ITEM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AGENDA COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 9/7/2022 NAME & NUMBER OF PROJECT: NAME OF APPLICANT OR ORGANIZATION: BKO Parmer (SP-2021-0034D) BKO Parmer (Steve Jamison) LOCATION: 4801 East Yager, Austin, Texas 78754 COUNCIL DISTRICT: ETJ ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STAFF: Tunde Daramola, Environmental Review Specialist Senior, DSD, 512-974-6316, Babatunde.Daramola@austintexas.gov WATERSHED: REQUEST: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: STAFF CONDITIONS: Harris Branch Watershed, Suburban, Desired Development Zone Variance request is as follows: Request to vary from LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill over 4feet up to 12feet. Staff recommends this variance, having determined the findings of fact to have been met. Preserve trees/natural areas. Apply City of Austin Landscaping Ordinance on ETJ site. Provide structural containment of fill with a retaining wall. Development Services Department Staff Recommendations Concerning Required Findings Project Name: Ordinance Standard: Watershed Protection Ordinance Variance Request: BKO Parmer To allow for fill exceeding 4 feet up to 12 feet for building construction Include an explanation with each applicable finding of fact. A. Land Use Commission variance determinations from Chapter 25-8-41 of the City Code: 1. The requirement will deprive the applicant of a privilege available to owners of similarly situated property with approximately contemporaneous development subject to similar code requirements. Yes. The variance will not be providing a special privilege to the applicant. The proposed buildings are similar in size to similarly situated property. In order to facilitate this type of development levelling and additional fill is required for the buildings. Prior projects in this area had a similar situation. A prime example is Crossroad Logistics Center Additions, SP-2021-0169D. A Land Use Commission variance was granted to LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill up to 17 feet. 2. The variance: a) Is not necessitated by the scale, layout, construction method, or other design decision made by the applicant, unless the design decision provides greater overall environmental protection than is achievable without the variance; Yes. Existing site conditions necessitate additional “fill” for fulfilling the requirements of two fire lane/emergency access routes as well as structural bridge for spanning the CWQZ. b) Is the minimum deviation from the code requirement necessary to allow a reasonable use of the property; Yes. The site is being graded as efficiently as possible to provide the required access slopes and bridge heights to minimize the amount of variance required. c) Does not create a significant probability of harmful environmental consequences. The variance does not create a significant probability …
2022 Environmental Code Amendments Phase 1 Environmental Commission S e p t e m b e r 7 , 2 0 2 2 C I T Y O F A U S T I N W A T E R S H E D P R O T E C T I O N D E P A R T M E N T Objective • Respond to por tion of Resolution 20220609- 061 that requires staff to bring for th an ordinance amending Title 25 related to environmental protection. • Due September 15, 2022 • Key subject areas Stormwater Landscape • • • Water Resource Protection Colorado River Protections • Previously identified minor code amendments and other amendments that meet the • objectives of the resolution • Don’t Disincentivize Missing Middle C I T Y O F A U S T I N W A T E R S H E D P R O T E C T I O N D E P A R T M E N T 2 Progress So Far • I nterna l Wa ter shed Protection Dep t (WPD) technica l sta ff • I np ut from other d ep a r tm ents inc lud ing • Development Services Department • Austin Water • Austin Transportation • CoA Project Connect Office • Housing and Planning • Law • Env ironmenta l Com m is sion Workg roup 7/25/2022 • Env ironmenta l Com m is sion U p d a te 8/3/2022 • Cod es a nd Ord ina nces J oint Committee 8/18/2022 • Pla nning Commis sion B riefing 8/23/2022 C I T Y O F A U S T I N W A T E R S H E D P R O T E C T I O N D E P A R T M E N T 3 Next Steps • 9/7/2022 – Environmental Commission • 9/13/2022 – Planning Commission • 9/29/2022 – City Council Phase 2: Greenfield Detention Requirements and Urban Slope Protection September & October Commissions • • November City Council C I T Y O F A U S T I N W A T E R S H E D P R O T E C T I O N D E P A R T M E N T 4 Stormwater “ 1 . E s t a …
