Follow the links on each line. We clearly can turn some past disgraces on their end, if our primary goal is to schedule pansies. We can also re-establish some classic rivalries with the traditional powers that used to rule football with us back when Paterno was young. Get to it, Tim Curley!

There’s Pittsburgh with its Panther,

and Penn her Red and Blue,

Dartmouth with its Indian (woowoowoowoowoo),

and Yale her Bulldog, too (ruff, ruff).

There’s Princeton with its Tiger (grrrr),

and Cornell with its Bear (BEAR NOISE).

But speaking now of victory,

We’ll get the Lion’s share.

We may need to change the last two lines to something more suitable; like "But speaking now of filling our 110,000 seat stadium without playing road games; We'll get the Curley's Share". Also, we may want to skip Pittsburgh; they may actually win once in a while. But we can work on those details later.

As I told Mr. RUTS, THIS IDEA FREE FOR STEALING. Pay special attention to Yale and Princeton. Those jerks.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (0)

Comments on this Entry:

Live Music Task Force – Saundra Kirk, draft recommendations to be discussed in a public forum on Wednesday, October 29, 7:30-9:30 pm, City Council Chambers. Report will be finalized at the task force's final meeting on November 10, presented to City Council November 20. Saundra Kirk and Scott Trainer noted that the sound control recommendations are inadequate. Jeff Jack moved and motion was seconded Motion 1 "Authorize the ANC executive committee to draft a letter of concern to the task force and City Council regarding the task force sound control recommendations." The motion passed without opposition. The task force's draft report is available on the City of Austin Web site under "Live Music Task Force."

2. Austin Neighborhoods Council minutes, 6/27/2007

Noise Solutions Committee Update (Scott Trainer) City formed a committee to identify improvements to enforcement that could be made under the current ordinance. 1. APD is retraining police and increasing the number of meters from 2 to 23. 2. The committee is focusing on the effect of outdoor music on residents and educating the city's Music Commission on the need for mitigation. 3. Fire Department is assisting in crowd control, and PACE (includes AFD, APD, TABC, code enforcement) is coordinating permitting and enforcement through Municipal Court. APD will be contacting NAs and giving presentations on changes

3. Past list of ANC presidents, excerpted:

Past ANC Presidents

2008 Danette Chimenti
South River City Citizens

2006 - 2007 Laura Morrison
OWANA

2004-2005 Susan Pascoe
WANG

2003 Bryan King
South Lamar NA

2001 - 2002 Jim Walker
Cherrywood NA

1999 - 2000 Will Boseman
NUNA

1997 - 1998 Jeff Jack
Zilker NA

4. From yesterday's entry, courtesy of Gary Etie: (and updated per his update):

In this video, City Council member Laura Morrison, who was instrumental in passing the Amendment that was specifically used against Shady Grove, points out that the problem was that "Shady Grove's Permit had expired". What Ms Morrison fails to point out is that the March 23rd expiration date was part of (see correction and update in latest post) problems that are now coming around are related to the specific details contained in Amendments that she ramrodded through on March 12th 2009, on the consent agenda (!), as an Emergency item (!), right before SxSW, when anyone involved in the music business was going to be too busy to rally opposition. I don't think the problem is going to go away, until Ms. Morrison either gets it, and stops carrying the ball for the voter block she wants to retain, or is removed from the process, through recall.. I think Ms. Morrison is that good, at manipulation of the planning process, and it's that serious, in determining the future of music, in Austin.

5. From the day before:

Jeff Jack, President of Zilker Neighborhood Association and member of Austin Neighborhood Council discussed some of the local clubs in his neighborhood. He supports a balance between music and livability. The City’s current sound ordinance is ineffective, especially with a growing downtown, making entertainment districts important. Also, defined hours of operation are essential and should be limited near residential areas. Venue owners need to agree to restrictive covenants. At 85 DB, the loudness of sound is detrimental to hearing. Austin Bergstrom Airport can not have residences within a certain distance because of associated noise. Enforcement is an issue, sometimes police do not respond to a complaint in a timely manner or after the police have left, the music is cranked back up. It would be ideal if music people served as their own monitors. He would like the Live Music Task Force to develop new rules and take into consideration tougher penalties and a special zoning classification for music.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (4)

Comments on this Entry:

(Tim on Jun 17, 2009 4:31 PM) "Austin Bergstrom Airport can not have residences within a certain distance because of associated noise" Hey there's a solution. Obviously the problem is not Shady Grove, but the houses built too close to it. :D

(giallar on Jun 18, 2009 4:56 PM) Okay, fun's over - how do we recall Laura Morrison?

(Quiet Please on Jun 24, 2009 5:27 PM) Want to connect some more dots? While I agree that downtown condo owners are not the problem, the condo DEVELOPERS are part of the problem! Condo developers feel better about their investment knowing that they also have the older quiet demographic as potential buyers. Scott Trainer actually is developing 24 condo units within site of Freddie's Place, so he has a personal benefit from tough noise ordinances being passed. He worked very hard to keep his daily buisness quiet, but blew his cover with the 911 call. Turns out Scott Trainer has over $5 Million worth of commercial properties in the neighborhood he wants to stop music in! He is the landlord of Olivia Restaurant, the South Lamar Business Park, and is developing 24 condos on S. 1st (the Elizabeth project) within sight of Freddie's Place (where the music has already died thanks to the Noise Ordinance). Scott Trainer is the owner of an LLC that owns the $4 million South Lamar Business Park at 1700 S. Lamar. Scott Trainer spent 2005 to 2008 rezoning and developing into the property at 2043 S. Lamar that he leases to the restaurant Olivia. Scott Trainer is the owner of the land at 2417 S. 1st where he is currently developing a 24 condo project called "Elizabeth". If you have access to search public records, you will find him the member (owner) of the following LLCs that own the above properties: JSTRAIN LLC, FIRST BOULDIN CREEK LOFTS LTD, JTTJ BOULDIN CREEK LLC, and COLLIER PROPERTIES LLC which all have his home address listed at contact point. Scott Trainer's neighbor, David Johnston was seen on this KXAN video saying that he also has been complaining about music for over 5 years. CAD search shows David Johnston owns 18 properties (rentals) in the neighborhood worth $6.5 million dollars. So David wants things quiet for his rental property business!

