T.C. Broadnax
A little-noticed memo from Austin City Manager T.C. Broadnax grants Austin’s Development Services Department expanded authority over the development process, including the final say when departments disagree over how development-related rules should be interpreted or applied.
Keith Mars
The Sept. 25 memo took some city council offices, former city officials and planning and development employees by surprise. It names Development Services Director Keith Mars as the final department-level authority in those disputes and says some review functions now handled by Watershed Protection and the Parks and Recreation Department will transfer to development services.
At the center of the change is a tradeoff Austin has struggled to resolve for decades: whether a development system built to protect against flooding, environmental harm and other public risks can also move quickly enough to meet the city’s growth demands.
Broadnax’s memo addresses that question by concentrating more decision-making power in Development Services — the department charged with moving applications through the pipeline. But his decision weakens the authority of city specialists in watershed protection, parks, and public safety when they object. The result could be a smoother, faster path for projects stalled by competing city requirements, or a new system in which the pressure to keep development moving outweighs the independent safeguards other city departments were created to provide.
The two-page memo does not specify: how disagreements over technical or environmental judgments will be resolved; what safeguards will remain for other departments; which review functions will shift; or how the city will evaluate the new policy’s efficacy.
Several people interviewed by the Austin Free Press said the policy shift appears to have moved forward with no advance notice or public discussion, leaving such questions unanswered.
Jose “Chito” Vela
Mayor Pro Tem Chito Vela said the change addresses a problem that has frustrated developers and city staff for years. With different city departments controlling separate parts of the development process, construction is halted while disagreements are worked out.
“There was not really a clear way to resolve that interdepartmental conflict,” Vela said. “We need something.”
The new framework appoints development services as the final arbitrator when any development-related disputes remain unresolved and create delays. Vela said he views the change as another step in Austin’s long-running effort to expedite a development process that is too complex, slow and costly.
He rejected the idea that the shift will undermine development standards governing such issues as impervious cover, drainage and parkland dedication.
“The final product should look exactly the same,” Vela said. “The idea is just to speed up the process of getting all those things in place.”
Marc Duchen
District 10 Council Member Marc Duchen said his concern is what happens when speeding up the process comes at the expense of expertise held by departments such as Watershed Protection, Parks and Recreation or Austin Fire.
Duchen acknowledged longstanding problems with the city’s development review system but questioned whether giving development services more authority is the best solution. He said the city instead could look at technology, code changes or other process improvements before reducing the role of other departments that might have good reasons to raise objections.
“This was somewhat of a surprise to me,” Duchen said. “My fear is that all of this sounds great until there’s a fire or flood or landslide, or we irreparably lose green space.”
Austin’s development-review troubles go back decades. A 2015 review by consultant Zucker Systems identified longstanding city-permit problems, including some that had been identified in 1987.
A 2019 city audit found that though the city had made numerous changes, timelines and high costs remained major concerns. A 2023 consultant review that Mayor Kirk Watson commissioned from McKinsey & Co. found that the site-plan process spanned 11 departments. It recommended more than 40 changes to reduce siloed reviews, improve coordination and create a more consistent, streamlined process.
Kathie Tovo
Former Council Member Kathie Tovo said the separate roles of city departments can create delays, but they can also serve as checks when staff members disagree.
“We need all of that expertise in the room,” Tovo said. “We need people standing up for the environment. We need people standing up for our parks and the real public interest that our community has in those.”
Tovo said her concern centers on creating a structure where development services could override the recommendations of departments with specialized responsibilities
City’s explanation
In a written response to Austin Free Press questions, Development Services Director Keith Mars said the changes build on the city’s 2023 Transforming Site Plan Review. He stated that they’re intended to prevent avoidable delays; quickly resolve interdepartmental conflicts; and make development regulations more predictable. Under the new framework, he said that his department will coordinate permitting, while a new Executive Permitting Committee composed of leaders from development-related departments will handle any conflicts that arise.
Mars said his department’s coordinating role is being formalized and that environmental, watershed, parks and other specialists will continue to provide technical analysis. He didn’t specify which functions would move to his department from other bodies or when those changes would happen.
He also said that no particular project or dispute prompted the policy change. Mars said that it’s an outgrowth of the city’s other recent development reforms.
Duchen said he plans to seek more information from development services about how the framework will be implemented and when the council can expect a robust briefing.
Dog’s Head reaction
Recent controversies over East Austin’s Dog’s Head development add urgency to concerns about how the new framework could work in practice, though several people interviewed said the changes appear to have been in the works before that project landed at City Hall.
Robin Rather
Longtime environmental activist Robin Rather said Dog’s Head is a prime example of the city pushing environmental reviews aside in the interest of expediency. Environmental advocates are alarmed by the memo, Rather said, because it formalizes a shift in city power that already was underway.
“This is a seismic power shift,” she said, pointing to specialized areas that now could receive less city scrutiny, including flooding, water quality, heat and parkland.
Broadnax’s memo says development services will spend the coming weeks creating a framework for the Executive Permitting Committee to resolve development-related disputes. It adds that the Development Services Department could take over additional development-review functions in the future.
Chad Swiatecki is a 30-year journalist who relocated to Austin from his home state of Michigan in 2008. He most enjoys covering the intersection of arts, business and local/state politics. He has written for Rolling Stone, Spin, New York Daily News, Texas Monthly, Austin Monitor, Austin Business Journal, Austin American-Statesman and many other regional and national outlets.