http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte...er_mccrac.html
Live chat with Brewster McCracken (04/25/2008)
10:20 Ben Wear - Hi folks. This is Ben Wear, transportation reporter for the Statesman. I'll be moderating this chat, as well as the one with rail critic Jim Skaggs later in the day.
We'll get started for real in about 10 minutes. But if you want to see me some questions or comments between now and then, go ahead.
You need to know, by the way, that only some of your comments will make it up there. I'll be sifting through them and putting them up.
10:22 Ben Wear - that would of course be "send me some questions or comments." Let's all be forgiving about typos, OK?
10:28 [Comment From Brewster McCracken]
I'm online and ready to take questions.
10:29 [Comment From S.D. Rivas]
Current proposals for light rail do not include tracks south of Lady Bird Lake towards William Cannon and Slaughter (possibly through South First or Congress). Do you expect voters to support a transportation system that doesn't include their area when they could use light rail due to high fuel prices?
10:31 Brewster McCracken - While about half of the proposed 14-mile line is in South Austin, you're right that the current proposal doesn't extend south of Riverside Dr. There are fiscal limitations on how much could be proposed, and this system is targeted at serving the biggest destinations in the metro area -- the airport, University of Texas campus, the two regional hospitals, and the State Capitol complex. The system will need to include the Austin - San Antonio commuter rail line, and the ASA folks believe they are actually making great progress in opening that line in the near future.
10:31 Ben Wear - Brewster, ROMA in their presentation said it could be $50 million a mile. That gets it to $700 million. Don't we need a clear cost estimate before leaders and the public can evaluate this thing?
10:33 Brewster McCracken - How much the system costs and how we pay for it depend first on what people want. For example, do people want the line to go to the airport? That will impact the cost of the system. It will also mean that airport funds are available to finance it. So, first, we need to find out what people want. Also, as your own reporting has shown, a light rail line costs about 75% less per mile than a mile of new highway, and it has about the same cost per rider mile as a new highway.
10:33 [Comment From McLovin]
Has anybody done an engineering study to see if the Ann Richards Bridge can support a train?
10:34 Brewster McCracken - Yes. Both Parsons Brinckerhoff and the engineering firm hired by ROMA have confirmed that the Ann Richards bridge was engineered to hold rail. That actually was a surprise to us when we learned that several months ago in the preliminary due diligence stage.
10:34 [Comment From Mike]
Why is the "emerging" Mueller development included as a terminus in the proposal, rather than somewhere where people are ALREADY living and working?
10:35 Brewster McCracken - The Mueller development was actually financed and developed to be a Transit Oriented Development. It will have 10,000 residents with 25% affordable housing. It is also the home of a 60-county regional children's hospital and a rapidly growing regional medical office complex anchored by Seton's headquarters.
10:35 [Comment From Mike]
Applying the light-rail proposal to the parking debacle from last weekend in a "what-if" scenario, how would your plan have alleviated those conditions?
10:37 Brewster McCracken - Different transportation systems solve different problems. Rail is good at efficiently carrying large amounts of people to concentrated destinations. That's exactly the situation at Auditorium Shores and the Long Center. We need more parking there, but when you have 50,000 people converging on that location, you also need a transportation system like a light rail system.
10:37 Ben Wear - Wouldn't we lose lanes on Congress? Seems like tearing out all those sidewalk extensions, and taking away all that parking, would be tough for Congress merchants. And for the people who like to park there.
10:38 Brewster McCracken - For starters, that is simply one of the choices ROMA has presented to the public. If we remove the street parking, according to ROMA, the existing number of lanes are preserved and two dedicated rail lines can be built. These systems are installed about 2-4 weeks per block. Still, it's a choice for the community ultimately.
10:38 [Comment From McLovin]
How do you get CapMetro to agree to give up 20% of their operating budget?
