AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Is it just me or is it really weird that the recently failed 9.5-mile streetcar line in Austin would cost the same per mile (~$147 million) as the currently proposed 17-mile, Brooklyn-Queens Connector in New York City?

To me, it seems like it would be much more expensive to construct something like this in NYC.

Using all existing streets vs. using expanded RoW?

No park and rides vs. 4 park and rides.

No bridge vs. bridge.

No heavy rail line vs. heavy rail line.

[nixcity]

Is it just me or is it really weird that the recently failed 9.5-mile streetcar line in Austin would cost the same per mile (~$147 million) as the currently proposed 17-mile, Brooklyn-Queens Connector in New York City?

To me, it seems like it would be much more expensive to construct something like this in NYC.

Yeah, it always did seem too expensive but unfortunately the price of light rail has only gone up, add to the list that Novacek provided the tunnel part and you can see why it was so high, however, not near as expensive as some lines that have been floated in other cities recently, here is a good article with some prices of various systems.
http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=10109

[nixcity]

I've said it many times. The voters will NEVER vote themselves a huge tax bill for a few thousand riders per day.

I can certainly understand why you would be so skeptical, Austin has talked about passenger rail since at least the 80's. The only time, however, we have been real close to actually getting it was in 2000 where it was NARROWLY shot down.
http://kut.org/post/why-austins-rail...esonates-today
Fast forward 16 years and the density along the 2000 vote corridors is far greater and traffic is at an impasse. Also, bear in mind that the ONLY data we actually do have is a poll showing that 66% of Austinites would raise their taxes for light rail, this was AFTER the 2014 defeat. People are desperate for some way to relieve traffic or at least to have options to avoid it altogether. If a new plan is in the right place it will have high enough ridership to keep operating costs at a minimum and result in less tax payer subsidy than roads. Also keep in mind that good rail is the only way to move mass numbers of people,,,,sound like something we need???

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

Also, bear in mind that the ONLY data we actually do have is a poll showing that 66% of Austinites would raise their taxes for light rail, this was AFTER the 2014 defeat.

No we don't.

We have a poll that showed that Austinites overall(not necessarily voters) would support _some_ increase in taxes for _some_ sort of rail system.

Not necessarily light rail.

[nixcity]

_some_ sort of rail system

Nope, above ground rail was specified.

Seeing as how there are really only 2 kinds of above ground rail.....and the mode doesn't matter, they support a good rail plan, that is what is important.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

Nope, above ground rail was specified.

Seeing as how there are really only 2 kinds of above ground rail.....and the mode doesn't matter, they support a good rail plan, that is what is important.

There's at least 3.

Streetcar.
Commuter rail.
light rail.

It matters a _lot_, if your "66% support rail" is actually
20% that support a cheap, couple mile downtown streetcar.
20% that support commuter rail out to their suburb.
20% that support a >$1B light rail system.

[nixcity]

^And you really think the average voter will know the difference??? All they want to see is actual rail advocates supporting the line. PC did not have this. If you say $1 billion gets you 20,000 rider trips or $1 billion gets you 40,000, which do you think the voters would be more likely to choose???

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

^And you really think the average voter will know the difference??? All they want to see is actual rail advocates supporting the line.

That seems vastly naive. Do you really think pricetag is irrelevant? That a $100 system and a $1B system will get the exact same support and no voters will even look at the number? But instead will look at what "rail advocates" (who they don't even know about, and never hear from) support?

Originally Posted by nixcity

PC did not have this. If you say $1 billion gets you 20,000 rider trips or $1 billion gets you 40,000, which do you think the voters would be more likely to choose???

But that's never been the choice. And never will be the choice.

