Reports and Updates Austin Animal Services | March 9, 2026 Updates and Upcoming Events March 2026 Monica Dangler, Director Upcoming Events March 22, 2026 Who Let the Dogs Out On March 22, Borracho Pro is bringing the action to the shelter for a special charity wrestling event benefiting Austin Animal Services! This event helps raise critical resources to support the animals in our care. • • • Adoptable dogs and cats onsite Shelter tours + ways to get involved Admission is donation-based! Bring in wish-list items or donate directly — every contribution goes to helping the animals!! Come for the wrestling. Stay for the animals. March 11, 2026 Upcoming Closure On March 11, Austin Animal Services will be closed for a day of staff development and training. Staff training is essential to successful and safe shelter operations in alignment with Austin Animal Services’ Five-Year Strategic Plan, the Staff and Volunteer priority, Goal 1, Strategy A and D. This month’s training will be focused on safety including CPR, Stop the Bleed, First Aid, and Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) trainings. Emergency field services will remain available throughout the closure and normal operations will resume on March 12, 2026. 3 3 30-60-90 Day Horizon Plan Monica Dangler, Director Accomplishments on the Horizon! Completed action items in the past 30 days Process Improvement Evaluation of plea process for large dogs to rescues New Programming Dog's Day Out and Paw-jama Party begin this month and are on track to expand in the future. Enhance Staffing As of Monday, March 9, there are only 3 open Vet Tech positions! Onboarding has begun and offers have been extended to candidates. Improvements to shelter database Volunteer access has been implemented! Volunteer mentors received training and access. Additional training has been scheduled for all volunteers. Initial feedback sessions conducted Engagement with staff and stakeholders is ongoing. Develop plan for re-opening intake Explored foster management tools 5 What does the horizon plan look like for March? 30 Community Engagement • Develop a marketing plan with measurable goals and performance metrics to promote • Pet placement • Events • community education and engagement • capacity management, and • emergency communications. • Create a monthly in-shelter event calendar with success metrics Enhance Staffing • Onboard 3 Vet Techs and recruit 3 additional Vet Techs • Conduct Kennel cleaning time study 6 30 What does the horizon plan look like for March? Process …
Fiscal Year 2026 February 2026 Updates and Upcoming Events March 22, 2026 Who Let the Dogs Out On March 22, Borracho Pro is bringing the action to the shelter for a special charity wrestling event benefiting Austin Animal Services! This event helps raise critical resources to support the animals in our care. Adoptable dogs and cats onsite Shelter tours + ways to get involved Admission is donation-based! Bring in wish-list items or donate directly — every contribution goes to helping the animals!! Come for the wrestling. Stay for the animals. March 11, 2026 Upcoming Closure On March 11, Austin Animal Services will be closed for a day of sta(cid:431) development and training. Sta(cid:431) training is essential to successful and safe shelter operations in alignment with Austin Animal Services’ Five-Year Strategic Plan, the Sta(cid:431) and Volunteer priority, Goal 1, Strategy A and D. This month’s training will be focused on safety including CPR, Stop the Bleed, First Aid, and Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) trainings. The public will be informed of the closure through multiple channels, including: The Austin Animal Services website 3-1-1 A media release Social media platforms Advance and day-of signage posted on campus Emergency field services will remain available throughout the closure and normal operations will resume on March 12, 2026. § 3-1-27 - Reporting by Animal Shelter (1) Number of impounded animals 35, Wildlife 2 Guinea 66 Kittens 159 Puppies 1 Reptile Fowl Rabbit Bird 289 Cats 266 Dogs Cat Dog Puppy Kitten Wildlife 823 Intakes February 2026 (FY26) saw 788 domestic animals impounded at AAS. There was an 11.46% increase from January 2026 which brought in 707 domestic animals to the shelter. This number excludes the categories of wildlife, bird (wildlife), opossums, and reptile (wildlife). (2) Number of animals euthanized a description of the animal, including age, species, and size, and the reason for euthanasia Animals Euthanized A breakdown of animals euthanized this month by species and/or age. 1 Fowl 4 Puppies 4 Dogs 6 Wildlife 28 13 Cats Animals Euthanized Animal Type Cats Wildlife Dogs Puppies Fowl Reasons for Euthanasia This chart shows the breakdown of reasons for euthanasia by animal. For example, all 6 animals euthanized for “rabies risk” were wildlife. 1 3 Puppies 2 Dogs 12 Cats 6 Wildlife 1 Puppy 1 Dog 1 Dog 1 Cat Suffering Rabies Risk Agonal DB5 Bites Injured Neurological Each …
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-004]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Animal Care Positions WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has had two temporary positions in Animal Care that have been maintained long term and whose workload will be long term and ongoing; and WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of Economic and Workforce Development; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Humane Care with a specific goal to “enhance shelter cleanliness and sanitation,” it is critical that motivated and skilled Animal Care workforce is valued and maintained; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to support the conversion of two Animal Care positions to regular full time employees from temporary employees. The estimated FY 2027 cost of this would be $169,895, which could largely be made up for by a reduction in part-time employee budget for Animal Care. Seconded By: Date of Approval: Motioned By: Vote: For: Against: Abstain: Off the dais: Absent: Attest: _____________________________________________
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-005]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Staff Dog Walkers WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has had two positions for dog walkers that are both paid not from the general fund but from donations made to Austin Animal Services, but the services they provide are critical and on-going (at least until length of stay in the shelter for large dogs is dramatically reduced), WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of Economic and Workforce Development; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Humane Care with a specific strategy to “enhance capacity to provide enrichment and socialization services,” it is critical to at least ensure that that the current dog-walking staff can be maintained regardless of donation proceeds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to provide funding in the general budget for two staff dog walkers (Animal Enrichment Worker). The estimated FY 2027 cost of these two staff positions would be $169,895. Seconded By: Date of Approval: Motioned By: Vote: For: Against: Abstain: Off the dais: Absent: Attest: _____________________________________________
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-005]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Staff Animal Enrichment Specialist WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has employed an animal enrichment specialist paid not from the general fund but from donations made to Austin Animal Services, but the services they provide are critical and on-going given shelter enrichment enhances adoptability of shelter animals, WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of Economic and Workforce Development; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Humane Care with a specific strategy to “enhance capacity to provide enrichment and socialization services to all animals,” it is critical to at least ensure that the current enrichment specialist staff position can be maintained regardless of donation proceeds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to provide funding in the general budget for a staff animal enrichment specialist. The estimated FY 2027 cost of this staff position would be $90,053. Seconded By: Date of Approval: Motioned By: Vote: For: Against: Abstain: Off the dais: Absent: Attest: _____________________________________________
