AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Again, we just don't know that.

Yes, we DO know that. Just because you nor I will ever have the data to prove our points, doesn't mean that the tree doesn't make a sound when it falls in the forest. (It does)

C'mon man, I know you HAVE to be smarter than this.

Wait, who am I kidding? You are totally right, I'm wrong. Since the days of AOL chat groups 20 years ago, I've won exactly ZERO arguments online. Don't mind me, I see some sand that needs pounding.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

Yes, we DO know that. Just because you nor I will ever have the data to prove our points, doesn't mean that the tree doesn't make a sound when it falls in the forest. (It does)

C'mon man, I know you HAVE to be smarter than this.

How do we know that? Because you feel safer seeing people take Uber? Well, I feel way less safe knowing traffic fatalities were up 50% last year.

Maybe that was a statistical outlier. Maybe it was because it was 7 years since the recession instead of 6 years since the recession. Maybe it was because Austin was 3% larger. Because unemployment was 3% instead of 3.5%.
That doesn't gut check for me, but I admit I don't know that.

I'm don't really think Uber made us less safe, but I certainly don't know that it made us more safe.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Novacek

How do we know that? Because you feel safer seeing people take Uber? Well, I feel way less safe knowing traffic fatalities were up 50% last year.

Maybe that was a statistical outlier. Maybe it was because it was 7 years since the recession instead of 6 years since the recession. Maybe it was because Austin was 3% larger. Because unemployment was 3% instead of 3.5%.
That doesn't gut check for me, but I admit I don't know that.

I'm don't really think Uber made us less safe, but I certainly don't know that it made us more safe.

Do you frequent downtown bars? I do. I have for 25 years, and I still (more or less) go downtown as much as i did when I was 20.

It has kept ME and my drunken hooligan friends off of the streets. I admit, that we didn't cab when we should have in the past. Not proud of that, but now, NONE of us go out with taking a TNC. So there's that.

But you are right. I am wrong. We are all equally as safe as we were. TNC's had no impact whatsoever.

I don't have time to prove a negative. I need to feed my unicorn now, please excuse me.

[jbssfelix]

We have to remember that humans like to take the path of least resistance.

Mass Transit - Very high resistance (in Austin): not door-to-door, very limited hours, infrequent schedules, inexpensive

Taxis - High resistance: can be hard to hail on when busy, expensive, unpleasant experiences, hard to get one outside of downtown/airport, usually not as cheap as driving/parking

Driving - Medium resistance: potential for DUI, still have to pay for parking which can also be hard to find, guaranteed availability and knowledge of location, usual Austin traffic

Uber/Lyft/TNC - Low resistance: often cheaper than a cab, safer than driving, transactions are easy even with a BAC that should be clinically deemed lethal, easy to hail, can only be hailed with smartphone (which conveniently like to die upon leaving bars), usually not as cheap as driving/parking

Therefore, we either need to make the lowest resistance options the safest options, and/or make the high resistance options more appealing (make taxis easier/cheaper/more open, increase bus/train schedules, etc), along with making driving/parking the hardest, most inconvenient choice possible.

[hereinaustin]

Originally Posted by Novacek

How do we know that? Because you feel safer seeing people take Uber? Well, I feel way less safe knowing traffic fatalities were up 50% last year.

We obviously don't know how many fatalities we would have had without Uber and Lyft. Alcohol, weather, distractions, or car disrepair play a role in most MVCs.

[urbancore]

I just heard a rumor that Ann Kitchen's husband is a lobbyist for the taxi companies. Can anyone substantiate this? Sounds like something you would hear about in Chi-town, not in Austin.

[brando]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

I just heard a rumor that Ann Kitchen's husband is a lobbyist for the taxi companies. Can anyone substantiate this? Sounds like something you would hear about in Chi-town, not in Austin.

doubt it

[nixcity]

In other transportation news, the UTC is still pushing hard to get rail on this year's ballot, hope is still alive.
http://keyetv.com/news/local/austin-...ight-rail-bond

http://kxan.com/2016/05/12/after-def...ustin-returns/

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

I just heard a rumor that Ann Kitchen's husband is a lobbyist for the taxi companies. Can anyone substantiate this? Sounds like something you would hear about in Chi-town, not in Austin.

Googling Mark Yznaga turns up nothing on that. Mostly just him being a political consultant, former campaign manager to Tovo, etc.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

In other transportation news, the UTC is still pushing hard to get rail on this year's ballot, hope is still alive.
http://keyetv.com/news/local/austin-...ight-rail-bond

http://kxan.com/2016/05/12/after-def...ustin-returns/

Any rail system that doesn't get past the inner ring of congestion is probably a non-starter. If you only go up to Crestview (where there's 0 parking) on the first pass, how do you add any additional riders above and beyond the metrorapid?

You basically can only capture transfers from the red line (transfer penalty is over-emphasized by some, but it certainly exists) who then would take the rail downtown (where the red line _already goes_).


Instead of spending some pulled out of the ass number of $100 M on "engineering", spend $30 or so on transit only lanes on the drag and elsewhere. Then _if_ we ever put rail on G/L, you've already got those. And in the meantime, you've substantially improved metrorapid.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by nixcity

In other transportation news, the UTC is still pushing hard to get rail on this year's ballot, hope is still alive.
http://keyetv.com/news/local/austin-...ight-rail-bond

http://kxan.com/2016/05/12/after-def...ustin-returns/

The voters will not go for it. They will never go for it, because it will directly increase their taxes too much. It's about the $. It's always about the $.

