Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
 [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 06-03-2011, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Holly Neighborhood, Austin, Texas
3,982 posts, read 6,696,604 times
Reputation: 2882

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by eepstein View Post
Most areas within central austin and downtown are extremely expensive forcing people to move out to the suburbs. The cheap gas we have makes that possible. As I have been saying for years (and most don't listen), the city of Austin has NO plans to do anything about it's infastructure. Many of it's main thoroughfares are poorly designed and need to be widened, Mopac and I-35 are complete disasters. Most other cities take a "proactive" approach, and Austin takes a NO approach. As I have said many times before, the cities MAIN focus and goals are for the whealthy that don't have to move far away from town to make a living.

The traffic will only get worse, the pollution will only get worse, the cost of central Austin living will only go higher. But hey, at least we have our Tahoes, pickups, and Longhorns. Do we really need anything else??
I guess the question is should the city of Austin invest in infrastructure that mostly serves the needs of commuters who live outside of it. Should, for example, Austin voters approve a bond that would widen FM 1626 mainly for the benefit of Hays County commuters, when the current two lane configuration serves our needs for the occasional weekend getaway? Should we spend money on SH 45 SW for developing unincorporated parts of South Travis and North Hays Counties and easing the commute of those from Dripping Springs and Kyle?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2011, 11:20 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
522 posts, read 654,081 times
Reputation: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by verybadgnome View Post
I guess the question is should the city of Austin invest in infrastructure that mostly serves the needs of commuters who live outside of it. Should, for example, Austin voters approve a bond that would widen FM 1626 mainly for the benefit of Hays County commuters, when the current two lane configuration serves our needs for the occasional weekend getaway? Should we spend money on SH 45 SW for developing unincorporated parts of South Travis and North Hays Counties and easing the commute of those from Dripping Springs and Kyle?
Well, I don't know; do you want Austin to actually thrive as a city, with a good economy, jobs, and general prosperity? Or would you rather have a gridlocked mess of a town that no firms want to move to (and that many move out of due to mobility problems)?

This odd, arbitrary "everything ends at the city line" thinking is what led to the problem in the first place. Transportation is a regional issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Holly Neighborhood, Austin, Texas
3,982 posts, read 6,696,604 times
Reputation: 2882
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb9152 View Post
Well, I don't know; do you want Austin to actually thrive as a city, with a good economy, jobs, and general prosperity? Or would you rather have a gridlocked mess of a town that no firms want to move to (and that many move out of due to mobility problems)?

This odd, arbitrary "everything ends at the city line" thinking is what led to the problem in the first place. Transportation is a regional issue.
It is a regional issue, but then again so are job creation and good land use practices, something the bedroom communities around Austin - with the exception of Round Rock - have failed horribly at. There are ramifications when the main reason a subdivision is started is because land is cheap along with the ongoing assumption that gasoline will always be cheap too. We need to move away from leap-frog low density developments and into housing that does not force its occupants to rely on their car for 100% of their trips.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Not Moving
970 posts, read 1,863,434 times
Reputation: 502
Are "firms" not moving here or moving out due to "gridlock?" Let's see............how many succesful cities around the world can I name that have far worse "gridlock?" I think a Talent Pool has something to do with "firms" moving somewhere.......not "gridlock."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
12,867 posts, read 13,171,717 times
Reputation: 13815
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb9152 View Post
Well, I don't know; do you want Austin to actually thrive as a city, with a good economy, jobs, and general prosperity? Or would you rather have a gridlocked mess of a town that no firms want to move to (and that many move out of due to mobility problems)?

This odd, arbitrary "everything ends at the city line" thinking is what led to the problem in the first place. Transportation is a regional issue.
You are correct.

Unless the no-growthers prefer to return to the city limits as drawn by Waller in 1835.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 04:08 PM
 
Location: The Lone Star State
8,030 posts, read 9,009,172 times
Reputation: 5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb9152 View Post
Well, I don't know; do you want Austin to actually thrive as a city, with a good economy, jobs, and general prosperity? Or would you rather have a gridlocked mess of a town that no firms want to move to (and that many move out of due to mobility problems)?

This odd, arbitrary "everything ends at the city line" thinking is what led to the problem in the first place. Transportation is a regional issue.
This is a very good point.

The traffic itself isn't what will stop companies from moving here. But ridiculous traffic and lack of sufficient roads will eventually become a QOL issue, and people just end up moving elsewhere. Many of the key employees are mostly middle-class and not buying $500k homes in town (engineers, analysts, nurses etc.) and the companies will eventually end up following them where they are (suburbs or smaller towns.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 08:42 PM
 
8,231 posts, read 17,256,568 times
Reputation: 3696
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxrckr View Post
This is a very good point.

The traffic itself isn't what will stop companies from moving here. But ridiculous traffic and lack of sufficient roads will eventually become a QOL issue, and people just end up moving elsewhere. Many of the key employees are mostly middle-class and not buying $500k homes in town (engineers, analysts, nurses etc.) and the companies will eventually end up following them where they are (suburbs or smaller towns.)
I guess that's the way it goes!
No need for current residents to bankroll new companies moving here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 10:52 PM
 
10,130 posts, read 19,792,628 times
Reputation: 5815
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxrckr View Post
The traffic itself isn't what will stop companies from moving here. But ridiculous traffic and lack of sufficient roads will eventually become a QOL issue, and people just end up moving elsewhere.
Just curious, has there ever been a city in the US that people stopped moving to because the traffic became a QOL issue?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2011, 11:24 PM
 
Location: Greater Seattle, WA Metro Area
1,930 posts, read 6,514,276 times
Reputation: 907
I moved to Austin 1996 and left in 2007 (with a small stint in Dallas somewhere in there). I visit almost every year. I just got back last week from a visit and I agree that the traffic has gotten steadily worse. Certainly there are major cities that have worse traffic but for cities the size of Austin, it does seem bad. Many people will say Houston, Atlanta, DC, LA, etc have worse traffic but it's really an apples to oranges comparison. Those are much bigger metro areas. I think traffic anywhere compared to Portland will be bad because Portland has such great public transport options. In general, Texans love their cars. The bigger the better in many cases. And really, for such a friendly city, I am always shocked at how aggressive and bad the drivers are. Fortunately Austin has so much going for it, the good far outweighs the bad. Great place to live IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 07:49 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX
522 posts, read 654,081 times
Reputation: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by N. Olikee View Post
Are "firms" not moving here or moving out due to "gridlock?" Let's see............how many succesful cities around the world can I name that have far worse "gridlock?" I think a Talent Pool has something to do with "firms" moving somewhere.......not "gridlock."
Dell has already located a facility out of the area for that very reason (amongst a few others). The difference between Austin as it is now and "successful cities" is that there is a plan in those cities, adequate to excellent high capacity transit, and a regional approach to transportation issues, not a balkanized "we'll plan ours, you plan yours" process.

We're getting there, but not totally there just yet as a region. If population and NAFTA freight traffic continue to increase at the amazing rate of the last 10 years (Williamson County, for example, grew by an astounding 67%), we're going to have a real problem in the next 5 years.

There is also the concept of "just in time" manufacturing to consider. Most companies do not keep large inventories of raw materials, spare parts, and so forth any longer. They rely on on-time deliveries of materials. The higher the congestion (and the more spread across the day, as we're seeing now in Austin), the less reliable the delivery. This will work to make the region unfriendly, to say the least, for manufacturing/assembly businesses to locate here. That includes hi-tech companies that assemble electronic parts.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > Texas > Austin

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top