So uh..Austin Subway*, Light Rail Expansions and $3.2 - $10.2 Billion

[ChickenSandwich 10,004]

What a huge waste of money. Enjoy the 20% property tax increase. 2 empty train are better than one 

[blacklab 12,206]

I think it's actually the best plan I've seen so far, but if I lived in Austin still I'd have voted against it.

But now that I live outside of Austin, choo choo motherfucker. Raise those taxes and build the thing so the days I actually have to drive into town there will be a few dozen less cars on the road.

[Bolero88 286]

10 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

What a huge waste of money. Enjoy the 20% property tax increase. 2 empty train are better than one 

For the last time: it's not a 20% property tax increase. 

[LebongJames 1,936]

24 minutes ago, Bolero88 said:

For the last time: it's not a 20% property tax increase. 

It’s still a waste of money and it won’t help with shit because no one will ride it. It will cost the tax payers double or triple by the time it’s finished. Glad our address is Austin but not actually subject to the tax. It is also going to drive up rent across the city considerably after these apartments have to pay the higher tax. 

Edited November 4, 2020 by LebongJames

[B00M 6,749]

22 minutes ago, LebongJames said:

It’s still a waste of money and it won’t help with shit because no one will ride it. It will cost the tax payers double or triple by the time it’s finished.

Yeah but bro: ALL ELECTRIC BUSSES and MORE of them on the road with MORE stops and still no enclaves! The empty busses constantly parking in lanes, plus the empty trains constantly stopping all traffic at intersections, will totally make you reevaluate spending $300+ per year indefinitely to better CONNECT the homeless to your neighborhood!

Median home price is $320,000 ... Ad valorem tax rate increase from $0.4431/$100 valuation to $0.5335 per $100 ... $320,000/$100*(0.5335-0.4431)=$289.28, increasing every year with valuation ... And that assumes it's under budget and they get the federal funds. 

YOU WERE JUST GONNA WASTE THOSE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS ANYWAY. LET CAP METRO WASTE THEM ON TRAINS MOTHER FUCKER! CHOO CHOOOO

Edited November 4, 2020 by B00M
Enclave, turnout, pullout, bay, lay-by ... Whatever you call it when the bus can pull off the fucking road to stop

[Somnio 751]

Goodness, I am relieved most of the folks posting in this thread aren't indicative of Austin's electorate!

Austin's moving forward while y'all cling to the past, repeating the same tired rhetoric ad infinitum.

This was a historic vote for Austin, and it's citizens made clear what path forward we'll be taking.

Vaya con Dios, bitches!

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

35 minutes ago, Somnio said:

Goodness, I am relieved most of the folks posting in this thread aren't indicative of Austin's electorate!

Austin's moving forward while y'all cling to the past, repeating the same tired rhetoric ad infinitum.

This was a historic vote for Austin, and it's citizens made clear what path forward we'll be taking.

Vaya con Dios, bitches!

Ans it wasn’t particularly close. I’m shocked, honestly. Thrilled, but shocked. I’m beginning to think that the nostalgia cartel has lost their grip. 

[B00M 6,749]

What about trains and buses are the future? 

 

You're shocked that voters that traditionally approve anything on the ballot 80% to 20% approved this waste of money 59% to 41%? Shocked?

 

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

8 minutes ago, B00M said:

What about trains and buses are the future? 

 

You're shocked that voters that traditionally approve anything on the ballot 80% to 20% approved this waste of money 59% to 41%? Shocked?

 

Austin voters do no traditionally approve much for transportation. That’s part of how we got here. 

[B00M 6,749]

Got where? A thriving city that's a bargain to move to for most of the country where a big % of former daily commuters will WFH moving forward?

[Pam Cummings 9,923]

24 minutes ago, B00M said:

Got where? A thriving city that's a bargain to move to for most of the country where a big % of former daily commuters will WFH moving forward?

Lmfao at calling austin a bargain. Just lmfao.

[B00M 6,749]

43 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Lmfao at calling austin a bargain. Just lmfao.

It's a bargain for the folks that are moving here from SD, SF, LA, NYC ... it's gotta be a bargain for somebody given the 169 people that still move here per day. 

[Orange&White 5,574]

2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Austin voters do no traditionally approve much for transportation. That’s part of how we got here. 

What was the last transportation bond that failed? Austin voters typically did not approve light rail in the past, for good reasons, but they rarely ever failed to approve transportation bonds.

