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 …
Notice for Packet 3: This Draft 2 (May 18, 2020) document is believed to be nearly complete and accurate except for needed corrections for inputs regarding at least one of the “tipping parcels.” These corrections are being addressed but the corrections are not available at the issuing of Draft 2. However, these corrections are likely to affect the overall district buildout projections in this draft by less than 2%. A Final Draft version will be issued, ready for adoption. 2020 Buildout Scenarios for Financial Analysis (draft 2: May 18, 2020) Within the physical framework of blocks and green infrastructure, the SCW Plan modeled potential building developments on properties in the district. This exercise involved creating site-specific building designs (i.e. schematic building footprints, sections, and heights) on specific properties. This exercise was completed for “tipping parcels” – that is, parcels that were envisaged for redevelopment for the financial analysis. When this original work was done in 2015-16, tipping parcels were determined by (1) evaluating likelihood of redeveloping within the next twenty years, based on land value to building value; (2) age of current development; and (3) owner’s willingness in having their property evaluated. In the 2016 and the 2020 Update Buildout scenarios, ten properties 1 were designated as “tipping properties,” collectively representing about half of the gross acreage of all private properties in the SCW district. For tipping parcels, a future potential development proposal was modeled with a site -specific building footprint, with an assumed potential building height, massing and program of uses (i.e., square feet of Office, Retail, Residential, Hotel), as well as a calculation to assign a parking requirement. Site-specific schematic designs included accommodating the parking demand, schematically designed in a combination of podium and below grade structures. The Buildout Scenarios are a key input into developing site-specific proforma analysis to test the financial feasibility of potential developments. Three Buildout Scenarios have been modeled: 2020 Update: SCW Plan Buildout: This is identical to the 2016 Buildout except that the 2016 Buildout factored in two future buildings that are entitled under existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreements. In the 2016 analysis, the buildout scenarios for parcels were incorporated into a proforma spreadsheet analysis to test the financial feasibility of a development on a property. In this new deliverable, the 2020 Update takes the 2016 buildout information only, minus the PUD properties, and consolidated it into a simpler table. The …
Notice for Packet 4: This Draft 2 (May 18, 2020) document is believed to be nearly complete and accurate except for needed corrections to update the Buildout Scenarios input (See notice for Packet 3). Once the updates to the Building Scenarios are complete, the corrected inputs to this document can be finalized. The impact of these pending corrections/additions should not change the overall district costs. Instead, these updates will change the calculation for impact fees associated with two “tippin g parcels.1” Although these needed adjustments may have noteworthy impacts to the individual parcel calculations , these adjustments should have minor impacts to the districtwide Baseline Development (i.e., impact fees) that are part of this document. Nonetheless, staff will make needed corrections and issue a Final Draft of this document in time for the June SCWAB meeting. PHYSICAL FRAMEWORK FUNDING SOURCES This new single-source document consolidates and refines information that was previously embedded in the Physical Framework and Project Costs Estimates. To provide more clarity and functionality, this new document draws from information that has now been updated in Draft 2 of the Physical Framework and Project Costs Estimates spreadsheets, and Draft 2 of the SCW Buildout Scenario for Financial Analysis spreadsheets. Using information linked to those sources, this new document does two things: (1) It tabulates all Physical Framework and Project Costs for the full district, and (2) It identifies potential sources of funding for addressing those costs. Drawing from the Physical Framework and Project Cost Estimates spreadsheets, this new document tabulates potential funding that has been identified as within existing Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) and estimates from what utilities might contribute for service extensions. What is new in this document is how the contributions from “Baseline Development” are calculated. For this document, “Baseline Development” are costs that new development might be expected to cover through contributions, either in-kind or in fee, for Physical Framework improvements in the district. Baseline Development is a contribution that would be expected before consideration of “Bonus Fee” requirements. What is new in this document is how Baseline Development contributions are calculated. This document uses existing and pending City policy and methodology to calculate impact fees. Staff has coordinated with the following City departments to estimates impact fees as follows: Coordinated with Austin Transportation Department (ATD) to use the methodology from the Street Impact Fee Study Report to calculate the developer’s baseline contribution (before-bonus …
