U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-20-2018, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,853 posts, read 2,980,597 times
Reputation: 3399

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
Having quite a few midrises around its core plus several high rises in the core plus suburbs for miles every direction combined with nearly a complete lack of public transit is a recipe for LA traffic in the future. We've already seen what a city with tons of low/mid rise apartments and SFHs spread throughout an entire region with subpar public transit turns into. Don't repeat LA, please, Austin. It's not worth it. At least LA has a robust freeway systems. It doesn't exactly fix anything, but can you imagine if LA DIDN'T have the freeway system it has how terrible the traffic would be?
Yeah, pretty much too late lol. Was too late in 1995.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-20-2018, 12:26 PM
 
1,987 posts, read 1,235,853 times
Reputation: 2216
I stumbled on a local Dallas article about how the city of Minneapolis was able to address their housing affordability issues by drastically reducing (and even eliminating) parking requirements and eliminating zoning for single family housing only neighborhoods. Although it addresses issues in Dallas, it easily applies to Austin. This section really stuck out:

"Although laws in the Texas Triangle facilitate “horizontal” growth through exurban development, they restrict “vertical” growth, or the redevelopment of built areas. Even cities with loose zoning codes, such as Houston, impose some restrictions. Recent increases in house prices, furthermore, suggest that restrictions on vertical growth are beginning to cause a housing shortage in the region’s more desirable areas. The revitalization of central-city neighborhoods, meanwhile, shows a large demand for urban living that is underserved by today’s zoning codes and other land-use regulations. As horizontal growth reaches its limits, this shortage will only worsen. Unless restrictions on dense development are lifted, especially in urban cores, the Texas Triangle may come to resemble Los Angeles: a vast sprawl of unaffordable housing, beset by slow transportation and diminished social mobility."

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburne...arking-zoning/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2018, 01:23 PM
 
6,960 posts, read 14,091,290 times
Reputation: 4543
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTXman34 View Post
I stumbled on a local Dallas article about how the city of Minneapolis was able to address their housing affordability issues by drastically reducing (and even eliminating) parking requirements and eliminating zoning for single family housing only neighborhoods. Although it addresses issues in Dallas, it easily applies to Austin. This section really stuck out:

"Although laws in the Texas Triangle facilitate “horizontal” growth through exurban development, they restrict “vertical” growth, or the redevelopment of built areas. Even cities with loose zoning codes, such as Houston, impose some restrictions. Recent increases in house prices, furthermore, suggest that restrictions on vertical growth are beginning to cause a housing shortage in the region’s more desirable areas. The revitalization of central-city neighborhoods, meanwhile, shows a large demand for urban living that is underserved by today’s zoning codes and other land-use regulations. As horizontal growth reaches its limits, this shortage will only worsen. Unless restrictions on dense development are lifted, especially in urban cores, the Texas Triangle may come to resemble Los Angeles: a vast sprawl of unaffordable housing, beset by slow transportation and diminished social mobility."

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburne...arking-zoning/
Dallas is at least trying, albeit poorly. They've invested in public transit, just not in the best way. Austin just straight up seems to be ignoring the need for it. Dallas is addressing it at least.

The only saving grace both Austin and Dallas have is that they don't have massive mountains on three sides and an ocean on one side stopping development from going further out and restricting where highways can be built. The commute from the SFV into the LA Basin wouldn't be so bad if the Santa Monica Mountains didn't impede the street highway grids like they do. While the traffic may not grow to LA levels, commutes will just be disastrously long with housing spread too far away. The actual speeds traveled may not get as bad as LA, but the time it takes to commute to work could be longer just because of the necessary miles to travel.

Most of the Texas cities have the urban grid that's conducive to public transit. They're mostly grids with obvious channels of traffic and obvious locations where public transit use could be best implemented. Their urban footprints are large enough to allow quite a lot of people to live in the core and commute by foot or public transit. Austin doesn't seem like one of them, though, and has to combat this issue with aggressive public transit efforts...which it's failing at. I definitely see Dallas and Houston being the more desirable cities for young urbanites in the future once their public transit is improved and Austin becomes too overpriced and congested without any transit options.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2018, 03:39 PM
 
1,987 posts, read 1,235,853 times
Reputation: 2216
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
Dallas is at least trying, albeit poorly. They've invested in public transit, just not in the best way. Austin just straight up seems to be ignoring the need for it. Dallas is addressing it at least.

