Austin Sprawl?

[TheNiche]

If Houston had more of those 70s civic mindedness, discovery green would have been here sooner, maybe even more of it, or maybe there wouldn't be a need to built it from the ground up if some green had been preserved.

How hell did you figure that? Do you even know the history of that land? When you make it harder for people to get to an employment center, they tend to pay higher prices to live at higher densities, and the higher land values make it far more expensive for cities to set aside land as green space. One of the original premeses of suburbs was that they allow for vastly more parks, trees, and open spaces per capita.

Bayous wouldn't have so much fecal material in too.

How do you figure? The worst offenders were built prior to Houston having an extensive freeway system.

Then again, it is hard to have that kind of civic mindedness with the lack of natural beauty to preserve and love of concrete.

What is civic mindedness, to you? Is it where you like your neighborhood so much that you won't allow it to change in any way--for better or worse--regardless of how much more convenient a change might make the lives of untold tends of thousands of other people? Seems pretty selfish to me. It causes densification pressures, and if you remain as averse to change, then it causes ridiculously high housing prices because there's just too many people for too little well-located land...or just kills the growth of the economy of the central city as businesses move closer to the people, who have continued moving to suburbs whether a control freak wanted to stop them or not...that's what has historically happened in cities that didn't meet demands on their infrastructure.

[musicman]

Then again, it is hard to have that kind of civic mindedness with the lack of natural beauty to preserve and love of concrete.

how is civic mindedness and the lack of natural beauty related?

[webdude]

How hell did you figure that? Do you even know the history of that land? When you make it harder for people to get to an employment center, they tend to pay higher prices to live at higher densities, and the higher land values make it far more expensive for cities to set aside land as green space. One of the original premeses of suburbs was that they allow for vastly more parks, trees, and open spaces per capita.

It didn't stop other dense cities from creating their discovery green parks, some before their real estate prices soar. And yes, it is speculative, but it is logical to think that if other dense cities have done it, and did it bigger or more, it could have been possible here too. Are you trying to say that because it is not dense or a younger city here, so no matter what level of civic mindedness, it could not have happen? It is a younger city, but the boom happened a long while ago.

How do you figure? The worst offenders were built prior to Houston having an extensive freeway system.

How do you figure that because something is built earlier, it should be left unmaintained. For civic well being, we should have paid more attention and clean it up, regardless of when the problem was created.

What is civic mindedness, to you? Is it where you like your neighborhood so much that you won't allow it to change in any way--for better or worse--regardless of how much more convenient a change might make the lives of untold tends of thousands of other people? Seems pretty selfish to me. It causes densification pressures, and if you remain as averse to change, then it causes ridiculously high housing prices because there's just too many people for too little well-located land...or just kills the growth of the economy of the central city as businesses move closer to the people, who have continued moving to suburbs whether a control freak wanted to stop them or not...that's what has historically happened in cities that didn't meet demands on their infrastructure.

I would say its a mix, certainly let it happened, but also not to let it bulldoze its way through.

how is civic mindedness and the lack of natural beauty related?

Less one thing to be concern about when it comes to preserving something for the well being of the community.

[musicman]

Less one thing to be concern about when it comes to preserving something for the well being of the community.

this is sure different than you earlier statement. it is hard to have that kind of civic mindedness with the lack of natural beauty to preserve and love of concrete. people can be civic minded and love concrete.

[Trae]

Concrete is used for all of those sidewalks that people walk on in those trails, etc. Don't know why there is hate for concrete.

[webdude]

this is sure different than you earlier statement. it is hard to have that kind of civic mindedness with the lack of natural beauty to preserve and love of concrete. people can be civic minded and love concrete.

Its not different, the same point still stands. And you are trying too hard. I am talking unnecessary structures.

I don't hate concrete, and I like it in trails, but not if it is used to make unnecessarily huge parking lots.

[musicman]

Its not different, the same point still stands. And you are trying too hard. I am talking unnecessary structures.

I don't hate concrete, and I like it in trails, but not if it is used to make unnecessarily huge parking lots.

if someone makes a global statement just be prepared for people "trying too hard"

[KinkaidAlum]

Concrete is used for all of those sidewalks that people walk on in those trails, etc. Don't know why there is hate for concrete.

Have you ever walked the trails around Lady Bird Lake (Town Lake) in downtown Austin? Have you walked the newly improved Buffalo Bayou trails in Houston?

If you've done both, you might be able to answer your own question.

The new trail in Houston is a vast improvement with public art, creative lighting, pedestrian bridges, and even a canoe/kayak launch. However, the trail still feels like an afterthought since it takes you under multiple bridges, under a freeway, by surface parking lots, and by the backside of buildings and garages. It is clear that Houston put her back to the waterfront and is only now coming to terms with the possibility that doing so was a mistake.

