PROPOSED IRC 2024 CODE V1, DRAFT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL CHANGES Section R101.1 Section R101.2 Section R104.10.1 Section R105.2 Section R105.3.1.1 Section R106.1.4 Table R301.2 Section R105.3.2 Section R322.1 Section R322.1.4 Section R322.1.4.1 Section R322.1.4.2 Section R322.1.5 Section R322.2 Section R301.2.4 Section R322.2.1 Section R306 Section R322.2.2 Section R322.2.3 Section R322.2.5 Section R322.2.6 Part IV BAAE107 & subsections Section R320 & subsections § 25-12-241 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. (A) The International Residential Code for One- and Two-Family Dwellings, 20214 2024 Edition, published by the International Code Council ("20214 2024 International Residential Code") and Appendices AC, BA, BB, AE, BFAH, AJ, AQ, BIAR, BJAS, BKAU, BM, and BOAW are adopted and incorporated by reference into this section with the deletions in Subsections (B), (C), and (D) and the amendments in Section 25-12-243 (Local Amendments to the International Residential Code). (B) The following provisions of the 2024 International Residential Code are deleted (C) Except for P2904, Part VII (Plumbing) of the 2024 International Residential Code is deleted (D) The following definition is deleted from R202 (Definitions) of the 2024 International Residential Code: HEIGHT, BUILDING (E) The city clerk shall file a copy of the 2024 International Residential Code with the official ordinances of the City. Source: Ord. No. 20170406-048 , Pt. 1, 7-5-17; Ord. No. 20210603-054 , Pt. 1, 9-1-21. § 25-12-243 LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. Each provision in this section is a substitute for the identically numbered provision deleted in Section 25-12- 241 (B), (C), and (D) (International Residential Code) or is an addition to the 20241 International Residential Code. R101.2 Scope. The provisions of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, removal and demolition of detached one- and two- family dwellings and townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress and their accessory structures not more than three stories above grade plane in height. Exception: The following shall be permitted to be constructed in accordance with this code where provided with an automatic sprinkler system complying with Section P2904: 1. Live/work units located in townhouses and complying with the requirements of Section 508.5 of the International Building Code. Page 1 of 9 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Owner-occupied lodging houses with five or fewer guestrooms. A care facility with six or fewer persons receiving …
2024 International Building Code & International Residential Code Adoption Amendment: 2024 Technical Code Adoption- International Building Code & International Residential Code Planning Commission Date: August 13., 2024 Description: The purpose of this report is for recommendation of the 2024 technical code adoption of the 2024 International Building and International Residential Code. Development Services is purposing the adoption of the 2024 International Residential Code (IRC) and International Building Code (IBC). DSD Engagement team has conducted public engagement for both the IRC and IBC, which are currently open for public input from June 25 through July 24. This engagement pertains to the adoption of the 2024 editions of the technical codes, including proposed local amendments. The 2024 editions of the technical codes are scheduled for adoption by the City Council on October 24, 2024, with implementation slated for March 1, 2025. On May 3, 2024, resolution # 20240502-094 was approved by the council. Summary of Proposed Code Adoption: Adopting the most recent codes helps protect the health, safety and welfare of Austin residents by, • Responding to new findings from building science research, field experience, or changes in community expectations • Responding to building performance assessments following catastrophic events to • increase resilience in new structures Introducing new and innovative technologies and construction methods Aligning with other current accepted codes and standards Staff Recommendation: Staff recommend approval of the 2024 IBC and IRC. Board and Commission Actions On July 24, 2024, There is a scheduled meeting with the Building and Fire Board of Appeals to present the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC). Additionally, the Planning Commission is set to convene on August 13, 2024. City Council Action May 3RD, Council approved resolution # 20240502-094 Single Stair Resolution Attached: 2024 IRC Redline 2024 IBC Redline 7/1/2024 Single Stair Memo IBC Affordability Impact Statement IRC Affordability Impact Statement Ordinance Number: N/A City Staff: Todd Wilcox- Building Official, Jessica Lopez Phone: Jessica Lopez 512-978-4661 Todd Wilcox 512-974-1681 Email: Jessica.lopez@austintexas.gov / Todd.Wilcox@austintexas.gov 7/1/2024