(Quiet Please on Jun 24, 2009 5:50 PM) hey can you shoot me a private message? I had some more "connect the dots" info on Scott Trainer, but the system thinks I'm spamming you.

It kind of falls apart when you find, as I did today, these two sources:

Citizine Mag "Keep Austin Quiet"

Gary Etie says that "Neighborhood Groups, Council Member Morrison, certain City of Austin attorneys, et al, brought over an existing 70 dB limit that was found in the Zoning section of the Code, Chapter 25-2, and brought that language over to the Outdoor Music Venue Permit Amendment that was passed just prior to SXSW, while everybody was too busy to do anything to stop them. An Outdoor Music Venue Permit is a separate 'Noise and Sound' permit, issued under the Noise and Sound Ordinance, and must be obtained in addition to the Building Permit that establishes Use as a Restaurant or Cocktail Lounge."

and AustinCityPermits.com blog: (and updated per Gary Etie's update):

In this video, City Council member Laura Morrison, who was instrumental in passing the Amendment that was specifically used against Shady Grove, points out that the problem was that "Shady Grove's Permit had expired". What Ms Morrison fails to point out is that the March 23rd expiration date was part of (see correction and update in latest post) problems that are now coming around are related to the specific details contained in Amendments that she ramrodded through on March 12th 2009, on the consent agenda (!), as an Emergency item (!), right before SxSW, when anyone involved in the music business was going to be too busy to rally opposition. I don't think the problem is going to go away, until Ms. Morrison either gets it, and stops carrying the ball for the voter block she wants to retain, or is removed from the process, through recall.. I think Ms. Morrison is that good, at manipulation of the planning process, and it's that serious, in determining the future of music, in Austin.

Apparently Jeff Jack is pulling the same "who, me?" act on ANCTALK. Others will have to fight that battle, as I left there a very long time ago.

Back to work...

TrackBack (0) | Comments (2)

Comments on this Entry:

(AC on Jun 16, 2009 5:20 PM) I took a stab at it.

(AC on Jun 16, 2009 5:37 PM) The most important points in my post: (1) Unless a restaurant gets itself reclassified as a cocktail lounge, it cannot exceed 70 decibels. Period. No variance. (2) It is far from clear that a bona fide restaurant restaurant like Shady Grove can get itself reclassified as a cocktail lounge. City staff's interpretation of the code will matter. (3) Even if a restaurant can get itself reclassified, it still has to go through a permitting process that (a) requires notice to neighbors and the neighborhood group (b) makes approval of the permit discretionary.

• It's not downtown residents (although one sound engineer fell for it, as well as 90% of the public; note not one single complainant at the meeting was downtown
• It's not new residents (note how many talk about how long they've lived here)
• It's not Californians (see above)

Judge for yourself:

C. PUBLIC INPUT

Robert Corbin, a South Austin Resident reported that a couple months ago he started hearing music inside his house, and discovered it was coming from a club over two miles away. He contacted the police, after which the owner of the club made adjustments. This is a recurring situation with Threadgills, located one mile away. The City’s sound ordinance exists to favor music. He believes no one should have to listen to music that is not of their choice and he feels terrorized in his own home. Does not understand why thisproblem occurs with today’s available technology. He expressed concern over young people’s safety, specifically the potential for hearing loss in front of loud speakers.

Jeff Jack, President of Zilker Neighborhood Association and member of Austin Neighborhood Council discussed some of the local clubs in his neighborhood. He supports a balance between music and livability. The City’s current sound ordinance is ineffective, especially with a growing downtown, making entertainment districts important. Also, defined hours of operation are essential and should be limited near residential areas. Venue owners need to agree to restrictive covenants. At 85 DB, the loudness of sound is detrimental to hearing. Austin Bergstrom Airport can not have residences within a certain distance because of associated noise. Enforcement is an issue, sometimes police do not respond to a complaint in a timely manner or after the police have left, the music is cranked back up. It would be ideal if music people served as their own monitors. He would like the Live Music Task Force to develop new rules and take into consideration tougher penalties and a special zoning classification for music.

Tressie Damron, a resident of Castle Heights neighborhood has experienced problems with loud music. She would like more education and training at the police cadet level. Right now the solution for reducing the noise is complaint driven. Clubs need sound proofing and roof-top venues should not be allowed.

Gardner Sumner, a member of Zilker Neighborhood Executive Board, lives on Treadwell Street and complains that noise comes from all directions into the night. He requests to strengthen the noise ordinance, not weaken it. In addition, the ordinance is not effective if the police do not enforce it. He does not understand why sound amplification needs to be so powerful as to travels two miles away. It is not right for people to not be able to sleep in their homes at night.

Vicki Faust, a homeowner in Travis Heights lives behind Continental Club, near Guero’s restaurant. Lately, the noise has gotten louder. She spoke with Botticelli’s South Congress owners when the restaurant first opened and they were agreeable. She now fears the local noise will hurt her Bed & Breakfast business. The two most difficult things are parking and noise. She has no complaints about Continental Club; it’s the outside venues. She would like the Live Music Task Force to identify outdoor venues near residential areas and develop special considerations. The only options she currently has to deal with noise problems are to call the police or sue the venue owners.

Michael Lahrman, a band manager stated it disturbs him what other people refer to as noise, to him noise is traffic. People are taking advantage of their neighborhoods; they may not have professional sound or set-up. He thinks Threadgills is a wonderful venue with reasonable and tasteful music. Some restaurants play music at happy hour to draw crowds, but don’t have a sound person onsite. He would like to include buses or the interstate (if it’s over 85 DB) in the noise ordinance. The answer is not to have attendees wearing headphones at a concert. Unfortunate that people are having difficulty sleeping and that needs to be recognized, but we need to protect the people who are doing it right.

Member Saundra Kirk explained that noise is any unwanted sound and asked Michael Lahrman to clarify his statement on bringing the music industry down. He responded that downtown condos will continue to pose a problem with festivals and live music as the residents complain the noise is bothersome.

