AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[shanny]

just curious, do any of you actually live out west? because so far im the only one i know of here who lives in west austin that has voiced his opinion on this.

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by Scottolini

I believe that this will be a great success with 2 tracks dedicated for the commuter trains. All Capital Metro needs to do is buy/lease more trains, increase frequency of service, let the areas around the stations develop, let gas prices go back up, the commute down 183 and Mopac get worse, extend the line a touch further into downtown, and this will be a great success, especially for the money spent.

Over time the line to Manor/Elgin will open, the Georgetown-San Antonio line down the UP line, and an inner city streetcar with some dedicated ROW. Add in improved bus service, including BRT, and Austin may have a respectable mass transit system in a decade or less.

I'm sure someone from CapMetro or CAMPO can answer your questions. Check their website for contact info.

[Mopacs]

Originally Posted by shanny

just curious, do any of you actually live out west? because so far im the only one i know of here who lives in west austin that has voiced his opinion on this.

I live in far Northwest Austin, but occasionally commute along the 620/2222 corridor through West Austin. The congestion is considerable during peak hours due to lack of alternative inbound/outbound routes for lake area (north shore) residents.

I also look at huge developments such as Steiner Ranch, where there are merely two routes in and out of the community (Quinlan Park Road and Steiner Ranch blvd). Its basically a huge funnel with a small opening/choke point. As gorgeous as that area is, I would loathe to face that commute (unless you travel by boat )

Now granted, other priorities (such as such as quality of schools) often outweigh traffic concerns. I suppose most see that as a necessary sacrifice. Not my cup of tea, but if thats the lifestyle they choose, then they have to take the good with the bad.

[NormalgeNyus]

Yeah there is not enough room on mopac plus your forgetting that they are wanting to add the toll lanes on mopac which is the real stupid idea.

[hookem]

Originally Posted by shanny

just curious, do any of you actually live out west? because so far im the only one i know of here who lives in west austin that has voiced his opinion on this.

You aren't the only one. I live right off 360 near Bee Caves Rd, so I experience it first hand every day. During rush hour, we are effectively "isolated" (except for the shortcuts) by a wall of traffic. I've observed that the population of the 360 corridor jumps from maybe 4-8K to 40K or so during business hours. Restaurants are full during lunch. But after business hours, traffic is gone. Driving is a dream, and restaurants are all empty. It's almost... like an industrial zone in a city. Almost. It's not urban, not dense, definitely not walkable and no public transport. But in some other ways, it is mirroring a CBD -- reduced population outside of biz hours, horrible traffic during biz hours, new development is a little taller than typical sprawl... oh, and homeless people living in our parks.

[Scottolini]

So, has all of the beauty been destroyed, or only part by the bridges and access roads already in place at 2244 and 2222? Probably only the immediate area, huh? God forbid they did the same at the other lights. It would then look just like Dallas, and the entire aquifer would be annihilated.

[hookem]

Originally Posted by Scottolini

So, has the all of the beauty been destroyed, or only part by the bridges and access roads already in place at 2244 and 2222? Probably only the immediate area, huh? God forbid they did the same at the other lights. It would then look just like Dallas, and the entire aquifer would be annihilated.

There is beauty in urban settings. Look at San Francisco. My argument is that 360 is close enough to the city core that it might as well be urban -- there is plenty of hill country beauty to the west, where there hasn't already been a highway blasted through. Let's preserve those, and build along 360 instead (Except, as I've said, the Barton Creek Greenbelt, Bull Creek Greenbelt, and Wild Basin. We need our urban greenspaces like Golden Gate Park).

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by OU812

yeah i was kind of being facetious, since the transportation "leaders" in this state continue to squander our gas tax revenue on non road projects- then claim there's no money left.

This meme is spreading like wildfire lately, and it's dead wrong. Of course, so are other memes in this discussion, like the idea that "west Austin" somehow doesn't get its share of roadway funding. (Hint: many of the people out there get excessive amounts of road funding compared to what they actually pay - for a variety of reasons, including the fact that they often use county roads that the whole county has to pay for but are never built inside city limits).

Back to the gas tax: there's a 5-cent 'diversion' which was constitutionally dedicated to schools. Other than that, you've got 15 cents of state gas tax, almost all of which goes to roadways; and none of which can go to roadways outside the state highway system. Why is that important? Guess who gets more state highway lane-miles per capita? The suburbs.

