top of page

Department Processes

The City of Austin’s CIP planning and prioritization process is multi-faceted, incorporating review and public input at the departmental and organizational levels. Public input is gathered in numerous ways, such as through the processes for master plans, small area plans, and bond program development. CIP includes many recurring capital programs aimed at existing infrastructure networks, along with City facilities and services.

​

City departments identify potential new capital improvement projects to include in CIP each year using technical assessments of infrastructure condition and need, public input received through individual department’s planning efforts, and requests from City Boards and Commissions. Each department’s prioritization process is different based on its specific service responsibilities. However, in general terms, all capital projects address one or more of the following organizational capital investment priorities: asset management, planning priorities, Council policy directives, and departmental business priorities. A project’s state of renewal is categorized into growth (driven by the need to increase capacity to meet demand), renewal (driven by risks presented by ageing and poor condition assets), and enhancement (driven by opportunities for performance improvement). The City also considers sustainability and cost in prioritizing CIP projects. Other factors, including infrastructure master plans and the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, play important roles in the CIP planning process.

Animal Services

Animal Services operates the Austin Animal Center, co-located at the Betty Dunkerley Campus along with the Austin Public Health Department. The Center was built through the APH 2012 Bond Program, and as a General Fund department, most Animal Services capital projects are reliant on funds provided through voter-approved bonds.

Animals Services staff identify CIP projects based on facility infrastructure condition and service demand needs. Projects for Animal Services facilities support Council direction provided through Resolution 20100311-021 that adopts the Recommendations for the Implementation Plan to Reduce Animal Intake and Increase Live Animal Outcomes and authorizes the City Manager to initiate implementation.

Additionally, projects support Council Resolution 20190328-034 that reaffirms its support for and commitment to Austin's No Kill animal sheltering policy and supports an Austin Animal Center goal of a 95% or greater live-release rate.

Animal
acc

Austin Convention Center

The Austin Convention Center Department (ACCD) provides world-class convention center, meeting facilities and services which aligns to the City’s Economic Opportunity and Affordability Strategic Outcome by supporting the hospitality and tourism industry. Historically, the hospitality sector is the 3rd largest employer in the city, and visitors attracted by ACCD’s facilities increases the City’s economic wealth and provides job opportunities within the hospitality industry. A healthy tourism industry has allowed local businesses to thrive, creating employment opportunities within that sector. A higher level of employment increases family income, further fueling economic growth within the City. In order to continue to remain competitive within a fiercely competitive market and continue to be an economic engine for the City, continuous ACCD building improvements must be made to remain a top destination site.  Improvements are needed to address aging facility infrastructure resulting from years of use, which is occurring at an accelerated pace due to increased business levels. 

​

Being the first convention center in Texas to receive the LEED-Gold certified (Existing Buildings) distinction not only demonstrates the strong commitment to sustainability and furthering the City’s environmental goals, but also enhances facility marketability. Building improvements are made within the environmentally friendly framework to further these goals.

 

Project Selection/Prioritization Process

ACCD is steadily cognizant that achieving the Department’s central mission of providing outstanding facilities and services is mandatory if we are to continue to thrive in a competitive business environment.  In the ever‐changing convention market, facilities must grow to remain competitive with other new or recently expanded venues.  This vision allows for retaining current customers with growing events and attracting additional business, which will benefit the department as well as enhance economic vitality of the City.  Evaluation of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project selection and prioritization is based on several factors, including safety concerns, urgent needs, cost, alternative methods of project delivery, and project advantages.  Key personnel from across the department perform quarterly reviews and updates of the CIP to monitor the progress of the program, evaluate funding, analyze milestones, reconfirm priorities, and to accommodate new enhancement demands. Projects ranking the highest are those with safety risk concerns. Projects addressing building needs are imperative to protect the integrity of our major building assets.

​

Additionally, projects that will positively impact customer service or address customer needs are similarly a top priority. LEED related projects are also ranked highly due to their positive environmental affects, their favorable marketing effect, and reduction in long term operating costs. Building upgrades are made within the environmentally friendly framework to further these goals. Project scheduling can be challenging, as construction schedules must be coordinated with our event schedules to ensure that project deadlines are met with a minimum of disruption to clients’ events. Facility improvement projects have historically been funded from transfers from ACCD operating funds into the CIP, or the issuance of debt.

 

​

Learn more about the Austin Convention Center here: https://www.austinconventioncenter.com/

Anchor 1

Austin Energy

Austin Energy is a municipally owned electric utility that delivers energy to over 496,000 residential, commercial, and industrial customers, with over 12,000 miles of distribution and transmission lines serving a 437 square-mile area. The Utility endeavors to safely deliver clean, affordable, reliable energy along with excellent customer service.

 

Austin Energy’s project selection and prioritization process results from a combination of customer demand, Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) plans for electric grid build-out, Austin Energy’s generation resource plan, and schedules for system reliability and rehabilitation.  Due to customer growth and economic development, Austin Energy must evaluate its delivery system and build the assets necessary to deliver energy to serve these customers.  Austin Energy must also use the plans that ERCOT passes down to energy providers with generation, transmission and distribution systems in order to ensure that the statewide ERCOT electric grid has adequate supply to ensure reliability.  Austin Energy uses these ERCOT plans, usually received in December of each year, to plan the transmission and distribution grid projects in Austin Energy’s service territory.  Austin Energy also uses its system load forecast updated annually to plan the grid improvements and generation projects needed to keep up with the system load and to make sure peak system demand can be met.  Other factors used in prioritizing projects are system asset age and schedules for rehabilitation. 

 

The process for project selection of each category of project follows: 

 

Power Generation: Primary driver of projects is scheduled rehabilitation of equipment in the power plants (mainly Sand Hill Energy Center) based on age of assets and performance. Another consideration is Austin Energy’s generation resource plan which provides schedules for adding system generation.  For jointly owned projects such as the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) and the Fayette Power Project (FPP), Austin Energy works with the managing partners, Lower River Colorado Authority (LCRA) for FPP and NRG Energy, Inc. for STP, to agree on a capital projects budget for the five year period. 

 

On-site Energy:  Projects are for on-site energy using chilled water to cool and equipment heat for hot water.  Austin Energy approaches customers in the desired areas where this type of service can be provided and enters into contracts with these customers. Austin Energy must work with Austin Water, Public Works, Watershed Protection and Transportation departments to coordinate the routing of pipes bringing chilled water to these locations.  Projects are determined by customer demand, location and cost to supply this service. 

 

Customer Energy Services: This area involves the non-traditional production of energy such as solar and charging stations for electric vehicles.  Projects are planned based upon a schedule of areas in the City that are prepared for solar installations and have the necessary community involvement.  Other projects such as charging stations for electric vehicles will depend on demand levels in the Austin market and financial support of grants from the Federal government. 

 

Transmission: These are the higher voltage lines carrying energy from the power plants to Austin Energy’s service territory for distribution at lower voltage to retail customers.  ERCOT’s plans for the overall state-wide grid play a big part in the projects Austin Energy includes in its Capital Improvement Program (CIP).  Austin Energy also analyzes the transmission system to perform rehabilitation on the highest priority projects to maintain or improve system reliability. 

 

Distribution: Projects are prioritized based on system growth, schedules for rehabilitation of assets and improvements needed to the system to ensure reliability.  New developments and large customers coming into the system can determine how quickly an asset, such as a substation, needs to be built.  New substations and distribution lines must be built to provide service to areas of growth and projected demand determines when they need to be built.    Analysis of the system is also updated frequently to determine where system assets must be improved or upgraded to increase reliability and ensure system performance. The years in which these are built is determined by performance of the equipment, probability of failure and expected growth in load. 

 

Customer Service and Billing:  Projects are based upon upgrades needed to customer information systems and are prioritized based on cost and value to Austin Energy and other City departments for which Austin Energy provides billing and collection services. Projects may also include upgrades to the City’s 311 Information System.

 

Support Services:  Projects in this category support the other major areas listed above.  Many are facilities projects based on growth of staff and age of buildings.   Other projects include information technology systems which will keep the utility up to date with technology changes and are prioritized based on value to utility operations. 

 

Austin Energy is part of the City of Austin, with budget and policy oversight by the Austin City Council. The Electric Utility Commission (EUC) Review and analyze all policies and procedures of the electric utility including capital investments. Other external City of Austin oversight includes the Resource Management Commission (RMC). External regulatory oversight includes the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC), ERCOT, US Department of Energy (DOE), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). Decisions on the CIP are guided and influenced by The Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2030.