Gail Armstrong, a South Austin resident for the past 30 years stated the noise ordinance is a joke. She has never had a painter invade her home; it is only the musician, who enters her private residence to perform. The types of music coming into her house are neither the choice she prefers to hear nor when she wants to hear it. She believes this situation is not right and it happens on a daily basis.

Bill Neale, moved from Dallas to Austin in 1974 and currently live on Kinney Avenue in South Austin. He experiences a lot of problems trying to sleep because of non-permitted music, most recently with Enchanted Forest that has outside parties, which after the police leave, they turn the music back up. He has called the police to report a nearby Church. Music coming from South Austin Museum of Popular Culture and Austin Pizza can be heard in his living room. He believes the “Live Music Capital of the World” mentality attributes to the problem. There are different things that make this town great like bicycling and books, not just music. He expressed a concern for the impact of loud music on kids.

Jerry Jackson, resident of South Austin in the Circle C subdivision, used to do sound and productions on a professional basis. He suggested that one solution could be to require all outside venues to have on site sound engineer. The problem arises with how the equipment is set up. He calls the police all the time about neighbors having parties that are too loud. Venues and clubs are located throughout the neighborhoods and police have problems finding the source of the sound. It is not the loudness of the sound, but the articulation, which can be controlled or contained. 85 DB may seem loud, but every yard man is making the same loudness. Lowering music at a venue will affect the patrons and could reduce opportunities.

Teresa Ferguson, a Music Commissioner explained that venues are the incubators for Austin’s live music industry; part of the conversation is about defending musicians and preserving Austin’s culture. In regulating music in neighborhoods, it is difficult to differentiate between a downtown neighborhood and an entertainment district. She suggested examining the complaint driven solution. She asked if anyone has noticed improvement or difference since meters are now used by the police. She proposed having on City staff a sound engineer to approve buildings for live music as a beneficial service. If the DB is lowered, it will be overkill and should not be the first step. There needs to be better communication on best practices, residents talking with venues, enforcement and incentives for sound proofing.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (1)

Comments on this Entry:

(heyzeus on Jun 12, 2009 1:32 PM) This post is like a Public Service Announcement for people who care about live music. Thanks.

From austin360:

For the first time in its 16-year existence, KGSR’s “Unplugged at the Grove” series at Shady Grove was shut down Thursday night after a noise complaint from a neighbor. Shady Grove owner Mike Young said the restaurant is in the process of applying for a variance that will allow a ceiling of 85 decibels. According to the current noise code, Shady Grove is classified as a restaurant that must comply at 75 decibels.

More at the link.

Remember, it's not condo-dwellers; and it's not people from California who did this. It's a bunch of single-family homeowners from Bouldin and Zilker, led by Jeff Jack, who have been complaining for more than a decade about supposed 'night clubs' on Barton Springs who got this ordinance passed through their tool Laura Morrison.

Earlier:

• First Jack/ANC victim was Freddie's Place
• Earlier coverage about the task force - note lack of downtown complainaints

TrackBack (0) | Comments (2)

Comments on this Entry:

(heyzeus on Jun 12, 2009 8:51 AM) The very same people who bemoan all of the scary change coming to Austin are the neighborhood groups shutting down live music at Freddie's and Shady Grove. I guess when high density downtown development threatens old music venues, it's a California-born tragedy. But when wealthy urban neighborhood groups do it, it's protecting the sanctity of the city.

(Tim on Jun 12, 2009 10:20 AM) I think they might have met their match here, though. It's one thing to take on a brand new restaurant (Freddies) where people go mainly for the food. But it's another to take on a 16 years Austin institution where people mainly go for the music. Great move for getting the citizens of Austin mobilized against the noise ordinance, though.

Capital Metro has finally confirmed that it's still Guadalupe, although they insist their map wasn't confusing. At all. Here it is; you be the judge - in retrospect you can sort of see the Lamar wiggle on the left; but on the other hand, why is the UT logo so far away from the supposed Guadalupe line; and what's the grey line in between? Why have a large jog at what's clearly MLK when really only the northbound traffic jogs at all there, and only one short block?

Here's what you get at first: (squishing particularly annoying; and, yeah, I'm using firefox):

The image below is in the size you would normally get if you "expand" at Capital Metro's site. Click through to the image you get if you save; at which point the squiggles become a bit more obvious. (Yes, Lamar on the west; probably Speedway on the right, although why have a grey line curving towards 38th at the end there?)

After Erica McEwen confirmed the routing, Ed Easton defended their map and insisted that anybody and everybody should have shown up to their 'workshops'. I replied as follows:

Ed, the tone of your comment is a bit off-putting. I have no interest in attending sessions which purport to be seeking public input but are really marketing efforts to put the stamp of public participation on top of an already-decided plan.

I got the Rapid Bus pitch in 2004 in private with three other UTC members before this plan was ever unveiled to the public, by the way, in case you folks forgot.

While I and others had already been operating under the continued assumption that the route would be on Guadalupe in front of UT, there were no materials from Capital Metro available on your website that directly answered that question; and the maps became actually less clear as they evolved, making us have some doubts. It's not that hard to publish the route in detail - and it's not that hard to directly answer very simple questions.

Even Jeff Wood, who is clearly a lot more loved over there than I am these days, doesn't buy the public participation myth - his comment from an earlier posting:

M1ek is right. It wasn't a citizens process. It was more like "we're going to do this and you're going to like it". I remember we had to pull teeth to even get a streetcar studied. This decision to do faux BRT makes me sad. As a former #1 rider I really really wanted to see real quality transit on Guadalupe in my lifetime. Looks like the best corridor for that will now be taken for bus repackaged transit.

Part of me kind of wishes they had changed to Lamar - it would prevent the destruction of possible rail transit on this corridor that McCracken and Leffingwell (I misattributed to Walker at the time, I think) argued against last time around and it would actually 'work' better on Lamar due to the longer distance between traffic lights, but on the other hand, a stop at MLK/Guadalupe wouldn't serve UT well at all. All moot now, I suppose.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (2)

Comments on this Entry:

(The Dude on Jun 11, 2009 2:01 AM) I'm interested in seeing what the timetables would look like from Tech Ridge P&R to Downtown. Taking the 1L takes damn near an hour. I don't think it could really be more than 10 to 15 minutes quicker than it already is. Even then, 45 to 50 minutes isn't that much better than 55 to 60 minutes is it?

