ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4-12 (REGISTRATION OF CREDIT ACCESS BUSINESSES) OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION OF BOTH CREDIT SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS AND CREDIT ACCESS BUSINESSES; CREATING AN OFFENSE AND PENALTY; AND AMENDING THE 2019-2020 FEE SCHEDULE IN ORDINANCE NO. 20190910-002 TO ADD A REGISTRATION APPLICATION FEE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: PART 1. City Code Chapter 4-12 (Registration of Credit Access Businesses) is amended to amend the title of the chapter to read as follows: CHAPTER 4-12 REGISTRATION OF CREDIT SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS AND CREDIT ACCESS BUSINESSES. PART 2. City Code Chapter 4-12 (Registration of Credit Services Organizations and Access Businesses) is amended to replace “Director” with “director” in each place that the word appears within Chapter 4-12. PART 3. City Code Section 4-12-1 (Definitions) is amended to add new definitions for “Credit Access Fees”, “Credit Services Organization”, “Extension of Consumer Credit Transaction”, and “Valuable Consideration”; to amend the existing definitions for “Certificate of Registration”, “Consumer”, and “Owner”; to delete the definition of “Registrant”; to delete and replace the definition of “Credit Access Business”; and to re-letter the remaining definitions as set forth below: (A) CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION means a certificate of registration issued by the director [Director] under this chapter to the owner or operator of a credit services organization or a credit access business. (B) CONSUMER means an individual who is solicited to purchase or who purchases the services of a credit services organization or a credit access business. (C) CREDIT ACCESS BUSINESS means a credit services organization that obtains for a consumer or assists a consumer in obtaining an extension of consumer credit in the form of a deferred presentment transaction or a motor vehicle title loan. Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 (D) CREDIT ACCESS BUSINESS FEES mean the fees charged by a credit access business pursuant to Section 393.602, Texas Finance Code. (E) CREDIT SERVICES ORGANIZATION means a person who obtains an extension of consumer credit for a consumer as described in Section 393.001(3)(B), Texas Finance Code, or a …
City of Austin 301 W. Second Street Austin, TX Recommendation for Action File #: 20-1942, Agenda Item #: 28. 5/21/2020(cid:4) Posting Language Approve an ordinance amending Chapter 4-12 (Registration of Credit Access Businesses), creating an offense and penalty, and amending the 2019-2020 Fee Schedule in Ordinance No. 20190910-002 to add an application fee. Lead Department Telecommunications and Regulatory Affairs. Fiscal Note This item has no fiscal impact Prior Council Action: April 9, 2020- Council passed a resolution directing staff to return with this ordinance. For More Information: Rondella M. Hawkins, TARA Officer; 512-974-2422. Council Committee, Boards and Commission Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 20110818-075 in August 2011. Amended Ordinance No. 20151217-073 in December of 2015. Additional Backup Information: City Council passed Resolution No. 20200409-033 on April 9, 2020 directing staff to assess and update the City’s consumer protection ordinances and rules to ensure continued efficacy in light of Texas Attorney General Opinion KP-0277. If approved, the proposed ordinance will require credit service organizations to comply with Chapter 4-12. This change will address Attorney General Opinion KP-0277. The ordinance also makes clarifying changes to Chapter 4-12 and amends the 2019-2020 Fee Schedule in Ordinance No. 20190910-002 to add an application fee. Staff recommends that Council approve the proposed ordinance amendments. Strategic Outcome(s): Economic Opportunity and Affordability. City of Austin Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/8/2020 powered by Legistar™ (cid:5) (cid:6)
ORDINANCE NO. 20190910-002 AN ORDINANCE AUTEOR ZING FEES, FINES, AND OTHER CHARGES TO BE SET OR CHARGED BY THE CITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019-2020 BEGINNING ON OCTOBER 1, 2019, AND ENDING ON SEPTEMBER 30,2020. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: PART 1. The City Council authorizes the fees, fines, and other charges listed in the attached Exhibits "A" and "B" to be set or charged by the City for Fiscal Year 2019- 2020 beginning on October 1, 2019, and ending on September 30,2020. PART 2. To the extent that a previous ordinance conflicts with this ordinance, the earlier ordinance is repealed. PART 3. Except as otherwise specifically provided in Exhibits "A" and "B," this ordinance takes effect on October 1,2019. A fee, fine, or other charge for which a specific effective date has been established in Exhibits "A" and "B" takes effect on the specified effective dates. PART 4. Council waives fees and reimburses costs for City co-sponsored events listed in Exhibit "C" and identified in the following Council actions: Resolution No. 20021003-040 Resolution No. 20040226-040 Resolution No. 20050324-040B Resolution No. 20070308-033 Resolution No. 20100408-034 Resolution No. 2010624-080 Resolution No. 20111208-077 Resolution No. 20120927-081 Ordinance No. 20130808-057 Ordinance No. 20131212-140 Ordinance No.20141106-057 Page 1 of 2 These events are Council-approved co-sponsored events, which serve documented public purposes as set forth in the actions of Council noted above. Each event must annually provide reasonable documentation to the City Manager that the event brings a value to the City that is at least roughly equivalent to the fees waived or reimbursed by this action. PASSED AND APPROVED § § ff- *feve dler Mayor § ATTESET)C j€h uue=• A J:te-eaw Jannette S. Goodall City Clerk September 10 ,2019 APPROVED: Anne L. Morgan City Attorney Page 2 of 2
TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION THREATENS BASIC BORROWER PROTECTIONS FOR HIGH-COST LOANS HISTORY OF REFORM MOVEMENT In 2011, community and faith leaders organized a strong movement to encourage Texas leaders to address predatory payday and auto title lending practices. In response, the Texas Legislature updated the Credit Service Organization Act, a law loan operators were using to get around state consumer protections, including rate and fee caps. The new changes required licensing by the Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner (OCCC) and disclosures, but did not address problems with the cost or structure of the loans. LOCAL ORDINANCES PROVIDE RELIEF With families still hurting from the cycle of debt and ongoing economic harms from these high-cost loans, 46 Texas cities adopted additional, commonsense local protections to address harmful lending practices. City-based protections have maintained access to credit and created better outcomes for borrowers, including lower fees and fewer vehicle repossessions. $250,000 $250,000 $200,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $200,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 THREATS TO STATE LICENSING, ORDINANCES, & FIN ANCIAL WELLBEING In November 2019, the Texas Attorney General issued an opinion interpreting state law that opens a new loophole to skirt the few state and local protections that apply to high-cost loans arranged under the Credit Services Organization Act, once again leaving vulnerable Texans at the mercy of predatory market practices. $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000 $250,000 2012 2012 2012 2018 2018 2018 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 UNCAPPED PAYDAY AND AUTO TITLE LOANS Average APRs, often over 500% interest, drain wealth from Texas communities $50,000 From 2012-2018, payday and auto title loan operations collected $11.2 billion in fees from struggling Texas families. This money could have gone towards basic family needs and local businesses instead of being drained away for 500% plus APR loans. 2012 2018 High Fees and Refinances Make Up 70% of the Texans Lost 256,701 Cars, Repossessed by Auto Title Payday and Auto Title Loan Market Lenders (Total 2012-2018) Fees & Refinances $4 bil Fees & Refinances $4.1 bil Fees & Refinances $3.7 bil Fees & Refinances $3.5 bil 2012 2012 New Loans $1.9 bil New Loans $1.7 bil New Loans $1.5 bil New Loans $1.6 bil 2012 2012 2014 2016 2018 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 2014 2014 100,000 50,000 2014 2016 2016 2018 2018 2016 2018 2012 2018 AUTO TITLELENDERPAYDAY LOANSAUTO TITLELENDERAUTO TITLELENDERPAYDAY LOANSAUTO TITLELENDERAUTO TITLELENDERPAYDAY LOANSAUTO TITLELENDERAUTO TITLELENDERPAYDAY LOANSAUTO TITLELENDERAUTO TITLELENDERPAYDAY LOANSAUTO TITLELENDER IMPACTS OF …
DRAFT COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Human Rights Commission Recommendation Number 20200518-002c: Recommendation to Address Under-banking by Allowing City Libraries to Perform Limited Financial Services WHEREAS, Under-banking is a serious detriment to working people’s ability to build and grow wealth; and, WHEREAS, Online banking services and digital commerce are becoming increasingly ubiquitous; and, WHEREAS, The inability to participate in digital commerce can directly impact one’s quality of life, financial and employment prospects; thus negatively impacting one’s access to human rights; and, WHEREAS, Public institutions, such as the United States Postal Service, have previously provided limited banking services to the public; and, WHEREAS, The entrance of a public enterprise with more affordable rates stimulates competition in the private sector; and, WHEREAS, The definition of what public libraries are able to lend to the public has previously been expanded (i.e. DVDs, CDs, audiobooks, etc.); and, WHEREAS, Libraries are currently, in effect, depositories of a kind; and, WHEREAS, Exclusion from banking services has been a studied and documented symptom of institutional racism and sexism; and, WHEREAS, The right to Social Security is guaranteed by the 22nd Article of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights; and, WHEREAS, We are now facing unprecedented financial consequences due to COVID-19; and, WHEREAS, It is in the public interest to create a department within a publicly trusted institution dedicated to the financial success and prosperity of all Austin residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Human Rights Commission recommends the Austin City Council to investigate ways to charter the Austin Library System as a state bank to provide basic, free-to-access, financial services to include but not limited to: fee-free ATM services, checking and savings accounts with online access, debit card services, fee-free overdraft protection, etc.