South Central Waterfront Advisory Board Project Updates & Communications from Staff To: From: Alan Holt, Principal Planner; Planning & Zoning Date: May 18, 2020 RE: 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 updated deliverables: Package 1: 2020 Updated: SCW Street Typology and Sections (draft 2: April 18, 2020) 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. Packet 2: This packet combines two previous draft deliverables, both of which provide detailed cost estimates for the proposed SCW Physical Framework (streets, streetscapes, open spaces, utilities infrastructure) at full buildout (2040). The two documents include: 2020 Updated: SCW Physical Framework & Project Costs Estimates (draft 2: May 18, 2020) Changes from the draft 1: March 12, 2020 version: a. Adjust cost for Armadillo Drive from a Collector 1 Street to a Local Street (very small cost impact) b. Correct costs for open spaces inputs for direct costs (construction costs) only. c. Inclusion of a pie chart to show total district project costs as allocated into components (e.g., Open Space, Streetscape Improvements, etc.) 2020 SCW Modified Physical Framework & Project Costs Estimates (draft 2: May 18, 2020) Changes from the draft 1: March 12, 2020 version: a. Ditto from 2ai b. Ditto from 2aii c. Ditto from 2aiii Package 3: SCW Buildout Scenarios for Financial Analysis (draft 2: May 18, 2020). Changes from draft 1: March 16, 2020 version: 2020 Updated Buildout: a. Revised district framework map showing proposed bonus building heights for all “tipping parcels” from the SCW Plan. b. Summary table of modeled entitlements (heights and uses) for all “tipping …
URBAN RENEWAL BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20200518-2.a Seconded By: Vice-Chair Evans Date: May 18, 2020 Subject: Negotiation and execution of Amendment No. 1, to the Agreement Concerning Implementation of the East 11th and 12th Streets Urban Renewal Plan with the City of Austin to include an 18-month renewal with an expiration date of September 30, 2021, relating to roles, responsibilities and processes for the redevelopment of the East 11th and 12th Street Revitalization Project. Motioned By: Commissioner Watson Recommendation Authorize the negotiation and execution of Amendment No. 1, to the Agreement Concerning Implementation of the East 11th and 12th Streets Urban Renewal Plan with the City of Austin -to include an 18-month renewal with an expiration date of September 30, 2021, relating to roles, responsibilities and processes for the redevelopment of the East 11th and 12th Street Revitalization Project. Vote For: 7 Against: Abstain: 0 Absent: Attest: Sandra Harkins, Board Liaison 0 0 1 of 1 5/18/2020
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 RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, on March 6, 2020, the City of Austin and Travis County both declared a local state of disaster due to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and issued measures to reduce the possibility of exposure and promote the health and safety of City of Austin/Travis County residents; and WHEREAS, On March 13, 2020, Governor Abbott declared a state of disaster for all Texas counties due to the spread of COVID-19; and WHEREAS, in alignment with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and advice from local health authorities, subsequent executive orders in the City of Austin, Travis County, Williamson County, and the State of Texas have limited business operations and human social interactions to protect and promote public health; and WHEREAS, these and other necessary measures taken by jurisdictions across the United States and the world to control the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic have limited public interactions, closed schools and businesses, and resulted in economic uncertainty that has left an unprecedented number of Austin residents facing unemployment or underemployment; and WHEREAS, since the beginning of the crisis, the City Council of the City of Austin has responded to this through several actions , including Ordinance No. 20200326-090 and Resolution Nos. 