SAN ANTONIO | City and Metro Transportation Thread - Page 16

texboy · #**301** Posted **May 13, 2010, 4:49 PM**

http://www.mysanantonio.com/business..._93458629.html

Quote:

Delta Air Lines links San Antonio to New York
By William Pack - Express-News
Web Posted: 05/11/2010 5:13 CDT

Nonstop air service from San Antonio to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York will begin Sept. 7 as part of an expanded service plan announced Tuesday by Delta Air Lines.

Delta said the new San Antonio flights, along with other domestic and international flights included in the expansion package, are designed to make Delta the preferred airline in New York.

San Antonio Aviation Department spokesman Rich Johnson said that while Continental Airlines flies to Newark, N.J., the Delta nonstop flight will be San Antonio's first direct flight to New York.

sakyle04 · #**302** Posted **May 13, 2010, 5:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by miaht82

VIA has put out their draft Enviromental Analysis for VIA Primo (sorry sakyle04, had to write it.) It is available to view at various locations and online. You can comment at their meetings in a couple of weeks or also use the online comment form.

Link here - VIA Fredericksburg Road Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project Draft Environmental Assessment

I have seen a bunch of survey crews around the potential "stations" lately. Don't know if it's coincidence or if design is moving forward...

sakyle04 · #**303** Posted **May 14, 2010, 8:20 PM**

Living in the BRT corridor, I recieved the BRT Environmental Assessment announcement in the mail today.

Sure enough, looks like station sites have been determined and public "debate" window is open.

electricron · #**304** Posted **May 15, 2010, 4:16 PM**

From http://viabrt.net/Documents/DraftEA/...%20Summary.pdf

This Environmental Assessment (EA) discusses the environmental effects of constructing and operating VIA Metropolitan Transit’s (VIA) proposed VIA Primo - Fredericksburg Road Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project (hereafter referred to as the proposed VIA Primo) in San Antonio, Texas. This corridor is approximately nine miles long and extends from the South Texas Medical Center, southeast to the west side of downtown San Antonio via Fredericksburg Road and Interstate Highway (IH)-10.
The purpose of the proposed VIA Primo is to improve bus travel time reliability and efficiency,improve mobility for the large transit-dependent population, and expand transit capacity. The VIA Primo Corridor is a highly used transit corridor. Forty-six bus routes intersect the VIA Primo Study Area, and the total existing ridership of these routes exceeds 60 percent of VIA total system-wide ridership. However, these routes have the slowest travel times and poorest reliability in terms of on-time performance in the entire VIA system, and these travel times are expected to worsen. Implementation of the proposed VIA Primo would increase the average speed of buses from 10-12 mph to 15 mph and decrease bus travel time by approximately 30 percent.
VIA Primo would include the construction of the STMCTC, the eight proposed VIA Primo stations, and the WSMMTC within the VIA Primo Study Area.
Proposed VIA Primo Stations
Station 1: University Hospital – Medical Drive near Wurzbach Road
Station 2: Ewing Halsell Drive – Medical Drive at Ewing Halsell Drive
Station 3: Callaghan Road – Fredericksburg Road at Callaghan Road
Station 4: Crossroads Boulevard – Fredericksburg Road at Crossroads Boulevard
Station 5: De Chantle Road – Fredericksburg Road at De Chantle Road
Station 6: Babcock Road – Fredericksburg Road at Babcock Road
Station 7: Mary Louise Drive – Fredericksburg Road at Mary Louise Drive
Station 8: Huisache Avenue – Fredericksburg Road at Huisache Avenue

Construction of the proposed VIA Primo is tentatively scheduled to take place between 2010 and 2012, with regular operation of the new VIA Primo anticipated to begin by late 2012. Based on the proposed construction schedule, VIA estimates that the capital cost for the proposed VIA Primo would be approximately $57.2 million. This estimate includes the cost to design and
construct eight VIA Primo stations and two transit centers and purchase VIA Primo vehicles. The funding strategy includes a mix of Federal and local funds. FTA contribution would be $45.76 million and VIA contribution would be $11.44 million.

My thoughts:
(1) Two transit centers and eight stations along the nine mile Primo BRT route averages a bus stop-station every mile or so, instead of every few blocks that exists today. Will passengers be willing to walk the longer distances to reach the stations?
(2) The EIS didn't include a streetcar alternate. With 60% of all of VIA's riders coming from this corridor, one wonders why streetcars or light rail weren't even considered?

miaht82 · #**305** Posted **May 15, 2010, 5:45 PM**

The distance from Station 8 to the WSMMTC is a little over 2 miles.
These are all estimates:
Huisache to Mary Louise - 0.8 miles
Mary Louise to Babcock - 0.68 miles
Babcock to De Chantle - 0.72 miles
De Chantle to Crossroads - 0.87 miles
Crossroads to Callaghan - 1.15 miles
Callaghan to Ewing Halsell - 1.08 miles
Ewing Halsell to Wurzbach - 0.6 miles
Wurzbach to STMCTC - 0.7 miles

I believe a majority of the ridership comes from transfers coming into the Fredericksburg Corridor. Most spend their time waiting at stations, not so much walking from the surrounding neighborhoods.
I know that in the current MCTC, 91,522,534,602,603,604,606, and 607 all transfer in from Babcock, Wurzbach , North Star, Univeristy Park, Alamo Ranch & Ingram.
Callaghan will catch the 509 transfers and
Crossroads will catch 94,505,509,520,524, 550/551.
Mary Louise suprisingly is a major transfer point for routes 91,96,97,509,520, and 651.
The route takes Primo to Frio St. via I-10, so it misses the Flores/Fredericksburg transfers, but I'm sure that the WSMMTC will pick up the slack on those coming in from the East, South or West sides.

