Is it possible to have an honest discussion about Austin's traffic? (Howe: contractors, quality of life)

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Oh, ok so there is no additional demand to live central and all those notes and flyers I get asking if ill selll my house for a kings ransome are people who just want to generously give me money for no reason whatsoever?

Yeah, right

Komeht, people all over Austin and even in the outlying areas are getting those. The entire Austin area has drastically less inventory and drastically more buyers looking for that same inventory than a year ago (about 25-30% fewer homes on the market than last year). That isn't a downtown or even close-in phenomenon at all.

[gpurcell]

What's the story with them, BTW? I've had one send me four in the last six months for my house "in any condition." I'm assuming bottom end feeders...but has anyone actually gotten a quote from one?

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Can you really not understand that the market is complex? Sure, there are more people who want to live central than there are properties. That will always be true. It most certainly does not follow that desire holds true for the overall population. Even a relatively small proportion of the market wanting to live central can drive the demand.

It doesn't have to extend to the entire population. But every person who wants to live centrally but cannot is another person contributing to the traffic problems completely unnecessarily. And, if you really believe there isn't a strong interest in coming back to the central city then there simply won't be development because NO ONEinvests millions of dollars in housing that won't sell.

But this notion that there isn't a strong desire or demand for more central housing is a joke, laughable on its face. Houses and apartments in central Austin command a premium of 3X or more what houses in the burbs cost. Of course many people would gladly come in of they could afford it. And the people who don't would benefit as well by having fewer traffic problems and all without spending one addition dime to build new roads.

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by scm53

It is actually worse. Those 100K employees who work in the core (01, 03, 04 and 05) and live outside really represent 100K families, and therefore 100K dwelling units. Even if the cost were solvable, how do you solve the real estate problem? What neighborhoods do you destroy? Travis Heights? West Enfield? Clarksville? Adjacent zips like 02 or 51? None of that is going to happen.

So the urbanist dream of higher density is almost certainly going to be contained to the downtown - Town Lake to MLK, 35 to Lamar. Can you really expect to jam 100K families in there, even if they were willing? Of course not.

So we get back to how do we increase throughput on existing roads, while adding more capacity via transit? Managed lanes with express busses from park and rides, van pools, ad hoc car pooling (AKA "slugging") are all fairly fast fixes. Bus transit, even the new BRT, will not have a significant impact if it only travels at the existing traffic speeds. To attract the discretionary rider, it has to improve on a SOV.

So where does rail fit? First, let's agree that the proposed light rail will have ZERO impact on Austin congestion, as the current alignment doesn't serve the residential areas that contain the workers in the core. Regional rail could help. The problems are well known.

Now, let's get to the financing problem. A large percentage (wish I could find actual data) of those 100K work in buildings that are off the tax rolls. That make no contribution to the taxable real property or economic activity captured by sales taxes. So the burden falls even more heavily on the tax paying portion of the total economic base. So how do you solve this problem?

The problem is (or are?), is that no one is listening, and everyone is looking only through their own prism. The environmentalists, as they have for thirty years, will oppose every new mile of road. The neighborhood groups, with the willing cooperation of our feckless politicians, will oppose every change that has even the slightest negative impact on them, and uncompromisingly refuse to consider the greater good. The state will refuse to partner in a solution from the demand side. At same time, the City, with considerable egging from the "blue" side of the ledger, will seemingly purposely antagonize the state. And all the while, 170 new people move here every day, looking for a place to live and work - and we have a road grid frozen since we were 1/2 the size.

That was basically what I was saying in the post you were replying to.

It isn't going to happen, in spite of the density dreamers.

They will wind up conforming to all the rest of the drones in their 700 sq.ft. $700,000 cell boxes crammed into the high rise beehives downtown.

Traffic for the commuters will be worse than ever as the CoA phases out more downtown parking spaces & narrows down the few thoroughfares in the area to allow for more walking/bicycle space so wealthy white hipsters can sip their $7 lattes at sidewalk tables and shop for $300 jeans in stores with 4 sparsely stocked shelves.

[steve78757]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Exactly. Allandale, for example, would have been a great example at the time of what the song was about.

Actually, the song was written in reaction to seeing the suburbs of Daly City, Ca. shown below. Drive down a street in Allandale and each house has a unique design from another. Not the same thing, as you suggest.

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Oh, ok so there is no additional demand to live central and all those notes and flyers I get asking if ill selll my house for a kings ransome are people who just want to generously give me money for no reason whatsoever?

Yeah, right

I get those too, way down south here in Legend Oaks. Most of those offers are coming from buyers looking to scam anyone gullible enough to sell to them directly instead of going through a real estate broker.

[steve78757]

Originally Posted by ScoPro

They will wind up conforming to all the rest of the drones in their 700 sq.ft. $700,000 cell boxes crammed into the high rise beehives downtown.

Let me get this straight. The wealthy people with more choices than most who are choosing to live downtown in condos so they can drive less, walk to entertainment, etc. are DRONES. And in comparison the car saddled suburbanites, like yourself, are the imaginative free thinkers? Apparently, you also have access to the best drugs.

[mimimomx3]

Originally Posted by Komeht

One of the many many benefits of increased density is that it is very good for the bottom line of the city. There are lots of efficiencies gained coupled with an increase in the tax base makes it a win on both sides of the city ledger - more money coming in, less going out.

Why is this a good thing? Why is giving government MORE money to "play with" a good thing? I say it is a very BAD thing. Government should be as small, and efficient, as possible.

[steve78757]

The following article, written in 2008, is a prime example of why it's so hard to develop inside the city (as Komeht has repeatedly pointed out), and why the assertions being made here that it is equally hard to develop outside the city, as so ridiculous.

The comments below the article are very informative as well.

Council Caves to Allandale

[mimimomx3]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

The notion that people are choosing Pflugerville and Cedar Park because there isn't a 1500 ft2 urban townhouse for 150K is completely and utterly devoid of reason. People live in suburbia because they WANT suburbia.

Yes, this is exactly true. Just because someone here doesn't like it, doesn't mean that thousands of people DO. I'm very lucky to live in a close in suburban neighborhood, and I wouldn't trade it for a duplex or condo in 78704 at any price.