So uh..Austin Subway*, Light Rail Expansions and $3.2 - $10.2 Billion

[Guest Lobo]

I know.   You always flash the west side gang sign in your posted photos.  And you’ve been around since before cardinal directions...so, much respect. 

[Armybrat 41,389]

• Actually lived east of I-35 from 1959-95, except for a 2 year stay in a public housing project at 183 f N. Lamar (1969-71).

[TKthunder2 5,059]

9 hours ago, ZB'Tejas said:

I would think it's already there... You would be hard pressed to find anything (single family home) less than $700K within 10-15 min of downtown. I would think Dallas, Houston and other big cities have much more to choose from in that same boundary.

Quick search shows 50+ homes for sale under $400k East of I-35 and West of 183 which is about 10 minutes of downtown by car.

[ChickenSandwich 9,953]

That’s just to get multiple offers. 
 

See east Austin toward airport... 2 listed at 355. Sold 415 and 406

Edited November 11, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[TKthunder2 5,059]

16 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

That’s just to get multiple offers. 
 

See east Austin toward airport... 2 listed at 355. Sold 415 and 406

True, I just used $400k because it was a default filter.  The post I was replying to said single family home under $700k and 10-15 minutes away from downtown.  So while yes it’s getting harder to live closer to downtown it’s still not impossible (and that’s without including condos and townhomes).

[ZB'Tejas 597]

13 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Quick search shows 50+ homes for sale under $400k East of I-35 and West of 183 which is about 10 minutes of downtown by car.

I thought we were talking about areas next to downtown... east of 183 is not that. Looking at 78702 and I see one house under $400 ( 375) and it's a 2/2 1100 soft. Hardly what I would classify as a family home.

[elfenix 34,744]

14 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Quick search shows 50+ homes for sale under $400k East of I-35 and West of 183 which is about 10 minutes of downtown by car.

 

1 hour ago, ZB'Tejas said:

I thought we were talking about areas next to downtown... east of 183 is not that. Looking at 78702 and I see one house under $400 ( 375) and it's a 2/2 1100 soft. Hardly what I would classify as a family home.

 

[atomheartbevo 90,636]

On 11/10/2020 at 12:51 PM, Armybrat said:

• Actually lived east of I-35 from 1959-95, except for a 2 year stay in a public housing project at 183 f N. Lamar (1969-71).

Is that what they called halfway-houses back then?

[Armybrat 41,389]

For poor teachers. $100/month for an unfurnished 2/1, all bills paid.

[bschoolprof 6,341]

Dirty's got eminent domain letter for light rail project.  

 

Quote

Dirty Martin's Place, open since 1926 and originally known as Martin's KumBak (earning its nickname due to its earlier lack of flooring) is apparently in the way of the Orange Line of Project Connect. It has remained a hot spot for adjacent University of Texas students for the entire time, and maintains an outdoor garden area popular in the evenings.

Manager Daniel Young, via a forum dedicated to Austin's many past-and-present greasy spoons, confirmed rumors the establishment had received an eminent domain letter from the city:

 

"We’re going to fight the city on this, but need your support! .... We’re going to be starting a petition asking the city to keep the light rail underground from MLK to 38th St. Save Dirty’s."

 

[DanRydell 799]

4 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

Dirty's got eminent domain letter for light rail project.  

 

 

How many Dirty's locations could we build for what it would cost to keep the light rail underground for another 20 blocks?

[Wally Pryor 5,407]

No way. Who would have thunk.

Meh, it's just a few more zeros. No worry, it's still early. Still more time to double the budget.  Come on COA, I know we can do it. 

 

AAS:  When Austin voters were asked in 2020 to approve a local tax increase to pay for the massive transportation infrastructure plan dubbed Project Connect, they were told the project's estimated cost would be $7.1 billion.

Less than two years later, local transportation officials now say the estimated cost for the project has ballooned by an additional $4.5 billion, putting the estimated price tag now at about $11.6 billion.

Higher prices for acquiring property and surging inflation that has driven up costs for materials and labor are partly to blame, local transportation officials say. But in a memo to the Austin City Council, Project Connect's managers also say the cost for a proposed tunnel under Lady Bird Lake has doubled from $2 billion to $4 billion due to environmental concerns and because the original plan would have violated Austin's Capitol view corridor rules.

