Affordability Impact Statement South Central Waterfront Combining District and Density Bonus Program Case number: C20-2022-003 Date: March 27, 2024 Proposed Regulation • The proposed code amendments will create the South Central Waterfront Combining District (SCWCD) and the South Central Waterfront Density Bonus (SCWDB). The SCWCD is established to implement the intent of the 2016 South Central Waterfront Vision Framework Plan (Vision Plan). The SCWDB will allow for additional density beyond the South Central Waterfront SCWCD standard regulation in exchange for implementing certain design criteria and providing community benefits. • The affordable housing component includes: o Require 5% of housing on-site within 3:1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) must be affordable For rental units: • 60% MFI; or For ownership units: • 80% of ownership units; or • A fee in lieu equivalent to the otherwise required on-site set-aside percentage of the total residential units, including the mix of bedrooms required, at the rate set in the fee schedule at the time of final site plan submission. • Apart from meeting the on-site requirements within the 3:1 FAR, up to 70% of the additional bonus area can be attained through fees-in-lieu and dedications. These fees-in-lieu will be equally allocated among affordable housing, parks, and infrastructure. • The funds designated for affordable housing will be spent within a boundary delineated by Ladybird Lake to the North, E Ben White to the South, IH-35 to the East, and MoPac to the West and within a ½ mile of a rail stop or ¼ mile of a bus stop. • Recently, the City Council approved changes to City Code Chapter 4-18, impacting both residential and non-residential redevelopment. These changes included regulations for density bonus programs, with specific focus on residential redevelopment requirements. Initially, the ordinance called for the replacement of all units affordable to households earning 80% or less of the Median Family Income (MFI). However, subsequent collaboration among various City departments led staff to conclude that a more finely-tuned threshold for triggering unit replacement under this requirement would be to replace existing units affordable to a household earning 60% MFI or below. This adjustment aligns with the goals outlined in the Strategic Housing Blueprint, prioritizing deeper levels of affordability, and aiming to enhance participation in density bonus programs. Staff recommends bringing forward an item on a future Council agenda to update this provision of Chapter 4-18. • The staff proposal for redevelopment …
REGULAR MEETING of the ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PANEL Monday, April 1, 2024, at 6:00 PM Virtual Meeting Members of the ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PANEL may participate by video conference. Public comment will be allowed remotely via video conference or telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item 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 participation. To register to speak, call or email lindsay.hutchens@austintexas.gov, (512) 974-3788. CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS/COMMISSIONERS: Chair – Stephanie Lemmo, Vice Chair – J Muzacz, Sarah Carr, Taylor Davis, Kristi-Anne Shaer, Lisa Woods, Monica Maldonado – Arts Commission Liaison CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL AGENDA 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve minutes of the Art in Public Places Panel Regular Meeting on March 4, 2024. Discussion of Arts Commission Liaison Report on Action Items from March 18, 2024, Arts Commissions Meeting by Arts Commission Liaison Maldonado 1. DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 3. 4. 5. ACTION: Approve the Final Design for the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport Terminal Expansion Phase II / West Gate Expansion AIPP Project – Kat Quay ACTION: Approve the Final Design for the Dove Springs Health Center AIPP Project – Mai Gutierrez ACTION: Approve the Selection Process Recommendation for three Austin Fire Department/Austin-Travis County Emergency Medical Services Station AIPP Projects – Loop 360 / Davenport Ranch Station, Goodnight Ranch Station, and Canyon Creek Station. STAFF BRIEFINGS 6. Art in Public Places Staff Updates on Conservation, Current Projects, and Milestones by Art in Public Places Staff Frederico Geib, Sean Harrison, Lindsay Hutchens, Bryana Iglesias, Alex Irrera, and Ryan Runcie FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT 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 are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 days (48 hours) before the meeting date. Please contact Lindsay Hutchens at the Economic Development Department at lindsay.hutchens@austintexas.gov or (512) 974-3788 for additional information; TTY users' route through Relay Texas at 711.