 

The Austin Energy utility has nationally recognized energy efficiency and renewables programs, excellent reliability, and competitive rates. Austin Energy’s financial policies, approved by the City Council, outline the funding requirements for its CIP projects.  According to these policies, a mixture of current revenue and debt provide funding resources for CIP projects.  Debt is commercial paper issued in the short term that is periodically converted or refunded into long term bonds. 

 

Learn more about Austin Energy here: https://www.austinenergy.com/

Anchor 2

Austin Fire Department

 

The Austin Fire Department’s (AFD’s) mission is to create safe and resilient communities through prevention, preparedness and effective emergency response. The building and maintenance of fire stations is reinforced by the goal to “respond efficiently and effectively to emergencies.” AFD’s top priority is the performance gap related to our inability to respond (from receipt of call to arrival) in less than 8 minutes, 90% of the time. Our plan to reduce the performance gap includes building an additional fire stations between 2020 and 2030 to address the growing population of the jurisdiction. Adding stations is the most certain method to reduce response times in the areas of the city where the standard of coverage is lacking.

 

The Fire Department is also committed to improving firefighter health, safety, training and equitable working standards, by maintaining or expanding service levels at existing facilities.

Identification of AFD CIP projects is based on needs associated with improving firefighter health and safety, improving response times in the service area, and repairing and renovating older facilities. Needs are prioritized by analyzing data related to the length of time an issue has existed, firefighter safety concerns, frequency of use, delays in response times, and facility function and habitability. Austin’s Facilities Condition Index has shown that approximately 30 fire stations are in poor conditions.

 

AFD is a general funded department and largely has had to rely on voter approved and non-voter approved general obligation debt for fire facility projects.

 

Anchor 3

 

The Austin Police Department’s (APD) Capital Improvement Program complements departmental operations by providing strategically located facilities to deliver law enforcement services in a City that encompasses more than 323 square miles. The department’s capital program is instrumental in supplementing service delivery through efficient and effective operational deployment. As the City’s population continues to grow, so do the challenges that impact the delivery of police services.

 

The Department’s FY 2020-21 key performance goals include improving community safety and providing responsive service by:

  • Reducing the violent and property crime rate

  • Maintaining target response time to emergency and urgent calls

  • Reducing the traffic fatality rate

  • Improving resident’s satisfaction with service delivery and perceptions of public safety

  • Increasing the clearance rate of violent and property crimes

 

Performance gaps in service delivery can be found in the Department’s performance measure related to target vs. actual response time for emergency and urgent calls. There is a critical need to add strategically located police facilities necessary to maintain existing levels of service.

 

As a General Fund department, APD relies on General Obligation Bonds for major capital improvements. Funding for APD’s facility needs were not included in the 2018 City of Austin Bond package, so APD continues to struggle with funding the eight highlighted substations and operational facilities currently identified. This includes seven new facilities and one facility expansion. The total current value estimate for the eight highlighted projects reaches slightly over $200 million. APD also has needs related to rehabilitations and major maintenance of aging facilities as a result of deferred maintenance. The Building Services Manager maintains a list of ongoing major maintenance and end of life capital replacement needs (ie., roof replacement, HVAC replacement, fence replacement, etc.) and prioritized by analyzing data including factors such as the length of time an issue has existed, safety concerns, and facility function and habitability. This Prioritization of projects for major renovations of current facilities is accomplished by analyzing data outlining the length of time an issue has existed, safety concerns, and facility function and habitability.

 

APD prioritized new facility and expansion projects based on the following criteria:

  • Projected Population by Region & Sector (service area)

  • Crime Rates & Calls for Service

  • Index Crime & Arrest

  • Police Service Projections

  • Site Selection – Process and Criteria

 

While projects are selected for implementation based on a combined assessment of these criteria, timing of the projects also play an important role. APD seeks to optimize the impact of service delivery in a Region or Sector by prioritizing its CIP projects and the strategic deployment of resources. The projects also reflect the capital investments necessary to maintain existing levels of policing services.

 

Policy and planning direction will continue to be received through the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative and folded into the APD project prioritization and selection process.

Austin Police Department

Anchor 4

Austin Public Health

 

Austin Public Health develops capital needs and projects based on service growth and infrastructure renewal requirements. The APH Capital Improvements Program includes projects to address major maintenance and rehabilitation of existing facilities as well as new facilities as funding becomes available. Capital project needs are reviewed internally with executive management with final prioritization and selection made by the Department’s director.

​

The highlighted projects included in the FY 2021-23 Rolling Needs Assessment are located in Eastern Travis County, which houses a population high in poverty, health disparities, and social service needs. Austin Public Health has identified the need for neighborhood centers and health clinics in the Colony Park, Far Southeast, and North Lamar/Rundberg areas to address current and future service demands and growth.

​

Austin Public Health (APH) identifies and selects capital project needs by focusing on key indicators such as underserved areas within Austin/Travis County and population growth. Selected APH capital projects, including the three neighborhood centers highlighted in the FY 2021-23 Rolling Needs Assessment, aim to benefit underserved populations who experience a lack of sufficient basic needs, preventive healthcare, Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) services, immunization services, and employment support services.

​

As a general fund department, APH primarily relies on general obligation bonds as a funding source for the Capital Improvements Program. Most recently, APH received capital funding from the 2012 GO Bond and 2018 GO Bond propositions.

​

Learn more about Austin Public Health here: https://www.austintexas.gov/department/health

Anchor 5

Austin Public Library

Throughout each fiscal year, the Austin Public Library evaluates the efficacy of its ongoing and recently completed projects while identifying new project needs from staff input, requests from citizens and the counsel of the department's appointed advisory board, the Austin Public Library Commission.

 

To determine the prioritization of projects, the Austin Public Library depends on its professional staff to work closely with each other across divisional lines in the monitoring of developing departmental needs and the formulation of projects to address those needs. For specialized knowledge needed to better devise the scope and priority of proposed projects, professional staff members of the Austin Public Library regularly enlist the aid of their counterparts with such departments as Public Works, Communication and Technology Management, Economic Growth and Redevelopment Services, Watershed Protection, Austin Energy, Austin Water Utility, Austin Police, Austin Fire and others as deemed advisable. APL also regularly engages the Library Commission which include APL Director’s Report, which provides a monthly update from facilities services on bond funded CIP projects.

 

Once the projects have been prioritized and have been agreed upon by staff members, the Austin Public Library presents the document to the Library’s Executive Leadership Team for final vetting prior to submittal.

 

The key drivers and criteria utilized by the Austin Public Library in prioritizing its proposed Capital Improvement Plan projects are described below:

  1. Capital renewal needs are generally remedying and / or preventing public safety hazards, infrastructure failure and degradation of service.

  2. Plans and policies that serve as guiding documents to implement projects include Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plans or Master Plans adopted by Austin City Council, such as the 2003 Austin Public Library System Facilities Master Plan.

  3. Council Policies are supported by aligning our departmental projects with performance measures and outcomes as identified in the City’s Strategic Direction 2023.

  4. Business Priorities as defined in the Library Six Strategic Priorities (aligned with the City’s Six Strategic Priorities), including:

    1. Literacy Advancement

    2. Workforce and Economic Development

    3. Digital Inclusion

    4. Civic & Community Engagement

    5. Staff Development

    6. Equity, Diversity and Inclusion

 

APL regularly engages the Library Commission which include APL Director’s Report which provides a monthly update from facilities services on bond funded CIP projects. APL is a general fund department and relies on general obligation bonds for the vast majority of the CIP.

​

Learn more about Austin Public Library here: https://www.austintexas.gov/department/health

Anchor 6

Austin Resource Recovery

Guided by the City of Austin’s mission to achieve Zero Waste by 2040, Austin Resource Recovery (ARR) delivers excellent customer services that promote waste reduction, increase resource recovery, and support sustainability efforts. These critical public services range from the curbside collection of trash, recycling, organic material, and bulk items, to street sweeping, litter abatement, and household hazardous waste disposal.

 

Departmental Key Drivers

Austin’s population growth, economic development, and ambitious environmental goals drive ARR’s need for new and upgraded facilities, as well as for program expansions to help meet the City’s enhanced service requirements and strategic goals. The Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, Zero Waste Strategic Plan, and ARR’s Master Plan serve as guideposts for the Department as it plans, develops, and prioritizes current and future services.

