May – June 2021

TOPIC PAGE

Executive Summary 3

Community Approach 6

Results and Findings 16

Litter Estimate Maps 21

Insights 24
INDEX - Single-Use Litter
- Plastics
25
29

Recommendations and Conclusions 35

ANNEX 42

- Sampling Design 43
- Data Collection 44
- Data Analysis 45
- Limitations 46
- Data Sources 47
- Land Use Description (City of Austin) 48
- Take a Deeper Dive! 49
Executive Summary

3
Project Overview
• Austin’s litter has been an ongoing topic of conversation amongst its residents and visitors alike, for awhile now*. With
the city still in the grips of a the COVID pandemic, and Austinites more keenly connecting with their neighborhoods a
question began to emerge – How does prevalence of litter, specifically single-use plastic, impact the city?

• TrashBlitz is a community based project designed to engage local stakeholders in measuring plastic pollution and other
trash across their city, and utilizing the data to generate a relevant action-plan. TrashBlitz provides robust research
protocols and measures problem products and brands, while bringing diverse stakeholders together to co-create
solutions to stop plastic pollution at the source.

• The Inland Ocean Coalition, Into the Sea, and 5 Gyres in collaboration with Litterati, launched TrashBlitz Austin in the
Summer of 2021. From May 22rd to June 12th, 2021, 168 community members from all over the city joined forces in
collecting information on urban waste - categorized by type, material, and brand. Volunteers helped collect the data
from 80 randomly selected sampling points across Austin. The findings, which are designed to be open source, show a
clear and immediate need to push for policy change that centers around source reduction.

• Litterati was chosen as the platform for data collection – recognizing the value of their AI-powered litterdata, the
#TrashBlitzAustin team commissioned the Litterati Professional Service & Data Science Teams team to conduct research
on single-use plastic litter and the intersection of land use types, population density, and points of interest – such as
commercial corridors and the watershed. Litterati conducted the research using their ANALYZE Researcher tools and
methodology to generate the following report.

• All volunteers used the Litterati app in the advanced Researcher mode and conducted litter collection and
documentation through-out designated locations articulated in the sampling plan developed by Litterati and the
TrashBlitz Austin organizers.

*Austin city staff and volunteers pull 250 tons of trash from Lady Bird Lake and 6,500 tons of trash from the streets annually, according to a 2017 study commissioned by Texans for Clean Water, a 4
nonprofit advocacy group. https://communityimpact.com/ 'Don't Mess With Texas': New state anti-litter law can mean up to 60 hours of community service for convicted violators.
Summary of Findings
In total, 6,656 pieces of litter were observed across 207 100-meter- research segments – about 13 miles of linear sampling
across 80 research locations in Austin, covering a diverse and representative set of sociodemographic areas throughout the
city.

Cigarette butts (32%), wrappers (22%), and bottle caps (7%) were the top littered objects by #items (count).

• Litter Analysis
• Plastic Litter: 68% of all observed litter was made of plastic (4,530), the most statistically significant littered
material throughout Austin.
• Single-Use Litter: Single-use items such as food wrappers, bottle caps, and bottles accounted for nearly
one-third of all observed litter (2,207).
• Brand Audit: Of the 354 brands that were observed in Austin, the top 3 littered brands by #Items were
Coca-Cola, Marlboro, and McDonalds. Although there was not a strong correlation between the spatial
location of litter and specific places of interest (POIs), the brand and litter object metadata indicate that
plastic and single-use litter may be linked with fast-food restaurants and convenience stores.

• Spatial Analysis
• Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek, and Lady Bird Lake are the most vulnerable locations for litter to enter the
watershed via various drainage pipes and creeks.
• Littered single-use items were observed most often in open spaces and parks, the commercial districts, and
near civic buildings.
• Preliminary research has demonstrated that District 3 and 7 require the attention of Austin City.
Community Approach Approach
Community

6
Community Approach

Austin community members came together between May and June

2021 to collect more than 6,000 pieces of trash in the City of Austin.
Many volunteers got involved in TrashBlitz Austin because they have
noticed an increase in trash they found around their city, and want
to do their part to help clean it up.
Volunteer Katherine Kraus makes it a personal mission to clean up
natural areas around Austin. “I've spent most of my life outside and
picking up litter as I've seen it. This year I have seen a huge
increase in litter on the hiking trails. Moving to Austin brought me
to some of the most littered outdoor spaces I have ever seen and
recently moved from stashing trash in a section of my backpack to
bringing full trash bags on hikes.”
Volunteer Katherine Kraus
Community Observations
One of the most commonly reported sentiments from volunteers
interviewed was that TrashBlitz opened their eyes to how much
trash is actually all around us throughout the city, even if it looks
clean at first glance.

