From: Scott Collier < Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 11:53 AM To: Cc: Chelsea Collier <mm>; DSD Land Management <LandManagement@austintexas.gov> Subject: Harvey Street vacation objection - File No. 2021-047001 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Pam - Thank you for your time on the phone last week sharing your client's position regarding the Harvey Street vacation request they have filed. After considering our discussion, my wife Chelsea (copied here) and I have decided to oppose the vacation. To reiterate, my concerns regarding the vacation are as follows: 1) Once the Harvey right of way is vacated, your client intends to purchase and thus control the property, but as a resident on Sol Wilson for years now, I would say your client has mostly been a bad neighbor. The properties they already control are poorly maintained with a ragged chain link fence, shabby sheet metal that frequently gets tagged with graffiti, and trash and various discarded items including chemical barrels that are presumably from the Shaw automotive garage previously on the property (see the photos attached, taken from my front yard). We have several times over the years called in COA code compliance complaints to get the property mowed. To be fair, the property owners have been mostly responsive to those complaints and the mowing situation at least has been better in recent months. However, overall if the current owner is so negligent with their current property, I don't find it credible that they will take better care of the property if this vacation is granted and they buy the land. Those mysterious black barrels sit on land they already own. 2) You have said that your client has no specific plans for these properties but would like to develop them, including what is now the Harvey right of way, to be beneficial to the community. As I said on the phone, I don't see that anything built on that lot would benefit the community as we already have too many cars driving and parking on Sol Wilson given it is one of two means of access to the large Elm Ridge apartment complex . Furthermore, Elm Ridge provides inadequate visitor parking, despite having plenty of spaces, and I suspect someone makes money aggressively towing from their lot, so visitors that are in the know line the street in front of our house. Nothing built on the lots in question …
*** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Please share with the planning commission. This is a dangerous choice and will ruin the vibe of a public healing space. The majority do NOT want alcohol at the springs . Do you really want drunk people who have been in the sun all day to possibly drown, get killed in a car wreck, putting stress on our city services, lifeguards, etc? There is plenty of alcohol available in this city Keep Barton springs safe and peaceful. Marsha Fatino *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Please send to all the parks commissioners: I urge you to take a final vote against alcohol sales at Zilker Park Cafe. Protect our park goers young and old, our pool visitors and our lifeguards. Ed Crowell Sent from my iPhone This is a very bad idea to have alcohol service at Barton Springs. It will be smuggled in! This is a “family value” park. The high temperatures in summer promote drinking of all kinds, but the idea of having drunken individuals in and near the park is NOT a good idea. Kill this idea! We are again covered up with twaddle from the vocal minority regarding beer and wine sales at Zilker Park. This isn’t an issue about beer and wine sales in the new Zilker Snack Bar … it’s an issue of getting rid of ACL Fest. They will soon oppose all beer and wine sales in all of Zilker Park...in hopes of removing ACL Fest from the park. The vocal minority is opposed to ACL Fest in Zilker Park... I guess they are opposed to the over $40 million that ACL has contributed directly to Austin Parks...thanks to Austin Parks Foundation...a sizable percentage of that $40 million has gone to help parks east of IH35. Also, this isn’t an issue about beer and wine … it’s an issue of change. The vocal minority is opposed to change. Planning Commission Laura would have Council dictating what women are allowed to wear to Barton Springs pool. Her remarks of the possibility of men getting drunk at the cafe and making rude comments to women in swim-wear are just as irrational as her scare tactics. Do not turn this into some moral responsibility. Policy should be based on facts not proverbial scare tactics. Sincerely, Elizabeth Blankenship “A young woman who doesn’t know better that she shouldn’t wear …
Proposed Amendment Tracking # Proposed Text Change (Underline added text/Strikethrough deleted text) Text