City Council Election Questions: Kathie Tovo

2. Mayor Leffingwell recently said that “as the City continues to work to reduce expensive suburban sprawl and facilitate sustainable growth in Austin’s urban core, the prospect of closing successful central city schools clearly runs counter to our community’s long-term planning goals.” Recent census data shows that most central Austin neighborhoods lost population over the last 10 years, particularly people under 18. What city policies would you enact, modify or eliminate to help more families live in the neighborhoods around the schools proposed to be closed?

Building a more family friendly community is a major aim of my candidacy. Two of my major goals are retaining neighborhood schools -- which are central to the vitality of our city -- and “completing our communities” across the city so people at all stages of life can access the basic services they need close to home whether it be employment, transportation choices, shopping, parks and open spaces, or high quality child care and public schools. I served on AISD’s Community Committee on Neighborhoods and Schools and the City’s Families and Children Task Force, both of which were centrally concerned with these issues. As a member of the recent AISD Facilities Master Plan Task Force, I co-authored a report advocating against school closures. Successfully building a more family friendly community will take a broad policy approach, and I am prepared to do that.

3. The average new U.S. home in 2009 was 2,438 square feet. Austin’s McMansion ordinance limits the size of homes on most lots in central Austin to less than 2,300 square feet. Should the average family be able to build the same sized house in central Austin that they would be able to build in suburban Austin? What effect does the McMansion ordinance have on reducing expensive suburban sprawl and facilitating sustainable growth in Austin’s urban core?

I believe that the Residential Design and Compatibility Standards have reduced conflict in our central city neighborhoods. Although some feared that passage might stifle building in our city, that concern has not been borne out. The Residential Design and Compatibility Commission will continue to review proposals that fall outside the regulations and requirements of this ordinance, and the process in place seems to work well.

4. The restaurant Casa de Luz, which has operated in central Austin for the last 20 years, may be forced to relocate or close due to new enforcement of parking requirements. Do current parking requirements for central Austin businesses fit with your view of Austin’s long-term planning goals?

Casa de Luz is a valued iconic business, and I’m supportive of efforts to pursue shared parking or other arrangements that will allow it to remain in place. In a changing city, parking needs to be under regular review to determine whether the requirements continue to serve the interests of residents and businesses. Some day we may have more effective public transportation and more complete communities where residents and patrons walk or bike more frequently to nearby restaurants, and these changes will reduce the need for automobile parking.

5. The Council recently adopted new rules for street parking downtown in the evenings and on Saturdays. Do you support the new rules? What else would you do to improve parking downtown?

I oppose the Downtown Parking Extended Hours ordinance supported by Council Member Shade because of its expected impact on artists, musicians, and the many others who work and play Downtown. The new law should have provided clear affordable options for the thousands of workers and volunteers before Council passage. I believe our City should look at the parking availability information system, free offsite parking, shared parking, and many other options until a viable evening public transportation is established.

6. City council has approved various payments to subsidize the development of the F1 track southeast of Austin, including $13.5 million for water and sewer lines, and is considering adding $4 million per year for hosting expenses. Should Austin tax money be used to subsidize private development in general and F1 in particular?

The City should provide subsidies for private business only when community benefits substantially outweigh costs -- and when the business being subsidized meets the city’s goals and priorities. Decisions regarding major subsidies for private businesses should also take place with full public discussion and debate. Formula 1 has not met this standard.

7. By some standards, Austin traffic is among the worst in the nation. Many Austinites think transportation should be local government’s primary concern.

a. What do you think causes Austin traffic?

b. Do you see urban rail as a viable solution for downtown transportation?

c. Do you support adding a toll lane to MoPac?

d. Do you think either of the above will reduce traffic for anyone other than the people riding the rails or paying the toll?

e. What effect do you think each would have on reducing expensive suburban sprawl and facilitating sustainable growth in Austin’s urban core?

f. What changes would you suggest to either proposal (e.g., reserved lanes for urban rail or adding a non-toll lane to MoPac instead of a toll lane)?

