CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE DIRECTOR’S UPDATE 8 DECEMBER 2020 CONNECTING YOU ALL AROUND AUSTIN ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BY MONTH 82 80 82 73 69 69 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 BREAKDOWN BY CLIENT Active Construction Projects by Client and Project Cost Total Projects: 82 Total Project Cost: $1.67 Billion 4 39 s n o i l l i M $900 $800 $700 $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 8 2 6 3 1 3 7 6 RESPONSE TO COVID CASES Number of Confirmed Positive Cases on CIP Projects: 13 (Same as November) Number of Projects with a Positive Case: 7 (Same as November) Assure ECC’s have understanding of construction requirements in Stay Home Work Safe (SHWS) Order Distribute information required by SHWS Order Actions taken by CPD • • • Monitor contractor compliance with SHWS Order • • • Confirm each project site has a designated Site Manager and COVID Safety Representative. Ensure all construction site postings have the most up to date information. Exposures and Positive cases are reported to HR SPOC and PW Safety. Based on the nature of the exposure or positive result, PWD has established guidelines that conform to CDC guidelines for necessary quarantine. Projects with positive cases had crews removed from the site. Depending on the location the project and extent of infection, project may be required to shut down and undergo a thorough disinfection before additional work and/or visits can be done. • REQUIRED POSTINGS Public Works staff requires all contractors working on CIP projects to post Construction Jobsite Guidelines from APH and monitors compliance with recommendations CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONNECTING YOU ALL AROUND AUSTIN
DRAFT Samsung Boulevard Right-of-Way Vacation Briefing Urban Transportation Commission December 8, 2020 Austin Transportation Department Overview • COA departments have reviewed Samsung’s two applications to vacate the street ROW of Samsung Blvd • We are asking for UTC to recommend approval • We are taking the requests to Council for approval in January • Samsung will relocate Samsung Blvd and reconstruct it as a portion of the parallel regional Arterial A facility • Approvals are contingent on public utility and access easements being retained until Arterial A is dedicated, constructed, and accepted • COA departments support the requests if existing utilities are left in place until moved at the applicant’s expense DRAFT 2 Overview • COA is designing and constructing the extension of Braker Ln from its terminus to Arterial A • Road projects in the Samsung area will expand the transportation network consistent with the adopted ASMP • Projects will benefit Samsung as a major trip generator and the surrounding residential uses lacking an existing grid network 3 DRAFT Samsung Area Projects Approximate property holding - Samsung Future MoKan TXDOT Rezoning to LI-PDA West of Samsung Blvd C14-2020-0118 4 Braker Lane Extension Under Design by PWD To be Constructed by City Braker Lane Extension To be Designed and constructed by Samsung as Braker Lane Existing Samsung Blvd To be Vacated Rezoning to LI-PDA East of Samsung Blvd C14-2020-0117 Arterial A Extension To be Designed and constructed by Samsung as Samsung Blvd. DRAFT Braker Lane Extension Travis County Designing Construction Date TBD Questions Rob Spillar, Director Austin Transportation Department rob.spillar@austintexas.gov (512) 974-2488 Richard Mendoza, Director Public Works Department richardv.mendoza@austintexas.gov (512) 974-7190 5
Samsung Boulevard Right-of-Way Vacation Briefing Urban Transportation Commission December 8, 2020 Austin Transportation Department Overview • COA departments have reviewed Samsung’s two applications to vacate the street ROW of Samsung Blvd • We are asking for UTC to recommend approval • We are taking the requests to Council for approval in January • Samsung will relocate Samsung Blvd and reconstruct it as a portion of the future parallel regional Arterial A facility • Approvals are contingent on public utility and access easements being retained until the new Samsung Blvd designed to serve as Arterial A, is dedicated, constructed, and accepted • COA departments support the requests if existing utilities are left in place until moved at the applicant’s expense 2 Overview • COA is designing and constructing the extension of Braker Ln from its terminus to the location of new Samsung Blvd (future Arterial A) • Road projects in the Samsung area will expand the transportation network consistent with the adopted ASMP • Projects will benefit Samsung as a major trip generator and the surrounding residential uses lacking an existing grid network 3 Samsung Area Projects Approximate property holding - Samsung Future MoKan TXDOT Rezoning to LI-PDA West of Samsung Blvd C14-2020-0118 4 Braker Lane Extension Under Design by PWD To be Constructed by City Braker Lane Extension To be Designed and constructed by Samsung as Braker Lane Existing Samsung Blvd To be Vacated Rezoning to LI-PDA East of Samsung Blvd C14-2020-0117 Arterial A Extension To be Designed and constructed by Samsung as Samsung Blvd. (consistent with Arterial A design requirements Braker Lane Extension Travis County Designing Construction Date TBD Questions Rob Spillar, Director Austin Transportation Department rob.spillar@austintexas.gov (512) 974-2488 Richard Mendoza, Director Public Works Department richardv.mendoza@austintexas.gov (512) 974-7190 5
