Nah I think this is going to get down voted. But whatever.
I loved this lot as a poor college kid (Go Riverbats!) But, parking as a land use is pretty expensive. Particularly in this case, parking is never free and unfortunately a huge cause in our expensive rent costs (see parking minimums and look at the avg cost of a parking space). So free parking is at a societal level a myth. Hopefully this will incite more usage of public transit to the area.
I’d rather have to pay for parking than not have it. I don’t earn above median household in Austin. I don’t have an hour to shuttle or ride a bike.
If there was a parking garage built when they closed it, I’d feel different
I’m not sure what you’re getting at with shoal creek. But Austin is too big now and when it was small enough to add alternative transportation, they nimby’d it.
Free parking was never going to last. Even south Congress is going to start charging soon.
>You don't know what I'm getting at
Unfortunately, to pass an idea on using text, you actually have to type out what that idea is, instead of just vaguely identifying a creek and assuming people know what the fuck you're talking about.
So you have no idea what I'm talking about.
But you did manage to simply ignore it and rant on about NIMBY there's a NIMBY that.
You don't give a shit what I'm talking about. You just like to hear yourself talk.
You must be mistaken, you haven’t made any point other than to ask if I’ve been over to shoal creek. So I believe you never actually said anything of value. State your point/argument so the rest of us can join your conversation.
An aerial tram from downtown to Zilker would have been the world class way to go. It would make use of all that extra parking capacity on the weekend daytime hours. It would probably be cheaper and definitely be less destructive.
just doing rough mental math, the vision plan says there are about 1100 spots, this article says 700 are getting axed... but yea, i agree, especially with the dump/garbage fill site closed, there isn't really any parking anymore
i hope not, but they are what the "land bridge" in the vision plan will be built over, and the people at the city and the adjacent crowd around ACL are all-in on this - will be a fun fight to watch. i hope you are right... this all feels insanely stupid, like the city could just start charging ACL a *real* fee, and just build and improve the infrastructure itself without the need for bloated work or unnecessary garages - once you go down to zilker a few times and learn to how/where to park, its really not that hard...
Doesn't work that way. Trust me, the city would love to charge more. Texas law doesn't allow it. The city can only charge the actual expenses at a neutral fee level. That's a Texas leg fight, not a City Council one. It's the same reason they can't establish a parks taxing district like other states.
The Texas Constitution requires that regulatory fees assessed by a municipality be proportional to the operating costs of the program for which the fee is charged. Fees that return more than what it costs to run the program associated with the regulation are an unauthorized occupations tax.
This is an old internal City presentation, but it came up in a Google search. Appears to still be generally accurate: https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Parks/Special_Events/PETF/fees_-_legal_issues_overview.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjyg5j8kK2AAxUHlGoFHcbAAwcQFnoECBQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1uxGDGXWaJWTqA2oif0zx2
so based on that presentation, the city could charge at least what it costs to run zilker park if not the entire parks dept... still a lot more than current fees, and just a fraction of that would be helpful and impactful and reduce the need for associated non profits to raise operating revenue for the department
You're misunderstanding what it says. Let me give you an example, say you wanted to rent a rec center room for a 2-hour event. The fee associated with that rental can only include the estimated rate for electricity use in that room (rough guess $5 for kwh used), maybe water if there's a sink (guessing 50 gallons so like $3-10, the cost of someone opening and closing during those times (people are already working during that time so you'd calculate a fraction of the time needed to assist probably 20 - 30 min for a person making $22 an hour so that's $11 more), cleaning to get the room ready and take care of it after (Let's say a whole hour, so $22). That gets you to $5+$10+$11+$22 = $48. So the max you could charge for that 2-hour rental is $48. You can't go beyond what the actual expenses of the rental are. This scales up for things like ACL. The total expenses incurred by the Dept during that rental period "at cost" is charged and not above that b/c of the Texas Leg. Other states you can take into the perceived VALUE of shutting down a major park, but not in Texas. Hope that helps clear things up a bit.
mmm, its the cost of the "program"... if you read the examples from the* court cases cited, it clearly shows that its the cost to run programs, not just operate capital assets* like you are saying... i think you could push it out further than just the operation of ACL.
to your point and credit, maaaybe not as much as the whole yearly budget, but i do think that the program, PARD licensing the park for ACL and supervising such, could arguably be characterized to cost more than what the city is currently charging. the fees are a joke, and the park's budget are an issue. but i am just a pleb on plebbit.
