AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[StoOgE]

Originally Posted by drummer

You guys ought to see the issues with those bikes in China. Tens of thousands...millions...billions, who knows? In larger cities like Shanghai and Chengdu, they are a significant issue and the cities are doing their best to deal with them, but every subway station has hundreds literally piled up.

The bigger issue with these bikes (I rode a ton in Chengdu last summer) is that people destroy them. They will buy their own locks or scratch out QR codes so no one else can use them.

I've seen this in China and Europe pretty badly.

In theory I love the dockless system if people could just not be assholes about it.

[We vs us]

We just got notice from the Downtown Alliance that Colorado St. from Cesar Chavez to 9th will be converted to two-way on July 17-21 of this year.

Only a year behind schedule, not too shabby.

[KevinFromTexas]

https://www.statesman.com/news/bond-...rP4MVN0oEYiSL/

Bond project includes replacing obsolete bridges at Red Bud Isle

Updated July 05, 2018
By Ben Wear, American-Statesman Staff

The two low-slung bridges, joined by Red Bud Isle in the middle and leading to the Colorado River’s east and west banks, stand as a relic from another time.

The 68-year-old bridges’ two lanes and slender sidewalk on the south side, measuring just 28½ feet in width, are stressed by a daily load of 13,000 cars, some nervy cyclists and a dozen or so heavy sludge trucks serving Austin’s Ullrich Water Treatment Plant up the hill to the west.

This fall, it appears Austin voters will get a chance to launch a long-delayed $50 million project to replace what longtime Austinites have always called “the low water bridge,” situated just downstream of Tom Miller Dam. In August, the City Council will vote to call an election on what at this point amounts to $925 million in potential borrowing through bonds, presenting voters with up-or-down decisions in six subject areas.

[Urbannizer]

Colorado Street conversion to two-way traffic by Austin Transportation, on Flickr

[lzppjb]

The demolition of the William Cannon bridge over I35 begins this weekend. Lane closures start tomorrow at 10pm.

@35WilliamCannon on twitter says they'll share some footage.

[The ATX]

From a San Antonio station. This I-35 expansion project is news to me.

• Video Link

[lzppjb]

Holy crap. That's awesome!

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Holy crap. That's awesome!

They said the planned start is early 2019. It goes from Georgetown to downtown San Antonio. So it benefits the Austin metro more so than S.A. I don't know why this isn't on any Austin news source.

[lzppjb]

Are those elevated lanes talking about DT Austin? We've heard that before.

[The ATX]

Maybe, we've heard multiple things about I-35 plans through downtown. Four additional lanes from Georgetown to San Antonio is a significant upgrade.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by The ATX

They said the planned start is early 2019. It goes from Georgetown to downtown San Antonio. So it benefits the Austin metro more so than S.A. I don't know why this isn't on any Austin news source.

It's not so much that it benefits Austin's metro more than San Antonio's. Its just that SA has multiple interstates, a fully developed inner loop as well as an outer loop. Austin on the other hand has just the one interstate, a disjointed inner loop and an incomplete disjointed outer loop. Also it's worth noting that SA's most populated suburbs are to the north of the city, same as with our largest suburbs. Not a whole lot going on south of SA, in fact I-35 shrinks down to two lanes each way before reaching I-410 South.

[eskimo33]

I was trolling through the FY 2019 budget and found mention (page 55 and 256) of a Bowie St underpass that will go under the Union Pacific tracks. Has anyone heard of this before?
https://assets.austintexas.gov/budge...osedBudget.pdf

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by eskimo33

I was trolling through the FY 2019 budget and found mention (page 55 and 256) of a Bowie St underpass that will go under the Union Pacific tracks. Has anyone heard of this before?
https://assets.austintexas.gov/budge...osedBudget.pdf

It's been forever planned and continually delayed.

At least planned since 2002

https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2002-08-09/99635/

Still being discussed in 2012

https://www.statesman.com/news/local...qZg2CXsMtIuQK/

[freerover]

Cap Metro is leaning hard away from light rail. Major focus at last Friday's Project Connect meeting was dedicated ROW for transit and autonomous buses that can be strung together and run along painted tracks. Basically, this is how Cap Metro can pay for a transit system and also build it out throughout the city.

Light rail would be nice but I get what they are saying and I hope people just support dedicated ROW for transit and don't get hung up on the actual mode.

[Azul]

Originally Posted by freerover

Cap Metro is leaning hard away from light rail. Major focus at last Friday's Project Connect meeting was dedicated ROW for transit and autonomous buses that can be strung together and run along painted tracks. Basically, this is how Cap Metro can pay for a transit system and also build it out throughout the city.

Light rail would be nice but I get what they are saying and I hope people just support dedicated ROW for transit and don't get hung up on the actual mode.

I may be a minority, but I'm glad Austin hasn't taken any more significant steps into adding more light rail. While it's benefits would be felt in the short-term, I think the bigger concern should be if autonomous vehicles will render such an investment moot. The short-term inconvenience of having a ROW for [soon to be] autonomous buses is a fair compromise between the need for more mass transit and not spending significant assets and valuable land on infrastructure that could soon be obsolete. In addition it gives Capital Metro the flexibility to change their lines, fluctuate capacity, and rework logistics with new technologies as the City continues to grow and develop. It's another compromise, this time the intersection of being proactive while also being reactive to Austin's uncharted wave of growth.

If they add light rail I'd imagine it would be for routes that they could count on to always be a high capacity need, even in the next 40-50 years. The only lines I'd imagine would takes these loads and be potentially profitable are Downtown to ABIA and West Campus to Downtown; however I believe both would still be a stretch to consider a profitable endeavor.

