tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post117099099444741925..comments2010-01-08T02:42:18.946-08:00Comments on in city dreams: FWIWChester Burnettehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09832767342487144295noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-89255756066881741492007-02-24T18:56:00.000-08:002007-02-24T18:56:00.000-08:00My nine year old son insists that we respond to th...My nine year old son insists that we respond to this:<BR/><BR/>"YES, if you go directly west from Northcross Mall, as the crow files, you do in fact penetrate single-family residential use on Allandale. My error. I should have made it clear I was referring to the tilted axis of Austin's arterial roadways, i.e., a parallel line to Anderson Lane. And even then, you slice a small portion of single-family residential by doing so."<BR/><BR/>Okay, so you should have said that, when you said, straight, I meant, not straight. And when I said "none" I meant some. And when I said "residences" I meant something else. <BR/><BR/>(This is one clue that someone is engaged in bad faith argumentation: when I say one thing, I mean the other thing that makes my argument work.)<BR/><BR/>But, let's grant your odd geometry. There are still residences. For your argument to work "residence" does not mean "places where people reside" but "um....something else...rilly." And "small portion" means "um....places where people live...but that don't count." <BR/><BR/>Look, Mike, you were wrong. You're also wrong about what's to the south of the mall. Wrong. Deal with it. <BR/><BR/>My son--the one who insisted I post this--had a much longer post suggested, but it came down to "Pbbbththth" and "get a dictionary."Chester Burnettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09832767342487144295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-24036375271379170812007-02-24T01:52:00.000-08:002007-02-24T01:52:00.000-08:00"My friend and colleague DSK interviewed some peop..."My friend and colleague DSK interviewed some people at the transfer center during the protest, by the way, and they all said they'd love to see a Wal-Mart there."<BR/><BR/>Well, duh. They're just passing through the area so they could care less how a Wal-Mart impacts the area. They'd finally have something to do while waiting 30 minutes for their bus...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14381235261760702019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-53250336258811100152007-02-12T05:51:00.000-08:002007-02-12T05:51:00.000-08:00Chester, I believe you missed M1EKs point. I don'...Chester,<BR/> I believe you missed M1EKs point. I don't think he was asserting that there was a transit center within Lincoln's property. He is challenging your preceeding implication that (if I may paraphrase), in order to have adequate, non-disruptive mass transit access to the mall, the transit center must be on Lincoln's property. I challenge that implication as well.<BR/> M1EK's point was that the present location of the transfer center is actually quite adequate, and I agree with him.<BR/> Let's assume good faith here and concentrate on clarifying data and exploring assertions that are in contention. I hope you'll reread M1EK's position with an open mind.DSKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08779893421132273746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-28699499749640708802007-02-11T11:42:00.000-08:002007-02-11T11:42:00.000-08:00Okay, so, indirectly, you're granting that there i...Okay, so, indirectly, you're granting that there is not a transit center in the mall.<BR/>I do know a teeny tiny bit about argumentation, and I do know bad faith argumentation when I see it. And you're engaged in it. <BR/><BR/>There are many ways in which you do this, but I will mention just three. First, you keep shifting the stasis. Second, when proven wrong, you simply drop the point, without acknowledging error. (For instance, you were wrong to say "Nope" to my initial comment, but you've never acknowledged that--nor have you acknowledged the various points that Hugh has made.) Third, and most important, you hold others to different standards from what you hold yourself.<BR/><BR/>So, for instance, in your blog, on the discussion of the issue of neighborhood, you say, "To the west, you have to pass Mopac before you find any residential development."<BR/><BR/>Wow. I don't live in a residence. I wonder what I and my neighbors live in. Looks residential to me. Will you correct your statement? Will you acknowledge your error? I'm not going to hold my breath. <BR/><BR/>I love a good argument, but, to be blunt, an argument with you is not a good one. I don't like bile. And there is no way to argue with someone like you without looking bilious myself--either I have to dispute each of your (often over-stated and slightly inaccurate and non-trivially fallacious) assertions and arguments, or I look like I'm granting them. If I dispute them, I look like a petty, sniping jerk. Antagonistic argument, by leaving the interlocutors few options, makes all parties look equally bad. (That one person is actually behaving much worse than the other gets lost on the viewers.) If I don't, it looks like I grant them. So, I'm not playing. <BR/><BR/>Some day I'll write a post about the very real damage that people like you do to public argument. The short version is: "Don't wrestle with a pig. You get covered in mud, and the pig likes it."Chester Burnettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09832767342487144295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-83640018984262814712007-02-11T07:28:00.000-08:002007-02-11T07:28:00.000-08:00Change "hyperbole" for "wishful thinking," then. Y...Change "hyperbole" for "wishful thinking," then. You still didn't support the "long way" argument. There are two problematic assumptions you're making: first, that people could abandon their cars if they didn't need them to drive to their Wal-mart jobs. Second, that the Wal-Mart plan (not the current design at Northcross) has an adequate off-street area for public transportation.