CASE NO. C15-2026-0005 Madam Chair Cohen and Members of the Board of Adjustment City of Austin 301 West 2nd Street Austin, Texas 78701 RESPONDENT’S POSITION STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION TO THE HONORABLE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: COMES NOW, JBD CR HOLDING LLC ("Respondent" or "Property Owner"), by and through its undersigned counsel, and files this Position Statement in Opposition to the Request for Reconsideration filed by the opposing party ("Appellant"). Respondent respectfully requests that the Board of Adjustment ("Board" or "BOA") deny the reconsideration request outright and uphold its prior decision to affirm the issuance of Permit No. 2025-140201 PR. I. The Appellant’s Burden and the Strict Standard for Reconsideration Because the Board has already heard and decided this matter in favor of the Respondent, the Appellant's current filing is procedurally governed by the rules for Reconsideration under Article V, Section (F)(4) of the BOA Rules of Procedure. In any standard appeal, the Appellant bears the heavy burden of proving that the administrative official's decision was erroneous. However, in a Request for Reconsideration, that burden is significantly elevated. According to the Board's explicit rules, a request to reconsider must "state how the Board erred in its determination," "state why the action should be reconsidered," and critically, must "be supported by new or clarified evidence." Furthermore, the rules dictate that the Board shall only grant a reconsideration if there was an error in its original determination or "on the basis of new or clarified evidence not presented to the Board at the original hearing that might affect its determination." This means the Appellant has an affirmative duty to conduct new research and provide specific, material facts that were previously unavailable. A reconsideration request is not a venue for a party to simply express disagreement with a ruling or re-litigate the same arguments they already lost. ITEM08/1-PERMIT HOLDER II. Failure to Provide New Information or Meet the Burden of Proof The Appellant has thoroughly failed to meet this strict evidentiary threshold. The current filing provides no newly researched information and introduces no specific, clarifying evidence that was absent from the original hearing. Instead, the Appellant merely recycles the exact same unfounded speculations regarding technical building codes, bedroom counts, and FAR limits that this Board has already reviewed and properly dismissed. As previously established, the Board's jurisdiction is strictly limited to zoning matters, and it does not have the authority …
To: From: Chair Cohen Board of Adjustment Members Brent Lloyd Development Officer Austin Development Services Dept. Date: March 2, 2026 Subject: Case No. C15-2026-0005 | Appeal of Administrative Decision Approving Construction of Three-Unit Use at 205 East 34th St. (PR No. 2025-140201) On January 26, 2026, Peter Journeay-Kaler filed an appeal with the Board of Adjustment (BOA) challenging a decision by Austin Development Services (ADS) approving construction of a three-unit residential use at 205 East 34th Street. As explained below, ADS recommends that the Board uphold staff’s determination and dismiss the appeal. Summary of Appeal Issues Appellant argues that the approved plans fail to comply with four categories of regulation, which are summarized here along with ADS’s response: Regulation Appellant’s Position ADS’s Position North University Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) Three-unit uses are subject to NCCD FAR limit of 0.40 or, alternatively, 0.50 Three-unit uses are subject to 0.65 FAR limit per the “HOME” ordinance (Sec. 25-2-773) International Residential Code (IRC) Bedroom count exceeds limit for IRC review, so project is subject to International Building Code (IBC) Plans fail to meet Visitability requirements Stairs lack required tread depth Staff correctly applied IRC, IFC, and completeness requirements. None of these requirements are zoning regulations, so they are outside the BOA’s scope of review International Fire Code (IFC) Insufficient emergency access Application Completeness Permit application incomplete ITEM08/1-STAFF REPORT ADS Response to Appeal 1. FAR Issues In approving plans for this project (PR No. 2025-140201), ADS applied the 0.65 FAR limit applicable to three-unit residential uses under the “HOME” ordinance codified in Sec. 25- 2-773(E)(4)(a) of the Land Development Code. Appellant asks the Board to reverse this determination and instead find that three-unit uses are subject to the NUNA-NCCD’s 0.40 FAR limit for duplexes and two-unit uses or, alternatively, the 0.50 FAR limit that applies to most multi-family (MF) zoned lots within the NCCD. ADS recommends that the Board uphold staff’s determination that the 0.65 FAR limit applies to this project for the following reasons: • The NUNA-NCCD Ordinance says to apply the Land Development Code unless it conflicts with the NCCD. The NUNA-NCCD is silent on three-unit uses. Per direction in the original ordinance adopting the NCCD, this means that three-unit uses are subject to applicable requirements of the Land Development Code. See Ordinance No. 040826-58, Part 5, Sec. 1.a (“Except as provided in this section, the permitted and conditional uses for …
BOA Case No. C15-2026-0005 – Appeal of Permit No. 2025-140201 PR (205 E. 34th Street) Dear Chair and Members of the Board of Adjustment: On Monday, February 16, the Heritage Neighborhood Steering Committee met and voted unanimously to support the BOA appeal C15-2026-0005, concerning Permit 2025-140201 PR for a proposed project at 205 E. 34th Street in the North University Neighborhood. The North University Neighborhood Association (NUNA) general membership voted on February 2 to officially support the appeal. The Heritage Neighborhood Association shares concerns regarding adherence to the North University Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) and enforcement of City Code. The Heritage Neighborhood Steering Committee has the following concerns: 1) North University NCCD Floor Area Ratio limitations The proposed permit was approved for a Floor Area Ratio of approximately 0.65, despite the NCCD’s 0.4 FAR limitation applicable to SF-zoned properties. The North University NCCD was adopted in 2004, at a time when 3-unit residential use on SF zoning did not exist and could not have been anticipated. The absence of an explicit FAR entry in the NCCD for that use does not indicate an intent to permit greater building scale. The Heritage Neighborhood Association supports the interpretation that the NCCD’s 0.4 FAR limitation continues to apply to SF-zoned lots, including those now permitted to contain 3-unit residential uses. This is a narrow, district-specific application of adopted NCCD scale controls and would not have broader citywide implications. 2) Building Design and Review The proposed permit reflects a design that was modified from a previously rejected plan by removing walls and renaming rooms without materially changing the living space. Those walls could readily be restored after issuance of a certificate of occupancy and therefore warrant evaluation under an R-3 congregate living classification. Appropriate classification and review are essential to ensuring safe living conditions for group living arrangements, which are common in neighborhoods near the University of Texas, including both North University and Heritage. 3) Additional City Code and NCCD compliance concerns The appeal identifies several additional compliance issues, including deficiencies in application materials, stair safety, fire access, and required building orientation and visitable route standards. These concerns support the conclusion that the approved plans fail to demonstrate compliance with applicable City Code and NCCD requirements. Accordingly, the Heritage Neighborhood Association requests that the Board of Adjustment reverse the administrative decision and deny issuance of Permit No. 2025-140201 PR, and further requests that …