Draft – 9/1/22 C20-2022-005a ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET Amendment: C20-2022-005a, Land Development Code Amendments Description: Consider an ordinance regarding amendments to Title 25 related to environmental protection and landscape requirements. Proposed Language: Draft language is included as Attachment A. Summary of proposed code changes: A summary of the proposed code changes is included as Attachment B. Background: This ordinance responds to Council Resolution No. 20220609-061, which initiated Land Development Code amendments related to environmental, drainage, and landscape requirements. The resolution directed staff to present most of the initiated amendments to Council for consideration by September 15, 2022. The initiated code amendments and a summary of the staff proposal is provided below: 1. Establish criteria that prioritize when green stormwater methods should be required or incentivized over conventional stormwater controls; The proposed code amendments would require most sites to use green stormwater infrastructure, or GSI, to meet water quality treatment requirements. This amendment was previously proposed and reviewed as part of the Land Development Code (LDC) Revision. Under current code, many sites meet water quality treatment requirements by building a sedimentation/filtration pond. Sedimentation/filtration devices provide some water quality benefits by filtering polluted runoff and helping control stream-channel erosion, but they do not significantly address other important ancillary goals such as supporting on-site vegetation, increasing rainwater infiltration, and reducing potable water consumption. Requiring most sites to use GSI instead of conventional grey stormwater infrastructure will provide myriad benefits, including stormwater infiltration, soil health, wildlife habitat, urban heat island mitigation, water conservation, aesthetic value, and other ecosystem services. GSI also provides enhanced water quality benefits compared to sedimentation/filtration devices, including better removal of nutrients from stormwater and further reductions in erosive flows. The proposed code amendments would allow developments to choose from a variety of green stormwater controls, including biofiltration ponds, rain gardens, rainwater harvesting systems, porous pavement, and retention-irrigation systems (which can be built in conjunction with green roofs). All of these systems beneficially use rainwater to infiltrate and/or offset potable water. Staff also proposes to increase the beneficial use benefits of these controls over time through improvements to the design criteria in the Environmental Criteria Manual. 1 Draft – 9/1/22 C20-2022-005a The proposed code amendments provide some exceptions from the GSI requirement, allowing conventional controls to be used for sites with more than 90 percent impervious cover, regional ponds, difficult site conditions, and “hot-spot” land uses with highly contaminated runoff (e.g., …
1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20220907-002 Seconded by: Perry Bedford Date: Sept. 7, 2022 Subject: Shoal Cycle, SP-2021-0350C Motion by: Jennifer L. Bristol WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the applicant is seeking the removal of a Heritage tree with a single stem over 30 inches in diameter and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the request meets City Arborist approval criteria set forth in LDC 25-8-624(A)(2) and that staff recommends this variance; WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes mitigation for this site shall be addressed by planting two (2) Live Oaks at 5-inch caliper as street trees. These two trees are proposed to have adequate soil to ensure survivability and, when planted, will have a combined crown surface area that will rival the thinning canopy of the existing 32-inch Live Oak. In addition, the remaining inches owed will be paid to the Urban Forest Replenishment Fund for a total of $18,500. THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission recommends the variance request with the following Environmental Commission Conditions: 1. VOTE 10-1 For: Aguirre, Barrett Bixler, Bedford, Bristol, Brimer, Nickells, Schiera, Scott, Ramberg, and Qureshi. Against: Pam Thompson Abstain: None Recuse: None Absent: None Approved By: Include the 5-year tree care plan for the 5-inch trees being planted to replace the Heritage Tree. Kevin Ramberg, Environmental Commission Chair
