iacp_draftplan_comments-on-draft_3-8-12
Document Sample
Source- Source ID Page Edit or Correction to September 26th draft
category (9-26)
Public @waepoint, 5419 185
@jacedeloney
Public Abe I. C. 5379
Public AIA event 5001
Public AIA event 5002
Public Alex Davern, 5420 Map
Beau Site
Neighborhood
Association
Public Amalia 5421 132 one suggestion was that on page 132 Ch 4:
Rodriguez Creativity/ACC,the policy should explain how
Mendoza & you plan to achieve it i.e. through workshops
Gloria to teach artists the business aspect of art and
Pennington how to sustain themselves as artists,
sponsored by the Small business department,
or other agencies, etc;
Public Amalia 5422 133 Also on page 133, instead of create a
Rodriguez recommendation, it should be to pass an
Mendoza & "ordinance" (or something that compels them
Gloria to act). Also Gloria suggested that it
Pennington specifically mention to offer and make
available music education to low income
communities either through city-sponsored
recreation programs or coordination with
AISD.
Public Amalia 5423
Rodriguez
Mendoza &
Gloria
Pennington
Public ANC Central 5003 139
Sector
Public ANC Central 5004 Map
Sector
Public ANC Central 5005 Map
Sector
Public ANC Central 5006 Map
Sector
Public Ann Graham 5424 10 re. sustainability: add “business” to “…reduce
individual, household and business water
use…
Public Ann Graham 5425 9 Grow as a compact, connected city.
Austin’s long-term sustainability requires a
fresh focus on redevelopment and infill within
the city’s developed areas. Favoring compact
growth provides a balance to earlier decades
of sprawling, low-density development. More
compact growth contains costs by capitalizing
on the land and infrastructure already in place.
It also enhances human connections,
innovation, and urban vibrancy. Creating a
more compact and efficient city is critical to
our ability to connect people to homes, jobs,
schools, *cultural amenities* and other
destinations with a more complete
transportation system that is affordable to
build, operate, and maintain.
Public Ann Graham 5426 9 Provide paths to prosperity for all.
Austin can harness its strong economy to
expand opportunity and social equity for all
residents. Developing economic sectors
through partnerships between the business
community, city government, and institutions
will help employ a diverse workforce and
expand opportunities for young and old. To
ensure our economic strength, it is critical to
preserve Austin’s mix of large and small
businesses, local entrepreneurs, major
employers, clean industries, education and
government jobs. We can maintain economic
resiliency by staying attuned to global trends
and emerging technologies. Prosperity for all
means reducing the number of individuals and
families living in poverty by providing
workforce training and helping residents attain
living-wage jobs, as well as capitalizing on the
city’s *[delete-“creative class” vibe] creative
and cultural industries* to provide jobs and
career paths for workers of all educational and
skill levels.
Public Ann Graham 5427 10 Develop as an affordable and healthy
community.
As development and change occurs, we must
strive to contain Austin’s cost of living, while
increasing wages and good jobs. An
affordable community can only exist if we
make sure that the people who work in Austin
can afford to live here. Through incentives and
partnerships, the City of Austin can encourage
that more affordable housing be distributed
throughout the city. New mixed-use areas
need to have attainably priced housing,
provide shopping and services, be walkable
and bikable, and be linked by transit to jobs
and other centers, so residents can choose
whether or not to incur the costs of owning a
car. Healthy communities depend on easy,
safe access to walking, biking, and recreation,
healthy and nutritious food, quality healthcare,
schools, *cultural amenities,* police, and other
community services. We can strive to deliver
high public value for city taxes and maintain
low-cost amenities that all Austinites can
enjoy.
Public Ann Graham 5428 50 Austin’s 2011 five-year rolling average is 163
gallons per capita per day. City Council
has set a goal of 140 gallons per capita per
day or less by 2020 through water _______
Public Ann Graham 5429 55 correction Elisabet Ney Museum (not
Elizabeth)
• There are over 35 museums in the Austin
Museum Partnership (a consortium of
museums) which includes arts, sciences,
history, nature preserves, music, and
government museums. The city’s numerous
museums and galleries include the
Elisabet Ney Museum and the Jack S. Blanton
Museum.
Public Ann Graham 5430 62 “…urbanized land; however, this is
increasingly not the case in the counties
surrounding larger urban centers. (add period)
Today, Texas counties have only the ability to
regulate subdivisions, on-site sewage
systems, flood plain development, and water
supply. A few, such as Travis County, have…”
Public Ann Graham 5431 71 add “access to cultural programming” – in
keeping with one of the main principles of the
Plan:
Values and Respects its People:
Austin is its people. Our city is home to
engaged, compassionate, creative, and
independent thinking people, where diversity is
a source of strength and where we have the
opportunity to fully participate and fulfill our
potential.
• Austin government is transparent and
accountable.
• People across all parts of the city and of all
ages and income levels live in safe, stable
neighborhoods with a variety of affordable and
accessible homes, healthy food, economic
opportunity, healthcare, education, access to
cultural programming, and transportation.
Public Ann Graham 5432 79 “Job centers contain mostly of office and
industrial uses.”
– either “…contain mostly office…” or “consist
mostly of…”
Public Ann Graham 5433 79 add letter “s”
Highways and Other Streets
Highways and other streets consist of existing
roads, planned extensions, capacity
improvements such as creating additional
travel lanes**, and complete streets
improvements that include wider sidewalks
and bike lanes.
Public Ann Graham 5434 89 LUT 5. Create healthy and family-friendly
communities through development that
includes a mix of land uses and housing types
and affords realistic opportunities for transit,
bicycle, and pedestrian travel and provides
both community gathering spaces and safe
outdoor play areas for children. (See also H1;
H 5; PB 4; HHS 3; CFE 11, CFE 2; *ACC 14*)
Public Ann Graham 5435 89 LUT 10. Promote complete street design that
includes features such as traffic calming
elements, street trees, wide sidewalks, *public
art,* and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit
access throughout Austin, considering the
safety needs of people of all ages and
abilities. *(See also ACC 17)*
Public Ann Graham 5436 91 UD 1. Develop accessible community
gathering places that include such spaces *as*
plazas, parks, farmers’ markets, sidewalks,
and streets, in all parts of Austin, especially in
the Downtown, future TODs, in denser, mixed-
use communities, and other redevelopment
areas, that encourage interaction and provide
places for people to visit and relax. (See also
RO 1)
Public Ann Graham 5437 91 UD 3. Define the community’s goals for new
public and private developments using
principles and design guidelines that capture
the distinctive, *creative,* diverse local
character of Austin. *(See also ACC 17)*
Public Ann Graham 5438 92 HP 2. Preserve and interpret historic
resources (those objects, buildings, structures,
sites, places, or districts with historic, cultural,
or aesthetic significance) in Austin for
residents and visitors. *(see ACC 12, ACC
13)*
Public Ann Graham 5439 92 HP 6. Retain the character of National
Register and local Historic Districts and
ensure that development and redevelopment
is compatible with historic resources and
character. *(See also ACC 18)*
Public Ann Graham 5440 98 H 3. Increase the availability of affordable
housing, including housing for very low income
persons, *and live/work spaces for artists*
through new and innovative funding
mechanisms, such as public/ private
partnerships. (See also HHS 5; CFE 3; ACC
10)
Public Ann Graham 5441 98 H 4. Connect housing to jobs, child care,
schools, retail, and other amenities and
services needed on a daily basis, by strategies
such as:
• directing housing and employment growth to
sites appropriate for Transit Oriented
Development and
• coordinating and planning for housing near
public transportation networks and
employment centers to reduce household
transportation costs and vehicle miles
traveled. (See also LUT 3; LUT 6; *ACC 9,
ACC 10*)
Public Ann Graham 5442 99 N 1. Create complete neighborhoods across
Austin that have a mix of housing types and
land uses, affordable housing and
transportation options, and access to schools,
retail, employment, community services,
*cultural programming,* and parks and
recreation options. (See also UD 4; RO 3;
*ACC 9*)
Public Ann Graham 5443 99 N 4. Strengthen Austin’s neighborhoods by
connecting to other neighborhoods, quality
schools, parks, and other community-serving
uses that are accessible by transit, walking,
and bicycling. (See also LUT 14; *ACC 14*)
Public Ann Graham 5444 105 ECO 1. Promote and measure business
entrepreneurship, innovation and a culture
of creativity. *(See also ACC 1)*
Public Ann Graham 5445 105 ECO 2. Implement policies that create,
nurture, and retain small businesses. *(See
also ACC 1, ACC 2)*
Public Ann Graham 5446 105 Not sure what ECO 6 means.
Public Ann Graham 5447 106 ECO 13. Promote “start-up districts” where
new businesses benefit from locating near
transportation infrastructure, services,
suppliers, mentors, and affordable support
facilities. *(See also ACC 9)*
Public Ann Graham 5448 106 Not sure what ECO 14 means; add "See also
ACC 8"
Public Ann Graham 5449 109 add “ing”
“Monitoring and increasing Austin’s tree
canopy as urbanization occurs.”
Public Ann Graham 5450 119 PB 1. Improve access to neighborhood
Libraries, *community centers and cultural
facilities* to promote the establishment of
Complete Communities throughout Austin.
(See also ACC 11; ACC 14)
Public Ann Graham 5451 119 PB 3. Improve multi-modal public
transportation access to the City’s public
buildings, *cultural amenities,* and facilities,
including the Austin Bergstrom International
Airport.
Public Ann Graham 5452 119 PB 4. Integrate public buildings and facilities
into active, walkable, mixed-use
neighborhoods and complete, healthy
communities. (See also LUT 5; H1; HHS 3;
CFE 11;* ACC 14*)
Public Ann Graham 5453 120 RO 2. Ensure and increase equitable access
to and opportunities for cultural arts, recreation
and leisure activities for all ages throughout
the City. *(See ACC 14)*
Public Ann Graham 5454 120 RO 5. Feature superior design in parks and
recreational facilities and include opportunities
for public art and green and sustainable
design solutions. (See also UD 7*; ACC 16,
ACC 17*)
Public Ann Graham 5455 126 HHS 8. Improve educational opportunities for
marginalized populations and provide better
services for at-risk segments of our
community. *(See ACC 14, ACC 19)*
Public Ann Graham 5456 128 CFE 14. Partner with local school districts, non-
profits, and civic groups to expand after school
and summer programs for children of all ages
and abilities, *including cultural, creative and
arts based education. (See also ACC 11)*
Public Ann Graham 5457 128 CFE 18. Collaborate with school districts and
with public and private entities to create joint-
use partnerships at existing and new public
school campuses. *(See also ACC 1)*
Public Ann Graham 5458 128 CFE 16. Ensure that Austin children in every
part of town have access to excellent public
schools, , *including cultural, creative and arts
based education. (See also ACC 11)*
Public Ann Graham 5459 130 delete entire sentence:
“According to his ranking of creative and
innovative cities, economist Richard Florida
ranks Austin second behind San Francisco.”
Public Ann Graham 5460 132 ACC 1. Continue to grow artists,
microenterprises, and small cultural
organizations as businesses, and support
iconic cultural institutions to sustain and grow
Austin’s economic and cultural vitality. *(See
also ECO 1; ECO 2; ECO 5; CFE 18) *
Public Ann Graham 5461 132 ACC 2. Increase and enhance coordination
and resource sharing, and expand
partnerships among artist and creative
individuals, organizations, institutions, and
businesses. *(See also ECO 2)*
Public Ann Graham 5462 132 ACC 8. Expand access to affordable and
functional studio, exhibition, performance, and
office space for arts and culture organizations,
artists, and creative industry businesses.
*(See also ECO 14)*
Public Ann Graham 5463 132 ACC 9. E ncourage and support artists,
promote the creation *affordable* of live/work
spaces, and creative industry hubs, districts,
and clusters as retail, community, or
neighborhood anchors and activity generators
to attract and support other economic and
community enterprises. (See also LUT 3*; H 3;
H 4; N 1; ECO 13)*
Public Ann Graham 5464 133 ACC 10. Improve access to affordable living to
include housing, healthcare, and effective
transportation in order to develop and retain
Austin’s creative organizations, industries, and
individuals. (See also H3; *H 4;* HHS 5; CFE
3)
Public Ann Graham 5465 133 ACC 11. Encourage cultural, creative and arts-
based education in schools and
neighborhoods throughout Austin to sustain
Austin’s “culture of creativity” as a
fundamental facet of Austin’s spirit and
mindset. *(See also CFE 14; CFE 16; PG 1)*
Public Ann Graham 5466 133 ACC 14. Encourage grassroots, neighborhood-
based cultural development and activity and
recognize and enhance the role the arts play
at the center of community life. *(See also LUT
5; HH 8; PB 1; PB 4; RO 2)*
Public Ann Graham 5467 133 ACC 16. Increase the availability of significant
public art to designate districts and/or their
entrances and to assist visitors in navigating
the area. *(See also UD 7; RO 5)*
Public Ann Graham 5468 133 ACC 17. Define Austin’s sense of place
through high standards for architecture and
urban design, public art, public spaces and
public parks, and arts education. *(See also
LUT 10; RO 5)*
Public Ann Graham 5469 133 ACC 18. E xplore existing city policies,
processes and regulations regarding the arts
to determine what changes can be made to
coordinate these with other goals such as
historic preservation, affordable housing, and
high-density development. *(See also ACC
18)*
Public Ann Graham 5470 133 ACC 19. Collaborate with area school districts,
local businesses, and cultural organizations in
developing programs that encourage lifelong
active engagement and participation in the
cultural arts. *(See also HH 8)*
Public Ann Graham 5471 137 add “ing”
“To realize our aspirations, we must turn our
focus from thinking about the future to making
it happen.”
Public Ann Graham 5472 131
Public Ann Graham 5473 182 The proposal ____ compact and walkable
places, use of public transit, infill development,
or reuse of previously developed sites.
Public Ann Graham 5474 180
Public Ann Graham 5475
Public Ann Graham 5476 150
Public Ann Graham 5477 72
Public Armando 5478 5
Rayo
Public Armando 5479 23
Rayo
Public Armando 5480 26
Rayo
Public Armando 5481
Rayo
Public Austin Urban 5007 139 For changing Austin's development
Coalition regulations, add LUT 5; UD 1,4,5, & 8; HN
2 & 5; andHHS 3.
Public Austin Urban 5008 140 For investments in transportation, add LUT
Coalition 3,5, 7, 10, 15, 16, 17, & 18; UD 1,4,
5, & 8; HN 1; PB 3 & 4; HHS 3, and CFE 1 &
15.
Public Austin Urban 5009 143 For developing and maintaining affordable
Coalition housing, add LUT 5 & 7; UD 4,5, & 8;
PB 4; HHS 3, and CFE 1 & 15.
Public Austin Urban 5010 145 For a healthy Austin, add LUT 5, 7, 13, & 15;
Coalition UD 4, 5, & 8; HN 1; PB 4; HHS 3,
and CFE 1 & 15.
Public Austin Urban 5011 184 While the plan includes a representative set of
Coalition indicators for complete communities, we
encourage staff to review the CAMPO plan
and other plans for additional relevant
indicators.
Public Betsy 5012 Map
Greenberg
Public Brent 5013 139
Danninger
Public Brent 5014 Map
Danninger
Public CANPAC 5015 139
Public CANPAC 5016 Map
Public CANPAC 5017 Map
Public CANPAC 5018 Glossar
y
Public Carol 5019 Map
Journeay
Public Cindy 5020 Map [Remove Mixed Use Corridor designation from
Wilkinson 38th Street.]
Public CNU 5482 146 As the exact language of the plan will be
referenced for many years to come, we
believe it is important to strengthen the
language within the plan to ensure it fully
expresses this core principle [compact and
connected city]. We advocate that language
describing priority actions under “Development
Regulations and Processes” be revised as
follows (revisions in italics):
Public CNU 5483 146 Similarly, priority actions under Transportation
and Other Infrastructure Priorities)
should be revised as follows:
Public CNU 5484 151 As the exact language of the plan will be
referenced for many years to come, we
believe it is important to strengthen the
language within the plan to ensure it fully
expresses this core principle [compact and
connected city]. We advocate that language
describing priority actions under “Development
Regulations and Processes” be revised as
follows (revisions in italics):
Public CNU 5485 155 As the exact language of the plan will be
referenced for many years to come, we
believe it is important to strengthen the
language within the plan to ensure it fully
expresses this core principle [compact and
connected city]. We advocate that language
describing priority actions under “Development
Regulations and Processes” be revised as
follows (revisions in italics):
Public CNU 5486 155 Similarly, priority actions under Transportation
and Other Infrastructure Priorities)
should be revised as follows:
Public CNU 5487 73 Similarly, priority actions under Transportation
and Other Infrastructure Priorities)
should be revised as follows:
Public CNU 5488 We now advocate for City staff and
consultants to take one more fine-grained
pass at embedding the “compact, connected
city” principle into the language of the plan in
every section.
Public David 5021 117
Venhuizen
Public David 5022
Venhuizen
Public Donna 5023
Morrow
Public Early 5024 125 Ensure that Imagine Austin addresses early
Childhood education, child care, child care facilities in
Council TODs,
Public Early 5026
Childhood
Council
Public Ellen Richards 5027
Public Frank Harren 5028 139 Promote diverse infill housing that encourages
the establishment and maintenance of a
compact, connected city, while enhancing the
urban character of existing neighborhoods
(LUT Action-2)
Public Frank Harren 5029 139 Promote affordable housing throughout Austin
by allowing increased density and diverse
housing types, especially housing types which
encourage the development of Austin as a
compact, connected city (HN Action-3)
Public Frank Harren 5030 139 Change development regulations and
processes to foster a business-friendly and
infill friendly environment, so as to reduce both
the time and cost required for gaining city
approval of those types of projects which
promote a compact, connected city. Such
projects should be given increased density
entitlements so that such projects may be
approved administratively. (ECON Action-
3)
Public Frank Harren 5031 139 New LUT action: Establish and maintain a
consistent policy to make “compact, connected
city” an overriding principle in establishing and
interpreting development regulations and
processes, and in making approval decisions
on individual real estate projects at all levels of
city government, including staff, planning
commission, other boards and commissions,
and at city council. (LUT Action – New)
Public Frank Harren 5032 140 LUT Action 1: Prioritize City of Austin
investments to support mixed use, transit, and
the creation of a compact, connected city and
compact and walkable places within the city
(LUT Action-1)
Public Frank Harren 5033 140 Support the construction of a an urban rail
system within the city, with associated
construction of compact development needed
to support healthy ridership levels, and support
the construction of a statewide high speed rail
network (ECON Action-5)
Public Frank Harren 5034 140 Align policies, incentives, regulations, service
area extensions, and infrastructure to promote
the creation and maintenance of a compact,
connected city (CFS Action-36)
Public Frank Harren 5035 140 NEW LUT action: "Establish and maintain a
consistent policy to make “compact, connected
city” an overriding principle in making
transportation and other infrastructure
decisions, at all levels of city government,
including staff, planning commission, other
boards and commissions, and at city council.
(LUT Action – New)"
Public Frank Harren 5036 Map
Public Gabriel Padilla 5037
Public Gabriel Padilla 5038
Public HBA 5039 146 LUT1
Public HBA 5040 146 LUT2
Public HBA 5041 146 LUT3
Public HBA 5042 146 LUT4
Public HBA 5043 146 LUT5
Public HBA 5044 146 LUT6
Public HBA 5045 147 LUT7
Public HBA 5046 147 LUT8
Public HBA 5047 147 LUT9
Public HBA 5048 147 LUT10
Public HBA 5049 147 LUT11
Public HBA 5050 147 LUT12
Public HBA 5051 147 LUT13
Public HBA 5052 148 LUT14
Public HBA 5053 148 LUT15
Public HBA 5054 148 LUT16
Public HBA 5055 148 LUT17
Public HBA 5056 148 LUT18
Public HBA 5057 149 LUT19
Public HBA 5058 149 LUT20
Public HBA 5059 149 LUT21
Public HBA 5060 149 LUT23
Public HBA 5061 149 LUT26
Public HBA 5062 150 LUT30
Public HBA 5063 150 LUT32
Public HBA 5064 150 LUT33
Public HBA 5065 150 LUT34
Public HBA 5066 150 LUT35
Public HBA 5067 151 LUT36
Public HBA 5068 151 LUT37
Public HBA 5069 151 LUT38
Public HBA 5070 151 LUT39
Public HBA 5071 151 LUT40
Public HBA 5072 151 HN1
Public HBA 5073 151 HN2
Public HBA 5074 151 HN3
Public HBA 5075 152 HN4
Public HBA 5076 152 HN5
Public HBA 5077 152 HN6
Public HBA 5078 152 HN7
Public HBA 5079 152 HN8
Public HBA 5080 152 HN9
Public HBA 5081 152 HN10
Public HBA 5082 152 HN11
Public HBA 5083 152 HN12
Public HBA 5084 152 HN13
Public HBA 5085 152 HN14
Public HBA 5086 153 HN15
Public HBA 5087 153 HN16
Public HBA 5088 153 HN17
Public HBA 5089 153 HN18
Public HBA 5090 153 HN19
Public HBA 5091 153 HN21
Public HBA 5092 153 HN22
Public HBA 5093 154 HN23
Public HBA 5094 154 HN24
Public HBA 5095 154 HN25
Public HBA 5096 154 HN26
Public HBA 5097 154 HN27
Public HBA 5098 155 HN28
Public HBA 5099 155 ECON1
Public HBA 5100 155 ECON3
Public HBA 5101 155 ECON4
Public HBA 5102 155 ECON6
Public HBA 5103 155 ECON7
Public HBA 5104 155 ECON8
Public HBA 5105 156 ECON12
Public HBA 5106 156 ECON15
Public HBA 5107 157 ECON16
Public HBA 5108 157 ECON17
Public HBA 5109 158 ECON18
Public HBA 5110 159 ECON19
Public HBA 5111 159 ECON20
Public HBA 5112 160 CE1
Public HBA 5113 160 CE3
Public HBA 5114 160 CE4
Public HBA 5115 160 CE5
Public HBA 5116 160 CE6
Public HBA 5117 160 CE7
Public HBA 5118 160 CE8
Public HBA 5119 160 CE9
Public HBA 5120 161 CE11
Public HBA 5121 161 CE12
Public HBA 5122 161 CE13
Public HBA 5123 161 CE14
Public HBA 5124 161 CE15
Public HBA 5125 161 CE17
Public HBA 5126 162 CE21
Public HBA 5127 162 CE22
Public HBA 5128 162 CE23
Public HBA 5129 162 CE24
Public HBA 5130 162 CE25
Public HBA 5131 162 CE26
Public HBA 5132 163 CFS1
Public HBA 5133 163 CFS2
Public HBA 5134 163 CFS4
Public HBA 5135 163 CFS6
Public HBA 5136 164 CFS8
Public HBA 5137 164 CFS9
Public HBA 5138 164 CFS10
Public HBA 5139 164 CFS11
Public HBA 5140 164 CFS12
Public HBA 5141 164 CFS13
Public HBA 5142 165 CFS20
Public HBA 5143 165 CFS21
Public HBA 5144 165 CFS22
Public HBA 5145 166 CFS24
Public HBA 5146 167 CFS32
Public HBA 5147 167 CFS34
Public HBA 5148 167 CFS35
Public HBA 5149 168 CFS36
Public HBA 5150 168 CFS37
Public HBA 5151 168 CFS38
Public HBA 5152 168 CFS39
Public HBA 5153 168 CFS41
Public HBA 5154 169 CFS44
Public HBA 5155 169 CFS45
Public HBA 5156 172 Soc22
Public HBA 5157 174 Soc36
Public HBA 5158 176 CRE3
Public HBA 5159 176 CRE10
Public HBA 5160 176 CRE11
Public HBA 5161 177 CRE13
Public HBA 5162 177 CRE14
Public HBA 5163 178 CRE21
Public HBA 5164 178 CRE22
Public Heather 5380 Map
Hunziker
Public Heather Way, 5489 9
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5490 9
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5491 49
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5492 55
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5493 66
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5494 72
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5495 88
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5496 91
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5497 91
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5498 91
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5499 120
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5500 132
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5501 138
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5502 146
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5503 148
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5504 164
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5505 164
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5506 164
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5507 166
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5508 182
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5509 185
FACTF
Public Heather Way, 5510 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5511 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5512 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5513 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5514 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5515 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5516 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5517 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5518 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5519 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5520 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5521 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5522 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5523 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5524 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5525 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Heather Way, 5526 In addition to the above recommendations, we
FACTF ask the draft Plan’s implementation strategies
and priority actions incorporate the policy
recommendations we set forth in the Task
Force report, with priority given to the
following:
Public Hyde Park 5527 Map
Neighborhood
Association
Public Hyde Park 5528 78
Neighborhood
Association
Public Immigrant 5165 22
Services
Network of
Austin
Public Immigrant 5166 31
Services
Network of
Austin
Public Immigrant 5167 172
Services
Network of
Austin
Public Immigrant 5381 28
Services
Network of
Austin
Public Immigrant 5382 30
Services
Network of
Austin
Public Immigrant 5383 172
Services
Network of
Austin
Public Interact with 5168 32
IA
Public Interact with 5169 50 "Potable water and drainage"-
IA
Public Interact with 5170 50 "Potable water and drainage"-
IA
Public Interact with 5171 82
IA
Public Interact with 5172 83
IA
Public Interact with 5173 83
IA
Public Interact with 5174 84
IA
Public Interact with 5175 108
IA
Public Interact with 5176 121
IA
Public Interact with 5177 131
IA
Public Interact with 5178 132
IA
Public Interact with 5179 175
IA
Public Interact with 5180 184
IA
Public Interact with 5181 184
IA
Public Interact with 5182 185
IA
Public Interact with 5183 186
IA
Public Interact with 5184
IA
Public Interact with 5185 105
IA
Public Interact with 5186
IA
Public Interact with 5187
IA
Public Interact with 5188
IA
Public Interact with 5189
IA
Public Interact with 5190
IA
Public Interact with 5191
IA
Public Interact with 5192
IA
Public Interact with 5193
IA
Public Interact with 5194
IA
Public Interact with 5195
IA
Public Interact with 5196
IA
Public Interact with 5197
IA
Public Interact with 5198
IA
Public Interact with 5199
IA
Public Interact with 5200 Map
IA
Public Interact with 5201
IA
Public Interact with 5202
IA
Public Jay Tassin 5203 139
Public Jay Tassin 5204 Map
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5529
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5530
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5531 143
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5532
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5533
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5534
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5535
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5536 144
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5537
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5538 Glossar
meeting y
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5539
meeting
Public Jeff Jack-TF 5540
meeting
Public Joe Bailey, Jr. 5205 139
Public Joe Bailey, Jr. 5206 Map
Public Kathleen 5384 Map
Strong
Public Letter from 5207 Map Remove designation of Lake Austin Blvd as a
Central West Mixed Use Corridor
Austin
Combined
Neighborhood
Plan Contact
Team
Public Letter from 5208 Map Remove designation of 35th Street west of
Central West Randalls as a Mixed Use Corridor.
Austin
Combined
Neighborhood
Plan Contact
Team
Public Letter from 5209 Map Remove designation of Lake Austin Blvd as a
West Austin Mixed Use Corridor
Neighborhood
Group
Public Letter from 5210 Map Remove designation of 35th Street west of
West Austin Randalls as a Mixed Use Corridor.
Neighborhood
Group
Public Library 5385
Commission
Public Library 5386 167
Commission
Public Lisa Harris 5211 Map
Public Lisa Harris 5541
Public Lorraine 5212
Atherton
Public Lorraine 5213
Atherton
Public Lorraine 5214
Atherton
Public Marcelo 5542
Tafoya
Public Mark Seeger 5215 Map
Public Megan 5216 139
Meisenbach
Public Megan 5217 Map
Meisenbach
Public Michael Curry 5218 Map
Public Michael Curry 5387 Map
Public Nancy Neavel 5543
Public North 5219 Map NUNA is opposed to the designation of 38th
University Street between I-35 and Guadalupe Street as
Neighborhood a "mixed use corridor," "transportation
Association corridor," or any similar designation.”
Public North 5220 NUNA is opposed to the use of roadway
University terminology in the comprehensive plan that is
Neighborhood the same as, or similar enough to be confused
Association with, land use terminology used in the zoning
regulations.
Public Presentation- 5221 Neighborhood plans should be identified as
Northeast the foundation of the comprehensive plan.
neighborhood
s
Public Presentation- 5222 Map On the Growth Concept Map, remove centers
Save Barton from the Barton Springs segment of the
Creek Edwards Aquifer.
Association
Public Presentation- 5223 Map Remove SH-45 SW from the Growth Concept
Save Barton Map.
Creek
Association
Public Presentation- 5224 Map Identify additional open space for water quality
Save Barton protection of the Edwards Aquifer.
Creek
Association
Public Public - Abe 5225
Public Public - Chris 5226 7 Need to better define SUSTAINABLE - it is a
Crawford word that is used too frequently and has
different meanings to different people.
Public Public - Chris 5227 14 Partner Up - the last thing we need is another
Crawford entity!!!!
Public Public - Chris 5228 37 Fig 2.3 page 37 - the existing land use map is
Crawford not correct at the southeast corner of HWY
290 and SH 130. Why purple?
Public Public - Chris 5229 84 Why did the town center shift north to Rio da
Crawford Vida? It seems more logical location would be
at the intersection of SH 130 and Hwy 71. The
land is NOT in the Floodplain.
Public Public - Chris 5230 All of the development is focused on the
Crawford central city and urban core - development will
go to the suburbs due to the school districts,
available land and lower cost of land
Public Public - Chris 5231 We have not gained public parkland - a lot of
Crawford the land shown on the plan is land that cannot
be accessed by the general public.
Public Public - Chris 5232 184 How will the plan be measured?
Crawford
Public Public - Chris 5233 It sounds expensive to the city - incentives,
Crawford etc.
Public Public - Steve 5234 4 Strengthen child-friendly language: Chapter 1
Zettner "6 key challenges' addresses racial and
income imbalances, should address age
distribution imbalances in urban core as well.
Public Public - Steve 5235 27 or p53? 3. Strengthen child-friendly language:
Zettner Chapter 2 "Who we are today" implies that
Austin has lots of children, but fails to explain
their distribution in a "donut" pattern on the
city's periphery. This is covered in the section
on Society, but that's buried and disconnected
from the big picture themes. Would love to see
the "donut" map that Ryan Robinson did from
2010 census data of child-age distribution
added to demographics section.
Public Public - Steve 5236 79 On p 79, change language describing mixed
Zettner use corridors. CURRENT: "In existing
neighborhoods, mixed-use corridors include
areas for redevelopment, which may eithr be
continuous or link together a series of smaller
redevelopment opportunties" PROPOSED:
"In existing neighborhoods, mixed use
corridors include areas for redevelopment,
which may either be continuous or link
together a series of transit-oriented nodes,
with transition zones in between".
Public Public - Steve 5237 138 3. Strengthen child-friendly language:
Zettner c. Chapter 4 - There's a great set of Children,
Families and Education building blocks, but I
don't see how these connect to the eight big
initiatives put forward in Chapter 5, nor to the
metrics. For instance, the CFE section talks
about the need for family-friendly housing, but
the broader initiatives about affordable
housing don't seem to mention that.
Public Public - 5238
Teresa Garrett
Public Raul Garza 5544
Public Raul Garza 5545
Public Raul Garza 5546
Public Raul Garza 5547
Public RECA 5239 138
Public RECA 5240 138
Public RECA 5241 138
Public RECA 5242 139
Public RECA 5243 139
Public RECA 5244 139
Public RECA 5245 139
Public RECA 5246 140
Public RECA 5247 140
Public RECA 5248 140
Public RECA 5249 143
Public RECA 5250 143
Public RECA 5251 143
Public RECA 5252 143
Public RECA 5253 144
Public RECA 5254 144
Public RECA 5255 145
Public RECA 5256
Public RECA 5257
Public RECA 5258
Public Release Party 5259 34 Page 34 Utility space -121% is that correct?
2003 is 100% or 2010 is 100% percent?
Public Release Party 5260 Map Growth Concept Map concern- 38th st. yellow
= mixed up corridor (which can indicate a
major transit corridor in the future- happened
to 51st st.)
38the st between Guadalupe to Red River (&
IH35) is a 2 lane street. This stretch is listed
with houses- runs thru neighborhoods with SF-
3 zoning and low commercial as LO or NO.
Inappropriate designation.
Public Release Party 5261 Map Streetcars Please
Public Release Party 5262 Map Inappropriate designation of mixed use
corridor from I-35 to Guadalupe on "Growth
Concept Map" should be removed.
Public Release Party 5263 Map Don't plan for large population growth and
more roads over the aquifer recharge zone.
Public Release Party 5264 Map Growth Concept Map concern at 38th st
between Guadalupe & I35- not a mixed use
corridor (zoning supports that on FLUMs- SF3
to (no, LO<--Very few). This is a 2 lane street-
a "neighborhood street"- no bus route on 38th
st which is an indication for VMU and MU
corridors- according to Brewster years back.
45th st is a better fit for transportation corridor--
4 lanes
Public Release Party 5265 Map Remove MUC from 38th st. Shift it to 45th
Public Release Party 5266 Map Less industry around airport.
Public Release Party 5267 Map E. 11th and 12th streets need to be
designated on growth map as mixed use.
Public Release Party 5268 Environmental Consciousness. The need for
zero waste is long overdue. Recycling and
composting should be everywhere. Recycling
should be mandated in all areas of the city!
Public Release Party 5269 Confusing process for survey- 8 priorities on
computer do not match order or color on
handout sheet. This can lead to confusion and
seems misleading.
Public Release Party 5270 Comprehensive Plan Oversight-
Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is
too important to be delegated to city staff.
There needs to be a citizens oversight
commission on board to direct the
implementation and to assume it is consistent
with the public's inputs to the Comprehensive
Plan.
Public Release Party 5271 Several of the "Ideas" in the "Idea farm"
should not be addressed by the city as city
services. They are social engineering "ideas".
This "plan" is a takeout to re-define the land
development code and should not go forward.
Public Release Party 5272 What I like: Austin's conscious consumerism;
music venues/free music; lots of social
activities; local food/drinks and businesses;
improvements in public transit.
What could be better: More efficient public
transportation- like London! More promotion
and education about local, social,
environmentally conscious consumers-- big
chains out!
Public Release Party 5273 Something like this should not be called a
plan. It’s just a vision of staff.
Public Release Party 5274 The real public input is needed when the
vision/plan is written as ordinances. The
interpretation of the vision/plan is where the
specific get realized and conflict happens or is
resolved.
Public Release Party 5275 This is not a comp plan. It's a glorified "vision".
The stakeholders were never given enough
information to formulate a real plan. This is
just a land use "plan" not a comprehensive
plan, and an excuse to redo the LDC.
Public Release Party 5276 Lone Star Rail
-property tax education and caps to keep
people in the homes
Public Release Party 5277 Independent Education Systems
Public Release Party 5278 Priority not listed: Keep property taxes at a
reasonable level- Not funding boondoggles
and bad ideas.
Public Release Party 5279 Economy growth priority- Develop a talented,
home growth workforce with trade schools:
electrical, plumbing and carpentry. Using
Junior Achievement program volunteers.
Public Release Party 5280 Water resources- I agree with the objective in
the initiative in the survey but the recent city
council vote to approve a water treatment
plant is in strong contradiction to the described
initiatives in the Imagine plan.
Public Release Party 5281 Healthy Austin- Why do we only have one
community clinic? Need more community
clinics. Definitely need city initiative to reduce
teenage pregnancy- if we were successful.
The state could model COA program.
Public Release Party 5282 Promote sustainable local food production and
preserve farm land.
Public Release Party 5283 Dense, Compact City- Austin needs to
dramatically change its land use rules to allow
for much higher density throughout most of the
central city.
Public Release Party 5284 Dense, Tall, Compacted Downtown- Austin
has a very limited area in which downtown can
develop. We should eliminate height
restrictions and FAR limits throughout
downtown.
Public Release Party 5285 Rail Transit- We should construct a subway
system, beginning in downtown, together with
unlimited density in the entire downtown area,
so that we can accommodate enough
residents who can live and travel within the
central city.
Public Release Party 5286 Idea Farm: Neighborhood-Level governance.
Empower diverse stakeholders to implement,
monitor and update comp plan in their
neighborhoods.
Public Release Party 5287 Update Land Codes and other to
accountability for compliance with comp plan
is necessary to everything
Public Release Party 5288 Turn Austin Healthy and Organic and self
sufficient.
-Educate people about genetically modifies
food.
-Get it out of the schools and hospitals.
-eat more local
Public Release Party 5289 Lone Star Rail sounds great!! Get to Dallas
and/or San Antonio without driving on I35. 2nd
this! 3rd this!
Public Release Party 5290 The COA should prepare for becoming a non-
attainment city for ground-level ozone by hiring
managers who have vast experience with air
quality issues and better training exiting
managers/staff to effectively address this
important health issue.
Public Release Party 5291 Rezone downtown future development to
require ground floor commercial to better
promote and encourage a viable and walk able
downtown.
Public Release Party 5292 Explore the idea of a larger area around town
that uses one way streets. Many roads, north
of the capital but still in town are single lane
and get choked down at the lights. This would
also allow for the lights to be timed better and
cycle faster.
Public Release Party 5293 In Austin there are 2 whole-foods markets, 3
or 4 sprouts, 2 natural grocers, 2 central
markets and 1 wheatsville--All west of I-35,
Why can't we have a decent grocer on the
east side that offers healthy food choice for
the low SES people here? We have a food
desert on the east side. Don't tell me about the
market! The city subsidized The Domain with
millions$
Public Release Party 5294 Love idea of Lone Star rail. Also don't forget
us living in the Northeast part of Austin. We
need better sidewalk and bike lanes all along
Cameron/Dessau rd.
Public Release Party 5295 Guaranteed Business development and
startup for African Americans to ensure the
spirit of innovation is broad.
Public Release Party 5296 Equitable distribution of affordable housing.
Target areas having no or little affordable
housing for more.
Consider existing concentrations and do not
interesting. Consider community impacts of
concentration.
Public Release Party 5297 Infrastructure- Invest in upgrades (especially
sustainable, green upgrades) to existing
infrastructure to promote infill development
within Central Austin.
Public Release Party 5298 Campaign to keep UT students in Austin;
encouragement and incentives to open local
businesses for there students in lieu of other
business opportunities that competing cities
like houston/dallas can offer.
Public Release Party 5299 Get Cap Metro or whoever is responsible to fix
the deadly crossing gates at Airport & 51st,
Guadalupe, and perhaps other crossing. I
have footage of what those gates are doing.
What had to happen before you take this
seriously.
Public Release Party 5300 Stop fluoridation Austin's water. Use the
$400,000 that AWU admits to spending on this
exercise in futility to something actually useful,
such as dental vouchers for low income
children (85% of dentists refuse to accept
Medicaid). $400,000 = $100 each for 4000
kids and just one annual dental appointment
will do more for oral health then all the fluoride
in the world. Think about it.
Public Release Party 5301 Make more incentives to conserve water.
Public Release Party 5302 Create a fund to take care of trees in parks
(i.e. Zilker) each activity pay into the fund with
money - not "in kind" payments.
Public Release Party 5303 Create hands off houses only living areas that
is quiet in terms of noise and traffic- ringed by
condos (closest) then outer ring of LO close to
center.
Public Release Party 5304 Ask local users before implementing street
changes, don't close roads, don’t decrease
traffic flow on local streets mandate all relation
areas be mult, use as public areas, such as
ponds, trails, etc.
Public Release Party 5305 Transportation and connectivity-- no mention
of sidewalks or completing "infrastructure"
necessary to compliment a complete
transportation system. No inventory has been
done about missing sidewalks. Please connect
the dots.
Public Release Party 5306 Mental Health- Austin has an extremely high
concetration of drug addicts and severe
alcoholics with jobs. They adverly affect each
person they interact with including
theunsuspecting public and of course their
family members. Austin has high concentration
of frug deals who are female and thrive under
the radar. these factors are not good for the
overall mental health of the community. Police
killings of black men affects the community.
The African/Americam community is terrorized
by each killing. members of their communities
who are sympathetic fed helpers. Everyone to
some extent start feding helpers. terrorizing a
community affects everyone's health in a
negative way. Something else that affects this
is the infiar and untouched behavior of ther
merchanet. When you are treated unfairly and
in a unethical fashion by merchants it
discourages from wanting to do buisness with
them. the erosion of your mental health is
gradual. We can do better to make ausitn a
more compassionate community that nurtures
everyone.
Public Release Party 5307 Late night rail service so we can take it to the
bar.
Public Release Party 5308 Additional focus on aging in place making the
community ideal for people of all area- not just
young families.
Public Release Party 5309 Austin should spend less money on police and
put it to jobs or bettering communities.
Public Release Party 5310 make Austin less of a Mall. Less commercial.
Have fruit bearing trees. Have places to sit
and converse at the end of the block. Have
Car Free days.
Public Release Party 5311 Move the freight trains (with dangerous cargo)
off of MOPAC. Use the tracks for people.
Public Release Party 5312 Updating land use tools and zoning code is a
must! The vision of Imagine Austin is
commendable, but you must have the tools to
implement.
Public Release Party 5313 Please Consider allowing drivers to stop at red
lights (after high volume) traffic hours) then
proceeding if there is no cross traffic. Also: set
timing on streets such as 15th between I-35
and Lamar so traffic going the speed limit. Do
Not have to stop. Both would cut down on
idling autos pollution.
Public Release Party 5314 Encourage small business to grow here.
Currently the rules for small business are
crazy (i.e. bed & breakfasts, etc.) I know
people who are moving away because the city
tortured them when they tried to open a
bed&breakfest while VRBO are allowed
without any thought.
Public Release Party 5315 Boost Funding for development of 11th and
12th street to be a thriving walk able area of
shops, cafes, work/live spaces!!
Public Release Party 5316 To make eating organic affordable and
promote sustainability, have community
garden spaces designated. Maybe one every
two sq. miles. Volunteer run but city helps
start. You give time, you get food.
Public Release Party 5317 Remove tolls for trucks on I-30; add tolls for
trucks on I-35.
Public Release Party 5318 Block by Block: Encourage Car Pooling and
Errand Sharing
Public Release Party 5319 Complete the downtown side walk network-
get rid of stairs. Complete broken segments
make sure commercial use makes sense for
the block.
Public Release Party 5320 78 Clarify the similarities between mix use as in is
used in neighborhood plans and mixed use as
it is used in the comp plan (imagine Austin)
Public Release Party 5321 Improve bike lanes and punish drivers who
disregard or injure bike riders. Real
punishment- Jail Time- for people that harass
or injure/kill. Otherwise more bike lanes will
stay empty.
Public Release Party 5322 Traffic is awful! There has to be a way to apply
technology to improve traffic patterns, not just
on 35, but surface streets as well. There is no
reason to wait 5+ minutes at a stoplight.
Public Release Party 5323 Thoughtful development of East Austin that
pays careful attention to being fair to its long-
time, low- income & homeless residents. DO
NOT YUPPIFY.
Public Sally & 5324 139
Michael Ward
Public Sally & 5325 Map
Michael Ward
Public Sandy 5326 Map
McMillan
Public Sandy 5327 180
McMillan
Public Sandy 5328 78
McMillan
Public Sandy 5329
McMillan
Public Sandy 5330
McMillan
Public Sandy 5331
McMillan
Public Sandy 5332
McMillan
Public Sandy 5333
McMillan
Public Sandy 5334
McMillan
Public Sandy 5335
McMillan
Public Sandy 5336
McMillan
Public Scott Morris 5548 Map
Public Sirgun Kaur 5549 Map
Public SpeakUp 5337 78
Public SpeakUp 5338 Map Call for urban rail down the #1 travel corridor
in the urban area
Rather than meekly accepting the dregs
Capital Metro is giving the urban core, if this
thing is REALLY a 'plan', it should be calling
out what Austin thinks it needs on various
corridors.
And to put it frankly, nobody but Capital Metro
thinks "Rapid Bus" will be rapid or remotely
useful.
This means: put the trains where the people
are. IE, on the #1 bus route, whether or not it
continues northwest on the original 2000 light
rail route. Tear up the Red Line if necessary;
the tens of thousands of travellers true light
rail would serve are more imporant than the
temporary disruption for the 850 people
currently using the Red Line, many of whom
don't even pay Capital Metro taxes.
Public SpeakUp 5339 Prohibit multi-axle trucks on steep grade single
lane ramps
There are a number of interchanges in Austin
with single lane flyovers that are ridiculously
steep. A prime example is the northbound I-
35 ramp to the northbound 183. Trucks come
to a crawl navigating these ramps, with the
result that traffic begins to back up and clogs
the previous onramp posing then a jam that
takes a long time to clear up, only to have it
happen again with another slow truck. Any
ramp beyond a certain grade that does not
have a slow truck lane should not allow trucks.
Trucks should be diverted to the frontage road
to make the turn and rejoin the road or some
other Truck Route designated.
Public SpeakUp 5340 Add frontage roads to the MoPac bridge that
crosses over Lady Bird Lake.
Adding frontage roads (or additional travel
lanes) to MoPac at this location would alleviate
the terrible traffic jams that occur on this
important thoroughfare every day, every
morning and evening. Traffic jams in this area
have significant impacts on people who work
downtown (and on anyone else who tries to
travel on MoPac in this congested area).
Public SpeakUp 5341 Add Anderson Ln rapid transit to Growth
Concept Map
On Growth Concept Map, add rapid transit to
Anderson Ln, with connections NW to
Arboretum/Jollyville and SE to Crestview
Station and down Airport. This supports
planned density on Anderson and provides
more E-W connectivity.
Public SpeakUp 5342 Remove the Freight Train line that parallels
Lamar and goes up mopac.
The rail line that transports lots of freight
poses a public safety risk and noise pollution
to the population. The rail line should be re-
routed around Austin and use the rail line only
for mass transit. Or convert it into a hike and
bike path.
Public SpeakUp 5343 141
Public SpeakUp 5344
Public SpeakUp 5345
Public SpeakUp 5346
Public SpeakUp 5347
Public SpeakUp 5348
Public SpeakUp 5349
Public SpeakUp 5350
Public SpeakUp 5351
Public SpeakUp 5352
Public SpeakUp 5353
Public SpeakUp 5354
Public SpeakUp 5355
Public SpeakUp 5356
Public SpeakUp 5388
Public SpeakUp 5550
Public SpeakUp 5551
Public Steve 5357
McGuire
Public Stuart Hersh 5552
Public Stuart Hersh 5553
Public Stuart Hersh 5554
Public Susan Pantell 5555 88
Public Susan Pantell 5556 184
Public Susan Pantell 5557 184
Public Sustainable 5358 65 2) Specify food access under complete
Food Policy community elements -
Board Our suggestions:
Livable-
Add food to the following (feel free to replace
*good* with *healthy*):
- Access to good food and community
amenities.
Values People-
Add your preferred version of the following as
additional bullet point:
- Access to nutritious, culturally appropriate,
and sustainably grown food.
Public Sustainable 5359 124 1) Change building block name -
Food Policy The most visible change that could happen
Board immediately to emphasize the critical role that
food systems play. Change current SOCIETY
building block to:
HEALTH, FOOD SYSTEMS and QUALITY OF
LIFE.
Public Sustainable 5360 171 3) Accept rewording of Society 8 in priority
Food Policy actions and policies and to include in the
Board Healthy Austin Program as divided into the
following three bullets:
8A- - Make healthy and local foods accessible,
particularly in underserved, areas by removing
barriers and providing incentives for the
establishment of neighborhood grocery stores,
farmers markets, farm stands, mobile veggie
carts/trailers, sustainable community gardens
and urban farms.
8B - Facilitate a strong and sustainable local
food system by linking farmers, distributors,
and markets and creating programs and
partnerships to ensure profitable local food
enterprises throughout all five food sectors
(production, processing, distribution,
consumption, and waste recovery).
8C - Partner with public and private
stakeholders to promote awareness and
educate residents about healthy food choices,
sources, and preparation, including keeping up-
to-date and accessible data on community
garden plot availability, food preparation
education, and city and country property for
food production (neighborhood gardens and
family farms) as well as direct and indirect
sales of sustainably produced and culturally
appropriate food (e.g,. farmers markets, farm
stands, mobile veggie carts, neighborhood
grocers).
Public Sustainable 5361 171 4) If possible add the following additional
Food Policy bullets to that section and program that are in
Board the same spirit:
- Change the environment to promote a culture
in which good food is a right, and eating
healthy food is an easy choice.
- Reduce obesity through establishing local
fresh food initiatives in institutions (e.g.
schools, colleges, universities, hospitals,
nursing homes, city and county departments
and venues) and through implementing and
encouraging purchasing policies that source
local and sustainable foods.
Public Sustainable 5558 SOC-8
Food Policy Make healthy and local foods accessible and
Board facilitate a strong and sustainable local food
system by:
- removing zoning and other barriers to the
development of small grocery stores and other
alternative retail
outlets (including farmers markets, mobile
veggie carts, etc.) in residential areas
- providing incentives for local community
gardens and small urban farms
- linking farmers, distributors, and markets
Public Sustainable 5559 Society-45
Food Policy Develop educational and public information
Board programs focused on promoting nutrition,
healthy food, and local food sources.
Public Sustainable 5560 NEW Society/Food System or Economy
Food Policy Remove zoning and policy barriers and create
Board incentives to improve and rebuild local food
production, processing, and distribution
systems appropriate to location and scale.
Public Sustainable 5561 NEW
Food Policy Change the environment to promote a culture
Board in which good food is a right, and where eating
healthy food is an easy choice for all
Austinites.
Public Sustainable 5562 NEW
Food Policy Reduce obesity through local fresh food
Board initiatives in institutions (e.g. schools, colleges,
universities, hospitals, nursing homes, city and
county departments/venues) and through
encouraging food service purchasing policies
that prioritize locally-sourced, nutritious, and
sustainable foods.
Public Sustainable 5563 147 Land Use-6
Food Policy Locate industrial development; logistics,
Board warehousing, and distribution; research and
development; local food production,
distribution, and storage and other comparable
businesses in areas with the necessary utilities
and transportation links and locate them in
parts of Austin and its extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ) that reduce conflicts with
new and established neighborhoods and in
areas to diminish threats to environmentally
sensitive areas.
Public Sustainable 5564 161 Land Use-13
Food Policy Expand the City of Austin’s acquisition of
Board environmentally significant land, easements,
and/or development rights to address flood
rehabilitation, aquifer recharge, water quality,
open space, trails *and sustainable food
production.*
Public Sustainable 5565 Land Use-17
Food Policy Create a plan and implementation framework
Board to expand the green infrastructure network by
increasing plantings of trees and vegetation,
acquiring additional open space, parkland, and
preserve areas; increasing permeable
surfaces in public areas; establishing green
corridors that serve as habitat, open space,
community gardens and family farms and as a
trail system linking local and regional
destinations.
Public Sustainable 5566 Land Use-19
Food Policy Implement a program to transfer development
Board rights from environmentally sensitive and peri-
and intra-urban agricultural areas to targeted
growth areas identified on the Growth Concept
Map.
Public Sustainable 5567 Land Use-20
Food Policy Develop a regulatory framework to incentivize
Board the use of Low Impact Development (LID)
design features such as rainwater harvesting,
increased permeable surfaces, rain gardens,
green roofs, green streets, gardens and farms
with stormwater mitigation features, and
natural-looking water quality features such as
bioswales to manage stormwater.
Public Sustainable 5568 Land Use-26 - same as LUT-17 above
Food Policy Expand the current green infrastructure
Board network by increasing tree and other
vegetative plantings; acquiring additional open
space, parkland, and preserve areas;
increasing permeable surfaces in public areas;
establishing green corridors that serve as
open space and as a trail system linking local
and regional destinations.
Public Sustainable 5569 Land Use-27
Food Policy Incentivize appropriately-scaled and located
Board green infrastructure and public spaces, such
as parks, plazas, greenbelts, trails, sustainable
agriculture, and/or open space, in all new
development and redevelopment projects.
Public Sustainable 5570 Land Use NEW
Food Policy Preserve and protect agricultural lands and
Board maintain the agricultural heritage of the region
utilizing tools such as farmland trusts,
farmland mitigation, conservation easements
and planning and zoning strategies.
Public Sustainable 5571 Economy-72
Food Policy Incorporate the principles of Urban Ecosystem
Board Management, including urban and periurban
agriculture (a flexible and multidisciplinary
approach requiring a combination of social,
environmental, economic and decision-making
tools and practices that are quickly adaptable
to changes in the urban environment--natural
or man-made), into the programs and policies
of all applicable City of Austin departments.
Public Sustainable 5572 Economy-93
Food Policy Establish an ongoing dialogue with the Austin
Board business community to develop regulations
and programs fostering the development and
success of local businesses by: creating an
inventory of locally-owned businesses,
developing a mentor program for locally-
owned businesses, promoting the formation of
worker-owned and community-owned
businesses (co-ops) that sell local products,
creating an Austin Craftsmen's Guild to
showcase products created by Austin
residents, providing tax incentives for locally-
owned businesses, creating a directory of
locally-produced products, expanding the Go
Local card concept, simplifying the process to
have local businesses provide additional
services (eg host bands for SXSW).
Public Sustainable 5573 NEW Economy/ Environment
Food Policy In partnership with Chamber of Commerce,
Board create a Buy Local Food Campaign to educate
consumers and businesses about the
economic, environmental, and social benefits
of local food enterprise.
Public Sustainable 5574 NEW Economy
Food Policy Encourage new local businesses that create
Board food production and distribution-related jobs.
Public Sustainable 5575 NEW Economy/ Environment
Food Policy Assess the local food economy and plan and
Board advocate for strategies that strengthen the
food system with special emphasis on
development and support of networks,
creation of jobs, guidance of decisions with a
broad set of sustainability actions, that
equitably promote the distribution of food
system benefits.
Public Sustainable 5576 NEW Economy
Food Policy Develop infrastructure that will strengthen the
Board local food economy by linking production,
processing, distribution, marketing, and sales
of food.
Public Sustainable 5577 171 Economy-96
Food Policy Develop a program to find interim uses for
Board vacant land such as community gardens or
other food-related uses.
Public Sustainable 5578 City Facilities and Services-114
Food Policy Use bond elections to continue funding the
Board acquisition and protection of environmentally
sensitive areas and farmland, including:
floodplains, riparian areas, wetlands, prairies,
land that supports recharge of the Edwards
Aquifer, wildlife habitat and corridors,
bottomland forests and priority woodlands,
critical environmental features and farmland.
Public Sustainable 5579 City Facilities and Services-129
Food Policy Support pollution and greenhouse gas
Board reduction targets of the Austin Climate
Protection Plan and develop indicators to the
progress.
Public Sustainable 5580 City Facilities and Services-155
Food Policy Develop recognition and incentive programs to
Board encourage industry/commercial best practices
in waste reduction, food diversion,
manufacturing techniques, recycling and
extended producer responsibility.
Public Sustainable 5581 City Facilities and Services-158
Food Policy Incentivize and promote low-impact
Board development designs and techniques on
private land that preserve key environmental
features, reduce runoff and the use of potable
water for plantings and increase stormwater
infiltration. Examples include rainwater
harvesting, porous pavement, rain gardens,
green roofs, and sustainable agriculture
techniques.
Public Sustainable 5582 City Facilities and Services-159
Food Policy Create a green infrastructure plan for public
Board land or in public rights-of-way to preserve
Austin's ecosystem, improve the water cycle,
reduce the urban heat island effect, improve
air quality, enrich public space, and provide for
traffic calming. Examples include open space,
community gardens, family farms, wetlands,
green streets, infiltration facilities, and the
urban forest.
Public Sustainable 5583 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 319
Board Continue to preserve, protect and restore
environmentally sensitive areas using a variety
of tools including transferable development
rights as well as policies and regulations that
incentivize greyfield/redevelopment/infill/food
production.
Public Sustainable 5584 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 321
Board Create policies and incentives for restoration
of damaged natural resource areas.
[REDUNDANT-same as above]
Public Sustainable 5585 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 324
Board Develop an educational program with a public
recognition or awards program, to showcase
best practices in sustainable and low-impact
development as well as achievements or
innovations in waste reduction, recycling, and
sustainable food practices.
Public Sustainable 5586 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 331
Board Require green buffers between incompatible
land uses and program these for uses that
benefit the community such as sustainable
food production.
Public Sustainable 5587 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 334
Board Allow for and incentivize responsible
greywater reuse in building and site design,
landscape maintenance, and agricultural
irrigation.
Public Sustainable 5588 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 335
Board Create a strategy, and accompanying budget,
to identify and prioritize lands, particularly
farmland, for public acquisition, conservation
easements, and purchase of development
rights.
Public Sustainable 5589 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 336
Board Identify prime farmlands and create incentives
for protection such as transferable
development rights.
Public Sustainable 5590 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 337
Board Support local farmers in continued operations
by creating incentives, removing barriers,
offering tailored small business support and
encouraging local food in public education
campaigns.
Public Sustainable 5591 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 338
Board Facilitate and encourage distribution
mechanisms for local farm products.
Public Sustainable 5592 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 339
Board Identify and map food deserts and provide
incentives for grocery stores of different
scales, farmers markets, food carts and other
mobile vendors to locate in underserved
communities.
Public Sustainable 5593 Conservation and Environmental Resources-
Food Policy 342
Board Continue to develop and strengthen
partnerships with universities and local
schools to integrate educational programs with
conservation, agriculture and sustainability
policies and projects.
Public Sustainable 5594 NEW Conservation and Environmental
Food Policy Resources
Board Recognize and publicize the significant
contribution that the food system makes to
carbon emissions and encourage consumption
of climate-friendly foods and the enactment of
policies and programs that support a strong
and sustainable local food system.
Public Teresa Garrett 5389
Public Tina 5595
Fernandez
Public Travis County 5362 4
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5363 6
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5364 7
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5365 9
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5366 11
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5367 12
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5368 12
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5369 12
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5370 147
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5371 147
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5372 149
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5373 154
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5374 157
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Travis County 5375 161
Trans &
Natural
Resources
Public Trish O’Day 5376 47
RN & Lisa
Doggett MD,
MPH
Co-
Presidents,
Austin
Physicians for
Social
Responsibility
Public ULI 5390
Public ULI 5391
Public ULI 5392
Public Urban Parks 5393 9 Change the core value of “Integrate nature into
Workgroup the city” to “Integrate nature and family-friendly
parks and other public spaces throughout the
city.” Discuss the integration of these features
in terms of all the environmental, social, and
economic benefits that they hold for the city.
Public Urban Parks 5394 49 Incorporate the statistics about how Austin
Workgroup compares to other peer cities in terms of
number of parks and access to parks—not just
park acreage (see p. 12 and p. 16-18 of the
Urban Parks Workgroup report). We
recommend you do not just focus here on park
acreage, as this is an insufficient indicator of
park access. We recommend you include the
statistics from the Urban Parks Workgroup
Report that only 37% of the population in the
urban core lives within a ¼-mile walking
distance of developed parkland, and Austin
ranks 52nd in the per capita number of parks
and 56th in playgrounds per capita.
Public Urban Parks 5395 49 We recommend you also add a bullet here to
Workgroup read: “As the City becomes more compact,
there is a heightened need to incorporate
more urban play spaces for children in parks
and other public places.
Public Urban Parks 5396 49 State more emphatically that Austin falls far
Workgroup behind other cities in terms of their park’s
operational funding. (Austin ranked 65th out of
all major US cities by the Center for Park
Excellence, “Park Related Total Expenditure
per Resident, by City (FY2008)”).
Public Urban Parks 5397 68 Add a bullet under “Austin is Livable” to
Workgroup incorporate a vision that children will be able to
access urban play spaces throughout the City:
For example, a new bullet could read: “The
urban landscape incorporates publicly-
accessible play spaces for children throughout
the city.”
Public Urban Parks 5398 68 Add a bullet under “Austin is Natural and
Workgroup Sustainable,” to incorporate the City Council’s
previously adopted vision that all residents will
live within walking distance of a park. The new
bullet could read: “Austin residents live within
walking distance of a well-maintained park or
other green space.”
Public Urban Parks 5399 88 Add a new land use and transportation priority
Workgroup to read: “Integrate child-friendly parks and
other child-friendly open spaces into the urban
environment.”
Public Urban Parks 5400 91 Include language similar to CFE19, which
Workgroup pertains to the “creat[ing] public spaces that
attract and engage children and serve as
gathering places for families and children,” in
the Plan’s Urban Design policies on page 91
Public Urban Parks 5401 91 Add the word “family-friendly” to UD 1 so that it
Workgroup reads: “Develop family-friendly, accessible
community gathering places….”
Public Urban Parks 5402 116 Include within the Key Challenges section the
Workgroup following Council Resolution (2009119-
068):Providing parks within walking distance
of all city residents (1/4-mile goal for the urban
core and a ½-mile goal for all other parts of the
City.)
Public Urban Parks 5403 120 Include the following recommended additional
Workgroup policies:
RO 10: “Foster partnerships with private and
public entities (including larger research
institutions and school districts) that can help
contribute to the vitality and development of
city parks.”
RO11: “Increase recreational and cultural
opportunities throughout the city that include
new forms of recreation (such as skate parks)
and new types of play spaces (such as nature-
based play areas).”
RO12: “Add new parks and green spaces to
allow all residents to live within walking
distance of a publicly-accessible and child-
friendly park or green space.”
Public Urban Parks 5404 138 Change language in the Priority Programs
Workgroup listed here to reflect our recommended
changes to the priority program language on
page 9. Thus, the core action program to
“Change Austin’s development regulations
and processes to promote a compact and
connected city” would read, “Change Austin’s
development regulations and processes to
promote a compact, connected and family-
friendly (or inclusive) city.” Change the third
core action program which currently reads
“Create a green infrastructure program to
protect environmentally sensitive areas and
integrate nature into the city” to read: “Create
a program to protect environmentally sensitive
areas and integrate nature and family-friendly
parks and other public spaces throughout the
city.”
Public Urban Parks 5405 146 Modify LUT Action 1 to add the word “family-
Workgroup friendly” so that the Action reads, “Prioritize
City of Austin investments to support mixed
use, transit, and the creation of compact,
family-friendly, and walkable places.
Public Urban Parks 5406 148 Modify the 3rd bullet in LUT Action-14 to add
Workgroup the word “family-friendly” so that the bullet
reads: “Create inviting family-friendly public
spaces at stops and transfer centers.”
Public Urban Parks 5407 149 Add a new LUT Action to read: Modify the
Workgroup City’s parkland dedication policies to further
the City’s ¼-mile and 1/2 –mile parks access
goals.
Public Urban Parks 5408 164 Add a new CFS Action to read: “Pursue
Workgroup strategic partnerships with health-related
entities and government and private grants to
facilitate the creation of more outdoor play and
recreational opportunities for children in the
fight to address the nation’s obesity epidemic.”
(See Urban Parks Workgroup Report, p. 34).
Public Urban Parks 5409 164 Add a new CFS Action to read: “Create a
Workgroup workgroup with Austin Independent School
District to create an plan for incorporating
outdoor play spaces accessible for younger
neighborhood children and their families
during school hours.” (See Urban Parks
Workgroup Report, p. 33).
Public Urban Parks 5410 164 Add CFS Action to read: “Produce a 10-year
Workgroup action plan for adding and developing urban
parks to fulfill the City Council directive of
creating accessible park space for every
resident within ¼-mile walking distance for the
urban core and a ½-mile walking distance for
areas outside the urban core.” (See Urban
Parks Workgroup Report, p. 28-29).
Public Urban Parks 5411 164 Add CFS Action to read: “Partner with other
Workgroup Texas cities to obtain state legislative authority
to create city-wide parks districts to fund
development and maintenance of parks.” (See
Urban Parks Workgroup Report, p. 30-31).
Public Urban Parks 5412 164 Add CFS Action to read: “Increase safe
Workgroup pedestrian and bike access to city parks and
other outdoor public spaces.” (See Urban
Parks Workgroup Report, p. 32).
Public Urban Parks 5413 164 Add CFS Action to read: “Ensure city
Workgroup departments include outdoor family-friendly
features such as creative play spaces, nature-
based play areas, and interactive arts spaces
at all new city facilities that are oriented to the
public.” (See Urban Parks Workgroup Report,
p. 33).
Public Urban Parks 5414 164 Add CFS Action to read: “Develop strategies
Workgroup to transform under-utilized public land into
innovative, child-friendly pocket parks.” (See
Urban Parks Workgroup Report, p. 33).
Public Urban Parks 5415 166 Modify CFS Action-25 to add a bullet that
Workgroup reads: “child-friendly play spaces” under the
standards to be utilizes when designing public
buildings and spaces.
Public Urban Parks 5416 182 We recommend the following bullet be added
Workgroup below “livable”: “The proposal incorporates or
provides walking distance access to a child-
friendly park or other play space.”
Public Urban Parks 5417 184 Within the report the additional metric of
Workgroup “Population within X distance of park/open
space (percent)” was added. This is a very
good metric for addressing the key need to
understand our urban open space system not
only in terms of acreage but in terms of access
as well. Please ensure that it stays in the
Plan, although we recommend the language
we changed to more accurately reflect the
Council’s vision by stating, “Population within x
walking distance of family-friendly park/open
space (percent).
Public Urban Parks 5418 184 Include within the Report as a metric to
Workgroup measure progress on the Plan’s parks access
goals the primary statistic that was developed
by the Urban Parks Workgroup, which showed
that 87% of the current Austin population
describes a strong desire to live within
walkable distance of urban open space, but
only 37% of the population currently does.
Maps that illustrate this statistic and current
gap areas are available in the Urban Parks
Workgroup Report and from PARD.
Public Vera Givens, 5596
University
Hills
Neighborhood
Association
Public Vera Givens, 5597
University
Hills
Neighborhood
Association
Public Vera Givens, 5598
University
Hills
Neighborhood
Association
Public Walt & Raine 5377 139
Hornaday
Public Walt & Raine 5378 Map
Hornaday
Task Force 1100
Carol Torgrimson, October 18 145 Healthy Austin section is too much related to
transportation and needs to bring in other
components.
Task Force 1144
Carol Torgrimson, October 18 The Growth Concept map needs more detail.
Task Force 304
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Requested again a summary of expert panel
sessions from staff
Task Force 1130
Carol Torgrimson, October 4
Task Force 1135
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Expressed concern that some in the
community fear that the final Growth Concept
Map (p. 76-84) could be used to rewrite the
land development codes. Indicated a need to
know this and to address it with the
community.
Task Force 1148
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Expressed concern with the vagueness of the
Growth Scenario Map. Suggested that it
needs more detail.
Task Force 1152
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Expressed the need to more fully develop the
Indicator pages (key challenges?)
Task Force 1156
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Supported the concept of the need for specific
measureables/ baselines.
Task Force 1170
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Concerned that one of the expert panel
sessions was not taped.
Task Force 1172
Carol Torgrimson, October 4 Expressed concern that the content generated
by the expert panel process (August) is not
being sufficiently utlized/synthesized into the
plan. The content is important and needs to
fully considered.
Task Force Cavazos 74 9 Provide paths to prosperity for all: the
paragraph should include a comment about
supporting and lifting up our “Pre-K through
16” youth to be academically, physically, and
emotionally prepared to live & lead the future
of Austin.
Task Force Cavazos 75 17 Place this summary of the chapters before
chapter one.
Task Force Cavazos 76 18 [Growth Concept Map box] doesn’t really fit
with the other boxes that summarize the
chapters. What is its purpose? Perhaps add it
to the Chapter 4 box? Or is it even needed?
Task Force Cavazos 77 22 Ch 2: Follow-up with Lupe Morin of the
Hispanic Quality of Life Taks Force for edits.
Task Force Cavazos 78 8 Starting on page 8 and intro to each Building
Block -- “key challenges” suggests something
negative that needs to be improved. It may be
better phrased as “key goals” so the policies
can address both positive goals that we are
trying to create for Austin as well as the
tackling of key challenges.
Task Force Cavazos 79 86 Include language that clearly includes the
importance of preserving “cultural” heritage &
influence in our city’s land use and design, and
by cultural heritage implies the multi-ethnic
contributions, to the city’s neighborhoods, city
character, land use, public art, historic
buildings and other parks and areas
Task Force Cavazos 80 96 Paragraph 1, last sentence, remove period,
add comma and the following: “and in many
instances has led to the voluntary or
involuntary relocation of families who have
historically lived in these neighborhoods to
Austin’s suburbs.
Task Force Cavazos 81 97 Add another key challenge is balancing
redevelopment of struggling neighborhoods
with maintaining the unique character,
diversity, cultural heritage (people and
orgs/biz) and affordability of those
neighborhoods
Task Force Cavazos 82 99 Add language: Protecting neighborhood
character also means protecting affordability
for residents currently living there, and
sensitivity to preserving the cultural, historic,
and multi-ethnic influences that contributed to
the character of the neighborhood
Task Force Cavazos 83 103 Add another key challenge: addressing the
fact that wages are not keeping up with cost of
living in Austin
Task Force Cavazos 84 105 Add to statement “, minority and women
owned businesses.”
Task Force Cavazos 85 105 105 & 106 In references to “cultural” arts and
“cultural” facilities, do you mean multi-ethnic? I
believe “multi-ethnic” should be explicit within
these statements or separately. For ECO 5,
the Latino arts and music scene in Austin is a
tourism draw. As should be the African
American arts & music. Additionally, for ECO
8, major cultural facilities in Austin’s downtown
should be inclusive of multi-ethnic facilities like
the Mexican American Cultural Center and
Mexic-Arte museum, etc
Task Force Cavazos 86 105 There are no policies addressing the wage
gap or the fact that wages are not keeping up
with cost of living. Also, there are no policies
addressing limited access to jobs for minority
groups. (These were both bullet points under
the side bar Key Issues & Trends on page
103)
Task Force Cavazos 87 125 Add bullets on education issues and trends. It
is currently weighted toward health.
Task Force Cavazos 88 125 Add teen pregnancy and repeat teen
pregnancy
Task Force Cavazos 89 132 Ch 4: Creativity / ACC 1 Expand or clarify the
policy to also mean that we should support
artists who want to learn the business aspect
of art/ to make a living from their art
Task Force Cavazos 90 133 Ch 4: Creativity / ACC 12 Add or clarify or
create a recommendation about completing
the Mexican American Cultural Center and any
other cultural centers that the city committed to
help build but have not completed
Task Force Cavazos 91 Add relevant Comments from Children &
Families Task Force, Hispanic QOL, African
American QOL, and Asian American feedback
Task Force Cavazos 92 Link policies directly to trends, challenges and
vision statement goals. Policies should not
contradict.
Task Force Cavazos 93 Need measurable metrics for each building
block. Ask if city departments will help with
brainstorming metrics
Task Force Cavazos 94 137 Integrate principles & policies &
recommendations under each building block in
Ch 4
Task Force Cavazos 95 Need more recommendations. Go back and
look at all cumulative recommendations
provided by task force and public going back
to the first meeting.
Task Force Cavazos 96 18 There needs to be a clear strategy to meeting
the Vision Statement in the Plan. For
Example:
Vision Statement =>Building Block=>Key
Challenges that need to be addressed in
meeting Building Block
Goal=>Policy=>Recommendation
Task Force Cavazos 1001 26 core principles-who we are today- outdated
census data?
Task Force Cavazos 1002 103 economy- wages not keeping up w/ cost of
living in sidebar but not in key challenges
Task Force Cavazos 1003 105 105- include minority and WBE
Task Force Cavazos 1004 need more recommendations linked to
opportunities, metrics, individual involvement,
engage citizenry
Task Force Cavazos 1005 9 core principle- path to prosperity needs to
mention youth
Task Force Cavazos 1006 are minority ethnic group presentations
included in draft?
