From: To: Subject: Date: Grant Thomas, Jr. Fahnestock, Sam 4110 Avenue F: HR case # 2024-043920 Saturday, April 20, 2024 5:15:12 PM You don't often get email from Learn why this is important External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Mr.Fahnestock: Greetings from Avenue F! My wife and I have lived at 4106 Avenue F in Hyde Park ever since we moved to Austin in 1976; and during those years, we have seen and participated in a dramatic transformation; as a once-shoddy dump has turned into a vibrant, attractive model neighborhood. Among the important contributors to that transformation has been the Osborne family, which has been our next-door neighbor since moving here in 2015. In addition to being wonderful neighbors, the Osbornes have a keen appreciation of the special character of the neighborhood. Most recently, this appreciation has been evident in their proposed project at the rear of their property. We have had an opportunity to review various iterations of their plans over the past year, and we appreciate the care that has been taken with the design. Thus we encourage your positive consideration of their proposed plan. Sincerely, Grant and Margot Thomas, 4106 Ave. F CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov."
From: To: Subject: Date: Jill Nokes Fahnestock, Sam Re: Case Number: HR-2024-043920 Tuesday, April 23, 2024 4:07:34 PM [You don't often get email from https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] . Learn why this is important at External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Mr. Fahnestock, I am a neighbor of Mike Osborn and his wife Meggie. My husband and I have lived at 4200 Avenue F, just 2 houses north of the Osborns, for over 30 years, and we raised our family here. Incidentally, our home is also a historic landmark. We have known Mike’s family since they moved in 2015, and find them to be good neighbors and very considerate. Mike showed me the architect's rendering and modeling of their proposed addition, which gave me a good idea of the massing of the addition and the view from the street. It appeared to me to be in scale of the original house, and in the back arranged to be in consideration of the trees, as well as a practical use of the space without overwhelming the lot. Therefore, I am in favor of granting them a building permit so that their family can enjoy staying in the neighborhood with the space they need. Please feel free to contact me with further questions. Sincerely, Jill Nokes 512-296-1188 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov."
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS MAY 1, 2024 HR-2023-043027 TRAVIS HEIGHTS-FAIRVIEW PARK NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT 1409 ALTA VISTA AVENUE 10 – 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1926 house. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH One-story Craftsman with horizontal wood siding, screened wood windows, decorative shutters, a hooded entryway with decorative brackets, and a clipped-gable roof. The house at 1409 Alta Vista Avenue was built around 1926. Until 1947, its occupants were mostly short-term owners and renters, including an engineer, a state highway inspector, an office manager, and a mechanic. The home was then purchased by Frank and Lura Connolly. Frank Connolly was the editor, owner, and publisher of the Texas Tax Journal, while Lura worked both at the journal and as a Red Cross nurse. The Connollys sold the home in the late 1950s to Anna and William Duncum. William Duncum worked as a public school teacher. PROPERTY EVALUATION The property contributes to the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain high integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff has evaluated the property and determined that it does not meet two criteria: a. Architecture. The building is a good example of modest Craftsman architecture in Travis Heights. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations. c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The property does not appear to possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e. Landscape feature. The property does not appear to be a significant natural or designed landscape with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Strongly encourage adaptive reuse and rehabilitation, then relocation over demolition, but release the demolition permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. The Historic Landmark Commission must review plans for new construction in National Register Historic Districts before the permit is released. LOCATION MAP 10 – 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos 10 – 3 10 – 4 Application, 2023 1952 Frank R. & Lura J. Connolly – Texas Tax Journal Publication Co., Littlefield Bldg. Occupancy History City …