M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and Council Members THROUGH: Veronica Briseño, Assistant City Manager FROM: José G. Roig, Development Services Director Chief Joel Baker, Aus�n Fire Chief Chief Robert Luckritz, EMS Chief, Aus�n Travis County EMS DATE: June 26, 2024 SUBJECT: Resolu�on No. 20240502-094 Staff Update - Single Stairway Provisions for Mul�family Developments Up to Five-Stories We want to provide all of you with a mul�-departmental recommenda�on on Resolu�on No. 20240502-094 which proposes an amendment to the 2024 Interna�onal Building Code (IBC) allowing a single stairway for mul�family developments up to five stories. Technical code and first responder experts from the Development Services Department (DSD), Aus�n Fire Department (AFD), and Aus�n/Travis County Emergency Medical Services (ATCEMS) reviewed Aus�n’s single stairway amendment and found significant poten�al safety risks to occupants and first responders were we to amend the Code. As a result, staff recommends that the City of Aus�n con�nue to allow the model na�onal codes to set minimum standards for construc�on in Aus�n, thereby maintaining two means of egress for mul�family developments. Safety Concerns Construc�ng a single stairway --as opposed to two separate stairways-- for a five-story building poses escape hazards for occupants during fire, ac�ve shooter, severe weather, or large-scale emergencies. The following points highlight primary safety concerns: • Occupant Risk Considera�ons – Fire-loss data, some�mes cited by proponents of single stairway design, suggests that such an approach poses a low risk to occupants. While the probability of a fire is low, the consequences of a fire with a single stairway design make this an inherent risk. The na�onal standard set in the model code manda�ng two staircases reflects the increased likelihood of significant injury and mass casual�es in limi�ng occupants to a single exit in the event of a fire or other emergency. • Subject Mater Expert Findings – A na�onal proposal to permit mid-rise buildings to be served by a single exit stairway was reviewed and overwhelmingly rejected by the Interna�onal Code Page 1 of 4 Council (ICC) Technical Commitee, ci�ng tes�mony from many na�onal safety experts about the dangers it would pose to occupants and first responders. • Hindered Evacua�on Tac�cs – AFD employs evacua�on tac�cs by designa�ng one stairwell for evacua�on and the second stairwell for firefigh�ng opera�ons. Elimina�ng a stairwell may lead to unsafe exposure of fire condi�ons to occupants and cause counterflow and conges�on with occupants …
To: Planning Commission, City of Austin From: Lorraine Atherton, Zilker NA zoning committee member Re: August 27, 2024, agenda item 6, Thornton Road rezoning, Case C14-2024-0071 Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners, In 2015 and 2016 the Zilker and South Lamar neighborhood associations opposed attempts to upzone the 2300-2400 blocks of Thornton Road, as described in the following letter. I have sent the South Lamar NA letter in a separate attachment. The 2016 rezoning case was withdrawn before the City Council could finalize its approval of MF2. Item 6 on your current agenda is essentially a revival of the request for VMU that was denied in 2015, only much worse. Today, ten years later, implementation of the South Lamar Mitigation Plan is proceeding very slowly. Two eminent domain cases, involving the acquisition of drainage easements on either side of the 2300 block of Thornton Road, are on the City Council’s August 29 agenda. It would be wise to put off any rezoning of these properties until after construction begins on the drainage projects. Note that point 4 in the ZNA letter is relevant to your agenda item 11 on changes to residential drainage requirements, and that the street improvements proposed in the South Lamar Mitigation Plan have not been pursued. Here is the text of the 2016 Zilker NA letter: The Executive Committee and Zoning Committee of the Zilker Neighborhood Association agree with the South Lamar Neighborhood’s position on the rezoning case C14-2015-0047 (Thornton Road). The main points are: 1. The VMU overlay is not appropriate for properties that are not on a designated core transit corridor. ZNA studied this issue in connection with our successful VMU proposal in 2008, and we concluded that VMU was not appropriate on Oltorf west of the railroad track. If it’s not appropriate on Oltorf, it is certainly out of the question on a street like Thornton, with no possible connection to South Lamar. 2. Properties within the South Lamar Mitigation Plan should not be rezoned before staff has "enhanced tools to better anticipate the cumulative effects of increasing density on a neighborhood’s natural and manmade infrastructure," as proposed in the mitigation plan. The South Lamar Neighborhood Association has described a potential 1 analytical approach that tries to capture methods to determine what the infrastructure can support. It or a better method should be implemented before any of these properties are upzoned. 3. The rezoning …
