What ails this city? / What could it be?

[Jeff]

What don't you like down here and what would you like to see? Nothing is off limits.

I'm too cynical to make my first post here mention the over-corporatization, because I don't think anybody's ever going to do anything about that. But since you said nothing's off limits, I think Austin is too new and slick. Whichwich. Starbucks. Seattle's Best. God, it would be awesome if there was a CD store in downtown Congress. Or on the fucking Drag, for fuck's sake! There used to be a sweet little bookstore on Congress. I think it was named after the street, but I can't remember.
RIP Fringeware, Europa Books, Liberty Lunch, Electric Lounge, Sound Exchange, Cafe Solaire, ABCD's, Duval Discs (yay EoaE), Technophilia, the old Quack's on the Drag, GM Steakhouse on the Drag with a PA system where employees would playfully harass passersby through the window... okay, I'm going to shut up now. But this town has become a giant heap of ARTIFICE! And they've taken the art right out.

[mcnichol]

Now is the time for Austin to dive headlong into a serious mass transit plan. We are in (and have been in) and huge growth spurt and the sooner they can lock down plans and begin on a multi-year plan the better.

The things that oppose or compromise this currently are:

1. The city's reluctance to move away from car-based/highway-based transportation planning (ie. building more and more highways; assuming that we can all just keep driving cars into the city)

2. The car-based mentality that is pervasive among Austinites/Texans.

3. The fact that the city is -- so far -- only willing to invest in a lame rail thing initially, which is only going to serve to validate everyone's worst assumptions about rail-transit. It follows an illogical path and will be slower than driving for the overwhelming majority of potential riders (at least for the next for years it will). If they want to get people on board (yes, pun) they need to put something in place that will actually be MORE efficient than what is currently available.

I've lived in cities where I and many people do not have or need a car. That seems to blow people's minds down here, but it's really easy to get around without one as long as the infrastructure is there to support that lifestyle. As we become more a dense urban center -- combined with the fact that WE JUST WILL stop relying on oil so much -- we need to start jumping on some mass transit plan now before it gets too late. Building highway after highway won't help this. It doesn't even have to be rail (although I love subways and rail systems), but other global cities have come up with interesting ways to deal with this urban growth (ie. that Brazilian city, with thei bus system that runs on it's own highway -- awesome).

Mike, if you have any influence on this stuff, this is the biggest thing.

Regarding all the "this place is getting too big, maaaaan" -- this is inevitable. It's how we decide to deal with and plan for this change that we DO have control over.

Too corporatized.

Er, don't you work for a massive corporation?

[Roy Janik]

RIP Fringeware, Europa Books, Liberty Lunch, Electric Lounge, Sound Exchange, Cafe Solaire, ABCD's, Duval Discs (yay EoaE), Technophilia, the old Quack's on the Drag, GM Steakhouse on the Drag with a PA system where employees would playfully harass passersby through the window...

Many happy returns on the relatively recent birth of Torchy's Tacos, The Buenes Aires Cafe, Habana Downtown location, Eastside Pies, Flip-Happy Crepes, Epoch Coffee House, The End of an Ear, Bird's Barbershop, Big Top Candy, Craft-o-Rama, Hey Cupcake!, ColdTowne Theater, The Alamo Drafthouse at the Riz...

I hate to see old, cool places going, too, but I do think Austin continues to generate new and interesting local businesses.

[York99]

I hate to see old, cool places going, too, but I do think Austin continues to generate new and interesting local businesses.

I totally agree. Austin isn't going downhill, I don't think. But responsible growth and not stepping on the people who got you there are important, as well. When you've got someone's ear who wants input on what's wrong with the city or how it can be improved, I feel it's important to speak up.

If someone wanted to start a new thread about what's right with the city or how it's getting better, I have to assume people would respond with the same or greater enthusiasm.

[Miggy]

This is good! Keep it coming - lots of good topics and perspectives. Feel free to also say what you would like to see that doesn't exist today or hasn't in the past.

[Roy Janik]

But responsible growth and not stepping on the people who got you there are important, as well. When you've got someone's ear who wants input on what's wrong with the city or how it can be improved, I feel it's important to speak up.

Yeah, absolutely.

I personally agree with most everything said so far. Especially those damned train/trolley/whatever tracks on 4th. It's friggin' dangerous.

But especially I would like more alternative transit options- light rail, monorail, subway, bike lanes, segway ramps, whatever.

[York99]

Now is the time for Austin to dive headlong into a serious mass transit plan.

I have been working on an idea for zipline transit for years.

Seriously, it's pathetic how far we are behind nearly every major European city in mass transit. [Most anywhere outside of the Northeast US is ridiculously pathetic.]

Back to traffic, I've known several people who cite traffic as reasons why they would never consider moving to LA, Atlanta, Houston and even Austin. It was the one negative that people told me about before I moved here... and I'm learning how right they are.