Commission for Women REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, April 3rd , 2024 The Commission for Women convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, April 3rd , 2024, at Austin City Hall, Boards and Commission Room-1101 301 West 2nd Street, Austin, Texas, 78701 Vice- Chair Tau called the Commission for Women Meeting to order at 12:11p.m. Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance: Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Jocelyn Tau, Vice Chair Angela Harris Becky Bullard Katrina Scheihing Rebecca Austen Diana Melendez, Chair Vanessa Bissereth Pam Rattan Josephine Serrata Staff in Attendance: Julie Glasser Maria Veloz Salas Board Members/Commissioners Absent: Tabitha Taylor, Office of Civil Rights Christi Vitela, City Clerk’s Office Alejandra Mireles, City of Austin, Equity Office 1 PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL NONE APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Commission for Women regular meeting on March 6th, 2024. The minutes from the meeting were approved at the April 3rd, 2024 meeting on Commissioner Tau’s motion and seconded by Commission Scheihing (6-0) vote. Commissioners Glasser and Melendez were absent from the vote. Commissioners Bissereth, Rattan and Serrata were absent from the meeting. DISCUSSION 2. Presentation: Highlights from the 68th Annual Commission on the Status of Women at the United Nations, Cristina Ayala, CA Consulting, Strategies & Management, Principal Discussion was held. 3. Quality-of-Life Study Status Update, Alejandra Mireles, Community Services Coordinator, City of Austin Equity Office Discussion was held. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 4. Approve Commission for Women’s Hall of Fame Plan and Recognition Date Discussion was held. WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES 5. Updates from the Joint Inclusion Committee (JIC) regarding upcoming collaborative 6. Update from Working Group on Recognition of Equity for Women and Girls regarding opportunities within the community Discussion was held. recognition plan candidate selection process. Discussion was held. 7. Update from Working Group on Quality-of-Life Study regarding the progression of the Quality Life Study Discussion was held. Discussion was held. 8. Update from Working Group on FY2025 Budget regarding funding allocations. 9. Update from Working Group on Joint Collective Sex Crime Response Model (CSCRM) Project regarding current financial allocations and project needs. Discussion was held. 2 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Commission for Women Elections Austin Police Department: Neighborhood Liaison Homeless Strategy Office ADJOURNMENT Vice-Chair Tau adjourned the meeting at 12:58 p.m. without objection. The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations …
Regular Meeting of the Environmental Commission May 1, 2024 at 6:00 PM Permitting And Development Center, Events Center, Room 1405 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive Austin, Texas 78752 Some members of the Environmental Commission will be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, call or email Elizabeth Funk, Watershed Protection Department, at (512) 568-2244, Elizabeth.Funk@austintexas.gov no later than noon, the day before the meeting. The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). Colin Nickells Jennifer Bristol, Secretary David Sullivan Richard Brimer Perry Bedford, Vice Chair CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Haris Qureshi Peter Einhorn Mariana Krueger Melinda Schiera Hanna Cofer AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. 1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES PUBLIC HEARINGS Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on March 20, 2024 and the Special Called Meeting on March 28, 2024. Name: Bridle Ridge at Wildhorse Ranch, C8-2023-0259 Applicant: Kimley Horn (Kevin Burks) Location: 10501 ½ Blue Bluff Rd, Austin, TX 78653 Council District: District 1 Staff: Pamela Abee-Taulli, Environmental Program Coordinator, Development Services Department Applicant request: Request to vary from a) 25-8-341 to allow cut over four (4) feet, to 15 feet and b) 25-8-342 to allow fill over four (4) feet, to 15 feet. Staff recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variances with conditions DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 3. Approve a recommendation on an ordinance amending City Code Title 25 related to development regulations applicable to residential re-subdivisions and multi-family residential site development of five to sixteen units – Brent Lloyd, Development Officer, Development Services Department Election of Environmental Commission Officers for the May 1, 2024 through April 30, 2025 term. Approve a recommendation supporting the City Council’s code resolutions for Home 2 (allowing 2,000 …