BOA Monthly Report July 2025-June 2026 MARCH 9, 2026 Granted 1 1. 25-10-129 (Downtown Sign District Regulations): (F) (2) (a) maximum sign area for a freestanding sign and (G) (1) to exceed sign height for a freestanding sign Postponed 2 1. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the interior yard setback 2. 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height Withdrawn Denied 0 3 1. 25-2-1176 (Site Development Regulations for Docks, Marinas, and Other Lakefront Uses) (A) (1) to increase the dock length 2. 25-2-1176 (Site Development Regulations for Docks, Marinas, and Other Lakefront Uses) (A) (1) to increase the dock length 3. The appellant has filed an appeal challenging determinations by City staff in connection with approval of a building permit (Permit No. 2025-140201 PR) and related construction plans for proposed development of a three-unit residential use Discussion Items 1 MAR 2026 Interpretations MAR 2026 BAAP 0 new inquiries 0 (Added MAR 9# 2026) The deposition of the case items: Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items 9 16 0 5 9 Board members absent: Melissa Hawthorne Vice Chair, Tommy Ates, Suzanne Valentine (unavailable) (1 vacant alternate position) February 9, 2026 Meeting cancelled due to notification error January 12, 2026 Meeting cancelled due to technology upgrades in Council Chambers December 8, 2025 Granted Postponed 0 2 4. 25-2-1176 (Site Development Regulations for Docks, Marinas, and Other Lakefront Uses) (A) (1) to increase the dock length 5. 25-2-1176 (Site Development Regulations for Docks, Marinas, and Other Lakefront Uses) (A) (1) to increase the dock length Withdrawn Denied 0 1 1. Appellant challenges approval of administrative revisions to Plan Review No. 2022-0060407PR and revisions to the following associated permits: Building Permit No. 2022-093202BP (house remodel/additions) Building Permit no. 2022-093203BP (pool) Discussion Items 2 Dec 2025 Interpretations Dec 2025 BAAP 1 new inquiries 0 (Added Dec 8# 2025) The deposition of the case items: Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items 8 14 0 2 (recon) 8 Board members absent: None (1 vacant alternate position) November 10, 2025 Granted 4 1. 25-10-127 (Multi-Family Residential Sign District Regulations): (E) (2) (a) to exceed total sign area 2. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the front yard setback 3. 25-10-124 (Scenic Roadway Sign District Regulations), (B) to allow more freestanding signs 4. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) setback requirements to decrease the minimum interior side yard …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MONDAY, April 13, 2026 AT 5:30 P.M. AUSTIN CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ROOM 1001 301 WEST 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT may 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, contact Elaine Ramirez at 512-974-2202 or email elaine.ramirez@austintexas.gov. CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS: ___Jessica Cohen (Chair) ___Melissa Hawthorne (Vice-Chair) ___Haseeb Abdullah ___Thomas Ates ___Sameer S Birring ___ Jeffery Bowen ___ Yung-ju Kim ___Bianca A Medina-Leal ___Brian Poteet ___Margaret Shahrestani ___Michael Von Ohlen ___Corry L Archer-Mcclellan (Alternate) ___Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 4 speakers signed up/register prior (no later than noon the day before the meeting) 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 1. Approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustment Regular meeting on March 9, 2026 On-Line Link: March 9, 2026 draft minutes PUBLIC HEARINGS Discussion and action on the following cases Previous Postponed cases: 2. C15-2026-0003 Luke Caraway for Yair Cohen Hoshen 8506 & 8507 Walhill Cove On-Line Link: ITEM02 ADV PACKET ; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the interior yard setback from five feet (5 ft) (required) to one foot (1ft) (requested) in order to complete two residential structures in a “SF-3”, Single-Family zoning district. 3. C15-2026-0006 Cole Stewart 4301 Manzanillo Drive On-Line Link: ITEM03 ADV PACKET PART1, PART2, PART3; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height from six feet (6 ft) (maximum allowed) to eight feet (8 ft.) (requested) along rear property line (southeast) and street side yard property line (northeast), in order to erect a fence in a “SF-2”, Single-Family zoning district. Note: The Land Development Code 25-2-899 Fences as Accessory Uses (A) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, …
2026-000001 BA 8506 & 8507 Walhill Cove Presenter: Luke Caraway 3/9/2026 ITEM02/1-PRESENTATION Original Site Current Lot Configurations • Address: 8506 & 8507 Wahill Cove in Northwest Austin • Zoning: SF-3 • Existing Structures: • 8506 Walhill (Lot 62): 2,500 sf, construced in 1991 • 8507 Walhill (Lot 61): Detached Garage ITEM02/2-PRESENTATION A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 I T N I NOTE: 00 10' 20' GRAPHIC SCALE 10' 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 8" PVC PUBLIC WWL 8" PVC PUBLIC WWL PROPERTY BOUNDARY ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPOSED PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED SETBACK/BUFFER LINES PROPOSED ROADWAY CENTERLINE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER APPROX. FEMA 100YR FLOODPLAIN EXISTING EASEMENT EXISTING BARBED WIRE FENCE EXISTING OVERHEAD WIRES PROP WATER SERVICE LINE WITH METER PROP WASTEWATER SERVICE LINE WITH CLEAN-OUT PROP EASEMENT SAVED TREES REMOVED TREES I S N O S V E R I I I N O T P R C S E D E T A D V E R THIS PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR GENERAL DISCUSSION ONLY AND IS BASED UPON LIMITED DUE DILIGENCE. 109 108 107 8506 Walhill Cove 102 106 5' 5' 5' 1.5' 105 101 103 111 112 5' 8507 Walhill Cove 8507 WALHILL COVE 3,580 SF 5.0 BATH FFE = 799.00 3.00' MIN. 4" PVC PUBLIC WL (W-1978-0028) E WW WW W W 4" PVC PUBLIC WL (W-1978-0028) i g n i r e e n g n E t n o P w e i V i W W 8" PVC PUBLIC WWL (PROFILE #A13146) W W DWN BY: EH CHK BY: LC WL 8" PVC PUBLIC W (PROFILE #A13146) W W W W W W W W I E V O C L L H L A W 7 0 5 8 N A L P P A T L A T N E D S E R I I I E V O C L L H L L A W 7 0 5 8 9 5 7 8 7 X T , I N T S U A T C E J O R P PROJECT NO. DATE SHEET # 03 Know what's below Call before you dig TEXAS ONE CALL DIAL 811 or 800.245.4545 TEXAS811.org LOCATION OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IS APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON OBSERVABLE SURFACE FEATURES ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT …
Fence Height Variance Request April 13, 2026 BOA Hearing Case No: C15-2026-0006 4301 Manzanillo Drive Austin, Texas Applicant: Cole Stewart ITEM03/1-PRESENTATION Corner Lot Configuration Subject property has frontage on Manzanillo Drive and Eskew Drive ITEM03/2-PRESENTATION Physical Site Conditions • 32-inch cumulative grade change • Fence measures 91-95 inches from grade • Measurements verified using laser level and post-by-post field measurements 91 ft Drop: 21.5 in 47 ft Drop: 10.5 in ITEM03/3-PRESENTATION Limited Scope and No Public Impact • Over-height segments limited to side and rear yard • Fence remains outside public right-of-way • No obstruction of corner visibility ITEM03/4-PRESENTATION
C16-2026-0003 311, 321, 323, 325, and 327 W. 6th Street ITEM04/1-PRESENTATION ITEM04/2-PRESENTATION ITEM04/3-PRESENTATION ITEM04/4-PRESENTATION ITEM04/5-PRESENTATION 221 W. 6th Street – Chase Bank Tower Sign is 4-feet and 11 inches tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of W. 6th Street ITEM04/6-PRESENTATION 201 W. 5th Street – 5th & Colorado Sign is 5-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Colorado Street ITEM04/7-PRESENTATION 300 Colorado Street Sign is 6-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Colorado Street ITEM04/8-PRESENTATION 110 E. 2nd Street – Corner Restaurant Sign is 4-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Congress Avenue ITEM04/9-PRESENTATION 110 E. 2nd Street – Dean’s Steakhouse Sign is 4-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Brazos Street ITEM04/10-PRESENTATION 98 San Jacinto – San Jacinto Center Sign is 5-feet and 8 inches tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Cesar Chavez Avenue and Brazos Street ITEM04/11-PRESENTATION 111 Congress Avenue – One Eleven Congress Sign is 5-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Cesar Chavez Avenue ITEM04/12-PRESENTATION 301 W. 2nd Street – The Austinite Market Sign is approximately 7-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of Lavaca Street and 2nd Street ITEM04/13-PRESENTATION 525 N. Lamar – Whole Foods Market Sign is approximately 5-feet tall and located within 12-feet of the street right-of-way of W. 5th Street ITEM04/14-PRESENTATION 525 N. Lamar – Whole Foods Market Signs are approximately 6-feet 3 inches tall each and located within 12-feet of the street right- of-way of W. 5th Street ITEM04/15-PRESENTATION