Case Number C14-2024-0071 Kim Vitray Fri 8/23/2024 12:36 PM To: Hadri, Cynthia <Cynthia.Hadri@austintexas.gov> Cc: Dana Lasman Board or Commission's Name: Planning Commission Scheduled Date of Public Hearing: Aug 27, 2024 Case Number: C14-2024-0071 Contact Person: Cynthia Hadri Cynthia, External Email - Exercise Caution I am writing to vehemently object to both this rezoning request by the developer and the alternative recommendations of city staff. My understanding of the developer's rezoning request is to enable construction of a 350-unit apartment building on Thornton Rd, and that city staff's counter recommendations would allow the developer to still build multi-family housing but not to the height and density they are requesting. I own and live in a condo at 2216 Thornton Rd, which is just a block down the street from the proposed rezoning and development area. Most alarming about the rezoning request is the neighborhood traffic analysis that projects an increase in vehicle trips per day from the current 217 to an expected 1623. The analysis also notes that Thornton Rd is already operating at an undesirable traffic volume for the kind of street it is, which will get significantly worse if the properties are rezoned and developed as requested, or as alternately recommended. The developer indicates its goal is progress toward the city's affordable housing goal, which is laudable. However, the infrastructure on Thornton Rd simply cannot support more multi-family development. The developer also indicates the existing zoning allows for intense commercial uses with higher vehicular impact; however, no such commercial development currently exists or is planned, and if it were, the neighborhood would similarly object. The developer mentions "easy access" to Oltorf and South Lamar - have they been there lately? With all the development currently on South Lamar, both north and south of Oltorf, South Lamar has become virtually impassable, and the terrible effects of this have spilled onto Oltorf and Thornton Rd. There's no "easy access" anywhere in our neighborhood right now! Also, any development of any kind on Thornton Rd would necessitate considerable street improvements, in terms of widening, sidewalks, and parking, as well as designated right and left turn lanes and a signal at the intersection of Thornton and Oltorf (although I've been told the latter is not possible because of proximity to a nearby railroad crossing). Otherwise, traffic on Thornton will become gridlock and our neighborhood will become unlivable and dangerous. I am aware of …
1 Interim Planning Commission Rules and Procedures Note: These are based on current rules and practices. Where conflicting rules exist, current practice is noted. Any change with no clear guideline or precedent is highlighted in yellow. Procedure for Amending Rules After Initial Adoption These rules may be amended through unanimous consent or with support from two- thirds of the body, once a motion has been made and seconded. For unanimous consent, the Chair may ask if there is any objection to the proposed action, and if there is none, announce the result. Speaker Registration As listed on the Planning Commission agenda, whether for in-person or via teleconference. Speaker Time Allocation for Discussion and Action Items Applicable to zoning cases, neighborhood plan amendments, land development code amendments, comprehensive plan amendments, and all other action items that are not on the consent agenda or being considered for postponement. 5 minutes each, up to 8 minutes total with donated time* Primary speaker in favor and primary speaker opposed (primary speaker is selected by parties in favor and opposition or is the first person to sign up. There can only be one primary speaker. 3 speakers in favor and 3 speakers opposed (in order of sign-up. This can be changed by the interested parties with consultation from the persons who signed up in the order) All other speakers in favor or opposed 3 minutes each, up to 6 minutes total with donated time* 1 minute each, up to 2 minutes total with donated time* Applicant rebuttal (speaker designated by applicant) 3 minutes, with no donated time *Speaker donation of time is an available option for in-person participants. Both the registered speaker donating time and the speaker recipient must be present when the public hearing is conducted. The amount of donated time is dependent upon where in the list the secondary speaker falls (e.g., 3 minutes or 1 minute). 2 Speaker Time Allocation for Discussion Postponements Testimony regarding a discussion postponement consists of applicant and public comment on the postponement alone and should not delve into the merits of the case. The granting of a postponement must be approved by affirmative vote of the Commission. All speakers in favor or opposed (those in favor of postponement speak first) 3 minutes* Applicant rebuttal (speaker designated by applicant) 3 minutes* *Donation of time is not an option for discussion postponement. Speaker Time Allocation for Consent Agenda Items …