in a REGULAR meeting on ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR CALLED MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, March 20, 2024 The ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION convened Wednesday, March 20, 2024, at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Vice Chair Bedford called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Perry Bedford, Richard Brimer, Jennifer Bristol, Hanna Cofer, Colin Nickells, and David Sullivan Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Mariana Krueger Commissioners Absent: Peter Einhorn, Haris Qureshi, Melinda Schiera, and Kevin Ramberg PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Santiago, I35 projects Shiang Lee, How You Can Benefit from the Inflation Reduction Act APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on March 6, 2024 The minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular meeting on March 6, 2024 were approved on Commissioner Sulivan’s motion, Commissioner Brimer’s second on a 7-0 vote. Commissioners Einhorn, Ramberg, Qureshi, and Schiera were absent. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Presentation on the South Central Waterfront Combining District with a Density Bonus – April Geruso of the City of Austin Planning Department. Speakers: April Geruso, Planning Department Vice Chair Bedford called for a recess at 6:39. Vice Chair Bedford reconvened the meeting at 6:47. 1 3. 4. Chad Sharrad, Planning Department Tyler Tripp, Planning Department Item conducted as posted. No action taken. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 2. Consider a recommendation on the budget recommendations from the Joint Sustainability Committee – Presented by Haris Qureshi and David Sullivan, Environmental Commission Members A motion to support the budget recommendations from the Joint Sustainability Committee was approved on Commissioner Sullivan’s motion, Commissioner Brimer’s second on a 6-0 vote. Commissioner Nickells abstained. Commissioners Einhorn, Ramberg, Qureshi, and Schiera were absent. COMMITTEE UPDATES Update from the Urban Forestry Committee on adding a discussion on ghost trees to the March 28th agenda – Richard Brimer Item conducted as posted. No action taken. Update from the South Central Waterfront Advisory Board on the status of the Combining District & Density Bonus Program and Planned Unit Development applications – David Sullivan Item conducted as posted. No action taken. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Sullivan wanted to discuss IH35 and requested a presentation from staff on the environmental impacts of the IH35 expansion and the benefits of capping, seconded by Commissioner Brimer. Commissioner Bristol requested a presentation from Audubon on bird-safe buildings, which was seconded by Commissioner Bedford. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chair Bedford adjourned the meeting at 7:50 P.M. 2
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SPECIAL CALLED MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 2024 The ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION convened in a SPECIAL CALLED meeting on Thursday, March 28, 2024 at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas 78752. Vice Chair Bedford called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Perry Bedford, Rick Brimer, Peter Einhorn, Melinda Schiera Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Hanna Cofer, Mariana Krueger, David Sullivan Commissioners Absent: Jennifer Bristol, Haris Qureshi, Colin Nickells, Kevin Ramberg PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 1. Presentation on Watershed Protection Department's Fiscal Year 2024 Budget, Programs, and Projects Overview and approve recommendations for their FY25 budget — Anupa Gharpurey, Financial Manager, and Pam Kearfott, Managing Engineer, Watershed Protection Department Speakers: Jorge Morales, Director, Watershed Protection Department Anupa Gharpurey, Financial Manager, Watershed Protection Department Pam Kearfott, Managing Engineer, Watershed Protection Department A motion to make recommendations for Watershed Protection’s Fiscal year 2025 budget was approved on Commissioner Bedford’s motion, Commissioner Einhorn’s second on a 7-0 vote. Commissioners Bristol, Qureshi, Nickells, and Ramberg were absent. Vice Chair Bedford adjourned the meeting at 7:11 p.m. without objection. 1
Pamela Abee-Taulli Environmental Program Coordinator Development Services Department BRIDLE RIDGE AT WILDHORSE RANCH 10501 ½ BLUE BLUFF RD C8-2023-0259 PROJECT LOCATION Site Location Austin ETJ Austin City Limits Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone 2 This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. It does not represent an on-the- ground survey and represents only the approximate relative location of property boundaries. This product has been produced by the Watershed Protection Department for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is made by the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness. 0510Miles[ PROPERTY DATA • Gilleland Creek Watershed • Suburban Classification • Desired Development Zone • Austin Full Purpose Jurisdiction • Council District 1 • Wildhorse Ranch Planned Unit Development (PUD) 3 [ PROJECT DATA • Single family residential development with roadways and storm water ponds. • 21.4 acres [ ENVIRONMENTAL DATA • Wetland Critical Environmental Features (CEF) • Critical Water Quality Zone (CWQZ) CEF CWQZ [ ENVIRONMENTAL DATA • Wetland Critical Environmental Features (CEF) • Critical Water Quality Zone (CWQZ) • Slopes • 86% of the site is 0-15% slopes, but very hilly CEF CWQZ 2-foot