(M1EK on Jun 11, 2009 7:40 AM) Well, it could be that much faster than the 1L pretty easily; but that's not the comparison to make - there's already limited-stop service on the corridor in the #101 (which could just as easily be extended up to that P&R). I can't see signal priority providing more than a minute or two of improvement from the 183 park-and-ride where the #101 originates today to downtown; especially the other direction in the afternoon. And unlike light rail service, whose advantage over cars/buses grows as traffic increases; Rapid Bus will be stuck in the same increased traffic - affected in the same exact way. It's a complete waste of time and money - that $100M could be quite an effective down-payment on the urban rail system downtown.

This morning, I dropped off my stepson at Austin HIgh for his last day of school this year. Pulled in at the PAC, which is the entrance closest to that underpass of Cesar Chavez. As I was leaving, I saw a cyclist on the Stopway; waiting for a spot to clear (lots of people turning into the same entrance I used). I stopped short of the crosswalk and motioned him on, trying to be nice, but after several moments of people coming around the corner and turning, he gave up and motioned me to go instead.

Yay, Stopway!

TrackBack (0) | Comments (0)

Comments on this Entry:

GM's failure after 101 years is an indictment of American management in general. It highlights the damage to our economy that results when finance becomes the tail that wags the economic dog.

Guess what Toyota and Honda do? No, not finance; they actually make cars! Cars that the whole world wants to buy, instead of creating demand out of whole cloth for suburbanites to use 10 mpg trucks to hit the grocery store; demand that evaporates outside of the US and even inside the US as soon as gas gets expensive. Yeah, for a while you didn't have to worry about competing against those two; but they found their way into the SUV market eventually, and in the meantime you got out of the market segments the rest of the world actually buys.

Not just GM; but our entire economy fell prey to the stupid idea that if you could sucker somebody into paying you to do something for a while, it had to be valuable work. Rebuttal: Ponzi schemes work for a while too.

At my current jorb in the military-industrial complex, I'm already more removed from making useful things than I like to be; but compared to most jobs in our 'economy', I'm practically still a farmer.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (5)

Comments on this Entry:

(Tim on Jun 1, 2009 2:31 PM) I love my current job for that exact reason. We actually make a server, that goes in your data center. It's the first time in my career that I've been able to hold something up and say, "This. This is what I make at work."

(Tim on Jun 1, 2009 2:35 PM) Back to the subject of cars. This blog is interesting (guy I used to work with), because it speaks to the flaws in the entire way car dealerships are run: http://www.dalepollak.com/ How these young guys are realizing that you can make a lot more money on the financing for economy cars that people want to buy, rather than paying the carrying costs to have vehicles on your lot that have the profit margins you want to sell. GM was building the vehicles its dealer's wanted to sell. Wrong audience.

(pel on Jun 4, 2009 3:23 PM) I have a wife and four children. We own a suburban and live in town (Crestview). Our vehicle only gets 16/19 mpg, and we put less than 10k miles on it per year. Maybe less than that. I don't want to be reduced to a minivan or a station wagon or two vehicles. Is that so wrong?

(M1EK on Jun 4, 2009 3:52 PM) pel, the trick is that the SUV wouldn't be as cheap or as attractive if it hadn't been given preferential treatment in emissions, fuel economy, and safety regulation, to say nothing of the tax code. Would you be as enamored of your SUV if it cost $20,000 more than it does now because it had to meet those requirements, just like the minivan and station wagon did?

(pel on Jun 6, 2009 6:49 PM) I don't think they'd add up to $20k. I'd be just as enamored, because the Suburban is the ultimate blend of blue-collar luxury, passenger toting, and cargo toting. I'm sorry, but the minivan and wagon do not compare. I could discuss the repeal of certain regulatory advantages to SUVs if I knew that the all-purpose use of Suburbans was respected and that they weren't being shoehorned into a passenger-only category that imposes onerous requirements which don't make sense for a large frame, cargo-toting vehicle like that. However, I suspect that most of the SUV dislike is driven by people who just hate big cars, no matter what their utility. Even if SUVs were made to obey the same requirements as a Ford Fiesta and cost exceptionally more than they do now, I don't think that would be enough for the big-car haters. They'd find some reason to demand they be removed from the road and would seek a regulatory route to realize that goal.

"Was this the best investment?" asks Steve Polzin, director of public transit research at the University of South Florida in Tampa. "You wonder what could have been accomplished if they had not rushed into it. If, for example, they'd waited a few years and bought the FEC."

[...]

The Tri-Rail system was never supposed to be this expensive. Because of its innocuous start as a temporary traffic-mitigation measure and because the project has been expanded in small increments, the kind of planning that generally precedes a billion-dollar public-works project never occurred. In the end, the stop-gap became part of the transportation landscape. "Once you start service, it's extremely hard to stop," Polzin says. "You've made the commitment and invested the capital."

Lyndon has made noises that we could still switch the Red Line over to electrified LRT and then run trains back on the 2000 route. He's either insane or lying; and the quotes above show you why: you can't get service like this stopped once you've spent 8 years telling people how great commuter rail is compared to LRT. Plus, of course, Capital Metro's public plans are all about improving the Red Line and adding the Green Line - with more and more diesel-smokin' trains that only take you to a shuttle-bus pickup; NOT about light rail. It's only McCracken and Wynn talking about urban rail (light rail), and although the plan pays lip service to Capital Metro, it's really going to be trying to build light rail despite Capital Metro.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (12)

Comments on this Entry:

(el_longhorn on May 27, 2009 12:36 PM) That is a pretty stunning article. I have the feeling that we are heading down the same path. Between Austin's desire for rail transit, CapMetro's bad management, and the lack of any political incentive to kill the commuter line if it is a dud, I have a feeling we are stuck with it. But can't we run the light rail along the 2000 route and just cut off the commuter rail at Lamar and Airport? If we had a good light rail to serve as the backbone of the transit system, I could see the Leander and Manor-Elgin lines working with it decently well.