Population Change and Demographic Trends for Austin’s Hispanic/Latina/o/x Population Hispanic/Latino Quality of Life Resource Advisory Commission August 27, 2024 Austin’s population has been doubling every 20 to 25 years. Recent growth has been at a slower rate. 1,137,983 961,855 974,447 Period of greatest growth 656,562 Period of fastest growth since 1900 251,808 National Ranking: 73rd 67th 56th 42nd 27th 16th 14th 11th 10th Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Censuses 1870 – 2020; 2022 Vintage Census Bureau Population Estimates; 2025, 2030 CoA Projections. 2 1,250,000 1,000,000 750,000 500,000 250,000 .974 million 4,428 0 The Hispanic population has always been a part of Austin’s growth history. 900000 800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 First time Hispanics were broken out from White. Black population split into “free” and “slave”. Initially measured simply as “Chinese”. “Mexican” included in Other Race. White Hispanic Black 1850 628 1860 2505 1870 2813 1880 7407 1900 1890 10956 16414 22366 27928 38209 73025 114652 161806 184859 232324 287166 353706 385271 452994 1940 1930 1950 1960 1970 1980 2010 2020 1990 2000 1910 1920 American Indian & Alaska Native Asian & Pacific Islander Population 9 10 1 8 2 14 22 27 29 4 40 10 107 39 184 170 622 1,003 1,756 1,967 2,002 3,642 14,141 31,421 49,560 86,381 1 989 1615 3587 3610 5822 7478 6921 14861 17667 24413 29845 42118 55824 66738 60760 66002 5014 9868 36623 64766 106868 200579 277707 312448 Asian & Pacific Islander Population American Indian & Alaska Native Black Hispanic White Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Census 1790-1990; Texas Demographic Center 1980-2000; data.census.gov 2010-2020 3 Hispanic or Latina/o/x Population, Austin, 1970-2020 88% 312,448 77% 200,579 65% 106,868 277,707 38% 36,623 64,766 13% 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Hispanic Population Percent Change 312,448 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Census Statistics for Large Cities and Other Urban Places in the U.S. 4 Where do Austinites come from? Place of Birth, 2022 Total Population Hispanics Asians Born in Texas Born in other US State Native born, outside US Born in Another Country 48% 32% 2% 18% 58% 13% 2% 27% 19% 18% 2% 61% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2022 1-Year Estimates Note: Figures in red represent a decrease since 2012, in blue an increase since 2012. 5 Components of Population Change, Austin Metro Area, 2022-2023 Drivers of Growth Migration continues to be a major component of growth …
A Food Plan for Austin-Travis County Hispanic/Latino Quality of Life Advisory Commission August 27, 2024 Today’s Topics ● Background ○ What is a food system ● How we Created the Austin Travis County Food Plan ○ What did Plan co-creation process look like? Who participated? ● What’s in the Plan and What’s Coming Next ○ Plan vision, goals, and strategy highlights ○ Next steps 2 2 Background 3 Some Food for Thought Food Production: Where our food comes from, including everything from farming to ranching Food Processing & Distribution: What happens to food from where it is grown to when it reaches your plate, including how food is moved and processed. Food Markets & Retails: Where food is sold, purchased, or provided cost-free. Food Consumption & Access: How we eat our food, who struggles to get enough food, and what impact our consumption has on our health. Post-Consumption & Food Waste: What happens to the parts of food we don’t eat and the impact of food waste on the environment. Food Justice: How systemic racism & colonization impact how the food system works — or doesn’t work — for each member of our community. 5 Some of Our Food System Challenges Disasters and severe weather events: Winter Storms Uri and Mara Rapid community growth and planning for land use Supply chain disruptions: COVID-19 pandemic The climate impacts of the food system 6 How We Co-Created the Food Plan 7 Origins • • In June 2021, Austin City Council directed the City Manager to initiate a planning process. In December 2022, Travis County Commissioners Court approved formal Travis County participation in the plan. Why a Food Plan? • Sets clear goals and strategies to move toward a more equitable, sustainable, resilient food system. • Builds on existing plans and initiatives from the County, City, and community to tackle key food system issues. • Centers equity and the lived expertise of those most impacted by the current food system. 8 8 Project Timeline Phase 0: Planning for the Plan Phase 1: Vision Development Phase 2: Goal & Strategy Development Phase 3: Review and Ground truthing 2021 – Jan 2023 Mar – Aug 2023 Aug 2023 – Feb 2024 Mar – Aug 2024 ● Website launch 📶 4 World Cafes ☕ ● ● ● ● Building Community Awareness 📰 Release of State of the Food System Report 📚 Onboarding Planning Consultant⭐ Recruitment of …
DRAFT AUGUST 2024 20 24 SUMMARY AUSTIN/TRAVIS COUNTY F O O D P L A N A food plan provides an opportunity for local government to co-create a vision and actionable goals for the local food system alongside community members, farmers and farmworkers, food retail and service workers, students, small business owners, and other partners. 2 The Food System The food system is the interconnected network of everything that happens with food — where and how it is grown, distributed, sold, consumed, wasted, or recovered. Globally, the food system is shaped by its stakeholders, practices, and the laws that regulate both. This food plan envisions the food system as five interconnected arenas with food justice at the center:1 • Food Production: Where our food comes from, including everything from farming to ranching to backyard gardening. • Food Processing & Distribution: What happens to food from where it is grown to when it reaches your plate, including how food is moved and processed. • Food Markets & Retails: Where food is sold, purchased, or provided cost-free. • Food Consumption & Access: How we eat our food, who struggles to get