AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Ugh. Sail shades are awful awful ugly and cheap, look dirty after just a few years. We can do better than that.

It says "Shade sails atop the steel trellis structure to provide shade for bridge users until vines are mature " (emphasis added)

So hopefully by the time the sails are degraded they're ready to pull them off anyway.

[Sigaven]

Originally Posted by Novacek

It says "Shade sails atop the steel trellis structure to provide shade for bridge users until vines are mature " (emphasis added)

So hopefully by the time the sails are degraded they're ready to pull them off anyway.

Oh! I didn't see that, sorry. I should probably read instead of looking at pretty pictures next time, lol. Yes, sail shades are great only if they are temporary.

[ATX2030]

Underground Light-Rail Tunnel Could Be More Than A Mile Longer Than Expected

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2...owntown-austin

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by ATX2030

Underground Light-Rail Tunnel Could Be More Than A Mile Longer Than Expected

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2...owntown-austin

Thanks. That's interesting stuff.

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by ATX2030

Underground Light-Rail Tunnel Could Be More Than A Mile Longer Than Expected

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2...owntown-austin

Really wish they'd just do subway from downtown to Crestview Station

[freerover]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Really wish they'd just do subway from downtown to Crestview Station

There are much better uses for transit funds.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by freerover

There are much better uses for transit funds.

Agreed.

But I do think if we are going to extend the subway, doing it for the drag is smarter.

[ATXboom]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Agreed.

But I do think if we are going to extend the subway, doing it for the drag is smarter.

Agree in terms of overall traffic infrastructure staying under the drag would be most ideal and worth it over time. So much car and foot traffic to deal with there. If nothing else go elevated.

[H2O]

The recent Project Connect Community Workshop for the Drag had a good explanation for why they are not considering a tunnel all the way up the Drag. It is near the beginning of the video and worth a listen.

https://publicinput.com/47945

[freerover]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Agreed.

But I do think if we are going to extend the subway, doing it for the drag is smarter.

Not really considering the reason the subway is being extended south is based on slope and geology and not asking "you know what would be cool?.

[drummer]

The Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority plans to add two toll lanes in each direction. The toll lanes will be built in the median of the highway. Plans also call for an additional non-toll lane along sections of 183 bringing the total to four lanes and two toll lanes in each direction on US 183 between 45 North and MoPac.

https://www.kxan.com/traffic/tolls-c...et-done-quick/

[austin242]

I think when looking north bound they should just turn down 12th st off guad then go down rio grande all the way to say 30th and then turn back onto Guadalupe. You could add an ACC Rio Grande Station as well. You avoid the drag but would still get the major population of west campus. You could also add the entry portal on 12th st possibly meaning you wouldn't block any traffic or take any lanes from a major st. Overall I think it would function way better.

[OfficialPBreton]

Originally Posted by austin242

I think when looking north bound they should just turn down 12th st off guad then go down rio grande all the way to say 30th and then turn back onto Guadalupe. You could add an ACC Rio Grande Station as well.

I don't really think that that's tenable considering the RoW reqs and who the stakeholders are. UT is happy to comply and even push for light rail next to them as it decreases their need for on-campus or west-campus housing (which makes it more expensive to attend for most) and makes them look more modern. But, say, Hotel Ella, The Quarters, 21 @ Rio, etc., don't see nearly the benefit from LRT compared to the costs of decreasing revenue that construction and other related things that it would bring.

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by OfficialPBreton

But, say, Hotel Ella, The Quarters, 21 @ Rio, etc., don't see nearly the benefit from LRT compared to the costs of decreasing revenue that construction and other related things that it would bring.

I think if anything, this makes this area more attractive for development, tourists, etc. I wouldn't recommend staying at Hotel Ella today bc it's not walkable to anything. When the train goes in, you're a 5/10 min walk to 2 stations. That's a win.

[OfficialPBreton]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

I think if anything, this makes this area more attractive for development, tourists, etc.

I may be wrong, but I don't think many tourists want to stay in the heart of West Campus for their vacation. Unless, of course, they're touring UT as a prospective school. Even then, the difference to tourism with LRT on Rio vs Guad isn't going to be a huge deal, IMO.

And I'm not talking about the final product, necessarily, when it comes to being attractive for development. The currently established tenants and property owners almost assuredly wouldn't be happy with construction on their "doorstep" (so to speak). And West Campus housing is much more attractive not because of transit connections, but because it's right next to UT. Where LRT is placed really doesn't matter in that respect. The property owners probably know this, as does CapMetro/ATP, and trying to fight/anger them in order to go down Rio is not really worth it. Not to mention the cost of a diversion off of Guad would add to the total cost because of the additional underground length.