The only saving grace both Austin and Dallas have is that they don't have massive mountains on three sides and an ocean on one side stopping development from going further out and restricting where highways can be built. The commute from the SFV into the LA Basin wouldn't be so bad if the Santa Monica Mountains didn't impede the street highway grids like they do. While the traffic may not grow to LA levels, commutes will just be disastrously long with housing spread too far away. The actual speeds traveled may not get as bad as LA, but the time it takes to commute to work could be longer just because of the necessary miles to travel.

Most of the Texas cities have the urban grid that's conducive to public transit. They're mostly grids with obvious channels of traffic and obvious locations where public transit use could be best implemented. Their urban footprints are large enough to allow quite a lot of people to live in the core and commute by foot or public transit. Austin doesn't seem like one of them, though, and has to combat this issue with aggressive public transit efforts...which it's failing at. I definitely see Dallas and Houston being the more desirable cities for young urbanites in the future once their public transit is improved and Austin becomes too overpriced and congested without any transit options.
For most of DART's (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) history, there were few if any real urban planners on its board. Virtually no one on the board had ever used public transit. Finally, we're beginning to see that change with an individual named Patrick Kennedy, who intentionally moved to Dallas to work his urban magic so to speak. His influence on Dallas locally is pretty remarkable. He was the biggest advocate for tearing down a portion of a highway dividing Downtown from Deep Ellum in order to stitch the urban fabric back together and free up more land for urban development. It actually reached the state level (TXDOT), which launched a major study of highways in and around DT Dallas (cost/benefits of maintaining, removing, burying, or re-routing) titled CityMAP. Now it's up to the city to decide the highway's fate, but it likely won't be maintained in its current form (either turned into an urban boulevard or buried).

Regarding Austin, it has done a great job preserving greenspace and encouraging urban development in its Downtown. However, it will be choked to death (housing affordability & congestion) if doesn't allow that to spill over into nearby neighborhoods or address its lackluster public transit. Dallas and Houston have more of an "urban template" that they've been filling in over time. Austin transitions to low density, single family suburbia (with no sidewalks) a lot quicker than the other two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2018, 08:44 PM
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
2,970 posts, read 4,343,026 times
Reputation: 2010
Austin's sprawl will look more like Atlanta than Houston or Dallas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2018, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,853 posts, read 2,980,597 times
Reputation: 3399
Quote:
Originally Posted by R1070 View Post
Austin's sprawl will look more like Atlanta than Houston or Dallas.
Because of the tree cover?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 07:55 AM
 
615 posts, read 175,626 times
Reputation: 426
Quote:
"Although laws in the Texas Triangle facilitate “horizontal” growth through exurban development, they restrict “vertical” growth, or the redevelopment of built areas. Even cities with loose zoning codes, such as Houston, impose some restrictions. Recent increases in house prices, furthermore, suggest that restrictions on vertical growth are beginning to cause a housing shortage in the region’s more desirable areas. The revitalization of central-city neighborhoods, meanwhile, shows a large demand for urban living that is underserved by today’s zoning codes and other land-use regulations. As horizontal growth reaches its limits, this shortage will only worsen. Unless restrictions on dense development are lifted, especially in urban cores, the Texas Triangle may come to resemble Los Angeles: a vast sprawl of unaffordable housing, beset by slow transportation and diminished social mobility."

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburne...arking-zoning/
Zoning codes/regulations are useless, confirmed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Wonderland
44,713 posts, read 36,145,910 times
Reputation: 63310
I hope Austin "matures." The highway system there is horrible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 11:12 AM
 
4,481 posts, read 2,663,831 times
Reputation: 4090
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
Having quite a few midrises around its core plus several high rises in the core plus suburbs for miles every direction combined with nearly a complete lack of public transit is a recipe for LA traffic in the future. We've already seen what a city with tons of low/mid rise apartments and SFHs spread throughout an entire region with subpar public transit turns into. Don't repeat LA, please, Austin. It's not worth it. At least LA has a robust freeway systems. It doesn't exactly fix anything, but can you imagine if LA DIDN'T have the freeway system it has how terrible the traffic would be?
Quite a few of those highrise residents must be there to AVOID traffic. A lot of them can walk to work instead of commuting!

Vancouver doesn't have inner-city freeways. I suspect that's a big reason behind its zillions of residential towers, particularly before the train system arrived.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 05:30 PM
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
2,970 posts, read 4,343,026 times
Reputation: 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker View Post
Because of the tree cover?
The other big Texas cities and their burbs have more of an integrated grid and freeway system than Austin.

Once you get out of the core of Austin the density drops off and the freeway infrastructure is limited similar to Atlanta.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top