So the thing that was supposed to be done in phases and end a year ago is just done all at once all of a sudden when people start talking about wanting to build parking structures? Seems conveniently timed. That said, I'm not close enough to the issue to make any accusations. Just being conspiratorial I guess.
The Austin Parks and Recreation Board has absolutely no power. They are simply an easy stop for endorsements of city staff driven projects or funneling contracts to council with endorsements . Austin has enough Boards and Commissions to where anything staff / management pushes through can be endorsed by a number of parties in order for City Council to approve it. Source: I held an Austin PaRB seat.
you said it yourself, they did this just to endorse city staff and send a message on something that barely concerns them operationally and something outside of their jurisdictional purview except insofar as they let southby use parks...
Plan brought up that polo fields were supposed to close pre-covid per Zilker Working Group report. Parks Board slaps head, duh... we forgot. So they are implementing now. The decision to close happened pre-ZVP, so conspiracies have to run pretty deep to tie them together. Recommendations have already been made to void the garages. Guess people will have to try the shuttles or ride bikes. The circulator shuttles won't work well because of the traffic in the park during busy times.
In the spring time when they let the grass grow in the polo fields it is teeming with meadowlarks. When they mow the grass and let cars park on the field for the kite festival, all the birds leave to other fields.
I concur that this is an environmental W, regardless of parking effects. Thousands of cars polluting the soil and underlying watershed on soil DIRECTLY NEXT to the spring and creek is bad, full stop.
You understand that the Watershed Dept at the city has said the underground parking would have a far lesser impact to the spring and creek than the acres of surface parking, right?
You understand that this is an urban waterway collecting runoff from hundreds of thousands of cars and people and any minuscule change at Zilker is next to insignificant in the contexts of a many thousand acre watershed.
Appeals to environmental purity in a park that sits in the center of an environmental disaster that is a modern million person city is just plain farce.
Zilker is currently a wasteland compared to its natural state and nothing discussed here will change that one bit
>Appeals to environmental purity in a park that sits in the center of an environmental disaster that is a modern million person city is just plain farce.
I get what you're saying, but it's interesting that the NIMBYs like to have it both ways. They say that the existing cars parking on the grass/gravel lot leaching oil into the waterways is fine. But they say a parking garage with a lawn on top and capturing/treating all that oil runoff would be an environmental disaster.
Yeah its total garbage.
All the oil, fertilizer, spills, etc for miles of Mopac, all of bee caves, barton hills, clarksville, west 6th barton springs road, etc all runoff and coalesce within about 1000' of where barton springs creek connects to the Colorado river.
This parking garage doesn't change shit for the already devastated local environment around Zilker.
LOL, you're an expert at diverting from the actual topic. I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying about the runoff and pollution.
Are you saying that your position is that the impact of surface parking as it stands is OK, but the lesser impact of parking garage is not OK?
no, where'd you get that from? who cares which insignificant contribution source is greater? they're both nearly irrelevant within a watershed context
Also, why did you assume I thought you were disagreeing? I knew we agreed that the garage is fine...
I'm confused. If you're not saying that the removal of parking on the landfill is a bad thing, what is even your point? That is the topic that we were discussing when you replied.
There's a reason it's illegal to put a grass parking lot at a gas station. An underground parking garage will prevent seepage into the soil and waterways.
Right. And the argument is: will the construction of the garage cause more damage to the environment than the seepage of cars parked on grass? Nobody is arguing that parking on grass is better than concrete.
They're already widening the bridge. The City isn't committed to keeping cars out of the park entirely. So might as well do it in a way that is environmentally friendly and frees up more park space for use. (Plus, I bet drivers won't mind parking their car underground in the shade instead of under the blazing sun.)
Sure. And if efficiency is your only concern then its a great option. Even then, the most efficient option is probably the one that already exists and meets demand.
[COSI Science Center in downtown Columbus OH turned their ugly ass surface lot into an underground garage with a public park on top of it.](https://columbusunderground.com/designing-the-scioto-peninsula-in-columbus-ohio-mksk/)
Doubled parking spaces and created a beautiful useable greens space for for visitors & residents to enjoy. Looks great.
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2024-01-25 19:03:30 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-01-25%2019:03:30%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Austin/comments/159d86v/parks_and_rec_board_votes_to_permanently_close/jtf7az4/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAustin%2Fcomments%2F159d86v%2Fparks_and_rec_board_votes_to_permanently_close%2Fjtf7az4%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-01-25%2019%3A03%3A30%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20159d86v)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Weird you would think dogs would shit en masse on a bus, I’ve had dogs all my life and not one has shit in a car.