DRAFT COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Human Rights Commission Recommendation Number 20200518-002d: Universal Basic Electricity WHEREAS, inability to access electricity is a violation of an individuals human rights according to the 3rd, 14th, 22nd, 25th, and 28th Articles of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and, WHEREAS, Austin has previously been a leader in providing cheap electricity for its residents; and, WHEREAS, the stated purpose of Austin Energy is said to embrace the public utility model; and, WHEREAS, Austin Energy makes an average of $100 million in profits each year; and, WHEREAS, the elimination of a utility bill can have incredible impacts on working class residents; and, WHEREAS, Austin Energy customers are already stakeholders by participating in a $200 refundable deposit program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Human Rights Commission for the City of Austin recommends the City Council of Austin direct Austin energy to restructure it’s payment schedule to fit the following: Expand Tier 1 to include up to 700 Kwh/Month at $0.00/Kwh with fee-exemption, and create a flat-fee of $10 for Tier 2 which should be from 700-1300 Kwh/Month at $0.01/Kwh.
Eligible Expenses for Historic District Tax Abatement DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 5/14/2020 These amendments are proposed in an effort to more closely align the list of eligible expenses with the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit, which staff believes will add clarity and encourage use of the tax abatement. Proposed changes include expanded eligibility for permanent interior work (elements attached to the building) and soft costs. A certain proportion of expenses will still be required for exterior work, depending on property location (if in the East Austin Revitalization Area) and use (homestead or income-producing). Additions are not allowed by the federal tax credit and have not been allowed to date by the local tax abatement; that item is noted for discussion by the Commission. The Historic Landmark Commission must review and approve all eligible expenses. If the property owner completes the work themselves, s/he must submit at least one quote from a professional contractor providing an estimate of costs for materials and labor. Only work completed after the owner has obtained a Certificate of Eligibility can be considered. X = proposed to be added X = proposed to be removed Expense Proposed eligible Currently eligible Proposed ineligible Eligible for fed. historic tax credit X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Carpeting (if glued in place) Ceilings Chimneys Doors, exterior (repair and rehabilitation; replacement if staff concurs is necessary) Doors, interior Electrical wiring Energy efficiency improvements (weather-stripping, etc.; solar panels if essential to the operation and maintenance of the building) Fire escapes Floors (construction) Foundation (repair, replacement) Gutters Hazardous material abatement (lead paint, asbestos) HVAC systems (permanent) Light fixtures Roofing (repair, replacement) Painting, exterior Painting, interior Paneling or other permanent interior wall covering X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Proposed eligible Currently eligible Proposed ineligible Eligible for fed. historic tax credit X unsure Expense Plumbing and plumbing fixtures Reconstruction of documented missing architectural features Soft costs: architect fees, engineering fees, construction management costs, reasonable developer fees, financing fees Sprinkler/fire suppression systems Stairs, escalators, and elevators Structural repairs Tiling or other permanent floor covering Walls, exterior (repair, rehabilitation, and demolition of non-historic additions) Walls, interior (construction, demolition) Windows (repair and rehabilitation; replacement if staff concurs is necessary) Acquisition costs Additions (increase …
