AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[wwmiv]

The problem I see with NIMBYs is that alot of them argue against ANYTHING to do with road expansion - whether or not they like the urban trash that it would be replacing.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by M1EK

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

I'll agree no one is seriously discussing light rail today, but I disagree CapMetro can't find the funds to build light rail. CapMetro can go into debt, specifically sell some bonds, just like DART and METRO to fund its half of any light rail project. There may be no cash in CapMetro's capital fund to do so today, but that can change...

Several things must happen first,
(1) CapMetro needs to raise its bus and rail fares to match what DART (TRE) and METRO charges. A fare recovery rate below 10% is much too low. 90% of its operation costs come from its sales tax revenues, leaving far too little to finance bonds payoffs.
(2) Sell some bonds while the bond market is good. DART sold $1 Billion in bonds in 2009. METRO sold $227.6 Million in 2009. So, there are significant amounts of cash that can be raised locally by selling bonds. CapMetro's existing Red line commuter rail has been paid for entirely from CapMetro cash funds.
(3) Finish an environmental study and review for building light rail, then get the FTA to fund up to half the total costs.
(4) It's also not necessary to follow the existing commuter rail Red Line to Leander. The light rail line should also head south of downtown Austin too. After reaching the existing Red Line in north Austin at Airport Blvd (5 to 6 miles north of the River), they should look at extending the line further north along Lamar (SH 275) another 6 to 7 miles (to Howard Lane or so). At that point, the light rail will be 11 to 13 miles north of downtown Austin, about as far an ideal light rail system should go. The environmental study and review should be able to identify exactly where.

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by electricron

(4) It's also not necessary to follow the existing commuter rail Red Line to Leander. The light rail line should also head south of downtown Austin too. After reaching the existing Red Line in north Austin at Airport Blvd (5 to 6 miles north of the River), they should look at extending the line further north along Lamar (SH 275) another 6 to 7 miles (to Howard Lane or so). At that point, the light rail will be 11 to 13 miles north of downtown Austin, about as far an ideal light rail system should go. The environmental study and review should be able to identify exactly where.

Do you have any idea of the built environment on N. Lamar north of the intersection with Airport Blvd? Or are you just looking at maps and drawing a fantasy line?

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by breathesgelatin

Do you have any idea of the built environment on N. Lamar north of the intersection with Airport Blvd? Or are you just looking at maps and drawing a fantasy line?

Thee farthest any line going up Lamar should go is Rundberg. Perhaps an extension for a stop in Pflugerville and then Round Rock and Georgetown to get the park and ride people, but even that would be barely doable. However, this is thinking about the density now. What about future density levels? Even thinking within that framework there is little justification for a line past Rundberg. Density levels just won't ever be a proper level - I don't think - for a successful line.

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Thee farthest any line going up Lamar should go is Rundberg. Perhaps an extension for a stop in Pflugerville and then Round Rock and Georgetown to get the park and ride people, but even that would be barely doable. However, this is thinking about the density now. What about future density levels? Even thinking within that framework there is little justification for a line past Rundberg. Density levels just won't ever be a proper level - I don't think - for a successful line.

Yup. I don't think electricron really knows much about Austin. The density isn't there. Especially once you pass Braker and it's basically Walnut Creek park and nothing else. Honestly, densification/gentification/redevelopment on Lamar north of 183 is a long, long way off. It's not the greatest area.

And up to Howard? Geez, that's basically the light rail to Wal-Mart. Not seeing it at all.

If you had to run a light rail line north and we couldn't just scrap the Red Line infrastructure to use that ROW (and I am more and more wishing we would just scrap the Red Line), I would say use Burnet. Cut across on Anderson and go up Burnet. I know, fat chance that will ever happen given the NAs in the area. But it's a nice fantasy of mine. Much more likelihood of future dense development on Burnet and up by the Domain (which I still see as not that likely) than on N. Lamar.

[SecretAgentMan]

I agree with BG. The logical terminus of a northern urban rail extension is Pickle Campus / Domain. I believe it is feasible to use the Redline ROW, but if that restricts capacity too much, Anderson or Koenig to Burnet would work. Burnet has even wider ROW than Lamar north of Koenig and would not require any reduction in travel lanes or property impacts. This was actually considered in the RTP prior to 2004.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by SecretAgentMan

I agree with BG. The logical terminus of a northern urban rail extension is Pickle Campus / Domain. I believe it is feasible to use the Redline ROW, but if that restricts capacity too much, Anderson or Koenig to Burnet would work. Burnet has even wider ROW than Lamar north of Koenig and would not require any reduction in travel lanes or property impacts. This was actually considered in the RTP prior to 2004.