Pedestrian Advisory Council (PAC) Recommendation: Active Mobility Recommendations for Texas Department of Transportation IH‐35 Capital Express Project WHEREAS, the Pedestrian Advisory Council (PAC) advises the City of Austin on pedestrian planning, policy, design, funding, education, and enforcement efforts regarding the creation, maintenance, and operation of pedestrian facilities in order to ensure a safe and enjoyable circulation for both commuting and recreation within the City of Austin; WHEREAS, the purpose of the Bicycle Advisory Council (BAC) is to advise the City of Austin and other jurisdictions on all matters relating to the use of the bicycle, bicycle infrastructure, and individuals of all ages and abilities who utilize bicycles; WHEREAS, the City’s 2014 Bicycle Master Plan envisions a core network of safe facilities suitable for people of all ages and abilities, and approximately three‐quarters of the streets that cross this project corridor have been identified as being in the Bicycle Priority Network; WHEREAS, the City’s Sidewalk / ADA Transition Plan accounts for missing and broken sidewalks citywide, including significant very high priority missing and broken sidewalks along the project corridor and TXDOT has adopted a renewed focus on sidewalks and building an inclusive, accessible transportation system for all users; WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP) calls for a reduction in the percentage of single occupancy trips to 50% by 2039; WHEREAS, the High‐Injury Network (HIN) identifies streets in Austin that are under City of Austin jurisdiction that has a relatively high number of serious injuries and fatal crashes, and 12 of the streets which cross this project corridor are included therein; WHEREAS, the City’s Vision Zero Plan calls for intersection improvements, raised crosswalks, signal upgrades, design modifications to major streets and other measures aimed at ending the needless deaths and injuries occurring on Austin roads every year; WHEREAS, a significant number of people who were walking or riding bicycles or micromobility devices have been killed or seriously injured on or along Interstate Highway 35 (I‐35) in Austin; WHEREAS, the impact of these serious injuries and fatalities have been inequitable, disproportionately affecting people of color, individuals experiencing homelessness, and other marginalized communities; WHEREAS, Cap Metro’s transit service currently releases passengers near I‐35 frontage roads, leaving them to make east‐west connections across IH‐35 or along the frontage road via whatever means of transport they have available, most often by foot or bicycle; WHEREAS, the Purpose and Need document of the TxDOT I‐35 Capital …
I-35 Capital Express Scoping Overview Austin Transportation Department Presentation to Urban Transportation Department 12/2/2020 I-35 Capital Express Project Overview • I-35 EIS Timeline and Scoping Considerations • TxDOT Design Alternatives • City of Austin Goals – Participating Agency • Timeline and Needs for Scoping Deliverables • Questions 12/7/2020 2 Blue highlighted graphics are reprinted from the TxDOT I-35 Capital Express Scoping documents. Mobility35 Program Three stand-alone projects from SH 45 North to SH 45 SE — North, Central and South. – North and South projects Construction ~ 2022 – I-35 Capital Express Central project Construction ~ 2025 12/7/2020 3 I-35 Capital Express Plans Project: • Add two, non-tolled managed lanes (HOV) in each direction along I-35 from US 290 East to SH 71/Ben White Blvd. • Flyovers at I-35 and US 290 E • Various operational and safety enhancements, enhancing bicycle and pedestrian paths. Project Limits: • I-35 from US 290 East to US 290 West/SH 71, approx. 