BUSES DON'T HELP. They create needless traffic, a lot of pollution and a pissed-off road-rager named Justin. I'm not anti-bus or anti-bus riders, but it's at the low end of the range of potential mass transit options.

[ratliff]

Bob, your point is well taken, but I'll bet none of those cities were in the South or West, where we build out instead of up. It's much easier to build an effective mass transit system in an area the size of Manhattan or San Francisco than across the vast expanse of Greater Austin.

Furthermore, the people who really need mass transit are poor people, and given the primacy of car culture they're the ones who are most likely to use it in the immediate future. And since poor people can't afford to live anywhere near downtown, that means that mass transit needs to extend out to the places where they can afford to live. So convenient when you have all the poor people conveniently located in one place, like Roxbury or Harlem; a little tougher when the only thing that poor people's houses have in common is that rich people don't want to live there.

As Michael heard from me last night, I think pouring a lot of money into a local economy pretty much fucks everything up, particularly when the quality of life is dependent on things that can't be made into line items in a budget. I've watched the systematic destruction of this city's basic civility, friendliness, egalitarianism, and starving-artist-friendly economy. Bob's right, there's nothing to be done about it, but I don't have to like it. Money changes everything, and not necessarily for the better. Sure, I've benefited from a vibrant downtown that doesn't go dark every time there's a dip in oil revenues, but I've paid the price for it too.

No, I don't have a solution, short of more government interference than even I can stomach, but then I didn't create the fucking problem by spreading my city's legs for every business that waves a few jobs in its face. Michael, that building you blew up: doesn't anyone remember how it got there in the first place? Is our collective attention span that short already?

I acknowledge that a lot of what I despise about Austin's boom is probably symptomatic of what's going on across the country, e.g., the concentration of more and more wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people, the increasing tendency to ignore other human beings who are right in front of you, the complete lack of connection or obligation to the less fortunate. But this is where I live, so this is the only place I can know how it's changed. I still like living here. But I'm no longer sure I'll die here, and it's not my city any more. It belongs to people with more money than I have or want.

[LisaJackson]

I would like a crepe vendor on each corner making fresh crepes with nutella, cinnamon and banana in them. I would like them to sell fresh cupcakes as well, yellow bottoms and chocolate tops.

I want a 14K foot mountain moved by helicopter from the Cascades and placed on top of the capitol building. Refrigeration will be needed to maintain the snow cap so we can toboggan together.

I would like a pool of single men who are emotionally mature, funny, intelligent, courageous, good looking, romantic and think I'm the Bee's Knees. And they should have yellow bottoms and chocolate tops.

I would like less allergy symptoms.

Oh, and decent mass transit to fix the traffic problem.

On a serious note, something needs to be done about the race relations in this town. I suggest bringing Lillian Allen of Be Present to workshop with city officials.

And on another serious note, KXAN should be held responsible for all of their unethical actions.

The end.

[mcnichol]

Bob, your point is well taken, but I'll bet none of those cities were in the South or West, where we build out instead of up. It's much easier to build an effective mass transit system in an area the size of Manhattan or San Francisco than across the vast expanse of Greater Austin.

Furthermore, the people who really need mass transit are poor people, and given the primacy of car culture they're the ones who are most likely to use it in the immediate future. And since poor people can't afford to live anywhere near downtown, that means that mass transit needs to extend out to the places where they can afford to live. So convenient when you have all the poor people conveniently located in one place, like Roxbury or Harlem; a little tougher when the only thing that poor people's houses have in common is that rich people don't want to live there.

No, no no no no no....

"Greater Austin" is no bigger than "Greater Chicago", which managed to do this 100 years ago when they were in the exact same situation.

Two: mass transit is not for poor people you classist. Take the El in Chicago (or the subway in NYC) and you see traders making $200k/yr standing next to the guy who's making their sandwich at Subway for $7.25/hr. It's for everybody. It's that mentality (it's for poor people) that will kill it.

Sorry, but I'm passionate about it and those two mentalities will drive us towards f-ing Houstonism.

EDIT: also, I'm talking about a mass-transit combination of trains, rails, busses, etc. Chicago has the Metro, which pulls suburbanites into the city, the El which gets people around the city in a macro way, and busses, which get people closes to their destination. It does work, it already works in all these other cities here and around the world. I just dislike that defeatist attitude of, "Well, it can't happen here. We're different." Also, the NYC mass transit goes beyond Manhattan. It goes into most of the boroughs, plsu you;ve got the busses, the PATH... all that.

[LisaJackson]

Bob, your point is well taken, but I'll bet none of those cities were in the South or West, where we build out instead of up. It's much easier to build an effective mass transit system in an area the size of Manhattan or San Francisco than across the vast expanse of Greater Austin.