For a BILLION dollars, COA could create their own TNC company, buy a fleet of electric cars from Elon, house the ALL the homeless, and still have enough left over to give themselves a well deserved bonus.

I will gladly wager $100 (and I'll give you 2 to 1) that if rail comes up on a city wide ballot again this year, it will be defeated. Kevin can hold the money via Venmo. (that's what moderators do right?) We can use the money to pay for a couple rounds at the next Forum happy hour. Any takers? I doubt it.

[nixcity]

We are in a delicate position of deciding how much money to put on a bond and for obvious reasons are weary of putting up too much although I would push for the extension up to the transit center. You will capture many people that did not want to ride a bus, there are neighborhoods as well as apartments and condos that will fill the trains and that is the key, showing full trains (more train cars and more frequently than red line and in a highly visible place) will make it easier to extend and then eventually add more lines. And this would get the transfers to the places they want to go DT and get there quicker.

Instead of spending some pulled out of the ass number of $100 M on "engineering", spend $30 or so on transit only lanes on the drag and elsewhere. Then _if_ we ever put rail on G/L, you've already got those. And in the meantime, you've substantially improved metrorapid.

No numbers were pulled out the ass, these people know what they are doing. Spending that money to add transit lanes sounds good on paper I guess but by doing that you push getting rail back by a minimum of 2 years quite probably more like 10 and spend $30 million that could have improved metrorapid in other areas not to mention the fact that those that are planning on transit lanes for Guadalupe want to put them in the right lanes.....

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

For a BILLION dollars, COA could create their own TNC company, buy a fleet of electric cars from Elon,

Let's see, for a billion dollars (actually more like $600M, since the Feds would give us money for a rail but not taxis, but sure $1B) we could buy about 30k Model 3s. Well, if they existed.

We'd have no place to park them. And we'd be adding no additional lane capacity, but we'd have them. And the operating expenses would be way more than rail (or fares would be TNC-like, instead of transit like, so the poor would be screwed). And none of them would be handicapped accessible.

Then when they wore out in 10 years, we'd have nothing.


Or we could have rail, where in 10 years the rail itself would have 90 years left in it, the acquired RoW would have infinite years left in it, and the rail vehicles would have 30 or more years left in them.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

No numbers were pulled out the ass, these people know what they are doing.

Really, what are the backgrounds and technical expertise of the "Central Austin Community Development Corporation"?

[nixcity]

The voters will not go for it. They will never go for it, because it will directly increase their taxes too much. It's about the $. It's always about the $.

For a BILLION dollars, COA could create their own TNC company, buy a fleet of electric cars from Elon, house the ALL the homeless, and still have enough left over to give themselves a well deserved bonus.

I will gladly wager $100 (and I'll give you 2 to 1) that if rail comes up on a city wide ballot again this year, it will be defeated. Kevin can hold the money via Venmo. (that's what moderators do right?) We can use the money to pay for a couple rounds at the next Forum happy hour. Any takers? I doubt it.

Novacek covered most here but to add on, a MOS at MOST would be $450 million and that is if we pay for all of it. I suggest extending the line to transit center and get the feds to pay for half of it which they already said in 2000 that they would do. So we could be asking for "only" $300-350 million. I don't gamble but I would take that bet, if the line is under $500 million and is a good route it will either pass or be very close. Especially if the bike/sidewalk plan ends up only asking for like half funding.
BTW, you do know that the vote in the year 2000 lost by less than 2000 votes?!?!?!

[nixcity]

Really, what are the backgrounds and technical expertise of the "Central Austin Community Development Corporation"?

They are only a driving force in this discussion and thanks to them it is going to council. I am talking about the current UTC, former members and chairs, engineers and rail experts all coming together. That is how we are where we are.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

In other transportation news, the UTC is still pushing hard to get rail on this year's ballot, hope is still alive.
http://keyetv.com/news/local/austin-...ight-rail-bond

http://kxan.com/2016/05/12/after-def...ustin-returns/

So I went looking at the UTC meeting info.

Light/Urban rail isn't even on the agenda, so they're certainly not "pushing hard" for it.

http://austintexas.gov/cityclerk/boa...tings/50_1.htm


But there is an interesting updated presentation on the downtown red line station.

http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=253522

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

They are only a driving force in this discussion and thanks to them it is going to council. I am talking about the current UTC, former members and chairs, engineers and rail experts all coming together. That is how we are where we are.

It's the CACDC pushing for this two stage approach. And they're the ones giving this $100-$120M number.

What is _their_ background and technical expertise, anything to suggest that number isn't ass-pulled?

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

I suggest extending the line to transit center and get the feds to pay for half of it which they already said in 2000 that they would do. So we could be asking for "only" $300-350 million. I don't gamble but I would take that bet, if the line is under $500 million and is a good route it will either pass or be very close.

There is No Way In Hell the feds give us any money if they bypass the standard planning practices and choose the line _before_ studying (putting the cart before the horse).

2000 is meaningless, Austin has vastly changed both demographically and geographically since then, and you're _not even proposing the same thing_.

[nixcity]

Yeah, you are right, the place we want to put it, MANY OF THE MILES IN THE EXACT SAME PLACE AS 2000, is way more dense than it was then. This would be the same process as proposed in the 2014 proposition.