AUSTIN: Green Water Treatment Plant & Seaholm Power Plant Redevelopment Update Thread

[Syndic]

They will build a road crossing Shoal Creek at 3rd St. They're already expanding 3rd St. north of Seaholm in preparation for it. It's just a question of whether it will be one-way or two-way.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

On the palm tree thing, I say if it can grow here without you having to hold its hand, then let it be. We have two of them in our yard that are way taller than the house and they're doing fine. Oddly enough, one of the three pecan trees we have is just about toast. Part of it broke off last year.

Pecan trees don't last all that long, really (75 years).

[KevinFromTexas]

This one is less than 25 years old. The drought did a number on it even though I was watering it. Ironically I didn't water the palm trees at all.

[lzppjb]

Sorry to hear that. That drought did a real number on our trees.

[the Genral]

We didn't have palm trees in NY, too cold in the winter. When I moved here, we ended up at the Royal Palms Mobile Home Park at 79 and 183. We had tons of palm trees throughout the park and I thought, Texas, mild winters, and palm trees, how cool! Then one winter in the early 80's, it got cold, like single digit cold, and all the palms died. I have one palm on my property now which is a freeze resistant variety and is the only one that survived past freezes in my neighborhood. I guess you can "hate" palm trees, which I find an odd thing to hate in the first place, but for my northern friends and family, they are pretty cool
when they come to visit. They say its like a piece of tropicana.
Now if I was going to hate a tree, it would have to be our beloved water guzzling cedars.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by the Genral

Now if I was going to hate a tree, it would have to be our beloved water guzzling cedars.

http://www.texas.sierraclub.org/alamo/trees.htm

Numerous articles over many years have claimed that cedar (Ashe juniper) is a waterhogging plant that is depriving springs and streams of water and that its removal would provide large quantities of extra water. A new study appearing this spring has shown that, contrary to longstanding belief, increases in Edwards Plateau tree and shrubs over time have resulted in more—not less—water in regional streams.


The analysis of decades of stream flow data by Bradford Wilcox and Yun Huang of Texas A&M University showed that base flows in the Nueces, Frio, Guadalupe, and Llano rivers have significantly increased since the 1950s. Prior to the 1950s, base flows were about half what they have been since 1960. Total flow, which also includes storm flow from rainfall events, has increased in 3 of the 4 basins.

High numbers of sheep, cattle, horses, and goats on the land prior to 1960 (leading to overgrazing and overbrowsing) resulted in degraded watershed conditions. The bare land did not facilitate water infiltration, and the reduced groundwater was reflected in lower amounts of base flow in the streams. Reductions in the numbers of livestock in recent decades have allowed the vegetation of the watersheds to recover.

At the same time, numbers of trees (particularly cedar) have greatly increased. Thus, the vegetation recovered while becoming dominated by cedar. This vegetation recovery is responsible for approximately doubling the amount of base flow, because average rainfall has not increased during the period of study. Trees encourage water to infiltrate, and cedar is apparently beneficial in terms of increasing the amount of available water.

Myth: Cedar competes with other trees for water, eventually killing them.

Fact: There appears to be little or no evidence that cedar competitively replaces other trees. Yes, the tree is increasing in relative abundance due to lack of fire and perhaps livestock foraging (Smeins and Merrill 1988: 110; Owens 1996: 622). In addition, oak wilt, a fungal disease, may be contributing to a decrease in oak abundance. However, mixed cedar-oak and oak-cedar woodlands and forests are common in the Hill Country. Pure stands of cedar, which one would expect if they were driving out all other trees, are relatively uncommon.

Myth: A full-grown cedar tree will suck up 80 to 150 gallons of water a day.

Fact: A mature cedar will use about 33 gallons of water per day. A live oak of comparable size will use about 19 gallons per day (Owens 1996: 621).

Myth: Clearing cedar will provide lots of extra water for recharging the Edwards Aquifer.