 

CIP Selection and Prioritization Process

Capital Improvement Projects are selected based on need, research, and evaluation to determine how they will contribute to achieving strategic goals outlined by the ARR Master Plan and the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan. Prioritization considerations consist of:

  • Current and future project service demands (such as an additional deployment service center);

  • Resources required to perform or complete the project (for example, funding source and impact on operating fund and customer utility rates);

  • The extent to which the project will achieve City goals; and

  • Support from stakeholders, both internal (executive leadership and division managers) and external (residents and City Council).

 

Capital Improvement Project Categories

Facilities and Landfill Capital Requirements are major categories of ARR Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) investment, supporting materials collection management, Zero Waste activities of the Department, and landfill regulations compliance. Facility investments help maintain ARR’s ability to meet City of Austin service demands, increase landfill diversion, and achieve cost and operational efficiencies. The Department prioritizes landfill projects to ensure adherence to all governmental regulatory requirements.

 

Funding Sources

ARR’s funding mechanisms for capital projects are cash transfers from ARR’s rate revenue, FEMA reimbursements, and debt.

Anchor 7

Austin Transportation Department

The Austin Transportation Department (ATD) Capital Improvement Program (CIP) strives to meet the safety and multimodal mobility needs of our community. The Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP), approved by City Council in April 2019, guides the department’s project selection processes. The plan aims to reduce the impact of traffic congestion, provide more transportation choices, reduce the cost of traveling in Austin, lower the risk of travel-related injury and mitigate impacts to the environment related to transportation. In coordination with other City of Austin departments and agencies, ATD seeks to maximize the efficiency of the current transportation network, equitably manage travel needs and operations, and plan for a future that provides greater mobility options. The ASMP identifies priority networks for roadways, bikeways, and transit - as well as a High-Injury Network - that aid in the prioritization of projects.

 

Projects identified for inclusion in the CIP and long-range plans are prioritized using processes developed by ATD program leads. These processes for project selection and prioritization are based on a need-assessment analysis that aligns with ATD’s mission and goals. Typically, the processes identify a battery of key measures of effectiveness and criteria against which all proposed projects are evaluated. These processes assure that the projects recommended for inclusion in ATD’s capital improvement program align with City goals and provide the greatest benefit to the traveling public.

 

The specific procedures for prioritization are established in program guidelines. For example, the Speed Management Program prioritizes projects based on crash history, community context, speed data, and street characteristics, to name a few. This allows ATD to be objective in its scoring and implement improvements in locations most needed throughout the city.

 

In developing the Safety Improvement Program, ATD uses a two-step screening process to arrive at a ranked list of locations to implement crash-reduction and mitigation strategies based on available funding. In the first step, comprehensive crash data is used to determine a list of locations which are further evaluated in step two, which uses engineering criteria such as crash rates, frequency and presence of vulnerable users.

 

The Active Transportation and Street Design division’s internal method of project selection and prioritization is based upon recommendations in the ASMP. These priorities are coordinated with routine street maintenance and data-driven needs to improve safety, mobility and connectivity. ATSD routinely coordinates with other active mobility infrastructure delivery groups such as Urban Trails, Safe Routes to School and Sidewalks to leverage funding across multiple programs to achieve more complete multimodal outcomes.

 

The Transit Enhancement Program coordinates with Capital Metro, our regional transit provider, to identify priority locations for the development and implementation of transit enhancements. The program develops projects both proactively – using quantitative data and community input – and opportunistically, based on coordination with other programs. Prioritized projects focus on improving transit speed, reliability, safety, access and comfort.

 

Implementation of the Corridor Construction Program (CCP) is guided by voter approved bonds and the Contracts with Voters. ATD and the Corridor Program Office work closely to ensure that use of Mobility Bond funds are aligned with ordinances and resolutions. In addition to the construction of critical safety and mobility improvements, the CCP strives to make progress toward accomplishing the goals and outcomes outlined in the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP) and in the Austin Strategic Direction 2023, SD 23. Staff also continue to engage residents, property and business owners, and the general public throughout development, project prioritization and implementation of the corridor improvement projects.

 

The Signals and Beacons program prioritizes potential projects through a scoring that includes observations, crash history, roadway characteristics and pedestrian demand. A spatial, data-driven method is used to identify needed locations, and the program also receives suggestions from the public through the 311 Customer Service Request system and engineering staff. Candidate locations are scored, and the highest scoring locations are then evaluated through an engineering study. If the study recommends building a signal or beacon, then the department will seek a funding source.

 

Capital funding for ATD projects has come primarily from general obligation bonds and transfers from ATD’s operating funds. Active voter approved bond programs that ATD programs receive funding from include 2016, 2018 and the recently approved 2020 program. Supplementary funding sources also include Federal and State grant funds, funds from the Surface Transportation Program and Metropolitan Mobility (STPMM), and the Capital Metro Build Greater Austin Program.

Anchor 8

Austin Water

Capital improvements may include new and/or improvements to existing water, wastewater, and reclaimed water infrastructure, including, but not limited to, studies, design, new construction, realignment of existing infrastructure, replacement of existing infrastructure, deepening or widening of existing infrastructure, or abandoning existing infrastructure.

 

Austin Water provides safe, reliable, and high quality water services to a population of over 1,000,000 inside and outside the city limits as well as about twenty-one wholesale customers, including the communities of Rollingwood, Sunset Valley, Manor, Westlake Hills, two water control and improvement districts, five municipal utility districts, and several water supply corporations and private utilities. Austin Water is responsible for three utility systems: Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed. Austin Water draws water from the Colorado River into three water treatment plants and then drinking water is pumped from the plants into Austin’s water distribution system. Austin Water also operates a collection system that brings wastewater to two major treatment plants where it is treated before either being returned to the Colorado River or reclaimed for irrigation, cooling, or industrial uses. A bio-solids facility at Hornsby Bend receives sludge generated by the treatment processes at Austin Water’s wastewater plants and uses it to create compost. Austin Water also promotes water conservation through educational, enforcement and incentive programs as well as manages the City’s wildlands and Balcones Canyonlands Preserve (BCP), protecting water quality and conserving habitat for endangered species.

 

Austin Water is an enterprise department that has a dedicated funding source for its Capital Improvements Program (CIP) through rate revenues. Each year, Austin Water prepares a prediction of future revenues, and then Austin Water CIP project selection and prioritization for funding allocation involves a bottom-up approach of reviewing existing CIP priorities and identifying critical needs. The Austin Water CIP team analyzes previous CIP spending compared to the approved budget in an effort to improve project cost and schedule estimates. They then meet with Austin Water personnel responsible for managing, operating, planning, financing, and delivering CIP June 2020 Long-Range CIP Strategic Plan projects to develop priority lists by infrastructure category. Information from asset management condition assessments and from hands-on operations personnel provide an essential basis for the development of these CIP priority lists. A CIP coordinating committee composed of representative chairpersons from different Austin Water divisions evaluates projects based on the identified priorities. Once these evaluations are complete, Austin Water’s director and executive team meet regularly with the CIP coordinating committee and the CIP management team to finalize the projects to be included in the City’s CIP Five-Year Plan and Austin Water’s internal financial planning for a 10-year horizon.

 

Through this process, Austin Water carefully evaluates each CIP project to determine the impact of any project reprioritizations. Austin Water’s CIP planning is designed to balance investments in rehabilitation and/or replacement projects to reduce risks associated with aging infrastructure with investments in major infrastructure system improvement projects to support growth and development.

 

Because of the size and complexity of Austin Water’s CIP program, there are always projects that need to be executed but cannot be undertaken as quickly as Austin Water would prefer. Austin Water’s program is designed to address the highest priorities first. When unforeseen conditions arise requiring spending on a project that was not in the current year’s CIP plan, another project or projects may have to be delayed.

 

Stakeholder guidance and direction is provided by the Water and Wastewater Commission and the Austin Water Oversight Committee.

Anchor 9

Aviation

The Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (AUS) strives to be the airport of choice for Central Texas by continually working to ensure passenger safety and a convenient, friendly travel experience. The Aviation Department aims to connect our community to the world with an Austin-style experience through operational excellence and community value.

​

The Capital Improvements Program (CIP) complements Imagine Austin and the Department’s mission and vision by ensuring that campus facilities are improved, repaired, and expanded to achieve an exceptional level of safety, security and efficiency in cost-effective and socially responsible ways. The Department’s CIP addresses projects in the following categories: airside (inside the Air Operations fence), landside/utilities, terminal, information systems, and vehicles and equipment purchases.

