HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6721  
Old Posted May 14, 2020, 9:43 PM
sammyk sammyk is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by freerover View Post
I don't think battery powered trains are possible. This is what a 3rd rail option would look like. Very clean but expensive.
Definitely possible. Look up BEMU.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6722  
Old Posted May 15, 2020, 7:52 PM
atxsnail atxsnail is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 252
I'm listening to the first Zoom town hall for Project Connect (PC) featuring CMs Casar, Pool, and Kitchen.

I've heard Pool speak in vague and general terms about supporting transit but this was the first time I've heard her speak specifically and positively about the plan. She wants to stay the course on PC even during this crisis. She even allowed positive words about the McKalla place red line station to leave her face without grimacing. My recollection on the 2014 plan was that she opposed it - I don't remember if she had a specific reason for her opposition.

I think her support for a bond/tax election is going to be a pretty good indicator of how the ANC/Nimby types will vote. While development attitudes aren't cleanly partisan, transit attitudes usually are. The ANC/Nimby types claim to be progressives but aren't reliable votes in favor of transit. I think this is especially true when it could mean losing road lanes or having visible/conspicuous transit infrastructure as may be the case with PC. Most of these people would be the first votes to peel away due to worries about increased property taxes. That Pool wasn't more guarded in her language is a good sign.

Casar spoke excitedly about this project as you might have expected. His vote and those of his supporters are basically guaranteed. I was worried about the Alter/Pool voters before but I feel better about it now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6723  
Old Posted May 15, 2020, 8:25 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by atxsnail View Post
I'm listening to the first Zoom town hall for Project Connect (PC) featuring CMs Casar, Pool, and Kitchen.

I've heard Pool speak in vague and general terms about supporting transit but this was the first time I've heard her speak specifically and positively about the plan. She wants to stay the course on PC even during this crisis. She even allowed positive words about the McKalla place red line station to leave her face without grimacing. My recollection on the 2014 plan was that she opposed it - I don't remember if she had a specific reason for her opposition.

I think her support for a bond/tax election is going to be a pretty good indicator of how the ANC/Nimby types will vote. While development attitudes aren't cleanly partisan, transit attitudes usually are. The ANC/Nimby types claim to be progressives but aren't reliable votes in favor of transit. I think this is especially true when it could mean losing road lanes or having visible/conspicuous transit infrastructure as may be the case with PC. Most of these people would be the first votes to peel away due to worries about increased property taxes. That Pool wasn't more guarded in her language is a good sign.

Casar spoke excitedly about this project as you might have expected. His vote and those of his supporters are basically guaranteed. I was worried about the Alter/Pool voters before but I feel better about it now.
What was the context of the Red Line station comment? Are those still potentially in (even with the other red line improvements being removed)?

I wanted to listen in but had work conflicts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6724  
Old Posted May 15, 2020, 8:35 PM
atxsnail atxsnail is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
What was the context of the Red Line station comment? Are those still potentially in (even with the other red line improvements being removed)?

I wanted to listen in but had work conflicts.
Pool spoke about McKalla and Broadmoor stations as though they are definitely going to happen. Randy Clarke mentioned at the very beginning that they'd hope to have more info on Broadmoor station in the coming weeks.

I think the call is being recorded. I had to jump off Zoom to take a work call.

I found the recording on the CapMetro Facebook account under the Live videos. I can't link from my work machine however

Last edited by atxsnail; May 15, 2020 at 8:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6725  
Old Posted May 17, 2020, 7:21 PM
paul78701 paul78701 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
For a primarily north south city.
I'm aware, but there is enough density between Mopac, downtown, and east Austin to potentially warrant an east-west route that is a bit more seamless.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6726  
Old Posted May 19, 2020, 3:54 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,675
There’s a “Broadmoor Station Update” on the agenda for the next CapMetro board meeting this Friday. Just agenda, no packet yet.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...ing_Agenda.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6727  
Old Posted May 19, 2020, 4:42 PM
freerover freerover is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
There’s a “Broadmoor Station Update” on the agenda for the next CapMetro board meeting this Friday. Just agenda, no packet yet.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...ing_Agenda.pdf
Hopefully good news.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6728  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 3:40 PM
freerover freerover is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
There’s a “Broadmoor Station Update” on the agenda for the next CapMetro board meeting this Friday. Just agenda, no packet yet.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...ing_Agenda.pdf
Looks like it will be an oral update at the meeting. Nothing in the packet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6729  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 8:13 PM
slippi slippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 5
Presentation is here: http://capmetrotx.iqm2.com/Citizens/...MeetingID=1868

Just absurd that our transit agency is building a 400 car parking garage on the land next to the stop. Let someone build apartments on that land and use the money on truly anything else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6730  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 8:33 PM
Echostatic Echostatic is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Austin
Posts: 380
Park-And-Rides are an integral part of suburban rail transit. If you don't live within walking distance of a transit station, you'll probably drive to it. Every station past Kramer has a large parking lot, and most major bus terminals in the city have significant lots as well. Good luck getting people to bike to transit with the summer heat we have around here.
__________________
Widen I-35! Vote For Project Connect! Build Skyscrapers!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6731  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 8:47 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by slippi View Post
Presentation is here: http://capmetrotx.iqm2.com/Citizens/...MeetingID=1868

Just absurd that our transit agency is building a 400 car parking garage on the land next to the stop. Let someone build apartments on that land and use the money on truly anything else.
They’re not.

