AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by electricron

The Red line is almost into operation, it's time to have another election to build the Green line. Obama's administration will be much easier on new transit projects qualifying for Federal funds. Don't make the mistake Austin did the last time and wait for Obama's terms to expire before having another vote. You have to strike while the iron is hot.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO not the Green Line, please no!!!

(By this I mean the crappy Green Line out to Manor or wherever.)

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by SecretAgentMan

I never disputed Krusee's involvement in derailing the 2000 LRT plan, nor have I disputed the abrupt change in direction in 2003. I was there at the table at the time. What I have disputed is your implication that Krusee was behind the shift in strategy in early 2004.

And Jeff Wood disputes your refutation, so we now have 2 non-anonymous people doing so. Nice try. The reason for the shift in strategy was Krusee - he told Capital Metro he'd stop threatening to yank their tax money away from them if they moved away from LRT and built this commuter rail line instead.

As for Lee Walker, he was the chairman of Capital Metro until earlier this year - so your comments that he was going to push for LRT on the Lamar/Guadalupe corridor are ridiculous. Guess he had so much else on his plate he could never get to it, huh?

As for the neighborhood planning in 2003/2004, you don't need to remind me of this time; I was on the UTC then; and the plan being worked on was for LRT only (with possible Red Line service added on later). The effort to continue up Lamar to Anderson was a dead-end for reasons discussed here many times - was just an attempt to see if they could get a compromise that the idiots in Crestview and Wooten wouldn't complain about. The commuter rail service wasn't really part of the plan at this point (again, the Feds were rating this service very poorly in informal conversations, which is why CM didn't even try to go to them for money after the 2004 election, despite promising to do so before the election).


Hooray for anonymously-sourced misrepresentation and confusion!

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by electricron

The Red line is almost into operation, it's time to have another election to build the Green line. Obama's administration will be much easier on new transit projects qualifying for Federal funds. Don't make the mistake Austin did the last time and wait for Obama's terms to expire before having another vote. You have to strike while the iron is hot.

Because we did what Krusee (and SecretAgentMan, apparently) wanted, we can now no longer feasibly build the original "Green Line".

1. We can't justify taking away a traffic lane on Lamar/Guadalupe with the much lower passenger load that would be arriving from the Red Line as it exists now, even if a lot of them wouldn't be turned off by the necessity to transfer.

2. We can't run light rail trains on Lamar/Guadalupe and then continue on the Red Line. Unless we admit the Red Line as it exists now is a failure, tear up those tracks and stations, return the DMUs, and go build the full 2000 LRT plan.

3. We can't run light rail trains through the Lamar/Airport intersection and continue to the north. (We couldn't justify taking a traffic lane based on the much lower ridership compared to the Red/Green of 2000; and the intersection at Lamar/Airport would now have 2 rail lines going through it, not just one turning *at* it).

The die was cast a long time ago. Those who claimed we could have LRT later on Guadalupe were either idiots or lying. You can tell this because it's now late 2009 and nobody is seriously discussing rail on Guadalupe.

[ATXboom]

^^^ M1, you are very good with the analysis and crit of what HAS happened and what CANNOT happen.

Do you have any proposed solutions to achieve an ideal scenario? What is that ideal scenario/vision of the future? What CAN/COULD/SOULD happen from this point forward?

[SecretAgentMan]

Originally Posted by M1EK

As for Lee Walker, he was the chairman of Capital Metro until earlier this year - so your comments that he was going to push for LRT on the Lamar/Guadalupe corridor are ridiculous. Guess he had so much else on his plate he could never get to it, huh?

As for the neighborhood planning in 2003/2004, you don't need to remind me of this time; I was on the UTC then; and the plan being worked on was for LRT only (with possible Red Line service added on later). The effort to continue up Lamar to Anderson was a dead-end for reasons discussed here many times - was just an attempt to see if they could get a compromise that the idiots in Crestview and Wooten wouldn't complain about. The commuter rail service wasn't really part of the plan at this point (again, the Feds were rating this service very poorly in informal conversations, which is why CM didn't even try to go to them for money after the 2004 election, despite promising to do so before the election).