South Central Waterfront Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION 20240401-XXX Date: Subject: April 1, 2024 Recommendation to remove or exclude height limits from the SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT COMBINING DISTRICT & DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM Ryan Puzycki Seconded By: Felicity Maxwell Motioned By: Description of Recommendation to Council Height limits should be removed or excluded from the South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program. Rationale: Given the difficulty of predicting future market conditions, the decades-long redevelopment timeline for the district, the significant variability of parcel sizes within the district, and the other prescriptions in the South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program, arbitrary height limits would serve to limit flexibility and adaptability to future market conditions, particularly on smaller parcels. As a transit-connected district facing Downtown, a significant portion of which already falls within the Downtown Public Improvement District, the South Central Waterfront will become an integrated extension of Downtown over time. The Core/Waterfront and Rainey Street Districts in the Downtown Austin Plan, which comprise the northern banks opposite the South Central Waterfront, are also not subject to height limits but remain regulated by FAR limits. Vote For: Against: Abstain: Absent: Attest: [Staff or board member can sign] 1 of 1 South Central Waterfront Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION 20240401-XXX Date: Subject: April 1, 2024 Recommendation to amend SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT COMBINING DISTRICT & DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM to direct the Director of the Housing Department to allocate funds from the Housing Trust Fund Fee-in-Lieu to purchase existing housing units within a refined Affordable Housing Fee Spending Area Ryan Puzycki Seconded By: Felicity Maxwell Motioned By: Description of Recommendation to Council Proceeds allocated to the Housing Trust Fund Fee-in-Lieu should be spent to purchase existing housing stock within a refined Affordable Housing Fee Spending Area, as defined by the walkshed of the district and current or planned transit lines transecting or terminating in the district, bound by the borders defined in Section 6.4.E.1.b. Rationale: Given the high cost of building new housing units, affordable or otherwise, in the South Central Waterfront District, the city should allocate funds from the Housing Trust to purchase existing, cheaper housing units within or as close to the district and nearby transit as possible. Vote For: Against: Abstain: Absent: Attest: [Staff or board member can sign] 1 of 1 South Central Waterfront Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION 20240401-XXX Date: Subject: April 1, 2024 Recommendation to amend the boundaries of the Housing …
Sound Assessment & Disclosure Requirements Proposal Presentation to City of Austin Music Commission April 3, 2024 Background • Council approved Resolution No. 20181018- 038 directing the City Manager to propose programs, rules, and ordinances necessary to improve compatibility between residents, lodging establishments, and music-related businesses. • The resolution was part of Council efforts to support music, arts and culture. Purpose • Policy related to residential development responsibility is still outstanding. • In addition to the sound ordinance and enforcement, the sound management system should also anticipate and address quality of life issues for residences in proximity to nightlife and entertainment establishments and districts. Policy Goals Ensure Accurate Expectations • Improve compatibility between entertainment uses with amplified sound and residential and hotel uses. • Anticipate, plan for, and minimize common conflicts between residential and hotel uses and entertainment-related amplified sound. • Ensure residential and hotel development projects understand the sound levels in the area so they can design and construct the building considering the sound impact from nearby code-compliant entertainment uses. • Provide residential development projects and new residents with accurate expectations about the level of sound that will be present in the environment, and the information they need to make informed decisions. Approach A commonsense solution that is not prescriptive and focuses on education and awareness Sound Assessment & Disclosure Requires residential and hotel developments near Outdoor Music Venues and Performance Venues to: • conduct a sound assessment • disclose to future residents when they sell or lease units about the presence of nearby venues, and that a sound assessment was conducted Description and Intent • Does NOT mandate building standards. • Requires residential developers to: Promotes Education and Informed Decisions 1. document that they have studied the sound levels in the area they are building. • This includes assessing the impact of legally compliant sound from nearby music and nightlife establishments. 2. disclose to future residents the presence of nearby music and nightlife establishments, and that a sound assessment has been conducted. Description and Intent • Residents are encouraged to ask questions about sound mitigation efforts, make informed decisions Promotes Education and Informed Decisions • Does NOT require anything further from Outdoor Music Venue Permit Holders or Performance Venues. • Their sound level is already regulated with a fixed sound level standard that is appropriate for the context, is predictable and doesn’t change when new residential is built nearby. …
