Historic Design Standards City of Austin October 2022 Welcome In Austin, historic preservation encourages the preservation of historic buildings, structures, sites, and districts; promotes awareness of cultural and architectural heritage; and helps shape a more sustainable, equitable, and livable place. As the city grows, these Historic Design Standards will help property owners, designers, builders, and historic preservation professionals make consistent decisions about how to meet present-day needs while stewarding local built heritage and achieving larger goals. Clear standards and graphics show good practices, as well as changes to avoid. The Historic Design Standards were created by a working group representing property owners, designers, developers, advocates, and the Historic Landmark Commission. The working group sought to develop locally relevant standards grounded in national preservation principles. Many members are laypeople, and readability was a key concern: the standards needed to be understandable by property owners and neighbors considering whether to apply for historic district designation, as well as by architects. A Maintenance and Preservation chapter and illustrated glossary support those who want to learn more about architectural elements and materials. The Historic Design Standards promote long-term sustainability by supporting the retention and repair of existing buildings, which keep tons of old-growth wood and other material in use and out of the landfill. They also support sustainable solutions for making buildings more energy efficient now, from high-impact improvements like attic insulation and duct sealing to DIY changes such as weather-stripping around windows and doors. Historic Preservation Office staff are available to answer questions and provide feedback on proposed projects. Reach out to preservation@austintexas.gov or call (512) 974-3393. Left cover image: People looking out over Austin, ca. 1940s Acknowledgments Design Standards Working Group The Historic Landmark Commission created the Design Standards Working Group on September 24, 2018 to create a new set of historic design standards, with the goals of providing clear, user-friendly standards and guidelines for all historic property owners and of simplifying the historic district application process. This document is the product of the working group’s efforts and is modeled on the Preservation Austin design standards template produced through a community initiative in April 2011. David Carroll, AIA Urban Design Commission, preservation architect Janet Beinke Historic district property owner Cara Bertron Historic Preservation Office staff Madeline Clites Preservation consultant Angela Gaudette Historic Preservation Office staff Laura Keating Urban Design staff Marie Oehlerking-Read Texas Historical Commission staff (prev.) Misael Ramos Representative from potential …
Frequently Asked Questions This FAQ sheet is intended to provide a brief orientation to the Historic Design Standards. Please contact preservation@austintexas.gov if you have further questions. 1 Why were the Historic Design Standards I own a property in a locally designated historic developed? Don’t we already have standards for district. How will the Historic Design Standards 3 historic properties? affect me? The Historic Design Standards were developed to clarify existing standards for historic landmarks and National Register districts. They will also make the historic district application process easier and more equitable for new districts. The Historic Design Standards will not affect previously agreed-upon design standards for existing historic districts. They do align with existing district design standards and may be adopted by property owners within each district if desired. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation form the foundation of preservation practice in the United States and are used in Austin to evaluate proposed changes to historic landmarks and in National Register districts. However, these very general standards can be hard to interpret when planning and evaluating specific projects. The Historic Design Standards clarify them with more specific good practices and illustrations. Right now, community members compiling a historic district application must hire a consultant or learn how to develop their own design standards. Then multiple rounds of review are required with other property owners and City staff. This adds time and cost to the application process—and results in design standards that are nearly identical to those for other districts. The Historic Design Standards will provide a consistent, predictable set of standards for all areas considering historic district designation. I own a historic landmark. How will the Historic 2 Design Standards affect me? If adopted by City Council, the Historic Design Standards will clarify existing standards for exterior changes to historic landmarks, as well as new construction on landmarked properties. The Historic Design Standards are based on the standards that City staff and the Historic Landmark Commission already use to evaluate projects. However, they are clearer, more specific, and easier to use. No process changes are proposed. 4 I own a property in a National Register district. How will the Historic Design Standards affect me? If adopted by City Council, the Historic Design Standards will clarify existing guidelines for National Register district properties. The Historic Design Standards are based on the standards that City staff and the Historic Landmark …
