AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[BevoLJ]

Could you please elaborate on what "congestion charges" are? If I am following right you would want to charge people to drive downtown?

Ignoring the obvious of how local business would never allow that, wouldn't you run into issues with the University? How does it work? There are just so many ways into downtown I can't really think of how it would work.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by Scott Wood

Yet unchecked congestion won't keep them away? It's of course a concern, and there's a limit to how much you can pile on charges relative to the alternatives and incentives you provide, especially with the general cost of driving (to the driver) remaining so low, no land-use disincentives to job sprawl, etc.

However, rail bias isn't infinite. Downtown is congested because a lot of people want/need to get there despite it already being less convenient/cheap for drivers, and if transit represents significant time or money savings, you'll see more people using it, whatever the mode.

Rail is great, and we should do it for the denser corridors subject to available funds (and competence) to do it right. But providing time/cost advantages for buses is still important, since rail will not cover as much territory as buses can, and thus rail will not be an option for a lot of people.

I'm arguing that when the competition is suburban office parks with free parking on freeway frontage roads, you'd better be really careful how much more expensive you make downtown without really improving commuting at all.

And, yes, workers with a choice - especially in an area where, again, the competition is the suburban office park, stay away from buses in droves. Most of the ridership of the (pretty darn good) express buses here is university and state workers, NOT downtown workers - there's a reason for that, and it's not going to go away just because we'd really like it to.

So providing a cost advantage to buses isn't going to fly. Again, non-captive employers and employees here. You have no idea how hard it is to have a conversation here with a private sector employer about locating downtown (I've tried many times); it'd be even harder if you have to say "oh, yeah, and boss? you're going to have to pay a congestion charge", as much as I'd love to live in that world).

Finally, providing non-trivial time advantages to buses is almost as expensive as just building rail. You either end up with the HOV solution (meaning the buses' time savings don't benefit people in the core at all - so medium cost with fairly little benefit) or the bus lane solution (just about as expensive as light rail if you actually do it halfway well).

[nixcity]

I think I saw again why so many people complain about ATX traffic, which of course is usually coming from those that commute from the outskirts of town or the burbs to get into the real city. Obviously, being the only interstate in town and with the bottlenecks, 35 is a mess. But outside of that it is the access roads around the crappy big box heavy retail areas. I just got back from the Sunsvet Valley, Brodie lane mess and it was horrible.
Big Box+Strip Malls=Big Box strip mall=hell on earth!

[austlar1]

While 35 and Mopac may both be very congested at rush hour and at other times of the day, the TRUTH is that commute times by auto to central Austin are not significantly different than commute times in most other sizable US cities. The idea that downtown Austin is somehow at capacity now because of road congestion is risible.

There will be new office building construction downtown when there is sufficient demand for the product. Right now the demand is limited by the sluggish economy. Downtown Austin has not been a traditional corporate headquarters, and,Whole Foods or Silicon Labs notwithstanding, it may never be that kind of business center. It will continue to attract professional services such as law firms, accounting firms and a wide variety of organizations and lobbying entities that do business with the state government. These entities want to be clustered together and will continue to do so. They will continue to require additional office space, and it will get built over time. There would probably be a building or two on the way now except for the conservative lending practices in place and the reluctance of business managers to commit money to expensive new leases. Anecdotal evidence that high tech employers currently housed in Edge City developments are unwilling to relocate to downtown Austin should not be taken to mean that an expansion of downtown office supply is unthinkable under present transit conditions.

Posted below is link showing current market conditions for Austin office space.. Downtown, as usual, outperforms all other areas.

http://www.austintenantadvisors.com/...ce-lease-rates

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by austlar1

While 35 and Mopac may both be very congested at rush hour and at other times of the day, the TRUTH is that commute times by auto to central Austin are not significantly different than commute times in most other sizable US cities. The idea that downtown Austin is somehow at capacity now because of road congestion is risible.

Actually, we show up very high on the list for commute times for our peer cities - even though most of them are sprawling messes. This is, frankly, the opposite of anectdotal evidence.

[austlar1]

Austin is also a sprawling mess. The commute times are not that significantly different. The anecdotal evidence I am referring to has to do with your conversations with decision makers in local businesses that decline to move operations to downtown Austin. There is still plenty of demand for downtown office space and there will continue to be demand in spite of commute times. Austin is growing into a large city and compared to the time it takes to drive out of downtown Houston, Dallas, or Atlanta commute times in Austin are not all that bad. People here just have a memories of a few years ago when it was still possible to zip around town at rush hour with only minor inconvenience. Rail or no rail, those days are long gone.