8 mile Project Cost: $4.9 Freeway Lids: Scoping Timeframe: Nov 12 – Dec. 12, 2020 • TxDOT has indicated that lidding is a project “betterment” or a separate project that could be funded locally • Freeway structural consideration for future lids are being considered for inclusion in the base design of the I-35 project • Lids are not included in the current NEPA process 12/7/20 20 2 Environmental Impact Statement -Scoping Process will evaluate impacts to the human and natural environment, including: WATER AIR QUALITY TRAFFIC NOISE COMMUNITY VEGETATION & RESOURCES IMPACTS WILDLIFE THREATENED & ENDANGERED INDIRECT & CUMULATIVE HISTORICAL & ARCHEOLOGICAL SPECIES IMPACTS RESOURCES HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SITES LAND USE & PARKLAND 12/7/2020 4 I-35 EIS Project Timeframe 12/7/2020 6 I-35 Capital Express “Purpose & Need” • The proposed project is needed to improve I-35 between US 290 East and US 290 West/SH 71 to meet current design standards and current and future travel demand. The existing roadway does not meet current federal and state design standards, which has resulted in operational deficiencies and longer travel times for all users, including emergency response vehicles and transit, particularly during peak hours. The proposed project is also needed to improve bicycle and pedestrian paths within the project limits. • The purpose of the proposed project is to improve this critical regional, national, and international thoroughfare by enhancing safety, managing congestion, improving operational efficiency, and creating a more dependable and consistent route for the traveling …
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number #20201208‐02B I‐35 Capital Express Central Project WHEREAS, the TxDOT I‐35 Capital Express Central Project proposes to add two non‐tolled managed lanes in each direction to I‐35 through central Austin, between US 290 East and SH 71/Ben White Boulevard, growing to 20 total lanes in some segments of the highway; WHEREAS, the original siting and construction of I‐35 through Austin was a directed, intentional project to physically enforce racial segregation; WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility plan calls for Austin to reach a goal of 50% of Austinites commuting by walking, biking, transit, or any other non‐drive‐alone mode by 2039, from today’s current 24% of Austinites using non‐drive‐alone modes; WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan further reaffirms the Vision Zero goal the City of Austin set in 2016, to reach zero traffic fatalities by 2025; WHEREAS, the Texas Transportation Commission has set a goal of zero traffic fatalities by 2050 and cutting deaths in half by 2035; WHEREAS, our current climate crisis calls for us to make changes to the way we live and plan our cities and our pattern of continued highway construction is neither safe nor sustainable, given the contributions of automobiles to climate change; WHEREAS, in November 2020 Austin voters passed a Project Connect tax district which will fund and construct a generational, comprehensive portfolio of transit projects; WHEREAS, the Orange Line light rail corridor included in Project Connect essentially runs parallel to I‐35, while also taking people more directly to their homes, jobs, and a variety of safe, walkable destinations; WHEREAS, the Orange Line light rail corridor can therefore serve as a better alternative for I‐35 commuters , particularly if the delivery of later phases of the project (such as the northern segment to Tech Ridge Park and Ride) are accelerated by additional funding; WHEREAS, average daily traffic on I‐35 from 2015‐2019 was relatively flat during a time of population and job growth, while TxDOT predicts dramatic increases in traffic demand on the corridor; WHEREAS, the City’s 2014 Bicycle Master Plan envisions a core network of safe facilities suitable for people of all ages and abilities, and approximately three‐quarters of the streets that cross this project corridor have been identified as being in the Bicycle Priority Network; WHEREAS, the City’s Sidewalk / ADA Transition Plan accounts for missing and broken sidewalks citywide, including significant very high priority missing and broken sidewalks …
River Street Residences Partial Alley Vacation Urban Transportation Commission December 8, 2020 1 Project Facts 505,409 total square feet Residential: 406,815 square feet / 409 units Retail: 1,500 square feet 2 Property Facts Address: 61-69 Rainey Street, 60 East Avenue Lot Size: 0.541 acres / 23,579 square feet Entitled FAR: 8:1* Proposed FAR: 21.43:1 Entitled Height: unlimited Proposed Height: 569 feet / 48 floors *8:1 FAR achievable with compliance with Waterfront Overlay Rainey Street subdistrict affordable housing provision requirements. 