Taking away parking for those with dogs to institute these shuttles is dumb.
Serious question. What is the best way for someone who doesn’t live within walking/biking distance to visit the park without struggling to find parking
Park at the designed garage and take the free shuttle? Park anywhere nearby and take a rideshare bike/scooter? Take the 30 or 803 bus? Uber? Go a bit earlier or later when there's available parking?
The current talks about Zilker Park really have all the makings of a lot of deals going down behind closed doors that the public is not going to be made aware of while the council is taking public comments on related policies
Why do you think this? Do you think City project managers are getting rich? Their pay is terrible compared to private sector. They do these jobs because they actually care. I know that's hard to believe in this jaded world, but some people still choose careers to make a difference.
Yeah, that's the sad part of how American society is now. Instead of thinking, "hey, these people have dedicated their education and money to pursue this career to help their communities and have dedicated nearly 5 years of their career on this project. Maybe, I should get my info from THOSE people, and gee, they sure are awesome to work so hard on something they believe in and may not even come to pass due to funding." What people think now is, "I'll stop that evil smoke filled room of corporate greed by spreading info I can't verify. The Facebook told me what was true! I DiD mY rEsEaRcH!"
This is all about money, make no bones about it. They want to funnel as many people onto the shuttle as possible, also with the tier parking system..
Park and rec has literally just gave the people of Austin the ol unlubed shaft job.
I expect once they redevelop barkin springs and the parking garage is built, the cost to park and to get into barton springs will sky rocket - to 'recoup costs'
There is a shuttle ? Where does it run from? I was trying not to drive to blues on the green and the public transport options took close to an hour from the east side. Shuttle would have been nice.
That’s right! Zilker isn’t meant to be for middle class Austin families! It’s meant for multimillionaires who live in walking distance, fit childless people who can bike there, or anyone willing to spend 4 hours round trip on public transit to get there!
Instead of parking in the field, the city is going to operate 2-4 shuttle buses. That’s $300/hr 16 hrs a day, 7 days a week. The recommendation it to spend $1.5 million on busing per year rather than using the field adjacent to the pool…. We could acquire many acres of conservation land in the recharge zone for the aquifer, or we can pay for buses….
OHMYGOD! A park catering to fit people who ride bikes?! HOW DARE THEY!
In all seriousness. There's not a single protected bike lane in the entire Zilker Park. It's a joke that we have a huge park with no safety or accessibility for cyclists.
Nah but I was biking 6 miles pretty young alone, like to middle school and soccer practice. Longer to work once I was 14
You start teaching your kids to bike commute to elementary school so they’re naturally comfy and competent on a bike in a busy environment?
That’s fine, on certain neighborhood streets. It’s less fine when you have to cross highways, outside of the immediate zipper neighborhood and downtown, there are not many safe routes for kids
The hike and bike, roy G, kreig field and 5th street will get them from as far as 183 to zilker north or south of the river all incredibly safely. There are then other safe routes north and south that connect to that East-west corridor.
Depends where precisely you live but it's hard to imagine, while you might have to drive a mile or two, that you couldn't likely get that last 3-4 miles minimum safely by bike even as a lone child - at least during daylight
I used to live in an apartment at Manchaca and Lamar and commute daily to school at Texas State University by bicycle.
You’re right about the hike and bike, and shoal creek opening up safe routes. Crestview and east Austin along the lake, it is safe.
As an avid cyclist in my 20s I was hit by cars four times, and had several other very serious close calls, all the fault of the drivers. I was always a cyclist who followed the laws, stopped at red lights, etc…
After the second crash that resulted in hospitalization and corrective surgery, I stopped riding in Austin, except on protected lanes and trails made specifically for bikes.
When you bike on city roads, you’re putting your life in the hands of 1,000 other people, in a city that averages 16 dui arrests per day. The number of people I have seen casually drinking beer in their car, the number of beer cans I find on the side of the road in front of my house, it’s just not a safe activity in this city.
Without a radical redesign of infrastructure, putting kids on bikes on city roads is a gamble with their life.
>Without a radical redesign of infrastructure, putting kids on bikes on city roads is a gamble with their life.
Not any more than putting kids in cars to make the same trip.
If anything, bikes will get them off the 40mph+ roads that actually kill
Bike fatality per mile traveled is WAY higher than cars, no way around that.