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-006]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Expected, Ongoing, Necessary Hardware Upgrades WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services general budget does not currently include funding for expected, ongoing, necessary hardware upgrades; and WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of a High-Performing Government that promotes operational efficiency; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Staff & Volunteers with a specific strategies of “[analyze] equipment needs for staff and volunteers, and take steps to address them”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to provide funding in the general expected, ongoing, necessary hardware upgrades. Seconded By: Date of Approval: Motioned By: Vote: For: Against: Abstain: Off the dais: Absent: Attest: _____________________________________________
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-004]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Animal Care Positions WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has had two temporary positions in Animal Care that have been maintained long term and whose workload will be long term and ongoing; and WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of Economic and Workforce Development; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Humane Care with a specific goal to “enhance shelter cleanliness and sanitation,” it is critical that motivated and skilled Animal Care workforce is valued and maintained; 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.” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to support the conversion of two Animal Care positions to regular full time employees from temporary employees. The estimated FY 2027 cost of this would be $169,895, which could largely be made up for by a reduction in part-time employee budget for Animal Care. Date of Approval: March 9, 2026 Motioned By: Chair Nilson Seconded By: Commissioner Loignon Vote: 10-0 For: Chair Nilson, Vice Chair Linder, Commissioners Ahmed, Dulzaides, Daniel, Ferguson, Holt, Loignon, Nemer, and Van Landingham Against: Absent: Commissioners Clinton, Huddleston, Norton Attest: Nekaybaw Watson, Staff Liaison
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-005]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Staff Dog Walkers WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has had two positions for dog walkers that are both paid not from the general fund but from donations made to Austin Animal Services, but the services they provide are critical and on-going (at least until length of stay in the shelter for large dogs is dramatically reduced), WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of Economic and Workforce Development; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Humane Care with a specific strategy to “enhance capacity to provide enrichment and socialization services,” it is critical to at least ensure that that the current dog-walking staff can be maintained regardless of donation proceeds. 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.” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to provide funding in the general budget for two staff dog walkers (Animal Enrichment Worker). The estimated FY 2027 cost of these two staff positions would be $169,895. Date of Approval: March 9, 2026 Motioned By: Chair Nilson Seconded By: Vice Chair Linder Vote: 10-0 For: Chair Nilson, Vice Chair Linder, Commissioners Ahmed, Dulzaides, Daniel, Ferguson, Holt, Loignon, Nemer, and Van Landingham Against: Absent: Commissioners Clinton, Huddleston, Norton Attest: Nekaybaw Watson, Staff Liaison
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-006]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Staff Animal Enrichment Specialist WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has employed an animal enrichment specialist paid not from the general fund but from donations made to Austin Animal Services, but the services they provide are critical and on-going given shelter enrichment enhances adoptability of shelter animals, WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of Economic and Workforce Development; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Humane Care with a specific strategy to “enhance capacity to provide enrichment and socialization services to all animals,” it is critical to at least ensure that the current enrichment specialist staff position can be maintained regardless of donation proceeds. 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.” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to provide funding in the general budget for a staff animal enrichment specialist. The estimated FY 2027 cost of this staff position would be $90,053. Date of Approval: March 9, 2026 Motioned By: Chair Nilson Seconded By: Commissioner Nemer Vote: 10-0 For: Chair Nilson, Vice Chair Linder, Commissioners Ahmed, Dulzaides, Daniel, Ferguson, Holt, Loignon, Nemer, and Van Landingham Against: Absent: Commissioners Clinton, Huddleston, Norton Attest: Nekaybaw Watson, Staff Liaison
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Animal Advisory Commission Recommendation Number: [20260309-007]: Austin Animal Services Budget Recommendation FY ’27 & FY ‘28 Regarding Expected, Ongoing, Necessary Hardware Upgrades WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services general budget does not currently include funding for expected, ongoing, necessary hardware upgrades; and WHEREAS, the city’s strategic plan includes a goal of a High-Performing Government that promotes operational efficiency; and WHEREAS, Austin Animal Services has as one of its six priorities Staff & Volunteers with a specific strategies of “[analyze] equipment needs for staff and volunteers, and take steps to address them;” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Animal Advisory Commission encourages the Austin City Council to provide funding in the general expected, ongoing, necessary hardware upgrades. Date of Approval: March 9, 2026 Motioned By: Chair Nilson Seconded By: Commissioner Dulzaides Vote: 10-0 For: Chair Nilson, Vice Chair Linder, Commissioners Ahmed, Dulzaides, Daniel, Ferguson, Holt, Loignon, Nemer, and Van Landingham Against: Absent: Commissioners Clinton, Huddleston, Norton Attest: Nekaybaw Watson, Staff Liaison
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 …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COLLEGE STUDENT COMMISSION FRIDAY, MARCH 6, 2026, AT 3:00 P.M. CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 301 W 2ND ST AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the College Student 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 Abrianna Citta, 210-232-4773, abrianna.citta01@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Andrew Lyon, Chair, Austin Community College Elisha Mac Gregor, Austin Community College Sage Zuniga, Austin Community College Mekides Guta, Concordia University Lorian Lopez, Concordia University Aidyn Ogle, Concordia University Aidan Cournoyer, University of Texas at Austin Carson Domey, University of Texas at Austin Kritika Ramesh, University of Texas at Austin Caleb Brizuela, Vice Chair, Huston-Tillotson University Camila Colin, St. Edward’s University Caroline Schilling, St. Edward’s University AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL 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 College Student Commission Regular meeting on January 9th, 2026. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 2. Approve a recommendation to Council on 6th Street Micromobility Lanes. 3. Approve a recommendation to Council on the UNO (University Neighborhood Overlay) Amendments and Student Housing. WORKING GROUP UPDATE 4. 5. 6. Update from TRANSPORTATION working group on their priorities. Update from MENTAL HEALTH working group on their priorities. Update from HOUSING working group on their work around student housing availability. 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 Dr. Chiquita Eugene at the Youth Initiatives Office, at chiquita.eugene@austintexas.gov or (512-972- 5003) to request service or for additional information. For more information on the College Student Commission, please contact Dr. Chiquita Eugene at (512-972-5003).
