Cox-Gomyl  Skyscraper posters - sale!  
HomeDiagramsCitiesForumSkyscraper PostersStore
     
--> Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ad banners, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old 04-23-2007, 07:18 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016
Austin Metro Transportation Updates


MoPac managed lanes: A question of safety
Special lanes in Dallas have sharply increased accidents, but engineers say MoPac plan would address flaws.

By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Monday, April 23, 2007

If the state adds two "managed lanes" to MoPac Boulevard north of Town Lake as proposed this month, the increasingly clogged freeway would have a third more capacity and a high-speed refuge for buses, emergency vehicles and motorists willing to pay tolls.

However, given design compromises forced by lack of space, research indicates that the highway would also have more accidents and serious injuries. What is not clear at this point, because little or no study has been done of the particular design contemplated for MoPac (Loop 1), is just how many more.

he state plans to add lanes along MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1) near 35th Street in Central Austin. But because of space constraints – train tracks, power poles, resolute homeowners – some parts of the inside shoulder of the northbound lanes would be just 15 inches wide.


Officials working on the project say that the design, with the possible exception of an exceedingly tight stretch near Camp Mabry, meets acceptable standards (if not optimal recommendations) and that it is the best approach possible at this point for moving more people in Austin's northwest quadrant.

"If you did not have right-of-way constraints, would you design it differently?" asked Bob Daigh, Austin district engineer for the Texas Department of Transportation. "You bet you would. But that's not the project we have to design. We have to live within those constraints."

The agency hopes to begin construction in late 2008 and have the lanes open two years after that.

The constraints exist only in the southern five miles of the project, between Town Lake and RM 2222, where Union Pacific railroad lines on the inside and a combination of enormous power poles and resolute homeowners on the outside mean the expansion must occur within the Transportation Department's existing right of way.

North of RM 2222, there is plenty of room for expansion, and the state will be able to lay down full 12-foot-wide lanes and spacious 10-foot-wide shoulders.

For that southern section, however, Daigh and his engineers have spent the past year or more trying to figure out how to cram in another lane, plus a buffer of a few feet between the new managed lane on the inside and the three lanes that would remain free. To do that, the design would narrow the regular lanes to 11 feet and have shoulders that typically would be 4 feet wide.

In the worst case — on the northbound lanes of a milelong stretch between West 35th and West 45th streets — the inside shoulder would be a scant 15 inches wide, the managed lane would be just 11 feet wide, and the normal 4-foot buffer separating it from the free lanes would be just 2 feet wide.

For cars using the managed lane in that area, the total side-to-side maneuvering space, including the lane itself, would be just over 14 feet.

The Texas Transportation Institute, in a 2004 study of accidents and designs on Dallas high-occupancy-vehicle lanes where there is typically no inside shoulder, recommended that cars on such segregated, high-speed lanes have 26 feet total side-to-side maneuvering space. That would allow cars to get around a stalled vehicle or one slowing down to move over into the regular lanes.

The "absolute minimum cross-section," the report says, should be 18 feet.

"Without an inside shoulder, when you looked at the crash reports (in Dallas), there just wasn't anywhere for someone to avoid the crashes," said Scott Cooner, an associate research engineer in the Texas Transportation Institute's Arlington office.

The study looked at accident rates on Interstate 35 and Interstate 635 before and after HOV lanes were added. After the HOV lanes opened in 1996 and 1997, injury accidents per million miles traveled over the next four years increased 41 percent on I-35 and 56 percent on I-635.

But as with so many questions about highway safety, any comparison to what might happen with MoPac's managed lanes is necessarily inexact. The state Transportation Department, to some degree because of experience with the Dallas HOV lanes, would build the Austin lanes differently.

On those two Dallas highways, the only separation between the HOV lane and the regular lanes is a double stripe painted on the pavement. Signs tell drivers not to cross those solid double stripes, that movement from the HOV lane to the inside regular lane is supposed to occur only every mile or so, when there is an access point indicated by a dashed line.

On MoPac, the managed lane would be segregated from the regular lanes by a series of closely spaced, flexible plastic pylons. At entry or exit points — and there would be only five, aside from the southern and northern ends — there would be a gap in the pylons of about 1,200 feet, about a quarter-mile, where people could make the lane change.

The reality in Dallas, according to the 2004 report, is that many people have ignored those signs, weaving in and out of the managed lane in efforts to gain advantage or (in the case of people driving alone who are illegally in the HOV lane) to avoid being caught and ticketed. Most of the accidents, Cooner said, occurred because of that rampant lane changing.