[BevoLJ]

I grew up here in Austin, but lived in both Boston and LA while going to school there. When people here complain about traffic I still have to shake my head and chuckle under my breath. But just because Austin doesn't have half the issues of those cities, doesn't mean we can't do better. I just don't think people in Austin really get it. Or maybe I don't properly. People want a busy downtown and to give easier access to places, but look at the county courthouse. I still don't understand why people want to move it out of downtown. It is my understanding that you want your busiest places that have the most visitors each day to be downtown. Isn't that smart urban planning? Since a huge portion of downtown office space is all law firms, why would you put the courthouse out of downtown and make them drive there rather than putting it right by the Federal Courthouse where they have access to both courthouses right there near their offices that they work.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

I grew up here in Austin, but lived in both Boston and LA while going to school there. When people here complain about traffic I still have to shake my head and chuckle under my breath. But just because Austin doesn't have half the issues of those cities, doesn't mean we can't do better. I just don't think people in Austin really get it. Or maybe I don't properly. People want a busy downtown and to give easier access to places, but look at the county courthouse. I still don't understand why people want to move it out of downtown. It is my understanding that you want your busiest places that have the most visitors each day to be downtown. Isn't that smart urban planning? Since a huge portion of downtown office space is all law firms, why would you put the courthouse out of downtown and make them drive there rather than putting it right by the Federal Courthouse where they have access to both courthouses right there near their offices that they work.

I think the courthouse probably ought to be downtown. I just wish it was not going to be on that block. For security reasons they are gonna end up with a kind of bunker there. As somebody pointed out, the area fronting the park will be dead at night. Not really a good thing it seems to me.

I am a big proponent of the redevelopment of the Highland Mall area. I think in the larger Austin that is on the way, the center of Austin is going to expand. The center itself is likely to be multi-nodal. I think the Highland area is a logical place for pretty intense development, a view not held by some others on this site. Eventually I would love to see that whole corridor from downtown up to Highland served by various high capacity transit options. I have been noticing the Travis County operations currently located on Airport Blvd. and can't help but think that so much of that area could be put to better use probably without too much neighborhood opposition.

Maybe the courthouse should be downtown (somewhere else downtown, I wish), but a large county office building in the Airport Blvd area might be a great catalyst and an affordable way for this fast growing county to house workers and various offices. The highway access at that location is the best in the area really when you boil it all down. This area, rather than downtown, is the real junction of so much of the local high capacity road network. I just imagine how this area might be in 30 or 40 years. Some people posting on this site don't seem to be able or willing to look that far down the path. I have witnessed a lot of changes here and elsewhere over the course of my adult life. I know that the Austin that we are dealing with today would have been built differently if only we could have imagined the kind of growth that has taken place. We could have avoided a lot of mistakes. This place is not going to stop growing. There are already a lot of constraints on downtown expansion. It is time to visualize dense development in close in areas like the Highland Mall area.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Austin is also a sprawling mess. The commute times are not that significantly different. The anecdotal evidence I am referring to has to do with your conversations with decision makers in local businesses that decline to move operations to downtown Austin. There is still plenty of demand for downtown office space and there will continue to be demand in spite of commute times. Austin is growing into a large city and compared to the time it takes to drive out of downtown Houston, Dallas, or Atlanta commute times in Austin are not all that bad. People here just have a memories of a few years ago when it was still possible to zip around town at rush hour with only minor inconvenience. Rail or no rail, those days are long gone.

Austin shows up the worst on the list for mid-sized cities; we're now not the worst in the category just because we graduated to large-sized. We are substantively different than other peer cities - objectively speaking - and it's because of our travel patterns (which better match large older cities than medium Sunbelt ones - we actually have a higher proportion of employment in the core than most other Southern cities, for instance).

We're less of a sprawling mess than the other medium-sized Sunbelt cities to which we're sometimes compared; but we also haven't done anything to improve core mobility like all the large cities have already done. No new highway lanes; no rail; no nothing.

And if you think this hasn't had an impact on the fact that downtown employment has basically held steady for decades, you're fooling yourself. The new office space created in the last couple of buildings basically just made up for old office spaces that were converted into other uses.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by M1EK

Austin shows up the worst on the list for mid-sized cities; we're now not the worst in the category just because we graduated to large-sized. We are substantively different than other peer cities - objectively speaking - and it's because of our travel patterns (which better match large older cities than medium Sunbelt ones - we actually have a higher proportion of employment in the core than most other Southern cities, for instance).

We're less of a sprawling mess than the other medium-sized Sunbelt cities to which we're sometimes compared; but we also haven't done anything to improve core mobility like all the large cities have already done. No new highway lanes; no rail; no nothing.

And if you think this hasn't had an impact on the fact that downtown employment has basically held steady for decades, you're fooling yourself. The new office space created in the last couple of buildings basically just made up for old office spaces that were converted into other uses.

