With a potential November public vote on a first segment of a downtown-centric, electric-powered rail system, City of Austin transportation planners have added about 10 miles to the 16.5-mile, $1.3 billion proposed system that has long been public.

The newest map shows rail lines reaching Southpark Meadows shopping center in far south Austin, MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1) near West Fifth Street and at West 35th Street, the Triangle on Guadalupe Street and MetroRail’s Crestview Station on North Lamar Boulevard.

Construction of any part of such a system is far from certain, and decisions by officials or the public on the newly proposed sections likely would be many years away. Nonetheless, retired political consultant Peck Young said city officials are making a politically savvy move.

“The only way you can get citywide support for those kinds of things is to have a citywide plan,” said Young, executive director of Austin Community College’s Center for Public Policy and Political Studies. “And that looks like what they’re trying to do. I’m glad in particular that we decided to remember that South Austin is part of the city too.”

The city’s original urban rail proposal has been criticized both by rail skeptics —for being too concentrated in the central business district and thus failing to address highway congestion — and by some rail advocates, who have major quibbles with its route. That route connects Mueller in East Austin with Austin-Bergstrom International Airport, running through the University of Texas, the Capitol complex and downtown.

This map from the Statesman is helpful:

Capital Metro announced today that it has received $38 million from the Federal Transit Administration to help cover the cost of the MetroRapid program.

The funds come from the administration’s “Very Small Start” program and will cover about 80 percent of the program’s $48 million cost, said Linda Watson, the president and CEO of Capital Metro.

“That’s tax money that Texans pay coming back to Texas,” Watson said. “So it’s a great day not only for Capital Metro and our customers, but for Central Texas and taxpayers in the whole state of Texas.”

MetroRapid will premiere in 2014 with two rapid bus routes. One route will go down Lamar from the Tech Ridge Park & Ride to the Southpark Meadows shopping center. The other route will run from North Austin Medical Center at Parmer Lane to Westgate Mall off South Lamar Boulevard.

Here’s the info from the Cap Metro website:

• Bus Stop Info – Scan the code at several bus stops around town for the next scheduled bus arrivals, detours and other information.
• Promotions – Scan the codes on special signs or posters to get exclusive discounts and deals on local merchandise, restaurants and entertainment.
• Real-Time Schedules (future use) – Capital Metro is developing the ability to track buses and trains in real time to provide accurate arrival/departure times.

Here’s a little excerpt from the article. (I highlighted parts I thought were interesting and/or funny):

Now Austin is considering spending about $1.8 million, plus operating costs of about $225,000 per year, to put in a similar system.

It would start with 30 stations and 300 bikes but could eventually expand to 70 stations with 700 bikes, said Annick Beaudet, head of the city’s Bicycle Program.

The city would apply for grant money to help cover costs. If Austin officials find a business model that will work, a bike-share system could be up and running within two years. Officials would work to make memberships, grants and possibly advertising sustain it.

As urban areas look for ways to efficiently move people around, Denver, Chicago, Miami, Minneapolis and Washington have all put in bike-share systems in recent years. An estimated 200 cities around the world, including Paris, London, Barcelona and Berlin, now have them.

Proponents say bike sharing can reduce traffic congestion and improve users’ health. Most cities, including San Antonio, team with a nonprofit or private-sector partner for operations.

Many are considered successful, although vandalism and theft have been problems in some places. In Paris, which began a program in 2007, thousands of bikes were stolen, dumped into the Seine River or hung from light posts in the first two years, according to a 2009 article by The New York Times. Those problems have decreased since locking mechanisms were improved and users were required to use credit cards to buy memberships.

Theft hasn’t been as much of a problem in the United States. Just one bike in Minneapolis’ NiceRide system, which operates 65 stations with 700 bikes, has disappeared in the five months the program has been operating, said Executive Director Bill Dossett.

I would  definitely be interested in a bike share the program if it was available in Austin – hopefully we will hear more about this as time goes on.

One big problem with the bus option: Buses, say many transit mavens, have a bad image. People who won’t get on the bus, they say, will opt for nice rail cars. The reasons are multiple. For some, it’s classism – buses are seen as a service for poor people. For others, it’s mode of travel – the General Accounting Office report said “the public sees rail as faster, quieter, and less polluting than buses, even though Bus Rapid Tran­sit is designed to overcome those problems.”

The Central Austin Transit Study projected that better bus would attract only 9,000 boardings per weekday by 2030, compared with 27,600 on urban rail. But maybe “better bus” is the problem – by offering that limited concept, rather than full-fledged BRT*, as the only alternative to rail, perhaps URS** gave short shrift to the potential of bus. What if Austin created BRT that approached the quality of rail?

(*The article earlier explains “BRT” as “bus rapid transit” – a loosely defined term that usually means high-quality buses running on busy corridors at greater frequencies and with fewer stops. Beyond that, however, BRT systems vary widely in quality, ranging from buses that simply have traffic signal-changing technology (currently being considered by Cap Metro) to buses running in high-occupancy-vehicle lanes or even on exclusive bus highways, with fancy stops resembling rail stations.” **Also URS is an Austin company the city paid to do the Central Austin Tran­sit Study.)

