this you're lacking the major traffic movement with this arrangement - that extra phase of traffic where the through traffic is allowed to flow through the intersection. Sure, by just looking at things we'd only have four phases ... but that means you're looking at 20-30 fewer seconds given to that through traffic for each cycle. That traffic would instead simply stack up on queues on the main lanes, bogging down traffic on Lp 1604 even more.

That's why we don't do an optional left-turn lane on any location comparable to Loop 1604 here (think of Loop 337 in New Braunfels or Northwest Military at Wurzbach Parkway).

Here's the good news: you may have noticed we're working on the overpasses at Wiseman, NW Military and Potranco. It'll take some time to get to where those overpasses are in use, but they are your long-term solution. By the way, when we have those overpasses in we'll be able to employ your suggestion and move to a four-phase cycle (which is standard for expressway intersections).

One issue that seems to be ignored is the lack of a good connection for people leaving AR wanting to head north on 1604. The best way now is Wiseman, out the "back" of the area, although it is generally backed up at rush hour.
It appears to me that a simple clover, eastbound just pass the overpass, onto 1604 headed north, would solve the problem. There doesn't appear to be any right-of-way issue, when might this project be put in place?
- Richard
The issue wasn't ignored at all; the current strategy is to route traffic down to Wiseman like you're doing today. When the project was studied and designed the demand (and projected demand) for that move wasn't very high. Remember these plans go back over seven years, so a lot of what you're seeing now wasn't known of during those plans.
Once we were ready for construction, financial constraints kept us from adding more features to the project (and bridge work is really expensive).
The current option will improve dramatically when the overpass at Wiseman is constructed and, as you know, we're working on that now. When that's done (the project is set to wrap up in 2019) we'll take a new look at traffic movements to determine needed improvements in the future.


You posted some information on your blog sometime around October 2015 regarding a lane being eliminated on the frontage roads of the I-410 just north of TX-151 due to construction work. It said that work would be completed around 2017. I know there is still construction work going on around this area, however I would like to know if this lane elimination is still there or if it has been lifted. I have also pasted in the information that was shown on the blog. Thank You.
- Jay
Those frontage road lanes is still eliminated, and we're still working to fill the promise of having that lane reopened this year. That will happen when we've got the new ramps finished - a task on this project that's prioritized right now. The closures are designed to help crews widen the frontage roads and the main lanes, fitting them to new ramp configurations that are being pushed to be in place this summer (if all goes well).


Why is there no plan for an east bound exit for Boerne Stage Road? Everyone going to HEB or Walmart has to sit through the Ralph Fair stop light. I'm not surprised the bridge needed expansion but a lot of that was due to two streets worth of traffic forced to go through the same exit and light.
Could you please let me know why this is the plan?
- Reid
Right now it's really a matter of geometry. You're familiar with the area; you know the on-ramp from Ralph Fair Road (which gets more than its fair share of use) takes up most of the space between Ralph Fair Road and Leon Creek. Yes, there's a big gap between Ralph Fair Road and that on-ramp, but that's filled by the auxiliary lane allowing turnaround traffic to blend with traffic off the bridge - preventing us from moving that entrance ramp anywhere.
Those unfamiliar with what's going on out there can check out our schematic of the area here.
It's a tough situation, for sure - but not one that has been taken lightly by our folks at all. The situation will likely improve for you when we convert that frontage road between Old Fredericksburg Road and Ralph Fair Road to one-way; it'll open up some capacity along the frontage road and improve the signal operations a bunch.


We are new to the area and keep hearing rumors about SH 211 extending to Culebra. I saw something that there is a project out there that has been on and off for years. Is there anything in the future for this effort?
- Matthew
This is a discussion that's been had by the Alamo Area MPO, Bexar County and us quite a bit over the last several years. The effort is currently in the hands of Bexar County. They have information posted online here.