contours [ ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CWQZ [ VARIANCE REQUESTS 8 § 25-8-341 - CUT REQUIREMENTS. (A) Cuts on a tract of land may not exceed four feet of depth. • The variance request is to allow cut over 4 feet to15 feet. § 25-8-342 - FILL REQUIREMENTS. (A) fill on a tract of land may not exceed four feet of depth. • The variance request is to allow fill over 4 feet to 15 feet. VARIANCE REQUESTS [ VARIANCE RECOMMENDATION • Variances for grading have been granted for projects with similar site constraints, specifically topographic conditions that constrain the ability to comply with transportation and ADA regulations. • The variance • • • Is necessitated by topographic features, not design choice; Is the minimum deviation from the code; and Is unlikely to result in harmful environmental consequences. • Water quality will be equal to water quality without the variance. 10 VARIANCE CONDITIONS 1. Slope stabilization for areas of existing erosion adjacent to the lots, will be provided with grouted rip-rap or approved equivalent method. [ VARIANCE CONDITIONS 2. Slope stabilization in area of cut over 8 feet will be provided by terracing, 25 feet at 15% grade …
ITEM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AGENDA COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 1, 2024 NAME & NUMBER OF PROJECT: Bridle Ridge at Wildhorse Ranch C8-2023-0259 NAME OF APPLICANT OR ORGANIZATION: Kimley Horn (Kevin Burks) LOCATION: 10501 ‰ BLUE BLUFF RD, Austin, TX 78653 COUNCIL DISTRICT: District One ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STAFF: Pamela Abee-Taulli, Environmental Program Coordinator Development Services Department 512.974.1879 / pamela.abee-taulli@austintexas.gov WATERSHED: REQUEST: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: STAFF CONDITIONS: Gilleland Creek Watershed, Suburban Classification, Desired Development Zone Variance request is as follows: Request to vary from: 1) 25-8-341 to allow cut over four (4) feet, to 15 feet. 2) 25-8-342 to allow fill over four (4) feet, to 15 feet. Staff recommends this variance, having determined the findings of fact to have been met. 1. Slope stabilization for areas of existing erosion adjacent to the lots, will be provided with grouted rip-rap or approved equivalent method. 2. Slope stabilization in area of cut over 8 feet will be provided by terracing, 25 feet at 15% grade and 20 feet at 5% grade, and revegetation with native grasses and forbs (per Standard Specifications Manual 609S.5). 3. Fill over 8 feet will be contained with engineered walls. 4. The water quality ponds will be biofiltration ponds. Page 1 of 15 Development Services Department Staff Recommendations Concerning Required Findings Project Name: Bridle Ridge at Wildhorse Ranch Ordinance Standard: Comprehensive Watershed Ordinance and Wildhorse Ranch Planned Unit Development (PUD) Variance Request: Request to vary from: 1) 25-8-341 to allow cut over four (4) feet, to 15 feet. 2) 25-8-342 to allow fill over four (4) feet, to 15 feet. A. Land Use Commission variance determinations from Chapter 25-8-41 of the City Code: 1. The requirement will deprive the applicant of a privilege or the safety of property given to owners of other similarly situated property with approximately contemporaneous development; Other owners with similarly situate properties and contemporaneous development Yes have received similar variances for grading. Turner’s Crossing (C8J-2018-0091) with cut and fill to 15 feet, Northwind Apartments (SP-2021-0384C.SH) with cut to 12 and fill to 17 feet, and Blueridge Multifamily at Wildhorse Ranch (SP-2022-0426C.SH) with cut to 12 and fill to 10 feet, are all residential projects on sites with rolling topography generally within the 0-15% slope category. In order to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requiring 2% cross slope at intersection crosswalks on the local and collector roadways, and to meet Transportation Criteria Manual (TCM) …
Infill Plats & Site Plan Lite, Part 2: Overview of Staff Proposal Codes & Ordinances Joint Committee | April 1, 2024 Brent Lloyd, DSD Development Officer Agenda Items • Discuss proposed code amendments for: 1. Infill Plats 2. Site Plan Lite, Part 2 • Questions & Answers Infill Plats Subdivision Overview Subdivision Plats • The division of land into one or more lots for the purpose of sale, transfer, development, or extension of utilities. • Unless an exception applies, only land within an approved subdivision plat may be developed. • Infrastructure and amenities dedicated at subdivision serve multiple lots, which can then be developed independently. — Commercial & Residential Subdivisions Subdivision Overview (cont’d) Subdivision Types and Order of Process • Preliminary Plan • Final Plat • Subdivision Construction Plans • Re-subdivision Effect of Subdivision on Residential Development • “Fee Simple” Ownership vs. “Condominium Regimes” Greenfield Subdivision Subdivision Construction Plan - Build Infrastructure Residential Subdivision Infill Plats – Challenges • In the platting context, “infill” is the re- subdivision of lots in