11.20.18 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes November 20,2018 same as the previous draft version. It is also very similar to the 2004 version, something that was developed a decade before the current Comprehensive Plan's vision of growth-and at a time when sustainability within transportation planning was not quite as urgent. So what remains is a Thoroughfare plan that continues to project a business-as-usual future with significant ETJ build out and city limit expansion, particularly on the east side of town.The design raises concerns of equity, fiscal responsibility,economic vitality,increased impervious cover, natural land loss,the list is long. So, before you adopt this plan, please just look carefully at the Thoroughfare Plan and ask yourselves,is this aligned with the recent vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan? Does this project a future of compact, connected development that minimizes sprawl and natural land conversion?Does this thoroughfare plan reinforce and support a future of multimodal transit-where both current and future residents have legitimate options to walk, bike and bus around town?Where kids can better walk and bike to school? Does this thoroughfare plan project equitable forms of development throughout all neighborhoods,all sides of town?While I generally support the revised draft,I believe that-despite all of the great improvements to the report-the thoroughfare plan continues to be at odds with the comprehensive plan and should be revised to emphasize the roads that serve the intensity zones,to encourage transit-supportive densities- not the opposite.Let's learn from the mistakes of nearby cities like Houston that triggered decades of sprawl simply with designs for their ringed beltways in the 1970s.Instead, let's follow the lead of cities like Portland that are pushing not to build more roads but are digging in to move people along their existing roads more efficiently.This change can be accomplished in a variety of very easy ways-one being to simply remove the extraneous roadways, similar to what was done with the craddock extension and the revised CIP plan; alternatively, move these proposed ringed roads to a separate category of reserved ROW so they do not serve as prominent pieces of the plan. I encourage you to improve upon the preferred scenario- not make it worse.Before this TMP rewrite is complete, take this opportunity to make sure the thoroughfare plan reflects the community's vision.Thanks for your time. John David Carson, he provided the following comments: I complement staffs responsiveness to input provided on the Transportation Master Plan(TMP)and for making this revised draft a more sustainable plan. I'll also echo Sarah's comments, particularly as it relates to removing far-flung roads from the Plan. That said, I'm going to focus my comments on just one issue I am thankful has been added. You will now find,on page 93, recommendations for"Safe Streets Design and Public Health".Traffic violence CO or San Marcos Page 4