4219 S 1st Street Board of Adjustment Case # C15-2026-0010 April 13, 2026 1 ITEM07/1-PRESENTATION Project Location 2 ITEM07/2-PRESENTATION Project Location 3 ITEM07/3-PRESENTATION Site Zoning GR-MU-CO-NP CS-MU-NP LO-CO-NP CS-MU-NP CS-MU-NP 4 ITEM07/4-PRESENTATION Proposed Site Plan 5 ITEM07/5-PRESENTATION Proposed Site Plan Required compatibility setbacks Heritage tree to be preserved Existing utility corridor showing significant congestion 6 ITEM07/6-PRESENTATION 25-2-814 – Service Station Use § 25-2-814 - SERVICE STATION USE. § 25-2-814 - SERVICE STATION USE. A service station use: (1) must be screened from the street by a building or a landscape buffer that includes shade trees; (2) may not have more than 16 fuel dispensers; and (3) may not have more than eight vehicle queue lanes. A service station use: (1) Compliant with buffer. • Screened from street by a landscape buffer that includes shade trees. (2) Compliant with number of fuel dispensers. • Only 12 fuel dispensers proposed. (3) Requesting a variance from LDC §25-2-814. • Applicant is proposing 12 vehicle queue lanes. • The queue lane listed in the Transportation Criteria Manual (allowing up to 16 pumps) requires outdated fuel dispensing configuration. • The Applicant is requesting a safer and more accessible configuration. 7 ITEM07/7-PRESENTATION Transportation Criteria Manual – Figure 9-10 • Figure 9-10 illustrates outdated conceptual queuing layouts ▪ Newer convenience stores do not use this “inline” approach because it: • Increases vehicular conflict points, which decreases safe maneuverability; • Reduces user visibility, which decreases safe maneuverability; and • Customers do not like this configuration. • The intent of the standard is to ensure: ▪ Safe circulation; ▪ Safe vehicle stacking; and ▪ Minimized conflicts. • The proposed site layout meets the functional intent of the Transportation Criteria Manual by: ▪ Providing clearly defined queue lanes; ▪ Separating circulation from pedestrian routes; and ▪ Reducing internal vehicle conflict points. Transportation Criteria Manual: Figure 9-10 8 ITEM07/8-PRESENTATION Queue Lane Configuration Comparison TCM Compliant Queue Lane Configuration • Not enough space for vehicular maneuverability • Multiple points of vehicle conflict • Doesn’t matter where on the site it goes Proposed Queue Lane Configuration • Allows adequate vehicular maneuverability • Improves safety/reduces conflict points • Industry standard design 9 ITEM07/9-PRESENTATION Improvements to Pedestrian Experience Existing Conditions 1 2 Photo 1. No sidewalk along Radam looking west Photo 2. No sidewalk along S. First looking north 10 ITEM07/10-PRESENTATION Similar Projects Approved by Board of Adjustment Project: Board of Adjustment Action: • C15-2025-0001 …
205 E 34th St Board of Adjustment Reconsideration Case C15-2026-0005 1 ITEM08/1-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Basis for Reconsideration and Requested Action • Procedural concerns regarding Board participation and required voting thresholds • A clear NCCD building orientation requirement was not addressed • The NCCD 0.4 FAR standard was not evaluated under the applicable Part 7 provisions • The approved plans allow construction of a building configuration that does not meet requirements identified during staff review Accordingly, we ask the Board of Adjustment to: • Reverse issuance of Permit No. 2025-140201 PR based on failure to demonstrate compliance with applicable NCCD standards and other adopted code requirements 2 ITEM08/2-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Procedural Issue: Participation of a Disqualified Member • Board member received material information about this case outside the hearing record • No disclosure was made as required under the Board’s Rules of Procedure, and the member did not recuse • The statutory requirement that at least 75% of Board members hear a case was not met • The disqualified member’s seconding of the motion to deny and vote in support of the motion determined the outcome of the appeal 3 ITEM08/3-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT NCCD Building Orientation Requirement Not Addressed Visitability path from Alley to Building 2 Main Entrance Building 2 Main Entrance (Alley Facing ) • NCCD Part 3 defines front of building as the side of a building that includes the main entrance • NCCD Part 6 requires that “a building shall front on the short side of the lot” defined as the street frontage • Approved plans orient Building 2’s main entrance to the alley • Compliance with NCCD Part 6 would require a redesign, as the current layout does not allow the main entrance to front the street 4 ITEM08/4-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT NCCD FAR Evaluated Under Part 5 Instead of Part 7 • The NCCD is a Council-adopted ordinance governing development within North University • Staff report and motion to deny relied on NCCD Part 5 • Part 5 governs permitted uses, not site development standards • NCCD Part 7 governs site development standards, including FAR • Part 7 applies to New Residential Development • Part 7, Item 7 applies the 0.4 FAR Standard to a SF-3-NCCD-NP Lot with Three-Units 5 ITEM08/5-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Part 7 applies the 0.4 FAR Standard to Three-Unit Residential Use 201 E 34th Street & 3307–3309 Helms Street Lot 1, Block 19, Grooms Addition (SF-3-NCCD-NP) sq ft Gross Floor Area: Unit 1 Gross …
FAR Issues – Outside the Scope of BOA Authority The NCCD specifies FAR for single-family and duplex uses. The City later introduced two- and three-family dwelling terminology, so that the HOME ordinance applies citywide, including within NCCDs. NCCD was specifically designed to impose regulation on then existing uses. HOME ordinance specifically added 3-plex regulation on city wide scale. Home Ordinance Being regulation adopted later in time and covering the whole City it is the controlling regulation for this project. Any change to NCCD FAR requires action by Mayor and Council and is outside the authority of the BOA. The building orientation issue was not identified as a distinct ground in the original appeal or preserved as a specific issue for Board determination. ITEM08/1-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER The building orientation issue were not before the Board in the original appeal and therefore cannot serve as a basis for reconsideration. The deadline for appeal is passed and no other item can be added into consideration after that. Even if we consider this item, the BLDG 2 front and back are exactly the same and either side can be called building front. ITEM08/2-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER The lot is surrounded by multifamily buildings and the blue area marks rental/investment property. This particular area is already heavily populated by tenants. Over 11 houses in North University NCCD have over 15 bedrooms, and are rentals. This is a modest project and it is not located at Historical Aldridge Place, where most of the houses are single family. ITEM08/3-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER The block of 34th Street where this project is located consists of poorly maintained houses, tear- downs, and homes in desperate condition. It is also surrounded by multifamily and commercial properties, where new single-family, low-density construction would be inconsistent with the surrounding context and economically impractical, placing the owner at a financial loss. The ITEM08/4-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER proposed development not only provides more affordable housing but also improves the overall appearance of this particular block, which is, without exaggeration, in very poor condition. ITEM08/5-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER ITEM08/6-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER ITEM08/7-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER ITEM08/8-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER ITEM08/9-PRESENTATION-PERMIT HOLDER
Courtney Blanton To: me, Cc: Message Body · Tue, Nov 25 at 7:37 AM This looks good to us. You have our blessing. We are all good with the structure to go back where it was before. Happy Holidays! Courtney & Tom 2205 Quarry Garage rebuild • John Lohr To: Message Body Courtney, Tom, · Sun, Nov 23 at 2:20 PM As discussed, we are preparing to submit an application to allow our garage to be rebuilt in the same spot and same configuration as was there before the fire. If you could just a reply to this email to confirm y'all are good with that plan. I have attached a copy of our survey prior to the garage being demolished. The new structure would go right back in the same spot, same size, height, design etc. No plumbing, Let me know any questions. Thanks, John and Sally John L. Lohr mobile ITEM05/1-SUPPORT Garage rebuild 2205 Quarry Road • • • • John Lohr John and Sally, As your next door neighbors, Patrick and I are in support of your application to allow your garage to be rebuilt in the same spot and same configuration as was there before the fire! • • Hi John, • • I'm just letting you know that I also fully support your application to allow your garage to be rebuilt in the same spot and in the same configuration as was there before the fire. • • • • • I know Tracy has already spoken on my behalf, but sometimes attorneys or courts want signatures from both married parties. Patrick Parker 2203 Quarry Road --Tracy LaQuey Parker 2203 Quarry Road • • • • Hi John, • • I'm just letting you know that I also fully support your application to allow your garage to be rebuilt in the same spot and in the same configuration as was there before the fire. • • • • • I know Tracy has already spoken on my behalf, but sometimes attorneys or courts want signatures from both married parties. Patrick Parker 2203 Quarry Road ITEM05/2-SUPPORT Garage rebuild 2205 Quarry Road • John Lohr To: , Nov 22 at 7:27 PM Wells, Thanks to you and Leslie for chatting with me this morning. As discussed, we are preparing to submit an application to allow our garage to be rebuilt in the same spot and same configuration …