Brodie Oaks Redevelopment SOS Amendment 4107 S Capital of Texas Highway C814-2021-0099 Leslie Lilly Environmental Program Coordinator Watershed Protection What is an SOS Amendment • 1992 Save Our Springs ordinance adopted by citizen initiative • Per 25-8-515, variances to SOS are not allowed • Supermajority of Council must approve amendments to SOS • Council Resolution 20221011-076 on October 13, 2022: • “ The City Manager is directed to initiate site specific variances ….. Brodie Oaks Planned Unit Development • A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is a type of site development and regulatory process established by city ordinance for a tract of land. • The SOS amendment is being considered concurrent with the Brodie Oaks PUD ordinance • SOS Initiative prohibits the ability of a PUD Ordinance to modify SOS Full Purpose Jurisdiction Barton Springs Watershed Barton Springs Zone Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone 37.6 Acres 84% Impervious Cover Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone SOS Requirements • Impervious cover in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone is 15% NSA, 20% NSA in the Contributing Zone undeveloped conditions. • Water Quality Controls required for runoff from all impervious cover to meet Land Use Plan for Brodie Oaks PUD Water Quality for Brodie Oaks PUD SOS Amendment • Section A of 25-8-514 (Pollution Prevention Required) shall be modified to allow a maximum impervious cover for the site of 56% net site area. PUD Ordinance • • • • 25-8-341 shall be modified to allow cut not to exceed a maximum of fourteen (14) feet as indicated on Exhibit G. 25-8-342 shall be modified to allow fill not to exceed a maximum of fourteen (14) feet as indicated on Exhibit G. 25-8-281 shall be modified to allow encroachment into CEFs as indicated on Exhibit F. ECM 1.6.7.5 (D) shall be modified to allow captured runoff for beneficial reuse Critical Environmental Features Grading Plan Staff Recommendation Recommended with the following conditions provided in Brodie Oaks PUD Ordinance: • Reduction in impervious cover from 86% NSA to 54% NSA • Bring the site into compliance with SOS water quality treatment requirements • Clustering impervious cover 100-300’ away from Barton Creek • Provides rainwater harvesting for landscape irrigation of not less than 50% of the landscaped • Restoring 2 acres of the tract to native vegetation • Provide 100% GSI for water quality controls. area. • Provides superior tree protections. • Complies with Austin Green Building 3-star rating • Provide …
A Holistic Work Program for long-term unhoused residents of East Austin. Chase Wright Executive Director chase@springdaleparkneighbors.org 512-621-1510 New Website: https://springdaleparkneighbors.com (note – it is .com not .org) Mission/Vision We support East Austin residents on their re-entry journey from unhoused to self-sufficient citizens through a holistic multi-tiered work/apprenticeship program. We seek to establish SPN as a new and more effective model for addressing long-term homelessness that can be replicated within our city, our state, and eventually our country. It is hard work putting people to work. But no one is beyond help and everyone can be productive if given the right opportunities and support. Hidden Barriers keep people homeless The unhoused population we work with have many barriers to participating in normal society exasperated by mental health problems and substance abuse. The City funds a multitude of services but makes little progress, year-over-year, in actually helping people find a way out of the poverty trap they are stuck in. To many social workers, it feels that they are throwing a life vest to a drowning man who tells them they would rather keep swimming. Our peers think the problem is lack of coordination between services. We have a different opinion. The current system doesn’t have a way to establish a relationship that motivates change because help comes from outside the community. SPN’s Relationship-First Holistic Solution SPN has taken a holistic approach to rehabilitating each homeless individual - mind, body, and soul. What works for one homeless individual will not