enough food, and what impact our consumption has on our health. • Post-Consumption & Food Waste: What happens to the parts of food we don’t eat and the impact of food waste on the environment. • Food Justice: Seeking to ensure that the benefits and risks of where, what, and how food is grown, produced, transported, distributed, accessed, and eaten are shared fairly. It represents a transformation of the current food system, including but not limited to eliminating disparities and inequities. d F o o d Processing ction & D istribution o o F R & u d o r P P o s t - & C F o o n s u o d W a Food Justice m ption Fo o d C o ste s n & A c u c F o o d M a r k e t s e t a i l e s s m ption This plan considers our local food system to include the 5-county Austin Metropolitan Statistical Area of Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties. However, the vision, objectives, goals, and strategies outlined in this plan are focused geographically on the City of Austin and Travis County. Travis County Austin 3 FOOD PLAN SUMMARY2024 Community Centered Process …
DRAFT AUGUST 2024 Table of Contents Preface ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introductory Letter ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Plan Authorization ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 The Food System .................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 What this Plan is and Isnʼt .................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Plan Framework & Approach ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 A Plan of Plans .................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Food Plan Oversight ................................................................................................................................................................................ 14 CAC Mission Statement ...................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Values .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 16 Sustainability & Equity Assessment Tool (SEAT) Values .................................................................................................................... 16 Food Plan Vision & Objectives ................................................................................................................................................................ 18 Parts of the Food Plan ........................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Food Plan Goals & Strategies .................................................................................................................................................................. 23 A Note on Strategies Related to Populations Who are Underserved or Historically Disadvantaged ............................................... 25 Goal 1. Land ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Goal 2. Ownership ............................................................................................................................................................................. 33 Goal 3. Livelihoods ............................................................................................................................................................................ 36 Goal 4. Preparedness ......................................................................................................................................................................... 40 Goal 5. Institutions ............................................................................................................................................................................. 45 Goal 6. Access ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Goal 7. Food Recovery ........................................................................................................................................................................ 55 Goal 8. Pro-Climate, Pro-Health ........................................................................................................................................................ 60 Goal 9. Empower ................................................................................................................................................................................ 64 Plan Implementation & Next Steps ......................................................................................................................................................... 68 Implementation Planning .................................................................................................................................................................. 69 Strategy Sequencing .......................................................................................................................................................................... 70 Implementation Network ................................................................................................................................................................... 70 Funding ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 71 Measurement & Reporting ................................................................................................................................................................. 