Considering moving seattle/portland to austin (Howe: subsidized, prices, company)

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by cBach

Austin has a lot of LGBT population and the hippies tend to be ones that smoke weed so the "live and let live" attitude prevails. Anytime there is a real progressive solution on the line, like expanding CapMETRO, the population usually votes against taxes for such things. They talk the talk but don't walk the walk. City services for the poor and mentally ill are vastly underfunded. In contrast there are festivals every week and we have great bike trails. Lots of SJW here as well but even some of the leftest people own guns here. In general, fiscally conservative but fairly socially liberal.

You say the population usually votes against things, but I see that in general they vote for the vast majority of bonds. I would say they rare vote against things so they actually do walk the walk.

For example in the last bond election voters passed a 250m affordable housing bond with 73% in favor.

The things that havent passed in recent memory were the $1billion 9 mile rail line that was not on the preferred route of people in favor of rail.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Austin97

You say the population usually votes against things, but I see that in general they vote for the vast majority of bonds. I would say they rare vote against things so they actually do walk the walk.

For example in the last bond election voters passed a 250m affordable housing bond with 73% in favor.

The things that havent passed in recent memory were the $1billion 9 mile rail line that was not on the preferred route of people in favor of rail.

You need to reread my post:

"Anytime there is a real progressive solution on the line, like expanding CapMETRO, the population usually votes against taxes for such things"

Every rail measure recently has been defeated. Austin is not progressive, sorry. A progressive city wants to expand its rail system.

[austinnerd]

Originally Posted by cBach

You need to reread my post:

"Anytime there is a real progressive solution on the line, like expanding CapMETRO, the population usually votes against taxes for such things"

Every rail measure recently has been defeated. Austin is not progressive, sorry. A progressive city wants to expand its rail system.

I don't know that it's an issue as simple as "Austin is not progressive", the issue with rail isn't that folks simply don't want rail, the issue is convincing folks that the results will be meaningful and the money that we the taxpayers are forking out will not go to waste on a system that no one uses and continues to bleed money and becomes an ongoing tax drain. The promises of the existing line vs the reality of it has given the anti-rail folks plenty of ammo. This is not unlike the previous thread on inter-metro high speed rail, it's not so much the rail as it is folks distrust of "the powers that be" to pull it off.

[WhatTheFox]

Originally Posted by cBach

You need to reread my post:

"Anytime there is a real progressive solution on the line, like expanding CapMETRO, the population usually votes against taxes for such things"

Every rail measure recently has been defeated. Austin is not progressive, sorry. A progressive city wants to expand its rail system.

I'm curious about this relation between public transportation / rail systems and progressiveness.

I don't ever see any big Texas city adapting the public transportation lifestyle that exists in NYC, Boston, Chicago etc. Not when you have grown up watching your parents, grandparents etc. having their own transport. So are you saying there is no chance of these Texas cities ever becoming progressive?

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by cBach

You need to reread my post:

"Anytime there is a real progressive solution on the line, like expanding CapMETRO, the population usually votes against taxes for such things"

Every rail measure recently has been defeated. Austin is not progressive, sorry. A progressive city wants to expand its rail system.

There have been 3 rail proposals in the last 20 years.

The first was defeated, the second passed, the third was defeated.

The third was ridiculous at 100m per mile for 9 miles that wouldnt service anyone. It was also the biggest bond package in austin history. It was a bad plan that even pro rail people could not get behind, that is not indicative of not walking the walk.


So I guess depending on what you mean by recently, 100% of rail bond proposals have been rejected. If you are only considering the 1, is it really correct to say "every"?

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by WhatTheFox

I'm curious about this relation between public transportation / rail systems and progressiveness.

I don't ever see any big Texas city adapting the public transportation lifestyle that exists in NYC, Boston, Chicago etc. Not when you have grown up watching your parents, grandparents etc. having their own transport. So are you saying there is no chance of these Texas cities ever becoming progressive?

dallas and houston embraced sprawl. The anti-growth austinites did one good thing which was reject new roads when building massive suburbs was in vogue. The implication today is that the only answer in a timely fashion is increased density in the core. That density will 100% drive demand for public transit.

I personally believe that the day of rail has passed and that rideshare algorithm driven shuttles are the public transit of the future.

They will pick you up at your location and drop you off at your destination. They could involve transfers with other shuttles, or even busses/trains.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Austin97

There have been 3 rail proposals in the last 20 years.

The first was defeated, the second passed, the third was defeated.

The third was ridiculous at 100m per mile for 9 miles that wouldnt service anyone. It was also the biggest bond package in austin history. It was a bad plan that even pro rail people could not get behind, that is not indicative of not walking the walk.


So I guess depending on what you mean by recently, 100% of rail bond proposals have been rejected. If you are only considering the 1, is it really correct to say "every"?

You're proving my point here that it's all about cost. Austinites are fiscally conservative, I rest my case.

You build a rail before you need it, not after. As population density increases, the rail is already there. In progressives it works like this: Land was acquired when it was cheap not expensive, the desired route was created instead of a hodge podge workaround route.

Dallas was smart with starting DART in the 90's but the are isn't conducive to rail. Houston made some colossal mistakes even though it is more concentrated than Dallas and it could work. MetroRAIL is a good line and ridership has been increasing, there is development along E 5th right where the line is, people want this stuff.

It's just at the ballot box the budget rules. I'm not knocking it, I'm telling the truth. We don't walk the walk here.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by WhatTheFox

I'm curious about this relation between public transportation / rail systems and progressiveness.

I don't ever see any big Texas city adapting the public transportation lifestyle that exists in NYC, Boston, Chicago etc. Not when you have grown up watching your parents, grandparents etc. having their own transport. So are you saying there is no chance of these Texas cities ever becoming progressive?

There are different levels of progressive. Wanting gay rights so your brother can marry is one thing, wanting to spend lots of money on infrastructure projects is another.

One's about gaining rights, another's about giving resources to promote a cause that you support. Austin is great about the former, not so much the latter. It's easy to support a cause that you have no skin in the game, not so easy to support a cause where your money is involved.

Oh and by the way, Texas is spending so much more than they should on this old style feeder road system that no other state does, it makes a project consume much more land than it should and does not make traffic flow easier. As Texans we're paying but the money is going to inefficient roads and not public transit. We could achieve every project warranted if instead of building this feeder road system on all projects they simply just built the freeway (and the flyovers, feeder roads are not substitutes for flyovers) but not all the access road infrastructure. But I digress.

[WhatTheFox]

Originally Posted by Austin97

I personally believe that the day of rail has passed and that rideshare algorithm driven shuttles are the public transit of the future.

Agreed! I couldn't believe it when Austin actually asked Uber to leave. I know Uber needed a kick in the pants to straighten a few things out but asking them to leave was a bigger loss to Austin. Glad they got back to their senses and worked things out.

[WhatTheFox]

Originally Posted by cBach

You're proving my point here that it's all about cost. Austinites are fiscally conservative, I rest my case.

You build a rail before you need it, not after. As population density increases, the rail is already there. In progressives it works like this: Land was acquired when it was cheap not expensive, the desired route was created instead of a hodge podge workaround route.

Dallas was smart with starting DART in the 90's but the are isn't conducive to rail. Houston made some colossal mistakes even though it is more concentrated than Dallas and it could work. MetroRAIL is a good line and ridership has been increasing, there is development along E 5th right where the line is, people want this stuff.

It's just at the ballot box the budget rules. I'm not knocking it, I'm telling the truth. We don't walk the walk here.

But but ... "if you don't build it they won't come" ... oh wait! They came anyway and now it's too late to build.