AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[smith_atx]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

Already seeing this on Reddit. "Of course I'm not voting for this. I can't use public transit to do everything I need to do."

I had to quit going to that subreddit for the preservation of my own sanity.

[Sigaven]

Originally Posted by smith_atx

I had to quit going to that subreddit for the preservation of my own sanity.

Honestly I'm not seeing any of this on reddit. The thread over there looks very supportive of light rail. There's even folks in there saying they voted against rail in 2014 who are now for this proposal.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Apparently the whole system plan has _2_ lines south of the river, even though the majority of Austin lives North.

So yeah, quit your complaining

2 lines is great but we need to know these will be built sooner rather than later.

Doesn't matter which side has the greater population, it's a matter of treating the southside equally. At least make sure what we vote for will actually benefit us from it sooner rather than later which is why I think they should add South Congress in conjunction with Guadalupe/N. Lamar.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

2 lines is great but we need to know these will be built sooner rather than later.

Doesn't matter which side has the greater population, it's a matter of treating the southside equally. At least make sure what we vote for will actually benefit us from it sooner rather than later which is why I think they should add South Congress in conjunction with Guadalupe/N. Lamar.

I fully expect that it will be seen as political necessity to package at least 1 south line with a north line in a vote. It may be Riverside rather than Congress(like in 2014), given the recent and future redevelopments there. Also because it's seen (as some) as a way to the airport (even though that shouldn't matter).

And those added votes hopefully will be more than the votes it loses from increased costs.

[Novacek]

I just noticed KUT put up the full presentation

http://kut.org/post/austin-getting-a...ight-rail-line

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

I fully expect that it will be seen as political necessity to package at least 1 south line with a north line in a vote. It may be Riverside rather than Congress(like in 2014), given the recent and future redevelopments there. Also because it's seen (as some) as a way to the airport (even though that shouldn't matter).

And those added votes hopefully will be more than the votes it loses from increased costs.

The Riverside line has to cross I-35 which is a huge problem because of TxDot. The reconstruction of the Riverside overpass was suppose to begin in 2018-2019 but it's now on hiatus along with the rest of 35 in the Austin area. Unless things clear up real quick, real soon Cap Metro can't put a riverside LRT on their implementation plan because they have no way of knowing when the overpass will be rebuilt. It's not just a case of money either. It's also design.

Originally Posted by Novacek

These are separate "Enhancement" projects that are independent of the light rail plans?
If so, that's very important. As much as I would love to have that system, I think it's DOA.

I think they were all separate mobility investments. I think the S. 1st bridge and Cesar transit lanes are great ideas but it's going to get a lot of hate from motorists. I really think the city should invest in at least 1 more crossing at the river or expand the capacity of Pleasant Valley.

Let's let things play out in terms of the funding. I don't disagree with you but we need people to be confronted with realities.

[freerover]

The public presentation at the library of the entire plan is being delayed a month. The new Cap Metro CEO might want time to go through the plan before the city gets excited about this very ambitious proposal.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by freerover

The Riverside line has to cross I-35 which is a huge problem because of TxDot. The reconstruction of the Riverside overpass was suppose to begin in 2018-2019 but it's now on hiatus along with the rest of 35 in the Austin area. Unless things clear up real quick, real soon Cap Metro can't put a riverside LRT on their implementation plan because they have no way of knowing when the overpass will be rebuilt. It's not just a case of money either. It's also design.

You mean 35 through the DT area I take it. Cause construction has begun in ernest south of Riverside through Slaughter with new bridges and adding an extra lane to each side at least in segments.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

You mean 35 through the DT area I take it. Cause construction has begun in ernest south of Riverside through Slaughter with new bridges and adding an extra lane to each side at least in segments.

I assure you that the Riverside overpass was taken off the 10 year schedule and is in current hiatus.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

^Haha, classic Novacek, I agree and even wonder if there is a point further south to spur off since Burnet is getting denser.

(reply moved from Domain thread)

The previous map they showed had the rest of Burnet listed as "long term Tier 1".

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMYcZHZUMAAUAb7.jpg

cutting across on 45th(?).

Along with Airport, Oltorf(?), Pleasant Valley.

I'm assuming/hoping that the exclusion of all of those from this map just means they'd be on a longer timeline.

Further south, it seems like the only potential options (besides Anderson) are there at 45th or 2222 (north Austin lacks good E/W connectivity). At 45th, it is really more of a second line than a spur. 2222 has some similar issues as 183. Its not an IA corridor. It has a more constrained RoW than Anderson. You'd also have to convince TxDot to give up lanes of technically a state highway.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

(reply moved from Domain thread)

The previous map they showed had the rest of Burnet listed as "long term Tier 1".