Brandywine is.

I imagine it’ll end up similar to the Triangle Park and Ride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6732  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 9:14 PM
slippi slippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Echostatic View Post
Park-And-Rides are an integral part of suburban rail transit. If you don't live within walking distance of a transit station, you'll probably drive to it. Every station past Kramer has a large parking lot, and most major bus terminals in the city have significant lots as well. Good luck getting people to bike to transit with the summer heat we have around here.
That's why we should allow as many people to live within walking distance of this stop as possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6733  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 9:19 PM
slippi slippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
They’re not.

Brandywine is.

I imagine it’ll end up similar to the Triangle Park and Ride.
What's in it for Brandywine? Surely they're not building a free parking garage for those that want to get on a train and promptly leave the development. Or are these just parking spots they were already required to build due to parking requirements for the development?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6734  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 10:19 PM
atxsnail atxsnail is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by slippi View Post
What's in it for Brandywine? Surely they're not building a free parking garage for those that want to get on a train and promptly leave the development. Or are these just parking spots they were already required to build due to parking requirements for the development?
The "shared parking spaces" description is interesting. Maybe it's just a garage with 400 general spaces for retail guests that transit users could use as well? The number of people who would park at Broadmoor just to ride downtown is probably so small that it would have virtually no impact on Broadmoor retail visitors outside of special events like SXSW, Pecan St Festival, or maybe Austin FC. I'm assuming people who are inclined to use the Park & Ride model mostly already do so at Lakeline or Howard.

I would think the companies renting commercial space would require their spaces be guaranteed, or at least shared among other commercial tenants and not open to the general public.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6735  
Old Posted May 22, 2020, 11:40 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by slippi View Post
What's in it for Brandywine? Surely they're not building a free parking garage for those that want to get on a train and promptly leave the development. Or are these just parking spots they were already required to build due to parking requirements for the development?
The get the train station, and the millions of square feet of additional development entitlements that unlocks.

CM can’t ask for the moon, but they’re not coming hat in hand either. It’s a negotiated mutually beneficial arrangement.

As I said, I suspect it will at least mostly be the existing required parking, with CM riders only allowed to use it during the day on weekdays, like at the triangle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6736  
Old Posted May 23, 2020, 12:12 AM
slippi slippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
The get the train station, and the millions of square feet of additional development entitlements that unlocks.

CM can’t ask for the moon, but they’re not coming hat in hand either. It’s a negotiated mutually beneficial arrangement.

As I said, I suspect it will at least mostly be the existing required parking, with CM riders only allowed to use it during the day on weekdays, like at the triangle.
Unfortunately I think further subsidizing driving is the opposite of a benefit for the city. Using that land for offices or residences would net the city additional tax revenue and bring in more ridership than a parking garage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6737  
Old Posted May 23, 2020, 12:36 AM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by slippi View Post
Unfortunately I think further subsidizing driving is the opposite of a benefit for the city. Using that land for offices or residences would net the city additional tax revenue and bring in more ridership than a parking garage.
Who said anything about benefit for the city? I said mutually beneficial between brandywine and capital metro.

But if the city wanted less parking and more other development, they shouldn’t have such high parking requirements.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6738  
Old Posted May 23, 2020, 12:50 AM
slippi slippi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Who said anything about benefit for the city? I said mutually beneficial between brandywine and capital metro.

But if the city wanted less parking and more other development, they shouldn’t have such high parking requirements.
My comment on ridership applies to Cap Metro as well. Agreed on the second point, but there's not much Cap Metro can do about that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6739  
Old Posted May 24, 2020, 1:12 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,078
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Who said anything about benefit for the city? I said mutually beneficial between brandywine and capital metro.

But if the city wanted less parking and more other development, they shouldn’t have such high parking requirements.
CapMetro loses money on every passenger. why is it a benefit for them to have more?
If 96%-98% of all Brandywine customers and workers get their by private transportation requiring parking places, why is it a benefit for them, CapMetro, and the City to have less parking spaces?
We are not playing Cities Skylines, reality is far different!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6740  
Old Posted May 24, 2020, 2:12 PM
atxsnail atxsnail is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
CapMetro loses money on every passenger. why is it a benefit for them to have more?
If 96%-98% of all Brandywine customers and workers get their by private transportation requiring parking places, why is it a benefit for them, CapMetro, and the City to have less parking spaces?
We are not playing Cities Skylines, reality is far different!
If CapMetro gets more passengers while maintaining the same service level, they obviously benefit financially from the increase in fares. This would manifest as a reduction in the "loss" you describe. But to even talk in these terms is to follow the CATO playbook.

From CapMetro's perspective, why should it be hard to see that they would benefit from someone else paying to build a park and ride for them? Adding any new passengers at effectively no additional cost to them is a win. Besides this there are intangible gains in the form of increased goodwill and community reach.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:06 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.