Urban rail should definitely be considered as part of the answer to Austin’s traffic problem -- though we need to have further discussions about the management and funding of such a system so that the full cost doesn’t fall on the backs of Austinites. Anyone who has seen the gridlock of the last weeks in the central City knows we need more options. An integrated public transportation system that includes rail -- along with buses and improved bike - and pedestrian-ways -- will take cars off the road and provide a more sustainable option to get to the city center for jobs and entertainment. While I support improvements to MoPac, I do not support tolling a lane because I don’t think it will reduce traffic enough to be worth the congestion caused by the years of construction. I would support looking at more immediate, less expensive congestion relief improvements for MoPac first.

8. LCRA is considering selling certain Central Texas water and wastewater utilities that cost more to operate than they generate in revenue. The Austin Water Utility is considering additional restrictions on water usage and rate increases. What do you think the proper role of LCRA and the Austin Water Utility is in providing water to Austinites? Other Central Texans? Should those entities take an active role in influencing land development patterns and/or the amount of water used by individuals?

The role of water utilities is to provide a reliable clean source of water to the community along with stewarding Central Texas’s most limited resource. Water utilities have always had an important influence on land development decisions. Conservation is critically important to our future and should be a major priority -- both to save water along with limited future tax dollars. That is why I would not have supported the Water Treatment Plant #4 vote, which will substantially raise every ratepayer’s water bills f or years to come.

9. In 2009, City Council enacted the Waterfront Overlay, which restricts development (particularly height) along Lady Bird Lake, but as yet has failed to enact the “density bonuses” that were planned as a way to allow additional construction in exchange for community benefits. What “density bonuses” or other changes to the Waterfront Overlay do you think should be implemented?

The Waterfront Overlay represents the desire of our community to protect one of the real jewels of Austin: Lady Bird Lake. When City Council reviews projects requesting variances to the Overlay, our leaders should pay greater attention to affordability and other general community benefits.

10. The city is now in the process of creating a city-wide comprehensive plan. How should we resolve conflicts between the comprehensive plan and neighborhood plans?

As a planning commissioner, I served on the Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan subcommittee, and I regard Imagine Austin as a great opportunity to craft a community vision for our city’s future. I believe our community has many opportunities to resolve potential conflicts now during the current plan development process. The working groups meeting now offer the opportunity to address many potential conflicts, and the mandated yearly review and five-year major revisions offer additional chances to address concerns. Other issues may need to be resolved; in these cases, I support the existing neighborhood plan amendment process, which provides an opportunity for community stakeholders to resolve outstanding issues.

11. Many see denser development, particularly along transit corridors, as the key to developing more affordable housing and more workforce housing, but neighborhoods have often resisted such projects. How should this conflict be resolved? What else should be done to keep or make housing in Austin affordable?

The discussion of density must mature as our city grows. The question should be about what type of community we want to live in and what type of businesses, services, and housing we need to make that happen. One of my major campaign goals is “completing our communities” across the city so people at all stages of life can have the basic services they need close to home whether it be employment, transportation choices, shopping, parks and open spaces, and access to high quality child care and public schools.

For years I have supported efforts to expand affordable housing across our community. Just a few of the many policies that would help include greater use of city land for housing, support for non-profit housing developers, and improving the development process for affordable projects. I also pledge to support additional money for affordable housing in the proposed 2012 bonds.

12. Downtown has traditionally been viewed as the area between the lake and UT and between I-35 and Lamar. Does this definition still make sense? Are there other areas that should be considered part of downtown?

Yes, the traditional definition still works. This does not mean others areas near Downtown will not grow or change, but there is no need to expand our definition of Downtown. Many cities have surrounding areas that are vibrant distinct districts with their own character and communities.

13. Do you think Austin is better now than it was 10 years ago? Do you think it will be better 10 years from now than it is now?

As an Austinite for almost 20 years, I’ve seen many changes in our city. As an optimist I believe we’ve improved in many ways -- but I do regret the loss of some of our city’s iconic places and I know that for many of our neighbors, Austin has become a very unaffordable place. I believe we can do better in preserving what’s great about Austin and making Austin a place that works better for everyone -- and that’s why I’m running for City Council.