1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20220907-003 Seconded by: Kevin Ramberg Date: Sept 7, 2022 Subject: BKO Parmer (SP-2021-0034D) Motion by: Jennifer Bristol WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the applicant is requesting to vary from LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill over 4 feet up to 12 feet and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the site is located in the Harris Branch Watershed, Suburban, Desired Development Zone and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes that Staff recommends this variance, having determined the findings of fact to have been met. THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission recommends the variance request with the following: Staff Conditions: • • • and the following Environmental Commission Conditions: 1. 2. Work with staff to facilitate walking trails in the critical water quality zones. Work with staff to protect the riparian area/wetlands with signage or additional methods to best protect the wetland critical environmental features (CEFs) on site. Preserve trees/natural areas. Apply City of Austin Landscaping Ordinance on ETJ site. Provide structural containment of fill with a retaining wall. VOTE 11-0 For: Aguirre, Barrett Bixler, Bedford, Bristol, Brimer, Nickells, Schiera, Scott, Ramberg, Thompson, and Qureshi. Against: None Abstain: None Recuse: None Absent: None Approved By: Kevin Ramberg, Environmental Commission Chair 2
1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20220907-004 Seconded by: Ana Aguirre Date: September 7, 2022 Subject: Ordinance regarding amendments to Title 25 related to environmental protection, landscape requirements, and site plan requirements Motion by: Kevin Ramberg RATIONALE: WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes all the hard work that staff has done on the proposed amendments to Title 25 related to environmental protection, landscape requirements, and site plan requirements, and WHEREAS, there are many elements in the proposed amendments that the Environmental Commission supports; however, the Commission needs additional time to review in detail the concerns about other elements of the proposed amendments. THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission recommends postponing consideration of the ordinance regarding amendments to Title 25 related to environmental protection, landscape requirements, and site plan requirements until the next regular Environmental Commission meeting on September 21, 2022. VOTE 8-2 For: Aguirre, Bedford, Brimer, Bristol, Ramberg, Qureshi, Scott, and Thompson Against: Schiera and Barrett Bixler Abstain: None Recuse: None Absent: Nickells Approved By: Kevin Ramberg, Environmental Commission Chair
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 7, September, 2022 The Environmental Commission convened in a regular meeting on 7, September, 2022 at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Commissioners in Attendance: Ana Aguirre, Audrey Barrett Bixler, Jennifer Bristol, Rick Brimer, Colin Nickells, Melinda Schiera, Kevin Ramberg, and Haris Qureshi. Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Perry Bedford, Rachel Scott, and Pam Thompson CALL TO ORDER Chair Ramberg called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND ACTION 1. Approval the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on August 17, 2022, and the Environmental Commission Special Called Meeting on August 31, 2022 (5 minutes) The minutes of the August 17, 2022 Environmental Commission Regular Meeting and the August 31, 2022 Environmental Commission Special Called Meeting were approved on Commissioner Bristol’s motion, Commissioner Thompson’s second on a 9-0 vote. Commissioner Nickells abstained. Commissioner Scott was off the dais. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Name: Shoal Cycle, SP-2021-0350C Applicant: CJI Properties Inc. Location: 812 West 11th Street, Austin, Texas, 78701 Council District: District 9 Staff: Naomi Rotramel, City Arborist Ordinance: Heritage Tree Ordinance (LDC 25-8-641) Request: The applicant is seeking the removal of a Heritage tree with a single stem over 30 inches in diameter Staff Recommendation: The request meets City Arborist approval criteria set forth in LDC 25-8-624(A)(2). Thus, the variance is recommended. (30 minutes) A motion to close the public hearing was approved on Chair Ramberg’s motion, Commissioner Brimer’s second on a 11-0 vote. 1 3. A motion to approve the requested variance with conditions was approved on Commissioner Bristol’s motion, Commissioner Bedford’s second on a 10-1 vote. Commission Thompson voted nay. Name: BKO Parmer, SP-2021-0034D Applicant: Steve Jamison Location: 4801 East Yager, Austin, Texas 78754 Council District: None (Extraterritorial Jurisdiction) Staff: Tunde Daramola, Development Services Department Watershed: Harris Branch Watershed, Suburban, Desired Development Zone Request: Request to vary from LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill over 4 feet up to 12 feet Staff Recommendation: Recommended with conditions (30 minutes) A motion to close the public hearing was approved on Commissioner Ramberg’s motion, Commissioner Qureshi’s second on an 11-0 vote. A motion to approve the proposed variance with conditions was approved on Commissioner Bristol’s motion, Commissioner Ramberg’s second on an 11-0 vote. Chair Ramberg recessed the meeting at 7:48 P.M. Chair Ramberg called the meeting back to order at 8:00 P.M. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 4. …
