HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2022, 8:35 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post

so even when we disregard the more heavily used section of the redl ine on the far southside, we see that the red line's expressway trench ROW through the mid-southside is still more heavily used than the green line's legacy-style ROW through the same part of town.

Do the "boardings" include bus transfers? Some people might prefer to use the red line stations when getting picked up/dropped off in a car because they perceive the station area to be safer.

The 95th St. red line station also has a Greyhound station, so it no doubt picks up a few hundred if not 1,000+ boardings each day from that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2022, 9:05 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
Do the "boardings" include bus transfers?
yes.

those L stop boarding figures include everyone who went through a turnstyle going into the station on a typical weekday regardless of whether they got there by bus, car, walking, biking, horseback, whatever.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2022, 10:07 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
so even when we disregard the more heavily used section of the redl ine on the far southside, we see that the red line's expressway trench ROW through the mid-southside is still more heavily used than the green line's legacy-style ROW through the same part of town.
It's kind of an apples-oranges comparison. The Red Line has a valuable crosstown route and connects to North Side areas with a lot of service industry jobs and universities. It also picks up most of the White Sox ridership. The Green Line in contrast only goes to the Loop or the West Side.

For those Loop-bound riders that do have a roughly equal choice between the two lines, the Red Line is just faster even if the pedestrian experience sucks. The pedestrian experience doesn't really matter if you're transferring from a bus, anyway.

The only reason to take the Green Line is if you live in walking distance to a station. Many of those areas are still heavily depopulated. They're slowly bouncing back, but all that new housing is more likely to put cars on the road instead of transit riders. The one thing in the Green Line's favor is access to Fulton Market, and soon the United Center.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2022, 10:13 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Well that didn't take long and makes one wonder if this is money well spent.

For 30% more money Toronto is building a 650 km electrified suburban rail system of which 220km will have trains running every 8 minutes off-peak. It has made this possible by purchasing freight corridors from the freight companies and twinning track, upgrading and building new stations, and building overpasses.
That doesn't really work for Sunbelt cities like Austin. People don't live, shop or work where the freight corridors run, and there aren't many freight corridors to begin with. Those areas tend to be heavily industrial. IMO the best model is more like Vancouver Skytrain where you build fast elevated lines along arterial roads to reach existing neighborhoods, and then you densify with lots of TOD to grow more ridership.

I'm also partial to the Houston model, where they build light rail lines at grade along arterials, but they are focusing on the core city inside of 610 instead of sprawling all over the region like Dallas' system.

Quote:
So many US cities have grand schemes on how to spend their infrastructure money but don't provide the operational funds needed when the service actually starts.
This is what happens when the Federal government tries to get people out of cars by writing big checks to cities/states. The incentive is to build stuff, because that's free money. There's no incentive to spend their own money running more service, especially if the riders aren't people they care about.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2023, 4:00 PM
Easy's Avatar
Easy Easy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,570
The Austin City Council just approved Phase 1 which will be a just under 10-mile street running light rail line. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't appear as if there will be any money for any underground sections nor any phases after Phase 1. The state has also questioned the financing model for Phase 1, so that's not yet certain to be built.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...ght-rail-plan/

I don't think that this is what voters approved and wonder if this plan still has the support of the pubic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2023, 6:07 PM
TWAK's Avatar
TWAK TWAK is offline
Resu Deretsiger
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 14,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy View Post
The Austin City Council just approved Phase 1 which will be a just under 10-mile street running light rail line. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't appear as if there will be any money for any underground sections nor any phases after Phase 1. The state has also questioned the financing model for Phase 1, so that's not yet certain to be built.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...ght-rail-plan/

I don't think that this is what voters approved and wonder if this plan still has the support of the pubic.
Looks like they did the required community meetings and everything for it, but hopefully there's no lawsuits to block it (like what CA has to always deal with ).
from the article:
__________________
nobody cares about your city
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2023, 1:12 AM
SoCalKid SoCalKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy View Post
The Austin City Council just approved Phase 1 which will be a just under 10-mile street running light rail line. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't appear as if there will be any money for any underground sections nor any phases after Phase 1. The state has also questioned the financing model for Phase 1, so that's not yet certain to be built.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...ght-rail-plan/

I don't think that this is what voters approved and wonder if this plan still has the support of the pubic.
If there's really no underground section, those costs of nearly $500M/mile are terrible. And excluding tunnels is a big mistake. I'm pretty convinced by the experience of LA light rail that street running rail in a dense area is the easiest way to ensure a line will never truly change travel patterns.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2023, 4:28 AM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalKid View Post
If there's really no underground section, those costs of nearly $500M/mile are terrible. And excluding tunnels is a big mistake. I'm pretty convinced by the experience of LA light rail that street running rail in a dense area is the easiest way to ensure a line will never truly change travel patterns.