existing single-family subdivisions into new, smaller lots. • Current regulations, particularly drainage & water quality, are tailored to greenfield subdivisions rather than residential infill. Infill Plat Process - Council Direction Goals of Resolution No. 20230504-023: • Establish an efficient process to create infill lots within residential subdivisions, thereby facilitating fee-simple ownership and small-lot development form. • Right-size regulations to the scale and intensity of infill development. • Explore making waivers and variances administrative. • Include other changes to facilitate creation of infill lots. Subdivision-Related Improvements Adopted in 2023 Ordinance No. 20230831-141 • Eliminated commission approvals for plats, which means all applications without variances may be approved by staff. • Streamlined application submittal requirements. • Extended application deadlines. • Modified flag lot regulations. Summary of Infill Plat Proposal Response to Resolution No. 20230504-023 • Targeted changes to regulations for residential resubs. aimed at: — Making the process more efficient and less costly for small-lot developments that are comparable in scale & intensity to development currently permitted under HOME 1. — Ensuring that drainage requirements are: Right-sized to infill development Sufficient to ensure that development does not increase risk of lot-to-lot flooding. Infill Plat Proposal (cont’d) Drainage Plan In-Lieu of Onsite Detention & Drainage Studies • For resubdivisions of platted residential lots, onsite detention & drainage studies would not be required for development that: — Does not exceed: (b) …
C20-2023-045 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET Amendment: C20-2023-045 Site Plan Lite, Phase 2 & Infill Plats Description: These proposed amendments to respond to separate council initiatives: Resolution No. 20221201-048 (“Site Plan Lite”) and Resolution No. 20230504-023 (“Infill Plats”). The amendments, which will be included in a single ordinance, facilitate development of missing middle housing. Background: — Site Plan Lite Phase 2 On December 1, 2022, City Council approved Resolution No. 20221201-048 initiating Land Development Code (“LDC”) amendments to facilitate the creation of missing middle housing by scaling site plan review requirements for residential projects of three to sixteen units. As Phase 1 of the project, Council adopted Ordinance No. 20230720-158 on July 20, 2023, creating a site plan exemption for projects having four or fewer residential units. For a few months following passage of the ordinance, DSD required projects utilizing the new process to obtain formal “site plan exemptions,” which is an added step beyond obtaining a residential building permit. Following passage of the initial HOME amendments, which modified the definition of “multi-family,” DSD now routes projects of one to three units directly to residential review without requiring a site plan exemption. These proposed amendments would complete Council’s direction from Resolution No. 20221201-048 by establishing a more streamlined review process for projects of 5 to 16 units located on a single lot. — Infill Plats On May 4, 2023, Council approved Resolution No. 20230504-023 initiating LDC amendments to facilitate the creation of infill lots within existing residential subdivisions, with the goal of expanding opportunities for “fee simple” ownership and easing the impact of non-zoning regulations on residential re-subdivisions. The proposed amendments would achieve this objective by modifying non-zoning regulations for infill development, thereby establishing a more streamlined review process. Summary of Proposed Code Amendment: 1 Below is a general summary of amendments proposed to implement the Infill Plat and Site Plan Lite resolutions. C20-2023-045 Modified Drainage Regulations I. — Background LDC Sec. 25-8-211(B)(3) exempts development with up to 8,000 square feet of impervious cover from the requirement to provide water quality controls on sites located outside of the Barton Springs Zone. However, the code provides no similar exemption for drainage regulations. This means that infill re-subdivisions and small-scale site plans are required to meet detention standards similar to those required for large-scale multi-family and commercial projects. The proposed amendments would tailor drainage regulations more closely to the scale and intensity of …