10:40 Brewster McCracken - You don't. Cap Metro's budget has an operating budget component and a capital budget component. The capital budget component is 20-25% of their overall budget. As recently as 2 years ago, Cap Metro was sending this 25% to local governments. But I don't think you can ask Cap Metro to send any portion of their operating budget to a capital partnership -- only their capital budget could be used as a challenge grant to attract other funds from local governments.
10:40 Ben Wear - Brewster, Cap Metro has been saying ALL of its budget will be committed to operations within three or four years. If Cap Metro did give up that money, wouldn't that necessarily mean cuts in bus service, or lower wages over time for bus drivers and mechanics?
10:41 Brewster McCracken - My understanding is that Cap Metro is not saying all of its capital budget will also go to operations. They are saying that they will exhaust their operations budget capacity.
10:42 [Comment From Sean Des]
I live in South Austin and can't afford to drive to work. I would like to take a light rail to downtown and beyond, but it looks like light rail is just being proposed for tourist areas around downtown and UT. What about building a transportation system for those of us in South Austin?
10:43 [Comment From Matt Turner]
How will this note negatively impact the bat colony under congress bridge? How do they propose to do this much development (aka hang off sidewalks) in the period between when the bats are here?
10:43 Brewster McCracken - That's a very fair question. First, until the Austin - San Antonio line can open, we will have a regional commuter rail gap. I am told there is considerable progress on that front. Second, the biggest employment and transit destinations in this city -- the State Capitol complex, both regional hospitals and the UT campus would be served by this system. Those of course aren't tourist destinations.
10:44 Brewster McCracken - As for the bats, my understanding is that an electric train is much less disruptive than gas and diesel powered cars and trucks.
10:44 [Comment From Meghan]
I live a block off Manor Rd. Please ask whether we will lose lanes off Manor and how it will affect all the great businesses and restaurants on Manor Rd. that have really revitalized the neighborhood. Also, would a stop be contemplated on Manor?
10:45 [Comment From McLovin]
Ok, that doesn't answer the question. How do you get CapMetro to give up 20% of their capital budget then?
10:46 Brewster McCracken - The 14-mile line outlined by ROMA would not take away existing lanes of traffic on Manor. The community has a choice on Manor of either having dedicated lanes and buying 4-6 of right-of-way on each side of Manor, or having the rail operate in-traffic on that short stretch. Even with right-of-way purchase, local businesses would not have their buildings taken, and they would have improved customer access. There were also be a couple of stops on Manor itself.
10:47 [Comment From Spencer]
The current trend seems to be reducing bus reach. We are cutting back Dillo services to the South Congress area and at the same time talking about constructing a rail service to the area. Will the bus lines continue to be cut while the trains are built? What about people that already bike/bus around the city?
10:47 Brewster McCracken - We are working with Cap Metro on identifying funding strategies that leverage their existing funds to attract capital and operations funds from local governments. Cap Metro recognizes that without some partnership, they will go broke under the current paradigm. But we are all committed to a collaborative process on this.
10:48 Brewster McCracken - A focused rail system like the 14-mile line outlined by ROMA would actually enhance bus service. First, it is a higher capacity system. Second, it provides the opportunity to a more integrated transit system. The proposal is not to rob the bus system to pay for rail. It is to improve transit to high destination areas.
10:48 [Comment From Jane Thorne]
Why should we spend so much for a minimal rail system when Mopac needs to have the same number of lanes from 183 south to Sunset Valley? And when 290 absurdly goes from an eight-lane freeway to a two-lane road with stoplights?
10:50 Brewster McCracken - According to CAMPO figures, in 2001 the price of gas was 89¢ a gallon. Today, it is $3.57 a gallon. So, the question is whether we want to pursue a roads-only future or diversify our transportation system. For example, if you are a state employee working at the Capitol complex, your cost of gas has quadrupled in six years. Has your salary quadrupled? Second, we have at CAMPO approved major expansions of 290 East and 183. I agree that both our transit and our road systems are inadequate.