If you read what I wrote, you would see that I said Lee told he would push for LRT after the Red Line was approved and operational. He resigned before that happened.

As for the neighborhood plan: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/zoning/do.../cw_p72_90.pdf Note transfer station on page 77.

At the Envision Central Texas TOD Seminar on September 29, 2004 (prior to the election) Mike Krusee introduced Scott Polikov by explaining his new found support for rail and urbanism. Note page 4 of Scott's presentation.

http://envisioncentraltexas.org/reso...OD-Polikov.pdf

Back row center: Mike Krusee (next to Will Wynn); front row left, kneeling with plastic bag between his knees: Scott Polikov; Far right: John Langmore; Brewster McCracken, AWOL (behind camera); SecretAgentMan, undisclosed location in DC suburbs.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by SecretAgentMan

If you read what I wrote, you would see that I said Lee told he would push for LRT after the Red Line was approved and operational. He resigned before that happened.

Awfully convenient, huh? Amazing he's still silent, if he was so incredibly committed to LRT down Lamar/Guadalupe. Is he going to wait forever?

As for the neighborhood plan: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/zoning/do.../cw_p72_90.pdf Note transfer station on page 77.

Yes. Briefly discussed during the SHORT window when LRT up Lamar to Anderson was being brainstormed as a "what if this lets us get past the Crestview/Wooten opposition" flier. Never seriously studied. Would have never happened. As I said, would have required essentially shutting down the Lamar/Airport intersection to car traffic for far too many cycles to be remotely feasible.

At the Envision Central Texas TOD Seminar on September 29, 2004 (prior to the election) Mike Krusee introduced Scott Polikov by explaining his new found support for rail and urbanism. Note page 4 of Scott's presentation.

Yep. The same Scott Polikov who was one of the featured speakers (with me) at UT before the election. The same Scott Polikov who had business interests with the suburban TODs that have since failed to materialize. The same Sott Polikov who insisted, despite being told so by yours truly, that TODs would materialize and be successful even with a mandatory shuttle-bus transfer on the work end of the trip. The same Scott Polikov who dishonesty insisted that the commuter rail line went right into downtown despite obvious evidence that even the pro-rail PAC assumed most people would need to shuttle to their downtown offices.

How'd all that work out, anyways? Polikov is up in Ft. Worth after having collected fees planning that TOD that failed; but the Red Line trains are running and packed with 38,000 riders just like the 2000 light rail plan would have been, right? Right?

(to the other readers):

Summing it up, folks, in this post we had an anonymous coward casting aspersions on somebody who actually posts publically, and identifies themselves, even when the public poster has been right, and the anonymous poster has been wrong. The gloves are off again.

[wwmiv]

I'm all for debate. I typically see things the same way as M1EK (except on toll roads and access roads), but going to another level and calling someone a jackass is something that should be called out. At other forums I participate in a comment like this, let alone a series of them, would be grounds for immediate profile deletion. I know that I caused a bit of stir weeks ago with my wonderful naivete, but it never escalated to something detrimental to the comity of this forum - this has. Also, I get the distinct impression that this has been going on for awhile.

On another note, what do you all think of the plans to start construction on 290 east of 183 as a toll road within the next year or two? Personally, I think that toll roads are a huge problem and such projects should never see the light of day. The projects are typically emblematic of other systemic problems. In Texas it would be - as I see it - the lack of adequate taxation, and to a lesser extent the subsidization that larger cities give to their corresponding suburban belts. What about the eastern loop of 183? Unless more rabid and rapid gentrification occurs throughout east Austin that proposed stretch of tollway will be of no use to anyone who would be using it if it were free - they simply wouldn't be able to afford the tolls.