The Littlefield Building Proposed Awning Addition 106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701 May 18 2020 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701 SECONDARY ENTRANCES HAVE LOWER METAL AWNINGS, CREATING TRANSOM WINDOWS MAIN ENTRANCE HAS AWNING INSTALLED ABOVE WINDOWS HISTORICAL CONTEXT 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701The Littlefield Building Awning106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701 1958 ANWINGS ALONG TWO PROMINENT FACES OF BUILDING HISTORICAL CONTEXT 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701The Littlefield Building Awning106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701 EXISTING CONDITION / OCTOBER 2019 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701The Littlefield Building Awning106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701 MINIMIZED POINTS OF CONTACT CAN BE REPAIRED IF AWNINGS WERE REMOVED EXISTING AWNING ABOVE MAIN ENTRY TO BUILDING / MAY 2020 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701The Littlefield Building Awning106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701 EXISTING AWNING ABOVE MAIN ENTRANCE TO BUILDING PROPOSED AWNING INSTALLED AT A LOWER HEIGHT ABOVE THE SECONDARY ENTRANCE CREATES TRANSOM WINDOWS TO MATCH HISTORICAL CONTEXT PROPOSED AWNING RENDERING 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701The Littlefield Building Awning106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701 12” PAINTED ALUMINUM C-CHANNEL FASCIA OVERHEAD HANGER WITH TURNBUCKLE ALUMINUM SUPPORT BRACKET PROPOSED AWNING RENDERING 512.330.4243 / NOLAN-ARCHITECT.COM / 708 RIO GRANDE ST. AUSTIN TEXAS 78701The Littlefield Building Awning106 E 6th Street Austin Texas 78701
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS B.1 - 1 MAY 18, 2020 C14H-1978-0033 LITTLEFIELD BUILDING 106 E. 6TH STREET Install a removable metal canopy along with 6th Street elevation of the building. PROPOSAL PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The applicant proposes a suspended metal canopy along the east portion of the 6th Street elevation of the building. The canopy will extend over the retail spaces to the east of the 6th Street entrance to the building. The canopy will be suspended from metal cables and will be constructed of welded aluminum with a sheet metal roof and a frosted plexiglass ceiling. The exterior of the canopy will be finished in black. The canopy has a modern design. The applicant’s drawings show signage to be installed on the face of the canopy but no application for signs has been submitted at this time. There is currently a metal canopy over the 6th Street entrance to the building, but canvas awnings over the retail space to the east. Historic photos show the metal awning and the entry on 6th Street but nothing over the current retail space to the east: B.1 - 2 B.1 - 3 B.1 - 4 UPDATE: Friday, May 15, 2020, 3 p.m. The applicant has furnished photos showing the building in the 1950s with a metal awning at this location. Staff therefore no longer maintains that there was no awning here, but still has major reservations about the style of the proposed canopy, and believes it should be visually distinguished from the historic canopies on the building. Staff recommends that the proposed canopy be executed in canvas or another material that does not mimic the existing historic awnings, or if proposed in metal, have a different fascia treatment or color than the existing historic awnings. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are used to evaluate projects on historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. Evaluation: There is no historic record of a metal canopy at this location on the building. 9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS B.3 - 1 MAY 18, 2020 C14H-1997-0008 NORWOOD HOUSE 1018 EDGECLIFF TERRACE PROPOSAL Restore main house and add a terrace to the rear of the building. Reconstruct the historic teahouse gazebo. Add a new storage building and auxiliary function building to the site. Remodel landscape. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Main house: Most structural members will be repaired or replaced to retain the building’s original form. It will be clad in running-bond brick with soldier and sill course detailing; river rock and limestone accents throughout define the house’s exterior openings, sills, columns, and chimney. Masonry elements will match historic photographs and samples found on-site. The roof will be retiled with Ludowici clay shingles, with finish and color matching original samples. Wood window screen frames, doors, columns, lanterns, frieze boards, vents, and timber framing will be restored where possible. Window screens will be replaced with non-reflective bronze screen. Wood window sashes will be replaced in- kind where deterioration precludes repair and rehabilitation; as most of the original glazing is missing, it will be replaced with energy-efficient double glazing. Façade variations are as follows: a) South: The main elevation will be rebuilt to match historic photographs of the building, with the addition of a brick and exposed concrete access ramp and exposed-concrete steps. b) East and west: Two windows will shift slightly from their original placement at the west elevation. c) North: The central windows will be enlarged and replaced with fixed, single-pane clear picture windows and two aluminum-clad doors. The positions of the existing door and window will be reversed. 