Now, contrast that with Austin's Lady Bird Lake and trails. They are much more natural and beautiful. Sure, some of that is topography and the fact that the water is wider/cleaner. However, much if it has to do with the views that are available on that trail. You aren't left looking up at the ugly side of buildings, parking garages, and elevated roadways with roaring traffic noise overhead.

[webdude]

if someone makes a global statement just be prepared for people "trying too hard"

Then you got to try harder then, cause I don't really see what point you are trying to argue with my statement beside semantics?

[CDeb]

Now, contrast that with Austin's Lady Bird Lake and trails. They are much more natural and beautiful. Sure, some of that is topography and the fact that the water is wider/cleaner. However, much if it has to do with the views that are available on that trail.

....and relatively few people get to enjoy it as nobody can get to it in less than an hour because the city's transportation infrastructure is crap.

[TheNiche]

It didn't stop other dense cities from creating their discovery green parks, some before their real estate prices soar. And yes, it is speculative, but it is logical to think that if other dense cities have done it, and did it bigger or more, it could have been possible here too.

You mean like the way that we created Hermann Park? Or Memorial Park? Or Sesquicentennial Park? Or the linear parks along Buffalo, Brays, and White Oak bayous? It was possible here. It happened. The evidence is all over the place.

But how this relates to freeways, I'm not sure.

Are you trying to say that because it is not dense or a younger city here, so no matter what level of civic mindedness, it could not have happen? It is a younger city, but the boom happened a long while ago.

I'm not really clear what you're trying to communicate, here.

How do you figure that because something is built earlier, it should be left unmaintained. For civic well being, we should have paid more attention and clean it up, regardless of when the problem was created.

I would say its a mix, certainly let it happened, but also not to let it bulldoze its way through.

Less one thing to be concern about when it comes to preserving something for the well being of the community.

I didn't say that it should be left unmaintained. My point was that not building freeways would not have prevented it. I'm trying to stay on topic, here.

I would say its a mix, certainly let it happened, but also not to let it bulldoze its way through.

There is always an alternative use for land that could be used for highways, whether it be for pre-existing homes, future homes, a commercial strip, parks, power lines, pipelines, frieght rail, etc.

I'm not advocating that every other arterial be converted to a freeway, but it is in the best interests of the greatest numbers of people that there be adequate portions of land allocated to each of the uses required to sustain a city. That may mean that one neighborhood gets a park and another one gets a freeway. Freeways and parks have to go somewhere, but they can't be everywhere and they can't be nowhere. Not everyone is going to be happy, but then not everyone has to be.

[Saddleman]

Yall have already made up your minds about how things are. So why pretend to discuss?

[KinkaidAlum]

....and relatively few people get to enjoy it as nobody can get to it in less than an hour because the city's transportation infrastructure is crap.

Please. Plenty of people can get to it by walking or biking from their close-in neighborhoods. Thousands of people live withing a two miles radius of Town Lake. Many more work close by in downtown offices. Additionally, thousands of hotel visitors who choose to stay downtown also have easy access to Town Lake.

The only people who can't get to it because it takes them an hour to drive there are the folks who CHOSE to live in Williamson County or way out on Lake Travis in the Hills.

Since when did being able to drive somewhere really quickly and without any traffic become a right? Did the people who chose to buy in sprawling burbs on the outskirts of town NOT factor in commuting times? I have no sympathy for them. They made their own beds (or paid someone to make them).

[CDeb]

Since when did being able to drive somewhere really quickly and without any traffic become a right?

Never said it was. I am merely amused by the bed that Austinites have made for themselves. You think all those evil conservatives out in the burbs are the only ones that have to lie in that bed?

[Jax]

Just got back from Austin. The outskirts are totally unmemorable but Downtown, UT campus, South Congress, and Guadeloupe Street were very cool. It seems that if you live anywhere near downtown you shouldn't have to deal with traffic. I found the entire area from UT to the waterfront very walkable. If anybody is interested, I can post more photos later...

[CDeb]

If anybody is interested, I can post more photos later...

Your photos are always a pleasure, Jax.

[TheNiche]

Thousands of people live withing a two miles radius of Town Lake.

The only people who can't get to it because it takes them an hour to drive there are the folks who CHOSE to live in Williamson County or way out on Lake Travis in the Hills.

Yeah, and over a million do not. And you're right that they could ALL choose to live within the two mile radius, and it would physically be possible to accomodate them, but housing prices would be ridiculous, historic structures would be razed and replaced by the hundred, neighborhood protection groups would be going nuts, and the high cost of commercial real estate would drive out all the funky storefronts that make Austin interesting.