​

Project identification is guided by the AUS 2040 Master Plan. The Airport Advisory Commission is a valuable stakeholder that provides oversight and guidance for the department. The Aviation Department has established a robust, inclusive process for identifying, vetting, and approving CIP projects. This process involves projects requested by staff at any level of the organization, and are vetted by both a Core Team and an Executive Team. This process allows a level of transparency, thorough review, and solid decision-making for CIP projects.

​

Aviation Staff has developed a set of project priority categories to use as a guide in determining what projects to include in the CIP. These priorities are very important, especially for those projects identified in the first year of the Plan. These priority categories are scored with a point system and are listed below.

​

Priority #1 - Safety Related and Committed Projects

City has made a commitment to complete these projects. Some projects are new while others are phases of a larger project that are still continuing.

​

This category also includes items related to issues of safety. These are projects that staff feels are required to correct a deficiency and improve continuing safety at ABIA.

​

And, projects that management has determined important and are included in the Department’s Goals and Targets.

 

Priority #2 - Essential

This category is for projects that cannot be accomplished by Aviation maintenance staff, but are “essential” for reasons of economics or continued airport operations. Failure to proceed with these projects allows continued deterioration, which leads to higher replacement/repairs costs, safety problems or insurance claims.

​

Priority #3 - Regulatory Requirements

This category includes projects that are necessitated by regulatory control over the City’s actions, such as Federal Aviation Regulations and local, state and federal laws.

​

Priority #4 - Environmental and Noise Mitigation/Abatement

These projects address various environmental issues ranging from storm water management, waste management, and noise mitigation programs.

​

Priority #5 - Preventative Maintenance

These are projects oriented toward the constant changes occurring at ABIA, the need to continuously upgrade older pavements to meet the loading they receive today, and to avoid larger, disruptive projects in future years.

​

Priority #6 - Customer Service/Tenant Projects

These projects, as the name implies, are oriented toward improved customer service and/or convenience.

​

Priority #7 - Operational Improvements

These projects have been identified as improving various operational aspects of the airports, whether applicable

The Aviation Department is an enterprise organization and funds its CIP using a combination of Airport cash, airport revenue bonds, passenger facility charge (PFC) revenue, and FAA grants. The Department is subject to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations and policies. As a recipient of federal funding, ABIA is subject to comply with FAA Grant Assurances.

Anchor 10

Building Services

The Building Services Department uses four key drivers to identify, select, and prioritize capital improvement projects, including:

 

  1. Capital Improvement Projects for the Building Services Department (BSD) are identified through several methods:

    1. Facility Condition Index: The Facility Condition Index (FCI) is a tool for asset condition tracking and project identification. The FCI is represented by a ratio of the near-term (1-3 years) capital improvement needs for each asset (building or campus) to the total replacement value for the asset. Assets with a higher FCI are identified as having more immediate funding requirements than those with a lower ratio.

    2. Preventive maintenance schedules: Every mechanical component of each asset is identified including the date placed in service, manufacturer, recommended service requirements, and estimated service life. As mechanical components reach the end of their estimated service life, they are evaluated and are scheduled for overhaul or replacement. If replacement does not occur at the end of service life, the cost of replacement is considered deferred maintenance. At BSD’s current rate of capital funding, the majority of replacement needs have become deferred maintenance.

    3. Component or system failures: The current level of capital funding is far short of that required to repair or replace building components that have reached the end of their estimated service life. Instead, many capital improvement needs become identified by full component failure, which can result in interruptions in the usage of an asset (for example, closing a building while repairs are made to an HVAC system), reductions in occupant comfort and satisfaction, and potential life safety concerns.

    4. User satisfaction surveys: BSD measures user satisfaction of core managed properties in two ways. First, BSD uses an internally administered survey given to the requestor of each service order after completion that asks about the speed and effectiveness of the services provided.  Second, BSD uses an annual third-party administered survey of overall facilities satisfaction including questions relating to the quality of service responses, property management, and the facility itself. Survey responses from both tools help inform BSD of capital improvement needs, deficiencies and priorities.

 

  1. Once identified using the methods above, capital projects are selected and prioritized based on the following criteria:

    1. Impact on the health and safety of the public and occupants

    2. Environmental impact

    3. Minimize operational downtime

    4. Relative condition

    5. Coordination with other projects

    6. Relative cost

 

  1. Service demands and financial limitations impact the selection and prioritization of capital improvement projects and ongoing facilities maintenance in the following ways:

    1. The number of BSD staff dedicated to the maintenance and repair of City of Austin facilities has not increased in over ten years despite increases in the number of buildings serviced and the occupancy of those buildings. Additionally, BSD has encountered difficulties filling staff vacancies due to salaries that are lower than those in the private sector. These factors have caused increases in response time affecting user satisfaction and deferred preventive maintenance which negatively impacts the Facility Condition Index and ratio of scheduled to unscheduled maintenance.

    2. Council resolutions affect the capital selection process by causing uncertainty regarding the length of time buildings will continue to be in service. Examples include the potential redevelopment of the BSD Headquarters at 411 Chicon, the Rutherford Lane Campus. Both sites have been impacted by council resolutions and either have been, or are currently being, evaluated for redevelopment. In addition, the process of evaluating the use of office assets has been contracted to an external vendor which impacts BSD’s capital decision making as well.

 

  1. Capital improvement project funding:

    1. Three of BSD’s core facilities – Rutherford Lane Campus, One Texas Center, and City Hall, have dedicated funds that pay for operating expenses and capital projects. The sources of these funds include rental revenue from occupant departments, parking revenue, and rent collected from third-party retail operations.

    2. Capital funding for BSD’s five other core facilities (BSD Headquarters, Rebekah Baines Johnson Health Center, Techni Center, the Municipal Building, and the Public Safety Training Campus) are funded primarily through General Fund transfers to BSD’s general maintenance and deferred maintenance capital funds. The amount of these capital funds vary from year to year and are subject to availability based on citywide priorities.

    3. BSD is also responsible for some non-core facilities, including some facilities within Austin Police Department, Austin Fire Department, Emergency Medical Services, Austin Public Health, Animal Services, Austin Public Library, and Fleet. Funding for these projects include public safety bond funds and BSD’s general and deferred maintenance funds. As one-time bond funding becomes fully exhausted and ongoing capital transfers become less consistent, BSD’s ability to address facility needs for external departments is reduced.   

    4. Building occupants at many BSD core facilities have more recently been receiving their own capital improvement and deferred maintenance funding. Funding at the department level for building assets that are occupied by multiple departments negatively impacts BSD’s ability to drive maintenance and improvements across the entire facility.

 

The Building Services Department works to maintain the backbone and infrastructure necessary for departments to operate efficiently. Given funding commensurate with overcoming the existing backlog of deferred maintenance, BSD will invest in maintaining and improving the workplace and continue its commitment to sustainable facilities that meet Well Building Standard, LEED, and Energy Star standards.

Communication and Technology Management

Anchor 11

Communications and Technology Management (CTM) provides information technology services to City of Austin departments and external agencies in the Central Texas region. CTM’s mission to deliver innovative business technology solutions that improve City services.

 

CTM manages the City’s IT infrastructure including desktop computers, servers, networks, IT security, radio and telephone systems and software applications. CTM has three major divisions:

  • Communications and Technology Management provides infrastructure and technology services for most City departments;

  • The Combined Transportation, Emergency, and Communications Center (CTECC) is the regional inter-agency partnership that provides public safety, transportation coordination, and emergency operations services; and

  • The Wireless Communications Services Division (WCSD) manages the Greater Austin-Travis County Regional Radio System (GATRRS) and installation/maintenance of radios and other technology for Public Safety and other vehicles.

 

Communication and Technology Management (CTM) identifies, prioritizes, and selects CIP projects via Critical Replacement and no longer by IT Governance.

 

CTM has a critical replacement process that implements a lifecycle management strategy for technology systems and IT infrastructure that improve the effectiveness of City services that rely on critical equipment in order to consistently provide services to the public. CTM develops a 5-year plan for replacement of critical hardware and infrastructure, where projects are driven by -capital renewal and service demand needs. A few examples of purchases range from standard servers to storage for Oracle databases for our financial systems to distribution network equipment for voice, data and Wi-Fi to public safety mobile technology devices. This process is updated annually from CTM managers including equipment lists, locations, replacement schedules, and justification. CTM executives reviews each plan and prioritizes projects based on “end of life” and/or “end of support” for technology equipment and systems, and/or based on projected growth and advancements in technology. After thorough vetting, the updated plan is presented to the IT Steering committee for their final review and approval.