Volunteer Nick Borges from Driftwood Recovery exclaimed,

“Even when you feel like there’s not a lot of trash in the area, if you
look a lot closer there is quite a bit, especially cigarette butts.”

Even those immersed in sustainability on a personal and professional

level, gained great insight from this experience. Jasmin
Rostamnezhad, Engagement Lead for TrashBlitz Austin and
Sustainability Coordinator for Austin Community College noted the
broad reach our systems have on a global scale. “While Austin isn’t
directly close to the ocean, it’s important to realize the impact cities
Nick Borges from Driftwood Recovery and fellow volunteer
have on our ocean all over the world (and) helping the animals in
the ocean that can’t speak for themselves.”
8
Plastic Pollution Awareness
This heightened awareness volunteers gained during TrashBlitz put our
throwaway culture into greater perspective.
Nevia Lopez from the zero-waste delivery service, Prep to Your Door, said
“That’s a big thing I think we’re missing, is when we throw something away, we
never look back at it. We never think about where does it go. And to come out
here where we see our families and our community enjoying these beautiful
spaces, and knowing just to our right that there’s that trash that we thought went
somewhere but ultimately it’s just in our parks, our communities, our cities.”

Larry Franklin and Juvelyn Owen of Black Lives Veggies with a

volunteer at the TrashBlitz Austin Opening Ceremony

Larry Franklin, founder of Black Lives Veggies, makes sure to

incorporate sustainability into his organization’s mission to help
contribute toward positive change. Larry sees plastic pollution
as a “huge crisis” and is greatly concerned for his community
and the amount of trash that’s in it. He chose to participate in
TrashBlitz Austin to make his environment a better place for
those who come after him. 9
 Motivated Volunteers
Volunteers were encouraged by the collection of data and
the possibilities that come with the power of information.
Austin community member, Charlie McCarty of Active
Recovery Coaching noted, “For me it’s about kind of just
statistics and seeing what’s out there, and then asking
those questions of why is it this way and how could we
improve some of those things.”

Nevia Lopez explains how TrashBlitz is inspiring communities to

come together to repair our systems: “I think it just raises
awareness of how the systems that we currently have in place
here just really aren’t doing the best job that they could be, so
I love that TrashBlitz is really gathering and collecting that
data to hold companies accountable and figure out ways that
every business whether it’s a person picking up trash or a big
corporation can really contribute and work together to clean
up our planet.”

TrashBlitz Austin volunteer picks up trash

Research Methodology

11
Sampling Plan for TrashBlitz Austin

North Central:
48 locations
North West:
24 locations North East:
25 locations

West:
1 location

South West: South East:

4 locations 10 locations

South Central: 17 locations

Downtown: 22 locations

150 locations were randomly selected

12
Location Examples
📍 A segment is 100 meters, half a standard city
block or about 328 steps.

An example of visible litter documented overlayed

on Google Street View.

Segment examples carried out in Austin with each

pin representing a litter piece.

13
Austin City – Data Sampling
In order to generalize findings about the amount and composition of litter in Austin, Litterati identified representative clusters of census block
groups with statistically similar demographic profiles. A random sample of research locations were distributed across these clusters.

Please note: This sampling strategy was designed using census block groups as the geographic unit of analysis. Although subsequent analyses in this
report estimate the amount of litter observed in both census block groups and city council districts, the sampling strategy precludes a definitive analysis
of city council districts.

Demographic Clusters in Greater Austin Sampled Clusters with Randomized

Research Locations

14
 City of Austin Watershed Regulation Areas
In collaboration with the City of Austin,
Watershed Protection Department,
Litterati reviewed the intersection of
litter and the watershed.

