Capital Metro is seeking public feedback on proposed changes to the transit system that, if approved, would take effect January 15, 2012. Customer input helps Capital Metro fine-tune the proposal and ultimately improve service.



Route 100 has not performed well in terms of ridership productivity but it provides an important link to Austin Bergstrom International Airport. In recent years, Capital Metro cut several low-performing routes; Route 100 now sits near the bottom of the list and is failing to meet minimum ridership standards. Proposed changes to Route 100 focus on efficiency, directness, and simplicity. Realigning the route from 7th Street to a dense, high-ridership corridor like Riverside would draw riders seeking a faster trip to downtown. Shortening the route within UT would reduce (bus) running time. The northern terminus for Route 100 would be located along 23rd Street, the eastern hub for UT Shuttles. Streamlining the route within the downtown area would speed up service and make the route easier to understand. Stops would be located within ¼ mile of most hotels and attractions (Convention Center, Capitol, museums, etc.). Connectivity with MetroRail would also be improved by stopping at Downtown Station. In addition to the routing and stop changes, the biggest improvement for this route and its riders includes increasing the frequency to 30 minutes from 40 minutes.

For more information or how to attend a public meeting please visit capmetro.org/changes/jan2012.asp

12 Votes Completed
Bootstrap_783035412
Mike Dahmus over 6 years ago

This service would be better aligned on Guadalupe - closer to where more peoples' offices are, and closer to West Campus, where even more people live. Run it up to the Triangle while you're at it.

Vote
Default_avatar
Patrick E over 6 years ago

CapMetro, I have no problem with realigning the Airport Flyer route from 7th Street to Riverside Drive; however, I am concerned about planned Riverside Drive road construction projects that should happen in the near future. I'm not sure that a final date has been set for this major road construction project, but information on the City of Austin website makes it appear that this project will occur soon. If that project results in delays like those that routinely occured during the 7th Street project (let's all pray that it's not like the Brazos, Colorado or Cesaer Chavez road improvement projects), then the Airport Flyer would be frequently and significantly delayed in getting to and from ABIA. Perhaps, you could have the Flyer continue to take the 7th Street route to and from Downtown/ABIA until the Riverside road construction project is completed.

Vote
Default_avatar
Tom Thayer about 6 years ago

I also have questions about the downtown alignment.  Which alignment services the most hotels?  It's not a bad idea running it through UT where lots of dorms area, but maybe it could cut over to West Campus also.  The comments about delaying the move to Riverside until after construction also make lots of sense.  Long-term the move to Riverside would be a good one.

Vote
Default_avatar
Capital Metro admin about 6 years ago

Hi Patrick,

Eventual construction on Riverside cannot duplicate projects such as Brazos or 7th. Traffic flow for autos and buses on Riverside is much too critical. Riverside is a high-volume corridor with much more capacity (6 lanes wide between I-35 and Ben White).



Vote
Default_avatar
Capital Metro admin about 6 years ago

Hi Tom, The current alignment provides good hotel coverage but comes with a price: infrequent service, less than ideal stop locations.

The proposed alignment is within walking distance of more hotel beds. The number of hotel beds is a more effective measure than number of hotels.

 West Campus is not feasible given the travel time impact. Riders could take West Campus shuttle to Airport Flyer stops.



Vote
Default_avatar
Patrick E about 6 years ago

CapMetro, Thanks for your reply. I think you may have mis-read a portion of my comment. I did not intend to imply that the Riverside Drive construction project would, in fact, be exactly like the Brazos and Colorado Street projects. That parenthetical comment was more of a prayer/hope that this is what WOULD NOT occur. I thought that the 7th Street construction project actually went WELL considering it was a major thoroughfare and the amount of work that the project sought to accomplish. Clearly, it adversely affected several local businesses and greatly/frequently inconvenienced many travellers. Unfortunately, that is the price of living in a growing urban area. I get that. I don't fault the City of Austin, the road contractors or CapMetro for delays that occurred on 7th Street. Delays will ALWAYS happen when there is major road construction.