2) Teahouse: The teahouse, a simple brick-columned structure with attached trellis, exposed rafter tails, and tiled hipped roof, will be constructed on the site of the historic teahouse. 3) Storage and support buildings: A CMU storage building with flat roof and fixed-pane windows will be set back from the main house. It is connected to the new auxiliary building by a walkway covered with a steel drill-stem pipe trellis. The auxiliary building, constructed with matching CMU and fenestration, features small skylights and solar panels on its flat roof. 4) Site work: The proposed landscaping plan for the event lawn follows the general design of the historic formal garden. A low concrete fountain will be installed at the site of the historic fountain, and a low brick retaining wall will define the lawn’s edge. STANDARDS …
B.4 - 1 HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MAY 18, 2020 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS C14H-2008-0037 1300-02 E. 4TH STREET TEXACO DEPOT PROPOSAL Replace some windows and close one window opening; slightly alter a rear roofline; add a concrete ramp to a side elevation; install modern storefront systems in rear and side walls; add a new side staircase and rooftop MEP equipment; and construct a rear elevator tower, trellis, suspended roof deck, covered walkway, and perimeter fence. ARCHITECTURE The property includes two 1½-story, rectangular-plan warehouse buildings both clad in corrugated metal and capped by gabled roofs. The western building (Building A) features a vented monitor roof, 2-over-2 wood-sash windows, other ribbon windows, a paneled wood door, sliding industrial doors, and painted signage; some window and door openings are boarded up. The eastern building (Building B) features a 1-over-1 aluminum-sash window in the front gable end and sliding industrial doors; a number of window openings on side and rear walls are boarded up. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS For Building A (1300 E. 4th Street on the west), the existing siding and Texaco-related signage will be preserved. The following changes are proposed: Primary (south) facade 1) Rehabilitate the historic 2-over-2 wood-sash windows on the ground floor. 2) Replace the historic window in the façade gable end with a 4-lite clad-wood replica window. The existing window is missing half the wood sash and does not appear to be repairable. West wall (facing Saltillo Path) 3) Rehabilitate the historic 1-over-1 windows at the front of the wall. 4) Replace the paired pedestrian doors with a single flush metal door, shift the door opening slightly to the right, and infill part of the existing door opening with metal siding. 5) Construct a concrete ramp with a simple metal railing, which will provide access to the west entrance. 6) Infill the ribbon-window openings at the rear with slightly differentiated metal siding; create a new five-lite opening with similar dimensions. Rear (north) wall 7) Infill four window openings in the gable end of the front portion of the building with slightly differentiated metal siding. 8) Replace the wood and metal sliding door on the rear wall with a multi-lite metal door flanked by sidelights. The door opening will be shifted approximately 4’ to the east; approximately 4’ of the existing opening to the west will be infilled with salvaged metal siding. B.4 - 2 9) Construct a simple metal …
P R OJECT SC O PE DES C RI PT I O N Project (#) Date To From Cosmic Coffee (19051) 04.17.20 City of Austin – Historic Landmark Commission Clayton & Little - Sky Currie Regarding Cosmic Coffee – Project Scope Overall Proposed Work: Existing exterior materials to be preserved, repaired as needed. Metal siding to be cleaned, graffiti to be removed and the historic Texaco related signage preserved. Roofs to be repaired, replaced as needed. Windows to be repaired or replaced with replicas; all to be reglazed with new insulated lites. New windows are proposed to be aluminum clad wood, with muntin and sash profiles similar to existing windows. New storefront system to be steel and glass, with thin muntins and frames. New exterior doors to be steel and glass, with lites or flush (painted) hollow metal. The existing building exteriors are to be left mostly intact, except for proposed new openings and repair work noted above. Proposed ground level decks, vertical circulation and a new roof deck to be minimally attached to the existing structures. Location