AUSTIN | Transportation Updates - Page 321

Azul · #**6401** Posted **Nov 1, 2019, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

here's where you can find that document and others

https://assets.adobe.com/public/a3b4...sis%20(2019-20)

Dead link for me.

Novacek · #**6402** Posted **Nov 1, 2019, 5:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxsnail

At first I was hesitant to support an elevated Orange Line because of NIMBY protest, but I've come around to rather liking the idea. I think the mayor and council have been relatively shrewd in publicly saying this won't take away from car travel lanes. The only thing NIMBYs love more than protecting SF zoning is protecting their driving habits. The vast majority of NIMBYs can't see Lamar/Guad from their houses and won't be impacted by the view except from their cars. If we tell them the alternative is that we take away an additional car lane then they'll fall in line even if it costs more.

The number of actual NIMBYs is way overstated anyway as seen by the last council elections. I think NHM and Caleb have the right idea if they're going to aim big. The general voting public is probably going to approve a big bond by a good margin if turnout is as expected.

The question starts to become, how big is "big"?

Does the city even have the bonding capacity for 4-6 billion dollars in local money? Or does "go big" mean set us on the path for a high dollar system, but start with a subset (Orange from Stassney to NLTC instead of the full length perhaps).

Novacek · #**6403** Posted **Nov 1, 2019, 5:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azul

Dead link for me.

Okay, try

https://assets.adobe.com/public/a3b4...9-a39efed032fc

And then click on Alternatives Analysis

cubbie9000 · #**6404** Posted **Nov 2, 2019, 5:10 AM**

Where's the lie?

cubbie9000 · #**6405** Posted **Nov 2, 2019, 5:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freerover

Yea Caleb plays fast and loose with tax money since he's always one tantrum away from moving to Chicago.

Where's the lie?

freerover · #**6406** Posted **Nov 2, 2019, 2:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubbie9000

Where's the lie?

I wasn’t suggesting you were lying Caleb. Just cavalier with how to spend future property tax money when you are always threatening to move out of Austin and thus won’t be paying it. Spending what valuable bond capacity we have on caps on 35 would be part of that IMO when there are going to be parts of project connect we won’t be able to afford.

cubbie9000 · #**6407** Posted **Nov 2, 2019, 2:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freerover

I wasn’t suggesting you were lying Caleb. Just cavalier with how to spend future property tax money when you are always threatening to move out of Austin and thus won’t be paying it. Spending what valuable bond capacity we have on caps on 35 would be part of that IMO when there are going to be parts of project connect we won’t be able to afford.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...is%20the%20lie

freerover · #**6408** Posted **Nov 3, 2019, 12:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

Okay, try

https://assets.adobe.com/public/a3b4...9-a39efed032fc

And then click on Alternatives Analysis

I wonder if the green line needs a light maintenance facility if they approve the heavy maintenance facility for the red line whenever they actually put the green line on the ballot.

Also be interesting to see where the maintenance yard for the Orange and blue lines go. I’m guessing somewhere near the airport if it’s LRT since the yard has to be physically connected to the rail system. Maybe cap metro can buy one of the warehouse properties on riverside south of 71.

Novacek · #**6409** Posted **Dec 2, 2019, 3:30 PM**

Item 58 in this week's council meeting is the city starting the process to take over ownership (from TxDot) to North/South Lamar and South Congress.

http://www.austintexas.gov/departmen...191205-reg.htm

Interestingly, they're not yet including North Burnet (north of 183).

urbancore · #**6410** Posted **Dec 2, 2019, 3:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

Item 58 in this week's council meeting is the city starting the process to take over ownership (from TxDot) to North/South Lamar and South Congress.

http://www.austintexas.gov/departmen...191205-reg.htm

Interestingly, they're not yet including North Burnet (north of 183).

Is this a good or bad thing?

I imagine it is good in that we can make improvements on our timeline, anything else?

Novacek · #**6411** Posted **Dec 2, 2019, 3:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancore

Is this a good or bad thing?

I imagine it is good in that we can make improvements on our timeline, anything else?

It's good for Project Connect transit planning as well (I imagine that's why SoCo is included).

freerover · #**6412** Posted **Dec 2, 2019, 9:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

It's good for Project Connect transit planning as well (I imagine that's why SoCo is included).

It'll also simplify the corridor construction project for S. Lamar and the northern section of North Lamar (183 to HowardLn/I-35.) Neither of these segments are in the 1st round of the Orange/Blue line for Project Connect.

I know Txdot will be the one actually doing the construction for the FM 969 corridor from 183 to Decker. The Southern section of Airport Blvd is also a state road. Not sure if Txdot will handle that section of the corridor or not.

freerover · #**6413** Posted **Dec 11, 2019, 7:53 PM**

Looks like the wishbone design is going forward to engineering for the Longhorn Dam bridge project.

I like that they are doing to add a little pedestrian underpass on the west side of PV. I wish there were way more of those in Austin.

Here are the already funded improvements to the existing longhorn dam bridge. It should help out a lot.

Earliest Opening for the new bridge would be 2025.

KevinFromTexas · #**6414** Posted **Dec 11, 2019, 8:03 PM**

That's gonna be nice. I'm looking forward to it. My mom saw it on the news last night, and was asking "where is that?" I told her where, and that it's one of my favorite spots to go to. The view across the lake from there is one of the best.

urbancore · #**6415** Posted **Dec 11, 2019, 8:32 PM**

gunna miss squeezing my bike past the runners along the bridge, ducking in the little spaces where the locks are to let them pass.

seriously, this is the one I voted for. Love it.

Sigaven · #**6416** Posted **Dec 11, 2019, 10:18 PM**

Earliest it will open is 2025? Why so long down the road?

Azul · #**6417** Posted **Dec 11, 2019, 10:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Earliest it will open is 2025? Why so long down the road?

First it has to finish the open houses and public outreach phase. After that the design itself will likely take around a 1-1.5 years to lock down. This includes time for AE bids/teams to form, design to be fully fleshed out, and fully engineered. With some overlap would be the construction itself which would probably be a year in itself, potentially more if including surrounding work.

That would put us optimistically around 2022 for a start date if everything went without a hitch, design teams and construction worked in partial overlap, and full productivity was achieved. A lot of the gray area will probably include the politics of it, which is required because the bridge itself is not yet funded. 2025 sounds about right for something like this if it's bundled in a bond vote.

Billy Cannon · #**6418** Posted **Dec 13, 2019, 2:23 PM**

I just wished they designed the bridge in a way where it could be a habitat for more bats

urbancore · #**6419** Posted **Dec 13, 2019, 6:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Earliest it will open is 2025? Why so long down the road?

Gotta give the "anti-everything" crowd time to cook up a reason to fight it.

Dale · #**6420** Posted **Dec 23, 2019, 11:55 PM**

Apologies if I missed it, but is a transit referendum set for 2020 ?