AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by electricron

A short subway or aerial guideway circulator system will not be as expensive as a longer, system wide, all the same, unified project. How about a monorail circulator, north to Keeton, west to Guadalupe, south to Chavez, east to Trinity? If UT objects to the monorail on campus, use MLK instead.

They need to get the costs down for there to be any chance it will pass in a referendum. I believe "sticker shock" is one of the major reasons the past referendums have failed. Spend a little extra in the central core, spend as little as possible elsewhere I believe is the path that will pass.

I really like the way you're thinking about this. Something like monorail or gondolas in the highest-trafficked core of the city would provide benefits well beyond the pragmatic achievement of moving people from place to place. Unfortunately I don't know many people who take such ideas seriously. When it comes to serious business like public infrastructure, people seem to have an aversion to any proposal that involves fun, play, experimentation and novelty.

I honestly believe that a futuristic and/or fun and attention-grabbing transit system would pay off in terms of providing a tipping point for attracting more of what we're already starting to attract, big events such as the Grand Prix and X-Games. In the future, it could tip the scales toward choosing Austin for pro sports expansion teams, TV and movie location, certain types of corporate HQs, and a destination for visitors. It would boost top-of-mind awareness of the city because there would be one more thing that stands out about it, relative to other places. In short, it would be good for economic development, and it would be fun, and without fun then economic development just leads to generic urbanization.

[lzppjb]

My dad has been saying for years we should have Disney come in and design a monorail system. He loves the one in Orlando. haha

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

My dad has been saying for years we should have Disney come in and design a monorail system. He loves the one in Orlando. haha

Funny you should mention that, because I think that's part of the image problem for monorail. For me, it's a positive image, but for others there may be an instinctive guffaw at such ideas because they might see it as the Disneyfication of Austin. I've been on Seattle's monorail several times, in each case because it was the best mode of transportation to get from where I was to where I was going. And it's really enjoyable, such a smooth ride, with great views. But apparently there is something about monorail that makes it impractical for most situations.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Funny you should mention that, because I think that's part of the image problem for monorail. For me, it's a positive image, but for others there may be an instinctive guffaw at such ideas because they might see it as the Disneyfication of Austin. I've been on Seattle's monorail several times, in each case because it was the best mode of transportation to get from where I was to where I was going. And it's really enjoyable, such a smooth ride, with great views. But apparently there is something about monorail that makes it impractical for most situations.

I'm sure some of these mass transit gurus can tell us what makes monorail impractical.

Off the top of my head, I would probably support a monorail system if it was planned and presented well. Our system cannot take car lanes away, or it'll never pass. Go over, or go under.

[JoninATX]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

The thing is, it's ok if people still drive, but there has to be an alternative. And it should be encouraged for people to take mass transit when they're commuting. I see so many single occupant commuters on I-35 and Mopac and elsewhere. I know that a pickup is still necessary for some trips. I dare you to carry some lumber on the train or the bus. And I personally have never strapped any lumber to my bicycle. haha People flip out when they hear anything about mass transit and think it means they'll be banned from driving, when what it's really about is giving people an alternative to having to drive and sit in traffic. We're Americans, we should love the idea of the freedom to choose which method we use for transportation. Some seem to think one will automatically cancel out the other or prohibit it, and that's just not true.

Lol that is so true, people do flip out if they think change will alter their own way of life. Especially if it involves public transportation.

[AusTxDevelopment]

This is an interesting article about how companies in Austin are working toward getting their employees to use alternative transportation. Some good ideas in there. However, this was a little depressing:

Researchers created traffic models for I-35 by incorporating all of the road projects identified in the 2035 long-range plan created by the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, which is responsible for Central Texas’ long-term regional transportation planning efforts. “When you look at 2035 the demand and trips are so large that the system is just overwhelmed,” he said. “We tried a number of different strategies and projects, and at best they were [improving] congestion levels by 2035 by 5 percent.”

Community Impact Newspaper
Changing driver behavior could help better Austin's congestion
http://impactnews.com/austin-metro/n...in-congestion/

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

I'm sure some of these mass transit gurus can tell us what makes monorail impractical.

Certainly not without it's own biases, but fairly in-depth.

http://www.mrl.ucsb.edu/~yopopov/rai.../monorail.html

http://www.mrl.ucsb.edu/~yopopov/rai...rail-cost.html

http://www.lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_monorail007.htm

Edit, and another:

http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-ad...ransit-systems

[Tech House]

The arguments against monorail are pretty clear in those articles, can't even imagine that option ever being considered now that I see its limitations.

So we're really looking at rail, hopefully underground in the downtown-UT zone. All the fun options are off the table: gondolas, catapults, jetpacks, quantum entanglement...

[jngreenlee]

Originally Posted by Tech House

So we're really looking at rail, hopefully underground in the downtown-UT zone.

You may be better off relocating to find underground rail!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metro_systems
The most recent completely new underground system built in the United States was in Puerto Rico, started in 2004. Population was over 2MM in the impacted area.Link to Tren Urbano

The next one before that was Los Angeles in 1993. Population then was over 8MM in the impacted county.Link

For interesting contrast, there are 36 systems worldwide U/C. 15 in China proper, 2 in Chinese Taiwan, 6 in India, the rest in Greece, Russia, Ecuador, Iran, Indonesia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Australia.

[jngreenlee]

Here's the fairly typical sorts of things I get in my neighborhood group email list. I think you'll cringe:

I fear we will only wind up with pretty pictures that do nothing to improve the through put of traffic.
Only sidewalks/landscape/public spaces/buses/bike lanes - which all could contribute to less throughput.