Due to increased population density

and urban construction, there is less soil
to absorb rainfall and flooding
throughout the Austin Watershed has
become more prevalent.

Run-off from Austin City streets moves

directly into the watershed and the
Colorado River.

A Litterati assessment of observed litter

in the watershed is provided in the
Insights section of this report and
additional research will need to be
conducted in order to further assess the
intersection of watershed
contamination and sources of litter.

15
http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Watershed/watershed_regs_map.pdf
Results
Results&and
Findings
Findings

16
One-third of litter items were from food and drinks
Another 20% of litter items found were smoking related

6,656 total pieces of litter were observed in Austin.

• Drinkware (1,238) and food-related litter (969) comprised a

combined 33.33% of the total litter observed.
• This includes single-use objects such as plastic bottles,
aluminum cans, straws, plastic wrappers, and other items.

• Smoking-related litter (1,323) – e.g. cigarette butts and packs –

accounted for 19.9% of the total litter observed.

• *Uncategorized litter (2,563) composed 38.5% of the total litter

observed.
• This may include small and degraded pieces of plastic, paper,
etc. that are unidentifiable.

Categories #Items
*Pie Chart excludes uncategorized litter 17
More cigarette butts by count; more drink related items by weight
#Items
• Cigarette butts (31.5%), wrappers (22.2%), and bottle caps (6.99%) were the top littered objects by #items.
• Cigarette butts accounted for 2.12% of littered items by weight.

Weight
• Bottles, cans, and cups were the top three littered objects by both weight (g) and volume (ml).
• Containers accounted for 6.03% of littered items by volume.
#Items Weight

Objects #Items and Weight *Pie Charts % excludes unclassified objects

18
Almost 70% of items found made of plastic
75% of the total weight was glass + aluminum materials
• Plastic was the predominant material by #items at 48% but only accounted for 19.8% of litter by weight.
• When combined with cellulose acetate and polystyrene, plastic accounted for 68% of all litter by #items, but only about 20% by weight.
• Cellulose acetate accounted for 19.4% of litter by #items but only 2.12% by weight.
• Glass and aluminum accounted for over 75% of the total weight of litter.

#Items
Weight

Material #Items and Weight 19

Coca-Cola, Marlboro,
McDonald’s were the
most littered brands in
Austin
Of the 354 brands that were observed in
Austin, the following brands were littered
most:
• Coca-Cola
• Marlboro
• McDonald’s
• Swisher Sweets
• Gatorade
• Taco Bell
• Bud Light
• Corona
• Modelo
• Budweiser

Brand IDs #Items

20
Litter Estimate Maps

21
Count of Litter by Census Group vs. Council Districts

Est. #Items per Census Block Group Est. #Items per Council District with Research Locations

Medium More Litter

Less
Litter
Litter Estimated Litter by #Items 22
Litter by weight in Austin by Census Group vs. Council Districts

Est. Weight per Census Block Group Est. Weight per Council District with Research Locations

Medium More Litter

Less
Litter
Litter Estimated Litter by Weight 23
Insights
Insights

24
Top single-use litter: food and drink-related items

Insight 1:
Single-use items
• Single-use items (2,207)
accounted for 33% of total
observed litter.

• Single-use items are

categorized as food and drink
related litter.

• Food wrappers, plastic

bottles, and bottle caps are
the most observed single-use
litter.

25
Single-use plastic was more prevalent in Districts 3 and 7*

Single-Use Litter Map

While single-use litter was
observed across the city of
Austin, more was observed
in City Council Districts 3
and 7*.

* Litter Data per City Council District has not been normalized (See methodology). 26
Top brands in D3 and 7 from convenience stores or fast-food
District 3 District 7

Brand Audit Analysis: Districts 3 and 7 brand analyses also reflect a high proportion of
single-use items associated with fast food restaurants (e.g. Taco
Districts 3 and 7 Bell) and convenience stores (e.g. 7-Eleven).

