PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD Tuesday, April 27, 2021 – 6:00pm MINUTES The Parks and Recreation Board convened in a regular meeting on Tuesday, April 27, 2021 via videoconference in Austin, Texas. Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:03pm. Board Members in Attendance: Chair Dawn Lewis, Laura Cottam Sajbel, Richard DePalma, Anna Di Carlo, Sarah Faust, Francoise Luca, Kate Mason-Murphy, Nina Rinaldi and Kimberly Taylor. Board Members Absent: Vice Chair Romteen Farasat and Fred Morgan. Staff in Attendance: Kimberly McNeeley, Liana Kallivoka, Lucas Massie, Suzanne Piper, Anthony Segura, Carre Adams, Christine Chute Canul, Megan Eckard, Laura Esparza, Gregory Montes, Vanorda Richardson and Sammi Curless. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Adam Sparks – Hancock Conservancy and support for turning the golf course into park/green space. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes from the regular meeting of March 23, 2021 were approved on Board Member Rinaldi motion, Board Member Cottam Sajbel second on an 9-0 with Vice Chair Farasat and Board Member Morgan absent. B. NEW BUSINESS: PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS CONSENT 1. Discussion and possible action regarding the Parks and Recreation Department Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget. Chair Lewis made a motion to recommend approval of the Parks and Recreation Department Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Operating Budget as presented in its Budget Forecast; and the Parks and Recreation Board recommends that City Council make the additional allocations on the attached “FISCAL YEAR 2022 UNDER RESOURCED NEEDS” to the Parks and Recreation Department as these are priority items needed to address changes in city services, for parks programming, and pressures on the parks system which are not addressed under the current definitions provided in the budget process; Board Members Faust and Taylor seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 9-0 with Vice Chair Farasat and Board Member Morgan absent. Page 1 of 3 2. Discussion and possible action regarding a recommendation to the City Council for the negotiation and execution of a partnership agreement with Pease Park Conservancy for the operations, maintenance and programming for Kingsbury Commons within Pease District Park. Board Member Luca made a motion to recommend to the City Council the negotiation and execution of a partnership agreement with Pease Park Conservancy for the operations, maintenance and programming for Kingsbury Commons within Pease District Park; Board Member Di Carlo seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 9-0 with Vice Chair Farasat and Board Member …
Business Committee Meeting of the HIV Planning Council Monday, April 26, 2021 The Business Committee Meeting to be held 04/26/2021 with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via Microsoft Teams; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (04/23/2021 by Noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the April 26, 2021 HIV Planning Council Meeting, residents must: •Call or email the board liaison at (512) 972-5806 and Jaseudia.Killion@austintexas.gov no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The information required is the speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, and a telephone number or email address. •Once a request to speak has been called in or emailed to the board liaison, residents will receive either an email or phone call providing the telephone number to call on the day of the scheduled meeting. •Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. •Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. •Handouts or other information may be emailed to Jaseudia.Killion@austintexas.gov by Noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. •If this meeting is broadcast live, residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live Versión en español a continuación. Reunión del Special Called Buisness Committee Meeting of the HIV Planning Council la folletos junta en FECHA de la reunion (Monday, Abril 26, 2021) La junta se llevará con modificaciones de distanciamiento social Se permitirán comentarios públicos por teléfono; no se permitirá ninguna entrada en persona. Todos los oradores deben registrarse con anticipación (04/23/2021 antes del mediodía). Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los miembros del público deben: • Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de (512) 972-5806 and Jaseudia.Killion@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). La información requerida es el nombre del orador, los números de artículo sobre los que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutrales, y un número de teléfono o dirección de correo electrónico. • Una vez que se haya llamado o enviado por correo electrónico …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 22, 2021 – 6:00 PM VIA VIDEOCONFERENCING COMMISSION MEMBERS: x x x x x x Terri Myers, Chair Ben Heimsath, Vice Chair Witt Featherston Mathew Jacob Kevin Koch Kelly Little x ab x x x Trey McWhorter Alex Papavasiliou Blake Tollett Beth Valenzuela Caroline Wright CALL TO ORDER: 6:01 PM AGENDA CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first ten (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. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 25, 2021 – Offered for consent approval MOTION: Approve the minutes, per passage of the consent agenda, on a motion by Commissioner Koch. Commissioner Valenzuela seconded the motion. Vote: 10-0. 2. PRESENTATIONS, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION Presentation on the Translating Community History project. http://www.austintexas.gov/page/current-projects Presentation by Cara Bertron, Housing & Planning Department. A. A. B. Presentation on recently completed historic resource surveys: Historic Resources Survey for Old Austin Neighborhood Association (2020) Historic Building Survey Report for North Central Austin: West Campus, North University, Heritage, Bryker Woods, and North Hyde Park (2021) http://www.austintexas.gov/page/historic-survey Presentation by Andrew Rice, Housing & Planning Department. 