20200326-091, 20200326-092, 20200409-079, 20200409-081, 20200409-086, and 20200423-040 each of which respond to needs of Austin residents amid the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, and open a path toward relief in economic strain for individuals and businesses during this crisis; and 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 WHEREAS, the City has been able to launch several programs to date, however, currently launched programs have already received more requests for assistance than there are available funds; and WHEREAS, on March 27, 2020, the CARES Act, was signed into law, which authorized $2 trillion in federal economic relief through a stimulus infusion into housing and public health programs, as well as direct financial assistance and additional unemployment benefits to individuals, allocating $170 million to the City of Austin with an additional tens of millions to our partner counties; and WHEREAS, on April 22, 2020, federal guidelines for expending the CARES Act funding were released, helping to lay out the …
CULTURAL ARTS PROGRAM FUNDING – HOTEL O CCUPAN CY TAX ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MAY 18, 2020 C I T Y O F A U S T I N E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 2 C I T Y O F A U S T I N E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 3 C I T Y O F A U S T I N E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 4 C I T Y O F A U S T I N E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 5 DRAFT DRAFT Cultural Arts Fund Beginning Balance 4,518,915 3,215,422 2,960,636 1,758,364 (1,564,286) Revenue Interest Total Revenue Transfers In Other Funds Convention Center Total Transfers In Total Available Funds Program Requirements 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 2020-21* Actual Actual Estimated Amended Proposed 56,500 56,500 70,152 70,152 38,500 38,500 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 11,231,717 12,639,480 8,245,008 11,880,629 9,304,634 0 0 0 3,144,447 0 11,231,717 12,639,480 8,245,008 15,025,076 9,304,634 11,288,217 12,709,631 8,283,508 15,050,076 9,329,634 Cultural Arts and Contracts 12,677,444 13,001,908 12,808,430 12,808,430 Total Program Requirements 12,677,444 13,001,908 12,808,430 12,808,430 6,835,302 6,835,302 Total Requirements 12,677,444 13,001,908 12,808,430 12,808,430 6,835,302 Excess (Deficiency) of Total Available Funds Over Total Requirem ents Adjustment to GAAP Ending Balance No te: Numbers may no t add due to ro unding. (1,389,227) (292,277) (4,524,922) 2,241,646 2,494,332 85,734 37,491 0 0 0 3,215,422 2,960,636 (1,564,286) 4,000,010 930,046 ** **PLEASE NOTE: The Proposed FY21 ending balances reflects a 10% reserve. EDD is working with the Budget Office to identify additional revenue for FY21 that will allow for level funding. C I T Y O F A U S T I N E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 6 QUESTIONS? C I T Y O F A U S T I N E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 7
Austin Police FY2020-21 Preliminary Proposed Budget May 18, 2020 City of Austin, TX Police Department Budget Overview FY2021 Preliminary Proposed Budget FY2021 Preliminary Proposed Budget $446.8 Million* FY2021 Positions 1,989 Sworn 737 Civilian Police FY2021 Preliminary Proposed Budget Highlights Personnel Cost Drivers Interfund Transfers Contract & Operating Increases Capital & Non-Capital Replacement Items $9.6M $802K $1.3M $641K Total $12.3M* or 2.8% *Estimate: The FY2021 Budget Forecast is still under development, pending CM review and City Council approval. Council Initiatives & Other Budget Items Under Review Addressing Violent Crime in Austin Cadet Salary Increase 4 Civilian FTEs Records Management System Replacement $1.5M Helicopter Replacement Total $5.5M $1.5M $406K $1.3M $10.2M Police Sworn Attrition Rate by Month for FY 2016-2020 APD Sworn Attrition Rate by Month for FY16-FY20 October November December January February March April May June July August September YTD Totals: October - March April - September Annual Average FY2016 2 3 9 5 3 4 5 2 8 11 4 7 63 4.3 6.2 5.3 FY2017 5 3 9 3 6 6 4 5 3 11 8 11 74 5.3 7.0 6.2 FY2018 1 6 33 6 2 11 8 1 5 9 3 6 91 9.8 5.3 7.6 FY2019 9 12 9 10 2 5 5 3 1 8 6 9 79 7.8 5.3 6.6 FY2020 7 5 9 18 19 5 11 74 10.5 Police Cadet Classes 141st 142nd M 143rd 144th 145th 146th 147th 148th M Orientation 5/21/2019 9/17/2019 1/21/2020 6/22/2020 10/12/2020 2/1/2021 5/24/2021 9/13/2021 Start Date 6/24/2019 10/14/2019 2/18/2020 7/20/2020 11/9/2020 3/1/2021 6/21/2021 10/11/2021 Graduation 1/31/2020 1/31/2020 9/25/2020 2/26/2021 6/18/2021 10/8/2021 2/4/2022 2/4/2022 Police Sworn Position Justifications City Council Resolution No. 20181213-043 acknowledges the APD Chief’s recommended staffing plan for sworn personnel and recognizes the staffing plan as a core component for consideration in FY2020 and subsequent budget proposals and sets a goal and commitment to approve future budgets that address sworn officer staffing with the aim of meeting public safety outcomes outlined in SD20203. If the 30 Sworn positions (6 months funded) are removed from the Fy2021 budget, it impedes APD’s ability to recruit and plan for the 147th, 148th and future cadet classes . 6 of the Sworn positions are specifically authorized for Investigations (Detective positions), so the removal of those positions affects the workload, investigation and clearance rates of …