71 Afterword ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 72 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 74 Appendix 1: Glossary .......................................................................................................................................................................... 75 Appendix 2: Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................................ 79 Appendix 3: Sustainability & Equity Assessment Tool (SEAT) ............................................................................................................. 88 Appendix 4: Strategy Implementation Details ................................................................................................................................... 92 Appendix 5: Plan Crosswalk to Existing Efforts ................................................................................................................................ 124 Appendix 6: Companion Documents ............................................................................................................................................... 126 The photos in this plan were provided by the Office of Sustainability or were licensed from stock resources. Exceptions are noted as listed. AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD PLAN DRAFT (AUGUST 2024) Preface 1 AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD PLAN DRAFT (AUGUST 2024) Introductory Letter Food connects us all. Every seed planted, garden tended, acre harvested, and plate served sparks a ripple effect, impacting the system that nourishes our community. From farmers and grocery store workers to families, chefs, and health providers, we're all part of this story. While the City of Austin and Travis County continue to grow, this food plan exists to move us toward ensuring everyone has access to the nutritious food that they need to thrive. We are working for a future where food is a fundamental human right. The instability of the food system was widely felt in February 2021 when Winter Storm Uri arrived in Austin-Travis County during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. We experienced a multitude of emergencies, including food shortages, and while everyone was impacted, it was …
¿Porqué Invertir en Cuidado Infantíl Económico? Apoya a las familias trabajadoras: El acceso a guarderías económicas es esencial para las familias trabajadoras y que desean participar en la educación o capacitación para empleo. Al ampliar los servicios de cuidado infantil, ayudamos para que los padres mantengan sus empleos y procuren avances profesionales, que utlimadamente resulta en mejor estabilidad económica y desarrollo de nuestra comunidad. Programas de calidad en la primera infancia tienen un impacto significativo en el éxito futuro de los niños: Los que asisten a estos programas tienen cinco veces más probabilidades de leer con competencia en tercer grado, graduarse, y asistir a la universidad. Cuando invertimos en el cuidado infantíl, invertimos en el futuro de nuestros hijos. Programas de calidad extracurriculares y los de verano aumentan las habilidades académicas y desarrollan habilidades de los jóvenes para futuras carreras, mejoran su asistencia escolar, apoyan la salud mental y física, y las familias trabajadoras se benefician porque sus hijos participan en actividades sanas cuando no hay clases. Acceso al cuidado infantíl no solo apoya a los padres que trabajan, sino que también contribuye a mejorar la educación de los niños: Permite que los padres mantengan mejor equilibrio entre el trabajo y la vida personal; más felicidad para las familias, crea comunidades fuertes y vibrantes. Los Fondos Serían Para: Mayor Acceso con impacto a 10,000 niños anualmente incluyendo más horas y en las zonas más necesitadas. Costos más económicospara familias en diversas condiciones, ayudando a cubrir la diferencia entre el costo de cuidado infantíl y lo que las familias pueden pagar. Mejores sueldos y capacitación para reclutar, instruir, y retener personal de las guarderías. “ “ El cuidado infantíl económico es la salvación de las familias que luchan para sobrevivir. Por eso estamos tomando este paso gigantesco para remediar la carga económica de las familias trabajadoras y asegurar que todo niño de cualquier condición económica pueda acceder el cuidado y ambiente acogedor merecido”. Judge Andy Brown La falta de cuidado infantíl económico retrasa nuestra economía, comercios, y familias, sin duda. Por lo tanto, yo apoyo totalmente aumentar la inversión pública en programas de cuidado infantíl y aprendizaje. Acceso al cuidado infantíl de calidad y económico, no solo es cuestión de familias- es cuestión de la fuerza laboral, y económico que impacta a las empresas en todo sector. Inversiones en el cuidado infantíl deberían ser consideradas como inversiones de infrastructura". Bobby Jenkins, …
