It’s not too often I attempt to write a justification for my existence, but here goes.
Few people in Austin are willing to talk about public transportation right now, which seems odd given the major developments in Connections 2025 (now branded “Cap Remap”) and Project Connect. This is a gap I’ve tried to fill with my new transit blog, the Austin Metro Journal.
Capital Metro’s board meetings draw a small cohort of regular critics, but they focus on individual service planning and customer service issues (“I don’t like the way y’all cut service to my neighborhood post office”) and thereby miss the bigger picture. I’d put Austin’s light rail boosters in the same camp. These folks have the best intentions, but they’re narrowly focused on building a specific transit technology.
On the flip side, you have Austin’s “urbanists” and policy wonks, comprised mostly of millennials and techies, who see public transit as a stepping-stone to a New Urbanist utopia complete with Vision Zero, universal cycle tracks, and—let’s be honest—Manhattan-like densities. Urbanists certainly value public transit, but it’s not their main focus. They care about transit insofar as it paves the way for their starry-eyed visions.
And then you have me, the guy who’s interested in critiquing Capital Metro and advocating for better service for Austin transit riders. Continue reading “Transit Advocacy Is Not Urbanism”
After months of analysis paralysis, Connections 2025, Capital Metro’s shiny new transit system, is almost here. I witnessed the board of directors approve the first set of service changes back in November. The new local bus network is slated to roll out in June 2018.
In the spirit of other transit network redesigns, Connections 2025 will transform Austin’s bus network from a collection of downtown-oriented radials to an intuitive, connected grid with vastly expanded frequent service. Capital Metro will become much more useful for non-commute trips; journeys not involving downtown will be much more convenient to take, while weekend service will be largely on par with weekday service.
At least, that’s the pitch. And if you’re a transit rider or public transit advocate, that all sounds like pretty good stuff. Austin clearly needs a new bus network; Capital Metro’s decades-old system is inconvenient and frustrating to use.
But as excited as I am for the new network, it has some flaws that will probably leave it just short of achieving its full potential. I have two main quibbles with Connections 2025, and I think the root cause (as I wrote, awkwardly, last year) is Capital Metro’s consistent failure to engage with its riders and its constituents. Continue reading “New Year, New Network: Connections 2025 Looks Fresh, but Feels Oh-So-Familiar”
I usually keep my writings on my personal blog and The Daily Texan separate, but I’ll make an exception here: this post is an addendum to my recent opinion column on sustainability and the UT campus map.
Here’s how I think the campus map should look like. I took the visitor map from the Parking and Transportation Services website and added the UT shuttle campus circulators and some suggested bicycling routes.
(I’m not a huge fan of the segregated bike lanes on Guadalupe and Dean Keeton, but they are depicted for posterity’s sake.)
If we want to claim the mantle of a sustainable campus, a map like this is just plain common sense.
Capital Metro’s ongoing Connections 2025 study promises to restructure Austin’s transit network to be more frequent, reliable, and efficient. It’s in the vein of other successful network redesigns, particularly the one in Houston last year. And as with any redesign, it’s been a lightning rod for controversy, as I observed first-hand in the November board meeting. Schoolchildren, those with disabilities, the elderly, and business owners pleaded with the board to reconsider changing their bus routes.
As I have previously noted, I think that 2025 is a mostly good plan. The results of other network restructurings like Houston’s have been astounding, and I’m excited at the prospect of similar opportunities for Austin. And given the archaic design of Capital Metro’s bus network, some sort of ground-up redesign was long overdue. Routes meander slowly in a hub-and-spoke pattern from suburbs to downtown. Service is duplicated, hurting efficiency. Headways are long and inconsistent, meaning a printed schedule is mandatory, even for a route used on a regular basis. To a rider, the whole thing is difficult to decipher and frustrating to use. Continue reading “2025: the Mistake Capital Metro Shouldn’t Make”
Good afternoon. My name is Ryan, and I am a UT undergraduate studying computer science, urban studies, and public transportation. I have followed the Connections 2025 system redesign with much interest. I think it’s a forward-thinking plan with good principles; but I am here today to share with you some concerns I have with the draft plan. Continue reading “A Speech I Gave at Today’s Capital Metro Board Meeting”
Having lived in Austin for some months now I’ve been surprised by the lack of quality public transportation in a so-called “liberal” and “weird” city.
