Waller Creek Flood Tunnel & Trail Update Thread

[_Matt]

Blocking the intake grates seems like it would definitely reduce the effectiveness. We can speculate about it and create drama, but unless you're the engineer with the actual numbers, I wouldn't worry too much about it.

[priller]

Interesting. My friends in our building (Sabine at 5th) were talking about how the tunnel worked like a champ during the recent flood. The creek rose some but not nearly as much as it has in the past during similar heavy rain. I'm sure the tunnel has some issues but overall it's doing its job.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Morons. How do they get away with this BS? The view is already obstructed! There is no protected view! They could just add some deck on top and it would improve the so-called protected view.

Stupid SOBs wasting our money because they don't give a shit. It's not their money, why should they care?

That was a tasty rant and I agree wholeheartedly. I'll never understand the tendency for most humans to unquestioningly adhere to rules that don't make any sense. Maybe it's driven by a desire not to face the kind of consequences I've experienced in my many run-ins with rules I didn't like. People, and systems, don't like disruption.

[Syndic]

I asked the Watershed Protection Department for an update on the state of the Waller Creek Tunnel project and they game through.

Check out these pics: https://www.flickr.com/photos/828351...57656784869385

Oops, never mind, these are super old! I've been sold a fake bill of goods!

[ahealy]

ugh, and Austin can't build a subway .......because

[jbssfelix]

Originally Posted by ahealy

ugh, and Austin can't build a subway .......because

Lack of density to warrant the expense. Ridership would likely be too low.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by ahealy

ugh, and Austin can't build a subway .......because

They're massively expensive and it would bankrupt us for decades?


So the Waller creek flood tunnel is $163M for ~ 1 mile in length. Any viable subway system would need to be, what, at least 5-6 miles.


That's just a tunnel, not including track, electrification, stations (a _biggy_), emergency access and egress, ventilation (water doesn't need to breath), and vehicles. Oh, and some sort of vehicle storage and maintenance facility presumably above ground.

And the construction of _just_ the tunnel started in 2011. So you figure at least inflation out to 2025 or so (planning + voter approval + construction).



At least initially, any Austin transit system will be mostly above ground, with potentially underground sections in the very limited areas it's necessary or makes sense. Remember, the 2014 plan was (or at least considered, it's been long enough that I can't quite recall) an underground section through downtown up to about 12th street or so.

[The ATX]

As soon as the tunnel is finished Waterloo Park will get a $15 million dollar makeover.

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/loca...ef=cbTopWidget

[JoninATX]

Also more logical move would to expand Capital Metro rail.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by JoninATX

Also more logical move would to expand Capital Metro rail.

A multi-prongred approach

(1) an extension of the red-line all the way down 4th with stop just east of each of Congress, Guadalupe, and Rio Grande.

(2) the construction of a new north-south line in towntown using the same technology as the Red Line on Red River, Manor, and Airport (this is the quickest, most direct route, with the least amount of traffic and/or the highest amount of available ROW, with stops at Airport & Mueller, at Manor & Chestnut, and at Red River & MLK (for UT), 15th (for UT medical & Cap Complex), 12th (for Cap Complex & State Capitol), 8th, 6th, 4th, Cesar Chavez, ) and connecting into the red line at 45th and Airport with the same northern terminus... unless we could get the rail line to work with us in the limited area between McNeil Junction and the Dell Diamond, in which case a terminus at the Dell Diamond would be ideal and extremely cheap, relatively. Instant rider boost and visibility for the system.

(3) double track way way way more of the current red line for added frequency.

(4) a rebranding of the entire system with a more catchy name and advertising campaign. Here's an idea: The BATrail: The Beat Austin Traffic Rail.

(5) the yellow line

(6) the beginning planning stages of two southern lines, which would most likely have to be a purpose built segments, one would hope along with a new bridge from Red River and then into the median of...

(A) South Congress with grade separation at Oltorf, 290, Stassney, William Cannon, and a terminus at Slaughter and stops at those intersections with additional stations at the river, Riverside, SoCo, St. Edwards, and St. Elmo.

(B) East Riverside, the route that they've planned all along to the airport that's not exactly shovel ready, but its as close as given the state of our transportation planning.

Really, that's all we need for a complete system here in Austin, except for the eventual necessary piecemeal extensions of this main system (see the bullet below, for instance). Sure, there are way better alternatives, but this is something that would be truly workable and something off of which we could build.

• To be honest, I'd be totally down to destroy Republic Square and create a huge public plaza around a new station so that we could shift the line onto 5th and keep going all the way down 5th and Lake Austin eventually, but that's not what an initial expansion should do. Just extend into the employment core a bit more so that you actually capture choice riders without the need for transfers.

That's probably $800 million total?

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

That's probably $800 million total?

Probably at least an order of magnitude higher (more like $8B). Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be wrong, but a lot of what you describe seems infeasible (either politically or financially) or has already been shot down by the powers that be.