10:50 [Comment From Guest]
Brewster, thanks for helping together a plan that makes a lot of sense, if only because it connects into the commuter rail. Let me urge you to push for the line to run down San Jacinto rather than Congress. This is a wide, underutilized road that also has a great deal of potential for TOD.
10:51 Brewster McCracken - Thanks. Going up San Jacinto instead of Congress is one of the options on the table for public input. Another possibility could be to go up Lamar and Guadalupe. This is the public's system, and it needs to reflect where the community wants it to go.
10:51 [Comment From Jim]
There are many open issues for "public decision" yet there has been almost no public input and the anounced schedule of presenting this rail plan to the City Council and to the Transit Working Group in May allows no real time for input.
10:53 Brewster McCracken - We've actually been working on this for a couple of years, and some elements of the proposal reflect significant public input. For example, this proposal is for dedicated lanes without taking up existing lanes of traffic. That is what the public has asked for. Also, we can't go to the public for input unless we have actual issues that are unresolved. That is why there are open issues. It's intentional. These are for the public to decide.
10:53 Ben Wear - Some folks are talking about getting this to CAMPO as early as June. Wouldn't there have to be action by the City Council, County Commissioners and Cap Metro board to commit to funding their part before you go to CAMPO?
10:55 Brewster McCracken - We have to know what the public wants from its system before we can model the cost and the financing structure. For example, do people want this to go to the airport? If so, that impacts the costs. It also makes it possible to use airport funds, which impact the financing model. So that's why it's so important first to find out where the public wants this system to serve.
10:55 Ben Wear - Can you get all this done for a November election? How?
10:56 [Comment From Bob]
There have been successful light rail ventures and less successful. For example, when Atlanta built a light rail, it failed in large part due to the placement of its stations. The jury is still out on the Houston light rail "system." However, Dallas has had a great deal more success than the aforementioned. What cities has Austin looked at so as to learn from past mistakes in order to avoid these same mistakes going forward?
10:57 Brewster McCracken - It can go to the voters in November to get approval for entering a funding partnership. Much of the engineering on the system choices is already done. Over the coming months we will receive input on the alignment, which impacts which of the existing 15 potential funding streams can be accessed. I do believe a partnership can be authorized in November to build the system the public wants.
10:57 [Comment From Lauren]
First-of-all, I'd like to say that this proposal is a great and innovative idea that should be highly beneficial to the central Austin area. Secondly, I was wondering how long this would take, from approval to opening?
10:59 Brewster McCracken - Everyone around the country has examined the problems with Houston's system, which resulted from an engineering mistake that has since been corrected in Houston. We have looked at that mistake, as well as examining the mistakes from Seattle's in-traffic system. On the positive side, we have learned from the great successes of Denver's, Portland's and Charlotte's systems. You're right -- different systems have different lessons, and we are looking at all of them. The big difference in this proposal is that it is coming out of the city, which has land use powers and thereby can integrate land use and transportation (unlike a transit agency).
10:59 Ben Wear - Folks, let's take a couple minutes off to keep Brewster from getting RSI. Back on at 11:04.
11:01 Brewster McCracken - Thanks, Lauren. I think the timing of how fast the system could be built and opened really depends on what system people want and how they want to pay for it. In general, ultra-light systems can be built much faster than traditional light rail systems. Also, we have the crack team in the city that did the Lamar Road reconstruction in six months when it was supposed to take three years. This is a very talented, aggressive team who are good at infrastructure projects, and they have a great track record.
11:03 [Comment From Bob]
Since the voters have voted down light rail several times, why has the Council ignored what the voters have said and moved forward with this at all. It seems the voters are not being heard.
11:04 Ben Wear - Actually, it was just voted down once, in 2000.
11:05 Ben Wear - Have you figured out for sure yet if the per mile costs ($30 million the other day) include or do not include the cost of the rail cars?