Change Included in Amendment (YES/NO) Commissioner Chapter/Sub-Chapter Page # Proposed Amendment Justification References (if needed) Notes PC Vote ATD Staff Response 1 Thompson 2.8.0 2-16 2 Thompson General NA 3 Cox Table 2-2 2-10 Provide Cross Sections for streets with zero lanes for cars There are no mechanisms for designating pedestrian priority streets. Add a note that decouples sidewalk width from street width, where transit, urban trails, or other planning documents or land use would necessitate a wider sidewalk. Change "Use green infrastructure to protect environmentally sensitive areas and integrate nature into the City" to "Integrate nature into the City" There are no criteria for Passeos. There appears no way to require a street near a transit station to have a wider sidewalk other than Level 0-5 designation, and this also increases car traffic. Ensure that there is a way to expand sidewalk space where necessary, particular in cases where the ROW may be subject to change from a new development 4 Azhar 1.1 1-1 Use green infrastructure to protect environmentally sensitive areas and iIntegrate nature into the City Yes Align with language from Imagine Austin Page 10 of Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan
TO: M E M O R A N D U M Mayor and Council Chairs of the following Boards, Commissions, and Committees: Zoning and Platting Commission; Planning Commission; Historic Landmark Commission; Board of Adjustment; Environmental Commission; Sign Review Board; Building and Standards Commission; Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals; Code and Ordinances Joint Committee; Design Commission; Electric Board; Mechanical and Plumbing Board; Small Area Planning Joint Committee; Waterfront Planning Advisory Board; and the Urban Forestry Board October 19, 2021 Change of location for land use related Commissions Denise Lucas, Development Services Department Director Rosie Truelove, Housing and Planning Department Director FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: On June 29, 2021, a memo was distributed regarding the opening of the Permitting and Development Center. As indicated within the memo, the PDC brings together resources and expertise from multiple City departments which provide permitting and development services for our community. The new facility is designed to provide a seamless development process, all in one place, for residential and commercial customers and special events permitting. All pertinent department representatives will be co-located at the PDC. As a next step for utilizing the PDC, liaisons to each respective board, commission, and committee will be asked to assist with coordinating the relocation of meetings to the PDC Conference Center, which is a key asset included in the approved design of the PDC. Coordination will include working with each board, commission, and committee to walk through the facility, identify and collaborate to solve for major concerns, and to develop and implement communications plans leading up to and through changes in meeting locations. The Conference Center is 5,000 square feet, will be equipped to televise meetings through ATXN by late February 2022, has sufficient room for 351-person occupancy and the capacity to be separated into small rooms, and has a 969-parking space garage connected to the PDC. Changes in meeting locations will not occur prior to February 2022. Rather, there will be initial discussions and opportunities to visit the PDC so that each respective board, commission, and committee has an opportunity to learn more about the PDC. This change will reduce the reliance on the City Hall Council Chambers and Boards and Commissions Room and reinforces the concept of the PDC serving as the City’s one-stop shop for all development and permitting related needs, which was a key recommendation in the 2015 Zucker Analysis. As with all public meetings, …
Dear Commissioners, I am reaching out to you regarding the City Staff’s proposal to move future Planning Commission Meetings to a new location in far North Austin. I believe this issue will come up under Item C-3 in your meeting this evening. I would fully support any efforts to ensure the Planning Commission meetings stay centrally located at City Hall. Moving the meetings would add an undue burden to the residents in far SE Austin and Travis County. As you are aware, our population is very diverse and mostly representative of low-income and people of color, plus there would be challenges in having access to public transportation in order to make meetings on time or return home when the meetings run extremely late. I do not think the Equity Office was consulted on the impact this move would have for vulnerable populations? The