Special Called Meeting of the Environmental Commission August 31, 2022 at 6:00 P.M. Permitting and Development Center, Events Center, Room 1405 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive Austin, Texas 78752 Some members of the Environmental Commission will be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely by telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation. To register to speak remotely, call or email Kaela Champlin, Watershed Protection Department, at (512) 974-3443, Kaela.Champlin@austintexas.gov, no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Haris Qureshi Rachel Scott Pam Thompson Melinda Schiera Audrey Barrett Bixler Colin Nickells Jennifer Bristol, Secretary Kevin Ramberg, Chair Ana Aguirre Richard Brimer Perry Bedford, Vice-Chair AGENDA The Environmental Commission will convene for a Commission Retreat at 6:00 P.M. on Wednesday, August 31st at the Permitting and Development Center. The agenda is as follows: CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 5 speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. 1 2. 3. 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Discussion on variances and variance conditions Discussion on Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and environmental superiority Discuss goals and objectives for the Environmental Commission 2022-23 calendar year Refresher on administrative procedures ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 days (48 hours) before the meeting date. Please call Kaela Champlin, Watershed Protection Department, at (512) 974-3443, Kaela.Champlin@austintexas.gov for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. For more information on the Environmental Commission, please contact Kaela Champlin, Watershed Protection Department, at (512) 974-3443, Kaela.Champlin@austintexas.gov. 2
VARIANCES and VARIANCE CONDITIONS Mike McDougal Environmental Policy Program Manager Development Services Department WHAT IS A VARIANCE? When an applicant cannot comply with a Code requirement, a variance to the Code is required. This is, in effect, a request to rescind a specific Code requirement for a specific project. For example A parking space is not permitted to be built on a slope over 15%. At the same time, the Code requires a specific quantity of parking spaces for a project. WHAT IS A VARIANCE? CONTINUED So an applicant might need to request permission to allow a parking space to be built on a slope over 15% in order to provide the required quantity of parking spaces. This request to rescind a Code requirement is a variance. Most commonly, applicants seek to vary a requirement in LDC 25-8. For simplicity, I’ll speak about variances to LDC 25-8. WHAT IS A VARIANCE? CONTINUED There are two types of environmental variances: 1. Administrative variances may be granted by Staff 2. Land Use Commission variances may not be granted by Staff WHAT IS A VARIANCE? CONTINUED The Code clearly states when and where Staff may grant an administrative variance. Very few regulations in the Code may be varied administratively. What is not an administrative variance must be a Land Use Commission variance. One notable exception is the SOS requirement. This cannot be varied; Council action is required if an applicant cannot comply with SOS requirements. WHAT IS A VARIANCE? CONTINUED When a variance is presented to the Environmental Commission, it is a Land Use Commission variance. LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES When Staff presents a Land Use Commission variance, we also recommend approval or denial of the variance request based on criteria in LDC 25-8-41 called the findings of fact. The findings of fact are a series of questions intended to analyze the merit of the variance request. LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES CONTINUED The Environmental Commission has the authority to consider factors beyond the findings of fact. The Environmental Commission may accept or reject Staff’s recommendation. LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES CONTINUED The Environmental Commission votes to approve or deny the variance. This vote represents a recommendation. After the Environmental Commission, the variance along with the Environmental Commission vote is presented to either Zoning and Platting Commission (ZAP) or Planning Commission (PC): -ZAP if there is no neighborhood plan; -PC if there is a neighborhood …