The fundamental problem is that cars in the HOV lanes at rush hour, by and large, are going 30 to 35 miles per hour faster than cars in the regular lanes, Cooner said. That speed differential makes lane changes more problematic than on a normal freeway, where everyone typically is traveling at the same speed.

That same problem would exist with the managed lanes on MoPac.

"If you're going to ask people to pay, they have to be going faster," Cooner said.

In fact, the plan with MoPac is to have "dynamic pricing" to ensure that speeds remain high on the managed lane. The tolls to drive in the lane would be significantly higher at peak traffic hours, set at whatever price it took to discourage enough drivers to keep traffic uncongested.

On State Route 91 in Southern California, for instance, the toll for a 10-mile stretch of managed lanes varies between $1.10 overnight and $9.50 between 4 and 5 p.m. Fridays.

The expectation with MoPac is that the pylons, by limiting lane changes to the designated access points, will produce a far lower accident rate than Dallas has seen. In fact, the state Transportation Department is installing pylons on its next Dallas HOV project, on U.S. 75.

"I would certainly feel like your situation is set up to be more successful than what we've had in Dallas," Cooner said.

On the other hand, could funneling everyone who wants to enter or exit the managed lane into a quarter-mile section actually cause more accidents? Cooner said that's an ongoing debate in traffic design circles, one yet to be settled by reliable research.

The bible for U.S. highway design is called the green book, a thick manual published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

It says that on urban freeways, "through-traffic lanes should be 12 ft. wide." On freeways with at least six lanes, such as MoPac, the book says both shoulders should be at least 10 feet wide.

That won't be the case for certain sections of MoPac under the proposal. However, that is already the case near 35th and from Town Lake south to Loop 360 (Capital of Texas Highway). That section south of the river also has shoulders only a couple of feet wide.

The narrower lanes — 11 feet vs. 12 feet — are unlikely to cause any significant increase in accidents, several engineers say. But they could decrease capacity on the regular lanes, because drivers intuitively leave more space between their front bumper and the car in front when the lane is narrower.

The managed lanes could have a similar congesting effect on the inside regular lane, said Elizabeth Jones, an associate professor of civil engineering at the University of Nebraska.

"It's like being in that far right lane where people are entering and exiting," said Jones, a University of Texas graduate who specializes in transportation systems. "You get a little bit of turbulence there, so you don't get as much capacity."

Daigh says this $110 million project is a stopgap solution. A long-term approach, which might involve sinking MoPac belowground like Dallas' Central Expressway, would come much later.

"We cannot wait in this community 10 years to make some improvements" to MoPac, Daigh said. "This is not a silver bullet that will solve all of MoPac's problems. But it is a good step in the right direction."

bwear@statesman.com; 445-3698









http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...3/23mopac.html


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old 04-23-2007, 08:20 PM
Mopacs's Avatar
Mopacs Mopacs is offline
Austinite
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Austin.TX.USA
Posts: 3,727

That is one tight squeeze on Mopac, especially around Camp mabry, as noted. So how much of a success are the DFW-area managed lanes? Those rush hour prices are steep, to say the least!


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old 04-24-2007, 06:26 AM
austlar austlar is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 77

I wish they would manage to squeeze double track commuter rail of some sort along Mopac instead of adding lanes for auto traffic. It is time for a bold proposal to relocate the UP line to the east of Austin and use that right of way to provide rail from Stassney to points far to the north and northeast. That kind of plan is the only long term solution to the ever growing traffic mess in this town. I find myself thinking about this every time I drive up Mopac. It seems like such a wasted opportunity.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old 04-24-2007, 02:00 PM
Mopacs's Avatar
Mopacs Mopacs is offline
Austinite
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Austin.TX.USA
Posts: 3,727

Quote:
Originally Posted by austlar View Post
I wish they would manage to squeeze double track commuter rail of some sort along Mopac instead of adding lanes for auto traffic. It is time for a bold proposal to relocate the UP line to the east of Austin and use that right of way to provide rail from Stassney to points far to the north and northeast. That kind of plan is the only long term solution to the ever growing traffic mess in this town. I find myself thinking about this every time I drive up Mopac. It seems like such a wasted opportunity.
I agree, long-term that is an optimal solution. At least the UPac ROW is left intact as a result of the lane expansion, hopefully leaving that option available... Does this leave enough room for a double-track setup, or would the UP ROW need to be expanded itself? Just curious.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old 04-27-2007, 04:41 PM
M1EK's Avatar
M1EK M1EK is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,759