(M1EK on May 27, 2009 1:53 PM) The number of people from the park-and-rides who will be willing to ride commuter rail to Lamar/Airport and then transfer to light rail is a lot smaller than the number of people who would have been willing to ride all the way down in one seat. I believe the number to be small enough that it would be essentially impossible to justify taking a lane on Guadalupe, which means rail service there becomes pointless. In other words, as I've said before, the only way you can justify taking a lane on Guadalupe is to be carrying both urban and suburban passengers.

(el_longhorn on May 27, 2009 6:51 PM) What I was thinking was that the commuter rail would meet the light rail at Lamar and Airport, but the light rail would continue north on Lamar.

(M1EK on May 27, 2009 6:57 PM) That's been discussed too, both here and elsewhere. 1. LRT further north on Lamar is unappealing - no choice commuters; no chance for redevelopment (scarier environs than E Riverside). 2. (assuming commuter rail doesn't just stop at Crestivew Station and continues southeasterly as today): Would effectively shut down the intersection of Lamar/Airport way too much of the time.

(Nicolas on May 27, 2009 10:00 PM) Could you not extend the line up to the Park & Ride Lot at 183 and Lamar? It seems you could even extend it further at some point, cross I-35 around Parmer or Yager, and end up at the Tech Ridge Park & Ride. Also, it seems that one or both of the rail lines could be elevated at the Lamar and Airport intersection to prevent too much traffic disturbance. But while we're dreaming, let's just bury the rail lines. SUBWAY!!!

(Nicolas on May 27, 2009 10:01 PM) Could you not extend the line up to the Park & Ride Lot at 183 and Lamar? It seems you could even extend it further at some point, cross I-35 around Parmer or Yager, and end up at the Tech Ridge Park & Ride. Also, it seems that one or both of the rail lines could be elevated at the Lamar and Airport intersection to prevent too much traffic disturbance. But while we're dreaming, let's just bury the rail lines. SUBWAY!!!

(Nicolas on May 27, 2009 10:02 PM) Could you not extend the line up to the Park & Ride Lot at 183 and Lamar? It seems you could even extend it further at some point, cross I-35 around Parmer or Yager, and end up at the Tech Ridge Park & Ride. Also, it seems that one or both of the rail lines could be elevated at the Lamar and Airport intersection to prevent too much traffic disturbance. But while we're dreaming, let's just bury the rail lines. SUBWAY!!!

(Nicolas on May 27, 2009 10:03 PM) Could you not extend the line up to the Park & Ride Lot at 183 and Lamar? It seems you could even extend it further at some point, cross I-35 around Parmer or Yager, and end up at the Tech Ridge Park & Ride. Also, it seems that one or both of the rail lines could be elevated at the Lamar and Airport intersection to prevent too much traffic disturbance. But while we're dreaming, let's just bury the rail lines. SUBWAY!!!

(Nicolas on May 27, 2009 10:03 PM) Could you not extend the line up to the Park & Ride Lot at 183 and Lamar? It seems you could even extend it further at some point, cross I-35 around Parmer or Yager, and end up at the Tech Ridge Park & Ride. Also, it seems that one or both of the rail lines could be elevated at the Lamar and Airport intersection to prevent too much traffic disturbance. But while we're dreaming, let's just bury the rail lines. SUBWAY!!!

(Nicolas on May 27, 2009 10:06 PM) Oops...

(el_longhorn on May 29, 2009 8:04 PM) I was thinking along the same lines as Nicolas - extend at least to the 183/Lamar park and ride, preferably up to Rundberg or so. Also, why not just stop the commuter rail at Airport/Lamar to avoid a traffic nightmare? It would require a transfer, but would still be a better option than the shuttle bus transfer for the commuter rail riders.

(M1EK on May 30, 2009 11:27 AM) 1. Rail without reserved guideway is worse than bus. 2. Reserved guideway on Guadalupe was only justifiable based on the 30-46,000 riders projected by the 2000 LRT line. It is NOT justifiable based on, say, the number of people who would be willing to transfer from the Red Line running only during rush hours every 30 minutes plus the urban pickups further south (maybe 15,000 people, best-case).

Here's a little table for you to consider:

Sounds pretty good, huh? Saved on quite a bit of labor there - as well as other costs that track with 'trips', like fuel! But wait a minute - how are the passengers getting from the train station to their office again?

Continued reading Rail Should Reduce Operating Costs...

TrackBack (0) | Comments (0)

Comments on this Entry:

--- In BusRidersAustin@yahoogroups.com, Nawdry wrote:

> Well, I see Mike has basically morphed into the rant-recycling stage

Well, I see Lyndon has basically morphed back into his lying-sack-of-crap stage.

Just ONE among many of your lies:

Tri-Rail serves mostly Broward and Palm Beach Counties - extending a bit into
Dade County, but that's not the focus of the service. MetroRail is a Dade County
phenomenon (more specifically Miami) - most Tri-Rail ridership never goes that
far south. MetroRail (Dade County / Miami) is largely an artifact of the 1970s.

The area that saw transit stall out for 20 years was Broward and Palm Beach
Counties (Ft. Lauderdale is still trying to establish some momentum for a
streetcar/light-rail system against the headwinds of 20 years of Tri-Rail
failure).

Tri-Rail was planned and built during the mid-to-late 1980s; AFTER MetroRail.
The fact is that after Tri-Rail turned out to be such a disaster, nobody could
get any traction on any additional rail in the region for a couple of decades.
And now, the local governments are so enamored by Tri-Rail's 'success' that
they're writing 'doomsday budgets':

Recent Miami Herald article

Recent Palm Beach Post article

Tri-Rail ridership has, in fact, declined since the 2008 fuel spike has eased,
despite what these articles imply (note that they do not state what current
ridership actually is; if anybody cares to doubt THAT, I'll spend some time
finding the media that I read a few months back on the subject).