MUSIC COMMISSION MEETING 4/01/2024 H O T E L O C C U P A N C Y T A X C O L L E C T I O N S L I V E M U S I C F U N D Kim McCarson Program Manager UPDATED 4.01.2024 FY 24 Year-to-Date Hotel Occupancy Tax Collections – Live Music Fund FY24 Amended Budget $5,575,000 February 2024 w/ Encumbrances $288,304 FY24 Year-to-Date w/ Encumbrances $2,077,678 FY24 Year-End Estimate $17,874 $312,748 $827,586 $19,399 $338,773 $854,923 $12,938 $323,076 $798,287 $5,509 $217,400 $744,461 $288,304 $857,431 $4,903 $171,733 $755,308 FY 23 October February FY 24 November March December April January May FY 23 Year-to-Date Hotel Occupancy Tax Collections – Live Music Fund FY23 Amended Budget $4,100,000 September 2023 w/ Encumbrances $17,874 FY23 Year-to-Date w/ Encumbrances $4,472,973 FY23 Year-End Estimate $4,043,166 $17,874 $312,748 $827,586 $19,399 $338,773 $854,923 $12,938 $323,076 $798,287 $5,509 $217,400 $744,461 FY 23 October April November May December June January July February August March September
M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and Council Members THROUGH: Bruce Mills, Interim Assistant City Manager FROM: Robert Kingham, Court Administrator, Downtown Austin Community Court DATE: March 27, 2024 SUBJECT: Staff Response to Resolution No. 20230816-016 regarding Downtown Austin Community Court Mobile Court Pilot This memorandum provides a staff response regarding the Downtown Austin Community Court (DACC) Mobile Court Pilot, initiated in response to Resolution 20230816-016. Included as an attachment is a third-party analysis of the Pilot conducted by Sultan Justice Consulting Corp. The Report includes research on mobile court and community court models and a detailed account of the Pilot’s development, implementation, and outcomes. Additionally, the Report includes the following recommendations: 1. Implement a sustainable, fully-staffed, DACC Mobile Court Program. 2. Continue and expand upon stakeholder engagement to scale Mobile Court implementation. 3. Study the impact on existing requests for current DACC services with the addition of Mobile Court to inform further DACC staffing needs and growth. 4. Invest in Mobile Court transportation resources and technology. Mobile Court Pilot Development DACC consulted with the DACC Advisory Board regarding data collection and potential Pilot locations. DACC also engaged with the Austin Homelessness Advisory Council (AHAC) on data, locations, and how to build trust and encourage people to engage in services. Austin Municipal Court (AMC), the Homeless Strategy Office, and staff across DACC’s Court Services, Homeless Services, and Support Services units offered insights to inform program development. In line with direction in the resolution, DACC engaged other stakeholders with a goal of identifying locations for Pilot sites that were geographically dispersed and trusted locations where members of the community were already engaging in services. The Pilot was developed to bring the same level of services provided onsite at DACC directly to individuals in community-based locations. Throughout the Pilot, DACC provided individuals the opportunity to check for open cases and warrants with AMC and DACC, virtual access to a judge and prosecutor to resolve cases and clear warrants, as well as onsite access to a case manager to help with resource navigation and connection to services. When appropriate, individuals engaging in the Pilot were able to enroll in ongoing case management through DACC’s Clinical Diversion Program (CDP). Mobile Court Pilot Implementation Between October 18, 2023 and February 5, 2024, there were 18 dates where DACC provided Pilot services. The service location partners for the Pilot included …