[Scottolini]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

On another note, what do you all think of the plans to start construction on 290 east of 183 as a toll road within the next year or two? Personally, I think that toll roads are a huge problem and such projects should never see the light of day. The projects are typically emblematic of other systemic problems. In Texas it would be - as I see it - the lack of adequate taxation, and to a lesser extent the subsidization that larger cities give to their corresponding suburban belts. What about the eastern loop of 183? Unless more rabid and rapid gentrification occurs throughout east Austin that proposed stretch of tollway will be of no use to anyone who would be using it if it were free - they simply wouldn't be able to afford the tolls.

I'd prefer that Ben White be completed to just east of the airport as a freeway. I would also prefer 183 to just south of 71 as a freeway. The only reason is that much of those are already freeways. On 183, it's a freeway all the way south of 290 East. Then there are overpasses at MLK, Manor, and Bolm. There are really only a handful of lights left. It doesn't seem feasible to toll just a couple of intersections. It's the same with Ben White.

Beyond that, I have no problem with any other extensions of expressways to be tolled, and that includes 290 East of 183, or further extensions of Ben White or 183. I'd even support any hypothetical new lanes on I-35 or Mopac being High-Occupancy Toll lanes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_oc...ess_toll_lanes

[Scottolini]

They've already done it in Houston, with the expanded Katy Freeway (I-10 west of downtown).
https://www.hctra.org/katymanagedlanes/

[electricron]

TXDOT doesn't have enough money to build any new freeways. They barely have enough money to maintain what has already been built. The most you'll see for the next few years is the completion of intersections, a mile here or there. No more 10 miles of freeway to anywhere.

Golly, our State sponsored Turnpike Authorities are also losing the capability to finance (bond) new tollways too. They're stretched so thin with what they got built now, the only way the TXDOT can build any new controlled access highways is selling the highway to private parties.
The Legislature wants to kill that option as well, except the Legislature so far hasn't raised TXDOT funding. So, until gas taxes are increased, or some sort of local option taxes are approved, the only new highways Texans will see will be nice drawings on cardboard or in pdf files. The legislature did give TXDOT the ability to sell bonds, to be paid off with future gas taxes, to a tune of $2 Billion or so. Too bad, almost all of that will be spent expanding four lane sections of I 35 between Austin and Hillsboro into six lanes.


Yipee-yi-yea!

[wwmiv]

I was referring only to the section of 183 hasn't been upgraded to freeway standards (I.E. from Manor to 71). The section south of 71 can be tolled for all I care simply because any new development out there will be for people who can afford to it.

Managed lanes are a logistical nightmare... I would never move back to Austin if they added those to either Mopac or 35.

Has anyone noticed that Google maps no longer shows 290 as a freeway? They finally added 45 SE to their maps as well.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by electricron

TXDOT doesn't have enough money to build any new freeways. They barely have enough money to maintain what has already been built. The most you'll see for the next few years is the completion of intersections, a mile here or there. No more 10 miles of freeway to anywhere.

Golly, our State sponsored Turnpike Authorities are also losing the capability to finance (bond) new tollways too. They're stretched so thin with what they got built now, the only way the TXDOT can build any new controlled access highways is selling the highway to private parties.
The Legislature wants to kill that option as well, except the Legislature so far hasn't raised TXDOT funding. So, until gas taxes are increased, or some sort of local option taxes are approved, the only new highways Texans will see will be nice drawings on cardboard or in pdf files.

Local tax options need to be approved. The gas tax needs to undergo a major overhaul - not just an increase. The gas tax as it currently exists is a major subsidization scheme. Also, regarding the completion of intersections: from what I understand they are going to use stimulus funds to build a five-stack at 183 and 290? Is the need really there for that yet? They need to focus on finishing the two southern interchanges (thankfully that process is ongoing). Something that REALLY is a sticking point with our crazy system is the intersections of 35/183 and 35/290. What crack were they smoking when they decided that those interchanges need only be two ramps each? Those need major redesigns. Also, they need to add that last ramp at Mopac and 183. Unfortunately, they didn't leave any options open to build the rest of the ramps in original construction.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by electricron

Almost all of that will be spent expanding four lane sections of I 35 between Austin and Hillsboro into six lanes.

