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.
From what I know about Austin, residents don't want mass transit. I don't see how "turning blue" changes any of this. It's a sunbelt city you move to in order to put more space between you and other people, have the bigger house with a yard, etc. Los Angeles pioneered freeways when no one else was doing them, Measure M's passage shows the residents want world class mass transit again, which Los Angeles also pioneered in the 1910's and 20's.
To me, Austin's all of sudden "destination city" status in recent years says more about how lacking the big metros are in Texas than anything else.
I'll admit I don't know THAT much about Austin's transit, except it isn't growing, it's subpar, and traffic is bad for its size. Have there been votes/plans to improve that have been shot down?
If Austin doesn't want public transit, then yes, it'll become an LA-style traffic mess. It's already one of the worst for its size.
From what I know about Austin, residents don't want mass transit. I don't see how "turning blue" changes any of this. It's a sunbelt city you move to in order to put more space between you and other people, have the bigger house with a yard, etc. Los Angeles pioneered freeways when no one else was doing them, Measure M's passage shows the residents want world class mass transit again, which Los Angeles also pioneered in the 1910's and 20's.
To me, Austin's all of sudden "destination city" status in recent years says more about how lacking the big metros are in Texas than anything else.
I disagree on the last statement, Houston and Dallas metros gain over 100,000 people every year. Austin to me especially East-West still fills like a small city, as you can be in the core and out of it in roughly 20-30 minutes. I think it's just a destination city because like Seattle and Portland and Minneapolis no real large urban ghetto has plagued the city center, and you have a bunch of desirable areas immediately around Downtown with zero gentrification of violent neighborhoods needed. Houston would be like Austin if the urban ghetto had never developed and instead had been relatively mild crime wise neighborhoods surrounding it's core. The only thing Houston and Dallas really fail at is the stereotypical urban liberal neighborhoods. A huge portion of the gentrified core's of those cities lean red and are family oriented.
Another thing, Texas cities never really stopped growing, Austin included, go back to the 1960s, since then it has been since 40%+ growth nearly every decade same with the other major Texas cities, it's just that no one cares about growth when we are talking small towns. The main difference is while the Rest of the U.S slowed by the 1990s, Texas kept putting up the same/similar numbers in growth.
I'll admit I don't know THAT much about Austin's transit, except it isn't growing, it's subpar, and traffic is bad for its size. Have there been votes/plans to improve that have been shot down?
If Austin doesn't want public transit, then yes, it'll become an LA-style traffic mess. It's already one of the worst for its size.
Awful traffic. They've talked about transit, but people in Texas or the south really, love their cars. Of course, every major city has traffic. It was bad in Denver and they have good public transit, same with Seattle.
I'll admit I don't know THAT much about Austin's transit, except it isn't growing, it's subpar, and traffic is bad for its size. Have there been votes/plans to improve that have been shot down?
If Austin doesn't want public transit, then yes, it'll become an LA-style traffic mess. It's already one of the worst for its size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare
I disagree on the last statement, Houston and Dallas metros gain over 100,000 people every year. Austin to me especially East-West still fills like a small city, as you can be in the core and out of it in roughly 20-30 minutes. I think it's just a destination city because like Seattle and Portland and Minneapolis no real large urban ghetto has plagued the city center, and you have a bunch of desirable areas immediately around Downtown with zero gentrification of violent neighborhoods needed. Houston would be like Austin if the urban ghetto had never developed and instead had been relatively mild crime wise neighborhoods surrounding it's core. The only thing Houston and Dallas really fail at is the stereotypical urban liberal neighborhoods. A huge portion of the gentrified core's of those cities lean red and are family oriented.
Another thing, Texas cities never really stopped growing, Austin included, go back to the 1960s, since then it has been since 40%+ growth nearly every decade same with the other major Texas cities, it's just that no one cares about growth when we are talking small towns. The main difference is while the Rest of the U.S slowed by the 1990s, Texas kept putting up the same/similar numbers in growth.
Good post. Austin core is tiny, though Austin itself is a sprawl.
The only thing Houston and Dallas really fail at is the stereotypical urban liberal neighborhoods. A huge portion of the gentrified core's of those cities lean red and are family oriented.
How are you defining the "core" of those cities? Preston Hollow & Highland Park in Dallas are not part of the core or the "greater Downtown area." They're too far north. Downtown/Uptown/Oak Lawn/DE are completely blue and have a large cluster of nightlife options. This has been especially true over the past decade.
The main differences between Dallas and Austin was that the former had a lackluster Downtown (mostly 9-5 businesses), underdeveloped secondary urban neighborhoods (Uptown), limited greenspace, nightlife districts with horrible boom & bust cycles along with crime waves (Deep Ellum), and a lack of a signature event aka SXSW style. Over the past 10 years, there has been mass improvements to varying degrees. But reputations take a lot longer to die out than actual reality.
How are you defining the "core" of those cities? Preston Hollow & Highland Park in Dallas are not part of the core or the "greater Downtown area." They're too far north. Downtown/Uptown/Oak Lawn/DE are completely blue and have a large cluster of nightlife options. This has been especially true over the past decade.
The main differences between Dallas and Austin was that the former had a lackluster Downtown (mostly 9-5 businesses), underdeveloped secondary urban neighborhoods (Uptown), limited greenspace, nightlife districts with horrible boom & bust cycles along with crime waves (Deep Ellum), and a lack of a signature event aka SXSW style. Over the past 10 years, there has been mass improvements to varying degrees. But reputations take a lot longer to die out than actual reality.