COLLEGE STUDENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 9, JANUARY, 2026 The College Student Commission convened in a regular meeting on 9, January, 2026 at 301 W 2nd St, Austin, TX 78701 in Austin, Texas. Chair Lyon called the College Student Commission Meeting to order at 3:22 p.m. Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance: Andrw Lyon, Camila Colin, Carson Domey, Sage Zuniga Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely:, Aidan Cournoyer, Lorian Lopez, Elisha MacGregor, Caroline Schilling PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. The motion to approve the minutes of the COLLEGE STUDENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING on DECEMBER 12th, 2025, was approved on Commissioner Domey’s motion, Commissioner Zuniga’s second on a 8-0 vote. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 2. Presentation by Central Texas Food Bank regarding the College Food Access Program by Emily Larson and Anurita Mittra—presenters were unable to attend; slides were shared and reviewed by commissioners. WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES 3. Update from TRANSPORTATION working group on their priorities. Update by Chair Lyon. Update from MENTAL HEALTH working group on their priorities. Update from Chair Lyon. Update from HOUSING working group on their priorities. Update from Chair Lyon. 4. 5. WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS 6. None 1 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 7. None Chair Lyon adjourned the meeting at 3:42 p.m. without objection. The minutes were approved at the January 9, 2026, meeting on Commissioner Domey’s motion, Commissioner Zuniga’s second on a 8-0 vote. 2
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL College Student Commission Recommendation Number 20260306-02: 6th Street Design WHEREAS, 6th Street serves as a key connection between the University of Texas area, downtown, and transit services frequently used by college students, and functions as a late night transportation corridor and entertainment district; and WHEREAS, 6th Street experiences sufficient pedestrian activity to have been closed to vehicular traffic on weekend nights (Thursday through Sunday). This indicates significant non-automotive travel particularly during evening and late night hours; and WHEREAS, the nearest active transportation counter at East 4th Street and Waller Creek recorded 521,445 pedestrians and cyclists in 2025, signaling substantial travel along this general downtown corridor; and WHEREAS, college students are disproportionately reliant on walking, biking, and micromobility for affordable transportation, shown in increased micromobility use around UT Austin and downtown. This is often due to lower rates of personal vehicle ownership. College students are therefore uniquely impacted by the design of 6th Street; and WHEREAS, 6th Street’s role as a nightlife district increases the importance of safe, non-automotive transportation options for students, as students traveling late at night face higher injury risk; and WHEREAS, the lack of clear separation between pedestrians, cyclists, and micromobility users increases collision risk and reduces safety and comfort for everyone; and WHEREAS, protected bike lanes support students using bicycles, e-bikes, and micromobility devices, including dockless scooters and services such as CapMetro’s Bikeshare, reducing the need for these devices to operate on sidewalks that are regularly crowded with pedestrians, as on 6th Street; and WHEREAS, safe and accessible transportation options contribute to student well being, campus connectivity, and overall quality of life in Austin; and WHEREAS, in Recommendation 20251201-007, the Bicycle Advisory Council and Pedestrian Advisory Council jointly recommended Alternative 1 and opposed Alternative 3; and WHEREAS, the 6th Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found that 63% of 3,723 respondents supported Alternative 1, which included bicycle and scooter lanes with curb insets for vehicle access, while only 27% of 3,706 respondents supported Alternative 3, which included no bicycle or scooter lanes and vehicle curb access on only one side; and WHEREAS, the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that Austin Transportation and Public Works advance Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 for the 6th Street Mobility and Revitalization Project, while City Staff recommended advancing Alternative 3 to final design; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the College Student Commission, in alignment with the …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL College Student Commission Recommendation Number 20260306-03: UNO Amendments and Student Housing WHEREAS, the City of Austin both historically and in the present day continues to have a young college student population that is greater than or equal to approximately 100,000 students; and WHEREAS, housing affordability has become an increasingly significant challenge for college students across the City of Austin, particularly for the majority of students at major Austin-area colleges and universities, including the University of Texas at Austin, Austin Community College, St. Edward’s University, Huston-Tillotson University, and Concordia University Texas, who, due to limited on-campus housing capacity, rely on the private rental market for housing during the academic year; and WHEREAS, 48% of renters in District 9, including the area of West Campus, are “rent-burdened,” where a tenant spends more than 30% of their monthly income on housing; and WHEREAS, students attending institutions located near central Austin, including The University of Texas at Austin, Huston-Tillotson University, and Austin Community College’s Highland and Rio Grande campuses, face additional heightened housing pressures due to rising rents, limited supply, and competition with non-student renters; and WHEREAS, student-oriented rental housing in Austin has experienced substantial rent increases in recent years, disproportionately impacting students who rely on fixed financial aid packages, part-time employment, or family support; and WHEREAS, the University Neighborhood Overlay (UNO) area, particularly West Campus, experiences uniquely intense housing demand due to its proximity to The University of Texas at Austin, resulting in rental prices that significantly exceed the Austin citywide median and serve as a benchmark for influencing student housing costs more broadly; and WHEREAS, rising rents in central Austin neighborhoods have contributed to the displacement of students attending institutions without large on-campus housing availability, including Austin Community College and Huston-Tillotson University, forcing many students to seek housing farther from campus and increasing transportation costs and commute times; and WHEREAS, students at smaller and private institutions such as St. Edward’s University and Concordia University Texas face similar affordability pressures, as limited on-campus housing availability and surrounding neighborhood zoning constraints restrict access to lower-cost off-campus options; and WHEREAS, these affordability challenges affect students across institutional types, including community colleges, public universities, and private universities, demonstrating that student housing insecurity is a citywide issue not confined to a single campus or neighborhood; and WHEREAS, land-use and zoning policies such as the University Neighborhood Overlay play a critical role in shaping housing …