Project Connect officials say the higher estimated cost won't lead to an increase in the tax rate local voters approved. However, some community leaders point out that higher costs for the project could lead to the tax being collected for a longer period of time — and they also question why planners weren't aware of the potential issues that have led to the higher cost estimates.

By far the largest ballot measure Austin voters have ever approved, Project Connect was presented as a generational opportunity to remake Austin's mass transit system. The plan calls for two light rail lines, a downtown Austin tunnel and multiple new bus routes. The plan also includes housing funds, equitable development planning and more city park-and-ride options. Austin voters approved an 8.75-cent increase to city property taxes to help pay for the project in 2020, although more than half of Project Connect's cost is expected to be funded by federal grants.

A memo released in April by the Austin Transit Partnership detailed the estimated cost increases and identified three primary causes: the increasing cost of real estate in Austin; the impact of inflation and supply chain concerns; and changes to the scope and design of the projects. 

Much of the cost increase is related to the light rail Orange and Blue Lines, and a tunnel to be built under Lady Bird Lake. 

The Blue Line is now estimated to cost $600 million more than originally planned because of a pedestrian concourse and underground tunnel along the rail that would extend from Austin-Bergstrom International Airport to North Lamar Boulevard.

At a community meeting Tuesday, stakeholders outlined two design proposals for the bridge, set to bring the Blue Line across Lady Bird Lake. One proposal for the bridge includes the light rail and a hike-and-bike concourse, and the other added a level for bus traffic. 

The Orange Line, which stretches from South Congress Avenue to North Lamar, is now expected to cost $1.8 billion more than planned, according to transit officials.

Meanwhile, the estimated price tag for the tunnel under Lady Bird Lake jumped by $2 billion, doubling the original estimate for that portion of the project.

The memo from the Austin Transit Partnership says the much higher cost estimate is due in part to Federal Emergency Management Agency flood zones near the Colorado River, which will necessitate increasing the tunnel's length from 1.56 miles to 4.19 miles. 

The original tunnel route also ran afoul of long-standing Capitol view corridor restrictions, which regulate what structures can be built that might obstruct views of the Capitol and which added to the need to lengthen the tunnel.  

David Couch, Project Connect's chief program officer, said he was not available for an interview. Project Connect officials, answering questions via email, said that during the preliminary engineering phase for the tunnel two options were considered — the first was a short tunnel that would terminate near the Texas School for the Deaf's campus and the other a longer tunnel that would end near Live Oak Street.

 

Edited May 2, 2022 by Wally Pryor

[bluto 4,995]

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/bb237e3e-1f27-443b-a4a2-3baad52e854f

[freyguy 4,368]

we are literally the dumbest city...

[PilotsError 2,336]

This thread got real quiet.

[WBT 20,966]

[UTexasFight 9,809]

And we’re only in the 30% design phase!

 

[UTexasFight 9,809]

 

Planners said the Capitol sight lines extend far enough down Congress to disqualify any other shorter tunnel options and an above-ground South Congress station. Even the longer tunnel's entrance portal and catenary poles were nearly in conflict with the state rules given the unforeseen limitations of the corridor restraints, which even extend several feet below ground near Live Oak.

““That was not something we expected when we were researching this and looking at state law and things like that. So that’s kind of what caused us to also take another look at that design for the portal, the stations and ultimately ended up with the extended tunnel,” said Sofia Ojeda, the Austin Transit Partnership's director of Orange Line design.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/central-austin/transportation/2022/04/11/project-connect-design-planning-continues-as-cost-estimates-for-light-rail-lines-jump-77/

Good lord, Sof.

hey, I’m happy to jump on as a consultant to help your team avoid such embarrassing oversights in the future.

Qualifications? I’m pretty good with google.  I did this in 32 seconds. But I’ll be sure to increase my billing rate by 77% on the first change order. You know, kinda like you guys did.

 

 

[Armybrat 41,389]

Austin could revote on these inflated projects and reverse the folly.