work for all. Because we have an ongoing employment relationship with our clients, we can help them address the barriers that the long-term unhoused face when seeking regular employment: appearance and hygiene, lack of ID/address/phone/bank account, inability to focus due to hunger, work habits, and mental issues / substance abuse. Ultimately, this enables our clients to find their way back into society. We show them by example that hard work is rewarded and that they are capable of working hard. Program Progression Community Services Watershed Cleanup s l a i t n e s s E • Breakfast and Lunch for anyone who shows up to at our work site. • Dinner will be added when funding permits. • Free clothing – durable outfits purchase from Goodwill in bulk. • Laundry – Washing performed while people work. • Showers – Manned and monitored safe space to take a shower. We encourage change …
SPECIAL EVENTS TASK FORCE - RECOMMENDATION 20221019-4 Date: 10/19/2022 Subject: Special Events Task Force Final Report and Recommendations Motioned By: Laurel White Recommendation: Approve the final version of the Special Events Task Force and submit to Mayor and Council. Description of Recommendation to Council: Seconded By: Ingrid Weigand The Task Force submits to Mayor and Council the following Final Report and list of recommendations for their consideration to adopt in totality. Rationale: As directed by Resolution No. 20210902-049 on September 2, 2021, The Special Events Task Force has been charged with providing Mayor and Council with a Final Report and recommended changes to the Special Events Ordinance by October 31, 2022. This report is the culmination of the Task Force’s efforts and deliberations. Vote For: Dan Carroll, Bobby Garza, Shelley Phillips, James Russell, Jeff Smith, Frances Thompson, Ingrid Weigand, Laurel White, Against: None Abstain: Absent: Cindy Lo, Heath Riddles-Sanchez, Mandi Thomas Attest: Brydan Summers Brydan Summers Special Events Task Force Liaison Development Services Department SPECIAL EVENTS TASK FORCE Final Report and Recommendations This document details the Special Event Task Force’s recommendations and topics for consideration for City Council, as directed in the Special Events Ordinance – Ordinance No. 20180510‐018 1 Executive Summary The Special Events Task Force (SETF or Task Force) was created by Ordinance number 20180510‐018 approved by the Austin City Council on May 10, 2018. The Task Force held its first meeting on June 12, 2019, when all eleven voting members were seated, and the eleven ex officio members were identified. We had hoped to provide our final report by the prescribed timeline on March 31, 2020, but were forced into a hiatus due to COVID‐19. The Task Force is grateful that on September 2, 2021 the Council re‐authorized our work so that we could continue to assess the performance of the Special Events Ordinance and provide recommendations for its improvement. In the Special Events Ordinance, the Council directed the Task Force to “provide the Council with a report and any recommended changes.” This overarching directive guided the Task Force through its deliberations and informed the following key Task Force recommendations: ACE (Austin Center for Events) Administration Amplified Sound Ordinance Definitions Notifications to the Public Staffing, Primarily Public Safety Post Event Reporting The Task Force was subject to the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, and all meetings were open to …
SPECIAL EVENTS TASK FORCE - RECOMMENDATION 20221019-3 Seconded By: Ingrid Weigand Date: 10/19/2022 Subject: Recommended Changes to the Special Events Administrative Rules Motioned By: Laurel White Recommendation: Modify section Description of Recommendation to Council: The Task Force recommends updating the ACE Administrative Rules to describe how ACE accepts applications, processes application fees, performs completeness checks, and notifies applicants of the status of their application. This process should ensure that if a plan will not move forward with further review because the site or location is inappropriate that the applicant will be notified in a timely manner. Rationale: ACE began charging fees in October 2022. As such, the administrative rules should be updated to reflect this change. In addition, Tier 2 events currently do not require staff to provide preliminary approval within 10 days of submittal the way Tier 3 and Tier 4 events do. Staff have indicated that applications that have had a completeness check, and been accepted for review, have informal preliminary approval for these events. Meaning staff will work with the applicant to further modify the plan so that a permit will be issued. Codifying this process should provide Tier 2 applicants with re-assurance in their planning without modifying City Code. Furthermore, the Task Force has identified that staffing at AFD is