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMYcZHZUMAAUAb7.jpg

cutting across on 45th(?).

Along with Airport, Oltorf(?), Pleasant Valley.

I'm assuming/hoping that the exclusion of all of those from this map just means they'd be on a longer timeline.

Further south, it seems like the only potential options (besides Anderson) are there at 45th or 2222 (north Austin lacks good E/W connectivity). At 45th, it is really more of a second line than a spur. 2222 has some similar issues as 183. Its not an IA corridor. It has a more constrained RoW than Anderson. You'd also have to convince TxDot to give up lanes of technically a state highway.

I can see why they want the transfer point between the Lamar Line and domain spur to be the North Lamar Transit Center north of 183. You're talking about an actual lot to use as oppose to just an easement on the side of the road. Lot of room for bus and train idling. That likely maximizes the number of people that can quickly get to where they are to where they want to go with a few transfers as possible.


Also, city council approved work to re-route power lines underground between 35 and Sabine on 4th as a part of the new downtown train station. It's the 1st work I've seen authorized so big win there. I'm not sure if they are going to be rebuilding the 4th street bridge over waller creek or just widening it so they can keep a car lane open on that block.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

I can see why they want the transfer point between the Lamar Line and domain spur to be the North Lamar Transit Center north of 183. You're talking about an actual lot to use as oppose to just an easement on the side of the road. Lot of room for bus and train idling. That likely maximizes the number of people that can quickly get to where they are to where they want to go with a few transfers as possible.

What transfer point?

It's a spur, not a separate line. You don't have riders board at Payton Gin, ride for a stop, and then transfer to another train at the NLTC. You have riders board at PG (or the Domain) and have a one seat ride all the way to downtown.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by freerover

I assure you that the Riverside overpass was taken off the 10 year schedule and is in current hiatus.

Oh I know, but I was talking about all the construction going on I-35 south of Riverside. Oltorf has been rebuilt, Stassney, William Cannon, Slaughter Creek overpasses have all or are currently being rebuilt along with widening of the expressway.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Novacek

What transfer point?

It's a spur, not a separate line. You don't have riders board at Payton Gin, ride for a stop, and then transfer to another train at the NLTC. You have riders board at PG (or the Domain) and have a one seat ride all the way to downtown.

To add more details to my reply, since I'm now back in town.


They have stated that the full operational characteristics of the proposal wouldn't be determined until phase 3, so frequency and allocation between forks, etc.

There's certainly nothing that precludes them from running a Domain-originating train to short of downtown. But even if they try to cost-optimize runs, I'm going to affirmatively state that at _minimum_ a train from the domain will run at least to Crestview. Because that's where all the buses to transfer to actually are.

Under connections 2025 (and even before) they've continually been de-emphasising NLTC in favor of crestview. Cx2025 had a single non-Lamar route (323) stop there. They slid back slightly for June 2018 (now there's still the 383 as well). But that one almost certainly wouldn't exist anymore with light rail.

The NLTC is kind of in an awkward spot. It's too far into the city, and too far away from the major N/S highways. Yet it's so far out that once parking there you still have a long transit ride in. It's almost too close to 183 (either driving in or driving out is probably going to be an awkward U turn). The highway and depressed Lamar (which is highway-like in that section) cuts off good pedestrian access from almost 270 degrees. Any central-core buses need to cross over 183 (twice) to connect there. Etc.

It probably was a good location years ago, when that was out in the boonies. But nowadays I'd be surprised if a new P+R was proposed there, if CM didn't already have the land.

[Novacek]

The city posted some more details about cost estimates for the corridor work.

http://austintexas.gov/sites/default...ns20180216.pdf

It's not as fine grained as I was hoping for (how much does this intersection that was selected cost, vs. that intersection that wasn't selected). But it's something to read and discuss.

The estimate for Guadalupe seems really off to me. They estimate that the transit lanes for Guadalupe were going to cost $45M. Or 45M /mile. That's in addition to $20M for all the stuff on Nueces that was selected.

While CapMetro claims they can do _elevated_ Gold Class true-BRT for $50M /mile.

Someone is massively off.

Edit: Different compare. That's what, twice as expensive per mile as the Mopac toll lane, which added lanes and sound walls.