11:06 Brewster McCracken - First, Cap Metro voters have only voted twice -- in 2000 and again in 2004. In 2000, Cap Metro voters narrowly voted against that 52-mile proposal. In 2004, Cap Metro voters approved by over 60% the commuter rail proposal. Also, it is my understanding that city of Austin voters in 2000 actually voted in favor of the 52-mile light rail proposal. Also, since 2000, gas has quadrupled in price and is heading to $4 per gallon, and our population is rapidly growing. I believe we have plan for the future and present these plans to the voters for them to consider. Not planning for the future is poor leadership.
11:06 Brewster McCracken - I don't know.
11:06 [Comment From Randall]
Hey Brewster, just joined and can't catch up with all that's happened on the chat. If you haven't answered this already, can you please explain why the proposed configuration makes sense? Downtown, UT, Manor, Mueller? There seem to be a lot of jigs and jogs in the line, and it doesn't appear to be a very appealing route selection. Something straighter and moer direct might be more appealing and cheaper.
11:08 Brewster McCracken - Hi Randall. The current heaviest transit destinations in this city are the University of Texas, the State Capitol Complex, the downtown employment district and East Riverside. Given the growing ridership (and yes, ridership is actually growing to these destinations) and the quadrupling of the price of gasoline, we believed we needed a system that served the highest destination locations. Also, by making the system dedicated lane, they will have fast, predictable travel times.
11:08 [Comment From Craig]
You really can't compare the scope of the utility work done on Lamar to the scope of a Lite-Rail system. The company who did that is not a big enough company to build the rail system.
11:10 Brewster McCracken - A rail construction project is basically a road construction project with two pieces of metal embedded in the pavement and electric utility wire work. Between the teams in Public Works and Austin Energy, the city has 175 years of experience in this kind of work, and the teams doing these projects have a great track record of fast, cost-effective infrastructure work.
11:10 Ben Wear - The city's finances are tightening — sales tax revenue lagging below projections, a $21 million budget gap to fill for next year. Can the city really spare some significant amount of money for rail?
11:12 Brewster McCracken - Two areas where revenue is growing are in bed tax funds and airport revenues. State and federal law prohibit us from using these funds for general revenue purposes, but they can in prescribed circumstances be used for a rail system. These are two examples of growing funds. Also, we could use an approach similar to the Mueller redevelopment where we funded $50 million in infrastructure through tax increment financing, and this infrastructure made possible the development to pay for that infrastructure.
11:12 [Comment From Shelley Nathan]
How come nothing is being done about southwest Austin? We have virtually nothing when it comes to public transit options.
11:14 Brewster McCracken - The next step in this system definitely needs to be the Austin - San Antonio commuter rail line. That line would serve Southwest Austin. If we don't plan for the future now, however, a state employee in SW Austin would find the Austin - San Antonio commuter rail line worthless when it opened unless there was a connector that took the employee to the State Capitol complex.
11:14 [Comment From William Powers]
When will the public be allowed to have input on the proposed configuration of the rail system?
11:15 Brewster McCracken - That input is happening now. You can contact the city's planning team or my office to schedule a public meeting. The city's planing team is headed up by Jim Robertson. His email is
[email protected]. (Sorry, Jim.)
11:16 Ben Wear - The cost figures we've heard so far are 2008 dollars, right? So if this weren't built for three to five years, inflation would come into play. Correct?
11:17 Brewster McCracken - That is my expectation -- that inflation would impact the cost figures. Other potential positive impacts are that if the city builds the system (as we are outlining), we could sync up existing and planned capital improvement projects (such as road reconstructions, water line expansions, etc.). This would reduce the cost to build the system.
11:18 [Comment From Bob]
Will the system utilize overhead wires for power, or will the power be an embedded third rail system such as Bordeaux, France's light rail?
11:18 Brewster McCracken - ROMA's proposal identified overhead wires. I've been trained to be wary of third rails, both for trains and in politics. I clearly didn't listen to my training very well...
11:19 [Comment From Mike]
Mr. Wear, are you part of the planning system? Where are the hard questions? What is the obligation of the media here? It seems like the city is running pretty hard at this, and there are no real obstacles or public tests of their logic.
