Sustainable Growth
Investment and Economic Development: The ASMP definition
From the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan Community Objectives and Outcomes
The Community Objectives are drawn from the work of HUD-DOT-EPA and its Livability Principles, Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities, Community Workshops, Online Surveys, and Envision Central Texas (ECT). Below each Objective is an Outcome, which defines the Objective and was included in the presentation of the Objectives to the community for prioritization. The ASMP community outreach program solicited feedback on these Objectives and Outcomes in order to assess the community's values and their relative importance. Following each Objective and Outcome are the individual criteria, or Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs), used to score how well each gap, solution, and project meets the intended goal.
Investment and Economic Development
The mobility network should support job creation, investments, and sustaining the city's tax base while being cost effective for individual users. New mobility investments should be leveraged to attract additional federal and state funding as well as new private development and redevelopment.
Measures of Effectiveness:
Within a corridor or area planned for sustainable development patterns
Supports sustainable development patterns
Redevelopment and value-capture potential
Ability to leverage public and private funds
Understanding the state of Austin's Economy w/ a report from Livable City
Building a More Sustainable Economy
A Livable City Report
Austin's economic growth and industrial development over the past four decades has been, by any measure, remarkable. Just 38 years ago, Austin was at the center of a small region of just under 400,000 residents linked to an economy dominated by state government and the University of Texas. Today, this area is home to over 1.5 million people, a host of high technology manufacturing and service firms, and boasts a per-capita income above the national average. In percentage terms, Austin's growth has outstripped that of other storybook growth centers such as Raleigh-Durham, Phoenix, and Silicon Valley. Local leaders promote the prominence of Austin's tech economy, our high quality of life, and the metro's high position in various business "top ten" lists, such as Best Places To Do Business, Top Tech Cities, and Best Cities for Young People.
The basic storyline of our economic development describes an exhilarating climb from a sleepy state capital/university town to a vibrant high tech center, but our hothouse growth has also generated ambivalence and real costs. Some residents view our current status as just "too much and too many," and others feel the pressure of higher costs and increasing congestion. While our region continues to add population at a rapid clip, Austin is also experiencing a number of vulnerabilities that could dampen economic growth, tilt job opportunities to lower wage jobs and undermine some of the unique qualities of place that are widely cherished.
On the economic front, we have lost over 20,000 jobs in high technology sectors since 2000. Our core computer and microelectronic manufacturing sectors continue to decline seven years after the "dot com" bust and even high tech services such as software design and internet service provision are experiencing slow and spotty growth. Our regional economy is adding more employment in lower-wage occupations versus middle-income jobs. While city and business leaders have been very active in trying to diversify the economy and stimulating new growth sectors, we have not fully made up for big declines in our older tech sectors. With an economic downturn on the horizon, these economic vulnerabilities will likely come into sharper relief.
City residents are also experiencing a growing tension between continued population growth and important aspects of our quality of life. The Austin region faces two specific problems that threaten the growth process: (1) increasing inequality and stratification in the region's labor market, communities, and opportunity structure; and (2) intensifying transportation and environmental problems associated with sprawl and lack of transportation alternatives. These challenges, if unmet, will seriously threaten future growth and development. The reputation of Austin as an affordable place with unique environmental and urban amenities has been sullied as environmental stresses accumulate, housing prices climb, and traffic jams worsen.
For many, it is not clear where Austin's economic development strategy comes from, how it is implemented, or what institutions and actors shape the economic development policies and programs. In the past year, these broad economic concerns have come into sharper focus on the issue of incentives. Why should public money be given to private firms? How much are we giving? And what are we getting in return? Though incentives are just one piece of the city's overall economic development strategy, it is important that the public and policymakers clearly understand what they are giving and what they are getting in return. Moreover, it is essential that we understand the role incentives play in our larger economic landscape, to ensure informed, transparent decisions that will truly benefit our community as a whole.
A Capitol Idea? The Capitol Complex Meets the Downtown Austin Plan
Published in the Austin Chronicle on May 21, 2009
by Katherine Gregor
Under a concept being explored by the Texas Facilities Commission, the dullest swath of Downtown Austin - the state Capit ol complex - could become a whole new urban district. TFC staff - since Decem ber under the executive directorship of former Austin state Rep.Terry Keel - is considering a long-term, statewide "asset management strategy" that could include partnering with the private sector to redevelop the Capitol complex. The proposal could consolidate state offices currently in leased space across Travis County into new development on the Capitol complex's 122 state-owned acres.
If the state indeed redevelops the Capitol complex as a complete live-work-play neighborhood - a big "if" under the current proposal - it could realize goals for the surrounding district in the Downtown Austin Plan. Today a bleak government monoculture of office buildings and parking garages - with nary a coffee shop or strolling human being - the complex long has been a "black hole" in Austin's urban fabric, as architect and urban designer Sinclair Black has dubbed it. "For years now, we've been talking about the need to bring some new life to that area, especially north and east of the Capitol," said Council Member Chris Riley. "It seems like such an opportunity now, to partner with the state and encourage their action to make those areas available for redevelopment."
