PIN6 is required for nectary auxin response and short stamen development

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98417/1/tpj12184-sup-0001-FigS1.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98417/2/tpj12184.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98417/3/tpj12184-sup-0004-FigS4.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98417/4/tpj12184-sup-0003-FigS3.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98417/5/tpj12184-sup-0002-FigS2.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98417/6/tpj12184-sup-0005-FigS5.pd

Rockport Comprehensive Plan

This document was developed and prepared by Texas Target Communities (TxTC) at Texas A&M University in partnership with the City of Rockport, Texas Sea Grant, Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi, Texas A&M University - School of Law and Texas Tech University.Founded in 1871, the City of Rockport aims to continue growing economically and sustainably. Rockport is a resilient community dedicated to sustainable growth and attracting businesses to the area. Rockport is a charming town that offers a close-knit community feel and is a popular tourist destination for marine recreation, fairs, and exhibitions throughout the year. The Comprehensive Plan 2020-2040 is designed to guide the city of Rockport for its future growth. The guiding principles for this planning process were Rockport's vision statement and its corresponding goals, which were crafted by the task force. The goals focus on factors of growth and development including public participation, development considerations, transportation, community facilities, economic development, parks, and housing and social vulnerability

Liberty County Strategic Plan 2016 - 2036

In the fall of 2015, the County of Liberty and Texas Target Communities partnered to create a task force to represent the community. The task force was integral to the planning process, contributing the thoughts, desires, and opinions of community members—as well as their enthusiasm about Liberty’s future. This fourteen-month planning process ended in August 2016. The result of this collaboration is the County of Liberty Strategic Plan, which is the official policy guide for the community’s growth over the next twenty years.Liberty Strategic Plan 2036 provides a guide for the future growth of the county. This document was developed by Texas Target Communities in partnership with the County of Liberty

Enhancing Community Resilience to Flooding through the Spatial Evaluation of Plans, Policies, and Regulations

Flooding is among the most deadly and destructive of all-natural hazards, both in the United States and around the world. As human and economic costs from flooding continue to rise – driven by a changing climate and increasing urbanization, as well as local land use decisions – communities are being forced to reevaluate their planning and development management practices. Land use planning is frequently cited by academic and government sources as one of the most important factors in mitigating (or exacerbating) flooding hazards. Communities that plan for growth and management in a coordinated, proactive way are shown to be more resilient—with infrastructure that continues to function during and after a hazard event; critical facilities and residential communities located away from the most hazardous areas; building standards based on actual hazard risk; and natural environments prized and protected for the critical ecosystem services they provide. Unfortunately, integrative planning is currently the exception, rather than the rule, in many places, especially in the U.S., and unwise development persists. A single community is often guided by multiple plan documents constructed by various ‘siloed’ departments and organizations, each in pursuit of its own interests and goals. The resulting network of plans – which typically includes comprehensive, hazard mitigation, and various sector- and place-specific plans – guides future land use and development patterns, including in hazardous areas. Poor coordination of these documents can lead to conflicting policy guidance, reduced efficacy, and increased hazard vulnerability. Research also suggests that community resilience can be affected by policies or recommendations located anywhere in this network of plans, including in documents seemingly unrelated to hazards. Emerging concepts and techniques focused on a spatial understanding of plan, policy, and regulatory coordination present a compelling new direction for research and practice aimed at improving integration and, ultimately, strengthening community resilience. This work consists of three related studies, designed to continue the development of such approaches and push them into new conceptual and methodological territory. Results suggest that the spatial evaluation of plans, policies, and regulations has significant potential as a means of enhancing community resilience to flooding

Enhancing Community Resilience to Flooding through the Spatial Evaluation of Plans, Policies, and Regulations

Flooding is among the most deadly and destructive of all-natural hazards, both in the United States and around the world. As human and economic costs from flooding continue to rise – driven by a changing climate and increasing urbanization, as well as local land use decisions – communities are being forced to reevaluate their planning and development management practices. Land use planning is frequently cited by academic and government sources as one of the most important factors in mitigating (or exacerbating) flooding hazards. Communities that plan for growth and management in a coordinated, proactive way are shown to be more resilient—with infrastructure that continues to function during and after a hazard event; critical facilities and residential communities located away from the most hazardous areas; building standards based on actual hazard risk; and natural environments prized and protected for the critical ecosystem services they provide. Unfortunately, integrative planning is currently the exception, rather than the rule, in many places, especially in the U.S., and unwise development persists. A single community is often guided by multiple plan documents constructed by various ‘siloed’ departments and organizations, each in pursuit of its own interests and goals. The resulting network of plans – which typically includes comprehensive, hazard mitigation, and various sector- and place-specific plans – guides future land use and development patterns, including in hazardous areas. Poor coordination of these documents can lead to conflicting policy guidance, reduced efficacy, and increased hazard vulnerability. Research also suggests that community resilience can be affected by policies or recommendations located anywhere in this network of plans, including in documents seemingly unrelated to hazards. Emerging concepts and techniques focused on a spatial understanding of plan, policy, and regulatory coordination present a compelling new direction for research and practice aimed at improving integration and, ultimately, strengthening community resilience. This work consists of three related studies, designed to continue the development of such approaches and push them into new conceptual and methodological territory. Results suggest that the spatial evaluation of plans, policies, and regulations has significant potential as a means of enhancing community resilience to flooding

A Call for a National Community Resilience Extension Partnership to Bridge Resilience Research to Communities

Resilience planning and action is limited to communities with significant technical and administrative capabilities. Engaging communities to co-produce research enables a more equitable distribution of needed tools. A national Community Resilience Extension Partnership linking scientists with place-based planners and emergency managers provides the research-to-practice infrastructure for equitable development of community resilience science and technology

Plan integration for resilience scorecard: evaluating networks of plans in six US coastal cities

<p>Planning for hazard mitigation is frequently detached from other planning activities that influence development patterns in hazardous areas. Consistent integration of mitigation reduces hazard vulnerability for people and the built environment. We apply a plan integration for resilience scorecard in six US coastal cities to evaluate the integration of local networks of plans and the degree to which they target areas most vulnerable to flooding hazards. We find that plan integration scores vary widely across the six cities, and that some plans actually increase vulnerability in hazard zones. Policies also frequently support mitigation in areas with low vulnerability, rather than in areas with high vulnerability. The plan integration for resilience scorecard can generate information to improve hazard planning by allowing planners to identify conflicts between plans, assess whether plans target areas that are most vulnerable, and better inform decision makers about opportunities to mainstream mitigation into multiple sectors of planning.</p