City Hall location is central and the logically best location for all residents. Additionally, because City Hall is centrally located, the surrounding residents and businesses would be best equally served, including equally disadvantaged. If the meetings are moved far North, those living and/or working in South Austin, particularly SE Austin, will be at a much greater disadvantage to publicly engage in your hearings. With all the growth in our area, it will make it harder if not impossible for our community to participate in the hearings in the future. Please let me know how I can help support you. I sincerely hope the Planning Commission votes in support of keeping the Planning Commission meetings at City Hall. This would also ensure there would be no confusion on the location of zoning and land use hearings and where they would be heard regardless of which body is having the hearing: Planning Commission or City Council. Thank you for your consideration and your continued service to our community. Respectfully submitted, Ana Aguirre D2 Resident
EMORY TREE DR R D H S U R B N I P SF-6 SANDHILL BRANCH DR 44 R D P U C N R O C A 41 42 44 46 43 SF-4A SF-4A R D F A E L N E D L O G W SLAUGHTER LN COTTAGE BANK TRL Y A W R E G A N A T I B R D G E L N L O S T D N A E C O T C G N O G I MISTY NEST CV MF-2-CO 6 5 S A X E T R D S K A O 26 25 24 23 12 27 28 SF-2 4 3 29 IRON MUSKET CV 33 11 10 9 O P 31 8 30 IN D E P E N D E N C E L O 5 7 6 4 1 2 32 3 3 4 5 6 1 2 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 SF-2 2 1 LO-CO 2 3 1 5 LO 3 LO-CO 4 W SLAUGHTER LN SF-2 1 2 DR 3 DR N L M L O H S I H C LR-CO 1 GR LR 3 LR-CO 4 LR-CO 1 5 LO-MU-CO TRACT 1 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 R D M O D G N I K D E T I N U 13 12 11 10 9 8 SF-2 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 T A L L L N E TRACT 2 Y SF-2 3 E14 SF-1 4 2 1 2 1 SF-1 2 S C H I S H O L M T R L RR 1 MF-1-CO 2 RR 1 1 P F14 D R I P R V E T 2 LR-MU-CO DR 3 4 TRACT 3 LO-MU-CO SLEEPY DELL LN C14-2021-0156 FIREBRANCH TRL B C E A O R L D C V TANGLEMEDE ST T O T I S R D B O A T S W A I N W A Y DUSTY BRANCH WAY I-RR A A B SUNNY SWAN CT SF-6-CO T A L L T R E E L N R D A M I L O T SF-2 Copyright nearmap 2015 ± 1'' = 300' West Slaughter Lane Residences Two Exhibit A - 1 SUBJECT TRACT ZONING BOUNDARY ! ! ! ! ! ! PENDING …
PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD October 26, 2021 MINUTES The Parks and Recreation Board convened in a regular meeting on Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 301 W. Second Street, Austin, Texas. Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:05pm. Board Members in Attendance: Dawn Lewis, Nancy Barnard, Laura Cottam Sajbel, Sarah Faust, Lisa Hugman and Nina Rinaldi. Board Members in Attendance Remotely: Richard DePalma, Anna Di Carlo and Kimberly Taylor. Board Member Di Carlo joined the meeting at approximately 7:58pm. Staff in Attendance: Kimberly McNeeley, Liana Kallivoka, Lucas Massie, Suzanne Piper, Lana Denkeler, Bianca Galvan, Charles Mabry, Jason Walker, Tonja Walls, Diana Wang, and Sammi Curless. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL August Harris – Preservation Texas 2021 award for the Shipe Cabin Sharon Blythe – Austin Memorial Park Kevin Reinis – Austin Rowing Club Frederick DeWorken –Foundation Communities development and need for green space Scott Cobb – memorializing Joan Khabele A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board Member Cottam Sajbel made a motion to correct the minutes to reflect clarification of the final motion related to item B3. The clarification is to strike the following language: “Board Member Cottam Sajbel made a motion to recommend to the Planning Commission that the Statesman PUD…;” Board Member Faust seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 8-0 vote with Board Member Di Carlo absent and two vacancies. The corrected minutes from the regular meeting of September 28, 2021 were approved on Board Member Taylor motion, Board Member Cottam Sajbel second on a vote of 8-0 with Board Member Di Carlo absent and two vacancies. Page 1 of 3 Due to the number of interested speakers, Chair Lewis moved Items B3 and B5 to be heard following approval of the minutes. Items B1 and B2 were taken up after Item B5 and were followed by Items B4 and B6. B. NEW BUSINESS: PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS CONSENT 1. Discussion and possible action regarding a recommendation to the City Council regarding an ordinance waiving up to $9,315 in Parks and Recreation Department Asian American Resource Center rental fees for Austin Community College; and authorizing the negotiation and execution of an Interlocal Agreement with Austin Community College to provide classrooms at the Asian American Resource Center for English as a Second Language classes and potentially other adult education programs free of charge. Chair Lewis made a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of …