ITEM06/1-SUPPORT Neighbor Letter of No Opposition Date: 3/30/2026 To: City of Austin Board of Adjustment QT South, LLC is the owner of the property located at 9509 E Parmer Lane. I am writing to express no opposition for Board of Adjustment Case No. C15-2026-0009. This case requests a variance to reduce the southeastern side setback requirement from 25 feet to 15 feet for the property located at 9419 E Parmer Ln, Austin, TX 78653. After reviewing the request and understanding the nature of the proposed development, I do not oppose the requested setback reduction. I do not believe the variance will negatively impact my property or the surrounding area. Please consider this letter as my formal statement of no opposition to the variance request. Sincerely, Signature: ______________________________ Printed Name: Robert Costello, Real Estate Project Manager, QT South, LLC Property Address: 9509 E Parmer Lane ITEM06/2-SUPPORT
ITEM08/1-SUPPORT Heritage Association Steering Committee Letter of Support - BOA Case No. C15-2026-0005 Dear Chair and Members of the Board of Adjustment: On Monday, February 16, the Heritage Neighborhood Steering Committee met and voted unanimously to support the BOA appeal C15-2026-0005, concerning a proposed project at 205 E. 34th Street in the North University Neighborhood. The Heritage Neighborhood Association shares concerns regarding adherence to the North University Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) and enforcement of City Code. This request is not about opposing development or density. The Heritage Neighborhood Association supports affordable housing in Austin. The proposed development at 205 E 34th Street has resulted in the demolition of existing affordable housing and the displacement of residents. This makes it especially important that new development comply with standards adopted by City Council, including the North University NCCD, and be subject to a complete and transparent review process. The reconsideration request raises several issues that were not addressed during the March 9 hearing: • • • • A Board member participated after receiving information about the case outside the public hearing process A required NCCD building orientation standard was not addressed The NCCD’s Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standard, which regulates building scale, was not evaluated under Part 7 of the NCCD, which sets a 0.4 FAR limit for a lot with the same zoning (SF-3-NCCD- NP) and use (three-unit residential) as the proposed project The proposed project’s layout raises questions about whether it can be constructed and used in a manner consistent with applicable zoning requirements, including requirements identified by City staff during the review process Accordingly, the Heritage Neighborhood Association respectfully requests that the Board grant reconsideration and sustain the appeal to ensure that the proposed project complies with applicable NCCD and City Code requirements. Sincerely, Laura Grim, President Heritage Neighborhood Association ITEM08/2-SUPPORT President: Charles d’Harcourt, Vice President: Bart Whatley, Treasurer: Bruce Fairchild, Secretary: Christopher Oakland April 13, 2026 Re: BOA Case No. C15-2026-0005 Dear Chair and Members of the Board of Adjustment, In the case regarding the building permit for the property at 205 E 34th Street, the Hancock Neighborhood Association membership has voted to support the appellant, particularly because: ● The project's floor-to-area ratio exceeds the 0.4:1 ratio set out by the North University Neighborhood Conservation Combining District for SF-3 properties (ordinance 040826-58, Part 7, site development standards table, "Max. FAR" line) ● The building permit applicant has …
- REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD POLICY BOARD MONDAY, APRIL 13, 2026, AT 5:00 P.M. PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, ROOM 1406 6310 WILHELMINO DELCO DRIVE, AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board may be participating by videoconference. 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, contact Amanda Rohlich, (512) 974-1364, Amanda.Rohlich@austintexas.gov. CURRENT AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD POLICY BOARD MEMBERS: Joi Chevalier, Chair Lisa Barden, Vice-Chair Andrea Abel Marissa Bell Beth Corbett Nitza Cuevas Kacey Hanson Seanna Marceaux Melody McClary Erin McDonald Natalie Poulos Andrew Smith AGENDA CALL TO ORDER Board Member roll call and introduction of new and existing board members. 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Special Called Meeting on Monday, March 23, 2026. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding Austin-Travis County Food Plan Implementation. Presentation by Edwin Marty, Food Policy Manager, Austin Climate Action & Resilience and Yaira Robinson, Assistant Director of Environmental Programs, Travis County. DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Presentation and discussion regarding Agricultural Evaluations, Nickolas Fritz, Land & Special Valuation Manager, Travis County Appraisal District. Report from Joint Sustainability Committee on March 25, 2026. Presentation and discussion regarding the working group to expand access to nutritious foods through improvement to existing materials and resources and explore alternate or expanded hours for existing resources. Presentation and discussion regarding the working group to participate in the USDA Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) application for funding for conservation easements as a regional partnership. Presentation and discussion regarding the working group to explore revenue generators such as sugar sweetened beverage tax, a surplus food donation requirement for events, and/or a percent conservation fund from all land purchases or new developments. Review Board Member Assignments. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Discuss and take possible action on the Joint Sustainability Committee liaison appointment. Discuss …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: XXXXXXXX-XXX: Supporting Food Plan Implementation through Urban Agriculture Coordination and Festival Beach Restoration WHEREAS, the Festival Beach Food Forest is a volunteer-led permaculture food forest developed in partnership with the Austin Parks and Recreation Department beginning in 2014, sponsored by 501(c)3 nonprofit organization Fruitful Commons; and WHEREAS, in 2021 the Austin City Council approved expansion of the Festival Beach Food Forest to approximately three acres to support community food production, ecological restoration, and climate resilience on public parkland; and WHEREAS, a wastewater pipeline relocation associated with the Texas Department of Transportation Interstate 35 Capital Express Project has impacted the approved Phase 2 expansion area of the Festival Beach Food Forest, resulting in the removal of 92 trees and shrubs and the loss of approximately $550,000 in public and community investment, including $375,000 in volunteer labor; and WHEREAS, despite quarterly coordination meetings over 18 months, community stewards were notified of the wastewater pipeline relocation only two weeks before construction was scheduled to begin, highlighting gaps in communication and coordination between City departments, infrastructure projects, and community partners stewarding food-producing landscapes on public land; and WHEREAS, the Festival Beach Food Forest and adjacent Festival Beach Community Garden are also expected to be impacted by a proposed Austin Energy transmission line relocation associated with the Interstate 35 Capital Express Project, for which Austin Energy has agreed to provide $2,414,240 in parkland mitigation funding for permanent use of parkland, pending approval by the Austin City Council on April 23, 2026; and WHEREAS, the combined impacts of the wastewater pipeline relocation and the proposed Austin Energy transmission line relocation represent cumulative disruptions to the Festival Beach Food Forest and adjacent community food production spaces, compounding the loss of established plantings, volunteer investment, and community use of public land; and WHEREAS, community-scale food production projects such as the Festival Beach Food Forest advance goals of the Austin/Travis County Food Plan by increasing local food production, climate resilience, and community stewardship of public land; and WHEREAS, in 2025 the Austin Travis County Food Policy Board adopted Recommendation 20250210-003 urging the City to establish an interdepartmental coordination mechanism, including a dedicated staff role, to support urban agriculture and implementation of the Food Plan across departments; and WHEREAS, the Austin Climate and Resilience Office previously proposed a budget enhancement to create an Urban Agriculture Program Manager position to coordinate Food …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: XXXXXXXX-XXX: Support for Del Valle Food Co-Op Rezoning and Fee Relief WHEREAS, the Austin‑Travis County Food Plan, adopted