They did with the crooked attempt to move the Austin airport to Manor almost 30 years ago.

[Texas Jeff 1,999]

No more cars on the Drag ... the plan is trains and buses only between the former Dirty's location and the MLK/Drag intersection.  I think they plan to route car traffic down Nueces, which will become a two way street.

I saw a drawing which had the tunnel entrance right around Dobie, which means you'll be able to get on a train on the Drag and take tunnels all the way to South Congress.  That's pretty cool if you are a pedestrian at the Co-op and you want to suddenly travel to South Congress.  Most students are just walking from West Campus to campus and back.  Car travel north/south on the remaining open streets will be pretty brutal, which I think is the main idea.

UT should be buying up everything they can in west campus and building student housing.  I think that entire area is going to gentrify like crazy with folks that work downtown but want to live near campus.  Students are going to be pushed out.

[LCHorn 2,750]

3 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

UT should be buying up everything they can in west campus and building student housing.  I think that entire area is going to gentrify like crazy with folks that work downtown but want to live near campus.  Students are going to be pushed out.

Why?  Have you not been recently?   It’s essentially that already but with (compared to campus) luxury housing for students who can afford it.

[TKthunder2 5,059]

49 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Why?  Have you not been recently?   It’s essentially that already but with (compared to campus) luxury housing for students who can afford it.

True but he’s not wrong.  UT should be buying as much as they can around campus.  It’s not a bad investment and it can benefit their students and faculty.  Put it in a holding company and buy up as much as possible.

[Texas Jeff 1,999]

Why?  Have you not been recently?   It’s essentially that already but with (compared to campus) luxury housing for students who can afford it.

So that UT can control the cost of housing for kids once they move out of the dorm. I have a kid living at 2400 Nueces right now, an apartment owned by UT. It’s not super fancy but I know that UT is going to lease to students and they are going to charge less than the free market would.

Eventually the private dorms and the folks that build the tall buildings are going to figure out that they can rent places or sell condos to 20 somethings that want to be around younger folks but have six figure salaries and work downtown. The train is going to make the commute from west campus really easy for those folks.

[Orange&White 5,573]

Who could have ever seen this coming?????????????

Austin's light rail might not connect to airport

https://www.axios.com/local/austin/2023/03/14/austin-light-rail-airport-plan?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axioslocal_austin&stream=top

 

Come on Troxy!! Get this back to the voters now that the curtain has been pulled back on this piece of shit and all of the lies used to get it passed in the first place.

 

[YGIFS 19,458]

Look, it'll get you to that DHL hangar.  And you'll have to hoof it from there.  This is beyond maddening.  But if messaged properly, could be the final move of idiocy that prevents austin from rubber stamping every shithead move from Council.  They forgot about CVC on the CBD lines.  Now it won't go to the airport.  I promise you they were lying on another portion of the underground line.  And you're gonna find out about it when Watson is up for re-election so they can blame it on him in an attempt to rope us back to more idiotic leadership.  Watch.

[Guest]

I was promised by Adler that this would be transformative.

Three years in and we've got jack shit to show for it, a paring back of what was promised, a higher cost than what was sold on it. Meanwhile, I've already contributed what, $1K to this bullshit and will have to for years to come before there is anything to show for it?

It was a scam when it was sold and it still is. But we had to do "something" because it would only get more expensive!

 

[Grade of D as in David 13,255]

If we're just going to fleece the public at least make it fun. Can we get a gondola proposal on the ballot. We will promise to run it to the airport but it will stop at 35.

[WBT 20,966]

If they connected to the airport now, what would they have to sell on the next ballot initiative?

 

 

 

 

 

[Deej 77,806]

3 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

It was a scam when it was sold

[royiv 9,776]

3 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

I was promised by Adler that this would be transformative.

Three years in and we've got jack shit to show for it, a paring back of what was promised, a higher cost than what was sold on it. Meanwhile, I've already contributed what, $1K to this bullshit and will have to for years to come before there is anything to show for it?

It was a scam when it was sold and it still is. But we had to do "something" because it would only get more expensive!