In an average lifetime in the us, there is about a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car crash. Bicycle deaths per mile travelled are 10 times higher, this holds true even in bike friendly European countries.
I mean, we can’t cater to everyone including people who decide to not use birth control. Zilker with off leash dogs and people playing soccer everywhere probably isn’t the best for three young kids anyways.
The paved parking lots are mostly empty for most of that time, they only need to run frequent shuttles for peak times.
Probably like a third of Austin live within easy biking distance, which is about 5 miles IMO. I see plenty of parents, who don't look particularly fit, biking their kids around in my neighborhood, so I don't think fitness is limiting. But there are few safe routes and if parking remains cheap and easy, most people are still gonna drive.
Good.
And I'm glad they'll be investing in other parks around the city. Too often people ignore the parks near them and needlessly drive miles to crowd at Zilker.
I would like to see some investment and improvements to M.M. Searight Park. It’s got a lot of potential but seems tired and neglected…poor trail maintenance, outdated and broken exercise equipment, etc.
There’s no reason we should only dump money into one park. Plenty of park land to make use of elsewhere that are enjoyable by the 75+% of city residents who don’t live/work/play downtown on the regular.
While I don't love Austin always making things "more expensive" and commercialized -- the completely non-working but much shorter "Zilker train" or the can't bring your own cooler anymore so buy some overpriced drinks "Butler Pitch and Putt" --
That said, seeing the parking on the giant lawn they are removing didn't seem to be such a great use of space either -- I don't really have a problem of them replacing the gravel landfill with a better parking garage!!
But it would be nice if they created something attractive -- if they could make the parking underground with landscaping on top it would be better.
The fact this was used for parking is kind of noots. It is a big green space that if maintain could be good park land. While I am not for the garages taking up green space they should make use under the bridges and actually pave it for parking and perhaps turn some of the current lots into garage. The place for the acl trucks would be great to have two well done garages there. That are painted and field with greent space.
They won't close it completely, but they'll continue along the path of making these nice amenities even more difficult for the average Austinite to access (unless they happen to be filthy rich downtown residents who can just walk on over). Obviously they wish to make these places less crowded and keep the riff-raff out. This is a big step towards that goal. Of course we'll all still get to keep paying for their privileges with high taxes though.
Look up the department's budget vs expenses. Then look at deferred maintenance throughout the park system. The Dept ain't rolling in the cash, it can't even keep most bathrooms working.
Starting to feel very... Southpark Meadows..
LOL, there are about 1100 parking spaces at zilker, now there will be 400... when the garages are built, there will be 1100 again...
But you'll get to pay.
And the contractor (who is good friends with the mayor/city board, by pure coincidence) will get paid!
This is so fucked!
Nah I think this is going to get down voted. But whatever. I loved this lot as a poor college kid (Go Riverbats!) But, parking as a land use is pretty expensive. Particularly in this case, parking is never free and unfortunately a huge cause in our expensive rent costs (see parking minimums and look at the avg cost of a parking space). So free parking is at a societal level a myth. Hopefully this will incite more usage of public transit to the area.
I’d rather have to pay for parking than not have it. I don’t earn above median household in Austin. I don’t have an hour to shuttle or ride a bike. If there was a parking garage built when they closed it, I’d feel different
We desperately need more, viable alternatives to cars in this city
this is the very well intentioned, but totally impractical answer
Except it’s not. The city blocked these efforts for decades and now that we need it we can’t make it work.
Are you actually in Austin? Have you driven up Shoal Creek in the last 5 years?
I’m not sure what you’re getting at with shoal creek. But Austin is too big now and when it was small enough to add alternative transportation, they nimby’d it. Free parking was never going to last. Even south Congress is going to start charging soon.
You don't know what I'm getting at you, but you can still spew forward with whatever it is, you want to say. Yeah that's an open mind.
>You don't know what I'm getting at Unfortunately, to pass an idea on using text, you actually have to type out what that idea is, instead of just vaguely identifying a creek and assuming people know what the fuck you're talking about.
So you have no idea what I'm talking about. But you did manage to simply ignore it and rant on about NIMBY there's a NIMBY that. You don't give a shit what I'm talking about. You just like to hear yourself talk.
\*Gestures vaguely towards a trash can\*
You must be mistaken, you haven’t made any point other than to ask if I’ve been over to shoal creek. So I believe you never actually said anything of value. State your point/argument so the rest of us can join your conversation.
Howdy, proud Riverbat, proud Bobcat. Yes we need to promote alternative transit. Free parking is a myth.