Ridership on the 91 and 92, the Fredericksburg Skip and Frequent, catches most of transfers that Primo is set to gain and I'm sure one of those will disappear in a couple of years.

Not quite sure why they didn't include the streetcar alternate, I was wondering that myself. I was going to ask that question at one of the public meetings. I thought I had heard someone mention that they were trying to sneak in rails, once the ROW was approved and people had given the OK to the route and stations.

sakyle04 · #**306** Posted **May 16, 2010, 3:03 PM**

91 & 302 would be eliminated and the 92 would modified.

The extensions (to utsa north and through downtown east) are what makes this attractive. Otherwise it is a silly, incremental improvement that won't really serve to improve many folks' standard of living....

texboy · #**307** Posted **May 20, 2010, 5:35 PM**

Interesting article on planned growth for SAIA

http://www.kens5.com/news/Will-San-A...-94346184.html

Quote:

Will San Antonio's airport grow enough to attract more major companies?

by Karen Grace / KENS 5

kens5.com

Posted on May 19, 2010 at 10:00 PM

Updated today at 6:30 AM

For a city of nearly two million people, some people would argue that the San Antonio International Airport does not represent our size and growth. But there is a new vision that will give birth to growth there.

The airport is booking plans way in advance for the next 20 to 40 years. The size of an airport can cripple a city economically. Two years ago A.T.&T. made the call to move to Dallas. One reason was because they needed access to two major airports.

Now San Antonio is scrambling to keep up. One hundred community leaders divided up into three advisory committiees came up with "Vision 2050."

miaht82 · #**308** Posted **May 21, 2010, 3:16 AM**

Thanks for the heads up on the plan.

usctxn · #**309** Posted **May 21, 2010, 7:05 AM**

If anyone is interested..check out the latest ppt of Vision 2050.

http://www.sanantonio.gov/Aviation/i...01032244pm.pdf

What intrigued me was the idea of expanding 21 to 10,000 feet, but it seems the best option would be to expand the length and width of 12L to mirror 12R.

The terminal alternatives were really neat, never imagined a satellite terminal in the future. I like the layout of the recommended terminal configuration.

From the article posted above, I forgot about the idea of Terminal 1 being able to be expanded all the way to Airport Blvd. But it seems the plan is to expand it only a couple of gates more south.

It's really great to imagine what the future holds for SAT.

alexjon · #**310** Posted **May 21, 2010, 3:49 PM**

Let's repeat this mantra: light rail to the airport. Light rail to the airport. Light rail to the airport. Om padme, padme om.

UTSABA06 · #**311** Posted **May 21, 2010, 9:44 PM**

Wow that's awesome!

miaht82 · #**312** Posted **May 25, 2010, 3:28 AM**

Went to the meeting today, had a chance to ask a few questions.
Rail was considered, this was "the most cost effective way to improve efficiency along the corridor."
Part of the reason I was given by a URS consultant was that the road size differed along Fred Rd. I-10 route was used to avoid the track delays.
A couple of notes I took from the presentation:
During peak periods, there was standing room only on certain buses. Higher capacity was needed.
There were many reasons for delays; handicap ramp loadings, slow boardings, high # of passengers boarding, etc. Direct platform to bus loading should help this issue.
60 ft. buses would allow bike ride ons. At the stations (both) there will be bike lockers and changing/shower facilities.
I was told many times that the Long Range Plan (smartwaysa.com) would include possible rail options in the future for Fred. Rd. There will be public meetings in June for input on that.

The reason for these meetings on what seems like basic improvements, is that the Feds are funding a majority of it and require the EA prior to funding.

note: someone mentioned that 50% of DT residents that work, work in the Med Center.

4 people commented.
One USAA employee commended the UTSA extension that would allow for single-seat riding (no transfers) from DT to UTSA.
Second speaker (local neighborhood assoc. rep) applauded efforts but tore down the design. She criticized lack of public art and the fact that the bus stops would allow for too much "grafitti" space. She commented that Mary Louise stop should show better local design for Deco district.
Third speaker (the oldest) criticized that it wasn't light rail or streetcars.
Last speaker was a business owner. He said that he was looking forward to negotions with VIA for the space in front of his Babcock/Fred Rd. business.

sakyle04 · #**313** Posted **May 25, 2010, 2:29 PM**

Article in today's paper said "VIA officials originally envisioned BRT service to run in dedicated right of way. But that plan was jettisoned for the current one that runs the vehicles in mixed traffic. There's a financial benefit to it, and it also allows VIA to retro-fit the corridor with light rail in the future."

Thoughts on that as an ACTUAL possibility?

(Full article: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...wFullArticle=y )

Dom"n"Converse · #**314** Posted **May 25, 2010, 3:06 PM**

If VIA has the rail running along the sides (or in the median if that somehow happened) of Fred Rd, then I doubt it would happen since there are so many other side streets intersecting Fred Rd-it would make the entire corridor one big accident waiting to happen. If the line was elevated and/or similar to Vancouver's Skytrain or what the East JR Company runs in heavy urban areas, then it might work and get approval although it would cost much more. I just don't want to see a half-assed design with a train running in the street.