HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3801  
Old Posted May 22, 2014, 8:09 PM
MichaelB MichaelB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 3,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereinaustin View Post
I fly into/out of ABIA ~2-4/week. I wouldn't mind not having to sit in traffic, pay for gas, find parking, wait to be shuttled to/from my lot, etc. I'm probably not alone.

If we had the route, I'm willing to bet (no hard proof, of course) that there would be more people using the line on average between Downtown <-> Riverside <-> Airport than from Downtown <-> Highland. Swap the currently proposed northern route with Guadalupe/Lamar and I bet the whole system would see much higher volumes.

I just think a fair evaluation of the route I'm describing should be offered to tax payers alongside the current proposal. It's kind of whack for the city to offer us just one option that ignores a lot of the people who want to see a solid rail line in Austin.
I fly in and out of Austin on average twice a month.
I also think that with the amount of festival traffice we have, and a very walkable downtown…there would be lots of visitors who would be well served by an airport to downtown connection.
Seems important to the cities growth and "usability" ….if thats a word!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3802  
Old Posted May 22, 2014, 9:03 PM
hookem hookem is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
I fly in and out of Austin on average twice a month.
I also think that with the amount of festival traffice we have, and a very walkable downtown…there would be lots of visitors who would be well served by an airport to downtown connection.
Seems important to the cities growth and "usability" ….if thats a word!
I agree, and I think most voters would also. People have been around the world, or at least the country, and they can see that places with real transit systems have a line to the airport. As well as lines through the main travel corridors of the city, but that's another matter.

People arguing that another, non-central corridor route would get better numbers are likely using the same iffy projections that were used to justify the project connect routing, red line, etc.. Probably using the same folks that estimate COTA attendance!

Anyway, a line to the airport may have lower numbers than the fantasy planner ones, but they are 100 times more "real". There really will be folks who take the train to the airport, and visitors who use it to get to the city. That is not a projection, it's a guarantee.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3803  
Old Posted May 25, 2014, 11:57 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,249
As much as I'd love to see a streetcar/light rail system in Austin...let's converse as to why it would cost Austin seven times the cost as it would to develop a streetcar system in OKC? OKC has a 4.6-mile system in development that estimates say would cost $100-$110MM to construct.

I'm hoping the City of Austin is not trying to line the pockets of potential voters with their $1.4B 9-mile system (to know where).

Something is really smelly here...

Houston's light rail was started for a "mere" $325MM (at least it's route made since)! It opened in three years from start of construction.

Also, just to our north...Dallas has the largest light rail system in the U.S. (their starter line opened in 1996). Why are we not in deep discussions with them on how to implement a good system here???
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 974,447 +1.30% - '20-'22 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,421,115 +6.03% - '20-'22
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,472,909 +2.69% - '20-'22 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,655,342 +3.80% - '20-'22
AUS-SAT REGION (MSAs/13 counties): 5,076,457 +4.85% - '20-'22 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3804  
Old Posted May 26, 2014, 3:24 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBoot View Post
As much as I'd love to see a streetcar/light rail system in Austin...let's converse as to why it would cost Austin seven times the cost as it would to develop a streetcar system in OKC? OKC has a 4.6-mile system in development that estimates say would cost $100-$110MM to construct.

I'm hoping the City of Austin is not trying to line the pockets of potential voters with their $1.4B 9-mile system (to know where).

Something is really smelly here...

Houston's light rail was started for a "mere" $325MM (at least it's route made since)! It opened in three years from start of construction.
$600 million of that $1,400 million are for a $400 million tunnel extension and a $200 million bridge over a lake; a few obstacles neither OKC or the initial Houston trains did not have to cross. Never-the-less, the remaining $900 million projected costs is still significantly larger than Houston or OKC initial costs.
Additionally, the federal environmental process has yet to finish, so very little of the final design is completed, so there's very little accuracy with the projected costs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3805  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 1:48 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
I also think that with the amount of festival traffice we have, and a very walkable downtown…there would be lots of visitors who would be well served by an airport to downtown connection.
And that's the _other_ problem with an airport connection. By it's very definition, a large percentage of its riders (possibly approaching half) would be non-Austin residents. And by that, I mean non-Austin taxpayers. So Austin taxpayer money would be going to subsidize non-residents, without even getting any benefits out of it (it's not going to improve festival attendance, and hence revenues. It's not going to improve, or slow the increase, of traffic, etc.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3806  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 2:25 PM
hookem hookem is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
And that's the _other_ problem with an airport connection. By it's very definition, a large percentage of its riders (possibly approaching half) would be non-Austin residents. And by that, I mean non-Austin taxpayers. So Austin taxpayer money would be going to subsidize non-residents, without even getting any benefits out of it (it's not going to improve festival attendance, and hence revenues. It's not going to improve, or slow the increase, of traffic, etc.)
And yet the voters would much prefer to vote for an airport line than a Highland Mall segment, IMO. Why do you think that is?