27
 Single-use items were prevalent in open
spaces and parks, commercial, and civic areas
• Single-use items were predominantly found near the following designated land-use areas:
• Open Space and Parks- Set aside for environmental protection, recreation, or drainage.
• Commercial- Wholesale and retail trade and services.
• Civic- Ranging from museums, schools, fire houses, and other public buildings.

Land Use Type

Analysis

28
Significantly more plastic was found than non-plastic litter

#items objects by material type - plastic

Insight 2:
Plastics

• 4,530 pieces of plastic litter, 68% of all

items observed, including cellulose
acetate (e.g. cigarette butts) and
polystyrene, were observed.

• A Mann-Whitney U Test confirmed a

significant difference between the
amount of plastic and non-plastic litter
observed.

29
Where is plastic
being littered in
Austin?
Plastic litter was observed
throughout the entire city,
however, more plastic litter
was found in City Council
Districts 3 and 7*.

* Litter Data per City Council District has not been normalized (See methodology).

30
 Pathways for Plastic into the
Watershed

31 The longer litter remains, the

more potential there is for plastic
to pollute watersheds in Austin.

For example: Plastic litter found

at these research locations is at
risk of entering drainage pipes -
symbolized here as yellow lines,
releasing into creeks, and running
into the watershed.
Plastic Litter in Watershed

Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek, and Lady Bird

Lake Watersheds had the most observed
plastic litter.

In District 3, Lady Bird Lake had more

observed plastic litter than in areas to the
south.

32
About 30% of plastic litter observed was at 3 locations:
Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek, and Lady Bird Lake

33
Plastic Litter
Watershed
Assessment
Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek,
and Lady Bird Lake
watersheds had more food,
drink, and smoking related
(e.g. cigarette butts) litter
than any other category.

34
Recommendations and Conclusions

35
 Overview of Recommendations, Conclusion, and Next Steps

Recommendations Overview Conclusion Overview

• Focus legislative action on single-use plastics in food • Conduct further research through
establishments, especially fast-food restaurants, cafes, ongoing monitoring and long-term data
and convenience stores. collection for a time-series assessment.
• Protect Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek, and Lady Bird Lake • Collaborate with Austin City to support
from plastic litter entering clean waterways; direct future future reporting and MS4 Stormwater
clean-ups in District 3 and 7. Monitoring.
• Leverage litter data from Litterati to conduct future • Leverage the community and the
assessment of existing city infrastructure and waste TrashBlitz Austin report to encourage
management programs including street sweeping. Austinites to participate in future
• Conduct additional research with Litterati in Austin to advocacy campaigns and take legislative
incorporate the analysis of watershed locations and action.
legislative districts.
• Promote community engagement and education around
cigarette butts’ environmental impact.
 Recommendations
Protect Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek, and Lady Bird Lake from plastic litter entering clean waterways;
direct future clean-ups and research at these sites and in District 3 and 7.
- The Austin watershed contains critical areas designated for conservation and protected by the Watershed
Protection Ordinance.
- Pay specific attention to open spaces and parks, commercial areas, and civic buildings when assessing
waste infrastructure and litter.
- The following watersheds had the highest levels of observed litter: Walnut Creek, Shoal Creek, and Lady Bird
Lake.
- Conduct further research of areas where litter was most prevalent: City Council Districts 3 and 7.
- These districts had a high amount of plastic and single-use litter observed.
- Both Walnut Creek and Lady Bird Lake watersheds intersect these council districts.
Focus legislative action on single-use plastics and comprehensive action on plastics
reduction and elimination.
- Legislation across the country has lead to a decrease in plastic waste. Communities have adopted new programs that
phase-out or ban single-use plastics in an effort to move towards a culture of reuse and refill systems. The 5 Gyres
Institute, BreakFreeFromPlastic, Plastic Pollution Coalition, and Upstream are a few organizations currently working
on campaigns like #SkipTheStuff, encouraging both individuals and industry to move away from single-use plastics
and towards reusables through the adoption of waste reduction measures. These types of policy models allow
customers to opt-in for foodware accessories which ultimately saves businesses money and reduces single-use
plastic consumption. Austin voters can encourage a culture of refill and reuse by urging local legislators to pass new
bills that focus on plastics reduction and incentivize models of refill and reuse.