I'm guessing this should be moved onto the transportation thread. I'll make more comments there.

[jbssfelix]

That still leaves out one of the highest potential riderships, which is along the Lamar/Guad corridor. Build a light rail line from the Midtown red line stop to 4th St, extend Red Line to same terminus on 4th/Guad or 4th/Lamar, and now you're covering a huge population network for a lot less money. That can actually be done well within your $800m figure and reach a much higher ridership right off the bat.

http://centralaustincdc.org/transpor...%20Council.pdf

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by jbssfelix

That still leaves out one of the highest potential riderships, which is along the Lamar/Guad corridor. Build a light rail line from the Midtown red line stop to 4th St, extend Red Line to same terminus on 4th/Guad or 4th/Lamar, and now you're covering a huge population network for a lot less money. That can actually be done well within your $800m figure and reach a much higher ridership right off the bat.

http://centralaustincdc.org/transpor...%20Council.pdf

Again, transportation thread.


But the CACDC numbers (ridership and cost) are completely debunked BS.

They literally copied the ridership number from the 2000 light rail plan, a system 3 times the length.

[nixcity]

But the CACDC numbers (ridership and cost) are completely debunked BS.

They literally copied the ridership number from the 2000 light rail plan, a system 3 times the length.

Their plan was for 14.7 miles of track compared to 2000's 14.6. Not sure where you get 3 times.
Their ridership model was not based on STOPS but rather a Transportation Research Board model drawing. Regardless of whether or not it was even within 10,000 it would be a big success. Red line has yet to achieve 3,000 lousy boarding. Case in point, while at Blackstar (Crestview Station), not a sole was waiting for the trains. The 2 that passed while we were there were maybe 1/10 full while during the same time 27 people boarded the bus there (where the first line should be, not wasted on yet another commuter line). It would be easy to then envision a spur going right over to Burnet and heading all the way to its end where it turns into Duval.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by nixcity

Their plan was for 14.7 miles of track compared to 2000's 14.6. Not sure where you get 3 times.
Their ridership model was not based on STOPS but rather a Transportation Research Board model drawing. Regardless of whether or not it was even within 10,000 it would be a big success. Red line has yet to achieve 3,000 lousy boarding. Case in point, while at Blackstar (Crestview Station), not a sole was waiting for the trains. The 2 that passed while we were there were maybe 1/10 full while during the same time 27 people boarded the bus there (where the first line should be, not wasted on yet another commuter line). It would be easy to then envision a spur going right over to Burnet and heading all the way to its end where it turns into Duval.

We could accomplish the same ridership with shorter tracks, though, in the way that I describe in more detail in the transportation thread. I.E. it'd be cheaper because it'd be shorter. If we can accomplish the same thing (because it'd hit all the major nodes of employment and residential density as the line you're wanting) for cheaper, then why wouldn't we?

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by nixcity

Their plan was for 14.7 miles of track compared to 2000's 14.6. Not sure where you get 3 times.

No, that's the claimed "ridership" number from their MOS, 5.3 miles in length.

Literally the very first non-cover page of jbssfelix's link. Page 2

Originally Posted by nixcity

Their ridership model was not based on STOPS but rather a Transportation Research Board model drawing.

and they just happen to get the _exact_ same number (down to 3 figures) as the completely different 2000 plan?

Originally Posted by nixcity

Regardless of whether or not it was even within 10,000 it would be a big success.
Red line has yet to achieve 3,000 lousy boarding.

Success is also measured in the capital costs required to get there.
A half a billion dollar system that got ridership "within 10,000" (most simply converted over from bus riders) would not be considered a success.
Especially not in comparison to a commuter rail 1/4 the cost, and potentially greater passenger-miles.

[JoninATX]

That would cost alot less than a subway line running through the city, than for the rundown wwmiv. For me I'm all for mass transit, more options in choosing different transportation methods, the better! I hoping soon there will be an expansion line to the airport, as well as new rail stops arcoss the Austin area.

[Jdawgboy]

I ran across some renderings that I don't believe I've seen before. Here's the link.

http://archinect.com/people/project/...pment/61097307

Not sure if this is recent or old or if these people are no longer in the running. They apparently collaborated with Lake Flato.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I ran across some renderings that I don't believe I've seen before. Here's the link.

http://archinect.com/people/project/...pment/61097307

Not sure if this is recent or old or if these people are no longer in the running. They apparently collaborated with Lake Flato.

Old.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

Old.

Okay, just checking.

Has there been a timeline set for when Waterloo Park will open? Is there also any word on when work is expected to begin along the stretch between Waterloo Park and the river? Seeing as how the intake facility is nearly completed (again). I would think that the conservancy could move forward with some restoration projects, at least with areas that are farther from the creek until the tunnel is fully operational.

This whole ordeal has taken so much longer than expected for the obvious reason of the intake facility. Just curious if there is some sort of timeline that we can go by? This will be a great addition once completed but would like to see it within my lifetime lol.