It just looks to me like the people in charge aren't willing to take any risk. They incorrectly see current conditions as analogous to the 1970s and don't want to be responsible for disasters from that era like the unfinished Second Ave. Subway in NYC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2023, 5:19 AM
WrightCONCEPT's Avatar
WrightCONCEPT WrightCONCEPT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
It just looks to me like the people in charge aren't willing to take any risk. They incorrectly see current conditions as analogous to the 1970s and don't want to be responsible for disasters from that era like the unfinished Second Ave. Subway in NYC.
Yes reducing risks is a good thing, if you want to continue building more public transit infrastructure using taxpayer dollars especially if they are property tax dollars.

With all brand new starter systems they want to ensure that this first project goes through without too many delays and problems which then impacts the opportunities for future extensions. There's also a brand new rail yard and facilities that will be needed for a new rail system which will probably be 10-15% of the costs of this starter line if they have the land acquired, cleared and built.

Thankfully the core of this corridor is along a very busy bus corridor with solid ridership and activity centers. As I view the google map and read through the study reports I see that this is a corridor that they want to redevelop in a manner like Portland, OR.

I am surprised they are not putting the downtown portion elevated and closer to the Commuter Rail station on 4th Street, Cesar Chavez is by the Convention Center but it is a long walk around the Convention Center to make the connection (something is telling me given it is right near the Colorado River, there is a soil issue with digging the line underground)
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully

The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?

Last edited by WrightCONCEPT; Jul 10, 2023 at 6:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2023, 5:24 PM
SoCalKid SoCalKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by WrightCONCEPT View Post
Yes reducing risks is a good thing, if you want to continue building more public transit infrastructure using taxpayer dollars especially if they are property tax dollars.

With all brand new starter systems they want to ensure that this first project goes through without too many delays and problems which then impacts the opportunities for future extensions. There's also a brand new rail yard and facilities that will be needed for a new rail system which will probably be 10-15% of the costs of this starter line if they have the land acquired, cleared and built.

Thankfully the core of this corridor is along a very busy bus corridor with solid ridership and activity centers. As I view the google map and read through the study reports I see that this is a corridor that they want to redevelop in a manner like Portland, OR.

I am surprised they are not putting the downtown portion elevated and closer to the Commuter Rail station on 4th Street, Cesar Chavez is by the Convention Center but it is a long walk around the Convention Center to make the connection (something is telling me given it is right near the Colorado River, there is a soil issue with digging the line underground)

But don't you think the lack of grade separation in Downtown is a major issue. It will be very difficult to come back and grade separate it later, which will make this section a serious bottleneck for any expanded system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2023, 5:36 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Grade separation is really important to both speed and reliability. I agree that it should be a priority.

The issue is how we fund things in the US. Since transit has to go to the voters on a per-phase/project basis, and voters are often selfish and shortsighted, they have see benefit to themselves for each project. The mileage will matter more to them than future proofing and operational simplicity.

Speaking for Seattle's experience (with some grade crossings, though not in the core), both speed and reliability have become issues. At least we don't have the issue of block-length limiting train length since our at-grade stations aren't in small-grid areas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2023, 7:47 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

$4.5 to $5 Billion for a 10 mile line seems excessive price wise. But, to lay the tracks in the streets in downtown Austin, and along Guadalupe north and Congress south, they are basically going to have to rebuild all the streets. All the roads are rough, plumbing underneath will have to have cathodic protection installed or strengthened. 3rd Street is fairly small, I would not be surprised to see it turned into a light rail mall. Guadalupe Street downtown is fairly wide, but up by UT campus it is fairly narrow.
I do not mind the line shortness, remember this is a starter line for a longer system. If the original line attracts higher number of passengers than the bus, it would be considered a success.
For those who are still advocating for a subway downtown, it just will not work as I have been writing for almost 10 years. The routes desired climb hills the further away you get from the Colorado River. Considering how deep you must dig under the River, that means a longer dig for tunnels climbing up from the depths to the heights of the hills. Golly, the tunnel heading south on Congress would have to be longer than the at grade proposed line today.
As for using a bridge over the Colorado River, they would need more than three blocks to turn and follow beneath 3rd Street, considering that would be a station location. You never want to place a station on a steep grade.
The only other valid alternate would have been to use elevated guideways downtown Austin, which I am sure the hipsters did not want.
Squeezing a light rail line on Congress, 3rd, and Guadalupe north of downtown will require widening these streets, or completely eliminating traffic lanes. I believe more than many realize of the costs to build the proposed light rail line is to buy properties needed to widening the light rail line and street corridor. These are not 6 or 8 lane boulevards being used, they are 4 and 5 lanes. Installing a light rail line in its own right of way or its own dedicated lanes, requires up to three lanes of the existing streets at station locations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2023, 2:32 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Elevated structures not an option because of required view corridors to the capitol dome.

For awhile there was even an interpretation that the OCS poles on S. Congress would violate the view corridor. I'm glad they did not proceed with this interpretation when there are plenty of streetlights and traffic signals that are apparently just fine in the view corridor.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2023, 4:08 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 8,722
Is there a good map to show which part of this project is at grade and which is grade separated/subway? It's not very clear to me based on the map above.