DOWNTOWN AUSTIN COMMUNITY COURT Public Safety Commission April 1, 2024 Robert Kingham, Court Administrator Christopher Anderson, Court Operations Manager DOWNTOWN AUSTIN COMMUNITY COURT Established in 1999 • 1st Community Court in Texas • 7th Community Court in United States Mission Statement • Empowering people to thrive by providing impartial justice and compassionate community-based services Address root causes of justice involvement • Intensive and compassionate wrap around services OPERATIONAL AREAS Homeless Services Court Services Customer Service Walk-in Case Management Courtroom Support Intensive Case Management Case Flow Management Outreach Clinical Diversion Program Community Services Support Services Community Service Program Violet KeepSafe Storage Planning & Strategic Development Procurement & Contract Management Communication and Public Information PRIMARY AND EXPANDED JURISDICTION • Class C criminal offenses in Downtown, West Primary Jurisdiction Campus and East Austin Expanded Jurisdiction (Ord. No. 20231214-006) • Citywide jurisdiction for Prop. B & State camping band and DACC Top 10 offenses • Expansion provides more equitable access to resources • Data reflects violations included in expanded jurisdiction are the most likely for people to need access to the services available at DACC HOMELESS SERVICES DACC has helped connect 550+ clients to housing since 2015 through Intensive Case Management DACC has a waitlist of more than 300 individuals MOBILE COURT OVERVIEW DACC MOBILE COURT OVERVIEW How it began: • Previous site visits and best practice research by DACC • Judge Coffey asked staff to develop a mobile court strategy • Created by Council Resolution 20230816-016 Overall purpose: • Community-based program - meeting people where they are already engaging in services • Connect individuals with solutions for resolving outstanding cases and warrants • Immediate connection to services through case manager DACC MOBILE COURT PROGRESS How it works: • Court case checks & education about DACC services • Virtual access to judge and prosecutor • Case manager onsite Service day frequency and locations: • Approximately 5 service days per month during Pilot period • Austin Public Health Neighborhood Centers, Austin Public Library, North Bridge Shelter, Pop-up Resource Clinics, Sunrise Homeless Navigation Center, The Charlie Center at Mosaic Church During the 18 events in the Pilot period of October 18, 2023 through February 5, 2024: 383 individuals had their court case status checked by DACC 125 individuals had one or more open AMC or DACC court cases 35 individuals participated in a DACC Mobile Court hearing 69 cases were …
RESOLUTION NO. 20230816-016 WHEREAS, the Downtown Austin Community Court (DACC) is a justice diversion program that provides an alternative to the traditional criminal process, targeting low-level offenses frequently associated with poverty, lack of housing, substance use, and mental illness; and WHEREAS, DACC's alternative adjudication options help prevent citations from becoming part of residents' criminal records, removing potential future barriers for housing and employment, and serves as a critical component of Austin's homelessness response system; and WHEREAS, DACC's case managers provide housing-focused case management and resource navigation services to sign up individuals for public benefits and connect them with existing resources in the community; and WHEREAS, one of the primary benefits of resolving court cases through DACC versus other courts is immediate access to services through DACC's Case Management staff; and WHEREAS, DACC has d 'safe harbor' or 'no arrest' policy allowing defendants with active warrants to come to court to address their case(s) and engage in services without being arrested; and WHEREAS, DACC's approach has resulted in financial savings to the City, from court resources to officer time, when people get connected to support, while reducing defaults and increasing the resolution of pending cases; and WHEREAS, City Council approved Resolution No. 20230608-044 which in part, directed initiation of City Code amendments to expand DACC's jurisdiction Page 1 of 4 citywide to include Section 48.05 of the Texas Penal Code (Prohibited Camping) and covering DACC's top 10 case types; and WHEREAS, it's anticipated that a City Code amendment to finalize the expansion of DACC's jurisdiction will be on a Council agenda in fall 2023; and WHEREAS, mobile court operations in other communities, such as Fort Worth, Arlington and Grapevine have proven successful models for increasing appearance and compliance rates and proactively connecting individuals to services; and WHEREAS, implementation of a DACC Mobile Court pilot (Pilot) would complement the forthcoming jurisdiction expansion by providing more geographically dispersed options for people to resolve their cases and have immediate access to services; and WHEREAS, a Pilot could prioritize City owned and/or operated service centers, and other programs that are already serving community members who may have cases to resolve and/or which are providing homeless services; and WHEREAS, by looking at existing resources and staffing across departments, while also exploring strategic partnerships with Travis County, Central Health, Integral Care, and other partners, a Pilot could be developed and implemented without additional funding allocation in Fiscal …