One can certainly conclude, with accuracy missing from anything Lyndon Henry has
ever written here, that the public in South Florida has not supported Tri-Rail
like they have, let's say, DART in Dallas or Houston's Metro system (both of
which passed expansion referendi with overwhelming support).

Some other (older) links, with links back to media (some of which has expired)
and with excerpts:

Old crackplog post

"Take the Delray Beach Tri-Rail station, for instance. It's located way west of
downtown, languishing between Linton Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue. Now, where
can one walk from that location? The whole point of public transit is to create
an alternative to driving. Yet, the thriving popular downtown area of Delray
Beach is far removed from the poorly planned station location. Thus, you still
have a downtown clogged with cars, because the Tri-Rail station is beyond
walking distance. "

[...]

"I have ridden on Metrorail, on the other hand, and it is a joy compared to the
mess that Tri-Rail is. Metrorail actually goes places, near neighborhoods, and
other places people actually go, and it doesn't share its tracks with 8,000
mile-long freight trains. That's why it works."

and:

Old crackplog post

"The greatest hindrance to Mica's rail, however, could come from the failure of
a predecessor, South Florida's Tri-Rail, which runs from Palm Beach County south
to Miami. Tri-Rail has proven costly; it has drained $433 million so far, and
reports say it needs another $327 million to stay alive. Despite the investment,
Tri-Rail averages only 60 percent of its projected ridership, and governments
subsidize more than 70 percent of the operating costs.

The problem? Essentially, Tri-Rail doesn't go anywhere. For most of its 11-year
life, Tri-Rail delved only into northern Dade County. "That's like taking a
train from Volusia and dropping people off at the Seminole County line," Mica
says. Connections to major workplaces and airports rely on unreliable bus
systems. Moreover, Tri-Rail only runs once an hour, and is frequently late at
that."

and:

Old crackplog post

"Luksha is among the many South Floridians who derisively note that not a single
Tri-Rail train goes through a single �downtown�, and only indirect services
via, bus, taxi or Metrorail will get you to the region�s airports after
getting off Tri-Rail. "

As should be obvious by the lead to this post, I will not stand by and let you
drag me down without responding in kind.

- MD

and

--- In BusRidersAustin@yahoogroups.com, Nawdry wrote:

> At 2009/05/25 15:41, Mike Dahmus wrote:

> >Just ONE among many of your lies:

> >

> >Tri-Rail serves mostly Broward and Palm Beach Counties - extending a

> >bit into Dade County, but that's not the focus of the service.

> >MetroRail is a Dade County phenomenon (more specifically Miami) -

> >most Tri-Rail ridership never goes that far south.

>
> Mike is just disseminating rubbish. By far the heaviest Tri-Rail
> ridership occurs at the 5 Miami-area stations, particularly the
> MetroRail Transfer station, where interface with the MetroRail rapid
> transit occurs. Tri-Rail also serves the Miami Airport.
>
> When I stayed in Deerfield Park

Heh.

Credibility, huh?

It's "Deerfield Beach", you ignoramus.

And, yes, Tri-Rail ENTERS Dade County. Of its 70 mile length, by far, the overwhelming majority of the line is in Palm Beach and Broward Counties. The fact that those stations see a bit more than typical traffic shows how stupid the plan was to rely on shuttlebuses for passenger distribution everywhere else; the only marginally successful stops are the ones that feed into the existing urban rail network in Dade County at the extreme end of a 70 mile system.

Urban rail systems never took off in Ft. Lauderdale or West Palm Beach or Boca Raton or any of the other large towns and cities along the line. Commuter rail spurred precisely nothing; no public support for more rail that might actually work - were it not for the existing MetroRail system that actually goes where people want to go, and, this is important, the 1200 magnet students riding every day, the system would have collapsed 15 years ago.

I lived there for most of my life, genius. I was around when Tri-Rail was getting started. I worked at IBM three summers and then three full years within a short shuttle ride of both the Delray Beach and Boca Raton Tri-Rail stops.

I had many coworkers that gave it a try (I lived too close for it to be of any use to me). None stuck. The shuttlebuses were the problem for every single one of them.

I've seen more than a dozen proposals for TOD come and go along the line. None stuck. The lack of choice commuters was the problem for every single one of _them_.

I was around when the original discussions about CSX vs. FEC were taking place. You're right in one small respect - the FEC wasn't available right at that instant; but there were people EVEN BACK THEN who said we'd be better served by waiting a couple of years and trying to negotiate with FEC instead of CSX. (Parallel to Austin here: Some people said, me among them, that rather than barreling ahead with a stupid dead-end Red Line commuter "ender" line, we'd be better served by waiting a few years to develop momentum for a re-run at the 2000 LRT line).

This was 20 years ago, mind you. Tri-Rail still, now, 20 years after the fact, has not approached initial ridership projections, unlike light rail starter lines all over the country which have mostly knocked them out of the park. After 20 years of disastrous failure on Tri-Rail, the number of people willing to say we should have waited for FEC has grown dramatically - including most of the political leadership in the counties paying the bills.

Those counties, by the way, are the ones that are cutting their subsidy to Tri-Rail because it was such a 'success' that they've gotten tired of the bleeding for so little benefit (again, compare and contrast to what happened in Houston and Dallas after GOOD LIGHT RAIL STARTER LINES showed people what could happen - 2/3 of the electorate voted in favor of huge expansions in both cases).

It's you whose credibility ought to be completely lacking here. You visited South Florida once and rode Tri-Rail a couple of times.

Big whoop.

I lived there for 20 years.

You're absolutely wrong, as usual.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (7)

Comments on this Entry:

(natrius on May 26, 2009 12:07 AM) Sigh. You're usually right, but I don't think anyone is going to be convinced when you're so antagonistic. They stop focusing on your points and focus on the vitriol instead. It's hard to see how even an impartial reader who is learning about these types of things for the first time would side with the guy who's insulting everyone. I don't know the backstory about the guy you're responding to in these emails, but if he's one of the people who is never going to change his mind, I assume the real audience is all of the other people on the mailing list. If your goal is to change their minds, is this actually effective? It's true that people often make dishonest arguments, but humans are stubborn creatures who don't like changing their opinions, so when the facts contradict those opinions, sometimes they react by saying things that don't make sense. They're not necessarily being malicious, and even they're even less likely to change their minds when they're being pissed off. Some of the people you insult are even trying to have honest discussions about the issues, and the way you respond to them boggles my mind. Being right isn't going to get things changed. Making other people right will. You've done plenty of things that have advanced the cause of sane urban development, but you would be far more effective if you would just suffer fools gladly. Is it that hard?

