BIKE: Pfluger Completion Within Sight?

[Eric Anderson]

Bike folks:

Just to answer a few of David's questions, offer some comments:

1) I am assuming that the negotiations with "developers in the Seaholm
District" have resulted in a -center/Bowie- alignment through the Gables
project/ Lumberman's trust land.

2) By combining NE-2 and NE-3 I mean a NE-(center) arm heading directly
toward site of Bowie underpass, crossing Sandra Muraida at controlled
intersection, through Gables site, through Bowie underpass, and ideally
coming to grade in two directions: left to Bowie/3rd, right toward Shoal
Creek, Downtown, as the Lance Armstrong Bikeway.

3) Additional pathway alignments as depicted in NE-2 and NE-3 should be
considered for district connectivity, as secondary pathways connecting E-W
(Gables, Children's and Seaholm); or N-S (3rd and window to Shoal Creek,
down hill to Seaholm, and intersection at Cesar Chavez)

4) If a Cesar Chavez LAB alignment remains, I will insist that Pfluger
extension and LAB share alignment between Pfluger Bridge and 3rd.

5) Cesar Chavez LAB alignment still "makes no sense whatsoever", but short
of efforts to revise plan at this late date, and a new bridge over Lamar
south of the UP bridge, a Cesar Chavez LAB alignment seems likely.

6) If however, negotiations with "developers in the Seaholm District" have
also resulted in adding this new bridge over Lamar south of the UP bridge,
all bets re: LAB are off. This new bridge was identified as important in
Seaholm Masterplan, and would facilitate desired vehicle access to the
Gables/Children's Museum/Seaholm. If this wild-card appears on the table,
Mike Dahmus, David Foster and I might insist on renewed discussion of my
preferred LAB "northerly" alignment through UP (Amtrak) property, down
hill behind YMCA, behinnd Town Lake Animal Shelter, and parallel to
reserve drive.

Again, in closing: If Pfluger planners are unable to leverage this
economic development and civic momentum toward a wildly successful Pfluger
Bridge, we might as well just lay down and die!

Eric

--- David Foster <david-k1971-foster> wrote:

> Thanks, Eric, for staying on top of this very important issue. The web
> page 
> links you site have great visuals depicting some of the current options
> for 
> extending the bridge.
> 
> Here are my comments.
> 1) The NW extension appears to be the only option that does not have an 
> at-grade crossing of a realigned Sandra Muraida. However, it also lacks
> an 
> easy transition to the Lance Armstrong Bikeway (LAB) which for some
> reason 
> is omitted from the west extension graphic. However, it might be easy to
> 
> make an smooth transition to the LAB if the LAB is positioned north of
> the 
> UP tracks along 3rd Street rather than just north of Cesar Chavez. I
> have 
> yet to meet a single cyclist who wants the LAB on Cesar Chavez.
> 
> I say might be easy because the underpass beneath the tracks (purple on
> the 
> city's graphic) appears to emerge farther north of 3rd Street (where the
> 
> LAB should go!!) than optimal.
> 
> 2). All of the underground options require an at-grade crossing of
> Sandra 
> Muraida and in my view move the extension too far east. They would also 
> require as I understand it a reconstruction of Cesar Chavez. I do not
> want 
> to wait that long.
> 
> 3) Of the NE options, option 2 seems the best, since it does not require
> 
> passing beneath the UP tracks to the east and is hence a more direct
> route 
> under the tacks to 3rd Street. However, all 3 NE options require an 
> at-grade crossing of Sandra Muraida and none of the NE options allow for
> a 
> smooth transition to the LAB if the LAB is placed on Cesar Chavez.
> 
> I am curious to know what Eric means about a combination of NE 2 and NE 
> 3... maybe we will earn more once city staff lets us know about the 
> discussions with the developers.
> 
> And of course, in the best of worlds we would have both the NW arm and
> one 
> of the NE arms, as originally intended!
> 
> But please, let's move the LAB away from Cesar Chavez.
> 
> 
> At 05:58 PM 11/30/04, Eric Anderson wrote:
> >Friends and foes of Pfluger Bridge:
> >
> >I have submitted the following for publication in the
> December-(January)
> >issue of Southwest Cycling News (newspaper of the Austin Cycling
> >Association), available today at your neighborhood bike shop or
> >coffeehouse:
> >
> >Pfluger Bridge Completion Within Sight?
> >
> >Pfluger planners hint at new developments
> >
> >The four year-old riddle of our short-armed Pfluger Bridge may soon be
> >closer to solving. Quoting from a November 4th letter to the members of
> >the Community Advisory Group (CAG), Pfluger Extension Project planners
> >wrote:
> >
> >“Exciting potential partnering opportunities are developing for the
> >Pfluger Bridge Extension Project as a direct result of the City's
> ongoing
> >discussions with developers of projects in the Seaholm District. New
> and
> >potentially exciting opportunities for the Pfluger Bridge are resulting
> >from these discussions…”
> >
> >The Pfluger Bridge Extension Project CAG will meet December 15th to
> >discuss “these exciting new developments and how the Pfluger Bridge
> >Extension options dovetail into them…”
> >
> >Pfluger Bridge Extension Project CAG meeting:
> >Date: Wednesday, December 15, 2004
> >Time: 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
> >Place: Town Lake Center, 721 Barton Springs Road, Room 100
> >
> >If you have not yet visited the Pfluger Bridge Extension Project
> Website,
> >you will find considerable background information:
> >http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/publicworks/pflugerbridge_planning.htm
> >
> >Seven alignment options follow three design concepts: 1) the original
> >northwest option that would start from the bridge and travel
> northwesterly
> >towards North Lamar Boulevard, 2) a set of options in a northeasterly
> >direction from the bridge, and 3) a set of options that would cross
> West
> >Cesar Chavez Street through a street underpass at a point east of the
> >Union Pacific bridge.
> >http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/publicworks/pflugerbridge_design.htm
> >
> >You will also find on the “design page” several other links, including
> >“Preliminary Alternative Data Sheet” which details distance, structure
> >length, and grade change information. An “Evaluation Criteria Sheet”
> will
> >help you rate the various alternatives.
> >
> >Now, to offer my own opinion, incorporating thoughts of others who have
> >battled this Pfluger Bridge conundrum as long or longer than I. To
> begin
> >with, the facility must serve well the bridge’s original transportation
> >purpose, or quoting Urban Transportation Commissioner Mike Dahmus:
> >
> >“The route MUST be an attractive enough alternative to LAMAR BLVD so
> that
> >TRANSPORTATIONAL CYCLISTS willingly use it instead of the Lamar
> Bridge.”
> >
> >I believe that a (center) Northeast Pfluger extension (or variation on
> >NE-2 and NE-3) could serve not only those seasoned Class "A" cyclists,
> but
> >also Class "B" cyclists. It may be that an alternative has finally
> emerged
> >that unites district needs with bicycle transportation requirements,
> >including:
> >
> >·       secure Bowie St. alignment through proposed Gables project on
> >Lumberman’s Tract, facilitating a Bowie St. underpass
> >·       build Bowie underpass in tandem with a bridge extension
> >·       incorporate Lance Armstrong Bikeway into Pfluger Bridge
> extension
> >alignment between Cesar Chavez and 3rd St.
> >·       signalized intersections at BOTH 5th and Bowie AND 6th and
> Bowie
> >·       design and implement quality engineered transition/crossing
> connecting
> >Bowie and 6th with Henderson, facilitating north and south-bound travel
> >from Pfluger Bridge and Bowie underpass to 9th and Henderson
> >·       create a bike-way to and through the Market District while also
> >facilitating the north-south connectivity desired by seasoned bike
> >commuters
> >
> >Stay tuned for more “potentially exciting opportunities for the Pfluger
> >Bridge”.
> >
> >=========================================================
> >
> >Pfluger planners hope to have consensus on a bridge-alignment by early
> >this next year, then going to council, and receiving authorization to
> >follow through with design and engineering. If all goes well, we might
> >expect construction to begin sometime in 2006.
> >
> >Clearly the opportunity that seems to be unfolding involves
> coordination
> >and partnership with neighboring projects and developers, including:
> >Gables, Children's Museum, Seaholm redevelopment, Whole Foods flagship
> >store and corporate offices, Schlosser Development, Phoenix project at
> >Goodwill site, and perhaps involving other corporate "good citizens" in
> >the neighborhood such as GSDM.
> >
> >If Pfluger planners are unable to leverage this economic development
> and
> >civic momentum toward a wildly successful Pfluger Bridge, we might as
> well
> >just lay down and die!
> >
> >
> >
> >=====
> >Eric Anderson <bikeeric>
> >(512) 476-7304
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
> >http://my.yahoo.com
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Get on or off this list here:  http://BicycleAustin.info/list
> 
> 




=====
Eric Anderson <bikeeric>
(512) 476-7304


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com