Austinites like Mike Dahmus criticize Capital Metro constantly for being inefficient, opaque, and making all the wrong decisions.
After many sleepless nights thinking about Capital Metro’s shortcomings, I thought I’d add my viewpoint to the Austin transit scene.
- Poorly laid out routes. Just look at the Capital Metro system map (warning: ridiculously large PDF) and see how Austin’s transit lines are structured. It’s clear that they are designed to do one thing: provide single-seat rides from the suburbs to the downtown core. But this is the 21st century, and as modern transit planners have noted, downtown just isn’t that important anymore. What happens if you want to go somewhere else besides downtown? On Capital Metro, be prepared for numerous transfers, long waits, and very, very long travel times.
- Too focused on coverage. So many of Capital Metro’s routes zigzag through neighborhoods and detour into strip malls to provide “service” to those special-interest areas. Also, particularly in the downtown/UT core, there are far too many stops. This is the safe way to run transit if you’re looking to appease your political base, but the fact is that streamlining routes and consolidating stops would go a long way in speeding up service. This would result in a more efficient system, increased frequencies, and lower operating costs.
- Not enough frequency or weekend service. Routes have 30-minute headways if you’re lucky. On weekends, particularly Sundays, be prepared to wait 45 to 60 minutes for the next bus. Also, there are no express buses running on the weekend.
- Too confusing. Bus stops signs are nearly impossible to decipher, and in a lot of cases the information is incomplete (e.g. no indication that certain stops are drop-off only). The headways are not only long, they’re also inconsistent (varying between 25-35 minutes), forcing you to check the schedule to really know when the bus will arrive. I have also seen riders get on the wrong route or attempt to pay for an express bus with a local day pass. Maybe Capital Metro should stop flashing random messages like “ATX IS HANDS FREE” on the destination blinds.
- Commuter-oriented. Far too many of Capital Metro’s services are only useful to commuters. I’m talking about buses that only run one direction in the morning and the other direction in the evening. Or coach-style buses to nowhere with no obvious connections to local service. Good transit isn’t about getting you to work and back – it’s about being there for all your transportation needs, anytime, anywhere.
- Trains to nowhere. Austin’s over-hyped MetroRail service connects North Austin’s far-flung suburbs with downtown. Well, in theory. The downtown station is half-mile walk from the local bus routes, so walking that distance to make a transfer is a pain. (Furthermore, forget about making a transfer to Amtrak or Lone Star Rail if it ever gets built.) And MetroRail completely misses the UT campus, making it useless for students. Capital Metro’s latest rail expansion plan (November 2014) called for light rail tracks in a very low-ridership corridor. It reeked of developer speculation and special-interest lobbying; Austinites were smart to turn it down.
- Poor downtown coverage. So you ride the bus downtown. Great, the mediocre bus system is working to your advantage. But where do you go from here? Capital Metro recently realigned all services onto the same pair of streets, so many downtown attractions are a half-mile walk or more from the nearest bus stop. Oh, and the downtown circulator named the “Dillo” was cut a few years ago.
“Crap Metro” should follow the lead of other cities like Houston, which is transforming its bus system into an efficient grid network and built a cost-effective, high-ridership light rail system. (Oh, the irony! A conservative Texas city with progressive transit policies!)
Instead, it’s poured all its resources into more commuter-centric services and a “Bus Rapid Transit” project that isn’t actually BRT and has a premium fare.
I am shocked that Austinites aren’t demanding better.
As part of an open-ended class project, I wrote a program to collect arrival time statistics for Capital Metro BRT buses.
You can check out the final report here.