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopacs View Post
I agree, long-term that is an optimal solution. At least the UPac ROW is left intact as a result of the lane expansion, hopefully leaving that option available... Does this leave enough room for a double-track setup, or would the UP ROW need to be expanded itself? Just curious.
The managed lanes supposedly leave enough room for double-tracking. Won't ever happen, anyways; UP has too much power and nobody who wants commuter rail has enough money to induce them to move.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old 04-27-2007, 07:06 PM
Mopacs's Avatar
Mopacs Mopacs is offline
Austinite
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Austin.TX.USA
Posts: 3,727

FYI... The western 3 mile leg of SH 45 is now open (from 620/parmer to US 183).. This includes the truly massive interchange with US183/183A near Lakeline Mall/Cedar Park.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old 04-27-2007, 07:13 PM
priller's Avatar
priller priller is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,627

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopacs View Post
FYI... This includes the truly massive interchange with US183/183A near Lakeline Mall/Cedar Park.
I took this photo of that intersection over a year ago. It's even larger and more jumbled now:



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old 04-27-2007, 07:22 PM
Mopacs's Avatar
Mopacs Mopacs is offline
Austinite
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Austin.TX.USA
Posts: 3,727

Quote:
Originally Posted by priller View Post
I took this photo of that intersection over a year ago. It's even larger and more jumbled now:
Great shot! Looks like you took that from the EB 620 frontage road, at 183. I drove the WB stretch of 45 yesterday on the way home from work. The top level ramps (WB45 to NB and SB 183) are incredibly tall, with a panoramic view of nearly the entire cities of Cedar Park and Leander, and many parts of Round Rock. ...not to mention NW sections of Austin.

Here are a couple of shots taken from the NW corner of 183/45 yesterday:





Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old 04-27-2007, 07:52 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Missing Chicago...
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Back in Ohio
Posts: 4,866

It's too bad it's so tight through that area. MoPac is definitely overcrowded and the addition of one extra lane probably won't have much of an impact with easing the congestion, especially if it results in more accidents.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old 04-27-2007, 09:16 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioGuy View Post
It's too bad it's so tight through that area. MoPac is definitely overcrowded and the addition of one extra lane probably won't have much of an impact with easing the congestion, especially if it results in more accidents.
I'm hoping it does help, its probably the best, practical solution we have right now. If they run it as a HOT lane and really rack up the prices when necessary , then it should allow traffic to flow pretty freely. The entrances and exits sort suck. It will be nice to see buses flow rather than sit in traffic. Maybe some people will actually take the bus if they know they can save time in traffic.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old 04-27-2007, 09:45 PM
M1EK's Avatar
M1EK M1EK is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,759

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM View Post
I'm hoping it does help, its probably the best, practical solution we have right now. If they run it as a HOT lane and really rack up the prices when necessary , then it should allow traffic to flow pretty freely. The entrances and exits sort suck. It will be nice to see buses flow rather than sit in traffic. Maybe some people will actually take the bus if they know they can save time in traffic.
As usual, TXDOT refused to learn anything from other states - HOV lanes which require merging back into general traffic to exit have been disastrous (again South Florida serves as a cautionary tale). If traffic is bad enough to make you want to pay the toll, it's also bad enough that it's really hard to merge back in without slowing to a crawl - at which point you slow down all the people behind you in the managed lane, and before too long, it's not much faster than the general-purpose lane.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old 05-02-2007, 10:20 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016
Bill restricting private toll roads gets nod


By Ben Wear | Wednesday, May 2, 2007, 02:23 PM

House Bill 1892, which would restrict private toll road contracts in a variety of ways, heads to Gov. Perry’s desk after passing on a 139-1 vote. The lone nay vote was State Rep. Mike Krusee, R-Williamson. While Perry may veto the bill, the Legislature would have enough time before it adjourns May 28th to override such an action.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte..._gets_nod.html


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old 05-04-2007, 03:26 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016
Benzene found at Crestview Station


Developers will argue to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality that the levels are too low to pose a danger.

By Claire Osborn
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Friday, May 04, 2007

Benzene found in the groundwater on 3 acres of a proposed North Austin development poses a minimal risk and shouldn't have to be cleaned up, a developer's consultant said. But some residents in the area want the chemical removed from the ground.