I wouldn't recommend staying at Hotel Ella today bc it's not walkable to anything. When the train goes in, you're a 5/10 min walk to 2 stations. That's a win.

This literally doesn't make sense. You're already a 5/10 minute walk to a bus stop (UT/21st), and would be a 10 minute walk with LRT at the UT West Mall stop (same place as the current bus stop). So, yeah it's walkable.

If LRT went in on Rio, I can't see a stop being in the first 2 blocks, so it most likely would be just as far vertically as the one that's currently planned. That would take off... 3 minutes? I don't really get this argument and it really seems like you haven't walked WC in a good bit.

Either way, the guiding principle as to why it's not happening on Rio is $$$. Because the diversion off of Guad is just adding unnecessary expenses.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by OfficialPBreton

UT is happy to comply and even push for light rail next to them as it decreases their need for on-campus or west-campus housing (which makes it more expensive to attend for most) and makes them look more modern. But, say, Hotel Ella, The Quarters, 21 @ Rio, etc., don't see nearly the benefit from LRT compared to the costs of decreasing revenue that construction and other related things that it would bring.

UT would welcome more dense West Campus housing. There's no room for more on campus. Regardless, UT is not overly concerned with the cost of housing. That is the concern of students (i.e., in most cases - parents). It's a cost of sending your kid to one of the best public institutions in the world in one of the hottest real estate markets in the world!

And who cares about "looking modern?" Seriously.

And, please explain what you mean by "...cost of decreasing revenue and other related things that it would bring." I'm confused. Everyone in West Campus (Campus itself) would benefit from LRT. In fact, values will increase - especially near the line itself.

[OfficialPBreton]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

UT would welcome more dense West Campus housing. There's no room for more on campus.

Yes, it would absolutely welcome more dense WC housing. It would also welcome a better transportation system which makes it easier for students to live outside of WC and commute to UT.

Regardless, UT is not overly concerned with the cost of housing.

To be clear, I do not think that UT is so invested in the cost of housing that it's going to make some radical decisions to reduce overall cost, but it is an institution which, for better or worse, is governed by the same economic forces that any other higher-learning institution is. These institutions (especially ones that are some of the best in the nation) are worried about the *overall cost* that a prospective student will see, compared to say, Rice, which gives full-ride tuition to students with family incomes under 140k. UT, like almost all universities, are fighting for the best students who will contribute to the culture, community, and alumni network.

That is the concern of students (i.e., in most cases - parents). It's a cost of sending your kid to one of the best public institutions in the world in one of the hottest real estate markets in the world!

Sure. But UT wants the best, regardless of their family income or SES. And that means caring about the overall cost, too.

And who cares about "looking modern?" Seriously.

The same people paying for the tuition, apparently. Lots of things have been built at plenty of universities that don't serve much purpose but look good to draw in students (and parents). LRT certainly is more useful.

And, please explain what you mean by "...cost of decreasing revenue and other related things that it would bring." I'm confused. Everyone in West Campus (Campus itself) would benefit from LRT. In fact, values will increase - especially near the line itself.

I'm going to take this backwards. Values are increasing in WC regardless of LRT, even though everyone would benefit in the long run from LRT being in Austin. But *during installation* the construction will affect some more than others, and that's the bit that I meant about decreasing revenues. Most people want to avoid living directly next to a construction zone, and most businesses would rather not have the regular stream of people walking by disrupted. That means that tenants and landlords alike aren't going to be thrilled for the extended amount of time I am sure the installation will take.

[chinchaaa]

delete

[kingkirbythe....]

Left turns will be restricted along Austin light-rail routes

https://www.kut.org/transportation/2...ht-rail-routes

The change will not require approval from City Council, according to the Austin Transportation Department.

ATD doesn't know how many intersections would be affected, but expects to produce a list in the coming months. The restrictions on left turns wouldn't take effect until the light-rail lines are constructed.

Restricting left turns is a common safety practice along light-rail routes in cities like Houston, Minneapolis and Salt Lake City.

"It's a way of prioritizing transit and allowing for greater throughput of people and overall greater mobility for the community as a whole with some tradeoffs," said Lyndon Henry, a transportation planning consultant who sits on a technical committee advising the Austin Transit Partnership on Project Connect.

"But that happens all the time whenever they upgrade a major roadway [by adding a center median]," he said. "That just happens as a city grows."

[StoOgE]

Got a notice in the mail from the city saying that they are planning on redoing Lamar soon. Looks to be part of the Great Streets program.

Didn't have a lot of particulars.