Planned Unit Developments Leslie Lilly Environmental Program Coordinator C I T Y O F A U S T I N W A T E R S H E D P R O T E C T I O N D E P A R T M E N T What is a PUD § 2 5 . 2 . 1 4 4 P L A N N E D U N I T D E V E LO P M E N T ( P U D ) D I S T R I C T D E S I G N AT I O N A l a r g e o r c o m p l e x s i n g l e o r m u l t i - u s e d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t i s p l a n n e d a s a s i n g l e p r o j e c t a n d t h a t i s u n d e r u n i f i e d c o n t r o l . P u r p o s e o f P U D z o n i n g i s t o p r e s e r v e t h e n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t , e n c o u r a g e h i g h q u a l i t y d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i n n o v a t i v e d e s i g n , a n d e n s u r e a d e q u a t e p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s a n d s e r v i c e s . A P U D p r o v i d e s g r e a t e r d e s i g n f l e x i b i l i t y b y p e r m …
I SECOND THAT (E)MOTION How to make motions and when to use them YOU’VE GOT ME FEELING THAT MOTION Main motion – A motion must be made and seconded to initiate discussion on an issue (a limited amount of discussion may be allowed at the discretion of the Chair prior to the motion being made). Amendment - If you support the motion but would like to add something that doesn’t change the meaning of the motion, propose an amendment. The proposed amendment must be germane to the main motion. An amendment can be amended and is debatable. YOU’VE GOT ME FEELING THAT MOTION • A motion to amend requires a second. • After the motion to amend is seconded, a majority vote is needed. • Then a vote is taken on the amended motion. PAPA’S GOT A SUBSTITUTE MOTION • A substitute motion is a form of amendment applied when the desire is to amend a motion in several different, nonconsecutive places. • If you want to change the meaning of the motion or propose an alternative action to the main motion, use a substitute motion. PAPA’S GOT A SUBSTITUTE MOTION • Other types of substitute motions: • Motion to postpone – indefinitely/to a specific date • • Call for the question – if a member feels the item has been adequately discussed & it is time for a vote Table (means that the item will be discussed later in the same meeting) PAPA’S GOT A SUBSTITUTE MOTION • Up to one main motion and two substitute motions may be on the floor at one time. • • If the substitute passes, it does away with the prior motion. If it fails, the previous motion comes back up for consideration. LESSER USED MOTIONS Motion to reconsider – Can only be made by a member on the prevailing side of a previous vote. If seconded and passed, it rescinds the previous vote and brings the motion back for discussion. HANDLING MORE THAN ONE MOTION • Secretary: “I propose a motion to approve the variance with the following conditions: the applicant will provide extra tree mitigation.” • Commissioner A: “I move to amend the motion that the condition includes that the applicant will provide 50 extra inches of tree mitigation.” • Commissioner B: “I propose a substitute motion to deny the requested variance.” METHODS OF VOTING • Adopt by consensus: If there …
2. 3. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SPECIAL CALLED MEETING MINUTES 31, August, 2022 The Environmental Commission convened in a special called meeting on 31, August, 2022 at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Commissioners in Attendance: Ana Aguirre, Audrey Barrett Bixler, Rick Brimer, Colin Nickells, Haris Qureshi, Kevin Ramberg, and Melinda Schiera. Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Perry Bedford, Jennifer Bristol, Rachel Scott, and Pam Thompson. CALL TO ORDER Chair Ramberg called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:06 P.M. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 5 speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. None DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Discussion on variances and variance conditions Item conducted as posted. No action taken. Discussion on Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and environmental superiority Item conducted as posted. No action taken. Discuss goals and objectives for the Environmental Commission 2022-23 calendar year Item conducted as posted. No action taken. A motion to extend the meeting until 10:15 P.M. was approved on Commissioner Ramberg’s motion, Commissioner Bedford’s second on a 9-1 vote. Commissioner Thompson voted Nay. Commissioner Nickels was absent. Refresher on administrative procedures A motion to postpone the refresher on administrative procedures was approved on Commissioner Ramberg’s motion, Commissioner Qureshi’s second on a 10-0 vote. Commissioner Nickels was absent. 1 ADJOURNMENT Chair Ramberg adjourned the meeting at 10:15 P.M. without objection. The minutes of the August 31, 2022 Environmental Commission Special Called Meeting were approved on Commissioner Bristol’s motion, Commissioner Thompson’s second on a 9-0 vote. Commissioner Nickells abstained. Commissioner Scott was off the dais. 2