An environmental cleanup company hired by developers Stratus Properties Inc. and Trammell Crow Co. found the carcinogenic chemical last summer in soil at Crestview Station, a 73-acre site bordered by North Lamar Boulevard, Morrow Street and a future Capital Metro commuter rail. The $200 million development is slated to include 450 houses, 800 to 900 apartments and condos, and 150,000 square feet of office and retail space.


Weston Solutions Inc., the company hired to do the cleanup for the entire site, will make a final report in two to three weeks to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality concluding that the level of benzene found is not high enough to warrant a cleanup, considering the condition of the soil, said Jeff Henke, a project manager for Weston.

The benzene was found about 10 feet below the soil in groundwater on 3 acres in the southwestern part of the site, as well as under four nearby homes on St. Johns Circle, he said.

Henke said test results showed that benzene levels reached about 3 milligrams per liter at Crestview Station. But he classifies the soil as "saturated soil," because it is made up of dense limestone with few cracks and low permeability. State rules for such soil, which produces little water and no potential for direct human contact, trigger a cleanup if the benzene level reaches 6.6 milligrams per liter or higher.

The chemical could have gotten into the groundwater from a sewer line leak 30 to 40 years ago, Henke said.

"I don't think it poses any risk to homeowners, because it is far enough underground for them not to become exposed to it," he said.

Weston already conducted a $3 million cleanup at the site that included removing 18,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and waste, said Mike Blizzard, a community relations consultant for Crestview Station.

The Huntsman Chemical Plant, which was on the site from 1949 to 2005, tested products that went into soap, detergent and foam, Blizzard said.

"Highly toxic chemicals were not being used," he said.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has already approved residential use for the 70 acres of the site where benzene wasn't found.

Neighbors said they were told of the benzene in January and April. Weston also drilled wells in the St. Johns Circle area and found benzene in one of the six wells, near the house where Marla Benningfield lives with her parents.

Benningfield said Thursday that she was furious when Weston told her about the benzene. Benningfield said the discovery of benzene makes her parents' property worthless. Cathleen Martin, who also lives on St. Johns Circle, said she's not that worried about the benzene because it was found so far down in the soil.

Martin said she supports the proposed development at the Crestview Station.

"I'm glad someone came out and cleaned up the Huntsman facility," she said.

cosborn@statesman.com; 445-3871

What is benzene?

It is a component of products derived from coal and petroleum and is found in gasoline and other fuels. Benzene is used in manufacturing plastics, detergents and other chemicals.

Research has shown that benzene can cause cancer. After being exposed to it for less than five years to more than 30 years, people have developed, and died from, leukemia. Long-term exposure can affect bone marrow and blood production. Short-term exposure to high levels of benzene can cause drowsiness, dizziness, unconsciousness and death.

Source: U.S. Occupational Safety & Health Administration

http://www.statesman.com/news/conten.../4benzene.html



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old 05-06-2007, 12:01 AM
RobDSM RobDSM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX, USA
Posts: 219

Quote:
Originally Posted by M1EK View Post
If traffic is bad enough to make you want to pay the toll, it's also bad enough that it's really hard to merge back in without slowing to a crawl - at which point you slow down all the people behind you in the managed lane, and before too long, it's not much faster than the general-purpose lane.
What an awful idea. They'd be better off making it a general-purpose lane until plans are finalized for the complete reconstruction. But then they'd probably have a hard time convincing the public that they need to put it back to just 3 GP lanes after having had 4, and I'm sure that's what they plan to do, or at least that's what I recall from the concepts on the old mopac183.com web site.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old 05-06-2007, 12:55 AM
TexasBoi's Avatar
TexasBoi TexasBoi is offline
Ya Dig!!
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Inside the Beltway
Posts: 2,145

Good Lord. Where in the hell did tha interchange come from. I haven't been in that part of Austin in 4 years. I knew they were working on the expansion of 183 but never even seen signs of a large interchange.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old 05-06-2007, 05:52 PM
JDSII JDSII is offline
JDSII
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 39
1 is company 2 is a crowd


That's a shame about the managed lanes, they are needed; But will this one day affect the UP rail? What if we do get the money to relocate UP to the East and we use their ROW for San Antonio to Dallas passenger rail service. Will there be enough room to have 2 tracks? Most likely not. These managed lanes have been on the drawing board forever! Do you think that they suddenly got started on it in order to stifle their competition- mass transit?


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old 05-14-2007, 03:40 AM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016
Free parking at City Hall to end


I don't think this is a very good idea unless the garage is overloaded. This isn't going to help the fledgling 2nd street retailers one bit.