4 Community Benefits 1. On-site Affordable Housing: a. 7,593.37 square feet (Rainey District Requirement) b. 7,586.2 square feet (on-site provision above 15:1) 15,179.57 square feet (Total)* 2. Fee-In-Lieu a. $825,265.00 (8:1 to 15:1 FAR) b. $379,310.00 (15:1 to 21.43:1 FAR) $1,204,575.00 fee-in-lieu (Total)* *Figures subject to confirmation from NHCD 5 6 7 8 Summary of Improvements 1. Alley to be widened from 16.5 feet to 26 feet 2. Public sidewalk easements granted on both sides 3. Alley to be paved 4. Overhead utilities will be buried The above improvements allow for a safer and more functional alley 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT RIVER STREET HOTEL & HOMES 60 EAST AVE, AUSTIN, TX 78701 N SP-2019-0465C 01 18 25-5 10-21-2019 112 JEREMY SALTILA CBD Final plat must be recorded by the Project Expiration Date, if applicable. Subsequent Site Plans which do not comply with the Code current at the time of filing, and all required Building Permits and/or a notice of construction (if a Building permit is not required), must also be approved prior to the Project Expiration Date. □ □ · · · · · · · · · ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ⅓ TEMPORARY VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION: PERMANENT VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION: 10. 11. · · · SP-2019-0465C 02 18 25-5 10-21-2019 112 JEREMY SALTILA CBD Final plat must be recorded by the Project Expiration Date, if applicable. Subsequent Site Plans which do not comply with the Code current at the time of filing, and all required Building Permits and/or a notice of construction (if a Building permit is not required), must also be approved prior to the Project Expiration Date. GENERAL NOTES ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUECY OF THESE PLANS REMAINS WITH THE ENGINEER. APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOES NOT REMOVE THESE RESPONSIBILITIES. REVIEWED BY AUSTIN WATER APPLIES ONLY TO FACILITIES WITHIN PUBLIC STREETS OR PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS. ALL OTHER WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES INSIDE PRIVATE PROPERTY ARE UNDER THE JURISDICATION OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS. Use of Electronic Files General Disclaimer: Use of the attached files in any manner indicates your acceptance of terms and conditions as set forth below. If you do not agree to all of the terms and conditions, please contact Austin Water pipeline engineering, project coordinator prior to use of the referenced information. Please be advised that the attached files are in a format that can be altered by the user. Due to this fact, any reuse of the data will be at the user's sole risk without liability or legal exposure to The City of Austin and user shall indemnify and hold harmless The City of Austin from all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorney's fees arising out of or resulting from using the digital file. In addition, it is the responsibility of the user to compare all data with the PDF version of this drawing. In the event there is a conflict between the PDF version drawing and the electronic file, the PDF version …
UNPAVED HEAVY DUTY FRAME AND LID SPL WW-622 TOP FLUSH WITH FINISHED GRADE PAVED* No. 5 BARS AT MID-DEPTH TYP. 2" TO 4" 18" TYP. 0.5" x 5" REDWOOD CONTROL JOINT TYP. 5" CONCRETE PAVEMENT (1) CLOSED PICKHOLE 4" SHARP FACE 1 1 GOTHIC L # E D O M O. D N O R P R X Y / Y A O / D M B 5 3 L 8 C 4 M A T S A SEWER TOP VIEW GRASS OR EXIST. SURFACE 1 1 16" 11 13 16" DIA. 1 1 8" 1 3 8" 6" PVC THREADED CAP COMPACTED NATURAL GROUND 6" PVC PIPE 6" PVC ADAPTER COMPACTED NATURAL GROUND 3 4" 2" SECTION 5 8" - 11 x 3" LG S.S. HEX BOLT (1 REQ'D) 5 8" S.S. FLAT WASHER AND RUBBER WASHER 5/8" HEX S.S. NYLOCK NUT BRONZE LOCK LUG (1 REQ'D) 5/8" HEX S.S. JAM NUT CLEAN-OUT LID 3 4" PICKHOLE DETAIL 13 3 16" DIA. 12" DIA. 10 5 8" DIA. 1 1 8" SUBGRADE 3" MIN. " 9 3 4" x 1.5' SMOOTH DOWELS 2 ON EACH SIDE, EQUALLY SPACED. GREASE ONE END. ALL DOWELS TO BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT AND LEVEL. ℄ * CLEAN-OUTS MAY NOT BE PLACED IN PAVED AREAS - I.E. SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, OR PARKING LOTS, AND MUST BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF 6" FROM ALL PAVED AREAS. BOTTOM VIEW PAVEMENT CURB & GUTTER THE AREA THREE FEET (3') AROUND THE FIRE HYDRANT SHALL BE CLEAR OF ALL OBSTRUCTIONS GREATER THAN SIX INCHES (6") ABOVE FINAL GRADE. FIRE HYDRANT TO BE SET PLUMB 18" MIN. FACE OF CURB TO STEAMER NOZZLE COMPACTED BASE 6" GATE VALVE AND CASTING SEE STD. DETAIL 511-AW-01 SEE CONNECTION OPTIONS BELOW " 8 1 H T P E D Y R U B . X A M ' 5 - . I N M ' 4 6" DI CLASS 350 OR C900 PVC PIPE (TYP.) SEE INSTALLATION TYPES 2" MIN. 8" MAX. GROUNDLINE GROOVE SEE NOTE 2 GRAVEL DRAIN SEE NOTE 4 . I N M " 4 2 . I N M " 2 1 RESTRAINED JOINTS (TYP.) SEE NOTE 3 WATER MAIN THRUST BLOCKING REQUIRED FOR PIPE SIZE AND SOIL CONDITION 12"x12''x4" CONCRETE BLOCK, CLASS A 24" MIN. CONNECTION TO MAIN SIDE VIEW 6" FLG. TEE 6" SWIVEL TEE (F.H. TEE) MJxMJ ADAPTER SPL WW-27B 6" MJ TEE NOTES: 1. SUB-GRADE SHALL …