(M1EK on May 26, 2009 9:13 AM) Perhaps some context would help. Here's one of the EIGHT, count them, EIGHT responses that Lyndon Henry made last night: "I'm sure Road Warriors in Austin - and perhaps elsewhere - are pleased by Mike Dahmus's vigorous attacks on regional passenger rail ("commuter rail") - including the South Florida Trai-Rail, which is certainly one of the more successful of the new RPR operations. I'm finding Mike's arguments basically indistinguishable from the kinds of diatribes launched by the likes of Wendell Cox, Randal O'Toole, Tom Rubin, and similar prominent anti-rail jihadists. And this is coming from a purported "rail supporter"! There's gotta be a descriptive term for the likes of Mike Dahmus, who fights rail transit implementation as hard as any Road Warrior while cloaking himself in a kind of fantasy support for Austin's 2000 LRT plan, which he now insinuates can never be achieved - and he's doing his darnedest to make sure it never will. Chutzpah doesn't quite capture it... Insanity maybe?" The dude's been doing stuff like that since 2004. He's long since lost any right to be suffered gladly; but every single time I engage him I start out with nothing but calm - but I do, as noted, fight fire with fire.

(M1EK on May 26, 2009 9:23 AM) Oh, and, I reposted the last thing here because some folks have indicated they appreciate the "bile" part of the site more than others, including yourself, obviously do.

(natrius on May 26, 2009 11:46 PM) I definitely enjoy the bile. It's entertaining. I just don't think it's the most helpful thing in the world, not that it's your responsibility to be the Gandhi of sensible development. I don't understand why this guy seems to be so fond of logical fallacies and so averse to actually disproving things... I'm going to have to restrain myself from subscribing to that list because I suffer from severe "Someone is wrong on the internet" disease. http://xkcd.com/386/

(breathesgelatin on May 27, 2009 1:03 AM) I too enjoy the bile, very much so. However, I agree with natrius that in some forums it may scare people away from your extremely valid points... They cruise in for a second and you come off looking like "the mean guy." So you suspect that this guy on the yahoo group might be one and the same as electricron from skyscraperpage?

(M1EK on May 27, 2009 8:51 AM) Those were posts 50 and 51 of a long series where we both started cold and heated up accordingly (each time I've dealt with Lyndon, I warned him that I'd not tolerate personal attacks and would respond vigorously to them when they show up). If he was anybody on SSP, it'd be SecretAgentMan. Somewhat of a style mismatch, but the knowledge is about the same - electricron doesn't appear to know much about Austin.

(breathesgelatin on May 27, 2009 11:31 PM) Ah yeah - you're right about electricron. Anyway. So much for me being an internets sleuth!

The only other thing I'd like to add is that MetroRapid is a part of the All Systems Go plan, which thousands of citizens helped create.

Now, go back to this crackplog from May 2004. Note, this was long before the public was ever involved - at no point, never, was the public asked if they preferred Rapid Bus to light rail on Guadalupe. Not one single time. (The earliest I got wind of Rapid Bus was actually in January of 2004).

My work is never done.

As for light rail on Guadalupe, yes, it would have taken away a lane of traffic each way (even more in one difficult stretch). This is how you get rail to where it's needed, and precisely what every city that has succeeded with rail transit has done. That lane will carry a lot more people in a train than it ever will with cars or "Rapid" buses that are stuck in traffic the whole time. (No, once again, holding a single light green for a few more seconds doesn't do jack squat in the afternoon congestion on Guadalupe). The only thing that would make Rapid Bus really 'rapid' would be to take away a lane on Guadalupe each way, and then what you've got is service not quite as good as light rail with far higher operating costs. Yay.

My response:

Jamie, you are wrong; the 20% time difference is compared to the #1, not the #101. It is very very unlikely that signal priority will help much in the most congested part of the #1 route since congestion usually results from the next two or more intersections.

Misty, it is foolish to claim citizens chose Rapid Bus. Citizens were presented with Rapid Bus as the only option for Lamar/Guadalupe; the only 'choice' presented was 'where else would you like Rapid Bus?'

The fact is that in other cities, light rail would run on Guadalupe. It would already be running on Guadalupe by now had Krusee not pushed the election early in 2000.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (2)

Comments on this Entry:

(northcomm on May 19, 2009 5:28 PM) can we go back and remove Krusee from the space-time continuum? sorry about leaving you in Austin, M1EK...

(el_longhorn on May 19, 2009 6:00 PM) I wonder if the Chronicle still believes CapMetro will pay Austin the money it promised after today's credit line announcement? As a former #1 rider, I don't see any big benefits from implementing rapid bus. The #101 is about as good as you can get. The millions to be spent on rapid bus don't seem to be worth the few minute gain.

In this thread, I just made the comment below, saved here for posterity in case it doesn't make it.

Fundamentally, quite a lot of the things that are supposedly being worked on now would have had to have been completed for an earlier launch, and obviously weren't. This calls into question the truthfulness of the agency on everything else, of course.

Brushing this off as "well, we held off on operator training because we'd have to do it all over again" is nonsense. You supposedly decided to stop the rollout very shortly before the actual date - so some of that training, for instance, would have had to be underway by that point were you telling the truth.

It should be obvious to anybody who isn't completely credulous that quite a lot of the things Capital Metro is working on now would have delayed the rollout of the line or been PR disasters (imagine cops having to direct traffic at all the road crossings for months, for instance), and that Veolia basically saved their asses by making those mistakes.

Lee Nichols at the Chronicle ought to be paying attention: if they're willing to pull such obvious BS on this stuff, why on earth are you trusting them on their financials?