11:19 Ben Wear - Nope, not working for them. Brewster might disagree about me throwing up softballs. But this is mostly for you guys today, not me.
11:20 [Comment From Mike]
Why are we spending all this money on a light rail line when Mopac is like a parking lot from 3:30 - 6:30 during rush hour in the evenings and similarly in the morning? What are we doing to help those commuters?
11:21 Brewster McCracken - We have already approved the expansion of Mopac to add two new lanes, and we have approved the largest highway construction program in the nation this decade. However, with the price of gas quadrupling in six years, I really do believe we need to plan for the future and provide people with choices other than $4 per gallon gas.
11:21 [Comment From Thomas Denney]
What have you found about long term maintenance costs from cities like Boston, New York, Chicago, etc? Ones that have had rail for 100 years +
11:22 Brewster McCracken - I can't answer that question. I do know that in virtually every city in the nation that build urban rail systems, these systems have been extremely popular once they have opened. That includes Denver, San Diego, Houston and Dallas. Maintaining transportation is important, whether for roads, buses or rail.
11:22 [Comment From Mike W]
What interest, if any, has CTRMA shown to get involved?
11:24 Brewster McCracken - CTRMA has the legal ability to build or partner in building and operating rail systems. They are good at capital projects and have regional flexibility. They are not interjecting themselves in this effort at all. I do believe it makes sense to include them in a regional transit partnership, given their strengths with capital projects and their regional flexibility.
11:24 [Comment From Ben]
You mentioned "ultra-light" rail. Could you please outline the differences between traditional light rail and ultra-light rail? Is it simply the same system with lighter materials?
11:24 Ben Wear - Different Ben, not me.
11:25 Brewster McCracken - Ultra-light rail uses smaller rail cars with a tighter turning radius. Because the cars are smaller, you don't have to dig as deeply into the road bed, and that makes it cheaper and faster to install. They can hit speeds up to 45 mph.
11:25 [Comment From Guest]
Does this mean I could park my car where? to take the rail downtown? What would it cost me and how quickly will it get me downtown?
11:27 Ben Wear - Time for a couple more questions. We end at 11:30
11:27 Brewster McCracken - There will be plenty of public parking at every commuter stop (including locations such as E. Riverside, etc.). The parking will either be free or pay to park, depending on the location. Since we are using dedicated lanes, the rail cars will travel the same speed or slightly faster than cars and will have stoplight preemption ability.
11:27 [Comment From Thomas Denney]
Do you think that long term maintenance and operatioal costs should be part of deciding what form of rapid transit should be built?
11:30 Brewster McCracken - To a point. However, we also need to look at how each type of transportation system serves the overall need. Buses are good at relatively low density areas, and they run on the same $4 a gallon gas (or diesel) that cars do. Roads are the backbone of the transportation system. Rail is good at carrying people efficiently to high destination locations (such as airports, the 67,000-person University of Texas campus, etc.). Each system is good at different things, and they all have their role. That's why I believe we need a comprehensive system that plans for the future in the era of $4 a gallon gas and growing populations.
11:30 [Comment From McLovin]
Let's ask the elephant in the room: How can you expect voters to approve something when you don't know how much it costs or how you will pay for it?
11:32 Brewster McCracken - We obviously won't put anything on the ballot without two things -- clear direction on what system the public wants, and a tangible, credible plan on how to pay for what the public wants. We have 15 available revenue streams to potentially pay for rail, but many of these revenue sources (such as airport funds and hotel bed tax funds) depend on the locations. First, we have to know where the public wants to go. That is the process we are in right now.
11:32 Ben Wear - That's it folks. Thanks so much Brewster for the time, and what had to be considerable mental and digital effort. And thanks to all of you for participating and asking good questions.
Maybe we'll see you again at 2 p.m. when Jim Skaggs will be on.
11:32 Brewster McCracken - Thanks, everyone.
Prev
Linear Mode