 

Enterprise business initiatives and department-specific business initiatives are typically driven by policies, planning priorities, and regulatory requirements. The City established an IT Governance structure in FY 2010-11 and began implementation in FY 2011-12 to prioritize IT initiatives for general government and support services departments. IT Governance, as part of the IT planning process, provided City-wide prioritization for funding technology projects. IT Governance process was administered IT Steering Committee on an annual basis, but there has been no significant funding for these projects since Fiscal Year 2018-19; examples of previously funded initiatives which are still ongoing are the Municipal Court’s case management software system upgrade and the Office of Real Estate’s leasing and facility management system which will ultimately integrate with Maximo. Currently, departments engage the Business Relationship Management unit in CTM on an as-needed basis for assistance with IT initiatives.

 

CTM utilizes a combination of various funding sources to complete its projects including department operating funds, grants, and other sources. Depending on the project, the operating costs, including maintenance and support and/or additional non-capital software licenses, or payments resulting from a financed contract, such as the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement (MSELA), Oracle ELA, or the PC Lifecycle project may be funded either by the related departments’ operating budgets or by CTM’s operating budget (operating capital). Some technology projects may be funded partially or entirely with grant funds. Public Safety, Health and Human Services, Parks, Library, and others frequently utilize grant funds. Other Sources may include partnerships for GAATN, the Regional Radio System, or CTECC projects which may be fully or partially funded by the relevant partner agencies. Some large, multi-year projects may be funded through debt financing options.

Anchor 13

Economic Development

Economic Development Department (EDD) capital improvement projects ensure that the department can develop and lead innovative programs that increase the prosperity of Austinites, businesses, and diverse neighborhoods, creating a cultural and economic environment that enhances the vitality of the community. The goal is to ensure that EDD can provide current services, improve, and expand department services as directed by Council.

​

To identify projects, Economic Development Department (EDD) project managers and division managers evaluate prior year RNA projects and currently funded projects to determine continued relevance and identify new projects to determine if they align with the Department direction and business needs. Projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis to determine well-warranted need and prioritized using the criteria bulleted below. Highlighted projects are may be included in the upcoming or following fiscal years 5-year CIP plan. EDD’s Executive leadership discuss and review the final department projects.

 

EDD facilitates the use of public-private partnerships to redevelop targeted areas of the city, which allows City resources to be leveraged with those of a private developer. The EDD Redevelopment Division sponsors the construction of public infrastructure that helps to deliver community-beneficial development on formerly City-owned land through Master Development Agreements (MDAs) with private developers. Additionally, EDD serves as project sponsor for capital enhancements in the public real to create a sense of place and identify for commercial and cultural districts.  These EDD-sponsored initiatives typically include many cross-departmental elements such as street and utility construction, open and park space creation, public art, and provision of affordable housing. Financing for these elements come from a variety of sources and can include tax increment financing used to repay bonds.

​

To identify projects Economic Development Department (EDD) uses the following criteria and prioritization process: 

​

1. Identify who provided the direction, such as:

  • Council Direction: Resolutions, Ordinances

  • Council Approved City Plans: City Strategic Direction 2023 Plan, Imagine Austin

  • Community feedback or survey: Creative Space Survey, Listening to the Workforce Survey, Department Survey, Stakeholder Identified Needs

  • Response to an Audit

​

2. Determine project readiness, including:

  • Spending Plan identified

  • Spending in the next 1-3 years

  • Spending in the next 4-10+ years

  • No spending plan identified

  • Early project development phase planning

 

3. Prioritize projects leveraging interdepartmental and inter-agency collaboration

 

The EDD CIP traditionally includes redevelopment projects or public realm enhancement projects associated with the Art in Public Places (AIPP) program. These projects require significant coordination with other City departments and private stakeholders that typically deliver the capital improvement projects through reimbursement agreements. Due to the significance and uniqueness of every redevelopment project EDD undertakes, there are numerous sources for project direction that are project specific.  The AIPP Program receives a 2% contribution from eligible capital projects per City Code Chapter 7-2, the Art in Public Places Ordinance. Funds for the AIPP Program are derived from various funding sources for CIP projects across the City, therefore individual AIPP project amounts are reflected in the sponsoring departments’ CIP Plan Pages. 

Emergency Medical Services

Anchor 14

Austin Travis County EMS has developed a facilities criterion that incorporates key drivers to identify projects.  These key drivers include:

 

  • Facility Age

  • Equipment Age

  • Electrical

  • HVAC

  • Lighting

  • Plumbing

  • Roof

  • Hazards including: Asbestos Abatement, Foundation Issues, Structural Issues

  • Medic Living Conditions

  • Medic Footprint

  • Gender Equity

  • Functionality

  • Significant Facility Repairs

  • Access / Egress

  • Facility Construction Type

  • Area Growth

  • Area Response Times

  • Overall 911 System Performance

  • Command Oversight / Span of Control

The primary goal of this process is to ensure that ATCEMS can improve and expand our service to support capacity.  Austin Travis County EMS also incorporates a Facilities Survey Form in the evaluation process.  Projects are then reviewed on a case by case basis to determine which ones are most warranted.  The projects identified through Austin Travis County EMS’ prioritization process are ranked to ensure ATCEMS has adequate infrastructure to continue to provide superior service to the City of Austin and Travis County in an environment with increasing population, service volume, and traffic congestion.  This comprehensive infrastructure assessment outlines the condition of EMS facilities to inform and prioritize needs for funding opportunities.

 

The project selection and prioritization process is organized into two areas: Facility Modifications and New Facilities.  Modifications to existing facilities address changing unit configurations and allow us to make the most efficient use of existing resources.  Building modifications are needed to accommodate the larger vehicles in the current ambulance fleet.  The project also includes the renovation and expansion of crew quarters, as well as, improvements to comply with ADA, gender equity, and fire code standards.  Expanding ATCEMS’s resources across the service area by adding new facilities will provide sufficient geographical coverage as the demand for services continues to grow in conjunction with the population and annexations.  We have partnered with Austin Fire Department (AFD) to build joint EMS and Fire Stations to maximize space and coverage as well as mitigate cost. 

 

The top priorities identified by ATCEMS have been determined by need.  Projects identified by a need to improve ATCEMS’s efficiency and coverage in services have a higher priority.

As a general fund department, EMS relies on general obligation debt, either through the public improvement bonds or non-voter approved debt for projects, such as Council’s new stations initiative outlined in Resolution 20180524-035. EMS is also eligible to receive funding from the capital rehabilitation fund to address rehabilitation and betterment of assets.

Fleet Mobility Services

Anchor 15

The mission of the Fleet Mobility Services (FMS) is to provide safe and reliable mobility solutions in a timely, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible manner to ensure the continuity of city services to our citizens.  The department’s CIP focuses around service center and administrative facilities, fuel facilities, fleet information technology, and the annual vehicle and equipment acquisitions.

 

To identify, prioritize and select projects the FMS department uses numerous considerations. Council direction, resolutions, ordinances, are used as criteria. An example is resolution 20160505025 which is part of the carbon neutral plan. In addition, this resolution is in line with the City’s SD2023 plan. Council approved city plans used as guidance are the City Strategic Direction 2023 Plan and Imagine Austin. Facility needs assessments are completed by fleet staff, prioritizing health and safety and operational efficiency. Process is reviewed by management and is based on condition of the facility (e.g. good, fair, and poor) then the work is prioritized with health and safety first. Stakeholder needs are identified depending on the type of project and internal and external stakeholders are engaged for feedback. Service demands are also a consideration. Regulatory requirements may include information received from Texas Commission Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the City of Austin Watershed Protection Department, and other regulatory agencies we possibly might receive directive from. FMS evaluates prior year RNA projects and the current 5-year CIP plan to determine continued relevance of identified projects.

 

Annually, the department staff identifies needs and determine if they align with the department direction and business criteria. Projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis to determine well-warranted need using the criteria above. If projects do not align with one or more criteria outlined above, they do not move forward. Projects are then prioritized and ranked by FMS division managers and their staff keeping in mind project readiness. The FMS executive team reviews for final departmental approval.

 

As an internal services department, the department has limited funding sources. Currently, fleet’s annual vehicle and equipment purchases for general fund and support services departments have utilized short term non-voter approved debt. Cash transfers from operating funds are limited and have only been available for the most critical of projects to move forward on facility renewal and deferred maintenance. Grants are utilized when available and typically are used on alternative fuel vehicles and fueling infrastructure. Large scale capital projects the department identifies would likely have to rely on long term general obligation bonds. In most recent history, at the City of Austin, the voter approved public improvement bonds have not included major infrastructure for internal and support service departments, which limits the department’s opportunity to move forward with larger scale projects.