by Austin City Council in October 2024, calls for expanding access to nutritious and affordable food for all residents, prioritizes community‑led solutions, and emphasizes strengthening food markets and retail outlets in underserved areas; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co‑Op is a community‑driven initiative launched in 2023 to establish a neighborhood grocery store in East Austin — a location with limited retail access to healthy foods — with the goal of improving food accessibility, reducing transportation barriers, and providing a walkable, community‑centered food retail option; and WHEREAS, the project received a $500,000 allocation from the City of Austin through the American Rescue Plan Act, representing a public investment in equitable food access and local economic development; and WHEREAS, the co‑op has been developed through strong, ongoing collaboration with community partners including Go Austin Vamos Austin (GAVA) and Austin Cooperative Business Association (ACBA), with community organizing and outreach central to designing a store that reflects local needs, priorities, and lived experience; and WHEREAS, Phase I activities have been completed, including business planning, creating a market study, cooperative incorporation, governance development, and hiring operational leadership, demonstrating readiness for next-phase site planning and implementation; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co‑Op has established over 40 paid member‑owners and has secured additional membership pledges, reflecting sustained local support and community engagement; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co-Op has identified a development site at 5807 Ross Road to serve East Austin residents; and WHEREAS, the selected site is within an area identified in a 2023 market feasibility study as having strong potential to support a neighborhood grocery store; and WHEREAS, the selected site also meets key feasibility criteria, including access to utilities, location outside of the floodplain, proximity to public transportation, and accessibility to surrounding neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the site must be rezoned from SF-6 (Townhouse & Condominium Residence) to LR (Neighborhood Commercial) or an equivalent commercial designation that permits a neighborhood- scale grocery store to proceed; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co-Op has secured site control through a lease agreement with the property owner, including authorization to pursue rezoning and an option to purchase the property; and WHEREAS, the standard rezoning process is estimated to cost $10,000 or more, including application fees, planning or legal …
Nickolas Fritz, Land & Special Valuation Manager To qualify for agricultural evaluation, a property must show: • Agricultural use for 5 of the preceding 7 years • Agriculture is the land's primary use • Degree of intensity generally accepted in the area • Current intensity guidelines are generally designed around larger traditional operations. However, the law does not allow TCAD to deny a qualifying use solely on the basis of acreage. A small, intensive commercial operation that meets the degree-of-intensity test can qualify, regardless of size. • Commercial intent — production for sale, not hobby or personal use Application deadline: April 30 annually (Form 50-129) Land Inside Austin City Limits • Standard 5-of-7 year history becomes a continuous 5-year requirement — no gaps allowed • One missed year inside city limits can break the qualification, whereas it would not outside the city limits • Alternate path: land that does not receive city services comparable to surrounding properties may qualify. This is rarely applicable in Austin proper. • Consistency of documented use is critical — off-season gaps in visible activity matter more inside city limits Both mixed produce and cover cropping are recognized agricultural activities under Texas Tax Code §23.51. Mixed Produce Farms • Qualifies under irrigated or dry cropland categories • Must demonstrate commercial sales — receipts, Schedule F, and buyer documentation are key Both mixed produce and cover cropping are recognized agricultural activities under Texas Tax Code §23.51. Cover Cropping • Explicitly listed as a qualifying activity in Tax Code §23.51 when part of a normal commercial crop rotation • Cannot stand alone as the primary qualifying use — must support an active commercial operation TCAD currently has no formal mixed produce intensity classification — but the legal framework fully supports creating one. • The Chief Appraiser has full statutory authority to establish intensity standards for any agricultural use type. • The Comptroller's framework explicitly supports small intensive operations and does not allow acreage alone to be disqualifying. • TCAD has discussed a mixed produce class for several years — limited demand has slowed formal development. • Engagement from Austin's food community is exactly the kind of input that moves this forward through the Ag Advisory Board. A conservation easement is a voluntary legal agreement — permanently recorded in the deed — that restricts development or commercial use of land for conservation purposes. It is governed in Texas by …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number20260413-011: Supporting Food Plan Implementation through Urban Agriculture Coordination and Festival Beach Restoration WHEREAS, the Festival Beach Food Forest is a volunteer-led permaculture food forest developed in partnership with the Austin Parks and Recreation Department beginning in 2014, sponsored by 501(c)3 nonprofit organization Fruitful Commons; and WHEREAS, in 2021 the Austin City Council approved expansion of the Festival Beach Food Forest to approximately three acres to support community food production, ecological restoration, and climate resilience on public parkland; and WHEREAS, a wastewater pipeline relocation associated with the Texas Department of Transportation Interstate 35 Capital Express Project has impacted the approved Phase 2 expansion area of the Festival Beach Food Forest, resulting in the removal of 92 trees and shrubs and the loss of approximately $550,000 in public and community investment, including $375,000 in volunteer labor; and WHEREAS, despite quarterly coordination meetings over 18 months, community stewards were notified of the wastewater pipeline relocation only two weeks before construction was scheduled to begin, highlighting gaps in communication and coordination between City departments, infrastructure projects, and community partners stewarding food-producing landscapes on public land; and WHEREAS, the Festival Beach Food Forest and adjacent Festival Beach Community Garden are also expected to be impacted by a proposed Austin Energy transmission line relocation associated with the Interstate 35 Capital Express Project, for which Austin Energy has agreed to provide $2,414,240 in parkland mitigation funding for permanent use of parkland, pending approval by the Austin City Council on April 23, 2026; and WHEREAS, the combined impacts of the wastewater pipeline relocation and the proposed Austin Energy transmission line relocation represent cumulative disruptions to the Festival Beach Food Forest and adjacent community food production spaces, compounding the loss of established plantings, volunteer investment, and community use of public land; and WHEREAS, community-scale food production projects such as the Festival Beach Food Forest advance key goals of the Austin/Travis County Food Plan, including expanding access to land for community-based food production (Goal 1), increasing equitable access to nutritious and culturally relevant food (Goal 6), and strengthening community leadership, participation, and decision-making in the food system (Goal 9); and WHEREAS, the Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board has consistently advanced this priority, adopting Recommendations 20240318-007 in 2024 and 20250210-003 in 2025, both of which urge the City to establish an interdepartmental coordination mechanism, including a dedicated staff role, to support …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: 20260414-012: Support for Del Valle Food Co-Op Rezoning and Fee Relief WHEREAS, the Austin‑Travis County Food Plan, adopted by Austin City Council in October 2024, calls for expanding access to nutritious and affordable food for all residents (Goal 6), prioritizes community‑led solutions, and emphasizes strengthening food markets and retail outlets in underserved areas; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co‑Op is a community‑driven initiative launched in 2023 to establish a neighborhood grocery store in East Austin — a location with limited retail access to healthy foods — with the goal of improving food accessibility, reducing transportation barriers, and providing a walkable, community‑centered food retail option; and WHEREAS, the project received a $500,000 allocation from the City of Austin through the American