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20240401-003 Subject: South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program – Above-Ground Structured Parking Seconded By: Date: April 1, 2024 Motioned By: Recommendations The Above-Ground Structured Parking criteria needs to be refined so that it can align with the Urban Design Guidelines on parking facades and accommodate practical code/layout concerns. Description of Recommendation to Council .1 Revise Section 3.6.1.C.2 to read “Above-ground structured parking may be exposed to a street front provided that the structure’s façade shall be the same as, or of equal quality to, the material used for the street facing building façade. .2 Revise Section 3.6.1.C.3 to read “All above-ground structured parking shall have flat parking decks wherever possible.” Rationale: .1 Section 3.6.1.C.2 requires above-ground parking structure facades to maintain the same materials and treatments as the primary building, which implies that they should match. This contradicts the recommendation in the Urban Design Guidelines/B.5 “Control On-Site Parking” recommendation 4, which states” Structured parking should not be treated in such a way that it is indistinguishable from inhabited areas of the building.”. This also deviates from other COA regulating plans such as ERC Article 4/4/b/c that has the same “or of equal quality to” flexibility that allows for alignment with the Urban Design Guidelines recommendation. .2 Section 3.6.1.C.3 requires all parking decks to be flat, which is contrary to IBC 2021 section 406.2.4 which specifically requires that all parking decks slope to drain. In addition, the verbiage as structured forbids parked ramps, which exist in 95% of all structured parking and are critical to maximizing parking yield per plate. Adding a “wherever possible” caveat would provide flexibility needed to address these code and layout concerns, but I would also suggest that the Planning Department clearly describe their rationale for this requirement. If it is meant to allow for the future convertibility of parking structures, it fails to address the most critical components which would be increased floor-to-floor height, a ramping system that can be easily demolished and backfilled for usable area, and fire separation distances that can allow for future openings. If convertibility is the intent, a much more comprehensive set of requirements should be developed with aid from the building design community and calibrated by developers. 1 of 2 Vote For: Against: Abstain: Absent: Attest: [Staff or board member can sign] 2 of 2
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20240401-003 Subject: South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program – Affordable Housing Toolkit Seconded By: Date: April 1, 2024 Motioned By: Recommendations The Program should provide the more robust affordable housing toolkit envisioned by the Vision Framework Plan and codified into the 2018 Regulating Plan draft to drive an increased number of affordable units within and in close proximity to the District. Description of Recommendation to Council .1 Add Section 6.1/E: Off-Site Production of Affordable Units The off-site production of affordable units may be proposed if it produces more units or derives a greater community benefit, as determined by the Housing Director. Off-site affordable units: 1) Must be deed-restricted to achieve at least the same affordability period and income restrictions as the on-site affordable units, and may include any combination of new units or units in an existing structure; 2) Must include at least the same number of units and same bedroom count mix as would be required of the on-site affordable units. 3) Must be within the SCWCD or within one mile of the property seeking the bonus. 4) Must include the payment of a fee equivalent to the on-site requirement. This payment will be held in escrow, until a final Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the off-site units; and 5) Must receive Certificate of Occupancy for the off-site units within 36 months of the date that the final Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the property seeking the bonus. .2 Add Section 6.1/F: Land Dedication for Affordable Units Land dedication for affordable units may be proposed as an alternative to on-site production of affordable units. The applicant may donate to the City land that is within the SCWCD or within one mile of the property seeking the bonus, and provides equal or greater value than the fee equivalent to the on-site requirement. .3 Add Section 6.1/G: City of Austin Funding for Additional Affordable Units. The City of Austin may fund the provision of additional affordable units to achieve affordability for up to twenty percent of the units in a Project or may partner with the developer to increase the yield of off-site affordable housing projects created under Section 6.1/E. The City may elect to 1 of 2 subsidize residential units in these developments for rental or ownership purposes in any amount and at any level of affordability pursuant to …
