PDA

View Full Version : LSTAR: Austin to San Antonio commuter rail


jtk1519
Nov 10, 2009, 1:52 AM
A commuter rail line stretching from Austin to San Antonio has taken another step forward.

The Lone Star Rail District -- formerly, the Austin-San Antonio Commuter Rail District -- has been a long time in the making. Twelve years ago state lawmakers authorized the train service.

“We need alternatives to driving our cars on congested highway and especially on Interstate 35. For many years our regional transportation plans included an Austin-San Antonio rail line, and it is frankly a key element as far as having a comprehensive multi-model transportation system that we need in Central Texas,” said State Senator Kirk Watson, (D)-Austin.

Monday morning leaders announced that LSTAR will receive funding for a required federal environmental impact study. There’s also new funding to create the official design.

LSTAR will run from Georgetown to the south side of San Antonio along the I-35 corridor.

“People feel chained to their cars (on that route),” said Mary Briseno of San Antonio’s Metropolitan Transit. “Rail will offer travelers independence from I-35.”

LSTAR will make up to 16 stops, including Georgetown, downtown Round Rock, the McNeil junction, Braker Lane at the Domain, 35th and MoPac, downtown Austin, Slaughter Lane, Kyle/Buda, San Marcos at Texas State University, New Braunfels, Schertz, Loop 1604, Loop 410/Airport, Downtown San Antonio/UTSA, Port San Antonio and City South/TAMU.

LSTAR is expected to serve roughly 4 million people across its five-county region.

“It means easier commutes for downtown employees and more travel options for people who live near here. It means more visits from travelers and tourists coming to Austin. It means good things, great things for our environment as we provide more sustainable mobility options,” said Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell.

Altogether, officials say getting the line on track will cost $3 billion. The expense includes finding new lines and re-routing the two dozen Union Pacific freight trains that already use the tracks on a daily basis.

The State Legislature has granted nearly $200 million so far. There's also federal funding coming in for the line.

“We’re closer than we’ve ever been to offering travelers some independence from I-35 traffic,” said Senator Watson.

The line’s environmental impact study will begin early next year. It's required by the federal government.

http://www.kvue.com/news/LSTAR-Commuter-Rail-Moving-Forward-69574787.html

From LSTAR's website...

We don’t need to tell you that traffic on Interstate 35 through the Austin-San Antonio corridor is bad and getting worse. It’s one of the most congested interstate segments in America and the biggest bottleneck on I-35 between Mexico and Canada. It’s also one of the deadliest stretches of highway in the country, with over 100 fatalities a year.

Rebuilding I-35 to accommodate all of the different travel demands it now handles would take decades and could consume Texas’ entire transportation budget. That’s why for many years, regional leaders and thinkers have been looking at alternatives. And one of the best alternatives is passenger rail.

The Union Pacific corridor that parallels I-35 is an important link for moving goods through the region, but as a freight rail line, it suffers from many of the same challenges as I-35. It’s outdated, runs right through the heart of major cities, and leaves little room for expansion or improved service. Moving through-freight traffic to other, more suitable and more modern corridors would have benefits for the railroad and its customers as well as the communities in the corridor.

But that same UP right-of-way is almost perfectly suited to passenger service that can bring people right to the region’s major destinations—downtown Austin and San Antonio, a long string of university campuses, tourist attractions, and major employers from Williamson County to Port San Antonio and beyond.

That’s why, in the late 1990s, the state first conducted a feasibility study for regional passenger rail service in the corridor. Once that report came back positive, the pieces fell into place for the creation of an independent public agency that represents and is governed by local communities and stakeholders.

Texas voters also gave their approval to efforts to jump-start rail relocation and improvements, with the state and private railroads like UP working together for mutual benefit. In recent years, passenger rail has taken off across the country, with dozens of regional services achieving wide popularity, including systems like the Trinity Railway Express connecting Dallas and Fort Worth and the New Mexico Rail Runner Express connecting Albuquerque and Santa Fe. And the federal transportation program is devoting more energy and resources to passenger rail than ever before.