37
 Recommendations
Conduct additional research in Austin incorporating watershed
locations and legislative districts 1.
- Given the limitations of this study (methodology), additional research is
needed to better understand the underlying factors influencing higher
amounts litter in varying census block groups.
- Review data in the following areas in addition to further litter and plastic
pollution research.
- Resource Allocation Assessment:
- Street Sweeping Schedules in relation to litter observed.
- Missed Residential Trash and Recycling Collection.
- Waste Bin and Recycling Infrastructure.
- The Inclusion of Foot Traffic (Human Mobility) Data
- Consumer behavior patterns at nearby fast-food restaurants and
convenience stores.
- Assess touristic and resident data by location type.
- Community Engagement Programs
- Evaluate community engagement in each city council district
and community engagement opportunities.

1: Watershed Protection Citywide Profile. 38

http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Watershed/Citywide_Profile.pdf
Recommendations

Leverage litter data from Litterati to conduct future

assessment of existing city infrastructure and waste
management programs including street sweeping.
- Most littering occurs when a receptacle is out of reach and out of
sight.. Research has shown that distance to the receptacle was
positively predictive of littering1.
- An assessment of municipal infrastructure and litter
concentration could help illuminate the cause of litter in areas
that lack receptacles for landfill waste and recyclables, and areas
that have a lower incidence of street sweeping - i.e. areas without
sidewalks.
- Review maintenance of trash cans.
- Use Litterati data to target problematic areas that require
hand sweeping, like the Philadelphia hand sweeping
program.
- Adding sidewalks has been an ongoing issue in Austin2. There are
2,580 missing miles of sidewalks.
1: Schultz1, Bator, Large, Bruni, Tabanico. “Littering in Context: Personal and Environmental Predictors of Littering Behavior.” Environment and Behavior
45(1) (2013): 35–59
39
2: https://austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Public_Works/Street_%26_Bridge/FINAL_Website_Sidewalk101Handout_Reduced.pdf
Recommendations
Promote community engagement and education around cigarette butts’
environmental impact.
- Cigarette butts are ubiquitous throughout Austin, Texas (31.5% of all
observed litter).
- Many adults in the US are unaware that cigarette butts contain (cellulose
acetate) plastic1.
- Cigarette butts collect chemicals produced by smoking and may not
degrade in the environment for many years2.
- Even after deterioration, cigarette butts persist in the environment as
small particles of ‘toxic-infused’ plastic2.
- In Austin, littered cigarette butts may be carried into drainage pipes, creaks,
rivers and eventually into the ocean3.
- Review existing solutions from organizations like the Surfrider Foundation’s
Hold On To Your Butt campaign.

1: Pon, Juan Pablo Seco, and Maria Eugenia Becherucci. "Spatial and Temporal Variations of Urban Litter in Mar Del Plata, the Major Coastal City of Argentina." Waste Management 32, no. 2 (2012): 343-48.

2: Shen, Maocai, Yougong Li, Biao Song, Chenyun Zhou, Jilai Gong, and Guangming Zeng. "Smoked Cigarette Butts: Unignorable Source for Environmental Microplastic Fibers." Science of The Total Environment (2021): 148384.

3: Stigler Granados, Paula, Lawrence Fulton, Evangelina Nunez Patlan, Mischa Terzyk, and Thomas E Novotny. "Global Health Perspectives on Cigarette Butts and the Environment." International journal of environmental research and
public health 16, no. 10 (2019): 1858.

40
 Conclusion and Next Steps
A City of Creeks: A creek in every
Council District in Austin City
➔ Single-use litter and plastic pollution is omnipresent throughout
the City of Austin.

➔ Single-use items comprised of 33% of the total litter observed

and much of it could be diverted through an increased focus on
restaurants and convenience stores.

➔ This litter is at risk of entering the watershed through various

drainage pipes and creeks.