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20240401-003 Subject: South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program – Continued SCWAB Oversight Seconded By: Date: April 1, 2024 Motioned By: Recommendations Publicly visible oversight by the South Central Waterfront Advisory Board should be a Program Requirement. Description of Recommendation to Council .1 Add the following clause in Section 5.1: “The South Central Waterfront Advisory Board (SCWAB) shall evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the Project is in compliance with the Vision Framework Plan and the Combining District and Density Bonus Program. The Development Services Director shall consider comments and recommendations of the SCWAB”. Rationale: A continued advisory role for the SCWAB was envisioned in the original Vision Framework Plan and enshrined as an Application Requirement in the 2018 Regulating Plan Draft. The SCWAB provides critical continuity and communication amongst stakeholders and advocates for the District to ensure that the original vision is properly implemented. It also provides the only public transparency into the process, allowing citizens insight into upcoming SCW projects and giving them a platform for direct feedback as SCWAB recommendations are formed. Continued SCWAB oversight is also entirely consistent with the setup of the Downtown Density Bonus Program (DDBP) that served as the foundational template for the Combining District Program. The recommended clause exactly matches the 25-2-586, section C/I/ii verbiage requiring Design Commission evaluation and recommendations as a DDBP Gatekeeper Requirement. The Planning Department has voiced a concern that the Vision Framework Plan is too aspirational and/or too outdated to serve as a basis for compliance recommendations moving forward. The SCWAB does not agree with this sentiment. That document is our only connection to the District-wide, consensus-based, masterplanning effort that kickstarted this neighborhood, and the vision it imparted is sorely missing in the project-focused implementation program. As such, it can still serve as our North Star in discussions with developers, helping to improve project designs and aligning proposed community benefits to the betterment of the District as a whole. 1 of 2 Vote For: Against: Abstain: Absent: Attest: [Staff or board member can sign] 2 of 2
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20240104-03 Subject: South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program – Green Community Benefits Seconded By: Date: April 1, 2024 Motioned By: Recommendations The stipulated list of community benefits should be expanded to include increased green building ratings and green roof community benefits to align with the environmental stewardship goals in the Vision Framework Plan. Description of Recommendation to Council .1 Add the following option in Section 6.5: Green Building Community Benefit An applicant may achieve bonus area by constructing a project to green building standards that exceed the requirements in section 6.2/D/2. The amount of bonus area that may be achieved is listed in the DBSCW Bonus Schedule. The requirements are as follows: 1) The applicant shall execute a restrictive covenant committing to achieve a specified rating under the Austin Energy Green Building (AEGB) program using the ratings in effect at the time the ratings application is submitted for the project or Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) program using the most recently launched version of the LEED for New Construction rating at the time of the project's registration. 2) The applicant shall also provide the director with a copy of the project's signed Austin Energy Green Building Letter of Intent for projects seeking AEGB rating or a copy of the completed LEED registration for projects seeking a LEED rating before the director may approve bonus area for a site. 3) An applicant must submit an AEGB or LEED checklist indicating the measures the project intends to complete to meet the applicable green building requirement before the director may approve bonus area for a site. 4) A project seeking an AEGB rating will be subject to at least one inspection during construction and an inspection at substantial completion. A project seeking LEED certification must submit the LEED design review results and an updated LEED checklist or scorecard indicating the project will be able to obtain LEED certification by substantial completion. 5) If the specified AEGB rating or LEED certification is not achieved within nine months from time of occupancy, an owner must pay into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund the applicable development bonus fee for the bonus area initially granted for this community benefit. The owner's payment will be based on the development bonus fee in effect when the owner pays. 1 of 2 .2 Add the following option in Section …