Today, regional passenger rail is no longer just a good idea. It’s a transportation choice that will improve our lives and expand our horizons—and before you know it, the LSTAR will be ready to roll.

http://lonestarrail.com/images/temp/map/map-large.jpg

www.lonestarrail.com

ardecila
Nov 10, 2009, 2:28 AM
$3 billion? I can't possibly believe that, unless Lone Star is trying to build a completely separate line with high-speed characteristics. If that's the case, then AWESOME. Otherwise, y'all in Texas are getting ripped off. Majorly.

KevinFromTexas
Nov 10, 2009, 2:58 AM
Oh man, I would love for this to happen. One of the stations would be within 3 miles of me. I would totally use it.

They have a website:
http://www.lonestarrail.com/

unless Lone Star is trying to build a completely separate line with high-speed characteristics.

Apparently it won't be high speed rail. At least judging by the travel time (90 minutes from downtown to downtown). That's about what it takes to drive there.

Quote from their website:

Express service between downtown Austin and downtown San Antonio (with stops in San Marcos and New Braunfels) should take around 90 minutes. This is comparable to current travel times on I-35, but will likely be faster than driving as I-35 becomes more congested. Moreover, travel times and schedules on the LSTAR will be predictable, whereas accidents, weather conditions and other variables can often cause delays for drivers. But most important, rail travel will offer relaxing, stress-free travel that allows riders the freedom to make the most of their time by reading, studying, working, napping or simply enjoying the scenery. Local service, stopping at all stations, will be about 15-20 minutes longer than express service.

I agree that without it being high speed rail, that it would be pretty pointless. I doubt many people would favor it over driving if the travel time is roughly the same. Now, if they could cut the time in half, that would be great.

ardecila
Nov 10, 2009, 3:32 AM
It's not pointless at lower speeds, it's just massively overpriced to build a standard rail line for $3 billion. Even standard commuter rail still has powerful benefits, but its usefulness and its impact on congestion will depend on how fast the trains are and how frequently they operate.

From Georgetown to the southern part of San Antonio is about 110 miles, or $27 million/mile. That's low for an urban transportation project, where land must be bought and heavy construction must work around heavy road traffic, but when you consider that the tracks already exist and are in good enough shape to run 24 freight trains per day, then you're really only paying for a few sidings and the construction of 16 stations... plus a few grade separations (although honestly, a bunch of short commuter trains are probably less of an impact than 24 long freight trains).

KevinFromTexas
Nov 10, 2009, 3:33 AM
They said there would be 12 trains a day. Right now 2 dozen freight trains use that line.

PartyLine
Nov 10, 2009, 5:51 AM
Hey Kevin sent you a PM a little bit ago

jtk1519
Nov 10, 2009, 8:27 AM
They said there would be 12 trains a day. Right now 2 dozen freight trains use that line.

The news report I saw said it would require re-routing Union Pacific traffic. Not sure if that is included in the price estimate.

SecretAgentMan
Nov 11, 2009, 5:33 PM
The news report I saw said it would require re-routing Union Pacific traffic. Not sure if that is included in the price estimate.

The $3 B figure includes rerouting UP through freight. Some local freight on the existing line would remain. The cost for rail relocation is between $800 M and $2B, depending on options selected. The relocation of through freight has many benefits to the communities along the line in addition to commuter rail, and the cost would not be borne directly by the rail district. The cost for commuter rail alone has been estimated at around $600 M or a little less than $6M/mile.

mrnyc
Nov 11, 2009, 6:41 PM
this is an awesome project. making it happen is another story, but i hope its gets a green light.

M1EK
Nov 11, 2009, 8:52 PM
This is not a new project, folks, it's just a relaunch/rebrand of the ASA commuter rail effort - and it will not happen. UP has the ability to just say "no" to anybody short of God who wants them to move their freight service off this corridor - so it will take billionS (more than one) just to get them to move (build them a track and probably bribe them to boot as they have absolutely no natural incentive to move).

Even after they move, there's a lot of local service that would remain.

Finally, this service does not penetrate downtown; it does not hit any other activity centers; it does not even have any TOD capability (even if it didn't have those other fatal flaws). It's like the Red Line, except worse.