Task Force Cavazos 1007 land use and transp- "cultural" heritage needs
to also mean "multi-ethnic"
Task Force Cavazos 1008 housing/neighborhoods- reference
gentrification, no mention
Task Force Cavazos 1009 housing/neighborhoods- "balancing…" needs
to mention gentrification
Task Force Cavazos 1010 neighborhood character- wants more language
associated w/ "protection" than just historical
preservation, such as muti-ethnic culture
Task Force Cavazos 1011 neighborhood character- what does "unique"
mean
Task Force Cavazos 1012 we need measurable metriics
Task Force 1097
Charles Miles, October 25 22 concern w/ description of Austin, ieThreadgills,
Armadillo; not the way he sees it.
Task Force 1107
Charles Miles, October 25 more specificity in some areas, realistic
Task Force 1116
Charles Miles, October 25 some sections seem too vague, some too
specific, some contradict ea other.
Task Force 1125
Charles Miles, October 25 needed more informative graphics that inform
public of "vision"
Task Force 1165
Charles Miles, October 25 Concerned that younger citizens not involved
w/ Task Force as they seem to better see the
possibilities of the Plan, they are more
optimistic.
Task Force Collins 108 29 What Does it Mean? 7th bullet
Task Force Collins 109.1 30 Home Ownership, 3rd Bullet
Task Force Collins 109.2 30 Home Ownership, 3rd Bullet
Task Force Collins 110 30 Housing values/affordability, 2nd bullet
“…property tax rates have generally
decreased over the same period.”
Task Force Collins 111 31 2nd bullet: Many affordable rentals have been
converted to condominiums
Task Force Collins 112 31 Neighborhoods, 3rd bullet: What is the
connection between the isolation of immigrant
communities and the deterioration of the built
environment? Is it cause and effect?
Task Force Collins 113 41 Bicycle/Pedestrian, 4th bullet: Define absent
sidewalks, are they absent-minded?
Task Force Collins 114 44 It is more relevant to compare Austin’s wages
and housing prices, etc. with cities in our
targeted competitive set.
Task Force Collins 115 45 Commercial Real Estate Market
Task Force Collins 116 45 CREM: 2nd bullet: …space has been
constructed.
Task Force Collins 117 45 Most of Austin’s retail growth since 1960 has
occurred outside of the Central Business
District, but more has been leased in CBD
since 2005 than in the last 40 years.
Task Force Collins 118 46 Water Resources 4th bullet point.
Task Force Collins 119 49 Parks and Preserves: 4th bullet: There is a
need for better parkland: better planned,
better maintained, better managed and better
funded. I question the more parkland
generalization.
Task Force Collins 120 52 What does it mean? Second bullet. Actually
Urban Redevelopment and denser urban
development requires new and expanded
infrastructure also.
Task Force Collins 121 56 Second bullet point: Austin ranked second
nationally?
Task Force Collins 122 56 Last bullet point: is not completed
Task Force Collins 123 58 Developing a Regional Perspective
Task Force Collins 124 61 Housing Jobs imbalance
Task Force Collins 125 59 Austin’s location within the region should be
changed to include the ETJ’s of the other
cities like Austin’s
Task Force Collins 126 61 Rising costs of Housing and transportation
Task Force Collins 127 83 Roadway Projects Map
Task Force Collins 128 89 LUT10 and 14.
Task Force Collins 129 98 Housing Policies
Task Force Collins 130 109 CER 1: How many acres of valuable
agricultural land is not being farmed and why?
Task Force Collins 131 111 CER 11 -- Who should pay for the
replacement of existing utilities and
infrastructure? Should the City? Or should
residents of the areas served?
Task Force Collins 132 111 CER 15 -- Reduce the per capita disposal of
solid waste.
Task Force Collins 133 111 CER 13 --Why should the City of Austin be
developing and expanding the market for local
and sustainable food production.
Task Force Collins 134 118 SW 2. Incentivize MF, retail, restaurants and
manufacturers to recycle.
Task Force Collins 135 118 EN 4 -- Add …at lowest possible cost.
Task Force Collins 136 120 RO 1. This would fail middle school English.
Separate this into easily readable points.
Task Force Collins 137 120 RO 9 -- Maintain existing and develop new
partnerships between City of Austin Depts.,
community organizations and volunteer groups
to support recreational services
Task Force Collins 138 125 Key Challenges: second bullet point:
Task Force Collins 139 127 CFE 16 & 17 -- These are duplicative
Task Force Collins 140 131 I strongly object to the singling out of the need
to provide affordable housing for artists over
teachers, policemen, the handicapped, the
aged, or any other group in our city.
Task Force Collins 141 132 ACC 2: Increase and enhance coordination,
resource sharing, and partnership…..
Task Force Collins 142 139 Last bullet point. They city shouldn’t
segregate the value of providing work space to
artists any different from any of its other
valuable constituencies.
Task Force Collins 143 140 This is a poor effort at providing an integrated
transportation network for the next 35 years.
Task Force Collins 144 148 LUT Action 16 -- Enhance crosstown
transportation options……
Task Force Collins 145 152 HN Action 6 -- The City of Austin should not
make stable housing options the basis for any
incentives granted to business, organizations
or developments.
Task Force Collins 146 152 HN Action 10 -- The City of Austin should
incentivize the providers of affordable housing
to provide workforce housing, instead of large
employers because the private sector can
provide that housing most efficiently.
Task Force Collins 147 160 CE Action 2 -- Strike this paragraph. IF you
want reasons ask me. They are too numerous
to detail.
Task Force Collins 148 161 CE Action 11 -- Strike as unnecessary.
Task Force Collins 149 164 CFS Action 11 -- Add one that says:
Incentivize developers to connect to existing
trail systems or to complete existing trail
systems.
Staff note: We interpret this as referring to
CFS Action 10.
Task Force Collins 150 168 CFS Action 39 -- Should be reworked to say
Build water conservation programs that
incentivize users to lower water use
Task Force Collins 151 169 CFS Action 44 -- Rephrase to say Incorporate
best practices in flood control, erosion, and
water quality technologies to incentivize
customers to save more water, soil and land
areas.
Task Force Collins 152 169 CFS Action 45 -- Strike expand,
Task Force Collins 153 170 SOC Action 7 -- Unless those entities are
going to pay for the facilities, why does the city
want to partner with them?
Task Force Collins 154 171 SOC Action 8 -- The City of Austin should not
be doing any of these.
Task Force Collins 155 172 SOC Action 17 -- This needs to be much more
specific.
Task Force Collins 156 172 SOC Action 18
Task Force Collins 157 172 SOC Action 19 -- Why is the City doing this?
Task Force Collins 158 172 SOC Action 20 -- Last bullet should read:
Reducing regulatory barriers to the
development of housing for the homeless
Task Force Collins 159 172 SOC Action 21
Task Force Collins 160 172 SOC Action 23 -- This should be supported by
private donations to private non-profits.
Task Force Collins 162 175 CRE Action 1 -- This should not be a function
of the City of Austin. Pattern this after the Fort
Worth Council on the Arts , should not be a
City Dept.
Task Force Collins 163 176 CRE Action 3 -- Delete regulations
Task Force Collins 164 176 CRE Action 4 -- This should not be a City of
Austin function.
Task Force Collins 165 176 CRE Action 6 -- Change to say Collaborate
with sponsoring organization and promoters to
develop special event transportation plans
to…….
Task Force Collins 166 176 CRE Action 9 -- Change Develop and Invest in
to Foster or Promote
Task Force Collins 167 176 CRE Action 11 -- Change to delete and
programs
Task Force Collins 168 177 CRE action 13 -- Delete and regulations
Task Force Collins 169 177 CRE Action 14 -- Delete programs and
Task Force Collins 170 177 CRE Action 15 -- Delete programs and
Task Force Collins 171.1 175 SOC Action 46 - 49 -- This is not a City of
Austin function and should be deleted.
Task Force Collins 171.2 177 CRE Action 16 -- Re work this to mean what
was intended. Not grammatically correct.
Task Force Collins 172 178 CRE Action 20 -- Delete and regulations
Task Force Collins 173 185 Prosperous:
* Bank deposits per capita
* Bank loans per capita
* Businesses stated per capita or dba’s filed
per capita
* Company investment: startup capital
* Occ. Retail space per capita
Task Force Collins 174 186 Educated
* Population proximity to schools (public and
or private)
Task Force Collins 175 186 Creative
* Private funding on arts /per capita
Task Force Collins 176 The need for a requirement that any new
regulations and policies that come forth from
this Plan or otherwise should have an
economic impact analysis attached to them is
the only thing that will keep this Plan from
being self -contradictory.
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 307
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 308 132
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 309 132
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 310 133
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 311 133
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 320
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 326 184
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 342
Task Force Cookie Ruiz 1118
Task Force 3
CT, November 1 33 66 vision statement seems to have been
changed, uncomfortable w/ font and location
Task Force CT, November 1 099 72 discrepancy in complete community….is it one
large complete community or interconnected
smaller communities
Task Force CT, October 251175 Need some positive energy. Too much
apathy.
Task Force CT, October 251179 We don’t want to reach out to just young
leaders, we need broad exposure.
Task Force D'Amico 266 105 p. 105 ECO 6. Encourage Austin’s creative
economy and culture through flexible, place-
based policies (those directed at specific
geographic areas) as well as policies directed
toward virtual reality and digital media.
Task Force D'Amico 267 125 p. 125 -- Improving the actual and perceived
safety of neighborhood streets to encourage
children to play outside and encourage more
outdoor activities by residents.
Task Force D'Amico 268 186 186
• Standardized test scores: TAKS, SAT, AP (in
relation to neighboring jurisdictions, state,
Task Force 330
ET, November 1 66 maybe some visuals w/ Vision statement
Task Force 1171
ET, November 1 concurred w/ JJ about CATF Chairs and
Planning Comm developing a laundry list for
Comp Plan to determine what time and effort it
will take before beginning fixes such as
wordsmithing and more detailed map.
Task Force ET, October 251094 agricultural technology is changing, more
dense farming area is the future, similar to
housing
Task Force 1143
Evan Taniguchi, October 4 Suggested the inclusion of minority report
maps, in response to dissatisfaction w/
Preferred Growth Scenario map.
Task Force Ferguson 242 72
Task Force Ferguson 243 88 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 244 89 Policies
Task Force Ferguson 245 96 Introduction
Task Force Ferguson 246 97 Introduction
Task Force Ferguson 247 96 Introduction
Task Force Ferguson 248 97 Introduction
Task Force Ferguson 249 97 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 250 97 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 251 97 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 252 97 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 253 97 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 254 97 Key Challenges
Task Force Ferguson 255 98 Policies
Task Force Ferguson 256 98 Policies
Task Force Ferguson 257 98 Policies
Task Force Ferguson 258 98 Policies
Task Force Ferguson 259 143
Task Force Ferguson 260 143
Task Force Ferguson 261 143
Task Force Ferguson 262 143
Task Force FF, October 25 1111 71 pg 71 City of Complete Communities needs to
be reworked
Task Force FF, October 25 1163 too much confidence in Staff
decision/iplanning. Need revenue/fee
structure to get there but this has been
overlooked.
Task Force 1119
Frances Ferguson, October 4 Need to establish/include baseline data for
areas to be measured throughout the plan
Task Force 1159
Frances Ferguson, October 4 Would like to see metrics tied to the Core
Principles for Action (p. 9) as well as to the
Complete Communities Indicators (p. 184-
186).
Task Force 1183
Frances Ferguson, October 4 Frances expressed a desire to invest the
necessary energy/work to move toward
adoption of the plan and to avoid long delays.
She agreed that reasonable delay of the
timeline to address current unresolved issues
and/or to reach CATF consensus may be
needed, but delays of 6+ months would not be
beneficial for this project
Task Force Frances 306 The communication from a neighborhood
McIntyre, newsletter was an example of the
October 4 misinformation that is so prevalent about the
Imagine Austin plan. How can that be
mitigated?
Task Force 337
Francie Ferguson, October 18GlossaryMaybe include Glossary
Task Force 1108
Francie Ferguson, October 18 Need language that addresses how to live in
poverty.
Task Force 1124
Francie Ferguson, October 18Map Somehow indicate affordability on Growth
Concept map.
Task Force 1129
Francie Ferguson, October 18
Task Force 25
group, October 1141 maps are mainly conceptual and that needs to
be clearly undeerstood
Task Force Gullahorn 177 Recommends careful look at cost impact of
new regulations to implement Plan, esp tough
on small businesses. Used parking
regulations as an example. Do new regulation
costs counter-act improved/better
development? How do people stay in their
homes: how do we maintain affordability while
creating a better place? Need to reconcile
better development (regulations) vs
affordability.
JG: The need for a requirement that any new
regulations and policies that come forth from
this Plan or otherwise should have an
economic impact analysis attached to them is
the only thing that will keep this Plan from
being self -contradictory.
Develop an affordability impact index or
something similar for every regulation or
requirement.
Task Force Gullahorn 178 Collaboration with the county is imperative if
the Plan isn’t to produce results that will later
make it less effective because of the lack of
coordination in the ETJ, especially as many
areas are annexed into the city in the future.
Task Force Gullahorn 179 9 Important to add language referencing that the
county is a collaborative partner in managing
growth in the ETJ, and their participation is
critical to jointly incent and focus growth into
urban corridors to limit sprawl.
Panel discussion on development in the 130
corridor referenced the need to use the limited
tools available to government in concert and
in a new focused manner.
Task Force Gullahorn 180 10 All references regarding sustainably
managing water and environmental resource
are to the city. Need to include an emphasis
on the importance of creating policies that
incent similar activities in the ETJ. County
can’t become dumping ground for problems.
Task Force Gullahorn 181 12 2nd paragraph: "Add language including
county government in sentence for those that
also will need to commit to action"
Task Force Gullahorn 182 13 1st paragraph: "Think holistically:
“how…pieces of the city and ETJ interconnect"
Task Force Gullahorn 183 14 3rd paragraph: "Clarify “right entity” language:
What des it mean? Emphasize ps between
govt institutions"
Task Force Gullahorn 184 17 Move "At a glance" section to the front
Task Force Gullahorn 185.1 28 Paragraphs 5,6: update poverty and education
stats?
Task Force Gullahorn 185.2 29 Paragraphs 1-3: update poverty and education
stats?
Task Force Gullahorn 186.1 30 Statistics are 2009, pre census. Can’t we get
more recent numbers post census?
Task Force Gullahorn 186.2 31 Statistics are 2009, pre census. Can’t we get
more recent numbers post census?
Task Force Gullahorn 187 32 "What Does It Mean?" This section implies
that there is a need for immediate, affordable
solutions that impact development in the ETJ
what’s timeline for infill development and
development along major roadways?
Need to plan for contingencies if solutions
driven by new regulations and policies within
city limits are not sufficiently immediate.
Task Force Gullahorn 188 36 36-38 (Susceptibiltiy to change analysis, 1st
para on p38): "add language at end of 1st
sentence saying “ … to Williamson County,
west of SH 130."
Task Force Gullahorn 189 40 Can older data be updated? Better numbers
from Cap Metro than 2008?
Task Force Gullahorn 190 41 3rd paragraph: "Installed 15 miles of what per
year?"
Task Force Gullahorn 191 47 9th paragraph: "What does this imply? Only 87
acres out of over 50k (p 34) were in small
family farms? What is “planning area for
sale”?" Clarify.
Task Force Gullahorn 192 47 10th paragraph: Remove sentence that
discusses farms being not profitable and the
“hobby farms” reference
Don’t need it, doesn’t make much sense.
Regardless of whether you make any money
(like my coffee shop doesn’t) it doesn’t mean it
is a hobby.
Task Force Gullahorn 193 62 3rd paragraph: Turn negative sentence at end
into positive, saying makes it imperative
(rather than “difficult”) that jurisdictions work
together in new and focused efforts with the
private sector to implement regional growth
management strategies
Task Force Gullahorn 194 70 1st paragraph: Add “and medical research and
technology” following “medicine”
Big differentiation possible as to the economic
driver that medical research and medical
technology will be bringing to Austin in the
next 10 years …
Task Force Gullahorn 195 80 3rd paragraph: Opportunity here to insert
language that stresses need for collaboration
with the county to plan for contingent growth in
the ETJ.
Suggestion: after sentence ending with “…but
does not control zoning”, insert the following:
“The opportunity for well-planned future
development to minimize sprawl in the ETJ
can be enhanced through intentional
interaction and collaboration with the Country
government. The use of targeted infrastructure
investments and other incentives to manage
development in an organized and thoughtful
manner will be the best tool to meet the
contingencies of continued growth in the ETJ.”
Task Force Gullahorn 196 88 1st paragraph: 5 of 7 key challenges relate to
meeting the challenges associated with the
contingencies related to growth in the ETJ in
some manner.
Need a realism statement that reflects that
these contingencies constitute a major
planning need and will require the intentional
and coordinated use of infrastructure
investments in order to prepare properly for
the need.
Task Force Gullahorn 197 88 LUT 2: Add county government along with
municipalities
Task Force Gullahorn 198 89 all LUT: The success of many of these policies
will be contingent on the ability of the city and
the county to work together to accomplish
coordinated planning in the ETJ.
For example LUT 19 will require collaboration
with the county as roads are expanded or built
in the ETJ to encompass all these attributes. If
not the city will have to do once annexation
occurs.
Task Force Gullahorn 199 90 LUT 26: Decreasing the amount of light will
require regulations that will increase costs to
the consumer and taxpayer. Are these policies
justifiable? Do we want to promote as we look
at a balance of vision and how to afford it?
Task Force Gullahorn 200 97 Key challenges: Add challenge reflecting the
need to address the lack of housing for the
homeless and near homeless.
Should reflect the policies stated in H2 and H3
Task Force Gullahorn 201 102 2nd paragraph: Add “medicine and medical
research “ instead of “medical”
Task Force Gullahorn 202 103 Key challenges: Add bullet about creating a
world class medical research and technology
component to the city’s future, including a first
class medical school and residency programs.
Task Force Gullahorn 203 109 Key challenges: Additional bullet about
incenting target development in an intentional
fashion by the maximization and coordination
of resources and incentives with the County.
Example: CER 6 can’t be well done without
collaboration with the county
Task Force Gullahorn 204 116 Key challenges: Additional bullet about
collaboration with the county will enhance the
chances for meeting the rest of the
challenges listed here.
Task Force Gullahorn 205 119 119-129/policies: Add county collaboration in
many of these where obvious.
Cf PS 5, 6 and RO 9
Task Force Gullahorn 206 126 Key challenges: Add language in bullet about
becoming a world leader in health care
research and technology
Cf HHS 2
Task Force Gullahorn 207 137 Entire chapter: Move entire chapter closer to
the front
Important for readers understanding as they
begin to read report
Task Force Gullahorn 208 138 et seg/ priority programs and related priority
actions: How do these or the following
breakdowns of each of these incorporate any
flexibility for the need for planning for growth
(desired or not) in the ETJ, especially in those
areas where annexation will occur most
quickly?
Must build in language in these action
programs and their priority actions that reflect
the need to address these contingencies.
Task Force Gullahorn 209 140 priority actions: Add bullet specifying that city
should collaborate with the county to incent
development in the ETJ that will maximize
opportunities for success of all these priorities
in the ETJ
Task Force Gullahorn 210 143 housing priorities: Add action to increase the
availability of sustainable housing bond
funding for lowest income residents and
working homeless
Task Force Gullahorn 211 146 LUT Action 4: Modify to say add language
about the ETJ and directing growth through
incenting any development that may occur
through collaboration and targeted user of new
infrastructure projects to minimize sprawl
Task Force Gullahorn 212 146 LUT Action 5: This parking regulation proposal
will raise the cost of new businesses and
those that already exist that already can’t meet
parking restrictions. Counterintuitive to getting
businesses to locate in the inner city as well as
negatively impacting affordability.
Task Force Gullahorn 213 147 LUT Action 14: In first bullet add language
saying that in collaboration with county use
public transit centers as an incentive to drive
development in the ETJ to preferred areas.
Task Force Gullahorn 214 149 149, et seg/ LUT Action 20, 23, 33,35, 37, 39:
Increase costs of living in inner city.
“regulation and Require” are not the words to
use. “encourage” better if at all.
This is a major area of conflict in the plan with
regard to affordability and the desire to have a
tightly regulated dense inner city
Need a requirement that for any new
regulation or requirement there is an
“affordability impact statement” that would
have to be performed and assess the impact
on additional costs to existing homeowners as
well as the home buyer/ renter or taxpayer.
Task Force Gullahorn 216 151 HN Action 3: Affordable housing bullet:
incomplete paragraph
What regulations? What enhancements?
Task Force Houston 269 Concerned the planning commission will not
listen to/hear/address the needs of those not
at the table, those at the margins.
Task Force Houston 270 The plan is too "downtown/DAA focused,"
when most of our citizens live outside of
downtown and in a growing number of cases
outside the city's tax base.
Task Force Houston 271 The plan must address the challenge to
maintain a sense of unity/cohesion between
the people and parts of the expanding city(up
and out) not create independent
communities/silos. Keep the feel of
'community'.
Task Force Houston 272 72 The plan needs to address the need to bring
'human' services, artistic culture, quality of life
for communities of color and resources out of
downtown Austin into already geographically
expanding neighborhoods.
Task Force Houston 273 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 274 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 275 42 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 276 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 277 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 278 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 279 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 280 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 281 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 282 29 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 283 143 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 284 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 285 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 287 42 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 288 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 289 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 290 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 291 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 292 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 293 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 294 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force Houston 295 Missing threads in the plan:
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,319 Statistics/demographic data is outdated and
needs update.
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,321 More emphasis on medical community (sim to
Kirk Watson plan) from economic
development and "healthy Austin" viewpoint.
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,341
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,1101 How do people stay in their homes: how do
we maintain affordability while creating a
better place? Need to reconcile better
development (regulations) vs affordability
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,1128
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,1162 Recommends careful look at cost impact of
new regulations to implement Plan, esp tough
on small businesses. Used parking
regulations as an example. Do new regulation
costs counter-act improved/better
development?
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,1167 Agrees that intent of this plan outlines vision
and creates toolbox for more detailed future
plans
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,1176 Not that concerned about more outreach if
there's not enough time but would like to tweak
Plan to get buy-in from Travis County, medical
and affordability communities/constituency.
Task Force October 25
Jack Gullahorn,1180 Whats happening currently to reach out to
those who have been overlooked? What's our
timeline and does it allow for this?
Task Force Jonathan 1091 169 CFS Action 45: Change "Maintain and
Ogren, expand" to "Expand and strengthen", and
December 13 include the goal of non-degradation.
Task Force 328
Jonathan Ogren, November 1 141 prioritization of open spce, mechanisms,
values, priorities of which areas need to be
preserved
Task Force 343
Jonathan Ogren, November 1
Task Force 1109
Jonathan Ogren, November 1 need more forward thought on some issues
Task Force 1137
Jonathan Ogren, November 1 ET asked JO for map comments- poor
graphics, maybe relook at maps, legitimize
map looking at other different components led
to separate discussion of improving map w/
more detailed data layers.
Task Force 1160
Jonathan Ogren, November 1 innovation- "good nuggets" need to be
included that might have been missed in
process.
Task Force Lind 1013 47 p 110 agricultural farmland- add that the E.
Austin Blacklands are some of the most fertile
soil anywhere. Agriculture should not be
denigrated.
Task Force Lind 1014 72 pg 72- needs to be reprioritized (Complete
Communities matrix should match order of
themes in Vision)
Task Force Lind 1015 78 No list of mixed use corridors, no criteria for
mixed use corridors.
Task Force Lind 1016 78 No criiteria for dense nodes
Task Force Lind 1017 147 Designated redevelopment area language too
vague.
Task Force Lind 1018 Map Conservation of resources contradiction, esp
bldg in farmland Sh 130
Task Force Lind 1019 How will prorities be realistically implemented?
Too much glitter and not enough bite. Metrics
seriously needed.
Task Force Lind 1020 Graphics (maps) lacking; mentioned McHarg
overlay method.
Task Force Lind 1021 Plan is rife w/ contradictions, esp purports to
be dense, compact city, but too much
emphasis on ETJ growth. There is emphasis
for limiting infrastructure but not consistent w/
land use vision.
Task Force Lind 1022 Density offsets req for connected nodes but
nobody will participate
Task Force Lind 1023 Target density swaps for future development
Task Force Lind 1024 Tax abatement needed for green space
Task Force Lind 1025 Protection of exist environmental features not
stressed enough.
Task Force Lind 1026 Prioritize development in dense central city
(urban core) and then move outward, only
makes sense economically
Task Force Lind 1027 Investigate land bank concept
Task Force Lind 1028 40 Compare Austin traffic to great cities
(Portland), not Dallas or Houston
Task Force Lind 1029 content driven, meaningful graphics required,
not just pretty pictures
Task Force Lind 1030 City process does not seem to be
understanding of small business
Task Force 1182
Margaret Cooper, October 4 Spoke to the need for the CATF members to
come to meetings prepared, materials
reviewed, ready for comment.
Task Force 329
Mark Lind, October 25 Protection of exist environmental features not
stressed enough.
Task Force 1095
Mark Lind, October 25 City process does not seem to be
understanding of small business
Task Force 1096
Mark Lind, October 25 40 Compare Austin traffic to great cities
(Portland), not Dallas or Houston
Task Force 1147
Mark Lind, October 25 How will prorities be realistically implemented?
Too much glitter and not enough bite. Metrics
seriously needed.
Task Force 1169
Mark Lind, October 25 Concerned that it's the end of process and
there are so many flaws; shows that process
didn't work.
Task Force 1174
Mark Lind, October 25 Frustrated that he has never received dwgs or
data that he's requested from Staff.
Task Force 1181
Mark Lind, October 25 Working Group meetings were abyssmal.
Why did people stop coming? Too scripted.
Not enough attention to participant concerns.
Task Force 305
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Need better communication plan to
promote/sell Comp Plan
Task Force 336
Mark Yznaga, October 18 1 Difficulty with navigation of document for
specific embedded info. Perhaps an index?
Task Force 338
Mark Yznaga, October 18 137 Perhaps select very top priorities w/ proposed
action for each which can be viewed as an
example for the other priorities. Also, more
rationale as to why these are priority items.
Task Force 1103
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Incorporate a futurist vision that shows
contrast between now and 30 yr from now.
Task Force 1110
Mark Yznaga, October 18 137 Not enough strength in implementation ,
monitoring language. Not enough trust that
the Plan will be implemented. Who will be
accountable? Move this section up in the
order.
Task Force 1113
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Priorities need to be closer linked to actions
(Tulsa Plan).
Task Force 1115
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Relationship to other Plans not clear. Need
more/better reference to other Plans
Task Force 1121
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Economic development section too light
Task Force 1122
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Need more emphasis on climate change.
Task Force 1123
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Need more emphasis on water use plan,
future energy vision
Task Force 1136
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Ambiguity w/ Growth Concept Map. Ensure
that map is not taken so seriously, it's the big
picture concepts that should trigger more
detailed smart growth decisions.
Task Force 1138
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Improve the quality of the maps . Sometimes
the maps seem to be o ut of place.
Task Force 1145
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Benchmarks need to be more related to the
actions.
Task Force 1146
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Perhaps include metrics in specific sections
ratner than lump them together in their own
section.
Task Force 1153
Mark Yznaga, October 18 Inclusion of a sustainability index is very
important.
Task Force McIntyre 217 9 FACTF: "Experts agree:
Families with children are critical to the growth,
diversity, vibrancy, and economic vitality of a
city." Could be included in "Core Principles for
Action" or elsewhere.
Task Force McIntyre 218 49 FACTF Chapter 2: "87% of people in Austin
says it is important to live near open space.
-vs-
37% of people in Austin’s urban core do not
live near a park."
Task Force McIntyre 219 52 Incorporate into chapter 2: FACTF: Austin
becoming less welcoming to families: "High
housing costs in central core
Quality of public schools
Disparities in access to resources
Need for safer biking/walking
Need for more child-friendly parks & open
spaces
Lack of affordable quality child care"
Task Force McIntyre 220 72 Perhaps somewhere in Complete
Communities. FACTF: "What is a family-
friendly city?
Safe, affordable housing designed for families’
needs
Affordable, quality child care
Excellent public schools
Parks and play spaces within walking distance
Pedestrian and bicycle pathways
Safe neighborhoods"
Task Force McIntyre 221 72 In Complete Communities or an action:
FACTF: "Family-friendly cities create better
built environments by keeping central the
needs of families and by involving families in
the decision-making processes."
Task Force McIntyre 222 72 In Complete Communities or an action:
FACTF: "City Council adopted new vision:
Austin will be the most family-friendly city in
the country. April 2009
City Council added family-friendly city to one
of 4 core strategic priorities for Austin. April
2009
Council directed City Manager to 'address and
incorporate the perspectives of families with
children in all current and future planning
initiatives, including the ongoing
Comprehensive Plan.' April 2009"
Task Force McIntyre 223 72 In Complete Communities or an action:
FACTF: "Create Families with children
ombudsman
Adopt family-friendly design standards
Address needs and interests of families with
children in all city planning. "
Task Force McIntyre 224 116 11th bullet – “Providing sufficient funding for
acquiring and maintaining parks ……..”
Comment: self explanatory
Task Force McIntyre 225 117 WPD 2 – “Regularly scheduled maintenance
of water and wastewater………”
Task Force McIntyre 226 117 WPD 3 – “Develop and evaluate decentralized
wastewater………..” Comment: Remove
“Continue” which may not suggest anything
different being done.
Task Force McIntyre 227 117 WPD 4 – “Maximize efforts to develop
diversification ……….” Comment: See
above.
Task Force McIntyre 228 118 SW 1 – “Plan for the waste management
implications…..” Comment: “Address”
has no specific direction.
Task Force McIntyre 229 118 PS 2 – ‘Improve community outreach through
building trust between the police force and
Austin’s minority communities” Comment:
After presentation from the minority
communities on Tuesday, this is a VERY
important key challenge. If it can be made
more forceful, that would be good.
Task Force McIntyre 230 146 FACTF action item: "Greater access to
affordable family-sized housing is needed
throughout the city and particularly in the
urban core."
Task Force McIntyre 231 143 FACTF action item. I like the specificity of this
one. We should have more direct actions like
this in the plan. "Fund a model family-friendly
development that illustrates best practices and
design standards in a TOD.
Adopt a 20-year vision and plan for closing
affordable housing gap in Austin. Set specific
targets for families with children through five-
year Consolidated Plans.
Start rental assistance program to keep K-12
students in their neighborhood schools."
Task Force McIntyre 232 146 Action items from FACTF: "Medium and high
density developments should accommodate
children’s need for outdoor space.
Include a broader range of family-friendly
features in parks and programs.
Expand cultural opportunities for families with
children in Downtown and throughout the city."
Task Force McIntyre 233 146 FACTF action items: "Encourage community
benefit agreements that include child care in
new development projects.
Require impact reviews that analyze how new
developments will affect existing child care
services.
Incorporate child care in TODs.
Target portion of fee-in-lieu-of proceeds from
Downtown development for child care.
Provide land and building space for child care
as part of city real estate transactions."
Task Force McIntyre 234 146 FACTF action items:
"Adoption of impact statement for new
developments impacting AISD school
enrollment.
Improved collaboration with more clear areas
of focus for the COA/AISD/Travis County Joint
Subcommittee
Take more active role in discussions related to
facility changes"
Task Force McIntyre 235 146 FACTF action items:
"Adopt policy for formal, coordinated planning
Coordinate on capital improvement projects"
Task Force McIntyre 236 146 FACTF action item: "The City of Austin should
increase the efficiency and safety of its
transportation network."
Task Force McIntyre 237 146 FACTF items: These items are in the plan but
are they stated as actions? "Expand bicycle
and pedestrian pathways, especially near
schools, parks, and public transit
Increase the safety of our streets, crossings,
and bicycle/pedestrian pathways through
signage, traffic calming, and increased
enforcement"
Task Force McIntyre 238 116 3rd bullet – “Continuing and expanding our
commitment to implementing……reclamation,
and drought-management programs and
implementing (or finding) effective ways……”
Comment: use more action words
Task Force McIntyre 239 116 9th bullet – “Providing services …….The rapid
increases in Austin’s older population, youth
population and Hispanic population will require
additional services oriented to these age
groups and ethnic groups.” Comment: The
largest change in Demographics will be the
increase in the Hispanic population.
Task Force McIntyre 240 116 10th bullet – Move this up to after bullet #6.
Comment: Related subjects
Task Force McIntyre 241 From the presentations of the Asian, African
American, and Hispanic communities, the
following concerns were expressed from them
all and should be reflected in the Plan
(primarily in Complete Communities).
1. Working with the Police Dept. to: ensure a
safe neighborhood; attention bullying and
racism in the schools; reduce racial profiling,
working with Judicial system to help reduce
school crime.
2. Quality child care is essential.
3. Affordable housing in all neighbornoods is
essential.
4. Health care must be available and
affordable.
5. Cultural activities will enhance the
communities.
6. Transportation must be available for work,
school, shopping, etc.
7. Equity and inclusion are necessary for
success in all areas.
Task Force Melancon 97 102 FIRST SENTENCE: Government, technology,
medical and institutional uses such as higher
education and government form the base of
Austin’s Economy. should include small, local
business. According to the 2009 Sustainability
Indicators Project, 72% of Austin employers
have fewer than 10 employees and 46% of all
Austin employees work for a company with
less than 50 employees.
In this paragraph there is discussion on
specific industries such as technology sectors,
health care and data centers. While some of
the industries mentioned do indeed have small
businesses, most do not. With 72% of
employers being very small, I think this
justifies consideration in this paragraph and
throughout the Economy section. I would like
to see the sentence read:
Government, technology, medical, higher
education and small, local business form the
base of Austin’s Economy.
Task Force Melancon 98 103 KEY CHALLENGES FOR THE FUTURE
BULLET POINT 6: Broaden this sentence by
removing the repetitions of the word creative
and including local business. This is only
about creative businesses while “local
businesses” encompasses creative as well as
not so creative. Sentence should read:
Reducing the number of obstacles facing
small, local business (e.g.....
Task Force Melancon 99 103 BULLET POINT 7: Again, broaden the
statement by removing the reference to East
Austin.
Task Force Melancon 100 103 NEW BULLET POINT (8): A huge challenge
for local business is to level the playing field
between small, local business and big
business. Our local government continues to
offer big business serious incentives such as
tax rebates, outright paying for jobs and
waivers of fees. Local business creates jobs
and is the backbone of our local economy, yet
receives no benefits for growth or expansion.
Perhaps this could read:
Creating programs that encourage and
support the growth and stability of local
business in order to preserve our unique local
business community.
Task Force Melancon 101 105 In the first Economy working group meeting on
March 26, where the details of this vision were
to be defined, local business was mentioned in
27 separate actions and ideas. I unfortunately
couldn’t be at this meeting, so I had no input
on this but I was pleased to see the public
express such support of local business. At the
second Economy working group meeting on
April 14, local business was in 23 actions and
ideas. City staff then compiled the hundreds of
ideas and actions into a list for the public to
vote on. Local business was mentioned in one
item (Local-3).
Local business is not mentioned at all in the 17
economic policies. It is mentioned, ironically, in
a pull quote from a community forum
participant. How did we go from 50 action
items to not one policy? There are more than
75,000 business owners in Austin and we
should consider their power in any policies we
create.
Task Force Melancon 102 105 ECO2: Change small business to local
business.
Task Force Melancon 103 106 ECO13: Change new business to new local
business.
Economy Policy 13 (page 106) which states
"Promote "start-up districts" where new
businesses benefit from locating near
transportation infrastructure, services,
suppliers, mentors, and affordable support
facilities." Change "new business" to "new
local business."
Task Force Melancon 104 104 ECO14: Replace ...and digital media with
...through local business. It makes no sense
the way it reads now.
Task Force Melancon 105 Map I am very concerned about the map from its
creation to its completion. I witnessed people
slapping sticky notes on any neighborhood but
their own. There weren’t enough instructions,
etc. I don’t really know how to fix this. Staff
says it corresponds to the neighborhood plans
but the neighborhoods say it doesn’t.
Task Force Melancon 106 138 CHANGE AUSTIN’S DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AND PROCESSES TO
PROMOTE A COMPACT CITY. Under
Related Priority Actions, bullet number 8 reads
Change development regulations and
processes to foster a business-friendly
environment (ECON Action-3). But ECON
Action-3 reads Create a regulatory framework
to foster a business-friendly environment by:
Then nothing. That’s all it says. Instead of
ECON Action-3 which offers nothing, change
this to read ECON Action-18 which offers a
long list of ideas for local business.
Task Force Melancon 107 144 We need to connect Related Priority Actions to
the Policies. Without this we’re giving an open
license to interpreting how to implement the
policies and the actions have no direction.
Task Force Melancon 1031 economy- concerned that ideas from WG mtgs
are not addressed....local business came up
27 times with 23 actions but no mention in
Comp Plan draft. next mtg.final compile little
mention. Not enough mention of "local".
"Small" mentioned but needs to be "local and
new" led to discussion of small business w/
Austin character. Does not like "iconic".
Task Force Melancon 1032 economy language too general, need to be
much more specific w/ descriptions
Task Force Melancon 1033 actions- policies w/o actions. Priorities not
representative of all citizens.
Task Force Ogren 296 1) Innovation Check-- throughout plan.
Balance the idea of moving ahead for 20 to 30
years with fresh ideas while still being
pragmatic.
Task Force Ogren 297 2) Spatial representation of expenditures
within the study area over the last 30 years--
Where have capital improvements and tax
incentives been made by city, state, federal,
county, river authority include:
Transportation
Flood Control
Water Quality Mitigation
Erosion Control
Amenity Creation
Social Service Supply
Environmental Degradation
Species Protection
Karst Protection
Recreation
Education
Look at existing capital expenditures and
ordinance to understand how future
expenditures will or will not work towards
principles asserted in the Comprehensive Plan-
and address which ones will be contradictory
to the comprehensive plan and need to be
reconciled.
Task Force Ogren 298 3) Testing the Preferred Growth Scenario.
Break down the density of jobs and population
by the following:
Watershed-- understand the impervious cover
implications per watershed
Transportation capacity-- over and under
capacity transportation networks
Recharge Zone and Contributing Zone of
Edwards Aquifer-- Both Barton Springs
Segment and Northern Edwards
Water Quality Buffers-- Proposed Headwaters
for east and general Water Quality Transition
Zones and Critical Water Quality Zones
Floodplain
Prime Farmland Soils
TPWD Ecological Systems Classification
SH 130 Corridor
Existing Business Centers
Impaired Waterways
Wastewater and Water Supply infrastructure
Slope Classifications in Ordinance (15 to 25%,
25 to 35%, over 35%)
Note: There are many more to use but this is
a good starting list.
Task Force Ogren 299 4) Prioritization of Conservation/ Open Space
Areas-- Tiers of purchase and/or conservation
easements priorities over the life of the plan.
This may be something the plan calls for or is
actually in the plan but it we should make sure
the city is strategically using its resources to
protect open space, farmland, water quality,
and guiding land use.
Task Force Ogren 300 5) Other elements Once we get back public
comments I want to look at: how local
agricultural is treated in the plan, the concept
of natural capitalism/ ecosystem services, and
a thorough explanation of the economic
benefits and issues with natural resource
degradation and conservation.
Task Force 1164
Patricia Dabbert, November 1 church taking advantage of zoning by opening
business, neighborhood compatabililty issue?
Task Force November 1
Perla Cavazos, 316 land use and transp- "cultural" heritage needs
to also mean "multi-ethnic"
Task Force November 1
Perla Cavazos, 318 neighborhood character- wants more language
associated w/ "protection" than just historical
preservation, such as muti-ethnic culture
Task Force November 1
Perla Cavazos, 322 105 105- include minority and WBE
Task Force November 1
Perla Cavazos, 324 103 economy- wages not keeping up w/ cost of
living in sidebar but not in
Task Force November 1
Perla Cavazos, 332 need more recommendations linked to
opportunities, metrics, individual involvement,
engage citizenry
Task Force 323
Rebecca Melancon, November 1 economy language too general, need to be
much more specific w/ descriptions
Task Force 1090
Rebecca Melancon, November 1
Task Force 1132
Rebecca Melancon, November 1 the map relies too much on chip exercise, not
enough validity in chip exercise
Task Force 1177
Rebecca Melancon, November 1 revisit constituency?
Task Force October 18
Regina Rogoff, 1093 Address challenges w/ true solutions (vs
theoretical).
Task Force October 18
Regina Rogoff, 1104 Lack of equity info, too much about trails.
Task Force October 18
Regina Rogoff, 1120 Need economic impact of Comp Plan.
Task Force October 18
Regina Rogoff, 1168 Asked Staff to become more involved in
establishing/recommend metrics.
Task Force October 4
Regina Rogoff, 344
Task Force October 4
Regina Rogoff, 1150 Expressed need to see specific baselines
relating to current status of health in Austin
Task Force RM, 1154 more metrics from city depts, education
metrics
Task Force RM, October 25335 Will Executive Summary help w/ outreach to
those overlooked.
Task Force 340
Rob D'Amico, October 18
Task Force 1092
Rob D'Amico, October 18 "Complete Streets" definition required as
opposed to Great Streets.
Task Force 1098
Rob D'Amico, October 18 105 Creative economy language is questionable
(ECO-6)
Task Force 1112
Rob D'Amico, October 18 Poverty vs prosperity. Not enough emphasis
on "curing" the poverty
Task Force 1117
Rob D'Amico, October 18 78 Streets w/in private developments and their
peripheries need to be better planned for
bicyclists/pedestrians.
Task Force 1157
Rob D'Amico, October 18 Supports more measurable indicators
Task Force 331
Robert Martinez, October 18 Need better link to existing Plans.
Task Force 339
Robert Martinez, October 18 Glossary"Planning" terms need clarification for average
citizen.
Task Force 1105
Robert Martinez, October 18 More emphasis needed on "unity".
Task Force 1106
Robert Martinez, October 18 More emphasis needed on community and
connectivity.
Task Force 1155
Robert Martinez, October 18 Need more detailed
measurements/benchmarks. Ie reduce dropout
rates. And we need specific (numeric) goals
for ea benchmark.
Task Force Roberto 312
Martinez
Task Force Roberto 1134
Martinez
Task Force 1149
Roberto Martinez, October 4 Expressed general concerns about the need
for the plan to be more
accountable/measureable
Task Force 1151
Roberto Martinez, October 4 Expressed the need to establish/include
baselines for the metrics
Task Force 1158
Roberto Martinez, October 4 Would like to see metrics tied to the Core
Principles for Action (p. 9) measureable
outcomes need to include specific metrics
Task Force Rogoff 7 28 Under "Median Incomes", add bullet or chart
that compares Austin’s median household
income to median household incomes of peer
cities
Task Force Rogoff 12 43
Task Force Rogoff 18 45 Under "What Does It Mean," Add bullet:
“Austin needs to invest in workforce
development programs that address shortages
in critical healthcare professions.”
Task Force Rogoff 19 49 Under "Parks and Preserves," add bullet:
“Dove Springs area in southeast Austin has
limited access to parks and other amenities.”
Task Force Rogoff 20 49 Amend Parks and Recs Facilities chart to
include swimming pools and planned Waller
Creek Boathouse. Add footnote to
explain/describe 28 Special Parks.
Task Force Rogoff 21 49 Add bullet re: “Austin’s innumerable races and
regional regattas provide both physical and
financial value to the community.”
COA Comment - Need to see what section this
best fits into.
Task Force Rogoff 24 53 Under "Education," add bullet re: The area’s
high HS drop out rate is caused in part by its
high rate of teen pregnancy.”
Task Force Rogoff 25 53 Under "Education," add bullet re: “______#
start but fail to complete community college.”
Task Force Rogoff 25 53 Add bullet re: “200,000 area residents have
started but failed to complete community
college.”
Task Force Rogoff 26 53 Under "Education," add bullet re: “Austin has
___# of Blue Ribbon schools mainly located in
upper-income areas.” (Is this true?)
Task Force Rogoff 27 29 Under "Educatinal attainment", add bullet re:
College completion rate—“200,000 area adults
aged 25 or older have some college; 38,000 of
them have incomes <200% FPG.”
Task Force Rogoff 28.1 29 Under "Educatinal attainment", add bullet re:
“The large pool of adults with some college
can portend either a social problem or an
opportunity to invest in region’s human
capital.”
Task Force Rogoff 28.2 53 Under "Health and Healthcare," add statement
or bullet re: “Austin has a significant shortage
of healthcare professionals including primary
and specialty care providers willing to accept
new Medicaid and/or Medicare patients.
Task Force Rogoff 31.1 54 Under "Social Services," add bullet re: “The
City allocates $___million dollars for social
services.”
Task Force Rogoff 31.2 54 Under "Social Services," add bullet re:
“services to seniors and persons with
disabilities.”
Task Force Rogoff 39 62 Under Regional job…" add statement
“Meanwhile, high wage, high skill jobs in the
healthcare sector are projected in both the
short and long term.”
Task Force Rogoff 41 42 Under "Economy", add bullet re: “200,000
adults have started but not completed a
college education.”
Task Force Rogoff 42 88 Add bullet to address “Meeting the needs of
under-developed communities like Dove
Springs in southeast Austin.”
Task Force Rogoff 43 98 Add new policy re: “In order to preserve and
protect neighborhoods short-term rentals
should be regulated and restricted.”
Task Force Rogoff 44 99 Add to N.1 reference to “both new and
redeveloped” neighborhoods across Austin
Task Force Rogoff 45 103 RE: Key Challenges For the Future
Task Force Rogoff 46 105 p105-106 -- Add bullet re: “Invest in medical
education and residency programs.”
Task Force Rogoff 47 105 p105-106 -- Add policy re: “Invest in region’s
human capital through long-term job training
for living wage jobs.”
Task Force Rogoff 48 109 5th bullet change "increase" to increasing
Task Force Rogoff 49 115 3rd paragraph: Add boathouse to list of PARD
managed properties.
Task Force Rogoff 53 124
Task Force Rogoff 56 126 add Best Practice
Task Force Rogoff 57 127 CFE 17. “Schools” should be singular.
Task Force Rogoff 61 140 5th bullet delete "s" on "creates"
Task Force Rogoff 62 140 Last bullet, change first word to either promote
or create
Task Force Rogoff 66.1 143 Under "Grow and invest…", 6th bullet, change
first word to either promote or create
Task Force Rogoff 66.2 144 Change 6th bullet to either promote or create
Task Force Rogoff 67 143 1st bullet under "Develop and Mainitian…",
add "s" to complement and enhance
Task Force Rogoff 68 144 Add an "s" to "education system"
Task Force Rogoff 69 144 Add a bullet re: “Invest in workforce
development and training for adults.”
Task Force Rogoff 72 145 Add bullet re: “Create a waterways master
plan to integrate and foster water based
activities.”
Task Force Rogoff 73 145 “Likewise, a healthy city confronts the social
stigma associated with mental illness and
developmental disabilities. It also tackles the
complex social factors that contribute to teen
pregnancy.”
Task Force Rogoff 303 55 Under "What does it…: define Blue Ribbon
Task Force Rogoff 1083 26 Add bullet re: “Racial and ethnic minorities
experience significantly higher morbidity and
mortality due to disparities in health and
healthcare.”
Task Force Rogoff 1084 28 Update data: “1 in 5 Austin residents live in
poverty; 27% of children reside in households
with incomes under federal poverty
guidelines.”
Task Force Rogoff 1085 29 Under educational attainment, add reference
to health disparities: “Services to address
poverty, health disparities and limited job skills
are needed in Austin.”
Task Force Rogoff 1086 43 Under "Labor Force", add bullet re: “200,000
adults have started but not completed a
college education.”
Task Force Rogoff 1087 43 Under "Employers/Business Sector," add
bullet:“Central Texas faces a shortage of
healthcare professionals.”
Task Force Rogoff 1088 54 Under "Social Services", add bullet re: “Austin
has thousands of not-for-profit organizations
but ranks ___ in philanthropy and charitable
giving nationally.”
Task Force Rogoff and 40 77 The paragraph section for the numbers for
COA PDR outreach should be rethought for clarity and
Staff anot to create a misleading idea.
Task Force 1
RR, November 334 66 why has the sequence of vision statement
components changed
Task Force RR, November 1089 policies vs challenges. Policies too specific.
Challenges need to include actions
Task Force RR, November 1102 9 incorporate "family friendly" in core principles.
Task Force SC, November 1127
Task Force SC, October 251133 ea constituency needs their own needs map
Task Force SC, October 251161 foundational data needs to assist future
decisions, requires assessment
Task Force SC, October 251166 We need to revisit outreach to younger
generation. What mechanism?
Task Force 325
SC/ET, November 1 small local businesses (Austin character) need
to be preserved or encouraged. maybe
"iconic" is not proper word
Task Force 313
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Concern raised about needed cultural heritage
information
Task Force 315
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Indicated that the African American/Black
communities believe the Quality of Life
statement to be too general to reflect their
priorities/concerns
Task Force 317
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Need to ensure historical representation of the
African American/Black communities in this
plan
Task Force 1126
Scooter Cheatam, October 4
Task Force 1131
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Suggested the need to include minority report
maps and stressed the importance of
providing a public platform for those with
specific/ alternative views.
Task Force 1139
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Indicated that he may still be able to assemble
a number of GIS volunteers
Task Force 1140
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Indicated that Jonathan Ogren provided a
report of "needed fixes" early in Community
Inventory process. Requests that this review
process with Jonathan/Scooter completed.
Task Force 1142
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Suggested that the Plan should include a map
indicating archaeological sites.
Task Force 1173
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Expressed criticism of the outreach efforts and
that there is a general assumption that the
techniques used to reach diverse communities
were sufficient to encourage participation.
Task Force 1178
Scooter Cheatam, October 4 Suggested that if we want to fully engage
those yet to feel engaged/welcome in this
process, that specific efforts be made to sit
down with each of these communities.
Task Force 314
Scooter Cheatham, October 18 Include something on issue of better educating
minorities to better represent themselves, at all
levels.
Task Force 327 111
Scooter Cheatham, October 18 Address need for resiliency to climate change.
Task Force Task Force 1034 40 Reduction in VMT: do we know why this
10/18/11 happened? Brag about it, but not sure that it's
due to positive forces.
Task Force Task Force 1035 78 More on addressing [accessibility along the]
10/18/11 periphery of big developments/activity centers.
Task Force Task Force 1036 90 CFS participant quote on "biker" and "reliant
10/18/11 infrastructure" -- reads funny.
Task Force Task Force 1037 90 LUT 20: Include mention of water quality.
10/18/11
Task Force Task Force 1038 105 Economic policy on creating flexible place-
10/18/11 based policies, virtual & digital -- what does
this mean?
Task Force Task Force 1039 125 What is "perceived safety"?
10/18/11
Task Force Task Force 1040 More on economic development, water,
10/18/11 energy, climate change, and air quality. More
on resiliency/transitions.
Task Force Task Force 1041 Mixed Use Corridors: Need to find a way to get
10/18/11 past the VMU discussion.
Task Force Task Force 1042 Glossar Include a glossary? FLUM, zoning map, GCM,
10/18/11 y etc.
Task Force Task Force 1043 180 Move the implementation and monitoring part
10/18/11 of ch. 5 before the action table.
Task Force Task Force 1044 1 More detailed table of contents -- detail on
10/18/11 sections that are 20-30 pages long.
Task Force Task Force 1045 Should the plan include an index?
10/18/11
Task Force Task Force 1046 More detail on how this plan and other plans
10/18/11 relate. (Toronto is an example.) Refer to
existing plans in building blocks?
Task Force Task Force 1047 Stronger connections between the priority
10/18/11 programs and related priority actions. What's
the first step? PlaNYC as an example.
Task Force Task Force 1048 139 Code review action item: specify which
10/18/11 sections are the focus and why.
Task Force Task Force 1049 Benchmarks & data: stronger connection
10/18/11 between these and the actions/programs
Task Force Task Force 1050 Map improvements: clearer, better legends,
10/18/11 better relation to the text.
Task Force Task Force 1051 More of a sense of how the city pays for itself
10/18/11 and what this plan does to improve that?
Task Force Task Force 1052 Timetables for actions
10/18/11
Task Force Task Force 1053 Introduce/highlight small/local business
10/18/11 actions earlier.
Task Force Task Force 1054 Re: creating a complete streets policy --
10/18/11 mention that we have one already and clarify
relation to new policy.
Task Force Task Force 1055 28 Incorporate more info from recent report on
10/18/11 number of people living in poverty.
Task Force Task Force 1056 Ways for people to see the potential difference
10/18/11 that the plan maps? Simple map showing
where change is likely to occur?
Task Force Task Force 1057 Clarify some terms -- community, unity, equity.
10/18/11
Task Force Task Force 1058 Do more to assert that we're all together as a
10/18/11 single community.
Task Force Task Force 1059 Complete Community Matrix is hard to
10/18/11 understand.
Task Force Task Force 1060 Mixed Use Corridors: more on affordability
10/18/11 along corridors.
Task Force Task Force 1061 Include disclaimers on the map (Dallas
10/18/11 example or statutory language)
Task Force Task Force 1062 Clearer connections to the racial divide
10/18/11 mentioned on p4-5 -- how do our
actions/programs connect to this?
Task Force Task Force 1063 What are our actions for addressing below-
10/18/11 market housing? Build into zoning or create a
dedicated funding source.
Task Force Task Force 1064 154 Possible new action: mechanism for
10/18/11 involving/engagement minority community in
the ongoing comprehensive planning program.
Task Force Task Force 1065 Indicators: look to existing plans for topic-area
10/18/11 specific measures.
Task Force Task Force 1066 Does/can the plan address affordability/people
10/18/11 getting taxed out of their homes.
Task Force Task Force 1067 New action: Recommend creating an
10/18/11 economic impact statement whenever the city
adopts new policies?
Task Force Task Force 1068 Highlight things in the plan that promote
10/18/11 making places more livable for poor folks (or
add actions that address this)
Task Force Task Force 1069 33 p33: goals: density; farmland preservation;
10/4/11 crime rate, fire, EMS service; hospital
locations and proximity
Task Force Task Force 1070 187 Geographic sub-areas (p187): revise NE
10/4/11 suburban boundary? Urban area -- split along I-
35? Combine 2 water supply areas? Tie sub-
areas to population counts (50,000 -
100,000?)
Task Force Task Force 1071 Map Data: Karst features (review by TF and/or
10/4/11 Watershed Protection, compared with activity
centers?)
Task Force Task Force 1072 1 Include page numbers for each Building Block
10/4/11 and action table for each BB in the Table of
Contents.
Task Force Task Force 1073 Indicators - more health indicators (outcomes
10/4/11 and access) -- teen pregnancy rates.
Task Force Task Force 1074 Data: TX Parks & Wildlife
10/4/11
Task Force Task Force 1075 Data: early settlement areas in blackland
10/4/11 prairie (incorporate into Fig. 4.6?)
Task Force Task Force 1076 Visuals: incorporate Airport Blvd visuals on
10/4/11 transitions
Task Force Task Force 1077 Indicators - attach goals.
10/4/11 - Perhaps this is a product of the first year of
implementation?
Task Force Task Force 1078 Indicators - baseline for metrics. Integrate into
10/4/11 chapter 2, with charts?
Task Force Task Force 1079 Incorporate the "DNA" of the two Quality of
10/4/11 Life studies
Task Force Task Force 1080 African-American Quality of Life: Historic
10/4/11 Preservation action: Define a cultural area
(possibly around the old Anderson High
School area) -- provides tourism and job
opportunities?
Task Force Task Force 1081 African-American Quality of Life: Concern with
10/4/11 prosperous young African-Americans moving
out of the city and region
Task Force Task Force 1082 Hispanic Quality of Life: interest in a
10/4/11 community development corporation to
attempt to reduce rising land costs in key
areas
Task Force Winetroub 301
Task Force Winetroub 302
Comp Plan Austin African 7001.1 28 1. pp 28-30: Did African American population
Committee American drop, or just the precentage?
Quality of Life
Study
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Austin African 7001.2 29 2. pp 28-30: Can we include school drop-out
Committee American rate by race/ethnicity, educational attainment
Quality of Life by race/ethnicity, to show where we need to
Study concentrate resources?
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Austin African 7001.3 52 3. pp 52-57:Would it be possible to show
Committee American health insurance coverage by race/ethnicity?
Quality of Life
Study
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Austin African 7001.4 53 4. There is relatively little in Chapter 2 showing
Committee American that economic and educational challenges are
Quality of Life disproportionately heavy for minority
Study communities. Adding this would help.
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Austin African 7001.5 5. The word "gentrification" does not appear in
Committee American the IACP. The word "displacement" appears
Quality of Life twice, but not beyond Chapter 2, yet it is a key
Study issue in "Neighborhood Sustainanblity".
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Austin 7002.1 1. Austin-Bergstrom International Airport
Committee Bergstrm (ABIA) did not have the references that other
International plans had in the Imagine Austin
Airport Master Comprehensive Plan. One reason is that
Plan (Hatfield) ABIA is an enterprise operation, which means
that ABIA does not receive monies from the
City of Austin. ABIA is funded by passengers,
airlines, and the FAA.
Comp Plan Austin 7002.2 2. ABIA has updated the Airport Master Plan
Committee Bergstrm several times. Light rail is in the master plan
International for the future to connect Austin with ABIA
Airport Master along with a flyby for automobile traffic.
Plan (Hatfield)
Comp Plan Austin 7002.3 41 3. ABIA is committed to a growth plan that
Committee Bergstrm matches the growth forecast by Imagine
International Austin. ABIA expects the Passenger activity
Airport Master to double from 2007-2026 (8.7 M-17.5M).
Plan (Hatfield) There are also future plans for a third runway
as traffic increases. ABIA has been working
on a new drainage plan that will come to the
Planning Commission in early 2012.
Comp Plan Austin Bicycle 7003.1 Included Complete and Healthy Communities,
Committee Plan Update and Compact and Connected strategic
(Sullivan) directions and actions because bicycling is
part of a complete transportation system
Comp Plan Austin Bicycle 7003.2 41 Page 41: Over-aching goal is 5% City-wide
Committee Plan Update modal splitby 2020 could be stated explicitly
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Austin Climate 7004 47 Page 47: The Climate Plan has several
Committee Protection specific goals that could be mentioned:
Plan (Sullivan) Municipal gov't carbon neutral by 2012, meet
30% of all energy needs with renewable
resources by 2020, update building codes for
home & businesses to significanlt reduce
energy use or do on-site generation, some of
which could go in this section.
Comp Plan Austin 7005.1 Do the growth patterns proposed in the IACP
Committee Emergency have signficant conflicts with existing
Operations pipelines? Areas known to flooding? Areas
Plan susceptible to wildfire? Areas downstream of
(Anderson) dams?
Comp Plan Austin 7005.2 Has the appropriate Police/Fire/EMS teams
Committee Emergency reviewed this plan to ensure it meets the
Operations requirements set forth by Federal, State, and
Plan local laws and regulations and will facilitate
(Anderson) them keeping Austin citizens safe?
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.1 10 Page 10: Add language to the Core Principle
Committee Strategic Plan paragraph to support inclusion of Energy in
(Tiemann) title. Recommend- “to continue commitment to
support Austin Energy’s Renewable Portfolio
Standard,
moving the utility from fossil fuels to clean
energy in our efforts to reduce CO2 emissions
and reduce negative effects of global warming.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.2 91 Page 91: Urban Design Policies- Create a UD
Committee Strategic Plan 9 that addresses utility’s Energy Resource
(Tiemann) Strategy
relating to renewable energy & conservation
strategies in new compact urban development.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.3 106 Page 106: Economic Policies- ECO-18,19, &
Committee Strategic Plan 20 are missing as indicated on page 159.
(Tiemann) Create a ECO 21 that addresses utility’s
economic development objective.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.4 114 Page 114: City Facilities and Services is
Committee Strategic Plan currently described with three categories- 1)
(Tiemann) Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage, and
Potable Water (this refers to water utility) 2)
Public Services, Buildings, and Facilities, and
3) Recreation and Open Space. Recommend
creation of additional category for electric
utility with emphasis on renewable energy.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.5 138 page 138: Change Austin’s development
Committee Strategic Plan regulations and processes to promote a
(Tiemann) compact and connected city- modify bullet
point language to reference comp plan doc
language on page 180.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.6 159 page 159: May want to expand ECON-19 or
Committee Strategic Plan create a new ECON-21 to capture Austin
(Tiemann) Energy’s clean energy/economy goal.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.7 184 Page 184: Natural and Sustainable- add bullet
Committee Strategic Plan point: • Energy consumption and generation,
(Tiemann) costs per capita,and percentage by fossil fuel
and renewable sources.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.8 185 Page 185: Prosperous- add bullet point: •
Committee Strategic Plan Green technology development, including
(Tiemann) number of companies, employees, and
economic output.
Comp Plan Austin Energy 7006.9 185 Page 185: Livable- add bullet point: • Energy
Committee Strategic Plan cost to consumer
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Austin Hazard 7007.1 Are Section 3 of this Plan and the IACP
Committee Mitigation consistent? If not, how does that impact the
Plan Update iACP?
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Hazard 7007.2 Where is Dam Safety addressed in IACP?
Committee Mitigation
Plan Update
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Hazard 7007.3 Where is Drought addressed in IACP? How
Committee Mitigation we grow can signficantly impact our
Plan Update susceptibility to drought…
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Hazard 7007.4 Does proposed transporation network in AICP
Committee Mitigation facilitate emergency evacuation procedures
Plan Update (i.e., Hurricane?)
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin 7008.01 9 page 9: Add language to the Core Principle
Committee Hispanic paragraph- Provide paths to prosperity for all:
Quality of Life "To ensure our economic strength, it is critical
Initiative to preserve and expand Austin’s mix of large
(Tiemann) and small businesses, local entrepreneurs,
major employers, clean industries, education
and government jobs. It is vital to cultivate the
expansion to include our multicultural
community and the talents it has to contribute
to Austin’s continued success and prosperity."
Comp Plan Austin 7008.02 10 page 10: Add language to the Core Principle
Committee Hispanic paragraph- Develop as an affordable and
Quality of Life healthy community: "New mixed-use areas
Initiative need to have attainably priced housing, be
(Tiemann) configured to accommodate multigenerational
cohabitation and larger families..."
Comp Plan Austin 7008.03 91 page 91: Urban Design Policies- Create a UD
Committee Hispanic 10 that promotes mixed income and multi-
Quality of Life cultural
Initiative neighborhoods by providing affordable
(Tiemann) housing options that also respond to the needs
of multigenerational and larger families.
Comp Plan Austin 7008.04 97 page 97: Key Challenges for the future- first
Committee Hispanic bullet point modified to capture
Quality of Life multigenerational/
Initiative larger families. This could also be folded into
(Tiemann) the last bullet point but wouldn’t address the
affordability component unless that aspect
could also be incorporated into sixth bullet
point: "Fostering mixed-use, mixed-income
neighborhoods with a range of housing
choices that include options for single living to
larger and/or multigenerational living..."
Comp Plan Austin 7008.05 98 page 98: Housing Policies- Modify H5 to
Committee Hispanic capture multi-generational family living
Quality of Life
Initiative
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Austin 7008.06 103 page 103: Key Challenges for the Future- Add
Committee Hispanic bullet point to provide emphasis to expand
Quality of Life local
Initiative businesses and cultivation of opportunities for
(Tiemann) multi-cultural communities: "To ensure our
economic strength, it is critical to preserve and
expand Austin’s mix of large and small
businesses, local entrepreneurs, major
employers, clean industries, education and
government jobs. It is vital to cultivate the
expansion to include our multicultural
community and the talents it has to contribute
to Austin’s continued success and prosperity."
Comp Plan Austin 7008.07 116 page 116: Key Challenges for the Future- Add
Committee Hispanic or modify bullet point to include growing
Quality of Life multicultural community and need for
Initiative multilingual communication to these
(Tiemann) communities about City services.
Comp Plan Austin 7008.08 119 page 119: Public Safety Policies- add PS10
Committee Hispanic that addresses need of multicultural
Quality of Life community for
Initiative multilingual communication to enhance
(Tiemann) preventative safety education and awareness
of other
services.
Comp Plan Austin 7008.09 130 page 130: adjust language to include "multi-
Committee Hispanic cultural..."
Quality of Life
Initiative
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Austin 7008.1 138 page 138: Change Austin’s development
Committee Hispanic regulations and processes to promote a
Quality of Life compact and
Initiative connected city- modify bullet point language to
(Tiemann) reference comp plan doc language on page
180: "Change Austin’s development
regulations and processes to promote a
compact and connected city in alignment with
other Master and Strategic plans, Initiatives,
and Neighborhood Plans."
Comp Plan Austin Public 7009.1 50 page 50: Library System- add bullet point or
Committee Library language to existing noting Resource Libraries
Strategic Plan in
(Tiemann) four Quadrants of City (i.e., Additionally, four
existing community branch libraries are
elevated and reorganized to serve as
Resource Branches in four quadrants of the
City.).
Comp Plan Austin Public 7009.2 69 page 69: Austin is educated- modify bullet
Committee Library point language: "Neighborhood schools and all
Strategic Plan libraries serve as centers for community
(Tiemann) collaboration, recreational and social events,
and venues for learning, job training, and other
life enrichment opportunites."
Comp Plan Austin Public 7009.3 99 page 99: Neighborhood Policies- Add
Committee Library language to N1: "Create complete
Strategic Plan neighborhoods across Austin that have a mix
(Tiemann) of housing types and land uses, affordable
housing and transportation options, and
access to schools, retail, employment,
community services and libraries, and parks
and recreation options."
Comp Plan Austin Public 7009.4 119 page 119: Public Building Policies- Add
Committee Library language to PB1: Provide transportation
Strategic Plan alternatives to community.
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Austin Public 7009.5 144 page 144: Continue to grow Austin’s economy
Committee Library by investing in our workforce and education
Strategic Plan sytem related priority action needs more
(Tiemann) definition and alignment with Library Strategic
and Master Plans.
Comp Plan Austin 7010 Hatfield
Committee Strategic
Mobility Plan
Comp Plan Austin Water 7011.1 111 There should be a specific reference in the
Committee 140 GPCD IACP to achieving the 140 GPCD goal by
Conservation 2020. Include as CER 17.
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7011.2 111 Reduction of peak demand should also be
Committee 140 GPCD reflected in the IACP. Include as CER 18.
Conservation
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7011.3 In general, not enough focus on water quantity
Committee 140 GPCD (adequate focus on water quality).
Conservation
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7011.4 Implementation section of IACP should
Committee 140 GPCD discuss addressing the reality of reducing
Conservation Utility revenue through successful
Plan conservation program.
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7012.1 The AWU Strategic plan is dated from 2003.
Committee Strategic Is there more current info that needs to be
Water reflected in the IACP? It is difficult to ensure
Resources alignment without newer data being available.
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7012.2 Treatment Capacity is different from available
Committee Strategic resources. Is there enough water in the
Water Colorado Basin to support the population and
Resources growth patterns predicted in the IACP, given
Plan climate variability and recent drought
(Anderson) conditions? How is the dealt with in the IACP?
How many people with this resource support?
Comp Plan Austin Water 7012.3 The proposed development patters in the
Committee Strategic IACP do not match the growth patterns
Water envisioned by the AWU during their planning
Resources process (which is appropriate, given different
Plan timing, assumptions, etc.). However, how has
(Anderson) the IACP considered the economic impact to
the citizens in general of providing adequate
water/wastewater infrastructure for this new
growth reality?
Comp Plan Austin Water 7012.4 Is the assumption that Austin will provide
Committee Strategic water to other entities within our planning area
Water in the future reflected in the IACP?
Resources
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7012.5 Reclaimed water should be promoted explicitly
Committee Strategic in the IACP as a strategy to ensure our water
Water is secure as possible.
Resources
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Water 7012.6 How does the IACP deal with the economic
Committee Strategic impacts of being water resource limited?
Water
Resources
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin 7013.1 Flood safety, erosion control, is a concern in
Committee Watershed Austin and should be mentioned in the Urban
Protection Design Building Block Policies. Balancing
Master Plan development with these needs is critical to our
(Anderson) success long-term.
Comp Plan Austin 7013.2 110 Add an erosion component to CER 6 (or other
Committee Watershed places it may be appropriate).
Protection
Master Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin 7013.3 91 Mission integration should be a stand along
Committee Watershed item - perhaps CER 17. Addressing flooding,
Protection erosion, and water quality concurrently is
Master Plan paramount going forward.
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin 7013.4 110 Address neighborhood connectivity in terms of
Committee Watershed bikeway, roads, etc., but also in terms of
Protection creeks and streams. This keeps micro-
Master Plan ecosystems together, which is good for our
(Anderson) neighborhoods.
Comp Plan Austin Zero 7014.1 118 Where is IACP reference to Zero-Waste by
Committee Waste 2040? Specifically, a reference to 75%
Strategic Plan reduction in waste to landfills and incinerators
(Anderson) by 2020, and 90% by 2040?
Comp Plan Austin Zero 7014.2 map How has IACP reflected Green Campuses and
Committee Waste Resource Recovery Parks? Should these be
Strategic Plan included on a Growth Concept Map?
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Austin Zero 7014.3 167 Consider including Pay as you Throw Review
Committee Waste every 5 years in Implementation Section.
Strategic Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Bouldin Creek 7101.1 180 Correspondence from Stuart Hampton, Chair
Committee Neighborhood of NP Contact Team-
Plan I am afraid my comments to you will go
(Tiemann) beyond simple language clarification to include
commentary on my concerns about how the
language and maps will be interpreted in terms
of policy and code. So please make use of this
information as best you can.
While I understand some flexibility is needed
in interpreting a Citywide master plan, it is the
lack of safeguards for existing neighborhood
planning language (and their current
interpretation under City code) that concerns
me the most.
The Comprehensive Plan (CP) document (and
the whole process do far) seems to say
contradictory things about Neighborhood
Plans (NP). On the one hand we hear that
NPs are an integral part of, inform, and help
shape the CP. On the other hand we hear that
the CP trumps the NPs.
From the Bouldin Creek Neighborhood Plan
perspective I do not believe there is any
argument with the general vision in the
Imagine Austin document. However, the
concern comes with how the language that
describes that vision will be interpreted and
codified.
Case in point -- in the Land Use section of the
CP. The lack of definition of “mixed-use
corridor” and its visual representation on the
accompanying map (Growth Map Fig.4.4) –
Comp Plan Bouldin Creek 7101.2 153 the yellow line-- 0n page 153 talks aboutand S.
HN Action 21 overlays on S. Congress
Committee Neighborhood creating a process to implement the CP and
Plan small area plans (NPs) in a coordinated
(Tiemann) manner. Again, vague – no indication of how
thishappens or the standing of NPs viz-a-viz
the CP.
Comp Plan Bouldin Creek 7101.3 154 HN Action 24 seems to make NPs co-equal
Committee Neighborhood with the CP
Plan 3. HN Action 25 seems to make NPs
(Tiemann) subservient to the CP
4. HN Action 27 seems to undercut the
viability of existing NPs.
Comp Plan Bouldin Creek 7101.4 180 Consistency with Existing Plans & Zoning --
Committee Neighborhood page 180: “Zoning decisions will be guided by
Plan Imagine Austin’s vision, policies, action, and
(Tiemann) Growth Concept Map. Where an adopted
small area plan exists, requests for rezoning
will be reviewed in the context of the adopted
plan and decisions should be consistent with
its Future Land Use Map, or equivalent map, if
one exists. Imagine Austin will guide updates
to existing master and small area plans. When
updated, these plans will receive additional
review to ensure their directions support
Imagine Austin. Inconsistencies will be
addressed through plan updates or
amendments considered and approved by the
City Council.” - (the first paragraph gives NPs
some encouragement by saying the FLUM
determined by the NP is king. The second
paragraph seems to say that the CP and
Council can trump the NP. Again the
conflicting messaging and the vagueness of
the language. Are NPs coequal in shaping the
CP (as the first paragraph suggests), or
subject to being trumped by the CP (as the
second paragraph implies)? Who determines
inconsistencies?