critical to ensuring plans are appropriate for different sites, particularly if there is a change of use or if special events have not taken place at that location. Increasing staffing at AFD will help to ensure these applications can be reviewed in a timely manner so applicants know about the feasibility of their event sooner. The Special Events Task Force was shown administrative rules draft language drafted by ACE staff which will be the baseline language that moves through the rules process. Vote For: Laurel White, Ingrid Weigand, James Russell, Jeff Smith, Dan Carroll, Shelley Phillips, Frances Thompson Against: None 1 of 2 Abstain: Absent: Mandi Thomas, Heath Riddles-Sanchez, Cindy Lo Attest: Brydan Summers Brydan Summers Special Events Task Force Liaison Development Services Department 2 of 2
SPECIAL EVENTS TASK FORCE REGULAR CALLED MEETING MEETING MINUTES 10, OCTOBER 2022 The Special Events Task Force convened in a regular meeting on 10, October 2022, at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Chair Russell called the Special Event Task Force Meeting to order at 2:04 p.m. Task Force Members in Attendance: Co-Chair James Russell, Co-Chair Jeff Smith, Laurel White, Ingrid Weigand, Frances Thompson, Laurel White, Cindy Lo, Dan Carroll Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Shelley Phillips, Bobby Garza PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL No public communication was offered. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes from the meeting of 9/21/2022 were approved on Member Thompson’s motion, Co-Chair Smith’s second, and on a unanimous vote. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS Update from Organizers Currently Planning Events – SETF Member RoundTable on Their Experiences Co-Chair Russell shared that he had two events in the review process, the Veteran’s Day Parade and Trail of Lights. He did not have any concerns. Member White explained her venue gets a lot of billing emails now with the new fees, but is probably a unique situation. Member Carroll stated that they are having difficulty getting law enforcement staffing for their events, they have a large multi-county event this weekend. Discuss and Possible Action on Recommendations to Codify Tier 2 Completeness Checks and Notifications in the Administrative Rules Mr. Summers explained the history of the Task Force trying to address providing preliminary approval for Tier 2 events, and that the proposed recommendation language will 1. 2. 3. 1 direct ACE to update the administrative rules to accomplish this. The Task Force requested that the paragraph in the recommendation’s rationale related to AFD be also included in the staffing section of the final report. Member White asked if the proposed administrative rule language would be included in the recommendation. Mr. Summers explained the administrative rules process and suggested it may not be appropriate for Council to take action on administrative rules language as that is not how the rules process is intended to work. The Task Force decided to add the following language to the recommendation: “The Special Events Task Force was shown administrative rules draft language drafted by ACE staff which will be the baseline language that moves through the rules process.” Member White motioned to approve the recommendation as amended, Co-Chair Russell seconded, it passed unanimously. Discuss and Possible Action on the Final Report to Mayor and Council Member …
Code Amendment: Compatibility on Corridors Codes and Ordinances Joint Committee October 19, 2022 Greg Dutton – Housing and Planning Content Background Council resolution Proposed draft changes Staff’s recommendation Timeline Background Draft LDC is suspended (March 2020) VMU2 is passed on 6/9/22: Allows 30’ additional feet for deeper affordability Parking reduction to 25% of standard for properties on light rail lines Compatibility reduced to 100’ for properties on light rail lines 3 Council Resolution 6/9/22 WHEREAS, Austin is facing an affordability crisis as the housing market reaches record rents and home prices; and WHEREAS, City Council has recently passed a number of resolutions to address affordability and housing supply, including reforms for accessory dwelling units, Vertical Mixed Use, Equitable Transit Oriented Development, and affordable housing bonus programs for commercial zones; and WHEREAS, Austin voters approved substantial investments in corridor improvements, active transportation, and Project Connect in 2016,2018, and 2020; 4 Council Resolution 6/9/22 WHEREAS, current compatibility regulations, established in the 1980s, limit housing capacity on corridors by limiting the height of developments of properties within 540 feet of single-family properties, which is significantly more restrictive compared to cities with similar regulations; and WHEREAS, current parking minimums may require