Housing and Planning Department

Anchor 16

The primary drivers for the project needs identified by the Housing and Planning Department (HPD) are policy and planning priorities identified by the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan and attached small area plans, as well as the Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint.

​

In coordination with the community, HPD assists with the implementation and serves as the lead department on updates to the City’s Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, and develops and implements a variety of small area plans including neighborhood plans, corridor plans, area-specific master plans, and other plans. These plans include numerous implementation strategies, including policies, regulations, and desired City investments. As the department lead, HPD has the role of facilitating the implementation of public elements of the plans, either through its own CIP or those of other departments. The small area plan implementation needs identified include the top three priority CIP recommendations across all adopted small area plans.

​

The HPD projects outline multi-year planning efforts, to facilitate implementation of key public improvements identified in the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan and small area plans, and to review, coordinate, and implement streetscape projects in support of the Great Streets Master Plan. HPD’s project selection and prioritization process is guided by Council policy including Strategic Direction 2023, consultation and coordination with other departmental CIP plans, internal assessment and evaluation by HPD staff, as well as input from neighborhood plan contact teams and the community at large. HPD coordinates actively with implementing departments, including Public Works, Austin Transportation Department, the Parks and Recreation Department, and others to ensure that the project priorities identified through HPD-led plans are considered as implementing departments conduct their own technical prioritization processes and develop their individual CIPs. If another department does not fully cover the scope of a project as identified in a plan then HPD may look for funding opportunities to include that project in its CIP.

​

The Great Streets Development Program provides a mechanism to improve and prioritize the quality of downtown streets and sidewalks, aiming ultimately to transform the public right-of-way into great public spaces. It provides financial assistance to private developers with the cost of implementing streetscape standards that go above and beyond the City’s minimum requirements. The program allows the City to leverage needed above and below ground streetscape improvements from private developments by sharing the cost of implementing Great Streets enhancements. The program establishes criteria for the City’s financial participation in a project based on specific eligible criteria. Project priorities include: partial reimbursement to projects that implement Great Streets Standards, construction of approved CIP streetscape improvements, and collaboration with other city departments on streetscape enhancement projects. The sole source for the Great Streets Program is derived from yearly contributions from the Parking Management Fund which sets aside a percentage of the parking revenues collected in downtown within the program’s boundaries to provide assistance to the development community to implement the Great Streets standards.  

​

The Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint includes numerical goals, timelines, and strategies to maintain and create affordable housing for a range of incomes throughout the city, as envisioned in Imagine Austin. The Blueprint helps align resources, ensures a unified strategic direction, and facilitates community partnerships to achieve this shared vision. The types of projects undertaken and prioritized are also guided by Austin’s housing market, specific community needs that are identified, priorities set by City Council, and input from stakeholders and the public.

​

At the program level, affordable rental and ownership development projects go through an application review process. The process includes review by staff for project feasibility, developer capacity, and other factors. For those applications to be funded with affordable housing General Obligation bond dollars, an additional review takes place through an external Housing Investment Review Committee (HIRC) before projects are recommended for funding. The key criterion that determines program eligibility for applicants is the household income and number of household members. The area median family income (MFI) limits are set by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and govern the applicant screening process. These projects are almost exclusively funded with General Obligation bonds.

Anchor 17

Parks and Recreation

The Parks and Recreation Department (PARD) mission is to inspire Austin to learn, play, protect, and connect by creating diverse programs and experiences in sustainable natural spaces and public places. The Capital Improvement Program supports this mission by acquiring and developing new land, amenities, and facilities to meet increasing service demands, while rehabilitating, renovating, and replacing existing sites through ongoing capital renewal. Both renovation and new facility development are done with an eye toward long-term operations and maintenance concerns so as to not adversely impact future budgets, especially as economic conditions fluctuate during the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

PARD has assembled a set of criteria with the input of key policy and planning documents to select and prioritize projects, including the PARD Long Range Plan, the City Strategic Direction 2023, and the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan. City Council’s Contract with the Voters for the 2018 Bond Program also established specific guidelines for the selection of projects and programs funded by Proposition C (Parks and Recreation). Criteria considered in the selection and prioritization of projects include condition of facilities, equity, safety, compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Texas Accessibility Standards, improved access to parks, potential to improve to park features, anticipated population growth, sustainability benefits, and partnership or leveraging opportunities. Individual project concepts are prioritized using these criteria.

 

PARD’s highlighted CIP projects for the Rolling Needs Assessment have been outlined in PARD’s Long Range Plan (LRP).  The purpose of the LRP is to create a framework for park system planning and growth over the span of the next ten years.  This plan provides a foundation for decision-making on how to spend limited resources for the greatest and most equitable impact in the City’s park system. The LRP is created through extensive stakeholder engagement, collected through focus groups, surveys, open houses, and pop up events. City Council approved the Department’s updated Long Range Plan for 2020-2030, Our Parks, Our Future, in November 2019.  The Citywide strategies of the LRP are to:

  • Ensure parks act as a relief from urban life

  • Expand and improve park access for all

  • Activate and enhance urban public spaces

  • Align programs with community interests

  • Optimize and improve efficiency of operations

 

Additionally, PARD informs its planning and project prioritization through ongoing condition and health assessments at parks and facilities across the system. Assessments include documentation of assets’ age, wear and tear, damage, and need for replacement or removal. Photos, descriptions, and other comments are collected in GIS applications, which feed into PARD’s asset management data.

 

The Rolling Needs Assessment provides a regular check on the execution of the Department’s goals through the Department’s CIP and allows PARD and City Council to adapt as financial resources and City needs change over time.  To help achieve these goals, PARD works with various partners such as neighborhoods, non-profits, civic groups, and businesses.  Work with these groups includes fundraising, park and trail clean-up events, and public advocacy campaigns for new and existing parks.  Outside fundraising and contributions make up a significant portion of PARD funding, allowing PARD to preserve greenspace, implement improvement projects, and provide a higher level of service than would otherwise be possible.

Public Works

Introduction:

The mission of the Public Works Department (PWD) is to build and maintain a better community by delivering services to every corner of Austin. PWD aims to set the standard for connecting people with safe and reliable infrastructure. The Capital Improvement Program supports this mission and vision by renewing existing mobility infrastructure, constructing new sidewalks and urban trails, creating Safe Routes to School, forging partnerships with the community through the Neighborhood Partnering Program, and improving service centers from which these services deploy.

 

Asset Management:

PWD has made a commitment to extending our already mature infrastructure management and maintenance programs into the more robust realm of Asset Management (AM). The PWD effort is similar to the initiatives by the other key infrastructure departments within the City of Austin. PWD has had several mature infrastructure programs over the years having formal staff, tools, and processes for managing streets, bridges, and sidewalks. Others asset classes are being added to this knowledge base by gathering full inventories, regular condition assessments, developing planned preventative maintenance strategies, and better predicting rehabilitation and replacement needs.

 

PWD has been a leader in project coordination within the right of way for decades with AULCC (utility coordination), holding monthly capital project coordination meetings, and the Project Management Division reaching out to affected parties. Coordination is now and has always been a crucial aspect of the AM processes we’ve had in place. We coordinate with other City projects, public and private utilities, and development activities to minimize disturbances to the community and leverage City funds. Coordination with other departments and stakeholders upfront allows for PWD sponsored and managed projects to support other mobility, connectivity, water and wastewater, drainage, and other goals identified within Imagine Austin, planning overlays, master plans, and strategic plans.

 

PWD has sought to compare our functional and technical performance with the Citizen satisfaction data from Citywide surveys, door hangers used by our operations, and the number and severity of customer complaints we receive. Furthermore, equity and geographic distribution of candidates is also examined and balanced against the overall infrastructure needs from condition data.

 

PWD strives to be a good steward of our physical assets after they are built. We believe and support a robust preventative maintenance approach to aggressively caring for our assets. This practice has the effect of eliminating excessive asset deterioration and any premature need for capital renewal due to early failures. PWD has sustained a fairly large preventative maintenance budget and programs for the preservation of all of our major assets. For example, we do more street surface seals than most comparable local government agencies. This is not because we are doing too much, but because in comparison, they are doing far too little to preserve the value of their assets. This concept is a primary principle of good infrastructure management.