Comp Plan Bouldin Creek 7101.5 138 page 138: Change Austin’s development
Committee Neighborhood regulations and processes to promote a
Plan compact and connected city- modify bullet
(Tiemann) point language to reference comp plan doc
language on page 180: "Change Austin’s
development regulations and processes to
promote a compact and connected city in
alignment with other Master and Strategic
plans, Initiatives, and Neighborhood Plans."
Comp Plan Brentwood/Hi 7126.1 180 oPg. 180 of the IAP seems to guaranty that
Committee ghland zoning decisions will respect our NP & be
Combined consistent w/our NP FLUM. Adherence to
(Hatfield) those principals will go a long way toward
alleviating any suspicions we may have about
the proposed IAP.
Comp Plan Brentwood/Hi 7126.2 139 oPgs. 139, & 155 of the IAP propose
Committee ghland updating the LDC to foster a business friendly
Combined environment but the details are left out. We
(Hatfield) can only hope there will be no surprises when
those details are revealed.
Comp Plan Brentwood/Hi 7126.3 166 oPg. 166 of the IAP proposes creating a
Committee ghland more robust & flexible code enforcement
Combined program. Again, without more detail it’s hard to
(Hatfield) know how this could impact our plan.
Comp Plan CAMPO 2035 7015.1 140 Developing a connected multi-modal
Committee Regional transportation system to foster connectivity,
Transportation efficiency, improved quality of life, social
Plan (Sullivan) equity, environmental stewardhship and
security
Comp Plan CAMPO 2035 7015.2 8 Pages: 8, 29, & 43 CAMPO has tables of
Committee Regional population proojection and employment
Transportation projection by county that would be useful in
Plan (Sullivan) IACP
Comp Plan CAMPO 2035 7015.3 84 Page 84: Several difference in GCP map and
Committee Regional CAMPO centers map - e.g., S IH35 & SH 45
Transportation
Plan (Sullivan)
Comp Plan CAMPO 2035 7015.4 89 Page 89: As much as I would like to implement
Committee Regional LUT 14, CAMPO Plan is more restrictive
Transportation
Plan (Sullivan)
Comp Plan CAMPO 2035 7015.5 165 Page 165 (CFS Action-21): CAMPO plan
Committee Regional shows emergency travel routes for hurricane;
Transportation we should list coordination w TxDOT for
Plan (Sullivan) evacs.
Comp Plan Central Austin 7103 1. Concept of scaling mixed uses to
Committee Combined neighborhood (vision and goals) not explicitly
Neighborhood evident in IACP. Should it be?
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Central Austin 7016 Working with staff on any information dealing
Committee Transit Study with this plan.
Comp Plan Central East 7104.1 Not sure what "compatibility for civic
Committee Austin investments" means (Goal 4), but this should
Neighborhood be investigated to make sure it is addressed in
Plan IACP
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Central East 7104.2 Goal 9 discussed "complementary relationship
Committee Austin between adjacent land uses". In general the
Neighborhood IACP addresses this, but anyone can point to
Plan a place on the map that may appear to run
(Anderson) contrary to this idea.
Comp Plan Central West 7105.1 map From Neighborhood Contact Team:
Committee Austin I appreciate that you are focusing on the
Neighborhood language of the draft document and offering
Plan us the opportunity to suggest language more
(Tiemann) in line with our neighborhood goals, rather
than map suggestions. But speaking
specifically about the Windsor side of the
Central West Austin Neighborhood Plan, the
designation of West 35th Street as a Mixed
Use Corridor on the Growth Concept Map is
the most significant misalignment between the
comprehensive plan and our neighborhood
plan. This is a serious incongruity for the
reasons set forth in the attached letters. The
Map is connected to the text because LUT 1
states "Align land use planning and
transportation decision-making to achieve the
Growth Concept Map." So, on this issue at
least, it is hard to separate the Map from the
text and I hope you will forgive me for talking
about the Map.
In reading through the draft comprehensive
plan it struck me that applying MU designation
to W. 35th St. also seems to violate parts of
the
comprehensive plan itself. Comprehensive
Plan N 5 urges us to "strengthen planning
processes by recognizing that the
Comprehensive Plan and small-area plans,
Comp Plan Central West 7105.2 map As detailed in the attached letter to the Task
Committee Austin Force, the neighborhood, the Planning
Neighborhood Commission and the City Council specifically
Plan excluded W. 35th St. as a designated Mixed
(Tiemann) Use area. Our plan respects the desire in the
Comprehensive Plan to promote Mixed Use
and we simply ask that the Comprehensive
Plan meet its obligation to respect our plan by
excluding W. 35th St. from a Mixed Use
Corridor. Designating W. 35th St. as a MU
Corridor is also inconsistent with LUT 4 (the
blanket application of the MU corridors fails to
recognize that different neighborhoods have
different characteristics to which infill and new
development should be sensitive), HP 6
(redevelopment should be compatible with
National Register Historic Districts - W. 35th
St. immediately adjoins one) and H 2
(promoting MU on W. 35th St. promotes
redevelopment of existing inexpensive multi-
family uses and conflicts with the goal of
preserving existing affordable housing).
Having appropriate language in the plan is
critical, but if the language is not honored in
the same document the words become
meaningless.
Comp Plan Central West 7105.3 138 age 138: Change Austin’s development
Committee Austin regulations and processes to promote a
Neighborhood compact and connected city- modify bullet
Plan point language to reference comp plan doc
(Tiemann) language on page 180: "Change Austin’s
development regulations and processes to
promote a compact and connected city in
alignment with other Master and Strategic
plans, Initiatives, and Neighborhood Plans."
Comp Plan Central West 7105.4 The Central West Austin Combined
Committee Austin Neighborhood Plan Contact Team has also
Neighborhood sent direct correspondence with their
Plan comments to the Task Force.
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Chestnut 7107 1. Chestnut Goals focused on small-lot infill.
Committee Neighborhood Should IACP reference this specifically?
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan East Cesar 7116 no comments.
Committee Chavez
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan East MLK 7108.1 Idea of addressing transit as needing to
Committee Comined explicitly serve within the neighborhood (Goal
Neighborhood 8 states "to, from, and through" should be
Plan expanded on in IACP.
(Anderson)
Comp Plan East MLK 7108.2 Idea of waste management was brought up in
Committee Comined Goal 12. This could be better addressed in
Neighborhood IACP. How do you manage waste to minimize
Plan pollution and resulting health and aesthetic
(Anderson) effects?
Comp Plan East MLK 7108.3 Goal 1 discussed "infill housing compatible
Committee Comined with the existing system of the neighborhood ".
Neighborhood In general the IACP addresses this, but
Plan anyone can point to a place on the map that
(Anderson) may appear to run contrary to this idea.
Comp Plan East Riverside 7110.1 86 page 86: Bottom of 2nd paragraph- There is
Committee Corridor opportunity to recognize East Riverside
Master Plan Corridor Plan: (add sentence) Today, the East
(Tiemann) Riverside
Corridor Master Plan takes city planning to the
next level by redeveloping a brownfield area
with higher densities and mass transit that will
also serve as a “Bridge” connecting the airport,
downtown, the university, and the public parks
system around Lady Bird Lake.
Comp Plan East Riverside 7110.2 138 page 138: Change Austin’s development
Committee Corridor regulations and processes to promote a
Master Plan compact and connected city- modify bullet
(Tiemann) point language to reference comp plan doc
language on page 180: "Change Austin’s
development regulations and processes to
promote a compact and connected city in
alignment with other Master and Strategic
plans, Initiatives, and Neighborhood Plans."
Comp Plan East 7111.1 Does the IACP increase home ownership
Committee Riverside/ opportunities (Goal 2)?
Oltorf
Combined
Neighborhood
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan East 7111.2 How is Town Lake Waterfront preservation
Committee Riverside/ handled in IACP?
Oltorf
Combined
Neighborhood
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan East 7111.3 78 Compatability I know is an issue in this area;
Committee Riverside/ the words in the IACP align pretty well with the
Oltorf NP, but there is a fear that the Growth
Combined Concept Map will not appropriately reflect
Neighborhood existing compatability standards.
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan East 7111.4 oI have noted that the current draft of
Committee Riverside/ Imagine Austin designates property owned by
Oltorf Austin Community College at our Riverside
Combined Campus as Open Space (p. 84), as Park (p.
Neighborhood 122), and as Undeveloped (p.93) in its various
Plan future land use maps. The East
(Anderson) Riverside/Oltorf Neighborhood Plan excluded
this property from its plan, partially because
ACC had not yet completed its Campus
Master Plan project. The Campus Master
Plan is now complete, and envisions
expanding the Riverside Campus onto part of
the existing golf course as soon as practical.
Enrollment growth could necessitate further
expansion of the campus after the timeline
envisioned in the Campus Master Plan. This
plan for expansion of the campus was
developed through an open public process,
including representation from the local
neighborhoods, and was adopted by our Board
of Trustees.
ACC purchased this property with the intent of
eventually expanding the campus, and the
land is currently zoned for commercial and
multifamily use. Its current use as a golf
course is temporary until the District uses it to
further its core mission of delivering higher
education services to the community.
We believe that Imagine Austin’s designation
of ACC’s property as open space is
Comp Plan Families and 7017 The “Families and Children Task Force Plan”
Committee Children Task is very unique. This plan caught my attention
Force Report and is extremely important for Imagine Austin
and the City of Austin. The key factors from
Imagine Austin are mentioned so many times,
but I did not see or feel the importance that I
thought I should see for families and children
in the Imagine Austin Plan. I would like for the
staff to revisit both plans to consider a higher
priority for families and children.
Comp Plan Govalle/Johns 7121 no comments.
Committee ton Terrace
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Greater South 7124.1 oOf prime importance to the success of our
Committee River City neighborhood plan’s goal of preserving and
(Tiemann) protecting our neighborhood is that
compatibility standards continue as they are
today (and when our neighborhood plan was
adopted). We accepted mixed-use along the
South Congress corridor in our neighborhood
plan with the understanding/promise from city
NP staff that compatibility standards would
continue to protect the single family residential
properties adjacent to the commercial uses
along S. Congress. Likewise, we went through
the VMU opt-in process and accepted VMU on
almost all properties along S. Congress with
the understanding and because of the
understanding that compatibility standards
would protect the neighborhood. We strongly
urge that it be made clear that compatibility
standards as they exist today go hand-in-hand
with the growth concept map.
Comp Plan Greater South 7124.2 Map oNorth of Oltorf on S. Congress, the Mixed
Committee River City Use Corridor shown on the Growth Concept
(Tiemann) Map does but should NOT include the single-
family properties between Mary and The
Circle. The commercial properties are only ½
block wide and directly back up to single family
homes. The Fairview Park NCCD runs form
Academy to Monroe. Note should be taken of
the special provisions in this NCCD that
protect single family homes. Avoiding
commercial creep and retaining those single-
family homes is important to our neighborhood
plan (South River City) and protecting the
integrity and character of our neighborhood
(SRCC).
Comp Plan Greater South 7124.3 oThe goal we have heard city staff refer to of
Committee River City 7500 people every 2 miles along mixed-use
(Tiemann) corridors will not work for S. Congress given
the shallow commercial properties that back
up to single-family homes unless those homes
are wiped out and the properties become
commercial/mixed use. Our NPCT and
neighborhood are adamantly opposed to that.
Comp Plan Greater South 7124.4 oSouth of Oltorf, the St Edwards
Committee River City Neighborhood Center on the Growth Concept
(Tiemann) Map includes the single-family neighborhood
along the south side of Woodward Street. It is
important that this single-family neighborhood
be preserved as our St. Edwards FLUM
indicates.
Comp Plan Greater South 7124.5 oIn a Feb 2010 briefing to the City Council
Committee River City Comprehensive Planning and Transportation
(Tiemann) Committee, city staff’s analysis of the South
Congress corridor from Lady Bird Lake to Ben
White Blvd indicates that current zoning
already wo9uld allow for 28,000 people which
is 19,000 more than current estimated
population and 9,00 more than the preferred
scenario increment calls for. The FLUM
increment along that same stretch allows for
52,000 people which is 33,ooo more than the
preferred scenario calls for. In another
breakdown by staff of FLUM capacity by NP
area, our two NP areas, South River City and
St. Edwards, has a current population of
11,768 with total available FLUM capacity of
27,101 leading to an excess population
capacity of 6882 over the additional 8451 that
the comp plan chips called for. Therefore we
see absolutely no reason to violate our NP and
the integrity of our neighborhood by imposing
additional density beyond what current
zoning/FLUM provides by incorporating parts
of our single-family neighborhoods into what is
designated as the mixed-use corridor or by
allowing for any p9ossibility of relaxation of
compatibility standards.
Comp Plan Holly 7117 176 IACP should include an LUT objective for
Committee (Sullivan) better planning for festival parking to reduce
impacts on nearby businesses and residents.
Comp Plan Hyde Park 7118 no comments.
Committee (Sullivan)
Comp Plan Montopolis 7109.1 Idea of defining diversity of housing in terms of
Committee Neighborhood life-stages introduced here and should be
Plan reflected in IACP.
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Montopolis 7109.2 Goal 7 states "Ensure Compatiblity an
Committee Neighborhood dEncourage a Complimentary Relationship
Plan bewteen Adjacent Land Uses". In general the
(Anderson) IACP addresses this, but anyone can point to
a place on the map that may appear to run
contrary to this idea.
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.01 138 The Oak Hill (OH) neighborhood plan calls for
Committee Combined clustered high density, while maintaining rural
Neighborhood destiny and feel to achieve regional water
Plan quality goals (4.A.1b) which would be in
(Tiemann) conflict with the IA comprehensive plan that
seems to promote a compact and connected
city (page 80 and “eight action programs”
listed on page 138 including “Change Austin’s
development regulations and processes to
promote a compact and connected city.” There
is no direct mention of maintaining rural
character of neighborhoods such as OH. If this
IA ‘action program’ is implemented in the OH
area, the landscape and character will
significantly change from what is envisioned in
the OH plan.
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.02 map In the Imagine Austin comprehensive plan, the
Committee Combined designated Town Center (TC) in OH is larger
Neighborhood than the TC specified in the OH neighborhood
Plan plan and FLUM. According to Beki Halpin, the
(Tiemann) limits of the designation in the IA
comprehensive plan are not consistent with
what was intended when the OH plan was
created. The TC lies adjacent to a road (SH 71
and US Hwy 290) that does not have sufficient
capacity for the proposed density also includes
environmentally sensitive Williamson Creek.
The IA comprehensive plan does not
adequately address transportation needs to
and through this area. The Imagine Austin
plan contradicts the OH neighborhood plan by
indicating the desire for a more “compact city
with a green infrastructure program to protect
environmentally sensitive areas.” However,
residence of OH have discussed that the TC
area north of the ‘Y” shown in the
comprehensive plan, due to its proximity to
Williamson Creek, should be converted to
open space / parks for environmental
protection.
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.03 The OH plan includes a desire to maintain
Committee Combined rural density (4.A.1b) to achieve regional water
Neighborhood quality goals. Furthermore, the OH plan
Plan expresses a concern of the environmental
(Tiemann) impact of creating a densely developed transit
center (4.A.1h). The Imagine Austin
comprehensive plan seems, in general, to
support a more compact city. Section 4.A.1h in
the OH plan calls for research regarding the
potential “environmental impact of creating a
densely developed transit center in Oak Hill.
Some stakeholders are concerned that too
much development in Oak Hill will draw
additional visitors to the environmentally
sensitive area, which will result in additional
car trips and resulting automobile related
pollution.” It is essential that the IA
comprehensive plan address transportation
and the associated environmental impact to
and through the area.
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.04 138 Based on our experience with the OH
Committee Combined neighborhood plan, there is a significant
Neighborhood problem in that these neighborhood plans, and
Plan various planning exercises, do not include
(Tiemann) incentives for individual property owners to
work together in a comprehensive way. This
has been a major inhibitor of the OH contract
team to be effective in guiding our
neighborhood plan. Specifically with respect to
Town Centers, which may be made up of
several properties, this issue could be
addressed in an ordinance if the LDC is to be
updated as stated in the IA comprehensive
plan, to include rules that guide development
to work with adjacent properties in a more
comprehensive way that fits better within the
neighborhood plan.
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.05 139 The number 1 challenge as well as the
Committee Combined number 1 opportunity identified in the OH plan
Neighborhood is transportation (see page 29 of Chapter 3:
Plan The Planning Process). While the OH
(Tiemann) neighborhood plan considers connections
within the neighborhood, regional
transportation needs (e. g. highways, rail, etc.)
of the area are not addressed due to
complexities that extend beyond the abilities of
a neighborhood plan. However, a
transportation issue of this significance should
be addressed in the City’s comprehensive
plan. While it does address transportation in
other areas of the City, the IA comprehensive
plan is derelict with respect to this issue in Oak
Hill, Austin’s GATE WAY to the hill country.
The Y, in Oak Hill, needs increased
connectivity to accommodate increased
density expected in the future. IA does not
address the impact of cars coming into Oak
Hill from areas such as Dripping Springs and
Bee Caves. Dripping Springs is a
demonstration site (HEB Sustainable
Communities initiative) and Bee Cave has
already developed the Hill Country Galleria
which draws significant traffic through the
area. The following comments are provided by
Rick Perkins, a member of the Oak Hill
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.06 140 Complete SH 45 between Hwy 290 West and
Committee Combined IH 35 - This will be the ONLY SOLUTION to
Neighborhood get traffic from the West around Oak Hill and
Plan to IH 35
(Tiemann)
The CAMPO Plan has SH45 SW approved for
construction between MoPac Hwy 1 and IH 35,
and CTRMA has plans to build it. However,
CAMPO removed the section of SH 45
between FM 1826 and Hwy 290 West from the
plan back in the 1990's. We must have the
CITY and CAMPO add that section back into
the CAMPO plan. This is not pie in the sky
dreaming; many, many transportation planners
see this is viable and inevitable. The City
Planners have put far too much emphasis on
water quality and ignoring air quality. The
increased congestion that they are going to
cause by obstructing the proper planning of an
adequate transportation system are going to
throw us into Ozone Non-attainment. This
year, we are exactly at the maximum
permissible level, but with increased traffic
congestion the numbers will creep higher each
year. The City Planners MUST pay attention to
the problems of congestion and pay more
homage to it. This will be the environmental
disaster of the future for Austin, not water
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.07 map Build out MoPac (Hwy 1) to maximum capacity
Committee Combined between the River and SH 45, to include HOV
Neighborhood / HOT Lanes in both directions.
Plan
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.08 map Build Out Hwy 290 West to Dripping Springs
Committee Combined to include HOV / HOT Lanes in both directions
Neighborhood
Plan
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.09 map Reconstruct Southwest Parkway and consider
Committee Combined an elevated Toll Way between MoPac Hwy 1
Neighborhood and Hwy 71 West
Plan
(Tiemann)
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.1 80 The OH plan is not consistent with the
Committee Combined proposed IA comprehensive plan with respect
Neighborhood to the development of centers over the
Plan recharge or contributing zones of the South
(Tiemann) Edwards Aquifer or within water-supply
watersheds (see page 80 of the IA
Comprehensive Plan). There are a different
set of opportunities in each part of Austin. The
IA comprehensive plan seems to describe
more of a solution that might apply to the
City’s more urban area which may not apply in
the more rural environment of OH. For
example, most of Oak Hill is over aquifer,
while the inner urban core of Austin is not. OH
has more open space opportunities that would
lend itself to preservation as a method for
water quality treatment. With respect to mass
transit, OH has a unique set of constraints (e.
g. topography, environmental constraints, lack
of density, size, etc.) and not a lot of
opportunities for the same urban
transportation solutions in the inner city. The
same development concepts that work in the
inner core, as generally reflected in the IA
comprehensive plan, do not necessarily apply
to rural areas such as OH.
Comp Plan Oak Hill 7112.11 138 page 138: Change Austin’s development
Committee Combined regulations and processes to promote a
Neighborhood compact and connected city- modify bullet
Plan point language to reference comp plan doc
(Tiemann) language on page 180: "Change Austin’s
development regulations and processes to
promote a compact and connected city in
alignment with other Master and Strategic
plans, Initiatives, and Neighborhood Plans."
Comp Plan Old West 7122 no comments.
Committee Austin
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Rosewood 7119 98 IACP should include a Neighborhood &
Committee (Sullivan) Housing objective for improving the
attractiveness of affordable housing projects.
Comp Plan South 7125.1 oI would like to address the sidewalks within
Committee Congress the South Congress Combined Neighborhood
Combined Plan. We have approximately 11 sidewalks
(Tiemann) listed within our neighborhood plan, for which
most are needed and some are not.
As of right now, we have not seen one
sidewalk placed within any of the
neighborhoods, as per our neighborhood plan.
During my term as President of Battle Bend
Springs HOA 2010-2011, I gathered
information about the specific sidewalks that
we as a community needed first, working with
Greenwood Hills NA and Colonial Trails HOA.
During the sixth month time span, I went
through every hoop, as well as the chain of
command, in order to find out if we would
receive our sidewalk(s). Many of the residents
knew what I was doing and after time became
frustrated with the system and time it took to
receive answers.
As a result, they started to call and wanted
answers which contributed to some confusion.
On the flip side, the City Of Austin knew they
were not providing an answer, and the
community became more involved. After sixth
months, I was told "No sidewalks, but we will
have a grant process". At the same time, I
also brought our concern regarding the basic
infrastructure needs to the attention of city
council. We then submitted a grant through
Comp Plan Southeast 7123 no COA grant
thecomments. process, which included our
Committee Austin
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan University 7120 98 IACP should include a Neighborhood &
Committee Hills/Windsor Housing objective for better maintenance at
Park Group Homes.
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan University 7120.1 98 IACP should suggest ways to improve
Committee Hills/Windsor communications between newer residents and
Park long-term residents in an area.
(Sullivan)
Comp Plan Upper Boggy 7115.1 First reference to "educational fabric" of
Committee Creek neighborhood. Concept that should be
Neighborhood embraced in IACP.
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Upper Boggy 7115.2 Concept of scaling mixed uses to
Committee Creek neighborhood (vision and goals) not explicitly
Neighborhood evident in IACP. Should it be?
Plan
(Anderson)
Comp Plan Upper Boggy 7115.3 Goal 3 discusses "existing housing and
Committee Creek construction of new housing to be compatibile
Neighborhood with surrounding neighborhood". In general
Plan the IACP addresses this, but anyone can point
(Anderson) to a place on the map that may appear to run
contrary to this idea.
Staff AISD 9500 127 On p.127, the language for CFE 5, CFE 7, and
CFE 9 should be similar to that on p. 128
under CFE 13, CFE 14, CFE 17, and CFE 18.
Namely, the "voice" used implies that the City
will be the one taking the action. Suggested
rewrites:
Staff AISD 9501 144 I have a similar comment on language used on
pp. 173-174, namely referring to SOC Action-
28, SOC Action-29, SOC Action-36, and SOC
Action-39. Suggested rewrites:
Staff AISD 9502 186 under you indicators, should probably change
TAKS to STAAR
Staff APD 9001 48 • The Austin Police Department has over
1,620 sworn officers, 617 civilian positions,
and a Fiscal Year 2009-2010 operating budget
of $240 million. the city’s full purpose
jurisdiction is divided into three Police bureaus
(North, Central, and South) and headquarters.
Specialty divisions offer additional department-
wide support.
Staff APD 9002 48 • The Austin Police Department has over
1,620 sworn officers, 617 civilian positions,
and a Fiscal Year 2009-2010 operating budget
of $240 million. the city’s full purpose
jurisdiction is divided into three Police bureaus
(North, Central, and South) and headquarters.
Specialty divisions offer additional department-
wide support.
Staff APD 9003 48 • The Austin Police Department has over
1,620 sworn officers, 617 civilian positions,
and a Fiscal Year 2009-2010 operating budget
of $240 million. the city’s full purpose
jurisdiction is divided into three Police bureaus
(North, Central, and South) and headquarters.
Specialty divisions offer additional department-
wide support.
Staff APD 9004 48 The average response time to high-priority
calls in 2008 was just over eight minutes.
Staff APD 9005 48 In 2008 Austin had one of the lowest violent
crime rates of all U.S. cities with populations
exceeding 500,000.
Staff APD 9006 118 PS 1. Reduce crime rates, thereby improving
the perception of safety in neighborhoods
across Austin.
Staff Budget Office 9007 12
Staff Budget Office 9008
Staff Budget Office 9009
Staff CAD 9053 19 Complete Communities matrix: "Support for
arts/cultural activities and creative industries."
Staff CAD 9054 43 Add after sixth bullet: "The creative sector
(including arts, film and visual media, gaming
and digital media, and music) contributed
$4.35 billion in annual economic activity to
Austin in 2010 and have been growing at a
more rapid pace than the economy as a whole
over the last few years. This overall economic
activity and growth rate reflect the fact that the
creative sector is increasingly important to
Austin’s regional economy."
Staff CAD 9055 45 P. 45 bullets under What does it Mean? –
Economy edit the bullet about “Austin’s
‘creative class’” to read: Austin’s “creative
class” workers and creative sectors of arts,
film and visual media, gaming and digital
media, and music are a key to Austin’s
continued economic growth.
Staff CAD 9056 56 P. 56 add to Bullet about Austin’s music
festivals: “Austin’s music festivals are
important to the city’s economy. The 2011
SXSW (which includes interactive, film, and
music) contributed $167 million to the local
economy; the 2010 Austin City Limits Festival
contributed $73 million.
Staff CAD 9057 56 Rewrite bullet about the city’s gaming industry.
(After suggested edits from me) It now reads:
“The city’s gaming industry generates over
$990 million annually and provides over 7, 274
jobs.” Rewrite to read: According to a 2012
economic impact study commissioned by the
City, the film and visual media sector
generated a little over $280 million in
economic activity in Austin in 2010 and a little
over 2,700 jobs were ascribed to this sector in
2010.
Staff CAD 9058 69 P. 69 – Austin is creative vision statement.
Please consider adding bullet: According to a
2012 economic impact study commissioned by
the City, the creative sector (arts, film and
visual media, gaming and digital media, and
music) contributed $4.35 billion in economic
activity to Austin in 2010, brought in over $71
million in City tax revenues, and almost 49,000
jobs are ascribed to this creative sector.
Staff CAD 9059 103 P. 103 under ECONOMY “Key Issues and
Trends” edit bullet as in the 3rd bullet above:
Austin’s “creative class” workers and creative
sectors of arts, film and visual media, gaming
and digital media, and music are a key to
Austin’s continued economic growth.
Staff CAD 9060 103 P. 103 under ECONOMY “Key Challenges for
the Future” edit bullet # 6 to read: Reducing
the number of obstacles facing creative
industries and small creative businesses, such
as physical space for industry and business
incubation, education and training,
*information about where to find the best
sources for financing,* health care and
housing options, and affordable commercial
rents.
Staff CAD 9061 106 P. 106 under ECONOMIC POLICIES:
Consider adding ECO18. Implement policies
and programs that enhance Austin’s creative
industries (arts, film and visual media, gaming
and digital media, and music).
Staff CAD 9062 116 P. 116 under CITY FACILITIES AND
SERVICES: Add bullet between bullets 7 & 8:
Implementing policies and programs that most
effectively use the City’s buildings and land to
support Austin’s creative industries (arts, film
and visual media, gaming and digital media,
and music.)
Staff CAD 9063 133 Replace Best Practice (Paducah Artist
Relocation)
Staff CAD 9460 55 Suggest revised language for 2nd bullet
Staff CAD 9461 55 Suggest revised language for 3rd bullet
Staff CAD 9462 56 Correction in 4th bullet
Staff CAD 9463 56 Corrected 1st bullet under Econ Impact &
Funding
Staff CAD 9464 56 Corrected 2nd bullet under Econ Impact &
Funding
Staff CAD 9465 56 Corrected 3rd bullet under Econ Impact &
Funding
Staff CAD 9466 56 Add bullet under Econ Impact & Funding
Staff CAD 9467 56 Corrected 4th bullet under Econ Impact &
Funding
Staff CAD 9468 56 Corrected 5th bullet under Econ Impact &
Funding
Staff CAD 9469 56 Insert new bullet after existing 1st bullet of Arts
Education Programs
Staff CAD 9470 57 Correction in 1st bullet under What Does It
Mean
Staff CAD 9471 57 Revision to last bullet under What Does It
Mean
Staff CAD 9472 57 Add data sources
Staff Campo 9010
Staff Campo 9011
Staff Campo 9012
Staff Capcog 9013 3 Ch. 1
Staff Capcog 9014 22 Ch. 2
Staff Capcog 9015 137 Ch. 5
Staff Central Health 9016 54 Central Health (the Travis County Healthcare
District) was created in 2004 and provides
publicly funded healthcare services to the
county’s medically needy residents.
Comprehensive benefits are available to
families at or below poverty level through a
limited provider network.
Staff Central Health 9017 54 The University Medical Center at Brackenridge
also provides hospital-based services when
necessary.
Staff Central Health 9018 54 New bullet
Staff Central Health 9019 54 New bullet
Staff Central Health 9020 55
Staff Central Health 9021
Staff CPO 9022 114 114-120 -- Building Block 5 - City Facilities
and Services
Staff CPO 9023 116 KEY CHALLENGES fOR THE fUTURE
Staff CPO 9024 138
Staff CPO 9025 138 Priority Programs
Staff CPO 9026 146 Action Matrix
Staff CPO 9027 181 Framework for Decision-making
Staff CPO 9028 189 Station Area Plans
Staff CPO 9029
Staff CPO 9030
Staff CPO 9031
Staff EGRSO 9448 4,5 Key Challenges and Opportunities/Promoting
Prosperity for All. – new information you might
want to include somehow
Staff EGRSO 9449 9, Core Principles
18,19
Staff EGRSO 9450 23, 24 Austin's Historical Context
Staff EGRSO 9451 24 Austin's Historical Context-2nd paragraph
Staff EGRSO 9452 26 Change in Population 1960-2010
Staff EGRSO 9453 130 2nd paragraph
Staff EGRSO 9454 130 3rd paragraph
Staff EGRSO 9455 133 PADUCAH ARTIST RELOCATION
PROGRAM AS “BEST PRACTICE
Staff HHSD 9032 53 pp53-54
Staff HHSD 9033 54 The Austin/Travis County Health and Human
Services Department provides public health,
social, and environmental health services for
Austin and travis county and serves nearly one
million residents. the department operates six
neighborhood centers that provide social
services for low- and moderate-income
families. Services include child care programs,
homeless assistance, day labor and
employment programs, mental
health/substance abuse services, programs
for at-risk youth, and basic needs services.
Staff HHSD 9034 54 The Austin/Travis County Health and Human
Services Department provides public health,
social, and environmental health services for
Austin and travis county and serves nearly one
million residents. the department operates six
neighborhood centers that provide social
services for low- and moderate-income
families. Services include child care programs,
homeless assistance, day labor and
employment programs, mental
health/substance abuse services, programs
for at-risk youth, and basic needs services.
Staff HHSD 9035 54 Austin’s Animal Services manages one of the
largest animal shelters in Central Texas,
caring for more than 23,000 animals each
year. A new animal shelter will shift animal
services from the town lake Animal center and
help Austin transition to a “no-kill” city.
Staff HHSD 9036 54
Staff HHSD 9037 58 pp58-62 -- Developing a Regional Perspective
Staff HHSD 9038 What Does It Mean?
Staff Library 9403 50 Library System-2nd bullet: Over 3.2 million
Department people usd the library system in Fiscal Year
2007-2008, including nearly 900,000 computer
login users.
Staff Library 9404 53 Add new bullet under Education
Department
Staff Library 9405 53 Add new bullet under Library System
Department
Staff NCD 9039 41 Since adopting the Bicycle Master Plan in
2009, the Bicycle Program has installed about
15 new and improved miles per year.
Staff NCD 9040 42 What Does it Mean? – Transportation
Staff NCD 9041 55 What Does It Mean – Security and Health (last
bullet):
• Design of the physical environment affects
public health. Ensuring that new development
creates walkable communities with safe
pedestrian facilities and recreation
opportunities can promote the health and well-
being of Austin’s residents and reduce risk
factors associated with diabetes and heart
disease.
Staff NCD 9042 68 Development occurs in connected and
pedestrian-friendly patterns supporting transit
and urban lifestyles and reducing sprawl, while
protecting and enhancing neighborhoods.
Staff NCD 9043 82 Figure 4.2
Staff NCD 9044 184 Complete Communities Indicators
Staff NCD 9045 184 Natural and Sustainable Indicators
Staff NCD 9046 185 Mobile and Interconnected Indicators
Staff NCD 9047 188 Appendix: Attached Plans
Staff NHCD 9048 5 Austinites living east of interstate 35 are,
overall, poorer, less healthy, lag academically,
and share less equally in Austin’s celebrated
quality of life
Staff NHCD 9049 5 How do we ensure that musicians, young
families, and hourly workers aren’t “priced out”
of living in Austin? How can we help wage
growth catch up to the rising costs of living to
close the “affordability gap”?
Staff NHCD 9050 10 New mixed-use areas need to have attainably
priced housing, be walkable and bikable, and
be linked by transit to employment and
commercial centers, so that residents can
choose to avoid the costs of car ownership.
Staff NHCD 9051 10 We can strive to deliver high public value for
city taxes and maintain low-cost amenities that
all Austinites can enjoy.
Staff NHCD 9052 13 Think of the Less Fortunate
Staff NHCD 9053 26 Proportionally, Austin has far fewer family
households than Texas as a whole, but a simi-
lar percentage of married-couples-with-
children households.
Staff NHCD 9054 30 • In 2010, Austin had an estimated 354,241
housing units. Total housing units increased
by 28% from 2000 to 2010.
• Single-family detached housing units made
up about 47 percent of total housing stock in
2009. Between 2000 and 2009, the proportion
of single-family detached remained about the
same, while the percentage of multi-family
housing in 10-19 unit buildings increased and
the percentage in 20 or more unit buildings
decreased.
Staff NHCD 9055 30 Over the last ten years, median housing
costs have risen by 85 percent, while house-
hold incomes have grown at a much lower
rate. Between 1998 and 2008, the median
single-family house price increased by almost
90 percent ($129,900 to $240,000) while the
percentage of all single-family houses
considered affordable declined from 42 to 28
percent. During the same
period, Austin’s median family income
increased by 36 percent. When adjusted for
inflation, this equals little growth in the median
family income
Staff NHCD 9056 30 As property values have increased, property
tax rates have generally decreased over the
same period.
Staff NHCD 9057 31 Many of the affordable apartment rentals
have been converted to condominium use,
Staff NHCD 9058 31 This cost burden strongly affects households
with incomes below $50,000.
Staff NHCD 9059 31 • Austin’s neighborhoods built prior to World
War II are characterized by mixed housing and
lot sizes, interconnected streets, diverse
architectural styles, and compact character.
These neighborhoods typically have a school
and park within their boundaries.
• Neighborhoods built since the 1950s are
more uniform in size and character, supporting
an auto-oriented lifestyle that is typical of
suburban development.
• There are a growing number of
neighborhoods throughout Austin where
immigrants, largely from latin America, are
increasingly settling. this has resulted in these
areas becoming linguistically, socially, and
economically isolated from the larger city.
Some of these neighborhoods are
experiencing a deterioration of the built
environment.
Staff NHCD 9060 32 What Does It Mean?
Staff NHCD 9061 58 Development has been happening in these
areas as parcels are converted to residential
subdivisions or commercial centers,
particularly along or near major roadways.
Staff NHCD 9062 59 Central Texas Region.
Staff NHCD 9063 66 A Vision for Austin’s future As it approaches
its 200th anniversary, Austin is a beacon of
sustainability, social equity and economic
opportunity; where diversity and creativity are
celebrated; here community needs and values
are recognized; where leadership comes from
its citizens and where the necessities of life
are affordable and accessible to all. Austin’s
greatest asset is its people: passionate about
our city, committed to its improvement, and
determined to see this vision become a reality.
Staff NHCD 9064 96 Austin. over the last ten years, median
housing costs have risen by 85 percent, while
household incomes have remained stagnant
or declined.
Staff NHCD 9065 97 Discouraging the loss of affordable housing in
....
Staff NHCD 9066 98 H 5. promote a diversity of land uses
throughout Austin to allow a variety of housing
types ranging from permanent supportive
housing to rental and ownership opportunities
for singles, families with and without
children,seniors, and person with disabilities.
(See also lUt 5)
Staff NHCD 9067 139 Create sustainable pedestrian and bicycle-
friendly neighborhoods providing a range of
housing type options (lUT Action-3)
Staff NHCD 9068 143 Create sustainable pedestrian and bicycle-
friendly neighborhoods that provide a range of
housing type options (lUt Action-3)
Staff NHCD 9069 151 hn Action-3 produce regulations and enhance
programs to promote affordable housing
throughout Austin by:
Staff NHCD 9070 152 HN-8: Expand home-buyer assistance
programs so that lower income households
can purchase abandoned and foreclosed
houses to increase homeownership levels in
Austin.
Staff NHCD 9071 152 HN Action-4: Land Banking
Staff Office of 9072 3
Sustainability
Staff Office of 9073 7 Securing a Sustainable Future
Sustainability
Staff Office of 9074 8 We all want Austin to prosper, innovate, and
Sustainability lead. toward that end, we must be wise
stewards of our natural world and its resources
– the original “infrastructure.”
Staff Office of 9075 9 A beautiful, world-class system of outdoor
Sustainability places for recreation and environmental
protection will define Austin as a world-class
city.
Staff Office of 9075 9 A beautiful, world-class system of outdoor
Sustainability places for recreation and environmental
protection will define Austin as a world-class
city.
Staff Office of 9076 9 By strengthening our “green infrastructure” –
Sustainability parks, the urban forest, trails and greenbelts,
rivers, creeks, lakes, gardens, urban
agriculture, open spaces, and wildlife habitat –
Austin can protect the natural environment and
enhance recreational opportunities.
Staff Office of 9077 10 healthy communities depend on easy, safe
Sustainability access to walking, biking, and recreation, as
well as to quality healthcare, schools, police,
and other community services.
Staff Office of 9078 12 The City Charter requires that elected officials
Sustainability and city government use the comprehensive
plan as a guide for policies and practices. the
city of Austin is already committed to action,
as it references this long-term plan to set
annual budget, program, and project priorities.
But the aspirations of the comprehensive plan
are far bigger and deeper than what municipal
government can accomplish alone. to fully
realize the community benefits it outlines,
visionary individuals and groups across the
City of Austin will also need to commit to
action. the whole community must sustain the
work that enacts the plan, through projects
small and large.
Staff Office of 9079 12 Before making improvements to a single park,
Sustainability for example, consider how it might meet the
needs of people across the entire city.
could a network of connected bike lanes make
it more accessible? could more trees help cool
the urban environment?
Staff Office of 9080 13 We will also need landuse regulations that
Sustainability make it easier and less expensive to do
sustainable development and projects that
create compact and walkable places.
Staff Office of 9081 13 new approaches that utilize both zoning and
Sustainability incentives are needed to implement this plan.
offering incentives in the form of grants, loans,
infrastructure investments, or innovative
regulatory approaches is a way Austin can
encourage good projects that deliver
numerous community benefits. These benefits
can include affordable housing, great design
that beautifies our city and creates lively public
places, operational improvements, more
transportation options, pocket parks, low-
impact development, new jobs, an expanded
tax base, and so on. Incentives
matter to people who want to improve our
community, and they can generate goodwill
while helping us reach our goals.
Staff Office of 9081 13 new approaches that utilize both zoning and
Sustainability incentives are needed to implement this plan.
offering incentives in the form of grants, loans,
infrastructure investments, or innovative
regulatory approaches is a way Austin can
encourage good projects that deliver
numerous community benefits. These benefits
can include affordable housing, great design
that beautifies our city and creates lively public
places, operational improvements, more
transportation options, pocket parks, low-
impact development, new jobs, an expanded
tax base, and so on. Incentives
matter to people who want to improve our
community, and they can generate goodwill
while helping us reach our goals.
Staff Office of 9082 18 Chapter 2: Experiencing Austin: Who Are We
Sustainability Today?
Staff Office of 9083 19 to address the core principles for action and
Sustainability begin to implement the working group ideas,
the plan includes eight priority action program.
Staff Office of 9084 19 pp19 & 89
Sustainability
Staff Office of 9085 26 Proportionally, Austin has far fewer family
Sustainability households than Texas as a whole, but a
similar percentage of married-couples-with-
children households. in 2009, only 54 percent
of
Austin households were family households,
and of these, 36 percent were married with
children. in comparison, in 2009, 70 percent of
texas households were family households;
37 percent were married with children.
Staff Office of 9086 28 In 2009, more than 18 percent of Austin’s
Sustainability residents live below the poverty line.
Staff Office of 9087 47 According to the Census of Agriculture,
Sustainability farming in Travis County is not highly
profitable, suggesting that many owners
operate as residential or “hobby” farms. the
amount of
farmland in travis county decreased by 12
percent from 2002-2007, a loss that is likely
attributable to both urbanization and farmland
being taken out of production.
Staff Office of 9088 71 People across all parts of the city and of all
Sustainability ages and income levels live in safe, stable
neighborhoods with a variety of affordable and
accessible homes, healthy food, economic
opportunity, healthcare, education, and
transportation.
Staff Office of 9089 111 CER 13. incentivize, develop, and expand the
Sustainability market for local and sustainable food
production, which includes such activities as
farming, ranching, and food processing.
Staff Office of 9089 111 CER 13. incentivize, develop, and expand the
Sustainability market for local and sustainable food
production, which includes such activities as
farming, ranching, and food processing.
Staff Office of 9090 141 "Creating a Green Infrastructure Program" and
Sustainability "Create a Program to Sustainabily Manager
Our Water Resources."
Staff Office of 9091 142 Incentivize the use of sustainable and cost
Sustainability effective design features (HN Action-15)
Staff Office of 9091 142 Incentivize the use of sustainable and cost
Sustainability effective design features (HN Action-15)
Staff Office of 9092 68 Use of term "sustainability" throughout
Sustainability document
Staff Office of 9093 LUT
Sustainability
Staff Office of 9094
Sustainability
Staff Office of 9406 19 Chapter 5: New bullet: Take on traffic!
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9407 47 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas
Sustainability- Emissions: 1st bullet
KG
Staff Office of 9408 47 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas
Sustainability- Emissions: 2nd bullet
KG
Staff Office of 9409 47 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas
Sustainability- Emissions: 3rd bullet
KG
Staff Office of 9410 86 Natural and Sustainable
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9411 87 p87: Key Issues and Trends - last bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9412 88 Key Challenges-1st bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9413 88 Add new Land Use Policy
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9414 89 Add new Land Use Policy
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9415 90 Add new Land Use Policy
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9416 91 UD3
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9417 91 UD6
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9418 92 HP5 or new HP Policy
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9419 116 Key Issues and Trends - new bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9420 98 H9
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9421 103 Key Issues and Trends-new bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9422 103 Key Challenges-new bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9423 106 ECO 16
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9424 109 Key Issues and trends-8th bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9425 111 CER 10
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9426 111 CER 12
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9427 115 Key Issues and Trends-new bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9428 116 Key Challenges-5th bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9429 117 Wastewater, Potable Water, Extreme Water
Sustainability- Events, and Drainage Policies
KG
Staff Office of 9430 117 Plan for and adapt to increased drought,
Sustainability- severe weather, and other potential impacts of
KG climate change on the water supply.
Staff Office of 9431 117 WPD 5 or new
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9432 118 New SW 7
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9433 119 NEW PS 10
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9434 119 PB 5
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9435 120 NEW ROS 10
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9436 127 CFE 7
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9437 132 New ACC 9
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9438 139 New Related Priority Action
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9439 140 New Related Priority Action
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9440 141 Modify Related Priority Action 3
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9441 141 Modify Related Priority Action 4
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9442 141 Modify Related Priority Action-last bullet
Sustainability-
KG
Staff Office of 9443 145 Create and implement a "Healthy Austin"
Sustainability- program.
KG
Staff Office of 9444 145 Modify Related Priority Actions 9-18
Sustainability-
KG
Staff PARD 9279 3 Austin today is model of livability
Staff PARD 9280 4 Today, Austin tops numerous “Best City in the
Country” lists.
Staff PARD 9281 5 We get out on our trails and greenbelts, lakes
and rivers,
Staff PARD 9282 7 Austin today is threatened by the
consequences of its past development
patterns:
Staff PARD 9283 7 Growth can have tremendous benefits for
Austin, but not if we repeat past patterns and
continue to incur their environmental, fiscal,
and social costs.
Staff PARD 9284 5 We need to develop our natural assets into a
complete network of connected greenways
and waterways. By strengthening our “green
infrastructure” – parks, the urban forest, trails
and greenbelts,
Staff PARD 9285 8 To ensure our economic strength, it is critical
to preserve
Austin’s mix of local entrepreneurs, major
employers, clean industries, and education
and
government jobs.
Staff PARD 9286 8 Prosperity for all means reducing the number
of families living in poverty by providing
workforce training and helping residents attain
living-wage jobs, as well as capitalizing on the
city’s “creative class” vibe to provide jobs and
career paths for workers at all educational and
skill levels.
Staff PARD 9287 10 ...the city can encourage homes at lower price
points distributed throughout Austin.
Staff PARD 9288 9 ...and be linked by transit to employment and
commercial centers, so that
Staff PARD 9289 10 Austin can reduce its greenhouse gas
emissions by promoting community health,
encouraging walking, biking, and other daily
exercise, and making fresh, local food
accessible.
Staff PARD 9290 12
Staff PARD 9291 11 Now, Austinites and their city government
must work collaboratively
Staff PARD 9292 10 Whose job is it to get to work on the plan?
Look in the mirror.
Staff PARD 9293 13
Staff PARD 9294 17
Staff PARD 9295 20
Staff PARD 9296 20 pgs 20, 62, 73, 135
Staff PARD 9297 21 What are we getting right?
Staff PARD 9298 22 Austin's Historical…
Staff PARD 9299 55 * addition under ARTS AND CULTURE
Staff PARD 9300 28
Staff PARD 9301 30
Staff PARD 9302 32
Staff PARD 9303 34
Staff PARD 9304 35 Map "Annexation by Decade"
Staff PARD 9305 35
Staff PARD 9306 37
Staff PARD 9307 35 Figure 2.2: annexation by decade map
Staff PARD 9308 37 Figure 2.3 existing land use map
Staff PARD 9309 39 Figure 2.4: susceptibility to change map
Staff PARD 9310 41
Staff PARD 9311 48 • Austin controls a large portion of the land
within area watersheds, which gives it some
control over development within these
sensitive areas.]
Staff PARD 9312 41
Staff PARD 9313 43
Staff PARD 9314 44
Staff PARD 9315 46
Staff PARD 9316 47
Staff PARD 9317 49
Staff PARD 9318 49 Maps
Staff PARD 9319 51
Staff PARD 9320 49 Austin's park area has doubled in size over the
past two decades, but funding and
maintneance has not kept pace with growth.
Staff PARD 9321 49 addition
Staff PARD 9322 49 addition
Staff PARD 9323 51
Staff PARD 9324 52
Staff PARD 9325 55
Staff PARD 9326 58 pgs 58, 59
Staff PARD 9327 56 p. 54 ARTS AND EDUCATION
Staff PARD 9328 56 p. 54 ECONOMIC IMPACT
Staff PARD 9329 56 addition Open air markets, farmer's markets
and 23rd street renaissance market
Staff PARD 9330 62
Staff PARD 9331 63
Staff PARD 9332 80 67-71, 177
Staff PARD 9333 77 • Protect existing open space and natural
resources (e.g., creeks, rivers, lakes, and
floodplains).
Staff PARD 9334 78 watershedsand
Staff PARD 9335 86
Staff PARD 9336 81 figure 4.1 grey box
Staff PARD 9337 81 p81-83; Central Texas is in compliance with all
federal air quality standards.
Staff PARD 9338 87
Staff PARD 9339 86
Staff PARD 9340 92
Staff PARD 9341 101 The city must build a vibrant, resilient, and
diverse economy that celebrates innovation
and creativity; provides equitable opportunities
for people; and protects the environment. a
vibrant,
Staff PARD 9342 105 • Working with area educational institutions
and business leaders to expand job training
opportunities in areas such as business
management, entrepreneurship, and health
services
to meet expected industry demand.
Staff PARD 9343 103 Creating well-paid jobs in the clean energy
industry particularly in solar manufacturing
and installation, energy services companies,
and green building
Staff PARD 9344 103 Reducing the number of obstacles facing
creative industries and small creative
businesses
(e.g., physical space for industry and business
incubation, education and training,
health care and housing options, and
affordable rents for business owners).
Staff PARD 9345 105 Enhance Austin’s draw as a premier national
and international tourist destination by
strengthening cultural (arts, music, film) and
entertainment offerings, enhancing natural
resources,
Staff PARD 9346 105 ECO 6. Encourage Austin’s creative economy
and culture through flexible, place based
policies (those directed at specific geographic
areas) as well as policies directed toward
virtual reality and digital media.
Staff PARD 9347 106
ECO 7. Promote Downtown as the premier
business district in the region and expand the
presence of global finance and trade.
Staff PARD 9348 106 ECO 9. Spur medical and life science
technology investments by establishing a
medical school.
Staff PARD 9349 106 ECO 10. Cluster or co-locate educational
facilities (e.g., high schools, vocational
schools, colleges or universities) near
employment centers (e.g., healthcare facilities,
biotech and green technologies, etc.) to better
connect students to potential employment
opportunities. (See also LUT 12; CFE 5; CFE
7)
Staff PARD 9350 106 ECO 12. Engage major employers and
institutions of higher education to provide
leadership
in meeting the needs of chronic unemployed
and underemployed residents, such as people
with disabilities, and former clients of the
criminal justice or foster care systems.
Staff PARD 9351 106 ECO 14. E ncourage and support innovation
through flexible city rules, adaptive reuse of
buildings, and up-to-date infrastructure so that
creativity thrives in actual as well as virtual
reality and digital media.
Staff PARD 9352 106 ECO 15. Improve regional transportation
planning and financing for infrastructure (e.g.,
air, rail, and roads) in order to ensure the
reliable movement of goods and people.
Staff PARD 9353 106 ECO 17. Expand connectivity within the Texas
Triangle (Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, San
Antonio, and Houston) in order to facilitate
movement of ideas, goods, and people for
economic prosperity. (See also LUT 17; LUT
18; LUT 19; LUT 23)
Staff PARD 9354 111 “The City in 2039 has made choices that…
Staff PARD 9355 109 Monitoring and increase Austin’s tree canopy
as urbanization occurs.
Staff PARD 9356 110 Best Practice: Urban Forestry |
Ithaca, New York
Staff PARD 9357 146 Tables of Actions begin
Staff PARD 9358 115 113, 117
Staff PARD 9359 114 Austin Bergstrom International Airport
Staff PARD 9360 115 citywide
Staff PARD 9361 137
Staff PARD 9362 115 Public Services,Buildings, and Facilities
Staff PARD 9363 115 Recreation and Open Space
Staff PARD 9364 115 Key Issues and Trends - last bullet
Staff PARD 9365 116
Staff PARD 9366 116 Providing sufficient funding for maintaining
parks and recreation facilities, as the city
continues
to grow and budgets for police, fire,
emergency services, and other city services
increase.
Staff PARD 9367 115 Best Practices
Staff PARD 9368 120 multi-use paths, and trails.
Staff PARD 9369 120 RO 8 (See also LUT 22; CER 3)
Staff PARD 9370 120 RO 5 (See also UD 7)
Staff PARD 9371 120 RO 1.
Staff PARD 9372 122 Park Service Area Analysis
Staff PARD 9373 126 HHS 6. Promote the availability of and
educate the community about healthy food
choices, including "slow food" and nutritional
education programs
Staff PARD 9374 126 HHS 8. Improve educational opportunities for
marginalized populations and provide better
services for at-risk segments of our
community.
Staff PARD 9375 126 HHS 9. Develop and promote tobacco
cessation programs and regulations to support
tobacco-free environments.
Staff PARD 9376 127 CFE 6. Increase the availability of continuing
education.
Staff PARD 9377 127 CFE 9. Increase the availability of quality early
education, childcare, after school, and
preschool programs……
Staff PARD 9378 127 CFE 12. Improve access to quality childcare
services near homes and workplaces
Staff PARD 9379 127 CFE 18. Collaborate with school districts and
with public and private entities to create joint-
use partnerships as existing and new public
school campuses
Staff PARD 9380 130 addition History, Arts, and Nature
Mission/Vision and summary
Staff PARD 9381 167 p167-178
Staff PARD 9382 138
Staff PARD 9383 141 new trails and bike paths,
Staff PARD 9384 145
Staff PARD 9385 145 Tables of Actions
Staff PARD 9386 151
Staff PARD 9387 161
Staff PARD 9388 163
Staff PARD 9389 159
Staff PARD 9390 163 Explore additional funding sources for the
design, construction, and maintenance of
parks, including:
Staff PARD 9391 163 through passive maintenance practices
Staff PARD 9392 167
Staff PARD 9393 180
Staff PARD 9394 181
Staff PARD 9395 182
Staff PARD 9396 186
Staff PARD 9398 Glossar Use of the phrase "open space"
y
Staff PARD 9399 149 Create a network of separated bicycle and
walking…
Staff PARD 9400 33 Table "Average Density in Austin and
Comparable Cities" -
Staff PARD 9447 163 CFS-3: Expand equitable access for adults,
children and their pets to active and passive
parks throughout the city by carefully targeting
new parks where most needed and developing
public access agreements with non-City-
owned parks and open space, including school
playgrounds.CFS
Staff PDR 9270 3
Staff PDR 9271 9
Staff PDR 9272 26
Staff PDR 9273 27 Age brackets in 2nd bullet do not match the
chart below it on the same page.
Staff PDR 9274 28
Staff PDR 9275 29 2nd bullet
Staff PDR 9276 97 1st Bullet under Key Issues and Trends
Staff PDR 9277 3
Staff PDR 9278 7 minor changes
Staff PDR 9401 126 By adding paragraph on teenage pregnancy
on pp 124/125 we need to add new policy:
New HHS Policy
HHS Policy X (p. 126)
Reduce the incidence of teenage pregnancy
and address the social and health concerns
associated with it.
Staff PDR 9402 169 Since we added a policy on teenage
pregnancy we needed an action to map to.
New SOC Actions
SOC Action XX
Address the high incidence of teenage
pregnancy by creating and expanding
partnerships with area school districts,
nonprofit organizations, and healthcare
providers to develop a comprehensive
education and outreach program to reduce the
number of teenage mothers, to expand access
to social and health care services for teenage
mothers and their children, and to increase
educational and vocational opportunities for
the mothers.
Staff PDR 9445 76 Change intro section to mention about policy
Staff PDR 9446 47 Include information from the recently
completed Travis County greenhouse gas
emissions inventory.
Staff PW 9095 3
Staff PW 9096 3 Known as a “smart” city, we are also smart
enough to not rest on our laurels.
Staff PW 9097 3 Austin today is model of livability, widely
acclaimed as one of the top metropolitan
areas in the country.
Staff PW 9098 5 Yet we are still dealing with the legacy of
segregation and racism.
Staff PW 9099 7 "Right now over 70 percent of the world
population is convinced that something
serious has to be done about the dangers
facing the planet.... most of humanity wants to
know how to make the change. it’s one of
those tipping-point times where things can
change unbelievably fast."
Staff PW 9100 7 Sustainability means considering not only the
needs of today, but also whether these needs
are being met in ways that conserve resources
for future generations. Prioritizing sustainability
requires that we consider the way we grow:
our people (equity), our planet (environment),
and our prosperity (economy).
Staff PW 9101 7 growing in accordance with this
comprehensive plan offers Austin a way to do
it better. it offers us more choices for where
and how to live. it can reduce the distances
that people
must drive to get to work, or to find an
affordable home. A more compact, connected
city can reduce the stressful hours that we
spend stuck in traffic and commuting alone,
and free up precious time for more pleasant
and productive pursuits. it also allows more
people to live closer to the Austin amenities
and services available in downtown and the
central city.
Austin today is threatened by the
consequences of its past development
patterns: increased air pollution and traffic
congestion, loss of agricultural land and open
space, rising
housing and transportation costs, increasing
infrastructure costs, and social segregation
and isolation. in the last half-century, most
new homes, shopping centers, and
employment
sites sprang up in the city’s suburban fringes,
accessible only by automobile. We expanded
the city to accommodate them, making costly
infrastructure and service extensions
to outlying areas.
Staff PW 9102 9 Austin’s long-term sustainability requires a
fresh focus on redevelopment and infill within
the city’s developed areas. Favoring compact
growth now provides a balance to earlier
decades of sprawling, low-density
development. it contains costs and limits the
need for tax increases by capitalizing on the
land and infrastructure already in the city. It
also enhances
human connections, innovation, and urban
vibrancy. creating a more compact and
efficient city is critical to our ability to connect
homes, jobs, schools, and other destinations
with a more
complete transportation system that is
affordable to build, operate, and maintain.
Staff PW 9103 11 11-15 -- "The Road Ahead"
Staff PW 9104 17 Chapter four (Shaping Austin: building the
Complete Community) sets a two-part
framework for action to realize our vision of a
Complete Community. The Growth Concept
Map shows in general terms where new
development over the next 30 years should be
located to support the vision. The Building
Blocks define specific policies to guide
decisions on topics ranging from land Use and
transportation to economy to culture. These
policies are the foundation of the action ideas
and programs contained in chapter Five.
Staff PW 9105 22 Austin is different from other texas cities. our
progressive spirit, environmental ideals, and
innovative culture distinguish us from other
metropolitan areas such as houston and
Dallas. many of the city’s policy choices show
an early understanding of growth and
economic issues that many texas cities only
recently have begun to address. this contrast
has enhanced Austin’s
community identity, creating a strong sense of
our uniqueness in relation to the rest of texas
(and the nation).
Staff PW 9106 23 This resulted in new directions that leveraged
the city’s role as an educational center to
attract high-tech employers such as IBM.
Staff PW 9107 28 Median Incomes and Cost of Living
Staff PW 9108 28 Poverty
Staff PW 9109 40 During the same year, five percent of Austin’s
working population rode a bus to work, one
percent bicycled, and 2.3 percent walked.
Staff PW 9110 40 Capital Metro operated 79 bus routes in 2008,
including regular, commuter/express,
university, and late night buses. Weekday
ridership averaged 130,560 boardings.
Staff PW 9111 40 A 2008 Brookings Institution study found that
between 2002 and 2006 Austin led the
nation’s largest metropolitan areas in reducing
the number of vehicle miles traveled. During
this period, Austin’s vehicle miles traveled per
capita decreased more than 12 percent. In
2006 the city’s vehicle miles traveled per
capita (4,974 miles) ranked 77th out of 100,
which was much less than that of San Antonio
(23rd), Dallas (28th), and houston (51st).
Staff PW 9112 42 In 2010, Austin experienced a 7.1 percent
unemployment rate, the highest in twenty
years. however, this was lower than the texas
rate of 8.2 percent or the US rate of 9.6
percent during 2010. By April 2011, Austin’s
unemployment rate had decreased to 6.5
percent.
Staff PW 9113 44 • A household’s “living wage” depends on the
size of the household. In Travis County, a
household with one adult and one child must
earn an hourly rate of about $13.81 to support
their family.
Staff PW 9114 46 The region has diverse plant and animal
habitats that transition from east to west. The
karst landscapes of the Balcones escarpment
and edwards plateau are home to many
unique, endangered species of birds,
salamanders, and invertebrates. Austin is also
located beneath the central Flyway for north
American bird migration.
Staff PW 9115 47 Climate scientists predict that the Central
Texas region could become warmer and drier.
Staff PW 9116 48 • The average response time to high-priority
calls in 2008 was just over eight minutes.
Staff PW 9117 48 We have invested in high-quality facilities and
services throughout the city; however new
development and a changing population are
placing pressures on service delivery.
Staff PW 9118 52 What Does It Mean?
Staff PW 9119 61 Limited water supply and water systems.
Some new development is occurring in
outlying areas that have limited or no water
systems to support moderate or concentrated
growth. many area communities do not have
resources to extend existing infrastructure or
do not have contracts for long-term water
supply. Some of those that do have contracts
are already exceeding their yearly allocations.
Limited availability of
public water infrastructure reinforces
scattered, inefficient development patterns,
and new draws on groundwater sources could
impact the region’s water supply.
Staff PW 9120 76 This chapter presents a two-part planning
framework for realizing our vision of a
complete community (chapter 3) through
action (chapter 5):
• Growth Concept Map. the growth concept
map (Figure 4.4) applies the imagine Austin
vision to the city’s physical pattern of
development. generated through a public
scenario-building
process, it defines how we will seek to
accommodate new residents, jobs, mixed-use
areas, open space, and transportation
infrastructure over the next 30 years.
• building blocks. the Building Blocks set the
policies to implement imagine Austin. they
cover a range of subject areas, including the
Austin city charter-required elements of a
comprehensive plan and several others based
on public input. the seven Building Blocks are:
Staff PW 9121 76 The growth concept map (Figure 4.4) applies
the imagine Austin vision to how the city’s
physical development pattern will evolve over
the next several decades.
Staff PW 9122 79 Job centers include major employers (e.g.,
IBM in north Austin) and industrial uses such
as warehouses, offices, and manufacturing
that are not compatible with residential areas.
Staff PW 9123 116 KEY CHALLENGES fOR THE fUTURE
Staff PW 9124 119 Rec and Open Space Policies
Staff PW 9125 138 Priority Programs
Staff PW 9126 138 The eight action programs are:
Staff PW 9127 138 Priority Programs
Staff PW 9128 139 139-145 -- The eight priority programs
Staff PW 9129 141 Create a green infrastructure program to
protect environmentally sensitive areas and
integrate nature into the city.
Staff PW 9130 146 Action Matrix
Staff PW 9131 180 If, during these planning processes, new
conditions or issues are discovered which
require reconsideration of imagine Austin’s
recommendations, an amendment to the
comprehensive plan may be considered by the
city council to ensure imagine Austin’s ongoing
viability.
Staff PW 9132 180 CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING PLANS &
ZONING
Staff PW 9133 181 Local Partnerships/Capacity Building
Staff PW 9134 182 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9134 182 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9135 182 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9135 182 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9136 182 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9136 182 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9137 183 Decision-Making Checklist
Staff PW 9138 184 An annual report will be submitted to the
mayor, city council, and planning commission,
which assesses the progress in achieving the
vision and goals of imagine Austin.
Staff PW 9139 184 Complete Communities Indicators
Staff PW 9140 184 Complete Communities Indicators
Staff PW 9140 184 Complete Communities Indicators
Staff PW 9141 Action Action Matrix
Matrix
Staff PW 9142 Action Action Matrix
Matrix
Staff PW 9143 Action Action Matrix
Matrix
Staff PW 9144 The draft Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan
is a bit different than other master plans I’ve
reviewed. It is much more conceptual and
less detailed than I would have expected.
While it is writing in an engaging style, in some
instances it expresses the writer’s opinion
more than what I would consider to be
appropriate for a City-wide planning document.
In particular, Chapter 1
rambles on too long and is somewhat pedantic
in its tone.
There is no Executive Summary.
The tables at the end of Chapter 5 are the
most useful part of the document, however no
cost data or time frames are provided.
Staff PWD 9145 5 Second sentence – “We need good, complete
roads, and we need to move...”
Staff PWD 9146 9 3rd paragraph, 3rd sentence – “By
strengthening our “green infrastructure” –
parks, the urban forest, urban trails,
greenways, rivers, creeks...”
Staff PWD 9147 10
Staff PWD 9148 11
Staff PWD 9149 14
Staff PWD 9150 19
Staff PWD 9151 22
Staff PWD 9152 23
Staff PWD 9153 25 And all maps generally
Staff PWD 9154 33 3rd bullet point – “In 2000 and 2010 Austin
was…”
Staff PWD 9155 38
Staff PWD 9156 41 2nd bullet – “The Bicycle Master Plan
recommends 900 miles of bicycle
lanes…When installed, the 900 bicycle lanes
will exist on 21.3% of our roadways.”
Staff PWD 9157 41 3rd bullet - “Since adopting the Bicycle Plan in
2009, the Bicycle Program has installed about
15 new and improved bicycle facilities per
year.”
Staff PWD 9158 42
Staff PWD 9159 42 4th bullet, “In 2005...Transportation options
other than the single occupancy vehicle
provide a lower-cost way for residents to
travel, but limited multi-modal options and
limited routes reduce access to jobs and
services.”
Staff PWD 9160 42 5th bullet - “In the past decade...growing
transit, bicycle, and sidewalk networks.”
Staff PWD 9161 42
Staff PWD 9162 48
Staff PWD 9163 48
Staff PWD 9164 49
Staff PWD 9165 52
Staff PWD 9166 52 “Rising housing and transportation costs,
school quality…”
Staff PWD 9167 55
Staff PWD 9168 58
Staff PWD 9169 62 Second sentence, “Too many people live and
work in places where densities are too low, do
not have a good mixture of uses, cannot
support regular transit service, or are outside
of a transit agency’s service area. In many
places served by transit, the routes, and the
frequency of service, and location of stops are
so limited that people do not view it as a viable
alternative to driving.”
Staff PWD 9170 68 First bullet – “Development occurs...supporting
transit, bicycling, and urban...”
Staff PWD 9171 68 3rd bullet – Development and transportation
investment occurs across the city in a manner
friendly to families with children, seniors, and
individuals with disabilities (8 to 80 concept).
Staff PWD 9172 69 3rd bullet – Our open spaces and preserves
shape city planning, reduce infrastructure
costs, and provide us with transportation,
recreation, clean air…”
Staff PWD 9173 70 Austin promotes safe bicycle and pedestrian
access with well-designed routes that provide
connectivity throughout the greater Austin
area. These routes are part of our
comprehensive regional transportation
network and provide Austinites and visitors an
affordable, efficient and safe way to access
the roadway, greenway, and urban trail
networks.”
Staff PWD 9174 77
Staff PWD 9175 79 under Job Centers – 4th sentence – “While
these centers are currently best served by car,
the Growth Concept Map increases bicycle
and public transit options…”
Staff PWD 9176 79
Staff PWD 9177 82
Staff PWD 9178 83
Staff PWD 9179 88 4th bullet – “Coordinating land use,
transportation, environmental, and
economic…”
Staff PWD 9180 88 LUT3 – “Promote development in compact
centers, communities, or along corridors that
are connected by roads and transit, are
designed to encourage walking and bicycling,
and reduce health care, housing, and
transportation costs.”
Staff PWD 9181 90 LUT 22 “Integrate…parks, urban trails, stream
corridors…”
Staff PWD 9182 90
Staff PWD 9183 97
Staff PWD 9184 97
Staff PWD 9185 103
Staff PWD 9186 110 “Expand the city’s green infrastructure network
to include such elements as preserves and
parks, urban trails, stream corridors…”
Staff PWD 9187 114 second sentence ‘ “They create and convey
many of the necessities of modern life
(electricity, transportation, solid waste…”
Staff PWD 9188 115 Recreation and Open Space segment should
be re-written to reflect Public Works’ role with
urban trails. See attached resolution and
memo. ADD – “The City’s Public Works
Department is responsible for urban trails, to
assure they function well for sustainable
transportation.” OR re-write paragraph to note
Public Works involvement with urban trails
(see attached resolution).
Staff PWD 9189 116 12th bullet – “Strengthening partnerships
between the Austin Parks and Recreation
Department, the Real Estate Department, and
private …”
Staff PWD 9190 116 13th bullet – “Preserving environmentally
sensitive areas as open space and expanding
the city’s green infrastructure network to be
used for sustainable transportation.”
Staff PWD 9191 120
Staff PWD 9192
Staff PWD 9193 126 HHS3 – add 3rd sentence – “Require and/or
provide incentives for shower facilities in new
development and re-developments.”
Staff PWD 9194 127
Staff PWD 9195 127 ADD - CFE12 – “Increase number of bicycle
facilities that accommodate bicyclists of all
ages and abilities.
Staff PWD 9196 128
Staff PWD 9197 131 2nd bullet under “Key Challenges” - “Ensuring
that affordable resident units and
transportation options are available….
Staff PWD 9198 133 ACC10 – “Improve access to affordable living
to include housing, health care, and affordable
transportation in order…”
Staff PWD 9199 137 11th bullet – “Promote the creation of flexible,
affordable work spaces, housing, and
transportation options for artists…”
Staff PWD 9200 140
Staff PWD 9201 140 4th bullet – change to, “Create a network of
bicycle and walking routes that accommodate
people of all ages and abilities.” OR – can you
clarify for us what “separated means?” Is it a
cycletrack, buffered bike lanes, trails, or just a
bicycle lane?
Staff PWD 9202 141 3rd bullet – “Create a trails master plan for
open space creation, protection of
environmental resources, and sustainable
transportation purposes.”
Staff PWD 9203 143 9th bullet – Provide flexible, affordable work
spaces, housing, and transportation options
for artists”
Staff PWD 9204 145
Staff PWD 9205 148 Under LUT Action -14 – ADD, “Add more
bicycle carrying capacity to buses and trains.”
Staff PWD 9206 149
Staff PWD 9207 151 add LUT42 – Require implementation of
shower facilities with new development to
eliminate barriers to bicycle commuting.
Staff PWD 9208 151 Add LUT 43 – Provide education,
encouragement, evaluation, and enforcement
to grow the bicycle split.
Staff PWD 9209 163 CFS Action – 5 – Explore additional funding
sources primarily for the maintenance of
parks, urban trails, as well as …”
Staff PWD 9210 166 CFS Action – 25 – bikesharing and bicycle
facilities and end of use accommodations
(parking/showers)
Staff PWD 9211 168
Staff PWD 9212 177 CRE Action 14 – “Develop programs and
incentives to provide flexible, affordable work
spaces, transportation options…”
Staff PWD 9213 180
Staff PWD 9214 182 1st bullet – define green infrastructure, 3rd
bullet – “The proposal promotes…”, 7th bullet
– “The proposal is designed to increase real or
perceived safety.” 10th bullet – “The proposal
is within a ¼ mile of retail…”
Staff PWD 9215 184
Staff PWD 9216 184
Staff PWD 9217 185
Staff PWD 9218 188
Staff PWD 9219 188
Staff WPD 9220 33 During the past decade there has been a
modest trend of infill development and
redevelopment in established areas of Austin;
however, the pace of urban core development
lags far behind new development in suburban
and exurban areas.
Staff WPD 9221 69 Austin is Natural and Sustainable
Staff WPD 9222 79
Staff WPD 9223 79 pp79-80?
Staff WPD 9224 80 Other Development within City Limits and ETJ
Staff WPD 9225 82 Figure 4.2
Staff WPD 9226 84 Growth Concept Map
Staff WPD 9227 84 Growth Concept Map
Staff WPD 9228 90 LUT 22. integrate a citywide/regional green
infrastructure (e.g., preserves and parks, trails,
stream corridors, green streets, greenways,
agricultural lands, etc.) and the trail system
into the urban environment and the
transportation network.
Staff WPD 9229 91
Staff WPD 9230 105
Staff WPD 9231 110 110-111 -- Conservation and Environment
Policies
Staff WPD 9232 117 WPD 7. Reduce the public safety threats of
flooding in the 100-year floodplain.
Staff WPD 9233 117 WPD 2. Maintain water and wastewater
infrastructure through its useful life and
replace aged infrastructure as conditions
warrant. Continue to ensure safe and reliable
service.