Bitters Road between Blanco and 281 is down to two lanes and it is a nightmare for traffic, particularly for parents and school buses who have to use Bitters to reach Hidden Forest Elementary. I have not seen any public notice about the scope of this project, although there has been intermittent resurfacing on parts of the road. What's going on right now and how long is it going to take?
- Haley
Haley wrote this in a few weeks ago. The work to which she referred was being done by the city of San Antonio.
Y'all, we know it can be confusing regarding who is in charge of what road. Heck, we get it wrong from time to time. A good rule of thumb: if it has an FM (Farm-to-Market) road designation, it's a TxDOT road. These designations feature the big white boxes with black numbers you'll see on the large green directional signs when you're running down the Interstate highways. If it doesn't have that designation, it's not ours.
If it's not ours and it's in the city limits, it belongs to the city of San Antonio. If it's beyond city limits, it goes to Bexar County Public Works.
It's tough to keep straight for us all, but we try to manage. We have cheat sheets that help, too!
All that said, the city had responded to others asking similar questions and should have had the issue resolved a while ago.


So since the new on ramp has opened on 1604 and Bandera headed west, I've seen many, many people leave the Stonefield Place street and interrupt traffic to get on the highway. The street is passed the entrance ramp so they have to drive up and cross over the 3 lanes to get on. I've seen people almost get hit several times in the last week alone. Any way something could be done to alleviate this?
- Leah

Don't let this be your commute. Be safe. Drive smart.

Unfortunately there aren't a lot of options to deal effectively with these very rude, very selfish, very dangerous drivers. And that's what they are - rude, selfish and dangerous. They are putting their own wants ahead of the safety of all of us on the road, aren't they?
Sadly, Leah, this is a driving behavior displayed all over the city. What's more, it's not even against the law (as Texas Highwayman points out) in Texas, though it is elsewhere. Here it's just an obnoxious lane change. Just because it's not illegal doesn't mean it's the right thing to do, though, and this sort of mentality has simply got to be eradicated. At this location specifically, going through that signal at Bandera only takes a few extra minutes and could extend life expectancy of they motorist by years. Decades, even. That's a heck of a return-on-investment!

We design and build the roads and include with our building a set of instructions (pavement markings, highway signs...). When those instructions are not followed, the results are almost always disastrous.
Update: Looking at this location a second time based on feedback from Texas Highwayman, we need to point out this movement is, in fact, an illegal movement. Coming out of Stonefield to get to the entrance ramp to northbound/eastbound Loop 1604 means crossing the "gore", which is absolutely illegal. And unsafe. And selfish. And reckless. And everything we mentioned above.
We can try to install some sort of barrier to stop this - like the Tuff Curb and delineator paddles we're planning to put in on Alamo Ranch Parkway near Westwood Loop, but this shouldn't be a necessary strategy.
Let us be clear: this reckless, dangerous, selfish, childish, rushed and illegal driving behavior exists all over San Antonio. We stripe the roadway to let folks know this is unacceptable, but are criticized because drivers completely ignore the striping. This leads to pressure to put up these positive barriers - which we can absolutely do, when needed - at a higher cost to you, the taxpayer, and at an absurd cost to repair, replace and maintain as we go. To see what we mean, take a look at US 281 north of Loop 1604, where we've installed these curbs and paddles to stop selfish and disrespectful drivers from doing the same thing up there. We've had to replace those paddles routinely, as drivers ignore them and figure the damage to their own car is minimal, so they simply drive over them.
Installing a small concrete curb isn't an option, either - those are only to be used on roads with posted practical speeds under 45 miles per hour. The frontage road here is now posted at 50, and drivers are often exceeding that posted limit.
This gets us to the point of actual solutions for you, Leah. Option one: tell your neighbors to stop being so dang selfish, rude, dangerous, reckless, careless and more. Option two: encourage your local law enforcement agencies to up the enforcement on this maneuver, writing tickets for those who do it.
In the interim, we'll pass along some comments on this issue to our engineers for a fix.