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

8 hours ago, Orange&White said:

What was the last transportation bond that failed? Austin voters typically did not approve light rail in the past, for good reasons, but they rarely ever failed to approve transportation bonds.

2014

[Guest Lobo]

6 out of the last 7 transportation-related bonds have passed.  And most with double-digit wins.  There is also roughly $200mm sitting idle in transportation bond money that has not yet been deployed to a specific project for myriad reasons.  But the paper has been sold and our debt service continues on its 'amortization clock.'  We're actually overly generous when it comes to voting/spending on transportation programs in this city.  We're just not that tactical about it.  

All that aside, this thing passed comfortably.  So now the real work begins and I'll do my part. 

[LebongJames 1,936]

13 hours ago, Somnio said:

Goodness, I am relieved most of the folks posting in this thread aren't indicative of Austin's electorate!

Austin's moving forward while y'all cling to the past, repeating the same tired rhetoric ad infinitum.

This was a historic vote for Austin, and it's citizens made clear what path forward we'll be taking.

Vaya con Dios, bitches!

Im scared for the city that people like you will be making the decisions moving forward. We have built a great city but keeping making terrible decisions. Adler and the city council are slowly ruining the city. The only thing historic about this vote will be how much money it will cost and how it will drive a higher cost of living in the city, creating more gentrification in the parts of town they claim they care about. 3 train lines that provide little value to actual commuters is not pushing Austin into the future.

Edited November 5, 2020 by LebongJames

[Armybrat 41,611]

The ‘burbs will continue to flourish & diversify while Austin degenerates to downtown San Francisco 2.0..... without the Bay view.

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

50 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

The ‘burbs will continue to flourish & diversify while Austin degenerates to downtown San Francisco 2.0..... without the Bay view.

We might have different ideas about how degenerate it will be, but think that’s broadly true, mainly because our land development code essentially preserves central Austin under glass, like Stalin’s corpse. 
But think of it this way- as much as I don’t like that future, can you imagine how more unlivable and Hostile the SF Bay Area would be for working people without BART and CalTran? All we can do about things we can’t stop is mitigate them. That’s why I’m happy about Prop A. 

Edited November 5, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[Armybrat 41,611]

I have often stated that I like the idea of mass transit, but with the caveat that it be done efficiently and cost effectively (without corrupt kickbacks). IMO, the CoA will do none of those things, especially on a project this big.

Until the CoA gets its disastrous homeless policy fixed quickly, the central core will not be a desirable destination for tourism, entertainment, living & working. Adler & his cohorts shit the bed on that issue terribly.

[BrazilHorn 6,873]

COA should have used this picture from SF for their rendering of what the downtown train station will look like

[ZB'Tejas 597]

The current red line cost about $15M a year to run and what’s the ridership? Less than 1000 a day? I’d love a better mass transit system but I’m just not sure how many people this will help.

Didn’t they say would only take 1% of cars off the road? That’s not very much for what will likely cost over 10B.

I think I’d rather see I35 buried and solve for the downtown portion of that road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChickenSandwich 10,004]

4 hours ago, LebongJames said:

Im scared for the city that people like you will be making the decisions moving forward. We have built a great city but keeping making terrible decisions. Adler and the city council are slowly ruining the city. The only thing historic about this vote will be how much money it will cost and how it will drive a higher cost of living in the city, creating more gentrification in the parts of town they claim they care about. 3 train lines that provide little value to actual commuters is not pushing Austin into the future.

We are in a race to copy our costal elites. Austin is rapidly becoming the 2%. Top 1% and the bottom 1%. All those in the middle get screwed. 

[ChickenSandwich 10,004]

3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

We might have different ideas about how degenerate it will be, but think that’s broadly true, mainly because our land development code essentially preserves central Austin under glass, like Stalin’s corpse. 
But think of it this way- as much as I don’t like that future, can you imagine how more unlivable and Hostile the SF Bay Area would be for working people without BART and CalTran? All we can do about things we can’t stop is mitigate them. That’s why I’m happy about Prop A. 

There is no working class in Austin proper. They can’t afford to live there. This will be exclusively to serve the 1% able to afford to live in central Austin and the homeless. The days of downtown being a true business center with thousands of workers commuting are over. It’s city government, the rich land/home owners and the homeless. 
 

Most new business will choose other areas for cost reasons. See Tesla. See Apple. Downtown is a vanity project. 

