CapMetro trying to prop up declining ridership (Austin, Trinity: subdivision, live)

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

True, and that fact exposes another major government planning problem. Courts should be dispersed around the area, not in the most expensive and most congested acreage in the metro area.

I agree and this is why I opposed the Travis County courthouse boondoggle. So glad it was defeated and then they ended up buying that nice art deco old federal courthouse as a solution. Cheaper and revitalized a nice property.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Luckily we don't have to guess.

" As of November 2015, the citywide sidewalk network
includes 2,580 miles of absent (missing) and 2,400 miles of existing sidewalk."


https://austintexas.gov/sites/defaul...16_reduced.pdf


That was two and a half years ago, so it's improved (slightly) since then.


Now, there's a lot missing. But it's getting much better in the central core. A lot of the missing miles are in the periphery and are (rightfully) lower priority.

As I just pointed out, two years ago there were vast sections of even common streets (like Burnett which I clearly showed) that didn't have sidewalks.

So you really need recent data on this. By my calculations they have paved at least 1,500 additional miles since 2015.

They have even (gasp) paved additional miles in Steiner Ranch and I'm not talking new streets, I'm talking the main streets like Steiner Ranch Blvd and Quinland Park Road. It is much easier to "take a walk" than ever before:

Steiner Ranch Blvd:
Apr 2011 (I wish they had 2015 but this sidewalk wasn't paved in 2015 either but google maps doesn't come out my way that much):
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3777...7i13312!8i6656

Apr 2017:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3777...7i13312!8i6656

Oct 2013:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3829...7i13312!8i6656

Apr 2017:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3829...7i13312!8i6656

Quinlan Park Blvd:
Sep 2011:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3620...7i13312!8i6656

Apr 2017:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3620...7i13312!8i6656

[Bp25]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

Why would anybody work for minimum wage in downtown Austin? And who pays minimum wages in downtown Austin? Nobody?

Ok, maybe not federal minimum wage but what do the restaurant workers get paid in downtown? $10? $15? Enough to live within walking distance from downtown or maintain a car and pay parking fees for downtown? Not all downtown workers are high income or tech workers.

[riaelise]

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

Sure you do. You chose to be employed downtown.
As far as litigation is concerned, if your firm is a big firm then litigation is only one component of its business and even then "downtown Austin" is at best convenient only for cases in Austin and only on days individual attorneys from that office have to go to court. It's certainly not convenient when representing clients in litigation in other courts nor on any other days of the year. It's also not convenient for the clients. It's solely for "status".

All of that is irrelevant.

Whatever the reasons are, whether it's status, convenience, whatever, it is what it is and doesn't really matter so I'm not going to waste keystrokes arguing. If I could find a company that was a true apples to apples comparison up north or in Wilco, of course I'd work there.

I chose to be employed downtown because that's where most of the big law firms are located. My industry is centered downtown. Downtown is also the location of most of the state offices.

[IC_deLight]

Originally Posted by riaelise

All of that is irrelevant.

Whatever the reasons are, whether it's status, convenience, whatever, it is what it is and doesn't really matter so I'm not going to waste keystrokes arguing. If I could find a company that was a true apples to apples comparison up north or in Wilco, of course I'd work there.

I chose to be employed downtown because that's where most of the big law firms are located. My industry is centered downtown. Downtown is also the location of most of the state offices.

I'm glad you agree your reasoning was irrelevant. You do have a choice as to where you work and you chose to work downtown. That is hardly relevant as to whether taxpayers should be subsidizing a mass transit solution for you to work at a big law firm downtown.

The fact that downtown has a lot of property that is exempt from property taxes so that the taxpayers that aren't even served by CapMetro further subsidize the attorneys and employees of the big law firms that locate there is hardly a selling point for those taxpayers to support such activity to continue unabated.

The City of Austin's has a decidedly anti-car stance - at least towards car owners who actually use their cars. On the other hand the city seems to have little problem and even encourages if you have to pay for a taxi, ride-hail service, or "ZipCar". I wonder if you would still want that job (and if the businesses would locate there) if Austin limited your access to downtown to exclusively via CapMetro.

This isn't intended to be a rant against all mass transit or against buses as a form of mass transit - only to illustrate the fallacies behind arguments used by proponents of mass transit.

[riaelise]

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

I'm glad you agree your reasoning was irrelevant. You do have a choice as to where you work and you chose to work downtown. That is hardly relevant as to whether taxpayers should be subsidizing a mass transit solution for you to work at a big law firm downtown.

The fact that downtown has a lot of property that is exempt from property taxes so that the taxpayers that aren't even served by CapMetro further subsidize the attorneys and employees of the big law firms that locate there is hardly a selling point for those taxpayers to support such activity to continue unabated.

The City of Austin's has a decidedly anti-car stance - at least towards car owners who actually use their cars. On the other hand the city seems to have little problem and even encourages if you have to pay for a taxi, ride-hail service, or "ZipCar". I wonder if you would still want that job (and if the businesses would locate there) if Austin limited your access to downtown to exclusively via CapMetro.