Rescue Plan Act, representing a public investment in equitable food access and local economic development; and WHEREAS, the co‑op has been developed through strong, ongoing collaboration with community partners including Go Austin Vamos Austin (GAVA) and Austin Cooperative Business Association (ACBA), with community organizing and outreach central to designing a store that reflects local needs, priorities, and lived experience; and WHEREAS, Phase I activities have been completed, including business planning, creating a market study, cooperative incorporation, governance development, and hiring operational leadership, demonstrating readiness for next-phase site planning and implementation; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co‑Op has established over 40 paid member‑owners and has secured additional membership pledges, reflecting sustained local support and community engagement; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co-Op has identified a development site at 5807 Ross Road to serve East Austin residents; and WHEREAS, the selected site is within an area identified in a 2023 market feasibility study as having strong potential to support a neighborhood grocery store; and WHEREAS, the selected site also meets key feasibility criteria, including access to utilities, location outside of the floodplain, proximity to public transportation, and accessibility to surrounding neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Cooperative Property is currently zoned townhouse and condominium residence (SF-6) district, a zoning designation which does not allow the use of this property as a grocery store; and WHEREAS, the Del Valle Food Co-Op has secured site control through a lease agreement with the property owner, including authorization to pursue rezoning and an option to purchase the property; and WHEREAS, the standard rezoning process is estimated to cost $10,000 or more, including …
April 13, 2026 Food Policy Board Presentation Founded 2019MissionWe support neighborhood leaders and organizations to grow food,strengthen communities, and foster stewardship of the natural commonsVisionEvery neighborhood has green spaces that reconnect people to food,nature, and each other AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD PLAN Fruitful Commons supports Food Plan Strategies: Currently engaged as “Network Weaver” for Food Plan Implemenation Collaborative Expand access to nutritious andculturally relevant food in fooddistribution programs and foodretail locations for residents ofAustin-Travis County experiencingfood insecurity or facing barriers tofood access...GOAL 6: ACCESSExpand community food production,preserve agricultural lands, andincrease the amount of farmlanddedicated to regenerative foodproduction long-term in Austin-Travis County.GOAL 1: LANDDevelop community education,empowerment, and infrastructure tosupport effective implementation ofthe food plan as measured byincreased funding, data collection,partnerships, and communityparticipation in a local food systemnetwork.GOAL 9: EMPOWER FISCALLY SPONSORED PROJECTS Onion Creek Park Neighborhoods Alliance Memorial Garden Orchard Project TREE CARE MINI GRANT PROJECTS UT Microfarm WorkdayInstalling IrrigationSDF Garden Tree PlantingSt. John OrchardExpandedLabyrinth CommunityGardenPEASEl Buen SamaritanoCenter for MaximumPotential BuildingSystems Food ForestAlamo CommunityGardenKealing Middle SchoolAustin DiscoverySchoolSalvation ArmyFestival BeachCommunity GardenFestival BeachFood Forest 2025 MINI GRANT RECIPIENTS Fifth Annual Cohort of Urban Canopy Champions! Applications for the 2026-2027 cohort will be open July 15-August 31. Festival Beach Community GardenFestival Beach Food ForestFriends of Grand MeadowIslamic Center of Greater AustinJollyville ElementaryKalpulli Texas QuetzalcoatlOdom ElementaryOnion Creek Park Neighborhoods AlliancePartners for Education Agriculture andSustainability (PEAS)Rebuilding Broken CommunitiesThe Salvation Army AustinUrban Roots Festival Beach Food forest FESTIVAL BEACH FOOD FOREST FBFF expanded from 3/4 acre to 3 acres in 2022-2024 and will continue to grow in 2026 TXDOT CAPITAL EXPRESS PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SURVEY “Festival Beach Community Garden and Festival Beach Food Forest onWaller Street, between Clermont and Flores Streets, were added as Section4(f) resources for constructive use analysis, as they would be directlyacross from temporary construction staging areas. No direct impactswould occur at these Edward Rendon Sr. Metro Park facilities.“ WASTEWATER PIPELINE UTILITY RELOCATION Approved by Parks Board, Nov. 2024 - Board was misinformed that pipeline “would not” directly impact food forest; no public comments given Approved by Austin City Council, Jan. 2025; no public comments given First notification to FBFF & Fruitful Commons - January 6, 2026 - via Rifeline, TxDOT Community Liaison contractors Estimated $550K loss, including city-funded plantings & $375K in-kind community labor COMMUNITY RAPID RESPONSE COMMUNICATION AT AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, BOARD & COMMISSION MEETINGS: Water & Wastewater Commission - 1/14/26 Parks & Recreation Board - 2/2/26, 2/23/26, 3/23/36 Environmental Commission …
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Recommendation Number: XXXXXXXX-XXX: Supporting Food Plan Implementation through Urban Agriculture Coordination and Festival Beach Restoration WHEREAS, the Festival Beach Food Forest is a volunteer-led permaculture food forest developed in partnership with the Austin Parks and Recreation Department beginning in 2014, sponsored by 501(c)3 nonprofit organization Fruitful Commons; and WHEREAS, in 2021 the Austin City Council approved expansion of the Festival Beach Food Forest to approximately three acres to support community food production, ecological restoration, and climate resilience on public parkland; and WHEREAS, a wastewater pipeline relocation associated with the Texas Department of Transportation Interstate 35 Capital Express Project has impacted the approved Phase 2 expansion area of the Festival Beach Food Forest, resulting in the removal of 92 trees and shrubs and the loss of approximately $550,000 in public and community investment, including $375,000 in volunteer labor; and WHEREAS, despite quarterly coordination meetings over 18 months, community stewards were notified of the wastewater pipeline relocation only two weeks before construction was scheduled to begin, highlighting gaps in communication and coordination between City departments, infrastructure projects, and community partners stewarding food-producing landscapes on public land; and WHEREAS, the Festival Beach Food Forest and adjacent Festival Beach Community Garden are also expected to be impacted by a proposed Austin Energy transmission line relocation associated with the Interstate 35 Capital Express Project, for which Austin Energy has agreed to provide $2,414,240 in parkland mitigation funding for permanent use of parkland, pending approval by the Austin City Council on April 23, 2026; and WHEREAS, the combined impacts of the wastewater pipeline relocation and the proposed Austin Energy transmission line relocation represent cumulative disruptions to the Festival Beach Food Forest and adjacent community food production spaces, compounding the loss of established plantings, volunteer investment, and community use of public land; and WHEREAS, community-scale food production projects such as the Festival Beach Food Forest advance goals of the Austin/Travis County Food Plan by increasing local food production, climate resilience, and community stewardship of public land; and WHEREAS, in 2025 the Austin Travis County Food Policy Board adopted Recommendation 20250210-003 urging the City to establish an interdepartmental coordination mechanism, including a dedicated staff role, to support urban agriculture and implementation of the Food Plan across departments; and WHEREAS, the Austin Climate and Resilience Office previously proposed a budget enhancement to create an Urban Agriculture Program Manager position to coordinate Food …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION MONDAY, APRIL 13, 2026, AT 6:00 P.M. AUSTIN CITY HALL, ROOM 1101 301 WEST 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Animal Advisory Commission may 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, contact Nekaybaw Watson at nekaybaw.watson@austintexas.gov or 512-974-2562. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Dr. Paige Nilson, Chair, D4 Koby Ahmed, Mayor Ryan Clinton, Travis County Beatriz Dulzaides, D2 Jennifer Daniel, D6 Erin Ferguson, D8 Whitney Holt, D5 Sarah Huddelston, D9 David Loignon, D10 Julie Maron, D3 Nancy Nemer, Travis County JoAnn Norton, Parliamentarian, D7 Erin Van Landingham, D1 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 1. Approve the minutes of the Animal Advisory Commission Regular meeting on March 9, 2026. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. 3. Staff briefing regarding monthly reports. Presentation by Monica Dangler, Director, Austin Animal Services and Jason Garza, Assistant Director, Austin Animal Services. Staff briefing regarding deceased animal recovery services. Presentation by Amy Slagle, Assistant Director, Austin Resource Recovery. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. Quarterly report from Animal Pets Alive! Presentation given by Mara Hartsell, Quality of Care Director, Austin Pets Alive! DICUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Approve the reprioritization of the legislative priority list sent to the Austin Government Relations Office in February. Approve a Recommendation to Council regarding pet friendly housing policies in public funded housing developments. Approve the election of Chair. Approve the election of Vice Chair. Approve the election of Parliamentarian. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through 711. A person may request language access accommodations no later than 48 hours before the scheduled meeting. Please email or call Nekaybaw Watson at Austin …
ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MARCH 9, 2026 The Animal Advisory Commission convened in a regular meeting on Monday, March 9, 2026, at Austin City Hall, Boards and Commissions Room 301 W 2nd Street in Austin, Texas. Chair Nilson called the Animal Advisory Commission Meeting to order at 6:00 pm. Commissioners in Attendance: Dr. Paige Nilson, Chair, D4 Jennifer Daniel, D6 Erin Ferguson, D8 David Loignon, D10 Erin Van Landingham, D1 Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Ann Linder, Vice Chair, D3 Koby Ahmed, Mayor Beatriz Dulzaides, D2 Whitney Holt, D5 Nancy Nemer, Travis County Commissioners Absent: Ryan Clinton, Travis County Sarah Huddleston, D9 Jo Anne Norton, Parliamentarian, D7 PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Robyn Katz Gonzalez – State of Animals in ATX Rochelle Vickery – Thanks to Pat Valls Trelles and Amy, Animal Control Response Concerns Julie Oliver- Capital Improvements in Bond and ADA Compliance within the Shelter Suzie Chase- Austin Pets Alive! Area Wide Adoption Event APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Animal Advisory Commission Regular Meeting on February 9, 2026. The minutes of the February 9, 2026, regular meeting of the Animal Advisory Commission was approved during the March 9, 2026, regular meeting on Commissioner Ferguson’s 1 motion, Commissioner Loignon’s second on a 10-0 vote. Commissioners Clinton, Huddelston, and Norton were absent. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding monthly reports. Presentation by Monica Dangler, Director, Austin Animal Services and Jason Garza, Assistant Director, Austin Animal Services. Presentation given by Monica Dangler, Director, Austin Animal Services and Jason Garza, Assistant Director, Austin Animal Services. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 3. 4. 5. 6. Approve the addition of new members to the Budget Working Group. Withdrawn. Approve a FY27/FY28 Budget Recommendation to Council to convert two animal care positions to regular full-time employees from temporary employees. The motion to approve a FY27/FY28 Budget Recommendation to Council to convert two animal care positions to regular full-time employees from temporary employees was approved as amended on Chair Nilson’s motion, Commissioner Loignon’s second on a 10-0 vote. Commissioners Clinton, Huddleston, and Norton were absent. The amendment was to insert “WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has, as one of the six priorities in the strategic plan as staff and volunteers with a specific goal to “enhance working conditions and build skilled support staff,” under the third WHEREAS statement. Approve a FY27/FY28 Budget Recommendation to Council to provide funding in the general budget for two dog …
Reports and Updates Austin Animal Services | April 13, 2026 30-60-90 Day Horizon Plan Monica Dangler, Director Accomplishments on the Horizon! Completed action items in the past 30 days Process Improvement Met with Doobert about foster management program Programs and Socials Developed marketing plan Created quarterly promo and events calendar Enhance Staffing Adjusted Animal Care Tech schedules to better meet business needs Feedback Met with groups of dog and cat volunteers Develop plan for re-opening intake Trying out different strategies Improvements to shelter presence Collaborating with volunteers for social strategy Updated the Lost & Found page on shelter website Became current with reporting data to Petco Love & Best Friends to apply for grants and compare national data 3 What does the horizon plan look like for April? 30 Community Engagement • Implement Marketing plan • Event calendar website built, but not yet updated Enhance Staffing • Continue interviewing for vacant vet techs positions • Analyze kennel cleaning study results Process Improvement • Continue work on pathways and transfer protocols • Maddie’s Fund Clinic Consultation for efficiency and S/N • Develop communication strategy for kennel space protocol on Socials 4 What does the horizon plan look like for April? 30 Foster Program • Weekly foster posts • Identify 3 dogs for foster every day • Daily foster emails • Launch Dog Day Out to 3 days a week • Develop accountability plan Develop plan for reopening intake • Ongoing process • Work with APA on community-based solutions 5 60 What does the horizon plan look like for April? Foster Program • Weekly foster posts • Identify 5 dogs for foster every day • Daily foster emails • Implement foster management tools • Offer Dog Day Out program 5 days a week Shelter and Process Improvements • Develop communication strategy for kennel space protocol on Socials • Continue recruitment for Vet Tech openings Social Presence • Update language and tone on socials • Implement Newsletter • Implement plan for socials Develop plan for reopening intake • Reduce wait-time for intake 6 What does the horizon plan look like for April? 90 Open Intake Planning • Open intake for all stray animals Foster Program • Identify 7 dogs for foster every day • Offer Dog Day Out program 7 days a week • Implement foster management tools Shelter Database • Evaluate volunteer module for effectiveness and potential future enhancements • Explore allowing …
Deceased Animal Recovery Services Austin Resource Recovery | April 13, 2026 Background Deceased animal collection provided daily, including some holidays Animals are collected from the rights-of way and the Austin Animal Center Employees assigned to north and south zones of city for collection Program does not collect livestock. Contact the county in which you reside for livestock removal: Travis County: (512) 974-0845 Williamson County: (512) 832-7000 2 Collection Process Residents contact Austin 311 via phone, online, or through app to create service request Requests completed within 24 hours of being created Domestic animals are scanned for microchips Microchip information is provided to Animal Services for pet owner notification 3 Metrics Over 6000 calls per year are processed for dead animal collection. Non-domestic animals (deer, opossum, squirrels, etc.)are largest category collected 4 Pet Search Requests All pet searches require department staff to check collection records Austin Resource Recovery received a total of 47 requests for FY25 Outcome will be provided to Animal Services to respond to resident requests 5 Cross Department Collaboration ARR collects deceased animals from the Austin Animal Center 3x per week Austin Watershed Protection retrieves deceased animals found in waterways and creates requests for ARR collection through 311 Parks and Recreation creates a service request through 311 for collection of deceased animals All other City departments create a service request through 311 for collection of deceased animals found on City property 6 Questions? Amy Slagle, Assistant Director Amy.Slagle@austintexas.gov Austin Resource Recovery