Do you really believe that many passengers wish to go to the Pickle Campus?

Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._J._P...esearch_Campus
The Pickle Research Campus is not a full college campus: there are no dormitories, and few if any actual classes are held there. Other than normal campus operations and a cafeteria / conference center, it is strictly a research facility.
Due to the sensitive nature of some of the research being done at the PRC, it is also a closed campus. On a normal weekday, access to the campus is restricted to University students, faculty, and staff with parking permits, as well as expected guests. After hours or on weekends, access is restricted to approved personnel only.
A significant amount of the campus remains undeveloped. While there are roads throughout the campus, many of them border empty plots of land. UT administrators have announced plans to eventually develop the PRC into a full-fledged campus, but they are only preliminary.

Does the Domain make a better destination? It is relatively dense, but since the majority of the retail stores and restaurants are more than 3,000 feet away from the railroad tracks, it's not that great. The only density close to the tracks are the IBM buildings, and they're not that close to the train station at 2,300 to 2,500 feet either.

Some sort of bus circulator system is going to be needed to get the train passengers (either commuter or light rail trains) from the train station to the buildings of the various properties. Light rail trains to the Domain area isn't going to help much more than having more frequent commuter rail. I'll admit CapMetro commuter rail train frequencies is terrible, but that can be fixed.

[breathesgelatin]

Seriously, dude, you don't know anything about Austin. Please stop.

I'll grant you that PRC is not a prime destination except for the people that work and study there. However, UT has expressed interest, repeatedly, in having a rail link from the main campus to PRC. Having PRC on the route would help mightily in enlisting UT's support for the line.

Secondly, we aren't talking about using the Red Line ROW for this light rail. Secret Agent Man suggests that that could happen, but it would require building entirely new stops, as you well know. I was suggesting running the line up Burnet Road, which would provide far better access to the Domain. In fact, if you're going to go that far, maybe just have the terminus of the route enter the Domain proper. The Domain isn't that big or that dense yet, but please remember that the City of Austin has targeted the Domain as a site for increased density. Furthermore, the environs around the Domain, now largely consisting of light industry/warehouses/etc, have also been pegged for further densification. This is all good stuff when it comes to a rail line.

This couldn't be farther from the area of N. Lamar you're suggesting. That area is low-density and also, close to one of the most crime-ridden areas in Austin. As you head north on Lamar past 183, you enter some sketchy neighborhoods that are completely off the radar to gentrification/densification. Furthermore, huge swaths of land are devoted to a large park where there is NOTHING around. PRC is far more dense than Lamar north of Braker, which is basically Walnut Creek Park. By Howard, you're hitting real suburbia - I repeat- you would be ending the line at a Walmart or Carmax. This area is NOT slated for densification by anyone - developers, the City, residents, etc.

I can't believe you are seriously suggesting a line up N. Lamar and poo-poohing one on Burnet. Please, educate yourself about Austin if you're going to enter into these discussions. Clearly, we can debate the merits of light rail on Burnet vs. on the Red Line ROW - but light rail up N. Lamar ain't happening.

[PartyLine]

Also remember the Austin/San Antonio commuter rail will run up Mopac and it will have a stop at the Domain. But yeah that area eventually supposed to be a "second downtown" with more density (still waiting for some highrises up there)

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by PartyLine

Also remember the Austin/San Antonio commuter rail will run up Mopac and it will have a stop at the Domain. But yeah that area eventually supposed to be a "second downtown" with more density (still waiting for some highrises up there)

I don't think either of these things will ever come to pass. More likely than not, Austin will have to go it alone on light or commuter rail.

The Domain won't ever be like the Galleria in Houston or Fort Worth to Dallas or Century City in L.A.

[SecretAgentMan]

What she said, except there is an old rail spur from the red line into Pickle that could be extended into the Domain. I wouldn't completely discount North Lamar in the future, though. The existing land use is not very compatible, but the ridership in the area is quite high. The large immigrant population in the area is probably more willing to use transit than other Austinites.

[PartyLine]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

I don't think either of these things will ever come to pass. More likely than not, Austin will have to go it alone on light or commuter rail.

The Domain won't ever be like the Galleria in Houston or Fort Worth to Dallas or Century City in L.A.