I think they see the value in it, as demonstrated in other cities. Everyone in town can benefit from mass transit to the airport (since we all use it), and relieving some of the festival traffic (since we all experience it). When you compare it to benefiting only projected future density (and driving up profits for the developers/land flippers), there is really no comparison. I'd much rather my tax $$$ go to the former instead of the latter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3807  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 2:29 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBoot View Post
As much as I'd love to see a streetcar/light rail system in Austin...let's converse as to why it would cost Austin seven times the cost as it would to develop a streetcar system in OKC? OKC has a 4.6-mile system in development that estimates say would cost $100-$110MM to construct.
I don't know a whole lot about the OKC plan, but from some quick googling it _seems_ like its entirely shared lanes. And doesn't have the ridership to qualify for federal funds (which Austin will have, or the project is a no-go).
Also, it's a loop, so it's really only equivalent to 2.3 miles of the proposed Austin system (which is dual-track).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3808  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 2:34 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
And yet the voters would much prefer to vote for an airport line than a Highland Mall segment, IMO. Why do you think that is?
What do you mean "the voters"? Apparently there's some people on this message board (who fly 5-50 times as often as anyone else) who would prefer it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
and relieving some of the festival traffic (since we all experience it).
But that's not where the festival traffic is (or the cause of it). The festival traffic isn't people getting in from the airport. It's everyone trying to get downtown (from everywhere else in Austin) each day of the festival. The people who fly in are staying in hotels (many of them already downtown).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3809  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 6:01 PM
hookem hookem is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
What do you mean "the voters"? Apparently there's some people on this message board (who fly 5-50 times as often as anyone else) who would prefer it.

But that's not where the festival traffic is (or the cause of it). The festival traffic isn't people getting in from the airport. It's everyone trying to get downtown (from everywhere else in Austin) each day of the festival. The people who fly in are staying in hotels (many of them already downtown).
Seems to me that this is the kind of attitude that has resulted in the current "rail fail" proposal. Trying to convince people that a utilitarian route, a staple of any good transit system, something that ALL Austinites could make use of, is somehow "not right". That's the kind of talk that makes people think the planners are blowing smoke up our ass.

Is a line to the airport the most important rail segment we could build? No, a north-south one that mirrors Mopac or another arterial route would be the best. But an airport line is a useful segment -- and more Austinites (and visitors) could make use of a line to the airport instead of to Highland Mall. Everyone uses the airport. And visitors would be less likely to even need to rent a car, especially for SXSW. They'd just hop on the train from the airport, stay at one of the many new hotel rooms being built downtown, then take the train back. You don't need any fictional projections to see how this could be useful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3810  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 6:31 PM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is offline
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 3,144
Here's my thinking...

A route going to the airport: I won't use it often because I don't fly much, but I would use it when the opportunity arises.

A route going to Highland: 0% chance I'll ever use it.

Because of this, I'd go with the airport. I'm betting many voters would think the same way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3811  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 6:53 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 3,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by lzppjb View Post
Here's my thinking...

A route going to the airport: I won't use it often because I don't fly much, but I would use it when the opportunity arises.

A route going to Highland: 0% chance I'll ever use it.

Because of this, I'd go with the airport. I'm betting many voters would think the same way.
Would you look more kindly towards a Highland route, if other LONG RANGE plans were announced that designated Highland as a future rail transit node that would serve to collect commuter light rail from points east, north, and northwest? I suspect that the reason they are trying to push Highland in this election might have something to do with that kind of planning. If so, I don't understand why they don't come out and talk about LONG RANGE transit plans. Voters need to see a vision for something truly significant, or they will not be inclined to support any kind of rail proposal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3812  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 7:02 PM
ivanwolf's Avatar
ivanwolf ivanwolf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 469
The Hotels at least big enough ones have their own shuttles they run to the airport. Cap Metro has its own dedicated Airport shuttle route 100 that shuttles people down town.

A Light Rail system will only mirror the existing shuttles routes and will not serve the city to decrease traffic.

You think someone who can not get a hotel shuttle to their door will take a Light Rail instead? No.

The only way a Light Rail system to the airport would kinda work is to eliminate the door to door service the hotel shuttles provide and to eliminate Cap Metro dedicated route to the airport.

Then this Light Rail would have a minimal purpose to the airport and to still no where else important to most Austinites.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3813  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 7:25 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
is somehow "not right".
It's not right as the first segment. It's not right, right now.