1 C. Presentation, discussion, and possible action to seek a recommendation to City Council for the Parks and Recreation Department’s preferred design scenario for the Dougherty Arts Center Replacement Project. Presentation by Kevin Johnson, Parks & Recreation Department, and Jonathan Pearson, Studio8 Architects. MOTION: Recommend endorsement of either Option 1A or Option 1B on the basis of preservation of the historic PARD Headquarters building on a motion by Vice Chair Heimsath. Commissioner Little seconded the motion. Vote: 10-0. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Discussion and Possible Action on Applications for Historic Zoning, Discussion and Action on Applications for Historic District Zoning, and Requests to Consider Initiation of Historic Zoning Cases A.1. No cases. B. Discussion and Possible Action on Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness B.1. C14H-2009-0021 – 2406 Harris Blvd. – Discussion Jackson-Novy Kelly-Hoey House Council District 9 Proposal: Construct a swimming pool and terrace, landscape modifications; remove an attic vent opening on the front of the house Applicant: Tina Contros City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Committee Feedback: Provide evidence of historic nature of proposed changes and consider another location for the proposed pool; concerns regarding the appropriateness of a pool in the front yard. Staff Recommendation: Approve the …
Historic Landmark Commission Applications under Review for April 26, 2021 Meeting This list does not constitute a formal agenda and is subject to change. A final agenda will be posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. The Historic Landmark Commission meeting will be held with Social Distancing Modifications. Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers (applicants included) must register in advance no later than Sunday, April 25, 2021 by 12:00 noon. All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the Historic Landmark Commission meeting: • Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-1264 or preservation@austintexas.gov no later than 12:00 noon the day before the meeting. The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). • Once a request to speak has been made to the board liaison, the information to call on the day of the scheduled meeting will be provided either by email or phone call. • Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start time in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. • Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. • Handouts or other information may be emailed to preservation@austintexas.gov by noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. If the meeting is broadcast live, it may be viewed here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live • Briefings 2.A. 6416 N. Lamar Blvd. – Former Threadgill’s No. 1 Historic zoning applications A.1. 5312 Shoal Creek Blvd. – Kohn House Historic landmark and historic district applications B.1. B.2. 5312 Shoal Creek Blvd. – Kohn House – Construct an addition 907-09-11 Congress Avenue – Grandberry Building and Mitchell-Robertson Building, Congress Avenue National Register District – Deconstruct, store, and re-erect historic building facades (postponed March 22, 2021) 1501 Northwood Road – Voss House – Construct a rear addition B.3. 1 B.4. B.5. B.6. B.7. C.2. C.3. C.4. C.5. C.6. C.7. C.8. C.9. 1419 Newning Ave. – Dumble-Boatright House – Screen an existing porch and install skylights 612 Highland Ave. – Smoot/Terrace Park Historic District – Construct a …
Versión en español a continuación. Library Commission Meeting MONDAY, April 26, 2021, 3-4:30 PM Library Commission meeting to be held April 26, 2021 with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance no later than Sunday, April 25 by Noon. All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the April 26, 2021 Library Commission Meeting, members of the public must: •Call or email the board liaison at 512-974-7420 or sharon.herfurth@austintexas.gov no later than noon, Sunday, April 25. The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). •Once a request to speak has been made to the board liaison, the information to call on the day of the scheduled meeting will be provided either by email or phone call. •Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start time in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. •Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. •Handouts or other information may be emailed to sharon.herfurth@austintexas.gov by Noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. •If the meeting is broadcast live, it may be viewed here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Reunión del Library Commission FECHA de la reunion Monday, April 26, 2021, 3-4:30 PM La junta se llevará con modificaciones de distanciamiento social Se permitirán comentarios públicos por teléfono; no se permitirá ninguna entrada en persona. Todos los oradores deben registrarse con anticipación Sunday, April 25 antes del mediodía. Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los miembros del público deben: • Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de la junta en 512-974-7420 or sharon.herfurth@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). Se requiere la siguiente información: nombre del orador, número (s) de artículo sobre el que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutral, dirección de correo electrónico (opcional) y un número de teléfono (debe ser el número que se utilizará para llamar ). • …