Staff WPD 9234 117 Wastewater, Potable Water, and Drainage
Policies
Staff WPD 9235 117 WPD 2. Maintain water and wastewater
infrastructure through its useful life and
replace aged infrastructure as conditions
warrant. Continue to ensure safe and reliable
service.
Staff WPD 9236 120 Rec and Open Space Policies
Staff WPD 9237 127 Children, Families and Education Policies
Staff WPD 9238 137
Staff WPD 9239 139 Not sure about the reference
Staff WPD 9240 140 Expand the acquisition of environmentally
significant land, conservation easements, and
development rights to protect sensitive areas
(cFS Action-1)
Staff WPD 9241 142 Related Priority Actions
Staff WPD 9242 142 Similar to (and in coordination with) the green
infrastructure program, this program needs to
build on ongoing water resource management
efforts to establish a comprehensive,
integrated strategy addressing the range of
water resource issues – supply, conservation,
environmental protection, etc.
Staff WPD 9243 142 Expand the acquisition of environmentally
significant land (CE Action-17 and CFS Action-
1)
Staff WPD 9244 143 Related Priority Actions
Staff WPD 9245 143 Develop and Maintain affordable housing
Staff WPD 9246 146 Direct growth to areas with existing
infrastructure capacity including roads, water,
wastewater and schools.
Staff WPD 9247 146 LUT Action 5: create a regulatory environment
to promote the redevelopment of brownfields
and greyfields into compact, walkable places
by:
Staff WPD 9247 146 LUT Action 5: create a regulatory environment
to promote the redevelopment of brownfields
and greyfields into compact, walkable places
by:
Staff WPD 9248 146 146 - 151 LUT actions
Staff WPD 9249 146 o LUT Action-4 Direct growth to areas with
existing infrastructure capacity including roads,
water, wastewater and schools.
Austin’s Land Development Code to create a
compact and connected city.
o LUT Action-37 Develop a regulatory
framework to incentivize the use of Low
Impact Development (LID) design features
such as rainwater harvesting, increased
permeable surfaces, rain gardens, green
roofs, greenstreets, and natural-looking water
quality features such as bioswales to manage
stormwater.
climate by sustainably managing our water
resources
Staff WPD 9250 148 LUT Action 15: ensure that the construction,
operation, and management of rail, bus rapid
transit, local bus systems, and future public
transportation are integrated and coordinated.
Staff WPD 9251 149 LUT Action 20: Develop street tree standards
for all roadway types.
Staff WPD 9252 149 LUT 26-Set targets for vehicle miles traveled
per capita, and incorporate those targets into
traffic impact studies for new development.
Staff WPD 9253 149 LUT Action 19: Develop complete streets
design guidelines and require these standards
for all new road construction and
reconstruction:
-Green Street Techniques
Staff WPD 9254 151 LUT Action 37: Develop a regulatory
framework to incentivize the use of low impact
Development (liD) design features such as
rainwater harvesting, increased permeable
surfaces, rain gardens, green roofs, green
streets, and natural-looking water quality
features such as bioswales to manage
stormwater.
Staff WPD 9255 152 HN Action 5: Incentivize and subsidize the
construction of infrastructure for projects
providing affordable housing.
Staff WPD 9256 152 expand existing and develop new programs,
and coordinate with other organizations to
retain longtime residents of neighborhoods
experiencing rapidly increasing property
values and an influx of wealthier new
residents.
Staff WPD 9257 153 Develop a regulatory framework to incentivize
the use of sustainable and cost effective
design features such as rainwater harvesting,
xeriscape features, rain gardens, green roofs,
greywater irrigation, solar power, and energy
efficient utilities.
Staff WPD 9258 168 establish regulations, programs, and funding
sources to allow offsite stormwater detention
and water quality controls to be used in
concert with green infrastructure and low-
impact development techniques in areas
identified for compact, walkable development
or redevelopment and identify opportunities for
recreational uses and habitat creation or
restoration.
Staff WPD 9259 184 Complete Communities Indicators
Staff WPD 9260 Map
Staff WPD 9261
Staff WPD 9262
Staff WPD 9263 Sustainability
Staff WPD 9264 Urban Farms
Staff WPD 9265
Staff WPD 9266 Land Use and Transportation
Staff WPD 9267 148 Land Use and Transportation
Staff WPD 9268 141
Staff WPD 9269 Overall
Comment Staff suggested Edit
Imagine Austin should use this metric // While the draft does not include the specific
RT @JaceDeloney: "We're done comment, indicators include transit ridership,
moving more cars, it's time to start vehicle miles traveled per capita, households within
moving more people" - Gary Schatz 1/4 mile of transit, bicycle miles traveled,
employees within 1/4 and 1/2 mile of transit and
and high capacity transit.
The Canadian/U.S. oil pipeline, Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
described as going from Canada to
Texas introduced this year, has
fascinated me very much. Not only as
a U.S./Texas citizen, but as a person
concerned about the environment,
land, air quality, etc. I am as deeply
concerned as all the other ecologists,
and environmentalists. Even though
the Texas legislation and Gov. Perry
still doubt there are such problems and
conditions.
I was wondering, and I am not a
scientist or engineer. If this proposal
for this pipeline does get approved by
some power within Texas and the rest
of the country that is involved. Since
Texas and some other areas have
suffered a tremendous drought and
water shortage this year. Plan on
running a parallel or sister pipe along
the oil pipe to carry water that might be
in abundance during the year from
states that the pipe line goes through
and have an abundance of rainfall,
snowfall. Who knows it might even
prevent local floods and disasters. This
can be done by a series of capture
levees and revenes, gates and
aquaducts. California has an aquaduct
that travels hundreds of miles through
the state. I believe this could be cost
effective. rentals should not be
Short term Program and regulations are currently in
allowed. This needs to be addressed in development.
the plan because it is a huge issue and
is changing the character of our
neighborhoods.
Are quantifiable goals specified for the See revised Priority Programs.
future? Need these for
implementation.
I am writing to express my severe PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
disappointment with the recent plan by on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
the City Staff to designate 38th street
between I-35 and Mopac as mixed use.
I live in the Beau Site Neighborhood
which is bordered by 38th street to the
North and Red River to the East. We
are very opposed to this change. 38th
St East of Guadeloupe is not suited to
this use, this is especially true East of
Duval.
This Street is a key part of our
residential neighborhood and changing
this to mixed use, east of Duval will do
irreparable damage to our
neighborhood and will promote its
decay as a family neighborhood.
I challenge each of you to drive slowly
along 38th street east of Duval. When
you drive this one lane residential
street carefully there is no way you can
consider it suitable for mixed use. I
plead with you to reconsider this
damaging decision.
This comment is addressed by Culture Actions 9,
12, 16, 18, 19 and included in the revised Creative
Economy Priority Program
Unclear what the first reference is.
Second sentence is broadly captured by ACC 11
and ACC 19.
Gloria also reviewed the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
recommendations with gave Sylvia
Orosco her imput. She did say the
report very comprehensive and
included many of the topics that
needed to be dealt with. We also
spoke to some of the artists at the E.
Austin Arts Tour and one in particular
felt the People's Gallery at COA
building was a good idea but needed to
be smaller and more attention should
be put on how the art is displayed.
It was very encouraging and eye-
opening to see how the artists are
flourishing all over E. Austin. We
visited some new studios and found
some wonderful art. If we can get the
City to be more involved in this effort, I
think that would help as well and help
publicize it to tourists, I think it can
continue to grow.
Do not rewrite the Land and Use Code. Ch. 5 Re-write
It is understandable that perhaps the See revised Priority Programs.
LDC would need to be tweaked as
issues arise in developing the Comp TF: ensure neighborhoods are included in LDC
Plan; if so, it should be done so with rewrite stakeholders.
neighborhoods at the table.
Stakeholders relied on the current LDC
to create their Neighborhood Plans, so
to rewrite the LDC would open up
Neighborhood Plans to unforeseen and
probably negative consequences.
Neighborhood Plans and FLUMs PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
should be the basis of the Comp Plan exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
Growth Concept map. As it stands Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
now, the Comp Plan map shows many different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
central neighborhoods as part of the Regional Center, including a highlight for the
“Downtown Regional Center.” Our Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
Neighborhood Plans and the Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
Downtown Austin Plan have already map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
accommodated density, but to make
them into "major urban hubs of the
region. They have the highest
employment and residential
densities…support high-capacity
transit …regional centers are entirely
urban, like Downtown…" does not take
into account the FLUMs and the
Neighborhood Plans, as well as the
recently-crafted Downtown Austin Plan
that preserves the historic Judges Hill
neighborhood. This “Downtown
Regional Center” designation seems to
ignore the stakeholder process that
created Neighborhood Plans and the
Downtown Austin Plan.
The Mixed Use on the map looks to be Corridors are shown with a single width; as defined
drawn with a very wide marker. For by this plan, they accommodate many different
example, the CANPAC neighborhood current and future land uses and, in part, connect
plan has some neighborhood mixed redevelopment areas together. This means that not
use and some VMU, but this looks to every part of a Corridor would need to take a Mixed
be much larger -- like a full block Use Future Land Use Category or zoning.
instead of just the properties on the
core transit corridors. Finally, 38th Regarding 38th St in particular, PC/TF 1/23:
Street should not be mixed use in its Removed Activity Corridor designation on 38th
entirety. MU should only appear on the Street between Speedway and I-35.
Growth Concept when it is consistent
with Neighborhood Plans.
“Mixed Use Corridor” should only Do not recommend redefining Mixed Use Corridor
where Mixed-Use zoning is solidly (though it has been renamed to "Acitivty Corridor"
applied along both sides of the street in under the general headings of Activity Centers).
Neighborhood Plans. The designation The current, more flexible definition of Corridors
of 38th Street between I-35 and were generated from a meeting of Contact Teams
Guadalupe Street as a "mixed use (Jan. 6) with support of TF members.
corridor” is a good example. If the
Comp Plan is trying to indicate a range Regarding 38th St in particular, PC/TF 1/23:
of transportation options, then the Removed Activity Corridor designation on 38th
more accurate term “multi-modal” Street between Speedway and I-35.
should be used.
Ok.
Ok.
Ok for this change. Removed "creative class" here
and elsewhere. Generally, "creative community" is
used instead, as appropriate.
Not recommended because cultural amenities is
covered by community services. Also see
inclusiveness sidebar.
conservation.
ok.
ok.
Not recommended. This is addressed by the Austin
is Creative section, and especially the 3rd bullet.
Rewritten in revised Growth Concept Map
definitions.
Ok.
ok.
Not recommended. ACC 17 and UD 7
accomplishes this on its own.
ok.
"Distinctive and diverse local character" implies
creativity. As used throughout plan, "creative" in
this context creates confusion.
ok.
ok.
Not recommended; ACC 10 and CRE-14
accomplishes this.
ok.
Ok to add reference to ACC 9. Do not recommend
adding cultural programming to the text of this
policy.
Not recommended; this is focused on physical
connections.
ok.
ok.
See revision to ECO 6 and ECO 14 (#104)
ok.
See revision to ECO 6 and ECO 14 (#104); ok to
add See ACC 8.
ok.
Not recommended because this is covered by CRE
9, LUT 5.
Not recommended. In this context, cultural
amenities should be a subset of either public
buildings or facilities.
Not recommended because ACC 14 refers to
development of grassroots organizations, not
physical development.
ok.
ok.
Add: See ACC 11, ACC 19.
Additional policy language not recommended. See
also: ok.
Not recommended because ACC 1 does not
address these partnerships
Not recommended because CFE 16 assumes a
general education, including all types
ok.
ECO 1, ECO 2, ECO 5: ok
CFE 18: not recommended.
ok.
ok.
Not recommended: addressed by ACC 10.
ok
ok; include HHS 8 also.
LUT 5, HHS 8, RO 2 -- ok
PB 1, PB 4 -- not recommended.
ok
LUT 10 -- not recommended
RO 5 -- ok
See also HP 6.
ok
ok.
• nothing under ‘Key Challenges for Third bullet: Improving awareness and visibility of
City Facilities’ that addresses the City’s the City of Austin’s many public art projects and its
cultural resources (Elisabet Ney, broad range of cultural resources*, including
O’Henry, MACC, Carver, Dougherty museums and arts centers.*
Arts Center). (p. 119)
promotes
• One reference to Imagine Austin See revised priority programs, which will explicitly
being an ‘umbrella’ plan to existing reference related plans.
master and small-area’ plans (and
under N 5), but would be good to
explicitly cite CreateAustin, Downtown
Plan (just approved), Waller Creek
Plan (still in development).
• Many mentions in ‘Building Blocks’ of See LUT Action-29.
efforts to develop this/develop that…no
real place to insert need to incorporate TF: LUT 29 not quite on point. Find a place for this.
artists into planning teams – planning
for downtown, planning for Waller Artists and other members of the creative
Creek, planning for improved street community such as architects and designers will be
scapes and public plazas, etc. listed as partners for the Code Rewrite for
Compact and Connected.
• Under LUT, no reference to Include in LUT Action-29.
design/incorporation of public art at
transit stops
• Under BU, no reference to “Improve This should be coordinated through the Growth
transportation access to cultural Concept Map (p78) and complete communities
activities” (p72).
In the 6 key challenges and See additional data health, education, jobs. See
opportunities - seems like there is are call-out page on Hispanic & African-American
whole sections focused on some of the Quality of Life Initiatives and connections in priority
issues but the one that no one talks programs.
about and deserves it's own section is
Tackling the Racial Divide. There are
sprinkles of data that talks about this in
the plan but I recommend calling it out
completely and adding it as it's own
section to give it equal value.
In the Historical Context there is no This issue is now covered by "Tackling the Ethnic
mentioned of the segregation policies Divide" on page 178-181
set by Austin public official of Latinos
and African-Americans. I think this is a
key reason we are behind in diversity
and the racial divide is still a big issue
in Austin.
In the demographics section, the title This headline is meant to capture one of the big
says Austin is growing, becoming older areas of change, which is the fast-growing cohort
- but the data shows that younger aged 55-64 (p27).
populations are still larger. Doesn't add
up.
Those sound like good goals but I don't See new African-American & Hispanic Quality of
think they can be accomplished until Life spread.
Austin integrates and shows that it
values diverse perspectives, insights
and most important people. We need
to deal with these issues from the
perspective of those living it which is
mostly Latinos and African-Americans.
For example, wouldn't it be great if we
learned from English Learners and
utilize their strengths instead of trying
to get them to adopt new ways. It
should really be a combo effect - using
both perspectives, mainstream policies
and the grassroots.
Added all but H 2
Added all but H1, CFE 15
Added all but UD 4, 5, 8, PB4, CFE 15
Added all but CFE1
Reviewd by Comp Plan Committee of Planning
Commission.
I live in the Heritage neighborhood in Regarding the downtown regional center: PC/TF
central Austin. I'm very concerned that 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
part of our neighborhood (as well as exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
Shoal Crest and Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
OWUNA) is shown as part of a different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
Regional Center on the Growth Regional Center, including a highlight for the
Concept Map. I'm worried about what Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
this will mean for the single family Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
homes in this area. Also, the MU on map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
the map looks to be drawn with a very
wide marker. The CANPAC Regarding 38th St, PC/TF 1/23: Removed Activity
neighborhood plan has some Corridor designation on 38th Street between
neighborhood mixed use and some Speedway and I-35.
VMU, but this looks to be much larger --
like a full block instead of just the
properties on the core transit corridors.
Finally, 38th Street should not be
mixed use in its entirety. MU should
only appear on the Growth Concept
when it is consistent with the CANPAC
plan.
Do NOT rewrite the Land and Use See revised Priority Programs for detail on how the
Code as part of the plan as we have LDC project relates to other Priority Programs.
supported compatible development
along our periphery with a complex set Many of the goals in Imagine Austin (improved
of sustainable agreements that depend transportation, addressing affordability, preserving
on the current code and would be environmental features, improving public health)
undermined by rewriting it after the fact require revising the Land Development Code. Such
revisions should also address neighborhood
preservation and transitions/compatibility. As
detailed in the revised priority program, any
revision to the Land Development Code would
require a public process for both developing the
code and applying to specific land. Where a small-
area plan (including the Downtown Plan) is
involved, applying the new code would work with
those plans. Additionally, for recently adopted
ordinances and regulations (such as Downtown's),
we would expect few revisions.
This comment will be saved as input to the code
revision process.
Remove our district from the Not recommended. See #5004 regarding the
Downtown Regional Center on the relation between the Downtown Regional Center
Growth Concept Map as it does not fit and the Downtown Plan.
your definition (" . . . the major urban
hubs of the region. They have the
highest employment and residential
densities . ... support high-capacity
transit, and provide a full range of
employment, shopping, cultural,
recreational, and entertainment
opportunities . . .. regional centers are
entirely urban, like Downtown . .. .. ").
To inaccurately label our historic,
largely single-family Judges Hill District
as such would place an irresistible
developer bounty on it and destroy its
role as a shaded, heritage-laden
counterpoint to the dense portions of
Downtown nearby. It would also be
counter to the goals of our district as
laid out in the new Downtown Austin
Plan and thereby mock the public
process that has led to that document.
The rewrite of the LDC (land The survey was not changed midway through the
development code) should not be in process. See revised Priority Programs for how this
the ranking of Comp Plan priorities; it program relates to the other priority programs.
is a result that will happen when the
Comp Plan is finished. The success or
failure of the Comp Plan could very
well hinge on this very important item.
38th Street is colored yellow and PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
designated as a mixed use corridor. on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
This conflicts with our FLUM in the
neighborhoods- Hancock and NUNA.
38th Street has been the target over
the years of such designations- all
such attempts were not successful
because of neighborhood objection.
There is a regional center (orange PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
blob) stuck in the middle of 2 exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
neighborhoods next to UNO. The Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
rationale is what? Why is the regional different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
center there where there are single Regional Center, including a highlight for the
family homes in OWUNA and Heritage Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
Neighborhoods rather than further west Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
in UNO where the density is large? map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
These regional centers imply dense
development and much change.
Placement of a regional center at this
spot would alter the character or these
2 fragile, single family neighborhoods
around UT.
There is a need for a more concise Glossary has be developed.
glossary of terms throughout the plan- Regarding the relation between Corridors and
for eg., mixed use corridors and transportation: east-west transportation through
regional centers are very vague and central Austin has long been an issue. Long-term,
include many elements. How do mixed transit will need to be part of the solution. For
use corridors turn into transportation transit to be as successful as possible, it needs to
corridors? be coordinated with land use patterns as well as
pedestrian friendly facilities like sidewalks. These
land use patterns don't need to be continuous --
nodes work fine. Showing these areas linked
together is important for providing future guidance.
I object to mixed use and increased PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
traffic on 38th Street. Both would form on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
a major barrier between NUNA and
Hyde Pard which are contiguous
neighborhoods. The traffic we have
now on 38th is already a major
problem. Perhaps 38th should be
closed off altogether to cars so that
the street becomes a major bike and
pedestrian throughway. There is no
safe way to get from east to west on
bike or foot and this would provide that
safety. ( The hike and bike trail on
Town Lake is the only east west route
at this time and it is already
overcrowded.) Where 38th Street is
already four lanes, two could be closed
to bikes and pedestrians only.
Mixed use would also nearly
surround the NUNA neighborhood with
commercial activity. Noise problems
are already a major concern. We
already have to deal with the "music"
from down town bombarding our
neighborhood. Plus, NUNA already
has more than its share of dense living
situations with student apartments.
Imagine Austin should be left to
one's imagination. I find most of the
plan catering to developers' greed.
It is my understanding that Imagine The Corridor feature in the current draft of the
Austin has presented plans to convert Growth Concept Map is intended to give
the 38th St corridor into a multiuse neighborhood planning areas flexibility in identifying
area - multi-use being described as areas that should be developed more intensely and
multistoried structures with busiensses areas that should be preserved from
at street level and residences above. redevelopment.
Apparently surveys have been taken
and people surveyed are on board with Also, see the alternate proposal for TF review,
this plan for Austin's future. I live in the #5260.
38th Street corridor. The house I live in
has been in my family since the 1930s.
The chance to express my opinion
through a survey has not been made
available to me. Therefore I will take
the opportunity in this letter to say that I
am completely against any conversion
of the 38th Street corridor into a
multiuse area. I say area because I
feel it will cease to be a neighborhood.
If this is what Imagine Austin is about -
frankly I can't imagine anything worse.
Promote diverse infill housing that See priority program revision, where the household
encourages the *establishment and affordability program is connected to investing in a
maintenance of a compact, connected compact and connected city and revising the land
city, while* complement*ing* and development code to promote a compact and
enhanc*ing* the character of existing connected city.
neighborhoods (LUT Action-2)
Prioritize City of Austin investments to "Give priority to City of Austin investments to
support mixed use, transit, and the support mixed use, transit, and the creation of a
advancement of *a compact, compact, connected city with walkable places."
connected city* and compact and
walkable places *within the city* (LUT
Action-1)
Promote affordable housing throughout See revised Priority Program for connection
Austin by allowing diverse housing between affordable housing and land development
types*, especially housing types that code.
encourage the development of Austin
as a compact, connected city* (HN
Action-3)
Change development regulations and Addressed in bullets (missing from 9/26 draft).
processes to foster a business-friendly
and *infill friendly* environment*, so as
to reduce both the time and cost
required to gain city approval of
projects that promote a compact,
connected city* (ECON Action-3)
Support the construction *of a public Not recommended because ECON Action 5 is
rail transit and a first-class bus transit specific to improving transportation and economic
infrastructure, with associated conditions within the Texas Triangle. Improving our
construction of compact development local transit is covered by LUT Actions 1, 13, 14,
as well as a* regional and statewide 15, 16, 17,
rail network (ECON Action-5)
Align policies, incentives, regulations, Incorporate compact & connected bullet into
service area extensions, and Growth Concept Map introduction, p. 77
infrastructure *to promote the creation
and maintenance of a compact,
connected city and to* coordinate with
the Growth Concept Map (CFS Action-
36)
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
the cynicism fairly drips off WPD 3 -- Austin Water is currently investigating pilot
"Continue to develop and evaluate programs to assess decentralized wastewater
decentralized wastewater processing systems.
site options, including package plants
and satellite facilities, to complement
centralized facilities." Uh, "Continue"?!
When did they start? Indeed, I've been
told Meszaros has said he doesn't
WANT to consider any of this. WPD 3
also highlights how very, very unaware
they are of what the opportunities are.
Distributed reuse will have NOTHING
to do with "package plants".
the plan is TOTALLY devoid on See CFS Actions 37 and 38; rainwater harvesting
integrating rainwater harvesting into is also incorporated into the Priority Program
the water supply system. Also related to sustainably managing our water
something that Austin Water would run resources (where rainfall is called out along with
away screaming at the very mention. the Colorado River, aquifer, and water re-use).
Indeed, I'd be very surprised if there is
ANYONE in a position of authority
within the City bureaucracy who even
thinks this "should" be on the table.
I wish I could get behind your plan, but Noted. One goal of the Growth Concept Map, with
as an older inner city resident of 31 its approach to centers and corridors, is to relieve
years in this location, I am being priced pressure on older neighborhoods.
out of my home thanks to property
taxes & "densification". I understand
your thinking, but I hate it because of
the way it is destroying older
neighborhoods & citizens with modest
incomes. You do not have my support.
Around here, modest homes housing 2
people are being torn down & replaced
by enormous overpriced mansions
housing 2 rich people. What is being
gained, besides some developer's fat
wallet & more property tax income for
the city to throw at questionable
projects?
The Early Childhood Council P. 125:
recommends that revision to the Top paragraph, last sentence: "Education goes
Imagine Austin Plan give greater beyond basic primary, ….; it also includes *quality
attention to the needs of children in the education and day care from birth,* continuing
zero to five age range and their education throughout life, *and* job skills training."
families. The population of
children in this age range in Austin has Key challenges, fourth bullet: "Add the word
increased by 29% in the last decade, “quality” before childcare"
and almost half of them
live in low-income families. Although Key challenges, fifth bullet: "Increase access to
several components of the plan can programs to enhance birth to age 5 development,
affect these young quality pre-K…."
children, the goal “Prepare today’s
children for tomorrow’s jobs,” is Key challenges, second to last bullet: "Using
particularly relevant. Work schools as community centers….for activities such
toward this goal needs to begin at birth. as parenting classes, early childhood learning,
By the time children reach school, the tutoring…."
achievement gap
between those from low- and high- P. 144:
income families is already large. The At the end of the middle paragraph (or somewhere)
return on investment in add a sentence: In order to grow an educated
children is higher the earlier it occurs. community from within our population, children
In 2008, the Early Childhood Council from birth to age 5 need a supportive learning
(then the Child Care Council) environment.
participated in the City of
Austin Families and Children Task P.9 (Paths to Prosperity): Prosperity for all means
Force. We submitted the following …
recommendations regarding Living in poverty by providing quality learning
child development and child care that opportunities for all ages from birth through
are pertinent to the current planning retirement. Provide workforce training….
effort:
1. Encourage the use of Community P.26-29: Incorporate data from Ryan – one of his
Benefits Agreements Council hopes to
The Early Childhood (CBAs) that presentations had data that showed 82.8% of
Per City Charter, the annual report is administered
take part not only in the design of the by Planning Commission.
plan, but in the ongoing
process of monitoring and reviewing
progress in achieving its goals. We
request that city officials
include representatives of the Early
Childhood Council as appropriate in
these activities. It is also
important to include service providers
and families with young children in
focus groups and
community forums providing input
about the plan.
I am following up from the ICC Healthy Austin priority program revised to identify
Travis/Williamson Service Committee key connections with other priority programs.
meeting yesterday. Central Health
recently produced a report that might
be of interest related to Imagine Austin -
a pdf is attached. Also, I mentioned a
model - Take Care New York - that
might be worth looking at for informing
the development of "Healthy Austin". I
would say the most critical thing about
"Healthy Austin" is to not create it in a
vacuum. Increasingly we are trying to
look at health from a regional
perspective and there are lots of
people working on this issue - ideally
whatever Austin does should be
connected into a bigger effort. Below
is a link to Take Care New York - Phil
Huang spoke to many of the ideas
while the link below shows more of an
organized framework. The critical
element is that health policy is looked
at as being integral to everything as
opposed to an issue that is addressed
in a silo. I think this fits well with the
direction of Imagine Austin - that
policies need to cut across areas of the
City - eg enforcement can't push
creative industries out that are
simultaneously being funded by other
city departments.
These bullets are removed in the revised Priority
Programs. LUT Action-2 addresses these changes.
These bullets are removed in the revised Priority
Programs. HN Action-3 addresses these changes.
These bullets are removed in the revised Priority
Programs. ECON Action-3 addresses these
changes.
Revised LUT 1 to Align land use and transportation
planning and decision-making to achieve a
compact and connect city in line with the Growth
Concept Map.
MW: "Prioritize City of Austin investments to
support mixed use, transit, and the creation of
compact, connected, and walkable places."
TF: "Give priority to"-ok
Not recommended: other actions support within-city
transit improvements; this one is specifically related
to a statewide rail system.
Not recommended: compact & connected city is
picked up in the core principles for action as well as
the overall priority programs and doesn't need to be
reiterated everywhere.
Not recommended: That is the role of this plan.
Lastly, as some of you already know, I Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
believe the growth concept map still
needs substantial revision. In its
current form, I believe the map not only
fails to implement the policy of
developing a “compact, connected
city”, it actually cuts in the opposite
direction and institutionalizes additional
sprawl into the ETJ and beyond. While
I understand the practical, political
influences which caused the map to
take its current form, including the
perceived need to conform in a major
way to both the CAMPO “centers”
concept and to the existing individual
neighborhood plans, I believe that such
conformity substantially undercuts and
neutralizes the very policies underlying
the plan. The only antidote will be a
substantial and years-long continuing
effort to revise the map to accurately
depict a “compact, connected city”,
rather than just a sprawling city with a
few “compact, connected”
neighborhoods within it. As long as we
continue to send the vast majority of
new population outside the city limits of
Austin where the associated
development is unguided by the new
plan (which the map in its current
configuration would clearly do), Austin
Like any service, program, or Comment not recommended by CATF
infrastructure that impacts one's life,
folks are interested in seeing that this
plan will directly impact their everyday
experience in this City. The plan, for
the most part, is consistent and easy to
read but there is a lack of identity
attached to it. I found racial justice
mentioned two or three times, disability
justice two or three times, youth justice
two or three times, and economic
justice over and over again. It looks
pretty, but lots of folks are still hearing
the same messages, "zoning."
"economic growth," etc. ANd while
YES this applies to all folks across the
city, it remains disconnected.
Suggestions: Write scenarios of how
the plan will effect an everyday
austinite's or austinite's family
experience, be specific about who
needs what, and what needs those are.
It was dissapointing to find no LGBTQ: From the comprehensive plan's
information on the LGBTQ community perspective, haven't seen LGBTQ issues called out
and the 11,000 LGBTQ youth as a separate category of need (transportation,
estimated to live in the area. housing, education, etc.)
It is dissapointing to find no information 2nd paragraph deals with state government issues.
on women's professional, sexual, and
overall human rights, with planned Immigrants: see edits in response to #5165 & 5166
parenthood and other organizations
struggling to sustain resources against LGBTQ included with inclusiveness sidebar
a hostile overwhelmingly male
dominated Texas government
implementing harsh abortion laws and
continueing to not educate students on
safe sex and relationships in schools.
It was dissapointing to find no or litte
information on our overwhelming
immigrant communities and policies
such as secure communities. As it was
said folks of color and immigrants now
make up the majority of Austin and in
fact nearly 64% of the state. No longer
minorities.
It was dissapointing to find that the
prison/justice system and institional
oppression by the Austin Police
Department against community
members and discrimination against
black, latino, LGBTQ, and disabled
students in our schools, especially as
How does school disciplinary
we see ourmixed use take into See revised definitions of Activity Centers.
consideration of single-family homes?
Most families want yards. Other people
do not want shared walls. Just because
an area is “compact” and walkable,
how do you know that people will walk
more than for recreation?
How is affordable housing defined? Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
When neighborhood pushback and
density halted on one downtown
project because of a tree near the end
of its normal lifespan, how will the city
ever agree on policies that promote
density? Also, future building code
cycles may limit the amount of density
between single family homes due to
fire restrictions. Fire officials usually do
not support narrower streets, etc.
One of our members had a private Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
greenfield new urbanism project that
was considered a failure since houses
were not selling well in the
development. New urbanism founding
father Andres Duany visited the project
to provide advice. Curiously, the issues
cited by Duany as causes for less than
successful results all pointed back to
mandatory municipal regulations such
as large street widths required by fire
officials.
Not everyone wants to live where there Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
is existing infrastructure due to
personal choice, higher costs,
concerns about schools, etc. What
about all the land east of the City?
That’s really where affordable housing
can go but that area lacks basic
infrastructure.
Incentives are the way to go but Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
redevelopment in Austin is notoriously
difficult. Development rights have
been fought by Austin to the extent that
it is no longer possible to vest
development rights in a large mixed
use project. Project duration limits
make anything but very small projects
a gamble. Redevelopment is extremely
expensive and the legal liabilities are
daunting. Perhaps legislative relief for
those
projects might be a good fit for Austin’s
legislative agenda. Expedited
processes are a positive, but
construction has often been the piggy
bank used by the city’s Budget Office
to pay for general fund shortfalls.
This is already being accomplished Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
through CAPCOG and the US
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Sustainable
Communities Planning Grant
This is basically a program to donate Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
open space to the city in order to
receive a density bonus on a site. In
essence, the city is selling density
rights to the highest density bonus on a
site. In essence, the city is selling
density rights to the highest bidder. If
the site can be built at a higher density,
then that fulfills the goals above and
there is no reason for a developer to
pay extra for it. To many Austin
activists, all land is environmentally
sensitive and there is no location that
is suitable for future growth. More to
the point, there are few tracts of land
left west of MoPac in Austin that are
not already vested by making
environmental concessions or
dedicated endangered species habitat.
What incentives would be provided? Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Again, only about 20% of the new
residential market would buy a mixed-
use product. Historically, Austin
incentives usually are eroded by
regulatory additions made year –to-
year. Also, for some people incentives
have been seen as “giveaways” and
“support” of the development
community.
What is a “complete community?” The Covered on page 72
city’s authority relative to schools is
extremely limited.
This policy is market driven. If Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
businesses could not locate their
company in Austin they would likely
move to a neighboring city or county
which still adds to traffic issues.
How do you force people to exercise Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
and eat right just because you have
mixed-use development that is
“walkable?” Some would suggest that
conventional housing patterns are
actually more likely to encourage
evening walks and runs and promote
healthy lifestyles. What about the
neighborhood tennis and basketball
courts?
The city’s job is not to ensure that Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
people are in good physical shape, but
rather, provide the service of streets,
bridges and roads that move people
from one area of town to another in a
timely fashion. Most of these projects
do little to address the traffic
congestion you face in Austin nor the
reality that most people will not ride a
bike or walk most of the time due to
time constraints, length of trips,
weather, etc. Funding of transportation
improvements should be proportionate
to actual use.
At this time, the HBA does not support Comment would not result in edits to plan
or oppose the Central Austin Urban
Rail project but does request a "fact- Project Connect (COA, LStar, CMTA under
based" analysis and cost benefit CAMPO auspices) will be provide some answers to
analysis of this project. We are the Mayor's 30 Rail Questions as well as vetting
concerned about the projected data/issues through the renewed CAMPO Transit
construction costs and the likely Working Group (the first meeting was Monday).
increase in taxes the project requires Project Connect will use the adopted CAMPO 2035
thus making Austin even less High Capacity Transit projects as a starting point
affordable for families. for review of regional rail, incoluding Austin's Urban
Rail, and evaluation of potential gaps and improved
connectivity in the Plan Transit System:
HOV/HOT/BRT/Managed Lanes/CMTA
Rail/MetroRail/City Urban Rail, and other transit &
rail projects in the Plan (such as the Williamson
County "T" rail proposal. Status: Underway
We are deeply concerned about the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
projected construction costs and the
likely increase in taxes the project
requires, thus making Austin even less
affordable for families. First, much of
this initiative is not within the scope of
the City of Austin responsibility, but
rather Capital Metro. It might be
worthwhile to determine whether
initiatives such as this are actually
desired by Austin citizens – possibly in
the form of an initiative or voter “poll” at
an election site. To give a near empty
bus queue jumpers, signal priority and
dedicated lanes may not only be
ineffective, but might create extreme
hostility to a transit program. Few
would argue that the routes do not
need improvement, but the difficulty of
that task should not be underestimated
– if it was easy, Capital Metro would
already have done it. Van pools are the
most cost effective transportation
alternative operated by Capital Metro
but receive little promotion. Car pooling
and ride sharing are both initiatives
that could be provided incentives with
comparative ease and are more
compatible with current lifestyles.
If it was easy, Capital Metro would Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
already have done it.
If it was easy, Capital Metro would Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
already have done it.
If it was easy, Capital Metro would Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
already have done it.
We would urge the city to perform a Comment would not result in edits to plan
study that shows that these projects
(especially retrofit projects) would not Local Area Traffic Management will address the
increase the amount of traffic in the Complete Streets aspect of the comment. Status:
core of the city. Roadway Underway.
transportation bonds usually pass –
even when loaded up with non- City departments have already begun identification
transportation items. Congestion is the of possible 2012 Bond Package projects, including
number issue for Austin. ATD. Status: Underway
Costs must be heavily weighed in Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
order to keep new homes affordable
for families to buy. These types of
regulations usually fall on the backs of
developers and home builders when
rather they should come through bond
elections and the city’s tax base (not
new fees).
Although street trees can provide a This concern will be addressed through
positive impact on the community, we implementation such as changes to the code and
have experienced a severely low criteria manuals.
survival rate of trees planted in the
area between the sidewalk and street
curb. The road base that is required
with the street construction blocks root
growth on one side and the required
sidewalk restricts water penetration on
the other side. If the tree can get
enough water, then you still have the
risk of the tree out-growing the area it
is given. Street trees have also
historically been resisted by cities
because they become safety issues
and hinder utility maintenance.
Responsibility for maintenance of
those trees during times of drought
should be included in the planning.
This would benefit mainly the central Response from Neighborhood Connectivity
city. Most people will not hike to bike to Division: At this time we have not executed a
work if they live in South Austin and cost/benefit analysis. However, this item complies
work in the North Austin, etc. Has the with our current Bicycle Master Plan, passed by
city prepared a cost benefit analysis? Council in 2009 (Ord. # 20090611-075) that has as
one of its benchmarks, increasing citywide
commuter bicycle trips to 2% in 2012 and 5% in
2020. It has also been proven worldwide that
investment in cycling is an inherent local economic
good. For example, last week, the journal
Environmental Health Perspectives published
findings from a study by scientists at the University
of Wisconsin on the economic and health benefits
of switching from a car to a bike for trips shorter
than five miles long in 11 metropolitan areas
around the upper Midwest. Combining data on air
pollution, medical costs, mortality rates, car
accidents, and physical fitness, the researchers
found that if inhabitants of the sample region
switched to bikes for half of their short trips, they'd
create a net societal health benefit of $3.5 billion
per year from the increase in air quality and $3.8
billion in savings from smaller health care costs
associated with better fitness and fewer mortalities
Traditionally, existing neighborhoods Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
have been the most vocal and
successful opponent to connecting
existing and newly-built subdivisions
which is an excellent example of where
some planning mandates are directly
contrary to the will of the public.
This could drive new construction Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
outside the city limits, further
enhancing traffic problems. Also, this
represents lifestyle and personal
choice control at unprecedented levels.
The questions for the regulated areas
are “What will be done with the
targets?”
We support more flexibility. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
We support making changes to the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
tree ordinance that would allow the
removal of regulated trees in exchange
for planting more trees in the areas
where the city would like to have “tree-
covered places”. (i.e., a mitigation
plan). We oppose more regulatory
intrusion into the details of residential
development. The decisions on public
spaces should allow for determination
by the developer (and ultimately the
buyer) to allow for a variety of public
space use and that is most compatible
with the buyers or public demand.
The city should be aware of safety Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
issues regarding lack of lighting.
We support incentives so long as the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
source of funds does not come from
housing that does not choose to
participate, thereby reducing flexibility
and buyer choice.
We support incentives. Austin already Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
has the strictest energy code in the
nation. What problem is the city trying
to solve? The restrictions are reaching
a diminishing point of returns and
raising new home prices. Net gains in
energy conservation must focus on
existing housing stock.
We support incentives as long as the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
source of funds does not come from
housing that does not choose to
participate; thereby reducing flexibility
and buyer choice. .
We support incentives but significant Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
progress will only be made by
addressing current housing stock.
We support incentives. New homes Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
are already more energy efficient and
conserve more resources than existing
homes. The city updates International
Residential Building Code every cycle.
It should focus on ways to keep
housing affordable versus raising cost
by amending the code.
We support incentives. Austin builders Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
and developers are already the best in
the country in conservation practice.
The city currently has more parkland Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
than it can take care of. Why is more
open space needed? It has more open
space than almost any other city
proportionally. The Austin Parks and
Recreation Department oversees more
than 16,000 acres of land containing
251 parks, 15 preserves (sanctuaries
for native plants, native animals and
unique natural features), and 40
greenbelts (parkland on creeks and
canyons). All parks are open for public
use each day from 5:00am-10:00pm
unless otherwise posted.
Builders are market driven. See Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
comments below.
The city must develop incentives Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
especially financial ones for
private/public partnerships with for-
profit builders. The challenge is for
builders and developers to obtain the
funding to develop lots at all. The
market is seeing the lot supply
constrict due to the loss of traditional
land development supply-side
economics and the loss of funding
sources. Builders are motivated to
become engaged in early stage
community design driven by their
consumer’s market tastes and
demands. Entry-level, first-time
homebuyers are looking for value. An
increase of even $100 per month in
monthly mortgage payments can mean
the difference of being able to
purchase a home or not. The builders
noted that only 30 percent of all
houses built will be more expensive
than the $175,000 range average price
that most Central Texas buyers would
be able to afford. That probably will
mean that most development will be
east of Interstate-35 in the State
Highway 130 corridor.
Same comments as above Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Same comments as above Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Same comments as above Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Same comments as above Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
We oppose. This type of approach to Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
housing needs has already been
attempted in California. That state
provides extensive practical knowledge
on the effects of housing price
mandates. By setting price controls,
municipalities magnify the same
problems they are trying to fix. While a
very select few are allowed to
purchase homes at below market
rates, virtually all other buyers
subsidize that purchase through higher
costs for their own homes. Price
controls have been shown to lower the
values of the homes where they are
applied because there are usually strict
limitations on resale homes. Separate
and apart from the economic
considerations, there are basic equity
and constitutional issues.
Municipalities must focus on more
legal, more effective methods for
encouraging affordable housing and
keep everyone out of the courthouse.
If a home is abandoned it is probably in The action is a general statement that does not
disrepair. The same goes for many identify a particular group.
foreclosed properties. How about
giving home builders assistance in
buying these properties and building
new, energy efficient homes in their
place?
A major factor in gentrification is the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
cumulative impact of taxes and fees in
Austin. Initiatives to retain longtime
residents may need to consider tax
valuation or new homestead
exemptions.
See comments under HN Action-2 Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
We support incentives. Loft Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
construction has been a trendy
concept for some time. Roll back of
regulatory barriers to housing is
supported for every venue.
This is critical step that would probably Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
require federal regulations.
We currently team with Austin Energy Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
for a “Green Boots” Building Program
that has been successful. The goal is
to provide a basic introduction and
comprehensive education for builders
and trades into “green building,” more
sustainable practices and an overview
of products and services that are
available in the Central Texas market.
It is the most advanced green building
education program in the country.
Presumably this is a program for code Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
enforcement of established housing.
Many residents are already resentful of
the city’s intrusiveness; whether this is
indeed a generally perceived need
may be worth testing.
We support incentives but significant Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
progress will only be made by
addressing current housing stock.
The city must focus on market-driven Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
approaches. The private sector will
design and build what the public will
buy. It is curious that Austin planners,
be they public or citizens, believe they
can better decide what “should be built”
than the homeowners who purchase
those homes.
The city already has the McMansion Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
ordinance.
The city must focus on market-driven Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
approaches. The private sector will
design and build what the public will
buy and where they want to live. Many
businesses are now locating in
surrounding communities to be closer
to affordable work force housing.
The city already has the McMansion Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
ordinance.
The current policy and plans are Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
cumbersome, time consuming and
costly but we doubt neighborhoods
would back off any changes.
This policy appears to be in direct Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
conflict with the one above. The small
area plans are cumbersome, time
consuming and costly.
Affordable lots are the most important Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
variable. The biggest challenge for
development is offsite infrastructure
(bridge, lift station, etc.). Public home
building companies are saying “no” to
large projects making smaller units
near existing planned communities and
municipal services price competitive.
Actions in this section are mutually
exclusive (e.g., align growth concept
map with small area plans).
Most neighborhood plans do not Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
support density.
Most neighborhood plans do not Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
support density.
Stakeholders who are business Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
interests do not have the resources to
participate in all of the small-area
planning, thereby ensuring that
outreach efforts will not be
representative.
For plans that are not practical or Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
viable, what initiative can the city take?
The HBA agrees it is critical to include Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
the private sector in such planning.
We strongly support this action item. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
This will be a huge challenge and has Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
failed every time it was attempted.
We strongly support this action item. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
We strongly support this action item. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
We strongly support this action item. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Nearly 87% of HBA members are small Included as part of Changing regulations to
business owners. What would help promote compact and connected priority program
them immensely is a permitting and
development process within the city
that is expedient and user friendly.
Private property rights must be taken Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
into consideration.
One of the most viable employment Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
opportunities is in the housing industry
for those willing to work hard.
A regional approach is important. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
The HBA would support regional Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
building code adoption and regional
development standards. The HBA
already hosts quarterly Building Official
meetings and quarterly City Planner
meetings to encourage common
interpretation of the codes.
All small businesses should be Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
considered.
The HBA supports job creation in Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
cutting edge industries.
Efficiency should be encouraged in all Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
governmental fields. Currently, city
building inspectors that are cross-
certified to be more efficient in field
inspections. However, they are not
paid more even though they
significantly enhance the revenue
stream for the city and improve
response times for the private sector.
While there is an important role for the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
residential construction industry in
energy independence, it must be
based on sound science and should be
cost effective.
For many Austin residents, there are Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
no areas that are not environmentally
sensitive.
For many Austin residents, there are Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
no areas that are not environmentally
sensitive. To effectively manage water
resources requires addressing lifestyle
choices and construction already in
existing homes.
There are already statutes and Noted. Watershed Protection states we do have
ordinances that require remediation of such provisions but they are in the process of
damaged areas. improving them via the Watershed Protection
Ordinance update.
CE5 revised to "Improve"
What is meant by “political Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
boundaries?” To integrate nature into
city when that city is a highly compact
community with dense development
will be a great challenge. To effectively
manage water resources requires
addressing lifestyle choices and
construction already in existing homes.
The city already has an open space Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
ordinance, stringent building codes,
etc.
Please add predictable and “less Revise CE-8: Establish a comprehensive,
expensive process” to the mix. predictable, consistent, and efficient process to
evaluate the environmental effects of new
development.
Public recognition is valuable. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
The process is already expensive, Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
unpredictable and time consuming
often with little coordination
interdepartmentally and between
departments.
Why is more open space needed? The Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Austin Parks and Recreation
Department oversees more than
16,000 acres of land containing 251
parks, 15 preserves (sanctuaries for
native plants, native animals and
unique natural features), and 40
greenbelts (parkland on creeks and
canyons). All parks are open for public
use each day from 5:00am-10:00pm
unless otherwise posted.
There is no evidence that the loss of This action is primarily about supporting the local
farmland in the region is affecting food economy by supporting local food production.
supply or costs. Regulatory authority Also, cost could be affected if, for example, gas
outside the city does not exist and the prices increase.
question remains, “What does
acquisition of development rights
accomplish?”
There is no evidence that the loss of This action is primarily about supporting the local
farmland in the region is affecting food economy by supporting local food production.
supply or costs. Also, cost could be affected if, for example, gas
prices increase.
There is no evidence that the loss of This action is primarily about supporting the local
farmland in the region is affecting food economy by supporting local food production.
supply or costs. Also, cost could be affected if, for example, gas
prices increase.
Standard should be determined based Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
on scientific analysis of true needs.
The city must make sure that such Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
incorporation does not raise the price
of new homes.
The HBA supports an incentive-based Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
program.
The current ordinance has a myriad of Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
problems that must be addressed
before the city moves forward. Private
property rights are currently being
violated. Should the public benefit of
keeping a tree over ride all other
considerations? How can the mitigation
requirements be made more
predictable? What should the phrase
"reasonable use" mean in the findings
of fact for the removal of a Heritage
Tree?
See CE Action-23 Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
See CE Action-23;. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Development in floodplains is already Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
severely restricted.
Please do not raise taxes to meet Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
these goals. It would be helpful if
standards could be determined based
on scientific analysis of true needs.
Bastrop County was able to implement
protections for the Houston Toad that
respected private property rights.
While this may be necessary for some Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
species, multiple use tracts of land or
owner agreements may reduce costs
and certainly enhance the public’s
support of the set asides.
See comment CE Action-12 Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
If the city cannot maintain all its parks, Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
then perhaps its dedication
requirements from new housing is
excessive.
See comment CE Action-23 Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
The mitigation plan for the tree Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
ordinance could be used to direct
planting of trees or vegetation in the
desired areas.
See comment CE Action-21 Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
This is a laudable goal so long as it Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
does not result in additional exactions
from new home buyers.
This is a laudable goal so long as it Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
does not result in additional exactions
from new home buyers.
This is a laudable goal so long as it Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
does not result in additional exactions
from new home buyers.
Perhaps the Fire Departments should Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
consider smaller trucks to allow for
roads that are better scaled or give
credits for the fact that homes today
are much safer. The issues of
connectivity are ones where the
planning remains at odds with the
public. Often, current voter decisions
and solutions are not in the hands of
the building community.
Because Austin has been so dominant Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
in the region, the COG is an
underutilized entity that in other regions
is an incredibly effective planning and
coordinating tool. The North Texas
COG is perhaps the most respected in
the country. However, enhanced use
requires additional resources and
willingness to accept outcomes not
created solely by Austin.
We strongly see the need for and Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
support streamlining and cooperation.
Will the city include a provision on Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
grandfathering or statute of limitations
on some violations? Some people will
not be able to afford to bring housing
standards up to current code (or even
code at the time the permit was pulled).
The city should be the early adopter for Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
its own projects, iron out the kinks and
then move forward on the plan with the
private sector. Currently there is a not
cost effective method for recycling all
construction waste. Some construction
currently has the practice, but it is done
for Green Building homes and is
subsidized by the builder. This
mandate is a requirement where there
has not been an independent cost
benefit analysis of the environmental
benefits.
These are conflicting goals. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Austin already has the most stringent Noted.
energy codes in the country and must
consider their cost in light of hitting a Energy efficiency covered in LUT Action 34, 35, 36,
point of diminishing returns. In just the 37, 38, 39 and HN Action 12, 13, 15
last code cycle, HBA members who
build entry-level homes estimated all of
the combined 2009 energy code
amendments add eighty cents (80¢)
per square foot to every new home.
Entry-level buyers of new homes face
the biggest financial obstacles and are
least able to absorb that cost. For the
average home size of eighteen
hundred (1,800) square feet, the added
cost of the new code to the new home
price is at least $1,440.00. That
amount often means the difference
between a buyer qualifying to purchase
a new home or not. Virtually all of the
homes currently built in Austin
significantly exceed the performance
standards that the local amendments
to the 2006 energy code were created
to achieve. That “real world”
accomplishment justifies flexibility to
allow the builders to incorporate
efficiencies on the private sector side.
The best opportunities for energy
efficiency enhancement are with
existing housing.
The city can direct growth by investing Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
in infrastructure in a certain area. One
of the best ways to ensure compact
development is to address the issues
of utilities. For example, utilities are
rare in the large amount of land
between the current city limits and
SH130, so the city encourages
sprawling development with little
control of water resources and makes
annexation difficult.
This is a laudable goal so long as it Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
does not result in additional exactions
from new home buyers.
Incentives are key for the private Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
sector. This is a laudable goal so long
as it does not result in additional
exactions from new home buyers.
This is a laudable goal so long as it Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
does not result in additional exactions
from new home buyers. Existing
housing stock is where the most
potential gains may be achieved.
Regional water quality facilities Added "including regional"
constructed by the city would be an
asset that would allow for denser
development, open space and more
trails.
The City can build regional facilities to Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
make improvements to the existing
infrastructure. Best practices
developed using sound science and
recognized by engineering
professionals are reasonable. To
exceed those standards is not.
This is a laudable goal so long as it Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
does not result in additional exactions
from new home buyers. Existing
housing stock is where the most
potential gains may be achieved in
water conservation.
This should only be part of what Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
housing bonds are used for. Many
families want to buy single-family
homes, so such purchases should be
considered as a portion of the bond
package.
We support construction related/trades Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
programs in high schools and
community colleges.
We support incentives but not Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
regulations or mandates.
This enforcement is one of the most Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
onerous impacts on Austin venues and
Austin live music. It clearly contradicts
the purported goals in other action
items.
This should not violate private property Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
rights.
We support incentives but not Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
regulations.
We support incentives but not Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
regulations.
Private property rights must be Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
considered, see comments for CE
Action-23.
These goals conflict. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
It has come to my attention that city PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
staff has designated 38th Street on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
between MOPAC and I-35 as a mixed
use area. This violates the
neighborhood FLUM (Future Land Use
Map), and I strongly oppose this
change.
Please stick to the FLUM, and keep
the area designated residential only.
This is one of the few historic areas of
Austin that maintains its character as a
residential neighborhood. Don't ruin a
good thing!
Our primary recommendation is to "Creating a more compact and efficient city is
change the first principle in the draft critical to our ability to connect people *of all ages,
Plan from “Grow as a compact, backgrounds, and abilities* to homes, jobs,
connected city” to “Grow as a compact, schools, and other destinations with a more
connected, family-friendly City.” The complete transportation system that is affordable to
history of growth in cities across the build, operate, and maintain." -- if this seems ok in
U.S. has established that focusing on concept, it can be rewritten to sync up better with
redevelopment into a compact city the Inclusiveness sidebar.
without also focusing on
redevelopment that is friendly to
children will result in a city that is more
dense in the urban core but also more
void of children. Families with children
are pushed out to the suburbs
defeating the city’s primary goal of
sustainability. In contrast, cities like
Vancouver, Portland, Stockholm, and
Freiburg, Germany, and others have
made it a goal to be more compact and
sustainable while also including
children. As these cities have shown,
for compact development to be
successful, it will need to be designed
with children in mind, incorporate open
space and access to play spaces, and
be pedestrian-oriented. (See, e.g.,
“TODS for Tots,” Planning Magazine,
Feb. 2011).
Compactness is problematic unless it
speaks to redevelopment that is
inclusive for all residents. We
Change the core value of “Integrate Not recommended. TF: family-friendly is described
nature into the city” to “Integrate nature in the paragraph
and family-friendly parks and other
public spaces throughout the city.”
We recommend you add a bullet here Addressed by the fourth bullet.
to read: “As the City becomes more
compact, there is a heightened need to
incorporate more urban play spaces for
children in parks and other public
places.
The draft Plan states that “families with p55, 1st bullet: include safety and available
children are not necessarily staying in amenities in list of issues of concern to families.
Austin,” and on page 52 mentions that "Blue ribbon... deleted from bullet.
the proportion of households with
children has held steady. However, the p53, 1st bullet: At end of 1st sentence, include:
Plan overlooks the important data "(see map X-X for change in households with
showing that families with children do children from 2000 to 2010)." Insert the map.
continue to make up a decreasing
percentage of households in the urban
core, while the number of families with
children sky rockets in suburban areas.
The Plan should mention more
emphatically the interesting and
important array of Census data
showing that the % of families with
children in the urban core continues to
decline, that more families with
children are moving to the surburbs,
and that less middle income families
are remaining in Austin’s urban core
(see City of Austin Demographer Ryan
Robinson’s “Top Ten Trends for
Austin”). These trends are alarming
and important to highlight—and they
should help guide the City’s future
planning efforts.
We recommend the vision statement Vision Statement contains family-friendly provisions
for the City in Chapter 3 incorporate
the following specific vision statements
adopted by the Families with Children
Task Force for Austin to become a
more “family-friendly city”:
o Families of different sizes, needs,
and income levels can afford to live in
neighborhoods throughout the city, in
homes designed to accommodate
families.
o All families, including those with
children with disabilities, have access
to high-quality child care that they can
afford near homes or workplaces.
o All children attend excellent public
schools that they can reach safely by
walking, bicycling, or taking public
transportation.
o Pocket parks and playgrounds are
interspersed throughout the City, such
that all families can walk safely to a
park using sidewalks and crosswalks.
o In downtown and throughout the city,
public spaces contain amenities that
attract and engage children and that
serve as gathering places for children
and families.
o Recreational activities, events,
restaurants, and stores that cater to
families with children are found
throughout the city and in areas that
familiesthe bullet under “Livable” access
Modify with children can safely from Not recommended because this language is
“Healthy and Safe Communities” to implied.
“Healthy, Safe and Family-Friendly
Communities.” Add text to the vision on
page 72 that new development,
amenities, and services will be
attractive and safe for families with
children.
Add a new land use and transportation LUT 5: "...and provides *community gathering
priority to read: “Integrate child-friendly spaces, parks,* and safe outdoor play areas for
parks and other child-friendly open children."
spaces into the urban environment.”
Include a new policy with language Add see alsos between LUT-5, UD-1 and CFE-19.
similar to CFE19, which pertains to
“creat[ing] public spaces that attract Generally, the policies should be treated as one
and engage children and serve as body, rather than repeating points everywhere they
gathering places for families and might be relevant.
children.”
Add the word “family-friendly” to UD 1 Original language implies family-friendly. Also,
so that it reads: “Develop family- included in the inclusiveness sidebar on page 10.
friendly, accessible community
gathering places….”
Add the word “family-friendly” after Original language implies family-friendly. Also,
“accessible” to read” Develop included in inclusiveness sidebar on page 10.
accessible, family-friendly community
gathering places….”
Include the following recommended RO 9: Include "other governments"
additional policies:
o RO 10: Foster partnerships with RO10: address in RO9 and related actions.
private and public entities (including
larger research institutions and school RO11: Addressed in RO2, RO4, and related
districts) that can help contribute to the actions.
vitality and development of city parks.
o RO11: Increase recreational and RO12: Addressed in RO1 and related actions.
cultural opportunities throughout the
city that include new forms of
recreation (such as skate parks) and
new types of play spaces (such as
nature-based play areas).
o RO12: “Add new parks and green
spaces to allow all residents to live
within walking distance of a publicly-
accessible and child-friendly park or
green space.”
Include the following additional policy: See CRE 17 (was ACC 17), UD 17, and
“Provide for child-friendly interactive art inclusiveness sidebar.
in public places.”
Change the language in the Priority Not recommended because this is implied.
Programs listed here to reflect the
recommended changes to the priority
program language on page 9. Thus,
the core action program to “Change
Austin’s development regulations and
processes to promote a compact and
connected city” would read, “Change
Austin’s development regulations and
processes to promote a compact,
connected and family-friendly city.”
Change the third core action program
which currently reads “Create a green
infrastructure program to protect
environmentally sensitive areas and
integrate nature into the city” to read:
“Create a program to protect
environmentally sensitive areas and
integrate nature and family-friendly
parks and other public spaces
throughout the city.”
Modify LUT Action 1 to add the word See LUT-Action 3 and new sidebar on
“family-friendly” so that the Action inclusiveness.
reads, “Prioritize City of Austin
investments to support mixed use,
transit, and the creation of compact,
family-friendly, and walkable places.
Modify the 3rd bullet in LUT Action-14 Not recommended. See new sidebar on
to add the word “family-friendly” so that inclusiveness.
the bullet reads: “Create inviting family-
friendly public spaces at stops and TF: Staff should revise language to reflect that we
transfer centers.” want to our transit stops / centers to be accessible
to riders of all ages, abilities, levels of familiarity w/
transit. Agree not to just insert "family friendly".
Add CFS Action to read: “Produce a CFS A-2 (expanding access to parks) includes a
10-year action plan for adding and connection to the 1/4 and 1/2 mile distances in the
developing urban parks to fulfill the Urban Parks Workgroup map.
City Council directive of creating
accessible park space for every Also, CFS-3 and CFS-4 and pg 49 and 52
resident within ¼-mile walking distance
for the urban core and a ½-mile
walking distance for areas outside the
urban core.” (See Urban Parks
Workgroup Report, p. 28-29).
Add CFS Action to read: “Ensure city Add "child-friendly features" bullet to CFS-25. See
departments include outdoor family- ID# 232
friendly features such as creative play
spaces, nature-based play areas, and
interactive arts spaces at all new city
facilities that are oriented to the public.”
(See Urban Parks Workgroup Report,
p. 33).
Add CFS Action to read: “Develop See CFS-3.
strategies to transform under-utilized
public land into innovative, child-
friendly pocket parks.” (See Urban
Parks Workgroup Report, p. 33).
Modify CFS Action-25 to add a bullet ok.
that reads: “child-friendly play spaces”
under the standards to be utilized when
designing public buildings and spaces.
We recommend the following bullet be Incorporated in third bullet in Livable.
added below “livable”: “The proposal
is designed to address the needs of Include parks in 3rd bullet in Mobile &
children.” Interconnected.
Add a measurement to track the Households with children (tracked geographically)
number and percentage of families included as an indicator.
with children living in specific
neighborhoods and areas of the city
over time, and include breakdown by
income levels.
Form a Families with Children This was not supported by the CATF
Commission to examine city policies
for their impact on families with
children;
· Establish a Families with This was not supported by the CATF
Children Ombudsperson to ensure that
the perspectives of families with
children are taken into consideration in
city decision-making;
· Expand family-friendly cultural See CRE Action-1, 7, 8 and inclusiveness sidebar.
offerings downtown and encourage
family-friendly cultural events
throughout the city.
· Create more pedestrian zones. Not recommended, beyond priority program for
Close certain streets in downtown and investing in a compact, connected city.
other areas on certain days to promote
car-free family-friendly areas.
· Increase availability of family- See LUT Actions 1, 2, 3. Include reference to
friendly pedestrian and bicycle routes, Families and Children Task Force Report in Invest
and family-friendly traffic calming in and Code changes for compact priority programs
residential neighborhoods. Adopt new
innovative strategies to create play
areas and “trike” friendly zones on
neighborhood streets.
· Make streets around schools, See CFS-25/transportation priority program, LUT
parks, library and other public spaces Action 1, 3, 8, 12, 23,
more pedestrian- and bicyclist-friendly
(the draft plan speaks to safe routes to
schools but not a focus on safe routes
for children to these other important
neighborhood amenities).
· Make existing streets, See Complete Streets (LUT Action-19) and priority
crosswalks, and sidewalks safer for program.
families with children.
· Coordinate and develop See Society Action 4, 5, 7 and equity spread
partnerships among schools,
neighborhoods, health care providers,
institutions of higher learning, and city
social services to make strategic
investments in targeted areas to
support the most vulnerable children.
· Require more formal, See Society Actions 3, 7, 30, 34, 39, 41, 43, 46 and
coordinated planning with area school LUT Action-9.
districts.
· In partnership with external This was not supported by the CATF
organizations and publications, create
a web portal with information on kid-
friendly activities, schools, child care
services, housing, and other issues
relevant to families with children.
Explore opportunities for supporting
additional family resource centers and
making resources for families (such as
toy libraries) available at branch
libraries and community recreation
centers.
· In collaboration with local See CRE 12, 13, and 19.
businesses, cultural organizations and
institutions, AISD, and other partners,
support neighborhood-based cultural
activities and the development of
cultural and heritage
community/neighborhood districts.
· Create additional public GC: identify actions (LUT-28 and CFS -- ?)
gathering spaces in downtown and
throughout the city and incorporate
child-friendly and family-friendly
features into these new and existing
public spaces.
· Start collecting and reporting See priority program review.
family-related data for all
homeownership units that receive
housing subsidies from the City of
Austin or through city-administered
federal housing programs. The data
should include the numbers of
bedrooms, the family composition, and
the household size of the original
purchaser from the City of Austin.
· Provide land and building space See Society action-28, 30, 31
for early education and child care
facilities as part of city real estate
transactions.
· Research and develop a See Society action-28, 30, 31 and p. 127
comprehensive needs assessment and
strategic plan for child care services as
an economic development strategy for
the City of Austin.
· Create family-friendly design Not recommended.
standards for development, using a
rating system similar to the Austin
Energy Green Building standards.
Create a map of current amenities for Not recommended. Should be handled through
families with children to guide future small area plans and complete community
planning. indicators.
HPNA is opposed to the designation of 51st St is identified as an Activity Corridor from US
51st Street or 38th Street between I-35 183 to Duval. At Duval, the Corridor shifts north to
and Guadalupe Street as a "mixed use 53rd St. PC/TF changed where this connection is
corridor," "transportation corridor," or made from Duval to Airport.
any similar designation.
PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
HPNA is opposed to the use of See revised Activity Corridor description.
roadway terminology in the
comprehensive plan that is the same
as, or similar enough to be confused
with, land use terminology used in the
zoning regulations and;
Who Are We Today? P. 26, Add bullet under Population: Austin has
We are a city where 1 in 5 residents is become a gateway city for immigrants. One in five
an immigrant. While over half of these residents are immigrants and while over half come
immigrants come from Mexico, another from Mexico, another quarter come from Asia.
quarter of them come from Asia.
Immigrants have been some of the
drivers of Austin’s cherished creative
and innovative identity.
The city’s hard-working and
resourceful immigrant workforce is
behind the statistic about the labor
force doubling between 1990 and
2010, and the idea that Austin provides
fertile ground for small businesses to
grow. Our refugee resettlement
agencies have strong partnerships with
hospitality and health care employers,
another reason why those industries
have been able to grow over time.
The statement on p30 reads: There are a growing number of neighborhoods
throughout Austin where immigrants, largely from
"There are a growing number of Latin America, are increasingly settling. This has
neighborhoods throughout Austin resulted in these areas becoming linguistically,
where immigrants, largely from Latin socially, and economically isolated from the larger
America, are increasingly settling. This city, including from critical city services such as
has resulted in these areas becoming emergency response and public health services.
linguistically, socially, and Part of this isolation results in the physical
economically isolated from the larger deterioration of parts of these neighborhoods, as
city. Some of these neighborhoods are immigrants are unable to call on code enforcement
experiencing a deterioration of the built or access money for maintenance.
environment."
TF: Reword to say we should assist.
While the language itself may appear
neutral the structure of the wording Assistance to such groups covered by Policies
could support an understanding that HHS 8, CFE 1, 4, 8, 9
immigrants - especially Latinos - are
isolationists, invasive, and/ or
destructive to the community. If
anything, workgroup participants
voiced concerns that linguistically
isolated individuals and communities
are at greater risk of isolation from
critical city services (such as
emergency response and public health
services). Perhaps rather than leaving
it open to interpretation that immigrants
pose a threat to the built environment
of a neighborhood - the narrative could
focus on the need for the city to
improve its outreach and
communications with the linguistically
isolated (in order to insure equal
Despite the anti-immigrant sentiment That language is included in the plan as SOC
that is growing in many areas of the Action-16, p. 172.
country, Austin and its leaders have
long welcomed immigrants and
defended their rights. Our police force
has championed the safety of
immigrant residents, including the
undocumented. Immigrant residents
(high tech whizzes, specialized
doctors, restaurant owners, musicians,
actors, public servants, teachers,
engineers, brew masters, and
homebuilders) have contributed to our
growth, prosperity, and culture.
Austin has a proud tradition of
supporting its significant, vibrant, and
booming immigrant population. It is
essential that Imagine Austin include a
strong statement of support for
maintaining and expanding, as
needed, the programs that the city has
developed to foster trust in the
immigrant community, facilitate access
for immigrants (who may be socially
isolated from city services because of
cultural or linguistic barriers), and
ensure protections against the
exploitation of this not insignificant and
uniquely vulnerable section of the
community.
The action statement we finally put
Who Are We Today? New Bullet
We are a city where 1 in 5 residents is Almost 20 percent of Austin residents are foreign-
an immigrant. While over half of these born. Over half of these people came from Mexico
immigrants come from Mexico, another and about a quarter from Asia. Of those people
quarter of them come from Asia. born in Asia, the majority are from India, followed
Immigrants have been some of the by Viet Nam, China, and Korea.
drivers of Austin’s cherished creative
and innovative identity.
The city’s hard-working and
resourceful immigrant workforce is
behind the statistic about the labor
force doubling between 1990 and
2010, and the idea that Austin provides
fertile ground for small businesses to
grow. Our refugee resettlement
agencies have strong partnerships with
hospitality and health care employers,
another reason why those industries
have been able to grow over time.
Negative Tone Around Immigrant There are a growing number of neighborhoods
Neighborhoods throughout Austin where immigrants, largely from
The statement on p30 reads: Latin America, are increasingly settling. Language
and cultural differences between this growing
There are a growing number of community and the largely English-speaking
neighborhoods throughout Austin population has led to varying levels of isolation.
where immigrants, largely from Latin This isolation has made it difficult for the City of
America, are increasingly settling. This Austin to serve and these residents to access
has resulted in these areas becoming services such as basic infrastructure maintenance,
linguistically, socially, and building code enforcement, public safety and health
economically isolated from the larger services.
city. Some of these neighborhoods are
experiencing a deterioration of the built
environment.
While the language itself may appear
neutral the structure of the wording
could support an understanding that
immigrants - especially Latinos - are
isolationists, invasive, and/ or
destructive to the community. If
anything, workgroup participants
voiced concerns that linguistically
isolated individuals and communities
are at greater risk of isolation from
critical city services (such as
emergency response and public health
services). Perhaps rather than leaving
it open to interpretation that immigrants
pose a threat to the built environment
of a neighborhood - the narrative could
focus on the need for the city to
improve its outreach and
Action Statement This refers to SOC Action-16, which is included in
Despite the anti-immigrant sentiment the plan.
that is growing in many areas of the
country, Austin and its leaders have
long welcomed immigrants and
defended their rights. Our police force
has championed the safety of
immigrant residents, including the
undocumented. Immigrant residents
(high tech whizzes, specialized
doctors, restaurant owners, musicians,
actors, public servants, teachers,
engineers, brew masters, and
homebuilders) have contributed to our
growth, prosperity, and culture.
Austin has a proud tradition of
supporting its significant, vibrant, and
booming immigrant population. It is
essential that Imagine Austin include a
strong statement of support for
maintaining and expanding, as
needed, the programs that the city has
developed to foster trust in the
immigrant community, facilitate access
for immigrants (who may be socially
isolated from city services because of
cultural or linguistic barriers), and
ensure protections against the
exploitation of this not insignificant and
uniquely vulnerable section of the
community.
Note special housing needs of aging Modify 6th Bullet: To accommodate the increasing
population-both in the residential space diversity of Austin area households, more housing
and the supporting services. options and designs will be needed to address our
demographic changes.
Bullet 4-need last word probably, Ok: "Austin’s 2011 five-year rolling average is 163
"conservation" gallons per capita per day. City Council has set a
goal of 140 gallons per capita per day or less by
2020 through water conservation."
Need to plan to encourage use of Ties into actions encouraging local food production
water for farms and gardens and (SOC Action-8) and encouraging conservation
discourages its use for grass (CFS Actions 36, 38, 39, 40).
Attention to bike parking, secure, easy Covered by:
places to leave bikes, development of LUT Policies 3, 5, 10, 14
special corridors (for groceries, infants, LUT Actions 3, 14, 18, 19, 21
etc) Need not be high tech, single wire
boundary plus human attendants works
fine
Park and ride? Focus on feeders to LUT-14 includes key actions for making transit
major corridors. Focus on spreading more convenient. Activity centers on the growth
out at destinations eg. Downtown or concept map should also be convenient for
mall via small buses or even pedicabs. accessing by bike or transit, or by driving and
Could imagine downtown and major parking once to get around.
malls, featuring free pedicab service.
The legend says that S. Congress, This was a mistake. "Express Lanes" were
Burnet, etc are "Express Lanes"- intended to represent bus-only lanes, as included in
bypass for I-35 and for MOPAC the 2035 CAMPO plan. Only MoPac is correctly
represented as planned for managed lanes.
Track percentage of residences within See page 185, Livable indicators: (Population
walking of grocery, hardware, drug within X distance of full-service
store. supermarket/grocery store (percent))
Move away from non-adaptive planting- LUT 20, 28, 34, 36, 39; CE 5, 7, 18, 22, 25,
eg. Grass. Plants need not be native
per se, but drought resistant, heat
resistant, etc.
Encourage "agricultural use" of non- Incorporated into Priority Program on green
agricultural land-home gardens, roofs, infrastructure.
community spaces, in and around
parking spaces, etc.
Urban trees might contribute in
addition to shade and beauty--nuts,
fruits, bark--food or materials uses
Encourage programs for minority "Lower-income and minority communities may not
populations to participate in arts-not have adequate opportunities to
just low income-multi-cultural participate in Austin’s arts programs
participation and events."
"Creative Economy" support #2- Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
recording studios, recording
equipment, sounds and sight, video
and photo, lighting, uniforms/costumes,
stage sets, ie. All the goods and
services that suport the creative
activity
Creativity BB7: Develop a data set to See "Creative" indicators, p. 186.
be reviewed yearly to track trends and
progress of arts-related issues.
Tracking of impact of arts economy
Where's energy- conservation, new Water consumption is already included. New draft
sources, etc. Austin is already a includes greenhouse gas emissions and energy
leader-could be key aid to moving generation from renewables as indicators.
forward another element of plan.