 

Residents in the Cap Metro service area will have poured billions of property tax dollars into a system that will look nothing like what was sold to them. This is the same city that can't get a kiddie train at Zilker Park completed and people thought they could get a massive transit system built? Lol.

[B00M 6,729]

7 hours ago, YGIFS said:

Look, it'll get you to that DHL hangar.  And you'll have to hoof it from there.  This is beyond maddening.  But if messaged properly, could be the final move of idiocy that prevents austin from rubber stamping every shithead move from Council. 

[YGIFS 19,458]

Airport Points?  Game.  Aprons!  Get it?

[Guest]

14 hours ago, royiv said:

Residents in the Cap Metro service area will have poured billions of property tax dollars into a system that will look nothing like what was sold to them. This is the same city that can't get a kiddie train at Zilker Park completed and people thought they could get a massive transit system built? Lol.

This should be included in every discussion of Project Connect. KXAN article about delays? The last sentence should be "Austin is the same city that could not complete a kiddie train ride at Zilker park."

[BrazilHorn 6,822]

This was, is and will remain a complete fraud by the city of Austin politicians on the taxpayers of Austin. 
just a joke. 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,907]

4 hours ago, BrazilHorn said:

This was, is and will remain a complete fraud by the city of Austin politicians on the taxpayers of Austin. 
just a joke. 

Alternatives?

[Orange&White 5,573]

1 hour ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Alternatives?

They could have been honest in their proposal instead of lying about the true cost/plan just to get it passed and then completely altered for the worse, while nearly tripling in costs in less than three years. 

If you want alternatives, they could have left the fixed travel light rail completely off, ditched the tunnel, and gone with completely surface transitbus lines that can can chage their route with demands. Just for starters.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,907]

20 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

They could have been honest in their proposal instead of lying about the true cost/plan just to get it passed and then completely altered for the worse, while nearly tripling in costs in less than three years. 

If you want alternatives, they could have left the fixed travel light rail completely off, ditched the tunnel, and gone with completely surface transitbus lines that can can chage their route with demands. Just for starters.

Would these transit buses be operating in the same Austin traffic that I'm operating in?

[Deej 77,806]

But hey, at least they plan on tearing down Dirty's. 

[BrazilHorn 6,822]

6 hours ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Alternatives?

Admit light rail doesn’t work post covid. Look at current one that’s barely used (even pre covid) 
Austin doesn’t have an dense urban base to support. Covid has created remote work as norm etc etc

Giving city council basically a blank check to build trains to nowhere is dumb. 

[TKthunder2 5,059]

Connect the red line to the airport with the bridge over the lake by Rainey so tourists can get from the airport to downtown (and people near the red line can get to the airport). That will be used.

Then go to the next phase and expand to downtown/UT/ACC/student housing areas (you know, places where people will actually use it) slowly and build out little by little in loops (loop around downtown, loop around UT, the domain) and high impact runs that connect those loops, no need to buy a shit ton of land that will just sit there unused for years.

3 major routes all at the same time was never going to happen, this city can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. Focus on high impact lines (not building rails to Elgin)..or gondolas.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/high-tech-gondolas-could-be-coming-to-a-north-texas-city/ar-AA18CHJ5

[wackawacka 198]

mass transit is a public good - it doesn't have to make economic sense. i rather burn tax dollars than have our city look like the katy freeway

More lanes = more demand and same level of congestion. only way cities can solve traffic is investing in public transit.

[royiv 9,776]

12 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Connect the red line to the airport with the bridge over the lake by Rainey so tourists can get from the airport to downtown (and people near the red line can get to the airport). That will be used.

Then go to the next phase and expand to downtown/UT/ACC/student housing areas (you know, places where people will actually use it) slowly and build out little by little in loops (loop around downtown, loop around UT, the domain) and high impact runs that connect those loops, no need to buy a shit ton of land that will just sit there unused for years.

3 major routes all at the same time was never going to happen, this city can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. Focus on high impact lines (not building rails to Elgin)..or gondolas.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/high-tech-gondolas-could-be-coming-to-a-north-texas-city/ar-AA18CHJ5

Local residents don't use mass transit to get to the airport. It's a well documented fact. Why should Austin residents subsidize mass transit that will be used by a relatively small number of tourists to get to Rainey Street? That is a horrific use of resources and does next to nothing to alleviate traffic.