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Under connections 2025 (and even before) they've continually been de-emphasising NLTC in favor of crestview. Cx2025 had a single non-Lamar route (323) stop there. They slid back slightly for June 2018 (now there's still the 383 as well). But that one almost certainly wouldn't exist anymore with light rail.

The NLTC is kind of in an awkward spot. It's too far into the city, and too far away from the major N/S highways. Yet it's so far out that once parking there you still have a long transit ride in. It's almost too close to 183 (either driving in or driving out is probably going to be an awkward U turn). The highway and depressed Lamar (which is highway-like in that section) cuts off good pedestrian access from almost 270 degrees. Any central-core buses need to cross over 183 (twice) to connect there. Etc.

It probably was a good location years ago, when that was out in the boonies. But nowadays I'd be surprised if a new P+R was proposed there, if CM didn't already have the land.

I think the long term plans for nltc involved completely redeveloping the site into transit-friendly multi-family, possibly with an eye toward affordable housing. I remember there had been talk of an RFP just a few years ago.

Has that place ever been useful? It's only ever been a time-wasting, underutilized eyesore for the 15 years I've been here. It's almost like it was designed to be outright hostile to transit users and pedestrians.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

The city posted some more details about cost estimates for the corridor work.

http://austintexas.gov/sites/default...ns20180216.pdf

It's not as fine grained as I was hoping for (how much does this intersection that was selected cost, vs. that intersection that wasn't selected). But it's something to read and discuss.

The estimate for Guadalupe seems really off to me. They estimate that the transit lanes for Guadalupe were going to cost $45M. Or 45M /mile. That's in addition to $20M for all the stuff on Nueces that was selected.

While CapMetro claims they can do _elevated_ Gold Class true-BRT for $50M /mile.

Someone is massively off.

Edit: Different compare. That's what, twice as expensive per mile as the Mopac toll lane, which added lanes and sound walls.

They are proposing a complete rebuild/repave of the entire corridor ROW along with designating transit lanes which is where the cost comes from. COA has a lot of similar projects like Brozos St. downtown to draw cost comparisons to. Comparing to Mopac is not really apples to apples.

We really don't know much about the Cap Metro plan to know what we are getting with that cost estimate. The 2014 light rail plan included money to redevelop/rebuild Riverside but maybe the new Guad/Lamar plan is down and dirty costs of installing tracks without re-working corridors other than what is necessary to keep existing lanes.

[freerover]

Here are some high res images of the new downtown train station:

The design is %90 complete and COA Council recently approved utility work required for track expansion. Capital Metro is holding an open house on Wednesday to present the Downtown Station plans to the public. The come-and-go event will run from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. in the convention center’s Ballroom B.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

They are proposing a complete rebuild/repave of the entire corridor ROW along with designating transit lanes which is where the cost comes from. COA has a lot of similar projects like Brozos St. downtown to draw cost comparisons to.

I guarantee you they didn't spend $45M /mile on Brazos street.

A complete corridor rebuild shouldn't cost $45M /mile. It doesn't cost that much for a brand new corridor.

Originally Posted by freerover

Comparing to Mopac is not really apples to apples.

I know, it's intentionally not apples to apples. I'm stating that even with a much more complicated project, Mopac cost less (per mile).

Another non-apples comparison, building TX 130 (including RoW costs) was only $30M /mile.

Originally Posted by freerover

We really don't know much about the Cap Metro plan to know what we are getting with that cost estimate. The 2014 light rail plan included money to redevelop/rebuild Riverside but maybe the new Guad/Lamar plan is down and dirty costs of installing tracks without re-working corridors other than what is necessary to keep existing lanes.

Again, I specifically pointed to the _elevated_ option. Which represents massively more work (and what should be more $) than repaving a corridor.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

I guarantee you they didn't spend $45M /mile on Brazos street.

A complete corridor rebuild shouldn't cost $45M /mile. It doesn't cost that much for a brand new corridor.


I know, it's intentionally not apples to apples. I'm stating that even with a much more complicated project, Mopac cost less (per mile).

Another non-apples comparison, building TX 130 (including RoW costs) was only $30M /mile.


Again, I specifically pointed to the _elevated_ option. Which represents massively more work (and what should be more $) than repaving a corridor.

You may be on to something. The November 2017 estimate for all of the work was 33.7 million (2016 dollars). The cost now of splitting the work into 2 different phases doubles the total cost to about 66 million according to your link. There is going to be lost savings from not doing everything in the same round of survey/design/construction but I don't think you would expect it to double the cost.