#CarverMuseumATX THE GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER MUSEUM, CULTURAL & GENEALOGY CENTER Facility Expansion Plan Library Commission - April 26, 2021 / 3:00 pm 1 PLANNING PROCESS We are here Initiation Planning Conception Adoption Implementation 1 2 3 4 5 Needs Assessment Small Group Discussions Preliminary Planning Concepts Draft Planning Report Community Meetings Boards, Commissions & City Council Presentations Final Facility Expansion Plan Submission 2 Community Meeting # 1 - 08/8/20March - July 2020May 2021 / TBDCommunity Meeting # 2 - 10/3/20Community Meeting # 3 - 11/21/20 A VIRTUAL ADVENTURE...! COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT & INPUT Community Meetings: x 3 Small Group Discussions: 8 Groups 77 Participants • Performing Artists • Carver Task Force • Civic Leaders • Visual Artists • COA African American Employees • Carver Museum Staff • Carver Ambassadors • African American Resource Advisory Commission Technical Advisory Group Meetings: x 3 3 A Critical Piece of the African American Community in Austin Texas Capitol 1 2 t h S t r e e t Carver Site 8 C h i c o n S t r e e t . 2 9 10 I-35 11th Street 4 3 5 R o s e w o o d Av e . Rosewood Courts Eastside ECHS 7 1 6 1. Texas State Cemetery 2. Rosewood Neighborhood Park 3. Charles E. Urdy Plaza 4. Historic Victory Grill 5. Six Square 6. Huston-Tillotson University 7. Oakwood Cemetery 8. James L.Farmer Jr. Home 9. Dedrick Hamilton House 10. African-American Cultural Heritage Facility 4 GOALS & PRINCIPLES 1. Recognize, respect and reflect the community’s history, culture and heritage. 2. As the heart of Black art and culture in Austin, the plan should advance the vision and mission of the Carver 3. Establish stronger outdoor amenities that connect with Museum. nature. 4. Strengthen the diverse and inter-generational experiences in and around the facility, while meeting present and future needs of the community and staff. 5. Create flexible spaces that could be used by everyone in the community. 5 KEY PLANNING THEMES Explores the multiplicity of meanings and relationship of the community with the Carver Looks at one’s perception and experience of the building and the complex as a whole –includes branding, wayfinding & accessibility Idea of the Carver Experience Program Indoor Spaces Elaborates upon the programs and events organized by the Carver and their spatial requirements Understanding the design and utilization of existing indoor spaces Understanding the relationship …
Austin Public Library Fiscal Year 2021-22 Proposed Budget The Proposed Operating Budget of the Austin Public Library (APL) includes an increase of $1,321,890 or 2.25%. The Materials budget, including books and subscriptions, requested increase is $206,368, or 3.5% for inflation. Requirements: Revenues Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs): Materials Budget: FY 2020 Budget $54,685,661 $577,258 443.55 $5,232,169 FY 2021 Budget $58,868,376 $239,815 445.55 $5,896,218 FY 2022 Proposed $60,190,266 $525,806 450.55 $6,102,586 Proposed Operating Budget Highlights CITY-WIDE Personnel Requirements FTEs Wage increase of 2% for eligible employees, $ 543,556 .00 and adjustments for accrued payroll Insurance – health/life/dental, reduction of 15% Pension, increase of 1% in COAERS City contribution Internal Support Services allocation changes Administrative Support Communications & Technology Management (CTM) Fleet Maintenance DEPARTMENT-WIDE Security Guards 26 pay periods including fringe Materials Budget (Books and Subscriptions) ($1,011,798) $ 228,339 $ 132,770 $ 617,484 $ 3,365 $ 286,911 5.00 3.5% increase for materials, due to inflation & population growth $ 206,368 IT software – increase for hardware & software licenses and contracts $ 301,100 Library Facilities Maintenance and Improvements Fund The Operating Budget in the Library Facilities Maintenance and Improvements Fund (7LIB) is $505,559 in expenditures and $1,251,147 in revenues. This includes the Central Library gift shop, facility rentals, parking garage fees, café rental, and a contingency for facilities maintenance. Capital Improvement Program Funds APL continues work on renovations and repairs at various branches and locations across the city with planned spending of 2018 Bonds, 2012 Bonds, Historic Preservation Funds, and Deferred Maintenance Funds. Historic Preservation Fund The Operating Budget in the Historic Preservation Fund (1160) for Austin Public Library is $33,000. This annual funding began in FY 2020 to provide Digital Services for Austin History Center (AHC) Historic Collections. It is anticipated to continue through FY 2023. Questions? Email us at Library-ACAOFinance@austintexas.gov 3/10/2021
Design Commission April 26, 2021 Design Commission to be held April 26, 2021 with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (April 25th by Noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the Design Commission Meeting, members of the public must: • Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-1243 and aaron.jenkins@austintexas.gov no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The information required is the speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, and a telephone number or email address. • Once a request to speak has been called in or emailed to the board liaison, residents will receive either an email or phone call providing the telephone number to call on the day of the scheduled meeting. • Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. • Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. • Handouts or other information may be emailed to aaron.jenkins@austintexas.gov by Noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. • If this meeting is broadcast live, residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live Reunión del Design Commission FECHA de la reunion (Abril 26, 2021) La junta se llevará con modificaciones de distanciamiento social Se permitirán comentarios públicos por teléfono; no se permitirá ninguna entrada en persona. Todos los oradores deben registrarse con anticipación (Abril 25th antes del mediodía). Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los residentes deben • junta en (512) 974-1243 and Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de aaron.jenkins@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). La información requerida es el nombre del orador, los números de artículo sobre los que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutrales, y un número de teléfono o dirección de correo electrónico. la • • Una vez que se haya llamado o enviado por correo electrónico una solicitud para hablar al enlace de la junta, los residentes recibirán un correo electrónico o una …