SnyderBock
Nov 12, 2009, 12:01 AM
The news report I saw said it would require re-routing Union Pacific traffic. Not sure if that is included in the price estimate.

The $3 B figure includes rerouting UP through freight. Some local freight on the existing line would remain. The cost for rail relocation is between $800 M and $2B, depending on options selected. The relocation of through freight has many benefits to the communities along the line in addition to commuter rail, and the cost would not be borne directly by the rail district. The cost for commuter rail alone has been estimated at around $600 M or a little less than $6M/mile.


Has this price already been negotiated with Union Pacific? I ask this, because around the country, Union Pacific has been rather opposed to sacrificing ANY of it's railroad operations or ROW, without substantial compensation (up to 3 times more compensation than transit agencies are expecting).

So if this project is projecting $800 million to go to Union Pacific, but it has not officially been negotiated and agreed upon with Union Pacific, then when such negotiations do take place, you could expect Union Pacific to demand more in the range of $2.4 billion in compensation. This is not an exaggeration.

Unin Pacific woudl probably prefer they build them a brand spanking new railroad line and ROW, and then they hand over their old ROW as compensation. Of course, it would make more sense for a commuter rail to be built on the new ROW, if they were going to take it to that extreme, at least then it would be modern and allow for greater travel speeds for relatively the same cost.

ardecila
Nov 12, 2009, 1:43 AM
The rail relocation options being discussed involve new corridors using mostly existing rights-of-way to the east of the current corridor, connecting San Marcos to a point north of Georgetown or Taylor. These lines pass through rural areas outside the Austin metro area - that's the whole point. They wouldn't be practical for the commuter trains, since they wouldn't go through centers of population. Some of the options involve 30-40 miles of new right-of-way to connect existing rail segments, but nothing huge.

South of San Marcos, two parallel rights-of-way exist. Both are used for freight, but they could be consolidated into one line to free up the other for passenger traffic.

M1EK
Nov 12, 2009, 3:36 PM
Keep in mind that all else being equal, UP is better served by the current corridor - they have a lot of existing local traffic there in addition to the long-distance stuff. UP doesn't have to move unless they _want_ to, either. So, again, just building them a new rail line out to the east is unlikely to be sufficient motivation to move their through traffic and leave their local traffic (which is more costly to them in the long-run than having all that traffic on the same line).

electricron
Nov 12, 2009, 6:03 PM
M1EK has a valid point. Why would UP wish to maintain two separate rail corridors when one is enough?

A possible solution for a brand new bypass is building a brand new rail corridor directly between San Marcos and Taylor. Although there once was a rail corridor between San Marcus and Smithfield, and between Smithfield and Taylor (ie the MKT mainline to San Antonio). The old MKT line is considered much longer than the more direct route, which is close to the same in milage as the existing UP (ex-MP mainline) corridor through Austin.

Don't expect the UP to add a penny in capital to build the new bypass. But the UP will want to own and maintain it. I can see a deal arranged switching ownership of the two rail corridors between TXDOT and UP, as long as UP maintains freight exclusive trackage rights on the old corridor. They sell the old corridor to TXDOT or LSTAR at a premium price, and assumes the new corridor free.

All LSTAR predicted cost proposals do not include purchasing any land nor getting trackage rights. Also, as I hinted above, don't expect the UP to give anything away, they will seek the highest price possible to their advantage. My point is, no deals have been made with the UP, and we will not know how much a deal will cost until it occurs.......

breathesgelatin
Nov 13, 2009, 11:56 PM
Finally, this service does not penetrate downtown; it does not hit any other activity centers; it does not even have any TOD capability (even if it didn't have those other fatal flaws). It's like the Red Line, except worse.

^^^
THIS.

I love the idea of this service, in theory. But as it stands, I'd probably have to drive to the station, and I don't know where the heck they'd fit any parking for this. Combined with the idea of doing a park and ride, I probably wouldn't use it as driving would be more timely. Now, because I personally hate driving, if I had to commute daily, I might use it. But the benefits of it for pleasure/tourism are already negated by the current plans.

Also, scoffing at the idea of a "University of Texas" station on that map.