[gsoda3 3,366]

4 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

We might have different ideas about how degenerate it will be, but think that’s broadly true, mainly because our land development code essentially preserves central Austin under glass, like Stalin’s corpse. 
But think of it this way- as much as I don’t like that future, can you imagine how more unlivable and Hostile the SF Bay Area would be for working people without BART and CalTran? All we can do about things we can’t stop is mitigate them. That’s why I’m happy about Prop A. 

if there was no BART they'd just leave.  the entire bay area would be gentrified and a balance would be achieved only because they'd have to raise wages to keep workers in those jobs.

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

There is no working class in Austin proper. They can’t afford to live there. This will be exclusively to serve the 1% able to afford to live in central Austin and the homeless. The days of downtown being a true business center with thousands of workers commuting are over. It’s city government, the rich land/home owners and the homeless. 
 

Most new business will choose other areas for cost reasons. See Tesla. See Apple. Downtown is a vanity project. 

Sadly, I mostly agree with this, except for the bolded part. Austin's downtown has some unique business assets related to things related to the capital and various domains of officialdom. Also I wouldn't say Austin proper, but central Austin, agree. 

[phdhorn 6,225]

23 hours ago, blacklab said:

I think it's actually the best plan I've seen so far, but if I lived in Austin still I'd have voted against it.

But now that I live outside of Austin, choo choo motherfucker. Raise those taxes and build the thing so the days I actually have to drive into town there will be a few dozen less cars on the road.

Yeah, connecting the airport is a good idea. But I live out in the county and don't bring that shit out to me. Fortunately it won't while I'm still alive.

Also fortunately, the infrastructure for these lines are too late into the establishment of the automobile to make any significant change beyond the city limits, unlike most cities which have rail by now. Austin is now too built up the immediate county area to make it even half-tenable for eminent domain purchase. The drop in traffic will be negligible, some parsing of a percentage point of zero, so the vehicle will still rule the Austin metro area. As it should be.

 

Edited November 5, 2020 by phdhorn

[Wally Pryor 5,455]

6 hours ago, Armybrat said:

Until the CoA gets its disastrous homeless policy fixed quickly, the central core will not be a desirable destination for tourism, entertainment, living & working. Adler & his cohorts shit the bed on that issue terribly.

I'm curious where the $60MM+ that was budgeted last fiscal year on homelessness went.   Would love to see the detail on spend v. budget.    

[Armybrat 41,611]

5 minutes ago, Wally Pryor said:

I'm curious where the $60MM+ that was budgeted last fiscal year on homelessness went.   Would love to see the detail on spend v. budget.    

Maybe Bozo can point us in the right direction to find that info?

[Wally Pryor 5,455]

37 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Maybe Bozo can point us in the right direction to find that info?

Would be nice to see.  Even after pockets being lined, a hotel being purchased here and there and room service on Ben White that's still a shit-ton of money left. 

[ChickenSandwich 10,004]

45 minutes ago, Wally Pryor said:

I'm curious where the $60MM+ that was budgeted last fiscal year on homelessness went.   Would love to see the detail on spend v. budget.    

 

not a break down of 2019 - can't find what was actually spent on what, but this is the basic info that is available now.

https://www.statesman.com/news/20191018/fact-check-is-austin-spending-20000-per-homeless-person-as-abbott-said

The current Austin homeless population is 2,255 according to ECHO,” Wittman said in an email, referencing the non-profit Ending Community Homelessness Coalition. “The current Austin budget calls for $62.7 million to be spent on homelessness initiatives. This breaks down to $27,804.88 per homeless person.

Another report from KXAN says the city is spending $37,000 per homeless person,” Wittman said in his email.

This year’s survey shows that there were 2,255 homeless people in Austin. Of those, 1,169 were sheltered and 1,086 were unsheltered.

Austin’s homeless population has remained relatively steady over the past nine years, fluctuating from a high of 2,362 in 2011 to a low of 1,832 in 2015.

https://www.kut.org/post/austin-proposes-budget-includes-627-million-moral-imperative-ending-homelessness

City Manager Spencer Cronk unveiled the city's budget proposal for the 2019-2020 fiscal year Monday. It includes a $17 million increase over last year in money set aside for homelessness initiatives – a total of $62.7 million in general revenue funds.

The city says roughly $16 million of the total money will go toward one-time expenses for shelters – including a plan to build a new, housing-focused emergency shelter in South Austin and plans to put shelter or camping spaces in all 10 council districts. 