Since when did being able to drive somewhere really quickly and without any traffic become a right? Did the people who chose to buy in sprawling burbs on the outskirts of town NOT factor in commuting times? I have no sympathy for them. They made their own beds (or paid someone to make them).

Austin is going to grow, that is a certainty. And as history has shown, it'll grow up and out whether the infrastructure supports it or not. Maybe there need to be changes in how infrastructure is financed, but fundamentally even the inner-city activists realize these days that some sacrifices have to be made to prevent an even worse fate.

[barracuda]

Back to the original question, I think there are several reasons that many outsiders think more highly of Austin.

1. Austin has more natural beauty than Houston or Dallas. No argument there.

2. The Austin area offers more exciting outdoor opportunities (cleaner waterways [e.i. Barton Springs], hills on which to hike or mountain bike, etc.). Houston has some wonderful parks -- Memorial Park, Hermann Park, Bayou Park, Terry Hershey Park -- but they aren't as scenic or as integrated into the city as compared to Austin. For example, a tourist could drive very close by to Hermann Park and never know it was there since Houston is flat and you can rarely see beyond a few trees or buildings (or in the case of our freeways, you can't see much beyond the endless billboards and strip malls). Houston really has many beautiful areas once you get off the freeways and get to know the city.

3. Downtown Austin is appealing to many tourists -- lots of bars, restaurants, etc. The downtowns of Houston and Dallas are rather sterile by comparison, and they often look like dead zones after business hours. Of course, Houston is definitely making great strides with the Pavilions, Discovery Green, and new buildings planned for DT.

4. Austin just has more charm and charisma. It's a smaller and more accessible city, and this appeals to a lot of people. I think Houston and Dallas can be very intimidating for those unfamiliar with the cities, and so all they see are our ugly freeways. Not a good impression if that's all they see.

That said, I do think Austin is overrated. Most of the major roadways (I35, 183) are clogged at rush hour, and Austin seems to have the same suburban sprawl as Houston and Dallas. It just happens to be more limited by the fact that Austin is a much smaller city.

[KinkaidAlum]

Never said it was. I am merely amused by the bed that Austinites have made for themselves. You think all those evil conservatives out in the burbs are the only ones that have to lie in that bed?

Uh, since when did I mention conservatives?

This isn't about conservatives vs. liberals. It's about holding people responsible for their choices.

Suburban dwellars have no right to decide what the cities they DO NOT RESIDE IN should look like. People in Round Rock, Georgetown, Pflugerville, Leander, and Marble Falls shouldn't be deciding what the roadways in Austin look like. They gave up that right when they took their property taxes outside of the city's limits. Of course, the same in reverse is true as well. People who live on South Congress in Austin shouldn't be demanding that they have easier access to the baseball stadium in Round Rock for example.

Texas cities would be WISE to start standing up for themselves. Building mega-freeways that cut through the hearts of neighborhoods can destroy a sense of place. They can make the neighborhoods they cut through far less appealing while actually increasing the appeal of the suburbs. As a city dwellar, I don't think that's right. People in the suburbs have no right to demand better and larger freeways through other people's neighborhoods.

We've lost so much in Houston with the construction of 288, the Pierce Elevated, 45, 10, and others. It's time to put a stop to it. What is occuring on I-10 West of the city is shameful. Kudos to Austin for not falling for a developer's wet dream; massive roads to nowhere.

[CDeb]

Uh, since when did I mention conservatives?

You didn't. It was a joke. Sorry.

It's about holding people responsible for their choices.

Suburban dwellars have no right to decide what the cities they DO NOT RESIDE IN should look like. People in Round Rock, Georgetown, Pflugerville, Leander, and Marble Falls shouldn't be deciding what the roadways in Austin look like. They gave up that right when they took their property taxes outside of the city's limits.

It seems awfully hypocritical for inner-city dwellers to enjoy the benefits of living in a large market while having a "screw em" attitude about the people who make that market size possible.

Besides, if they CHOSE to live inside the city, it would have all the undesirable impacts that Niche pointed out earlier, giving you something new to complain about.

[musicman]

We've lost so much in Houston with the construction of 288, the Pierce Elevated, 45, 10, and others.

we've gained so much more with increased access to businesses/residences, ease of travel, etc. while some projects may be controversial (particularly transportationwise), if the benefits gained increase quality of life for the city as a whole (not just a few) they should be considered.

