Live Oak Comprehensive PlanComprehensive Plan Steering Committee

May 8, 2019

1

Agenda

• Introductions and Project Overview• Purpose• Process• Schedule

• Capturing a Snapshot of Live Oak

• Engaging the Community• Surveying the Community – Determining the Important

Questions• Community Events• Stakeholder Focus Groups

• Identifying Early & Important Issues

• Preparation for Next Meeting: Building a Vision Statement and Goals

2

Attendance:

Committee:• Paul Lukich• Miguel Esparza• Sandy Vogel• Scott Feldmeier• Rachel Clark• Harvey Johnson• Rebecca Kockan• Joseph Garcia (absent, excused)

City Staff:• Scott Wayman, City Manager• Donna Lowder, Economic Development Business Liason

Consultants:• Dan Sefko, FAICP• Chance Sparks, AICP, CNU-A

2

Introductions

3

3

Purpose

• Update Comprehensive Plan

• Direct growth and physical development

• Identify strategic long-term goals

• Recommendations for implementation

• High quality plan document

4

4

What is a Comprehensive Plan

• Community’s Vision

• Long-term statement of policy

• Guide for decision-making• Zoning Ordinance/Map

• Subdivision Regulations

• Capital Improvement Program

• Community based programs

• NOT A REGULATION

5

5

Plan Elements

• Existing conditions• Community Snapshot

• Community goals and objectives• Community Outreach• Vision and Goals, Guiding Principles

• Plan recommendations• Land Use, Population Patterns and Housing • Transportation and Circulation (Mobility)• Community Identity and Neighborhood Livability

• Implementation strategies

6

6

Planning Process

Baseline Analysis

Implementation

Visioning Goals & Objectives

Future Land Use

Mobility

Housing

Quality of Life

Plan Development

and

Recommendations

Existing

Conditions

What the City

Hopes to Achieve

Implementation

Strategies

YOU ARE HERE

7

Tasks

Community Outreach

• Public meetings/events/ workshops

• Online survey

Community Vision

• Community Vision

• Guiding Principles

• Goals and Objectives

Community Snapshot

• Historic trends, population & demographic patterns

• Existing land use analysis

• Planning Context• Boundaries, regulatory control• Surrounding communities• Physical constraints (natural and

manmade) • Past and current planning efforts

8

8

Tasks

Land Use, Population and Housing• Future Land Use Plan, Map, Types and

Projections

• Population Patterns

• Neighborhood Assessments

• Housing Demand

Community Identity and Neighborhood Livability

• Elements that do not fit neatly in the other areas

• Quality of life

Transportation and Circulation• Transportation Assessment

• Identifications of corridors and facilities for multi-modal extensions

• Addressing changes to I-35 and Loop 1604

Report and Implementation• Implementation Plan• Draft Plan• Final Plan

9

9

ScheduleComprehensive Plan Advisory Committee

• CPAC Meeting #1: May 8, 2019

• CPAC Meeting #2: Early July• Snapshot, Survey Results, Vision/Goals

• CPAC Meeting #3: Late August• Vision/Goals Confirmation• Land Use, Population, Housing

• CPAC Meeting #4: Late September• Transportation/Circulation• Community Identity & Neighborhood Livability• Implementation (possibly)

• CPAC Meeting #5: Mid-November• Implementation• Full Draft

Community & Stakeholder Meetings

• Stakeholder Meetings: Late May or Early June

• Community Meeting: Mid-June

Deliverables

• Draft Survey: May 17, 2019

• Survey Opens: June 1, 2019

• Survey Closes: July 1, 2019

• Community Snapshot: May 20, 2019

• Vision, Goals, Objectives: July 21, 2019

• Land Use, Population, Housing: August 10, 2019

• Transportation and Circulation: August 21, 2019

• Community Identity and Neighborhood Livability: August 21, 2019

• Implementation: September 15, 2019

• Full Draft: November 1, 2019

• Final Plan, Post Adoption: January 1, 2020

10

The team is currently a little behind schedule in preparing the survey, as the first CPAC meeting took place later than anticipated. This may also affect the community snapshot chapter, though it should be released as a draft the week of May 20th.

10

Capturing a Snapshot of Live Oak

11

11

12

12

13

13

14

Several comments and observations were provided regarding early demographic analysis. • The population is in need of transit

• Seniors, retirees and others medically unable to drive a personal automobile

• Service & hospitality industry struggles with hiring due to lack of transit access to the greater region

• Northeast Methodist Hospital Expansion will prompt additional clinics & services, and increase need for transportation alternatives

• Live Oak shifted ¼ cent sales tax to economic development; VIA funds in remainder of service area through sales tax allocation

• VIA has not indicated ability to expand service by contract with a City; could look towards Capitol Metro in Austin as example of method to do so.

• Should ask about transit in outreach, clarifying within Live Oak vs. region, and willingness to fund

• Key events in Live Oak’s development that have shaped the present• Randolph Air Force Base• Incorporation (see history documents)• Hospital arrival

14

• Arrival of The Forum regional “power center” retail development• Arrival of community college and development of Northeast Lakeview

College• Arrival of Live Oak Town Center regional “power center” retail &

commercial development

14

Existing Land Use

15

Existing Land Use Acreage Percentage

Two Family 5.2 0.17%

Commercial 187.8 6.13%

Industrial 44.6 1.46%

Multi Family 105.8 3.45%

Manufactured Home 8.1 0.27%

Office 44.5 1.46%

Parks/Open Space and Drainage 207.1 6.76%

Public/Semi-Public 212.5 6.94%

Retail 213.4 6.97%

Right-of-Way 558.3 18.24%

Single Family 892.2 29.14%

Town House 4.7 0.15%

Utilities 2.4 0.08%

Vacant 574.9 18.78%

3,061.4 100.00%

15

Physical Features

16

I-35 Northeast Expansion is key issue going forward (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/projects/studies/san-antonio/i35-ne-sat-pel.html) • It includes the addition of express elevated decks with significant access limits• City has, through fire/EMS response impact, negotiated for access at Pat Booker

and is negotiating additional consideration for a future phase

16

Undeveloped Areas

17

• Some residential development activity is pending, particularly the property that had been previously held by the school district for a future school. These houses are expected to fall in the $200,000 to $250,000 range.