 

PWD has an Asset Management Policy. Our goal this year is to develop a formal Asset Management Strategy and then produce our first formal Annual Asset Plan for PWD infrastructure. PWD has had formal prioritization tools, performance modeling and prediction, and optimizing decision making with pavements and sidewalks for quite a while. PWD also has extensive inventories and condition data for bridges, culverts, and portions of the right of way vegetation and trees. Other asset classes such as urban trails, curb & gutter, safety barriers, and operational facilities are being developed with our previous infrastructure experience.

 

The future PWD AM roadmap includes establishing very formally defined levels of service and demand, risk analysis and management, and trade-off analysis capabilities in the coming years. The concept of risk is “baked into” our infrastructure tools and processes, but it is not explicitly exposed for easy comparison and quantitative demonstration. For example, we grade arterial streets more harshly than collectors and collectors more harshly than the residential streets. This is in recognition of number of users, speeds, network criticality, and safety concerns; however, risk is not easily compared in a direct fashion. A more formal risk-based approach will be adopted in the future in addition to these other concepts on our roadmap.

 

Bridges, Culverts, and Structures:

Bridges and structures are critical locations in the mobility systems and networks which cannot be structurally unsound, deficient in safety, or have damage that is left unaddressed for any substantial length of time. Additionally, railings and other protection systems may be obsolete or may not meet current engineering standards. Bridge and large culvert structures form critical links within the roadway system with limited or sometimes having no alternative routes.

 

Bridge and culvert data for the larger structures greater than 20 feet long have been collected biannually by TxDOT trained professional engineers dating back to 1986. These extensive data have been used to select preventative maintenance, spot repairs, modest upgrades, and repair accident damage. For the smaller, less critical structures, SBO is in the process of validating our initial inventory and first full cycle of condition inspection data. This will be used to formally evaluate needs beyond only anecdotally reported concerns. Preventative maintenance, routine repairs, and rehabilitation will be selected from this condition data.

 

Major projects selected for the Bridges and Structures capital renewal program are prioritized to address infrastructure needs and implement solutions that meet current bridge and structural engineering standards. Bridges at end of life are scheduled for complete replacement. Alternatively, some obsolete bridges, while structurally adequate, are upgraded as needed to improve functionality. These types of projects address mobility and functional needs beyond structural integrity such as including or widening sidewalks, bicycle facilities where they may not currently exist, and modern railing and protection systems. All bridge, culvert, and structure projects are coordinated with other City departments to address other infrastructure needs where appropriate. This coordination is especially important with Watershed Protection as most bridges and culverts carry a transportation feature (roadway) over a drainage waterway.

 

Streets:

Street condition data is collected regularly on the entire network over a three-year period. Roughness and cracking distress data is routinely gathered for every street segment in the City that is maintained by PWD Street & Bridge Operations (SBO). Street project candidates are identified for the Street Reconstruction and Rehabilitation capital renewal programs by a technical assessment of current infrastructure conditions. SBO has used a fully functional Pavement Management Information System (PMIS) since 1993. Customer complaints and reported pavement damage are also considered by the engineering staff in the project candidate validation process. Street Reconstruction and Rehabilitation projects are selected and initiated based on a detailed analysis of the condition data.

 

Once project candidates are identified, validated, and internally vetted; they are coordinated as generally detailed above. The coordination processes mentioned above are critical in leveraging other projects, effectively managing timing, avoiding unnecessary damage to the streets, and minimizing inconvenience to the public. Streets are one of the largest infrastructures affected by many other underlying entities. Unfortunately, the condition of streets, utilities, and all of the other ancillary infrastructures are rarely fully in sync. So, balancing these differing needs, varying priorities, and desired project timings can be extremely challenging. Still, “Dig-Once” opportunities and collaboration between capital projects is always sought out in planning, design, and sometimes even during construction.
 

Sidewalks and ADA Ramps – New and Rehabilitation:

PWD, both constructs new and rehabilitates existing sidewalks and curb ramps throughout the City. The updated City of Austin Sidewalk Master Plan was adopted in June 2016 after extensive public outreach and establishes asset management policies for sidewalks within the City’s rights-of-way. New construction and rehabilitation of existing sidewalks is based on the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The City’s Sidewalk Master Plan provides goals and key recommendations for these programs, prioritization methodologies, infrastructure needs by council district, and historical information regarding sidewalk construction.

 

Urban Trails:

The Urban Trails program is guided by the 2014 Urban Trails Plan which was adopted after extensive public outreach. The urban trails program promotes non-motorized pathways for recreation and active transportation that are designed for users of all ages and abilities. The Urban Trails Plan identifies approximately 400 miles of urban trails to be constructed in Austin. Currently, approximately 55 miles have been constructed, 14 miles of trail are in the planning or design phases, and there is funding for construction of approximately 30% of the remaining 47 miles of Tier 1 trails called for in the Urban Trails Plan.

 

Neighborhood Partnering Program:

The Neighborhood Partnering Program (NPP) provides opportunities for community and neighborhood organizations to affect public improvements by sharing in the costs of those efforts with the City of Austin government. All NPP projects are generated through applications submitted by the community. Project applications are reviewed and awarded by the NPP Board made up of 5 COA department directors.  Proposal are evaluated on the program’s core values: community participation, quality of life enhancement, incorporation of City initiatives, geographic equity, and cost sharing. This program assists neighborhood groups in developing, resourcing, and executing small- to medium-sized improvements projects in the City’s right-of-way or on a City owned property. Cost sharing can be achieved through cash contributions, in-kind contributions, or donated labor (sweat equity). NPP began after the approval of the 2012 G.O. Bond, and most recently received funding through the approval of the 2018 G.O. bond election. Since 2012, NPP has implemented a variety of projects throughout the City, such as sidewalk and access/safety improvements, traffic circles, pedestrian paths and trails, adopt-a-median, bicycle facilities, public art, and green streets. The NPP board reviews and approves project applications bi-annually.

 

Safe Routes To School:

As part of the 2016 Mobility Bond, the Safe Routes to School program received $27.5 million G.O. bond funds for the first time. The Safe Routes to School program then developed an infrastructure report to identify barriers preventing students from safely walking or biking to school. The report identified 4,654 barriers citywide at a total cost of $825M. All barriers identified in the Safe Routes to School Infrastructure Report were evaluated on four factors: Demand (35%), Safety (30%), Equity (20%) and Stakeholder Input (15%).  This scoring system was used to calculate a Benefit Score for addressing each barrier. Barriers were then sorted into five Overall Benefit categories: very high, high, medium, low, and very low. Both Overall Benefit and Estimated Cost:Benefit are being used to prioritize improvements, focusing primarily on high and very high ranked projects. In an effort to best utilize Safe Routes to School’s limited resources, the program will also be considering other factors including final cost estimates, feasibility, leveraging and cost-sharing opportunities.

 

PWD Facilities:

PWD Facilities house employees, equipment, vehicles, and materials that support CIP projects and Operations and Maintenance activities. Funding to improve PWD Facilities is needed to better organize existing sites to optimize delivery services so that service level goals can be met. Funding for PWD Facilities is prioritized based on highest need and growth opportunities to meet future needs as PWD service centers. A cross-departmental working group is leading the citywide effort for identification, selection, and prioritization of facility projects. The group is expected to come up with its recommendation on facilities projects during FY21.

 

Typical Funding Sources:

PWD is an enterprise department that has the ability to collect revenue to support transportation infrastructure. While the Transportation User Fee (TUF) is available to support transportation infrastructure through transfers from the operating fund, the primary funding source for the PW CIP is voter approved general obligation bonds.

​

Learn more about Public Works here: https://austintexas.gov/department/public-works

Anchor 18

Watershed Protection

Anchor 19

Overview

 

The Watershed Protection Department (WPD) protects the lives, property, and environment of our community by reducing the impact of floods, erosion, and water pollution. WPD’s work is guided by the Watershed Protection Strategic Plan, which sets goals and objectives; prioritizes the worst flooding, erosion, and water quality problems; and identifies potential strategies to address problems using a combination of projects, programs, and regulations. A central principle of the plan is that the most severe problems—where the needs and risks are greatest—will be considered first for solution implementation. WPD currently uses technical data to define problem severity, but the department is evaluating how to incorporate social data in order to acknowledge the disparate community impacts of watershed problems and advance racial equity through our work. At later stages of project evaluation, additional factors, such as solution feasibility, timing, and opportunity to share resources, are also considered.

