HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6761  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2020, 2:45 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Capmetro is larger than just the city of Austin. Austin's the majority, but you're leaving out a big chunk (20% or so).

CapMetro projects it might have ~$60M per year about a decade out*. But yes that's not enough for the proposed system, this entire process has been predicated on a city election to provide additional funds (though still far less than what's spent on cars).
The sales tax revenues collected for CapMetro is its total from its entire service area. The entire metro area does not contribute tax revenues to CapMetro. I used just the city of Austin for population purposes only - and it is by far the largest amount for tax revenues.

I was replying to someone suggesting CapMetro would not be receiving any support without additional funding - all I'm trying to point out is that CapMetro already is receiving financial funding to amounts exceeding hundreds of millions of dollars each and every year.

Again, the question that needs to be answered is how much "more" you are willing to tax yourself for "better" public transit? Yes, every voter should have an opportunity to answer that question at a referendum.

Last edited by electricron; Jun 7, 2020 at 2:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6762  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 1:27 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Reminder that the big Capmetro/city council joint meeting is today.

The agenda packet has been updated, and includes the proposed joint governing structure for the proposed inter-govermental corporation that would be in charge of any resulting mass transit systems.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...et_Amended.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6763  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 2:22 PM
freerover freerover is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Reminder that the big Capmetro/city council joint meeting is today.

The agenda packet has been updated, and includes the proposed joint governing structure for the proposed inter-govermental corporation that would be in charge of any resulting mass transit systems.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...et_Amended.pdf
The Gold line LRT now also runs south along the Orange Line to the S. Congress transit center.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6764  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 3:10 PM
We vs us We vs us is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,587
Henry Han's excellent rendering of DT future projects is front and center on page 38 of the packet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6765  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 3:36 PM
freerover freerover is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by We vs us View Post
Henry Han's excellent rendering of DT future projects is front and center on page 38 of the packet.
It looks like they have a video they want to play.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6766  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 6:18 PM
atxsnail atxsnail is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Reminder that the big Capmetro/city council joint meeting is today.

The agenda packet has been updated, and includes the proposed joint governing structure for the proposed inter-govermental corporation that would be in charge of any resulting mass transit systems.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...et_Amended.pdf
hey I was quoted in here twice. same quote both times, but I'll take full credit
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6767  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 7:38 PM
freerover freerover is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by freerover View Post
It looks like they have a video they want to play.


Edit: Here is the video: https://twitter.com/capmetroatx/stat...878924288?s=21
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6768  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2020, 8:55 PM
Maximusx1's Avatar
Maximusx1 Maximusx1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 257
I think we need to keep in mind those underground building connections. They will be a great amenity for Republic Square building and whatever goes in the post office site, but they may also slow down construction timelines for those properties.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6769  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2020, 6:37 PM
ThyPiGuy ThyPiGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximusx1 View Post
I think we need to keep in mind those underground building connections. They will be a great amenity for Republic Square building and whatever goes in the post office site, but they may also slow down construction timelines for those properties.
Has their been any official plan for exactly where the underground station would be located? E.g. actually under the park? Seems like it could actually take potentially take up multiple blocks.

Assuming this passes, wonder if there is an opportunity to actually work with Republic building or Post Office site property owners to put it in under those lots instead of under the park. Seems like that would save a lot of effort instead of having to I assume dig up and rebuild the park again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6770  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2020, 7:10 PM
StoOgE StoOgE is offline
Resident Moron
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximusx1 View Post
I think we need to keep in mind those underground building connections. They will be a great amenity for Republic Square building and whatever goes in the post office site, but they may also slow down construction timelines for those properties.
Man, I know it's a great ammenity but when I worked for Deutsche Bank we had a connection in the atrium of the building to the 1-2-3 and other than a half block walk to the A/B in the UWS I didn't go outside for like 12 hours straight. It's a little unnerving to not see the sun all day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6771  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2020, 3:24 PM
cvillehorn's Avatar
cvillehorn cvillehorn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 83
Those are all pictures and videos from Toronto's system. Looks good in Austin though
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6772  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2020, 3:56 PM
Sigaven Sigaven is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Reminder that the big Capmetro/city council joint meeting is today.