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, March 22, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx MEETING MINUTES X X X Beau Frail (District 6) Jessica Rollason (District 7) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:34 p.m. Member List David Carroll – Chair (District 1) X X Melissa Hanao-Robledo – Vice-Chair (District 5) X X X Martha Gonzalez – (District 2) Samuel Franco (District 3) Josue Meiners (District 4) Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) “X” Denote Commission Members who were in attendance X Jorge E. Rousselin, Executive Liaison X Aaron D. Jenkins, Staff Liaison X Art Zamorano, Staff Liaison CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 1. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): CITY OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether City of Austin EMS Station 7, addressed at 8989 Research Blvd, complies with the City Design and Sustainability Standards, for the City of Austin: Owen Harrod MWM Design Group. • Owen Harrod MWM Design Group presented and answered questions from Commissioners. • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion that the City of Austin consider the Design Commission’s recommendation for alternative fencing (Ameristar, Design Master, or equivalent product) to eliminate the razor wire and where possible, add a shrub line or some sort of green landscaping onsite. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. Page 1 of 3 • The motion was approved [8 ayes, 0 nays] b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether City of Austin EMS Station 10, addressed at 5228 Duval Road, complies with the City Design and Sustainability Standards, for the City of Austin; Owen Harrod MWM Design Group. • Owen Harrod MWM Design Group presented and answered questions from Commissioners. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi made a motion that the City of Austin consider the Design Commission’s recommendations to install a Monument Sign closer to the street for increased visibility and for additional landscape elements near the parking spaces both at the North and South ends of the property. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. • The motion was approved [8 ayes, 0 nays] 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of February 22nd Meeting Minutes. • Commissioner A. Coleman requested that the February 22nd minutes reflect that although Commissioner E. Taniguchi recused himself from Item 1.b, Commissioner E. Taniguchi engaged in a brief dialogue during that item. • Commissioner …
$10/SF of Bonus Area $5/SF of Bonus Area $5/SF of Bonus Area $3/SF of Bonus Area September 11, 2018 City of Austin Design Commission David Carroll, Design Commission Chair Recommendations regarding adjusting the Downtown Density Bonus Program Fee Table Date: To: From: Subject: Per LDC §25-2-586, the Downtown Density Bonus Program outlines the Development Bonus Fee schedule that an applicant pays to the City per square foot of bonus area requested. These fees are then distributed by NHCD to help build affordable housing projects in Austin. The Development Bonus Fees, however, are not the equal across all downtown. The current fees for Residential projects are: Core/ Waterfront District: Lower Shoal Creek District: Rainey Street District: All other Districts: Due to many factors including Austin’s booming economy, the redevelopment of the Seaholm power plant, and the revitalization of Austin’s urban creeks, we have seen large growth in the Lower Shoal Creek, Rainey Street, and Waller Creek Districts in particular. It is now apparent that the incentive of lower Development Bonus Fees in these Districts is no longer necessary and they should be reevaluated. This task had been identified and written into CodeNEXT, but now that the effort has stalled the City is continuing to lose money every day in these Districts. The Design Commission recommends that the Development Bonus Fees in the Lower Shoal Creek, Rainey Street, and Waller Creek Districts be adjusted to match the current Core / Waterfront District fee of $10/SF of Bonus Area. This is an easy fix to an outdated system until the entire program can be reevaluated and will result in many more dollars allocated to affordable housing in Austin. Thank you, David Carroll, AIA Chair Design Commission
DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Date: November 04, 2019 Re: Land Development Code amendments related to the Downtown Density Bonus Program Honorable Mayor Adler and City Council Members, In Austin, high-rise projects that comply with the current Downtown Density Bonus Program (DDBP) can be awarded more than three-times the floor area than the base zoning allows in exchange for what today are considered modest design improvements. The Design Commission is a strong advocate for downtown density, but we also find that the DDBP is dated and does not create public benefits comparable to the entitlements that these projects receive. We are specifically concerned that the DDBP is not well aligned with more recently adopted policy goals including: mobility1, pedestrian safety2, climate and sustainability3, livability and affordability4. For example, a developer may approach the Design Commission with entitlements for an eight-story commercial building, and if compliant with the DDBP, walk away with the ability to construct 24 stories of hotel space (hundreds of units), and 8 stories of parking (thousands of additional parking spaces), in exchange for modest street level improvements5, and perhaps somewhat more energy efficient building design6. The Downtown Density Bonus Program’s gatekeeper requirements do not account for: • Design for ride share queuing and associated pedestrian safety • Public access to structured parking garages or parking demand management systems • Parking structures designed for future re-use as livable space • Downtown mobility planning, i.e. support for alternative mobility options through funding, and discouragement of parking structures, especially if not designed to support transit system. To this end, the Design Commission respectfully requests that Council consider a resolution directing the City Manager to assign multi-departmental staff7 to assist the Commission in drafting proposed code amendments to better align the DDBP with the city’s adopted goals. Input from public stakeholders will play an important role in this process as well to ensure the DDBP remains functional and attractive to developers. Further, the Design Commission recommends that the process to amend the Downtown Density Bonus Program should include an examination of the following recommendations: 1 Austin Strategic Mobility Plan 2 Vision Zero 3 Austin Community Climate Plan 4 Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan 5 City of Austin Great Streets Program. 6 Two-star rating from Austin Energy Green Building Program. 7 Austin Transportation Department, Office of Sustainability, Neighborhood Housing and Community Development with Capital Metro partnership. 1/2 FUNCTIONALITY • If a DDBP applicant receives a …