PLANNING COMMISSION October 26, 2021 MINUTES The Planning Commission convened in a meeting on October 26, 2021 in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 301 W. 2nd Street, Austin, Texas and via videoconference @ http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Chair Shaw called the Commission Meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. Commission Members in Attendance: Awais Azhar Joao Paulo Connolly Grayson Cox Yvette Flores Claire Hempel – Vice-Chair Patrick Howard Carmen Llanes Pulido Jennifer Mushtaler Robert Schneider James Shieh Todd Shaw – Chair Jeffrey Thompson Solveij Rosa Praxis Arati Singh – Ex - Officio Jessica Cohen – Ex-Officio Richard Mendoza – Ex-Officio EXECUTIVE SESSION (No public discussion) The Planning Commission will announce it will go into Executive Session, if necessary, pursuant to Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, to receive advice from Legal Counsel on matters specifically listed on this agenda. The Commission may not conduct a closed meeting without the approval of the city attorney. Private Consultation with Attorney – Section 551.071 CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of October 12, 2021. Motion to approve minutes of October 12, 2021 was approved on the consent agenda on the motion by Commissioner Connolly, seconded by Commissioner Mushtaler on a vote of 13-0. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Rezoning: Location: C14-2021-0009 - 1725 Toomey Rd; District 5 1725 Toomey Road; South Lamar Combined NP Area (Zilker), Lady Bird Lake Watershed Owner/Applicant: 1725 Toomey, LLC Agent: Request: Staff Rec.: Staff: Drenner Group (Amanda Swor) CS to MF-6 Recommended Kate Clark, 512-974-1237, kate.clark@austintexas.gov Housing and Planning Department Public Hearing closed. After discussion and debate, item forwarded to Council without a recommendation due to lack of an affirmative vote. 2. Plan Amendment: NPA-2020-0015.03 - 6705 and 6501 Regiene Road; District 1 6705 and 6501 Regiene Road; MLK- 183 NP Area, Boggy Creek Watershed Location: Owner/Applicant: Daryl Kunik Agent: Request: Staff Rec.: Staff: Drenner Group, PC (Leah Bojo) Industry to Major Planned Development land use Recommended Jesse Gutierrez, 512-974-1606, jesse.gutierrez@austintexas.gov Housing and Planning Department Public Hearing closed. Action on this item postponed by Planning Commission to November 9, 2021 on the motion by Commissioner Shieh, seconded by Commissioner Cox was approved on a vote of 13-0. 3. Rezoning: Location: C14-2020-0150 - 6705 and 6501 Regiene Road; District 1 6705 and 6501 Regiene Road; MLK- 183 NP Area, Boggy Creek Watershed Owner/Applicant: Daryl Kunik Agent: Request: Staff Rec.: Staff: Drenner Group, PC (Leah Bojo) SF-2-NP and LI-NP …
Historic Landmark Commission Applications under Review for October 25, 2021 Meeting Meeting will be held in person at City Hall Council Chambers 301 W. 2nd Street Austin, TX 78701 Public participation for this Public Hearing will be in-person only and no remote (by telephone) participation will be offered. To participate at this meeting, you must go to City Hall at 301 W. 2nd Street and attend in-person. Face coverings are required, regardless of vaccination status. For more information on the change in meeting format, please review the City of Austin’s statement here: https://austintexas.gov/news/person-public-meetings-are-back-following-expiry- governors-covid-19-exemptions 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. Historic zoning applications A.1. 10621 Pioneer Farms Dr. – Commission-initiated historic zoning following relocation of Evangelical Lutheran Church (postponed September 27, 2021) 13300 Dessau Rd. – Commission-initiated removal of historic zoning following relocation of Evangelical Lutheran Church (postponed September 27, 2021) 2501 Inwood Place – Commission-initiated historic zoning 1204 E. 6th Street – Commission-initiated historic zoning 8601 Azalea Trail – White-Alexander House – Owner-initiated historic zoning A.2. A.3. A.4. A.5. Historic landmark and historic district applications No items. National Register district permit applications C.1. 