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20240501-005 Date: May 1st, 2024 Subject: Home 2, reduced compatibility standards, higher density housing near future light rail lines, and site development standards for EV charging Motion by: Second by: WHEREAS, evidence produced by researchers at the University of California at Berkeley1 (https://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/ ) indicates that higher population density in urban areas leads to lower greenhouse gas emissions per household, based on energy savings from shared walls in duplexes, townhomes, apartments, and condominiums, and based on better walkability, more mass transit use, and more trips made with bikes and scooters, AND WHEREAS, low-density urban sprawl consumes valuable grassland prairies, tree covered hill country, and other rural landcapes, AND WHEREAS, the Austin City Council is considering changes to the City Code Title 25 Land Development Code to: • Allow smaller lot sizes (2,000 square feet) in single-family zoning districts, • Create regulations that allow properties to be used for charging electric vehicles, • Create regulations, including a density bonus program that modifies height and compatibility in exchange for community benefits, for properties that are located within a half mile of the planned Phase 1 Light Rail and Priority Extensions (also known as the Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (ETOD) overlay), • Revise regulations that apply to flag lots and small lots, • Revise height, building placement, and other related regulations that apply to property and are in addition to the base zoning regulations (also known as Compatibility Standards), reducing the extent of compatibility regulations to 75 ft. All of these will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions directly or subsequently with higher population density. THEREFORE, The Environmental Commission recommends endorsing these changes to the City Code Title 25 Land Development Code and offers the following additional recommendations: 1 Christopher M. Jones and Daniel M. Kammen, Spatial Distribution of U.S. Household Carbon Footprints Reveals Suburbanization Undermines Greenhouse Gas Benefits of Urban Population Density. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2014, 48 (2), pp 895–902. 1 of 2 • Loosening development restrictions to allow denser housing could lead to the involuntary displacement of low-income renters, and the City should track this displacement and take steps to assist in relocating displaced tenants. If possible, the City should take steps to incentivize new higher density housing in high opportunity neighborhoods near jobs and existing mass transit. • • Over time, the City should track changes in transit use, micromobility use, walkability in new higher density developments to verify …
Population Density and Greenhouse Gas Emissions per Household Dr. David W. Sullivan The University of Texas at Austin Center for Energy and Environmental Resources Cell 512-914-4710; Email sullivan231@mail.utexas.edu Details • Researchers at Univ. California at Berkeley have published studies on greenhouse gas emissions per household in the U.S. • They maintain a Website at https://coolclimate.berkeley.edu. • Coolclimate maps show that the inner city areas of big cities have the lowest greenhouse gas emissions per household, owing to lower energy consumption & shorter/fewer motor vehicle trips. • In their analysis of the U.S. by zip code, the researchers found lower emissions per household in denser areas, but the relationship was weak (R2 = 0.04). Emissions / Household vs Zip Code Population Density Problem • As the graph shows there is a wide range of emission rates at low population densities. This is because there are many small towns where trips may be shorter and consumption lower so emissions are low, whereas there are also many suburbs with low density but lots of driving and high consumption with high emissions. • I downloaded the data and averaged the zipcodes with similar densities and got better results. • I selected the zip codes in the Austin 5-county MSA and also got better results. Emissions / Household vs Zip Code Population Density bins at 10,000 person increments (R2 = 0.26) Emissions / Household vs Zip Code Population Density 80 Austin MSA Zip Codes (R2 = 0.39) (R2 = 0.34), excluding UT West Campus
Contreras, Kalan Fahnestock, Sam FW: Comparison -- O"Quinn Home to Granger Home Monday, April 29, 2024 8:09:24 AM From: To: Subject: Date: Kalan Contreras MSHP | she/her | Historic Preservation Officer City of Austin Planning Department 512.974.2727 | kalan.contreras@austintexas.gov Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Por Favor Tome En Cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin está sujeta a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y puede ser publicada en línea. > From: Duane G Albrecht < Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 3:46 PM To: Contreras, Kalan <Kalan.Contreras@austintexas.gov> Cc: Nicole Kessler Burnett < Subject: Comparison -- O'Quinn Home to Granger Home > External Email - Exercise Caution >; Evy Burnet >; Michael - - - - - - - - - - Kalan M. Contreras Historic Preservation Office Master of Science in Historic Preservation RE: Comparison -- Granger House & O'Quinn House — Arthur Fehr (Fehr & Granger) Hello Kalan Contreras. Of course you know the following. The Granger home is designated and recorded on the US National Register of Historic Places. The Granger home is a Texas Historic Landmark. The Granger home is a City of Austin Historic Landmark. There are some fascinating similarities as one compares "The Granger Home" to “The Trueman Edgar O’Quinn Home”. The archival records at The University of Texas Library show that these two homes were designed by Arthur Fehr and Charles Granger during the same time frame. The projects are listed as Project 150 “Granger Residence” and as Project 151 “ O’Quinn Residence”. There are some remarkable similarities that can be observed. Some of these similarities are illustrated in the images shown below. Once again: Thank you for your knowledgeable dedication to Historic Preservation within the City of Austin. Duane ———--------——— Duane G. Albrecht Professor University of Texas ———--------——— https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/cps/faculty/dga57 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov."