8 minutes ago, wackawacka said:

mass transit is a public good - it doesn't have to make economic sense. i rather burn tax dollars than have our city look like the katy freeway

More lanes = more demand and same level of congestion. only way cities can solve traffic is investing in public transit.

You do know that Houston has light rail, right? I guess you missed all of the headlines about how it has miraculously cured the traffic woes of the Bayou City.

[wackawacka 198]

5 minutes ago, royiv said:

Local residents don't use mass transit to get to the airport. It's a well documented fact. Why should Austin residents subsidize mass transit that will be used by a relatively small number of tourists to get to Rainey Street? That is a horrific use of resources and does next to nothing to alleviate traffic.

You do know that Houston has light rail, right? I guess you missed all of the headlines about how it has miraculously cured the traffic woes of the Bayou City.

it needs to have the reach to support local commuters. the issue is how it is sold as likely won't pay dividends for decades as the light rail in houston doesn't actually go anywhere.

the problem with most of these plans is longer-term investment so usable for local commuters. if you showed that total cost, it would never pass.

it is clear that more roads aren't the answer but politics won't allow for the investment needed for large scale public transit.

we should increase gas tax and use that to fund public transit.

look at any tier 1 city and notice all the places people want to live or visit has a huge network of public transit. the us has way under invested in that which results in shit hole cities like Houston and LA.

[royiv 9,776]

4 minutes ago, wackawacka said:

it needs to have the reach to support local commuters. the issue is how it is sold as likely won't pay dividends for decades as the light rail in houston doesn't actually go anywhere.

the problem with most of these plans is longer-term investment so usable for local commuters. if you showed that total cost, it would never pass.

it is clear that more roads aren't the answer but politics won't allow for the investment needed for large scale public transit.

we should increase gas tax and use that to fund public transit.

look at any tier 1 city and notice all the places people want to live or visit has a huge network of public transit. the us has way under invested in that which results in shit hole cities like Houston and LA.

The fact that you call LA and Houston shit hole cities immediately leads me to negate any opinion you have on the matter. Rail doesn't work in cities that grew up in the 20th century because they are spread out. They don't have the population density to support rail at scale.

[TKthunder2 5,059]

4 minutes ago, royiv said:

Local residents don't use mass transit to get to the airport. It's a well documented fact. Why should Austin residents subsidize mass transit that will be used by a relatively small number of tourists to get to Rainey Street? That is a horrific use of resources and does next to nothing to alleviate traffic.

Do you know why? Because right now WITHOUT ANY REAL TRAFFIC it takes 2 hours to take mass transit from the domain. That’s 4x as long as Ubering there.

Plenty of people would take a train especially when there is traffic. I just got back from a business trip and my ride home was $100. If you could get me a majority of my way home by rail for $10 and just have me Uber the last few miles that would be a huge win. You know how basically it works in almost every other major city.

If you don’t believe it go to the Taxi/Ride share pickup at the airport and see how busy it is. I can pretty much guarantee you that if you simply connected the red line to the airport you’d cut that line in half.

It’s also a lot easier to get someone to drive you to the nearest rail station than all the way to the airport.

Also “small number of tourists”? Compared to San Antonio and Arlington maybe but Austin has far more than a small number. It was embarrassing when they banned Uber/Lyft.

[wackawacka 198]

4 minutes ago, royiv said:

The fact that you call LA and Houston shit hole cities immediately leads me to negate any opinion you have on the matter. Rail doesn't work in cities that grew up in the 20th century because they are spread out. They don't have the population density to support rail at scale.

I grew up in Houston!

You can encourage population density and reverse urban sprawl. It just requires zoning and regulation which I know is heresy in Texas

[royiv 9,776]

21 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Do you know why? Because right now WITHOUT ANY REAL TRAFFIC it takes 2 hours to take mass transit from the domain. That’s 4x as long as Ubering there.

Plenty of people would take a train especially when there is traffic. I just got back from a business trip and my ride home was $100. If you could get me a majority of my way home by rail for $10 and just have me Uber the last few miles that would be a huge win. You know how basically it works in almost every other major city.