Any idea when construction to widen Loop 1604 from I-10 to FM 1346 might begin? Thanks!
- Todd
Right now that's included in our long-range wish list and is penciled in for the year 2020. To be honest, that mark will likely move - it's placed on the list for the year 2020 so it's considered and scored for prioritization. We are working on it, but at the moment we have other demands to fill.

Mail Bag: Hydroplaning issues, future on I-10 and on Loop 1604

Twice, within the last week (earlier this month), I have been told of hydroplaning on 1604 near LaCantera Pkwy and I-10. Both times it was raining lightly or the road was wet. Both times, the drivers were going under 40 mph when they tapped the brake lightly and began fishtailing. I know one incident could have been worn tires. But the second involved pretty new tires. Is this part of the road extra slick when wet?
- Michelle
Thanks for the question, Michelle. Let's start by defining what hydroplaning is and what it's not. A slick road doesn't mean it's causing hydroplaning. For hydroplaning to happen, you'd need excessive standing water and you'd actually be accelerating, not braking.
So it's unlikely you're talking about hydroplaning (or aquaplaning) and more about simple slick roads - a common hazard when roads get wet. When it rains, water mixes with the oils from cars on the roadway and fills some of the tiny cracks in the asphalt, creating a slick situation. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says this is at its worst about 5-10 minutes after it rains, or during a very light rain. It's important, then, for drivers to keep in mind during wet weather a huge need to slow down and increase following distance.

Hi! Will the project at I-10 at Old Fredericksburg Rd just be a highway overpass or will there also be a highway exit and entrance ramp at Old Fred?
- Anne
It'll have exits and entrances for Old Fred Rd ... the point here is to offer an additional access point to I-10 for folks out there, relieving pressure on the Ralph Fair Road and Fair Oaks Parkway intersections. Take a look at the schematic here for an idea of what it'll look like when we're done.

The daily commute between Bandera Rd and I-10 (vice versa in the evenings) is often at a complete standstill. Have any of the plans to expand this section of 1604 been funded yet?
- Zane
We know this is an issue. Frankly, added capacity won't help the real problem here - what we need to do is improve the interchange at Loop 1604 and I-10 as well as the westbound ramp to Bandera Road. These are some expensive fixes, though, and we don't have them on our plans for the next couple of years. We do have it on our list, to be sure, and once we get funding (that happens through the MPO) we'll make sure we get something done.

When will West Ave. close for construction? How long will it be closed? What are they doing to the road?
- Michael
West Avenue is a city road and this project is a city project. More information should be available on the city's web site.

This morning (Sept. 2) around 8:15 when I was driving on eastbound I-10 going into San Antonio from Boerne, Exit 543 (Boerne State Rd / Cascade Caverns Rd) had traffic backed up onto the exit ramp and almost onto the interstate. Are there any plans to move the exit ramp further away from the intersection so that this will not occur? I have also seen this same problem happen at the same exit when I have been heading West bound towards Boerne also. This could be an accident waiting to happen.
- Mark
The current project does not address ramp locations. That said, we do have plans to address this issue as we continue to develop I-10 in Kendall County to address the continued growth trends. We don't have a firm timeline on those future projects at the moment, but they will ultimately happen when we've identified funding.

Mail Bag: What's happening on I-10 between Foster and Graytown roads?

When are the project for improvements to I-10 between Foster Road and Graytown Road, including the Woodlake Pkwy overpass scheduled to begin? Will the frontage roads be rebuilt before they are converted to one way? How soon will traffic lights be added to the 10/1516 intersection?
- Marshall
Those who don't know what Marshall is talking about can check out our project information page here.

The $65.3 million project was awarded to Texas Sterling Construction earlier this summer, and we've been working out some details in some materials used. See, our pavement engineer has marked this job to conduct a pavement materials experiment that could help us save tens of millions statewide and improve the life of our roadway. We had to make sure the supply of materials needed - geogrid - was available for the project.