David Carroll, Chair Martha Gonzales, Vice Chair Melissa Henao-Robledo Aan Coleman Beau Frail Samuel Franco Ben Luckens Josue Meiners Jessica Rollason Evan Taniguchi Bart Whatley Jorge Rousselin, Executive Liaison Aaron D. Jenkins Staff Liaison Patrick Colunga City of Austin Design Commission DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20200518-01A Josue Meiners Seconded By: David Carroll Design Commission recommendation for the Tower 5C project, located at 415 Colorado Street. Date: May 20, 2020 Subject: Motioned By: Recommendation: The City of Austin Design Commission recommends that the Tower 5C project, located at 415 Colorado Street, as presented on May 18, 2020, substantially complies with the city’s Urban Design Guidelines. The Commissions further recommends that the ground floor lobby retail space is open to the public and not reserved for solely for the building users. Rationale: Dear Director of Planning and Zoning Dept., This letter is to confirm the Design Commission’s recommendation that the Tower 5C project, located at 415 Colorado Street, as presented on May 18, 2020 substantially complies with the Urban Design Guidelines as one of the gatekeeper requirements of the Downtown Density Bonus Program. Our review found the following: 1. The lobby retail space will serve to energize the ground floor as long as it is open to the public. 2. The proposed outdoor space, and landscaping, will activate the streetscape. 3. Above ground parking is mechanically ventilated and completely hidden behind glass façade. 4. Additional comments can be found in the Planning & Urban Design Working Group Memo, dated March 4, 2020. Respectfully, City of Austin Design Commission Vote: For: David Carroll, Aan Coleman, Evan Taniguchi, Melissa Henao-Robledo, Josue Meiners, Samuel Franco, Beau 7 - 0 - 0 Frail Against: None Absent: Bart Whatley, Martha Gonzalez, Ben Luckens, Jessica Rollason Attest: David Carroll, Chair of the Design Commission 1 of 1 Design Commission - Recommendation for 5th and Colorado Page 1
David Carroll, Chair Martha Gonzales, Vice Chair Melissa Henao-Robledo Aan Coleman Beau Frail Samuel Franco Ben Luckens Josue Meiners Jessica Rollason Evan Taniguchi Bart Whatley Jorge Rousselin, Executive Liaison Aaron D. Jenkins Staff Liaison Patrick Colunga City of Austin Design Commission DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20200518-01B Date: May 20, 2020 Subject: Design Commission recommendation for the Travis County Fire/EMS Station project located at 5410 W. Hwy 290 Service Road. Aan Coleman Seconded By: Beau Frail Motioned By: Recommendation: The City of Austin Design Commission recommends that the Travis County Fire/EMS Station project, located at 5410 W. Hwy 290 Service Road, as presented on May 18, 2020, conforms with City Design Standards. This recommendation comes with the stipulation that 1) the proposed public sidewalk, leading from the Service Road to the building, is relocated further west away from the private drive where it will provide safer access for pedestrians and 2) that shade trees be appropriately placed along the length of this sidewalk. Rationale: This letter is to confirm the Design Commission’s support of the Travis County Fire/EMS Station project, located at 5410 W. Hwy 290 Service Road, as presented on May 18, 2020. Our review found the following: 1. The landscape design, and meadow restoration, provides a nice amenity for building users as well as the future users of the planned urban trail. 2. The project will not increase the existing impervious cover. 3. The project proposes to reduce the number of existing curb cuts on the Service Road. Respectfully, City of Austin Design Commission Vote: For: David Carroll, Aan Coleman, Evan Taniguchi, Melissa Henao-Robledo, Josue Meiners, Samuel Franco, Beau 7 - 0 - 0 Frail Absent: Bart Whatley, Martha Gonzalez, Ben Luckens, Jessica Rollason Attest: David Carroll, Chair of the Design Commission 1 of 1 Design Commission - Recommendation for the Travis County Fire/EMS Station Page 1