This isn't intended to be a rant against all mass transit or against buses as a form of mass transit - only to illustrate the fallacies behind arguments used by proponents of mass transit.

Oh give me a break. Duh, nearly all of the jobs in my field are located in the downtown area. So how's that for choice? The downtown area for most cities is traditionally the business hub and employment center. Like I stated, if there was a job available that was located close to where I lived and was literally an apples to apples comparison, then I would have worked there. But ever since I set foot in this city all of the firms have been located downtown. the one firm that was located in north austin guess what? moved downtown two years later. When headhunters presented me with employers, they were ALL downtown. My experience is pretty specific too, so unless I take a job doing something I've never done before, I'm not going to be working close to home.

your yammering on about why law firms (and other companies) choose downtown is irrelevant. There's a myriad of reasons why and also there's a myriad of reasons why people choose to commute to downtown.

i'm also taxpayer. seems like that is conveniently forgotten. paying taxes doesn't make anyone special.

as was stated, whether it's building more roads or adding more transit, it comes out of somewhere.

having bus service benefits a lot of people other than commuters.

and by your logic, since I have the power to choose where i work, any taxpayer not served by CapMetro can move to a place near a transit route so that they can avail themselves of the system. just because they can't/won't use it doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist.

[10scoachrick]

Originally Posted by riaelise

There's a myriad of reasons why and also there's a myriad of reasons why people choose to commute to downtown.

I've told you ten thousand times not to exaggerate!!!

[cBach]

Originally Posted by IC_deLight

I'm glad you agree your reasoning was irrelevant. You do have a choice as to where you work and you chose to work downtown. That is hardly relevant as to whether taxpayers should be subsidizing a mass transit solution for you to work at a big law firm downtown.

The fact that downtown has a lot of property that is exempt from property taxes so that the taxpayers that aren't even served by CapMetro further subsidize the attorneys and employees of the big law firms that locate there is hardly a selling point for those taxpayers to support such activity to continue unabated.

The City of Austin's has a decidedly anti-car stance - at least towards car owners who actually use their cars. On the other hand the city seems to have little problem and even encourages if you have to pay for a taxi, ride-hail service, or "ZipCar". I wonder if you would still want that job (and if the businesses would locate there) if Austin limited your access to downtown to exclusively via CapMetro.

This isn't intended to be a rant against all mass transit or against buses as a form of mass transit - only to illustrate the fallacies behind arguments used by proponents of mass transit.

You kind of create strawmen for your arguments that are based on fallacies.

If law firms want to be close to business/government offices/courts downtown then they are free to do so (free market, surely you agree with that). If rialese wants to work in a good law firm, her only choices are downtown.

Multiply this decision by thousands of times and you'll see why it's necessary to have some form of transit to/from a densely populated and densely commercial area to/from far flung suburbs.

Yes they have to take a car to the ride sharing stop but that's a moot point. The traffic concerns are in the central where the density is.

It's not an "anti-car" stance, it's just realizing the reality of the situation and taking actions that mitigate the issues.

For all practical purposes you should consider a bus as a "bunch of cars" as that is what purpose it serves except that they share a common engine and frame. If you think of it in those terms, then you see that if anything a bus is "pro car" because it basically allows more people on the roads which means it's easier for you to drive around.

[CarnivalGal]

Originally Posted by cBach

They have greatly improved the linear footage of sidewalks in many parts of town with some of the new ordinances that require businesses on at least one side of the road to construct a sidewalk.

I'll give an example.

Burnett Road near 183 in 2015:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3706...7i13312!8i6656

Notice that there is no sidewalk and the grass is well worn.

Burnett Road near 183 in 2017:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3706...7i13312!8i6656

Notice the freshly paved sidewalk in this picture.

So even in the last 2 years there has been a great improvement in sidewalks. Maybe try again?

I'm glad they are making improvements, but they are slow in coming. I no longer work there. As I mentioned, I work on 360, where there are no mass transit options. There's also no sidewalks. However, my husband still works where I used to (in northeast Austin), and still no sidewalks where he is

[cBach]

The logic that says "well we pay twice for roadways because we are taxed for them (and possibly tolled) and then there are gas taxes" is very flawed. The reason why is for a rail system you could claim "we pay twice for them because we are taxed for them and then there is a ticket "turnstile" fee". Same thing for bus lines but I wanted to separate the arguments so the whole "but the bus is sharing the double taxed road with the cars" argument isn't used.

These arguments with anti-transit people always seem to devolve into a pissing match about who is getting screwed over the most and I'm frankly tired of these exhausting and irrelevant arguments.

That's why I try to explain transit in terms most anti-transit folks understand. Think of a bus as 20 uber vehicles. Think of it as 20 cars off the road. Anybody, even anti-transit folks would like 20 cars off the road at any point for each bus. Then multiply by a thousand buses. That's 20,000 cars off the road in a day.