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20240401-003 Subject: South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program – Subdistrict FAR/Height Map Seconded By: Date: March 28, 2024 Motioned By: Recommendations The Subdistrict FAR/Height Map should be further refined to align with the Vision Framework Plan’s intent to buffer existing residential and low-density neighborhoods from high density development. Description of Recommendation to Council .1 All Subdistrict 5 parcels South of Riverside Drive should be mapped to Subdistrict 4 and thus subject to a maximum height. .2 Subdistrict 4 should be limited to 500’ of height. .3 The newly added parcels at 601 South 1st St, and 601-605 Barton Springs Rd (West of South 1st Street) should be mapped to Subdistrict 3. Rationale: The South Central Waterfront Vision Framework plan and 2018 Regulating Plan Draft envisioned much lower building height limits (90’-400’ range) and stepped down building heights as they move away from the Northwest corner of the Statesman tract and toward existing low-density neighborhoods. This was a purposeful response to significant Stakeholder feedback, long-held planning/compatibility principles, and a need for enhanced environmental protections/setbacks at Bouldin Creek. The current FAR/Height Map has been completely revamped to address Council Resolution 20220915- 090. It now allows denser/taller buildings across the District as a whole as a reaction to 2024 land values, escalated construction costs, and the need to accelerate development in the area. In light of the preceding, the current map is generally acceptable to the SCWAB with some exceptions. .1 Extending the unlimited height and maximum FAR entitlements of Subdistrict 5 across the originally proposed dividing line at Riverside Drive is incongruous with the Vision Framework Plan’s stated goal to transition height down as it nears existing neighborhoods. In addition, several of these parcels are mapped to legacy lot lines that are likely going to be eliminated via the Developer’s DDA process. .2 Subdistrict 4 parcels adjacent to the environmentally sensitive Bouldin Creek and/or the School for the Deaf should not be allowed 600’ of building height, a number that dwarfs most downtown construction and exceeds by 200’ the highest limit even contemplated in the Vision Framework. That height is also twice the 300’ allowed height in the adjacent Subdistrict 3 parcels, thus inconsistent with the idea of a stepped height transition. 1 of 2 .3 The newly included parcels West of South 1st Street are in close proximity to one and two-story …
Austin Live Music Fund 2024 Draft Program Guidelines Erica Shamaly, Music & Entertainment Division Manager Economic Development Department Music Commission Meeting, 4/1/2024 Austin Live Music Fund • The Live Music Fund was established by City of Austin Ordinance No. 20190919-149 and provides an ongoing budget for cultural funding programs for Austin's music industry • The Live Music Fund Master Timeline outlines how pilot program guidelines formed through a robust community engagement in coordination with the Music Commission and as part of the Cultural Funding Review: Arts, Heritage, Music • Music Commission Recommendation 20201019-2bii stated that the core equity principles of Preservation, Innovation and Elevation & Collaboration (P.I.E.) be followed to create greater economic growth in Austin's music industry • Music Commission Recommendation 20220207-3b: Commission recommends "Option 2" to amend guidelines presented on September 13 according to feedback from the Live Music Fund Stakeholder Working Group 2 Austin Live Music Fund – 2024 Eligible Applicants Professional Musician – Must meet at least one of the following requirements: • At least 2 years of documentation showing that Applicant has regularly performed as a professional musician— solo or as part of a band—in live performances to public audiences • Or 6 released recordings (singles) • Or 6 promotionally released music videos Independent Promoter – Must meet all of the following requirements: • No more than 3 staff, including the owner, and • Documentation showing that Applicant has curated and promoted live shows featuring musicians and bands for at least two years, and • Must not be contractually tied to one venue. Live Music Venue – Must meet at least five (5) components of the City of Austin definition: • An establishment where live music programming is the principal function of the business and/or the business is a live music destination, and where the venue establishes the ability of an artist to receive payment for work by percentage of sales, guarantee, or other mutually beneficial formal agreement for every performance. A live music venue is a destination for live music consumers, and/or its music programming is the primary driver of its business. 3 Austin Live Music Fund – Purpose & Core Principles Program Purpose – Encourages, promotes, improves, and showcases Austin’s diverse live music industry through supporting a wide array of music initiatives, including Live and online events; studio, video, and merchandise production; and, touring, marketing, and broadcasting that is targeted to local audiences, …