#CarverMuseumATX THE GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER MUSEUM, CULTURAL & GENEALOGY CENTER Facility Expansion Plan Design Commission - April 26, 2021 / 5:30 pm 1 PLANNING PROCESS We are here Initiation Planning Conception Adoption Implementation 1 2 3 4 5 Needs Assessment Small Group Discussions Preliminary Planning Concepts Draft Planning Report Community Meetings Boards, Commissions & City Council Presentations Final Facility Expansion Plan Submission 2 Community Meeting # 1 - 08/8/20March - July 2020May 2021 / TBDCommunity Meeting # 2 - 10/3/20Community Meeting # 3 - 11/21/20 A VIRTUAL ADVENTURE...! COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT & INPUT Community Meetings: x 3 Small Group Discussions: 8 Groups 77 Participants • Performing Artists • Carver Task Force • Civic Leaders • Visual Artists • COA African American Employees • Carver Museum Staff • Carver Ambassadors • African American Resource Advisory Commission Technical Advisory Group Meetings: x 3 3 A Critical Piece of the African American Community in Austin Texas Capitol 1 2 t h S t r e e t Carver Site 8 C h i c o n S t r e e t . 2 9 10 I-35 11th Street 4 3 5 R o s e w o o d Av e . Rosewood Courts Eastside ECHS 7 1 6 1. Texas State Cemetery 2. Rosewood Neighborhood Park 3. Charles E. Urdy Plaza 4. Historic Victory Grill 5. Six Square 6. Huston-Tillotson University 7. Oakwood Cemetery 8. James L.Farmer Jr. Home 9. Dedrick Hamilton House 10. African-American Cultural Heritage Facility 4 GOALS & PRINCIPLES 1. Recognize, respect and reflect the community’s history, culture and heritage. 2. As the heart of Black art and culture in Austin, the plan should advance the vision and mission of the Carver 3. Establish stronger outdoor amenities that connect with Museum. nature. 4. Strengthen the diverse and inter-generational experiences in and around the facility, while meeting present and future needs of the community and staff. 5. Create flexible spaces that could be used by everyone in the community. 5 KEY PLANNING THEMES Explores the multiplicity of meanings and relationship of the community with the Carver Looks at one’s perception and experience of the building and the complex as a whole –includes branding, wayfinding & accessibility Idea of the Carver Experience Program Indoor Spaces Elaborates upon the programs and events organized by the Carver and their spatial requirements Understanding the design and utilization of existing indoor spaces Understanding the relationship …
City of Austin - Design Commission Project Review Application The Design Commission provides advisory recommendations to the City Council to assist in developing public policy and to promote excellence in the design and development of the urban environment. The Design Commission reviews three types of projects: 1. City projects (see page ii for process) The Commission reviews all municipal buildings and associated site plans to ensure they demonstrate compliance with city design and sustainability standards (Council Resolution No. 20071129-046), including those seeking Subchapter E Design Standards Alternative Equivalent Compliance (AEC) (Council Resolution No. 20100923-086). 2. Destiny Bonus projects (see page iv for process) The Commission reviews density bonus projects for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines for Austin in accordance with the Gatekeeper requirements of LDC 25-2-586 for the Downtown Density Bonus Program. 3. Advisory Recommendations for Private projects (see page ii for process) The Commission will consider Project Review Applications from private projects during its regularly scheduled monthly public meetings and may issue an advisory recommendation in the form of a Project Review Letter to the Applicant. This Project Review Application must be submitted before your project can be presented to the Design Commission for their review. Design Commission requests project be presented in their Conceptual/Schematic Design phase. This application primarily addresses inhabited buildings and structures and their effect on the public realm; please refer to Appendix A for infrastructure type projects. The Commission's review of projects is based on the planning/design principles in the Urban Design Guidelines for Austin. Ensure that all applicable principles are addressed in the application questions and in your presentation. https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Boards_and_Commissions/ Design_Commission_urban_design_guidelin es_for_austin.pdf The Design Commission supports the vision and principles of Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, especially those that affect the urban environment and fabric. All projects should consider this vision and principles, many of which are similar to the Urban Design Guidelines. Refer to Appendix C for the most pertinent sections of Imagine Austin. The Design Commission expects the applicant’s design team to present their project with those most knowledgeable and encourages the inclusion of sub-consultants at the presentation, when deemed necessary. EXHIBITS TO PRESENT 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Completed Project Review Application (p.1-6) Existing zoning classification, adjacent zoning & uses, future land use map classification, topography Vicinity plan, including public transportation and connectivity on-site and within quarter mile Site plan and landscape plan Ground level, basement …
