"Austin, we have a problem" (San Antonio, Round Rock: 2014, homes)

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

You do realize that property tax revenues do not fund the Transportation and Public Works departments - the folks that maintain streets. Right? So, now what is your argument?

Major rebuilds occur through general obligation bonds, which absolutely are paid back in property tax revenues.

[orngkat]

In this day and time, why are so many people still required to get in cars and drive to an office? It seems prehistoric given all the ways we can communicate and get work done remotely. I work at stodgy old UT and in many offices, staff are allowed to telecommute at least one day a week. Without adequate transportation options like rail, it really is the only answer to reduce this nightmarish traffic.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Major rebuilds occur through general obligation bonds, which absolutely are paid back in property tax revenues.

"Major rebuilds" account for 3/10% of current almost $1,000,000,000 capital improvements construction - and are about trendy improvements as much as reconstruction:

full depth street reconstruction of 3rd Street from Congress to Trinity. The project will include bicycle lanes, sidewalk, utility improvements to water, wastewater, storm drain, curb and gutter, & streetscape

Second, I don't think even you would describe 3rd as a "commuter road". And finally, the taxes on the new commercial property in that area under construction will more than fund the drop in the bucket this is.

Nice try.

[IC_deLight]

Originally Posted by kavorka

The prevalence of SF-1 zoning in the urban core prevents density. In most areas in the core, outside of downtown, multi-story condos and apartment buildings are not allowed. This limits inventory in a big way, drives up prices for existing properties, and forces people outward.

Are you presuming that the people living in Kyle, Buda, San Marcos, etc. would simply pick up and move into despicable condos (yeah, that's what gets built for "infill") and also that there would suddenly be no traffic from commuting? I think not. You'll just have more congestion from the "denser" population PLUS commuters from other areas.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

"Major rebuilds" account for 3/10% of current almost $1,000,000,000 capital improvements construction - and are about trendy improvements as much as reconstruction:

So a grand total of $3 million, that's your claim? Everything else on roads is from non-bond money?

There was more than that _just_ in the last transportation bond. Not including the one before that, and the one before that, and the one...


The 2012 transportation bond included money for

IH-35 Improvements
Loop 1 (MoPac) Improvements
North Lamar Boulevard/Burnet Road
East 51st Street
East Riverside Drive

2012 Bond - AustinTexas.gov

The 2010 bond included money for

I35
Airport
183
Guadalupe
Mopac
620/2222
.
.
.


http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/def...ndbrochure.pdf

That's just the road/signal/resurfacing improvements. Not even including the bicycle improvements, which the city is doing in large part to try and divert short trips away from the roads (because of maxed out capacities).

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

That's just the road/signal/resurfacing improvements. Not even including the bicycle improvements, which the city is doing in large part to try and divert short trips away from the roads (because of maxed out capacities).

Nice try confusing issues. Resurfacing isn't paid out of the general fund. And out-of-Austin commuters - the subject of your incessant ire - aren't placing demands for bicycle improvements.

So, yes, road reconstruction - "major rebuilds" as you called them, which you blame on commuters - is $3,000,000 out of the current $1,000,000,000 capital improvements under construction. Throw as much gorilla dust as you'd like, but that's the facts.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

Nice try confusing issues. Resurfacing isn't paid out of the general fund.

In many cases its paid out of bond funds, follow the damn link.

Originally Posted by scm53

And out-of-Austin commuters - the subject of your incessant ire - aren't placing demands for bicycle improvements.

Try to follow the logic.
Austin roads have a capacity of X. They currently have a usage of 2X (in part due to suburban commuters).
Upgrading the roads to capacity 2X would cost $$$$$ (and in many cases is basically impossible).

By upgrading the bike network, the hope is that some portion of the current trips will be diverted to it (maybe only .05 X, but the cost is .01, so it's a bang for the buck improvement). That improves transportation for the remaining road users (residents and commuters).

Originally Posted by scm53

So, yes, road reconstruction - "major rebuilds" as you called them, which you blame on commuters - is $3,000,000 out of the current $1,000,000,000 capital improvements under construction. Throw as much gorilla dust as you'd like, but that's the facts.

That's simply not true.

Here's another link, the 2010 bond was $23 million for arterial roads, and 4.3 million for highways.
City Announces 'Multimodal' Bond Package: Package notable less for its contents than for how it came to be - News - The Austin Chronicle


I've provided links. Now's your turn. Where's the links for $997 million of transportation bonds that have no benefit to commuters?

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

In I've provided links. Now's your turn. Where's the links for $997 million of transportation bonds that have no benefit to commuters?

You provided links to all kinds of things in the catch all "mobility" category - including "Citywide Sidewalks, Ramps, Curbs and Gutters" and "Citywide Bikeways and Urban Trails" which have ZERO to do with your pointless claim that commuters are burdening the property taxpayers of Austin with "major rebuilds".

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by scm53

You provided links to all kinds of things in the catch all "mobility" category - including "Citywide Sidewalks, Ramps, Curbs and Gutters" and "Citywide Bikeways and Urban Trails" which have ZERO to do with your pointless claim that commuters are burdening the property taxpayers of Austin with "major rebuilds".

No, I've provided links that break-out those categories. Seriously, did you even follow the links?

City Announces 'Multimodal' Bond Package: Package notable less for its contents than for how it came to be - News - The Austin Chronicle

4 Million _just_ for the Y (most/many users of which aren't Austin residents).


Or there's this
http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/def...ond_report.pdf
Look at all those roadway only projects

Including replacing the Red Bud Isle bridge benefiting (but not paid for by) West Lake.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Novacek

No, I've provided links that break-out those categories. Seriously, did you even follow the links?

I'm sorry that the city's role as the economic engine for the region - with costs and benefits, mainly from the commercial tax base - causes you to be so put upon. All of those projects you are so burdened with are not just for the convenience of the commuters you so disdain. They provide mobility for commerce, public safety and plenty of other things that have nothing to do with "major rebuilds" caused by commuters.

Obviously, Urbanist Moses descended with the tablets that said "Cities are shafted by their suburbs" (right before "rail is the only solution"). Just doesn't mean it applies to a city that funds street maintenance by a method other than the general fund.