of Proposed Work: Buildings A (1300 E. 4th St.) & Building B (1302 E. 4th St.) Proposed Material(s): Metal Siding (to match existing material and profiles), Painted Wood Trim, Painted Wood Windows (existing), Aluminum Clad Wood Windows, Steel and Glass Storefront System and Doors, Flush Metal Doors, Asphalt Shingle Roof, Metal Roofing (to match existing material and profiles), Metal Gutters, Metal Downspouts Proposed Work: New wood & steel fence with metal gates. Location of Proposed Work: At perimeter of Site, where buildings do not exist. Proposed Material(s): Stained Wood, Raw Metal Proposed Work: New Roof Deck to float above the existing low metal roof of Building A. Roof to be supported by columns that will penetrate the existing roof and floor and be supported by a new foundation. If desired, the roof deck could be disassembled and the existing building forms would remain as they presently exist. Location of Proposed Work: Above low roof of Building A 1 of 2 New MEP equipment will ne necessary to support the new function of the buildings, some exhaust vents and rooftop HVAC Proposed Material(s): Ptd. Stl., Perforated Sheet Metal, Stained Wood Proposed Work: New Stair, Elevator Shaft & Water Tower. Location of Proposed Work: North of Building A Proposed Material(s): Ptd. Stl., Perforated Sheet Metal, Mtl. Panels Proposed Work: units are anticipated. Location of …
South Central Waterfront Advisory Board To: From: Alan Holt, Principal Planner; Planning & Zoning Date: May 14, 2020 RE: Project Updates & Communications from Staff To keep the May virtual meeting of the SCWAB focused on time-critical issues, I am providing this brief update memo instead of the usual staff presentation. Updates on recently presented draft materials: So far in 2020, key first draft deliverables have been posted as backup to meetings to the SCWAB. These materials are milestone deliverables in themselves. These important materials are also foundational prerequisites to updating the Financial Framework and to completing the draft Regulating Plan. As indicated in the memorandum to the SCWAB at the April virtual meeting, staff has improved these first drafts deliverables to correct errors and clarify information. These improved updates have been completed and are posted as backup for this agenda item. Outlined below is a summary of the corrections/modifications that have been incorporated into the update d deliverables: Package 1: This packet specifically addresses the updates only to three previously shared draft deliverables, listed below. The fully revised deliverables are now available as whole documents. The updates that are addressed in this packet include: 1. 2020 Update: SCW Street Typology and Sections (draft 2: May 18, 2020 – full document available) a. What’s highlighted in this packet: Changed from the draft 1, January 10, 2020 version: Armadillo Drive (AD1 & AD2) has been changed from a Collector 1 Street to a Local Street. 2. 2020 Update: SCW Physical Framework & Project Costs Estimates (draft 2: May 18, 2020) a. What’s highlighted in this packet: Changes from the draft 1, March 12, 2020 version: i. Adjust cost for Armadillo Drive from a Collector 1 Street to a Local Street (very small cost impact) ii. Correct costs for open spaces inputs for direct costs (construction costs) only. iii. Inclusion of a pie chart to show total district project costs as allocated into components (e.g., Open Space, Streetscape Improvements, etc.) 3. 2020 SCW Modified Physical Framework & Project Costs Estimates (draft 2: May 18, 2020) a. What’s highlighted in this packet: Changes from the draft 1, March 12, 2020 version: i. Ditto from 2ai ii. Ditto from 2aii iii. Ditto from 2aiii Package 2: SCW Buildout Scenarios for Financial Analysis (draft 2: May 14, 2020). What’s highlighted in this packet: Changes from draft 1, March 16, 2020 version: 1. 2020 Updated Buildout: …
P R OJECT SC O PE DES C RI PT I O N Project (#) Date To From Cosmic Coffee (19051) 05.18.20 City of Austin – Historic Landmark Commission, et. al Clayton & Little - Sky Currie Regarding Project Scope Texaco Depot Buildings Built Circa: 1912 Address: 1300 & 1302 E. 4th Street General History: The Texaco Depot buildings are comprised of two historic structures, Building A (1300 E. 4th St.), a one - & two-story wood framed structure and Building B (1302 E. 4th St.), a two-story wood framed structure. Building A was constructed in the industrial warehouse style that was prevalent in the area during the early 20th century, with the two-story portion being used for Offices & Storage, and the one-story portion for Oil Storage. Building