M E M O R A N D U M Kaycie Alexander, Urban Transportation Commission and Mobility Committee Liaison, Stephany Roy, Senior Property Agent, Land Management Development Services Department TO: FROM: DATE: November 5, 2020 SUBJECT: F#10285-2006, 10286-2006 and 10287-2006 Partial Aerial Right-of-Way Vacation Applications for 60 East Avenue, 61 Rainey Street, and 69 Rainey Street Attached are the departmental comments and other information pertinent to the three joint referenced right of way vacations. The area being requested for vacation will be used for Mixed use high-rise with ground floor pedestrian oriented uses (retail) outdoor seating and multi-family housing. Buildings to span over the alley above 18'. All affected departments and private utility franchise holders have reviewed this request and recommend approval subject to the following conditions: AT&T (SWBT) – Only applies to F#10285-2006 • Approved contingent on the stipulation all AT&T facilities have been removed from said aerial ROW. • Approved contingent upon 1. A public access easement will be provided for an additional 3 feet of width on each side of the alley - 6 feet in total. 2. The aerial vacation will be 20 feet in height at the building face and will transition down to 18 feet at the lowest point. • Approved contingent upon retention of a public utility easement to cover aerial utility lines. Once the lines/poles are relocated/removed, the PUE can be vacated. Be advised that poles will not be removed until all utilities have been removed from them. If there are comms located on the poles in this area, applicant should begin conversations now with comm companies regarding relocations. Continue to work with Rudy Vela at Austin Energy regarding relocation of electric facilities. Google Fiber – Only applies to F#10285-2006 • Approved contingent upon any relocations and with the understanding that an alternate underground pathway will be provided for the relocation of our existing aerial fiber optics cables. All expenses will be the responsibility of the Developer. • Approved contingent upon full reimbursement for the cost of constructions if Grande Communications Grande will need to relocate. PARD / Planning and Design Review • Approved contingent upon “See comment document”. ATD Electric Time Warner Cable / Charter Urban Design Review • Approved contingent upon any relocations and/or adjustments of Charter/Spectrum facilities will be paid for by the applicant/developer/owner. • Approved contingent upon the vacation retain connectivity and public access per Transportation requirements. The …
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number #20201208‐02D Draft Transportation Criteria Manual WHEREAS, the City approved an updated city‐wide transportation plan in 2019, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP), that expands the vision of the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan into actionable mobility‐related goals and objectives to guide Austin’s near‐ and long‐term transportation investments; and, WHEREAS, the foremost goals of the ASMP are improving safety on our transportation network and significantly changing the City’s work commute mode split to be less reliant on single‐occupancy vehicle trips; and, WHEREAS, the Central Texas region is anticipated to double its population and add two million residents in the next 20 years; and, WHEREAS, the Transportation Criteria Manual defines the design requirements for transportation infrastructure within the City of Austin (City) and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ), when adopted by the applicable jurisdiction, including Travis County and Williamson County; and, WHEREAS, the City has revamped its transportation review guidelines for new development and is considering adopting a Street Impact Fee Program to impart a one‐time charge to new developments to contribute to capital improvement projects and roadway expansions as designated in the ASMP; and, WHEREAS, the City intends to look at managing transportation demand with respect to vehicle travel as much as providing additional supply; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that, in order to meet the goals listed in the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan, set an example for best practices in transportation, and to strive to meet voters’ desires as shown by the passage of Proposition A and Proposition B in 2020, the City should: 1. Remove the requirement for transportation review related to new development to be conducted by a licensed Professional Engineer since American Institute of Certified Planners are permitted to aid with Transportation Demand Management plans and have important perspectives and many have appropriate skill sets to conduct full Transportation Impact Analyses. 2. Include no travel lanes with a recommended/required design width of more than 12 feet. 3. Modify Section 10.4 TIA to include guidelines for analysis and not be in a separate administrative document (Please see UTC Recommendations 2018‐0416A, 20190318‐04C, 20191101‐02A, and 20200710‐02A for previous recommendations regarding transportation impact analysis processes). 4. Clearly identify the Impact Analysis/Comprehensive Transportation Review/Transportation Demand Management requirements, b) Rough Proportionality, interplay between the a) Transportation 1 and c) Street Impact Fee program should be clear within the Transportation Criteria Manual such …
