AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[wwmiv]

still waiting and hoping for the whole thing to be canned

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

still waiting and hoping for the whole thing to be canned

yea, that would be so great for the city! /s

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

yea, that would be so great for the city! /s

Building the right starter system would be good for the city. Building the wrong starter system would be worse than building nothing at all.

Congrats—you support the worst possible starter system imaginable: a waste of money, not what was proposed (which was awful anyway), horrible ridership, difficult-to-impossible to expand from, and is going to be a long-running political debacle that eventually loses the support of a majority of Austin’s residents and gets shuttered because the inevitable future funding rounds of long-term maintenance becomes a political third rail nobody wants to touch.

Your short term (“oooooo we need this now, let’s take whatever we can get”) thinking needs to a bit of a long term touch.

[LiveattheOasis]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Building the right starter system would be good for the city. Building the wrong starter system would be worse than building nothing at all.

Congrats—you support the worst possible starter system imaginable: a waste of money, not what was proposed (which was awful anyway), horrible ridership, difficult-to-impossible to expand from, and is going to be a long-running political debacle that eventually loses the support of a majority of Austin’s residents and gets shuttered because the inevitable future funding rounds of long-term maintenance becomes a political third rail nobody wants to touch.

Your short term (“oooooo we need this now, let’s take whatever we can get”) thinking needs to a bit of a long term touch.

I'm someone who has rallied at the city for Light Rail a few times over the past 2 decades. I'd love to understand what the right starter system is for you (not being defensive). Most cite the 2000 plan in some form, but I am genuinely curious and not defensive about the current plan. We always need to push for more efficiency given the amount of money allocated.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by LiveattheOasis

I'm someone who has rallied at the city for Light Rail a few times over the past 2 decades. I'd love to understand what the right starter system is for you (not being defensive). Most cite the 2000 plan in some form, but I am genuinely curious and not defensive about the current plan. We always need to push for more efficiency given the amount of money allocated.

Frankly, I am of the opinion that NO city should do anything until the federal funding situation for transit is resolved. That’s the major missing piece. Whatever any city does in the meantime is going to be ad hoc, piecemeal, and driven more by local funding ability than by actual transit effectiveness. And the more cities decide to go it alone, the less likely the federal government ever ends up stepping up to that plate. Austin is doing itself, and every other city, a disservice by not holding its ground firmly until the federal (and state) policy context is amenable.

Which is why all of my non-negotiables are simply NOT accomplishable (and are they even worth stating? Your reply is inevitably going to be “but we can’t afford all of that!!!” Right?) until the federal government steps up to the plate.

We all know this is a shit system, we were sold a bag of goods, and it isn’t even what we voted on anyway. We should not be forced to pay for something that was a lie. By anyone. At what point are we going to wake up and recognize that’s all the city does to us? They lie, lie, lie, cheat, steal, misuse the money, and then blame the voters for it all.

Sorry, not sorry: COA governance is pathetic.

That said: I am more than willing to walk you through step by step what I think it what Austin should pursue, once federal and state policy shift, if it isn’t going to descend into defensive postures from other forumers about how much the current proposal is “amazing!!!&@!!$&$!!!!”

Because all that does is make me see someone as a truly weak individual who is willing to settle for meager overpriced underdelivered transit scraps after COA did a bait and switch of epic proportions on its voters.

(A lot of that is directed to the forum as a whole, not you in particular)

[LiveattheOasis]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Frankly, I am of the opinion that NO city should do anything until the federal funding situation for transit is resolved. That’s the major missing piece. Whatever any city does in the meantime is going to be ad hoc, piecemeal, and driven more by local funding ability than by actual transit effectiveness. And the more cities decide to go it alone, the less likely the federal government ever ends up stepping up to that plate. Austin is doing itself, and every other city, a disservice by not holding its ground firmly until the federal (and state) policy context is amenable.

Which is why all of my non-negotiables are simply NOT accomplishable (and are they even worth stating? Your reply is inevitably going to be “but we can’t afford all of that!!!” Right?) until the federal government steps up to the plate.

We all know this is a shit system, we were sold a bag of goods, and it isn’t even what we voted on anyway. We should not be forced to pay for something that was a lie. By anyone. At what point are we going to wake up and recognize that’s all the city does to us? They lie, lie, lie, cheat, steal, misuse the money, and then blame the voters for it all.

Sorry, not sorry: COA governance is pathetic.