COLLEGE STUDENT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Friday, March 6, 2026 COLLEGE STUDENT COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING FRIDAY, MARCH 6, 2026 The College Student Commission convened in a Regular meeting on 6, March, 2026, at 301 W 2nd St in Austin, Texas. Chair Lyon called the College Student Commission Meeting to order at 3:09 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Andrew Lyon, Carson Domey, Mekides Guta, Sage Zuniga Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Aidan Cournoyer, Lorian Lopez, Elisha MacGregor, Caroline Schilling PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the College Student Commission Regular Meeting on January 9, 2026 The minutes from the College Student Commission regular meeting on January 9, 2026 were approved on Commissioner Domey’s motion, Commissioner Zuniga’s second on a 8- 0 vote. Commissioners Brizuela, Colin, Ogle, and Ramesh were absent. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 2. 3. Approve a recommendation to Council on 6th Street Micromobility Lanes. The motion to approve the recommendation to Council to improve 6th Street micromobility lanes was approved on Commissioner Zuniga’s motion, Commissioner Guta’s second on a 8-0 vote. Commissioners Brizuela, Colin, Ogle, and Ramesh were absent. Approve a recommendation to Council on the UNO (University Neighborhood Overlay) Amendments and Student Housing. The motion to approve the recommendation to Council approve UNO updates and conduct a Citywide Student Housing Needs Assessment was approved on Commissioner Domey’s motion, Commissioner Guta’s second on a 8-0 vote. Commissioners Brizuela, Colin, Ogle, and Ramesh were absent. 1 COLLEGE STUDENT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Friday, March 6, 2026 WORKING GROUP UPDATES Update from Transportation working group regarding their priorities. The update was given by Chair Lyon. Update from Mental Health working group regarding their priorities. The update was given by Chair Lyon. Update from Housing working on their work around student housing availability. The update was given by Chair Lyon. Chair Lyon adjourned the meeting at 3:33 p.m. without objection. The minutes were approved at the April 28, 2026, meeting on Commissioner Cournoyer’s motion, Commissioner Guta’s second on a 8-0 vote. 2
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4TH, 2026, AT 2:30 P.M. CITY HALL, BOARD & COMMISSION ROOM, ROOM 1101 301 W. 2nd STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Austin Travis County Public Health 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 remotely, contact Daniela Romero, daniela.romero@austintexas.gov or Juanita Jackson at Juanita.jackson@austintexas.gov. telephone. To to speak register CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS OR COMMISSIONERS: Natalie Poindexter, Chair Enrique Lin Shiao, Vice Chair Jawad Ali Chris Crookham Cara Dahlhausen Jacob Whitty Martha Lujan William Rice EX-OFFICIO BOARD MEMBERS/COMMISSIONERS: Adrienne Sturrup, Director, Austin Public Health Dr. Desmar Walkes, Austin/Travis County Public Health Authority Ana Almaguel, Division Director, Travis County Health & Human Services Perla Cavazos, Deputy Administrator, Central Health AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 5 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 Public Health Commission Regular Meeting on February 4th, 2026. DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. 3. 4. 5. Presentation by the Refugee Collective. Presentation by Meg Erskine, Co-Founder and CEO. Review and discuss goals set for FY 2026. Receive updates from commissioners on assigned action items. Discussion of draft recommendation “Bridging Public Health Funding” created by Commissioner Chris Crookham. 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 contact Daniela Romero at Austin Public Health, at daniela.romero@austintexas.gov, or Juanita Jackson at Juanita.jackson@austintexas.gov to request service or for additional information. For more information on the Public Health Commission, please contact Daniela Romero at daniela.romero@austintexas.gov or Juanita Jackson at Juanita.jackson@austintexas.gov.
T H E R E F U G E E C O L L E C T I V E 2024 Impact Report Producing Possibilities for Refugees Through Food & Fiber C E O R E F L E C T I O N S To Our Beloved Community: In 2024 we celebrated 15 years of creatively responding to the needs of Austin's refugee community. Our story has deep roots. It begins with four unlikely friends who met serendipitously and shared their unique perspectives and experiences to form the Multicultural Refugee Coalition in 2009. From 1946-1966, Central Presbyterian Church sponsored a family to support community development efforts in rural DR Congo, one of which was to teach sewing to local women. This was the family of our co-founder Sarah Stranahan, who many years later, taught sewing to refugee women here in Austin that began our work in the textile space. We cherish the beautiful light-filled space we get to work out of in the historic Central Presbyterian Church today for our office and textile studio, and love knowing that these roots run deep. During the Civil War in Liberia in 1989, Johnson Doe and Paul Tiah were from opposing counties. After many years in refugee camps in the Ivory Coast and Sierra Leone, both made their way to Austin, Texas through the federal refugee resettlement program. Paul arrived first in 2003 and invited Johnson over for dinner once he had arrived in 2004, since they were from the same country and spoke the same dialect. Even though they were supposed to be considered enemies, through love, acceptance, and reconciliation efforts they not only became the best of friends but consider themselves brothers. It is through their love and perseverance that they wanted to start an organization to support other refugees resettled to Austin and provide encouragement and resources to ease their journey. Finally, as a conservation biologist, I was yearning for a more international experience and the world came to me in my own community when I began teaching ESL to refugees in 2006 and met so many people sharing their desires and dreams in their new city of Austin that it changed my life forever. Some of these shared dreams included getting their hands in the dirt growing culturally desired food for their communities and being able to have the resources to sew things for their families. Through our …
-Providing Livelihood Opportunities for Refugees in Austin, Texas -Food Access for the Refugee Community -Implementing Texas’ First Resilient Farm Plan therefugeecollective.org Refugee Collective Farm Staff Matt Simon- Farm Director Matt Simon has been the Refugee Collective Farm Director since 2020. Prior to taking on this role, he managed another certified organic farm, Green Gate Farms, in nearby Bastrop, Texas. His knowledge of all aspects of vegetable production anchor the farm’s food access and regenerative agriculture efforts. Sarah Sims- Community Farmer Program Manager Sarah Sims brings over a decade of experience in refugee-serving organizations, with a focus on program design, data systems, and continuous improvement. Prior to joining The Refugee Collective, she led state- and federal-level mental and physical health promotion initiatives. Sarah is passionate about designing programs that are both data- informed and deeply responsive to the lived experiences of participants. The Refugee Collective Producing Possibilities through Food and Fiber -20 acre Certified Organic farm employs 8 year round refugee team members and 4 seasonal team members growing organic vegetables and eggs for our CSA and Wholesale Outlets -Textile Studio employs 4 year round team members in private label production and our own line of “Farm to Fiber” products which utilize natural dyes grown at the farm. Also piloting flax fiber production. -Wraparound Support for our refugee team members including rides to and from the farm for work and paid English instruction What is Regenerative Agriculture? -Includes common Organic practices such as crop rotation, cover cropping, compost application, and refraining from using chemical inputs that destroy life in the soil -In addition Regenerative Agriculture employs No-till planting methods, the establishment of Trees and other Perennials, and the integration of Animals into the Cropping System. -These are all codified in our Resilient Farm Plan, the First of its kind in Texas -Focus is on increasing biodiversity both above and below ground to build a more resilient, carbon rich system that produces more nutrient dense vegetables and animal products, leading to improved health outcomes Farm Livelihoods and Food Access for the Refugee Community -Through ARPA funding and other sources, we’ve built the capacity to send 50-80 Weekly CSA Shares to Refugee Households through partners including Global Impact Initiative, World Relief, IACT, and Literacy Coalition -Community Farmer Program provides education and resources to empower refugees to feed their own communities -78,000 lbs. of Organic Produce To Refugee Households since Fall of ‘22 through …