From: To: Subject: Date: Attachments: Rochlen, Aaron B Contreras, Kalan; HPD Preservation; Fahnestock, Sam; Castillo, Raymond - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Larosche, Carl - BC; BC-Jamie.Alvarez@austintexas.gov; Evans, Roxanne - BC; Rubio, JuanRaymon - BC; Grogan, Harmony - BC; Dudley, Tara - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC Case Number GF 24-030562; Opposition to Demolition of 2307 Windsor Road #2 Monday, April 29, 2024 2:41:32 PM 2342BD21-7162-46FA-BAA4-042861814ECD[47].png External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Chairman and Commissioners, My family and I reside at 2212 East Windsor and have lived in Austin for 24 years. I’m a Professor at UT. Our property is currently next to the 2307 Windsor Road #2 property/home up for demolition consideration. I recently read the email written by Mr. Donosi and thought it was excellent. His email perfectly captured how it meets the criteria for historical designation for the reasons of Architecture, Historical, Associations, and Landscape Features. In this e-mail, I just wanted to go a bit further about the historical importance of the property to the LGBTQ community. Granted, I don’t have the time to line up speakers for this part of the historical importance. But I’ve talked to many leaders in the community to provide the below summary. I also think this is another reason I’d advocate for a “delay” here to gather more information. In the 80’s and 90s, this property where Trueman O’Quinn’s son Kerry lived was a “safe place” for the LGBTQ community in Austin. The property, was referred to as “Camp Queer”, and served as a refuge where gay men were welcome to be themselves and enjoy community. The turquoise gate that was originally from the Texas Capitol building served as a landmark to the gay community. This was a marker of the private space beyond. The bathrooms near the playground and all along Parkway were well known places where gay people met up with essentially the “gay zone” being delineated by the bathrooms to the south and ended with the turquoise gate to the north of this property. Among many artistics interests and accomplishments, Kerry O’Quinn directed a short fillm called “Queerantine.” Obviously you are well aware —— Austin has seen significant threats to the queer built environment. Bars and nightclubs that have long provided Austin’s gay community with safe space have been threatened, and the City has made efforts to include gay history in our Austin story. We believe this …
From: To: Subject: Date: matt culmo HPD Preservation; Contreras, Kalan Review Case Number: GF 24-030562: Request to Utilize Demolition Delay for Historic Property at 2307 Windsor Road Unit 2 Friday, April 26, 2024 8:42:34 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from important . Learn why this is External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Members of the Historic Landmark Commission, My name is Matthew Culmo, and I am a property owner residing at 2213 E. Windsor Road, Austin, TX 78703. I am writing to formally object to the proposed demolition of the contributing home located within 500 feet of my property. (2307 Windsor Rd Unit 2) I urge the commission to consider the following reasons for my objection: 1. Historical Significance: The home in question is a contributing structure within the National Register Historic District. 2. Architectural Importance: Designed by the renowned Architecture Firm of Fehr and Granger, the property represents a significant example of Mid-Century Modern Architecture, contributing to Austin's architectural legacy. 3. Cultural Heritage: The original owner, Trueman Edgar O'Quinn, was a notable figure in Austin's history and considered one of the city's true founders. 4. Preservation of Historic Features: The stone wall on the property's exterior serves as an important historic landscape feature, adding to the property's overall historical integrity. Given these compelling reasons, I respectfully request that the commission exercise the 180-day demolition delay available for this property. This delay will provide an opportunity to explore alternative options that will allow us to preserve this valuable piece of our city's heritage. Thank you for considering my objections and taking the necessary steps to protect our historic landmarks. Sincerely, Matthew Culmo 2213 E. Windsor Road Austin, TX 78703 Phone: 512-736-6870 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov."