We'd like to get started on this project before Halloween (we're still getting our contracts drafted, and a three-month gap between letting and project start is fairly standard). The frontage roads won't be converted to one-way until the third phase of work, which comes once the new overpass at Woodlake Parkway is finished up. Don't expect to see that happen until 2018.

As for the traffic signals at the intersection of I-10 and FM 1516 ... those will be completed near the end of the project, after we've got the frontage roads and intersections reconstructed. (It's called for in Phase V Step 4B, if you're really interested in the detailed timing.)

Concerning the work activity at Hwy 46 and Hwy 281: Before the construction, two lanes were allowed to turn left from westbound Hwy 46 to southbound Hwy 281 (the middle lane could optionally go straight or turn left). Why has this configuration changed to only one left turn lane?
- Tom
Thanks for your note, Tom. You weren't the only one to reach out and ask about this issue. Unfortunately incorrect signs were installed and, for a while, it seemed as though the dual-left option was being removed.

This was corrected 18 August. The current configuration should be: Left lane is left only, middle lane is optional through or left, right lane is through only.

Is there any QA/QC project acceptance done by TxDOT? The firm working the Boerne Stage Rd-Leon Springs project has a lot of rough patches. The only ramp between Ralph Fair and BSR has a big tilt halfway along the length. The new on ramp at Leon Springs going west is the same.
- Matt
Having driven this length ourselves a few times, we're guessing you're talking about the rougher base surface that's now out there when compared to completed ramps and roadway, where things are a bit smoother. This is a common observation on our projects.

See, when we put our contracts together, we require a warranty on the asphalt that's put in. If the asphalt deteriorates under traffic, the contractor is required to replace it at their own cost. Because of this, contractors typically wait until the very end of the project to lay down that final surface of asphalt that's more expensive and tends to wear out a little faster (has to do with the size of the aggregate in the mix).

So what you're driving on is a temporary surface ... well, sort of. It's actually the base layer of asphalt on which we'll lay down the final surface later. That final surface is 1-2 inches thick while the base is 12-18 inches thick.

As for the westbound exit to Ralph Fair ... that ramp is a temporary ramp and will be replaced with a permanent ramp anyway.

So ... yes, we do have quality assurance and project acceptance on every TxDOT project. However, we're not ready to accept the project and are waiting for the project to be complete - which, in this instance, is around the end of the year.

Old Fredericksburg road at Ralph Fair Road is now a very dangerous intersection. Attempting to cross four lanes of traffic here is extremely unsafe at many busy times of the day. While visibility is close to zero many people still attempt the crossing. Even crossing two lanes from Ralph Fair onto Old Fred behind the Valero is difficult. Are any changes planned for this intersection?
- Deb
Part of your issue here is traffic volume, to be perfectly honest. We've seen a five-year low of 7,800 vehicles per day on Ralph Fair, capped by more than 11,000 cars per day in our five-year high. While we do see some flux from year to year, the trend is upward - and the range there is pretty significant.
So, what's the plan for the future? That's a complicated question, though it may not seem like it should be.

The state's responsibility here is Ralph Fair Road, and our plans include expanding that road (which shouldn't really help your specific observation much) in the future. We're working on plans to expand Ralph Fair to four lanes all the way up to Hwy 46 by time we're all done.

We could add a traffic signal at the location, but that would significantly add to the traffic delays folks are experiencing already at the intersection of I-10 and Ralph Fair. Frankly, Old Fred isn't much of a problem except for about four hours each day and a signal at that location would do more harm, overall, than good.

The real solution is providing another way for traffic on Old Fred to reach I-10. That's happening with our I-10 Fair Oaks project, which adds that overpass at Old Fred and I-10. When the intersection there is finished - by early 2018 - you'll see a bunch of that traffic trying to cross Ralph Fair or get through that intersection there dissipate and use the new route.

