-
To respond privately, use the "Reply" command.
To post to the list "Forward" to [at]
-
jody horton wrote:
-------------------------------
But we would DEFINITELY get are 117 more cars (at 1.5 per unit) from
that fourth floor alone.
Calculating a conservative 3 to-and-from trips a day that is 702 total
car trips.
Maybe 1/2 will be through the neighborhood. That’s 351.
We get 128,115 car trips through the neighborhood.
-------------------------------
Since traffic (and parking) are always the density bugaboo, let me say a
few syllables about this, too. The city's estimate of 1-1.5 cars per
bedroom is woefully out of touch with urban life in the year 2007 in
Austin's urban core, and is only going to get more absurd as gas prices
(and density/traffic) continue to increase. If we don't stop analyzing
everything using this metric, we will fail as a society and I'm not
joking about this or exaggerating in the least.
I have 2 rental houses with a total of 5 bedrooms. According to the
city, this means 5-7.5 cars. Not even close. There are only 2 cars
between 4 tenants.
3 to-and-from-trips a day per vehicle? Try 2-3 to-and-from trips A WEEK
TOTAL FOR BOTH VEHICLES, and I'm definitely overestimating. Is this
some kind of crazy anomaly? No, previously I had 5 tenants with 2 total
cars and 1 to-and-from car trip per day (total), and before that there
were 5 tenants with 1 car and 1 to-and-from-trip per week. At one point
I had 8 tenants with 1 car and 2 to-and-from-trips PER MONTH. The
city's rule of thumb is so far off that it's downright embarrassing;
sort of like when I called them last week and was told it would take 6
weeks to change the name on the water bill account. Come again? Is the
movie Idiocracy really a documentary about Austin? Is that what you're
telling me?
Don't you get it? The #1 reason people pay higher rents to live in the
urban core IS SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE AS MUCH! That's the
attraction, REALIZED in the form of restaurants, shops, jobs,
entertainment and other amenities within walking/biking distance of
home. That's the whole f'ing point. This is precisely why landlords
can charge more for apartments in dense mixed-use neighborhoods and
especially those near transit stops. There are entire papers written on
this subject, with estimates of just how much more you can charge for
every foot closer to a transit stop or walkable amenities.
Using a suburban segregated-use, you-gotta-drive-to-get-a-soda model to
draw conclusions about urban core traffic is not only stupid, it's
destructive; preventing good density from being built while encouraging
crappy McDorm density.
The people who oppose any and all density are invariably those driving
their hummer/SUV to the corner restaurant for lunch every day -- the
ones making those 3 to-and-from motor vehicle trips every day, day in
and day out. They really want to be living in the suburbs (and can't
imagine that anyone would think differently from them), but somehow
landed in NoLo or Hyde Park or Zilker instead. That's fine; continue to
drive your 5000lb vehicle from your driveway to your next door
neighbor's driveway because you were invited over for coffee, but
recognize that not everyone thinks the way you do, and that -- through
the process of self-selection -- many of your neighbors are eager to NOT
drive at every available opportunity. Again, regardless of what your
mom might have told you, it's not all about you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in messages are solely that of the author
and not of the list administrators nor Druma Inc (sponsor 14gram.com).
Website: Northfield Neighborhood Assoc - www.main.org/nna
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe & "howto" info, send a blank email to [at]
-