An urban driver is far less likely to use a road that receives gas tax funding - yet he/she still pays gas taxes whenever and whereever they drive. The difference is made up for by property and sales taxes (the city having to pay millions to reconstruct Lamar Blvd, for instance). The folks out on 360 and farther west hardly ever drive on an arterial roadway that isn't part of the state system - so they screw the city twice; once by sucking up gas tax funds that should be helping central Austin, and once again by sucking up county funds that largely come from city residents.

So you go right ahead and push for funding equity in gasoline taxes. To get to the point where, say, Austin received back 90% of what it paid in state gas taxes (a similar scheme to what the Feds do with states), and you still get your suburban sprawlways, you would need about another 50 cents of state gas taxes, at a bare minimum - that's what you're getting for free right now by screwing city dwellers.

I have a blog category for this stuff here. Here's one starter post for you on major roads in the central city versus Round Rock.

As for development out there, it's an environmental disaster waiting to happen, and it's not sustainable. I work on 360 at Westbank, although I'm typing this from 'lovely' Huntsville, Alabama. It's a ghastly, hideous, place - exactly what Austin would be like if it weren't for all the environmentalists who at least SLOWED DOWN the sprawl out in the hills.

[Scottolini]

Funny thing is, as the road stands now, there are no systems designed to catch run off. The cars idling while stuck in traffic are polluting way worse than a car moving. Any expansion would require that the run off be captured, instead of just washing away into the soil. Environmentalism is an argument that holds very little sway in this discussion. Maybe if this was an undeveloped area with no roads. That is not the case with 360.

[Scottolini]

Originally Posted by hookem

There is beauty in urban settings. Look at San Francisco. My argument is that 360 is close enough to the city core that it might as well be urban -- there is plenty of hill country beauty to the west, where there hasn't already been a highway blasted through. Let's preserve those, and build along 360 instead (Except, as I've said, the Barton Creek Greenbelt, Bull Creek Greenbelt, and Wild Basin. We need our urban greenspaces like Golden Gate Park).

Have you driven 620 recently? What about 2244, 2222, or 71 W.? There is massive development west of 360.

[hookem]

Originally Posted by Scottolini

Have you driven 620 recently? What about 2244, 2222, or 71 W.? There is massive development west of 360.

It's not massive compared to other parts of the city. Places like the Hill Country Galleria are exactly what I'm against, but the best thing about those is how long it's taken before they finally sprouted up. And take a look at what is happening to home prices in Lakeway and other places to the west of 360... they are taking a huge hit. Lots of new housing was built recently, during the boom, so it was built high-end and at a price point that's taking the biggest hit. Hopefully development will take a breather there.

Also, don't forget the "natural beauty" we associate with highway 360 is mostly MAN MADE. Prior to 360 being built, that swath of rolling hills was no different to Austinites than hundreds of others to the west, northwest, and southwest.

The beautiful limestone cliffs along the road, the bridge and vistas associated with it, even the river/lake that runs through it... all MAN-MADE.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by Scottolini

Funny thing is, as the road stands now, there are no systems designed to catch run off. The cars idling while stuck in traffic are polluting way worse than a car moving. Any expansion would require that the run off be captured, instead of just washing away into the soil. Environmentalism is an argument that holds very little sway in this discussion. Maybe if this was an undeveloped area with no roads. That is not the case with 360.

Any 'upgrade' to 360 is likely to involve more frontage roads - because it's impossible to take access away from properties that already have it, and there's insufficient room for perimeter roads, and no alternative access points (unlike 183, which never should have gotten frontage roads).

Frontage roads = more sprawl. Period.

Also, improving commuting conditions for people who chose to live in areas we all know they shouldn't be living in leads to more pollution in the long-run. For every quart of oil captured by a new feature on the roadway, there's ten more dumped on the way there from the new subdivisions much farther out which are now feasible to construct/sell thanks to the temporary relief of commuting times.

[jowens]

FWIW, I live in Southwest Austin, commute and work on 360; dislike the Palisades West Buildings on top of the hill at Bee Cave & 360; but even more despise the red-lights that keeps the traffic gridlocked in the mornings and evenings on 360.

[M1EK]

And building overpasses to avoid those traffic lights will just make more people move out there and work out there; and then you end up with the same traffic with even more pollution at the end of the day.