Regular Meeting of the Environmental Commission August 17, 2022 at 6:00 P.M. Permitting and Development Center, Events Center, Room 1405 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive Austin, Texas 78752 Some members of the Environmental Commission will be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely by telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation. To register to speak remotely, call or email the Kaela Champlin, Watershed Protection Department, at (512) 974-3443, Kaela.Champlin@austintexas.gov, no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Haris Qureshi Rachel Scott Pam Thompson Melinda Schiera Audrey Barrett Bixler Colin Nickells Jennifer Bristol, Secretary Kevin Ramberg, Chair Ana Aguirre Richard Brimer Perry Bedford, Vice-Chair AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND ACTION 1. Approval the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on August 3, 2022 (5 minutes) 1 DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Update on ATX Walk Bike Roll to update Austin’s sidewalk, urban trails, and bicycle plans. City Staff: Katie Wettick, Program Manager, Public Works (15 minutes) Name: 1609 Nueces St, Case No. 2022-018844 TP Applicant: Ronald Rodriguez Location: 1609 Nueces St. Council District: District 9 Staff: Naomi Rotramel, City Arborist Ordinance: Heritage Tree Ordinance - LDC 25-8-643- Land Commission Variance Requests: The applicant is appealing the City Arborist’s denial of application. The applicant is requesting the removal of a Heritage Tree with a single stem 30 inches in diameter or larger. Staff Recommendation: The request does not meet the City Arborist approval criteria in LDC 25-8-624(A)(1)(2)(3). The variance is not recommended. (30 minutes) Name: Seton Medical Center Planned Unit Development Amendment No. 2, Case No. C814-92- 0006.02 Applicant: Michele R. Lynch, Metcalfe Wolff Stuart & Williams Location: 1201 W. 38th Street Council District: …
ATX Walk Bike Roll Project Update Environmental Commission Agenda • ATX Walk Bike Roll Overview • Equity Focus • What We’ve Learned So Far • How We’re Moving Forward Goals of ATX Walk Bike Roll • Update three modal plans that identify where to build sidewalks and crossings, urban trails, and bikeways • Embed social and racial equity within the programs • Add maintenance into plans and update project prioritization • Work with partners to create a safer, more connected network • Identify ways to build high quality bicycle and pedestrian pathways in less time ATX Walk Bike Roll Principles & Values • Communities: Travel options affect the way we live • Equity and Diversity – Consider the needs of every community member – all ages, abilities, races, cultures, and classes • Mobility and Accessibility – Serve all ages and abilities, so that everyone has a safe way to travel • Health and Environment – Provide travel options that benefit physical, social, mental, and environmental health • Connections – Connect people to place • Transportation and Housing Affordability – Provide a low-cost way to travel with easier access to transit Timeline • Phase 1: Winter 2021 – Summer 2021 • Equity Framework; Conditions Analysis; Outreach Planning • Outreach goal: introduce project, discuss community needs and priorities to shape guiding values of ATXWBR. • Phase 2: Fall 2021 – Fall 2022 • Programs & Policies; Scenario Evaluation; Project Prioritization; Buildout • Outreach goal: determine where we build, how we prioritize projects, and what we base decisions on. • Phase 3: Fall 2022 – Spring 2023 • Plan Document Development and Revisions • Outreach goal: review and discuss the plans and priorities – did we get Plans it right? • Anticipated Adoption: Spring / Summer 2023 Equity Focus Equity is achieved when race no longer predicts a person’s quality of life outcomes in our community. The City of Austin recognizes that past plans and investments have not met the needs of all Austinites or have actively harmed communities - especially low-income communities and communities of color. This furthered inequalities in transportation, health, safety, housing, and income. Equitable Outreach Goals • Engage communities who have been underrepresented in past planning efforts, such as communities of color and low-income communities so their input meaningfully shapes the project • Prioritize engagement with historically underrepresented and underserved stakeholders by collaborating with key community organizations with access …