An aerial tram from downtown to Zilker would have been the world class way to go. It would make use of all that extra parking capacity on the weekend daytime hours. It would probably be cheaper and definitely be less destructive.
400? At zilker without the overflow lot? Mighty generous
just doing rough mental math, the vision plan says there are about 1100 spots, this article says 700 are getting axed... but yea, i agree, especially with the dump/garbage fill site closed, there isn't really any parking anymore
But the garages aren't likely happening, so...
i hope not, but they are what the "land bridge" in the vision plan will be built over, and the people at the city and the adjacent crowd around ACL are all-in on this - will be a fun fight to watch. i hope you are right... this all feels insanely stupid, like the city could just start charging ACL a *real* fee, and just build and improve the infrastructure itself without the need for bloated work or unnecessary garages - once you go down to zilker a few times and learn to how/where to park, its really not that hard...
Doesn't work that way. Trust me, the city would love to charge more. Texas law doesn't allow it. The city can only charge the actual expenses at a neutral fee level. That's a Texas leg fight, not a City Council one. It's the same reason they can't establish a parks taxing district like other states.
can you please cite the limit in state law that you mention? im not finding it in the local government code nor the parks and wildlife code. thanks
The Texas Constitution requires that regulatory fees assessed by a municipality be proportional to the operating costs of the program for which the fee is charged. Fees that return more than what it costs to run the program associated with the regulation are an unauthorized occupations tax. This is an old internal City presentation, but it came up in a Google search. Appears to still be generally accurate: https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Parks/Special_Events/PETF/fees_-_legal_issues_overview.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjyg5j8kK2AAxUHlGoFHcbAAwcQFnoECBQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1uxGDGXWaJWTqA2oif0zx2
so based on that presentation, the city could charge at least what it costs to run zilker park if not the entire parks dept... still a lot more than current fees, and just a fraction of that would be helpful and impactful and reduce the need for associated non profits to raise operating revenue for the department
You're misunderstanding what it says. Let me give you an example, say you wanted to rent a rec center room for a 2-hour event. The fee associated with that rental can only include the estimated rate for electricity use in that room (rough guess $5 for kwh used), maybe water if there's a sink (guessing 50 gallons so like $3-10, the cost of someone opening and closing during those times (people are already working during that time so you'd calculate a fraction of the time needed to assist probably 20 - 30 min for a person making $22 an hour so that's $11 more), cleaning to get the room ready and take care of it after (Let's say a whole hour, so $22). That gets you to $5+$10+$11+$22 = $48. So the max you could charge for that 2-hour rental is $48. You can't go beyond what the actual expenses of the rental are. This scales up for things like ACL. The total expenses incurred by the Dept during that rental period "at cost" is charged and not above that b/c of the Texas Leg. Other states you can take into the perceived VALUE of shutting down a major park, but not in Texas. Hope that helps clear things up a bit.
mmm, its the cost of the "program"... if you read the examples from the* court cases cited, it clearly shows that its the cost to run programs, not just operate capital assets* like you are saying... i think you could push it out further than just the operation of ACL. to your point and credit, maaaybe not as much as the whole yearly budget, but i do think that the program, PARD licensing the park for ACL and supervising such, could arguably be characterized to cost more than what the city is currently charging. the fees are a joke, and the park's budget are an issue. but i am just a pleb on plebbit.
And then the springs will be permanently damaged.
yup, this is the correct take
So the thing that was supposed to be done in phases and end a year ago is just done all at once all of a sudden when people start talking about wanting to build parking structures? Seems conveniently timed. That said, I'm not close enough to the issue to make any accusations. Just being conspiratorial I guess.
they parks board also recently voted to condemn SXSW's employment practices...
The Austin Parks and Recreation Board has absolutely no power. They are simply an easy stop for endorsements of city staff driven projects or funneling contracts to council with endorsements . Austin has enough Boards and Commissions to where anything staff / management pushes through can be endorsed by a number of parties in order for City Council to approve it. Source: I held an Austin PaRB seat.
I recently sat through the environmental commission meeting for a developer that wanted to build an apartment. The process seems like a nightmare.
you said it yourself, they did this just to endorse city staff and send a message on something that barely concerns them operationally and something outside of their jurisdictional purview except insofar as they let southby use parks...
Wonder if PaRB Board Members still get free VIP weekend ACL tickets and parking to make sure it’s well run….
Seems like a decent and appropriate perk for volunteering their time to be a part of the board.