Is there any info regarding extending Galm Road thru Fm 471 and beyond?
- Gary
Will Alamo Ranch Parkway eventually meet up with the new part of 211 (yet to be built)?
- Carolyn
We're bunching your questions together, Gary and Carolyn, because the answer isn't something we have within TxDOT. Galm Road and Alamo Ranch Parkway are both county roads, not state roads. Their development is all handled by Bexar County Public Works (sort of).

In the case of ARP, that's being done by private developers as the Alamo Ranch area continues to expand.

That said, Galm Road isn't slated to extend any further than it is now, but Talley Road and Old 471 are set for some upgrades. That info is here. Carolyn, you'll also find at that link information on the extension of Hwy 211 so private developers can connect ARP with Hwy 211 at some point in the future.

I saw they said West Avenue would be closed by Wurzbach Parkway beginning September 12 through March of 2017. Any idea how far along that closure is?
Is it just from Wurzbach to Nakoma or is it farther than that?
- Robert

Great question, Robert. Unfortunately, we're not the agency running that project. Give the city a call - their TCI group is heading up that work.

Mail Bag:

The person who commented on the on-ramp to westbound I-10 at Ralph Fair Rd was completely correct. You can't see the right lane clearly until you are in the acceleration lane which is way too short. And I don't agree about your suggestion on not stopping. If there is an 18 wheeler going 60 and you can't accelerate in front of it, you stop.
- Jean
For those new to the blog or unfamiliar with this issue, Jean is referring to Vicky's question back in the April 11 Mail Bag post.
A few minor points of clarification: it wasn't us making the recommendation on how to navigate the ramp; we referenced the recommendations coming from safe driving experts on the issue. That said, we've had our folks out there in a variety of vehicle types - the visibility of the roadway is quite clear from the frontage road.
The key here is to look ahead while driving. Those who aren't seeing the traffic on the I-10 main lanes are likely falling into the trap most of us do while driving; we're looking only at the pavement ahead of us. Nearly every safe or defensive driving course out there - including a standard drivers' education class and the Smith System program taught to drivers at TxDOT - teaches to aim high in steering and to get the big picture. In other words, don't simply focus on the road immediately ahead.
All this said, we stand by our explanation from before.

Why is the hillside by the southbound I-10 frontage road in Leon Springs being cut back? The project schematic does not show any additional main lines or ramps in that area. Is it for future projects?
- Blake
You're right - we're not adding additional lanes. But you'll notice on the schematic a realignment of entrance and exit ramps along the project. What you're seeing there is the cut for the new eastbound exit to Dominion Drive.

Are there plans to expand the road out Blanco Road to Old Blanco Road out in Bexar County near Camp Bullis?
- Rose
That's a great question - one we don't have a definitive answer for. The portion of Blanco Road north of San Antonio city limits is not a TxDOT facility, but is owned and maintained by Bexar County Public Works. They may have more to say on the issue than we do.

I was just wondering on the Hwy 90 west project if there will be additional lanes? And the bridge that is being built - is that going to be a turn around?
- Christina
In a word (or two): sort of. You've got two questions here. The easy one is about the turnaround. That answer is YES. As for the additional lanes ... that's the sort of.
We're adding "auxiliary lanes" in each direction to help facilitate traffic entering and exiting the highway in that area. For a closer look, check out our schematic used during our open house meetings prior to the project starting.