Is it the last option here?

In my experience, full grade separation is the way to go, either through subway or elevated rail (ie BART entire system or Muni Metro Market St/Central Subways). Next most efficient would be at grade with automated level crossings with gates (ie Caltrain - although its currently working on grade separation projects). Slowest is at grade without gates or optimized signal priority (ie Muni Metro surface lines).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2023, 5:09 PM
FrankLloydLeft FrankLloydLeft is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2023
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 71
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've read a lot both on the Austin Transportation thread and Reddit this plan would be grade separated despite being street-level.

I've been told that would mean it won't share traffic with cars and have light priority, but I don't have those sources to site atm, and it's possible that's changed.


Either way, fully team grade-separated and thought an El would be amazing as along as they avoided the issues Honolulu faced, corruption aside.

Really hope to see them get phase two's design finalized/ approved now so it can start construction sooner than later.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2023, 5:16 PM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,701
Otherwise, signal priority is more than enough. Grade separation is only important if the frequency of the trains is high enough (3-5 minutes) to cause major disruptions the car/bicycle/pedestrian traffic, and somehow I doubt Austin is going to reach that point anytime soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2023, 7:36 PM
SoCalKid SoCalKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 444
Grade separation refers to tracks being elevated or submerged below street level, not whether or not they have dedicated lanes. The problem with street running, at-grade rail (even in dedicated lanes) is that they have to go slowly through intersections and often hit red lights. I'm sure there will be some degree of signal priority at the traffic lights, but it will likely not be full preemption (where the light automatically changes for the train). That is difficult to do in dense urban environment since you're dealing with lots of pedestrians, cars, bikes, buses, etc. also trying to use that intersection. For example, what do you do if the pedestrian signal is in the middle of its cycle when then the train comes to the intersection? You can't just turn it off and give trains the green light, as that endangers pedestrians that are in the middle of crossing the street.

To the post above about street-running not being a problem for frequencies over 5 minutes, I can tell you from LA's experience that it has been an enormous problem even at 10+ minute frequencies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2023, 6:40 AM
WrightCONCEPT's Avatar
WrightCONCEPT WrightCONCEPT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
$4.5 to $5 Billion for a 10 mile line seems excessive price wise. But, to lay the tracks in the streets in downtown Austin, and along Guadalupe north and Congress south, they are basically going to have to rebuild all the streets. All the roads are rough, plumbing underneath will have to have cathodic protection installed or strengthened. 3rd Street is fairly small, I would not be surprised to see it turned into a light rail mall. Guadalupe Street downtown is fairly wide, but up by UT campus it is fairly narrow.
I do not mind the line shortness, remember this is a starter line for a longer system. If the original line attracts higher number of passengers than the bus, it would be considered a success.
For those who are still advocating for a subway downtown, it just will not work as I have been writing for almost 10 years. The routes desired climb hills the further away you get from the Colorado River. Considering how deep you must dig under the River, that means a longer dig for tunnels climbing up from the depths to the heights of the hills. Golly, the tunnel heading south on Congress would have to be longer than the at grade proposed line today.
As for using a bridge over the Colorado River, they would need more than three blocks to turn and follow beneath 3rd Street, considering that would be a station location. You never want to place a station on a steep grade.
The only other valid alternate would have been to use elevated guideways downtown Austin, which I am sure the hipsters did not want.
Squeezing a light rail line on Congress, 3rd, and Guadalupe north of downtown will require widening these streets, or completely eliminating traffic lanes. I believe more than many realize of the costs to build the proposed light rail line is to buy properties needed to widening the light rail line and street corridor. These are not 6 or 8 lane boulevards being used, they are 4 and 5 lanes. Installing a light rail line in its own right of way or its own dedicated lanes, requires up to three lanes of the existing streets at station locations.
Spot on, this rail system Austin is thinking about and executing is akin to Portland's MAX in the way it is described and advocated for. In addition, the costs for a starter system if done right will lead to a more expansive system to serve the needs of the region.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully

The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2023, 6:45 AM
WrightCONCEPT's Avatar
WrightCONCEPT WrightCONCEPT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalKid View Post
But don't you think the lack of grade separation in Downtown is a major issue. It will be very difficult to come back and grade separate it later, which will make this section a serious bottleneck for any expanded system.
Yes and no.

Yes if this is the busiest portion of the corridor.

No if there is another route that runs on the surface and can serve Downtown Austin. Given the two primary routing options they were deciding between I think their solution will be building it on another corridor and save the grade separations for when they will need the extra capacity and even then they will use another corridor to build it on.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully

The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2023, 10:46 AM
LineDrive LineDrive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 63
Surprised to see Austin copy LA’s mistakes. Total grade separation is neccesary. A subway preferable - it’ll be justified considering Austin’s growth
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 > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:04 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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