NEW LEAF AGRICULTURE EVALUATION REPORT 2024 TABLE OF CONTENTS 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 Introduction Methods, Quantitative Data Results, Quantitative Data Methods, Qualitative Data Results, Qualitative Data Conclusion Acknowledgements UTHealth | New Leaf Agriculture Report 2024 INTRODUCTION The Multicultural Refugee Coalition (MRC) is a non-profit organization in Austin, Texas, which creates refugee livelihoods through employment, training, and education. Since its inception in 2009, MRC has supported nearly 1,000 refugees from 20 countries by employing and training refugee farmers ensuring their long-term success as engaged community members. One of MRC’s programs, New Leaf Agriculture, is based on a 20- acre USDA-certified organic farm where refugee farmers learn about Central Texas agriculture methods and practice organic and regenerative farming techniques. The program is also designed to provide supplemental income to farmers and increase farmers’ families’ and their communities’ healthy food access. One component of the New Leaf Agriculture program focuses on primary farmers. Primary farmers are refugee farmers who work on the 20-acre farm and are full-time employees of MRC. They have a scheduled work time, are paid a wage, and receive additional benefits such as free transportation and English as a Second Language (ESL) classes. A second component of the New Leaf Agriculture program focuses on community farmers. Community farmers are refugee farmers who each manage a 750 sq. ft. production-size plot on the New Leaf Agriculture farm and earn supplemental income through produce sales. Before receiving a plot, farmers participate in a six-week training course on regenerative farming practices in Central Texas. New Leaf Agriculture provides supplies, land, education, and culturally specific seeds to the community farmers. Farmers choose which crops to grow, focusing on what they and their community desire, and farm according to their schedule. Produce grown by farmers is bought by MRC and then distributed either by the farmers to their communities or through partnerships with local organizations. UTHealth | New Leaf Agriculture Report 2024 As recipients of the Refugee Agricultural Partnership Program (RAPP) grant, MRC is expanding its New Leaf Agriculture program by providing agricultural land and training for at least 80 refugees. Evaluation of the program will be conducted yearly by The University of Texas Health Science Center School of Public Health (UTHealth) research team over three years. The evaluation is formative in design and fulfills the purpose of tracking the program’s progress toward anticipated short- and long-term outcomes while contributing to continuous …
AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSION Wednesday, February 4th, 2025 AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, February 4th, 2026 The Austin Travis County Public Health Commission convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, February 4th, 2026, at 301 West 2nd Street in Austin, Texas. Chair Natalie Poindexter called the Austin Travis County Public Health Commission Meeting to order at 2:47 pm. Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance: Natalie Poindexter, Chair Jawad Ali Chris Crookham Jacob Whitty Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Enrique Lin Shiao, Vice Chair Cara Dahlhausen William Rice Board Members/Commissioners Absent: Martha Lujan Ex-Officio and Staff in Attendance: Dr. Desmar Walkes, Austin/Travis County Public Health Authority Perla Cavazos, Deputy Administrator, Central Health Ana Almaguel, Division Director, Travis County Health & Human Services Daniela Romero, Staff, Austin Public Health Ex-Officio and Staff in Attendance Remotely: Megan Cermak Juanita Jackson Ex-Officio and Staff Absent: Adrienne Sturrup PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Sharon Behill, CEO of Communities In Schools of Central Texas, advocated for the protection of prevention-focused social services amidst ongoing city budget cuts. She emphasized that school-based "upstream" interventions for student mental health and trauma are vital, cost- effective investments that prevent more expensive long-term crises in public safety and emergency systems. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Austin Travis County Public Health Commission regular meeting on February 4th, 2026. The minutes for the regular meeting of January 7th, 2026, were approved on Commissioner Jacob Whitty’s motion, Commissioner William Rice second on a 7-0 vote. (Absent: Commissioner Martha Lujan) DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. 3. Presentation by One Voice on impacts of federal funding cuts. Presentation by Sam Woollard, Peter Arellano and Lynne Skinner. Received updates from commissioners on assigned action items. External Coordination: Although absent, Commissioner Luhan is reportedly coordinating future discussions with the Public Safety Commission and Capital Metro. Sexual Health Funding: Efforts to secure data from Austin Public Health (APH) are ongoing. The Commission discussed postponing this item temporarily due to budget uncertainties or shifting the focus to qualitative outcomes rather than just funding. Member Updates: Brief updates were noted regarding recommendations from Commissioners Dahlhausen and Commissioner Crookham, which were slated for the subsequent agenda items. Refugee Clinic: Commissioner Ali introduced Refugee collective CEO to staff. Staff is coordinating presentations for next meeting. 4. Discussed draft recommendation “Bridging Public Health Funding” created by Commissioner Chris Crookham. Commissioner Chris Crookham presented a draft recommendation addressing the …
ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION REFORM COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2026, AT 11:00 A.M. UNIVERSITY HILLS BRANCH LIBRARY 4721 LOYOLA LN AUSTIN, TEXAS 78723 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 Elizabeth Nelson, 512-974-6492, Elizabeth.Nelson@austintexas.gov. CURRENT [BOARD MEMBERS OR COMMISSIONERS]: Ian Steyaert, Chair; Gerald Acuna; and Seth Whaland AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up [prior*] to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Zero Waste Advisory Commission Construction and Demolition Reform Committee meeting on October 9, 2025. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding construction and demolition recycling and processing facility municipal case studies. Presentation by Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal, Austin Resource Recovery. 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 Elizabeth Nelson at Austin Resource Recovery Department, at 512-974-6492 or Elizabeth.Nelson@austintexas.gov, to request service or for additional information. For more information on the Zero Waste Advisory Commission, please contact Gustavo Valle at 512-974-4359 or Gustavo.Valle@austintexas.gov.