Urban Transportation Commission Transportation Criteria Manual Update December 8, 2020 Meeting 1 AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TCM Update Overview The criteria presented in the updated Transportation Criteria Manual provide a foundation or starting point for engineering design decisions. The criteria presented in the manual are based largely upon the standards, guidelines and policies set forth by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation (AASHTO), National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Summary of Significant Changes: • Prioritized safety for sustainable modes of travel (peds, bikes, etc.) • Modernized criteria to be in line with current local & national best practices • Introduced flexible design to account for existing conditions • Updated criteria for analysis of development transportation impacts 2 TransportationCM@austintexas.gov @austinmobility facebook.com/ATXTransportation AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT Project Timeline 2018-2020 2020 November 2020 Early 2021 Spring 2021 We Are Here Internal & External Input and Review Internal and External Input & Review Internal Draft Refinement Public Concurrence (Comment Period) Final Document Refinement Formal Rules Posting Process (Training Materials post-adoption) 3 TransportationCM@austintexas.gov @austinmobility facebook.com/ATXTransportation AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT Updated TCM Table of Contents • Section 1: What is the TCM, Vision, and Goals • Section 2: Street Cross Sections • Section 3: Design Criteria • Section 4: Pedestrian Zone • Section 5: Bikeways and Urban Trails • Section 6: Transit • Section 7: Driveways • Section 8: Temporary Traffic Control • Section 9: Parking and Loading • Section 10: Comprehensive Transportation Review • Section 11: Offsets and Rails • Section 12: Small Cell Facilities in the ROW • Section 13: Structures in the Right-of-Way 4 TransportationCM@austintexas.gov @austinmobility facebook.com/ATXTransportation AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT Sample Content: Figures & Tables High conflict density High conflict density Low conflict density Low conflict density High activity Low activity High activity Low activity Street Context Street Level Level 0 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 1 20 mph or lower 10 mph 20-25 mph 25-30 mph 30-35 mph 10 mph 20 mph 25 mph 30 mph 35 mph 10 mph 20 mph 25 mph 30 mph 35 mph 10 mph 20-25 mph 25-30 mph 30-35 mph 35-40 mph 5 TransportationCM@austintexas.gov @austinmobility facebook.com/ATXTransportation AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT SpeakUp Austin Website What’s on the project website? • Full Draft Document PDF • Videos with brief overview of content • Comment Boxes per Section Videos 6 TransportationCM@austintexas.gov @austinmobility facebook.com/ATXTransportation AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WE WANT YOUR FEEDBACK! • …
2021 UTC Meeting Calendar • January 12, 5pm • February 9, 5pm • March 9, 5pm • April 13, 5pm • May 11, 5pm • June 8, 5pm • July 13, 5pm • August 10, 5pm • September 14, 5pm • October 12, 5pm • November 9, 5pm • December 14, 5pm
Planning Commission Q & A Report B-1 - B -4 Chair Shaw / Staff • Does the applicant have proposed concept drawings for the properties? It has been a year since the public meeting when applicant stated they had none. There are no conceptual plans. It is my understanding that the owners plan to sell the properties but don’t have a buyer in mind. • The main church building was designed by John S. Chase, the first African American to graduate from the University of Texas at Austin in Architecture. Preservation of this building was a major topic of discussion in the community meeting. What is the opinion of the Historic Preservation Office as to the historic significance of this church and what is the process for its preservation given the change in ownership? David Chapel Missionary Baptist Church qualifies as a city historic landmark under the criteria for architectural distinction and historical significance. It was designed by John S. Chase, the first African-American licensed architect in the State of Texas, and is a masterpiece of mid- century Modern church architecture. The David Chapel