Hispanic/Latino Quality of Life Resource Advisory Commission Affordable Childcare Now is a broad coalition convened by United Way for Greater Austin that comprises of Travis County civic organizations, businesses, and community members who support equitable access to affordable, quality childcare for all. 3 Benefits of Quality Childcare 7 The Case for Significant Investments in Childcare ➔ Workforce ➔ Affordability ➔ Accessibility ➔ School Readiness ➔ Ongoing School Success ➔ Equity ➔ Long Term Social Returns “It’s time to start treating childcare as essential infrastructure — just as worthy of funding as roads and fiber optic cables.” Melinda Gates, 2021 8 Goals & Guiding Principles ➔ Increase Access ➔ Increase Access ➔ Improve Affordability ➔ Improve Affordability ➔ Invest in Quality ➔ Invest in Quality ➔ Grow the Workforce ➔ Grow the Workforce ➔ Strengthen the System ➔ Strengthen the System Adapted from Travis County Court Briefing ➔ Ground Solutions in Data ➔ Ground Solutions in Data ➔ Seek Equity ➔ Seek Equity ➔ Leverage Existing Assets ➔ Leverage Existing Assets ➔ Ensure Accountability and ➔ Ensure Accountability and Efficiency Efficiency 11 Recommended Strategies for Investment ➔ Expand Slots Early Childhood Afterschool/Summer ➔ Expand care in early ◆ ◆ morning, evening and weekend hours ➔ Build quality and capacity Early Childhood Afterschool/Summer ➔ Create a Business- ◆ ◆ Government Alliance 12 Strategy 1: Expanded Slots Early Childhood ➔ Expand access with funding to create additional capacity through contracts Guaranteed capacity Pay for the true cost of quality care ➔ Focus on full-day, year-round care (birth ◆ ◆ through age 3 years) ➔ Supplement subsidy funding for infants and toddlers to match cost of quality Adapted from Children’s Funding Project Work Group | 2024 13 Strategy 1: Expanded Slots Afterschool / Summer ➔ Expand access with funding to create additional capacity through contracts for new sites or additional slots at existing sites for youth in least resourced areas of Travis County Pay for the true cost of quality care ➔ Focus on quality afterschool and ◆ summer programming Learn All The Time Network | 2024 14 Strategy 2: Expand care for early mornings, evenings, and weekends Austin/Travis County’s supply of care in these hours serves only 10% of need. This care would benefit children of all age groups. Adapted from Children’s Funding Project Work Group | 2024 15 Strategy 3: Build Quality & Capacity Coordination & Data Systems Early childhood and after …
Beth Guillot 2216 Thornton Road Unit 210 Aus8n, Texas, 78704 Cynthia Hadri Senior Planner | Current Planning City of Aus8n, Planning Department Cynthia.Hadri@aus8ntexas.gov Re: Case No. C14-2024-0071 Ms. Hadri, I have been a resident of Carriage Park Condominiums since 2005, 2216 Thornton Road Unit 210, Aus8n, TX, 78704. There is a development planned for our neighborhood that is out of scale for Thornton Road. I am in opposi8on of the proposed density for the road due to the car trips projected to be added to our street. It is currently a challenge to navigate our street at 8mes with the current traffic. Below is an assessment prepared by our neighbor and civil engineer. LeZer to City Council and Staff – C14-2024-0071 We are wri8ng you today to express our opposi8on to Case No. C14-2024-0071, a mul8family project located on Thornton Rd., within District 5. Both the Owner and their Agent’s applica8on, and City Staff’s recommenda8on will have adverse effects to the South Lamar Neighborhood, par8cularly from a traffic and life safety perspec8ve. The project is approximately 1250 LF from the intersec8on of W. Oltorf and Thornton Rd., with traffic paZerns that are exacerbated by its proximity to the railroad tracks. Thornton Rd., which is a City of Aus8n Level 1 Street, consist of a 30’ clear space (FOC to FOC) and sporadically available sidewalks. This cross-sec8on paired with street parking results in the current traffic paZerns that require drivers to oeen yield to oncoming traffic and weave in and out of parked cars, trash cans, and pedestrians. The conges8on along Thornton Rd. is best displayed at its intersec8on with Oltorf, which experiences frequent backups and oeen requires quick and unsafe maneuvers to merge onto Oltorf. Addi8onally, the daily backups at this intersec8on are exacerbated by the at-grade railroad crossing along Oltorf, approximately 200 LF from the Oltorf and Thornton intersec8on. The Owner and their Agent’s applica8on seeks a density that is far beyond what is appropriate for the neighborhood and the Level 1 Street the project is located on. If allowed, their desired land use would increase traffic counts along Thornton Rd. by over 1,400 trips counts per day. This applica8on represents a gross misuse of the tools the City has worked to put into place to allow for the overall increase in housing units, including affordable housing units. A development of this size is more appropriately located on a …
the Ver8cal Mixed-Use Building Combining District (V) which is so loosely defined that its descrip8on is covered by a single sentence. This vague land use leaves the neighborhood and its residences with no picture of what this project will ul8mately become and how it will affect the South Lamar Neighborhood. It is because these reasons, and many more, that we ask you to reevaluate the project property and what an appropriate use for it would be. We’d suggest that you reengage with the Owner and their Agent to work towards a more amenable outcome for the beZerment of Thornton Rd., the South Lamar Neighborhood, District 5, and the City of Aus8n. Legend for intersection clear patterns: 1) Oltorf eastbound 2) Oltorf westbound + unprotected left onto Thornton 3) Thornton northbound with unprotected turns onto west and eastbound Oltorf Please consider our concerns when reviewing this case. We appreciate your 8me and aZen8on to this maZer. Thanks. Beth Beth Guillot Beth.guillot21@gmail.com 512.699.3083