I fear the worst - another "great streets" thingy with more traffic congestion than every before!

Bingo! You got it!
Zilker and SLNA will also supper more cut through traffic ..... oops, I meant to say benefit from "connectivity" through our neighborhoods!
Remember ALL of us were down at city hallo shouting - WE WANT COMPACT AND CONNECTED!!!! NOT!

Now where does it talk about improving the auto
experience???????????????????????????

End results will be the "public demanded more bike
lanes, bus lanes and more open spaces" that all displace cars!
Let's put a pocket park on the grassy knoll in
front of Matt's El Ranko and be so with it already! I am so sick of this end game

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Tech House

So we're really looking at rail, hopefully underground in the downtown-UT zone.

You don't need it (and potentially don't want it) underground in the downtown area.

Putting rail underground has some advantages, but also disadvantages.

Pro: don't need to worry about cross traffic
Pro: don't take away lanes/RoW/acquire property (except for station accesses).
Pro: resistant to weather shutdowns (but in Austin we don't really need to worry about snow/ice).
Pro: avoid contention with freight rail/rail crossing
Pro: potentially longer trainsets without having to worry about exceeding block lengths.

Con: less accessible (both for those handicapped and others).
Con: out of sight, out of mind, less likely for people to just jump on the passing train they see coming.
Con: $$$$

Not taking lanes may be a reason/need to go underground in some sections of the corridor. But there's a lot of N/S lanes (and parking) through downtown.
Remember, they looked at going underground through the downtown section for the most recent proposal, and decided it wasn't worth the cost. (they did have the northern tunnel to avoid the freight rail).

A little further north, maybe going underground (or elevated, LRT can be elevated as well) for a section is the solution for UT and the Guadalupe chokepoint, if that ends up being the next proposal again. But we'd have to pay for it.

[mebentley]

Remember that light rail (aka urban rail) can be elevated on pylons to achieve grade separation and minimize the taking of traffic lanes. DART in Dallas operates as a ground-level system in some places, elevated in others, and in a subway for part of its route. Lots of flexibility with the smaller electric trains.

Originally Posted by Novacek

You don't need it (and potentially don't want it) underground in the downtown area.

Putting rail underground has some advantages, but also disadvantages.

Pro: don't need to worry about cross traffic
Pro: don't take away lanes/RoW/acquire property (except for station accesses).
Pro: resistant to weather shutdowns (but in Austin we don't really need to worry about snow/ice).
Pro: avoid contention with freight rail/rail crossing
Pro: potentially longer trainsets without having to worry about exceeding block lengths.

Con: less accessible (both for those handicapped and others).
Con: out of sight, out of mind, less likely for people to just jump on the passing train they see coming.
Con: $$$$

Not taking lanes may be a reason/need to go underground in some sections of the corridor. But there's a lot of N/S lanes (and parking) through downtown.
Remember, they looked at going underground through the downtown section for the most recent proposal, and decided it wasn't worth the cost. (they did have the northern tunnel to avoid the freight rail).

A little further north, maybe going underground (or elevated, LRT can be elevated as well) for a section is the solution for UT and the Guadalupe chokepoint, if that ends up being the next proposal again. But we'd have to pay for it.

[austlar1]

Of course we have to pay for it. Might be time to start figuring out how we might be able to pay for it. We sure as hell need to do it.

[AusTxDevelopment]

Austin Business Journal
Subway idea back on for Austin — this time steered by Austin's wealthiest
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...e-steered.html

[KevinFromTexas]

Maybe Steve Adler can help wrangle some of that West Austin wealth he had supporting his election since one of his platforms was transportation improvements.

[Austin1971]

Glad to see this option being discussed by influential austinites. If packaged properly when presented to the public I think it would be supported. It's hard for those opponents to challege this option since it does not remove roads and increases mobility. It will be expensive but it is the best option.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by AusTxDevelopment

Austin Business Journal
Subway idea back on for Austin — this time steered by Austin's wealthiest
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...e-steered.html

At the end of the article:

Meredith said if the subway idea goes bust again they'll put their power behind other ideas such as gondolas

It sounds like they are committed to getting a mass transit option built in whichever form they can. That's nice to see.

[SkyPie]

Originally Posted by Austin1971

Glad to see this option being discussed by influential austinites. If packaged properly when presented to the public I think it would be supported. It's hard for those opponents to challege this option since it does not remove roads and increases mobility. It will be expensive but it is the best option.

I agree. It was pretty boneheaded of the rail planners to advocate for a "solution" that even many rail supporters couldn't get behind and support. I hope a lesson was learned. I guess time will tell...

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Maybe Steve Adler can help wrangle some of that West Austin wealth he had supporting his election since one of his platforms was transportation improvements.

Gosh, I hope so. I'd like to see what he'll actually do to advance Austin.

[Speculator]

Don't get me wrong, I'd like a workable subway system more than anyone.

Let's do this as long as people realize that it's a 20-30 year project to have any meaningful subway system in place. Like any rail system, one line won't do, we need multiple lines with appropriate coverage. Unless you're in China- 20-30 years is a reasonable time frame.

Second, is everyone ok with those who drive these things making a killing on the land deals and land speculation? Could that be what is the key driver?

It was so asinine for the last rail proposal to be voted down. That would have simply registered a start which would have seen numerous iterations over a 20 year period.