Robert Moses vs. Jane Jacobs. Anthony Flint tells the story, Glaeser has a few words on the matter.
From The New Republic
A book review by Edward Glaeser on 9/4/09
Book: Wrestling with Moses: How Jane Jacobs Took on New York's Master Builder and Transformed the American City - Anthony Flint
For urbanists and others, the battle between Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs was the great titanic struggle of the twentieth century. Like the bout between Joe Louis and Max Schmeling, their conflict has magnified significance, as the two figures have become symbols. Jacobs is the secular saint of street life, representing a humane approach to urban planning grounded in the messy interactions of the neighborhood. Moses is the icon of infrastructure established by power, the physical reconstruction of cities with great bridges and wide expressways and tall apartment buildings. The actual projects that fueled their acrimony may now be curiosities of urban history, but the ideological conflict embodied by Jacobs and Moses continues to rage in every growing city in the world. The growth of Shanghai may be described as Moses on steroids, whereas the land-use restrictions in Mumbai honor a central element of Jacobs's legacy.
Anthony Flint's book is a timely retelling of their battles. The federal government, under pressure of an economic crisis but also for reasons of principle, has now renewed its commitment to infrastructure, but it has done so in a way that preserves existing biases. The transportation spending in the Obama administration's recovery program targets highway-heavy areas, and promises twice as much aid, per capita, to the ten least-dense states as to the ten most-dense states. And beyond our borders, nothing less than the economic and environmental future of the world is tied to urban planning decisions now being made in China and India. So it is a good time to re-acquaint ourselves with Jacobs and Moses.
Austin's first affordable housing TOD. Would you live here? What are the benefits and drawbacks?
By Mary Tuma
Friday, 14 May 2010
Across the street from the MLK MetroRail station a construction drill pounded the ground, signifying the start of Austin's first transit-oriented affordable housing development. The $24 million project will include 150 units and is expected to be complete by July 2011.
Local nonprofit Foundation Communities is behind the development. M Station is the organization's first new affordable housing complex to be constructed in the last decade.
Executive Director Walter Moreau cited the development as a, "dream project" for several reasons including its location near Boggy Creek, the Greenbelt, community gardens and blue-ribbon awarded school, Campbell Elementary.
"With gentrification in East Austin it has become more and more expensive for residents to live there," said Sunshine Mathon, design and development director for Foundation Communities. "Our goal was to create a housing unit that wouldn't push people out, but create a robust safety net for those facing increasing housing costs."
M Station reserves 60 percent of its units for families making less $36,650. Roughly 90 percent of units are designated for those at or below the median family income.
City officials, neighborhood residents and organization representatives celebrated the new housing project with food, drinks and children's activities on Wednesday, May 12. Amid the live music and festivities, speakers highlighted the project's significance in terms of affordability and proximity to mass transit.
"By its name it tells you its accessible," said Gloria Ray of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. "Secondly, it follows green building guidelines and lastly, and perhaps most importantly, it has succeeded it winning the support of the community."
The housing complex will be the first large nine percent housing tax credit development for families in Austin since 2004 and the first tax-credit funded, LEED-rated development in Texas.
Austin Ranks #10 in Healthiest Places to live. Do you agree with the American Fitness Index?
From: Blisstree on 5/28/10
By: Briana Rognlin
The 10 Healthiest Places To Live: How Fit is Your City?
Have you ever noticed how some cities seem full of hot, fit people, while other cities just seem a little less toned? Well, according to the American College of Sports Medicine, where you live is a significant factor determining your health. ACSM's 2010 American Fitness Index was just released - a ranking of the 50 biggest cities in the U.S. according to their levels of health care access, community support of public recreation areas, public policy determining fitness standards in schools, and the overall income of a city can actually have a big impact on the health of its residents.
So what makes for a healthy city? The American Fitness Index ranking isn't just about which cities have the most residents who hit the gym. The country's healthiest cities generally have higher median incomes, a lower percentage of unemployed inhabitants, and fewer households below the poverty line, but they also do specific things to get their populations active. Advantages include a high number of primary health care providers per capita and high numbers of parks, dog parks, tennis courts, swimming pools, farmers markets. Most also have a high number of inhabitants who walk, bike or use public transportation to get to work or school. Living in these cities is likely to be a big health boost.
So which cities are the best?
Check out the 10 healthiest places to live, according to the American Fitness Index:
1. Washington, D.C.
2. Boston, MA
3. Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN
4. Seattle, WA
5. Portland, OR
6. Denver, CO
7. Sacramento, CA
8. San Francisco, CA
9. Hartford, CN
10. Austin, TX
For the entire list and further information about each city, visit americanfitnessindex.org.