LIBRARY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20210426-5b: Support for Austin Public Library Proposed Budget for FY22 Seconded By: Date: April 26, 2021 Subject: Support for Austin Public Library Proposed Budget for FY22 Motioned By: Recommendation Support for Austin Public Library Proposed Budget for FY22 Description of Recommendation to Council Requesting that the Austin City Council approve the proposed Austin Public Library budget of $60,190,266 for FY2022, an increase of 2.25% or $1,321,890 from FY21, including an increase to the materials budget by 3.5% or $206,368. Rationale: “Libraries are a cornerstone of democracy—where information is free and equally available to everyone. People tend to take that for granted, and they don’t realize what is at stake when that is put at risk.” ― Carla Hayden, 14th Librarian of Congress During an unprecedented year, including COVID-19 pandemic related shutdowns and a city-wide weeklong freeze, APL continued to serve the citizens of Austin by providing online access to digital materials and by providing access to conventional format books and materials by providing curbside service at 11 of its 20 branches. APL also continues to provide innovative programming. In the past year, April 2020 – March 2021, APL hosted 1325 virtual programs with 37,430 attendees. 2020’s APL Virtual Summer Reading Program saw a 39% increase in APL Summer Reading site views with nearly 10,000 individual views between June – August. Recently, in an effort to address the ongoing digital divide, the APL coordinated a widespread device loan program in partnership with community organizations and area school districts. Through individual donations, funding from commissions and boards, the CARES Act and operational funds, APL loaned laptops and hotspots to the Housing Authority of the City of Austin (HACA), Foundation Communities, South Asian’s International Volunteer Association of Austin (SAIVA), and City Departments to support families, individuals, and especially older adults who are isolated and lack access to online information and resources. This effort was driven by a clear need observed in the community, further amplified by COVID-19. In addition, APL staff recently made 209 calls to customers over the age of 65 who haven’t visited the library since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020. APL wanted to let customers 1 of 2 know that the library is open for curbside and answer questions about connecting to the virtual collection. APL also continues to provide staff development training to support the ability of all employees to provide a welcoming, …
DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Recommendation Number: (201804‐02a): CodeNEXT Draft 3 Working Group Memo Motion by: Aan Coleman Second By: Evan Taniguchi Per LDC §25‐2‐586, the Design Commission evaluates and makes recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Director regarding whether density bonus projects substantially comply with the Urban Design guidelines, one of the three Gatekeeper Requirements for the Density Bonus Program. The Design Commission proposes the following recommendations to the third draft of the CodeNEXT: 23‐3E‐1: The Design Commission suggests that the proposed Density Bonus of Max Dwelling Units per Acre be more equitable. This has been concentrated in east Austin and not been allowed in west Austin. This could be interpreted as racially and/or economically bias. Density must be distributed evenly to be effective at achieving affordability throughout Austin. 23‐3B‐1060: The Design Commission wants to understand how the Director determines if off site affordable units propose a better community benefit than on‐site affordable units. The Director shall provide metrics for the evaluation of the production of off‐site units in areas of high opportunity. 23‐3E‐1060: The Design Commission supports this proposed Downtown Density Bonus fee for non‐ residential projects. 23‐3E‐1060B: The draft does not include a fee‐in‐lieu schedule. This regulation cannot be properly evaluated without knowing what the cost to developers will be for the added entitlements. 23‐3E‐1070: It is unclear who the designated review group will be in determining the fee‐in‐lieu schedule. 23‐3E‐2: The Design Commission proposes that all downtown have a two‐tiered Density Bonus Program, like the current program in the Rainey Street District. The first FAR tier should have a properly calibrated affordable housing requirement without a fee‐in‐lieu option. The second tier could have a fee‐in‐lieu option. 23‐3E‐2040: If a design of a proposed project changes significantly after the Density Bonus is approved then it should be required to return to the Design Commission to be re‐evaluated for compliance. 23‐3E‐2050: The Design Commission recommends that the Community Benefit requirements be expanded to include all projects opting into the Density Bonus Program. 23‐3E‐2050: The Design Commission recommends that the Community Benefit options include mobility alternatives that support biking, and pedestrian transit, and manages off street parking and ride‐share loading availability to reduce street traffic and support Vision Zero’s mission to reduce pedestrian fatalities. If they are not providing on site affordable housing, the applicant should also be required to file a …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: April 26, 2021 PC DATE: N/A CASE NUMBER: C14H-2020-0033 APPLICANT: Aaron Franklin, owner HISTORIC NAME: Kohn House WATERSHED: Shoal Creek ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 5312 Shoal Creek Boulevard ZONING CHANGE: SF-2 to SF-2-H COUNCIL DISTRICT: 7 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from single family residence – standard lot (SF-2) to single family residence – standard lot – Historic Landmark (SF-2-H) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Architecture and historical associations HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: N/A PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: N/A DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The house is beyond the bounds of any historic resources survey to date. CITY COUNCIL DATE: N/A ORDINANCE READINGS: N/A CASE