Robin Cravey's Austin, Changing the Future

Plan theory vs. reality (0.00 / 0)

It's nice to think we can plan out growth - but you can't (you're limited to tools which can incent or disincent certain things at certain places, which we might also call a 'plan' but isn't really what people usually have in mind when they use the word).

The stuff about transportation is, of course, fabulous. But we need to understand that we cannot have affordable housing 'in the city' until the reactionaries controlling the neighborhood associations are brought to heel. For instance, just today, Hyde Park is continuing to try to back out of their end of the VMU-for-McMansion bargain even after being told on first reading that they were wrong for trying to do so (4-2, unfortunately not a stronger majority), and so is Allandale.

---

by: m1ek @ Tue May 06, 2008 at 14:31:20 PM CDT

city plan (3.00 / 1)

Robin worked on the Austin Tomorrow Plan back in the 1970s so I'm sure he understands the limits of planning.  As you mentioned, we can do a lot with zoning, development overlays/incentives etc. in directing growth, but we will never have absolute control.  

Specifically what Robin is talking about is the updating of the city's Master plan.  We've had a lot of changes since the '70s -- SOS, ECT, smart growth/new urbanist principles, transportation infrastructure changes, etc. yet our plan does not reflect that (other than the specific neighborhood plans that have been updated piecemeal).  The Planning Commission is currently working on updating the plan.  I believe Robin is suggesting that we make this a more open and inclusive process, ala Envision Central Texas.

There is actually a meeting of a Planning Commission subcommittee tonight discussing a draft update:

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/zon...

btw, the 2nd/3rd reading of the Hyde Park VMU smack-down is scheduled for this Thursday at 4pm.  The public hearing is closed, though, so there won't be any fireworks unless the council decides to reopen it.  (Actually, there is a separate item on "tract 100" that will have a public hearing, but the HPNT actually opted-in to that one)

---

by: Kedron Touvell @ Tue May 06, 2008 at 15:05:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yeah, that's why I said "just today" - saw the agenda. (0.00 / 0)

As for the next plan go-round, a more inclusive public process is exactly the opposite of what you want - unless your idea of a plan is "let's stop doing anything but suburban sprawl". I'm more than happy to leave this stuff up to the Planning Commission, where the people working on it have some grounding in actual facts, rather than leaving it up to the mob where a loud know-nothing anti-toller or anti-transit guy can screw it up by pandering to the worst aspects of the mob. Or, of course, where the most reactionary elements of neighborhood associations are put at a strong advantage (the more progressive folks are more likely to have jobs, for instance).

---

by: m1ek @ Tue May 06, 2008 at 15:35:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]