<BR/><BR/>The plan needs to have an increase in public transportation--can you show that it does? (A sincere, not a rhetorical, question--I haven't seen the plan, but have heard from people who have that it does not.)Chester Burnettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09832767342487144295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-6913204726351580972007-02-09T17:17:00.000-08:002007-02-09T17:17:00.000-08:00Mike, I know that you're given to hyperbole, but d...Mike, I know that you're given to hyperbole, but don't you want to rethink: "Most workers could use public transportation (and that would go a long ways to solving some of the "unlivable wage" arguments"?Chester Burnettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09832767342487144295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-42839588653860827622007-02-09T17:14:00.000-08:002007-02-09T17:14:00.000-08:00I should have included this study: Basker, Emek. "...I should have included this study: Basker, Emek. "Job Creation or Destruction? Labor Market Effects of Wal-Mart Expansion." Review of Economics and Statistics, February 2005, v. 87, iss. 1, pp. 174-83<BR/><BR/>The abstract is:<BR/><BR/>"This paper estimates the effect of Wal-Mart expansion on retail employment at the county level. Using an instrumental variables approach to correct for both measurement error in entry dates and endogeneity of the timing of entry, I find that Wal-Mart entry increases retail employment by 100 jobs in the year of entry. Half of this gain disappears over the next five years as other retail establishments exit and contract, leaving a long-run statistically significant net gain of 50 jobs. Wholesale employment declines by approximately 20 jobs due to Wal-Mart's vertical integration. No spillover effect is detected in retail sectors in which Wal-Mart does not compete directly, suggesting Wal-Mart does not create agglomeration economies in retail trade at the county level."Chester Burnettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09832767342487144295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-1171046850362621702007-02-09T10:47:00.000-08:002007-02-09T10:47:00.000-08:00brilligNIMBY stands for Not In My Back Yard.<B>brillig</B><BR/><BR/>NIMBY stands for Not In My Back Yard.Jammerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03455574122882664561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-1171045128210101952007-02-09T10:18:00.000-08:002007-02-09T10:18:00.000-08:00Not going to start a rant, I'm going to leave this...Not going to start a rant, I'm going to leave this one last note and invite those who have time to do their own research. <BR/><BR/>Concerning "Used to create traffic" vs. "Will create traffic"<BR/><BR/>Northcross created traffic when the neighborhood was the northern edge of town. The fact that the property hasn't created this traffic for years doesn't release the new owners from their obligation to improve the infrastructure they are affecting. According to the TIA submitted by Lincoln:<BR/>http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/news/2006/downloads/attach3_tia_memo.pdf<BR/>on page 4 they label the intersection of Burnet Road and Anderson as currently a "D" on a scale from A to F. the only grade it could get worse is "failing". <BR/><BR/>That seems to me to indicate overutilization, not underutilization.<BR/><BR/>This is the arterial intersection Northcross is closest to.<BR/><BR/>What this also indicates to me, is that this Mall, as anything other than a mixed use destination, might be a bad investment. People simply can't get in and out of it very quickly if 20,000 or so people are trying to go there a day. Office space and apartments to dilute the traffic impact of a shopping center makes sense to me. *IF* Northcross is a bad investment in terms of being a destination for huge numbers of people, that is nobody's fault but the investor.<BR/><BR/>As for the suggestion that people will HAVE to drive if it's on a frontage road. I am all for alternative transportation. However, I'm under the impression that people don't go to a super Wal-Mart to buy just a bagel or the evenings dinner. Generally people go to a Wal-Mart to get everything they need for the week along with clothes and anything else they are short of. Also, the Wal-Mart looks like it's a long walk to the bus stop. How can someone walk or take the bus with 10 or even 5 bags of groceries? Need I mention the fact that if only 5 percent of 20,000 visitors a day were to take the bus, and then use a shopping cart to get the the groceries to the bus, that would make 1000 shopping carts a day being left at the bus stop.<BR/>I would argue the huge majority of people have to drive already.<BR/><BR/>I'm all about bringing realistic alternatives to the table regarding transportation to Northcross. What I don't see is a Super Wal-Mart encouraging that.<BR/><BR/>Anyway that's it for me here.Hughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03975835279163473635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-1171038863013604242007-02-09T08:34:00.000-08:002007-02-09T08:34:00.000-08:00Can you hyperlink some of the jargon? What, for ex...Can you hyperlink some of the jargon? What, for example, is NIMBY?Victor Engelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10399267392813767880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38870608.post-1171035287823992752007-02-09T07:34:00.000-08:002007-02-09T07:34:00.000-08:00Thank you Chester. I strongly recommend people do...Thank you Chester. I strongly recommend people do their own research, but for a lot of us there just isn't enough time. It is nice to hear an objective opinion.<BR/><BR/>In response to the "edge of a neighborhood" argument Mike presents, my big question concerning road congestion is....<BR/>If traffic fails on the major arterials, which my research indicates it will, the ONLY place the traffic can go is through residential areas., hence the "in or near a residential neighborhood" argument <BR/><BR/>This is the reason people support putting these stores on highways. It allows the builder to incorporate feeders and high volume entrances into their design plans and on their own property. It makes much more sense to have a magnet store that attracts tens of thousands of patrons a day pulling people off a 65 mph highway directly into their parking lot than have those same thousands driving 35 MPH through clogged city streets, or trying to get their many bags of groceries home on a bus.Hughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03975835279163473635noreply@blogger.com