• Topperwein is viewed as an opportunity to enhance the medical service industry in Live Oak, strengthening the daytime population and bolstering access to healthcare for Live Oak citizens as well as the greater region.

• The far south area of the city, near O’Conner, has interesting development potential as well as “paper plat” subdivisions, but has utility access and capacity challenges.

• In the far northern area, planning should consider the rail presence for adjacency impacts, as well as environmental challenges on adjacent sites.

17

Engaging the Community

18

18

MetroQuest Online Survey

• Survey will be live prior to any community event/open house

• What specific input should we collect?• Land Use & Development• Housing• Transportation• Image• Other

19

Some things we’ve heard from you:• What do people like about Live

Oak/Why do they stay?• What is Live Oak lacking?• How should Live Oak focus funds?• List one thing you would change about

Live Oak.• How/Should Live Oak recognize its

relationship to the military?• What additional services or facilities

are desired in Live Oak?• What kinds of development would you

like to see in Live Oak in the future?• How can we better connect the citizens

of Live Oak, physically and as a community?

• How much do they shop/access services in Live Oak?

Several suggestions were made regarding information to seek through a survey:• What is the image of Live Oak (visual preference)?• How do you feel about the physical appearance of Live Oak (visual preference)?• Do you typically shop & dine in Live Oak?• How are existing commercial areas perceived (visual preference)?

• Broaden to include other regional commercial areas?• What should Live Oak do to support development of additional medical services? • What should Live Oak do to support development of additional businesses?• What businesses should Live Oak encourage to locate in the City? • If safe pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure was in place, would you walk or bike

more? • Budget-based exercise of “what are you willing to pay for?”• Is there a need for a community center, akin to a YMCA?

19

MetroQuest

• Online Survey

• 5 screens per survey

• 12 screen templates

20

20

21

21

22

22

23

23

24

24

25

25

Community Event

• Mid-June

• Active and engaging

• Convenient

• Consider tagging it onto another planned community event?

26

• Live Oak citizens are generally busy, with limited opportunities to engage a large number in a single location.

• Microevents and meeting-to-go packages may be effective; committee is willing to help in this effort in order to engage at the neighborhood level

• Senior luncheon may be a good opportunity, and could balance potential biases in technology-based outreach

• Coffee with Cops• Shin Dig on Shin Oak• Ikea, which could also bring in perspectives of outsiders

26

Stakeholders• Live Oak EDC

• Northeast Partnership

• NE Methodist Hospital

• RBFCU

• IKEA

• NE Lakeview College

• Live Oak Humane Society

• Live Oak League of Arts

• Live Oak Village Garden Club

• Alamo Area MPO

• Randolph AFB

• Seniors of Live Oak

• Live Oak Dolphin Swim Team

• Live Oak Jaguars Football/Cheer

• Greater Northeast Little League

• Parkour, Skate & Bike Association

• Live Oak Disc Golf Alliance

• Woodcrest Park Working Group

• Live Oak Citizens Assisting Police

• Judson ISD

• Bexar County (Pct. 4)

• TxDOT

27

List appears generally correct. Follow-up to schedule stakeholder meetings in June.

27

Identifying Early & Important Issues

28

28

Identifying Early and Important Issues

Strengths• Tax base

• Medical service hub

• History of responsible planning & zoning

• Strong, stable neighborhoods; pride in homes

• Significant parkland acreage and quality

• Active & engaged community

• Small town feel with proximity to big city amenities

• Effective & well-positioned emergency services

Weaknesses• Landlocked

• Aging infrastructure

• Limited choices in housing types

• Transportation connectivity

• Alternative transportation modes

• Manmade physical barriers separating portions of the city from one another

• Physical identity difficult to distinguish from other communities in the region

• Some changes needed to development standards to encourage redevelopment, higher use

29

The committee felt this was generally representative.

29

Identifying Early and Important Issues

Opportunities• Medical service hub

• Increasing interest in healthy lifestyle opportunities (parks, trails, sidewalks, recreation facilities/programs)

• Vacant land is located in ways that present unique economic and identity opportunities

• Relationships with other entities (schools, colleges, economic groups)

• Excellent regional location for residents as well as businesses, including corporate campuses

• Informal and formal relationships with nearby military facilities

• Pat Booker Road, historically & physical opportunity

• Conference center and hotels

• Redevelopment presents opportunity to shape identity

Threats• Limited growth potential

• Retail macroeconomy and eCommerce• Difficult environment for small businesses as well

• Aging commercial/retail corridors

• Aging neighborhoods

• Planned highway modifications & accessibility/visibility

• Traffic congestion on regionally-significant roadways & highways

30

The committee noted two additional threats:• The outcome of the I-35 Expansion• The economic risks to local sales tax presented by large retailers “flipping” the

point-of-sale in the online sales environment

30

Next Steps: Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals

31

31