Flooding happens every time we have heavy rains. I travel I-35 and I-410 every day and see the trash collecting. When it floods we see six vehicles and 15 workers trying to fix something that they were payed to keep clear. People will be people that is why we pay city crews to clean it up. Someone is not doing there (sic) job period.
- Paul
Paul, we're glad you've reached out - and we hope you'll join us in our efforts to remind people of our Don't Mess with Texas campaign.
The highway belongs to the public and, as such, the care of the highway is the responsibility of us all - not simply the folks contracted to clean it up. At least, not any more than it's the sole job of our moms to clean our rooms or do our laundry. Heck, we even have a whole national holiday to recognize our moms and remind us all it's us, not our mom, who's ultimately responsible for picking up those pesky dirty socks.
We have our crews patrol the highways regularly to clean trash, but that's an extremely hazardous job to do. We can't do it daily, which is - quite frankly - what would be required to keep up with the trash getting tossed out by those people who are simply being people.
Those same crews are contracted to mow the medians at various intervals. They repair guardrails destroyed by drunk, inattentive or speeding drivers. They clean up graffiti by those who deface the signs or columns your tax dollars built. They fill in potholes we stuggle to keep up with.
In our efforts to save money in order to focus our funds on improving your commute through capital projects, we've outsourced some of our maintenance work. That's the case here - and our maintenance contractors are out on these roadways routinely.
So the issue, Paul, is not with our crews who aren't able to keep up with the trash folks are tossing out the window. It's with folks who dismiss the pathetic practice of littering as something we just need to deal with.
We take a different approach, believing we can use education to combat the problem and bring it to an actual halt. We've been working at it for 30 years now and seen some great results. There's more to do, though. Join us!

With 1604 opening past Bandera Rd, why the drop in speed limit to 60 mph? This section of road seems to be better than the NE part of 1604 around I-35 where the limit is at least 65 mph with less limited access than this section of road. Could I be so bold as to even throw out 70 mph for consideration?
- Ryan
Ryan, your sentiment is familiar - it sounds a lot like the request to increase the speed limit on Wurzbach when it opened. Well, those familiar with that situation know the speed limits were, indeed, changed.
Our approach here will be much more tempered. We have two more expansion projects coming to similarly add overpasses along Loop 1604 all the way through Hwy 90. That means this stretch between Bandera and Culebra is the stretch leading into a construction zone (that will be active next year), and the decreased speed limit will help slow folks down as they head into the new construction zones.
After that work is all done (2019), well ... that's a question for elected officials, speed studies and the Texas Transportation Commission.

How long for a large pothole to be repaired at state Hwy. 16 and main street in Kerrville?
- William
The pothole has been reported and should be addressed quickly. Thanks for letting us know!

Would you please give me information on the Highland Hills subdivision, Pocahontas Dr., and other roads around the zip code 78264 having construction plans to pave roads.
- Lee
Those roads - all unpaved, private or county roads - are not under TxDOT ownership or maintenance. The best agency to approach with this project would be Bexar County Public Works.

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.

Mail Bag (2 of 2): Future plans for Lp 1604 and US 281, non-TxDOT issues reported

Friday's weather-related issues delayed this posting ... otherwise this would have been posted Friday or Saturday. So ... without further ado:

At southbound Stadium and N St. Marys 65 percent of the traffic turns right. This is a major access to downtown and SAC. Some 34 percent of the traffic goes strait. Anyone wanting to go to River Road or Zoo area would make a left back at Mulberry. Why, then, is there a dedicated left turn lane that seldom gets used. A dedicated right turn lane would do more to help traffic. This pattern has existed for 30-plus years and applies to every day of the week.
- Stanley

This issue belongs to our counterparts within the city of San Antonio - we've passed the comments along and they are aware of the concern. Thanks!

The intersection at westbound I-10 and Loop 1604 near The Rim is way over capacity and very congested during the (afternoon) rush hour. Is there a plan to build fly over ramps soon?
- Paul

The interchange - a cloverleaf design - is certainly beyond its intended capacity. It's an interchange we're aware of and trying to seek options that could fix the issue. The best plan currently in the works is a series of priority connectors between the managed lanes of I-10 and the managed lanes on Loop 1604. Right now all this is proposed and not set in stone, but we're working with the Alamo Area MPO to develop a workable plan.
Here's the real challenge we're facing: cash flow. A stack interchange - what folks typically think of when they think of a major interchange, such as what we have at I-10 and I-410 - is really costly. To build a complete interchange, we'd be looking at a price tag in the neighborhood of $500 million - a bit more than just pocket change, even for a government agency.
The main thing to know is we are aware of the need here, and we're working to develop options. The priorities for cash flow identified by folks living and driving throughout the region have not made this interchange a high enough priority for us to pour a ton of money into this location ... yet. If you'd like to help and bump this one up the list (or other projects, for that matter) contact the MPO for ways to get involved.