more parking than currently needed and conflict with the City's goal of reaching a 50/50 transportation mode share; and 5 Council Resolution 6/9/22 WHEREAS, moderate changes to compatibility and parking regulations on corridors would increase affordable and market-rate housing supply and support the City's transit investments; and WHEREAS, Planning Commission, Zoning and Platting Commission, City Council, and community members have provided substantial feedback in the last 10 years on potential changes to the compatibility regulations and parking minimums; and WHEREAS, the Austin City Council is committed to enacting policy changes to increase housing capacity and support transit investments on corridors; 6 Council Resolution 6/9/22 For a residential or mixed-use project on light rail, large corridors, medium corridors: Compatibility ends at 300’ from triggering property (zoning only) Additional 5’ in height Parking reduced to 25% (light rail and large corridor) or 50% (medium corridor) 7 Council Resolution 6/9/22 For a residential or mixed-use project on specified corridors providing affordable housing: Maximum height at a distance of 100’ from a triggering property for projects on a light rail line 65’ of height at a distance …
Code Amendment: Residential in Commercial Codes and Ordinances Joint Committee October 19, 2022 Greg Dutton – Housing and Planning Content Background Council resolution Proposed draft changes Staff’s recommendation Timeline Background Residential in commercial is a new concept for the draft LDC Basic concept is to allow residential in commercially-zoned property to add housing capacity Draft LDC is suspended (March 2020) 3 Council Resolution 12/9/21 WHEREAS, under the Land Development Code, residential development is not currently allowed in many of the commercial zoning districts in Austin; and WHEREAS, City Council adopted the Austin Housing Strategic Blueprint (the Blueprint) in 2017 which called for 135,000 housing units by 2028, with 60,000 of those units at or below 80 percent of the median family income (MFI); 4 Council Resolution 12/9/21 WHEREAS, in the proposed Land Development Code Revision, residential uses were allowed in more zoning districts than in current city code; and WHEREAS, allowing housing in more places provides the opportunity for increased housing supply in Austin; and WHEREAS, in its 2018 report, the Planning Commission Mapping Working Group indicated that allowing mixed use in commercial zoning could lead to about 46,324 housing units in new capacity; 5 Council Resolution 12/9/21 Allow residential development in: CS, CS-1, GR, LR, GO, LO Affordable housing required Right to return for creative spaces* *Definition still being determined 6 Proposed draft changes: Applicability 7 Proposed draft changes Affordable housing required for residential entitlement: Rental: 10% @ 60% MFI, 40 years Owner: 10% @ 80% MFI, 99 years Fee-in-lieu not allowed 8 Proposed draft changes Effectively grants –MU zoning administratively No other changes to site development standards: height, impervious cover, floor area ratio, parking 9 Eligible Commercial Parcels by Displacement Risk Area & High Opportunity Area 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Total 7474 Eligible Commercial Parcels 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Total 7474 Within All Displacement Risk Areas 2802 Within 1/2 mile of Project Connect routes 4615 Within High Opportunity Areas 3111 Within 1/2 Mile of Current Transit Service 6874 Eligible Commercial Parcels Along Compatibility Ordinance Corridor 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Total 7474 Along Compatibility Ordinance Corridor 3476 1 0 Staff’s recommendation Recommended with changes: Modify to exclude properties within 500’ of a level 5 …
1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20221019 004 Date: October 19, 2022 Seconded by: Kevin Ramberg Subject: Karanam Subdivision Wastewater Service Extension Request #5575 Motion by: Jennifer Bristol RATIONALE: WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the Service Extension Request (SER) is located in the Bull Creek, Water Supply Suburban, Northern Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, Drinking Water Protection Zone and limited purpose jurisdiction. WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes that Watershed Protection Department staff have completed the review for Karanam Subdivision Wastewater Service Extension Request #5575 and recommend approval of the request. THEREFORE, Environmental Commission recommends approval of the above noted wastewater service extension request. VOTE 9-0 For: Aguirre, Bedford, Brimer, Bristol, Nickells, Qureshi, Ramberg, Scott, and Thompson Against: None Abstain: None Recuse: None Absent: Barrett Bixler and Schiera Approved By: Kevin Ramberg, Environmental Commission Chair