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 20240401-003 Subject: South Central Waterfront Combining District & Density Bonus Program – Endangered Open Spaces Seconded By: Date: April 1, 2024 Motioned By: Recommendations The four key Open Spaces in the Vision Framework Plan are endangered by years of city inaction and by the transition from a true regulating plan to an opt-in Combining District Program that fails to acknowledge previous open space masterplanning at any level. While the Parks fee-in-lieu allocation and parkland dedication community benefit in the Program will no doubt help secure both funding and potential park land in the aggregate, developing a SCW Open Spaces Masterplan and Budget are critical in achieving the district-wide vision. In addition, the Program should require that all approved PUDs or PDAs seeking to unwind and opt into the SCWCD in the future, must satisfy their negotiated obligations to these Open Space projects. Description of Recommendation to Council .1 Direct PARD or another City Department to develop a comprehensive SCW Open Spaces Masterplan that further defines how the four open space catalyst projects in the Vision Framework Plan will be designed and delivered in the current regulatory environment. .2 Direct PARD or another City Department to develop a companion SCW Open Spaces Budget that projects estimated FIL funds from the DBSCW and details how these funds, along with other possible public and private funding sources not yet fully explored, will be used to finance the four key open spaces in a timely manner, and prior to those funds being used outside the District. .3 Add Section 5.1.A.5 – The applicant must satisfy all parkland dedication and open space community benefit obligations codified in a prior PUD or PDA executed after the June 16, 2016 adoption of the SCW Vision Framework Plan. The Director shall determine the total bonus area obtainable through the previously negotiated obligations and shall apply them to satisfy the DBSCW Parkland Fee-in-Lieu requirement and/or other community benefits. Rationale: The City of Austin won a US EPA grant from the “Greening of America’s Capitals Program” in 2016 and in conjunction with much stakeholder and public input that year, planned out approximately 20 acres of open space and trail improvements in the SCW area. The plan sought to humanize the district, increase connectivity, respect and promote the waterfront, improve water quality, nurture Austin’s eclectic character and create a welcoming, inclusive gateway to the South …
March 20, 2024 Austin Environmental Commission Via Electronic Delivery Re: Southshore District Combining District and Density Bonus Environmental Commissioners, Please find the following recommendations from the Save Our Springs Alliance concerning the current draft regulating plan for the South Shore Waterfront Combining District and regulating plan. These are relatively abbreviated comments, and we intend to continue to expand upon them as the plan makes their way through the public process. As an initial comment, we would encourage the Environmental Commission and all commissions to carefully study and review the plan. There seems to be a disconnect between the Southshore Vision Framework and much of the draft language that cannot be resolved in a single public hearing. As an advisory commission to the City Council, please take the time that you need to review and make recommendations. SOS Recommendations: 1. Riparian Zone Impacts. Mandate City Council oversight and approval for any modificaOons of the hike-and-bike trail and for any expansion of trails within the CriOcal Water Quality Zone and Water Quality TransiOon Zone. 2. District Overreach. Remove properOes that were not previously included within the Southshore Vision Framework. 3. Maintain Waterfront Overlay. Maintain the current waterfront overlay regulaOons, including setbacks, height limits, use restricOons, and impervious cover limits. 4. South Shore is Not Downtown. Scale back on the downtown-level densiOes within the South Shore Subdistrict of the Waterfront Overlay, which was intenOonally more of a natural aestheOc compared to Downtown. 5. Rezone All ProperCes. Rezone all the properOes within the Southshore District to require compliance with the regulaOng plan and ensure consistency with the Vision Framework. OpOonal/piecemeal compliance will not achieve the community benefits. 6. Enhance Open Space Requirement. Increase the requirements for public open space recognizing the constraints on requirements for dedicated, on-site parkland. 7. Require On-Site DedicaCon / No Fee-in-Lieu. To the maximum extent permi[ed under state law, require that all parkland requirements be met through on-site dedicaOon (removing the fee-in- _______________Austin’s water watchdog since 1992_______________ 4701 Westgate Blvd, D-401, Austin, TX, 78745 • 512-477-2320 • SOSAlliance.org lieu). Please also enhance the density bonus program to include more emphasis on on-site parkland dedicaOon. 8. No Public Subsidies. The enOre district relies too much on subsidizaOon from public tax dollars. Adding a density bonus on top of public subsidies is conceptually flawed. Brief Explanations of Each Recommendation. 1. Limit Riparian Zone Impacts. The Southshore Vision Framework states: “Almost all of …
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) …