Air as well as water-track quality Add air and water quality included as indicators in
"Natural and Sustainable"
Throughout-broadband? Digital Percentage of residents within 1/2 mile of library
divide? Digital delivery to save travel added to "Educated"
every time road is disturbed, etc. Lay
conduit of net also filter. Should
include
Education measure on-line activity. Percentage of residents within 1/2 mile of library
Not just "seniors" but adults. Another added to "Educated"
role for libraries-works/population miles
to buildings (indicator). Another role
for broadband-self, ed., not just final
"coarses"
Start the glossary now Glossary has been developed
Support/assist/encourage alternative Following TF comments: Adjust EN 4: "Increase
fuel infrastructure-vendors, re-fueling, share of renewable resources ... including
repair, etc.--natural gas, electricity, *infrastructure for* on-site sources throughout the
biomass, etc. Alternative energy city."
infrastructure, low-use designs,
eatherizations, solar, passive,
geothermal, etc.
Throughout-in all but extreme cases Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
diversity/mixed use is good-esp retail
and residential-varioius sizes and
types of residential, mixed, single-
family with multifamily, big with small,
etc…
"Creative Economy" should also Generally, those kinds of things are included in
include support to creative-eg Austin's creative economy, even though they are
broadband for digital, sound not directly supported by City activities. Some
engineering for performance spaces- actions (such as CRE Action-14) do connect, by
manufacture of instruments (guitar, helping to keep work spaces affordable.
sax), sound equipment, microphones,
speakers-developments in training of
artists, musicians, programmers, etc.
Do something for making Austin even Actions that promote diverse housing types, mixed
more attractive for seniors who are use/walkable activity centers, and improved urban
neither disabled nor poor-retirement design can promote this.
mecca
Require/assist/encourage big firms to Encouraging businesses to locate within activity
have more small firm impact-scatter centers should accomplish this (see ECON Action-
sites, build many small buildings, 2, for example).
telecommute, co-locate with retail, with
transit hubs. The isolated glass box
(building) is perhaps better than losing
the employment but improving the
positive imapcts would be even better.
Support/assist/encourage activities like Addressed by ECON Actions 18, 16, and 9
"Get Texas Online" where Google is
working on the 50% of small firms with
no web site.
Create framework (protocol, checklist) See revised priority program for revising the land
to guage a development's adherence development code.
to the Comp Plan
Great support of concepts, ideas, Comment not recommended by CATF
direction. However, its still disjointed in
practice to the typical citizen. Those in
the profession can use it as a tool. But
those protecting their neighborhood
may be lost…maybe let the comp plan
taper off to the NCCD's... and reformat
NCCD's to work with the Plan.
"Green Building"/energy efficiency CFS Action-35 (maintain superior energy efficiency
design should be standard for all new standards) does this.
development, regardless if it is
suburban/car-dependent or urban and
walkable.
Define options for high capacity transit Included as part of Growth Concept Map series
lines (BRT, LRT, HRT, Commuter Rail, descriptions.
etc)
Define future of Union Pacific Railroad Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
through the median of MOPAC Blvd,
especially in regards to Commuter Rail
and express lanes. Recommend
doube-tracking entire UP Railroad
between Round Rock and San Antonio
for commuter rail. Biggest bottleneck
for double tracking is crossing lady Bird
Lake and getting through Lake Austin
Boulevard/MoPac interchange. A
double tracked railroad and time traffic
management gives enough capacity
for both commuter rail and expected
freight traffic. Double tracked railroad
only requires 40 ft of ROW and can
carry thousands of people per day.
To make high density development Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
more inviting for pedestrians/ more
walkable, make the storefronts/
entrances in the fron and parking in
back. In additions, the transition
between sidewalk and storefront
should be as seamless as possible; ie
no stairs unless on hilly terrain.
Included a drawing on note.
Priority concern for transit in Downtown This detail is more appropriate for more detailed
Austin: Any form of transit, either bus plans, such as the Strategic Mobility Plan.
or rail, must be separate from other Comment forwarded to Transportation Department.
traffic or have downtown streets,
especially Congress and Guadalupe.
Traffic is almost always heavy and the
section along Congress Avenue is
often the slowest for current transit.
Stuck in traffic; no mobility area. No
mobility improvements = $1.2 billion
wasted will not vote for streetcar/light
rail in downtown Austin if transit is
sharing lane with other cars. I'm pro-
rail where it works.
High capacity transit along 183 North Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
of McNeil road and Anderson Mill
should be along Pond Springs Road,
not the US 183 frontage roads. Pond
springs is much friendlier to
pedestrians and walkable development
than 183. Recommend building tunnel
or bridge so that traffic can avoid the
McNeil/183 intersection while linking
Jollyville Road to Pond Springs Road.
SH-130-the basic spirit of this plan Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
appears to be that Austin becomes
Portland (south) and not Houston.
That said, developers are drooling over
land along SH 130, and that would be
very "Houston" and would steal
resources from making a denser more
liveable city. You have to legislate
against sprawl to stop it.
I am here from the West University Maps on 39 & 60 are informational only. Map on pg
neighborhood to express grave 84 was drawn to incorporate information from
concern about the pressure to neighborhood plans.
redevelop our area. From the maps on
pp 39, 60 & 84, it appears that 1) there See revised descriptions of GCM; regional activity
is no respect for the neighborhood centers are not intended to say that all parts of the
plans 2) we are slated for total center will develop or redevelop intensely.
redevelopment. If Austin loses the last
of these historic areas, it loses its
character and we lose our houses.
Change guidelines for building design First part of comment: addressed through priority
(recommend creating directive policies program to revise Land Development Code.
for buildings so we get more 2nd
streets). Why are you still planning to Second part of comment: added capacity for
expand MoPac? If your plan works MoPac is part of a complete transportation system
well-then people won't need to use moving forward. In particular, managed lanes
MoPac. STOP BUILDING ROADS. improve transit service as well as service for
drivers.
SRCC, Recommended Future Land NOTE: This comment refers to the Greater South
Use Map (p118) shows the Congress River City Combined Neighborhood Plan.
Avenue Baptist between Elizabeth and
Monroe to be "Civic" all the way to
Nichelson. Actually, the front half of
that lot is commercial but the eastern
half is SF-3.
Do NOT rewrite the Land and Use Many of the goals in Imagine Austin (improved
Code as part of the plan as we have transportation, addressing affordability, preserving
supported compatible development environmental features, improving public health)
along our periphery with a complex set require revising the Land Development Code. Such
of sustainable agreements that depend revisions should also address neighborhood
on the current code and would be preservation and transitions/compatibility. As
undermined by rewriting it. detailed in the revised priority program, any
revision to the Land Development Code would
require a public process for both developing the
code and applying to specific land. Where a small-
area plan (including the Downtown Plan) is
involved, applying the new code would work with
those plans. Additionally, for recently adopted
ordinances and regulations (such as Downtown's),
we would expect few revisions.
Remove our district from the Judges Hill is included within the Downtown Plan
Downtown Regional Center on the boundaries. Imagine Austin hands off
Growth Concept Map as it does not fit implementation of centers with existing small-area
your definition (" . . . the major urban plans to those plans.
hubs of the region. They have the
highest employment and residential Redraw Downtown Regional Center to exclude
densities . . .. support high-capacity single-family areas outside of Downtown Austin
transit, and provide a full range of Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
employment, shopping, cultural, different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
recreational, and entertainment Regional Center, including a highlight for the
opportunities . . .. regional centers are Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
entirely urban, like Downtown . . .. "). Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
To inaccurately label our historic, map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
largely single-family Judges Hill District
as such would place an irresistible
developer bounty on it and destroy its
role as a shaded, heritage-laden
counterpoint to the dense portions of
Downtown nearby. It would also be
counter to the goals of our district as
laid out in the new Downtown Austin
Plan and thereby mock the public
process that has led to that document.
not all comments from WG mtgs were Working Group meetings oversaw consolidation
implemented. Why? and selection of actions. All of the actions from the
end of the Working Group process were included.
questions validity of priority list Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
economics (land prices, taxes) of Develop affordability impact statement language.
affordable housing component needs
more attention
action items need to be tied to Vision guides policies, which guides actions and
something. Concrete linkage. priority programs. Indicators and metrics track the
Contradictions in priorities. programs.
assess neighborhood plans in map. In process (joint Task Force/Planning Commission
meeting)
Firm up metrics See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
laundry list needs to be established Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
first before tackling problems
too much emphasis on creative, not See workforce development & education priority
enough (if any) mention of working program.
class in plan
community inventory not indicated on Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
map- economic analysis/impact
planning term- can't measure, can't See glossary.
accomplish, how do we devise plan for
the people and what metrics does it
take. Sustainability and affodability are
not well defined
benchmark for taxation for growth. Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Who pays for all these wonderful
ideas?
vision statement can be revised, living Forward to TF.
statement
1. Do not rewrite the Land and Use Many of the goals in Imagine Austin (improved
Code as part of the plan. We have transportation, addressing affordability, preserving
supported compatible development environmental features, improving public health)
along our periphery with a complex set require revising the Land Development Code. Such
of sustainable agreements that depend revisions should also address neighborhood
on the current code, which would be preservation and transitions/compatibility. As
undermined by rewriting it. detailed in the revised priority program, any
revision to the Land Development Code would
require a public process for both developing the
code and applying to specific land. Where a small-
area plan (including the Downtown Plan) is
involved, applying the new code would work with
those plans. Additionally, for recently adopted
ordinances and regulations (such as Downtown's),
we would expect few revisions.
2. Remove our district from the Judges Hill is included within the Downtown Plan
Downtown Regional Center on the boundaries. Imagine Austin hands off
Growth Concept Map as it does not fit implementation of centers with existing small-area
your definition (" . . . the major urban plans to those plans.
hubs of the region. They have the
highest employment and residential PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
densities . . .. support high-capacity exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
transit, and provide a full range of Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
employment, shopping, cultural, different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
recreational, and entertainment Regional Center, including a highlight for the
opportunities . . .. regional centers are Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
entirely urban, like Downtown . .. "). To Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
inaccurately label our historic, largely map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
single-family Judges Hill District as
such would place an inappropriate
developer bounty on it and destroy its
role as a shaded, heritage-laden
counterpoint to the dense portions of
Downtown nearby. It would also be
counter to the goals of our district, as
laid out in the new Downtown Austin
Plan, and undermine the public
process that has led to that document.
As a resident of E. 40th Street in the Section of 38th St. corridor removed
Hancock neighborhood, I am opposed
to the designation of 38th Street from
IH-35 to Mo-Pac as a mixed use area.
This violates the neighborhood FLUM.
From IH-35 west to Guadalupe, 38th
Street is primarily residential. We want
to preserve the residential character of
our neighborhood. We oppose any
designation that encourages non-
residential uses in our neighborhood.
We want to preserve the central city
residential areas.
Not recommended: Lake Austin Boulevard is
currently a mixed use, transit-supportive corridor.
Moreover, recommendations within the Central
West Austin Neighborhood Plan support
investments to make it more pedestrian, bike, and
transit friendly (see L.2.6, T.2.2 and T.1.9 in that
plan)
PC/TF 1/23: Leave designation, but change name
of feature to Acitivity Corridor to reduce confusion
between this feature and mixed use future land use
categories and zoning. See revised definition of
activity corridor.
Not recommended: Lake Austin Boulevard is
currently a mixed use, transit-supportive corridor.
Moreover, recommendations within the Central
West Austin Neighborhood Plan support
investments to make it more pedestrian, bike, and
transit friendly (see L.2.6, T.2.2 and T.1.9 in that
plan)
PC/TF 1/23: Leave designation, but change name
of feature to Acitivity Corridor to reduce confusion
between this feature and mixed use future land use
categories and zoning. See revised definition of
activity corridor.
Reference the 2 library plans (Facilities Add to Economy Priority Program and appendix
Master Plan & Strategic Plan) in the
Imagine Austin
CFS 29 had more to do with the fact CFS
that this is a mission statement and not Action-29
an action item and therefore too vague Create a world-class library system by expanding
to be useful. Should reference mini- collections and public computer access and by
central library approach from facilities upgrading and expanding library facilities by
plan. completing the new Central Library, building four
regional Resource Branches in the four quadrants
of Austin and retrofitting the Faulk Library as an
expansion of the History Center.
There are serious traffic flow problems Not recommended: managing traffic and
with 51st St. west of I-35 at present. transportation programs is part of the City's
Between Guadalupe and Airport the ongoing work. Redevelopment will also continue to
problem is particularly acute. Is there happen with or without explicit City investments.
any provision in the plan that existing
traffic problems will be addressed PC/TF 1/23: Include language in the descriptions of
before mixed-use development is map features acknowledging that, depending on
promoted in an area? If that is not in local conditions, some areas identified by these
the current draft, what do we need to features may need additional investment -- right of
do to get that added? The idea of way, infrastructure improvements, etc. Also
promoting development that will attract incorporate complete streets into the description of
additional traffic to a stretch of road the corridors.
that is already a mess will give my
neighbors serious heartburn, and I
would be surprised if Northfield and
Ridgetop neighbors were not similarly
concerned by that prospect.
A neighbor has raised concerns about See LUT Action-23 and CFS Action-21. Also, next
hazardous gas/chemical trucks year the City’s Transportation Dept will work with
frequenting narrow roads in our area. CAMPO and its members to designate hazardous
Is it within the scope of the cargo route(s). This will include a public process.
comprehensive plan to designate how Once completed it will become part of the CAMPO
hazardous cargo should be transported plan and CAMPO members’ transportation plans.
in and through Austin? If so I think it So eventually it will make its way into the Imagine
should be incorporated into the plan. Austin comprehensive plan as part of the city’s
transportation plan.
1. Quality Public Schools: The growth Numerous actions support family-friendly
concept map and action items do not development within the urban core, with the goal of
indicate how the comprehensive plan enticing households with children back to these
will help us ensure that our areas, supporting neighborhood schools. Moreover,
neighborhood schools and surrounding the Growth Concept Map encourages new
communities remain viable. development in areas with existing schools,
relieving pressure on AISD and other schools
The top priority identified by districts to build new schools to accommodate a
Austinites in the Imagine Austin suburbanizing populace.
Community Survey was public
education. Zilker Neighborhood
Association is organized around Zilker
Elementary School, and so preserving
healthy and viable neighborhood
schools is definitely a top priority for
planning in Zilker and our neighboring
communities. The Imagine Austin
process has so far failed to address
this top priority, and it has not provided
the data necessary to analyze our
public education needs.
Imagine Austin cannot gain ZNA
support until this crucial issue of
economic and cultural sustainability is
addressed.
2. Sustainability of Water Resources: Sustainability is defined on pages 7-8. Unclear how
The draft plan does not address the data would change the definition of sustainability.
carrying capacity of our water Sustainably managing our water resources in
resources, and it does not provide the particular are called out as a priority program.
metrics needed to plan our water
future. See pg. 80 for a description of the centers over the
Edwards Aquifer; by redeveloping existing
ZNA has always supported the development that is already largely developed
conservation of Austin's environment, above current SOS standards, these centers strive
especially with regard to water to improve water quality and quantity recharging
resources, Barton Springs, and the the aquifer.
Edwards Aquifer. I can wholeheartedly
support the City Council's emphasis on
sustainability as the primary goal of the
comprehensive plan. The Imagine
Austin process, however, has not yet
provided the data required even to
define sustainability, let alone to build a
framework for managing growth within
our sustainability goals.
For example, according to the
city's "Preliminary Implications for
Planning," our projected population
growth will require 56,000 acre feet per
year more than we currently have
available through our LCRA contracts.
Clearly, Austin will need a major
conservation effort to avoid exceeding
that contract amount: we must reduce
waste by repairing and replacing leaky
water distribution systems, we must
dramatically reduce per capita
3. Affordability: The draft plan has no Dislocation: addressed generally throughout the
economic analysis, and it does not plan, as well as specifically in HN Action-9.
provide the metrics needed to plan for Policies, actions, and the affordability priority
the diverse and sustainable city program also address developing new and
described in the plan's vision preserving existing affordable housing.
statement.
See p. 31 for information on cost-burdened
The second and third priorities in households.
the Community Survey are "Affordable
tax rate" and "Affordable housing." In Revising the land development code may result in
the Zilker neighborhood, both of these additional allocations for density. However, more
issues are crucial to the first priority importantly, it should promote a better built
(maintaining the health of the public environment in Austin.
education system). They are also
determining factors in the economic,
environmental, and cultural
sustainability that the City Council has
identified as the overarching goal of
the comprehensive plan. Again, the
Imagine Austin process has so far
failed to produce the data needed to
address the growing disparity in cost of
living and income levels for most
Austinites, and it has not recognized
the dislocation of moderate and lower
income residents from previously
affordable neighborhoods.
For example, in Zilker, the latest
Census data show that over the last 10
years, rezoning decisions that were
supposedly made to increase density
have in fact replaced moderate-density See appendix B for outreach efforts and
Regarding the Comprehensive Plan:
The number of times we as Chicanos participation demographics.
went to testify at the board meeting we
were ignored and the community
never had a chance to response to the
changing plans as they were
presented. This is why you must give
us an opportunity to have input.
LULAC was never asked to participate.
Do the right thing...count us in for the
effects will last for years...once again
we get the short straw....
Tried the web sight and it's under
construction....
Need to let them know they have not
received any information from the
Chicano community. They never made
any out reach. The 100 reply's I gave
them were not reviewed. So you can
picture what is going to happen to our
community.
I am a resident of the Judges Hill Judges Hill is included within the Downtown Plan
Proposed Historic District and have boundaries. Imagine Austin hands off
learned that there has been a mis- implementation of centers with existing small-area
classification of our residential garden plans to those plans.
district as part of the downtown
business district targeted for growth PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
which I was shocked to have learn exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
after so much involvement from City Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
Planning officials and Council different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
Members engaged in the Downtown Regional Center, including a highlight for the
Austin Plan. Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
The City, Neighborhoods and map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
businesses have just vetted more than
two years of stakeholder input through
the Downtown Austin Plan which has
clearly, and unanimously at planning
commission and council, carved out
the Northwest District of Downtown for
Judges Hill to remain primarily as
residential and to specifically designate
any commercial development
opportunities as requiring compatibility
with the Architectural Style and
integrity of the historic area respecting
height, setbacks, FAR, etc.
To learn more about our historic area,
please visit
www.judgeshillhistoricdistrict.org and
click on the link of historic homes to
see the twenty-one historic National,
State and City landmarks within and
Judges' Hill has already crafted our Many of the goals in Imagine Austin (improved
agreed to important concessions to transportation, addressing affordability, preserving
development and adjustments on our environmental features, improving public health)
borders based on today's Land and require revising the Land Development Code. Such
Use Code. revisions should also address neighborhood
preservation and transitions/compatibility. As
Request: detailed in the revised priority program, any
Do not re-write the Land and Use Code revision to the Land Development Code would
as part of the Comprehensive Plan require a public process for both developing the
which will negate the more than 2 code and applying to specific land. Where a small-
years work and many taxpayer dollars area plan (including the Downtown Plan) is
put into the Downtown Austin Plan. involved, applying the new code would work with
those plans. Additionally, for recently adopted
ordinances and regulations (such as Downtown's),
we would expect few revisions.
The Judges' Hill District is not a Judges Hill is included within the Downtown Plan
Downtown Regional Center and does boundaries. Imagine Austin hands off
not fit your definition " . . . the major implementation of centers with existing small-area
urban hubs of the region. They have plans to those plans.
the highest employment and
residential densities . . .. support high- PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
capacity transit, and provide a full exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
range of employment, shopping, Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
cultural, recreational, and different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
entertainment opportunities . . .. Regional Center, including a highlight for the
regional centers are entirely urban, like Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
Downtown . . .. ". Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
Request:
Please remove Judges' Hill District
from the Growth Concept Map.
The community needs the Task PC/TF 1/23: Leave designation, but change name
Force’s assistance in resolving this of feature to Acitivity Corridor to reduce confusion
problem created by the Draft Growth between this feature and mixed use future land use
Concept Map. There are at least two categories and zoning. See revised definition of
ways this problem could be resolved: activity corridor.
1. The Growth Concept Map could be
corrected to remove West 35th Street
from the Mixed Use Corridor. End the
corridor at the West 35th/38th street
cut-off. Eliminating this two to three
block area would have absolutely no
city-wide implications and is the
simplest solution.
2. A more comprehensive and perhaps
better solution, which would also
address problems caused by the Mixed
Use designation on other roads such
as Lake Austin Blvd, would be to
rename the corridor. The Mixed Use
Corridor is the only development
category on the Growth Concept Map
which mirrors the name of a specific
land use district recognized by the
Land Development Code. Using a
specific land use district as a
description for a corridor is misleading
since it is not the only land use
envisioned along the corridor and, as
shown above, can be harmful to the
community when it promotes an
incompatible use. Changing the
corridor name to a more general term
would still permit
[See letter for full background] PC/TF 1/23: Leave designation, but change name
The community needs the Task of feature to Acitivity Corridor to reduce confusion
Force’s assistance in resolving this between this feature and mixed use future land use
problem created by the Draft Growth categories and zoning. See revised definition of
Concept Map. There are at least two activity corridor.
ways this problem could be resolved:
1. The Growth Concept Map could be
corrected to remove West 35th Street
from the Mixed Use Corridor. End the
corridor at the West 35th/38th street
cut-off. Eliminating this two to three
block area would have absolutely no
city-wide implications and is the
simplest solution.
2. A more comprehensive and perhaps
better solution, which would also
address problems caused by the Mixed
Use designation on other roads such
as Lake Austin Blvd, would be to
rename the corridor. The Mixed Use
Corridor is the only development
category on the Growth Concept Map
which mirrors the name of a specific
land use district recognized by the
Land Development Code. Using a
specific land use district as a
description for a corridor is misleading
since it is not the only land use
envisioned along the corridor and, as
shown above, can be harmful to the
community when it promotes an
incompatible use. Changing the
corridor name to a more general term
I can't find any statements about See the Society Building Block (pg. 124-128,
access to health care for all residents, particularly the Health and Human Service policies,
or any subject title regarding a healthy as well as the associated actions (SOC 1 through
community. I have just found the few 49, pages 169-175 -- most especially Soc Action-4,
times healthy living has been 5, 6), as well as the Healthy Austin program on pg.
mentioned. 145.
PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
PC/TF 1/23: Leave designation, but change name
of feature to Acitivity Corridor to reduce confusion
between this feature and mixed use future land use
categories and zoning. See revised definition of
activity corridor.
Activity Corridors connect areas where land uses
can support walkability, bike-friendliness, and
transit, making them both land use and
transportation features.
See revised section in chapter 5 on the relation
between Imagine Austin and small-area plans,
including neighborhood plans.
PC 2/13: Oak Hill Town Center redesignated as
Neighborhood Center
SH-45 SW has been removed.
There are no current plans for additional open
space which would not increase the cost of making
the purchase. See green infrastructure priority
program, which provides direction for the city to
continue to preserve land to protect water quality in
the Edwards Aquifer.
The Canadian/U.S. oil pipeline, Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
described as going from Canada to
Texas introduced this year, has
fascinated me very much. Not only as
a U.S./Texas citizen, but as a person
concerned about the environment,
land, air quality, etc. I am as deeply
concerned as all the other ecologists,
and environmentalists. Even though
the Texas legislation and Gov. Perry
still doubt there are such problems and
conditions.
I was wondering, and I am not a
scientist or engineer. If this proposal
for this pipeline does get approved by
some power within Texas and the rest
of the country that is involved. Since
Texas and some other areas have
suffered a tremendous drought and
water shortage this year. Plan on
running a parallel or sister pipe along
the oil pipe to carry water that might be
in abundance during the year from
states that the pipe line goes through
and have an abundance of rainfall,
snowfall. Who knows it might even
prevent local floods and disasters. This
can be done by a series of capture
levees and revenes, gates and
aquaducts. California has an aquaduct
that travels hundreds of miles through
the state. I believe this could be cost
effective. See definition on pages 7-8.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Updated current land use map data layer and sent
to WRT.
The floodplain in this area is currently under review.
PC/TF: do not move center.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
New version of map will show current parkland and
proposed.
See CFS Actions 3 & 4 (page 163) on expanding
access to parks. Features shown on maps tend to
be environmental features that need to be
protected, rather than specific tracts for parkland.
See Complete Communities indicators, p184.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Ok. Revise 2nd to last sentence on pg 4 to "How
will we increase housing and transportation choices
for different types of individuals and families
throughout Austin?"
Covered on page 53.
Will include census data map.
Developing revised section for growth concept map
features.
Revised Priority Programs.
I don't live in Austin but in Lampasas City of Austin and Cap Metro are currently
and from time to time like to come into exploring options.
Austin for a weekend event. I wish that
the commuter train that goes out to the
Leander/Cedar Park area would run on
the weekends. It would make getting
there a lot easier and less stressful. I
think a lot of people would take
advantage of this if it were offered.
Thanks!
The document is concise, professional, Noted. See Chapter 5 rewrite, including steps to
and user-friendly. In general, I am pursue each priority programs.
unclear regarding the role of this plan:
how will it be, or will it be -
implemented? I understand the
language in the plan citing it as a guide
by City Charter, but that does not seem
to really have teeth. I'd love to know
your thoughts on the role of the plan in
implementing new ideas and policies.
It is wonderful to acknowledge the See revised priority program on creative economy,
wealth of creativity in Austin. However, which will connect Imagine Austin to CreateAustin
I do not find in this plan real or tangible
recommendations to improve the
quality of life of artists and those who
feed into the Creative Economy (A 15).
I don't see near the specificity or
accountability in the Creativity Section
as I do in the Conservation and
Environment Policies, and that
concerns me. It seems like the status
quo of
"collaborate...enhance...explore..." that
really leaves the responsibility in the
hands of those already involved int he
creative community.
I strongly support the policies included See revised priority program on creative economy,
here that address Housing, which will connect Imagine Austin to CreateAustin
Collaborative resource management
for arts groups, and diversity. As
someone who has access to a variety
of arts organizations, I just don't feel
that a broad statement like ACC4
(Continue to Sustain and grow...) has
any specificity to Austin, or any
ownership of the disparity in resources
available to Austin artists versus
Austin's corporate citizens.
Austin desperately needs a long-term See revised priority program on creative economy,
vision the Arts and all the other areas which will connect Imagine Austin to CreateAustin
outlined in the plan. At the risk of
coming across as hyper-critical, I just
don't find a lot in the Creativity section
that addresses Austin's specific needs
or maximizes our unique assets.
The first priority should read “Change Revised Priority Programs show interconnections
Austin’s development regulations and between the eight programs
processes to promote a compact and
connected affordable city.” Moreover,
we would recommend adding the term
“affordable” to the term “compact and
connected city” every time it is
referenced in the plan.
The sixth priority should also take into The recommendation tries to tie together two
account affordability of businesses. We somewhat disparate concepts. The idea in the
would recommend that it read, recommendation is picked up as part of the ECON
“Develop and maintain affordable Actions 3 and 18.
housing and business opportunities
throughout Austin.”
The seventh priority should include a Not recommended because this is covered by the
reference to infrastructure. We would Invest in a Compact and Connected Austin priority
recommend that it read, “Continue to program.
grow Austin’s economy by investing in
our workforce, education system, and
infrastructure.”
In the first related priority action, RECA Revised priority programs do not include summary
would recommend that it read, action statements.
“Promote and incentivize affordable
infill housing that complements and
enhances the character of existing
neighborhoods.
In the third related priority action, Exisitng Action LUT4
RECA would recommend that it read, Direct growth to areas with existing infrastructure
“Incentivize growth in areas with capacity including roads, water, wastewater and
existing infrastructure capacity and schools.
cluster growth in new growth corridors
to minimize the need for new Staff revision
infrastructure.” Moreover, we would Use incentives and regulations to direct growth
recommend striking the terms “direct toward areas with existing infrastructure such as
growth / development” and replacing roads, water and wastewater lines, and schools to
that with “incentivize growth / minimize expenditures for new infrastructure.
development” every time it is
referenced in the plan. RECA's recomendation
Incentivize growth in areas with existing
infrastructure capacity and cluster growth in new
growth corridors to minimize the need for new
infrastructure.
In the ninth related priority action, Revised priority programs do not include summary
RECA would recommend deleting “by action statements.
directing growth toward redevelopment
and infill areas” and replacing it with
“by encouraging growth away from
such areas.” This priority as it is written
presents a false choice between
protecting environmentally sensitive
areas and encouraging redevelopment
in infill areas. There are other options
for protecting environmentally sensitive
areas besides just promoting infill
development.
In the eleventh related priority action, Existing Action CRE14
RECA would recommend deleting “for Develop programs and incentives to provide
artists and creative professionals.” flexible, affordable work space and housing
Creation of flexible, affordable work throughout Austin with an emphasis placed on
space and housing is necessary for locations in Transit Oriented Developments,
many in our community, not only artists Downtown, and mixed use centers and corridors for
and creative professionals including artists and creative professionals:
those who are not artists themselves, -Live-work space
but work in the hospitality and -Home-based businesses
entertainment industries. -Temporary lease agreements in multi-use venu
Revision:
Develop programs and incentives to provide
flexible, affordable work space and housing
throughout Austin with an emphasis placed on
locations well-served by transit, Downtown, and
mixed use centers and corridors for entrepreneurs,
small and local businesses, artists, and creative
professionals to address live-work space, home-
based businesses, and temporary lease
agreements in multi-use venues such as schools,
vacant buildings, and warehouses.
In the first related priority action, “to Revised priority programs do not include summary
support mixed use, transit, and the action statements.
creation of compact and walkable
places” should be deleted and
replaced with “to support alleviation of
congestion.”
In the third related priority action, Revised priority programs do not include summary
“Increase public transit ridership” action statements.
should be changed to read “Increase
use of all modes of public
transportation.”
In the eight related priority action, “for See changes made for p 148 in plan
artists and creative professionals” 9/26 draft Action CRE14
should be deleted for the reasons Develop programs and incentives to provide
stated above. flexible, affordable work space and housing
throughout Austin with an emphasis placed on
locations in Transit Oriented Developments,
Downtown, and mixed use centers and corridors for
artists and creative professionals:
-Live-work space
-Home-based businesses
-Temporary lease agreements in multi-use venu
Revision:
Develop programs and incentives to provide
flexible, affordable work space and housing
throughout Austin with an emphasis placed on
locations well-served by transit, Downtown, and
mixed use centers and corridors for entrepreneurs,
small and local businesses, artists, and creative
professionals to address live-work space, home-
based businesses, and temporary lease
agreements in multi-use venues such as schools,
vacant buildings, and warehouses.
Other than the last related priority Revised priority programs do not include summary
action, none of the related priority action statements.
actions listed are relevant to land use
and should be taken out of the
document.
In the first related priority action, See full text for LUT-3.
“Promote diverse infill housing” should
read “promote diverse housing
throughout the city” since affordable
housing options are needed for those
who work and need to live all over the
city, not just in central neighborhoods.
Although the priority is to direct growth
towards the inner city, we must
acknowledge that not everyone will live
in the inner city and that affordable
housing options will be needed
everywhere.
In the last related priority action, delete See changes made for p 148 in plan
“for artists and creative professionals” 9/26 draft Action CRE14
since affordable housing is needed for Develop programs and incentives to provide
everyone. flexible, affordable work space and housing
throughout Austin with an emphasis placed on
locations in Transit Oriented Developments,
Downtown, and mixed use centers and corridors for
artists and creative professionals:
-Live-work space
-Home-based businesses
-Temporary lease agreements in multi-use venu
Revision:
Develop programs and incentives to provide
flexible, affordable work space and housing
throughout Austin with an emphasis placed on
locations well-served by transit, Downtown, and
mixed use centers and corridors for entrepreneurs,
small and local businesses, artists, and creative
professionals to address live-work space, home-
based businesses, and temporary lease
agreements in multi-use venues such as schools,
vacant buildings, and warehouses.
Moreover, the City should develop Covered by: Econ Action 1, Econ Action 3
related priority actions for “affordable
business opportunities” as well as
housing, such as (i) reducing “red-
tape” and project review times, (ii)
limiting development related rule
changes, and (iii) prioritizing economic
development and growth in appropriate
circumstances.”
As stated above, these priorities do Revised priority programs do not include summary
not seem appropriate for a action statements.
comprehensive plan, with the
exception of related priority action
items five and six.
Develop related priority actions for See Priority Programs for Invest in a Compact and
investing in “infrastructure.” Connected Austin and Green Infrastructure.
Related priority action items one, two, Revised priority programs do not include summary
three, four, and seven do not seem action statements.
relevant to this comprehensive plan
and should be stated in a different
document.
The plan should be flexible. If this is a Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
land use document that will serve the
City for the next 20 to 30 years, it
should anticipate future growth and
should take existing plans into
consideration while not creating
obstacles for future plans and plan
amendments.
The plan should be realistic. While the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
City has done an admirable job of
promoting the densification of the
urban core and continues to promote
that vision, it must also acknowledge,
understand, and accommodate
economic realities. Not everyone can
afford to live in the urban core. The
plan has to allow for reasonable growth
opportunities outside the urban core
and along future growth corridors.
The plan should be regional. The plan Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
needs to take into account planning
that has already occurred on the
regional level and incorporate its vision
into the broader regional vision
-121% is correct; it is due to a reclassification of
one large parcel from 2003 to 2010 (Utility to
Undeveloped). This is more than the likely the
result of improvements made in the process in
2010 versus 2003, rather than a change in the
actual land status.
PC/TF 1/23: Remove Corridor designation east of
Speedway.
The plan does address various forms of transit
which could include streetcars.
PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
Noted.
PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
Not recommended. Reflects public input, existing
neighborhood plans, and supports the airport.
PC/TF 1/23: Include 11th and 12th as corridors, to
the extent of the redevelopment area.
Covered by SW P1-P6 and CFS A-30
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Section/text on PC's role.
According to Austin's City Charter, Article X,
Planning, the Planning Commission is the body
responsible for oversight of the comprehensive
plan. They are tasked with
City Council regarding adoption and amendments
to the comprehensive plan.
proposed adoptions and amendments to the land
development regulations (zoning, subdivision,
building and construction, environmental, and other
regulations controlling, regulating, or affecting the
use or development of land).
subdivision of land within the city limits and
extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city to insure these
plats and subdivisions are consistent with the
adopted comprehensive plan.
recommended capital improvements to implement
the comprehensive plan.
status of the comprehensive plan and recommend
annually to the City Council any needed changes to
the comprehensive plan.
the comprehensive plan, which shall be sent to the
council at least once every five years following the
adoption of the comprehensive plan.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Please see the policies in the Land Use, Economy,
and Creativity sections of Chapter 4
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
See revised priority programs -- public process
described where relevant in the priority programs.
Code rewrite will include a public process
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Please see the Continue to Grow our Economy
Prioritiy Program in Chapter 5
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Covered under Soc A9-13 in the Action
Matrix
Please see Change Regulations to create a
compact and connected Austin in Chapter 5
Noted. Please see the Downtown Plan
Noted. Please see the Land Use and
Transportation section of Chapter 4 as well as
Invest in a Comapct and Connected Austin in Chap
5.
Please see Chapter 5 and the relationship of
Imagine Austin and neighborhood plans.
A number of priority programs in Chapter 5 seek to
do this.
Please see the Create a Healthy Austin priority
program.
Noted. Please see the Land Use and
Transportation section of Chapter 4 as well as
Invest in a Compact and Connected Austin in Chap
5.
Covered: LUT-12: Create an integrated
transportation plan encompassing driving, transit,
bicycling, walking, and roads
LUT-13: Create a system of high-capacity transit
LUT-14: Increase public transit ridership
LUT-16: Enhance cross-town transit options
LUT-19: Develop complete street guidelines
LUT-25: Create a transportation and congestion
management plan to improve traffic in and out of
Downtown
CFS-33: Maintain a safe energy system and
improve Austin's air quality and lower greenhouse
gas emissions.
CFS-37: Create a green infrastructuer plan for
public land to improve air quality.
Covered under the definition of Regional Center.
Downtown Austin Plan
Covered: LUT-12: Create an integrated
transportation plan encompassing driving, transit,
bicycling, walking, and roads
LUT-13: Create a system of high-capacity transit
LUT-14: Increase public transit ridership
LUT-16: Enhance cross-town transit options
LUT-19: Develop complete street guidelines
LUT-25: Create a transportation and congestion
management plan to improve traffic in and out of
Downtown
Covered: CE-16: Identify and map food deserts
and provide incentives for full service grocery
stores and farmers markets to locate in these
underserved areas.
SOC-8: Make locally-grown produce and locally-
produced foods more accessible, particularly in
areas with limited access to fresh produce.
Covered: LUT-1: Prioritize City investments to
support mixed use, transit and the creation of
compact and walkable places.
LUT-12: Create an integrated transportation plan
encompassing driving, transit, bicycling, walking,
and roads
LUT-13: Create a system of high-capacity transit
LUT-14: Increase public transit ridership
LUT-16: Enhance cross-town transit options
Mixed Use Corridor along Cameron/Dessau Road.
See ID#84.
Covered: HN-1: Establish regulations to promote
the development of affordable housing types within
compact, mixed use centers and corridors.
HN-3: Produce regulations and enhance programs
to promote affordable housing throughout Austin.
HN-18: Establish a regulatory environment that
creates communities across Austin that provide a
range of housing integrating market rate and
affordable housing for people of all ages, abilities,
and means.
Covered: LUT-1: Prioritize City investments to
support mixed use, transit, and the creation of
compact and walkable places.
LUT-4: Direct growth to areas with existing
infrastructure cpacity including roads, water,
wastewater and schools
CFS-36: Align policies, incentives and
infrastructure to coordinate with the Growth
Concept Map, maintain Austin's livability and
affordability, protect environmentally sensitive
areas, and sustainably manage water resources.
ECO 11.Expand the educational offerings and
establish cooperative partnerships between Austin
Community College, the University of Texas, and
other institutions of higher learning to support target
industries’ education, *retention of graduating
students,* and training requirements.
This is an operational issue. Forwarded to
Transportation Department for consideration.
Council considered this issue on 12/15.
See the Sustainably Manage Our Water Resources
Priority Program
There currently exists a dedicated fund called
Planting for the Future Fund which can only be
spent on trees and tree planting related expenses.
Sources of money going into this fund include
donations from the AE utility bill,
donations from the X-Mas tree recycling event
each January and a 1% equivalent of CIP projects
which add road miles (per ordinance). The
Planting for the Future is a restricted use fund
exclusively used for new tree
planting/establishment. The need identified by the
comment may pertain more to funding for
maintenance of existing trees. Austin's street and
park trees represent a current standing
infrastructure value in excess of $1 billion for which
about $1.5 million is budgeted annually for care.
At current funding levels about $5/year is invested
on a per tree average (assuming $0 invested per
tree for those growing in greenbelts, preserves,
and natural areas). The investment in care places
Austin near the lowest end of the funding spectrum
for cities with established Urban Forestry
Programs. An alternative funding source or
Covered: HN-19: Ensure harmonious and
compatible transitions between neighborhoods and
adjacent commercial, mixed use, and denser
housing by regulating setbacks, building mass and
height, and other design elements and uses.
This is an operational issue. Forwarded to
Transportation Department for consideration.
Covered: LUT-11: Develop land use and
transportation policies that promote active
lifestyles.
LUT-12: Create an integrated transportation plan
encompassing driving, transit, bicycling, walking,
and roads
LUT-19: Develop complete street guidelines
LUT-21: Create a network of separated bicycle
and walking routes or trails.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Covered: LUT-3-:Establish land use and steet
design regulations to create neighborhoods that
support walking and bicycling, are in proximity to
daily needs, and provide a range of housing types
to meet the needs of people of different means at
different stages of their lives.
HN-18-Esltablish a regulatory environment tha
creates communities across Austin that provide a
range of housing for people of all ages, abilities
and means
The Comprehensive Plan sets out general
direction. Austin's year to year budgeting process
will set specific spending priorities.
Covered: LUT-28: Create design standards for
public spaces such as parks, plazas, and
sidewalks.
LUT-29: Engage the local creative community to
create more robust public art for Austin's public
gathering places.
LUT-31: Improve streetscapes and infrastructure
along mixed use corridors and at mixed use
centers.
LUT-32: Develop standards for public spaces, such
as parks, plazas and streets to create tree-covered
places.
CE-25: Create an urban forest plan that identifies
tree canopy goals.
Covered: LUT-24: Encourage the relocation of the
Missouri-Pacific Raildroad freight linke from its
current alignment.
Please see Revising Code to Promote a Compact
and Connect Austin Priority Program in Chapter 5
This is an operational issue. Forwarded to
Transportation Department for consideration.
Covered: ECON-3: Create a regulatory framework
to foster a business-friendly environment by
identifying regulatory impacts on business
development and retention, creating development
incentives, making development regulations more
flexible, and allowing more by-right development.
Covered: LUT-1: Prioritize City of Austin
investments to support mixed use, transit, and
creation of compact and walkable places.
LUT-8: Adopt policies that promotes the
development of compact, mixed-use places that
provide great public spaces.
Revise Downtown Regional Activity Center to
include 11th and 12th Streets
Covered: HN-18?: Establlish a regulatory
environment that creates communities across
Austin that: provides a range of facilities such as
parks, community gardens, and other public
gathering places.
Society-8: Make locally grown produce and more
accessible, particularly in areas with limited access
to fresh produce by providing incentives for local
community gardens and small urban farms.
CE-14: Support local farmers by creating
incentives and removing regulatory barriers.
My35 program (state-led initiative to improve
congestion along I-35) is included as a related
initiative in the "Invest in a compact and connected
city" priority program.
Ok. Revise Policy LUT 18: Reduce traffic
congestion and encourage alternative
transportation modes through such practices as
Transportation Demand Management which
includes car pooling, flex time work schedules,
subsidizing transit costs for employees, and
pedestrian and bicycle-friendly roads.
Existing actions cover car pooling and errand
sharing.
LUT-12: Create an integrated transportation plan
encompassing driving, transit, bicycling, walking,
and roads
LUT-14: Increase public transit ridership by…
implementing carpooling, vanpools, and car
sharing.
Covered: LUT-11: Develop land use and
transportation policies that promote active
lifestyles.
LUT-12: Create an integrated transportation plan
encompassing driving, transit, bicycling, walking,
and roads
LUT-19: Develop complete street guidelines
LUT-21: Create a network of separated bicycle
and walking routes or trails.
See revised Growth Concept Map definitions.
Covered: LUT-11: Develop land use and
transportation policies that promote active
lifestyles.
LUT-12: Create an integrated transportation plan
encompassing driving, transit, bicycling, walking,
and roads
LUT-19: Develop complete street guidelines
LUT-21: Create a network of separated bicycle
and walking routes or trails.
Covered: LUT-12: Create an integrated
transportation plan encompassing driving, transit,
bicycling, walking, and roads
LUT-13: Create a system of high-capacity transit
LUT-14: Increase public transit ridership
LUT-16: Enhance cross-town transit options
LUT-19: Develop complete street guidelines
LUT-25: Create a transportation and congestion
management plan to improve traffic in and out of
Downtown
Covered: HN-9: Expand existing and develop new
programs to retain long-time residents of
neighborhoods experiencing rapidly increasing
property values and an influx of wealthier new
residents.
Do NOT rewrite the Land and Use Many of the goals in Imagine Austin (improved
Code as part of the plan, as we have transportation, addressing affordability, preserving
supported compatible development environmental features, improving public health)
along our periphery with a complex set require revising the Land Development Code. Such
of sustainable agreements that depend revisions should also address neighborhood
on the current code and would be preservation and transitions/compatibility. As
undermined by rewriting it. detailed in the revised priority program, any
revision to the Land Development Code would
require a public process for both developing the
code and applying to specific land. Where a small-
area plan (including the Downtown Plan) is
involved, applying the new code would work with
those plans. Additionally, for recently adopted
ordinances and regulations (such as Downtown's),
we would expect few revisions.
This comment will be saved as input to the code
revision process.
Remove our district from the Judges Hill is included within the Downtown Plan
Downtown Regional Center on the boundaries. Imagine Austin hands off
Growth Concept Map as it does not fit implementation of centers with existing small-area
your definition (" . . . the major urban plans to those plans.
hubs of the region. They have the
highest employment and residential PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
densities . . .. support high-capacity exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
transit, and provide a full range of Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
employment, shopping, cultural, different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
recreational, and entertainment Regional Center, including a highlight for the
opportunities . . .. regional centers are Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
entirely urban, like Downtown . . .. "). Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
It would also be counter to the goals of
our district as laid out in the new
Downtown Austin Plan and thereby
mock the public process that has led to
that document.
To inaccurately label our historic,
largely single-family Judges Hill area
as such would place an irresistible
developer bounty on it and destroy its
role as a shaded, heritage-filled
counterpoint to the dense portions of
Downtown nearby.
Does the density under the Comp Plan Neither the Growth Concept Map nor neighborhood
match that of our neighborhood plans? plans set out specific densities. Dawson touches on
Where is the population analysis that two features in the Growth Concept Map: the South
shows the population each 1st Corridor and the South Congress Corridor. The
neighborhood could absorb under Corridor feature is intended to be used flexibly,
current zoning? The Dawson linking together separate redevelopment
Neighborhood willingly entered the opportunities (such as the Mixed Use areas on the
neighborhood planning process and composite Future Land Use Map at South
became the first neighborhood to adopt Congress & Oltorf), without requiring everything
a plan. Dawson readily accepted some along the corridor to change. The Corridor feature
increased density and, in fact, wanted also highlights areas for improved pedestrian-
more density in the form of urban lots friendliness. This is also currently supported for
and other residential options that better South 1st and South Congress by the Commercial
utilized land in the urban core. Design Standards, which identify the portion of
Unfortunately, a group of residents, these roads along Dawson as Core Transit
with assistance from outside the Corridors.
neighborhood, were able to eliminate
those options in our plan. While most
of Dawson embraced some higher
density during the planning process
and since, we do not want that
acceptance to come at the expense of
single family and other lower intensity
residential options. Not all or even
most of us wish to live in vertical
towers disconnected from the land.
Will Neighborhood Plans be Yes. Neighborhood plans will continue to provide
respected? Citizen volunteers and city meaningful guidance to future land use decisions.
staff invested an extraordinary amount As stated, they bring a vital perspective, reflecting
of time, energy and public money an enormous amount of effort and energy.
crafting these plans as part of good Similarly, Imagine Austin brings an important
planning principles, and they should be citywide perspective to future land use decisions.
included in the Comp Plan. At a public Both perspectives are important and need to be
meeting several months ago, Greg used together.; Added sentence: In essence, Small
Guernsey assured neighborhood Area Plans are implementation plans that help
activists that neighborhood plans realize the goals of Imagine Austin at the
would be incorporated into Imagine neighborhood or other small area scale. See also
Austin as is. Yet, the discourse HN Actions 21 and 24 . Revisions to Ch 5 support
surrounding this issue appears to once this as well as define that neighborhood plans are a
again provide a loophole to sidestep component of small area plans.
including neighborhood plans as part
of Imagine Austin.
The Comp Plan should adhere to The Comp Plan sets out general guidance for
current or more stringent compatibility revising the land development code. Certainly, the
standards. Increased density should plan recognizes the importance of transition and
not come at the expense of increased compatibility issues (see the sidebar on p78).
pressure on single family and other
lower intensity residential options in the One of the rationales behind the centers and
central city. Elimination of these corridors approach in the Growth Concept Map is to
minimal protections will only further relieve pressure on single-family neighborhoods.
increase sprawl as residents go
outside the urban core in search of
houses with yards or other more
human scale living options that are
protected from the encroachment of
incompatible, dense development that
negatively impacts quality of life.
Additionally, elimination of single family
and other human-scale housing
options should not be the result of
increased pressure for density.
Most neighborhood plans (as well as a Mixed use and multifamily development is one
whole host of community activists) response to increasing land values. Imagine Austin
express a desire for more affordable also identifies the need for preserving existing
housing in the central city in order to affordable housing, as well as the importance of
ensure we maintain a diverse citizenry assisting long-time residents with rapidly increasing
throughout the area. The Comp Plan property values (HN Action-9).
seems to address that desire only in a
call for more multi-family/mixed use Many multifamily and mixed use forms can be
development at a time when single- human scaled. One goal of the priority program to
family and other owner-occupied revise the land development code would be to
human scale housing options in make those options more affordable.
Central Austin are rapidly becoming
affordable only for economically
advantaged residents. Additionally,
many of us have seen our property
taxes double in less than a decade and
are now paying per month an amount
comparable to a month’s rent or a
mortgage payment. The city rewards
developers for including 10% of a
projects units affordable to those
earning 80% of MFI; however, with an
MFI near $75,000, those so-called
"affordable units" hardly address
affordable housing needs for the
thousands of individuals and families
earning far less than even 60% of MFI.
How is it possible for the Comp Plan to
turn back the clock to make Austin
affordable for all once again?
One of the action items in the Dawson As a vision, the entire city should be pedestrian
Plan---- common to most neighborhood friendly. Sometimes, this will mean sharing space
plans---- is for the city to build with bicycles and cars, on very low-speed, low-
sidewalks throughout the area in order traffic streets. In new development, this may entail
to create a more pedestrian-friendly changing the land development code to require
environment. We have been told time sidewalks where they aren't already. In the urban
and again that there is no money for core, adding sidewalks can be costly. The Comp
sidewalks in our neighborhood as the Plan, working with Neighborhood Plans, helps to
city decides in a piece meal manner to prioritize where investing in sidewalks will have the
fund a few Capital Improvement greatest community value.
Projects every few years. So, how is it
financially possible to make the entire
central city more pedestrian friendly as
envisioned in the Comp Plan?
When neighborhoods engaged in the See policies LUT 4 (p88) and N 2 (p99), and HN
neighborhood planning process, we Action- 20 (p153) and HN Action 24 (p154),
were told that these plans would stop seeking to direct growth away from existing
spot zoning that had become common neighborhoods.
place throughout Austin as developers
sought to up-zone more and more of
Central Austin. That has indeed not
been the case and all neighborhoods
have watched as residentially zoned
properties have been lost due to this
commercial encroachment. How will
Imagine Austin address this issue,
particularly in a state that favors
individual property rights over
community values?
One of the Comp Plan proponents’ Not having the tools that are available in Europe or
arguments in favor of this new vision the northeast does not mean there are no tools,
for Austin is that it will prevent sprawl. either by encouraging development where it would
That argument is disingenuous at best. have the greatest community benefit or by using
Austin began sprawling decades ago the tools that we do have to improve or mitigate it
as the population grew rapidly in a post- elsewhere.
war world in which the automobile
dominated the transportation options.
So, there is little power to retroactively
mitigate decades of bad planning or to
stop residents from moving further out
of the city in search of affordable
homes with yards. Additionally, Texas
is a property rights state and, as such,
most developers will build where and
what is most profitable for them, which
may not necessarily reflect the vision in
Imagine Austin. If we were in Europe or
parts of the Northeast in the U.S.,
where governments can mandate
sprawl prevention rules, that argument
might hold real meaning, but not here.
Wishing it so does not make it so.
Imagine Austin regularly refers to a Imagine Austin does take our anticipated
“sustainable Austin” but can a pro- population growth as a given -- a problem to solve.
growth ideology be sustainable? A number of actions, coordinated through a priority
program, seek to address managing our water in
the face of not just population growth but also
climate change. Promoting compactness,
A. Environmental Sustainability: improving regulations, and setting aside open
Austin is expected to double in space are important tools for preserving wildlife
population in the next 20 to 30 years, habitat and other natural resources.
yet there seems to be little if any
acknowledgement that resources such
as water do not have an infinite
capacity to support an unlimited
population. The fact is there is such a
thing as too many humans to sustain,
and we have many cases in the
historical record that illustrate what
happens when the human population
outstrips the resources necessary to
support it. Additionally, the burgeoning
population poses a threat to open
space, wildlife habitat and other natural
resources that generally decrease as
the human population increases.
B. Economic Sustainability: The Imagine Austin recognizes two aspects of
Comp Plan repeatedly mentions the affordability: market-rate affordability, addressed by
need to address affordability in Austin; improving the ability of the market to meet demand
however, the Austin-American for housing, and low-income affordability,
Statesmen reported in recent years addressed through subsidies, programs, and
that, in a decade, Austin moved from partnerships.
being the most affordable to the least
affordable city in Texas. How is it Both of these benefit from coordinating land use,
possible that Imagine Austin can housing, transportation, and economic
change that statistic? Certainly, over- development planning, as Imagine Austin does.
building apartments and condos can
drive down the costs of rent, but such a
boom and bust cycle associated with
multifamily developments is
undesirable. While there may still be
some areas that offer affordable prices
on single family homes, townhomes or
other human scale residences, they
become much less affordable when
property taxes are factored into the
costs. Additionally, the cost of goods
and services, such as utilities and
food, in Austin continues to increase.
Transportation: Austin’s streets seem Imagine Austin does not assume that Austinites will
to be more and more congested and simply abandon cars. It takes it as a given that
individual anecdotal experiences are improving transit and pedestrian- and bicycle-
time and again supported by national friendliness will entice some Austinites out of their
studies in which Austin streets and cars, either for cross-city trips or once they reach
intersections make the top ten most their destination by car. It also incorporates some
congested lists. Imagine Austin seems roadway capacity improvements throughout the
to rely on the assumption that planning areas. Last, it seeks to bring services and
Austinites will abandon their cars in jobs closer to residents, allowing for shorter trips.
favor of urban rail, cycling and other
non-automobile transportation options.
Are there statistically valid surveys to
support this assumption? So far,
Austinites have not abandoned their
cars to ride Capital Metro buses or
commuter rail, so what evidence is
there to support the belief that another
transportation option will alleviate
clogged streets? Why can we not
identify the problems facing the current
transportation system and find ways to
drastically increase ridership before we
yet again spend money on a
transportation system that may or may
not solve the traffic problems?
Additionally, an urban rail system that
will service the entire city is decades in
our future and will come only through
years of infrastructure construction that
will further disrupt the flow of traffic and
commerce. Urban rail makes more
sense if it grows as the community
grows rather than retroactively trying to
Who pays for growth? If Austin moves Developments that require expanded infrastructure
toward a future as a vertical city built typically pay for some or all of the expansion. The
on what is already an aging, benefit of focusing additional growth where there is
insufficient infrastructure, who pays for existing infrastructure is that the infrastructure can
replacing the infrastructure? We have be expanded as a part of its routine maintenence.
been told that growth does indeed pay Continuing to build at the city's edge adds the
for itself through increased fees, responsibility for new infrastructure while continuing
expansion of the tax base and other to need to maintain what already exists.
means, but why are existing residents
experiencing ever increasing property
taxes and elections asking us to tax
ourselves even more? In Dawson, the
city is spending millions of dollars on
storm drain improvements allegedly for
flood control; yet, only a handful of
homeowners self-reported flooding
problems. Several residents pointed
out to staff that the storm water runoff
appeared to be the result of insufficient
or non-existent storm water control on
the properties on South Congress.
Staff did not deny this observation and
merely replied that those property
owners could not be forced in hindsight
to deal with their storm water, further
adding that increased development in
this VMU corridor will only make the
problem worse.
I understand how the corridors have For 38th St, see alternate proposal, #5260.
been defined as a tool, but what is
missing is how the segment of 38th
between Guadalupe and I-35 was
identified and designated in the
recommendation. None of the parcels
with 38th St. frontage from Guadalupe
to I-35, residential or commercial, met
the then-criteria to be identified as
suitable for mixed use in the VMU
process in 2006. The street is already
extremely walkable. There are no town
or neighborhood centers defined at
either end. What are the 2
redevelopment areas, presumably at
either end, you cite?
Specifically, we have at least 2 historic
districts in place and 2 coming, one of
which is a national register district. This
segment is predominantly shallow-
lotted single family use backing up to
single family use, and has over 1800
feet of dedicated parkland frontage
with single family use opposite. This
Guad-35 segment only provides a
ROW of 45-to-60-feet. I will attach the
plats of the proposed corridor, most
notably it is no wider than 50' from from
IH-35 to Red River. How are Great
Streets sidewalks or VMU sidewalks
going to work without scores of
eminent domain cases, not to mention
I recently heard that part of 38th Street PC/TF 1/23: Remove Activity Corridor designation
has been changed to allow mixed use on 38th Street between Speedway and I-35.
and that means commercial uses of
property through out a current
residential area. This violates the
neighborhood future land use map and
I have to oppose this change.
I live on Rosedale Avenue and am on
the steering committee for the
Rosedale Neighborhood Association.
Since my house is just a block from
Burnet Road and a half block from
45th Street, I must be vigilant to keep
commercial uses from encroaching our
little fragile neighborhood and all
neighborhoods close by. If we don’t
stop this type of development, we
might as well live in the mess that is
Houston or Dallas with little to no
privacy and quiet that we have lived
with for so long. This must stop! We
can not let this happen to our inner city
neighborhoods! Stop it!
Replace "mixed use corridors" with Name of this feature changed to Acitivity Corridor
"multimodal corridors" to reduce confusion between this feature and
mixed use future land use categories and zoning.
With its "mixed use corridors" the draft See revised definition of activity corridor. Activity
plan would establish a new term that Corridors connect areas where land uses can
will cause confusion because it is very support walkability, bike-friendliness, and transit,
similar to existing land use categories making them both land use and transportation
(e.g., mixed use combining districts, features.
vertical mixed use overlay districts) but
is supposed to have a distinct
meaning. This is guaranteed to cause
confusion and mistakes. Replace the
term Mixed Use Corridor with the term
"multimodal corridor," and list and
define "multimodal corridor" as a
transportation category rather than a
land use category.
Define it as a roadway that supports
multiple modes of transportation.
Not recommended. Imagine Austin incorporates
current plans from Capital Metro and CAMPO.
This is an operational issue for TXDOT.
Imagine Austin envisions additional capacity for
MoPac primarily through managed lanes, but
wouldn't preclude other capacity. However, this
level of detail is more appropriate for the Strategic
Mobility Plan.
Not recommended. Imagine Austin incorporates
current plans from Capital Metro and CAMPO.
Covered: LUT-24: Encourage the relocation of the
Missouri-Pacific Raildroad freight line from its
current alignment.
Protect & preserve trees, creeks, See revised green infrastructure priority program
wildlife & preserves and water resources program, which recognize the
importance of protected land as one element within
Increase preservation and protection of an interconnected system of green space. New
trees, especially heritage trees elements within this system focus on the
everywhere in Austin. Increase floodplains to the east, working to preserve creek
protection of creeks including from quality while incorporating, where appropriate,
trails. Trails shouldn't be built at the public access and trails.
bottom of the creek or on creek banks.
Instead of planning green
interconnects, design green
infrastructure that takes into account
the environment, wildlife, water quality,
etc. everywhere, not just on the most
sensitive areas of endangered species.
Create wildlife corridors buffers by the
creeks, to protect riparian areas.
Increase land bought to be kept as
preserves with restricted access. Keep
current preserves with restricted
access, so that future generations can
enjoy them, so that wildlife and trees
can grow there. The public doesn't
have to have access to everything
green, to every creek, to every
preserve. Not very creek needs to
have a trail. Build trails away from the
creeks, don't cross creeks unless
absolutely necessary (low water
crossings, bike/hike paths), don't
remove creek banks and all vegetation
to build trails. Have limited
Plan does not address increased traffic Imagine Austin identifies a number of large-scale
and additional stress on aging existing strategies for addressing increased traffic --
infrastructure. additional capacity in a number of different modes,
improving the built environment, bringing services
I believe that these are critical gaps in and jobs closer to where Austinites live. Austin will
the current Comprehensive Plan that continue to participate in regional transportation
must be addressed. planning, as well as review and assess traffic and
mobility needs.
In reviewing the Draft of ‘Imagine
Austin’ I do not see how this proposed
Comprehensive Plan will address the
very real concerns of increased traffic
and the additional stress on Austin’s
existing aging infrastructure that comes
with future development.
As I understand the City’s
requirements for Traffic Impact
Analyses (TIA), the study is limited to
an evaluation of existing and projected
operating levels of residential streets
and an identification of mitigation
measures needed to minimize traffic
impacts. TIA requirements apply to
each individual lot when an application
is made to zone or rezone the lot or for
site plan approval to develop the lot.
If TIA’s are only triggered by an
individual development then how does
the city respond to multiple
developments, none of which may
individually trigger a TIA but jointly
Don't Forget the Neighborhoods LUT 4 (p. 88) recognizes the value of Austin's
existing neighborhoods and connects their
One of the things that makes some preservation to development in centers and
cities great and others just okay is the corridors. The Complete Communities concept (p.
presence of distinct neighborhoods 72, and in re-write to emphasize that Austin should
where people can walk/bike to most of become many complete communities) addresses
the services they need once they're completing all of the different neighborhoods that
home and that have interesting Austinites live.
character. The intense push to densify
downtown has been at the expense of Imagine Austin also continues to support
supporting more 'nodes' (aka neighborhood plans, which are a vital tool for
neighborhoods). If the neighborhoods identifying specific local needs.
had more complete services and better
internal bike/walk options that would
reduce pressure to move between
neighborhoods except for work. My
other big beef is that there are
ALREADY very dense neighborhoods
that get completely ignored in all plans
and are seriously lacking in significant
services and businesses to make
those neighborhoods great. There
should be some emphasis on getting
the neighborhoods that are already
dense (rewarding even?) the full
complement of services and amentities
to be livable and not exporting traffic -
not just creating new dense areas.
Too weak on Environmental The green infrastructure priority program is
Protections designed to identify key environmental features
within built areas and as open space for protection.
This plan is way too weak on Specific parcels are not identified for future parks;
environmental safeguards and the Parks Long-Range plan directs that.
protections! It proposes DENSE
DEVELOPMENT over : * aquifer
recharge zones, * agricultural areas, *
and doesn't propose enough public
parkland (except those areas within
floodplains, which isn't enough!)
Where is the integrated system of
parks in this pan?? Where is the
really large open area for the eastern
part of town (like Zilker Park for
instance)? Where are the
environmental protections specified in
clear, concrete language (and maps)
??
Sadly, the areas where dense
development is being proposed have
NO safeguards that there will be
density offsets to protect open areas
around these denser "nodes", and
without this, the benefits of density are
just B.S. !! If the goal of a "dense,
compact city" is to preserve open
space in turn, then where are the
_specific_ requirements for density
offsets in this plan? There aren't any,
which more Graphics more density
Need means we'll get More graphics, images, and spreads have been
added. In particular, see pages dedicated to mixed
The plan is too "verbal" and not based use, compact development, and complete streets.
enough on "graphic" information. The
plan is basically words on paper, and
the supporting maps are way too
general, fuzzy, and ill-defined. It
should have been designed primarily
as maps and graphic information that
is more defined, concrete, and less
open to debate and interpretation!
This is a feel good, political document
designed to open to gates to future
development by developers and city
staffers. It could have and should
have been a coordinated effort to
develop integrated communities,
transportation networks, open
space/park corridors, etc. It is overly
simplistic and a very poor result, given
all the time, money, and effort spent on
this...
the "plan" is way too general Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
This plan never really gets beyond a
general overview and into real
specifics! That means that it's
unrealistic and far too open to
interpretation by staff and developers.
A Plan is something that can be
implemented. Instead, this merely
paves the way for piecemeal urban
planning for individual areas. This
"plan" doesn't ever get down to a level
of detail that can be considered "real"...
Stick to the Plan: a dense, compact Private investment decisions, which should be
city !! guided by the best possible land use regulations
representing what Austinites want for the future of
There is too much development the city, do not occur in an orderly fashion. City
proposed in suburban/outlying areas. regulations need to acknowledge and work within
We need to concentrate development the market, even as they shape parts of it.
in the inner city FIRST !! Development
-- even dense development-- along the
perimeter of Austin violates other
provisions of the Plan that call for
preservation of open space, protection
of environmentally sensitive areas,
preserving existing farmland, and
limiting sprawl ! This is the SINGLE
BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THE
PLAN!
comprehensive plan priorities See revised priority programs, which each include
a section on how the programs relate to one
I have followed the preparation of the another.
comprehensive planning to date. I
have provided my priorities at the
appropraite site. But many areas
overlap....staff/advisory task
force/planning commission needs to
step back and create an interactive
diagram to proceed with prioritization of
activity by doing all related
programs/changes in the correct
order.....to provide more healthy living
environments (creating bike paths and
green areas in neighborhoods)
developers may be required to do
certain things which will require land
use/zoning requirement amendments
or be a part of the transportation
priority.....these priorities are not in a
vacuum.....they are not flat puzzle
pieces that can be moved around in
some numerical order. Do it now, to
avoid having to redo it in 10-15 years.
Bringing the city together See CFS Action-3 (expanding access to parks), but
also CFS Action-5 (which grapples with how to pay
The city is starting to charge its citizens for maintenance and expansion of the parks
money to enjoy there public parks. Lets system).
try to keep from paying a fee to enjoy
public parks in Austin. Also lets have
the city put on some big revenue
venues (concerts, festivals, gatherings,
ect.) in the park system instead of
putting admission fees for everyday
use. (Auditorium shores, commons
ford ranch, the great
lawn,FiestaGardens, the botanical
gardens, ect.). The city of Austin is
amazing because of its environment
and people. Lets put them together in
ways to keep both of them happy.
Elevated Bike Lanes See revision to Figure 4.2 (bike/ped projects),
which identifies major cross-city urban trails.
Elevated bike lanes and flyways over
major roads to make biking in Austin
quick, easy and safe. Bike-friendly just
isn't good enough. If you want to
relieve conjestion and get people out of
their cars, you need a viable alternative
that is as quick as cars by having
flyways so bikes avoid stoplights.
Bikes are an annoyance to drivers and
need their own dedicated lanes.
Elevated Light Rail See revised Fig. 4.2 (transit projects), which
identifies broad categories of new transit.
We need an elevated light rail system
to get around town quickly and easily
without conflict with street traffic. This
would releave congestion and be an
easier, quicker way to get around,
especially at rush hour.
Natural systems in Mueller This is a more appropriate issue for the Mueller
Commission.
The environmental systems appear to
be absent in Mueller. Perhaps we
could resore ones that were once there
before it was an airport.
8 true priorities Noted. Generally, Imagine Austin seeks to improve
the efficiency of the City's operations.
You have listed 8 selecte prioritiesas
the 8 most important. Here are the
real 8 by citizenry, not consultants:
1. Reduce Taxes
2. Cut Spending
3. Cut Entittlements
4. Cut number of Police
5. Cut Police overtime
6. Cut special interest departments like
DSMBR
7. Cut spending on healthcare for
friends/domestic partners of City
Employees
8. Quit Spending my money like it's
your's to decide
Honor neighborhood plans See #5203, regarding revising the land
development code and how that interacts with
The comprehensive plan should not neighborhood plans.
require an extensive rewrite of land
use rules in order to be in compliance
with the city charter. Existing land use
rules are the result of tens of
thousands of hours' work completed by
Austinites in good faith that as they
were developing their neighborhood
plans, they were sayingt how they want
our city to look. The comprehensive
plan should fill in the gaps left by
current land use rules, and may
provide guidance for directions
neighborhoods might consider, but
should never override what the people
have already said they want.
Give Children Priority Has been added throughout the plan for the 1/10
draft
There is virtually no mention of children
and their needs in this program. They
are the future of our city. Attention
needs to be paid to pocket parks in
areas where the street is the only place
to play. More open space in downtown
where children from condos live. More
safe corridors for youngsters to walk or
ride their bikes to school or to a park.
More neighborhood gardens to grow
fresh fruits and vegetable make for
healthier kids. Please give our future
citizens more consideration.
Sprawl bonus versus density bonus Task Force did not support this recommendation.
Since downtown is subsidizing
services for the rest of the city,
developers that contribute to sprawl
with single family home subdivisions or
large parking lots in thevoutskirts
should have to pay a "sprawl" bonus
for those privileges - not the other way
around. In actuality, city planners and
the city council shouldn't waver from
the zoning when developers present
the excuse of "current market
conditions" don't support density.
Resilience. Making our community and Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
environment more resilient is key to
withstanding the rough conditions
ahead.
The resilience of our community is tied
to food water and shelter. The five
basic elements to resilience are:
Water cycling (quantity but also just as
important is quality). This means less
run-off from our soils/yards, less
flooding as the soil holds the water
better, and shorter droughts as the soil
holds the water longer.
Nutrient cycling (mostly composting).
We have to replace the nutrients in the
soil as we remove them from our soil in
the form of food. We need to recycle
leaves, food scraps and wood chips on
site as best possible. Don't let it hit the
curb!
Carbon cycling. Carbon is the basic
building block for all plant life. When
carbon is recycled back into the soil, it
creates the water and nutrient holding
capacity of the soils. We include in our
goals, the production and recycling of
biomass into our soils.
Mineral cycling. If we remove minerals
Today I wanted to submit comments to Affordability is a key goal of Imagine Austin.
the Imagine Austin site but it is Policies and actions differentiate between providing
currently not functional. I saw this housing for low income and more gneral housing
piece by Ed Wendler in the Statesman affordability.
last week:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/wen
dler-count-on-higher-living-costs-in-
new-1959731.html
It aligns with my own perceptions that
our city government is seriously off
track and moving in the wrong
direction. I work at UT and many of the
students I interact with live in the East
Riverside area. They have been priced
out of West Campus, and with the type
of city planning currently in vogue in
Austin, they may in the near future be
driven out of East Riverside and be
commuting from much further away.
Everything I have heard about the
Imagine Austin process leads me to
believe that it is a flawed, top-down
process that has blocked and ignored
community input. I urge you to
empower the Citizens Advisory Task
Force to take control of this planning
process to allow for meaningful
community input, analysis and
evaluation of growth management land
use.
I remain concerned that the plan will Noted. See HN Action-3.
not contain achievable goals in the
following areas:
1. Making Austin a home ownership
majority City in the next decade and
sustaining this achievement
…
I remain concerned that the plan will See HN-9. Flag for TF (2-gentrification)
not contain achievable goals in the
following areas:
...
2. Mitigating gentrification in traditional
affordable neighborhoods in alignment
with the Homestead preservation
District …
I remain concerned that the plan will See revised priority program.
not contain achievable goals in the
following areas:
…
3. Establishing housing affordability
goals in alignment with federally
funded and locally funded investment
decisions
There should be a policy statement in LUT-18: add "increased transit use and …"
Chapter 4 under Land Use and
Transportation that specifically states See also LUT Action-14.
that provision of transit should be
improved and transit use increased.
While a number of policies address
transit-oriented-development, which is
also important, the city needs a
specific policy to improve and increase
transit use.
The indicators in Chapter 5 should See Task Force discussion // forward to PC.
have quantitative goals whenever
possible and dates to achieve those
goals, so that we can measure our
progress. Citywide goals should be set
whenever that is possible.
Neighborhood or regional goals can be
set later, and goals can be revised
over time as needed.
Specific recommendations for Included transit ridership, vehicle miles traveled per
indicators are as follows: capita, hosueholds within 1/4 mile of transit, bicycle
miles traveled, employees within 1/4 and 1/2 mile
Percentage of work trips by bus, rail, of transit and and high capacity transit.water
bike, walking, single-occupant vehicle, consumption, impervious cover, development
carpool, and telecommute within the Edwards Aquifer recharge and
contributing zones.
Percentage of other trips by bus, rail,
bike, walking, single-occupant vehicle,
carpool
Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per
person. Can also be broken down for
work and other trips.
• Percent of housing units within ¼
(and ½) miles of transit stop/station
(including local bus, express bus, and
rail) ‐
• Percent of housing units within ¼
(and ½) miles of high frequency transit
stop/station (including local bus,
express bus, and rail)
I don't think miles of sidewalks or bike
lanes are the most helpful, though bike
lanes more than sidewalks. Rather, the
number of people biking and walking
for trips, including leisure.
The number of bike accidents/deaths
and pedestrian accidents/deaths.
1st suggestion: Covered in "Austin is Livable"
2nd suggestion: Covered in Austin is Livable,
Austin is Natural and Sustainable, and Austin
Values and Respects its People
The title should remain broad so that it
encompasses the various aspects of this building
block.
