Urban rail will increase congestion

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

Your water is not coming out of the ground downtown - it is piped in from Lake Travis - an area you would deem a sprawly suburb.

No, I would deem the lake a _lake_. For purposes of water supply, the area can be totally undeveloped (and in fact, the surface of the lake is totally undeveloped, obviously).

Plus Austin's water is piped from Lake Austin, not Travis. It will only start to be piped from Travis when WTP4 is complete (demand for which is driven by thirsty suburbs).
Delivering Water Provides Texas-Sized Challenges - Tunnel Business Magazine

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

Without that water there is no downtown at all. The water is also not being centrally provided from downtown to all other locations.

Uh, what do you think Green was?

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

Austin isn't generating any of that electricity downtown (or even at all) and it arrives downtown by first being distributed through "sprawly suburbs" in order to reach downtown.

No, it arrives downtown via direct high-voltage lines. It's not being distributed through the pole by pole lines serving the suburbs.

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

The only thing that might make suburbs "harder to patrol" is the the lack of substations near the taxpayers and properties that paid for them.

And the huge area, which requires that many more officers.

You put an officer on the corner of a street downtown, and they can oversee hundreds of people. They can nearly-instantly respond to incidents blocks away, and thereby help cover thousands more people.

Covering thousands of people in the suburbs with the same response time takes hundreds of officers.

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

There are substations distributed throughout the metro area.

And you think those are free? And have no maintenance costs?

[IC_deLight]

Originally Posted by Novacek

No, I would deem the lake a _lake_. For purposes of water supply, the area can be totally undeveloped (and in fact, the surface of the lake is totally undeveloped, obviously).

Plus Austin's water is piped from Lake Austin, not Travis. It will only start to be piped from Travis when WTP4 is complete (demand for which is driven by thirsty suburbs).
Delivering Water Provides Texas-Sized Challenges - Tunnel Business Magazine

It doesn't get to Lake Austin unless released from Lake Travis.

Originally Posted by Novacek

Uh, what do you think Green was?

was and still is a color. The water is not sourced nor distributed throughout the rest of the city from downtown.

The Green Treatment Plant was closed down years ago. The Green Treatment Plant site was sold off to create hipster housing for those that want hamster-style hive living.

The Ullrich Treatment Plant located off Redbud is nowhere near downtown.
The Davis Treatment Plant located near Mt. Bonnell is nowhere near downtown either.
These water plants aren't located downtown and they don't draw water from Lake Austin downtown either.

Originally Posted by Novacek

No, it arrives downtown via direct high-voltage lines. It's not being distributed through the pole by pole lines serving the suburbs.

"Downtown" has no superior claim to the electricity being generated elsewhere. The electricity is certainly not being delivered downtown "first" and distributed to suburbs. The power is being generated in places you would deride as "suburban" and then distributed to Austin. You could cut off power downtown and it wouldn't impact provision of electricity to the suburbs.

Originally Posted by Novacek

And the huge area, which requires that many more officers.

An area consisting of taxpayers who pay ad valorem taxes and expect to get the same level of service.

They are not distributed proportionately through town. Perhaps they are located where they are due to higher crime rates near downtown - in which case it's another reason not to promote "downtown". If that is not the case, the substations should be distributed more uniformly throughout the city. If Austin doesn't want to provide the same level of service then perhaps it should yield its geographic territory. Clearly folks throughout the city are taxed but the substations are located disproportionately in a N-S corridor passing through downtown. That "huge" area you refer to is the area paying for the police.

Originally Posted by Novacek

You put an officer on the corner of a street downtown, and they can oversee hundreds of people. They can nearly-instantly respond to incidents blocks away, and thereby help cover thousands more people.

Covering thousands of people in the suburbs with the same response time takes hundreds of officers.

Suburbs don't tend to have "hundreds of people" milling about on the street. A Friday night on Sixth Street evening is not the environment that the overwhelming majority of residents are seeking to live in. All you have suggested is that downtown has a higher crime rate or higher propensity for crime due to all the people milling about. The "cover thousands of more people" claim is silly since those folks are at best "in the area" - but to the extent the claim is made it would apply equally in subdivisions patrolled by police.

Originally Posted by Novacek

And you think those are free? And have no maintenance costs?

Never made any such claim. The point was that they are disproportionately located in a N-S corridor passing through downtown. Do you believe "downtown" has some superior entitlement to tax dollars provided by all the areas? Of course they cost money - which is being paid by taxpayers elsewhere.

Back to the topic at hand - of course you believe that downtown has a superior entitlement to tax dollars provided by the rest of the city - it's consistent with your support for a Rail Tax and COA Prop 1. We'll find out in November 2014 if the voting taxpayers want to pay higher taxes to benefit so very few with a choo choo train.

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by scm53

Blatant oversimplification. Not "Every person living in Central Austin" works central, or can take transit to their job. The Austinite that lives central, and works suburban, contributes to congestion as much as the suburban Austinite that works central.

They would contribute less since they would be going against the bulk of the traffic.

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

LR will never pay back the bonds. Hard working taxpayers who don't use the rail will be paying back the bonds.

What about hard working tax payers who don't use every single road?

Look, I don't like this alignment, but LR or rail in general is advantageous when done correctly. Austin needs to quickly start voting on bonds and asking the state/federal government for money for transportation infrastructure. It's just silly to think LR, along with a decent bus system and bike network can't form a decent public transit system that provides mobility options.

[dv1033]

As far as rail goes, Austin just needs to bite the bullet and go all in on rail from St Edwards up to UT up Lamar OR some sort of viable central alignment with money left over to provide better walking/biking infrastructure and more buses. As far as suburban commuting, I would go with Park&Ride Express buses to job/activity centers. I know, only in a quasi-perfect world...