Municipal C&D Policies: Case Study ZWAC C&D Committee Austin Resource Recovery | 3/4/2026 Who was included? • Chatham County, NC • Oregon Metro/Portland, OR • • San Francisco, CA Seattle, WA 2 Overview ▪ Austin Resource Recovery staff looked at C&D policies and regulations across 5 city and counties to compare how processing facilities were regulated and how diversion and recovery rates were verified. ▪ All cities/counties studied require C&D processing facilities to be registered or qualified and meet certain requirements. ▪ All cities/counties studied require C&D debris generated within their boundary must be sent to a registered or qualified facility 3 Table Comparison City/County Number of processing facilities Facility min. diversion rate? Required 3rd party verification? City/County Staff Review Pre-construction requirements? Austin, TX Chatham County, NC 4 6 Oregon Metro/Portland, OR* San Francisco, CA 11 14 Seattle, WA 7 No Yes (30%) No No Yes (25%) No Yes Yes No (65% recovery responsibility of contractor) No (cannot have >10% residuals of banned materials) N/A No On-site audit 1x/year, digital report review Yes, C&D Debris Management section on permit application On-site audit 2x/year, scale data review 1x/month No Yes, Pre-project plan No On-site audit 1x/year, digital report review Consultant report 1x/year, digital report review 1x/month 4 Chatham County, NC ▪ Minimum diversion rate (30%) requirement for facilities ▪ Licensed C&D facilities that do not meet the annual 30% minimum requirement may be provided an exemption ▪ The facility must demonstrate practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships to meeting the requirement ▪ Contractors must haul mixed material to a licensed facility ▪ License lasts for 1 year; inspection happens before license expires C&D Debris Management section on permit application: 5 Oregon Metro & Portland, OR ▪ Both entities operate together to regulate facilities (Oregon Metro) and job sites/haulers (City of Portland) ▪ Send debris to a Metro-certified facility ▪ Recover at least 75% of materials from larger projects ▪ Minimum 25% diversion requirement for facilities ▪ 15% processing residuals threshold for wood, metal, and cardboard suspended ▪ All facilities consistently meeting requirements, monitoring no longer necessary ▪ Scale data from facilities automatically uploaded to a database that receives monthly review by Oregon Metro 6 Example Audit Sheet 7 San Francisco, CA ▪ Third party verification required ▪ 3 third-party verifiers available ▪ Transparent facility recovery rate reporting on website ▪ Contractors can make informed choices on where to drop off material ▪ …
ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION C&D ORDINANCE REFORM COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 04, 2026 The Construction and Demolition Ordinance Reform Committee convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, March 4th, 2026, at University Hills Branch Library at 4721 Loyola Ln in Austin, Texas. Chair Steyaert called the Committee Meeting to order at 11:03 a.m. Commission Members in Attendance: Ian Steyaert, Gerard Acuna, Seth Whaland PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Zero Waste Advisory Commission’s Construction and Demolition Ordinance Reform Committee Meeting on March 4, 2026. The minutes from the Zero Waste Advisory Commission’s Construction and Demolition Ordinance Reform Committee meeting on March 4, 2026, were approved on Commissioner Steyaert’s motion, Commissioner Acuna’s second on a 3-0 vote. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding construction and demolition recycling and processing facility municipal case studies. The presentation was made by Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal, Austin Resource Recovery. DISCUSSION 3. The following topics were discussed by Commissioners, stakeholders, and Austin Resource Recovery Staff. The committee discussed possible changes to Austin’s C&D Recycling Ordinance, including requiring qualified processors and new audit processes, and considered how local site constraints, cost impacts, and how enforcement affects implementation. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 4. Review staff proposed changes to code and the department’s rules for the construction and demolition ordinance. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Steyaert adjourned the meeting at 11:59 a.m. without objection. The minutes were approved at the 6/24/2026 meeting on Commissioner Steyaert’s motion, Commissioner Acuna second on a 2-0 vote. 1
ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION C&D ORDINANCE REFORM COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 04, 2026 The Construction and Demolition Ordinance Reform Committee convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, March 4th, 2026, at University Hills Branch Library at 4721 Loyola Ln in Austin, Texas. Chair Steyaert called the Committee Meeting to order at 11:03 a.m. Commission Members in Attendance: Ian Steyaert, Gerard Acuna, Seth Whaland PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Zero Waste Advisory Commission’s Construction and Demolition Ordinance Reform Committee Meeting on October 9, 2025. The minutes from the Zero Waste Advisory Commission’s Construction and Demolition Ordinance Reform Committee meeting on October 9, 2025, were approved on Commissioner Steyaert’s motion, Commissioner Acuna’s second on a 3-0 vote. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding construction and demolition recycling and processing facility municipal case studies. The presentation was made by Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal, Austin Resource Recovery. DISCUSSION 3. The following topics were discussed by Commissioners, stakeholders, and Austin Resource Recovery Staff. The committee discussed possible changes to Austin’s C&D Recycling Ordinance, including requiring qualified processors and new audit processes, and considered how local site constraints, cost impacts, and how enforcement affects implementation. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 4. Review staff proposed changes to code and the department’s rules for the construction and demolition ordinance. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Steyaert adjourned the meeting at 11:59 a.m. without objection. The minutes were approved at the 6/24/2026 meeting on Commissioner Steyaert’s motion, Commissioner Acuna second on a 2-0 vote. 1