Expanded and revised Society 8 into four different
actions
Society 8
Make healthy and local foods accessible,
particularly in underserved, areas by removing
barriers and providing incentives for the
establishment of sustainable community gardens,
urban farms, neighborhood grocery stores, farmers
markets, and farm stands and mobile vegetable
sales carts.
Society 9
Facilitate a strong and sustainable local food
system by linking farmers, distributors, and markets
and create programs and partnerships to ensure
profitable local food enterprises throughout all five
food sectors—production, processing, distribution,
consumption, and waste recovery.
Society 10
Develop partnerships with public and private
stakeholders to promote awareness and educate
residents about healthy food choices, sources, and
preparation, including keeping up-to-date and
accessible data on community garden plot
availability, cooking classes, and city and country
property for neighborhood gardens and family
farms, and the sale of sustainably produced and
culturally appropriate food at farmers markets, farm
stands, mobile vegetable carts, and at
neighborhood grocery stores.
Society 11
Reduce obesity by establishing local fresh food
initiatives in institutions such as schools,
colleges, universities, hospitals, nursing homes,
Addressed above in Society 8, 9, 10, 11.
Addressed in new SOC 8, 9
Addressed in new SOC 10
Addressed in new SOC Action 12
Austin is Liveable-6th bullet
Policies HHS 6, 7
SOC Actions 1, 10, 11, 49, 50, 54
SOC Actions 11, 54
Note, this refers to Land Use 10. New SOC Action 12. LUT 10 focuses on more
intense industrial uses which are more intense than
envisioned in the comment and is more restrictive
than new SOC Action 12
Incorporate "agricultural land" into list of areas to
be preserved in CE Action-17.
Revised in Green Infra Priority Program
See also Actions CFS 1, 37, LUT 36 and CE 17
See CE Action-13.
See LUT-37 and CFS-38.
Not recommended -- stormwater mitigation is
already included.
See CE Action-14. Actions CFS 1, LUT 36 and CE
17 and Green Infrastructure Priority Program.
Land Use Action-36: include "urban agriculture."
Incorporated list of tools into CE Action-13.
Green Infra Priority Program.
This is Economy Action 18-no change identified.
See Soc Action 9, 10, 49
See Soc A 8, 9, 10, 12
See New Soc A 9, Econ A 16, 18
See New Soc A 9
TF: SOC Action-8: Include vacant land (in addition
to city and school property) in list of areas for
community gardens.
See revisions per ID 5360
Include agriculture in land to be protected.
PC added Indicators greenhouse gas emissions,
air quality
CFS-32, 25 and Resource Recovery Master Plan
Covered by LUT Action 37, CFS 25
See ID# 5565
CE 13, 17
Removed redundant action
CE 9 modified
Action was removed by working groups
Covered by CFS-39
See revised Green infrastructure program
CE-17, 13
Society 8, 9
Society 8, 9
Society 8
Removed by working groups and no change
identified.
Society 8-12
Data for carbon emission? Chap 2
I don't live in Austin but in Lampasas Please see the Invest in a Compact and Connected
and from time to time like to come into Ausitn Priority Program in Chapter 5
Austin for a weekend event. I wish that
the commuter train that goes out to the
Leander/Cedar Park area would run on
the weekends. It would make getting
there a lot easier and less stressful. I
think a lot of people would take
advantage of this if it were offered.
Thanks!
The overall goal for Austin should be to Noted. These recommendations primarily address
provide an excellent education to every the ISDs.
child in Austin. This means
eliminating the achievement gap by
accelerating the achievement of low
income students. These goals should
coincide and not compete with each
other. Therefore, Austin should
* Create hybrid strategies drawn
from the strong parts of the various
educational reform ideas, rather than
relying on any single method to
achieve goals, and measure the
effectiveness of these strategies by
desired outcomes (for me, that would
be college readiness for all students)
* Identify and provide the human
and organizational resources and
leadership to improve education, at all
levels--from teachers to school
leaders, to district leaders.
* Expand particular capacities -
financial capacity, managerial capacity,
intellectual capacity, and political
capacity
Ensure that the policy climate
allows for robust and thorough
discussion of educational strategies
that includes both "frontline" staff and
outsiders, including the clients of the
educational system (i.e. students
and paragraph last sentence… How
last their families) Not recommended because the language implies
will we keep Austin and its the ETJ as well as the city limits.
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)
beautiful, and affordable?
2nd paragraph, 2nd last sentence… Not recommended because the language implies
Choosing a different path for our city the ETJ as well as the city limits.
and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
(ETJ) will require doing things
differently.
4th paragraph, last sentence… Austin Not recommended because the language implies
and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction the ETJ as well as the city limits.
(ETJ) simply can’t afford to ignore the
costs associated with the way we’ve
grown;…
4th paragraph, 4th sentence… Austin Sept 26th version states "Austin can protect the
can protect the natural environment natural environment and enhance recreational
and enhance recreational opportunities opportunities" which implies ETJ-not recommended
within in its city limits as well as its
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
5th paragraph, last sentence… When Not recommended because the language implies
challenging issues and choices arise, the ETJ as well as the city limits.
the plan guides both the municipality,
its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ),
and the community in thinking about
the good of the whole.
sentence before 4th paragraph… Not recommended because the language implies
When we think long-term and work to the ETJ as well as the city limits.
make the city and its Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction (ETJ) as a whole better,
everyone stands to benefit.
4th paragraph, 1st sentence… Not recommended because the language implies
Considering Austin and its the ETJ as well as the city limits.
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) as a
whole means seeing all of its different
pieces and identities and how they all
fit together.
Last paragraph, last sentence… As Suggest this change instead:
Austin and its Extraterritorial "Think holistically
Jurisdiction (ETJ) continue to grow, it This comprehensive plan is holistic in its
will take a big-picture view to bring consideration of big themes like livability,
everything together. sustainability, and complete communities. In
addition to planning for land use, transportation,
and other physical issues, it considers the provision
of services, economic development, cultural needs,
public health, resource efficiency, and equity. It
provides a framework for how the physical,
economic, and social pieces of the city and the
region interconnect."
LUT Action-12… Create an integrated This language implies the inclusion of the ETJ
transportation plan that encompasses
driving, transit, bicycling, walking, and
roadway and rail freight within Austin
and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
(ETJ).
LUT Action-13… Create a system of This language implies the inclusion of the ETJ
high-capacity transit including
elements such as urban rail and bus
rapid transit corresponding to land use
mix and intensity within Austin and its
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
LUT Action-21… Create a network of Revise to include the region. Revise LUT-21 to
separated bicycle and walking routers "Create a network of on and off-street phycially
or trails linking all parts of Austin and separated bicycle and walking routers or trails
its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). linking all parts of Austin and the region.
HN Action-25… Ensure that future This language implies the inclusion of the ETJ
neighborhood plans, significant
revisions of existing neighborhood
plans, and new subdivisions within its
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) and
other small area plans reflect the
goals, themes, and principles of the
comprehensive plan.
ECON Action-16… Create a regional Not recommended because the ETJ is implied.
economic development task force, led
by the Greater Austin Chamber of
Commerce, that includes the City of
Austin, its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
(ETJ), nearby municipalities and
surrounding counties;…
CE Action-18… Develop and Not recommended because the ETJ is implied.
implement unified, comprehensive land
management of all City of Austin and
its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)
lands for integrated environmental
sustainability, including carbon
sequestration, wildlife habitat, water
quality and quantity and education.
Austin Physicians for Social Ground-level ozone is Central Texas' primary air
Responsibility (PSR) fully supports quality concern. Vehicle engines, electric
“growing a healthy city”. As generation units, industrial facilities and many
physicians, nurses, and healthcare everyday activities create man-made sources of
professionals in Austin, we are highly nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic
concerned about poor air quality in our compounds (VOCs), which form ozone when
city and the health impact this has on exposed to sunlight. In 2007, most (55 percent)
the most vulnerable in our community nitrogen oxides result from mobile sources, like
–children and the elderly. Poor air cars, trucks, construction equipment, and lawn
quality causes irritation to the mowers. Most (78 percent) volatile organic
respiratory system, reduction in lung compounds result from fixed area sources, such as
function, aggravation of asthma and industry, home heating, or forest fires. Central
even permanent lung damage through Texas is currently in compliance with federal air
repeated short-term exposure. quality standards for ozone, though these
Numerous factors are responsible for standards may be revised in 2013.
poor air quality including automobiles,
power plants, and industries. Ground
level ozone is created when gasoline,
diesel fuel, kerosene, oil, or natural gas
is combusted. Cars and other vehicles
are major contributors. In addition,
coal combustion (power plants)
releases mercury, particulate matter,
nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and
dozens of other substances known to
be hazardous to human health.
Austin PSR supports city policies and
inter-city initiatives to improve our air
quality and thus our health.
The Imagine Austin Comprehensive Please see Chapter 5 and the relationship of
Plan will create value for the broader Imagine Austin and neighborhood plans.
community only insomuch as the vision
of the City is reflected in each
neighborhood and local concerns of
each neighborhood are expressed in
this vision. Therefore, greater
emphasis should be placed on the
working relationship between the
adopted and pending Neighborhood
Plans and the Imagine Austin
Comprehensive Plan. ULI Austin
believes a robust dialogue around this
challenge of plan concurrence will
create a better Imagine Austin
Comprehensive Plan.
The Imagine Austin Comprehensive Please see Chapter 5 and the discussion on the
Plan will require a significant need for regional planning and partnerships.
investment in regional coordination and
we would reiterate the mention this is
given in the plan. ULI Austin would
encourage structured regional
collaboration and believes a program
incentivized with shared costs/benefits
will have the most comprehensive
impact.
The Imagine Austin Comprehensive Revised priority programs will reflect the public's
Plan lists many worthwhile initiatives ranking from the priorities survey.
lacking sufficient prioritization. These
initiatives should be concretely
prioritized to fit the fiscal limits of our
City. ULI Austin would recommend a
more discrete list of priorities subject to
rigorous means analysis.
Revision:
A beautiful, world-class system of outdoor places
for recreation and environmental protection will
define Austin as a world-class city. We need to
develop our creeks, their tributaries and associated
flood plains, Lady Bird Lake, and the downstream
Colorado River into a network of connected
greenways and waterways. As we grow into a
more compact city we will also have an increased
need for more, smaller parks and open spaces
distributed across these new urban places. By
strengthening our “green infrastructure” – parks,
the urban forest, trails and greenbelts, rivers,
creeks, lakes, gardens, urban agriculture, open
spaces, and wildlife habitat – Austin can protect the
natural environment and enhance recreational
opportunities.
Include: The Parks and Recreation's operations
and maintenance budget is $20 per capita which is
lower than the national average of $91 per capita.
Ok, include in What does it mean?, page 52.
The Parks and Recreation's operations and
maintenance budget is $20 per capita which is
lower than the national average of $91 per capita.
Note that the third bullet picks this up.
Note that the first bullet is getting to this.
LUT 5: "...and provides *community gathering
spaces, parks,* and safe outdoor play areas for
children."
Add see alsos between LUT-5, UD-1 and CFE-19.
Generally, the policies should be treated as one
body, rather than repeating points everywhere they
might be relevant.
UD 1. Develop accessible community gathering
places that include such spaces plazas, parks,
farmers’ markets, sidewalks, and streets in all parts
of Austin, especially in the Downtown, future TODs,
in denser, mixed-use communities, and other
redevelopment areas, that encourage interaction
and provide places for people *of all ages* to visit
and relax. (See also RO 1)
OK - add to bullet that starts "Preserving
environmentally sensitive areas..."
RO 9: Include "other governments"
RO10: address in RO9 and related actions.
RO11: Addressed in RO2, RO4, and related
actions.
RO12: Addressed in RO1 and related actions.
Not recommended because this is implied.
See LUT-Action 3 and new sidebar on
inclusiveness.
TF: Focus inclusiveness on children not families.
Not recommended. See new sidebar on
inclusiveness.
TF: Staff should revise language to reflect that we
want to our transit stops / centers to be accessible
to riders of all ages, abilities, levels of familiarity w/
transit. Agree not to just insert "family friendly".
Include as part of Green Infrastructure Priority
Program
Partly addressed by CFS-3 through CFS-7.
New SOC Action 55: Create more opportunities for
outdoor play, recreational activities, healthy eating,
and other activities and programs that address
obesity.
Addressed by LUT Action-40 and CFS Action-3
CFS A-2 (expanding access to parks) includes a
connection to the 1/4 and 1/2 mile distances in the
Urban Parks Workgroup map.
Also, CFS-3 and CFS-4 and pg 49 and 52
Covered by CFS 5 and CFS 6. Update to the
Green Infrastructure Priority Program could include
this comment.
Include in review of Transportation priority program.
Add "child-friendly features" bullet to CFS-25. See
ID# 232
See CFS-3.
ok.
Incorporated in third bullet in Livable.
Included parks in 3rd bullet in Mobile &
Interconnected.
Edit: "park or accessible open space."
Added indicator: Households within 1/2 mile of
park or accessible open shpace
The neighborhood associations Comment viewed as a general comment by the
learned that their neighborhood plans CATF
were not compatible with the
comprehensive plan therefore, the
comprehensive plan would override
their neighborhood plans.
The working groups' survey indicated
that Neighborhood Plans would be
recognized as valid as they conform to
the Comprehensive Plan; This is a
stacked deck, placing the present
Neighborhood Associations at the
mercy of the Comprehensive Plan; it
provides no protection for the
Neighborhood Associations already in
force.
The question was asked, “Is the Comment viewed as a general comment by the
amount of land area designated as CATF
residential versus commercial the
same in both the neighborhood plans
and the comprehensive plan?” The city
planner’s response was that the two
are not comparable although he did not
provide provable data supporting his
contention. The inference is that this is
not something the COA wants to call
attention to which indicates that when
the two are laid side by side or
imposed one on top of the other, there
will be a significant difference in the
residential versus commercial usage.
There were concerns that there was no Comment viewed as a general comment by the
equity in the placement of the CATF
additional 750,000 residents. The Plan
appears to place majority, if not all,
new residents east of IH 35; by doing
this the density of plan will destroy
generational family oriented residential
areas.
Remove our district from the Judges Hill is included within the Downtown Plan
Downtown Regional Center on the boundaries. Imagine Austin hands off
Growth Concept Map as it does not fit implementation of centers with existing small-area
your definition (" . . . the major urban plans to those plans.
hubs of the region. They have the
highest employment and residential PC/TF 1/23: Redraw Downtown Regional Center to
densities . . . support high-capacity exclude single-family areas outside of Downtown
transit, and provide a full range of Austin Plan. Include additional map to highlight the
employment, shopping, cultural, different small-area plans involved in the Downtown
recreational, and entertainment Regional Center, including a highlight for the
opportunities . . . regional centers are Judges Hill District within the Downtown Austin
entirely urban, like Downtown . . . "). Plan. Other features to consider for this additional
To inaccurately label our historic, map: UNO, St. David's, UT.
largely single-family Judges Hill District
as such would place an irresistible
developer bounty on it and destroy its
role as a shaded, heritage-laden
counterpoint to the dense portions of
Downtown nearby. It would also be
counter to the goals of our district as
laid out in the new Downtown Austin
Plan and thereby mock the public
process that has led to that document.
To layout incentives on top of this
residential neighborhood would erode
the investment owners like myself have
made in this historic neighborhood.
Judge’s Hill is valuable to the City as a
largely single family historic
neighborhood. There is a strong trend
underway to restore these historic
Do NOT rewrite the Land and Use Many of the goals in Imagine Austin (improved
Code as part of the plan as we have transportation, addressing affordability, preserving
supported compatible development environmental features, improving public health)
along our periphery with a complex set require revising the Land Development Code. Such
of sustainable agreements that depend revisions should also address neighborhood
on the current code and would be preservation and transitions/compatibility. As
undermined by rewriting it. detailed in the revised priority program, any
revision to the Land Development Code would
require a public process for both developing the
code and applying to specific land. Where a small-
area plan (including the Downtown Plan) is
involved, applying the new code would work with
those plans. Additionally, for recently adopted
ordinances and regulations (such as Downtown's),
we would expect few revisions.
See revised Priority Program
Copies of written summaries provided by staff
Concern being expressed about the Comment not recommended by CATF
impact of the plan's maps on
neighborhood plans
The CATF considered this a general comment
Revised Priority Programs.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Garner indicated that the videographers were
requested and no-showed that session.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Honestly, Austin’s youth will be the To ensure our economic strength, it is critical to
ones to see & live the end of our 30 preserve Austin’s mix of large and small
year plan and beyond. businesses, local entrepreneurs, major employers,
clean industries, education and government jobs.
Prosperity for all means reducing the number of
individuals and families living in poverty by
providing workforce training and helping residents
attain living-wage jobs, as well as capitalizing on
the city’s “creative class” vibe to provide jobs and
career paths for workers of all educational and skill
levels. We can maintain economic resiliency by
staying attuned to global trends and emerging
technologies and by preparing our children
academically and socially to lead Austin's future.
ok
The GCM has been placed inside Chapter 4 box.
Lupe stated at the presentation to the Repeated attempts to make contact for information
task force on October 11 that she had but she never responded.
concerns with some of the outdated
statistics presented in the report
related to the Hispanic community.
TF 12/5: Rephrase all to "Key Challenges and
Opportunities."
Not recommended -- challenges lay the
groundwork for the policies that follow. Calling them
goals would introduce confusion, since they're
more general than goal statements.
Terms like “historic”, “cultural”, and p4, Preserving Our Livability: We want to preserve
“heritage-based” do not always our character and history, remembering the many
translate explicitly to mean multi-ethnic different experiences and cultures that have made
influences. I suggest it be explicit in Austin what it is today as we evolve with the future.
LUT4, UD3, UD7, all HPs
Staff has identified additional edits that will clarify
Chiquita Eugene in her presentation to and distinguish these various terms throughout the
the Task Force mentioned that one of plan.
the reasons that African Americans
have moved out of Austin is because
they don’t feel their cultural heritage is
valued.
The Hispanic Quality of Life
recommendations also ask the city to
preserve and value the Hispanic
cultural heritage & influence of certain
neighborhoods and areas.
In other words, complete the sentence Ok. Revise to "Centrally located neighborhoods in
that somewhat alludes to gentrification east and south Austin have experienced
without saying it. This has been the reinvestment that has also led to increasing
case for many African American and housing costs and has resulted in some long-time
Hispanic households. I think it is an residents having to move to more affordable
important housing and neighborhood neighborhoods.
challenge to mention.
Again, the challenge of gentrification. New Key Challenge (taken from the COA
Bullets 2, 4 & 5 vaguely allude to it, but Gentrification report):
it’s not explicit.
FYI, there is a city report on Balancing new and redevelopment in lower-income
Gentrification that may be a resource neighborhoods while maintaining the essential
for the recommendations section character and flavor of those neighborhoods.
Thinking about historically African New N-6: Protecting neighborhood character by
American and Hispanic providing opportunities for existing residents who
neighborhoods. are struggling with rising housing costs to continue
living in their existing neighborhoods.
Existing Actions:
HN-1 Establish regulations to promote the
development of a variety of market rate and
affordable housing types within compact, mixed
use centers and corridors served by transit.
HN-2: Development incentives and policies to
encourage more families with children to live in
Austin's established neighborhoods by increasing
the supply and variety of housing.
HN-3: Produce regulations and programs to
promote affordable housing throughout Austin.
HN-4: Provide incentives and develop funding
sources for the rehabilitation and repair of
affordable housing.
HN-9: Expand existing and develop new programs,
and coordinate with other organizations to retain
long-term residents of neighborhoods experiencing
rapidly increasing property values and in influx of
wealthier new residents.
Existing Policies:
HP 2: Preserve and interpret historic resources in
Austin for residents and visitors.
This has been cited in affordable New Key Challenge
housing presentations, by non-profit
organizations, citizens and is also cited Increasing the amount of well paying jobs to allow
in the side bar on page 103 (bullet #6) more people to live and work in Austin in the face
of rising costs.
Ok. Revise Eco 2 to Implement policies that
create, nurture, and retain small businesses and
minority and women owned business.
Refer to Hispanic Quality of Life and Ok. Revise ECO 5 to "Enhance Austin's draw as a
African American Quality of Life premier national and international tourist
recommendations. destination by strengthening and diversifying of our
cultural and entertainment offerings…
Again, one of Chiquita Eugene’s
comments included the fact that Revise ECO 8 to "Invest in, construct, and expand
African Americans do not feel like major multi-cultural facilities in Austin's Downtown."
Austin values their cultural heritage
because there are no TF 12/5: review in light of arts & creativity/cultural
arts/music/cultural festivals devoted to heritage distinction
highlighting their heritage. If there was,
this could be a touristic draw. Staff made changes throughout the plan to clearly
define culture, creative, and ethnic.
Music festivals like SXSW & ACL
have begun to capitalize on Latino
musicians and hip-hop artists and are
becoming more of a tourist draw for
special groups that wouldn’t attend
otherwise.
A number of policies are what ideas are proposed
to address this. In particular, ECO-12: Engage
major employers and institutions of higher
education to provide leadership in meeting the
needs of chronic unemployed and underemployed
residents. TF 12/5: Connect a policy to this issue.
ECO-11, 14 (see ID#47)
ECON Action 13, 15, 16
See response to ID 287 (p 42)
New Key Challenge
Reducing the incidence of teen pregnancy
through expanded education programs and
assisting those tens who do get pregnant with
better access to prenatal healthcare, programs
to keep them in school, and job training.
TF: "growing as a business" does this already.
Revise ECO 8 to "Invest in, construct, and expand
major multi-cultural facilities in Austin's Downtown."
Revise ACC 12 to "Construct, sustain, and grow
Austin's multicultural and artististic heritage…"
Two page spread on qol studies.
Revised Priority Programs
Revised Priority Programs
We need to create links between the Revised Priority Programs.
vision, building blocks, and building
block policies AND this chapter’s core
principles, related actions and
recommendations
See revised Priority Programs.
See revised Priority Programs. TF 12/5: Revise
Plan At a Glance; follow with a key for each plan
element/building block, so that people with a
particular interest can easily find where their issue
is addressed.
Updated where possible.
Recommend only mentioning it once. Could shift to
key challenges instead of Trends.
Ok. Revise Eco 2 to Implement policies that
create, nurture, and retain small businesses and
minority and women owned business.
See revised Priority Programs.
It does: "young and old"
Two page spread on qol studies.
Ok. Revise p. 87 to "Austin's historic assests
include neighborhoods, buildings, and sites
reflecting Austin's cultural, ethnic, social,
economic…In addition, Austin has many cultural
and ethnic resources lacking formal historic
designation..."
Covered by HN Action 9
Covered by HN Action 9
See N P6
Not recommended.
TF: addresses elsewhere
Revised Priority Programs.
Something both laid back and passionate, that
seems built on unlikely pairings*, like the State
Capital and University of Texas, blocks away but
worlds apart.*
CATF viewed as a general comment.
CATF viewed as a general comment.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Comment not recommended by CATF
Why is housing more expensive? Addressed by LUT Policies 3, 7, 9; Housing
Maybe we should focus on decreasing Policies 1, 4, 5; Neighborhood Policy 1
high housing costs. LUT Actions 2, 3, 5, 13, 14; HN Actions 1, 2, 3
1. This would mean more if other Included with peer cities table.
examples of Texas cities were given
2. Why is this important? Younger Provide context for Austin's overall homeownership
singles are not as stable in their rate.
economic or home life, so they rent.
I’m not sure why this point was made.
This is incorrect; tax rates have stayed Assessed property values have generally increased
level. Total taxes paid have in Austin between 1995 and 2010, with declines in
skyrocketed. 2004 and 2011. *Despite a generally declining
property tax rate over that period, total taxes paid
have risen, substantially in some parts of Austin.*
See pg. 67 of 2010-11 annual budget:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/10-
11/downloads/fy11approved_budget_vol1.pdf
This should be compared to housing Source: Community inventory (Chapt 4); 2008 COA
values in central neighborhoods and report: Preserving Affordable Housing in Austin: A
central city land values. Platform for Action
Revise to "Some of the affordable apartment
rentals" We do not have sufficient best available
data on this issue.
See rewrite from Immigrant Services Network, re-
framing this section as the problems caused by
isolation from the larger community.
Revised to roads that are missing sidewalks.
Included in peer cities chart.
These figures are out of date. The Angelou revised figures on 9/23/11; this may be the
office market here is much tighter than most recent information (1st quarter 2011) but John
cited. Karras is checking for us
Received 3rd quarter 2011 from John and revised
numbers in the draft - MB 1/6
Ok: "Austin’s percentage of the region’s office
space has dropped as more suburban
space has been constructed."
EGRSO confirms this is essentially correct. Please
note that the CBD is defined as those properties
with CBD zoning. From the 1960s to the mid-
2000s, much of the area zoned CBD was vacant or
had offices or parking lots and little retail. Since
2005, the CBD has extensively redeveloped which
includes a significant amount of retail.
Revise to:
This is not correct and is less important Regional issues related to water management and
than what is in the County and ETJ. the aquifer are noted at the end of chapter 2.
No change made in the current draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Revised to "The per unit costs associated with
serving low-density, sprawling development with
water and wastewater services are generally
greater than those associated with denser, more
compact development.
"In 2006, Austin ranked second in major U.S. cities
in terms of the number of non-profit community
celebrations, festivals, fairs, and parades per 1,000
persons."
Fixed in 9/26 draft.
Downtown Austin and its place in the TF: Include mention of downtown here.
region has been excised from this
discussion. Where did it go? Revised to: Austin has long been the hub of the
Central Texas region. Our Central Business District
is the “Downtown of Central Texas.” Although
Austin is the principal place where jobs and
necessary goods, services, entertainment, and
amenities are concentrated; the city’s role as the
only regional center has changed as increased
suburban development pulled against this identity,
reducing the city’s regional share of employment,
services, and housing.
I think that affordable needs to be This is addressed by the last two sentences in this
inserted here before residences. That paragraph.
is the crux of the problem.
WRT: Recommend removing Austin's ETJ from
map.
The costs of Austin’s regulatory Recommend addressing this point in revised
environment on new development and Priority Program section, with the overlap between
permitting needs to be discussed here new land development code and affordable
and is not insignificant. housing.
Why the planned isn’t re-work of IH35 I-35: will be added.
through downtown included here? Loop 360: Will review with ATD
Why isn’t the re-work of Loop 360 SH-45: corrected in 9/26 draft.
included here? Why isn’t SH45
extension included here?
How can we reduce roadway utilization No changes made to these polices
by vehicles unless we either build more
roadway width or find other means of
transportation? Central Austin streets
are at their limits now. Look at the
effects of the changes to Exposition
Blvd. on the flow of traffic at peak
periods?
I cannot believe in any of the forums or See policy H1, HN-Action 1, 2, 3, LUT Action-2, 3
working groups that no one said and
there is no policy promoting the
creation of more housing which in itself
helps create more affordable housing
stock. That is the single most effective
method of providing affordable
housing.
If land is not currently being farmed, No suggested edit. High value agricultural land
why would we preserve it? Who pays could be preserved as a reserve for the future.
for that preservation, the citizens of Alternately, defining "greatest value" could mean
Austin? focusing on actively farmed land.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Not recommended: the Zero Waste Plan sets out a
target for overall reduction, not per capita.
This is not the City of Austin’s role. This reflects public input as well as current city
policy (for example, the Sustainable Food Policy
Board). TF 12/5 support for suggested edit.
The existing language does not take Not recommended. The ordinance enacting this
into account that the City of Austin policy was approved since the plan framework was
incentivizes residential customers to first written.
recycle by making that service free.
Most of the commercial uses cited pay
for their trash and recycling separately
and they pay for recycling.
Not recommended: covered by EN 1 ("affordable,
reliable electricity").
Serve Austin's diverse, growing population and
provide family-friendly amenities throughout the city
by developing new parks and maintaining and
upgrading existing parks.
Add a new point : Maintain higher RO 9. maintain existing partnerships and develop
levels of service new relationships among city of Austin
departments, community organizations, and
volunteers to support recreational services and
*achieve higher* levels of service.
Change to Provide accessible Providing accessible preventive and basic *health*
preventative and basic health care and care and services for all residents, including the
health services……. economically disadvantaged, uninsured, and
underinsured.
We read them differently: CFE 16 is focused on
equitable access to good schools; CFE 17 is about
the role of schools within neighborhoods.
See inclusiveness sidebar; language singling out
artists has been removed
Ok. "ACC 2. Increase and enhance coordination,
resource sharing, and partnerships among artist
and creative individuals, organizations, institutions,
and businesses."
This is the purpose of private non- The current bullet points will be removed; however,
profits to provide things for narrow CRE Action 14 will remain, as it implements ACC 9
segments of the deserving population, and 10 (pg. 133), previously approved by the Task
not the City of Austin Force.
See revised Priority Programs.
Ok. MW.
That is why we are recruiting TF: remove "stable"
businesses away from socialistic cities
where they do that. Provide greater consideration for the awarding of
incentives to businesses, organizations, and
developments that provide housing and
employment opportunities for economically
disadvantaged individuals.
Suggest TF review.
CE Action 2 deleted.
This is like saying: “Continue to employ CE Action 11 deleted
code specialists to review building
permit plans or Continue to employ
code inspectors………
Note: we read this as applying to CFS Action 10.
Create a trails master plan to ensure connectivity
and provide consistency with regional, city and
neighborhood-level trail and transportation goals to
provide pedestrian and bicycle connections
between neighborhoods and destinations;
incorporate trails throughout the city and region;
encourage developers to connect to or complete
the trail system; and use protected land along
creeks and floodplains in an environmentally
sustainable way.
Why is “greenhouse gas emissions” TF: Remove phrase relating to greenhouse gas
mentioned here? emissions.
Added incentives to list: "Strengthen flood control,
erosion, and water quality programs, incentives,
regulations, and enforcement to incorporate best
practices and meet or exceed national standards."
CATF did not recommend.
What is this trying to say? This action is trying to encourage resource sharing.
Action has been revised (#5360). Additionally, the
City has existing policy and commitments to
supporting local food.
CATF did not recommend.
Are we prepared to pay for the City of Many existing public buildings currently provide
Austin to do this? Our Airport doesn’t free WiFi (City Hall, One Texas Center).
have free Wi-Fi.
TF: change "Provide" to "Expand access to..."
This is better accomplished by the Not recommended. Builds on existing programs
Heritage Society or another community through (for example) African-American Quality of
non-profit and funded by the private Life Study.
sector.
Ok.
A consortium of the organizations Not recommended because the plan is
serving the Homeless should do this implemented by partners and the City.
not the City.
Not recommended.
TF: Include mention of encouraging private/public
partnerships.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Not recommended.
TF: make change.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Ok: "Collaborate with sponsoring organizations,
sponsors, and transportation companies to develop
special event transportation plans to mitigate traffic
congestion associated with these events."
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Not recommended. Any incentive would need some
form of supporting program and regulations.
Not recommended. Any incentive would need some
form of supporting program and regulations.
Not recommended. Any incentive would need some
form of supporting program and regulations.
Not recommended. Any incentive would need some
form of supporting program and regulations.
Not recommended. The City currently has a
tobacco-free program.
TF: Revise to: "Support programs to engage the
business development community to assist creative
start-ups in developing business and management
skills."
Not recommended. Any incentive would need some
form of supporting program and regulations.
Planning Commission did not accept these
indicators
PC added households within 1/2 mile of a school
PC added this indicator
Develop an affordability impact index The City already conducts an affordability impact
or something similar for every statement for all plans and regulations
regulation or requirement.
In general, the word "culture/al is used TF 12/5: Review plan for use culture, and
differently in many different context. It distinguish between cultural arts (art and creativity)
is confusing and in many cases vs. cultural heritage.
inconsistent with CreateAustin plan.
The word "cultural" should relate to
"heritage" and the arts should be
addressed as "the arts" or assumed to
be included in the larger/more inclusive
category of creativity. This is an
ongoing issue that was resolved
through CreateAustin but has been a
challenge in this process.
ACC1: delete word "cultural TF 12/5 support
organizations" and replace with
"creative organizations"
ACC 4, pg 132: Delete "other cultural TF 12/5 support
offerings" and insert "other creative
offereings"
ACC 9: The wording "support artists" "Encourage *artists and other creative individuals
should be reworked. The process did by promoting* the creation of live/work paces, and
not suggest this. If this statement is creative industry hubs, districts, and
intended to be affirming, perhaps clusters as retail, community, or neighborhood
"value" artists by encouraging Austin's anchors and activity generators to attract and
organizations to employ artists with support other economic and
working wage and access to health community enterprises."
care.
ACC 10 is excellent. Reflective of Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
CreateAustin and this process.
With Austin's Hispanic community on Generally, this is captured by focusing the needs
trajectory to become majority within a identified, rather than as a factor of Hispanic
few years, the plan needs to more population growth, per se. For example, see how
specifically address the areas of increasing population of school-agred children is
needed attention to plan for this noted in several "What Does It Mean" sections of
important shift. (e.g. growing Chapter 2: population and growth, housing and
population under the age of 5: impact neighborhoods.
on schools/infrastructure)
Current drop out rates need to be PC approved high-school graduation rate
benchmarked. Holds the potential to
become debilitiating issue for the city if
not specifically addressed
When possible, should use 2010 Ok
census data
The communication from a CATF viewed as a general comment.
neighborhood newsletter was an
example of the misinformation that is
so prevalent about the Imagine Austin
plan. How can that be mitigated?
CATF viewed as a general comment.
A complete community varies depending on the
use or service.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Comment not recommended by CATF
What the heck does this mean? See #104 -- plain language rewrite that combines
ECO 6 and ECO14
get rid of perceived safety TF 12/5: Rewrite to avoid being misleading:
Important to convey that neighborhood streets are
both safe and widely understood to be safe.
"*Ensure that* neighborhood streets *are safe and
widely understood to be safe,* to encourage
children to play outside and encourage more
outdoor activities by residents."
Change to STAAR … and maybe not PC added "standardized test scores"
use as indicator at all.
TF 12/5: Add pictures/images.
The CATF considered this a general comment
Comment not recommended by CATF
Please change to: WE WILL WRT. TF supports this change, but would like to
BECOME A CITY OF COMPLETE revisit.
COMMUNITIES This change is
important b/c the concept of complete
communities is to frame the notion of
various large parts of town, each of
which is complete. The language
points in this direction … but this
distinction is important for many
reasons. … a full mix of housing …
but also a full mix of other land uses …
and access to opportunity in all parts of
town. This helps to address the social
justice issues.
Add: The opportunity to locate a rich Increasing the supply and variety of housing in and
housing mix near job centers, allowing near employment centers to allow more people to
more people to live near their work, is live closer to their jobs.
a key element to solving transportation
challenges.
LUT 9 – add “Corridors” (in addition to Ok. Revise LUT 9: Direct housing and
TODs). Include “development of employment growth to appropriate sites such as
affordable housing” (in addition to within centers and along corridors, including Transit
preserving existing) Oriented Development (TOD) and at intersections
of major roadways and preserve and integrate
existing affordable housing where possible.
ADD: Consistent with other goals in TF: add to 1st paragraph
the plan, preserving a wide range of
affordability, including deep Ok. Add as last sentence: Consistent with other
affordability, is essential to preserving goals in the plan, preserving a wide range of
the character of neighborhoods affordability is essential to preserving the character
of neighborhoods
Add language about opportunities to TF: incorporate into p97, 1st bullet (Key
include a wide range of housing in challenges)
transit-rich corridors and activity
centers… and publicly owned sites in Fostering mixed-use, mixed-income neighborhoods
these areas. with a range of housing choices, community
services, facilities, and amenities, including transit
options in which Austinites can afford to live.
Also add language about the TF: addressed in 5th bullet p97 and H 2 on p98.
opportunity to preserve existing
affordable housing.
Add: Reducing AISD student mobility TF: include as key challenge.
is a key strategic issue for the future of
Austin. Finding housing tools that Reducing AISD student mobility is a key strategic
ensure stable affordable housing issue for the future of Austin. Finding housing tools
opportunities is critical to this. that ensure stable affordable housing opportunities
is critical to this.
“Encourage the preservation or "Discouraging the loss of affordable housing in
incorporation of affordable housing in neighborhoods across the city, including near
neighborhoods across the city,” ADD: activity centers and corridors."
particularly core transit corridors and
other priority project areas.
Developing consistent financial Incorporate into Priority Program on affordability.
resources for promoting (developing
and preserving) deep affordability in all
parts of town
Integrating city housing goals among Not recommended.
City Departments and other local
public jurisdictions. TF: Add general discussion about how the plan is
for the entire city to ch. 5. Also include mention as
part of priority program (including partnerships)
Maintaining the unique and diverse Covered by bullet #2
personality of Austin’s neighborhoods
– including families with children –
while meeting the market demands for
close-in housing.
Developing a consistent financing Incorporate into Priority Program on affordability.
source to support development and
preservation of a full range of
affordable housing, especially the
financing needed for deeply affordable.
How to encourage the preservation or Key Challenges, 5th bullet identifies this as an
incorporation of significant amounts of issue.
new affordable housing in
neighborhoods across the city, with a TF: add "near public transit" within 1st bullet.-See
particular emphasis in transit corridors ID# 246
and other areas targeted for growth.
H1: Develop and adopt a housing plan See revised Priority Programs.
that identifies housing gaps and
establishes 10-year goals for each part
of town, transit corridors and activity
centers; align resources to achieve
these goals.
H2: Develop a defined set of local Included in revision to Affordable Housing Priority
housing finance resources to support Program
these goals (replace H3)
H3: Make housing more affordable by Not recommended as a policy. Included addressing
promoting diverse housing types, affordability in land development code rewrite
reviewing the development code to program and affordability.
promote affordability, and preserving
existing affordable homes.
H4: All corridor and activity area plans Addressed by HN Actions 23, 29.
will include a housing affordability Included in priority program-housing.
component addressing preservation
and new development.
Catalytic sites need to be prioritized for Ch. 5 Re-write
affordable housing planning – Note for Priority Programs.
Riverside Crive, Airport Blvd including
Highland Mall, Robinson Ranch, TF: include examples but don't set a list.
Gateway, and selected CATS sites, all
nine Red Line stops for transit oriented
planning.
Define complete community Review as part of Complete Communities rewrite
conceptual areas for goal setting and (#242)
monitoring.
Define the data needed on housing, See the revised Priority Programs and indicators.
households and jobs by geography to
support complete community planning.
Develop an apartment preservation Addressed through HN Action-3 (list of bullets
program. missing from 9/26 draft)
Ok.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Garner suggested the inclusion of a chart with
baselines in Chapter 2/ "Who we are today?" to set
up the use of the metrics throughout the plan.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Comment not recommended by CATF
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Glossary has been developed
CATF viewed as a general comment.
How does city sustain itself, TF 1/31: Discuss additional/dedicated housing
implementaion of measures to provide finance resources.
affordabilty
General comment
EGRSO states that conducting an economic impact
analysis for each regulation or policy would be
costly and time consuming. They don’t generally
support blanket requirements, but rather would look
at the need for an economic impact analysis on a
case-by-case basis.
NHCD conducts an Affordablility Impact Statement
for all proposed City regulations and plans.
See #5531.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
"The City of Austin will work to advance the
strategies in this plan, but it will need many
partners to achieve its comprehensive vision. This
is especially the case in its Extra-Territorial
Jurisdiction, where partnering with county
governments is critical. Austin has a strong private
sector, institutions, and non-profit organizations
that share responsibility for shaping Austin’s future.
These groups have significant resources and
relationships, and can do many things city
government cannot. Where the right entity does not
exist, a new one may need to be created.
Implementing this plan will require strong
partnerships among government, institutions,
businesses, and community groups."
Sustainability is about considering the needs of
present and future generations. As a city, we need
to respect our natural constraints, mitigate and
adapt to climate change, and conserve water,
energy, land, and other natural resources. The city
will enact public policies and make choices on the
basis of long-term costs and consequences. We
will also need to develop relationships with our
Central Texas neighbors to address these issues
on a regional basis. Austin can reduce its
greenhouse gas emissions by promoting
community health, encouraging walking, biking,
and other daily exercise, and making fresh, local
food accessible. We have a responsibility to future
generations to go even greener, encourage energy
independence, reduce individual and household
water use, and protect clean air and water. By
respecting our natural resources, we can build a
sustainable foundation for Austin’s enduring
prosperity.
Original Sentence:
To fully realize the community benefits it outlines,
visionary individuals and groups across the City of
Austin will also need to commit to action.
Revised:
To fully realize the community benefits it outlines,
visionary individuals, groups, agencies, and county
government will also need to commit to action.
"It provides a framework for
how the physical, economic, and social pieces of
the city and region interconnect."
Revised sentence:
Where the right organization does not exist, a new
one may need to be created.
ok
Twenty-seven percent of the individuals in poverty
in 2010 were foreign-born. Thirty-seven percent of
individuals living in poverty resided in households
where the household head had not received a high-
school diploma.
Additionally, 40 percent of Austin residents earned
less than 200 percent of the federal Poverty Level
in 2010. (The federal Poverty Level is tied to family
size; in 2010, 200 percent of the Poverty Level was
$44,100 for a family of four).
Austin’s population is well-educated. In 2010, forty-
four percent of residents aged 25 and older had at
least a bachelor’s degree, and 16 percent had a
graduate or professional degree. These rates are
much higher than the state as a whole: in 2010,
only 26 percent of all Texans 25 and over had at
least a bachelor’s degree, and nine percent had a
graduate or professional degree.
In 2010, 14 percent of Austin residents aged 25
and older did not have a high-school diploma.
Single-family detached housing units made up
about 46 percent of total housing stock in 2010.
Between 2000 and 2010, the proportion of single-
family detached remained about the same, while
the percentage of multi-family housing in 10-19 unit
buildings increased and the percentage in 20 or
more unit buildings decreased.
Hispanic and African-American households have
lower homeownership rates than White and Asian
households. In 2010, 53 percent of White
households and 41 percent of Asian households
were homeowners, but only 34 percent of Hispanic
households and 32 percent of African-American
households owned their homes.
Seventy percent of Austin’s married households
own their home, compared with 32 percent of single-
person households in 2010. Younger singles under
age 35 were much more likely to rent.
In 2010, Austin’s median rent was $901. This is
higher than the 2010 Texas median of $801 and a
22 percent increase since 2000. Due to tighter
capital markets caused by the recent recession, the
current supply of apartments has not kept up with
demand causing a marked increase in rents
expected to continue into the middle of this decade.
Rising housing prices impose higher monthly costs
on Austin’s households. Among homeowners in
2010, 30 percent paid more than 30 percent of their
incomes in housing costs and 12 percent paid more
than 50 percent.
Austin’s renter population is particularly affected by
rising housing costs. In 2010, 53 percent of renter
households were paying 30 percent of more of their
incomes in rent. Twenty-nine percent were paying
50 percent or more for rent. This is an increase
from 2000, when 42 percent of renter households
paid more than 30 percent of income in rent and 20
percent paid 50 percent or more for rent. This cost
burden strongly affects households with incomes
below $50,000.
Included as part of revisions to Chap 5 Annual
Report and 5-Year Update
Ok.
"Capital Metro operated 83 bus routes in Fall 2011,
including regular, commuter/express, university,
and late night buses. Weekday ridership averaged
131,440 boardings.
Opened in 2010, Capital Metro's MetroRail line (the
Red Line) has nine stations and extends from
downtown Austin to the City of Leander. Ridership
in Fall 2011 was approximately 1,800 daily
passengers."
bike-lane miles.
In 2011, within Austin and its extra-territorial
jurisdiction, 33 small- and medium-size farms
selling in the Austin region cultivated over 87 acres
of land.
Strike first sentence.
Last sentence revised:
This has resulted in low-density, piecemeal
development throughout the region and makes it
imperative for jurisdictions to work together to
implement regional growth management strategies.
(Staff edit: In partnership with private entities and
the broader community, institutions of higher
education continue to be incubators for innovation
in the cultural arts, medicine and medical research
and technology, industry, business, and
technology.)
TF - Use original language - prefer not to change
the vision
Flag for TF
3rd paragraph, after sentence ending with “…but
does not control zoning”, insert the following: "The
opportunity for well-planned future development to
minimize sprawl in the ETJ can be enhanced
through intentional interaction and collaboration
with the Country government. The use of targeted
infrastructure investments and other incentives to
manage development in an organized and
thoughtful manner will be a strong tool to meet the
contingencies of continued growth in the ETJ."
Ok. Promote regional planning and increased
coordination between local governments, especially
Travis County, agencies, districts, and the State of
Texas to address major land use and transportation
challenges.
TF: unsure this addresses the comment.
TF 1.17: 1 add bullet talking about city coordinating
with county infrastructure investments to guide
growth in the etj.
Final edit GC - Increasing coordination between
local governments to promote more efficient land
use and transportation policies *and investments.
Coordinating on infrastructure is particularly
important within Austin's extra-territorial
jurisdiction.*
LUT 2. Promote regional planning and increased
coordination between municipalities and county
governmnets to address major land use and
transportation challenges.
Ok. Revise p. 181 1st paragraph: The City of
Austin cannot implement imagine Austin by itself.
Some of the policies and actions cannot be
managed by the City of Austin as they are not
under our authority. There are other policies and
actions under the City of Austin’s authority that will
need the help of others. To successfully implement
the plan, partnerships between the City of Austin
and other organizations and individuals will be
necessary. This will include partnerships with
public, private, and non-profit organizations, as well
as developing coalitions with our regional partners
to address mutual concerns. For example,
coordination with Travis County is essential in order
to achieve the desired land use, environmental
protection, and service coordination. While many
of these partnerships have been formed, there is a
need to adapt the parternships to focus on Imagine
Austin and achieve mutual benefit. We will also
need to seek out and develop new partnerships.
These partnerships may also require capacity
building such as grants or other direct assistance to
develop training, leadership, programs, revenue
generation strategies, and community engagement.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
New Key Challenge:
Addressing the housing needs for the homeless
and those people who are about to become
homeless.
In addition, Austin’s technology sector has
diversified and job growth is expected in high-tech
computer and software employment, medicine and
medical research, life sciences, clean energy,
creative and technology industries, data centers,
and professional services.
New Key Challenge:
Expanding Austin’s economic base by positioning
the city as world class medical research and
technology center by establishing a medical school
and residency programs.
See response to ID 198
TF 12/5 support for inclusion in this section. See
response to ID 198. Add the following bullet:
E
•nhanced collaboration with Travis, Williamson,
and Hayes Counties as well as other partners will
enhance the likelihood of achieving the challenges
identified above.
TF 12/5 support for inclusion in this section. See
response to ID 198
HHS 2. Attract and retain high-quality health
service providers (including doctors, dentists,
specialists, medical technicians, and nurses) and
promote the development and expansion of
medical education opportunities *to include a
medical school and residency programs.*
TF: add the key challenge identified here -- sets out
the mission for this sector.
key challenge: Become a leader in health care
research and technology. (add as new 3rd bullet)
Not recommended. Executive Summary should
convey this.
TF: gently broaden to include ETJ.
Revised priority program Code changes for
compact revision.
Ch. 5 Re-write
See ID 198
TF: Include in priority program review; highlight role
of infrastructure in ETJ.
HN-3, HN-4
Covered in Housing Priority Program
Not recommended. See priority program revision.
TF: connect to priority program. coordinate LUT-4
with growth concept map.
Direct growth to areas consistent with the Growth
Concept Map that have existing infrastructure
capacity including roads, water, wastewater and
schools.
GC: Check with JG: this is the reverse of how it's
intended. Revise for clarity ("Revise parking
requirements to allow for lower permeable area..."
Revise to: "-Revising parking design
requirements that result in more permeable area
and promote walking, biking, and transit."
This is addressed by the first bullet, expanding
service to compact centers and mixed use
corridors.
LUT Action-23: Require that all new Revise LUT Action-23: Develop standards to
neighborhoods be connected to connect all new neighborhoods to adjacent
adjacent neighborhoods and neighborhoods and commercial areas by streets,
commercial areas by streets, sidewalks, and bicycle lanes and/or paths.
sidewalks, and bicycle lanes and/or
paths. Revise LUT Action 19-Develop complete streets
design standards for all new road construction and
Recommendation: Revise to LUT reconstruction.
Action-23: Develop standards to
connect all new neighborhoods to EGRSO states that conducting an economic impact
adjacent neighborhoods and analysis for each regulation or policy would be
commercial areas by streets, costly and time consuming. They don’t generally
sidewalks, and bicycle lanes and/or support blanket requirements, but rather would look
paths. at the need for an economic impact analysis on a
case-by-case basis.
NHCD conducts an Affordablility Impact Statement
for all proposed City regulations and plans.
TF 1/31: Make the two revise changes. Develop
language on affordability impact statements to
include.
Bullets were inadvertantly left out of draft. Problem
noted and will be addressed.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. CATF determined to be a general
comment.
This is the purpose of the plan, particularly the
Vision Statement and Complete Communities.
Addressed via complete communities.
1) How to connect to the people This was viewed as a general comment for the
CATF
2) Cultural/Ethnic Heritage - How to Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
connect all people to culture/ethnic
heritage found in this city? How to
provide the opportunity to engage in
this part of life outside the urban core?
How do we get things out of
downtown?
3) Prosperity - We talk as if Austin is This is included on page 42: "Among the working
fully employed, but the unemployment adult population, African-Americans had the
numbers within the communities of highest levels of unemployment
color reaches deeply into double digit with a rate of 13.3 percent."
numbers. This needs to be identified
and a baseline provided within the
plan.
There should be a more equitable The CATF considered this a general comment
distribution of the cost of growth
among tax payers.
4) Water - Concerned about the city's CFS Action-36: "Align policies, *rates,* incentives,
ability to provide water for the 800K regulations, service area
people moving to Austin. Water extensions, and infrastructure to coordinate with
conservation has been in place for the"
years and now water rates are going
up because citizens did a great job of
conserving. Or is it to fund the cost of
expansion/growth? What is the real
situation relating to Austin's water
supply and its future?
5) Electricity - Rates continue to Include discussion about the core task of the Comp
rise.The more people that move here Plan is to make growth improve Austin.
the more citizens are charged for their
arrival. The new arrivals should pay
more. Long-term residents should not
pay the bills for growth with no benefit.
No rates or taxes are decreasing.
6) Air Quality/Mobility - Would like to Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
see out of the box/innovative ideas to
improve air quality/mobility
7) Teen pregnancy - need baseline See ID #53.
data
8) Medical health as it relates to the TF: add data point on un/underinsured.
un/under insured
MB: please confirm this is included in health
section rewrite.
9) Homelessness - with special Add ending bullet to Poverty section: "The 2011
emphasis on the growth of the Point In Time count conducted by the Ending
number of children. The plan should Community Homelessness Coalition identified
include a baseline. 2,357 homeless individuals.Of these, 1,681 were
single adults; the rest were households including at
least one child."
10) Housing - Moving beyond the TF: Talk with NHCD. Include in reviewing Priority
federal definition for "affordable Programs.
housing" there should be an inventory
of rental units and starter homes for
those in blue collar jobs to afford in the
urban core.
11) Education - The often discussed TF 12/5: 1. CFE16: focus on kids, not schools:
educated workforce and the reality of "have access to *an excellent education.*"
life east of I35 need to mirror the 2. Incorporate into Complete Communities
resources and opportunities. Johnston, discussion --> See WRT's rewrite
LBJ and Pearce need to have 3. Continue to work, strengthen equity aspects -->
equivalent resources to the high See QOL spread.
schools in other sections of Austin.
12 Media - How do we portray the City See CRE Action-4 (p. 176). Refer to TF.
of Austin in the media? How do people
in other cities see us? Austin will soon
be majority Hispanic. When we market
the city do others see "someone like
me? The media has a lot to do with the
image we portray. If we don't provide
visibility for the communities of color,
people of the creative classes won't
want to be here/'come here. How 'non-
traditional' media can be used to
keep members of the community
informed.
While Austin may demonstrate better Revise pg. 42 4th bullet by adding: Unemployment
than average data in many targareted was also related to levels of educational
areas of the plan, this is not true for all attainment, with those with less than a high school
Austinites degree or G.E.D. experiencing greater
unemployment (13.9 percent) than those
completing college (4.6 percent).
TF 1/31: Include health disparities and teenage
pregnancy and connect to Tackling the Racial
Divide.
Wants to see a baseline number for The Housing/Student Mobility Working Group
the number of children moving from White Paper, presented in February 2010, doesn't
school to school due to homelessness. report a single figure, only figures for each school
independently, for 2007-2008. Suggest including
this language: "A further challenge for many
students from low-income families is the need to
change schools when they change residences. A
2010 study by the Austin Independent School
District, Travis County, and City of Austin found
high rates of student mobility at several schools in
the east and northeast part of the school district."
Communities of color must not remain See QOL spread.
invisible throughout this plan and the
City should be willing to discuss the
tough issues.
There is no mention in the plan of the See revised priority program.
need to intentionally bring employment
opportunities in town for people who
are un/underemployed citizens and
establish skills/trades nodes to
help with training.
People in parts of the city don’t trust TF 1/31: General comment, noting this is an
City staff to know or to represent their existing example of gentrification and
best interests. Example: 11th/12th displacement.
Street Revitalization resulted in the
displacement of this part of the
neighborhood as a result of higher
property taxes.
How do we 'improve' our city without CATF viewed as a general comment.
displacing its residents? Improve as
defined by whom?
What are the unintentional CATF viewed as a general comment.
consequences of "improvement?"
It seems that City staff are unwilling See appendices for outreach efforts
to/do not have the ability/capacity to
meet with the 'regular' citizens (tax
payers who provide the funding for city
budget/salaries).
In terms of process, there should have TF: In appendix.
been neighborhood
sessions/discussion in East Austin
neighborhoods at the start of the
process. Many of the advocacy groups,
ministry heads, residents have been
ignored/left out of other processes, and
should have been approached first.
Done. See detailed comments.
Ch. 5 Re-write
Incorporate into Priority Program?
How to deal w ETJ, esp farmland in See #196.
eastern travis county. Steer growth to
particular areas instead of sprawl thru
strategic incentives, and specifically
reference Travis County in Plan.
See #5531
Page 38 Susceptable to Change map From detailed comments: "add language at end of
needs more attention. Collaborate w/ 1st sentence saying “ … to Williamson County,
Travis County to drive development to west of SH 130."
certain areas (Sarah Eckhart idea?).
TF: Make map more legible.
See #5531
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
TF: ASk Jack
ok
TF 12/5: Include reference to GreenPrint.
change in future economic analysis See #5531
needs examination
CATF viewed as a general comment.
Comment not recommended by CATF
While much of the planning area is urbanized,
*some of Central Texas' most fertile* soils are
located throughout the Blackland Prairie and
Colorado River Terrace regions. *Prime farmland
soils are particularly prevalent* along and south of
the Colorado River."
Ok.
Will include list of corridors and centers.
From the revised descriptions of the GCM
elements:
Mixed-Use Corridors
Mixed-use corridors have a dual nature. They are
the connections that link many mixed-use centers
to one another and allow people to travel
throughout the city and region by bicycle, transit, or
automobile. Corridors are also characterized by a
variety of activities and types of buildings located
along the roadway—shopping, restaurants and
cafés, parks, schools, single-family houses and
duplexes, apartments, public buildings, houses of
worship, mixed-use buildings, and offices. Along
many mixed-use corridors there will be both large
and small redevelopment sites. Depending on
local conditions, these redevelopment opportunities
may either be contiguous, clustered, or intermittent
along a corridor. Other corridors may have fewer
redevelopment opportunities, but have a mixture of
uses, and could provide critical transportation
connections. As a corridor evolves, sites that do
not redevelop may transition from one use to
another, such as a service station becoming a
restaurant or a large retail space being divided into
several storefronts.
GC note: could generally describe Addressed in revision to GCM definitions revision
factors that were weighed in identifying
centers. TF: explain in greater detail. Provide rationale for
all features, possibly in an appendix.
Existing Action LUT 7
Implement a transfer of development rights
program to transfer development rights from
environmentally sensitive areas to targeted growth
areas identified on the Growth Concept Map.
Action LUT 7 Revised:
Implement a transfer of development rights
program to transfer development rights from
environmentally sensitive areas to areas identified
on the Growth Concept Map for new development
or redevelopment.
See revised Green Infrastructure priority program.
Priority Program revision.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
CATF viewed as a general comment.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Priority program revision & see LUT Action-7
Priority Program revision.
Priority Program revision.
State laws limit development regulations to achieve
this statement. Actions prioritize investments to
support compact, mixed use places.
OK. HN Action 3 added land banks
Ok. Revise p. 40, 3rd bullet: In 2009, the majority
of Austin's workers had commutes of 30 minutes or
less, generally shorther than those in Houston,
Dallas, or peer cities such as Seattle or San Diego.
P. 40, 4th bullett Raleigh (17th), Minneapolis
(58th), Seattle (64th), and Raleight (66th).
Considering including graphic sections/2 page
spread for 1) South Congress Study; 2) Complete
Communities; 3) Neighborhood Compatibility; 4)
Complete Streets
ECON-3, See ID 1031, 100, 97, 103, 104
Comment not recommended by CATF
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
The CATF did not include this comment
Including in peer cities comparison.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Comment not recommended by CATF
Comment not recommended by CATF
Comment not recommended by CATF
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
TF 12/5: Add detail to Table of Contents; improve
Plan at a Glance and move it earlier in the plan
This was the original rationale; see revised Priority
Programs. Provide rationale in introduction to
Action Table.
TF: Incorporate into Executive Summary
Expanding Ch. 5.
TF: Elevate its importance in Exec. Summary
CATF viewed as a general comment.
See revised Priority Programs.
Comment not recommended by CATF
The CATF did not include this comment
The CATF did not include this comment
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Various improvements have been made based on
PC and CATF recommendations.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Comment not recommended by CATF
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Not recommended because this is implied and
included in any discussion.
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/edims/docum Incorporated into Walkable Parks Map 4.9
ent.cfm?id=159390 -- Urban Parks
Stakeholder briefing with PARD gap
analysis maps.
Add to first bullet on page: "A number of factors
contribute to this disparity: higher housing costs,
fewer quality public schools, walking and biking
safety, and access to key amenities such as parks
and childcare."
Addressed in Suggested Edit in ID 222. Pulled
definition from FACTF report.
Revised paragraph with changes:
For Austin to become a Complete Community we
must balance the relationships between the natural
and built environments and their effect on the
community’s, health, social equity, creativity, and
opportunities for civic engagement. It means
expanding our understanding of the
interrelatedness of all elements of our city. We
need to consider how arts, culture, and
entertainment; local food production, health, and
wellness; and education and community services
affect the community’s well-being. A Complete
Community can be viewed from a variety of
different geographies—neighborhoods, even larger
areas of the city, and the city as a whole. These
communities will be for Austinites of all ages. It
will provide environments that support children at
every stage of their development, for young adults
beginning their professional lives and families, as
well as allowing seniors to age gracefully in the
neighborhoods where they raised their families.
These places will be safe and affordable; promote
physical activity, community engagement, and
COA COMMENT:
This doesn't realy flow from the text on p. 72 or
really with the rest of the chapter. However, the
concept of family-friendly is distributed throughout
the plan. See comment below.
Revised paragraph with changes:
For Austin to become a Complete Community we
must balance the relationships between the natural
and built environments and their effect on the
community’s, health, social equity, creativity, and
opportunities for civic engagement. It means
expanding our understanding of the
interrelatedness of all elements of our city. We
need to consider how arts, culture, and
entertainment; local food production, health, and
wellness; and education and community services
affect the community’s well-being. A Complete
Community can be viewed from a variety of
different geographies—neighborhoods, even larger
areas of the city, and the city as a whole. These
communities will be for Austinites of all ages. It
will provide environments that support children at
every stage of their development, for young adults
beginning their professional lives and families, as
well as allowing seniors to age gracefully in the
neighborhoods where they raised their families.
These places will be safe and affordable; promote
physical activity, community engagement, and
inclusion; make amenities and services easily
accessible to everybody; and contribute to Austin’s
Covered: HN Action-2: Develop policies to
encourage more families with children to live in
Austin's established neighborhoods by increasing
the supply and variety of housing.
HN-16: Engage the local architect community in
creating a variety of housing types to meet the
housing needs of all types of households (eg
singles, empty nester, families with children)
HN-18: Establish a regulatory environment that
creates communities across Austin that: support
walking, bicycling and transit; are in proximity to
daily needs; provide a range of housing for people
of all ages, abilities and means; are stable with low
crime and safe buildings; and provide a range of
facilities and services such as schools, parks, and
gathering spaces.
LUT-36: Incentivize appropriately-scaled and
located public spaces, such as parks, plazas, trails
and open space in all new development and
redevelopment
Not recommended. Acquiring additional parks is
implicit in this statement: "as the acreage and
number of facilities continue to increase." See also
revision to RO 1 (#136).
"Maintain water and wastewater infrastructure
regularly through …"
Not recommended. Important to note that this
builds on ongoing efforts.
"Expand efforts…"
TF: Rewrite: "Create a regional solid waste
management plan that addresses..."
Ok. "...by building trust…"
TF: "Incorporate community outreach and
involvement in public safety in order to build trust
between ... "
Addressed by LUT Action-3 and HN Action-2.
WRT. Model friendly development in affordability
priority program? Is M-Station an example? Closing
affordable housing gap: HN Action-3?
TF: "Fund a model development...": 3
"Adopt a 20-year vision and plan for closing
affordable housing gap in Austin, with specific
targets for families with children...": 1 This is
included in the revision to the Affordable Housing
priority program
"Start rental assistance program...": 3
Revised Action
LUT Action 3
Establish land use and street design
regulations to create sustainable
neighborhoods that are child-friendly; support
walking and bicycling; are within proximity to
daily needs; provide a range of housing options
such as duplexes, townhouses, row houses,
small-scale apartments, and houses on smaller
lots to meet the needs of people of different
means and at different stages of their lives.
Revised Action
CFS Action 3
Expand equitable access for adults, children,
and their pets to active and passive parks
throughout the city by carefully targeting new
parks where most needed and developing
public access agreements with non-City-owned
parks and open space, including school
playgrounds. For guidance, see the Walkable
Parks map (Figure 4.9, page XX).
TF: connect CFS Action 3 to Parks SErvice area
map. GC: See second sentence.
Add sub-bullet to CFS Action 25:
-family-friendliness
TF: CRE Action-7: ... by identifying existing
facilities and conducting a needs assessment.
Addressed by SOC Actions 28-32.
Priority Program revision.
LUT Action-9
HN Action-28
ECON Action-13
CE Action-19
CFS Action-22
SOC Action-7
SOC Action-41
SOC Action-42
SOC Action-43
CRE Action-14
CRE Action-18
Included in partnerships discussion in ch. 5.
Covered. LUT Action 11, LUT Action 12, LUT
Action 13, LUT Action 14, LUT Action 15, LUT
Action 16, LUT Action 17
Covered. LUT Action 11, LUT Action 12, LUT
Action 13, LUT Action 14, LUT Action 15, LUT
Action 16, LUT Action 17
*Expanding* our commitment to implementing
successful water conservation (including meeting
goals for reductions in peak day demand and per
capita water use), reclamation, and drought-
management programs and *identifying* effective
ways to address revenue and cost impacts
TF: Include ethnic groups generally, but don't single
out Hispanics here.
MB 12/27 Added: "The changing ethnic and racial
composition of the city will also shift demand for
certain services."
Ok.
Covered: HN Action 1, HN Action 3, HN Action 9,
HN Action 18, LUT Action 1, LUT Action-8, LUT
Action 9, LUT Action 11, LUT Action 12, LUT
Action 13, LUT Action 14, LUT Action 21, CFS-15,
SOC Action-5, SOC Action-6, SOC Action 9, SOC
Action 15, SOC Action 19, SOC Action 25, SOC
Action 29, SOC Action 30, CRE Action 3, CRE
Action 7,
p. 102 - Add the following sentence to the end of
the first paragraph: "While Austin is home to many
large, national and international employers, the City
is also home to a great number of small and local
businesses that contribute both to the economic
strength and the cultural vitality of area. In 2008,
nearly 72% of business establishments in the
Austin MSA had fewer than 10 employees."
(Source: U.S. Census Bureau Business Pattern
Survey, 2008)
Can also use this data for a chart or bullet in Ch. 2
Reducing the number of obstacles facing small and
local businesses such as the availability of physical
space for industry and business incubation,
affordable commercial rents, education and
training, health care, and housing options.
Done in 9/26 draft.
New bullet
Encouraging and supporting the stability and
growth of local business to sustain our
homegrown business community.
See specific changes on policy statements.
ECO 2. Implement policies that create,
nurture, and retain small and local businesses.
Not recommended. This would be too restrictive.
(TF 12/5 support)
Possible language for merging ECO6 & ECO14,
also adding local/small biz language: "Encourage
and support innovation and creativity through
flexible city policies, including those that are place-
based (i.e. directed at specific geographic areas),
as well as through maintenance and improvement
of physical infrastructure, including adaptive reuse
of buildings, so that small and local businesses can
thrive in both actual and virtual reality."
Addressed through PC & TF review process.
Partly addressed with Priority Program revision;
partly addressed by including the list of items for
ECON Action-3, which were originally cut off.
Not recommended. Actions will be linked with
Priority Programs. Linking them to Policies also
would be cumbersome.
See specific revisions. Define small & local in
glossary. Follow up with RM if issue with "local." TF
12/5 support for RM's general idea.
See specific RM comments.
See specific RM comments.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
TF.
Ch. 5 Re-write
TF: Add to green infrastructure priority program.
The CATF considered this a general comment
Comment not recommended by CATF
Addressed through clarifying culture/creativity
TF 1/31: Incorporate stronger language and
acknowledge it as an issue.
Done. See ID #84.
New Key Challenge
Increasing the amount of well paying jobs to allow
more people to live and work in Austin in the face
of rising costs.
See revised Priority Programs.
See RM's detailed comments.
too much policy written for city govt, CATF viewed as a general comment.
not citizenry
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
CATF viewed as a general comment.
CATF viewed as a general comment.
RR: Withdraw comment.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Submitted a 6-page document with 47 Staff to respond to suggestions> further
specific items for consideration by CATF
consideration/inclusion relating to
health, workforce, education and other
issues. The comments include
information from specific studies to be
referenced, some as baseline data,
etc. Refer to separate sheet of written
comments.
Working with HHSD
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Executive Summary will be developed.
Concerned that high property tax See revised housing affordability priority program.
forcing people out, Housing Plan
needed
Incorporating visuals with street cross-sections to
explain the relation between shared space and auto
speed, to convey how complete streets function.
See combination of ECO-6 and ECO-14 (#104)
CATF viewed as a general comment.
See #1035 (transitions/compatibility)
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
TF 12/5: Include in appendix and reference as
appropriate in Priority Programs.
Glossary has been developed
CATF viewed as a general comment.
CATF viewed as a general comment.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
change in culture is making urban life Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
more attractive for young people
growth concept map seems to follow Comment not recommended by CATF
current trends. Younger generation
developing different trends.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Revised Priority Programs.
See revised indicators per Comp Plan
Subcommittee and Task Force
Comparison is to Texas cities, but See Peer cities chart .
following paragraph compares COL to
peer cities
Query: Is age the primary Broadly speaking the “creative class” is comprised
distinguishing characteristic of the of those individuals who earn their livings in
“creative class” or is there something occupations that often require formal educations
else and employ many different forms of creativity.
Their economic function is to create new ideas,
COA Comment- need to add sentence new technology and/or creative content, and to
or so that encapsulates the concept of think and create new approaches to problems.
creative class Their economic function is to create new ideas,
new technology and/or creative content, and to
think and create new approaches to problems. The
professions range broadly and include scientists
and engineers, university professors, poets and
architects, people in design, education, arts, music
and entertainment, health professionals and
business managers.
Add bullet: "Investment is needed in workforce
development programs that address shortages in
critical healthcare professions in Austin."
Reference to needs of Dove PARD's Long Range Plan for Land, Facilities and
Springs/southeast Austin has been Programs gap analysis (p. 173) indicates that while
omitted throughout the document there are park service gaps in Dove Springs, there
are other areas of town, such as NE Austin and far
COA Comment - Need to expand this south Austin with far greater parks needs.
idea to identify other areas as well as
Dove Springs. Based on the gap analysis map the 4th bullet under
Parks and Preserves should be amended to read:
There is a need for more parkland within walking
distance of homes in many established
neighborhoods, particularly in far south, north-
central, northeast, and southeast Austin.
Clarity and accuracy. No reference to See ID 9321
Waller Creek Boathouse in draft.
Hardly a week goes by when there is EGRSO states they are not aware of any
not a race of some sort in Austin. economic impact of races, regattas, etc., and their
Regattas generate millions in model would not capture this. Perhaps Austin
economic return. No mention of this is Convention & Visitors Bureau has some
made in the draft. information or has a study that demonstrates the
impact. It would be difficult to do for each event, but
perhaps there is a study that captures them in
totality.
Austin/Travis County has one of the The high rate of teenage pregnancies in Austin and
highest teen pregnancy rates in the Travis County contributes to significant dropout rate
state (top 5) and Texas is either 1st or of many area high schools.
2nd in the nation.
Recommend not including this. If we need to, we
can say: "ACC three-year graduation plus transfer
rate is 43 percent, compared to 34 percent average
for other Texas metropolitan community colleges."
(source: IPEDS, 2006 cohort) However, the source
for this is an ACC document arguing that standards
measures of completion don't do ACC justice:
http://www.austincc.edu/newsroom/wp-
content/uploads/2011/12/ACC-Students-Count-
handout.pdf
Addressed in Demographics section.
Lays foundation for subsequent THE ANNUAL NATURE OF THE FEDERAL BLUE
statement re: Blue Ribbon schools RIBBON PROGRAM MAKES IT A POOR
attracting upper-income families. INDICATOR OF MUCH OF ANYTHING. MY
SUGGESTION (MW) IS DROP ALL REFERECNE
TO IT.
ACC’s completion rate is low. This Austin Community College is in similar to other
represents both a challenge and an community colleges in Texas where 15 percent of
opportunity. full-time community college students end up with
four-year degrees after six years
Source AARO Report If no intervening action are taken, the percentage
of Austinites with post-secondary education levels
is expected to decline from 65 percent to 55
percent by 2040. The cost to the Austin will be a
loss of $2.4 billion in annual income due to reduced
career opportunities and earning capacities.
SOURCE: An Investment in the Future of Central
Texas: Closing the Gap In Higher Education
(Austin Area Research Organization, October
2003, Edited Re-Release 2005)
According to the Austin American Added to pg. 53
Statesman less than 20% of Austin
physicians accept new Medicaid or
Medicare patients.
NEW BULLET
The City of Austin's 2011/2012 fiscal year budget
allocated $14.1 million dollars for social services
funding.
Revised paragraph with changes:
The Austin/Travis County Health and Human
Services Department provides public health, social,
and environmental health services for Austin and
Travis County and serves nearly one million
residents. The department operates six
neighborhood centers that provide social services
for low- and moderate-income families. Services
include child care programs, homeless assistance,
day labor and employment programs, mental
health/substance abuse services, programs for at-
risk youth, services to seniors and persons with
disabilities, and basic needs services.
Revised paragraph with changes:
The Central Texas economy has continued to grow
through the current national recession, although
growth has slowed in high-tech, higher-skilled
sectors. Much of the region’s recent job creation
has been directly related to its rapid population
growth over the past few decades. As Central
Texas has welcomed new residents from all parts
of the country and the world, demand has
increased for service-oriented jobs, such as leisure
and hospitality services and business and
professional services. Many of these jobs typically
require fewer skills, pay lower wages than
professional and high-tech jobs, and offer fewer
benefits. However, past and continued population
growth will increase the demand for high-wage and
high-skilled healthcare professionals. Households
faced with lower-paying jobs and increasing
housing and transportation costs are experiencing
greater economic stresses. In a 2009 report, the
Central Texas Sustainability Indicators Project
estimated that approximately 40 percent of the
region’s families live “at the edge of their means”
due to the widening gap between household
DISCLAIMER: This is the best info I could find.