MANAGER: Elizabeth Brummett NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Allandale Neighborhood Association; Austin Independent School District; Austin Lost and Found Pets; Austin Neighborhoods Council; AustinRAMP; Bike Austin; Central Austin Community Development Corporation; Central Austin Urbanists; Friends of Austin Neighborhoods; Homeless Neighborhood Assocation; Lower District 7 Green; NW Austin Neighbors; Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation; North Austin Neighborhood Alliance; Preservation Austin; SELTexas; Shoal Creek Conservancy; Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Architecture: The Kohn House, built around 1938 for Adolph and Mollie Kohn, occupies a premier site in the Shoalmont Addition. Two lots wide, the expansive parcel extends from Shoal Creek Boulevard on the east to Shoal Creek on the west and is studded with mature oaks. The architect of the house is unknown, but the design is possibly attributed to Kohn himself. Eclectic in its design, the one-story house is T-shaped, with a long side-gabled volume facing the street and a rear hipped-roof wing. A two-story square tower with a pyramidal roof is asymmetrically placed near the north end of the house. The house is predominantly clad in random ashlar limestone with quoins at the corners and a stone chimney; a portion of the rear elevation is clad in horizontal wood siding. Wrapping the southeast end of the house is a porch with square wood posts and curved brackets; its gable end has waney-edge siding. Varied fenestration includes multi-light casements, a bay window with a metal roof, round portholes, and 1:1 double-hung wood windows. To the rear of the house, the site also includes two side-gabled accessory buildings, one clad in board-and-batten and the other in horizontal wood siding. Historical Associations: The Kohn House is significant for its association with entrepreneur Adolf Kohn. A German immigrant, Kohn worked in multiple positions …
B.2 - 1 HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APRIL 26, 2021 C14H-1986-0015, C14H-2004-0008 GRANDBERRY BUILDING AND MITCHELL-ROBERTSON BUILDING CONGRESS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT 907, 909, AND 911 CONGRESS AVENUE PROPOSAL PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS Review of a plan to deconstruct, store, and re-erect historic building façades. Catalog and store, then re-erect the historic building façades as part of a redevelopment project at a later date. In conjunction with proposed additions, the project received preliminary approval from the Historic Landmark Commission on January 26, 2015 and June 25, 2018, pending development of more detailed plans for treatment of the façades. On March 24, 2021, the Building Standards Commission issued an order requiring that conditions be remedied within 90 days or imposing fines on the property owner. Per the applicant, stabilization of the buildings in place is not technically feasible due to the extent of deterioration, including mortar loss, shear failures and racking, and the inability to adequately shore the façades following demolition of masonry party walls that provide lateral support. The wall abutting the adjacent historic landmark building, in particular, requires demolition to allow that property owner to perform needed repairs. The proposed scope of work entails developing a detailed plan for deconstruction and reconstruction of the historic façades, including as an initial phase: review of existing documentation, visual and non-destructive analysis of building materials and assemblies, structural evaluation, and development of a finalized scope of work and sequence of implementation. Laser scanning will be performed. Deconstruction will be done by hand and treated much like an archeological investigation, with specific conditions and hidden elements documented as work progresses. This information will inform preparation of reconstruction drawings and specifications. The applicant proposes to place a restrictive covenant on the property requiring reconstruction within three years. ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS FOR REVIEW Three two-part commercial blocks sharing party walls; buildings are boarded at the street level. At the second floor, the Grandberry Building at 907 Congress has two-over-two light windows with decorative hood moulds, and the Mitchell- Robertson Building at 909 Congress has one-over-one windows and corbelled brickwork at the cornice. 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 at historic landmarks. The Historic Design Standards indicate that if any aspect of a proposed project is not covered by the design standards, the Secretary of …
907 – 909 – 911 CONGRESS AVENUE AUSTIN, TEXAS FAÇADE DECONSTRUCTION / RECONSTRUCTION SCOPE OF WORK / OUTLINE TO COMPLETE A. OVERALL PROJECT ORGANIZATION (OVERVIEW – SEE BELOW FOR DETAIL) a. Research and documentation search on existing construction b. Visual and non‐destructive evaluation (NDE) and testing c. Confirmation of structural integrity and ability to withstand documentation and deconstruction as planned. d. Deliverable 1 – Abstract and Bibliography of information used to inform reconstruction (photographs), summary of mortar, brick composition and condition testing e. Review of deconstruction Scope of Work based on Information gathered in a, b & C above f. Finalized Scope of Work and sequence of implementation. g. Deliverable 2 – Safety plan for documentation and deconstruction including pedestrian protection, neighboring building and selective access for design and deconstruction team. h. Preparation of specifications, drawings and other elements required for contract/bid documents for deconstruction work i. Deliverable 3 – Final drawings and documentation of existing conditions. j. Deliverable 4 – Deconstruction Phase: Confirm document accuracy based on profiles, details and other site collected information. k. Document, number and record materials pallets as part of deconstruction. l. On‐site observation of work in progress m. Final Documentation of deconstruction, material inventory and proper storage n. Deliverable 5 – Reconstruction documents and coordination with redevelopment