ITEM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AGENDA COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 17th, 2022 NAME & NUMBER OF PROJECT: 1609 Nueces St. 2022-018844 TP APPLICANT NAME OR ORGANIZATION: Ronald Rodriguez LOCATION: 1609 Nueces St. COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 9 CITY ARBORIST: Naomi Rotramel naomi.rotramel@austintexas.gov ORDINANCE: REQUEST: Heritage Tree Ordinance - LDC 25-8-643- Land Commission Variance The applicant is appealing the City Arborist’s denial of application. The applicant is requesting the removal of a Heritage Tree with a single stem 30 inches in diameter or larger. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The request does not meet the City Arborist approval criteria in LDC 25- 8-624(A)(1)(2)(3). The variance is not recommended. TO: FROM: DATE: REQUEST: MEMORANDUM City of Austin Environmental Commission Naomi Rotramel, City Arborist Development Services Department August 17th, 2022 CASE FOLDER: 2022-018844 TP The applicant is appealing the City Arborist’s denial of application. The applicant is requesting the removal of a Heritage Tree with a single stem 30 inches in diameter or larger. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Case Description: of the City Arborist’s determination to deny an administrative variance for the removal of a Heritage Tree at 1609 Nueces St. The site is zoned GO (General Office) and is in District 9. Case Timeline: • This case is an appeal th • , 2022 - A Tree Ordinance Review Application (TORA) was submitted to the Development Services Feb 10 Department’s online application portal. Trunk diameter was listed as 24 inches on the application. Feb 2022: Google Streetview • • • • • • th th , 2022 – Application was received and passed completeness check. Feb 11 Feb 28 working day (excluding President’s Day). City Arborist staff found that there was insufficient information provided to qualify this Heritage Tree for removal under Dead, Diseased, or Imminent Hazard Criteria in LDC § 25-8-624. City Arborist staff notified applicant the application was denied and if the applicant would like to continue with application, further information was necessary to continue the review. , 2022 – Application was denied on the 10 th June 13, 2022 – Applicant contacts staff regarding review timeline. June 13, 2022 – Staff responds to applicant the review deadlines are consistent with how the City counts review days. June 24, 2022 – Staff receives a Service Estimate Client Service Form dated 6/22/22 from an arborist company. o The service estimate lists the tree diameter at 29”. The client service form did not provide sufficient evidence to determine the health …
1609 Nueces St: Heritage Tree Variance Appeal August 17, 2022 Naomi Rotramel, City Arborist Development Services Department ITEM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 17th, 2022 NAME & NUMBER OF PROJECT: 1609 Nueces St. 2022-018844 TP NAME OF APPLICANT OR ORGANIZATION: Ronald Rodriguez LOCATION: 1609 Nueces St. COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 9 CITY ARBORIST: NAOMI ROTRAMEL NAOMI.ROTRAMEL@AUSTINTEXAS.GOV ORDINANCE: REQUEST: Heritage Tree Ordinance - LDC 25-8-643- Land Commission Variance The applicant is appealing the City Arborist denial of application. The applicant is requesting the removal of a Heritage Tree with a single stem 30 inches in diameter or larger. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The request does not meet the City Arborist approval criteria in LDC 25-8-624(A)(1)(2)(3). The variance is not recommended. 2022-018844 TP- 1609 Nueces St. • Case Description • Case Timeline • Staff Findings – Condition of Heritage Tree – Staff Measurements • Variance Request • Staff Recommendation Case Description • The applicant is requesting the removal of a Heritage Pecan. • This case is an appeal of the City Arborist’s determination to deny an administrative variance for the removal of a Heritage tree at 1609 Nueces St. • The site is zoned GO (General Office) and is in District 9. Case Timeline • Feb. 10th, 2022 - A Tree Ordinance Review Application (TORA) was submitted to the Development Services Department’s online application portal. Trunk diameter was listed as 24” on the application. • Feb. 2022: Google street view Case Timeline (cont.) • Feb 11th, 2022 – Application passed completeness check. • Feb 28th, 2022 – Application was denied on the 10th working day (excluding President’s Day). City Arborist staff found that there was insufficient information provided to qualify this heritage tree for removal under Dead, Diseased, or Imminent Hazard Criteria in LDC 25-8-624. City Arborist staff notified applicant the application was denied and if the applicant would like to continue with application, a comprehensive narrative report from a qualified arborist was needed. • • June 13, 2022 – Applicant contacts staff regarding review timeline. June 13, 2022 – Staff responds to applicant the review deadlines are consistent with how the City counts review days. Case Timeline (cont.) • June 24, 2022 – Staff receives a Service Estimate Client Service Form dated 6/22/22 from an arborist company. o The service estimate lists the tree diameter at 29”. The client service form did not provide sufficient evidence to determine the health of the …