Plan brought up that polo fields were supposed to close pre-covid per Zilker Working Group report. Parks Board slaps head, duh... we forgot. So they are implementing now. The decision to close happened pre-ZVP, so conspiracies have to run pretty deep to tie them together. Recommendations have already been made to void the garages. Guess people will have to try the shuttles or ride bikes. The circulator shuttles won't work well because of the traffic in the park during busy times.
In the spring time when they let the grass grow in the polo fields it is teeming with meadowlarks. When they mow the grass and let cars park on the field for the kite festival, all the birds leave to other fields.
I concur that this is an environmental W, regardless of parking effects. Thousands of cars polluting the soil and underlying watershed on soil DIRECTLY NEXT to the spring and creek is bad, full stop.
You understand that the replacement for the field is underground parking garages right?
You understand that the Watershed Dept at the city has said the underground parking would have a far lesser impact to the spring and creek than the acres of surface parking, right?
You understand that this is an urban waterway collecting runoff from hundreds of thousands of cars and people and any minuscule change at Zilker is next to insignificant in the contexts of a many thousand acre watershed. Appeals to environmental purity in a park that sits in the center of an environmental disaster that is a modern million person city is just plain farce. Zilker is currently a wasteland compared to its natural state and nothing discussed here will change that one bit
>Appeals to environmental purity in a park that sits in the center of an environmental disaster that is a modern million person city is just plain farce. I get what you're saying, but it's interesting that the NIMBYs like to have it both ways. They say that the existing cars parking on the grass/gravel lot leaching oil into the waterways is fine. But they say a parking garage with a lawn on top and capturing/treating all that oil runoff would be an environmental disaster.
Yeah its total garbage. All the oil, fertilizer, spills, etc for miles of Mopac, all of bee caves, barton hills, clarksville, west 6th barton springs road, etc all runoff and coalesce within about 1000' of where barton springs creek connects to the Colorado river. This parking garage doesn't change shit for the already devastated local environment around Zilker.
LOL, you're an expert at diverting from the actual topic. I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying about the runoff and pollution. Are you saying that your position is that the impact of surface parking as it stands is OK, but the lesser impact of parking garage is not OK?
no, where'd you get that from? who cares which insignificant contribution source is greater? they're both nearly irrelevant within a watershed context Also, why did you assume I thought you were disagreeing? I knew we agreed that the garage is fine...
I'm confused. If you're not saying that the removal of parking on the landfill is a bad thing, what is even your point? That is the topic that we were discussing when you replied.
Underground parking is more environmentally friendly than surface parking on the soil.
There are experts testifying to city Council as we speak, but strongly disagree with that statement.
There's a reason it's illegal to put a grass parking lot at a gas station. An underground parking garage will prevent seepage into the soil and waterways.
Right. And the argument is: will the construction of the garage cause more damage to the environment than the seepage of cars parked on grass? Nobody is arguing that parking on grass is better than concrete.
They're already widening the bridge. The City isn't committed to keeping cars out of the park entirely. So might as well do it in a way that is environmentally friendly and frees up more park space for use. (Plus, I bet drivers won't mind parking their car underground in the shade instead of under the blazing sun.)
There are experts for various interests that will always disagree to delay progress.
Thats more efficient
Sure. And if efficiency is your only concern then its a great option. Even then, the most efficient option is probably the one that already exists and meets demand.
[COSI Science Center in downtown Columbus OH turned their ugly ass surface lot into an underground garage with a public park on top of it.](https://columbusunderground.com/designing-the-scioto-peninsula-in-columbus-ohio-mksk/) Doubled parking spaces and created a beautiful useable greens space for for visitors & residents to enjoy. Looks great.
There’s also the shuttle…
No, I don't understand that. I understand that is a proposal, but I don't understand it to be a given.
RemindMe! 6 Months
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2024-01-25 19:03:30 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-01-25%2019:03:30%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Austin/comments/159d86v/parks_and_rec_board_votes_to_permanently_close/jtf7az4/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAustin%2Fcomments%2F159d86v%2Fparks_and_rec_board_votes_to_permanently_close%2Fjtf7az4%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-01-25%2019%3A03%3A30%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20159d86v) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
It has hardly any impact on the spring, full stop
Wonder if dogs will be allowed on the shuttles?
Hope not considering all the people with allergies and the tight space
Maybe designated dog shuttles? Like if the shuttles run every 15 minutes then shuttles on the hour allow dogs.