[nixcity]

^Might just be up for this voting cycle. Did you hear the mayor's state of the city speech and where he got the most applause???
http://www.mayoradler.com/

[QUOTEThat seems vastly naive. Do you really think pricetag is irrelevant? That a $100 system and a $1B system will get the exact same support and no voters will even look at the number? But instead will look at what "rail advocates" (who they don't even know about, and never hear from) support?][/QUOTE]

That is why I put for example, 2 equally priced bonds. One on G/L would capture at least 1.5 times the amount of people for the same price. At full build out it could see more than 100,000 rider trips per day.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

That is why I put for example, 2 equally priced bonds. One on G/L would capture at least 1.5 times the amount of people for the same price.

Your ridership estimate is, to be generous, very optimistic.


Let's sanity check it against the existing transit in that corridor.

The 1+801 sees ridership of approximately 15k.

But light rail on G/L wouldn't cover the current distance of the 801. It goes 21 miles.

Let's be generous and say the G/L light rail route covers 10k of those existing riders. Even though you're losing all the close-in rider on South Congress. And even assuming all those current 1 riders (using a local route) are willing to switch to a non-local with more separated stop spacing.

Your 40k ridership would then be a 4x multiplier based on mode preference.


I think that stretches the limits of feasibility.



As a comparison, I think the existing bus ridership in the 2014 plan route was ~7k. And there undoubtedly is a "rail preference" in ridership, so both would see increases. But 4x just seems too much. And if you personally believe in 4x, then you should use that for both.

[Novacek]

But honestly I don't think it really matters. Was anyone really voting against the 2014 plan going "20k is too little, 30k is my magic number and I'll vote for it then"?

My fear is that too many people voted against it based on the anti-rail advertising, which was (and will be) against any and all rail.

Do you really think people who voted against it for
"5% of the cars on I35"

will turn around and vote FOR

"7.5% of the cars on I35"?

[nixcity]

[QUOTEbus ridership in the 2014 plan route was ~7k][/QUOTE]
There was no bus that went that route....
I'll let the experts hash this out but I'm guessing a starter phase 1 line from North Transit Center down to roughly Seaholm would start at a minimum of 30,000 day one.

[wwmiv]

edit: delete

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

There was no bus that went that route....

The ridership on the existing route segments (from 7 and the 20) that went that route was ~7k. That was one of the inputs in the planning process.

The 2014 plan was on route segments that are some of the highest performing in the entire system.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by nixcity

That is why I put for example, 2 equally priced bonds. One on G/L would capture at least 1.5 times the amount of people for the same price. At full build out it could see more than 100,000 rider trips per day.

There's nothing wrong giving voters choices when it comes to bonding programs. But there's several entities with that capability in the Austin metro area. To name just two, the City and CapMetro.

Which one should we go forward with, if per chance, both referendums pass?

I'm pretty sure the City will propose a streetcar or light rail system that will never run beyond the city limits, and that CapMetro will propose a commuter rail system that will run all the way to the it's member city suburbs.

Can the Austin metro area support taxes to subsidize both rail systems?

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by electricron

There's nothing wrong giving voters choices when it comes to bonding programs. But there's several entities with that capability in the Austin metro area. To name just two, the City and CapMetro.

Which one should we go forward with, if per chance, both referendums pass?

I'm pretty sure the City will propose a streetcar or light rail system that will never run beyond the city limits, and that CapMetro will propose a commuter rail system that will run all the way to the it's member city suburbs.

Can the Austin metro area support taxes to subsidize both rail systems?

Frankly yes. Just like the Portland MSA can support both of their rail systems...

[nixcity]

^As long as they are spread out over time yes, I agree.
So we are looking at a 2020 vote if we leave it up to Capmetro (2018 at the absolute best) or a possible vote done by COA as early as this year.

[ahealy]

Can Austin just build the Wire and capitalize on driverless cars and become a leader in transportation by 2025? Ok c u then!

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Can Austin just build the Wire

No. Because it's a completely stupid idea.


to repeat my post

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...re#post6956598

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by ahealy

"....capitalize on driverless cars and become a leader in transportation by 2025? Ok c u then!"

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechc...f-driving-cars

They are coming, and not too soon. I will be a charter member....I can't wait. No way computers are worse drivers than the idiots on the road now.