TrackBack (0) | Comments (2)

Comments on this Entry:

(el_longhorn on May 14, 2009 3:42 PM) I was going to comment on that Lee Nichols blog post that you mentioned. He sure seems to have rose-tinted glasses on when it comes to CapMetro.

(breathesgelatin on May 15, 2009 4:35 AM) It was obvious to me that they were incompetent and something was wrong from their volunteer organization efforts alone. I was curious and semi-employed at the time of the Crestview Station open house and put my name and number down to be a line ambassador. They called me a few weeks later and it was obviously too late for me to undergo training in time for their supposed rollout. I told them my work circumstances had changed and could no longer do it. They called me back AGAIN to try to get me to volunteer after that. I could tell that things were completely disorganized from that alone.

Due to escalating pre-eclampsia, Jeanne was delivered at 9:42 this morning (was originally going to be around midnight). Sophie joins the world today at 35.5 weeks, 5 pounds 3 ounces, 41 centimeters (16 inches). She is now up in the neo-natal intensive-care unit to get a firm diagnosis about an intestinal tract problem observed previously via ultrasound which will almost definitely require surgery (and thus a stay here of a few weeks). Jeanne is recovering now; Mike got to visit Sophie in NICU for about 30 minutes before lunch with Aunt Karen and is going to visit again this afternoon. Other than the intestinal problem, whatever it is, everything is fine with Sophie. She is otherwise healthy and strong (and as Mike likes to describe all babies, "red wrinkly and pissed"). Jeanne thinks that she has Mike's smile.

Mike has lots of pictures on the camera but forgot the mini USB cable, so they'll have to wait.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (8)

Comments on this Entry:

(Kedron Touvell on May 10, 2009 3:29 PM) congratulations, Mike! Though I didn't realize you had a smile. :)

(juliet on May 10, 2009 4:03 PM) Congratulations! Glad to hear the little girl is going to be okay and her Mommy too. What a beautiful name. My grandmother's name was Frances so I have a special fondness for it.

(AC on May 10, 2009 4:05 PM) Congrats, Mike! I wish you, Jeanne and Sophia the best. Don't worry about bashing Cap Metro for a while. I'll try to pick up the slack; maybe TOW can help. ;)

(smcdow on May 10, 2009 7:28 PM) Many congratulations, Mike!

(natrius on May 10, 2009 8:30 PM) Congratulations!

(breathesgelatin on May 11, 2009 12:06 AM) Congrats!!! Pretty name.

(Sean Brown on May 11, 2009 7:49 AM) Congrats Mike

(el_longhorn on May 11, 2009 3:45 PM) Felicidades, Sr. Dahmus! Best wishes to you and your family. I hope you all get home soon.

(both reposted from the twitter during a short time window here in the hospital before I dive back into work):

In the "I can't believe they're really this stupid" department, Capital Metro's MetroRail has won a stewardship award from Envision Central Texas. Yes, really. The plan whose lies about seeking federal funding and other overruns have resulted in the funneling of Austin infrastructure dollars to Leander and Cedar Park. The plan that prevents light rail from being built; the one that has been delayed for many many moons due to incompetence and flat-out lies; the plan that provides jack squat to residents of Austin who pay essentially all the bills; THAT plan just won a stewardship award. Really? REALLY?

What's next; a posthumous humanitarian award for Stalin or Hitler?

Second, Rapid [sic] Bus has been awarded some Federal money - but not the 80% requested, meaning that the project is going to be much harder to kill but is going to cost even more in local dollars.

An awful day for transit all-around. If you still held out any hope for urban rail in Austin, today kills most of that hope. Envision Central Texas, you've just won the first ever group award here. Nice show, today's Worst People In Austin.

Some selected background reading for you from the archives:

• From 2004: Don't Kid Yourself: Commuter Rail Precludes Light Rail
• From 2005: It's Not Light Rail
• From 2006: Spot the correct rail corridor

Much much more, of course in the category archives, especially these two:

• Don't Hurt Us Mr. Krusee; We'll Do Whatever You Want
• Rapid Bus Ain't Rapid

3:00 update: Got a message from somebody who was there that the Red Line was the only entrant (presumably in the category) which wasn't clear to me before (the ECT front page just lists 'finalists' with no information about categorization). Supposedly eyes were rolling in the audience. I think "no award" would have been the right choice, if there were no other entrants (also, surely dadnab could have been given an/another award in the category instead). The point here is that not only does the Red Line fail to move the ECT vision forward; it's actually preventing projects which could be moving said vision forward - for instance, if the Pfluger Bridge extension fails to get built because CM spent the money promised to the City of Austin on Red Line overruns/lies. You don't even have to go to hypothetical-but-now-precluded light rail to get there; just pay attention to what's going on right now.

We're still left with: (1), ECT thinks the Red Line somehow moves us forward; and (2) Rapid Bus is not only still going to happen, but require more local dollars - condemning the #1 urban rail corridor in this city to nothing more than useless bus service for essentially forever.

TrackBack (0) | Comments (3)

Comments on this Entry:

(trza on May 8, 2009 3:51 PM) Bad news about the ECT award. CapMetro is a joke. I was just in San Francisco and I was impressed with their array of transit options. Commuter rail (BART, which actually runs to the airport! go figure), subway (muni), standard Bus, electrified bus (I guess this would qualify as BRT?), street car, trolley (for the tourists), not to mention a fair number of bike lanes. Granted, I guess taxes are much higher in SF than they are here, but it's sad that Austin hasn't worked toward a similar range of options. I would like to see a similar multifaceted approach here.

(northcomm on May 9, 2009 2:17 PM) This really sucks. And Rapid Bus ain't even "real" BRT. I'm thinking it's pretty sad when Eugene, Oregon, pop. 120,000 can do real BRT and Austin can't. Always hate this uniquely Austin dichotomy; liberal out its ass, yet has no stomach for transit and/or development like the more conservative DFW and Houston. trza, BART = heavy-rail/subway, Caltrain is commuter rail, and electric bus in SF is not BRT, waaay too stop and go, it's just that SF is too hilly for diesel buses in parts.

(breathesgelatin on May 11, 2009 12:10 AM) BOO! HISS!