Still, my point remains un-addressed. Why change the Out-bound/In-bound route from 7th Street to Riverside Drive right now? Wouldn't it be reasonable to wait until the Riverside Drive project is complete or nearly complete? I think many reasonable people would suspect that there would be frequent delays on Riverside due to the construction project. The fact that Riverside is a high-volume corridor might actually make traffic delays even worse because that high traffic flow will bottleneck and back-up as road crews must move heavy road equipment, aggregates and other construction related materials.

Personally, I don't mind being a little late to to some events once in awhile. However, air travel is already stressful and unpleasant enough and tardiness poses very special problems to air travellers. If you do change this route to Riverside while Riverside is under going construction, I feel it would be a mistake. I can not support this route change for that reason at this time. Thanks for your feedback and thank you for listening That is sincere -- I do truly appreciate your efforts to communicate with the public. I just don't agree with this particular route change at this time.

Vote
Bootstrap_2011_june
David Villa about 6 years ago

What difference does the density of the corridor make for an express route? The bus doesn't make any stops along 7th Street anyways, save one at Pleasant Valley for connections. If it doesn't work as an express route, then don't try to salvage it by turning it into a duplicative <strike>local service</strike> route feigning directness. Just eliminate it.

Vote
Bootstrap_783035412
Mike Dahmus about 6 years ago

Re: West Campus, expecting people taking a trip to the airport to transfer from a very unreliable service to a somewhat more reliable service with very long headways when they're trying to get somewhere where time is critically important is naive. Not going to happen. So you're basically giving up that population completely.

Vote
Default_avatar
Capital Metro admin about 6 years ago

Hi Patrick,

The primary reason to shift the #100 from 7th to Riverside now is that #100 has consistently underperformed and requires remediation to avoid complete elimination. Given our current budget situation, it is not fiscally responsible to continue operating #100 in its current form while other local fare services, such as #7 Dove Springs and #20 Riverside, which would encounter relief from the proposal, are often standing room only.

 

As you stated, major road construction will always create delays. Keep in mind, Riverside is already an important transit corridor. The aforementioned local routes as well as 4 UT Shuttle routes combine for 30 buses per hour (adding #100 would increase that figure to 32). These routes have no alternate corridor, thereby increasing the importance of efficient construction phasing and continuous traffic flow.

 

On-time arrivals are absolutely important for air travelers. They are equally important for employees and students.

Hi @David Villa,

Ridership is a direct result of density and destinations. There is only one #100 stop along 7th because it is the only stop with significant demand.

The 3 proposed stops along Riverside (Burton, Wickersham, and Montopolis) generate more local ridership than the entire #100 route. Adding these stops, while eliminating low ridership stops downtown, results in comparable speeds. As a result, #100 becomes a more efficient and cost-effective limited stop route.



Thanks for your feedback and thoughtful comments. We appreciate your interest and thank you for riding Capital Metro.



Vote
Default_avatar
Capital Metro admin about 6 years ago

Mike Dahmus,

ABIA, Riverside, Downtown, UT, Triangle would definitely perform well. It’s also an ideal light rail alignment. Perhaps, phase 2.

 

We’re in agreement, mostly. I would use Trinity between 4th and MLK and Guadalupe north of MLK. The number of destinations and redevelopment potential is greater east of Congress, in my opinion.



Vote
Default_avatar
Patrick E about 6 years ago

Thanks for your reply CapMetro. Given what you said in your last reply, I'm coming into agreement with the thrust of David Villa's comments concerning just eliminating the Airport Flyer. It sounds like the Riverside corridor is already well served and those Riverside routes are well supported in terms of ridership. If the Airport Flyer is a historically low performing route that has been given ample time to suceed and has not, than you should seriously consider just eliminating it. I know that is not a current option (the Service Change is the current option); however, this should be considered the next time around.

I do like the Airport Flyer and it has fulfilled my needs in the past, but I understand the current budgetary environment. I can find other ways to and from the airport and think many Airport Flyer passengers could to so as well. However, I won't be taking Riverside to and from ABIA during construction. Good luck with the route.

Vote
Bootstrap_2011_june
David Villa about 6 years ago

Thanks to CapMetro staff for all the responses. I'm starting to warm up to the idea, but elimination shouldn't be taken off of the table (edit:) in the future should the route continue to underperform.

Essentially what this service change would do is turn the 100 from express service (by which I mean non-stop or nearly so) to limited-stop service. If that's what it takes to salvage it then I'd have to concede that Riverside is the best option, aside from construction worries which sound like bad news all around. Please tell me that won't be until summer.