The agenda packet has been updated, and includes the proposed joint governing structure for the proposed inter-govermental corporation that would be in charge of any resulting mass transit systems.

https://capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/N...et_Amended.pdf
anyone else having trouble opening this pdf?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6773  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2020, 10:22 PM
atxsnail atxsnail is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 550
I listened to Randy Clarke discussing Project Connect on a podcast hosted by APTA and heard him describe the 3 light rails lines as something like the following. forgive my transcription because this was him speeding through a summary description:

"when I say light rail I mean incredibly advanced light rail because we gotta get this thing done. we would have the newest system certainly in North America. So we're really thinking about having maybe no-catenary kind of system, maybe automated train, all communications-based train control. 3 lines like that, downtown tunnel alignment which has 3 to maybe 4 underground stations. all platform screen door technology so we can have air conditioned stations, all coupled and built with big plaza underground, food court/art/entertainment locations..."

I think there's some new information in there. I didn't know that there could be up to 4 underground stations, nor do I remember hearing much about the electrification. I wonder if the "no catenary" thing just means 3rd rail or does he mean some sections would go without electrifications and the trains would have batteries?

The project connect discussion starts around 19:30
https://www.buzzsprout.com/735176/4329728

Last edited by atxsnail; Jun 29, 2020 at 10:24 PM. Reason: Added link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6774  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2020, 1:43 AM
austin242 austin242 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 591
I believe the trains are supposed to be battery powered. It'd be better if they just had a Ground-level power supply like in Bordeaux. Whatever happens I'm excited that they really want our system to be an example of what is possible in the U.S. .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6775  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2020, 8:10 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by atxsnail View Post
"when I say light rail I mean incredibly advanced light rail because we gotta get this thing done. we would have the newest system certainly in North America. So we're really thinking about having maybe no-catenary kind of system, maybe automated train, all communications-based train control. 3 lines like that, downtown tunnel alignment which has 3 to maybe 4 underground stations. all platform screen door technology so we can have air conditioned stations, all coupled and built with big plaza underground, food court/art/entertainment locations..."

I think there's some new information in there. I didn't know that there could be up to 4 underground stations, nor do I remember hearing much about the electrification. I wonder if the "no catenary" thing just means 3rd rail or does he mean some sections would go without electrifications and the trains would have batteries?
Honolulu's HART is building an "elevated" 20 mile light, third rail metro just like that you have described, with automatic controls and platform screen stations. The original cost estimation was $5 Billion, the latest cost estimation has skyrocketed to over $10 Billion. We're talking $500 Million per mile capital costs, and that's before including operations and maintenance costs. Imagine the costs overruns if they had been tunneling?

Austin's new proposed trains lines will be approximately 33 miles in length; Orange 21 miles and Blue (?) miles. The planners are having a difficult time deciding where the northern terminus of this line should be. But it will be at least 12 miles long between downtown Austin and ABIA. So we're talking about a 33 miles of double track rail being built. Costs could easily skyrocket to $15 Billion for such an automatic system.

Driver operator light rail lines average around $60-70 Million per mile, at least 7 times less expensive, and that's assuming they keep costs down to $500 Million per mile.

Good luck!

Oh, by the way, Ottawa just opened their 8 mile long Confederation light rail line with a tunnel under downtown. Final costs for the initial line segment #1 was $2.1 Billion (Canadian). That's around $260 Million per mile including the tunnel. The US/Canada conversion rate is 1.368 C to 1.00 US today. So the costs would be around a third cheaper using US dollars.

Last edited by electricron; Jun 30, 2020 at 8:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6776  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2020, 9:54 AM
accord1999 accord1999 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,028
Another example is Calgary's Green Line. The central section was originally planned to be a deep bored 4 km tunnel that went through downtown and a river crossing with four underground stations, but it turned out to be too expensive. So the tunnel is scaled back to roughly 2.5 km of shallow tunnels (likely cut and cover) through downtown, a new bridge to cross the river onto a surface track where it'll have no grade separation. And even with these corners cut, the 4 km section will still cost in the realm of C$2.2B.

5 years ago, the plan was C$5B for 40 km, now it'll be lucky to be $5B for 20 km.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6777  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2020, 1:33 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
Honolulu's HART is building an "elevated" 20 mile light, third rail metro just like that you have described, with automatic controls and platform screen stations. The original cost estimation was $5 Billion, the latest cost estimation has skyrocketed to over $10 Billion. We're talking $500 Million per mile capital costs, and that's before including operations and maintenance costs. Imagine the costs overruns if they had been tunneling?

Austin's new proposed trains lines will be approximately 33 miles in length; Orange 21 miles and Blue (?) miles. The planners are having a difficult time deciding where the northern terminus of this line should be. But it will be at least 12 miles long between downtown Austin and ABIA. So we're talking about a 33 miles of double track rail being built. Costs could easily skyrocket to $15 Billion for such an automatic system.

Driver operator light rail lines average around $60-70 Million per mile, at least 7 times less expensive, and that's assuming they keep costs down to $500 Million per mile.

Good luck!