Fact: While moderate amounts of clearing in small watersheds can increase the flows of minor springs in those places, it is very doubtful that this will translate into large quantities of water going into the Edwards Aquifer. That would require clearing almost all trees, including oaks, from the Hill Country, and would still not be effective unless the grasses that replaced the cedars and oaks were heavily grazed (White 2000: 7-8). In other words, only a barren Hill Country resembling a parking lot would provide large amounts of runoff to the Edwards Aquifer (White 2000: 1). It would be far better to keep the trees and simply use less water.

[migol24]

You know... I can see the arguments from both sides. But I kinda dig the idea of having 3rd St all pedestrian with the intent of having the west side of it more cohesive with the rest of downtown. That area is kind of dead and is a good indication why "most Austinites" don't walk it. In general, people here in Texas aren't costumed to walking and being without cars. I'm imagining that area will be hopping with more retail and restaurants that will make it more accessible and lucrative for pedestrians.

I can't remember what city in Europe it is... I think Coppenhagen, where they have some plaza or street where cars are completely prohibited. Anyways... it wasn't that long ago they decided to do it and people were very doubtful about it but from the looks of it it was a success. Anyways.. what I'm simply trying to say is this idea of serving the interest of cars is getting a bit old... and I think having some area that's dedicated to more bikes and pedestrians integrated with the city as opposed to being another hike and bike trail is worth being open minded about. If it turns out to be just another car lane, they should make it with the intent of also providing wide spaces for pedestrians and bikes to access with ease. In other words, if it turns out to be just an extension of 3rd St, I wouldn't like to see cars flying by like they do on Lavaca or Guadalupe like its some highway... it should be first and foremost a pedestrian friendly neighborhood, a la 2nd St district.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

http://www.texas.sierraclub.org/alamo/trees.htm

Wow! Thanks for clearing that up....but they still make me sneeze

[lzppjb]

I can't begin to imagine how annoying cedars must be for allergy sufferers. I understand why so many people want them eradicated.

[Syndic]

Yep. Cedar allergy sufferer here. Spent most of my Life living here in the cedar allergy capital of the world. It's awful. Your eyes constantly feel like you have pink eye and you pretty much become this big, nasty snot monster for 2 months or so. I don't want the cedar trees gone, though. Cedar is actually a very lovely (and lovely smelling) wood. I just want doctors to come up with better ways of dealing with the allergy.

[MightyYoda]

As somebody that is very into the gardening and has many native and non-invasive adapted plants in my yard, Kevin is correct. Junipers (colloquially called Cedar) in central Texas are a very important part of the ecosystem. They are fast growing and can be a fire danger when not kept under control, but many things rely on them for cover or their berries. Also plants such as cedar sage rely on them in micro-environments. Cedar can also be very pretty when pruned into more normal tree shaped habits.

Regarding non-natives such as st.augustine for instance. It is idiotic to plant and maintain for the most part, but it can actually thrive here under the right conditions. Under heavy shade, it is actually one of the least maintenance grasses to have. Most of the time though, you see it in new lawns with little tree cover and heavy sun which will kill it.

Pecan trees can actually live a very long time (hundreds of years), but tend to be susceptible to droughts, diseases, and other conditions that kill them prematurely.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by Syndic

Because they're a cheap gimmick employed by some developers and landscapers to try to make something instantly seem tropical and paradisiacal (i.e. to turn everything into California) even though it isn't. It's disrespectful of other ecoregions and other cultures. These people think everyone wants to live in a tropical place so they plant palm trees everywhere. To me, it's just as tacky and ridiculous as planting giant cactii in the middle of New York City. But these ignorant developers and landscapers keep doing it. They think everyone wants to live in California. But I'm a damn Texan, so screw that.

Texas has native palms and not all of them live along the coast. Texas Sabal Palm is a native and long ago before large swaths of the old Texas growth were chopped down, Sabal palms would grow in low lying areas and along rivers and creeks up into Central Texas. I have one in my back yard and I love it. We also have Palmettos that are native to this region. They may not get as large as trees, but they are palms.