B was constructed as a pole barn and was used for Oil Storage and “Pump”, per the 1935 Sanborn Map. The buildings appear to have not been in use for some time and are in significant disrepair. Proposed Work: Building A: The exterior of the structure will be maintained (will be repaired for weather-tightness, as needed). The Interior will be remodeled to accommodate a new Restaurant & Bar function. Existing metal roof on one story portion to be removed, repaired and reapplied, once tapered insulation has been added. New asphalt shingle roof to be applied to the two-story roof, color, size and pattern to match the existing shingle roof. Existing windows to remain will be repaired as needed, or replaced with a replica. New windows, with proportions to match existing, are proposed for the West elevation of the one-story portion; the existing aluminum windows in this location do not date to the original construction and are in poor condition. New fenestrations are planned for the East, North and West facades. Existing exterior deck areas to be modified and added to. New accessible vertical circulation tower, new roof deck over part of the one-story portion of the building and a new exterior egress stair with a dormer addition are proposed. Building B: Building will be stabilized, as the existing structure leans to the West, and repaired for weather-tightness. The Interior will be remodeled to accommodate a new Restaurant & Bar function. Existing metal roof to remain, be repaired, as needed. Existing windows to remain will be repaired as needed, or replaced with a replica. New fenestrations are planned for the East, North …
2020 SCW Financial Tool and Key Takeaways South Central Waterfront Advisory Board May 18, 2020 Financial model implications Financial model overview Affordable housing discussion Observations from modeling Agenda 2 SCW District Feasibility 3 Methods Update of 2016 modeling for Framework Plan to provide Council with directional indicators when considering policy options Parcel-based pencil-outs that consider plan entitlements, infrastructure costs, affordable housing, and bonus participation fees A snapshot look at the district build out, as though all development delivered simultaneously 4 Methods 2020 financial model accounts for: 2016 SCW Framework Plan entitlements Late 2019 market conditions (costs and revenues) 305 S Congress (Statesman) PUD proposal More precise infrastructure costs, including proposed Statesman site plan Bonus participation fees Affordable housing (including multiple OTC options and Statesman targets) 5 Financial Evaluation - Key Takeaways Developments of the scale contemplated in the 2016 SCW Plan may be financially infeasible, even before accounting for infrastructure and affordability requirements New development that matches the City’s vision will require public subsidy Infrastructure investments will require coordination between public and private sectors Achieving the 20% housing affordability target is infeasible without public subsidy 6 Affordable Housing – Key Takeaways 2016 Framework Plan: Achieving goal requires substantial project-by-project subsidies Updated 2020 Financial Tool: Reaffirmed 2016 results. Most feasible development types are low- and mid-rise 100% affordable rental projects: In the OTC parking lot In adjacent neighborhoods, without requiring onsite units for condo buildings 7 Financial Model Tour 8 Model Multiple inputs allow for the creation of “policy scenarios” 9 Model Three buildout scenarios are modeled based on: (1) 2016 Plan; (2) Statesman PUD proposal & Crocket w/ site modifications, and (3) A hybrid Statesman PUD proposal limited to 2016 plan heights & modified Crocket site 10 Model Outputs show development feasibility, district feasibility gap, and affordable housing shortfall (if any) for the District for each set of “input scenarios” 11 Nine different scenarios are modeled for One Texas Center to consider options: • Rental / ownership • Low-Mid-High rise • 100% affordable / mixed-income Model 12 Includes summary of parcel-by-parcel performance, which can be compared to 2016 analysis Model 13 Affordable Housing 14 2016 Framework Plan Affordability 20% of housing should be income restricted 100% affordable building on the OTC parking lot Affordable …