If we have a higher percentage of employment in the core than other Sunbelt cities, and if we are a growing city that is adding jobs, how is there not ongoing demand for office space in the core. What are the figures you are using and where do they come from? Austin added upwards of 900,000 sq. feet of class A space in the past ten years or so right in downtown within a one mile radius of 6th and Congress. This is without factoring in Whole Foods or other smaller buildings built around the same time. There was little or no loss of other Class A space downtown. In addition there have been several remodels of less than Class A space during the same period. You are saying that there has been no addition in the number of workers downtown during that period? Maybe, but it kind of defies logic.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by austlar1

If we have a higher percentage of employment in the core than other Sunbelt cities, and if we are a growing city that is adding jobs, how is there not ongoing demand for office space in the core. What are the figures you are using and where do they come from? Austin added upwards of 900,000 sq. feet of class A space in the past ten years or so right in downtown within a one mile radius of 6th and Congress. This is without factoring in Whole Foods or other smaller buildings built around the same time. There was little or no loss of other Class A space downtown. In addition there have been several remodels of less than Class A space during the same period. You are saying that there has been no addition in the number of workers downtown during that period? Maybe, but it kind of defies logic.

We have a higher percentage of core employment thanks to the state and university - and the class A space isn't the total employment picture - a lot of other space got turned into residential during the last 10-20 years (i.e. Brown, Sabine). Don't think they were class A before being converted.

[tampasteve]

Is the Dillo or any sort of DT circulator still around?

Steve

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by tampasteve

Is the Dillo or any sort of DT circulator still around?

Steve

Nope. Dillo is dead unfortunately. I always thought Austin would do well with an electric circulator. This hit me when I visited Santa Barbara for the frist time and saw their free electric shuttles on State St.

[M1EK]

full post here: http://mdahmus.monkeysystems.com/blo...es/000670.html

some images of relevance from it:

[nixcity]

Wow, what a great use of more than $100,000,000.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by nixcity

Wow, what a great use of more than $100,000,000.

It's not just that capital cost that was wasted; it's an incredible drain on operating costs that has directly led to cancellations of more heavily used (and/or needed) bus service.

[KevinFromTexas]

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/...y-1228726.html

Pfluger Bridge extension opens Friday
Extension of pedestrian bridge crosses over West Cesar Chavez

By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Updated: 10:24 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 2, 2011
Published: 9:54 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 2, 2011

The extra span of the Pfluger Bridge, extending the river crossing over West Cesar Chavez Street, will open midday Friday , city officials say, allowing cyclists and pedestrians to avoid that busy thoroughfare.

Completion of the 10-month project fulfills advocates' original vision for the decade-old bridge over Lady Bird Lake. But the fate of the final piece of that vision — an underpass under the Union Pacific railroad tracks to the north — remains fuzzy because of an imposing price tag and uncertain funding.

The Pfluger extension, just 207 feet long, should cost about $3.5 million by the time all the bills come in, said Sara Hartley , spokeswoman for the city's Public Works Department. The bridge's prefabricated metal span takes off from the north end of the bridge, then feeds into an earthen ramp and what will be a park north of Cesar Chavez. The Gables Park Plaza apartments, with one of two multi story buildings completed, sit further north, between there and the tracks.

[KevinFromTexas]

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/...e-1251956.html

Rail studies costing city millions, before public vote
Officials say anticipated $4.1 million helps define challenges; critic says policy already set.

By Ben Wear
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Published: 8:51 p.m. Sunday, Feb. 13, 2011

Austinites won't get their say on the city's $1.3 billion urban rail plan until at least November of next year, when city leaders plan to ask permission to borrow at least $200 million to build a first phase.

Even so, the City Council this week will consider approving $1.2 million in spending related to the proposed 16.5-mile light-rail or streetcar system — $700,000 for a federally required environmental study and $500,000 for a joint project with Capital Metro to update the area's transit plan and a key transportation modeling program.

[M1EK]

This is a disappointing slip back into stupidity by Wear. Skaggs is a lying, Neanderthal, pantload who shouldn't be listened to at this point - but those of you who supported the Red Line gave him a failed rail line to point at and say "See? Rail doesn't work!".

[electricron]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

[The Pfluger extension, just 207 feet long, should cost about $3.5 million by the time all the bills come in, said Sara Hartley, spokeswoman for the city's Public Works Department.

That's $16,908.21 per foot for the Pfluger extension.
Meanwhile, the often criticized Red Line trains capital costs were just $651.04 per foot....

Math:
$3,500,000 / 207 ft = $16,908.21
$110,000,000 Million / 32 miles / 5280 ft/mile = $651.04

Note: This was just the cost of extending the Pfluger Bridge, it doesn't include the costs for the entire bridge, nor its length. I wonder who is going to count the numbers using the Pfluger bridge and determined if it was worth the cost of building?