From: To: Subject: Date: Katy Culmo HPD Preservation; Contreras, Kalan Review Case Number: GF 24-030562: Request to Utilize Demolition Delay for Historic Property at 2307 Windsor Road Unit 2 Friday, April 26, 2024 8:52:19 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from important . Learn why this is External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Members of the Historic Landmark Commission, My name is Katy Culmo, and I am a property owner residing at 2213 E. Windsor Road, Austin, TX 78703. I am writing to formally object to the proposed demolition of the contributing home located within 500 feet of my property. (2307 Windsor Rd Unit 2) I urge the commission to consider the following reasons for my objection: 1. Historical Significance: The home in question is a contributing structure within the National Register Historic District. 2. Architectural Importance: Designed by the renowned Architecture Firm of Fehr and Granger, the property represents a significant example of Mid-Century Modern Architecture, contributing to Austin's architectural legacy. 3. Cultural Heritage: The original owner, Trueman Edgar O'Quinn, was a notable figure in Austin's history and considered one of the city's true founders. 4. Preservation of Historic Features: The stone wall on the property's exterior serves as an important historic landscape feature, adding to the property's overall historical integrity. Given these compelling reasons, I respectfully request that the commission exercise the 180-day demolition delay available for this property. This delay will provide an opportunity to explore alternative options that will allow us to preserve this valuable piece of our city's heritage. Thank you for considering my objections and taking the necessary steps to protect our historic landmarks. Sincerely, Katy Culmo 2213 E. Windsor Road Austin, TX 78703 Phone: 512-736-6870 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov."
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Although applicants and/or their agent(s) are expected to attend a public hearing, you are not required to attend. However, if you do attend, you have the opportunity to speak FOR or AGAINST the proposed development or change. You may also contact a neighborhood or environmental organization that has expressed an interest in an application affecting your neighborhood. During a public hearing, the board or commission may postpone or continue an application's hearing to a later date or recommend approval or denial of the application. If the board or commission announces a specific date and time for a postponement or continuation that is not later than 60 days from the announcement, no further notice is required. A board or commission's decision may be appealed by a person withstanding to appeal, or an interested party that is identified as a person who can appeal the decision. The body holding a public hearing on an appeal will determine whether a person has standing to appeal the decision. An interested party is defined as a person who is the applicant or record owner of the subject property, or who communicates an interest to a board or commission by: • • • • • delivering a written statement to the board or commission before the public hearing that generally identifies the issues of concern (it may be delivered to the contact person listed on a notice); or appearing and speaking for the record at the public hearing; and: occupies a primary residence that is witYiiri 500 feet ofith~ subject properly or proposed deveiopmerrt. is the record owner of property within 500 feet of the subject property or proposed development; or is an officer of an environmental or neighborhood organization that has an interest in or whose declared boundaries are within 500 feet of the subject property or proposed development? A notice of appeal must be filed with the director of the responsible department no later than 14 days after the decision. An appeal form may be available from the responsible department. For additional information on the City of Austin's land development process, please visit our website: www.austintexas.gov/abc Written comments must be submitted to the board or commission (or the contact person listed on the notice) before a public hearing. Your comments should include the board or commission's name, the scheduled date of the public hearing, the Case Number and the contact person …