The city also plans to set aside $1.3 million to repair the Austin Resource Center for the Homeless, as well as roughly $1.5 million to support the Salvation Army's Rathgeber Center

The new city budget walks just up to the 8% cap on the so-called rollback rate, a state-mandated limit on year-over-year tax increases. This year’s increase is a response to a state cap on tax revenue that takes effect next year and would require any proposed tax revenue increase to be put to a vote if it exceeds 3.5%.

https://www.kxan.com/news/more-spending-on-homelessness-than-ever-an-in-depth-look-at-austins-proposed-plan/

Here’s a breakdown of the proposal categories:

• $20.4 million for Housing Displacement Prevention
• $18.4 million for Re-Empowerment
• $23.9 million for Crisis Management

Housing displacement prevention is money for homeowner and renter’s assistance programs. Re-Empowerment is about ensuring people who no longer stay on the streets, stay that way. The final category, crisis management, is where money meant for shelters is located.

In this category, $16.3 million is dedicated to either the operation or construction of homeless shelters. If the same number of people are still living in shelters next year, the city will spend $13,943 on each of these people a year. This comes down to about $38 a day. As for what’s left over in this section, it goes to outreach and to keeping the city clean.

 

[Wally Pryor 5,455]

Thanks, I feel better.  Thought we were spending upwards of $35,000 per homeless individual.    It's only $25 - $30K.       Must be a re-empowerment savings.

Edited November 5, 2020 by Wally Pryor

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

1 hour ago, Armybrat said:

Maybe Bozo can point us in the right direction to find that info?

Not my lane, to be honest. @Pasken?

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

4 minutes ago, Wally Pryor said:

Thanks, I feel better.  Thought we were spending upwards of $35,000 per homeless individual.    It's only $25 - $30K.       Must be a re-empowerment savings.

It's actually probably quite a bit more considering the cost of the homeless to Fire & EMS, along with Central Health. 

Edited November 5, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[Pasken 1,312]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Not my lane, to be honest. @Pasken?

On the homeless spending? No idea. 

Edited November 5, 2020 by Pasken

[ChickenSandwich 10,004]

After the camping fiasco the city was now “forced” to add 17 million to the homeless budget and it just so happens that is the exact amount set aside for real estate purchases. Not really worth any transparency i suppose. 

[DanRydell 799]

The ‘burbs will continue to flourish & diversify while Austin degenerates to downtown San Francisco 2.0..... without the Bay view.

Not that Fox News talking points ever make much sense but this idea that San Francisco is some thunderdome hellscape is among the most detached from reality.

[Armybrat 41,611]

How many cities have a shit map? You can overlook the unpleasantness many can see, but it is there. Same in Austin.

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

16 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

How many cities have a shit map? You can overlook the unpleasantness many can see, but it is there. Same in Austin.

There’s an app for that

[Bozo_Casanova 27,042]

On 11/5/2020 at 11:50 AM, gsoda3 said:

if there was no BART they'd just leave.  the entire bay area would be gentrified and a balance would be achieved only because they'd have to raise wages to keep workers in those jobs.

But they couldn’t raise wages beyond a certain point in a lot of those jobs because the business models wouldn’t pencil out.

of course- it would be MUCH more cost effective, not to mention much more environmentally sustainable, to liberalize the development of market rate housing and lower the clearing price with supply, but people are very precious about close-in craftsman bungalows because evil developers or something.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[High Plains Drifter 11,197]

On 11/5/2020 at 8:54 AM, ZB'Tejas said:

The current red line cost about $15M a year to run and what’s the ridership? Less than 1000 a day? I’d love a better mass transit system but I’m just not sure how many people this will help.

Didn’t they say would only take 1% of cars off the road? That’s not very much for what will likely cost over 10B.

I think I’d rather see I35 buried and solve for the downtown portion of that road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

How many billions per mile would it it take to bury 1-35?

[Guest Lobo]

1 hour ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

How many billions per mile would it it take to bury 1-35?

Sarcasm aside, it will literally depend on what the bury process on the downtown light rail/Prop A line is doing at the same time.  Having that many massive earth-moving projects taking place at the exact same time within a mile of one another...there's not cost-precedence for it.  "The Big Dig" in Boston didn't even attempt anything like this.  We're gonna bury and cap multiple miles of a major U.S. interstate highway while also, just a mile away begin excavation or a huge chunk of the CBD in order to put in rail?  All within the same decade-time frame?  There's no model for it.  I haven't seen one sane financial nor construction model for it.  Because there isn't one.  I have more faith in a mission to Mars coming in on time and under budget.  Because there's no grift when it comes to Mars.  Unless of course you count the Martian Mob. 