I am wondering if someone can revisit the decision to make the new frontage road lanes at the Ralph Fair intersection double left turns. If you want to make a u-turn the turn-around is open for that. If you are in the far left lane, the signage and stripes on the street lead you to also make a u-turn, but by driving across the bridge. The lane that goes straight and also can turn left is the only choice for those wanting to go straight and also those wanting to turn left, cross the bridge and then go straight or turn right onto the opposite frontage road. (Therefore, this is the most used lane, by far, and it gets really long.) It seems a left turn only lane that leads to the center lane on the bridge and a straight only lane would be a better choice for this intersection. I hope I explained this well enough that it makes sense and isn't too confusing. Thanks!
- Carrie
We can certainly look into this, Carrie. Your comment has been forwarded on to our operations folks to see what can be done. That said, be aware there may be some limitations here until the I-10 frontage roads are one-way on both sides of this bridge. In particular, the work between Ralph Fair Road and Boerne Stage Road being done (on the eastbound side) will need to wrap up before we're able to do this.

Any plans to add capacity on 1604 between Bandera and I-10?
- Zane

There are! We are working through the MPO and the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority to develop a lasting plan. You can see the latest on that plan here.

The sun rays are interfering with traffic signals during the early morning and evening (sunrise and sunset) on Boerne Stage Road and HEB. The impact seems to leave no safe left-turn light when traveling northwest on Boerne Stage Road and the light is green for only about 10-12 seconds for the main traffic on Boerne Stage Road when when long traffic line builds up.
- Raj

Those sensors may just need to be cleaned. We're passing this note along to the folks with Bexar County, as these signals are not TxDOT signals.

With the U.S. 281 expressway still a few years away there are only a few options from northern Stone Oak to get into town. The traffic on southbound Blanco Road north of 1604 in the morning has been horrendous. It will take me 30 minutes from Timberwood Park to get to 1604. The lights at 1604 and Blanco seem to be on a really, really short cycle (less than 20 seconds) and I think that lengthening that could ease congestion for thousands of people each day. What else can be done until the expressway?
- Bryan

We'll talk to our friends with the city about the timing of signals along that corridor - they have already been optimized, but we can look at tweaking something again.
In the meantime, if you're having a tough time during peak traffic hours, you might consider moving your workday hours (where possible). One of the greatest things we can do as drivers or employers is consider off-peak start and end times to workdays. We even do that here with our folks - we stagger our start schedules so we have some folks that start as early as 6 a.m., and others who start around 9. The result is a minimized impact on those heavier traffic times between 7 and 8 a.m. (and a similar impact later in the day).
Here's some good news for you, Bryan: the expressway on US 281 between Loop 1604 and Stone Oak Parkway is set to start in 2017, which would mean that segment could wrap up as soon as 2020.

There was a light pole on Hildebrand and U.S 281 which was struck by a truck a month ago. How would they install a new light pole on the base of the previous broken light pole?
- Jose

Most street lights, traffic signal poles and highway signs include a breakaway base designed to snap and allow the pole to fall in a direction that minimizes potential harm in the event of a crash. These have been included since the late 1990s on pretty much anything (except for street lights mounted to the top of concrete median barrier) that could pose a danger when hit.
The added benefit - in addition to safety benefits - is on the replacement side. The base or foundation of the breakaway mount is typically still very usable after a collision. If this is the case crews can simply mount a new pole to the existing base. It's a simple and relatively quick process - ordering the required pole and lights becomes a more lengthy process than actually installing the pole.
Does that answer your question?