AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[ATX2030]

I can only pray that they have already selected which plan they are going to build and are going full bore working on it. Hopefully all this community input stuff is fluff to appease the masses. Not holding my breath though.

Supposedly its going to take a minimum of six months to select the plan and then another two years before shovel in dirt construction. Why in the world is it going to take six months? I would have a real problem if they're still spending time and money working on all the current plan proposals. Would not surprise me one bit though if they were. They'll justify it by saying eventually those things would need to be done for when they begin construction on those lines in the 2040's! As it stands now whatever plan they select for the first phase won't be operational until the mid 2030's.

Just think, current elementary students will be doctors by the time construction even begins on the second phase of the system. Let that sink in for a moment! One last thing to brighten the day, we don't even know if these proposals will be built in their current forms or if there will be more changes to come in the future. I'll bet the latter cause after all this is Austin!

[Maximusx1]

My vote, for the little it's worth, is to build North Lamar to Pleasant Valley including downtown tunnel and a bridge. That is the backbone that needs to be put in place.

Phase 2 should then be Riverside to St. Elmo and Pleasant Valley to the Airport (build this in conjunction with and maybe even using a little shared money with the airport expansion). You can talk me into North Lamar to Tech Ridge if the numbers and money are there.

I'm just as mad and disappointed as everyone else in how this is unfolding, but in my opinion this needs the realistic path forward.

[OfficialPBreton]

Originally Posted by ATX2030

I can only pray that they have already selected which plan they are going to build and are going full bore working on it. Hopefully all this community input stuff is fluff to appease the masses. Not holding my breath though.

They're taking the engagement and input seriously. That doesn't mean that the community has final say, but it does mean that they'll factor in what the community wants to see into their final choice.

Originally Posted by ATX2030

Supposedly its going to take a minimum of six months to select the plan and then another two years before shovel in dirt construction.

They're voting on the final plan in June. They're doing 6 weeks of engagement (until start of May ish), and I expect another 4 weeks of engagement (until start of June ish) on maybe 2-3 final iterations. After that, they'll finalize the options for the June 21 board meeting.

I have no clue about the shovel-in-dirt date. I would expect them to want to get decently far with their designs before they start demo anywhere, so 2 years seems reasonable.

[freerover]

We would be lucky if design/engineering only took 2 years. Hopefully they don’t have to resurvey everything. My concern at this point are lawsuits.

[ATX2030]

Construction starts in North Austin on five-year project to expand I-35

KUT 90.5 | By Nathan Bernier
Published March 29, 2023 at 5:07 PM CDT

https://www.kut.org/2023-03-29/const...to-expand-i-35

[freerover]

Originally Posted by ATX2030

Construction starts in North Austin on five-year project to expand I-35

KUT 90.5 | By Nathan Bernier
Published March 29, 2023 at 5:07 PM CDT

https://www.kut.org/2023-03-29/const...to-expand-i-35

At least this one doesn't include a new upper deck like the one going in south Austin.

[Mopacs]

Very interesting...

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...hicle-roadway/

Central Texas transit leaders eyeing ‘automated vehicle’ roadway

A stretch of roadway along the abandoned Missouri-Kansas-Texas (MoKan) railway could soon be designated for autonomous vehicle use. Currently, the Texas Department of Transportation is analyzing the possible development of a “Connected and Automated Vehicle” facility along the MoKan corridor. On Monday, the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization could take action to deem it a principal arterial road poised for development...Under TxDOT’s feasibility study, the state agency would create the MoCAV corridor, or Mobility for Connected and Automated Vehicles. In layman’s terms, CAVs include vehicles that don’t require a human driver to operate them, per TxDOT’s definition...

[freerover]

kill it with fire.

[EagerTurnip]

Seems like the tracks were pulled out a long time ago, but it would be cool to see this route turned back into a commuter train. It runs from Downtown Georgetown to East Austin and passes behind the Tech Ridge area.

Losing part of the greenbelt for a road is not worth it. We'll lose more once they decide to widen it later

[freerover]

Originally Posted by EagerTurnip

Seems like the tracks were pulled out a long time ago, but it would be cool to see this route turned back into a commuter train. It runs from Downtown Georgetown to East Austin and passes behind the Tech Ridge area.