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATIONS UNDER REVIEW FOR MARCH 4, 2026 MEETING This list does not constitute a formal agenda and is subject to change. A final agenda will be posted at least 3 business days prior to the meeting. 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. Speaker Registration will open once the formal agenda is posted. For questions, please email preservation@austintexas.gov. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular meeting on February 4, 2026. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Zoning 2. C14H-1987-0016 – 810 W. 10th St. Mayer-Howse House Council District 9 Proposal: Recommend ordinance cleanup via Commission-initiated historic zoning to Planning Commission and City Council. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Staff: Kalan Contreras, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-2727 National Register Historic District Permit Applications 3. HR-2025-145729 – 2100 Barton Springs Rd. Zilker Park Barton Springs Bridge Council District 8 Proposal: Construct a new bridge, reconstruct trails, and restore the stream bank. (Postponed by HLC on February 4, 2026) Applicant: Paulinda Lanham City Staff: Kalan Contreras, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-2727 4. 5. 6. 7. LM-2025-155778; HR-2026-014183 – 617 Congress Ave. Congress Avenue National Register Historic District Council District 9 Proposal: Reconfigure the primary facade and construct a balcony. Applicant: Jeff Schindler; Jeb Barmish City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 HR-2026-014204 – 809 Congress Ave. Congress Avenue National Register Historic District Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a compatible building, retaining the Congress Avenue facade. Applicant: Carson Nelson City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 HR-2026-010143 – 1611 Preston Ave. Old West Austin National Register Historic District Council District 10 Proposal: Reconfigure existing front wall and construct an addition. Applicant: Meegan Beddoe City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 PR-2026-015633 – 1508 Pease Rd. Old West Austin National Register Historic District Council District 10 Proposal: Construct a new residence. Applicant: Paul Zubeldia City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Demolition and Relocation Permit Applications 8. PR-2026-012921 – 844 Airport Blvd. Council District 3 Proposal: Demolish a restaurant. Applicant: Katie Congdon; Douglas Frey City Staff: Kalan Contreras, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-2727 DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 9. 10. Approve budget …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2026, AT 6:00 P.M. CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 301 W. 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Historic Landmark 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, please use the QR code or link at the end of this document. For questions, please email preservation@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS BEN HEIMSATH, CHAIR (D-8) CARL LAROSCHE (D-6) ROXANNE EVANS, VICE CHAIR (D-2) TREY MCWHORTER (D-10) JEFFREY ACTON (MAYOR) TONYA PLEASANT-WRIGHT (D-1) JAIME ALVAREZ (D-7) JUDAH RICE (D-4) HARMONY GROGAN (D-5) BAT TANIGUCHI (D-9) KEVIN KOCH (D-3) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three- minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular meeting on February 4, 2026. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Zoning 2. C14H-1987-0016 – 810 W. 10th St. Mayer-Howse House Council District 9 Proposal: Recommend ordinance cleanup via Commission-initiated historic zoning to Planning Commission and City Council. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Staff: Kalan Contreras, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-2727 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from general office- equitable transit-oriented development-equitable transit-oriented density bonus (GO- ETODDBETOD) district zoning to general office-historic landmark-equitable transit-oriented development-equitable transit-oriented density bonus (GO-H-ETOD-DBETOD) district zoning as a means of correcting the existing administrative record. National Register Historic District Permit Applications 3. 4. HR-2025-145729 – 2100 Barton Springs Rd. Zilker Park Barton Springs Bridge Council District 8 Proposal: Construct a new bridge, reconstruct trails, and restore the stream bank. (Postponed by HLC on February 4, 2026) Applicant: Paulinda Lanham City Staff: Kalan Contreras, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-2727 Staff Recommendation: Comment on and release the plans, encouraging the applicant to comply with THC feedback when received. Request that the applicant follow the appropriate City process if other contributing structures are to be removed or modified. LM-2025-155778; HR-2026-014183 – 617 Congress Ave. Congress Avenue National Register …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Permits in National Register Historic Districts March 4, 2026 HR-2025-145729 Zilker Park National Register Historic District 2100 Barton Springs Road 3 – 1 Proposal Construct a new bridge in place of the existing contributing bridge. Reconstruct trails. Restore stream bank. Project Specifications The proposed new bridge will replace the existing 1925/1946 Barton Creek bridge at Barton Springs Road and Azie Morton Road. Extreme deterioration and deferred maintenance necessitate bridge removal, with structural elements’ degradation beyond repair and safety concerns, including flood control and pedestrian safety issues, driving Council approval in 2023. The selected design appears to be the most compatible of three options. Proposed materials will match the existing bridge’s concrete and asphalt construction. The proposed bridge utilizes a set of arched piers, reflective of the existing bridge’s design, oriented transverse to the superstructure of the bridge. This orientation provides a maximum amount of visibility through the bridge. The abutment at the park side has been pushed back to create open space accommodating the park train and pedestrian path. The handrail on the park side of the bridge utilizes a robust steel design with heavy concrete pilasters that pay homage to the existing bridge and divert debris during flood events. The bridge has been widened to accommodate two lanes of traffic, planters, and seating with shade devices on either side. Streetscape elements have been selected to blend with the bridge’s surroundings and will be minimally visible above the handrail. Proposed lighting is simple in design. The proposed stream bank and pedestrian pathways are supported by ashlar masonry and stone veneer retaining walls. Design Standards The City of Austin’s Historic Design Standards (March 2021) are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and are used to evaluate projects in National Register districts. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Sites and streetscapes 1. Vegetation, topography, and landscaping 1.1 Do not grade, fill, or excavate unless it is to solve a drainage or flooding problem. 1.2 Retain permanent landscape features that define the character of the property and the district. Protect them when constructing new buildings or additions. The proposed project slightly changes the topography surrounding the bridge to alleviate flooding and allow for pedestrian use of the surrounding bank. No additional character-defining landscape features appear to be affected at this phase of the project. Changes to character-defining landscape features will require additional HLC review. …
