Saving the Springs: Urban Expansion and Water Quality in Austin - Politics of Urban Runoff: Nature, Technology, and the Sustainable City - page 49

wastewater bond referenda that would have provided necessary facili-
ties and improvements to create the desired north-south growth corridor
as specifi ed in the Austin Tomorrow Plan . 55 A municipal staff member
notes, “When I think about the early master plans that so clearly said
that we don't want development to the west, there were no mechanisms
to make that happen. It was just market forces; people want to be in the
Hill Country.” 56
The Hill Country was attractive because of its close proximity to Aus-
tin's burgeoning employment opportunities, its natural beauty, and an
abundant supply of water from the Highland Lakes, the most crucial ele-
ment to urban development in the region. As the high-tech sector fueled
population growth, developers initiated large-scale suburban development
in the Hill Country, in direct contradiction with the Austin Tomorrow
Plan . The municipal government's planning commission and city council
were complicit in these development projects, frequently offering exemp-
tions to subdivision and land use regulations to allow new development
over the aquifer, consistent with the municipality's historic emphasis on
economic development. 57
Development in the Hill Country was not only encouraged by the
municipal government but also by State law that allowed developers to
create Municipal Utility Districts (MUDs). MUDs were enacted by the
state legislature in 1971 as a mechanism to fi nance water, wastewater,
and drainage improvements for suburban developments while supersed-
ing local regulations. Today, the greatest concentration of MUDs can be
found in the sprawling metropolitan area surrounding Houston—a region
notorious for its lack of an urban growth strategy—but Austin also expe-
rienced signifi cant MUD development in the 1970s and 1980s. 58 MUDs
effectively uncouple infrastructure provision from municipal governance
and allowed developers to provide their own essential services. 59 Urban
expansion then becomes the providence of market forces rather than com-
prehensive municipal or regional planning, a defi ning characteristic of
Texas land development activities.
In addition to MUD developments, infrastructure services are increas-
ingly provided by the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA), the
state-chartered entity that manages the Highland Lakes. The LCRA is
purportedly an apolitical organization, but its general manager is cho-
sen by a board of directors appointed by the governor of Texas and its
income is derived from water and electricity sales. As such, the LCRA is
often characterized as a promoter of land development and an alternative
infrastructure provider to the City of Austin. The LCRA's former general