congregation also has historical significance; the first home of the congregation, at 14th Street and Chestnut Avenue (now St. Paul Primitive Baptist Church) is a historic landmark. Recent state law (House Bill 2496) requires that a building owned by a religious organization may only be designated as a historic landmark if the religious organization consents to the designation. • Micah King stated on behalf of the applicant, “They want to be respectful of the single family uses surrounding the property and to also respect the history.” How does applicant intent to meet this commitment? Pending • In 11-30-2020 Letter from Chestnut Neighborhood Plan Contact Team (From-David Carroll, Vice Chair), contact team supports CS-MU-V-NP for Tracts 1, 2 and 3 and they stated that they came to an agreement with applicant to rezone Tract 4 to GR-V-MU- CO-NP. However, GR-V-MU-CO-NP is not what is shown as applicant’s request in the backup. Does applicant agree to GR-V-MU-CO-NP instead of CS-MU-V-NP for Tract 4? The applicant agrees to GR-MU-V-CO-NP for Tract 4. Staff, however, is recommending LO-MU-CO-NP. Chair Shaw / Staff B-7 Chair Shaw / Staff B-17 See attachment. The Central West Austin Neighborhood Plan Contact Team opposed the NPA change. Are they speaking to their opposition that we should move this item for discuss on the agenda? No …
Citizen Communications Karen Reynolds B-1 - B-4 Applicant Nikelle Meade For: Rev. Joseph C. Parker, Jr. Jordan Smith Tracey Bradnan Alex Brown LaVerne Parker Against Brenda Malik B5 / B6 Applicant - Micah King Opposed Christopher Cavello Toni House Malcom Yeatts Rachel McClure Jeff Taylor B-7 and B-8 Applicant - Victoria Haase Ron Thrower B-9 and B-10 Applicant - Alice Glasco David Hartman B-11 Applicant Michael Gaudini Michael Whellan For Bethany Fadel Against: Ana Aguirre B-14 Applicant Leah Bojo B-15 Applicant - Amanda Swor For: Matteo Pacifici Jim Schissler B-16 Karen Wunch Nicole Gideon
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number #20201208-02D Draft Transportation Criteria Manual WHEREAS, the City approved an updated city-wide transportation plan in 2019, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP), that expands the vision of the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan into actionable mobility-related goals and objectives to guide Austin’s near- and long-term transportation investments; and, WHEREAS, the foremost goals of the ASMP are improving safety on our transportation network and significantly changing the City’s work commute mode split to be less reliant on single- occupancy vehicle trips; and, WHEREAS, the Central Texas region is anticipated to double its population and add two million residents in the next 20 years; and, WHEREAS, the Transportation Criteria Manual defines the design requirements for transportation infrastructure within the City of Austin (City) and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ), when adopted by the applicable jurisdiction, including Travis County and Williamson County; and, WHEREAS, the City has revamped its transportation review guidelines for new development and is considering adopting a Street Impact Fee Program to impart a one-time charge to new developments to contribute to capital improvement projects and roadway expansions as designated in the ASMP; and, WHEREAS, the City intends to look at managing transportation demand with respect to vehicle travel as much as providing additional supply; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that, in order to meet the goals listed in the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan, set an example for best practices in transportation, and to strive to meet voters’ desires as shown by the passage of Proposition A and Proposition B in 2020, the City should: 1. Remove the requirement for transportation review related to new development to be conducted by a licensed Professional Engineer since American Institute of Certified Planners are permitted to aid with Transportation Demand Management plans and have important perspectives and many have appropriate skill sets to conduct full Transportation Impact Analyses. 2. Include no travel lanes with a recommended/required design width of more than 12 feet. 3. Modify Section 10.4 TIA to include guidelines for analysis and not be in a separate administrative document (Please see UTC Recommendations 2018-0416A, 20190318-04C, 20191101-02A, and 20200710-02A regarding transportation impact analysis processes). recommendations for previous 4. Clearly the identify interplay Impact Analysis/Comprehensive Transportation Review/Transportation Demand Management requirements, b) Rough Proportionality, and c) Street Impact Fee program should be clear within the Transportation Criteria Manual such that the Comprehensive Transportation …