That said: I am more than willing to walk you through step by step what I think it what Austin should pursue, once federal and state policy shift, if it isn’t going to descend into defensive postures from other forumers about how much the current proposal is “amazing!!!&@!!$&$!!!!”

Because all that does is make me see someone as a truly weak individual who is willing to settle for meager overpriced underdelivered transit scraps after COA did a bait and switch of epic proportions on its voters.

(A lot of that is directed to the forum as a whole, not you in particular)

I hear you. Yeah this probably gets framed as patience for great, perfect is the enemy of the good, etc. It'd be a wonder to get an Eisenhower part 2 for US transit, but it's hard to imagine it today.

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Frankly, I am of the opinion that NO city should do anything until the federal funding situation for transit is resolved. That’s the major missing piece. Whatever any city does in the meantime is going to be ad hoc, piecemeal, and driven more by local funding ability than by actual transit effectiveness. And the more cities decide to go it alone, the less likely the federal government ever ends up stepping up to that plate. Austin is doing itself, and every other city, a disservice by not holding its ground firmly until the federal (and state) policy context is amenable.

Which is why all of my non-negotiables are simply NOT accomplishable (and are they even worth stating? Your reply is inevitably going to be “but we can’t afford all of that!!!” Right?) until the federal government steps up to the plate.

We all know this is a shit system, we were sold a bag of goods, and it isn’t even what we voted on anyway. We should not be forced to pay for something that was a lie. By anyone. At what point are we going to wake up and recognize that’s all the city does to us? They lie, lie, lie, cheat, steal, misuse the money, and then blame the voters for it all.

Sorry, not sorry: COA governance is pathetic.

That said: I am more than willing to walk you through step by step what I think it what Austin should pursue, once federal and state policy shift, if it isn’t going to descend into defensive postures from other forumers about how much the current proposal is “amazing!!!&@!!$&$!!!!”

Because all that does is make me see someone as a truly weak individual who is willing to settle for meager overpriced underdelivered transit scraps after COA did a bait and switch of epic proportions on its voters.

(A lot of that is directed to the forum as a whole, not you in particular)

so let's see your ideas. i don't think anyone here has said this is an amazing proposal, but i fully believe that letting perfect being the enemy of good is a fatal trap to fall into. we have to start somewhere.

also what are your thoughts on federal funding? under the current administration, we're not exactly in a friendly environment for that. we could be waiting forever.

[wwmiv]

I dispute the notion that the system proposed is “good.” This system is straight up bad. I cannot take seriously anyone who believes what we are building is “good”—especially after we aren’t even getting what we voted on (which WOULD have been good and I’d still support it, even if it wasn’t perfect). The changes made after the fact have downgraded the project from good and serviceable to bad and not worth it.

Ergo: I’m not letting perfect by the enemy of the good—I’m letting good be the enemy of a bad system designed in bad faith and passed in a bait and switch. And more and more it seems like you all are letting bad be the enemy of nothing. I’d rather have nothing and make do, because nothing is better than a millstone/albatross/white elephant. The whole system has been redesigned to be penny wise and a pound foolish.

If the current constitutional regime survives, I’d wager we are no more than two presidential cycles away from a sea change in federal policy on transit. The backlash against Trump (FWIW, I’ve said is here before and I’ll say it again: part of the reason I supported him [but not all] is to CREATE that backlash) nearly guarantees such a sea change. For Democrats who are already transit-friendly, they gain more power (potentially a stranglehold on the federal government for a decade, if we’re being honest); for Republicans who are not, transit is one of the easiest policy pivots to attract new voters. That’s worth being patient and waiting for.

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

I dispute the notion that the system proposed is “good.” This system is straight up bad. I cannot take seriously anyone who believes what we are building is “good”—especially after we aren’t even getting what we voted on (which WOULD have been good and I’d still support it, even if it wasn’t perfect). The changes made after the fact have downgraded the project from good and serviceable to bad and not worth it.

Ergo: I’m not letting perfect by the enemy of the good—I’m letting good be the enemy of a bad system designed in bad faith and passed in a bait and switch. And more and more it seems like you all are letting bad be the enemy of nothing. I’d rather have nothing and make do, because nothing is better than a millstone/albatross/white elephant. The whole system has been redesigned to be penny wise and a pound foolish.

