That's pretty much everywhere around Texas. There are people near where I live that were part of a 9,000-person town in the 90s... they're now in a 230,000-240,000 town. What's funny is I read an article about a couple moving from Cali to a town just north of there where the boom is overflowing. That town really doesn't have much of anything in it - it's just getting the overflow of crowded areas (kind of like Fulshear around Houston, I guess). The couple was stating how the homes were so much cheaper there than in California, so they would work remotely, and they loved the quaint feel of the town. That should last about another 3-5 years. The town has already exploded in population and isn't what I would call "quaint" unless you live on the outskirts and stay inside your house. Once you get on any major road, prepare to sit for a while in traffic.
I left Austin in dec '22 for several reasons, but the city undergoing massive growing pains was a big part of it. The growth was massively outstripping the infrastructure. The housing prices were insane. Popular restaurants had 3mo wait lists. Tiktok pop-up food trucks were besieged with Tesla's. It became a big city without the big city amenities. I moved to Dallas. Not particularly a prettier/more fun city but it at least has accessible big city amenities. Though, I was in Austin last week and it was still a vibrant/gorgeous city (in the middle of summer when the congestion isn't crazy).
I feel like I know what you mean. At the same time I dont understand what big city things Dallas has that Austin doesn’t.
When I moved to Seattle it felt like what Austin was shaping up to be in the medium term future. Get ready for Seattle 2.0 with tech bros eveywhere. Sky high food and rent prices, and minorities displaced due to gentrification (this already was happening when I lived there).
Some of the differences are easier to explain than others. Pro sports: An easy one. I'm not a Longhorn alumni and while college sports are entertaining I much rather prefer pro sports across the board. I'm a big Astros fan and being able to go to 4 games last year at Arlington (including games 3/4/5 of the ALCS) was amazing. Coming up this year I'll be able to see the Rockets at AA or the Texans at Jerry World if desired. Food: Austin has good food. There were definitely several restaurants I enjoyed there. That being said, the amount of options has not kept up with the population growth. If you want to eat at one of said restaurants, it's become a pain in the ass to get in there. Dallas is a solid, above-average food city; i think maybe a touch down from Houston but there's plenty of high-end, low-end and everything in the middle. The other week I ate at a really nice sit-down restaurant in South Dallas. It was legit one of the better sit down meals I've had in either Dallas or Austin; the restaurant wasn't even full on a Saturday. The restaurant was on no lists of any kind and wasn't a new restaurant either (opened pre-Covid). That experience doesn't exist in Austin. Any decent restaurant is well-known and heavily frequented; any new place goes viral before opening. Dallas has fantastic Asian food options, due to its history of ethnic suburbs/neighborhoods. E.g. Carrollton, Plano, Richardson.You can pop into a hole-in the wall and not hear any english while enjoying incredible food. That kind of ties back to the idea of being a mature, big city. There's significant ethnic areas around the city that contribute to the big city melting pot culture. Hispanic in Bishop Arts/Oak Cliff, more AA in South Dallas/downtown, Asian/Indian as above. Austin's historical legacy is small college town that was predominantly white. Economy: while Austin recently became a tech hot bed there are several mature industries (e.g. tech, oil, banking) in Dallas that drew people in for decades longer. Travel: DFW being a major airline hub means the connectivity to the rest of the world is that much better. Non-stops to Japan, Australia, and several to Europe are available. None of this is to **** on Austin. There were plenty of things I enjoyed when i lived there too. In 10-15 years it'll be a Dallas/Houston mega-city. It's just not there yet and the growing pains (to me) were very annoying and noticeable.
That is already happening, it benefits my family because we live in a very desirable location and basically can buy another home with just equity if we move, giving us a retirement free house to live in..... However, if you tried to buy in now, while we paid in the 300s our house is well over 1m now.......and while it has come down some - still really high.... It sucks being a kid these days or a recent college graduate, got to move out to San Marcos to get a reasonable deal now. And DALLAS STILL SUCKS ASS !!!!....... DD
Yeah this is a large part of why I moved. I saw the rapid jump in real time, my rent jumped $300/mo from $1300~ to $1600~. Median housing price went from 400k to 700k in one year. Glad to see it leveled off a bit but it really seemed like Austin was going to start seeing $2000 1BR median rent and $800k median housing prices like Seattle. Figured if I'm going to start paying tier 1 tech hub prices might as well relocate and get paid tier 1 tech hub wages.
Building more lanes never fixes traffic problems, just the opposite. Making it easier to drive means more people will drive. Drive down to Target during rush-hour or wait a few hours and go after the traffic has died down? Adding supply creates new demand. Charging more and/or reducing supply, reduces demand. Counter intuitive, I know. We've rebuilt 610 how many times? It still sucks. We added lanes to I-10, it still sucks. You want to fix traffic? You simply can't ...especially if a city is still growing. However, you CAN give people more transportation options.
Heard people say this before, but I don't believe it or see it. More lanes *always* improves traffic. Now, does it make traffic perfect?.. No People mostly say the bolded because traffic isn't perfect after new construction and it's something to complain about. Katy Freeway is better now than 15 years ago, and that's with the growing population. The 610 upgrade by the Galleria was insufficient because no lanes were added. All they did was stack a few exits and entrances. The main lanes are the same 8 lanes (4 each direction) it was 20 years ago. Construction should added 4 lanes (2 each direction), but they didn't. When it reopened 5 years ago after 5 years of construction, I was like, "these mfs did all that work and didn't add any lanes?!!". A perfect example of "more lanes" being effective is Main St between OST and 610. That street was a constipated crap hole in the 90's -- then, more lanes (2 to 5) were added around '00. Twenty years later, that street still flows smooth AF. One recent mistake is Almada @ 610. They were constructing on that the past 2 years (still are), but what they didn't do is add more lanes. It's been improved with a couple of added U-turns and a new exit ramp, but that road is too busy between OST and 610 for only 2 lanes. All that construction -- shutting down lanes (reducing traffic from 2 lanes to one for a while), shutting down the entire street at 610 some weekends, breaking concrete and pouring new concrete -- but they didn't add any lanes!! That project is *the* definition of inefficient. I understand the notion of "more lanes, so people will travel more or at different times", but 90% of all traffic is people doing the exact same thing they would've done regardless.