Notice: This Draft 2 (April 13, 2020) document is believed to be compete and accurate but may be subject to further modification before the Final Draft version is ready for adoption. The Final Draft version of this document will replace the 2016 SCW Appendices I: Street Sections. 2020 Update: SCW Street Typology and Sections (draft 2: April 13, 2020) The update was produced by PAZ staff in cooperation with Austin Transportation Department (ATD), Public Works Department (PWD), and the Capitol Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Capitol Metro). The update incorporates latest ATD policies and best practices, accommodates the Project Connect Blue Line, and integrates recommendations from the Congress Avenue Urban Design Initiative. Significance: 1. This document forms the basis for updating cost estimation for all SCW streets and streetscapes – both for construction of new streets and for upgrades to existing streets. These costs are reflected in the 2020 Update to the SCW Physical Framework and Project Cost Estimates. 2. This document is referenced in the pending SCW Regulating Plan to identify requirements for the location, type, and design of new streets on redeveloped properties and for upgrades to existing public streets adjacent to redeveloped properties. Draft 2_April 13, 2020 DRAFT Street Key Map Waterfront Park (OS1) Crockett Square (OS4) C A 1 A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 EB1 EB2 EB3 EB4 C A 2 C1 C2 D1 D2 D3 M L 1 M L 2 Green Connector (OS2) ER1 ER2 E1 C A 3 S F 1 Barton Springs Rain Garden Plaza (OS5) Bouldin Creek/TSD Trail (OS3) WR1 S F 2 1 B W W R2 HA1 A D 2 2 B W AD1 TL1 TL2 S F 3 New Street Shared Street Street A Local streets Street B Street C Street D Street E Texas Loop A1, A2, A3 B1, B2, B3 C1, C2 D1, D2, D3 E1 TL1, TL2 Haywood Avenue HA1 Armadillo Drive AD1, AD2 Collector Streets East Barton Springs Rd EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 Moton Lane ML1, ML2 West Barton Springs Rd WB1, WB2 Core Transit South First Street SF1, SF2, SF3 Congress Avenue CA1, CA2, CA3 West Riverside Drive WR1, WR2 East Riverside Drive ER1, ER2 Draft 2 p.1 - 04/13/2020 DRAFT 6 Ty pical Street S ecti ons Shared Street Collector New - 2 Local Street Collector Existing Collector New - 1 Core Transit p.2 - 04/13/2020 DRAFT Streetscape Improvements S F 1 2 …
Notice for Packet 2: This Draft 2 (May 18, 2020) document is believed to be nearly complete and accurate except one needed technical update. This update is not expected to affect the overall project cost, or only very insignificantly. A Final Draft version will be issues, ready for adoption. The Final Draft version of these two documents will replace the 2016 SCW Appendices II: Detailed Cost Estimates. 2020 Update: SCW Physical Framework & Project Cost Estimates (draft 2: May 18, 2020) This document provides an update to the 2016 SCW Physical Framework Plan, following exactly the arrangement of streets and open spaces as proposed in the 2016 Illustrative Plan. This direct translation of the 2016 plan provides a basis for comparing proposed future modifications to the physical framework to the original 2016 plan. The cost estimations cover all components of the SCW Physical Framework (2040 buildout) including utilities infrastructure; streets and streetscapes for both new streets and improvements to existing streets; and the open space system (i.e., parks, trails, plazas, and other open spaces). This work was accomplished accordingly: • • Open Space Designs: This update includes schematic designs for four key open spaces in the SCW Plan, including the Park @ the Statesman site, the Green Connector, Crockett Plaza, and the Bouldin Trail @ the Texas School for the Deaf. The schematic open space designs were produced by PAZ consultants1, with additional review by Watershed Protection Department (WPD), Park & Recreation Department (PARD), PWD and others. These schematic designs provide details for accurate preliminary cost estimation and provide a benchmark for evaluating open space proposals that may be submitted as part of a development proposal. Cost Estimate Database: This database provides estimated costs for the complete physical framework as envisioned in the SCW Plan for buildout on both private and public lands. A cost estimating consultant2 provided estimates for all open space components. PWD, with support from City departments, supplied all cost estimates for streets/streetscapes/utilities. All costs are integrated into a single interactive database, created by PWD and PAZ. The database provides depth details for quantities, specifications, and direct costs3 for all components of the physical framework. Additionally, the database provides a generator for adding indirect costs4 for either a privately-built or publicly-built project. Costs reflect January 2020 dollars for Austin construction; however, the database is interactive and can be adjusted to account for inflation, unit price fluctuations, and …
