Why are light rail and new roads combined in bond proposal? (Austin: spring break, transporting)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by hound 109

Besides Rail, here are the road projects (this was posted in another thread a month or so ago).

But they aren't "road" projects, because three of them are stealth rail projects.

#1. $120M to rebuild E Riverside/I35 interchange (30% of the entire "road" package). Not all of that cost is to improve the roadway. That is where the proposed LR line crosses I35.

#2. $34M to build an interchange at 183 and Riverside. Bet you didn't know that Riverside intersects 183. It does - S of the 183/71 interchange. Why do we need an interchange there? Because the city asked TxDOT for it. So why spend almost the same amount that was spent on the massively larger 71/Riverside overpass? Because the city plan says "... would remove turn conflicts at the existing intersection and provide structure for a future Urban Rail extension to ABIA.” To "remove turn conflicts" at an almost unused intersection.

#3. $80M for "direct connecting bridge and other improvements" at 71 and ABIA. Now, you know "direct connecting bridges" as flyovers. TxDOT paid $8M for two at Mopac and 290. They estimate about $35M to build the ABIA flyover - still high compared to $8M for two, but hey. Inflation. The question is, what are the "other improvements"? See #2.

So if you were wondering how road mobility was going to be improved by this $400M, wonder no more.

[austin-steve]

Originally Posted by scm53

But they aren't "road" projects, because three of them are stealth rail projects.

#1. $120M to rebuild E Riverside/I35 interchange (30% of the entire "road" package). Not all of that cost is to improve the roadway. That is where the proposed LR line crosses I35.

#2. $34M to build an interchange at 183 and Riverside. Bet you didn't know that Riverside intersects 183. It does - S of the 183/71 interchange. Why do we need an interchange there? Because the city asked TxDOT for it. So why spend almost the same amount that was spent on the massively larger 71/Riverside overpass? Because the city plan says "... would remove turn conflicts at the existing intersection and provide structure for a future Urban Rail extension to ABIA.” To "remove turn conflicts" at an almost unused intersection.

#3. $80M for "direct connecting bridge and other improvements" at 71 and ABIA. Now, you know "direct connecting bridges" as flyovers. TxDOT paid $8M for two at Mopac and 290. They estimate about $35M to build the ABIA flyover - still high compared to $8M for two, but hey. Inflation. The question is, what are the "other improvements"? See #2.

So if you were wondering how road mobility was going to be improved by this $400M, wonder no more.

Is the direct connect bridge at ABIA intended to also carry a train? Direct connect from where to where? Current you exit eastbound from Hwy 71 to enter the airport, and exit under Hwy71 to get on 71 westbound leaving (coming to Austin). Neither has ever seemed difficult to me. What would the bridge go over?

Steve

[centralaustinite]

I think there is a good chance that it doesn't pass! I cried when rail was defeated in 2000 but I won't be crying this time.

[alwaysmiling]

Voting for it. Services me nicely. A line to the airport is a good thing. This is the first step of many to offer more quality transportation options. I35 improvements are a bonus. Lots of folks want it to go down Guadalupe but students walk to school and walk home. They don't work and this line will provide better access to the stadium, concert hall, campus, healthcare complex, capital, dt, etc... Most affluent people on the west side of town want the freedom an automobile provides and won't use public transit anyway. There is brt and cap metro services that are running currently from far south to far north for those who need it from techrdge to southpark meadows. Connecting downtown to the airport is common sense and paramount to any desirable city. Remember this won't be running for another 7 yrs. At 125 people moving here a day, I don't think it is wise to vote it down and allow the situation to get worse. Is it perfect, no. But nothing is. Taxes are high. Always will be. I hate them too, but the project connect vision seems to be a reasonable plan to follow over the next umpteen years with spurs going in appropriate directions to population hubs. Rome wasn't built in a day. For those voting no, I get it, I really do. It doesn't service you. Nothing will service everyone. This is just the other side of the coin for those of which will be served by this urban route (in years to come).

[HappyTexan]

A line to the airport will best serve those that work there.
Travelers aren't going to be using that with all the luggage they have.
Auto and Taxi are what serve travelers to and from airports.

[10scoachrick]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

A line to the airport will best serve those that work there.
Travelers aren't going to be using that with all the luggage they have.
Auto and Taxi are what serve travelers to and from airports.

Guess you never lived in Sandy Springs, GA and took the MARTA train INTO the terminal at HJIA

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by 10scoachrick

Guess you never lived in Sandy Springs, GA and took the MARTA train INTO the terminal at HJIA

Airports make terrible starter lines - always. This isn't even debatable. The ridership numbers to airports is MOSTLY employees.

Must have excellent ridership to justify FTA dollars. Always can expand to ABIA with a subsequent phase, but it will never be included in initial phase (which will be easy under this plan).

People need to get away from the idea of building to the airport in phase 1. That's simply not ever going to happen. And no rail project will ever get off the ground proposing it.

[atxcio]

While I agree that a line to the airport isn't the best starter line, this is the starter line that they picked and it basically runs down 71 towards the airport... then doesn't connect.

And travelers do use the train if it connects at the airport. I know, I do it when I'm in cities that provide that option. People don't travel with much luggage these days, usually just a roll-aboard carry on. Visitors to SXSW or business travelers aren't lugging around tons of baggage.

It seems that this proposal has far less support than the 2000 proposal, so I'd say it has zero chance to pass... especially given the climate around this November election. But I also don't see the visible opposition like we did with the 2000 proposal (at least not yet). So I'm not discounting the fact that it might pass with the $$$ they are spending slick promotion and the hostage road spending deal.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by 10scoachrick

Guess you never lived in Sandy Springs, GA and took the MARTA train INTO the terminal at HJIA

Or ever traveled to DC and used the Metrorail from Reagan...

[centralaustinite]

But there isn't a line to the airport!! The proposed line ends at Grove! SOMEDAY there might be line to the airport and this bond issue is a precondition to that . . . but there are still many steps, lots of $$$, and at least a decade of time, before an airport line is a reality.