Wonderful example of bad use of limited amounts of money.

[Scottolini]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Has anyone noticed that Google maps no longer shows 290 as a freeway?

I just did. That's strange.

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Something that REALLY is a sticking point with our crazy system is the intersections of 35/183 and 35/290. What crack were they smoking when they decided that those interchanges need only be two ramps each?

35/290E has three, but I see your point, especially I-35/183. That was a terrible design from the day it opened, and could certainly use several more direct connectors, particularly SB 183 to NB I-35, and SB I-35 to NB 183.

[wwmiv]

I've posted it as a mistake through Google's system multiple times, but they seem to be sticking with the classification. Perhaps it will change back after the route is 'extended' past 183.

I've got other issues as well... Mainly the lack of a central east-west freeway, though I've resigned myself to the inability to add one now. The lack of freeways where they should have been built when the money was there: 360, 71 to the airport, the Y, 45 SW upgraded and extended to 35 to create a complete loop along with that last stretch of Mopac upgraded. Also, IMO Parmer should be upgraded to a freeway from 1431 to 130 - elevated along the lines of 183 between Mopac and 35.

Also, 1431 in between 183 A and 35 should eventually be upgraded to a freeway. If this were a perfect world, 79 from 35 to 130 would also be freeway.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Scottolini

I just did. That's strange.



35/290E has three, but I see your point, especially I-35/183. That was a terrible design from the day it opened, and could certainly use several more direct connectors, particularly SB 183 to NB I-35, and SB I-35 to NB 183.

The 183/35 mess is an embarrassment to the city of Austin. It is so bush league to have these irritating and time consuming gaps in such a major (and soon to be even more important assuming the other upgrades take place on 183 and 290 in the east side) intersection. It seems to me that it could be corrected with the lavish use of imminent domain and a lot of money for engineering a solution and getting it built. It doesn't hurt to dream.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by austlar1

The 183/35 mess is an embarrassment to the city of Austin. It is so bush league to have these irritating and time consuming gaps in such a major (and soon to be even more important assuming the other upgrades take place on 183 and 290 in the east side) intersection. It seems to me that it could be corrected with the lavish use of imminent domain and a lot of money for engineering a solution and getting it built. It doesn't hurt to dream.

They'll never use imminent domain. Can you imagine the NIMBY outcry?

[austlar1]

I can't imagine too much NIMBY outcry over the loss of the motel at the NW corner of 35 and 183. That would allow room for a SB 35 to NB 183 ramp. Figuring out an alignment for a SB 183 to NB 35 might be more tricky.

I guess the SB 35 to SB 183 is the most unlikely of all. It should be possible to make this transition without a light once the 290/183 interchange is built. It will just be complicated to go down 35 to 290 and then cut back to 183. I guess it helps keep Austin weird.

[wwmiv]

I'm not sure it would even require imminent domain on any of that property to build those flyovers. The SB35 to NB183 flyover could be done in such a why that support structures only utilize the existing ROW.

You are right that the most tricky of the overpasses will be SB183 to NB35. It might actually be easier from a design standpoint to call imminent domain on that Academy and build a cloverleaf-like turnaround. NB183 to NB35 shouldn't be hard either.

The other two (SB35 to SB183 and NB35 to SB183) shouldn't be built. It would be a waste of money when using 290 - it being only a stones-throw away - is easy enough... at least after the 290/183 intersection is complete. Same reason that WB290 to NB35 shouldn't be built (if a NB183 to NB35 is constructed) and, though the need isn't hugely there, an EB2222 to NB35 would be a great luxury.

Another intersection that needs to be finished is 45 and 35.

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by austlar1

I can't imagine too much NIMBY outcry over the loss of the motel at the NW corner of 35 and 183. That would allow room for a SB 35 to NB 183 ramp. Figuring out an alignment for a SB 183 to NB 35 might be more tricky.

Yeah, nothing in that area is very beloved as far as I know. In fact, it's borderline urban blight.