If you don’t believe it go to the Taxi/Ride share pickup at the airport and see how busy it is. I can pretty much guarantee you that if you simply connected the red line to the airport you’d cut that line in half.

It’s also a lot easier to get someone to drive you to the nearest rail station than all the way to the airport.

Also “small number of tourists”? Compared to San Antonio and Arlington maybe but Austin has far more than a small number. It was embarrassing when they banned Uber/Lyft.

I'm not talking about Austin specifically. There have been numerous studies that show that locals don't use rail to get to the airport in cities that have it. Airport employees are the biggest users of airport rail stops and that's a relatively small number. You are in the minority of folks that would schlep their bags on a train and then take an Uber when you get to a stop. The vast majority of folks want to get in a car and go direct to their destination. 

On the tourist issue, "small" is in comparison to overall traffic on the roads. Tourists aren't responsible for the traffic congestion in Austin. Why should taxpayers subsidize their ride to and from the airport?

[royiv 9,776]

26 minutes ago, wackawacka said:

I grew up in Houston!

You can encourage population density and reverse urban sprawl. It just requires zoning and regulation which I know is heresy in Texas

That's a whole different can of worms and only goes to prove my argument that rail isn't an effective fix in large cities that grew up over the last 75 years or so.

[LCHorn 2,750]

1 hour ago, royiv said:

Local residents don't use mass transit to get to the airport. It's a well documented fact. Why should Austin residents subsidize mass transit that will be used by a relatively small number of tourists to get to Rainey Street? That is a horrific use of resources and does next to nothing to alleviate traffic.

You do know that Houston has light rail, right? I guess you missed all of the headlines about how it has miraculously cured the traffic woes of the Bayou City.

Houston’s light rail is pretty sweet in the areas it services. 

[TKthunder2 5,059]

3 hours ago, royiv said:

I'm not talking about Austin specifically. There have been numerous studies that show that locals don't use rail to get to the airport in cities that have it. Airport employees are the biggest users of airport rail stops and that's a relatively small number. You are in the minority of folks that would schlep their bags on a train and then take an Uber when you get to a stop. The vast majority of folks want to get in a car and go direct to their destination. 

On the tourist issue, "small" is in comparison to overall traffic on the roads. Tourists aren't responsible for the traffic congestion in Austin. Why should taxpayers subsidize their ride to and from the airport?

Why do we spent $1.2 billion on the convention center expansion? Cities want tourists, conventions, festivals, concerts. We subsidize things because politicians are vain and want big business and celebrities to want to come to Austin. Is that worthy of the tax dollars? That is another argument (some facts say yes though it’s hard/impossible to prove causation in the larger economic picture).

By the way, I’m pro rail, but anti project connect (if that’s not obvious).

Mass transit won’t alleviate traffic anytime soon. Neither will bike lanes or toll lanes or buses. But it can help tourists, give college kids a cheap form of transportation that reduces drunk driving, make getting to events like SXSW, ACL, UT sporting events/concerts, more convenient for locals which reduces peak traffic during events and reduces buses within the central corridor all of which can help, but none of which will “solve” Austin’s traffic problem.

The only thing that can significantly help is expanding I35 through downtown/UT (which is happening) building a true free bypass (which I agree should have happened a long time ago) to divert i35 through traffic. They can complete the 45 South “loop” (which I think is in the early stages of planning approval) reduce the lights on 360 (which is happening) but other than that there is not much more you can do with Mopac/183/290 than the expansions/tolls which is already done/in process.

Focusing on density and linking the cheaper areas of Austin (eventually) to a robust downtown/UT/business corridor would likely be the best thing you can do for future growth and success…but it’s dumb to do that before the Central network has been established as no one is going to ride a train to downtown to walk 2 miles to work or wait 30 minutes a a bus in the Texas heat.

They need more stations closer together where it’s convenient to skip driving/parking and you don’t show up to work half drenched in sweat. Until that is done, no one will use these long North/South/East routes (that they did for political reasons) and that will only serve to give the rail haters more ammo.