Barton Springs Road Bridge Capital Delivery Services | 04 Feb 2026 Project Project Background Background Project History About the Bridge Nearly 100years old built in 1926 20,000 Vehicles per day 1946 Bridge Expansion Key Entrance to Zilker Park and for Major City Events 3 Project Site Protect Park Monuments Bridge Site Challenge and Constraint Categories: Park and Historic Environmental Roadway Intersection Bridge 4 Project Purpose and Need Project Needs Project Goals / Outcomes Age of Structure 100 yrs old, Associated structural degradation Safety Barton Springs roadway not aligned Hillside instability at Umlauf Gardens Provide 75 Year Bridge Service Life Improve Safety Stabilize Umlauf Gardens Insufficient Paths Not enough bike or pedestrian paths on bridge Add Multi-modal and Connect with Park Trails Intersection Congestion At Barton Springs / Azie Morton intersection Reduce Congestion with addition of right turn 5 Project Purpose and Need Roadway Alignment Issues 6 Project Purpose and Need Goal During Construction Maintain two-way traffic during construction Maintain the Azie Morton / Barton Springs intersection during construction 20,000 Vehicles per day on Barton Springs Road (cid:127) Important commuter route (cid:127) Key access to Zilker Park (cid:127) Access to many special events (Trail of Lights, Austin City Limits, Blues on the Green, Zilker Park) 7 Project Options Project Options Rehabilitation or Replacement Options 9 Project Elements Elements Required for Rehabilitation or Replacement Bike Lanes Sidewalk / Path Shared Use Path Proposed Bridge Widened Bike Lane Accommodates Accommodate hiking Trails Wider Ped. Paths off-road biker trail users Accommodates Pedestrians for Special Events Multimodal areas to accommodate off-road hike and bike trail users Longer service life length Wider bridge Better alignment for safety Dedicated bike lanes 10 Bridge Inspection Bridge Inspection Findings Deck (with integral longitudinal joint), floor beams, and spandrel columns exhibited the most degradation. All structural components exhibited some degradation. Degraded Concrete Spandrel Column Spalling Exposed and Corroded Rebar Exposed and Corroded Rebar 11 Rehabilitation Options Spandrel Columns Arch Ribs Bridge Inspection Findings Rehabilitation for increased service life requires removal of deck, floor beams, and spandrel columns Demolish the structure to the arch ribs. Significant work is needed: major rehabilitation or bridge replacement. Do Nothing is not an option 1 Preserve Rehabilitation Option 1 is not feasible 12 Rehabilitation Options Improve Paths Arch ribs …
C-2 - Draft Interim Bridge Status Memorandum – Feb 2022 Barton Springs Rd. Bridge over Barton Creek Interim Bridge Status REVISIONS Project: City of Austin – Barton Springs Road Bridge over Barton Creek Document: Interim Bridge Status Memorandum Revision Date of Issue Description D0 D1 D2 01/17/19 01/25/19 02/24/22 Draft Issue for Internal Comment Draft Issue for City Management Team Review/Comment Draft Issue for City Management Team Review/Comment Statement of Limitations This report is intended for the City of Austin and is not to be distributed to third parties outside the City’s organization. This interim memo provides an update regarding the status of the conceptual design work performed by URS for the proposed facility. This work is ongoing and not complete. Information included in this memo is subject to change prior to release of the Final Bridge Conceptual Engineering Report. Page ii Barton Springs Rd. Bridge over Barton Creek Interim Bridge Status CONTENTS PAGE 1. 2. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 1 Background ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Objectives .................................................................................. 1 1.2 Bridge Engineering Process ...................................................................... 2 1.3 1.3.1 Preliminary Selection and Concept Engineering – Process Phase 1 ...... 2 1.3.2 Preliminary Selection and Concept Engineering – Process Phase 2 ...... 3 1.3.3 Preliminary Selection and Concept Engineering – Process Phase 3 ...... 3 2.4 2.5 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ................................................................................. 4 Bridge Cultural/Historical Background ....................................................... 4 2.1 Barton Springs/Azie Morton Road Intersection Assessment .......................... 4 2.2 Roadway Alignment Concepts (Rehabilitation vs Replacement) .................... 4 2.3 2.3.1 Rehabilitation Option .................................................................... 4 2.3.2 Replacement Option ..................................................................... 5 Maintenance of Traffic / Construction Phasing ............................................ 5 2.4.1 Phase 1 (Figure 2-3) ..................................................................... 5 2.4.2 Phase 2 (Figure 2-4) ..................................................................... 6 2.4.3 Phase 3 (Figure 2-5) ..................................................................... 6 2.4.4 Final Tasks – Complete Construction............................................... 7 Bridge Rehabilitation Summary ................................................................ 7 2.5.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 7 2.5.2 Bridge Rehabilitation Feasibility ...................................................... 7 2.5.3 Description of Existing Condition .................................................... 7 2.5.4 Service Life Estimates ................................................................... 8 2.5.5 Existing Structure - Load Capacity Estimates ................................... 9 2.5.6 Rehabilitation Concept and Components ........................................ 10 2.5.7 Rehabilitation Renderings ............................................................ 11 2.5.8 Estimated Costs ......................................................................... 11 Bridge Replacement Summary ............................................................... 12 2.6.1 Introduction .............................................................................. 12 2.6.2 Bridge Replacement Feasibility ..................................................... 12 2.6.3 Replacement Concept and Components ......................................... 12 2.6.4 Estimated Costs ......................................................................... 13 Conceptual Zilker Park/Pedestrian Opportunities ...................................... 13 2.7.1 Structure/Tree Protection and Mitigation ....................................... 14 2.7.2 Zilker Park – Zilker Zephyr .......................................................... 14 2.7.3 Zilker Park Hike/Bike Trail ........................................................... 14 2.7.4 Barton Springs Road ................................................................... …
