What Austin Needs!!!

[llamaorama]

How about REAL BRT on major arterials all around the city. I mean dedicated busways with platform stations, like a train with rubber tires. The benefit being that you would have segments of such infrastructure where needed since a bus can also drive on normal streets too. Basically where major routes converge and pass through major urban corridors there would be be busway, all around the city. If you lived and worked along the corridor you'd have train-like service, while people who already ride buses wouldn't negatively impacted the way that a forced transfer to a new train would.

[AustinExPat]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

How about REAL BRT on major arterials all around the city. I mean dedicated busways with platform stations, like a train with rubber tires.

You mean, something like this:
http://www.portauthority.org/PAAC/Cu...8/Default.aspx
I used it for several years right after it opened in 1983. It was nifty!

[Scott Wood]

Originally Posted by AustinExPat

You mean, something like this:
http://www.portauthority.org/PAAC/Cu...8/Default.aspx
I used it for several years right after it opened in 1983. It was nifty!

I rode the west busway a bit when I lived up there -- it was nifty up until the point where the busway ended and the bus entered shared traffic, on the wrong side of the bridge from downtown.

Compared to Austin, though, it was great. :-)

[Austinite]

Originally Posted by M1EK

Wrong. Mopac and I-35 back up partially due to the fact that the roads from them into/out of downtown are well above capacity during rush hours. To say nothing of the fact that a driver coming from E Riverside, for instance, might well use I-35 (directly) to get to UT.

They certainly are also a limiting factor - right now no more people can get into the core per hour during rush hour until we build urban rail - which will allow more people to get into the core (may not affect I-35/Mopac at all; but more people will get into the core from places like Mueller or East Riverside than is currently possible on the surface streets or freeways they use). IE, Joe ThinksHesUrban stops driving from Mueller; opening up a space on 51st/Lamar/Guadalupe for Ron RoundRock to get off I-35; opening up a space on I-35 for George Georgetown.

So, at first, I was wrong when I said that urban rail wouldn't affect traffic jams on I-35 and Mopac at all. But then you decided to write a second paragraph, by which time I was right when I said that urban rail wouldn't affect traffic jams on I-35 and Mopac at all.

Thanks.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by M1EK

Wrong. Mopac and I-35 back up partially due to the fact that the roads from them into/out of downtown are well above capacity during rush hours. To say nothing of the fact that a driver coming from E Riverside, for instance, might well use I-35 (directly) to get to UT.

They certainly are also a limiting factor - right now no more people can get into the core per hour during rush hour until we build urban rail - which will allow more people to get into the core (may not affect I-35/Mopac at all; but more people will get into the core from places like Mueller or East Riverside than is currently possible on the surface streets or freeways they use). IE, Joe ThinksHesUrban stops driving from Mueller; opening up a space on 51st/Lamar/Guadalupe for Ron RoundRock to get off I-35; opening up a space on I-35 for George Georgetown.

You're probably 100% correct in that the inability of local streets to move as much traffic as the freeways "in to" and "out of" downtown Austin causes most of the congestion on the freeways. But, the urban rail being proposed isn't going to help the congestion on the freeways, because the proposed rail will not reach out as far as the freeways. Who along Riverside Drive is going to drive east to I-35 to head north to reach downtown Austin when they can drive west and head north on Congress? Who from Mueller is going to get on I-35 to head south for less than one mile when the can take city streets instead? In either case, not one would use the MoPac Freeway to reach downtown Austin from the directions urban rail is originally planned to be built.

[Scott Wood]

Originally Posted by electricron

You're probably 100% correct in that the inability of Who along Riverside Drive is going to drive east to I-35 to head north to reach downtown Austin when they can drive west and head north on Congress?

I imagine plenty of the people that live in those apartments on Riverside east of I-35 would drive west on Riverside and then north on I-35, especially if Congress is also congested, or if they're looking to head up to UT.

Originally Posted by electricron

Who from Mueller is going to get on I-35 to head south for less than one mile when the can take city streets instead?

It looks like the most obvious route to me, at least from the northern part of Mueller where the multi-family is planned to go. Why take city streets if they're congested too?

Originally Posted by electricron

In either case, not one would use the MoPac Freeway to reach downtown Austin from the directions urban rail is originally planned to be built.

The impact on MoPac would be less, but people trying to avoid MoPac congestion could take up the spaces vacated on I-35 or surface streets.

But that's not the point. The point is that getting additional people into and around the city core, easing a constraint on its development (and avoiding the suburban development that would have happened otherwise), is a good thing all by itself, regardless of any benefit to the freeways.

If the additional housing and jobs that could be added to the core with the added mobility were to instead go to Round Rock and Cedar Park, you don't think that would mean additional trips on I-35 and MoPac (and 183, and suburban arterials, etc)?

[nixcity]

^Well said

[JAM]

Originally Posted by Scott Wood

But that's not the point. The point is that getting additional people into and around the city core, easing a constraint on its development (and avoiding the suburban development that would have happened otherwise), is a good thing all by itself, regardless of any benefit to the freeways.

If the additional housing and jobs that could be added to the core with the added mobility were to instead go to Round Rock and Cedar Park, you don't think that would mean additional trips on I-35 and MoPac (and 183, and suburban arterials, etc)?