My issue is the cactus, not the native varieties. Im talking about when people completely strip their yards of grass and place rocks and gravel and nothing but desert plants. Despite the ongoing drought, Austin is not in Arizona, nor is it an arid climate despite what I hear some people say. Its not even semi arid. Austin is near the edge but completely within the Subtropical Humid Climate zone. When you head westward where rainfall averages less than 30 inches, thats when it changes over to a sub-humid subtropical zone. Im all for planting natives and there are plenty of native species that do just fine with little water that are not cactus or succulents.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by MightyYoda

As somebody that is very into the gardening and has many native and non-invasive adapted plants in my yard, Kevin is correct. Junipers (colloquially called Cedar) in central Texas are a very important part of the ecosystem. They are fast growing and can be a fire danger when not kept under control, but many things rely on them for cover or their berries. Also plants such as cedar sage rely on them in micro-environments. Cedar can also be very pretty when pruned into more normal tree shaped habits.

Regarding non-natives such as st.augustine for instance. It is idiotic to plant and maintain for the most part, but it can actually thrive here under the right conditions. Under heavy shade, it is actually one of the least maintenance grasses to have. Most of the time though, you see it in new lawns with little tree cover and heavy sun which will kill it.

Pecan trees can actually live a very long time (hundreds of years), but tend to be susceptible to droughts, diseases, and other conditions that kill them prematurely.

excellent post and you are correct about the Ash Blueberry Junipers.

[lzppjb]

I have never heard them called Ash Blueberry Junipers, but I guess it's technically correct. I've heard Ashe Juniper and Mexican Juniper. Cedar is just easier to say, even though it's inaccurate.

[MightyYoda]

Not to call out Syndic, but the palm comment amuses me because Palms aren't native to California at all, but there are multiple palm species native to Texas and even grow in central Tx.

[lzppjb]

I knew Texas had native palm species, but I did not know they were native to Central Texas. Interesting. Are there any naturally occuring palm stands in the Austin area still around?

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

Re: Third street bridge.
Heavily used bike corridor. Take it all the time. Why? Because It is safer and gets me away from cars to connect driectly to Town lake. Plus a great back way into whole foods… and soon to Trader Joes…..
Yes I live downtown. No I don't live in 360.
Folks who bike downtown all the time know how to get around the traffic grid and spaces like the 3rd street bridge are important to residents.
I am thrilled with three new streets. Happy to see third left alone.

And…. yes. I am a downtown NIMBY. So?
If you own your property, chances are you are too.

Rock on AHealy.

Spot on. I think there was some confusion about this....
It's not being a NIMBY to want to protect a unique bike/walk section of downtown that serves the people of the neighborhood it's in. I do social rides often through 3rd and commute to work safely and easily each day via 3rd st bike blvd. If y'all commuted on that road each day you would totally understand why it's special and should be left alone. I see so many downtown dwellers walking their dogs, jogging, biking, etc. We all have a love in common for dense urban development... It's why we're so passionate about these things.
The palm trees are pretty tacky though.....

and if I am indeed being a downtown NIMBY, so be it!

[MightyYoda]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

I knew Texas had native palm species, but I did not know they were native to Central Texas. Interesting. Are there any naturally occuring palm stands in the Austin area still around?

Read jdawg's breakdown. Mainly the Sabal Palm and Palmetto. I am not sure if any Sabal Palms (Palmetto) grow naturally this far inland. Dwarf palmettos are pretty common and get quite big still, but are more shrub like in growth.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by MightyYoda

Read jdawg's breakdown. Mainly the Sabal Palm and Palmetto.

Yeah, I read it. Most I see now were planted by homeowners or developers. I was just wondering if anyone knew of places they naturally grow, like a specific creek.

[MightyYoda]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Yeah, I read it. Most I see now were planted by homeowners or developers. I was just wondering if anyone knew of places they naturally grow, like a specific creek.

I will have to think about that, I know I have seen them, but can't think of exact locations on greenbelts atm regarding dwarf palmettos.