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20200518-002 May 18, 2020 Recommendation that Council Approve Austin Fire Department Budget Requests Date: Subject: Motioned by: Rebecca Webber Seconded by: Kathleen Hausenfluck Recommendation: The Public Safety Commission recommends that the Austin Fire Department budget should include: (1) overtime to cover Operations backfill, (2) adding a third Cadet class, and (3) funds for maintenance of the Records Management Software. Description of Recommendation to Council: The Austin Public Safety Commission is tasked with reviewing public safety agency budgets and providing recommendations to the Austin City Council. The Austin Fire Department provided backup materials and a briefing in the March 2020 Public Safety Commission on budget requests. The Public Safety Commission found that the Records Management Software for Austin Fire Department requires maintenance at this time. The Public Safety Commission found that a third Cadet class is needed to attain necessary staffing levels. The Public Safety Commission found that the Austin Fire Department needs additional overtime budget allocations to address staffing challenges. Therefore, The Public Safety Commission recommends that the Austin Fire Department includes the following items in the budget submitted to the Austin City Council: 1. $3.8 million for overtime to address Operations backfill. 2. $818,000 to add a third Cadet training class. 3. $225,000 for maintenance of the Austin Fire Department Records Management Software. 4. $1.6 million to add staffing for additional aerial apparatus. This recommendation was made and approved by City Council for the FY20 budget. This item needs to be added back to the FY21 budget. The Public Safety Commission also recommends that the Austin City Council funds these items in the budget. Rationale: The Public Safety Commission has reviewed the requests from the Austin Fire Department for additions to the budget for the three items outlined above in the March, May, and May Special Called meetings of the Public Safety Commission. The additional staffing for the additional aerial apparatus was approved in the FY20 budget. Funding of this item was delayed multiple times and is no longer included in the budget. The Public Safety Commission is recommending that this funding is incorporated in the FY21 budget. This recommendation was made and approved by City Council for the FY20 budget. Vote: For: Meghan Hollis Rebecca Webber William (Bill) Kelly Rebecca Bernhardt Chris Harris Kathleen Hausenfluck Daniela Nunez Selena Alvarenga Against: Abstain: Absent: Rebecca Gonzales Attest: [Staff or board member can sign] __________________________________
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20200518-004 Part 4 May 18, 2020 Recommendation that Council Approves $1.5 million to replace the current Date: Subject: Records Management System at the Austin Police Department Motioned by: Meghan Hollis – Motion was to vote individually on each of the five budget requests; therefore, each individual vote will be presented as a separate recommendation under this motion. Seconded by: Selena Alvarenga Recommendation: The Public Safety Commission recommends that the Austin Police Department budget should include funding to replace the existing Records Management System and that Council should approve this funding. Description of Recommendation to Council: The Austin Public Safety Commission is tasked with reviewing public safety agency budgets and providing recommendations to the Austin City Council. The Austin Police Department provided backup materials and a briefing in the March 2020 Public Safety Commission on budget requests. The Public Safety Commission recommends that the Austin Police Department include the $1.5 million for replacing the current Records Management System (RMS) in their current budget and that Council funds this budget item. Rationale: The Public Safety Commission has reviewed the requests from the Austin Police Department for additions to the budget for the item above in the March, May, and May Special Called meetings of the Public Safety Commission. The Austin Police Department is requesting $1.5 million to replace the current Records Management System which is 15 years old. The technology with this system is antiquated and results in excessive time spent on officer report writing, as well as, system maintenance down- time. Commissioners find that a new records management system will aid in records retention improvements, and will make it easier to extract data and link data across datasets for better and more timely data analysis. This will allow improvements in APD’s capacity to make data-driven decisions. Vote: For: Meghan Hollis Rebecca Webber William (Bill) Kelly Rebecca Bernhardt Kathleen Hausenfluck Daniela Nunez Selena Alvarenga Against: Abstain: Chris Harris Absent: Rebecca Gonzales Attest: [Staff or board member can sign] __________________________________