1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20221019-005 Seconded by: Perry Bedford Date: October 19, 2022 Subject: Loyola Junction Apartments, SP-2021-0242C Motion by: Jennifer Bristol WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the applicant is Request to vary from LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill up to 17 feet in the desired development zone and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the site is located in the Walnut Creek, Suburban Watershed, Desired Development Zone; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes that Staff recommends this variance, with conditions having determined the required Findings of Fact have been met. THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission recommends the variance request with the following conditions: Staff Conditions: • Install a retaining wall to contain the major fill areas • Utilize terracing techniques in the areas of major fill • Increase the CEF setback for the existing CEF wetland feature in the area by 50 feet • Add additional COA 609S Native seeding at the bottom of the major fill areas VOTE 9-0 For: Aguirre, Bedford, Brimer, Bristol, Nickells, Qureshi, Ramberg, Scott, and Thompson Against: None Abstain: None Recuse: None Absent: Barrett Bixler and Schiera Approved By: Kevin Ramberg, Environmental Commission Chair
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 19, October, 2022 The Environmental Commission convened in a regular meeting on 19, October, 2022 at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Commissioners in Attendance: Ana Aguirre, Rick Brimer, Jennifer Bristol, Kevin Ramberg, and Rachel Scott. Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Perry Bedford, Colin Nickells, Pam Thompson, and Haris Qureshi. Commissioners absent: Audrey Barrett Bixler and Melinda Schiera. CALL TO ORDER Chair Ramberg called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:04 P.M. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Speakers Malcom Yeatts spoke about Country Club Creek cleanups. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND ACTION 1. Approval the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on October 5, 2022 (5 minutes) The minutes of the October 5, 2022 Environmental Commission Regular Meeting were postponed until the next meeting. DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. Briefing on the Palm District Plan. Briefing and Possible Action. Housing and Planning Staff, Stevie Greathouse, (512) 974-7226, stevie.greathouse@austintexas.gov (30 minutes) Item conducted as posted. No action taken. 3. Presentation of Development Assessment Report for 311-315 South Congress, located at 311-315 South Congress Avenue, CD-2022-0002 (District 9). Applicant: Amanda Swor, Drenner Group, PC. Staff: Wendy Rhoades, Housing and Planning Department and Leslie Lilly, Environmental Program Coordinator, Watershed Protection Department (30 minutes) Item conducted as posted. No action taken. 1 PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. Chair Ramberg recessed the meeting for ten minutes at 8:32 P.M. Chair Ramberg resumed the meeting at 8:45 P.M. Name: Karanam Subdivision Wastewater Service Extension Request #5575 Applicant: I.T. Gonzalez, I.T. Gonzalez Engineering Location: 10802 D K Ranch Rd, Austin, TX 78759 Council District: Limited Purpose Jurisdiction (District 10) Staff: Kaela Champlin, Environmental Program Coordinator, Watershed Protection Department Watershed: Bull Creek, Water Supply Suburban, Northern Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, Drinking Water Protection Zone Request: Wastewater Service Extension Staff Recommendation: Recommended (20 minutes) A motion to close the public hearing was approved on Commissioner Ramberg’s motion, Commissioner Aguirre’s second on a 9-0 vote. Commissioners Barrett Bixler and Schiera were absent. A motion to approve the Karanam Subdivision Wastewater Service Extension Request #5575 was approved on Commissioner Bristol’s motion, Commissioner Ramberg’s second on a 9-0 vote. Commissioners Barrett Bixler and Schiera were absent. Name: Loyola Junction Apartments, SP-2021-0242C Applicant: Stephen Jamison, Jamison Civil Engineering Location: …