I don't see rail shutting down sprawl as long as our roads and suburban houses are subsidized by the government. Its just too cheap to live in the burbs compared to living in the core. It will help a small amount, but it is not a silver bullet. IF rail is super convenient, then it will help take people off the road who would have lived in the core anyway. I think the biggest segment that will move into the core due to rail would be younger and older people with no children who could move into newly built apartments along the rail. But most new single home development is going to remain in the burbs and encourage people to drive.

[priller]

It doesn't just encourage people to drive, it requires it!

My wife and I drove to the 'burbs last night after work to visit a friend. Since we live downtown and she works downtown, she almost never gets in the car any more. As we were driving along 183 access road, she was commenting on how nobody walks, how far apart everything is, how you have to drive to go anywhere, and how being in cars isolates you from other people. "Downtown seems so much more alive to me because you see people everywhere. Here it's just cars and roads."

[migol24]

Originally Posted by Austinite

Accordingly, I thought there was agreement that the purpose of urban rail in Austin was to make carpetbagging yankees (and their offspring) feel less embarrassed about living in Texas. ?

If this is one argument against it, I would suggest those that are against it to find better arguments than this.

[migol24]

Originally Posted by austin242

Austin needs A good urban park downtown Like Union Square In New york or one of many in portland.

I hear you! That Yerba Buena Gardens in San Francisco is also something cool that Austin can use. I think Austinites would welcome it easily.

[Azul_Caballero17]

Am I the only person that thinks that Austin could be perfect place to put a big-name amusement park, say Disney World? Think about it, let's say Disney decided to build a park in Austin, a city between 3 metropolises (S.A., Dallas, Houston) and a city that can provide leisure to the central part of this country, considering the 2 other Disney Parks are on polar opposite of the U.S. Also this would add to our up and coming tourism by at least two fold.
Anyone agree or am I just crazy (which could be a possibility)?

[KevinFromTexas]

Of course Disney is a corporate and marketing whore, so this might not be the case, but most theme parks aren't profitable anymore. Just ask Houston.

[JAM]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

but most theme parks aren't profitable anymore. Just ask Houston.

Well, that park sorta sucked to begin with. When I drove by it, I could hear this big "vortex like" sound. I'd much rather go to Disney than Six Flags any day.

In the past, I've heard unsubstantiated rumors of Disney coming this way, south of Austin. Disney supplied a lot of jobs in the area during the recession. I have been the beneficiary of that and many other families are also thankful to them for the work.

[Spaceman]

I hear that both of the planned water parks for this area have gone into limbo....No money for either..

[Jdawgboy]

Austin is strategically in a good location for a major attraction of some sort even more so than San Antonio IMO. We are centrally located in a population area of 20 million within a 200 mile radius and it makes sense for some sort of amusement park to come here. Im sure someday we will see something. Disney would be cool, but I doubt anything like that will happen soon.

[KevinFromTexas]

What I want is a science museum/planetarium. I would live there.

[Cloud92]

I think an amusement park idea would be great but i don't think it has to be a Disneyland park the city can make its own theme park that would be fitting for the area i think. actually i kind of have my own ideas of a park like that.
along with an idea of anew arena for the city. the "drum" is ok but really i hate going to Dallas or Houston for the "Big" shows that they have cause they have bigger arenas. sometimes i wish i can show my architectural designs to the city
I'd love it if urban rail would connect to every major suburbs maybe even to georgetown would be nice.
i think as time goes on people would see a transition from car to rail or bikes it just takes time before you see a difference.
would also be nice if they did something with that dried up patch of land between E 5th and E 4th where the metro train comes into a nice friendly plaza with trees or something better for the eyes, along with the surroundings would be great if small shops opened up there
what else maybe a new large scale park for the east also nice fields and gardens hike and bike trails like Zilker but east i guess.

[BevoLJ]

Is Lady Gaga not considered a "Big Show?" lol. I've only had to leave Austin twice to see a show and once was back in the mid-80's to see the Beach Boys in San Antonio, and once was in '04 (or '05?) to see Eric Clapton's Crossroads Festival up in Dallas. Either show could have been in in the Drum just as easy had they wanted to. Someone mentioned having something like London's O2 in Austin. Now that would rock! But is kinda wishful thinking. I'm still a big fan of our Erwin Center.

An amusement park would be kinda cool. But really the only amusement parks I like are Sea Worlds and there is already one of those just down the road in SA. lol. I have no doubt that eventually something will be built up in Williamson Co though. They love that stuff up there and seem to be ever trying to build something up there. No park would ever be allowed to build in the hills near Austin or over the recharge zone. We used to have something pretty cool down in San Marcos when I was a kid. Aquarena Springs. They had a swimming pig! And glass bottom boats where you could watch the fish that were very cool. Did that place close down? I saw someone posted an article recently about how someone fell from their old tower and died. =(

[Jdawgboy]

As far as the concerts go, Austin has been getting a lot of major artists coming. Adele, Ke$ha, LMFAO, Deadmau5, Tiesto, Sade, Katy Perry, Robyn, Erasure just to name a few are all coming to Austin in the next month or two. We had Janet Jackson, Gipsy Kings, and Tony Bennett earlier this year not to mention all of the SXSW acts and ACL fest. Its getting to the point to where you wont have to go to any other city to see major acts. Its also getting to the point where there are acts every week. I can't afford to see all of them even though I so want to. Lets not forget the new music venue at the Circuit of the Americas, Clear Channel Communications has partnered up with the COTA to bring huge acts next year.

As far as Disney goes, some disney officials have apparently made several trips to the COTA site this year and surrounding area. There must be some sort of interest. We shall see what happens.