[webdude]

You mean like the way that we created Hermann Park? Or Memorial Park? Or Sesquicentennial Park? Or the linear parks along Buffalo, Brays, and White Oak bayous? It was possible here. It happened. The evidence is all over the place.

But how this relates to freeways, I'm not sure.

I'm not really clear what you're trying to communicate, here.

No, like the way we are going to create discovery green, which is a green space that is easily accessible from work and living space (well living space around there still has long ways to go), unlike those parks you mention which are less integrated and less accessible, to the detriment of civic well being.

I believe we were talking about civic mindness, because of less or lack of it of it, has resulted in parks and green space that required by most to get there by freeways and roads.

I didn't say that it should be left unmaintained. My point was that not building freeways would not have prevented it. I'm trying to stay on topic, here.

I am staying on topic about civic mindedness. The mentality of freeways as the answer to everything is not of civic mindedness.

There is always an alternative use for land that could be used for highways, whether it be for pre-existing homes, future homes, a commercial strip, parks, power lines, pipelines, frieght rail, etc.

I'm not advocating that every other arterial be converted to a freeway, but it is in the best interests of the greatest numbers of people that there be adequate portions of land allocated to each of the uses required to sustain a city. That may mean that one neighborhood gets a park and another one gets a freeway. Freeways and parks have to go somewhere, but they can't be everywhere and they can't be nowhere. Not everyone is going to be happy, but then not everyone has to be.

Yeah, they can be closer and more assessable from work and living space though, which can be in the best interests of the greatest number of ppl.

[musicman]

No, like the way we are going to create discovery green, which is a green space that is easily accessible from work and living space (well living space around there still has long ways to go), unlike those parks you mention which are less integrated and less accessible, to the detriment of civic well being.

Discovery green isn't as accessible as other parks. the parking fee alone is a turn off to many.

[webdude]

Discovery green isn't as accessible as other parks. the parking fee alone is a turn off to many.

Then its even worse than I thought. That is like the closest to a well integrated, really in the heart of it all park.

[N Judah]

I'm sure downtown/midtown dwellers (now and in the future) won't mind the parking fee.

[Jax]

I'm sure downtown/midtown dwellers (now and in the future) won't mind the parking fee.

Besides its not too hard to find free street parking downtown on the weekend or after 5. I assume that's when most people would go to the park rather than during business hours. Those who go to the park during business hours will most likely already be downtown.

Also, when the new Metro system is built in 2012, people from all over the city can take the light rail downtown instead of driving.

Not to get this thread back on topic or anything, but here are some more Austin photos for you to consider.

[musicman]

Also, when the new Metro system is built in 2012, people from all over the city can take the light rail downtown instead of driving.

wow in 4 yrs they will have rail "all over the city"?

[totheskies]

I am an avid Houston supporter, but I have been flirting with Austin alot lately... I've been traveling there on the weekends to hang out with friends, and just tour the city. I LOVE the urban momentum that is occurring there. The city is being transformed within a matter of a few years with new highrise residential and the rail implementation. And as for the signature "vibe" that is has.... well that's part of what happens when you combine ultra conservative politicians with a 50,000 member university... it's like the college town that never grows up!!

As for comparisons to Houston, Dallas, or San Antonio, I see a lot more similarity than difference (this is Urban Texas after all). What cities in Texas DON'T have ridiculous congestion?? I-35 is pretty horrible, but so is US290 in Houston, or peak time for I-30 in D/FW. In reference to downtown populations, UT will always contribute to people activity whether the students live on/ near campus or not, but it helps that so many do live right in the area. I agree with JDawgATX, homelessness is a big issue for downtown and the areas around it, but I'm at a loss as to why. Not enough homeless and transitional centers??

Anyway, Austin is a first rate city in my opinion. I see so many great things happening there, and I'm proud to be only a short drive from this great city.

[swtsig]

Back to the topic....

Sorry, you cannot blame the state and federal governments for the state of Austin's freeway system. Do you think they just said, "Hey, let's build up Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio and screw Austin?" Nope.

What you have today is the direct result of Austinites and their leaders attitudes of the 1950's and 1960's which was, "If you don't build it, they won't come."

Well, they didn't build it, and they came anyway, and now they're hosed.

according to the parents of a few of my friends who lived/went to school in austin around that time, this is EXACTLY what happened.... the leaders of the city had no desire to accomodate growth because they never wanted it.

and now they are screwed... that's why i loved living in tarrytown right off of enfield and mopac, no freeways needed to get downtown

[rapturematt]

I think that a lot of reason for urban downtown movement being faster in Austin than in Dallas or Houston is because of the road system. It is like a roach motel. It is enticing to get into downtown, but once you are there, you find it really hard to get out, therefore, you might as well settle until you die.