Prop 1 Open Thread (Austin: costs, train, design)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

18,000 (and again, that's probably a pessimistic estimate)

According to one national transit expert, 18,000 is wildly optimistic. Probably closer to 12,300.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

According to one national transit expert, 18,000 is wildly optimistic. Probably closer to 12,300.

That "expert" doesn't even understand math.

See my comments on that story. They somehow don't understand that a model calibrated to 2005 data absolutely should use 2005 dollars.

Seriously, a 12,300 number doesn't pass the smell test. As you yourself noted, that's basically the ridership of the equivalent buses. _Today_, much less in 2030 (after the medical school. After ACC highland. After additional development on Riverside. After building park and rides for I35 drivers. Etc.)

(Edit: oh, and that "expert" has apparently no background in transportation, no published papers, etc.)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

That "expert" doesn't even understand math.

(Edit: oh, and that "expert" has apparently no background in transportation, no published papers, etc.)

Moderator cut: rude
Ms Pantell - this, and this, and this, and this, and this, and this. Apparently you didn't try very hard.

I think they nailed you in your back and forth in the article's comments:

Novacek, you may be “just reading the memo” but you’re misreading and misinterpreting the information in it, making claims apparently drawing on your own suppositions and inferences.

This is curiously similar to the modus operandi of Project Connect and its surrogates, who create smoke and confusion under the pretext of “scientific” or “professional” inquiries, then reach unsubstantiated conclusions on behalf of a preset agenda.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

Sure can for Ms Pantell - this, and this, and this, and this, and this, and this. Apparently you didn't try very hard.

You do realize that's another amateur web page (In fact, I'm guessing "lightrailnow" and "austinrailnow" are the same organization)? None of those are published papers.

Edit: (The website originated as a Web vehicle to support efforts to promote an LRT system for Austin, Texas in 2000, and was the official website of Light Rail Now and Walkable Neighborhoods.)

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

No, all the real transportation experts were hired by project connect, and support the plan.

For somebody who has spouted a laugher a minute today, this may be your best one. Everybody (who just happens to be also on the payroll) is on the side of the angels with me. Got it, too.

Guess this guy isn't a "real transportation expert":

Lyndon Henry is a writer, editor, investigative journalist, and transportation consultant currently based in Central Texas. He holds a Master of Science in Community & Regional Planning, with a focus in Transportation, from the University of Texas at Austin, 1981. From 1973 to 1989 he was executive director of the Texas Association for Public Transportation, and presented the original proposals and feasibility studies for light rail that led to the inclusion of rail transit in the Austin-area planning process.. From 1981 to 1985 he served as a transportation consultant to the Hajj Research Centre at King Abdul Aziz University, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He has also served as a transportation planning consultant on several other transit projects in the USA. In 1983-84 he was a member of the Austin-Travis County Transit Task Force which recommended a transit authority for the Austin area. That agency, eventually named Capital Metro, was created in 1985. From 1989 to 1993, Mr. Henry served as a board member and vice-chairman of Capital Metro. From 1990 to 1992 he was an Adjunct Faculty member at St. Edwards University, teaching a course in public policy. Since 2000 he has served as a technical consultant to the Light Rail Now Project, and from 2002 to late 2011 he served as a Data Analyst for Capital Metro in Austin. He is also a member of APTA’s Streetcar and Heritage Trolley Subcommittee and Light Rail Transit Technical Subcommittee.

Or Christof Speiler, Rice University:

It's amazing: Austin, the self-proclaimed progressive city, could have had the best rail system in Texas but has the dumbest.

Or Steven Smith, Market Urbanism,

Austin light rail is becoming more of a joke by the minute. Textbook example of politics getting in the way of good transit planning.

And the topper, from Jeff Wood, Reconnecting America:

I'm going to use this as a bad transit planning example forever

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

For somebody who has spouted a laugher a minute today, this may be your best one. Everybody (who just happens to be also on the payroll) is on the side of the angels with me. Got it, too.

Guess this guy isn't a "real transportation expert":



Or Christof Speiler, Rice University:



Or Steven Smith, Market Urbanism,



And the topper, from Jeff Wood, Reconnecting America:

And what are those credentials for Susan Pantell?

[scm53]

Moderator cut: bickering
And when that turned out to be "fictitious content" - keeping with your consistent MO - all you can do is point over there somewhere?

[hillcountryheart]

Originally Posted by scm53

No, you are the one spreading falsehoods. The Austin 2014 Strategic Mobility Plan (p. 7) shows all "future phases of urban rail". Highland has nothing past it.

More lust based mendacity.

Out of curiosity, who do you believe will profit from this particular route, and why are city leaders for it?

No agenda here, I see no benefit - but obviously some people do.

[df175]

I'm strongly against the light rail proposal.

Just a fraction of that money could build multiple BRT lines and make a much more significant dent in traffic. Even with Austin's choked roads and the inability to have dedicated lanes in most areas, our limited version of BRT is still the way to go.

More broadly, improvement of the bus system in terms of frequency and cleanliness and technology (real time GPS on all buses) would help tremendously. Many people don't use the buses because of these issues and it creates a chicken and egg scenario regarding ridership levels.

For people with options, one only has to have only a few bad experiences to shy away from using the system:

Waiting at bus stops 20 minutes for a late bus (would be helped by more frequency and real time arrival info on smartphones)

Stinky / dirty buses

Overly full buses during peak hours, due to inadequate service on some routes


Such people go back to their cars, understandably.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

Moderator cut: bickering
And when that turned out to be "fictitious content" - keeping with your consistent MO - all you can do is point over there somewhere?

Fictitious content?

Okay, let me ask you, why do You think that ticket prices in 2030 dollars ($2.78) should be plugged into a 2005 model.

That's my "fictitious content". Asking that question.



Oh, and I suppose pointing out that Houston is bigger than Austin is also "fictitious"