It doesn't matter that the proposed alignment duplicates part of route 20 since that's local service. The 1/101 is a good analogy. It doesn't really duplicate the UT shuttles either since these don't actually stop on Riverside. The closest stop is Crossing Place but for northbound 100 only. A stop closer to Wickersham would be more symmetrical (nearer the 100 southbound) and more central, if only it weren't so far from any route 20 stop.

Vote
Default_avatar
Susan Pantell about 6 years ago

The bus to the airport provides a service, so even though ridership is a concern, it should not be the primary determinant. There are a lot of options for people on Riverside to take buses into town. What is lacking is a good service for people throughout Austin to get to the airport. The shuttle should not only serve tourists and students, but the residents of Austin. The current proposal does not sound like it does that. The UT shuttle is for students and faculty, not the general public.

Vote
Bootstrap_2011_june
David Villa about 6 years ago

Susan, I can understand how this proposal would make that impression, with the new terminus of the route at the hub for UT shuttles, and with the route passing through the Riverside area concentrated with UT students. However, with closer evaluation, the change is actually beneficial to the general public, and does not turn the route into one that caters to students and faculty.

The reasons are that, first of all, the 100 still hits the major points that fulfill its mission as an express route to the airport, in particular the transfer corridor in the downtown area. Realignment would connect it with light rail, which is not a service that passes UT. The route is not being extended to the UT shuttle hub; in fact, it already passes by it, and would be truncated to that point instead of traveling the full length of the campus. Improved frequency, the number one measure that any bus rider will use to evaluate a route, is a direct result of this truncation. Finally, as I explain in an earlier post, it doesn't actually duplicate UT shuttle services, which stop in the Riverside area but not actually on Riverside itself. The 100 would act more as a limited-stop service on top of route 20. A great number of residents in the Riverside area are not UT students, and would use the route to get downtown. This is the increase in ridership that Capital Metro is aiming for. Those headed to UT would not find the route very attractive since it runs much less often than the shuttles and goes through downtown rather than directly to campus.

In other words, the 100 already serves tourists, students, and residents, and while the changes target which specific stops will most likely draw ridership, they do not discourage riders of any group. Students will continue to use the route primarily to get to and from the airport. Tourists will find the destinations more convenient. For Austinites more broadly, connection to rail will provide better service, if anything. You are right that we lack a good service for people anywhere in the city to get to the airport, but the 100 was never and can never be that. What people have always done is transfer downtown, and this proposal does not change that. It does, however, increased frequency, which simply benefits everybody.

Vote
Default_avatar
Julia Ferguson almost 6 years ago

Perhaps if the bus ran more frequently, and as late and early as airplanes take off and arrive, it would be more popular because people could rely on its being available. As it is, if a plane gets in late, the option of taking the bus (which is by far the cheapest and easiest way to get to and from the airport) is no longer available, so it's always worth it to set up a ride in advance rather than relying on the unreliable bus.

Vote
Default_avatar
steve waugh 22 days ago

figure numerous sensible individuals would presume that there would be visit delays on Riverside because of the development venture. Do my Coursework for me The way that Riverside is a high-volume passage may really aggravate activity delays even in light of the fact that that high movement stream will bottleneck and move down as street groups must move substantial street hardware, totals and other development related materials.

Vote
Default_avatar
siena william 15 days ago

We, at MyAssignmenthelp.com, began our journey a decade back with the goal of empowering students with all kinds of academic Essay Help. We know that sometimes it becomes impossible for students to meet deadlines and especially the high standards set by the universities and colleges of Australia for academic essay writing help.

Vote
Default_avatar
siena william 15 days ago

We, at MyAssignmenthelp.com, began our journey a decade back with the goal of empowering students with all kinds of academic Essay Help. We know that sometimes it becomes impossible for students to meet deadlines and especially the high standards set by the universities and colleges of Australia for academic essay writing help.

Vote
Default_avatar
michael gordon at December 13, 2017 at 1:22am PST

Many thanks for sharing this very diverse opinion post where each expert has no doubt shared his best knowledge on the topic. Have more success in your journey. Accounting Assignment Help from online assignment writing service

Vote