Sprawl doesn't scale.

[VileFuge]

Originally Posted by M1EK

And building overpasses to avoid those traffic lights will just make more people move out there and work out there; and then you end up with the same traffic with even more pollution at the end of the day.

Sprawl doesn't scale.

IT'S PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT HAVE CAUSED AUSTIN TO BE RANKED AS THE NUMBER 1 MOST CONGESTED CITY OF IT'S SIZE IN THE US. AS WE HAVE WITNESSED IN THE PAST SEVERAL DECADES, "DON'T BUILD IT AND THEY WON'T COME" DOESN'T WORK. BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS WILL CONTINUE TO BUILD REGARDLESS OF THE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION, QUIT BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM.

[LoneStarMike]

Originally Posted by jowens

FWIW, I live in Southwest Austin, commute and work on 360; dislike the Palisades West Buildings on top of the hill at Bee Cave & 360;

but even more despise the red-lights that keeps the traffic gridlocked in the mornings and evenings on 360.

Just thought I'd add some visuals to the discussion. I took them Spring 2008.

Y'all carry on.

[Scottolini]

The frontage roads of 360 would be the existing highway. The expressway lanes would be in the grassy median. The only reason I care is that if there weren't stoplights, 360 would make an excellent alternative to Mopac. I live near S. Lamar and 290, and it would be nice to be able to take 360 all the way to 183 without stopping when I head out that way. As it is now, I never even consider it.

Before I'm accused of being some kind of sprawl lover or something, I must say I am loving all the urban development taking place all over the central city. I voted yes on the 2000 light rail proposal, and yes on the 2004 commuter rail proposal. I want Austin to be a world class city, and that includes it's transportation infrastructure. We need great roadways, mass-transit, bike lanes/paths, and great sidewalks. All of them, every single one.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by VileFuge

IT'S PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT HAVE CAUSED AUSTIN TO BE RANKED AS THE NUMBER 1 MOST CONGESTED CITY OF IT'S SIZE IN THE US. AS WE HAVE WITNESSED IN THE PAST SEVERAL DECADES, "DON'T BUILD IT AND THEY WON'T COME" DOESN'T WORK. BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS WILL CONTINUE TO BUILD REGARDLESS OF THE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION, QUIT BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM.

"Don't build it and they won't come" worked better than "build it and hope more won't come". Look at Loop 360 versus FM 1604 in San Antonio. Hell, look at downtown Austin versus downtown San Antonio. It's not an accident.

In reality, you road warriors have the same exact problem as the ANC die-hards: you're holding a policy you disagree with to the standard that if it doesn't stop 100.0% of the bad thing it was trying to stop, it didn't do anything good.

This is, of course, baloney. The ANC idiots like Jeff Jack complain that some sprawl still happened, so we should stop trying infill. But the fact is that smart growth lessened sprawl by some degree. Not by 100%, but definitely by more than 0%. Just compare Austin to San Antonio - it clearly had an impact.

So did "don't build it", again, as you can tell by comparing the various edges of the Austin metro area (Leander/Cedar Park/Round Rock versus Bee Cave/Lakeway, for instance). Nobody tried to stop freeways to the north and northwest; and, lo and behold, there's a hell of a lot MORE sprawl out that way than there is to the west and southwest.

The only thing turning 360 into a 'free'way would do is completely destroy what little good SOS was able to accomplish by turning right around and making it easier for people to live farther out that direction. Meaning that, in aggregate, downtown and the center city suffer - a lot - for doing the right thing, and the people out west and south and southwest benefit (are subsidized) for doing the wrong thing. Nobody who purports to care about Austin should be allowed to get away with advocating that type of policy.

[Scottolini]

You know M1EK, you can be quite persuasive.

[Northcrossed]

Originally Posted by Mopacs

(unless you travel by boat )

That's it! A water taxi from 620 to Tom Miller Dam (with a stop at 360). Then an aerial tram ride from Miller to Zilker...there used to be a dragline across the river from Zilker to the brickworks where Austin High is now, so the tower and wires would be like a historical recreation. Then at Zilker you get on a trebuchet and are launched to your chosen destination downtown (like into the crown of Frost). The way they're tossing around billion$ and trillion$ in Washington lately we could apply for Federal funding and probably get it with no questions asked.