C14-2024-0071 Thornton Road Multfamily Kyla Kanz Tue 8/27/2024 11:07 AM To: Hadri, Cynthia <Cynthia.Hadri@austintexas.gov> External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Cynthia, I am writing to express my opposition to Case No. C14-2024-0071, a multifamily project located on Thornton Rd. within District 5. The Owner and their Agent’s application and the City Staff’s recommendation will adversely affect the South Lamar Neighborhood, particularly from a traffic and pedestrian safety perspective. Even now, I have to put my dog in my car and drive somewhere to find a safe place to walk him. I must load my bike into my car to find a safe place to ride it. Sometimes, it takes 10 minutes just to drive off of my little one-block street, 20 minutes if there is a train. The project is approximately 1250 LF from the intersection of W. Oltorf and Thornton Rd., and its proximity to the railroad tracks exacerbates traffic patterns. Thornton Rd., a City of Austin Level 1 Street, consists of a 30’ clear space (FOC to FOC) and sporadically available sidewalks. This cross-section, paired with street parking, results in the current traffic patterns that require drivers to often yield to oncoming traffic and weave in and out of parked cars, trash cans, and pedestrians. There are also no complete sidewalks on much of this road, and all the street parking makes this, at times, a one-way street. The congestion along Thornton Rd. is best displayed at its intersection with Oltorf, which experiences frequent backups and often requires quick and unsafe maneuvers to merge onto Oltorf. The daily backups at this intersection are exacerbated by the at-grade railroad crossing along Oltorf, approximately 200 LF from the Oltorf and Thornton intersection. The Owner and their Agent’s application seek a density far beyond what is appropriate for the neighborhood and this Level 1 Street the project is located on. If allowed, their desired land use would increase traffic counts along Thornton Rd. by over 1,400 trip counts per day. A development this size is more appropriately located on a Level 3 Street, such as Lamar Blvd., but Lamar Blvd. traffic is already ridiculous, and no infrastructure improvements are in the plans that I know of. While less intensive, City Staff’s recommendation does not go far enough to protect the neighborhood and its residents. Thornton Rd. is a Level 1 street, as defined by Section 2.4.1.2 of the City of Austin …
Infill Plats & Site Plan Lite: Overview of Staff Proposal Planning Commission | July 9, 2024 Brent Lloyd, DSD Development Officer Scope of Presentation • General Background • Discuss proposed code amendments for: 1. 2. Infill Plats Site Plan Lite, Part 2 • Questions & Answers Infill Plats Subdivision Basics 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 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. • But all regulations currently apply, regardless of subdivision size 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 Code Amendments Proposed in Response to Infill Plat Resolution • Targeted changes to regulations for residential resubs aimed at: — Making the process more efficient and less costly for landowners seeking to resubdivide into smaller lots authorized under HOME 2. — 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 if total land area does …
Planning Commission Resolution regarding Posting of Backup Materials Whereas the Texas Open Meetings Act requires that agendas for public meetings be posted at least 72 hours in advance. As the Planning Commission meets on Tuesdays at 6 pm, the practice of the staff has been to post the agenda on the Friday prior to a meeting by 3 pm. Whereas staff has also had the practice of posting backup by Thursday at 3 pm which includes the size and location of property, the staff recommendation, case manager comments, area case histories, information about the environment, maps, letters in support and opposition, and other useful information. Whereas the members of the Commission and the public should understand the details about the items on the agenda, and there are no rules requiring that backup be posted, Therefore, be it resolved, the following underlined text will be added to the RULES OF PROCEDURE of the Planning Commission, Section 1.400 : “Notices of meetings shall be in writing and shall be sent to all members at least two days in advance of the meetings and shall include the size and location of properties, the staff recommendations, case manager comments, area case histories, information about the environment, maps, and letters in support or opposition for each case included on the agenda, or the “Staff Report”, “Neighborhood Plan Amendment Review Sheet”, or the “Zoning Change Review Sheet” whichever is more readily available.” Agenda items for which no backup information is posted at least two days in advance of the meeting will be postponed at the discretion of the commission.