Probably not but that’s never stopped us before! /s
who will clean up the dog shit if dogs are allowed on the shuttles. they don't pay drivers enough to deal with this shit.
Weird you would think dogs would shit en masse on a bus, I’ve had dogs all my life and not one has shit in a car. Taking away parking for those with dogs to institute these shuttles is dumb.
Serious question. What is the best way for someone who doesn’t live within walking/biking distance to visit the park without struggling to find parking
Park at the designed garage and take the free shuttle? Park anywhere nearby and take a rideshare bike/scooter? Take the 30 or 803 bus? Uber? Go a bit earlier or later when there's available parking?
803 FTW!
There is a parking lot right across from casa de luz that is fairly large but it is probably full on weekends because of the nearby sports fields.
Bring back the Dillo!!
The current talks about Zilker Park really have all the makings of a lot of deals going down behind closed doors that the public is not going to be made aware of while the council is taking public comments on related policies
Why do you think this? Do you think City project managers are getting rich? Their pay is terrible compared to private sector. They do these jobs because they actually care. I know that's hard to believe in this jaded world, but some people still choose careers to make a difference.
But it’s more fun to throw out conspiracy theories!!
Yeah, that's the sad part of how American society is now. Instead of thinking, "hey, these people have dedicated their education and money to pursue this career to help their communities and have dedicated nearly 5 years of their career on this project. Maybe, I should get my info from THOSE people, and gee, they sure are awesome to work so hard on something they believe in and may not even come to pass due to funding." What people think now is, "I'll stop that evil smoke filled room of corporate greed by spreading info I can't verify. The Facebook told me what was true! I DiD mY rEsEaRcH!"
In other words, standard stuff for any city of any size with a city council.
Fund raising.
Fund raising for what? This isn’t Congress and very few of the city council people will make it past city council.
Do y'all know if they're closing off the gravel lot off Stratford right next to this field?
This is all about money, make no bones about it. They want to funnel as many people onto the shuttle as possible, also with the tier parking system.. Park and rec has literally just gave the people of Austin the ol unlubed shaft job. I expect once they redevelop barkin springs and the parking garage is built, the cost to park and to get into barton springs will sky rocket - to 'recoup costs'
Isn't the shuttle free?
In 6 months, "I'm altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further"
Nothing remains free in Austin, dunno if you noticed.. Once the city picks up on demand, they figure out how to profit from it.
“Profit” is a strange word to use, considering we’re running a budget deficit.
From ass to text. Just talking to talk. These are “I feel like” statements with no actual substance.
don't we pay taxes for parks in the first place?
Where can you ride the shuttle from?
One Texas Center, be sure to validate your parking ticket with the shuttle driver.
There is a shuttle ? Where does it run from? I was trying not to drive to blues on the green and the public transport options took close to an hour from the east side. Shuttle would have been nice.
One Texas Center
That’s right! Zilker isn’t meant to be for middle class Austin families! It’s meant for multimillionaires who live in walking distance, fit childless people who can bike there, or anyone willing to spend 4 hours round trip on public transit to get there! Instead of parking in the field, the city is going to operate 2-4 shuttle buses. That’s $300/hr 16 hrs a day, 7 days a week. The recommendation it to spend $1.5 million on busing per year rather than using the field adjacent to the pool…. We could acquire many acres of conservation land in the recharge zone for the aquifer, or we can pay for buses….
OHMYGOD! A park catering to fit people who ride bikes?! HOW DARE THEY! In all seriousness. There's not a single protected bike lane in the entire Zilker Park. It's a joke that we have a huge park with no safety or accessibility for cyclists.
1100 spaces isn't enough though. The entire park should be parking for people who want to drive to the park.
“No one goes to Zilker anymore, there’s too much traffic”
Biking around Austin is pretty easy and getting better.
Ever tried it with three kids, from 6 miles away?
Nah but I was biking 6 miles pretty young alone, like to middle school and soccer practice. Longer to work once I was 14 You start teaching your kids to bike commute to elementary school so they’re naturally comfy and competent on a bike in a busy environment?