It depends how you define traffic. Induced demand is real. Building more lanes will increase car use. Eventually, congestion will build up like it did with less lanes. Overall, you still have more volume of cars coming through. You can't just not build roads/infrastructure so there's no traffic. People got places to go.
False. Plenty of research disputing that. Here's a video describing why widening doesn't work. (from the guy that did the viral video about FM1960 as a great example of terrible design) But more concretely (pun), virtually every road in Austin (and Houston) have been widened before and we are where we are today. Is I-10 better today than it was 15 years ago? Sure. For now. But is the 24 lanes of I-10 "good?". Everytime I go, there is still a traffic slowdown on my side or I see the other side. What will I-10 be like 15 years from now? If Houston keeps growing, it'll be a mess. Do we widen it to 40 lanes? Basically, folks who build roads (and us taxpayers) need to change mindsets. Current mindset: Build/Rebuild/Extend roads to make auto travel as fast and smooth as possible. This way anybody can drive in or out as easy as possible. (fools gold) New mindset: Improve neighborhoods for those that live (and walk) there. Secondarily (operative part), figure out how to accommodate cars so they can move in (and around) congested areas. You do this by providing transportation options. I don't know how often I've heard that you have to own a car if you live in Houston. Anyway, back on topic. Austin should re-imagine it's self. Focus on keeping the character of it's city and maintaining the essence of it's neighborhoods. It's a choice. But we keep getting sold this bill of goods and who profits? Politicians, developers, and construction firms. Meanwhile, our cities keep getting worse. Keep Austin weird (and let me travel there by high-speed rail) so I can watch cool concerts and nap away my buzz while on a train on the way back to h-town. Oh, one more thing. Dallas sucks. Just thought I'd throw that in there for good measure.
Meanwhile, Main Street is still flowing smooth 20 years *after* being widened -- that's with increased population and 3 new lofts, a new hotel, 3 new strip malls, and a Target built right along side it. More lanes always improve traffic. I do agree though that adding other means of transportation helps. Trains connecting Houston to other cities should've happened decades ago -- it's been talked about for decades, but to no avail. The Katy Freeway is better than 15 years ago. Yeah, you or the other direction might have to slow down, but before, both sides were slowed down and moving even slower. Keep in mind too, some of those slowdowns could be an accident or stalled vehicle. The 610 project by the Galleria was complete buffoonery -- 5 years of construction, but the same 8 lanes remained. Whoever is responsible for that should be fired. Ditto the Almeda project at 610. As for Austin, there's zero doubt if 35 had 2-3 more lanes passing through downtown, traffic would be flowing like Main Street near 610.
We can agree to disagree. But for conversation, if you measure success as more auto throughput, then okay. Personally, I think that's the wrong measure of success and it's short sighted. You keep mentioning Main Street as a success. I say it's a mess. Most cities, Main St. is usually the "main" street with lots of pedestrians. Nope, the area you reference is dominated by high speed auto-traffic and no self-respecting pedestrian would cross that road without putting their lives at risk. We did try to put in rail, but it's going down the wrong side of NRG where there is no retail or any other reason to get off at that station. Even if you take it to NRG, it's slow and is still a crazy long walk. It should have gone down Main St. or Kirby closer to the front gate. So no, the Main St. widening is a great example of a car-centric project that, IMO, still sucks despite that traffic is better. Thanks for offering that example. I'll use that. I-10 isn't great now, albeit better, and will continue to get worse as Katy grows, which is enabled by the widening.
So now you're moving the goalpost from traffic congestion to, "oh no, I can't walk". LOL, okay. The rail was built along Fannin/Greenbriar in that area because it's more adjacent to hospitals. One of the stops serves a huge parking lot on OST that's 5x closer than Kirby. Another stop serves Metro's Medical Center Transit Center. And you're saying the NRG stop is a crazy long walk to the stadium -- maybe for a toddler who just took its first steps. Enjoy a close view of the Astrodome (the city needs to make use of it, it's a national landmark) along the way. Maybe they should have shuttles (maybe they already do) like they have for the rodeo. But one thing I agree on is, Houston's public transportation sucks.
Nope, not moving goal posts. My first post I said "You want to fix traffic? You simply can't ...especially if a city is still growing. However, you CAN give people more transportation options." (pardon the typo) Regarding the rail, that's a good point to connect several parking hubs. That said, They cut over from Fannin to Greenbriar. They could have cut over again to OST and down Kirby thereby reducing the walk by 2/3rd which would also have provided many more destinations to pedestrians, which would have caused more demand for surrounding development, which would have ultimately enticed more people to use it ...which would have gotten more cars off the road. But that requires a little more coordination and thinking ...something we don't do well in this city. In short, that Main St. area sucks. It's a great example of poor planning. In many cities, the area around sports arenas are gathering places for people to hang out before/after games. But not around NRG. It's a complete wasteland dominated by traffic. Anyway, I think we covered it all. Agree to disagree.
NRG should close all gates except one for game day. Watch traffic flow smoother than a Michael Jackson moonwalk on steroids
