Please note:September 7, 2014 - We have a couple of years of updates being loaded up. Learn all about the latest on the parkway, TxDOT's version (Alternative F), a new FAQ page, and the Austin City Council Resolution calling for TxDOT and CTRMA to evaluate a parkway alternative fairly, according to NEPA law, and more. Check back next week!

Breaking News:August 28, 2014 - Austin City Council Passes Resolution Supporting Parkway Design!
Click here to read more >>

The Parkway Concept

Fix290 is a grassroots movement based on a consensus regarding the best way to meet the transportation needs of Oak Hill and the surrounding region.

Fix290’s Goals:

    • Alleviate congestion while meeting traffic projections
    • Enhance community and business connectivity and cohesiveness
    • Save Williamson Creek and Oak Hill’s Great Oaks
    • Minimize cost and time to completion
    • Eliminate the need for tolls

Oak Hill Parkway (Large)

The parkway concept has the advantage of keeping the main traffic lanes at grade level and eliminating the 50-foot flyover that TXDOT thinks they need to build at the Y. It would save millions of taxpayer dollars and completely eliminates the toll road.

Note that, while the parkway would be mostly at grade-level, that there would be overpasses and exits where needed at major intersections.

The Fix290 Concept costs less to build and has fewer environmental and social impacts all while alleviating congestion and still meeting traffic projections.


Note: This chart compares the TxDOT designs for Alternatives A and C. Fix290 provided the concepts for a parkway to TxDOT who designed Alternative F. The currently posted Alternative F on TxDOT’s www.OakHillParkway.com has several deficiencies, some yet unexplained, relative to what we suggested they use as a parkway alternative. These deficiencies are listed below the comparison.

Alt.s A and C Alternative F (Parkway)
12 lanes 6 lanes now, 8 lanes in the future
100 Percent 2035 traffic capacity 100 Percent 2035 traffic capacity
Worse frontage road congestion because of
tolling
High speed non-tolled main lanes create
less overall congestion in areas without frontage roads
A mile of frontage and a signalized intersection to get to the hospital Direct Access to 1826 at the hospital
0.5 to 1.6 miles of continuous elevated road Zero miles of elevated road
Elevated high-speed lanes at William Cannon All US 290 high peed lanes depressed
100 percent frontage one-way frontage roads 60 percent frontage, 30 percent two-way frontage
12 and 13 access ramps 18 access ramps
Less protection for trees because of more road Greater protection for trees because of less road
Lanes on both sides of creek compromise environmental integrity Lanes on one side of creek only
Alt A obscures the convict Hill Quarry No elevated at Quarry
Alt A and C have flyovers at the “Y” No flyovers
Costs 28 to 37 percent more Responsibly spends taxpayer money

Major Deficiencies of Alternative F:
1) TxDOT does not show main lanes depressed at William Cannon. TxDOT says that they cannot install a pump system because the road would be deep than the adjacent creek, and they have no pump systems in Austin, yet Houston has pump systems.
2) TxDOT did not save the businesses along the creek, north of US 290 and east of William Cannon as we had suggested they do and as they did with the other alternatives north of US290 and east of William Cannon.
3) TxDOT inexplicably removed the access ramp to the mainlanes of US290 eastbound from Scenic Brook that were included in their second iteration of Alternative F.
4) TxDOT has not evaluated alternatives for the SH71 inbound access to Eastbound US290 at the “Y.”
5) TxDOT did not include a two-way access to Old Bee Caves road as we suggested.

What is a Parkway? >>>


Latest News

What’s All This Fuss About a Parkway?
By Carol Cespedes, Fix290 Coalition An expressway through Oak Hill? Sounds like a great idea, right? Residents of southwest ...
District 8 Forum on Wednesday, September 10
Plan now to turn out for the OHAN District 8 Candidates Forum to be held on Wednesday, September 10, ...
Austin City Council Passes Resolution Supporting Parkway Design
On August 28, 2014, The Austin City Council unanimously passed a resolution recommending "that a non-elevated and non- tolled “parkway” ...
Transportation Improvements in Oak Hill: A Busy Summer
By Bruce Melton, PE (Based on official comments to the NEPA process meeting of August 26, 2014 and delivered to TxDOT/CTRMA ...

More News >>

Quick Downloads

Austin City Council Parkway Resolution : A parkway should be given "full and fair consideration".

Fix 290 Poll : 82% of Southwest Austin residents prefer the parkway.

Fix 290 Noise Report : A parkway will produce 50% LESS noise than TxDOT's elevated design.

Fix 290 Cost Estimate : A parkway would cost about half as much as TxDOT’s latest designs.

Fix 290 Report : Highlights the problems with TxDOT’s plan for the project.

Supporters