design team o. On‐site observation of work in progress p. Final documentation of historic materials in place B. DOCUMENTATION preparation. Work. a. Review of existing photographic documentation to inform deconstruction and reconstruction plan b. Review all building inspection reports. c. Review all environmental documents and incorporate any outstanding items into final Scope of d. Photograph current conditions prior to any additional demolition. e. Document stone construction to same extent as brick construction for archives f. Recommendation: Laser scanning of the existing construction. Provide point cloud to be used in documentation and to assist in the deconstruction and reconstruction activities. g. Coordinate with Austin History Center and City Preservation Officer on document preparation and retention requirements for archival purposes CARTER ● DESIGN ASSOCIATES ‐‐ 31‐Mar‐21 1 | P a g e C, D & E ARE DONE SIMULTANEOUSLY C. THE NON – DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION (NDE) PROGRAM a. Determine logistics, fieldwork and site requirements. Work with contractor to determine scaffolding plan, safety procedures and building exposure strategies b. Confirm areas that are stable and can support further investigation c. Prior to deconstruction, expose representative areas of the structures for …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APRIL 26, 2021 C14H-2010-0009; HR-2021-041008 VOSS HOUSE 1501 NORTHWOOD ROAD B.3 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct a rear and second-level addition. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Demolish detached garage. 2) Construct a rear addition. The addition extends the back corner of the house by 5’-1” to the south and 8’-5 ½” to the west. Another building, 16’-5” by 25’-2”, is connected by an open porch in a dog-trot configuration. The additions have a cross-gabled, standing-seam metal roof and are clad in horizontal wood siding. Windows are 1:1 light and are of similar size and proportions to the windows on the house. 3) Construct a second-story addition to the house. The addition extends the ridgeline of the gabled roof to form a higher gable at the same roof pitch. On the east side facing Harris Blvd. is a shed-roofed dormer extending from the upper ridgeline. The overall length of the addition is pulled in from both gable ends, and the dormer is further inset. This addition also has standing-seam metal roofing and horizontal wood siding. Windows on the west are 1:1 light, arranged singly or in groupings of three, and are of similar size to the windows on the house. Windows in the east-facing dormer are also 1:1 light, arranged singly or in pairs, and though smaller are of similar proportions. 4) Remove four mulled windows on the south wall of the house and install a large, multi-light fixed window. ARCHITECTURE The Voss House faces Northwood Road; however, the following description from the landmark nomination considers the Harris Blvd. side as the primary elevation. The house is a one-story, rectangular-plan, side-gabled frame bungalow with a partial-width front-gabled independent porch on battered posts and stone piers with a brick cap and a vertical baluster railing. Fenestration consists of 1:1 wood-frame, wood-sash units in single and multiple configurations; the entry is flanked with sidelights. A battered stone chimney pierces the north side gable of the house. The garage is not mentioned in the landmark nomination. It has a low-pitched pyramidal roof and is clad in board-and- batten siding. The garage is located to the southwest of the house at the rear corner of the property, with a modern overhead garage door facing Harris Blvd. While the 1961 Sanborn Fire Insurance map shows a garage at the same location, it has a different footprint. Building permits show the …
N o r t h w o o d R e m o d e l A u s t i n , T e x a s T r a v i s C o u n t y VICINITY MAP ABBREVIATIONS AD ADJ AFF APPROX BLDG BOB CB CJ CL CAB CLG CLKG CLO CNTR COL CONC CONSTR CONT CRPT CTR CTSK D DF DO DS DEPT DET DIA DIM DN DR DTL DW DWG DWR EG EXG EJ ELEV EQ EQUIP EXP EXT FA FD FF FFE FOC FOF FOS FDN FIN FLR FRZ FT FTG FURR GB GC GA GALV GL GND GR GWB HB HC HM HDW HDWD HDWR HNDCP HORIZ HR HT ID IN INSUL INT JST JT KIT LIN LB LAB LAM LAV LKR LT LTWT MC MO MECH N MANUFACTURER MINIMUM MIRROR MISCELLANEOUS MOUNTED METAL MULLION NORTH NOT IN CONTRACT NOT TO SCALE NOMINAL OVEN ON CENTER OUTSIDE DIAMETER/DIMENSION OVEN & MICROWAVE OBSCURE OPENING PORCELAIN TILE PLATE PLASTIC LAMINATE PLYWOOD PLASTER PLYWOOD PRE-CAST QUARRY BLOCK RISER OR RADIUS ROOF DRAIN ROUGH OPENING REFRIGERATOR - FREEZER ROOF RAFTER RADIUS RECOMMENDATION REFERENCE OR REFRIGERATOR REINFORCED REQUIRED REVISION REGISTER ROOM SOUTH STONE TILE SOLID CORE SOAP DISPENSER STAINLESS STEEL SERVICE SINK SCHEDULE SECTION SHELF SHOWER SIMILAR SPECIFICATION STANDARD STEEL STORAGE STRUCTURAL SYMMETRICAL TONGUE AND GROOVE TREAD TOWEL BAR TOP OF CURB TOP OF TOP OF BEAM TOP OF CONCETE TOP OF DOOR TOP OF WALL TOP OF PAVEMENT TOILET PAPER DISPENSER TRUSS TELEVISION TOP OF WALL TELEPHONE TEMPERED TERRAZO THICK OR THICKNESS TYPICAL UNLESS NOTES OTHERWISE UNFINISHED URNINAL VERTICAL VESTIBULE VERIFY IN FIELD VERIFY WITH BUILDER VERIFY WITH BUILDING DESIGNER VERIFY WITH STRUCTURAL ENGINEER VERIFY WITH INTERIOR DESIGNER VERIFY WITH LANDSCAPE DESIGNER VERIFY WITH LIGHTING DESIGNER VERIFY WITH MECHANICAL ENGINEER VERIFY WITH OWNER WEST OR WIDTH WATER CLOSET WROUGHT IRON WATERPROOF WITH WITHOUT WD WAINSCOT WEIGHT AREA DRAIN ADJUSTABLE ABOVE FINISH FLOOR APPROXIMATE BUILDING BOTTOM OF BEAM CATCH BASIN CEILING JOIST CENTERLINE CABINET CEILING CAULKING CLOSET COUNTER COLUMN CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION CONTINUOUS CARPET CENTER OR COUNTER COUNTERSUNK DIAMETER DOUGLASS FIR DOOR OPENING DOWNSPOUT DEPARTMENT DETAIL DIAMETER DIMENSION DOWN DOOR DETAIL DISHWASHER DRAWING DRAWER EXISTING GRADE EXISTING EXPANSION ELEVATION EQUAL EQUIPMENT EXPOSED EXTERIOR FIRE ALARM FLOOR DRAIN FINISH FACE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION FACE OF CONCRETE FACE OF FINISH FACE OF STUCCO FOUNDATION FINISH FLOOR FREEZER FOOT OR FEET FOOTING FURRING GRAB BAR GENERAL CONTRACTOR GAUGE GALVANIZED GLASS …