➔ Additional analysis, using a rigorous research methodology, will

help further elucidate problem areas and potential solutions.

http://www.austintexas.gov/blog/city-creeks-explore-cre
ek-every-council-district

41
ANNEX
● Methodology
○ Research Locations
○ Data Collection
●○ Data Analysis
○ Limitations
● Data Sources
● Land-Use Type
Descriptions

42
 Litterati’s stratified sampling approach is designed to capture as much variance within a
city as possible by collecting litter across various income groups, population densities,
education levels, land-use types, and more. First, Litterati built an algorithm using principal
component analysis (PCA) in conjunction with k-means that allowed us to calculate
representative clusters of census block groups within Austin, Texas. The following variables
were used to cluster together statistically similar census block groups: population density,
median income, the ratio of adults over age 25 with at least a high school education, and
the ratio of occupied housing units. After the clusters were determined, Litterati then
utilized Land-Use data from the City of Austin’s Open Data portal and Point of Interest
Methodology: (POI) data from OpenStreetMap to help determine research locations. For each cluster,
research locations were randomly placed across each possible land-use type. In order to

Sampling Design ensure these locations were accessible, the research location was moved to the
mean-center of all POI points within that land-use polygon.

Finally, Litterati researchers performed two standardized research segments per research
location in order to compare litter collected across the city. A segment is an unobstructed
portion of land 100 meters long and at least 1 meter wide. This standard measurement is
in concordance with methods developed by international agencies such as OSPAR, CSIRO,
and GESAMP — see “Guideline of monitoring and assessment of plastic litter in the ocean”
published in 2019 (link).

43
 Litterati developed its protocol for sampling to be both robust and a
statistically valid method while also maintaining simplicity and repeatability.
Prior to data collection, researchers selected by Litterati underwent a training
(link) to review this protocol as well as how to use the Litterati app. The
researchers were then assigned several research locations and asked to
explore three standardized segments near each location.

Once collected, the data was then assessed to determine if all relevant
locations were sampled, segments were correctly performed, and images were

Methodology: Data correctly uploaded and registered according to their specific location and
segment.

Collection All the images were then annotated by a human according to the Litterati
taxonomy (link). These results were then used to validate other data by the
machine learning items and added other items that were not defined or picked
up by computervision model. To understand the performance of the models,
please refer to the computervision model performance section.

44
 Litterati has a defined taxonomy of Category, Object, Material, and Brand (link):
• As users consistently label their litter images with object, material, and brand, the
LitterAI is trained to better predict these specific labels in future images.
• General categories (ex. drink, food, personal hygiene) are derived from the different
combinations of objects and materials.
• Where possible, a proxy weight and volume value is applied to each combination.
• The combinations of objects and materials are mapped to international standards such as
The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Convention
for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR), United
Methodology: Data Nations Environment Programme-Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
(UNEP-IOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) etc., as well as

Analysis data sheets from organizations like Break Free From Plastic (BFFP).
Computervision model performance
• Litterati’s computer vision model has a mean average precision of 80% across 36 classes
of object-material combinations such as plastic-bottle, aluminum-can, and cellulose
acetate-cigarette butt. These 36 classes represent over 80% of the typical identifiable
litter found in the urban environment by # of items.
• The data was labeled by professional annotators. Out of the 6,656 items of litter
identified approximately 55% were confirmed correct. The remaining 45% of litter were
predominantly small unidentified pieces of litter.

45
 Research Location - Coverage
• The researchers for this project were volunteers selected by TrashBlitz Austin.
• Although these researchers underwent standard Litterati Training, there were several research
locations that were underrepresented in the final analysis due to various reasons:
• A segment was not completed
• A segment was performed in the wrong location.
Data Normalization
• Data normalization is the process of ensuring that the #items found in Austin are comparable
across each research location.
• When estimating the #items per census block group, data was normalized by the #Items
observed per segment at each research location.
Methodology: Generalizability of the Data
• This study was initially designed to randomly sample locations across statistically similar census
Limitations block groups in Austin.
• However, subsequent analysis called for an exploration of litter data patterns in relation to City
Council Districts and Watershed boundaries.
• Given the sampling strategy used for this study, we are unable to generalize litter data
patterns with confidence at these scales.
• For this reason, this data was shown as #Items and was not normalized per research
segment.