Furthermore, the people who really need mass transit are poor people, and given the primacy of car culture they're the ones who are most likely to use it in the immediate future. And since poor people can't afford to live anywhere near downtown, that means that mass transit needs to extend out to the places where they can afford to live. So convenient when you have all the poor people conveniently located in one place, like Roxbury or Harlem; a little tougher when the only thing that poor people's houses have in common is that rich people don't want to live there.

No, no no no no no....

"Greater Austin" is no bigger than "Greater Chicago", which managed to do this 100 years ago when they were in the exact same situation.

Two: mass transit is not for poor people you classist. Take the El in Chicago (or the subway in NYC) and you see traders making $200k/yr standing next to the guy who's making their sandwich at Subway for $7.25/hr. It's for everybody. It's that mentality (it's for poor people) that will kill it.

Sorry, but I'm passionate about it and those two mentalities will drive us towards f-ing Houstonism.

I have to agree on this. When I read Ratliff's post the first thing I thought of was Chicago. They spread out and up, and their spread out is to all classes, probably more middle and upper coming from the suburbs into town on the El. I miss the El. Out of everywhere I've lived that was the best place to get around. I never moved my car except to go out of town. But I do think Austinites have a different mentality about mass transit. It might be harder to get them to come to terms with the image that mass transit isn't a step down for them. Personally, I like the Austin buses but I don't use them for everyday use. Everyone else I know that uses them has a lot of complaints about frequency, commute time, and delays.

[ratliff]

Okay. (I'm not quoting because it gets too big.) Bob, you make excellent points. I stand corrected on the issue of area covered. However, let me clarify what I was saying:

First, I strongly support mass transit and am not a member of the defeatist group. I think it should happen and also that it might. But the only way it's going to happen is if we address the actual obstacles that stand in its way.

Chicago came into its own as a great city before the advent of cars. Austin didn't. This is important. Even if the area covered is the same, the culture is completely different. Cities built around cars are now the norm, not the exception. So even completely legitimate arguments on behalf of mass transit are running up against lifetimes of habit, custom, and inclination. That's not to say they shouldn't be pursued, but just saying, "Look! Mass transit!" is not going to be enough. If people chose their transportation rationally, the streets of Austin would not be clogged with gas-guzzling SUVs and pickups, but clearly even the potential destruction of the planet and expensive gas aren't enough to tip the balance. So I agree with the rational arguments and also think they're missing something important.

I didn't mean to suggest that only poor people SHOULD use mass transit, only that they're the ones who HAVE to. (See above paragraph.) Yes, I'd like to see politicians and captains of industry riding the rails, and that day may come. But right now, the people who ride the bus ride it because they have to. If you build a rail system downtown without first giving people good reason to use it -- say, a congestion tax like that used in London -- you're just going to continue the cycle: nobody uses mass transit because mass transit sucks because there's no money because nobody uses mass transit.

I don't mean to come across as a naysayer. I've supported every single mass transit initiative that's come across the transom since I've been here. But I'm not really the deciding factor, am I? I already ride my bike and walk instead of driving my car, and I avoid driving downtown except when it's raining or I'm late.

If you can run a line out to the 'burbs and get people to take it into Sixth Street to party, great -- though I note that they will certainly have to drive to and from the station. Chicago is a town built for pedestrians. This isn't. THere's no way to undo that, so we have to incorporate it into our planning. Just saying that it should work here because it works elsewhere -- and I know that's not what you're saying, but some people are -- will not suffice.

Please, let's not fall into the by-now-familiar liberal trap of designating something as self-evident and then refusing to listen to objections to it. (Again, not that you're doing this, but it happens.) You and I may agree that car culture is dangerously outmoded and based on faulty premises, but that doesn't make it go away, and saying Austin should be a pedestrian-friendly town can't unbuild a century's worth of infrastructure. It's not that we shouldn't try to change things, but we're pushing back a lot of history in the process. We should acknowledge the heavy lifting involved for everyone concerned.

[LisaJackson]

Okay, people, before this gets heated, I'd like to reiterate that yellow bottom/chocolate top cupcakes would solve all of these issues.

If you try to object I will punch awls in my ears, thereby making this a fact.

[ratliff]

I didn't even rise to the "classist" bait!

On the other hand, few holiday spectaculars could compete with Bob and me settling this with an old-fashioned girly slap-fight.

[slappywhite]

I know this will make me sound like a total dick but...Please for the love of god do something about the homeless problem downtown. Who's genius idea was it to put the homeless shelter full of folks who lets be honest, have a lot of drug or alcohol problems... next to the part of town where EVERYONE GOES TO BUY DRUGS AND ALCOHOL?!

The first thing I hear from people coming to Austin from other cities is "Wow you have a real homeless problem here."

One my big problems is the police are not enforcing panhandling laws, now don't get me wrong standing on the corner with a clever sign doesn't bother me. Pounding on my window at a traffic light does, or worse yet at the drive thru.

And don't even get me started on the "smoking ban"