Urban Transportation Commission (UTC) Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting 8 December 2020 The Urban Transportation Commission convened in a meeting on December 8, 2020 via videoconference. Commission Members in Attendance: Daniel Alvarado Mario Champion – Chair Susan Somers Commission Members Absent: Athena Leyton Kelly Davis Alex Reyna Michael Wilfley Cynthia Weatherby Daniel Hennessey Samuel Franco Allie Runas CALL TO ORDER Commissioner Champion called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 13, 2020 MEETING The October 13, 2020 minutes were approved on a 7-0 vote with Commissioners Davis, Leyton, Reyna, and Wilfley absent. 2. NEW BUSINESS action required A. Relocation of Samsung Blvd and associated right of way Vacation-Discussion and A motion to recommend the relocation of Samsung Blvd was made by Commissioner Alvarado, seconded by Commissioner Weatherby and approved on a 7-0 vote with Commissioners Davis, Leyton, Reyna, and Wilfley absent. B. I-35 Capital Express Central Project- Briefing and Possible Action A presentation was made by Rob Spillar. Draft recommendation language was presented by Commissioner Somers. No action was taken regarding the draft recommendation. A motion to establish a working group was approved on a 7-0 vote with Commissioners Davis, Leyton, Reyna, and Wilfley absent. Commissioners Somers, Runas, Champion, and Alvarado will serve on the working group and report their recommendations back to the full commission at a future special-called meeting. C. Alley aerial right of way vacations abutting 60 Rainey (File Numbers 10285-2006, 10286- 2006, and 10287-2006) – Discussion and Possible Action A motion to recommend the Alley aerial right of way for council action with no edits was made by Commissioner Alvarado, seconded by Commissioner Weatherby and failed on a 5-0-1 vote with Commissioner Hennessey abstaining and Commissioners Davis, Leyton, Reyna, Franco, and Wilfley absent. D. Draft Transportation Criteria Manual- Briefing and Possible Action A presentation was made by Daniel Morin, Commissioner Hennessey presented draft recommendation language which, after debate and amendment, read as follows. [Be it resolved that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that, in order to meet the goals listed in the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan, set an example for best practices in transportation, and to strive to meet voters’ desires as shown by the passage of Proposition A and Proposition B in 2020, the City should: 1. Remove the requirement for transportation review related to new development to be conducted by a licensed Professional Engineer since American Institute of Certified Planners …
Versión en español a continuación. Regular Meeting of the Public Safety Commission December 7, 2020 at 3:00pm Public Safety Commission meeting to be held December 7, 2020 with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (December 6, 2020 by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the December 7, 2020 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION Meeting, members of the public must: •Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-5747 or Janet.jackson@austintexas.gov no later than noon, December 6, 2020 (the day before the meeting). The information required is the speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, and a telephone number or email address. •Once a request to speak has been called in or emailed to the board liaison, residents will receive either an email or phone call providing the telephone number to call on the day of the scheduled meeting. •Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. •Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. •Handouts or other information may be emailed to Janet.jackson@austintexas.gov by Noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. •If this meeting is broadcast live, residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live Reunión del PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION la junta en FECHA de la reunion December 7, 2020 La junta se llevará con modificaciones de distanciamiento social Se permitirán comentarios públicos por teléfono; no se permitirá ninguna entrada en persona. Todos los oradores deben registrarse con anticipación (December 6, 2020 antes del mediodía). Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los miembros del público deben: • Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de (512) 974-5747 or Janet.jackson@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). La información requerida es el nombre del orador, los números de artículo sobre los que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutrales, y un número de teléfono o dirección de correo electrónico. • Una vez que se haya llamado o enviado por …