46
 Explore TrashBlitz Austin Data:
Here is access to a public ArcGIS Online Dashboard with compiled litter data from this study.
External Datasets
- Demographics (Census Block Group level data for Austin)
- OpenStreetMap Data for Place of Interest (POI) Data
- Land-Use Inventory
- Watershed Shapefile
POI definitions
˗ Leisure: hotels, spas, gyms, golf courses
˗ Tourism: areas of tourist interest
Data Sources ˗ Retail: commercial shopping areas
˗ Education: schools, colleges, and universities
˗ Financial: banks and ATMs
˗ Food Drink: restaurants, cafes, snack bars
˗ Healthcare: hospital, dentists, health centers
˗ Transportation: bus stops, train stations
˗ Trashcans: fixed waste bins and glass recycle

47
Land Use Description (City of Austin)
Single Family - One dwelling or duplex structures in detached buildings, usually on one parcel. Includes manufactured, and non-mobile
homes.
Mobile Homes - One or many dwellings in single buildings, designed to be mobile.
Large-lot Single Family - One dwelling in one building on a parcel ten acres or greater, usually used as a farm or ranch. In some cases
these are redeveloped, and therefore grouped with undeveloped.
Multi-family - Triplexes and Quad-plexes, units with 5 or more dwellings, group housing, or retirement housing.
Commercial - Wholesale and retail trade and services. Includes trade of most durable and non-durable goods, building, hardware, garden,
general retail merchandise, lumber, grocery, food sales, auto vehicle and gasoline sales, apparel and accessory stores, home furniture and
equipment, eating and drinking, commercial art and craft studios, lodging hotels and motels, personal services, mini-warehousing and
personal storage, automotive repair, automotive services, entertainment and recreation services, business services, commercial sports
recreation and exercise, and amusement services.
Mixed Use - One building containing both commercial and residential uses.
Office - Includes accounting, architectural services, design services, engineering, insurance, law offices, organization/association's office,
personnel, property management, real estate, secretarial services, telephone answering services, television/film/sound recording studios,
travel agency, financial services, banks, savings and loans, credit unions, blood banks, treatment, and guidance centers, doctor, dental,
psychological, and other medical offices, electronic, pharmaceutical, chemical, and other research and development services.
Industrial - Basic, light, and custom industry and manufacturing, industrial arts and crafts, general, limited and commercial warehousing
and distribution, not including mini-warehousing or personal storage, heavy equipment sales and services, including automobiles and
recreation vehicles, pool services, cans, paper, plastic, auto and junk recycling facilities, stables, kennels, pet services, and slaughterhouses.
Quarries and oil and gas drilling facilities. Processing and storage of garbage and other wastes.
Civic - Halfway houses, housing for mentally and psychologically handicapped; Police stations, fire houses, post offices, jails, prisons,
military installations; Day care, primary and secondary education, colleges, universities, business trade schools. Club or lodge halls,
religious assembly, convention centers, museums, and libraries.
Open Space and Parks - Open spaces and parks set aside for environmental protection, recreation or drainage. Private and public golf
courses and driving ranges. Private and public campgrounds for temporary use. Does not include permanent and semi-permanent RV
parks. Areas set aside for common use, typically privately owned areas that serve as drainage but are not registered as such by public
agencies. Open spaces set aside for preservation or protection.
Transportation - Railroad stations and right-of-way. Bus stations and other transportation facilities not used for aviation, railroads, or
marinas. Airports and aviation facilities. Commercial and private marinas. Surface parking for a variety of establishments/parcels,
including actual parking garage facilities or pay-for-parking parcels. Parcels on separate parcels that serve only one establishment are
coded with the use of that establishment.
Right-of-way - Public and private areas mainly containing roadways, railways, and miscellaneous infrastructure.
48
Utilities - Electric, water, and wastewater utilities
Take a Deeper Dive into the TrashBlitz Austin
Findings Through the Research Portal Below

ArcGIS Online Dashboard

49
 Thank you to our partners who
supported the volunteer cleanup efforts
by donating supplies in-kind.

50
Learn more about TrashBlitz Austin
and the organizing partners below.

https://www.5gyres.org/trashblitz

Follow us!
TrashBlitz

Into the Sea

5 Gyres Institute

Inland Ocean Coalition

Litterati
51