Emails, Jim Wick, campaign manager, Moving Austin Forward, Oct. 26, 2016

11:32 a.m.

I'm writing in regards to the statement that the Mayor's plan would remove 27+ miles of vehicle lanes and replace them with lanes for bicycles and buses.

I took a very hard look at the corridor plans and can say with absolute certainty that there is no way that number is correct.

First, there is no vehicle lane loss for buses on any corridor except for potentially Riverside and Guadalupe.

There is no vehicle lane loss for bicycles in this plan.

The plan does call for replacing some two way left turn lanes with medians and turning bays, so I went through the corridor schematics and calculated how many feet of vehicle lanes we would be "losing" to medians. Here are my calculations:

South Lamar is a 3.3 mile corridor that would lose 1.6 miles of TWLTL to medians. The remaining 1.7 miles would still be TWLTL or turning bays, along with sections of the roadway that already have a raised median.

Airport Blvd is a 6.5 mile corridor that would lose 3 miles of TWLTL to medians. The remaining 3.5 miles would still be TWLTL or turning bays, along with sections that already have a median.

North Lamar is a 6 mile corridor that would lose about 4 miles of TWLTL to medians. The remaining 2 miles would be turning bays or already has a median.

Burnet is a 5 mile corridor that would lose 3.2 miles of TWLTL to medians. The remaining 1.8 miles would be turning bays or already has a median.

Riverside is a 3.7 mile corridor that would lose .5 miles of TWLTL to medians. The remaining 3.2 miles would be turning bays or already has a median.

East MLK (city portion) is a 3.5 mile corridor that would lose 2.5 miles of TWLTL to medians. The remaining 1 mile would be turning bays.

By my calculation, we'd lose 14.8 miles of TWLTL to raised medians, but not to bikes or buses.

Does this all make sense?

Thanks,

Jim

From: "Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)"

To: Jim Wick

Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 5:20 PM

Subject: Following up

Got it.

Besides listing all this out in an email, have you posted the corridor-by-corridor analysis showing the mile counts in each category?

Per bikeways, is it fair to say that if you have a certain width right-of-way, and it currently has six lanes (like on Riverside), and then after you add bike lanes, parking, wider sidewalks and a bus-only lanes, you have four vehicle lanes, the bike lanes and widened sidewalks will have been partly responsible for the reduction in travel lanes? If not, why not?

Does this same logic apply to other corridors in the city’s plans? Why or why not?

And what is your formal title with the group?

G.

5:36 p.m.

-- I have not posted this analysis since I did it quite recently.

-- I don't believe so -- I think you could ascribe that to bus lanes or parking lanes, but the major thrust of these corridors is using the existing right of way more effectively and efficiently. It would not be accurate to say that removing 23' of right of way from vehicle lanes means we gain 62' of right of way for center running high capacity transit, medians, separated cycle tracks, parking spaces, and sidewalks. It would be much fairer to say one traffic lane (11.5') is being removed in favor of a parking lane (8') and a median (3').

-- For the other corridors, it is all maximization of right of way. There is no loss of vehicle lanes for bike lanes.

-- I'm the Campaign Manager for Move Austin Forward.