The free ride is over at City Hall.

Beginning June 4, the city will charge for parking in the City Hall garage.

But visitors will still be able to park at no charge with a validated ticket, and parking will be free on Thursdays when the City Council is in session.

The charge will be $3 for the first hour — with no charge for the first 30 minutes — and $1.50 for each subsequent half-hour up to $10.

Those entering the garage after work hours will pay a $5 flat fee.

Visitors to the Second Street retail district can get two hours of free parking with validation.


http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...13roundup.html


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old 05-22-2007, 01:45 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016
Commuter rail to cost twice the estimate in campaign


New contracts bring total to more than $10 million annually.

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Tuesday, May 22, 2007

The Capital Metro board awarded a $112 million contract Monday to Veolia Transportation Services Inc., a French company, to run the agency's freight rail and commuter rail operations for the next six years and four months.

The initial cost to run commuter rail is $9.4 million a year, including separate debt payments for its rail cars: almost twice the $5 million annual operating cost estimate shared with the public during the 2004 campaign to approve the 32-mile line from Leander to downtown Austin. The line will begin operations in late 2008.


Rodolfo Gonzalez
AMERICAN-STATESMAN
(enlarge photo)

Jim Skaggs: Rail opponent says, 'Capital Metro has been deceptive at best, lying at worst,' in its presentation of the cost.


The operating cost could be higher if Capital Metro, as some board members want, brings all commuter rail workers under the agency's umbrella and union pay scale rather than having them work directly for Veolia. Furthermore, Rich Krisak, Capital Metro's rail manager, said the numbers do not include fuel costs. Capital Metro will pay those directly, including an estimated $700,000 annually to fuel the diesel commuter rail cars initially.

Taken together, that would bring the first-year operating cost to $10.1 million.

Right Track PAC, a political action committee that worked closely with Capital Metro during the 2004 election, said in a widely disseminated mailer during the campaign that "Cap Metro estimates the new commuter rail system will cost approximately $60 million in capital and construction costs, and will require an additional $5 million annually to operate the trains and to lease-purchase the rail cars."

"It's pretty clear that from the beginning, Capital Metro has been deceptive at best, lying at worst, in their presentation to the public of the cost of this commuter rail system," said Jim Skaggs, a retired high-tech executive who has opposed Capital Metro rail ventures for the past decade. "This just confirms that they can't afford to continue on the way they have."

Capital Metro spokeswoman Andrea Lofye, when asked about the increased costs, said, "First of all, we don't know who Right Track PAC was. What we put out had different costs. . . . Our operating costs in the Veolia contract are on par with our own independent estimates for commuter and freight services."

Right Track PAC's chairman was former Austin Mayor and now state Sen. Kirk Watson, a Democrat. Its treasurer was former Austin City Council Member and longtime civic leader Lowell Lebermann Jr. According to a "Long-Range Transit Vision Update" released by the agency in May 2004, "Initial operating costs are estimated at $5M — including lease-purchase of vehicles."

The $112 million bid award to Veolia includes:

• $35.6 million for commuter rail, not including the cost of the rail cars.

• $61.5 million for freight rail operations, beginning in October. Capital Metro has another subcontractor handling freight rail operations on its track, primarily runs to and from the Marble Falls area to haul rock.

• A $14.6 million contingency, or 15 percent of the total, for the company. Krisak said much of that contingency is in place to account for possible quick growth in both the commuter rail and freight rail systems. Capital Metro's six cars will handle just 2,000 passengers a day, running primarily at rush hour.

The payments to Veolia are based on an hourly rate, however, and would increase if the agency decides to run the commuter rail service on an all-day basis or extensively on weekends.

The agency is considering ordering more cars.

bwear@statesman.com; 445-3698

Commuter rail costs

• $35.6 million of the $112 million bid is for commuter rail.

• First-year operating cost would be $5.2 million.

• Agency has $4.2 million annual payments to retire rail car debt.

• Fuel would cost $700,000 a year initially.


http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...2capmetro.html


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old 06-06-2007, 02:24 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016

From SecretAgentMan's post in another thread.



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old 07-05-2007, 04:04 PM
JAM's Avatar
JAM JAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,016
Tollway design generating rash of violations


183-A's toll-tag-only section has more than 30 percent violation rate.
Listen to this article or download audio file.Click-2-Listen

By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Thursday, July 05, 2007

More than 30 percent of people who drive on the 183-A tollway's anomalous toll-tag-only section are doing so illegally, an abnormally high violation rate that has the road's operator pondering alternatives to the confusing setup.

The Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority has asked Vollmer Associates, its traffic and revenue consultant, to analyze what might result from several scenarios, including continuing under the current arrangement. The authority expects to have that information within a few months and could consider making changes in the fall.

The good news for the agency is that in June, after toll charges began for all drivers, daily traffic on the 4 1/2-mile tollway in Northwest Austin and Cedar Park was about 125 percent higher than projections that were used to borrow money for construction.

On three Wednesdays in June, the tollway had an average of almost 62,000 toll transactions a day. With low-traffic weekends averaged in, the road had about 55,850 daily transactions in June. Vollmer's original traffic and revenue analysis, in December 2004, predicted 24,600 transactions a day by the end of 2007.

Based on unaudited numbers, 183-A generated $775,636 in June. On an annualized basis, that would be $9.4 million, not far below what the agency had expected to make in 2008. However, the agency did not start charging customers with toll tags full price until Sunday; drivers with tags paid 50 percent of the cash rate in June but now will permanently pay 90 percent. The higher price could produce more revenue even if usage ebbs.

"We're getting some complaints up there, but overall we're doing much better than expected," authority spokesman Steve Pustelnyk said. "The issues we're having are with infrequent customers."

Authority officials say that the road over time probably will move toward an all-electronic approach, which would be less confusing than the existing situation, although it would exclude cash customers. The tollway currently is something of a hybrid, with its southern third open only to people with toll tags and the northernmost three miles available for both cash and toll tag customers.

That mixture, along with the road's infancy (it opened March 3), has caused an unusually high number of tag-less people to blunder onto the all-electronic southern section.

That results — after forgiveness for the first couple of violations — in their getting citations and bills for both the forgone toll (45 cents) and a $5 "administrative fee."

The numbersare particularly bad for the northbound all-electronic gantry, which looms over the road just north of the Lakeline Mall Drive exit. In June, 38 percent of northbound drivers in that section did not have a toll tag.

The Lakeline Mall ramp is the last free exit for cars coming from Austin on U.S. 183. Drivers who are inattentive to the signs pointing that out or who are unaware that the road doesn't have cash booths for part of its length can find themselves on a toll-tag-only section with no tag. On the three other toll roads in the Austin area, which are operated by the Texas Department of Transportation, going through a tag lane with no tag generates only a bill at a higher toll rate (cameras record the car's license plate, and the bill goes to the car's owner). But on 183-A, which is run by the mobility authority under a different policy, doing so is considered a toll violation and triggers that $5 fee.

The tollway's this-and-that arrangement is not necessarily what the mobility authority would have chosen. With two flyover bridges from Texas 45 North hitting the road near Lakeline Boulevard and heavy traffic in the area, the agency had neither the room nor the inclination to build a broad toll plaza there with cash booths. In the alternative, the authority wanted the entire road to be open only to cars with toll tags, like toll roads that have opened in the past year or two in Dallas, Tyler and Houston.

But after looking at the numbers, Vollmer said that cutting off the entire road from cash customers would hurt revenue badly and not allow enough money to be borrowedfor construction. So the agency built cash booths at Park Street and Brushy Creek Road. Now, with 70 percent to 80 percent of the customers at those points (and southbound at Lakeline Boulevard) using toll tags, going all-electronic is becoming a serious possibility.

"Anything we do, we have to do very carefully with great research," Pustelnyk said. "We don't want to make any sudden changes."

Tracking 183-A tolls

In June, the first month when all cars on 183-A were subject to tolls (albeit at a reduced rate for toll tag users), the road averaged 55,850 toll transactions a day. However, more than 11,000 of those times — about 20 percent — the driver did not pay for the privilege, many at the toll-tag-only toll gantries near Lakeline Boulevard.

Toll point Daily toll transactions Violations Violation % Tag Use

Lakeline (northbound)* 16,246 6,216 38.3 61.7

Lakeline (southbound)* 10,260 2,148 20.9 79.1

Brushy Creek (northbound)** 3,623 187 5.2 76.5

Brushy Creek (southbound)** 2,701 151 5.6 79.7

Park Street (both directions)** 23,016 2,515 10.9 73.2

* Toll-tag-only plaza with no cash booths

** Cash booths and toll tag readers

Source: Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, unaudited toll statistics

http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...0705tolls.html


Reply With Quote
     
     
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump



 

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:51 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Forums Directory