The article goes on to talk about the costs of better bus versus urban rail, quoting former Tracor CEO Jim Skaggs:

“Fort Worth just went through this consideration in December and decided against rail as being the solution,” says Skaggs. “They decided that buses, which they could do for 10 percent of what the rail cost was, were perfectly adequate to do what they wanted to do, and give them more flexibility. They had $25 million in their pocket from the feds already and had to give it back, because they decided that [with the remaining costs], they couldn’t justify it.” (Actually, the Fort Worth City Council’s discussions of a downtown streetcar aren’t completely dead and buried, but it did halt a streetcar study in December over cost concerns.) Austin’s “alternatives studies from the very beginning have been based on rail,” Skaggs says. “[They've asked only] ‘What alternative rail are we going to use?’ They have really given lip service to alternative studies and haven’t really looked at the differences.”

I can see both sides of the debate of bus v. rail and it will be very interesting to see how this plays out as the election draws closer.

But I do love naps so I think I’ll buy another pass.

A small conference room was filled with large poster boards explaining the process of updating the public transportation system (such as environmental reviews the city will have to conduct), and there were several posters about different options the city was considering for improving public transportation. One option was the no-build option (basically doing nothing except minor additions to current bus system as needed), one was the better-bus option (making due with the bus system but making it “smarter” such as allowing lights to turn green as buses approach, making commute times via bus faster and more convenient) and the last option was the urban rail proposal, which would create a system of street cars mostly in the downtown area with extensions into the Mueller development and to the airport.  There were also maps of different proposed station locations for the urban rail option.  I didn’t learn anything about the city’s ideas that I hadn’t already learned just by reading the news and the public meeting website, so I was a little disappointed.  Plus I felt like the whole meeting was somewhat pointless -I suppose if I owned a house near a potential site for a new station to be built and I didn’t want a street car driving past my house all day I could have filled out a comment card asking  that the station be built elsewhere.  But I don’t own a house or business downtown, so really all I could write on my comment card was which of those 3 options I thought was best. And the City already paid for a study which recommended that Austin build an urban rail to decrease congestion, so it’s not as if me and the other 3 attendees of the event had gone in there advocating for the “no-build” option, the city would decide to drop the urban rail proposal.  So I suppose I felt like the public meeting was mostly a PR event for the light rail proposal.  I’m still glad I was able to check it out, and I do think the city needs to improve the public transportation system (I’m anti No-build), I just wish I had gotten more out of the event.

If you’re interested in filling out a comment card, click on the above link and you can find a link to the City’s website where you can submit one online.

 *Monday, April 4, 2 to 5 p.m., at the Austin Convention Center (meeting room 3 on the first floor), 500 E. Cesar Chavez St.;

* Wednesday, April 6, 5 to 8 p.m., at the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (first floor conference room), 4700 Mueller Blvd.;

* Thursday, April 7, 11 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the AT&T Executive Education and Conference Center (classroom 103 on the first floor), 1900 University Ave.;

* Thursday, April 7, 5 to 8 p.m., at the George Washington Carver Museum (museum foyer), 1165 Angelina St.; and

* Saturday, April 9, 11 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the Ruiz Branch Library (meeting rooms), 1600 Grove Blvd.

One of these is near my workplace during lunch so I may try to attend part of it.

The Statesman had this editorial in the paper over the weekend urging people to attend:

Last week, the city offered up a proposed light rail plan that includes more than 40 stations, including a possible spur heading up Red River Street from the University of Texas to Hancock Center. Among the many decisions to be made is where the rail line will cross the river.

Overall, we are talking about 16.5 miles of tracks running electric-powered trains on or alongside city streets. It would link downtown, UT, the Mueller neighborhood and Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. Any form of additional public transportation to our airport would be a great thing.

Estimated price tag, for now: $1.3 billion. The city is looking to a $200 million or more bond issue — to cover the project’s first phase — in November 2012. The Austin City Council this week will consider a plan to seek federal money for the project. Federal money seems crucial for this project.

There’s a lot to talk about and question –— especially financing — before we get anywhere near heading to the ballot box.

The environmental study, of which this week’s hearings are a part, hinges on three potential choices. One is “no-build.” Do nothing and stick with the current, limited transit options. We believe doing nothing is a feasible option only in the sad event that it turns out we can’t afford to do something.

The City of Austin’s website states:

Submit a written comment online, or via e-mail at transportation@ci.austin.tx.us. Written comments may also be submitted in person at the Public Scoping Meetings or by mail to Urban Rail Project, Austin Transportation Department, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767.

Comments should be postmarked before April 29, 2011 to be included in the public record.

The Federal Transit Administration and the City of Austin have officially begun the process of preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the city’s proposed Urban Rail system, including scheduling a series of meetings in April for the public to learn about and comment on the proposed Central Austin transit system.

If you are interested in public transportation, it should be interesting to learn more about the proposal.