Lol ok that's looking on the bright side

[PartyLine]

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/zoning/north_burnet.htm

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by PartyLine

Lol ok that's looking on the bright side

Don't get me wrong... I do believe that a second downtown or something similar to a downtown is in our future. I think that if Austin does the North Burnet/Gateway redevelopment properly it will emerge as such... However, the Domain isn't meant to be the center of that redevelopment project. The master plan mentions multiple times that the denser and taller development should be concentrated in the south of the parcel with various other small sections of tall buildings.

[M1EK]

Neither light rail up Lamar nor up Burnet will happen in the next 20 years. The speed such a route would entail makes it completely uncompetitive compared to driving.

The whole point of the 2000 proposal was that it ran fast on what is now the Red Line right-of-way up to Airport/Lamar, then slow the rest of the way (necessary to hit the activity centers and urban residential). A line which runs 15 miles in nothing but street right-of-way would, on the other hand, be slow the whole way; would require that the Lamar/Airport intersection be basically halved in capacity; would require that we pretend that nobody minds transferring from the Red Line to another train to get downtown (to justify taking lanes on Lamar and Guadalupe).

Not gonna happen.

Light rail starts like that one that have been successful have been in areas which have density like our downtown area on almost the entire route (Houston). Light rail starts which have tried this model but run through suburban density have been failures to mediocre.

There's basically one model for cities like ours; the 2000 model; the one that most other successful medium-sized cities have used. Forgetting this fact is foolish. The CoA urban rail plan suffers from the liability of running entirely in street runningway too, but it at least runs through areas of far higher current and future density than anything on Lamar north of Airport, or anything the Allandalites and Crestview/Wootenites would accept on Burnet or Anderson. Also, Riverside has enough space that you don't need to take a lane away - so the investment in terms of lost automobile capacity is correspondingly far less (limited to some impact on turns).

The BEST case scenario is that the CoA urban rail project proves successful, and then extensions can be added north from it up Guadalupe/Lamar to the Triangle or so. After that, I very much doubt whether anything further is feasible. Again, to justify taking away a traffic lane, you need very high prospective ridership, but a rail line that operates in low to medium density at low-ish speeds (which is what it would be from that point north on either Lamar or Burnet) is not going to deliver those numbers. (From the Triangle south, it MIGHT, IF AND ONLY IF the urban rail segments currently under discussion knock their projections out of the park).

The idea of running the urban rail line on the Red Line right-of-way is ridiculous. There is no space (can't add tracks); the technologies are fundamentally incompatible (can't run on the same track). Even if there were space, running a light rail line in the same corridor with different stations would be so expensive it'd actually make ripping up the Red Line and starting over look cheap.

If you're tempted to listen to an anonymous supposed insider on this, please remember who's been right the most often on this stuff so far. The folks who were pro-rail who got convinced that Capital Metro would take care of central Austin right after the 2004 election have a lot to answer for now; and you should be very careful of making the same mistakes they did by being naive.

[M1EK]

And after just having spent the better part of two evenings at the Domain, please don't oversell it either - the second part of the Domain isn't any more dense or more tall than the first part; it has even more parking garages and is separated from the first part by surface parking. Given the difference between rhetoric and reality (as with Mueller), it's not difficult to see what's going to happen with the supposed 'high' rises later on. This area is going to be midrises at best, I predict, and the overall density will be far less than the Triangle (merely low-to-midrises as well, but at least covers most of its area with buildings and non-parking-lot public space).

[arbeiter]

I agree with most or all of this, and it's one of the reasons I'm so ready to have moved away from here when I can finally afford to.

[PartyLine]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Don't get me wrong... I do believe that a second downtown or something similar to a downtown is in our future. I think that if Austin does the North Burnet/Gateway redevelopment properly it will emerge as such... However, the Domain isn't meant to be the center of that redevelopment project. The master plan mentions multiple times that the denser and taller development should be concentrated in the south of the parcel with various other small sections of tall buildings.

I know that's what I meant was the Domain is just part of it eventually they plan on building a 29 story Hotel/condo in there.

[M1EK]

The Domain and the area around it are looking to be something more like Buckhead in Atlanta rather than a second downtown. For those unfamiliar, Buckhead is full of tall expensive buildings with huge parking garages that are somewhat isolated from one another, with little pedestrian activity between them (surface parking on a lot of the in between space). Without rail transit that actually runs right down the middle rather than off to the side (an uncomfortably long walk away), that's all it could be anyways.

[Scottolini]

Originally Posted by arbeiter

I'm so ready to have moved away from here when I can finally afford to.

[Tombstone]Well, bye...[/Tombstone]