HART is an absolute useless compare, because Austin's system isn't going to be all grade separated. Far from it.

Surface rail isn't "7 times less expensive" because it's driver operated. It's less expensive because it's on the surface.

Like most of Austin's system.


Edit/Add: Also, all of HART's stations are big and screened, not just "3 or 4".



Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
Oh, by the way, Ottawa just opened their 8 mile long Confederation light rail line with a tunnel under downtown. Final costs for the initial line segment #1 was $2.1 Billion (Canadian). That's around $260 Million per mile including the tunnel. The US/Canada conversion rate is 1.368 C to 1.00 US today. So the costs would be around a third cheaper using US dollars.
oh by the way,

Looking at a system which is 20% underground (and the rest completely grade separated), calling that "$260 Million per mile including the tunnel", and then comparing that to a system which is only 5% underground is not only inaccurate, it's borderline "fake news".

Last edited by Novacek; Jun 30, 2020 at 2:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6778  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2020, 12:05 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
HART is an absolute useless compare, because Austin's system isn't going to be all grade separated. Far from it.

Surface rail isn't "7 times less expensive" because it's driver operated. It's less expensive because it's on the surface.

Like most of Austin's system.

oh by the way,

Looking at a system which is 20% underground (and the rest completely grade separated), calling that "$260 Million per mile including the tunnel", and then comparing that to a system which is only 5% underground is not only inaccurate, it's borderline "fake news".
If Austin's is not going to be 100% grade separated, it is not going to be 100% fully autonomous either. The reason why I used Honolulu and Ottawa as examples is because they will/can have fully autonomous operations. I was just trying to point out in my earlier response is that fully autonomous rail systems are never cheap.
Ottawa tunnel percentage is significantly higher only because stages 2 and 3 were not included within the total costs. But the length of their tunnel is no shorter than the tunnel now proposed for downtown Austin. With the same length tunnel or possibly longer tunnel, construction costs in Austin will be as high if not higher.
If Austin runs light rail vehicles at grade in the middle of existing streets as proposed, it is not going to be allowed by the FTA to run fully autonomous. It will require a driver/operator to control the train. If you want fully autonomous rail operations, the train will have to be fully grade separated. The autonomous technology exists, but that does not mean it fits well in Austin.

Last edited by electricron; Jul 3, 2020 at 12:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6779  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 2:16 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
If Austin's is not going to be 100% grade separated, it is not going to be 100% fully autonomous either. The reason why I used Honolulu and Ottawa as examples is because they will/can have fully autonomous operations. I was just trying to point out in my earlier response is that fully autonomous rail systems are never cheap.
Ottawa tunnel percentage is significantly higher only because stages 2 and 3 were not included within the total costs. But the length of their tunnel is no shorter than the tunnel now proposed for downtown Austin. With the same length tunnel or possibly longer tunnel, construction costs in Austin will be as high if not higher.
If Austin runs light rail vehicles at grade in the middle of existing streets as proposed, it is not going to be allowed by the FTA to run fully autonomous. It will require a driver/operator to control the train. If you want fully autonomous rail operations, the train will have to be fully grade separated. The autonomous technology exists, but that does not mean it fits well in Austin.

Clark didn't say "we're building it 100% elevated so that we can automate it with 1970s technology*"

He said that it'll be so _new_ that we _may_ be able to automate. Which is entirely consistent with their messaging throughout this whole process. New automation technology is coming (driven by mass market automobiles) which will eventually lead to ART (autonomous rapid transit). ART can be either buses or rail, but we heard more about the bus applications when that was still up in the air (since autonomous operation can mitigate some of the disadvantages of BRT).

Personally, I don't think the timelines will quite line up (developmentally or perhaps more importantly regulatory) so probably best case will be future proofing our system to enable it to be more easily implemented in the future.

*Automation through complete grade separation/access control dates back at least to WVU's PRT system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan..._Rapid_Transit
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6780  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2020, 12:35 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
Clark didn't say "we're building it 100% elevated so that we can automate it with 1970s technology*"

He said that it'll be so _new_ that we _may_ be able to automate. Which is entirely consistent with their messaging throughout this whole process. New automation technology is coming (driven by mass market automobiles) which will eventually lead to ART (autonomous rapid transit). ART can be either buses or rail, but we heard more about the bus applications when that was still up in the air (since autonomous operation can mitigate some of the disadvantages of BRT).
Anytime the CEO/President of a transit agency uses the verb "might or may" in a speech or paper you can usually assume he/she is over promising for political reasons.

The FRA and FTA have only authorized "autonomous" operations on fully grade separated systems in the past, why should they change in the future?
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 1:43 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.