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260413-006]: Austin Pet Friendly Housing WHEREAS, Housing barriers remain one of the leading causes of pet relinquishment and families living in affordable or subsidized housing often face the greatest barriers to keeping companion animals, forcing many residents to choose between stable housing and keeping their pets; WHEREAS, 1506 pets were surrendered to Austin Animal Services in FY25 alone, in addition to an untrackable number of abandoned pets due to open intake hurdles, with conservatively $50 dollars per day being spent to maintain large dogs, and 2,500 existing publicly funded affordable housing units and approximately 49,800 subsidized housing units in Austin, making efforts to mitigate these impacts not just the compassionate choice, but the fiscally responsible one; WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Open Intake with a specific goal to “remove barriers to pet ownership through resources and policy change,” making it critical to identify upstream solutions that preventatively and proactively address the number of animals being surrendered to the shelter’s care or end up as homeless strays; WHEREAS, Pet-inclusive housing supports family stability, promotes public health, and reduces animal shelter intake by preventing unnecessary pet relinquishment due to housing restrictions; and that these policies are especially important for residents of affordable housing, who are disproportionately impacted by restrictive pet policies; WHEREAS, Austin has long been recognized as a national leader in animal welfare and implementing pet-inclusive housing standards in publicly funded developments would further demonstrate the City’s commitment to keeping families and their companion animals together; WHEREAS, Several states have recently adopted legislation addressing these barriers and creating models for pet-inclusive housing policy, including: 1. Nevada law requires that tenants in housing developed or rehabilitated with public affordable housing funds must be allowed to keep pets, while still permitting reasonable rules regarding sanitation, vaccination, leash requirements, and nuisance prevention. (Justia) 2. Colorado enacted legislation requiring affordable housing developments that receive public financing to permit residents to keep dogs or cats regardless of breed or size, while allowing reasonable management policies and modest limits on deposits or fees. (rentgrace.com) 3. California lawmakers have also advanced legislation aimed at ending blanket prohibitions on pets in rental housing and requiring landlords to provide reasonable justification for denying tenants the ability to keep companion animals, acknowledging that housing restrictions significantly limit access to housing for pet-owning families. (californiaglobe.com) NOW, THEREFORE, BE …
Reports and Updates Austin Animal Services | April 13, 2026 41 Dogs sitting in crates or in non-public areas that are available to adopt or foster. 27 days The average number of days available dogs spend in crates or non-public areas. 2 Any animal that is one foot or longer will have an adoption fee ONLY $5 !! Adopt now while this deal lasts!! 3 30-60-90 Day Horizon Plan Monica Dangler, Director Accomplishments on the Horizon! Completed action items in the past 30 days Process Improvement Met with Doobert about foster management program Programs and Socials Developed marketing plan Created quarterly promo and events calendar Enhance Staffing Adjusted Animal Care Tech schedules to better meet business needs Feedback Met with groups of dog and cat volunteers Develop plan for re-opening intake Trying out different strategies Improvements to shelter presence Collaborating with volunteers for social strategy Updated the Lost & Found page on shelter website Became current with reporting data to Petco Love & Best Friends to apply for grants and compare national data 5 What does the horizon plan look like for April? 30 Community Engagement • Implement Marketing plan • Event calendar website built, but not yet updated Enhance Staffing • Continue interviewing for vacant vet techs positions • Analyze kennel cleaning study results Process Improvement • Continue work on pathways and transfer protocols • Maddie’s Fund Clinic Consultation for efficiency and S/N • Develop communication strategy for kennel space protocol on Socials 6 What does the horizon plan look like for April? 30 Foster Program • Weekly foster posts • Identify 3 dogs for foster every day • Daily foster emails • Launch Dog Day Out to 3 days a week • Develop accountability plan Develop plan for reopening intake • Ongoing process • Work with APA on community-based solutions 7 60 What does the horizon plan look like for April? Foster Program • Weekly foster posts • Identify 5 dogs for foster every day • Daily foster emails • Implement foster management tools • Offer Dog Day Out program 5 days a week Shelter and Process Improvements • Develop communication strategy for kennel space protocol on Socials • Continue recruitment for Vet Tech openings Social Presence • Update language and tone on socials • Implement Newsletter • Implement plan for socials Develop plan for reopening intake • Reduce wait-time for intake 8 What does the horizon plan …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260413-006]: Austin Pet Friendly Housing WHEREAS, Housing barriers remain one of the leading causes of pet relinquishment and families living in affordable or subsidized housing often face the greatest barriers to keeping companion animals, forcing many residents to choose between stable housing and keeping their pets; WHEREAS, 1506 pets were surrendered to Austin Animal Services in FY25 alone, in addition to an untrackable number of abandoned pets due to open intake hurdles, with conservatively $50 dollars per day being spent to maintain large dogs, and 2,500 existing publicly funded affordable housing units and approximately 49,800 subsidized housing units in Austin, making efforts to mitigate these impacts not just the compassionate choice, but the fiscally responsible one; WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Open Intake with a specific goal to “remove barriers to pet ownership through resources and policy change,” making it critical to identify upstream solutions that preventatively and proactively address the number of animals being surrendered to the shelter’s care or end up as homeless strays; WHEREAS, Pet-inclusive housing supports family stability, promotes public health, and reduces animal shelter intake by preventing unnecessary pet relinquishment due to housing restrictions; and that these policies are especially important for residents of affordable housing, who are disproportionately impacted by restrictive pet policies; WHEREAS, Austin has long been recognized as a national leader in animal welfare and implementing pet-inclusive housing standards in publicly funded developments would further demonstrate the City’s commitment to keeping families and their companion animals together; WHEREAS, Several states have recently adopted legislation addressing these barriers and creating models for pet-inclusive housing policy, including: 1. Nevada law requires that tenants in housing developed or rehabilitated with public affordable housing funds must be allowed to keep pets, while still permitting reasonable rules regarding sanitation, vaccination, leash requirements, and nuisance prevention. (Justia) 2. Colorado enacted legislation requiring affordable housing developments that receive public financing to permit residents to keep dogs or cats regardless of breed or size, while allowing reasonable management policies and modest limits on deposits or fees. (rentgrace.com) 3. California lawmakers have also advanced legislation aimed at ending blanket prohibitions on pets in rental housing and requiring landlords to provide reasonable justification for denying tenants the ability to keep companion animals, acknowledging that housing restrictions significantly limit access to housing for pet-owning families. (californiaglobe.com) NOW, THEREFORE, BE …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR’S COMMITTEE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 2026, AT 5:30PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 1101 301 W 2nd STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Mayor’s Committee for People with Disabilities may 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, contact Nekaybaw Watson, Nekaybaw.watson@austintexas.gov, 512-974-2562. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Conor Kelly, Chair Lisa Chang, Vice Chair Gabriel Arellano DeLawnia Comer-HaGans Elizabeth Slade Mickey Fetonte Lynn Murphy Alejandro San Martin Kristen Vassallo CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL AGENDA The first ten 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 1. Approve the minutes of the Mayor’s Committee for People with Disabilities regular meeting on March 13, 2026. STAFF BRIEFING 2. Staff briefing from the Urban Design Division of Austin Planning regarding updates to the Great Streets program and accessibility improvements. Presentation given by Jill Amezcua, Program Manager II, Austin Planning. DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Presentation by Savvy Tech regarding PDF and online document accessibility. Presentation by Benjamin Chen, technical lead, AIMRobotics, Jaxsen Day, digital disability researcher, University of Texas, and Katherine Chen, CEO, AIMRobotics. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 4. 5. 6. Approve the election of Chair Approve the election of Vice Chair Approve an alternate for the Joint Inclusion Committee. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through 711. A person may request language access accommodations no later than 48 hours before the scheduled meeting. Please call or email Nekaybaw Watson or nekaybaw.watson@austintexas.gov to request service or for additional information. Austin City Clerk’s Office, 512-974-2562 at at For more information on the Mayor’s Committee for People with Disabilities, please contact Nekaybaw Watson at nekaybaw.watson@austintexas.gov.
