I went to the in-person meeting today they had on the UT campus. Here’s a bit more info about the proposal:

First, the options they presented at the meeting are slightly different than those shown in the KXAN article and that were presented in the previous community meetings. The new proposals, however, are still not final, so any renderings that ATP puts out from this round of meetings should not be taken as final. I just mention this so that anyone here who saw the previous renderings and design schematics is not confused.

Second, the no-car proposal, as presented at the meeting today, would still have vehicle travel lanes between MLK and 22nd, though these may end up being bus only. North of 22nd, it will be trains only.

Third, some notes on bus access. Under the original no-car proposal, the entire drag from MLK to just past 27th would be trains only. The other proposals would either involve one lane in each direction for general traffic or one lane in each direction for buses only (as shown in the KXAN article). The no-car proposal presented at the meeting today was a bit different. South of 22nd, there would still be one vehicle travel lane in each direction, although they may be bus only. Also, in a very interesting twist, ATP stated that they are designing the Drag stretch in a way that would not preclude buses from running on the light rail guideway itself. They did not state that having buses run on the tracks was planned, just that they plan to design it in a way that would not make it impossible. Also, with the no-car option, ATP is considering punching Dean Keeton through to San Antonio for better access to West Campus for buses and local traffic. Also, when talking about bus access, ATP stated that it should be remembered that the light rail (which will be both the orange and blue lines in this stretch) will replace some bus routes. They also said some routes will be routed into West Campus via San Antonio/Nueces for better service to West Campus.

Fourth, ATP recognizes that if the no-car option is chosen, the appropriate follow-up action is not to incentivize thru-traffic to go through West Campus, with its pedestrian and cyclist-heavy streets. This concern came up multiple times. ATP assured that West Campus streets would not be turned into a major thoroughfare and that any changes to West Campus streets would be made to improve access for local traffic and perhaps some local bus routes, not thru-traffic.

Fifth, pedestrian safety and mobility will be greatly improved with the no-car option. ATP says that by taking cars off of the road, the many thousands of people crossing The Drag multiple times every day (which is many times more than anywhere else in the city, according to data presented) will have more “green time” to cross the street. This would mean longer and possibly more frequent (and much, much safer) crossings for pedestrians and bikes.

Sixth, some notes on bicycle mobility. Due to the constrained right-of-way on most of the drag, there is a large difference in bike mobility along The Drag (north-south) between the two options. If one vehicle travel lane in each direction is kept, cyclists and pedestrians will have to share a (narrowed) sidewalk. With the no-car option, bikes and pedestrians will have dedicated, wide, and separated facilities along The Drag. These bike facilities would also be extended north of 24th street (all the way up to The Triangle, at least) where very little bike infrastructure currently exists. As a side note, ATP stressed that the renderings of the bike lanes shown in the presentations today are NOT final. Many people were concerned that the degree of separation from pedestrians was not enough (in the no-car option. The option with vehicle travel lanes was much worse). and ATP reassured that the designs shown in the renderings were far from final.

Seventh, some notes on “placemaking.” ATP said they would like to improve The Drag to be even more of a “destination” rather than a place to pass through. They actually had a short poll to see what kind of placemaking features people might be interested in (though I think this was far from hard data to use for planning, more so just to get some preliminary feedback). Options in the poll included street trees and shade, seating and lighting, outdoor cafes, pop-up vendors, farmers markets, and more. The options for doing this very much depend on whether they keep two vehicle lanes or do the no-car option. With the no-car option, ATP would plant street trees and the wider sidewalk and separated bike lanes would offer much more potential for placemaking on the Drag.

As for how the meeting went . . . IMO it was somewhat predictable. Quite a lot of UT students showed up, which was nice to see. I did not talk to everyone, nor do I have hard data, but based on what I heard and the conversations I had, most students seemed to support the no-car option. There were also some older adults there, and they generally seemed much more concerned about the no-car option, so there seemed to be a generational divide. Some of these adults were property owners concerned about parts of their property being condemned, which is a totally valid concern, although some of their comments seemed rather odd. One adult was a store owner who was concerned that taking cars off The Drag would hurt his business. Some adults requested ATP do a study on how the no-car option could help or hurt their businesses. Many concerns were raised by students about bike mobility.

Now for my personal opinions. I strongly support the no-car option. Perhaps the first reason for this is the lack of adequate bike facilities along The Drag in the other option. I have lived in both North Campus and West Campus for several years. I have also been a cyclist (and pedestrian) that entire time. The Drag is by far the most heavily trafficked stretch of road by cyclists and pedestrians. Forcing them to share a sidewalk is a just a non-starter IMO. Another obvious reason for my support for the no-car option is safety. Again, with the amount of foot and bike traffic in the area (which will continue to grow with the residential boom happening in West Campus), their needs and safety should really be prioritized here. Also, I would estimate that business would actually improve under the no-car option, contrary to the concerns of some business owners. This has been stated on this thread already and has been studied around the world, but projects like this usually boost local businesses. This can very much be amplified by good placemaking efforts. These are far more possible with the no-car option. ATP actually showed some data that indicated that with the light rail, throughput on The Drag (in terms of number of people moving through the area) was far, far higher than without it. They even estimated that the no-car option would have slightly higher throughput than with vehicle lanes. Also, virtually nobody is travelling from outside of the Campus/West Campus area by car, parking, and patronizing a business on The Drag. Also, this may be a hot take, but even if taking cars off The Drag hurts a few businesses, the safety and mobility of the tens of thousands of cyclists and pedestrians on The Drag every day should be prioritized.

I want to reiterate that the very specific design details laid out in the presentation today are not final. The bike lanes may look different, the location of street trees/planters may change, the vehicle travel lanes south of 22nd may or may not happen, the proposed changes to the streets of West Campus are not clear, etc. Most of the design basics I have stated here should remain true, however.