1104 Toyath Street – Clarksville National Register District – Construct a new building (postponed September 27, 2021) 1104 Charlotte Street – Clarksville National Register District – Addition/remodel (postponed September 27, 2021) – Applicant-requested postponement to October 25, 2021 82 San Marcos Street – Willow Spence National Register District – Demolish ca. 1941 houses (postponed September 27, 2021) 1505 Travis Heights Boulevard – Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register District – Addition/remodel (postponed September 27, 2021) 1412 Alameda Drive – Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register District – Construct 1 C.2. C.3. C.4. C.5. C.6. C.7. a two-story addition and replace windows and siding (postponed September 27, 2021) 1809 W. 29th Street – Old West Austin National Register District – New construction 1500 Hartford Road – Old West Austin National Register District – Construct addition and remodel house and accessory dwelling unit 1409 Woodlawn Boulevard – Old West Austin National Register District – Enclose porches and construct addition 1617 Westover Road – Old West Austin National Register District – Construct addition C.9. C.10. 1519 W. 32nd Street – Old West Austin National Register District – Construct second-floor C.8. addition and replace windows, siding, porch C.11. 1400 Mohle Drive …
DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM (DDBP) SUBMITTAL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS A property owner (Owner) or his/her representative (Applicant) acting on behalf of the Owner can initiate an administrative request to the Director of Planning (Director) seeking additional Floor-to-Area (FAR) entitlements as outlined in the Downtown Density Bonus Program as approved by Ordinance No. 20140227-054. In order for the Director to conduct an administrative review, the requirements listed below must be submitted. Once an application is deemed complete, the Director will inform the Applicant of review commencement. The following submittals are required in a complete PDF package of no more than 10 Mb in size with sheets no larger than 11x17 inches: 1. Completed DDBP Application; 2. Vicinity plan locating the project in its context, and showing a minimum 9 block area around the project; 3. Location and nature of nearby transit facilities; 4. Drawings (submitted drawings should demonstrate compliance with Subchapter E Design Standards, as applicable): o Site plan; o Floor plans; o Exterior elevations (all sides); o Three-dimensional views; 5. As part of the gatekeeper requirements, o Urban Design Guidelines checklist; o Great Streets - ; o 2 Star Austin Energy Green Building rating - submit copy of the projects signed Austin Energy Green Building Letter of Intent and Austin Energy Green Building checklist.; 6. Other items that may be submitted but not required: Narrative / graphics / photos to further describe the project. 7. Coordination memo acknowledgment from the City of Austin’s Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Department (NHCD) detailing affordable housing community benefits. Please contact Ms. Sandra Harkins at NHCD for more information. DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM (DDBP) SUBMITTAL APPLICATION 1. Project Name: 2. Property Owner Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: 3. Applicant/Authorized Agent 4. Anticipated Project Address: Page 1 of 9 5. Site Information a. Lot area (also include on site plan): b. Existing zoning (include any zoning suffixes such as “H,” “CO,” etc. If the property has a conditional overlay (CO), provide explanation of conditions (attach additional pages as necessary): c. Existing entitlements: I. Current floor to area (FAR) limitation: II. Current height limitation (in feet) : III. Affected by Capitol View Corridors (CVCs) Yes/No? Yes No If yes, please provide specify height allowed under CVC: 6. Existing Deed Restrictions Detail existing deed restrictions on the property (if any): Page 2 of 9 7. Building Information a. Total square footage - Only include the …
Date: To: From: Subject: APPLICANT RESPONSE 10-14-21 September 29, 2021 City of Austin Design Commission Planning & Urban Design Working Group Density Bonus Working Group review of 415 Colorado Street for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines September 17, 2021; 12:00 pm; Virtual Microsoft Teams Meeting Michele Rogerson Lynch Meeting date: Applicant: The project location is located at 415 Colorado Street. The project includes mixed use of office (107,860 sf) and residential (426,968 sf). 15,799 sf is assigned to Common Areas, the total FAR gsf totaling 550,627. The project also includes 11 parking levels (none underground). The applicant is seeking a Density Bonus to raise the FAR from 8:1 to 25:1. The site is 22,080 sf (0.507 acres) with a current allowable building size of 176,641 based on the 8:1 FAR. The total building height is 668’-0” (47 floors). The maximum height achievable under the Density Bonus program in this portion of Downtown is unlimited. Per the Density Bonus Program ordinance, the applicant is required to meet the three gatekeeper requirements: • Substantially comply with the City’s Urban Design Guidelines • Provide streetscape improvements along all public street frontages consistent with the Great Streets Program Standards • Applicant must commit to a minimum of 2-star green building rating (3-star proposed). WORKING GROUP COMMENTS REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES AREA WIDE GUIDELINES 1. Create dense development – 25:1 far is being requested. Project complies with this Section. 