Many millennials and corporations race to one trendy, Texas city: Austin. In recent years, the concentration of people living in the area has dramatically increased, so the city council realized a desperate need for an updated plan for growth. For that reason, it proposed CodeNEXT, one segment of the city council’s project Imagine Austin. Unfortunately, many citizens opposed the idea of a modernized and modified aesthetic of Austin, so with a 7-4 vote by the Zoning and Platting Commission, the plan lost much of its support. This group rejected an idea which could improve “natural resources, household affordability, transportation, and access to healthy lifestyles” (CodeNEXT). Still, developers, environmentalists, engineers, and innovators in the community continue to collaborate and strengthen this plan in hopes that it will eventually pass and lead to an environment built to benefit people.
Although it is a wonderful plan, success is difficult for CodeNEXT. It consists of various reforms within the city, from building codes to rezoning. The main points of this proposition are clear: more affordable housing, nature preservation, taller height limit for construction, focus on reducing the carbon footprint through public transportation and trails for biking and walking, beautify urban landscape, and overall establish a more functional urban environment. All of these ideas have potential, but for others it is too much change. With many adjustments, disagreement will occur which leads to complaints and possible removal of these future plans. The majority of this frustration comes from conservative, older, white homeowners. This population tends to favor traditional, single-family homes rather than multiplexes and taller buildings. These NIMBYs complicate the approval of CodeNEXT through high voter turnouts and complaining at city hall meetings. Another factor inhibiting this project is the cost of land. Because so many companies and workers travel to Austin, the price to live or even build in Austin is substantially high. Many local businesses, residences, and roads cover the land, so even available land is unsuitable for developing housing complexes or parks. With inadequate and expensive space, the extensive work required is nearly impossible. A significant issue with CodeNEXT that many people criticize is the wait. The original idea, Imagine Austin, was proposed in 2012, and no obvious progress occurred. If this passes, the city would have to wait longer before commencing with construction which only supports the opposing argument. Although the current code is flawed, confusing, and completely outdated, supporters argue that using it is easier than adjusting to a new system. Nonetheless, advocates for CodeNEXT remain adamant in completing this task for Austin’s future generations. To avoid losing the chance to succeed, advocates should consider isolating and completing simpler, cheaper, time-efficient projects instead of introducing CodeNEXT as an immediate change.
CodeNEXT addresses many of the issues that are noticeable in Austin: limited and safe walkways or bike lanes, pollution, and the need for less impervious cover. I hope to see many more improvements in transportation services, affordable housing, walkability, and parking. Wherever I go, I prefer walking or utilizing the CapMetro because it is included in my already costly tuition. If it weren’t covered by the university, I would not choose to take the city-run transportation because routes are complex and inconvenient at times. Certain buses or shuttles are available only on certain days, and an alternative route may require one or more bus transfers. Also, many students dislike the bus because it is basic and smelly. An improvement on public transportation would attract more people to ride the bus versus waiting for a cab or paying to park within the city and reduce our carbon footprint. In addition to better public transportation, affordable housing closer to the city would benefit the community and allow people with lower incomes to live near work. Walkability is another essential aspect for the success of a city. With restaurants, bars, entertainment, and retail within a reasonable distance, walking is accessible to students and residents in the downtown area. However, Austin needs more of that. If grocery stores and parks were within walking distance, less people would prefer to drive, creating safer roads and less carbon emission. With more walking, the demand for parking spaces and garages would decline. The “dead” parking garages could be repurposed into parks or natural environments to reduce the amount of impervious cover and pollution in Austin. These ideas follow the goals of the community because they would benefit existing citizens and future populations. These plans prioritize the demands of the individuals who enjoy the city and its utilities, rather than the population who tends to stay within a secluded suburban area.
The city of Austin has exponential potential for the future with CodeNEXT. Already, the area is home to a competitive university, intense nightlife, and crazy cuisines. People who want to save their city need to accept the inevitable changes. Times change, and a city must adapt to keep up with an evolving society. A modernized and innovative environment would help maintain longevity of this established and historic city, and the way to achieve a “city upon a hill” vision is with new development codes and legislation that support the advancement of the city. Let’s replace the decades old development code. Now is the time to ask: “What is next?”