All in all I hope to see Austin begin to focus it's major infrastructure problems on the future of what transit will look like; likely autonomous, semi-personal vehicles.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Azul

I may be a minority, but I'm glad Austin hasn't taken any more significant steps into adding more light rail. While it's benefits would be felt in the short-term, I think the bigger concern should be if autonomous vehicles will render such an investment moot.

Exactly. The cost of rail -per person removed from the road- is cost prohibitive and will NEVER happen in Austin so long as the voters have to vote themselves a tax hike to pay for it.

It cost too much to serve too few, and the "last mile" problem still lingers. We have a buses, why do we need a rail that carries a few thousand commuters, when they won't even take the bus? Money and the fact that Austin's zoning will NEVER allow the type of density needed to make it work, killed it before and will kill it again.

I too think that electric, point to point, driver-less cars are the inevitable future (maybe after I'm dead, but it is the future).

Buying cars for existing rails is their only viable option. And I'm pro-rail BTW.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

Cap Metro is leaning hard away from light rail. Major focus at last Friday's Project Connect meeting was dedicated ROW for transit and autonomous buses that can be strung together and run along painted tracks. Basically, this is how Cap Metro can pay for a transit system and also build it out throughout the city.

Light rail would be nice but I get what they are saying and I hope people just support dedicated ROW for transit and don't get hung up on the actual mode.

I think claiming CM is against rail is premature. I think what they're saying is :

1) dedicated RoW is way more important than mode. Rail without dedicated RoW is (mostly) just a bigger failure.

2) Rail certainly isn't a viable answer for the entire system.


https://www.capmetro.org/uploadedIma...-01For-Web.gif

It's way to expensive, and too many of those corridors have borderline density/productivity.

Originally Posted by Azul

If they add light rail I'd imagine it would be for routes that they could count on to always be a high capacity need, even in the next 40-50 years. The only lines I'd imagine would takes these loads and be potentially profitable are Downtown to ABIA and West Campus to Downtown; however I believe both would still be a stretch to consider a profitable endeavor.

I sort of agree. I wouldn't be surprised if the proposal is a light rail spine of the Riverside Corridor and Lamer corridor, and BRT transitioning to ART for the rest of the corridors.

Though I disagree on the endpoints. Lamar at least north to NLTC. And Riverside stopping short of the airport, at least for now (airports aren't huge ridership drivers, despite what people think).

[Azul]

Originally Posted by Novacek

I sort of agree. I wouldn't be surprised if the proposal is a light rail spine of the Riverside Corridor and Lamer corridor, and BRT transitioning to ART for the rest of the corridors.

Though I disagree on the endpoints. Lamar at least north to NLTC. And Riverside stopping short of the airport, at least for now (airports aren't huge ridership drivers, despite what people think).

Likewise I sort of agree, you make fair points about potentially better endpoints. However, I imagine efficient light rail infrastructure here in Austin built around handling major volume over short spans of time rather than a commuter system to the likes of the Red Line or the famous subways of the Northeast. I see this form of mass-transit really making it's money if it's designed to push crowds in say:

• Major conference incoming traffic from ABIA
• West Campus/Riverside connections into gameday
• ABIA/West Campus into SXSW or ACL

or rather, events where people wouldn't want to / can not use their personal cars to begin with.

For other commuter traffic I think it's too much hassle and investment to change the social fabric of our city/state and have people give up using their cars to use these services. For that the key might be improved bus lines and technologies in that field along with codes that allow for better, sustainable density. I'm no expert though, so maybe I'll eat my words one day.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Azul

Likewise I sort of agree, you make fair points about potentially better endpoints. However, I imagine efficient light rail infrastructure here in Austin built around handling major volume over short spans of time rather than a commuter system to the likes of the Red Line or the famous subways of the Northeast. I see this form of mass-transit really making it's money if it's designed to push crowds in say:

• Major conference incoming traffic from ABIA
• West Campus/Riverside connections into gameday
• ABIA/West Campus into SXSW or ACL

For other commuter traffic I think it's too much hassle and investment to change the social fabric of our city/state and have people give up using their cars to use this services. For that the key might be improved bus lines and technologies in that field along with codes that allow for better, sustainable density. I'm no expert though, so maybe I'll eat my words one day.

All of those are infrequent, extremely "peaky" use cases. You don't put in infrastructure for peaks (and then have it be severely underutilized 350 days a year), you put it in for consistent and regular uses.

Certainly not commuter-only, but in town (non-suburban) rush hour will be an important part of it.

[Azul]

Originally Posted by Novacek

All of those are infrequent, extremely "peaky" use cases. You don't put in infrastructure for peaks (and then have it be severely underutilized 350 days a year), you put it in for consistent and regular uses.

Certainly not commuter-only, but in town (non-suburban) rush hour will be an important part of it.

Which is exactly why I don't see it as truly viable in Austin. We won't grow nor sustain the commuter traffic long enough before the infrastructure is obsolete to pay off such a project. For that the City will have to see a change of culture, further density development, as well as our other major road arteries becoming further insufficient in order for people to use such mass-transit lines. At least, in my opinion. What I listed are just the cases I personally see where the mix of "peaky use" and a somewhat sustained commuter base could provide to be profitable to CM.

We're long past the payback period where light rail would be considered a sound investment for a town like Austin, if we started tomorrow I firmly believe it will end up being a net-negative endeavor on many fronts. I believe you and I might agree on more than we don't and just some minor details are what delineate our opinions.