If the current constitutional regime survives, I’d wager we are no more than two presidential cycles away from a sea change in federal policy on transit. The backlash against Trump (FWIW, I’ve said is here before and I’ll say it again: part of the reason I supported him [but not all] is to CREATE that backlash) nearly guarantees such a sea change. For Democrats who are already transit-friendly, they gain more power (potentially a stranglehold on the federal government for a decade, if we’re being honest); for Republicans who are not, transit is one of the easiest policy pivots to attract new voters. That’s worth being patient and waiting for.

lol interesting reason to support trump.

what is your perfect system then? or good enough system?

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

I dispute the notion that the system proposed is “good.” This system is straight up bad. I cannot take seriously anyone who believes what we are building is “good”—especially after we aren’t even getting what we voted on (which WOULD have been good and I’d still support it, even if it wasn’t perfect). The changes made after the fact have downgraded the project from good and serviceable to bad and not worth it.

Ergo: I’m not letting perfect by the enemy of the good—I’m letting good be the enemy of a bad system designed in bad faith and passed in a bait and switch. And more and more it seems like you all are letting bad be the enemy of nothing. I’d rather have nothing and make do, because nothing is better than a millstone/albatross/white elephant. The whole system has been redesigned to be penny wise and a pound foolish.

If the current constitutional regime survives, I’d wager we are no more than two presidential cycles away from a sea change in federal policy on transit. The backlash against Trump (FWIW, I’ve said is here before and I’ll say it again: part of the reason I supported him [but not all] is to CREATE that backlash) nearly guarantees such a sea change. For Democrats who are already transit-friendly, they gain more power (potentially a stranglehold on the federal government for a decade, if we’re being honest); for Republicans who are not, transit is one of the easiest policy pivots to attract new voters. That’s worth being patient and waiting for.

It's not a bad system.

It wasn't designed in bad faith.

It wasn't a bait and switch.

In order for it to be a bait and switch, the city would have needed to know about Covid and its fallout in 2019 and early 2020.

[Lobotomizer]

Lol, the Federal Transit Administration certainly doesn't think it's a bad system.

Also, I can only speculate that many people do not understand what the voters of Austin approved for Project Connect. It wasn't a bond election. It created a new entity which is funded by a substantial and permanent property tax. This entity can issue bonds, and obviously apply for federal funding.

So, this starter system is obviously just the start of a plan which will continue to expand over the coming decades. It will clearly be extended to the airport. It will clearly extend further up Lamar, and down South Congress, which I might add already are some of our best corridors for public transit in the city with great potential for further densification.

This starter system through downtown, campus, and across the river with a new bridge and an elevated section is going to be by far the most difficult and expensive section. The expansions will be easy-peasy by comparison.

Another very relevant point indicating this is certainly not a bad system is the fact it will be entirely double tracked in it's own dedicated ROW. There will be no trains getting stuck in traffic like some other city's streetcar systems. It won't be stopping at traffic lights. There will be no pulling off on some siding track to let another train pass by in the opposite direction.

On a scale of 1-10 with 10 being perfect I'd rate this starter system a legitimate 7. Calling it bad in my opinion is not intellectually honest.

[zguerra]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

I dispute the notion that the system proposed is “good.” This system is straight up bad. I cannot take seriously anyone who believes what we are building is “good”—especially after we aren’t even getting what we voted on (which WOULD have been good and I’d still support it, even if it wasn’t perfect). The changes made after the fact have downgraded the project from good and serviceable to bad and not worth it.

Ergo: I’m not letting perfect by the enemy of the good—I’m letting good be the enemy of a bad system designed in bad faith and passed in a bait and switch. And more and more it seems like you all are letting bad be the enemy of nothing. I’d rather have nothing and make do, because nothing is better than a millstone/albatross/white elephant. The whole system has been redesigned to be penny wise and a pound foolish.

If the current constitutional regime survives, I’d wager we are no more than two presidential cycles away from a sea change in federal policy on transit. The backlash against Trump (FWIW, I’ve said is here before and I’ll say it again: part of the reason I supported him [but not all] is to CREATE that backlash) nearly guarantees such a sea change. For Democrats who are already transit-friendly, they gain more power (potentially a stranglehold on the federal government for a decade, if we’re being honest); for Republicans who are not, transit is one of the easiest policy pivots to attract new voters. That’s worth being patient and waiting for.