There's already transit to the airport. The airport flyer. People don't use it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
something that ALL Austinites could make use of
But they can't. Especially not when it's the first segment. Because it doesn't go where they live. So they'll have to take a bus to downtown, and transfer to the rail. So why not just take bus all the way to the airport?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
a staple of any good transit system,
Except it's not. Many good transit systems don't have an airport connection. DFW is finally getting one, and they're years ahead of us and much larger (both metro and airport).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3814  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 7:29 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by austlar1 View Post
Would you look more kindly towards a Highland route, if other LONG RANGE plans were announced that designated Highland as a future rail transit node that would serve to collect commuter light rail from points east, north, and northwest? I suspect that the reason they are trying to push Highland in this election might have something to do with that kind of planning. If so, I don't understand why they don't come out and talk about LONG RANGE transit plans. Voters need to see a vision for something truly significant, or they will not be inclined to support any kind of rail proposal.
You mean like the Project Connect Vision which is the very first thing they did?

http://www.projectconnect.com/vision.php

Or the North Corridor plan?

http://www.projectconnect.com/connect/north-corridor
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3815  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 8:02 PM
MichaelB MichaelB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 3,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
And yet the voters would much prefer to vote for an airport line than a Highland Mall segment, IMO. Why do you think that is?

I think they see the value in it, as demonstrated in other cities. Everyone in town can benefit from mass transit to the airport (since we all use it), and relieving some of the festival traffic (since we all experience it). When you compare it to benefiting only projected future density (and driving up profits for the developers/land flippers), there is really no comparison. I'd much rather my tax $$$ go to the former instead of the latter.
thank you…..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3816  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 8:07 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
But they can't. Especially not when it's the first segment. Because it doesn't go where they live. So they'll have to take a bus to downtown, and transfer to the rail. So why not just take bus all the way to the airport?
Not only that, but most of the buses into/out of downtown are switching from Congress Ave. to Lavaca/Guadalupe. From there, you'd have to hike all the way over to Trinity St. I don't see a lot of people wanting to do that. I live on S. Lamar just north of Ben White. I wouldn't do it. I'd rather walk the two blocks to Wendy's at Panther & Lamar, take the 331 to ACC Riverside and transfer to the 350 which drops you off at the lower level.

I don't think it really matters because I don't think a line to the airport will be on the November ballot. Frankly, I don't think any rail plan that winds up on the ballot will pass. It costs too much, does too little and would take way too long to complete. It wouldn't even open until 2022 and that's if everything goes as planned.

This is Austin. Nothing ever goes as planned. If this thing passes, it will wind up costing more than the initial projections and probably open three (or more) years late.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3817  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 9:56 PM
hookem hookem is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
It's not right as the first segment. It's not right, right now.
Highland Mall is not right as the first segment. It's not right now, and it might not even be right in the future.

Quote:
There's already transit to the airport. The airport flyer. People don't use it.
There's already transit to Highland Mall. Why not just take the bus instead?


Quote:
Many good transit systems don't have an airport connection. DFW is finally getting one, and they're years ahead of us and much larger (both metro and airport).
Most good transit systems have an airport connection. People use it. Not imaginary future "transit oriented development" people, but real actual Austinites and visitors.

Broken record, nothing to see here...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3818  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 9:57 PM
DoubleC's Avatar
DoubleC DoubleC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 309
Or one could build a bus lane, free of traffic lights to the airport, somehow... The point of building a rail is because it can't get stuck in traffic. If a bus had its own means of getting to the airport without traffic... I'm not sure what form this bus lane would take, whether it be a really long flyover or... well this is a little farfetched.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3819  
Old Posted May 27, 2014, 10:00 PM
hookem hookem is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
I don't think it really matters because I don't think a line to the airport will be on the November ballot. Frankly, I don't think any rail plan that winds up on the ballot will pass. It costs too much, does too little and would take way too long to complete. It wouldn't even open until 2022 and that's if everything goes as planned.
Agreed. It's a bummer because I would like to see rail, I think it would work great in this city, but this seems like a half-ass proposal with a full-ass price tag. I think people would vote for rail that was logical, but you have to show them some real value for existing voters.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3820  
Old Posted May 28, 2014, 3:30 AM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is offline
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 3,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleC View Post
Or one could build a bus lane, free of traffic lights to the airport, somehow... The point of building a rail is because it can't get stuck in traffic. If a bus had its own means of getting to the airport without traffic... I'm not sure what form this bus lane would take, whether it be a really long flyover or... well this is a little farfetched.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Rapid_Transit

Ottawa uses trenchways, overpasses, and bridges for their transitway. It's pretty awesome. Buses can fly around and not interfere with traffic. Same idea as rail, but cheaper.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:03 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.