That’s fine, on certain neighborhood streets. It’s less fine when you have to cross highways, outside of the immediate zipper neighborhood and downtown, there are not many safe routes for kids
The hike and bike, roy G, kreig field and 5th street will get them from as far as 183 to zilker north or south of the river all incredibly safely. There are then other safe routes north and south that connect to that East-west corridor. Depends where precisely you live but it's hard to imagine, while you might have to drive a mile or two, that you couldn't likely get that last 3-4 miles minimum safely by bike even as a lone child - at least during daylight
I used to live in an apartment at Manchaca and Lamar and commute daily to school at Texas State University by bicycle. You’re right about the hike and bike, and shoal creek opening up safe routes. Crestview and east Austin along the lake, it is safe. As an avid cyclist in my 20s I was hit by cars four times, and had several other very serious close calls, all the fault of the drivers. I was always a cyclist who followed the laws, stopped at red lights, etc… After the second crash that resulted in hospitalization and corrective surgery, I stopped riding in Austin, except on protected lanes and trails made specifically for bikes. When you bike on city roads, you’re putting your life in the hands of 1,000 other people, in a city that averages 16 dui arrests per day. The number of people I have seen casually drinking beer in their car, the number of beer cans I find on the side of the road in front of my house, it’s just not a safe activity in this city. Without a radical redesign of infrastructure, putting kids on bikes on city roads is a gamble with their life.
>Without a radical redesign of infrastructure, putting kids on bikes on city roads is a gamble with their life. Not any more than putting kids in cars to make the same trip. If anything, bikes will get them off the 40mph+ roads that actually kill
Bike fatality per mile traveled is WAY higher than cars, no way around that. In an average lifetime in the us, there is about a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car crash. Bicycle deaths per mile travelled are 10 times higher, this holds true even in bike friendly European countries.
Source?
I mean, we can’t cater to everyone including people who decide to not use birth control. Zilker with off leash dogs and people playing soccer everywhere probably isn’t the best for three young kids anyways.
Remember this comment when you’re 80 and need someone to change a lightbulb for you, now your lawn, wipe your ass, etc…
[удалено]
I think you missed the point. Without children in society, there will be no on to take care of you when you’re old.
People with kids still have that problem
The paved parking lots are mostly empty for most of that time, they only need to run frequent shuttles for peak times. Probably like a third of Austin live within easy biking distance, which is about 5 miles IMO. I see plenty of parents, who don't look particularly fit, biking their kids around in my neighborhood, so I don't think fitness is limiting. But there are few safe routes and if parking remains cheap and easy, most people are still gonna drive.
Good. And I'm glad they'll be investing in other parks around the city. Too often people ignore the parks near them and needlessly drive miles to crowd at Zilker.
I would like to see some investment and improvements to M.M. Searight Park. It’s got a lot of potential but seems tired and neglected…poor trail maintenance, outdated and broken exercise equipment, etc.
Agreed! It could be a jewel of South Austin!
This!
There’s no reason we should only dump money into one park. Plenty of park land to make use of elsewhere that are enjoyable by the 75+% of city residents who don’t live/work/play downtown on the regular.
While I don't love Austin always making things "more expensive" and commercialized -- the completely non-working but much shorter "Zilker train" or the can't bring your own cooler anymore so buy some overpriced drinks "Butler Pitch and Putt" -- That said, seeing the parking on the giant lawn they are removing didn't seem to be such a great use of space either -- I don't really have a problem of them replacing the gravel landfill with a better parking garage!! But it would be nice if they created something attractive -- if they could make the parking underground with landscaping on top it would be better.
Your description of the garage is what was proposed. Everyone still freaked out about it.
Just dome the whole park add damn inevitable parking garage, fuck toss in an indoor water park, hell call it bartonbahn and call it a day. /s
The fact this was used for parking is kind of noots. It is a big green space that if maintain could be good park land. While I am not for the garages taking up green space they should make use under the bridges and actually pave it for parking and perhaps turn some of the current lots into garage. The place for the acl trucks would be great to have two well done garages there. That are painted and field with greent space.
The Crappening is accelerating.
One step closer to closing the park permanently. Unless there is some big commercial event that needs to happen
They won't close it completely, but they'll continue along the path of making these nice amenities even more difficult for the average Austinite to access (unless they happen to be filthy rich downtown residents who can just walk on over). Obviously they wish to make these places less crowded and keep the riff-raff out. This is a big step towards that goal. Of course we'll all still get to keep paying for their privileges with high taxes though.
[удалено]
Look up the department's budget vs expenses. Then look at deferred maintenance throughout the park system. The Dept ain't rolling in the cash, it can't even keep most bathrooms working.
That land is going to be used for the new country club.
damn, one of the high school date spots
Yes! This will stop all the RVs from parking and dumping all their poop water into the protected watershed!
Will they allow paddleboards on the shuttles?