Guadalupe - N Lamar rail 10 minute walk from 31% of Austin jobs (employment, buy)

[scm53]

Another reason the Mueller rail plan is a loser.

According to the US Census Bureau's 2011 Current Employment Statistics the Guadalupe-North Lamar Subcorridor contains the highest density of jobs in the city. This online utility was configured to measure jobs located within one quarter mile and one half mile of the proposed alignment. The results speak for themselves. If built, the Guadalupe North Lamar alignment would put tracks within a ten minute walk of 31% of all jobs in the city.

[oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots]

I can only recall a quip from a former professor, "figures lie and liars figure". Or, "lies, dammed lies, and statistics".

Yes, I understand the prof didn't originate the quip.

And besides, how far do the rest have to walk....11 minutes and over?

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by scm53

Another reason the Mueller rail plan is a loser.

So first of all - this isn't a comparison between the two routes. It's a projection put out by an entity with a definite point of view - they're trying to make a case, not be even handed about it.

But if they were they would have shown that: Of the 187,475 jobs the G/L route here claims 156,403 (CBD and UT) would also be along the Mueller Route which also goes through the CBD and UT (the vast bulk of the jobs).

Now, add to that 15,000 jobs at Mueller and the number is 171,403. That is before you add in UT Med School, St Davids/Red River and Hancock (I don't have the figures on this.

So - we're talking about roughly the same number of jobs give or take a negligible amount.

I'm not making an argument in favor of one or the other, I'm agnostic on that point (although I think the G/L route isn't realistic right now because of investments the city has made into MetroRapid along that corridor).

Just be aware - this is not an unbiased study of two routes, it's put out by an organization who has dedicated itself towards pushing the G/L route - this is a campaign, not a study.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Komeht

So first of all - this isn't a comparison between the two routes. It's a projection put out by an entity with a definite point of view - they're trying to make a case, not be even handed about it.

But if they were they would have shown that: Of the 187,475 jobs the G/L route here claims 156,403 (CBD and UT) would also be along the Mueller Route which also goes through the CBD and UT (the vast bulk of the jobs).

If you had taken the time to actually read the link before your rush to refute it, you would have noted that they said:

"This number does not include 30,444 jobs at the University of Texas ..."

So yes, they have a point of view - which is only to counter the lack of transparency and use of data, and the absence of public engagement in the entire Project Connect rush towards the San Jacinto-Red River alignment. Just one example of an inconvenient fact missing from that route decision - the lack of analysis of the impact on property tax values. The Project Connect route travels through 1.63 miles of property tax "dead zone" - where both sides of the route are off the tax rolls. Given the proven effect of Transit Oriented Development, how smart is that? Just one example - and one that would never see the light of day without this "entity with a definite point of view".

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by scm53

If you had taken the time to actually read the link before your rush to refute it, you would have noted that they said:

"This number does not include 30,444 jobs at the University of Texas ..."

So yes, they have a point of view - which is only to counter the lack of transparency and use of data, and the absence of public engagement in the entire Project Connect rush towards the San Jacinto-Red River alignment. Just one example of an inconvenient fact missing from that route decision - the lack of analysis of the impact on property tax values. The Project Connect route travels through 1.63 miles of property tax "dead zone" - where both sides of the route are off the tax rolls. Given the proven effect of Transit Oriented Development, how smart is that? Just one example - and one that would never see the light of day without this "entity with a definite point of view".

I'm all for transparency - but transparency this is not. If someone (a neutral) wants to do an actual side-by-side comparison sans the bias it would be good to have.

Also - those numbers don't add up.

CBD - 125,959
Guadalupe and 24 - 4397
North Lamar and 38th 13,496
North Lamar and 49 16,614
North Lamar and Denson 7502
North Lamar and 183 2785

Equals 170,753

Add in the 30444 and you get 201,197

Neither of which match the claimed number of 187,475 - how do they arrive at that figure? It's not transparent to me.

In any case - the point being that there really isn't a dramatic difference in the number of jobs along either route. If the G/L lamar route is 31% then maybe the Mueller Route is 30% since the vast majority of these jobs is in the CDC - which both routes go through and both have large pockets of employment along them.

It's disingenuous to claim that there are significant increases in jobs along one route over the other.

Now ridership is a different matter. But the OP was about jobs along the route and there just isn't a big difference.

[Novacek]

>>If built, the Guadalupe North Lamar alignment would put tracks within a ten minute walk of 31% of all jobs in the city.

Which is great, if getting to the tracks were what you needed. Unfortunately, you need to get to an actual station.

I would be hesitant to draw any sort of conclusions comparing routes based on these numbers, because of their inherent "fuzziness" and imprecision. If the comparison ended up being an order of magnitude difference, sure, but that's not the case here.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Komeht

I'm all for transparency - but transparency this is not. If someone (a neutral) wants to do an actual side-by-side comparison sans the bias it would be good to have.

Also - those numbers don't add up.

Those are data points for specific employment centers along the route. You have to drill down to the summary - which captures the total employment (less the UT census tract) to get the 187K number.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Also - those numbers don't add up.

CBD - 125,959
Guadalupe and 24 - 4397
North Lamar and 38th 13,496
North Lamar and 49 16,614
North Lamar and Denson 7502
North Lamar and 183 2785

Equals 170,753

Add in the 30444 and you get 201,197

Neither of which match the claimed number of 187,475 - how do they arrive at that figure? It's not transparent to me.

My guess is that one number is the jobs "within" (fuzzily defined) a half mile of the corridor (which as I explained, doesn't really buy you anything if a station isn't there). The other set of numbers is the jobs from specific employers within .5 mile of some example stations (more useful).

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by Novacek

My guess is that one number is the jobs "within" (fuzzily defined) a half mile of the corridor (which as I explained, doesn't really buy you anything if a station isn't there). The other set of numbers is the jobs from specific employers within .5 mile of some example stations (more useful).

The problem with choosing "example" stations is that's just that they're best guesses at this point. Actual stations may bear some relation, little relation or no relation to the guesses. The best they can do is pick a corridor and make an analysis of likely ridership along it. I think all this organization has proved is that the vast majority of jobs in either case will be in the CBD and UT (which both the G/L and the San Jacinto route go through) and that the number of jobs along the route isn't likely going to be meaningfully different such that it can be used as criteria for evaluating which is the better route. Other metrics may be needed to provide a clear distinction such as ridership and potential for TOD.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Other metrics may be needed to provide a clear distinction such as ridership and potential for TOD.

Or cost. Like the fact that the mueller route is 5 miles, while this proposed route is 7, so at _minimum_ you would expect it to be 40% more expensive. Probably a lot more given the Lamar route will probably require much more eminent domain acquisition.