New Bullet
Almost 20 percent of adults older than 25 have
begun but not completed a college education.
Dove Springs was referenced as an New Key Challenge:
especially needy community Providing more shopping opportunities, healthy
throughout the process but is omitted food choices, and services in areas of Austin
from the draft report. underserved by these daily necessities.
This issue was raised by a member of Not recommended: Already being addressed in a
the public; current policy allowing this parallel process.
practice is counter to sustainable
communities.
Clarify that policy re: creating complete Not recommended. Implied by "across Austin."
neighborhoods applies to both new and
existing neighborhoods
Add bullet re: “Meeting the regions TF 12/5: p103, 4th bullet: add "and community
growing need for skilled healthcare needs" at end of sentence.
professionals.”
COA Comment - This is broadly
covered in the 4th bullet
Physicians are likely to stay where they Added to ECO Action-9.
complete their residency programs.
TF 12/5: TF 12/5: Revise ECO 9 along the lines of:
Establish a medical school and residency programs
to spur medical ... and meet region's growing needs
for healthcare.
Revised to : Establish a medical school and
residency programs to spur medical and life
science technology investments and meet the
region's growing needs for healthcare.
See: Marshall Center’s Report on ROI Proposed New Policy:
of long- term job training programs.
Invest in region’s people through long-term job
training for living wage jobs.
Ok.
COA Comment - "Boat house" is Ok.
specific when compared to the rest of
the items in the listing and could
covered by one or more of the items in
the listing. New information provided
by PARD covers boathouses
Add sentence re: “Likewise, the New paragraph for pg. 124/125
exceptionally high incidence of teen The incidence of teen pregnancy has generally
pregnancy calls for evidenced-based trended downward for Travis County since the
community responses.” mid-1990s. Although there are fewer teen
pregnancies, the issues associated with it can
have profound effects on the mother’s future
prospects, her family, child, and the broader
community. Teen parents are more likely to
drop out of school, not attend college,
experience unemployment, and earn lower
wages than their counterparts who bear
children after the age of 20. Children of teenage
mothers are more at risk for having low-birth
weight, prematurity, infant mortality, and
development delays. The effects of teenage
pregnancy have a disproportionate effect on
communities of color due to the high birth rate
among Hispanic and African American
teenagers. The birth rate for Hispanic teens is
almost five times higher than that of White non-
Hispanic teens, and the rate for African
American teens is almost four times greater
than their White non-Hispanic counterparts.
Add PCC’s Tandem Program and Tandem Teen Prenatal and Parenting Program
Capital IDEA Begun in 1998, the Tandem Teen Prenatal and
Parenting Program is an interagency
collaboration, led by People's Community
Clinic. It provides medical, mental health,
educational and vocational services, and social
support to pregnant and parenting teens. The
program aims to improve the health and well-
being of teen mothers and their children and to
reduce the incidence of additional pregnancies
for these young women. The program
addresses the medical, educational and
psychosocial needs of young parents during
pregnancy and through the first three years of
their baby’s life. By partnering with Any Baby
Can, Austin Child Guidance Center, and
LifeWorks, the program offers a comprehensive
array of services to young parents including
intensive case management, mental health
services, medical and prenatal care, child
development, family planning, and parenting
education. Over 90% of participants have
accessed ongoing healthcare for themselves
and their children, including annual exams, well-
child checks, sick care, and up-to-date
immunizations.
Capital IDEA
Capital IDEA is an academic Sponsorship
program for low income adults wanting a career
but unable to pay for the necessary training.
The program works with local employers to
“Partner with Austin-area school identify expanding job sectors that pay a living
Ok.
districts…”
This list of bullets will be removed in the revised
Priority Programs.
This list of bullets will be removed in the revised
Priority Programs.
TF: Make this change in CRE-14 (provide -->
promote).
This list of bullets will be removed in the revised
Priority Programs.
TF: Make this change in CRE-14 (provide -->
promote).
This list of bullets will be removed in the revised
Priority Programs.
TF: Make this change in CRE-14 (provide -->
promote).
This list of bullets will be removed in the revised
Priority Programs.
Ok (note, this is for the name of the priority
program).
Ch. 5 Re-write
Will discuss in Chapter 5 rewrite of this program.
Generally covered under ECON Action 14
COA Comment - The suggested bullet This list of bullets will be removed in the revised
was not one of the prioritized actions Priority Programs.
nor was it developed by the working
groups TF: Incorporate into priority program.
A healthy Austin is not just a city with Ch. 5 Re-write
reduced chronic disease. Pregnancy Ok.
is not an illness, but it is a medical
condition. Teen pregnancy is a serious
social and medical concern.
SEE COMMENT ABOVE REGARDING BLUE
RIBBON SCHOOLS.
Blue ribbon reference removed entirely
Source: African-American Healthcare See separate doc G:\Comprehensive-
Alliance Planning\Comprehensive Plan\Draft Plan\Sept 26
draft\Education health employment.doc
COA Comment - Although this is an
improtant fact to note, it may be best
put in a different section since the one
where it was proposed doesn't deal
with healthcare and only deals with the
demographics of different groups
Source: Austin American Statesman 2nd bullet from bottom, rewrite the lead-in: "In
article 2011, 21 percent …"
See separate doc G:\Comprehensive-
Planning\Comprehensive Plan\Draft Plan\Sept 26
draft\Education health employment.doc
Addressed in Demographics section.
Cite: Code Red and combined impact The State of Texas faces a critical shortage of
of healthcare reform in 2014 and healthcare professionals.
Texas legislative cuts to residency
programs and medical education in
2011.
Austin is home to many not-for profit organizations
but has a history of low rates of charitable giving.
Existing paragraph
The five scenarios were measured using
“sustainability indicators” developed from the
vision statement. These indicators included
such measures as the acres of land were
developed, the amount of greenhouse gas
emissions, the cost of public infrastructure,
average travel times, and percentage of
housing near transit stops for each of the
scenarios. Through the next round of public
meetings and surveys, the public rated each of
the scenarios using the indicator results. The
effort reached out to over 200,000 residents
through community events, newspaper
surveys, door to door outreach, newsletters,
social media, business and organizational
meetings, and one-on-one conversations.
Revised paragraph to address particpation
numbers issue
The five scenarios were measured using
sustainability indicators developed from the
vision statement. These indicators included
such measures as the acres of land developed,
the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, the
cost of public infrastructure, average travel
times, and percentage of housing near transit
stops. Through the next round of public
meetings and surveys, the public rated each of
the12/5: Restore to original sequence.
TF scenarios using the indicator results.
CATF viewed as a general comment.
New mixed-use areas need to have attainably
priced housing, provide shopping and services, be
walkable and bikable, and be linked by transit to
jobs and other centers, so residents can choose
whether or not to incur the costs of owning a car,
*matching the needs of Austin's increasingly
diverse households and wooing families who have
left back to the city.*
concurs w/ rethinking the map.
Brought up Heather Way's
presentation….walking distance green
space
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
TF 12/5: Follow up with ET.
1/31 - small / local business language added in
multiple locations based on comments by R.
Melancon
Addressed through other comments from Perla C.
See #314
Connect to African-American Quality of Life Study
& cultural heritage discussion.
Indicated that Christ Rengler (sp) has Comment not recommended by CATF
new information/data that is of value to
this plan. Suggests that this and other
new data be assembled as resources
to be included.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Comment not recommended by CATF
Comment not recommended by CATF
CATF to consider potential needed action
Possible new Neighborhoods policy? "Continue
building capacity among neighborhoods and
groups underrepresented in planning processes
and city programs."
Addressed by two policies: CER 9 and WPD 5.
No reason given in report.
Sidebar: "Creating these transitions requires a
broad regulatory approach to address the local
context, land uses, accessibility and transportation
needs, building setbacks, building heights, and
design elements such as landscaping, building
massing, lighting, the location of parking, and
building orientation."
Change to: Build new neighborhoods where
grocery stores, shopping and dining options, and
community services (such as post offices, libraries,
healthcare, government offices) are easily
accessed from nearby neighborhoods via bicycle
and pedestrian traffic. Limit 'sprawl' and commutes
all over town to access these types of services.
WPD review: LUT 20. Ensure that redevelopment
in the Edwards Aquifer’s recharge and contributing
zones maintains the quantity and quality of
recharge of the aquifer.
See rewrite for #104.
That neighborhood streets are both safe and widely
understood to be safe.
Developing a special section/spread in the plan
dedicated to neighborhood transitions with
examples from E. Riverside and Airport Blvd
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Ok.
Ok.
Ok.
WRT: We generally don't include indexes with
plans, this is usually done only for ordinances….
See revised priority programs.
OK, revising Chapter 5 to include this
OK, revising Chapter 5 to include this
See revised priority programs.
WRT (COA submitted comments) -- in process
Ch. 5 Re-write
Revising Chapter 5 to include cost analysis
See revised Priority Programs.
Incorporate more strongly into priority Ch. 5 Re-write
program? Will look at highlighting more in the priority program
See new complete streets spread.
See p. 28 edit
MD talk to MY
Noted. Edits to plan should provide clarification.
This is currently addressed in chapter 1. Are there
other places to incorporate?
MD talk to MY
Ok. P.78 In process of rewriting centers and
corridors.
Covered: HN-1: Establish regulations to promote
the development of affordable housing types within
compact, mixed use centers and corridors.
HN-3: Produce regulations and enhance programs
to promote affordable housing throughout Austin.
HN-18?: Establish a regulatory environment that
creates communities across Austin that provide a
range of housing integrating market rate and
affordable housing for people of all ages, abilities,
and means.
LUT-3-:Establish land use and steet design
regulations to create neighborhoods that support
walking and bicycling, are in proximity to daily
needs, and provide a range of housing types to
meet the needs of people of different means at
different stages of their lives.
Will incorporate current disclaimers on map.
Two page spread on qol studies.
Covered: HN-1: Establish regulations to promote
the development of affordable housing types within
compact, mixed use centers and corridors.
HN-3: Produce regulations and enhance programs
to promote affordable housing throughout Austin.
HN-18?: Establish a regulatory environment that
creates communities across Austin that provide a
range of housing integrating market rate and
affordable housing for people of all ages, abilities,
and means.
LUT-3-:Establish land use and steet design
regulations to create neighborhoods that support
walking and bicycling, are in proximity to daily
needs, and provide a range of housing types to
meet the needs of people of different means at
different stages of their lives.
Ok. Revise HN-26: Ensure outreach efforts for
*the ongoing comprehensive planning program as
well as* small area plans are directed toward
attracting a diversity of stakeholders including
under-represented demographic and socio-
economic groups.
MB collecting -- will forward to PC
Covered: HN-1: Establish regulations to promote
the development of affordable housing types within
compact, mixed use centers and corridors.
HN-3: Produce regulations and enhance programs
to promote affordable housing throughout Austin.
HN-9: Expand existing programs and develop new
programs to retain long-time residents of
neighborhoods experiencing rapidly increasing
property values and an influx of wealthier new
residents.
HN-18?: Establish a regulatory environment that
creates communities across Austin that provide a
range of housing integrating market rate and
affordable housing for people of all ages, abilities,
and means.
EGRSO states that conducting an economic impact
analysis for each regulation or policy would be
costly and time consuming. They don’t generally
support blanket requirements, but rather would look
at the need for an economic impact analysis on a
case-by-case basis.
Covered: HN-1: Establish regulations to promote
the development of affordable housing types within
compact, mixed use centers and corridors.
HN-3: Produce regulations and enhance programs
to promote affordable housing throughout Austin.
HN-18?: Establish a regulatory environment that
creates communities across Austin that provide a
range of housing integrating market rate and
affordable housing for people of all ages, abilities,
and means; are in proximity to daily needs; include
a variety of employment opportunities; are stable
with low crime and safe buildings; provides a range
of facilties and sevices.
CFS-4: Establish pocket parks and recreational
spaces in areas with little open space.
CFS-3: Expand equitable access for people to
parks thoughout the City by targeting new parks
where most needed.
ECON-13: Work with education providers to
educate students at al levels about the skills
needed to complete in a 21st Century economy.
ECON-15: Develop economic development
programs and incentives to promote the
employment of historically under-employed
segments of the population.
Revised Priority Programs, which incorporate
relevant goals and metrics for each program.
PC did not change boundary
WPD typically uses the recharge zone as a
surrogate for karst features. Karst features are
usually only discovered when a site is reviewed
during development projects, so the city's
knowledge of karst features is primarily limited to
areas that are already built.
Ok.
GC coordinate with HHSD
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Data forwarded from Task Force member
See new spread on transitions
See revised Priority Programs.
If we include them, our feeling is they should be in
Chapter 5 - with the prioirty programs.
Two page spread on qol studies.
Covered: CRE: 4-Cultivate cultural and heritage
education and tourism by marketing and promoting
Austin's museums, libraries, historic sites and
venues, and providing education and training to
frontline tourism workers.
Two page spread on qol studies.
ok. Revise HN-3: Produce regulations and
enhance programs to promote affordable housing
throughout Austin by:
-encouraging the expansion of community
development corporations
I hope a realistic economic and TF 12/5: Noted.
transportation impact analysis is part of
the future because I don’t believe
putting as much density as the current
plan proposes into the core area of
Austin will be affordable to the masses.
It will make for a fun and viable city but
it will be a very expensive place to live
with an already choked transportation
network strained to the max. It’s easy
to sit around and dream of what we all
like for our vision of the future but it
comes with a price tag and task force
members need to understand what
they are asking future generations to
pay for.
Everyone thinks that Mueller is a great Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
example of what future neighborhoods
need to look like and I agree with that.
In order to offer the price points in that
development with the high level of
amenities, the developer needed the
COA to provide financial incentives.
Similar incentives can be available to
developers doing master planned
subdivisions in the suburbs where
affordability as well as a cool
environment can be accomplished. I
hope the plan will support quality
suburban development because not
everyone is going to want to or be able
to afford to live in the core area.
Population -- text revised to reflect this.
The racial and ethnic composition of the city has
changed over the past decade. In 2010, non-
Hispanic whites comprised a smaller proportion of
the population, 48.7 percent compared with 52.9
percent in 2000.
The Hispanic/Latino population increased, rising
from 30.5 percent in 2000 to more than 35 percent
in 2010. Eighty-three percent of these residents
were of Mexican origin.
*Austin's Asian population also increased, with its
share growing from 4.7 percent in 2000 to* 6.3
percent in 2010.
*T*he proportion of African-Americans *in Austin*
decreased from 9.8 to 7.7 percent over *the past*
ten years. This reflects a decline in the total African-
American population in Austin. Despite this, the
region's African-American population grew over the
same period.*
ALSO note: There was a typo in African-Americans
originally.
Drop out data added
Added
See recent edits mentioned for other ones; also
proposing to include a spread tieing the 2 QOL
studies together and connecting to actions across
different building blocks. "Tackling the Racial
Divide" addition.
Gentrification has been added to the Chapter 2 as
well as the glossary
Include as related plan in Invest in compact &
connected city program.
Include as related plan in Invest in compact &
connected city program.
Included in chapter 2 ("Improvements in existing
plans")
Include as related plan in Invest in compact &
connected city program.
PC agreed to bicycle miles travelled. Invest in
Compact and Connected priority program has a
metric of % of trips by walking and bicycling
Could include as indicators
Police, Fire, EMS, WPD were involved in reviewing
the plan and shaping policies and actions.
Police, Fire, EMS were involved in reviewing the
plan and shaping policies and actions.
Ok to include energy in core principle title. Other
points are addressed in the paragraph already.
Added to Code Changes for Compact and
Connected
ECO-18, 19, 20 are actions. This section is
policies.
AE's economic development objectives:
1. Increase contract opportunities for local
businesses (addressed by ECO 2, which has been
rewritten to include local businesses)
2. Attract new business to Austin (addressed by
ECO 4 -- incentives to attract and retain major
employers)
3. Partnership with Chambers of Commerce
(addressed by ECO 4 -- "strengthen partnership
among Chambers of Commerce)
4. Develop clean energy industry (addressed by
ECO Action-19 -- "create a public-private task force
... to invest in ... green tech...).
Energy policies are included on p118. This section
was previously added in response to other
comments:
"Energy
Austin Energy serves 388,000 customers (with a
population of more than 900,000), including several
communities outside of Austin’s city limits. In 2008,
it had approximately 2,760 megawatts of
generation capacity, including generation from coal,
nuclear, natural gas, wind, solar, and landfill
methane. From 1982 to 2003, Austin Energy’s
conservation, efficiency, and load-shifting programs
reduced peak demand by 600 MW. Since 2004, the
utility has been working on a goal to reduce peak
demand by an additional 700 MW by 2020.
Austin Energy maintains over 5,000 miles of
overhead primary and secondary power lines,
4,000 miles of underground primary and secondary
lines, and 48 substations."
Include in appendix of plans. -- Ask GC for list of
plans reviewed by PC.
Covered by Econ actions 10 and 4. Added to
Invest in compact Priority Program.
PC agreed to energy generation, percent of
renewables
PC did not add this indicator
PC added cost burdened households which
includes utilities
They seem to be.
The Hazard Mitigation Plan appropriately
addresses dam safety. Dam safety was not
identified by the public process or stakeholder
interviews.
AWU is working on language about current
regional efforts at drought planning, including
expectations that we may set a new Drought of
Record soon.
in line with CAMPO which identifies evacuation
routes; see also CFS Action-25.
Suggest this: "Prosperity for all means reducing the
number of individuals and families living in poverty
by providing workforce training and helping
residents attain living-wage jobs, as well as
capitalizing on the city’s *diverse population and
knowledge based economy* to provide jobs and
career paths for workers of all educational and skill
levels."
NOTE: "creative class" section has been rewritten
elsewhere.
Revised sentence: Through incentives and
partnerships, the City of Austin can encourage that
more affordable housing be distributed throughout
the city matching the needs of Austin’s increasingly
diverse households.
Note in inclusion sidebar and affordable housing
priority program. Addressed via ID# 7008.05
Ok. Revised 1st bullet under Key Challenges.
Also included in inclusion sidebar.
Ok.
Addressed by edits for ID# 45, 98, 103
Added to 9th bullet: " The changing ethnic and
racial composition of the city will also shift demand
for certain services, including an increased need
for multilingual communications."
PS 4. Provide *accessible* preventive safety
education (fire, police, and emergency services) to
Austin residents.
Included in equity sidebar and response to ID#
5177
Include in related plans for this priority program.
Addressed by ID# 5386
TF 1.31: "Neighborhood schools and libraries serve
as centers for community collaboration,
recreational and social events, as well as
*educational and* learning opportunities."
Not recommended. Libraries fit under "community
services."
Not recommended. Improve access addresses this.
Actions related to the library system will be
connected to this program; the two library plans will
also be included as related city initiatives for this
program.
Connected to water resources priority program.
Could be included as indicator.
Addressed by WPD 1, 3, 4, and 9.
Connected to water resources priority program.
Could be included as indicator.
Addressed by WPD 5 and 9.
See WPD section of City Facilities and Services
Building Block.
AWU is drafting language to include in the priority
program (and include a connection to affordability).
AWU anticipates updating the plan to reflect
Imagine Austin, once it is adopted.
Fwd to AWU
Fwd to AWU
Fwd to AWU
Included in WPD9 and water resources priority
program.
AWU: Include discussion on the connection
between available water, technology, diverse water
sources, and affordability.
Added WPD 6, 7, 11 as policies related to UD 6.
WPD 11 as a policy related to CER 6.
Addressed by WPD 14.
Incorporate into green infrastructure program.
Revised Neighborhood Policy N4 to include
environmental features.
CFS Action-32.
Resource Recovery reviewed the Growth Concept
Map. Some features can be accommodated within
Regional or Town Centers. Others can be
accommodated within Job Centers.
Not recommended. This should be addressed by
the Zero Waste or Austin Resource Recovey
Master Plan.
Recommend deleting HN Actions 21, 24, 25, and
27. Chapter 5 addresses these actions in a more
unified way.
See revision to p. 189-192 regarding relationship
with neighborhood plans.
See revision to p. 189-192 regarding relationship
with neighborhood plans.
See revision to p. 189-192 regarding relationship
with neighborhood plans.
Reference to existing small-area plans included in
the Code Revision priority program.
Generally, Imagine Austin's approach is that it
should be easy to develop where we want growth to
go, with "where we want growth to go" defined by
the Growth Concept Map and neighborhood plans'
Future Land Use Maps working together.
This is the full text of ECON Action 3 (missing
bullets in 9/26 draft):
Create a regulatory framework to foster a business-
friendly environment by:
- Identifying regulatory impacts on investment,
business development, and retention (zoning,
permitting and licensing requirements, tax
requirements, etc.);
- Assigning city staff devoted to helping businesses
navigate the system and with trouble shooting;
- Creating development incentives (including tax
incentives), density and floor-to-area ratio (FAR)
bonuses, reduced and alternative parking
requirements, expedited review, etc.;
- Simplifying and clarifying the development review
process, including one-stop shop review, enforced
timelines, and set targets for responsiveness and
accountability;
- Allowing more by-right development;
- Making development regulations more flexible,
while defining the extent of flexibility and
maintaining safety and code integrity;
- Creating a program to assist businesses that are
affected by road construction or infrastructure
improvements;
Relates more to continual improvement of the code
enforcement program, rather than a single specific
thing to change.
Ch. 5 Re-write
GC: incorporate into "invest in compact/connected
city" introduction.
Not recommended. PC/TF 1/23: Okay to leave as
is.
Imagine Austin recommends shifting one CAMPO
center north (off the floodplain at 71/130);
additional centers are also identified.
Bike and pedestrian facilities along major roads,
such as tollways, would be accomplished through
separated trails.
TxDOT is now explicitly identified.
See revised transition/compatibility language. (GC:
ID#?)
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Please see People-Friendly Places spread.
Comp Plan Cmte voted 1/23 to leave West 35th
marked as a Corridor.
Comp Plan Cmte voted 1/23 to leave West 35th
marked as a Corridor.
Reference existing small-area plans and appendix
in the Code Revision priority program.
Comp Plan Cmte voted to leave West 35th (1/23)
and Lake Austin Blvd (1/30) marked as a Corridors.
LUT Action-2
Addressed by Policies LUT 1, 3, UD 5, 8 and
Actions LUT 1, 12, 13, 14, 19
Is this focused on city facilities, pollution, litter, or
something else?
Please see People-Friendly Places spread.
The suggested two sentences replace Additional sentence: Several City of Austin
the last sentence in the paragraph. planning initiatives, such as East Riverside Drive,
Airport Boulevard, and North Burnett/Gateway,
concentrate on creating places through a
framework to provide these increased choices. A
retooled transportation system, coupled with
focused planning efforts, could lead to the compact
and walkable places envisioned in this plan.
Ch. 5 Re-write
Reference existing small-area plans and appendix
in the Code Revision priority program.
HN-3, 4, 5, and 8. Note that EROC has many more
renters than the rest of the city.
Additional CE policy: Continue to maintain and
enhance Lady Bird Lake and its environs as the
premiere recreational and open space in Central
Austin and continue to improve its interface with the
built environment.
Covered by text for corridors and centers as well as
People-Friendly Places spread
Growth Concept Map (p84): There is a floodplain
that runs through this property, which is identified
as part of the open space network.
Future Land Use Map (p93): "Undeveloped" Future
Land Use category is similar to the grey used for
"no Future Land Use map," which is how this parcel
shows up.
Park Service Area (p122): This uses existing parks
to create a buffer. It will be replaced by another
map of existing parks, using a different approach to
drawing this buffer.
Will compile summary of families and children
changes.
Compatibility standards would be included in the
code diagnosis, the first step in revising the land
development code. The diagnosis is intended to
determine what parts of the code should be
revised.
The Corridor feature is generalized to connect
redevelopment opportunities and major
transportation features. It is not intended to suggest
that every parcel along or adjacent to the Corridor
should be redeveloped. The GSRC neighborhood
plan and Fairview Park NCCD work with the
Growth Concept Map to provide further detail.
No specific population estimates are included for
the Corridor feature.
Staff recommends against redrawing this feature.
The GSRC Future Land Use Map provides
appropriate guidance for preserving this area.
Redrawing the St Edwards Neighborhood Center
would result in a donut.Too closely tailoring these
centers also undercuts the ability of Growth
Concept Map to hand off detail to neighborhood
plans.
Imagine Austin would not require additional zoning
entitlements or changes to the Future Land Use
Map.
CRE Action-6, HN-Action 20
Developing an "inclusiveness" sidebar that should
address this. Addressed through ID# 7008.02
One of the goals in using neighborhood plans to
draw Growth Concept Map features is to suggest
when there's a hand-off to more detailed planning.
Ch. 5 Re-write includes this in the introduction to
the revised land development code priority
program: "A future of more compact and connected
places must also balance the importance of
existing neighborhoods as well as the suburban
and rural character of other parts of the city. "
PC recommended that the Town Center be
changed to a Neighborhood Center.
One of the goals in using neighborhood plans to
draw Growth Concept Map features is to suggest
when there's a hand-off to more detailed planning.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Incorporated through the Strategic Mobility Plan.
Comp Plan Cmte voted 1/30 to remove SH-45 from
the Growth Concept Map.
Included in the plan.
Highway 290 west is identified as an expanded
arterial in CAMPO. All the way to Dripping Springs
is beyond City jurisdiction.
Identified by CAMPO as an expanded arterial.
This is what the call-out regarding the Aquifer is
doing.
Ch. 5 Re-write
Incorporate into related plans for code rewrite.
Already covered by Policies UD 3, UD-6, HN Action-
14, 16, 17
3 sidewalks were submitted from SCCNP to the
bond development process.
Already covered by HN Action-14 (code
enforcement), SOC Action 26
While social interaction as per this comment is not
in Imagine Austin, the plan has provisions about
creating people-oriented places that encourage
interaction such as Policy LUT-5, N4, LUT Action
28, 32, 36, and the revised definition for centers
and corridors. May be more appropriate to
individual neighborhood plans.
Please see Society Policies regarding education
See definition of corridors and centers, p. 84-86
and and People-Friendly Places spread
Please see People-Friendly Places spread.
CFE 5 Ok
*Collaborate with educational partners
to* increase access to opportunities for
higher education, technical education,
and vocational training in Austin area
public schools, colleges, universities,
and other educational facilities.
Coordinate with educational and
business partners to match job training
with current and expected employment
needs for existing and emerging target
industries.
CFE 7
Work with school districts on planning
for long-range student population
growth from pre-kindergarten through
high school. *Encourage school district
support of the Imagine Austin
Comprehensive Plan in securing new
educational facilities and maintaining
existing facilities.*
CFE 9
*Coordinate with educational and
business partners to* increase the
availability of quality early education,
child care, after-school, and preschool
programs for all residents, especially
low and middle income households
and families with children with
disabilities.
SOC Action-28 Ok. Actions renumbered to SOC 32, 33, 40, 43
*Work with educational and business
partners to* expand early childhood
education and day care services and
programs.
SOC Action-29
*Collaborate with school districts in*
using under-utilized schools and other
public facilities for child care,
community educational programs, and
neighborhood activities.
SOC Action-36
*Collaborate with educational and
business partners in* developing a
comprehensive education program
focused on the skills for gainful
employment.
SCO Action-39
Collaborate with educational and
business partners in* expanding
educational opportunities to meet the
needs of current and emerging
industries.
ok.
Updated information is available. Replace bullet with: "APD has 1,669 sworn officers,
618 civilians positions, and a Fiscal Year 2010-
2011 operating budget of $250 million. The city’s
full-purpose jurisdiction is divided into four regions
and further subdivided into nine sectors."
Include information on community- Add new bullet: "The department’s community-
based approach. based approach to law enforcement puts the
responsibility for local policing in the hands of
region commanders, with centralized functions
providing support for operations and
investigations."
• To continue to keep Austin safe, the Not recommended. Covered by CFS Action-16.
department needs facilities that can
operate effectively and cost-efficiently.
Facilities should be strategically
located in the communities they serve.
They should also be flexible, thereby
allowing the department to adapt to
changing community policing needs.
Updated information is available. Replace bullet with: "The average response time to
high-priority calls in 2010 was just under seven
minutes."
Updated information is available. Replace bullet with "In 2010, Austin had one of the
lowest violent crime rates of all U.S. cities with
populations exceeding 500,000."
PS 1. Reduce crime rates, thereby Done in 9/26 draft.
improving both the actual and
perceived safety in neighborhoods
across Austin.
these edits result in this item matching
the wording of the bullet on Page 7 of
this document, which seems to be
worded more nicely.
Second, we suggest expanding the Second paragraph, first sentence: "The City
discussion on P. 12 of the document to Charter requires that elected officials and city
clarify that the plan is intended as a government use the comprehensive plan as a
guide to establish goals, but that the guide for policies and practices*, including
implementation of programs and budgeting*."
projects will be left to the established
annual budgetary process and subject In addition, ch. 5 should be expanded to reflect this.
to the availability of funding.
There are a significant number of new WRT: Expand discussion in chapter 5.
and expanded programs costs called
for in the draft plan, as well as
significant CIP related projects, with no
estimates of what the costs may be or
sources of potential funding. To
establish the context of project
resource levels, we suggest a section
or discussion of available funding
options and their relative scale.
Included as attached is sample
language from another jurisdiction for
your consideration. Not all examples
from the sample would apply in Austin,
but they give a flavor of what is
suggested.
The draft vision calls for the WRT: Expand discussion in chapter 5.
necessities of life to be affordable, and
the plan acknowledges the affordability
of government services in this context
on page 10, but primarily elsewhere in
the context of affordable housing. We
suggest expanding this section to
place more emphasis on the
importance of affordability to the
community and the City’s commitment
to providing high quality services at an
affordable price. Combined taxes and
fees for services, including the City
owned utilities of electric, water, and
solid waste services, all contribute to
the bottom line of costs paid by a
household, and constitute the cost of
living in Austin.
Ok
Not recommended. Out of step with the rest of the
Vision statement.
Not recommended. The Creativity Building Block
addresses this.
Not recommended.
ARTSPACE was established in 1979 Ok.
to serve as an advocate for artists’
space needs and, over the years, has
pioneered ways to build better
communities through the arts’ ability to
leverage transformative social change.
Today, Artspace is now a national
leader in the field of developing
affordable spaces across the country –
more than 30 to date! – that not only
meet artists’ needs but helps to create
a synergy that increases
collaborations, networking, sharing of
equipment, resources, skills, and
livelihood. Additionally, these
developments anchor arts districts and
expand public access to the arts. They
also spur economic development in the
neighborhoods and regions they reside
in through attracting additional artists,
arts businesses, organizations, and
supporting non-arts businesses to the
area.
Reference: http://www.artspace.org/
Austin has historically drawn large Ok.
numbers of creative individuals fueling
a strong experimental drive for a city of
Austin’s size. It has a growing film
industry, thriving gaming and digital
media industry, a cutting edge new
works theater community, and serves
as an incubator for emerging artists
and filmmakers, and more. Yet there is
a concern by mid career and mature
artists that there aren’t adequate
services, facilities or commerce to
support them in their artistic endeavors
and many move elsewhere.
There are over 35 museums in the Suggested language:
Austin Museum Partnership (a There are over 35 museums in the Austin Museum
consortium of local museums) which Partnership (a consortium of museums) which
include arts, sciences, history, nature includes arts, sciences, history, nature preserves,
preserves, music, and government music, and government museums. The city’s
museums. The city’s numerous numerous museums and galleries include the
museums and galleries include the Mexic-Arte and the Jack S. Blanton Museum.
Elisabeth Ney Museum and the Jack However, Austin does not yet have the iconic
S. Blanton Museum, yet Austin doesn’t museums of other cities of the same size.
have the iconic museums of other
cities of its size. Additionally, 2011 has
seen struggles in the nonprofit arts
world with the merger of AMOA and
Arthouse, and the sale of the Austin
Lyric Opera home.
Austin has been commissioning *many ok
award-winning* public art projects
through the Art in Public Places
*program* since 1985; however, many
of the projects are not well-known to
residents and visitors.
According to a recent economic impact Ok
study conducted by TXP, Inc. in 2010
the economic impact of the creative
sector was more than $4.5 billion in
annual economic activity, 48,000
permanent jobs, and over $71 million
in tax revenue for the City of Austin.
Austin’s music festivals are important corrected in earlier draft
to the city’s economy. The 2011 SXSW
contributed $167 million to the local
economy; the 2010 Austin City Limits
Festival contributed $73 million.
The city’s film, television, sports, and ok
animation industries generate
approximately *$282* million annually
and provides over *2,748* jobs.
The city’s gaming industry generates ok
over $990 million annually and
provides over 7,274 jobs.
In recent history Austin has supported Ok
funding for its cultural facilities. In
2006, residents approved a $31.5
million bond measure to support
construction and renovation of seven
of the City-owned cultural facilities.
Yet, one of the things most frequently
heard through the CreateAustin
process was that there is a perceived
lack of affordable, accessible, and/or
appropriately equipped cultural spaces
Over the last few years, the City of Ok
Austin’s Hotel Occupancy Tax portion
for the nonprofit arts and culture
groups and sponsored artist projects
enabled the City to allocate
approximately $5 million annually from
the Hotel and Occupancy Tax to over
240 non-profit arts and cultural groups.
In 2011/2012 the Austin Independent Ok.
School District (AISD), The City of
Austin, mindPOP (representing arts
and cultural organizations) and the
Kennedy Center’s “Any Given Child”
program have partnered up to
inventory arts education in K-8th grade
in AISD, determine gaps and create a
strategic plan.
Austin's live music and arts scene *is* Ok
a cornerstone...
Workforce development programs Edit made in previous draft
need to provide job training for
*technological arts related
occupations.*
Data sources: City of Austin Ok.
Community Inventory, CreateAustin,
*TXP, Inc.’s Economic Impact 2005
and 2012 studies of Austin, and the
Urban Institute’s Cultural Vitality in
Communities study.*
To discuss coming up - Tech Ridge Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
and South Austin Station are the
CAMPO Centers that are listed as only
as Imagine Austin Neighborhood
Centers. We’re not tossing out red
flags. This is a slight discrepancy and
something to jot down on our end really
as we start to revisit the Centers map
for our iterative regional plan process.
The population and jobs target ranges
actually overlap. I’m just thinking that
we might have to give higher priority to
other Centers the next time around. I
can envision a threshold that we’ll set
for Centers, based upon their build-out
capacity and other analysis, that will
determine their “Center-edness” and
typology.
Mile High Compact – sounds like a Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
good idea. We, ourselves, balked at
making our Centers sign similar MOUs
a few years back. Maybe this is
something that could get put before the
5 CATS sites? It would a good batch
of cities across 5 counties to get
started with. What type of monitoring
and reporting/enforcement do they
do? That follow-up might be an
effective stipulation for all CAMPO
centers.
If you’re looking to do some Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
specialized area outreach, the CAMPO
Technical Advisory Committee might
be a good forum to discuss the
transportation projects that connect
neighboring cities. I’d be happy to
discuss that with Gordon Derr (ATD)
who is the current chair of our TAC.
The major transportation projects you
have included in the Plan are already
in our 2035 Plan but if that’s still an
area you’d like to cover, we’d be more
than happy to accommodate your
team.
The introductory chapter of the plan is Not recommended because the purpose of this
positive to the point of being chapter is to identify the need for the plan, the big
promotional. While it is true, as Garner ideas of the plan and how to use the plan. It is the
pointed out, that there is material purpose of Chapter 2 to identify the trends and
showing the threats and weaknesses challenges.
to Austin’s continued success, the
overall description of Austin’s positives
found in this section is so strong that
the negatives take on a “dissenting
minority report” status that is not held
at the same level as the strong points.
Even the Key Challenges and
Opportunities section on page 4 starts
with “Austin is a great place to live”.
This approach overwhelmingly frames
one’s perception towards the positive
from the very beginning. As I stated in
the meeting, I believe this
overwhelmingly positive tone will not
lead to a strong sense of urgency to
enact the plan’s recommendations.
The plan overall does not go deep More detail is available in supplementary materials
enough into data in describing the (Community Inventory & Strategic Issues Report).
existing conditions. Given the length of
the plan, a fairly light level of data
analysis is present. Also, a large
portion of the plan is given to
describing what existing condition data
is covered, sometimes in repetitive
fashion. The plan should be revised
with an eye towards delving into data
more deeply while avoiding repetition
of the most general summaries of the
existing conditions.
In the final chapter, more steps should Priority Program revision.
be taken to create specific strategies to
make sure the plan’s goals are met.
Each action should have a specific
product or legislative outcome
identified to make the action happen.
Responsible parties should be
identified to see that the product is
made or the legislation happens and
dates should be set for when these will
be completed. Everything should be
filled out in the “Priority Program”
column on the right with something to
make the actions happen—even if that
means renaming the column to include
all actions. This is necessary in order
to have some feedback on whether or
not the plan is being carried out.
Named the Medical Access Program Replace bullet with: "The Travis County Healthcare
and clarified that it is available to low- District (created in 2004), doing business as
income residents, rather than Central Health, provides publicly funded healthcare
“medically needy” residents to avoid services to the county’s low-income residents
the perception that beneficiaries must through its Medical Access Program, a health plan
be in medical hardship to qualify. with a network of healthcare providers. Benefits are
available to families at or below poverty level
Incorporated Central Health as Travis through a limited provider network. Central Health
County Healthcare District’s correct also pays for discounted care through selected
name. providers for individuals up to 200% of poverty. "
Replace bullet with: "The University Medical Center
at Brackenridge provides hospital-based services
when necessary and operates the only Level 1
trauma center in Central Texas. "
CommUnityCare, a Federally Qualified New Bullet
Health Center with 21 locations around CommUnityCare, a Federally Qualified Health
Austin and Travis County, provides Center with 21 locations around Austin and
primary medical, dental, and Travis County, provides primary medical,
behavioral health care at reduced cost dental, and behavioral health care for families at
based on a sliding fee schedule for a reduced cost based on a sliding fee schedule.
families. CommUnityCare offers CommUnityCare offers services regardless of
services regardless of the patient’s the patient’s insurance status or ability to pay
insurance status or ability to pay for for services.
services.
Added specific information about
CommUnityCare to note the availability
of a comprehensive primary care
provider available to the community
and balance the focus with the hospital
care noted in other bullets.
The Integrated Care Collaborative, a New Bullet
nonprofit alliance of health care The Integrated Care Collaborative, a nonprofit
providers in Central Texas, operates alliance of health care providers in Central
and manages the region’s Health Texas, works to improve the healthcare delivery
Information Exchange called the ICare to the poor and people without health insurance
system and works to improve the and operates and manages the region’s health
safety net healthcare delivery system. information exchange, the ICare system. ICare
is an electronic system that allows sharing and
Removed original reference to the management of clinical and patient information
Integrated Care Collaboration. The among different healthcare providers.
current description of the organization
is incorrect and gives the impression
that the ICC is coordinating health care
services when their primary function is
simply to share information among
safety net providers. Added language
about ICare that was more accurate.
There are some minor editing issues September 26th draft corrected this.
that need attention on p. 53. The text
overruns the allocated space in the
white and blue boxes, limiting
readability.
We suggest providing citations for the Cites have been added
data presented.
Although there is brief mention of the See expanded City Facilities & Services section.
full range of core city services
provided, it is unclear why more
description was provided for certain
services: water, wastewater, drainage,
facilities, parks, but not others: public
safety, development review/permitting,
energy, maintaining streets, libraries,
etc. We suggest you look at the
current operating and capital budgets
and compare the proportions of our city
expenditures to the amount of
discussion various city functions
receive in Imagine Austin draft. While
not all services need as much text
discussion, their relative importance
and role in the city should not be
understated.
The City must manage and maintain New Key Challenge:
its existing and aging public
infrastructure – streets, sewers, water, Maintaining existing and aging public infrastructure
wastewater, drainage systems, public and facilites such as streets, sewers, water,
buildings, parks and more while also wastewater, drainage systems, public buildings,
planning for new investments needed and parks while also planning for new investments
to accommodate future growth and needed to accommodate future growth and
desire for public funding of new community desire for public funding of new
program and types of infrastructure programs and additional infrastructure investments.
investments.
In chapter 5, we recommend noting in The priority action programs laid out in the following
the introductory paragraphs that the section build on existing initiatives, as well as the
priority programs are intended to direct direction set during the Imagine Austin planning
new community investments for the process. As implementation occurs, the City will
specific functional areas addressed in continue to invest in essential infrastructure and
each priority program. The City will services where needed most with the greatest
continue to prioritize and invest in positive impact. The priority programs assist in
essential city infrastructure and guiding the efficiency and coordination of city
services where it is needed most or will operations and investments, as Austin continues to
have the greatest positive impact. provide the core functions and services of city
The priority programs and actions government.
assist in guiding the efficiency and
coordination of city operations and
investments, but they are not intended
to be prioritized over providing the core
functions and services of city
government when making budgetary
decisions.
In the intro paragraphs it states that the "new community investments" -- they include
priority programs will provide a plans/projects that are currently underway (e.g.,
framework to guide decision-making, transit, water). WRT will look for areas to
selection of priorities, and allocation of emphasize existing infrastructure and programs
resources on a yearly basis, however It and the balance between funding needs.
appears that the priority program and
actions primarily focus on new
infrastructure and services. We
suggest renaming them “priority
programs for new community
investments”, or something similar.
Please add more text about the
importance of balancing that with
adequately maintaining existing
infrastructure, facilities, and services.
(E.g. “changing development
regulations and processes to promote
a compact and connected city” may be
a priority new program for PDR, but the
bulk of PDR’s budget will continue to
be allocated to the provision of
essential development review and
planning services.) Right now the
Imagine Austin draft underplays this
basic fact and thus creates unrealistic
expectations for future decision-making
and balancing needs in the budget,
CIP and bonds.
See our specific comments in the Staff revised the Action Types within the Action
priority actions table (to be provided in Matrix and will be finalized as part of Chapter 5
the next few days). The “action type” is edits.
not consistent between building blocks.
In some only one “action type” is
selected for each action, in others,
multiple actions types may be listed,
and in others, no action type is given at
all. We tried to add (or delete) CIP
where appropriate. Note that we did
not consistently speak to whether an
action could also be a regulation,
policy, etc., so we recommend that the
actions be reviewed again specifically
for these actions types as well.
Because it is missing the context of Suggest: As potential capital improvement projects,
providing essential city services, it budget priorities, bond packages, programs,
does not seem to be an all regulatory changes, initiatives, plans, and even
encompassing framework for decision- zoning cases are considered, it is important for the
making or for “increasing the likelihood City of Austin to have a clear and objective
of funding”. (We recommend deleting framework for decision-making. The following
this phrase). It seems more like a checklist is intended to be used to extend and
guide to considering and incorporating refine the Imagine Austin vision, making it easier to
positive community impacts into use for departmental decision-making. The
decision-making. As such, it could be checklist can also be used by other organizations
transformed into a checklist for to guide the development of their projects and
determining whether the proposal is programs and ensure they are consistent with
moving toward implementing the Imagine Austin.
priority programs for new community
investments or incorporating the new
vision or goals of imagine Austin. It is
unclear right now how these relate to
the priority programs – some of the
priorities appear to be missing from
this list.
“Station Area Plans” should probably ok.
be renamed “small area plans”. Check
with the Urban Design division to get
complete set of plans and correct
names.
In several locations in Chapter 1 and WRT
Chapter 5 of the plan, it is stated that
Imagine Austin should be used to
guide budget priorities and be a “single
playbook” for decision-making.
However, there appears to be
disproportionate attention paid to “new”
investments and programs, and very
little to maintaining existing
infrastructure and public services. In
one of the early chapters it is noted
that Austin gets a lot of things right, but
that we also have many challenges.
The rest of the document tends to
focus on steering the city toward new
polices, programs and actions to
address the challenges. However, in
future decision-making, especially in
annual budget decision-making, it is
equally important to continue to fund
and prioritize those core functions of
the city and other things that we are
doing well.
A significant portion of the City’s WRT
annual operating budget is to provide
essential public services: public safety,
staffing public facilities such as
libraries, parks facilities, development
review, administrative services, etc.
and a large part of the capital budget is
dedicated to maintaining public
infrastructure: maintaining and
replacing aging infrastructure: water,
wastewater and electrical lines,
drainage, repaving and reconstructing
streets, renovating and repairing
existing public buildings and parks
facilities. The City will always operate
within the context of limited revenues,
and so it must constantly balance the
need to maintain existing public
infrastructure and provide essential city
services with the desire for new
community investments.
As a vision document, it is WRT
understandable that the vision, goals,
priority actions are not limited by
financial constraints, but it is important
to note within the document that that is
the case. In the absence of financial
constraints as part of the development
of priority actions, it is essential that
the document try to manage
expectations of how many “new”
investments and services can be
accomplished in a constrained revenue
environment given the amount of
essential city services that must
continue to be provided.
Statesman report 9.22.2011 – More New poverty stats included
than 1 in 5 Austin residents live in
poverty, new census data show
ABJ report 9-9-11 – The Capitol City
ranks no. 2 on CareerBliss’ list of cities
with the lowest job growth year over
year for positions that pay $50,000 or
less a year.
I respectfully recommend you add OK
another Core Principle to make it six – Think creatively and practice civic creativity.
“Think Creatively.” Think Creatively Austin’s spirit of creativity most openly manifests
and Practice Civic Creativity. Being itself in the local music and arts scenes and by
creative is an attitude of mind and a those engaged in these and other creative
way of approaching problems that enterprises. However, it also transcends Austin’s
opens out possibilities. creative community, to shape our entrepreneurial
and business community, technology sectors, and
local government to embody a broader, innovative
mindset and approach to solving problems. The
challenges of a growing population, finite natural
and fiscal resources, and a changing climate will
require Austinites and their local government to
become ever more resilient. Resilience—the ability
to adapt to challenges and change—will be a
hallmark of successful communities in the 21st
century and innovation has been identified as one
of the key attributes of resiliency. Creativity and
innovation are essential to realizing the sustainable
future envisioned by Imagine Austin. By
harnessing the collective energy of our people the
plan and its implementation will address the many
issues facing Austin.
Austin’s Historical Context – please During the 1980s, elements of the city’s character
rethink this section. You seem to stop began to change further. Multi-family construction
with the 70s; you attribute things to the experienced a marked increase over previous
Live Music moniker that wasn’t the decades resulting in a number of sprawling
case. “apartment cities” located throughout the city. Two
major high tech research consortium companies,
Microelectronics and Computer Technology
Corporation and Sematech opened in Austin and
by the early 1990s, the region had about 400 high-
technology manufacturers. During the 1990s
Austin’s population grew at phenomenal rates and
which led to concerted efforts to protect
environmentally sensitive areas from development.
These efforts are best exemplified by the passage
of the Save Our Springs ordinance, and initiation of
the Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan.
o 1st paragraph on p. 24 – Celebrating our creativity (as exemplified by
“Celebrating our creativity (by branding branding Austin, “The Live Music Capital of the
Austin as ‘The Live Music Capital of World”) has attracted talented, artistic, and
the World,’ for example) has attracted entrepreneurial individuals, contributing to our
talented, artistic, and entrepreneurial eclectic small business community and the growth
individuals, contributing to our eclectic of the culture and technology sectors.
small business community and the
growth of the culture and technology
sectors.”
§ “The Live Music Capital of the
World” brand was put in place in 1991
by the Music Commission and then
adopted by ACVB. It would not agree Equity covered at more in-depth level in Tackling
Many people of color was not THE
with this paragraph. the Racial Divide Spread
put the population # of 812,025 in your Not recommended - figure already included in text;
table best to keep table at 10 yr increments
2nd paragraph does not include the
Heritage, Arts, & Nature Division
(HAND) in PARD nor the Music
Division in EGRSO. Suggest the
following paragraph:
Austin’s arts and culture is supported
in four areas of City Government. The
Heritage, Arts, & Nature Division
(HAND) in the Parks and Recreation
Department provides artistic, cultural
and historical experiences for Austin’s
public, through its museums, theaters,
and arts centers. Through exhibits,
classes, programs, and low-cost or
free use of their facilities, they
celebrate Austin’s diverse history and
culture, cultivate a lifelong learning in
the arts, and incubate local arts and
community groups. The Cultural Arts
Division within the Economic Growth
and Redevelopment Services Office
(EGRSO), oversees the City’s cultural
arts program and the development of
arts and cultural industries as a part of
Austin’s overall economic development
strategy. Programs include the Art in
Public Places, a 2% public art
program; the Cultural Funding
Programs, utilizing the Hotel
Occupancy Tax to contract for services
from nonprofit arts and cultural
organizations; Civic Arts, cultural
There is a factual mistake and no
reference to strategies for other
entities. Suggest the following as a
rewrite:
Arts, culture and creativity are highly
valued in Austin. Following a two-year
planning effort, the City of Austin
completed the CreateAustin Cultural
Master Plan in 2008 and adopted by
City Council in 2010. In addition to
refining the City’s roles and
responsibilities for cultural support and
identifying strategies for both the City
and the community to implement, the
planning process helped spark
partnerships between community
leaders and the City. Austin must
support and value the City’s arts,
culture, and creativity as vital
contributions to the city’s identity,
economy, and quality of life.
This is not a good match for Austin.
This is a City program that bought up
rundown houses in a deteriorating
difficult neighborhood at cheap prices
and then marketed opportunities to
artists across the country to come
settle and purchase them at low prices.
I will find another program more
relevant to Austin to recommend.
Broadened Perspective on Health and GC -- working with HHSD
Healthcare
Data on the status of Austinite's health
in this section (Chapter 2: page 53)
refers solely to the leading causes of
death in Austin. The health of a
community, however, is measured by
much more than how it's citizen's die.
Including data that reflects the health
of residents throughout their life (and
not just how they die) will greatly inform
how the city can improve Austinites'
quality of life throughout the continuum
of the life cycle. Data on births, infant
mortality, risky behaviors in children,
chronic diseases in children and
adults, reportable diseases, and
disease prevalence could bolster the
recommendations that the plan makes
re: the Health Austin program. Our
Epidemiologists can provide you with
such data and assist with analysis, if
you are interested.
Addition of a Public Health Section ok
My primary concern is that
A/TCHHSD's services are listed under
social services (Chapter 2:page 54).
While our department does engage in
some social services initiatives, public
health is much more than social
services. Public health is a multi-
faceted field that seeks to insure
quality of life in a community through
the entire continuum of the lifecycle:
from pregnancy planning to death.
A/TCHHSD strives to work in
partnership with the community to
create and provide services that
improve quality of life, lower
morbidity/mortality rates, address
social inequities, and prevent both
contagious and chronic diseases in the
population. The neighborhood centers
mentioned on page 54 represent just
one of our program areas. In addition,
we provide: vital records, emergency
preparedness and response, regulatory
and environmental health (e.g. food
protection), immunization, women's
and children's health, sexually
transmitted disease, disease
surveillance, and chronic disease
prevention services.
Our website offers the following Change section heading to "Public health and
explanation social services".
(http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/health/admin
.htm): See other edits #9033.
Public health is all around us. From
prenatal care to immunizations, to the
water we drink, to the restaurants in
which we eat, to the helmets we wear
while riding bikes, to the many
programs promoting physical activity--
public health impacts our community.
Everyday in every part of our
community, public health protects
Austin and Travis County residents
from infectious diseases and
environmental threats and educates us
about the benefits of healthful
behaviors in avoiding chronic
diseases.
Public health surveillance in both
human and animal populations as well
as preparedness programs plays a key
role in emergency response to natural
disasters such as hurricanes or a
potential pandemic flu event.
The overall goal of Austin/Travis
County Health and Human Services is
to promote a healthy community, which
reflects social equity through
prevention, protection, provision and
promotion.
Delineation of Animal Services: Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Animal Services used to belong within
HHSD, but is now is now separate -
reporting directly to the City Manager. I
would recommend Filip Gecic as a
POC for more information on Animal
Services.
Inclusion of Travis County Health and Ok
Human Services and Veteran's
Services Department The Travis
County HHS/VSD provides a number
of key social services that warrant
inclusion in Chapter 2's profile of
services currently available within the
community. In particular, they produce
a number of reports that could inform
and enrich your community profile (e.g.
their mental heath services and
immigrant services reports available at
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/health_huma
n_services/default.asp).
Including background on current Include in appendix on related planning initiatives.
regional planning partnerships between CATRAC is the Capital Area Trauma Regional
the city and regional authorities may Advisory Council. Include them as a partner in the
help frame the regional planning Healthy Program priority program.
section.
Including general information on the
areas (emergency services,
transportation, public health, econ-
devo, etc) and status of regional
planning that the City is currently
engaged in through collaboration with
the various regional authorities
(CAPCOG, CATRAC, CAMPO, etc.)
could help define the City's regional
presence and related planning
considerations.
What does 'What Does It Mean' Not recommended.
mean?
I find the 'What Does It Mean' sections
to be somewhat confusing. Rather than
analyzing or even just summarizing the
content of a chapter, more often than
not the information in 'What Does It
Mean' ' provides new information that
is not always clearly related to the
content of the preceding chapter. (i.e.
'What Does It Mean - Society and
Health' at the end of Chapter 2,
includes information on a CAN
initiative - when CAN was not even
introduced or contextualized in the
chapter; likewise, the section includes
a list of pressures that local ISDs face
when the chapter includes no data or
background to support the bullet.)
Incorporating and substantiating such
'new' information bullets in the chapter
narrative may serve to alleviate
confusion and further support any
conclusions and recommendations
made in 'What Does it Mean' sections.
Updated Data Over 3.6 million people usd the library system in
Fiscal Year 2009-2010, including nearly 700,000
computer login users.
In 2010, over 4,800 programs were hosted by the
Library Department. This includes free computer
classes held at three public libraries.
The library system has more than 1.3 million books,
audiobooks, LPs, DVDs, CDs, e-books and graphic
novels. In FY 2010, the Library Department
checked out more than four million items.
“Since adopting the Bicycle Plan in 2009, the
Bicycle Program has installed about 15 new and
improved bicycle lane miles per year.”
this block is mainly about access to 4th Bulltet rewrite:
transit. Should we change the title, or In 2005, about 7 percent of households did not
find ways to include more have access to a vehicle and 43 percent had one
transportation options language. For vehicle available. Transportation choices other than
example, the secont-to-last, and last an automobile can provide lower-cost options;
bullet: however, transit route and service limitations and
• “In 2005...Transportation options gaps in the sidewalk and bicycle networks can
other than the single occupancy increase travel times and reduce access to jobs
vehicle provide a lower-cost way for and services throughout the greater Austin area.
residents to travel, but limited transit
options and limited routes reduce
access to jobs and services...” 5th Bulltet rewrite:
• “In the past decade...growing transit, In the past decade, Austin has worked to change
bicycle, and sidewalk networks.” the focus of its transportation policies and can point
to significant impacts made by its growing transit,
bicycle, and sidewalk systems.
Acknowledge bike friendliness as well “Design...Ensuring that new development creates
as pedestrian friendliness. walkable and bicycle-friendly communities with safe
pedestrian and bicycle facilities...”
“Development occurs...supporting Not recommended.
transit, bicycling, and urban...”
Include Urban Trail “Super Routes” on Urban trails and pedestrian areas will be one map;
map (I think that is the intent but I transit will be another. Trails map will include this
messed upf GIS file at last minute that (draft) language: "Urban trails are separated multi-
prevented inclusion) Question for use hard surface trails for transportation and
NCD: one map that shows existing and recreation."
future road, transit and trails is difficult
to read; should we be requesting a
standalone trail “corridors” map (with a
note at the bottom indicating the map
will be used to inform the development
of a Trails Master Plan) ?
Indicators are a great way to track Not recommended. Difficult to acquire the level of
progress over time. They are even comparable detail consistently from other cities.
more powerful if they provide a broader
frame of reference by comparing
Austin’s progress with other peer cities.
The indicators as proposed will help
Austin evaluate whether it is becoming
a better, more sustainable, more
livable City over time. Including data
from other cities for key indicators is
the only way to evaluate whether
Austin is achieving its vision of being a
“beacon of sustainability, social equity,
and economic opportunity”.
● Impervious cover: track on per capita Will consider as part of indicator review.
basis in addition to calculating percent
● Vehicle miles traveled: track per Will consider as part of indicator review.
capita in addition to tracking total
● Sidewalks: track % of street
frontages with sidewalks in addition to
miles
● Add Urban Trails Indicator:
Population within ¼ mile of an urban
trail (percent)
Include Bicycle Master Plan and Bicycle Master Plan is attached to Austin Tomorrow
Sidewalk Master Plan and the Sidewalk Master Plan is not. Sidewalk
Plan will be listed in Appendix but not attached.
May want to re-word this sentence in a Not recommended. Other comments request more
softer way. detail on this.
Why are "priced out" and "affordability How do we ensure that musicians, young families,
gap" in quotes? I would suggest for and hourly workers aren’t priced out of living in
them not to be. Austin? How can we help wage growth catch up to
the rising costs of living to close the affordability
gap?
affordably? New mixed-use areas need to have affordably
priced housing, be walkable and bikable, and be
linked by transit to employment and commercial
centers, so that residents can choose to avoid the
costs of car ownership.
See suggested edit. Moved to 2nd As development and change occurs, we must strive
sentence. It fits better. to contain Austin’s cost of living, while increasing
wages and good jobs. We must provide high
public value with tax dollars to deliver quality,
affordable amenities that all Austinites can enjoy.
An affordable community can only exist if we make
sure that the people who work in Austin can afford
to live here. Through incentives and partnerships,
the City of Austin can encourage that more
affordable housing be distributed throughout the
city. New mixed-use areas need to have attainably
priced housing, provide shopping and services, be
walkable and bikable, and be linked by transit to
jobs and other centers, so residents can choose
whether or not to incur the costs of owning a car.
Healthy communities depend on easy, safe access
to walking, biking, and recreation, healthy and
nutritious food, quality healthcare, schools, police,
and other community services.
Promote social equity (we would Not recommended -- more specificity gets
suggest altering the language to introduced in chapter 2 and policy chapters. This
underserved, historically excluded, or serves as a more general statement of principle.
name specific demographic categories
(i.e. low-income).
Might want to define "family insert: "(two or more people residing together who
household" are related by birth, marriage, or adoption)"
What is the source for this info? The Sent source info 10/25.
Census?
This statistic may not be correct if Neither statistic was adjusted for inflation, suggest
incomes were adjusted for inflation but deleting last sentance to make it less confusing:
home prices weren't. "Over the last ten years, median housing costs
have risen by 85 percent, while household incomes
have grown at a much lower rate. Between 1998
and 2008, the median single-family house price
increased by almost 90 percent ($129,900 to
$240,000) while the percentage of all single-family
houses considered affordable declined from 42 to
28 percent. During the same period, Austin's
median family income increased by 36 percent."
DELETE: When adjusted for inflation, this equals
little growth in the median family income.
Is this true? Has the property tax rate Yes. Pg. 67 of 2010-11 annual budget:
been decreasing? http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/10-
11/downloads/fy11approved_budget_vol1.pdf
Source for this? Source: Community inventory (Chapt 4); 2008 COA
report: Preserving Affordable Housing in Austin: A
Platform for Action
This statement could be revised to be more
specific, and add data from the affordable housing
report: "More than 2,000 rental units were
converted to condominiums in 2007 and 2008."
Renters earning less than $50,000 per year = 2/3 of
What is the source for this exact cut-off
of $50,000? I might suggest just Austin renters, this is referring to the
saying, low-income households, or homeownership gap. Recommend changing the
maybe an MFI, like, households at or last sentence to: "Rising rental costs and home
below 50% MFI. prices impact the majority of Austin's renter
households."
If possible, I would suggest where each Refer to figure 2.2
of these types of neighborhoods tend
to be located: i.e. neighborhoods built
before WWIII tend to be located closer
to downtown Austin. I'm not exactly
sure about the other ones, but I'm
guessing there's a pattern of where
those are located in the city as well.
These bullets are good, but they all Add bullets
mostly focus on the need for increased
rental housing. I think there are some As the City's housing stock ages, home repair
other conclusions, such as the need for costs will create additional burdens on low to
home repair, and housing for moderate-income residents. Home repair services
homeless/very low income households, can help low-income households stay in their
that could be added. homes, and can help mitigate gentrification
pressures in historically low-income neighborhoods
near the urban core.
Austin has a growing population of persons
experiencing homelessness. A combination of
housing and services is necessary to help these
very low income residents find safe and stable
housing, and attain the services they need.
Development that Development that has been happening in these
areas as parcels are converted to residential
subdivisions or commercial centers, particularly
along or near major roadways.
Might want to define this region more Add CAMPO and CAPCOG territory to Map 2.5
specifically
Is this the Vision Statement? Vision Statement is from p66-71.
Check this statement. Is this See #9055, recommend deleting sentence "When
accounting for inflation, both for adjusted for inflation, this equals little growth in the
incomes AND housing costs? median family income."
I would flip this and say it positively: Encouraging the preservation of affordable housing
Encouraging the preservation of.... ...
PSH should not be called out as it's OK. Revise to :Promote a diversity of land uses
own housing type, separate from throughout Austin to allow a variety of housing
rental. I would suggest taking it out of types including rental and ownership opportunities
the statement. for singles, families with and without
children,seniors, and person with disabilities.
This seems like it's combining a lot into Addressed in revised Priority Program.
one action:
1. pedestrian/bike friendly
neighborhoods
2. neighborhoods with a range of
housing types
This seems like it's combining a lot into Addressed in revised Priority Program.
one action:
1. pedestrian/bike friendly
neighborhoods
2. neighborhoods with a range of
housing types
Missing Text?-missing bullets Ok. Bullets will be added
Delete reference to abandoned and Ok. Expand home-buyer assistance programs so
foreclosed houses. that lower income households can purchase
houses to increase homeownership levels in
Austin.
How does land banking help Ok. Move Land Banking to HN Action 3
rehabilitate/repair affordable housing?-
PD Note: Move to HN-3 (MQ supports
this)
Dennis Waitley’s first name is spelled Ok. Dennis --> Denis.
Denis
Sustainability means finding a balance Second paragraph: "Sustainability means
among three sets of goals: 1) considering not only the needs of today, but also
Prosperity and jobs, 2) conservation whether these needs are being met in ways that
and the environment, and 3) conserve resources for future generations.
community health, equity and cultural Sustainability means finding a balance among
vitality. It means taking positive, three sets of goals: 1) Prosperity and jobs, 2)
proactive steps to protect quality of life conservation and the environment, and 3)
now, and for future generations. community health, equity and cultural vitality. It
means taking positive, proactive steps to protect
quality of life now, and for future generations."
"the original infrastructure" - I don't Strike phrase.
think is very intuititve as to what this
means.
We say "world class" several times. Not recommended.
What does this really mean? We also
use the term "creative class" and I
don't think this is a widely understood
term or concept.
We say "world class" several times. "world-class": Recommend keeping.
What does this really mean? We also Creative class: see #12
use the term "creative class" and I
don't think this is a widely understood
term or concept.
Recommend clarify that on their own, "By strengthening our “green
farms, parks and lakes etc. are not infrastructure” – parks, the urban forest, trails and
green infrastructure—they only greenbelts, rivers, creeks, lakes, gardens, urban
become green infrastructure when agriculture, open spaces, and wildlife habitat and
strategically planned and managed so the relationships between them and the rest of the
that the community benefits from the city – Austin..."
services ecosystems can provide.
Recommend explicitly add healthy food September 26th draft corrected this.
access to blurb on “Develop as an
affordable and healthy community.”
the second paragraph seems We read it as extending the previous paragraph,
somewhat overlapping or redundant and laying the groundwork for Chapter 5.
with previous page.
The example at the bottom of the page Revised in Sept 26th draft
needs to be revised slightly to make it
more clear and a better example
"Land use regulations will be needed We will also need landuse regulations that make it
that make it easier and less expensive easier and cost effective to do sustainable
to do sustainable development development and projects that create compact and
projects, I would substitute less walkable places.
expensive with "cost effective"
The statement about offering See TF change, but "can be a way".
incentives is nice, but we should be
careful to frame things as ideas or
needs and not commitments. Tweak
this statement a bit please.
The statement about offering Not recommended. It's a general discussion of
incentives is nice, but we should be possible tools.
careful to frame things as ideas or
needs and not commitments. Tweak
this statement a bit please.
"Austin is a younger city." Younger Replace with Austin is a youthful city.
than what?
“the plan includes eight priority action September 26th draft corrected this.
program.” (make programs plural)
Recommend include a key to the WRT.
category codes (LUT, EN, etc.) at the
beginning of or (in the margin of) the
first section where these codes are
referred to—but preferably include a
reference to where to find the key on
later references. Without prior
knowledge of what these codes mean,
it can be alienating.
Define or identify “family household” insert: "(two or more people residing together who
are related by birth, marriage, or adoption)"
“Live(d) below the poverty line” "In 2011, 21 percent of Austin’s residents lived
below the poverty line."
The second to last bullet, about farms, OK -- work with Task Force on language
does not indicate whether local farming
is valuable or not in the context of the MB 1/6 - Added the following: Local farming
plan. In the bullet below, tree canopy is enhances sustainability by increasing our local food
called “vital to water and air quality…” supply, addressing the challenge of food deserts in
etc.—recommend adding a certain areas of the city and contributing to the local
positive/supportive clause in the economy.
farming bullet based on local
food/farming stakeholder or task force
input.
“easy access to” or “readily available” "People across all parts of the city and of all ages
healthy food? It is not clear whether and income levels live in safe, stable
this sentence is meant to value healthy neighborhoods with a variety of affordable and
food available within neighborhoods accessible homes *with access to* healthy food,
(i.e. walkable). This would correspond economic opportunity, healthcare, education, and
with language on pp. 125, 183 transportation
“CER 13. Incentivize, develop, and Ok. Strike "production" from current language.
expand the market for local and
sustainable food production (e.g.,
farming, ranching, food processing).”
This is awkwardly phrased, perhaps
due to combining two different
ideas—the market we want to develop
is for the food, not for the food
production. Maybe “Incentivize,
develop, and expand the market for
local and sustainable food by actively
encouraging local production (e.g.,
farming, ranching, food processing).”
“CER 13. Incentivize, develop, and Strike "production" from the sentence.
expand the market for local and
sustainable food production (e.g.,
farming, ranching, food processing).”
This is awkwardly phrased, perhaps
due to combining two different
ideas—the market we want to develop
is for the food, not for the food
production. Maybe “Incentivize,
develop, and expand the market for
local and sustainable food by actively
encouraging local production (e.g.,
farming, ranching, food processing).”
Page 140 and 141 I think two of Revision to Chapter 5 is in progress. We are
these need a bit of work. First: "Create deleting the priority actions from this section and
a program to sustainably manage our reorganizing Table 5.1. Will address comments.
water resources:" This language
implies we don't currently have any
program in place, which we do. I also
have an issue with the term
"sustainably manage" as above. Most
importantly, there is a lot of overlap
with the next section on "Creating
green infrastructure to protect
environmentally sensitive areas. "
Water resources often appear as
"water quality" in many of the sub-
goals if you look at what the action
would achieve. Both sections have
multiple items dealing with
environmenally sensitive areas. Three
of the bullets repeat across the 2
sections. Is there a way to do this more
elegantly? Are we too far down the
road to reshuffle these? I almost see 2
categories, one on Protecting
Environmentally Sensitive Areas and
Expanding Green Infrastructure
including trails, parks, trees, and all the
bullets on environmental protection of
sensitive areas, and the Second on
Low Impact Development that
emphasizes water conservation and
reuse, complete streets, etc. Maybe
this is a place where we to asweave15. Housing & Neighborhoods action #15, page 153.
The third bullet referred can HN - in
What is this? I don't understand what it These brief summaries & references will be
means. Where else does it appear in removed in the revised Priority Programs.
the document? I couldn't find it.
The third bullet referred to as HN - 15. This refers to the actions, starting on page 146.
What is this? I don't understand what it These bulleted summaries are removed from the
means. Where else does it appear in revised Priority Programs
the document? I couldn't find it.
Use of the word SUSTAINABILITY is TF 1/31: Not recommended.
still somewhat confusing because it
appears inconsistently in the
document. I suggest we change the
Vision category Natural and
Sustainable, to instead read Natural
and Resource Efficient. I think the
latter still captures what is trying to be
said but eliminates overlap with how
the word is used more broady. We
need to be careful to make sure we are
consistently referring to the entire triple
bottom line when we use the word.
Here I think it is just referring to the
Environmental part.
Local food production/distribution is Not recommended. Adequately addressed in
well covered in health and human Society & Conservation/Environment.
services as well as society and
conservation/environment, but is
lacking in land use and transportation.
Style/grammar: 1) Spell out single digit Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
numbers or at least be consistent with
not doing so. 2) Use “more than”
instead of “over” when expressing
quantity (over expresses a position in
space). 3) Don’t hyphenate –ly adverbs
as compound modifiers (remove
hyphens in legally-enforced, highly-
skilled)
This is covered by Invest in a compact and
connected Austin
In 2007, the City of Austin passed the Ok
Austin Climate Protection Plan
resolution. Since then, Austin has
completed a greenhouse gas inventory
and update, reduced electricity output
by the equivalent of 26,100 homes per
year, committed powering all city
municipal operations and buildings with
100% Greenchoice power, organized
and begun implementing Climate
Action plans and teams across all city
departments, and continues to focus
on collaboration, education, mitigation,
and innovation.
Transportation and vehicle emissions Ok
are a major source of carbon-dioxide
pollution and smog-forming air
pollution. Continued outward
expansion and reliance on vehicles for
the majority of transportation trips will
increase both sets of emissions.
Potential impacts of climate change in Ok
Central Texas include increased
drought and severe weather events,
elevated temperatures, more heat
waves, and worsening air pollution.
Add new bullet "Climate Protection & Suggest to WRT
Adaptation"
Regional cooperation and a range of "...*proactive* regional cooperation..."
proactive policies are needed to
implement climate change solutions.
Counteracting the prevailing trend of Ok.
sprawling development that consumes
vacant land and natural resources,
reduces air and water quality,
*contributes to global warming,* and
diminishes the natural environment.
Develop buildings, sites, infrastructure, Not recommended.
and nodes and corridors for "greener"
outcomes that help to meaningfully
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Integrate land use and transportation
to reduce vehicle greenhouse gas
emissions regionally.
Encourage walking and bicycling with Not recommended. Addressed by LUT 15.
public education and programming.
Develop infrastructure necessary for Not recommended (considered and dropped by
electric vehicles and alternative fuel Working Groups)
use citywide, in response to evolving
technologies.
Define *and implement* the Not recommended.
community's goals for new public and
private developments using principles
and design guidelines that capture the
distinctive, diverse local character of
Austin.
Integrate green infrastructure elements Not recommended.
such as the urban forest, green
buildings, *roofing and landscaping,*
and green streets *paving and roadway
materials* into the urban design of the
City through "green" development
practices and regulations *in order to
reduce the heat island effect. *
Promote adaptive re-use of buildings, See ECO 6
with energy-efficiency upgrades as
needed, to recognize inherent "green"
benefits of avoiding demolition and
rebuilding.
Residential energy use needs to be 5th bullet ("Reducing energy consumption...")
lowered to reduce household costs and becomes: "Reducing energy consumption,
lower Austin's energy demands and including in public buildings and facilities, to reduce
carbon footprint (relates to H8 and H9) household energy costs, citywide energy demand,
and greenhouse gas emissions."
Renovate the existing housing stock to "...conserve energy and reduce greenhouse gas
reduce utility and maintenance costs emissions."
for owners and occupants*, lower
energy use citywide, and reduce
Austin's carbon footprint.*
Austin's natural beauty and climate is Ok.
critical to the City's attractiveness, for
business and employees, as we
complete as a global city.