I don’t think Austin can afford to wait for the federal government to fully fund its original vision. Waiting will likely take years, and by that point—if and when the federal government fully funds that original vision—costs may have doubled, making the delay counterproductive. Austin is wise to pivot to a scaled-down version of its original vision given unforeseen supply-chain increases in cost that were precipitated by a global pandemic no one saw coming. Pivoting when original circumstances have changed is not necessarily a bait and switch; it's more recalibration or course correction.

It’s easy to look at cities like London, New York, or Boston and want what they have when it comes to subways as public transport. While a subway system might seem more glamorous than light rail, when done well, however, light rail can be just as impactful—if not more so—depending on the context. A walk through the center of Dublin shows how positive an effect light rail can have on a city center, especially one like Austin’s. It doesn’t just move people in and out of downtown; it can support placemaking and help retail and street life thrive. Imagine South Congress when the street becomes less throughway and more destination; light rail can help the street maintain continued success. And lest we forget: the London Underground wasn’t built all at once; the Boston T wasn’t built all at once; the New York City subway wasn’t built all at once. They all started with initial lines and expanded gradually over decades. In fact, I’m not aware of any major rail system that was fully built or funded in a single phase. Cities are built organically and piecemeal. Our system will, eventually, reach the airport. Tossing out the plan today just because the airport is planned for a second phase simply ensures it likely never reaches the airport.

I think Austin is building the right line for the times we’re currently living in; it might not be amazing, but it's not bad, either. The starter system will run through the densest and most pedestrian-oriented parts of the city, which should help set it up for success. A successful first line is important if we ever want to secure funding and public support for future expansion.

[RuggedConformist]

From masstransitmag.com, April 16, 2026
The new facility will store, maintain and dispatch light-rail vehicles once complete.

Project Connect inexorably moves forward, which is good.
https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infr...ns-and-maintenance-facility-construction

[Urbannizer]

Shared Use Path Along a Section of Airport Boulevard Is Complete

The City of Austin recently completed a section of the shared use path (SUP) along the west side of Airport Boulevard between East 51st Street and Middle Fiskville Road. Completion of this segment means that bicyclists, scooter riders and pedestrians now have a continuous SUP running alongside Airport Boulevard from North Lamar Boulevard to East 46th Street.

Completion of this project is a major milestone in the City’s Corridor Mobility Program —development, design and construction of improvements along key Austin corridors that enhance mobility, safety and connectivity. The Corridor Mobility Program is funded by the 2016 Mobility Bonds.

The Airport Boulevard SUP makes important connections to other parts of the City’s All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network, including to the protected bike lanes on East 53rd Street/North Loop Boulevard and East 51st Street.

Also, coming soon to a different stretch of Airport Boulevard: Our City crew has begun construction of another SUP between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Springdale Road. Like the SUP above, this will run along the west side of the boulevard. Construction is expected to last 18 months.

Could use some trees.

[IluvATX]

God that’s ugly…

[Urbannizer]

Congress St. Improvements

Bike lane on the 100 block northbound now open

[Sigaven]

Lol. The bike lanes in this city are a joke.

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Lol. The bike lanes in this city are a joke.

The new airport blvd ones are awesome

[Urbannizer]

Work has now transitioned to the 100 block southbound.

[siriusdog]

Coming back to the discussion in earlier posts on light rail. I was recently reading this article https://worksinprogress.co/issue/why-japan-has-such-good-railways/
about the Japanese rail system and really liked the idea of rail companies owning the development around their stations. Is this feasible under US/Texas law?
If so, the best way to improve the project would be to use some of the funds to buy up the land around the stations and the city would have the power to upzone and remove any parking requirements. The profits would then be reinvested in maintaining service and expanding the network? What are your thoughts on that?

Additionally, I don't understand why the Project Connect light rail and the Metro rail programs are separate entities with different leaderships (is it because Leander is in the Cap Metro service area?). There is a lot of value in building upon the existing red line (and hopefully green line). If the the entity can buy the land around the track for development and use the proceeds to build the rail/station, there is alot of land around the red and green line stations that could be developed at much higher density (Hello Hancock station?) to bankroll a station at that location and double track the remainder of the lines.

Just some thoughts on improving the connectivity around the city. There is not much improvement I can think of for the proposed route. My only request would be to reduce the travel time between the stations. In an ideal world, I would like to travel between Yellow Jacket and Republic Square in less than 20 min (i read the latest estimate puts it at 35 min). Is this possible?