Austin Transportation Department Shared Micro-Mobility Program Update Jason Redfern, Parking Enterprise Manager Joseph Al-hajeri, Program Manager BRIEFING OVERVIEW Quick History Data Management/Analysis Program Regulation & Fees Safety and Infrastructure Licenses and Devices Enforcement/Compliance Data Trends Program Success Future Program Enhancements MICRO-MOBILITY HISTORY IN AUSTIN 2018 - 2021 Fall 2018 Final Director Rules adopted May 2019 Ordinance 14-9 revised to allow licensing and permitting November 2021 Device cap + reduced speed requirement April 2018 Scooters deployed in Austin – Emergency rules adopted to regulate service December 2018 Adopted new fee of $0.15 per trip October 2021 Adopted application fee and adjusted trip fee to range of $0.15 - $0.40. SHARED MICRO-MOBILITY PROGRAM REGULATION & FEES REGULATION CITY APPROVED FEES Texas Transportation Code, Title 7 • Chapter 551. - Operation of bicycles and mopeds, golf carts, and other low-powered vehicles. Title 14 Use of Streets and Public Property • §14-9-23 - City-wide dockless transportation • §14-9-24 - City-wide dockless transportation license authorized. unit placement plan. revocation. • §14-9-25 - License amendment, suspension, or Title 12 Traffic Enforcement • §12-2 - Micro-Mobility Devices and Bicycles. Fee Type Fee Amount Note License Fee $1,500 per year New since FY 22/23 Per Device Fee $80 per device/ per year Increased from $60 in FY22/23 Trip Fee $0.15 - $0.40 per trip Currently $0.15 and evaluating an escalating fee process. Fee range approved FY22/23 SHARED MICRO-MOBILITY PROGRAM CURRENT LICENSES AND DEVICE TYPES Stand-Up Scooter Licensed Companies 4 Device Permits 14,100 Permit Breakdown by Device Type 11,850 Sit-Down Scooter E-Bike Program Adjustments (as of fall 2021) • Moratorium on device permit increases in downtown • Required reduction of speed from 20mph – 15mph • Increased enforcement 1,750 500 WHAT THE DATA SAYS 600,000 500,000 400,000 I S P R T 300,000 200,000 100,000 - Micro-Mobility Scooter & E-Bike Trips By Month (2018-2021) SXSW ACL COVID Restrictions ACL SXSW E-Bike Scooter MONTH/YEAR DATA MANAGEMENT/ ANALYSIS Third Party Data Management Data Quality / Planning Tools Increased Public Data Availability & Protection of PII SAFETY AND INFRASTRUCTURE • Upgrading micromobility parking corrals – Increasing visibility and awareness using 2020 Mobility Bond. • Use of new combined data to better understand critical safety and infrastructure enhancements. • Contributed to device standards for commercial electric scooters to define required safety standards for devices. • Geofencing and in-app approaches to limit speeds, inform riders of parking areas and where not to leave devices. …
RESOLUTION NO. 20211029-003 WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan ("ASMP") (Ordinance No. 20190411-033) is the transportation element of the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan and calls for a 50/50 mode share by 2039, which includes increasing use of sustainable modes such as walking, bicycling, teleworking and transit; WHEREAS, City Council adopted Resolution No. 20190808-081 directing the City Manager to "analyze and report on options for the City of Austin and other related or interested public or private entities to leverage resources to support the creation, operation, and maintenance of a high-capacity transit system"; WHEREAS, Austin voters approved Project Connect, the regional high- capacity transit system, on November 3,2020; WHEREAS, on December 18,2020, the City of Austin and the Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority created a local government corporation named the Austin Transit Partnership Local Government Corporation to aid the City and Capital Metro and act on their behalf to accomplish the governmental purpose of implementing the Project Connect System Plan; WHEREAS, in a report entitled Saving Time and Making Cents: A Blueprintfor Building Transit Better ("Eno Report"), published in 2021, the Eno Center for Transportation identified local regulation, permitting, and decision- making procedures throughout the United States as an obstacle to achieving viable, cost-effective transit systems on par with those of peer nations; WHEREAS, noting that local development codes are generally ill- suited to the nature and scale of mass transit, the Eno Report found that jurisdictions that have successfully constructed mass transit systems apply modified regulations and review procedures to accommodate the unique challenges Page 1 0f 3 transit construction presents and the ways it differs from private development or conventional transportation and public works projects; WHEREAS, the City ofAustin's Land Development Code does not provide for the design and permitting of linear construction required for mobility and transit facilities that encompass large areas, include subsurface and above-ground elements, and span multiple zoning districts and watersheds; WHEREAS, greater flexibility and more carefully tailored regulations are required to facilitate construction of Project Connect; WHEREAS, City staff routinely interprets and applies City Code to development and capital improvement applications; WHEREAS, the Land Development Code, existing regulations, criteria, and procedures should be flexibly applied to facilitate construction of Project Connect to the greatest extent possible until existing requirements can be amended; WHEREAS, there are Project Connect MetroRapid and MetroRail projects currently moving forward in advance of the Orange and Blue Line light rail projects; …