Adapting to climate change impacts, Ok.
such as increased summer
temperatures and extended drought,
that impose threats to Austin's
attractiveness and economy.
Invest in sustainable, affordable utility Not recommended.
sources (communications, power,
water, wastewater) to meet the needs
of increasing population and
employment bases, *while reducing
Austin's carbon footprint.*
In 2007, the City of Austin passed the ok.
Austin Climate Protection Plan
resolution, *committing the City of
Austin to national leadership in the
fight against global warming*
Should we move this to LUT or repeat Not recommended.
in LUT
Adop innovative programs, practices, Ok.
and technologies to increase
environmental quality and
sustainability* and reduce Austin's
carbon footprint* through the
conservation of natural resources.
The City of Austin's Municipal Climate ok.
Action Program requires all City
departments to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions from operations and
facilities.
Reducing energy consumption in Combine with other rewrite.
public buildings and facilities and
general energy consumption to meet
the energy efficiency goals set by
Austin Energy *and the greenhouse
gas reduction goals of the Austin
Climate Protection Plan.*
Not recommended -- this language comes from the
charter.
Add. Strengthen plans and response See #9431.
to extreme weather events, including
floods and hurricanes, for public safety.
Plan for future public health risks from WPD 5. Plan for and adapt to increased
flooding and other extreme weather drought, severe weather, and other
events. potential impacts of climate change on
the water supply *and public safety.*
To lower greenhouse gas emissions Not recommended.
from waste, advance "green"
purchasing policies, debris
management, material reuse, use of
locally sourced materials, and state-of-
the-art landfill management.
Plan for public safety impacts of global See #9431.
warming, including emergency
preparedness for extreme weather
events
Reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas reduction: ok.
waste generation in all public buildings LEED Silver Certification: not recommended.
to meet the City's *greenhouse gas
reduction, LEED Silver Certification,*
and Zero Waste goals.
Utilize City owned land for community Not recommended: addressed in Society actions.
gardening. Develop Austin's good-
growing capacity to support locally
sources food and food security for low-
income residents.
Work with school districts on planning Not recommended.
for long-range student population
growth from kindergarten through high
school. Maintain and/or secure new
educational facilities *program and
curriculum* to support the direction set
by the Imagine Austin Comprehensive
Plan *and prepare our children to
become good environmental and civic
stewards.*
Engage Austin citizens in finding Not recommended.
creative solutions to civic issues,
including technical and social
innovation.
Engage public in making behavior See CE Actions 9 and 10.
shifts through robust education and
information campaigns that promote
sustainability.
Advance sustainability and livability See revised priority program.
through robust implementation of the
Austin Strategic Mobility Plan
Create a trails master plan *and Not recommended.
implement Phase I improvement.*
*Obtain* additional funding for the Not recommended.
design, construction, and
maintenenance of parks
Establish a tree canopy goal *and Not recommended.
implement an effective program to
expand the urban forest*
Not recommended.
Verb and implement Not recommended.
Seems to be missing either 'a' or 'the' Ok: include "a"
before model (Austin today is a/the
model of livability)
revise to read as: Austin tops Ok.
numerous "Best of" lists. (Austin,
and/or facilities within Austin are on
state, country and world "Best Of"
lists.)
greenways, lakes and Not recommended.
rivers/blueways…
add: 'such as' after patterns so that it Updated in 9/26 draft.
connects the items listed to
consequences instead of connecting to
past development patterns
What is the focus of the sentence? Updated in 9/26 draft.
What past patterns are you talking
about? Past development patterns? If
the latter, please be consistent with
terminology.
Please (consistently) use greenways Ok. Revise pgs. 5 (under Protecting Our Natural
instead of greenbelt Resources), 9 (under Integrate Nature into the
City), 151 (LUT Action 36)
To ensure our economic strength, it is Updated in 9/26 draft.
critical to preserve Austin’s mix of local
entrepreneurs, major employers, clean
industries, and education, and
government jobs.
Lots of information for one sentence. Austin can harness its strong economy to expand
This should be revise into two opportunity and social equity for all residents.
sentences. Developing new economic sectors through
partnerships between the business community, city
government, and institutions will help employ a
diverse workforce and expand opportunities for
young and old. To ensure our economic strength, it
is critical to preserve Austin’s mix of large and
small businesses, local entrepreneurs, major
employers, clean industries, and education and
government jobs. We can maintain economic
resiliency by staying attuned to global trends and
emerging technologies. Expanding our economic
base will provide jobs and career paths for workers
of all educational and skill levels. Prosperity for all
means reducing the number of people living in
poverty by providing workforce training and
services to help residents attain living-wage jobs. It
also means capitalizing on the city’s “creative
class” vibe to position the city as national and
international center for innovation and knowledge-
based industries.
How does the city encourage homes at Updated in 9/26 draft.
a lower price point? Is the intent of this
sentence to be about: existing homes?
new construction? remodeled homes?
other?
remove comma Grammar check.
How do these activities reduce Sustainability is about considering the needs of
greenhouse gas emissions? present and future generations. As a city, we need
to respect our natural constraints, mitigate and
adapt to climate change, and conserve water,
energy, land, and other natural resources. The city
will enact public policies and make choices on the
basis of long-term costs and consequences. Austin
can reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by
encouraging walking and biking and promoting
local food production. Supporting these activities
also has the added benefit of promoting community
health through daily exercise and making fresh
food more available. We have a responsibility to
future generations to go even greener, encourage
energy independence, reduce individual and
household water use, and protect clean air and
water. By respecting our natural resources, we can
build a sustainable foundation for Austin’s enduring
prosperity.
The think big picture and thinking Ok. MW.
holistically is the same thing, suggest
combining under big picture.
use City of Austin for consistency Not recommended. Chapter 1 is more informal;
variation aids readability.
Recommend revising the latter Updated in 9/26 draft.
sentence
Last sentence, 4th paragraph: Land- Not recommended.
use regulations will be needed that
make it easier and less expensive to
do implement sustainable….
This page should be at the beginning WRT.
not the back of chapter 1.
Blue seperator sheets are redundant Not recommended; enhances readability.
and bad practice for a publication
following sustainable practices.
Households: The 54% and the 70% Data has been updated where possible.
statistic are both listed as recorded in
2009.
add a coma after getting Grammar check.
Your history lacks info on the original MW
name of Waterloo Before it was Austin, the future capital of the State
of Texas was a small settlement located on a bluff
overlooking the Colorado River named Waterloo.
In 1839 it became the capital of the Republic of
Texas and renamed in honor of the “Father of
Texas”, Stephen F. Austin. It was selected as the
capital city due to its steady water supply, hills,
pleasant surroundings, and its central location
within the state.
The City of Austin's Park and Ok. Add new bullet "The City of Austin's Park and
Recreation Department serves over Recreation Department serves over 650,000
650,000 people a year with arts, people a year with arts, culture and nature
culture and nature programs at 13 of programs at its facilities, including the Elisabeth
its facilities, including the O. Henry, Ney Museum and the Zilker Botanical Gardens."
Museum, Elizabet Ney Museum,
George Washington Carver Museum &
Cultural Center, Dougherty Arts
Center, Austin Nature & Science
Center, SPLASH! Sheffield Education
Center, Susanna Dickinson Museum,
Old Bakery & Emporium, Emma
Barrientos Mexican American Cultural
Center, Zilker Hillside Theater, Zilker
Botantical Gardens, Umlauf Sculpture
Garden and Museum and 23rd Street
Renaissance Market.
May have a text overlap in the footer. WRT (overlap)
Poverty: 18 percent of Austin's
residnets lived below….
Housing values'affordability: Since this "Over the last ten years" is further defined In the
is a long range document I suggest not next sentence.
starting a sentence with "Over the last
ten years," the question I immediately "...while the percentage of all single-family houses
ask is, "What year was this written; *affordable at 80% of the median family income in
what ten years are they referring to?" the Austin region* declined from…"
Second to last paragraph: what was
the definition of "houses considered
affordable"? Seems subjective unless
you relate it to median income.
Neighborhoods, last paragraph: You Neighborhood plans do not have quantitative goals.
mention the neighborhood plans but
not what the goal of the plans are and I
wonder if you have any statistics on
how affective they hafe been since
initiating the program.
Check the subtotals and totals on the MB: correcting table.
percent change and land area total in
2010 columns.
This map has no legend corrected in 9/26 draft.
Map needs a legend. All maps have corrected in 9/26 draft.
too much white space shown outside of
the ETJ boundary. At this scale they
are hard enough to decifer. I suggest
enlarging to reduce the wasted white
space as much as possible!
What Does It Mean? Sixth bullet Included in Map 4.8 (agricultural resources)
mentions the agricultural land, but it is
not shown on the map on tne previous
page or any of the maps. When I read
the statement I immediately looked for
a map to get a sense of what a
"substantial amount" was.
Map lacks legend, north arrow, other WRT: add north arrows to all maps.
items basic maps require. Shows a
route in pink, what does this
represent?
Add north arrow to map WRT: add north arrows to all maps.
Add north arrow to map WRT: add north arrows to all maps.
Bicycle/Pedestrian:verify numbers with Neighborhood Connectivity Division has submitted
Nathan Wilkes. I believe the number of corrections.
existing mles is 160
Consider restating as: The City of Ok: "The City of Austin controls…"
Austin controls a large portion of the
land within area watersheds, which
gives the city some control over
development within these sensitive
areas.
About 10 percent of these gaps in the Ok.
sidewalks network are along arterials
with the remaining 90 percent are
along….
First bullet: How many or percentage of WRT
businesses formed between 2001 and
2009 where small businesses?
What year was the statistics for the Addressed by 9/26 draft
chart gathered? Are these employment
numbers for Travis County or COA
limits?
Water Resources: The "planning area" Planning area is City + ETJ. See page 25.
is mentioned in a couple of places but
not defined. Are you refering to the City
limits and ETJ?
2nd bullet: Do you want to list any of No, Imagine Austin takes it as a given.
the case studies that have predicted
climate warming?
Austin has over 19,000 acres of Updated table
parkland including water, 16,000 acres
without. Correct the following numbers
in the matrix: Neighborhood Parks
(76), Pocket Park (22), School (23),
Nature Preserve (15), Greenway or
Greenbelt (40), Tennis Centers (5),
Special Park (39), Total facilities (253)
Add north arrows WRT: add north arrows to all maps.
Solid Waste is now Resourse Changed in 9/26 draft.
Recovery Services
Can we add the % that we are The Parks and Recreation's operations and
underfunded vs. national standards? maintenance budget is $20 per capita which is
lower than the national average of $91 per capita.
The Parks and Recreation Department Ok. Add this information to table on page. 49 and
maintains more than 74 miles of hike- revise 3rd bullet under Parks and Preserves:
and-bike trails; 172 athletic fields; and
90 playscapes. Other facilities include Austin has more than 115 miles of trails (74 of
20 recreation centers; 3 senior activity which are hike- and bike- trails), including a 30-mile
centers; 1 garden center; 1 nature and network of trails in the Downtown area.
science center ; 2 art centers; 2 rental
facilities; 5 museums, 6 amphitheaters;
6 golf courses; 108 tennis courts; 47
swimming pools and 2 beach-front
facilities.
The City of Austin's Parks and This information has been added to the table.
Recreation Department (PARD) has
18,000 acres of water recreation areas,
parks and preserves consisting of 13
district parks, 24 metropolitan parks,
74 neighborhood parks, 20 school
parks, 20 pocket parks, 40 greenways,
5 golf courses, 20 recreation centers ,
3 senior activity centers, 4 tennis
centers, 50 aquatic facilities, 38 special
parks, 15 nature preserves. PARD is
operated by over 600 full-time
employees and 1400 seasonal
employees.
3rd bullet: curbside recyclingis bi- every two weeks
monthly, not bi-weekly
2nd bullet: what was the percentage Recent data is sufficient.
decline of households with childern
from 1970 to 1990? Education: How Incorporating count of private schools to page 53:
many private schools are there in the "Students are also able to attend about 30 charter
City limits and ETJ? Are the 100,000 or alternative schools, plus more than 30 private
college students full time residents or schools."
only during the acedemic year?
Count of students during academic year; don't have
breakdown otherwise.
The blue box does not match the Fixed in 9/26 draft.
black/white text layout
It would help to outline the counties Submitted to WRT.
identified as the "region". It would also
help to have the text definition of the
region in the first paragraph on the
previous page for context.
In 2010, the History, Art and Nature Ok. In 2010, the History, Art and Nature Division
Division facilities provided 1,841 adult facilities provided 1,841 adult and children classes
and children classes and provided a and provided a place of employment for 19,250
place of employment for 19,250 local local artists through Park and Recreation programs
artists through Park and Recreation and rentals.
programs and rentals.
In 2010, The History, Art and Nature Not recommended reporting on only division. PD:
Division generated $24,930,340.00 in check with Library and others for more expansive
local economy. bullet?
A growing number of open air Not recommended.
markets, including 88 trailer
restaurants in Austin have capitalize on
the huge audiences that ACL and
SXSW generate. In 2011, there are 11
certified FARMER'S MARKETS in
Austin and over 111 registered arts,
crafts, and farm vendors. The 23rd
Renaissance Market, is the oldest
Artisan market in central Texas and
generally retains 70-100 registered and
licensed artisans.
You may want to add LCRA and TCEQ Not recommended. LCRA & TCEQ are more
to the legal powers that regulate indirect.
development.
Suggest changing the heading to: WRT.
Becoming a Complete Community or
Achieving the Vision, The order of
statements in the vision statement
does not match the order of the matrix,
then again on page 177 it is in another
order all together. It is unnecessarily
confusing. Page 70 has an issue of
text overlap in the footer.
First paragraph: watersheds(space)and Include page #.
are…. Also the last sentence
refereneces LUT20 which has not
been explained or presented yet so it
has not context.
greenways, blueways Not recommended.
watershed and Ok.
The graphic in the upper right corner Updated in 9/26 draft.
for the building blocks is too similar to
the Chapter number graphics. I
suggest changing the color of the
numbers for the blocks so it is easier to
find when thumbing through the
document.
formatting issues? Fixed in 9/26 draft.
This is a statement that might be dated The comments are followed with caveats that
in the future, consider revising to say mention that the area is about reach non-
"currently" or "at the time of printing attainment.
this document" central TX is in
compliance
The two paragraphs on historic Begin historic paragraph: "Many of Austin's current
resources do not feel like they belong. compact and walkable places are rooted in an
One minute your discussing earlier era of city development."
transporation then without any
transition you jump into historic
resources.
Map needs a legend Updated in 9/26 draft.
Solic Waste is now Resource Updated in 9/26 draft.
Recovery Services
Agreed, a cornerstone of the General comment
uniqueness of Austin.
Incubators will serve as a course of Existing plan provisions: From Vision: Austin is
training, allowing support of these early Educated: In partnership with private entities and
entrepreneurs as they grow their the broader community, institutions of higher
knowledge and are supported for the education continue to be incubators for innovation
initial foray. in the cultural arts, medicine, industry, business,
and technology.
ECO Policy 2
Economy Action 9
This can be driven by the city requiring Addressed in actions.
green energy/building, and giving
incentives.
City ordinances and multiple steps for Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
processing continues to be an
impediment for small businees people
working within the system.
This is the one place economy is GC: Green infrastructure priority program--connect
connected to PARD, and I feel that it is to economy
underplayed in this document. The
truth is that the natural resources drive
a huge amount of prosperity to this
city, because of the attractive nature of
living here is often tied to the natural
areas in the city. The young affluent
folks who are largely responsible for
the technology bloom that has kept
Austin vibrant and fiscally sound are
the ones who have a choice where to
locate and pick this city for the outdoor
spaces. Please make more of a focus
on this asset, and how future plans will
play upon them
Was virtual reality and digital media Noted. See rewrite of ECO 6 and ECO 13. This is
selected as the focus for future focused on supporting a current sector of the
attraction, such as climate studies was economy, rather than a central growth tool.
done in Asheville? I do not agree that
it will be effective as a central growth
tool, since that field does not require
massive centralized data gathering, or
other infrastructure. Better to make it a
focus for water issue solutions into the
future; all needed by the south with
global warming increasing.
Unless more parking, mass transit and Noted; this detailed planning happens in small-area
connected trails happen, the downtown plans (i.e., Downtown Plan)
space is near to capacity. Another
area would better serve as a financial
district.
Not unique, not necessary…better to See other edits.
put in a major bioengineering
facility/research center that would
promote technology investments.
This requires the collaboration of the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
school districts, who currently are very
restrictive of allowing students to intern
during school hours. Otherwise, why
locate nearby? The only benefit would
be if a school made use of the
neighboring facility to present
programs and classes at the site….
These companies would need some
incentive or direction to put effort and
resources into that type of program.
Sounds interesting, but an example Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
here would be good, since most folks
won’t know what that would look like.
Again, what’s with virtual reality? Online activity. See the edit combining this and
ECO 6 (#104)
A critical need of the city. Congestion Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
and traffic lights will drive people away,
and it is hard to be sustainable if we
continue to depend on one person car
trips.
Focus should be less on transport, and ok.
more on regional efforts here.
This comment is confusing as it Add to caption: "How has the city improved by
doesn't reference back to what exactly 2039?"
2039 is…
Monitoring and increasing the health, ok.
function, and coverage of Austin's tree
canopy as urbanization occurs.
Case study for Minneapolis, MN would MW: Identify and draft a case study.
be more relevent/comparable to
Austin, or Milwaukee, WI example in
Arbor Day Foundation bulletin #12,
2009
Need a header of some sort to ok.
introduce the action items. Is this an
appendix?
16,000 acres parkland or 19,000 acres PARD has over 19,000 acres of parkland. See ID#
including water amenities/lakes 9317
Austin-Bergstrom… GC: ok. Global search.
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/austinairport/
city-wide Final style check.
You switch back and forth between Should be "priority programs." GC: global search.
"action programs" and "priortiy
programs" for the same thing and then
have "priority actions". It's confusing,
pick one and stick with it.
Parks are not listed in the first Parks are included in the Recreation and Open
sentence however the recreation Space section.
centers are mentioned later on.
Please include parks as part of the
public services that are mentioned
over 18,000. Please list metropolitan Ok.
parks before district park since metros
are larger. Why aren't blueways Include waterways in list.
mentioned? We have Texas Paddle Add bullet to p. 49: Austin has one blueway, the
Trail - see Ch 8 of PARD's Long Lady Bird Lake Paddling Trail. This trail is 11 miles
Range Plan for Land, Facilities and long and features many public access points and
Programs (LRP) recreational opportunities for water-related
activities.
NOTE: also mention Travis County parks on p. 49
Yes, more residents and businesses Noted. Addressed in policies and actions.
should be encouraged to use the
recycling program however this "*Recycling services offered by the City and private
program needs be expanded so that vendors should be expanded and m*ore residents
more residential developments and and businesses need to be encouraged to recycle
businesses may utilize the service, to reduce the amount of solid waste deposited in
particularly the smaller regional landfills."
developments/businesses/city services
that may not be on the current
recycling pickup routes
There is a great deal of reduce bulleted Policies and actions address this.
items yet no mention of increasing
energy efficiency and natural resource
consevation efforts. This is the
direction the City is heading therefore
this document should reflect this
Please revise to: Providing sufficient Not recommended.
funding for maintaining parks and
recreation facilities to sustain
continued population growth and
recreational demands within the City.
There appears to be no information on PD: Check to see if PARD has an example.
Best Practices for parks and recreation
in general or referencing another city
as a case study/point of reference.
The park system is a significant
marketing point for developments
within the City and a major contributor
to Austinite's quaility of life.
multi-use trails, and commuter trails sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and trails.
How do green streets fit in Recreation Green streets are considered green infrastructure
and Open Space when green streets and are used to expand the open space network.
are trees in planter boxes within a wide
sidewalk adjancent to roads while
everything else that is listed is nature-
based instead of concrete-based?
Public art is required for all new Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
development
I feel the emphasis should be on Maintenance gets more focus in the actions.
maintaining our current parks and
bringing all parks up to proper
(minimum industry) maintenance
standards.
Why do all park types have a 1/2 mi Updating with Urban Parks Working Group map.
radious when the service areas vary
due to size of the park? Correct park
service information was previously
provided to Comp Plan staff
currently partner with Texas Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Cooperative Extension to offier
nutrition classes in all of our
afterschool programs.
PARD currently looking into the Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
creation of a sliding scale for use in all
programs.
PARD currently has a "Tackle Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Tobacco" grant that they are using for
education and to create signage and
training to decrease smoking.
easy for recreation centers to host Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
classes just need College contacts to
start the process
all 20 recreation facilities currently offer Noted -- policy doesn't necessarily require city to
lower cost after school and childcare provide.
for ages 5+. Cannot offer under 4 yr
child care without state licensing which
will require each site to meet strict
guidelines and hire a full time certified
manager to oversee that program.
all 20 recreation facilities currently offer Noted -- policy doesn't necessarily require city to
lower cost after school and childcare provide.
for ages 5+. Cannot offer under 4 yr
child care without state licensing which
will require each site to meet strict
guidelines and hire a full time certified
manager to oversee that program.
PARD currently does not have the
ability to transport children from all
local schools. This would require a
partnership with AISD.
AISD has very strict usage policies for Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
it's facilities and it is principal
discression if they allow programs in.
Not likely to open up in summer
months because is when they do their
big maintenance and would have to
pay a staff person to be there.
The History, Arts and Nature Division Ok. Add as 3rd paragraph: The History, Arts and
supports the mission of the The Parks Nature Division of the Parks and Recreation
and Recreation Department by Department provides artistic, cultural and historical
providing artistic, cultural and historical opportunities for the public at its award-winning
experiences for Austin’s public, museums, theaters, and arts centers. They provide
through its museums, theaters, and exhibits, classes, programs, and low-cost or free
arts centers. Through exhibits, classes, use of their facilities which supports a lifelong
programs, and low-cost or free use of learning in the arts and helps incubate local arts.
our facilities, we celebrate Austin’s In 2010, the History, Arts and Nature Division
diverse history and culture, cultivate a facilities experienced 23% growth, as 687,307
lifelong learning in the arts, and visitors attended events and Austin residents were
incubate local arts and community offered 1841 adult and children classes. In
groups. addition, 19,250 local artists were employed in the
division.
The Austin Parks and Recreation
Department provides an extraordinary
array of artistic, cultural, historical and
environmental experiences through its
award-winning museums, theatres,
nature and arts centers. In 2010,
History, Arts and Nature Division
facilities experienced 23% growth, as
in 687,307 visitors attended events
and Austin residents were offered 1841
adult and children classes. In addition,
19,250 citizens were employed in the
division.
This section needs a heading of some Ok.
kind, like Action Plan. The priority
program column is redundant.
Removing it will allow for some
reduction in the number of pages in the
document. Consider alternating the
color fill of the building blocks to
differntiate.
First paragraph, 3rd sentence Buidlign Blocks are introduced in chapter 4.
mentions the building blocks of the
plan that have not been defined or
explained yet and therefore is
confusing.
new trails and bike routes Strike "and bike paths."
28 & 32 should action type should be Ok.
Regulation/Policy
What happens to actions that do not WRT: include discussion of this in new introduction
have corresponding Priority Programs? to action table.
[LUT-] 40 action type should be ok.
CIP/Regulation as parkland dedication
and open space ordinances affect
expansion capabilities
[CE-]12 action type should be ok
Analysis/Programatic
CFS 6 conflicts with CE 12and CFS 4. "passive maintenance" was revised to "best
What is the definitino of "passive maintenance practices" in 9/26 draft.
maintenance practices"? If we are
going to be held to implementing these PD: strike "and prioritizing"
we need clear direction.
CFS 10 is a repeat of CE 21 Delete CE-21.
Revised to: Explore additional funding Updated in 9/26 draft.
sources primarily for the maintenance
of parks as well as for design and
construction, including
through Best Maintenance Practices Updated in 9/26 draft.
CFS 32 - Isn't the Zero Waste Change to: "*I*mplement the Zero Waste Strategic
Strategic Plan already adopted? Plan and *Austin Resource Recovery* Master
Wouldn't it be more accurate just to Plan..."
state "Implement…."
Wouldn't it be more appropriate for this See revised At-A-Glance section.
to be at the beginning of the document,
not the end? I'm worried about the Planning Commission is reviewing for consistency
statement that the plan is "generally" with existing plans. These, and inconsistencies
consistent with existing plans. Anything identified later, could be addressed through plan
not consistent should be removed if updates, either to the master plan or the comp
they are adopted plans in use unless plan.
there are plans to revise.
Instead of "Framework for Decision- Updated in 9/26 draft.
Making" I suggest just plan and simple
"Checklist for Decision-Making" This list is intended to be tailored to specific needs.
because that is what it is. Last two
sentences: Who is the "We" in "We
should also review…."? If setting
targets is determined as
unmanageable, maybe we can just
indicate which ..... What's this
"maybe"? Shouldn't we be giving clear
direction?
Since it's a checklist it should be boxes Not recommended: This list is unlikely to be used
not circles even if it's been as a as is.
graphic for the previous bulleted lists.
Also again this is in a different order
than presented previously.
Seems like we are missing a summary An executive summary will be written.
or end statement
This phrase has different meanings
and interpretations. Include a definition
that relates to its landscape definition,
such as: areas of land without human-
built structures
Add the word "shaded" before the word
"network". This relates to both the
green infrastructure component and
the need for our actions to be mindful
of the Central Texas climate
Minneapolis and Seattle should be
switched so that the cities are sorted in
order of magnitude, they are currently
out of order
Allowing pets on school playgrounds Revise CFS3 to: Expand equitable access for
will cause dog waste on school adults, children, and their pets to active and
grounds which could be unsanitary for passive parks throughout the city by carefully
children. targeting new parks where most needed and
developing public access agreements with non-City-
owned parks and open space.
2nd paragraph has some awckward Existing paragraph
portions Known as a “smart” city, we are also smart
enough to not rest on our laurels. To maintain
our enviable economy and quality of life, we
know Austin must continually adapt as the
world evolves around us. As a fast-growing city
whose population is projected to nearly double
over the next three decades, we are becoming
more urban and diverse each year. Our
attractiveness brings a central challenge:
accommodating more people well, in a
sustainable fashion, so that we get better not
just bigger.
Revised paragraph:
Known as a “smart” city, we are also smart
enough not to rest on our laurels. Maintaining
our enviable economy and quality of life
requires continuous adaptation as the world
evolves around us. As a fast-growing city
whose population is projected nearly to double
over the next three decades, we are becoming
more urban and diverse each year. Our
attractiveness brings a central challenge;
accommodating more people in a considered
and sustainable fashion while preserving what
we value, so that we get better not just bigger.
Existing text
Grow as a compact, connected city.
Austin’s long-term sustainability requires a
fresh focus on redevelopment and infill within
the city’s developed areas. Favoring compact
growth provides a balance to earlier decades of
sprawling, low-density development.
Revised text
Grow as a compact, connected city.
Austin’s long-term sustainability requires a
fresh focus on redevelopment and infill within
the city’s developed areas. Favoring compact
growth presents an alternative direction to
earlier decades of sprawling, low-density
development.
Existing text
Austin’s percentage of the region’s population
has been declining. In 1960, 65 percent of the
region’s population lived within the Austin city
limits; however, by 2000, this had dropped to
52.5 percent, and by 2010 it dropped to 46
percent.
Revised text
Austin’s share of the region’s population has
been declining. In 1960, 65 percent of the
region’s population lived within the Austin city
limits; however, by 2000, this had dropped to
52.5 percent, and by 2010 it dropped to 46
percent.
WRT
Poverty
In 2011, 21 percent of Austin’s residents lived
below the poverty line. Almost one-third of all
children under the age of five lived in poverty.
Nearly 10 percent of the city’s residents over
the age of 65 lived in poverty.
Revised bullet:
Educational attainment
Austin’s population is well-educated. In 2009,
44 percent of residents aged 25 and older had
at least a bachelor’s degree, and almost 16
percent had a graduate or professional degree.
These rates are much higher than the state as a
whole: in 2009, only 27 percent of all Texans
aged 25 and over had at least a bachelor’s
degree, and 9 percent had a graduate or
professional degree.--This is covered by
ID#185.2
Existing text
Austin’s population is projected to almost
double over the next 30 years requiring new
and redeveloped housing to accommodate the
City’s growing population.
Revised text
Austin’s population is projected almost to
double over the next 30 years requiring new
and redeveloped housing to accommodate the
City’s growing population.
Revised 1st paragraph
Austin today is model of livability, widely
acclaimed as one of the top metropolitan areas
in the country. We have a distinctive and
appealing vibe, a resilient economy, a growing
national profile, good job and business
opportunities, a fun and relaxed way of life, a
beautiful natural setting for outdoor living and
recreation, a thriving arts and live music scene,
and a reasonable cost of living for a big city. In
fact, we’re so attractive that we draw over one
million visitors and many thousands of new
residents annually.
Revised text for 2 paragraphs
This comprehensive plan focuses on creating a
sustainable city. The way Austin has grown for
the last 60 years comes at a troubling price in
terms of social segregation and isolation,
public health, diminished air and water quality,
loss of natural open space and agricultural
lands, and climate change. Sprawling, low-
density development drives up the public costs
for roads, water lines, and other infrastructure
that must be continually extended to far-flung
new development. Austin simply can’t afford to
ignore the costs associated with the way we’ve
grown; the patterns of the past decades are
neither environmentally nor fiscally sustainable.
Growing in accordance with this plan offers us
a way to do it better. It offers us more choices
for where and how to live and work. A more
compact and connected city can reduce the
distances that people drive to work, shopping,
or to find an home they can afford. A more
compact, connected city can reduce the
stressful hours spent stuck in traffic and
commuting alone, and free up precious time for
more pleasant and meaningful pursuits.
Ok
Ok
MW
A Framework for the Future
Achieving the goal of complete communities across
Austin requires more than a vision statement.
While the vision describes the type of place Austin
should become as it approaches its bicentennial; it
does not identify the steps to make it happen. The
framework for realizing the vision is contained in
the Growth Concept Map and Building Blocks. The
framework is further refined by the actions in
Chapter 5.
(Figure 4.4) applies the Imagine Austin Vision
Statement to the city’s physical development.
Generated through a public scenario-building
process, it defines how we plan to accommodate
new residents, jobs, mixed-use areas, open space,
and transportation infrastructure over the next 30
years.
broad-ranging policies to implement the vision.
They cover fourteen general subject areas,
including the Austin City Charter-required
comprehensive plan elements and several others
that were developed based on public input. The
elements indicated by an asterisk are required by
the Austin City Charter.
Add new first bullet under Climate change and
greenhouse gas emissions: "In 2010, the entire
community within Travis County (including
residents, businesses, and the governments) were
responsible for emissions equivalent to 14.9 million
tons of carbon dioxide (the standard measure for
greenhouse gas emissions). Just over half of these
emissions resulted from energy use; another third
were the result of transportation; the final eleven
percent were the result of waste and wastewater
treatment. Per person, this was lower than the
average Texan (equivalent to 15 tons of carbon
dioxide for Travis County, versus 25 tons for
Texans overall) and the average U.S. citizen (19
tons)."
The plan does not provide the goal or Incorporate Charter language into p. 2 with Vision
purpose or assign responsibility for the intro.
document.
The statement that Austin is known as Not recommended
a “smart” city is self-serving and
inappropriate. PD Note: Revise to
well-educated??
Is the reference to “Best City in Not recommended
Country” lists appropriate for a
“generational” document?
Under “Tackling the Racial Divide,” Not recommended
the reference to racism is
inappropriate.
What purpose does the quotation It helps to make the case that now is a good time to
under the heading “Securing a act.
Sustainable Future” serve?
The definition of sustainability should See Sustainability office edit (#9073)
include the preservation of an
acceptable quality of life for our
residents.
The last two paragraphs should See Sustainability office edit (#9073)
address job growth and prosperity.
Adopting “Grow as a compact, Addressed by Vision statement. Also, improved
connected city” ignores the fact that connections applies to suburban and rural areas as
the City incorporates suburban and well.
rural areas over its 300+ square miles.
This aspect of the City’s geography
should be addressed.
“The Road Ahead” section is gratuitous Not recommended
and overreaching. It rambles and
proposes no definitive actions.
Under the “Chapter 4” heading, the Not recommended
statement is made “where new
development over the next 30 years
should be located to support the
vision.” There is no justification as to
who determined should be located.”
The paragraph “We are a Unique Change made in 9/26 draft.
Community” is self-serving. It is OK to
say who we are without denigrating
other cities.
Second paragraph – delete the Not recommended -- unclear what the issue is.
reference to IBM.
Under “Median Incomes,” an income Data received from WRT and incorporated into
histogram would be helpful as would a table in PeerCityInfo worksheet
chart comparing costs of living among
Texas Cities (to support the statement
“Austin has one of the highest costs of
living in Texas).
Under the “Poverty” heading, please According to the Department of Health and Human
state what the poverty level is. Services, the 2011 poverty level for a family of four
is $22,350
Please confirm the bicycling numbers. Bike number are correct.
I believe the 1% number is incorrect. If
it is taken from census track data,
please be aware that this data set does
not include university students.
Under “Transit,” note that the bus line Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
routes do not reflect or serve potential
demand.
This statement is inconsistent with Not recommended.
previous discussion about sprawl.
Please confirm and reconcile.
The unemployment rate cited in the September 2011 unemployment rate was 7.4%
second bullet under “Labor Force” is (higher than the 7.1% cited in the text). Will forward
not the same as that which has been to WRT.
recently reported in the media. http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-
gen/blogs/austin/theticker/entries/2011/10/21/unem
ployment_rates_stay_flat_i.html
The second bulleted item under The wage, updated to $17 in the 9/26 draft is a
“Wages” stated the living wage must household wage; the City's contacts are for
be $13.81. Where did this number individual wages. Also, "Living Wage" may not be
come from? The City currently understood by all readers.
requires $11.00 as a living wage under
its contracts. Please reconcile. Revised to: In Travis County, to a household with
one adult and one child must earn an hourly rate of
about $17.00 in order to pay typical monthly
household expenses. Typical hourly wages in food
preparation, personal care, farming, construction,
production, and transportation and material moving
are below the living wage.
The second bulleted item under "The region has diverse plant and animal habitats
“Biodiversity” identifies several species that transition from east to west. The karst
as endangered. Please ensure this is a landscapes of the Balcones Escarpment and
correct designation, as care should be Edwards Plateau are home to many unique and
taken in using this term and its rare species of birds, salamanders, and
incorrect usage would be in conflict invertebrates, some of which are listed as
with several City projects and endangered under federal law. Austin is also
initiatives. located along the central flyway for North American
bird migration."
The second bulleted item states Not recommended.
“Climate scientists predict that the
Central Texas region could become
warmer and drier.” This statement
might be controversial and a proof
statement should be added.
The statistics for public safety According to APD, no national standards or
response times should be compared to averages exist, because response time vary so
industry averages to provide context. much with geography. APD has yearly targets.
The statement “We have invested in Ok. Add to p. 48 There is a need for the City of
high-quality facilities…” This statement Austin to upgrade older facilities.
is most certainly not true for the
facilities housing our field operations
for the infrastructure
departments.
There is no discussion of See new introduction to City Facilities & Services
infrastructure, e.g. roads, bridges, and building block.
stormwater. These facilities are part of
the competition for City resources and
must be addressed.
The discussion should include an Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
analysis over the demand for services
from the City by regional entities that
do not support those facilities and
services with tax dollars. specifically,
the unbalance of taxes taken by the
Travis County government from the
City compared to the lack of
investment within the City is a net
outflow of dollars which drains
resources.
Under “A Framework for the Future,” The process for creating the plan is mostly handled
conclusions are provided without any in an appendix.
discussion of the process used to
arrive at that conclusion.
Please change the second sentence, Sept 26th version "should evolve"
first paragraph to read, “ …the City’s
physical development pattern might
evolve…”
Under “job Centers,” please delete the Paragraph with clause removed,
reference to IBM.
Job centers contain mostly of office and industrial
uses. Development can occur at a range of scales,
depending on zoning and small area studies such
as neighborhood or corridor plans. Job centers
include major employers such as industrial uses
such as warehouses, large office parks,
manufacturing, and other uses not compatible with
residential areas. While these centers are currently
best served by car, the Growth Concept Map
increases public transit options such as light rail,
and bus rapid transit) to shift the reliance away
from the automobile.
Recommend a statement be added Regarding transportation infrastructure: P.88: 4th
addressing the need to reduce bullet: Coordinating land use, transportation…
development burden while protecting policies to address the inefficiency of infrastructure
the overall quality of life. There also having to keep up with green field development and
needs to be a discussion of incentivize infill and redevelopment.
maintaining the transportation
infrastructure and better use of the Could add bullet on p.42 under What Does It Mean:
City’s right of way. As the City of Austin continues to grow, we must
maintain transportation infrastructure including
roads, right-of-way, sidewalks, bike lanes, and
trails.
There is no mention of infrastructure Infrastructure Policies found on pg.117, 118
policies in the document.
The title is confusing. “Programs for Updated as part of Chap 5 revisions.
Action” is more appropriate. It relates
well to the “Principles for Action”
articulated in Chapter 1. “Priority
Actions” are distinguished from actions
in matrix and using the title “Priority
Programs” only causes confusion.
Highlight text “The eight action Updated as part of Chap 5 revisions and remains
programs are:” Change title to “Eight Priority Programs
Programs for Action.”
Providing a graphic diagram illustrating OK. Being addressed through the rewrite of
how the programs “reflect the vision Chapter 5
statement and core principles” would
be helpful to clarify how the vision is
carried out by these programs and
priority actions.
For clarity provide a full page for each Ok.
of the eight priority programs
(programs for action). This may also
allow room to provide other action
items below priority actions that relate
to programs.
The “green infrastructure” discussion Ch. 5 Re-write
should also address methods of OK, Revision of Chapter 5 is in progress, will
construction and materials selections. include some limited discussion of construction and
materials (e.g., permeable pavers) under green
infrastructure
Provide a new heading entitled “Action Ok. WRT.
Matrix” similar to the prior “Priority
Programs” section and the following
“Using the Comprehensive Plan”
section.
The last sentence in the opening Not recommended.
paragraph seems to downplay the fact
the plan will be “monitored and
evaluated” and undoubtedly changed
on a regular (yearly) basis. The phrase
amendment to the comprehensive plan
may be considered by the City Council”
should be changed to “amendments to
the comprehensive plan shall be
brought before City Council for
consideration on a yearly basis.”
The “Consistency with existing plans Not recommended.
and zoning” section needs to take a
stronger stance that the
comprehensive plan takes precedence
over all neighborhood, station area and
corridor plans. It is good to note these
plans came prior to the comprehensive
plan and many of recommendations
align with and were absorbed into the
comprehensive plan; however, moving
forward he comprehensive plan must
take precedence if Austin is to achieve
the vision articulated. To attach
previous plans and FLUMs without full
alignment to the comprehensive plan
will continue the balkanization of Austin
into a collection of neighborhoods
rather than a unified city.
“Local Partnerships / Capacity The City of Austin currently has relationships with a
Building” and “Regional Coordination”. number of surrounding local governments and
As a matter of example list agencies such as Travis County, Capital
organizations, entities and Metropolitan Transportation Agency, and Central
municipalities that the City currently Health. In order to more fully realize the goals of
has active relationships with in regards Imagine Austin these relationships may need to be
to our Comprehensive Plan and other strengthened and those with other organizations
entities that the City needs to ally with. such as area school districts, colleges, and
universities made more firm.
For clarity the checklist should be Ok. WRT.
presented as a stand alone exhibit on
two pages with it’s own heading such
as “Decision Making Checklist”
For clarity the checklist should be Ok -- move to appendix.
presented as a stand alone exhibit on
two pages with it’s own heading such
as “Decision Making Checklist”
For consistency the Principals of the Ok.
Vision should be ordered as they are
on pg. 19. Naming should match
throughout document.
For consistency the Principals of the Ok. WRT.
Vision should be ordered as they are
on pg. 19. Naming should match
throughout document.
Checklist items should be based on Ok
items listed on pg. 68-71. It appears
criteria for assessing proposals does
not capture all the ideas and concerns
of the principals in Chapter 3
Checklist items should be based on This list captures key concepts from the Vision,
items listed on pg. 68-71. It appears informed by the policies.
criteria for assessing proposals does
not capture all the ideas and concerns
of the principals in Chapter 3
The last item in “Additional Criteria” WRT.
regarding tourism should more
appropriately placed in the
“prosperous” section.
“Annual Report” If within the intent of Charter specifies annual reports.
the City’s charter, consider reporting
on a bi-annual basis which is offset
with a bi-annual budget. The approved
2 year budget can inform the Comp
Plan report and vice versa.
“Complete Communities Indicators” Ch. 5 Re-write
should be consistently ordered with ok.
Principals of the Vision listed on pg. 19
“Complete Communities Indicators” Ok. WRT is including.
Since “all indicators were calculated for
the planning area” this section should
refer back to charts, diagrams and
tables listed previously in report or
provide benchmark indicators as an
appendix.
“Complete Communities Indicators”
Since “all indicators were calculated for
the planning area” this section should
refer back to charts, diagrams and
tables listed previously in report or
provide benchmark indicators as an
appendix.
In the tables provided, it would be OK, revising Chapter 5 to include this
helpful to match the actions with the
responsible entities per City code.
For clarity provide an introductory Revising to organize actions by program
paragraph (and white space) to explain
the shift from organizing action items
by Program to organizing action items
by Building Block policies.
Change headings to “Building Block 1/ Revising to organize actions by program
Land Use and Transportation Policies,”
“Building Block 2 / Housing and
Neighborhood Policies,” and so forth.
This follows syntax order in chapter 4
and helps reinforce the idea of seven
groups of policies to direct ongoing
decisions.
Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
Not recommended. The rest of the paragraph
addresses completeness.
Ok. Revise to "By strengthening our "green
infrastructure"-parks, the urban forest, urban trails,
greenways, rivers, creeks, lakes, gardens, urban
agriculture, open spaces, and wildlife habitat-Austin
can protect the natural environment and enhance
recreational opportunities.
2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence – “As a This refers to preparing for expected changes to
city, we need to respect our natural Austin's climate -- stormier, hotter, drier. The
constraints, mitigate and adapt to primary tool for this is by identifying it as an issue,
climate change...” What does “adapt to to be worked through by the Climate Protection
climate change” mean? Please Plan.
elaborate on how this plan hopes to
help Austin adapt to climate change.
2nd paragraph, 4th sentence – “Now Addressed in chapter 5 (Local
Austinites and their city government Partnerships/Capacity Building)
must work collaboratively...” Does the
Plan provide a goal/action item
towards building more trust between
citizens and the local government?
Should we? Did that come up in the
process? I think it is key. This could
also be expanded upon in the 5th
paragraph on the same page, under
“Agree to work together” – Could we
provide a better working environemnet
for citizens and governement, could
this section be stronger?
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence – “In the Not recommended -- we're trying to avoid "and/or".
past, Austin debates were often
simplistically framed as developers
versus neighborhoods and/or the
environement.”
Under “Chapter 4. Shaping Austin...” If Best practices are drawn from other cities.
this chapter includes key issues,
challenges, and best practice ideas
from other communities, did this come
from other cities, or from the citizens
within the Imagine Austin process?
Under “The Austin Spirit,” 2nd "as part of", but not ultimately "responsible for."
paragraph, 1st sentence, “While no city
program is ever going to be
responsible for this spirit...” Why not?
In the sense of improving
governement/citizen relations,
shouldn’t the government be seen as
part of making Austin’s spirit?
3rd paragraph, 4th sentence. Was the During the early 1970s, an overtaxed electrical grid
Texas Nuecelar Project ever built? It caused a series of major brownouts. These
isn’t clear if it was or wasn’t. Please brownouts, coupled with the rising price of natural
clarify. gas and the national energy crisis pointed to the
need for new electricity supplies. To supply the
needed electricity, coal-fired energy plants were
constructed as an alternative to natural gas.
Following a close election in 1973, voters approved
the City of Austin’s participation in a partnership to
construct a new nuclear power plant, the South
Texas Nuclear Project. Major cost overruns and
project delays, nuclear energy issues generally,
and pollution caused by coal-fired power plants
proved highly divisive. In 1981 Austin voters
authorized the sale the City’s 16 percent share in
the project; however, no buyers could be found.
The issues associated with nuclear energy and the
concerns over the pollution and greenhouse gas
emissions of coal-fired plants colored by Austin’s
“green” sensibility, has led to the development of
alternative energy sources and increased energy
efficiency programs.
If we are showing “high capaicity Not recommended. The High Capacity Transit
transit” lines, we also need to show that's currently shown is the Red Line, currently
bicycle super routes and major urban running. The bicycle superroutes are only
trails. For p. 25 in particular, if we are conceptual at this stage.
simply showing the ETJ and
boundaries, then is it important to also
show high capacity transit lines?
Existing Bullet:
In 2000, Austin was comparatively less dense than
other major cities in Texas and
national comparable cities.
Revised
In 2010 Austin was more dense (2,653 persons per
square mile) than in 2000 (2,477 persons per
square mile) it remains comparatively less dense
than most major cities in Texas as well as other
cities across the country.
Under “Transportation Costs” – If the p. 42: Add new "What does it mean?" bullet: "The
average household in Austin-RR average household in the Austin region spends one-
spends 23.3% on transportation costs, quarter of its income on transportation, contributing
what does that mean? Can we include to unaffordability in Austin and the region." (Data is
a point under “What Does it Mean,” to only available at the MSA level.)
elaborate on why? Portland, Seattle,
and even Dallas are bigger cities and
have a greater population and more
transit services, is this why they spend
relatively the same on transportation
given that they may have to go farther?
Existing Bullet:
The Bicycle Master Plan recommends 900 miles of
bicycle lanes (130 miles exist) and 350 miles of
multi-use trails (50 miles exist).
Revised
The Bicycle Master Plan recommends 900 miles of
bicycle lanes (130 miles currently exist) and 350
miles of multi-use trails (50 miles currently
exist)—when the plan is fully realized, there will be
bicycle lanes on 21.3 percent of Austin’s roadways.
Existing
Since adopting the Bicycle Master Plan in 2009, the
Bicycle Program has installed about 15 new and
improved miles per year.
Revised
Since adopting the Bicycle Plan in 2009, the
Bicycle Program has installed about 15 new and
improved bicycle facilities per year.
See ID# 9039
What Does it Mean? – Not recommended.
Transportation – Add bullet about
the fact that we have the same
transportation costs as peer cities,
but less density. What does this
mean? Does it mean that if we don’t
grow in a way that increases
density, transportation costs will go
up? If so, we should say that here.
Existing
In 2005, about 7 percent of households did not
have access to a vehicle and 43 percent had
one vehicle available. Transit provides a lower-
cost way for residents to travel, but limited
transit options and limited routes reduce their
access to jobs and services throughout the
greater Austin area.
Rewrite:
In 2005, about 7 percent of households did not
have access to a vehicle and 43 percent had
one vehicle available. Transportation choices
other than an automobile can provide lower-
cost options; however, transit route and service
limitations and gaps in the sidewalk and bicycle
networks can increase travel times and reduce
access to jobs and services throughout the
greater Austin area.
Existing
In the past decade, Austin has worked to change
the focus of its transportation policies and can point
to significant impacts made by its growing transit
system.
Revised
In the past decade Austin has worked to change
the focus of its transportation policies and can point
to significant impacts made by its growing transit,
bicycle, and sidewalk networks.
Add bullet – “Austin’s young Not recommended.
demographic offers an opportunity for
increasing the proportion of our
community that chooses to use a
bicycle for transportation. According to
a white paper from the City of Portland,
60% of the general public is interested
in cycling, but concerned about safety.
Implementation of the Bicycle Master
Plan will create the facilities that
improve the perception of safety for
new and existing cyclists.”
1st bullet under “what does it mean” – Rephrase 1st bullet: "Water supply and quality will
is inconsistent with 4th bullet on p. 46 be two of the most critical issues facing Austin as it
that states that there is sufficient water adds population in the future."
until 2050.
add another bullet under “what does it Already covered by 1st and 3rd bullets.
mean” about what it means that Austin
is becoming “hotter and drier.” Is this
good or bad? What will the effect be
on population growth, the economy,
etc?
Separate Greenways and Urban Trails Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
– The Bike Plan calls for 350 miles of
Urban Trails.
add a bullet under “what does it mean” Split current bullet in two:
– Explain what it means to have the
highest per capita parkland, but the The City has an above-average amount of
lowest spending. Does this mean the parkland, but funding for maintenance has not kept
quality of our parks is bad? For up.
example, Seattle has the lowest
amount of parkland per capita, but the More attention needs to be paid to creating smaller
highest spending. So do they have parks that are within walking distance or in
great parks, just not as many? neighborhoods. The absence of these smaller
parks means that many areas of the city are not
adequately served by the park system.
Existing
Rising housing costs, school quality, and access to
healthcare and social services are major
considerations for families and residents living in
Austin.
Revised
Rising housing and transportation costs, school
quality, and access to healthcare and social
services are major considerations for families and
residents living in Austin.
What Does It Mean – Security and Delete 3rd sentence from 1st bullet and revise 2nd
Health (last bullet) sentence to "Rising housing cost due to increased
1st bullet not supported well by the demand and limited supply, school quality….
information in the related sections.
“Design of the physical environment Revise 5th bullet to: Design of the physical
affects public health. Ensuring that environment affects public health. Ensuring that
new development creates walkable new development creates walkable and bicycle-
and bicycle-friendly communities friendly communities with safe pedestrian and
with safe pedestrian and bicycle bicycle facilities and recreation opportunities can
facilities and recreation promote the health and well-being of Austin’s
opportunities can promote the residents and reduce the risk factors associated
health and well-being of Austin’s with diabetes, heart disease, and obesity
residents and reduce the risk
factors associated with diabetes,
heart disease, and obesity.”
Should car or automobile be used? Not recommended.
I’ve seen them both used throughout.
Revised Text
As the region’s population struggles with rising
costs, the shortcomings of the regional
transportation system become even more
pronounced. The regional transportation network is
built for cars, and the growing congestion we see is
the direct result of increasingly distant growth with
few transportation options. Too many people live
and work in places where densities are too low to
support regular transit service or are outside of a
transit agency’s service area. In many places
served by transit, the routes, frequency of service,
and location of stops are so limited that people do
not view it as a viable alternative to driving.
Not recommended.
Not recommended.
TF 1/31: Not recommended.
Not recommended.
Make “Reduce vehicle miles traveled” New Bullet:
its own bullet. Reduce vehicle miles traveled
Ok: “While these centers are currently best served
by car, the Growth Concept Map increases bicycle
and public transit options…”
under Highways and other Streets – Ok.
please search for “bike” and replace all
with “bicycle.” We prefer to use bicycle
in our documents for consistency.
Include Urban Trail “Super Routes” on To WRT: explanation of the other maps in the
map – it may be near impossible to Growth Concept Map series. For this map, we need
show sidewalks – so why call it to explain that the activity centers and corridors are
“Pedestrian?” We can show our key walkable/pedestrian-friendly areas.
highest need sidewalks if needed.
add Urban Trails Including as a separate map (bicycle & pedestrian
features).
Ok. Revise to "Coordinating land use,
transportation, environmental, economic
development policies to address the efficiency of
infrastructure having to keep up with "green field"
development and invcentivize infill and
redevelopment.
Ok. LUT3 – “Promote development in compact
centers, communities, or along corridors that are
connected by roads and transit, are designed to
encourage walking and bicycling, and reduce
health care, housing, and transportation costs.”
Not recommended.
New Policy LUT 27 “Evaluate current Add New LUT Action “Evaluate and make needed
off-street parking regulations to ensure revisions to parking regulations to ensure they
they balance multi-modal needs with balance the needs of various transportation
other goals.” options.”
Under “Key Issues” 2nd bullet – Is this Not sure -- no standard measure for segregation?
segregation in line with peer cities The point of this bullet is to acknowledge that
across the US? segregation still exists.
under “Key Issues “ 3rd bullet – How See peer cities chart for information relating to
does this compare to peer cities? affordability.
under “Key Challenges” – Does our Add new challenge: "Preserving Austin's quality of
identity/image relate to the economy? life and expanding its image to more fully embrace
If so, we should say so. Images like, its diversity of cultures, experiences, and
“live music,” “City in a park,” “bicycle- opportunities."
friendly,” “green,” etc.
Not recommended. Trails should remain general.
Ok. “They create and convey many of the
necessities of modern life (electricity,
transportation, solid waste…”
Revised paragraph:
Recreation and Open Space
Austin has over 18,000 acres of parks and
preserves consisting of district parks,
metropolitan parks, neighborhood parks,
school parks, pocket parks, greenways, golf
courses, senior activity centers, tennis courts,
special parks, and nature preserves. The Austin
Parks and Recreation Department is
responsible for the management of parks,
recreational centers, museums, cultural
centers, a botanical garden, a nature center,
and an urban forestry program. The Public
Works and Parks and Recreation Departments
are working together to implement an enhanced
and interconnected bicycling, pedestrian and
trails network. Parks, trails, and preserves
contribute to the city’s green infrastructure
network— the natural life support system that
includes wilderness, parks, greenways,
conservation easements, tree canopy, and
working lands with conservation value. The
network includes the natural resource areas
described in the Conservation and Environment
Building Block that includes such areas as
wetlands, woodlands, waterways, conservation
lands, forests, farms and ranches, and outdoor
recreational areas and trails. Integrating nature
"Strengthening strengthening our green
into the city bypartnerships between the City of
Austin and private organizations…"
Not recommended.
The multi-use trail component here will RO 3: (See also LUT 22; UD 4; N 1; CER 10)
need to be listed in LUT too.
Add urban trails map. Will be included as bike/pedestrian map in Growth
Concept Map series.
Not recommended. Covered under LUT Action 11
and CFS Action 25
Possible change: LUT Action 11: Develop land
use and transportation polices and regulations that
promote the development of projects that
encourage more active and healthy lifestyles such
as community gardens, tree-shaded sidewalks and
trails, bicycle parking, showers within office
buildings, and having daily needs within proxmity to
home and work.
CFE1 – “Develop public transportation Ok. Revise CFE1 to " Develop transportation
options…” options that link all areas of the City, are affordable
to economically disadvantaged groups, and provide
access to job opportunities and services.
CFS-10, CFS-25, CE-12, HN-18, LUT-3, LUT-11,
LUT-12
CFE15 – change bike to bicycle… Ok. Change throughout plan: pages 79, 90 (x2),
128, 141.
Ok. Change to "Ensuring that affordable resident
units and transportation options are available for
artists as housing costs and land values in the
urban core rise.
Not recommended -- already covered with first
mention of affordable.
Not recommended.
1st paragraph – add 4th sentence, Revised Priority Programs.
“The purposed Bicycle, Urban Trail,
and Greenway systems will also
provide framework towards this action
item.”
Change LUT Action 21 to "Create a network of on
and off-street physically separated bicycle and
walking routes or trails linking all parts of Austin
and the region."
Not recommended. Original action (CFS-10)
addresses this.
Not recommended.
Create a trails master plan is on there Revised Priority Programs.
twice – combine references (CE Action
21 and CFS Action 10).
Ok. Add new bullet "Add more bicycle carrying
capacity to buses and trains"
LUT Action 21 – Add recommendation Change LUT Action 21 to "Create a network of on
from p. 140 – OR – can you clarify for and off-street physically separated bicycle and
us what “separated means?” Is it a walking routes or trails linking all parts of Austin
cycletrack, buffered bike lanes, trails, and the region."
or just a bicycle lane?
Covered under LUT Action 11 and CFS Action 25
Ok. Partially covered by LUT Action 27. Revise to:
LUT Action 27-Promote increased bicycling and
walking through traffic enforcement, program
evaluation, and developing and integrating Web-
based tools, mobile applications and other
educational materials.
Not recommended.
Ok: "bikesharing and bicycle facilities and
accommodations"
General Comment – Green Revised Priority Programs -- address varying levels
Infrastructure should be defined – does of access to different features..
this allow trails to be located within the
green infrastructure?
Not recommended.
Are Bicycle and Sidewalk Plans Only Bicycle Plan (only one currently attached to
included in Appendix D? Austin Tomorrow).
1st bullet: see revised Priority Programs;
3rd bullet: ok
7th bullet: ok
10th bullet: to WRT (compare with Bicycle and
Sidewalk plans)
Complete Communities Indicators Not recommended.
Indicators are a great way to track
progress over time. They are even
more powerful if they provide a broader
frame of reference by comparing
Austin’s progress with other peer cities.
The indicators as proposed will help
Austin evaluate whether it is becoming
a better, more sustainable, more
livable City over time. Including data
from other cities for key indicators is
the only way to evaluate whether
Austin is achieving its vision of being a
“beacon of sustainability, social equity,
and economic opportunity”.
Natural and Sustainable Indicators Forward to PC
Impervious cover: track on per capita
basis in addition to calculating percent
add 3rd bullet – BMT (Bicycle Miles Added sidewalks and bicycle lanes (linear miles) as
Traveled) – talk to Greg Griffin at well as bicycle miles traveled.
CAMPO for a formula to get a baseline
and track to the future. ADD “linear” to
bicycle and sidewalk miles.
Mobile and Interconnected Indicators Forward to PC
● Vehicle miles traveled: track per
capita in addition to tracking total
● Sidewalks: track % of street
frontages with sidewalks in addition to
miles
● Add Urban Trails Indicator:
Population within ¼ mile of an urban
trail (percent)
Appendix: Attached Plans Current rule for attachments: if it's attached to
● Include Bicycle Master Plan and ATCP. The Bicycle Master Plan is attached to
Sidewalk Master Plan ATCP, but the Sidewalk Master Plan is
not.Sidewalk Plan will be listed in Appendix but not
attached.
Second bullet - What is “exurbuan”? Fringe suburban areas, very low density.
Austin is Natural and Sustainable”: Not recommended.
Include statement, “We value our water
bodies and therefore manage
watersheds to protect them from
adverse impacts of urbanization.”
Please update the SH-45 text on page September 26th draft corrected this.
78 to match what was included on the
larger Growth Concept Map (non-
degradation standard, etc.).
Where there is potential for riparian Incorporate reference to ongoing Watershed
buffers (east side), will we let the Protection Ordinance in the green infrastructure
natural meandering process happen priority program, which addresses this.
within the buffer zones, or will we seek
to “fix” the locations of creek channels?
“Other Development Within City Limits” Include at end of description: "New development
and “Other Development in the ETJ”: should also incorporate and respect green
We should include statements similar infrastructure to preserve environmental quality."
to the one contained in the
development over the Edwards Aquifer
in terms of addressing water quality.
Green infrastructure should be
incorporated in development to
improve water quality and conserve
drinkable water.
Bike and trailways are not depicted on Split ped/bike/transit map in 2: ped/bike and transit.
this map.
Concern was raised that the From the revised text describing the elements
Town/Regional Center at Rt. 45 and of the GCM-p. 78
IH35 could create incentive to connect The mixed-use centers and mixed-use corridors
MOPAC and I35 through the Recharge are places where many Austinites will live their
Zone. Consider adding elements for lives—reside, work, shop, access services,
walk-able communities instead of a car people watch, recreate, and hang out. The
centric plan. design and availability of parks and gathering
spaces, the design of buildings, and the overall
scale of the built environment will indicate that
these are places for people. These places will
be walkable, bikable, and connected to one
another and the rest of the city and region by
transit. Although there are many similarities
between the two, there are important
differences. Depending on their size and
location, centers are likely to be focused on one
or more major transit stops, and feature a mix
of retail, offices, open space and parks, public
uses such as libraries and government offices,
and a variety of housing options. Because of
their generally compact shape, it will be a quick
trip to travel from one side of a center to the
other by foot, bicycle, transit, or automobile.
The character of the centers will vary
depending on their location and scale and are
Encourage the Eastside regional & characterized into three types—regional, town,
See above (9226)
town centers as destinations, so they
don’t become a collection of strip malls
that are only accessed by cars.
“Landuse and Transportation”: In Covered: LUT Action-19: Develop complete
addition to limiting roads in sensitive streets design guidelines and require these
areas, we should minimize new standards for all new road construction and
impervious cover and build “green reconstruction:
streets” that treat stormwater, conserve
potable water, etc. Green Street Techniques/Green Infrastructure Best
http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/ Management Practices
greenstreets/ This might fit into LUT
22 or be a stand alone. LUT-35: Developm standards for green building for
new construction and remodels.
LUT Action-36: Incentivize appropriately-scaled
and located green infrastructure and public spaces
in al new development and redevelopment projects.
LUT Action-37: Develop a regulatory framework to
incentivize use of Low Impact Development design
features such as increase pemeable surfaces,
green roofs, and green streets.
“Urban Design”: Incorporate UD 6. integrate green infrastructure elements such
stormwater treatment facilities into as the urban forest, green buildings, stormwater
urban areas and parks. Rainwater treatment and infiltration facilities, and green
harvesting, fountains using captured streets into the urban design of the city through
stormwater, beautiful landscaped “green” development practices and regulations.
areas irrigated with stormwater –
include this function in our multi-
functional areas.
“Economic Policies”: Reward and Not recommended. EGRSO states it would be
create incentives for sustainable difficult to define and implement this distinction, as
business. it would require a judgment to be made as to what
is “sustainable.” It may also limit or restrict new
business in ways unanticipated. They currently
consider the impact of a business to the community
when considering an incentive (i.e. requirement to
locate within the DDZ). Clean technology is a
targeted industry, which generally covers
sustainable business. The issue here is 1) clarifying
what is a sustainable business and 2) what type of
incentive does this individual have in mind.
“Conservation and Environmental See revised Priority Programs
Policies”: “Develop watershed
management plans linked to receiving
water impacts.” “Implement innovative
water quality controls in urban areas
and any area developed without
controls.” “Allow and encourage gray
water reuse.”
WPD 7 – We need to reduce both Ok: "WPD 7. Reduce the public safety threats of
flooding in 100-year floodplains and flooding."
localized flooding outside of the
floodplain. While the most severe and
dangerous flooding typically occurs
along waterways, the vast majority of
flood-related complaints from Austin
residents are related to localized
flooding. Localized flooding needs to
be more explicitly considered in the
document.
Similarly to WPD 2, we need to replace Ok. "WPD 2. Maintain water, wastewater, and
and maintain the storm drainage stormwater infrastructure through its useful life and
system infrastructure. This is especially replace aged infrastructure as conditions warrant.
true of the aging infrastructure in the Continue to ensure safe and reliable service."
downtown area. The WPD 2 item is
one of the few references to the
replacement or maintenance of
existing City infrastructure.
Maintenance of existing infrastructure
will be just as important as the guiding
of new and infill development that is
the focus of the document and should
receive more attention in the
document.
“Wastewater, Potable Water, and WPD 1. Deliver potable water to Austin’s residents
Drainage Policies”: “Develop as the population grows and maintain an efficient
watershed management plans linked to and sustainable water and drainage system in
receiving water impacts.” “Implement support of the Growth Concept Map.
innovative water quality controls in
urban areas and any area developed
without controls.” “Incorporate Green
Infrastructure into City facilities.”
“Allow and encourage gray water
reuse.” There is a lot of discussion
about infill, but no a discussion or
mention of the need to upgrade or
replace existing drainage infrastructure
in Chapter 4. On page 115 it states a
challenge is to reduce stormwater
runoff and improve groundwater
infiltration. This will be difficult,
especially for infill areas.
are the “Wastewater, Potable Water Ok: "WPD 2. Maintain water, wastewater, and
and Drainage Policies.” There should drainage infrastructure …"
be something added for local flood. For
example, in WP2 add the word
“drainage”: Replace and maintain
water, wastewater and drainage pipes
and infrastructure.
“Recreation and Open Space”: CFS Action-25 addresses this.
“Incorporate stormwater treatment
facilities into park areas – overlay
functions. Rainwater harvesting,
fountains using captured stormwater,
beautiful landscaped areas irrigated
with stormwater.” “Green Infrastructure
for stormwater treatment in parks.”
“Children, Families, and Education Addressed by CE Actions 9 and 10.
Policies”: “Public education on
environment, sustainability, and
watershed protection.”
Need to fill in the XX (page referencing September 26th draft corrected this.
Table 5.1).
“Change Austin’s development GC: Follow up
regulations….”: “Require application of
low impact development (LID)
principles and practices in new
greenfield development and in in-fill
development and re-development to
minimize the impacts of any increase
in impervious cover on existing
stormwater infrastructure.” Consider
making two separate statements out of
this section.
“Invest in transportation….”: Move Done in 9/26 draft.
acquisition of environmentally sensitive
land to the Green Infrastructure
program, page 140, it appears to fit
more readily in this location.
“Sustainable Water Resources Part of priority program review.
Management” - priority Action: “Create
watershed management plans that link
BMP placement/performance to
receiving water impacts”
Add flood protection at the end of first WRT.
paragraph. "Similar to (and in coordination with) the green
infrastructure program, this program needs to build
on ongoing water resource management efforts to
establish a comprehensive, integrated strategy
addressing the range of water resource issues –
such as supply, conservation, environmental
protection, and flood protection"
The bullet item “Expand the acquisition We need to choose either CFS or CE
of environmentally significant land” is
repeated twice with two different action 1/31- deleted from CFS; remains in CE only
item references.
In order to develop and maintain Addressed by HN-5.
affordable housing throughout Austin, Also, will discuss in the affordable housing priority
an action needs to include the program. Similar to comments above about
adequacy and existence of maintaining existing infrastructure
infrastructure (drainage, water,
wastewater, etc.).
LUT Action-2 and LUT Action-3 are Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
likely to be unpopular with most
developers. Affordable housing does
not typically equate to higher profits for
developers.
LUT Action 4–Add drainage after water Ok. Revise LUT Action 4:
and wastewater infrastructure. Direct growth to areas with existing infrastructure
capacity including roads, water, wastewater,
drainage and schools.
LUT Action-5: “LID in redevelopment Ok. New bullet: Utilizing Low Impact Development
particularly to mitigate any impacts practices to mitigate impacts associated with
associated with increases in increases in impervious cover or constrained
impervious cover or where existing stormwater infrastructure that may impede
stormwater infrastructure poses a redevelopment.
constraint to re-development.”
LUT Action-5: “LID in redevelopment ok: new bullet: Utilizing Low Impact Development
particularly to mitigate any impacts practices to mitigate impacts associated with
associated with increases in increases in impervious cover or constrained
impervious cover or where existing stormwater infrastructure that may impede
stormwater infrastructure poses a redevelopment
constraint to re-development.”
Add the word “drainage” to other utility Ok. Revise LUT Action 4:
categories. Direct growth to areas with existing infrastructure
capacity including roads, water, wastewater,
drainage and schools.
There is a discussion about LID and Ok. Revise LUT-4: Direct growth to areas with
directing development to where there existing infrastructure capacity including roads,
are existing utilities. There is no water, wastewater, drainage, and schools.
mention of storm drainage utility. There
is no mention of improving Water Revise WPD-2: Maintain water, wastewater, and
/Wastewater/Drainage services to drainage infrastructure regularly through its useful
older or underserved areas, especially life and replace aged infrastructure as conditions
those where infill will be encouraged. warrant. Continue to ensure safe and reliable
service.
Covered: CFS Action 36, CFS Action 37, CFS
Action38, and LUT Action 1.
.
As evidenced by the LFHM issues Ok. Revise LUT Action 15: ensure that the
presented by the proposed Metro- construction, operation, and management of rail,
Rapid “temporary” bus stations and the bus rapid transit, local bus systems, and future
stations to be constructed along South public transportation are integrated and
Congress (station platforms that may coordinated across City Departments and with our
adversely impact gutter flow or impede partners such as other local governments,
the operation of inlets), the integration agencies and districts.
and coordination of transit systems
needs to extend across a number of
City departments.
The standards for the location of street Revised LUT 20
trees need to respect the potential for Develop roadway and rights-of-way design
conflicts with all utilities, including standards that accommodate the needs of street
storm drains. Storm drain lines are trees and above and below ground utilities and
typically left out of the discussion of the infrastructure.
required offset between street trees
and other utility lines.
How much control does/can the City Not recommended.
have in the ETJ over items such as
targets for vehicles miles traveled per
capita for new neighborhoods? The
larger, new neighborhoods are most
likely to be constructed in the ETJ.
LUT Action -19: Add “Green Ok. Revise LUT Action-19: Develop complete
Infrastructure stormwater bmps to streets design guidelines and require these
green street techniques. standards for all new road construction and
reconstruction:
Green Street Techniques/Green Infrastructure Best
Management Practices
LUT Action-37: Question: Should we Not recommended.
“require” LID or just incentivize it?
The subsidized infrastructure Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
construction mentioned with this item
would likely include storm drainage
systems. WPD will need to consider
how such partnerships will be funded
and how to prioritize such funding
since a development project may not
include systems that are part of our
“five year plan”.
How is this a CIP item rather than a Corrected.
Policy item?
Incentivizing green infrastructure and Noted. Would not result in edits to the draft.
LID items implies giving credit for them
in the consideration of runoff
calculations and detention
requirements. We will need to very
clearly define how this is done and how
such green infrastructure is to be
maintained in the future (maintenance
agreements, restrictive covenants,
etc.). This also applies to CFS Action-
38.
Does this item refer to regional 1st question: Yes. 2nd question: potentially yes.
stormwater facilities when it mentions
offsite detention and water quality
controls to be used in concert with LID
and green infrastructure? If so, are we
going to be modifying or adapting the
City’s Regional Stormwater
Management Program to
accommodate such considerations?
“Natural and Sustainable”: Include Use EII scores and Lake Health scores, possibly as
reaches with poor EII scores as a reported in the annual State of the Environment
metric of stream health. Report.
In planning where future parks will go, Addressed by using the walkable parks area map
it appeared that the planners assumed produced by the Urban Parks Stakeholder group.
that proximity to a preserve is equal,
on a land planning basis, to a park.
Concern is that preserves don’t
function this way due to the access
restrictions to non-park open space.
Regarding formatting – use justification WRT.
of text sparingly to avoid long blank
spaces between words.
There is little to no focus on the Stormwater is incorporated more strongly into the
replacement of maintenance of existing introduction to City Facilities & Services Building
infrastructure and the City's storm Block. It is also covered as part of general
drainage system again appears to be infrastructure investments in the revised priority
an afterthought. program for Investing in a Compact City.
The Plan should include more Accomplished by the introductory section on
information regarding a unifying vision sustainability & the Vision.
for a sustainable future.
What is in the plan to encourage See revised SOC Action-8 and CE Action-13.
development of urban farms in fertile
East Austin?
Add more bike highways, add larger See revised pedestrian/urban trails map.
dedicated greenbelts with walkability or
ride-ability corridors & recreational
opportunities with green infrastructure.
It is not clear what tools will be used to Regulations (land development code rewrite
minimize the impacts of sprawl. program) and spending (compact and connected
Identification of this concern, as well as city program).
a menu of applicable tools should be
included.
Incentivize ride sharing to a greater Ok. Revise Policy LUT 18: Reduce traffic
degree. congestion and encourage alternative
transportation modes through such practices as
Transportation Demand Management which
includes car pooling, flex time work schedules,
subsidizing transit costs for employees, and
pedestrian and bicycle-friendly roads.
Exiting actions cover car pooling and errand
sharing.
LUT-12: Create an integrated transportation plan
encompassing driving, transit, bicycling, walking,
and roads
LUT-14: Increase public transit ridership by…
implementing carpooling, vanpools, and car
sharing.
Create, develop and improve migratory Review as part of priority program revision.
wildlife corridors. This would include
micro-habitats for refuge and feeding.
Overall, Imagine Austin will encourage Ok.
headwater protection and buffers for
floodplains which are both positive for
watershed protection. There is also
mention that a goal is to reduce the
risk of flooding at the 100-year level.
This is all very positive.