 

Problem Score Calculations

​

Watershed Protection performs technical studies to characterize flood, erosion, and water quality problems for the watersheds within its jurisdiction. These studies help locate areas within each watershed where watershed protection goals are not being achieved. This approach is designed to enable direct comparisons between watersheds and promotes consistency among the three missions: Flood Risk Reduction (Creek and Local Flood), Erosion Control, and Water Quality Protection.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

Using this technical data, WPD uses the problem score methodologies described in the Strategic Plan to quantify and prioritize problem areas for each of the department missions. Problem scores assign a numeric value to locations where a watershed problem has been identified, such as erosion sites or structures in floodplains. These problem scores can then be grouped into larger units, such as stream reaches, to enable comparisons across different geographies and identify opportunities for regional solutions.

​

Problem scores are generated by calculating the severity of existing and potential future problems (the problem severity) and assigning values to the types of resources that are potentially threatened (the resource value). Examples of resources include homes, businesses, hospitals, roadways, trails, and parks. The scores are then normalized to a 100-point scale to help simplify comparisons. For example, the worst erosion reach studied would have a score of 100. All other erosion reaches would have scores relative to this high score.

 

​

 

 

 

 

Flood problem scores reflect threats to public safety and property. The deeper and more frequent the predicted flooding, the higher the score. For flooding associated with creeks, flood problem scores are calculated for structures and street crossings. Floodplain models calculate predicted flooding depths and flow velocities for storm events. For flooding outside of the creek’s floodplain, modeling and resident complaint data are used to identify and prioritize problem areas, which are mostly associated with undersized storm drain systems.

 

Erosion problem scores are based on the number, type, and severity of the threat to structures, infrastructure, and other valued features located along stream banks. The scoring system accounts for factors such as distance of resources from the steam bank, bank stability, vegetative cover, and stream meandering. Areas or structures located near creek bends, steep slopes, high banks, and/or poor vegetative cover generally have high problem severity scores.

Water quality problem scores are calculated using the Environmental Integrity Index, which uses field measurements to monitor and assess the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of Austin’s creeks. Healthy creeks have high Environmental Integrity Index scores. Streams with more urbanization have more sediment, nutrients, toxins, and bacteria, resulting in lower Environmental Integrity Index scores.

In addition to the three primary missions of the department, WPD established a stormwater asset management program in 2016 with an objective to more effectively operate, maintain, repair, rehabilitate, and replace the City’s stormwater infrastructure. The program is developing Asset Management Plans (AMPs) for each of the department’s infrastructure asset classes, including open drainage channels, stormwater control measures (SCMs), storm drain systems, and tunnels. By analyzing the condition, criticality, and risk of failure of existing infrastructure, the department creates prioritized lists of desired projects, levels of service provided, and associated financial estimates for each asset class. This methodology will be included in the next update of the Watershed Protection Strategic Plan.
 

Project Prioritization and Partnership Opportunities

As stated above, the Strategic Plan uses a “needs-based” approach to prioritize capital projects. However, not every priority problem area will result in a capital project moving forward. Project implementation for larger projects may need to be phased over multiple years due to limited capital funding. For some problem areas, no technically feasible solution is available or the cost may be too high to fund though traditional funding sources, which include the drainage charge assessed on monthly utility bills as well as payments provided by development in lieu of on-site stormwater control measures. These problem areas may be set aside until another funding source is available, such as bonds, grants, or tax-increment financing. This may result in projects that are lower on the priority list being implemented first based on feasibility and availability of funds.

In addition, WPD also utilizes public-private partnerships and coordination with other departments and government agencies to share costs and increase benefits to an area. For example, WPD may partner with a development to provide additional water quality treatment and/or construct storm drain systems and other conveyance improvements. These partnerships reduce the overall cost of the project for WPD and are usually built more quickly than might otherwise be possible. However, since these projects are opportunity-based, they may be pursued in areas that are lower on the priority list.

With the passage of transportation bonds by City of Austin voters in 2016, 2018, and 2020 and the planned construction of several large regional transportation projects by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and Capital Metro, there is significant increased demand for funding to cost participate on improvements to storm drain infrastructure and water quality retrofits for these projects. This will likely represent an unfunded need in the next 10 years, given the number of projects and the substantial associated costs.

 

Achieving Goals and Maximizing Benefits

Capital solutions are measured by their effectiveness in achieving the watershed protection goals and objectives outlined in the Strategic Plan. Ideally, preferred solutions provide the following results:

 

•     Meet flood, erosion, and water quality goals and objectives;

•     Maintain or improve the natural character of waterways;

•     Minimize required operations and maintenance;

•     Ensure compliance with local, state, and federal regulatory requirements; and

•     Foster additional beneficial uses of waterways and drainage facilities where possible.


In addition to meeting these goals and objectives, capital projects should implement sustainable watershed protection strategies that integrate the Flood Risk Reduction, Erosion Control, and Water Quality Protection missions. Because current watershed conditions often fall short of watershed protection goals, WPD seeks opportunities to address multiple watershed problems to maximize project benefits. This means maximizing opportunities to advance individual mission objectives; seeking opportunities to attain common goals; and minimizing negative impacts to all missions.

​

Other Considerations for Capital Projects

Priority problem areas are evaluated by WPD for capital solution feasibility. Each mission completes a feasibility determination and rough cost estimates for the subset of solutions that could potentially address the problem. Once a solution is determined to be technically and financially feasible, there are multiple other factors that are further evaluated in choosing the type of solution implemented.

As project alternatives are screened and evaluated, the benefits of each solution are weighed relative to the project costs to determine cost effectiveness. Examples of cost-benefit analysis include calculating the average cost per linear foot of stream bank restored or the cost per structure with reduced depth of flooding. In addition to the cost of design and construction, estimates of cost also include the annual operations and maintenance costs associated with each alternative for the total life of the project.

Another factor that is considered during alternative evaluation is the time needed to implement the project. A project may provide a higher level of service, but the solution may take longer to fund and implement, leaving the community at risk of additional flooding, erosion, or water quality degradation in the interim. To help address this issue, WPD explores opportunities to phase capital projects to help provide limited, more immediate relief as a larger solution is developed and implemented. The time of implementation may also be impacted by the amount of real estate acquisition required (e.g., purchasing drainage easements) and the complexity of permitting requirements.

Input from the surrounding community plays a crucial role as alternatives are screened and evaluated. WPD consults adopted neighborhood and small area plans for potential actions or recommendations that can be incorporated into the project. In addition, the project team will meet with the community to discuss the project, the potential alternatives, and the projected level of service and benefits. Community input will help inform the final preferred alternative and the design of the project. Projects will work to incorporate elements that achieve the Strategic Plan goal to foster additional beneficial uses of waterways and drainage facilities.

 

Finally, in coordination with the City of Austin’s Equity Office, WPD is developing an Equity Action Plan to advance racial equity through the department’s work. As part of this process, the department is exploring ways to incorporate racial equity into capital project prioritization and alternative selection in order to acknowledge the disparate community impacts of watershed problems. WPD will be working closely with the community to develop a proposal and implement changes to the department’s formal prioritization process.

​

Typical Funding Sources

 

WPD is an enterprise department that has the ability to collect revenue to support drainage infrastructure. Typical funding sources include the Drainage Utility Fund (DUF), the Urban Structural Control Fund (USCF), and the Regional Stormwater Management Program (RSMP). WPD also utilizes voter-approved General Obligation debt.

 

The Drainage Utility Fund (DUF) must be used for drainage-related projects, which includes solutions to address flooding, erosion, and impacts on water quality. The Texas Local Government Code (§552.049) states that the income of a drainage utility system must be segregated and completely identifiable in municipal accounts, which is why the revenue generated by the charge is not transferable to the general fund. Therefore, the City of Austin uses the drainage charge as a funding source for future improvements, including replacement, new construction, or extension of the drainage system.

​

The Urban Structural Control Fund (USCF) provides funding for the planning, design, and construction of water quality improvements in the Urban Watersheds. The Land Development Code allows sites in these watersheds that meet the eligibility criteria to pay into the fund in lieu of building on-site water quality control structures.

​

The Regional Stormwater Management Program (RSMP) is a payment-in-lieu program administered by Watershed Protection. This program provides funding for the planning, design, and construction of regional drainage improvements to reduce the risk of flooding in specific watersheds. If a project meets the eligibility criteria to participate, developers may make a payment instead of constructing a detention pond or developers may construct approved off-site drainage improvements.

​

Learn more about Watershed Protection here: https://www.austintexas.gov/department/watershed-protection

Wshed_Narrative_image.jpg
Wshed_Narrative_image2.jpg
bottom of page