Losing part of the greenbelt for a road is not worth it. We'll lose more once they decide to widen it later

It was in the phase 1 evaluations for Project Connect however TxDot nixed that idea from moving forward. In their opinion, since the train ROW was purchased with certain funds, they legally have to be used as a road for automobiles. The line would have started in downtown, diverged from the green line just east of 183 and gone all the way north to highway 29.

https://www.austinmonitor.com/storie...s-mokan-donts/

Great use of effort and money IMO but the backbone of the transit movement in Austin are central Austin residents who really despise the red line and planned green line. They don't seem to understand that all good transit systems include both core service and commuter.

[drummer]

Interesting that a big push for automated vehicles is to use existing infrastructure. Isn't that supposed to be one of the major selling points? Obviously, they need to do a big more DV before that is viable in a major way.

I think the Mokan corridor should be reserved for commuter rail - it already ties into the existing Red and future Green lines. That said, it's also worth noting that several parts of the Mokan corridor already have vehicular roads - Dessau Rd. and Railroad Ave. in Austin/Pflugerville, the extension of Kenny Ford (currently under construction) in Round Rock, and I believe Maple St. in Georgetown. I'm sure there are some others. The other portions are greenbelt or trails.

[Riverranchdrone]

That Mokan line if developed would cut my subdivision in two

[H2O]

There is a letter writing campaign from Safe Streets Austin to kill this. The well-loved and already well-used Southern Walnut Creek Trail already exists on parts of the ROW. Although TxDOT says they would include bike trails as part of the MoCAV proposal, building a four lane arterial through the forest would entirely alter the experience of the trail.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by H2O

There is a letter writing campaign from Safe Streets Austin to kill this. The well-loved and already well-used Southern Walnut Creek Trail already exists on parts of the ROW. Although TxDOT says they would include bike trails as part of the MoCAV proposal, building a four lane arterial through the forest would entirely alter the experience of the trail.

They’re literally starting construction now on the extension to downtown manor. It’s a marvel that must be protected. In a few years it’ll get all the way to the LABW.

[KevinFromTexas]

Great. So, we got SH-130, a highway to and from nowhere, and now we'll have a highway to and from nowhere for no one. Imagining automated vehicles driving back and forth on there is a bit like watching a computer play pong with itself.

[lzppjb]

I like getting them off the highways going through town. Maybe the thinking is that a lot of trucking will be done driverless and it'll get all those trucks off I35.

Can we get a dedicated roadway like this for drunk drivers, too?

[Riverranchdrone]

Dessau Road does need some serious help and traffic relief. The road is packed almost all day. So many accidents as well. The road has signs all over that it is a high crash road.

[clubtokyo]

“TxDOT submits 3 applications for Corridor Identification Program, the "Texas Triangle"”

https://texasrailadvocates.org/post/...texas-triangle

[drummer]

^^ Well how 'bout that.

[enthurzan]

Originally Posted by OfficialPBreton

They're taking the engagement and input seriously. That doesn't mean that the community has final say, but it does mean that they'll factor in what the community wants to see into their final choice.



They're voting on the final plan in June. They're doing 6 weeks of engagement (until start of May ish), and I expect another 4 weeks of engagement (until start of June ish) on maybe 2-3 final iterations. After that, they'll finalize the options for the June 21 board meeting.

I have no clue about the shovel-in-dirt date. I would expect them to want to get decently far with their designs before they start demo anywhere, so 2 years seems reasonable.

I am very against community input. First, community members are not engineers. They have no expertise in this field. For example, if ATP designs a light rail to maximize ridership, why should we care if another community complains that the light rail line doesn't go near them? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Community input is the same cancer that has infected the housing market. We prioritize the needs of the few over the needs of the many.

Furthermore, while the price of conducting such input is low compared to the actual price of the project (similar projects have done community outrage for $250,000-$1M), the price we pay is in delayed construction. For example, if community outreach takes 2 years, and inflation is 7% per year, with an original OPCC of $10.3B, that 2 years costs taxpayers $1.4B. The same logic holds for lengthy design process.

Here is a image of Project Connect's "Initial Investment Sequence Plan"

As you can see, the design period is 4 years. Based on updated OPCC's released recently by ATP, we now know this slow-moving process doubled the expected cost of the project.