9.5-mile urban rail route from Highland Mall to Riverside Drive (Houston: price, station)

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

1) Never happened.

Building ATX » Will I-35 See A Cap Someday?

"Not so fast, says TxDOT. Lorena Echeverria de Misi, the TxDOT director of planning and development who gave the Sept. 18 presentation, says that Reconnect Austin’s plan doesn’t meet interstate standards, doesn’t include tunnel safety and ventilation measures or structural support for the caps, and would require more right of way than currently exists. In addition, it would require moving current utilities, which the state has to pay for by law."

I didn't say "impossible", I said "infeasible". Like jb9152 says, anythings is possible with enough money. But Black's crazy scheme that it will "pay for itself" isn't possible, because of the problems above (and the inevitable cost overruns).

Originally Posted by gpurcell

2) Cap and cover will have to take down the upper deck and have a descent phase. Guess where that would be likely to occur--yep, right at Hancock

The proposal for cut and cap stopped at 15th street. Even if they did it, it wouldn't require _30 blocks_ of descent phase.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

Having grown up with the DC subway system I think it is smarter in the long term to place stations in areas with the capacity for high density growth (cue zoning board) rather than areas with a moderate amount of existing density that is not at the end of its life cycle.

That's basically the "aspirational" part of PCCC's planning.

[mayfair44]

Originally Posted by jb9152

You're arguing with yourself, then. As I've said, I have no dog in this hunt. All of the sub-corridors have reasons to do them. It's the prioritization that people are objecting to, and that's one of those debates that's based on facts built into projections and assumptions. Very tough to make an objective analysis, but I think that both the PCCC planners and the L/G folks have done a very good job with laying out their arguments.

IMO, UT's Campus and Medical District Master Plans to run rail along SanJac/Trinity killed any hopes of a L/G starter line, being more of a political consequence vs data-driven decision. That was decided long before PC's "process."

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by mayfair44

IMO, UT's Campus and Medical District Master Plans to run rail along SanJac/Trinity killed any hopes of a L/G starter line, being more of a political consequence vs data-driven decision. That was decided long before PC's "process."

Proof? Links? I see master plans all the time that have "it would be nice if this happens" features. That's why they're just plans. The reality often enough looks very different by the time the full planning, architectural/engineering/design and construction efforts close. As I said earlier, the farther out you look, the higher the probability that you're going to get some things wrong.

If anything, I think the master plans supported the aspirational, "shaping" aspects of PCCC's sub-corridor choice by showing future transit-ready development in that area. So, I'm not saying they didn't have some effect, maybe even a large one. That's a lot different than saying that they solely drove the process to a political end.

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by mayfair44

IMO, UT's Campus and Medical District Master Plans to run rail along SanJac/Trinity killed any hopes of a L/G starter line, being more of a political consequence vs data-driven decision. That was decided long before PC's "process."

This is my feeling as well--with a potential additional kicker in a possible move of UT Arena to South Shore which, helpfully enough, will also be connected by the new bridge over Town Lake!

[mayfair44]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Building ATX » Will I-35 See A Cap Someday?

"Not so fast, says TxDOT. Lorena Echeverria de Misi, the TxDOT director of planning and development who gave the Sept. 18 presentation, says that Reconnect Austin’s plan doesn’t meet interstate standards, doesn’t include tunnel safety and ventilation measures or structural support for the caps, and would require more right of way than currently exists. In addition, it would require moving current utilities, which the state has to pay for by law."

I didn't say "impossible", I said "infeasible". Like jb9152 says, anythings is possible with enough money. But Black's crazy scheme that it will "pay for itself" isn't possible, because of the problems above (and the inevitable cost overruns).





The proposal for cut and cap stopped at 15th street. Even if they did it, it wouldn't require _30 blocks_ of descent phase.

TXDOT has already addressed the difficulty in going under Holly, then pitching back up to cross the lake, so that proposed below grade (depressed) section I believe is shorter, from CC to 12th:

https://vimeo.com/90142100

Thus far, there really hasn't been much discussion around the removal of the upper deck, except the fact that the engineering of adding an additional lane to 35 in that area (btwn MLK and Airport) would be easier on the lower level, vs the upper deck.

I-35 construction through the core, isn't going to start until both Mopac and Bergstrom Expressways can handle (Read: are completed) diverted traffic. 2020 at least? Don't see the upper deck going anywhere, anytime soon, and there are no hints of tearing it down, bc the capacity can't be absorbed in the lower deck with ROW, in addition to the one FTC lane each way proposed. Cut and cap refers only to the DT section.

[mayfair44]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

This is my feeling as well--with a potential additional kicker in a possible move of UT Arena to South Shore which, helpfully enough, will also be connected by the new bridge over Town Lake!

Agree. "Signature" transit for the Chamber's brochure!

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by mayfair44

Agree. "Signature" transit for the Chamber's brochure!

What it amounts to, really, is a way for visitors and folks downtown to move up and down the Waller Creek watershed among various amenities. It certainly isn't being designed to be a substitute for car commuting for anyone.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

What it amounts to, really, is a way for visitors and folks downtown to move up and down the Waller Creek watershed among various amenities. It certainly isn't being designed to be a substitute for car commuting for anyone.

East Riverside is for visitors and folks downtown to move up and down the Waller Creek watershed?

[verybadgnome]

I'm begging to think that alignment is only half the problem. 9.5 miles is too little to do much good and I'm having trouble finding comparables to this proposal. Even the maligned Houston system is 12.8 miles carrying 36,000 a day. If we had to start from the beginning I say a NW (Cedar Park) to Central to SE (airport) main trunk would be optimal. Problem is that would now compete with the red line (minimally) and BRT (somewhat more). Other problem is the 50,000+ Cedar Park is not in the fold. Unfortunately, I think Austin in general is one of the harder cities to retrofit good mass transit. I would love to have something like what is in Phoenix, Denver, Salt Lake City, or San Diego but that may not be feasible even if done is stages, something beyond the scope of our proposal anyway. There are some solutions out there but I don't see any slam dunks.