[ZB'Tejas 597]

9 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Sarcasm aside, it will literally depend on what the bury process on the downtown light rail/Prop A line is doing at the same time.  Having that many massive earth-moving projects taking place at the exact same time within a mile of one another...there's not cost-precedence for it.  "The Big Dig" in Boston didn't even attempt anything like this.  We're gonna bury and cap multiple miles of a major U.S. interstate highway while also, just a mile away begin excavation or a huge chunk of the CBD in order to put in rail?  All within the same decade-time frame?  There's no model for it.  I haven't seen one sane financial nor construction model for it.  Because there isn't one.  I have more faith in a mission to Mars coming in on time and under budget.  Because there's no grift when it comes to Mars.  Unless of course you count the Martian Mob. 

I'm not sure why you would need to do them at the same time. I'm half way kidding on burying I35 however I do that that would be significantly more impactful that a tunnel under Lavaca street.

[Guest Lobo]

The CBD light rail project will take about 15-20 years to complete.  Most estimates on a cut-n-cap of IH-35 would take 10-15 years.  It's not intentionally done at the same time, because it's two very different groups doing both projects.  But without even using my trusty 10b-II+ calculator, I'm just looking at a calendar and a paper map, and seeing that both projects would overlap substantially.  By both time and geographic footprint.  It would render, even pedestrian/bicycle traffic effectively worthless for at least a few years in some key pockets of the CBD for long periods of time.  

It passed guys, let down your guards.  It's time to start talking money and logistics.  Big boy shit.

[High Plains Drifter 11,197]

 

I wasn't being sarcastic. This time.

 

 

[Updawg 2,416]

I’m going to invest in dump trucks. All that dirt must go somewhere

[Guest Lobo]

Buy land, A.J.  God ain't makin' any more of it.  

[BradInATX 9,208]

On 11/5/2020 at 12:59 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Sadly, I mostly agree with this, except for the bolded part. Austin's downtown has some unique business assets related to things related to the capital and various domains of officialdom. Also I wouldn't say Austin proper, but central Austin, agree. 

I'm interested in your thoughts as well as @Pasken's on how that plays out. I'm sure you guys have seen some other cities having center-city affordability issues, where businesses downtown struggle to find people to work low-level jobs because those people can't afford to live anywhere close to the city center. New Orleans is the one that comes to mind for me, but I'm sure it's been repeated over and over in other big cities.

- How far do we think Austin is from that? Is it already there?
- How do you solve for that? I know NOLA has built (or bought, not sure) some projects near the CBD that they've made subsidized housing for service industry workers and that has helped some. Is that workable for Austin though? There's not some old apartment building downtown or a lot to build on one that COA can just write a check for. 

FWIW I'm glad Prop A passed and despite my throwing a few snide remarks out there, if I were in Austin still, I'd have voted for it. Gotta do something, and while I don't disagree with the notion of "I don't want to give our dumb ass city council a bunch of money to spend 3x what they should and line their pockets, it's who you have and it's probably never going to change.

[ZB'Tejas 597]

3 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I'm interested in your thoughts as well as @Pasken's on how that plays out. I'm sure you guys have seen some other cities having center-city affordability issues, where businesses downtown struggle to find people to work low-level jobs because those people can't afford to live anywhere close to the city center. New Orleans is the one that comes to mind for me, but I'm sure it's been repeated over and over in other big cities.

- How far do we think Austin is from that? Is it already there?
- How do you solve for that? I know NOLA has built (or bought, not sure) some projects near the CBD that they've made subsidized housing for service industry workers and that has helped some. Is that workable for Austin though? There's not some old apartment building downtown or a lot to build on one that COA can just write a check for. 

 

I would think it's already there... You would be hard pressed to find anything (single family home) less than $700K within 10-15 min of downtown. I would think Dallas, Houston and other big cities have much more to choose from in that same boundary.

[BradInATX 9,208]

6 minutes ago, ZB'Tejas said:

I would think it's already there... You would be hard pressed to find anything (single family home) less than $700K within 10-15 min of downtown. I would think Dallas, Houston and other big cities have much more to choose from in that same boundary.

We just sold a 4 bedroom house in the 78745, 10 minutes from downtown for $500k. There's still some stuff out there, at least in South Austin. But yeah, it's dwindling for sure.

[Armybrat 41,611]

18 hours ago, Lobo said:

Buy land, A.J.  God ain't makin' any more of it.  

Mine is for sale, as is the 50 acres of my west side.