I guess maybe because I keep up with development news and all, but Dallas seems like the way more interesting city to me. For a young professional that enjoys diversity and big city life (from LA live in NYC), Dallas seems much more my speed than Austin and I've read a lot about the development in Dallas. Public transit is better there, the city's urban core is expanding it seems, and the inner neighborhoods you mentioned that are suburban in nature still don't seem as suburban as the Austin suburbs just outside the urban core.
It will look like it's neighbor, San Antonio. Big, sprawled, low density, low amenities, meager if any mass transit. Austin is a "new" sunbelt city and they are heading in the same direction as their peers-Jacksonville, Columbus, Indy, etc.
Austin will continue building it's CBD and have an even bigger shiny skyline than it does today. It will have an abundance of new towers if it's momentum continues and look something like, Houston, but with less of the historical architecture stock that you find in that CBD.
But, from my perspective developers need to focus on areas outside the CBD and develop those sectors, like what is happening in S.A. San Antonio is building thousands of residential units throughout the urban core mostly non high rise but still much needed infil that is densfying and bringing all the good things that come with more residents. San Antonio has more urban districts and areas that are in need of gentrification than what you find in Austin. S.A. has more to work with.
On the topic of transportation infrastructure. Dallas and Houston didn't build mass transit systems until their respective metros had a 3 plus million population range which is San Antonio's next population milestone. I don't think S.A. is that much behind in this regard simply because of its size.
San Antonio has a massive freeway network for its size and traffic would be much worse if it wasn't for its well developed roadway infrastructure. San Antonio currently only has BRT, but mass transit is in the planning process because of the projected 1plus million new residents expected to move to the region over the next 15-20 years. Austin, on the other hand, needs to work faster on addressing it's traffic woes.
Furthermore, San Antonio has a fairly large urban core for a sunbelt city that is comparable to some rustbelt and even some east and west coast cities of similar size. There are many walkable historic districts that surround the CBD, which are seeing a lot of gentrification and new development. And, imo, S.A.'s urban core is rich in amenities and has lots of potential to transform and become one of the better urban cores in the U.S. It's not there yet, but change is happening for the better.
Last edited by SweethomeSanAntonio; 12-20-2018 at 12:39 AM..
Austin will continue building it's CBD and have an even bigger shiny skyline than it does today. It will have an abundance of new towers if it's momentum continues and look something like, Houston, but with less of the historical architecture stock that you find in that CBD.
But, from my perspective developers need to focus on areas outside the CBD and develop those sectors, like what is happening in S.A. San Antonio is building thousands of residential units throughout the urban core mostly non high rise but still much needed infil that is densfying and bringing all the good things that come with more residents. San Antonio has more urban districts and areas that are in need of gentrification than what you find in Austin. S.A. has more to work with.
On the topic of transportation infrastructure. Dallas and Houston didn't build mass transit systems until their respective metros had a 3 plus million population range which is San Antonio's next population milestone. I don't think S.A. is that much behind in this regard simply because of its size.
San Antonio has a massive freeway network for its size and traffic would be much worse if it wasn't for its well developed roadway infrastructure. San Antonio currently only has BRT, but mass transit is in the planning process because of the projected 1plus million new residents expected to move to the region over the next 15-20 years. Austin, on the other hand, needs to work faster on addressing it's traffic woes.
Furthermore, San Antonio has a fairly large urban core for a sunbelt city that is comparable to some rustbelt and even some east and west coast cities of similar size. There are many walkable historic districts that surround the CBD, which are seeing a lot of gentrification and new development. And, imo, S.A.'s urban core is rich in amenities and has lots of potential to transform and become one of the better urban cores in the U.S. It's not there yet, but change is happening for the better.
Austin has or had a limit in how tall their buildings can be, because of the capital. So I agree, it will never look like Houston, but I imagine it'll have quite a few mid rises around it's core, which is fine.
Austin has or had a limit in how tall their buildings can be, because of the capital. So I agree, it will never look like Houston, but I imagine it'll have quite a few mid rises around it's core, which is fine.
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?
How are you defining the "core" of those cities? Preston Hollow & Highland Park in Dallas are not part of the core or the "greater Downtown area." They're too far north. Downtown/Uptown/Oak Lawn/DE are completely blue and have a large cluster of nightlife options. This has been especially true over the past decade.
The main differences between Dallas and Austin was that the former had a lackluster Downtown (mostly 9-5 businesses), underdeveloped secondary urban neighborhoods (Uptown), limited greenspace, nightlife districts with horrible boom & bust cycles along with crime waves (Deep Ellum), and a lack of a signature event aka SXSW style. Over the past 10 years, there has been mass improvements to varying degrees. But reputations take a lot longer to die out than actual reality.
I know Dallas has liberal neighborhoods, I just mean when talking safe and clean liberal neighborhoods virtually nearly every neighborhood within a 5 mile radius of Austin meet this criteria. Do the same with Houston the eastside of the inner loop is dangerous, the north and south sides are still gentrifying and a substantial part of the west side,particularly SW side is as conservative as Fort Bend County (50-50 on each election which way that area will go), Dallas has similar problems albeit to a lesser extent than Houston. I would say for Dallas the score is bounded by the 12 for the North/West and South parts and White Rock Lake/Creek and the string of parks running south to the Trinity river for the eastern edge. Austin’s score is basically south of 51st street to 290/71 and from the 1 to 183. The Tarrytown area is part of core Austin as well.
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.
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.