2. Create mixed-use development – Office and residential uses are proposed as mixed use but there does not appear to be a “mixed income” component as mentioned in the Guidelines. Project partially complies with this Section. RESPONSE: The project fully complies with this section. We believe full credit should be given to the project for the reasons below: 1. The project meets and exceeds the mixed-use requirements a) The project includes 107,000 square feet of office and 328 residential units. The street level will have both an office lobby, a residential lobby with a residential lounge and a location for a street vendor with outdoor seating; and b) Two uses (office and residential) are provided on a quarter of a block. The Urban Design Guidelines require two uses per half block. The project exceeds the requirement by providing twice as many uses than required per site area. 2. The Urban Design Guidelines mention “a mixed income environment” but do not state …
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 …
DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM (DDBP) SUBMITTAL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS A property owner (Owner) or his/her representative (Applicant) acting on behalf of the Owner can initiate an administrative request to the Director of Planning (Director) seeking additional Floor-to-Area (FAR) entitlements as outlined in the Downtown Density Bonus Program as approved by Ordinance No. 20140227-054. In order for the Director to conduct an administrative review, the requirements listed below must be submitted. Once an application is deemed complete, the Director will inform the Applicant of review commencement. The following submittals are required in a complete PDF package of no more than 10 Mb in size with sheets no larger than 11x17 inches: 1. Completed DDBP Application; 2. Vicinity plan locating the project in its context, and showing a minimum 9 block area around the project; Location and nature of nearby transit facilities; 3. 4. Drawings (submitted drawings should demonstrate compliance with Subchapter E Design Standards, as applicable): o Site plan; o Floor plans; o Exterior elevations (all sides); o Three-dimensional views; 5. As part of the gatekeeper requirements, o Urban Design Guidelines checklist; o Great Streets; o 2 Star Austin Energy Green Building rating - submit copy of the projects signed Austin Energy Green Building Letter of Intent and Austin Energy Green Building checklist.; 6. Other items that may be submitted but not required: Narrative / graphics / photos to further describe the project. 7. Coordination memo acknowledgment from the City of Austin’s Housing and Planning Department for detailing of affordable housing community benefits. Please contact Alex Radtke for more information. DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM (DDBP) SUBMITTAL APPLICATION 1.Project Name: 4th & Brazos (SP-2020-0056C) 2.Property Owner 4th & Brazos, LLC 216 E. 4th Street, Austin, Texas 78701 3.Applicant/Authorized Agent Richard T. Suttle, Jr., Armbrust & Brown, PLLC 100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300, Austin, Texas 78701 512-435-2310 rsuttle@abaustin.com 4.Anticipated Project Address: 204-208 E. 4th Street; 409 Brazos Street; 404 San Jacinto Blvd. Page 1 of 9 Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: 5.Site Information a. Lot area (also include on site plan): 35,371 SF (0.81 AC.) b. Existing zoning (include any zoning suffixes such as “H,” “CO,” etc. If the property has a conditional overlay (CO), provide explanation of conditions (attach additional pages as necessary): Central Business District (CBD) c. Existing entitlements: I. Current floor to area (FAR) limitation: II. Current height limitation (in feet) : 8:1 None for CBD III. Affected by Capitol View Corridors (CVCs) Yes/No? Yes No If yes, please provide specify height allowed under CVC: N/A 6.Existing Deed …
MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Subject: October 08, 2021 City of Austin Design Commission Planning & Urban Design Working Group Review of the 216 East 4th Street project for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Meeting Date: October 01, 2021; 12:00 pm, Virtual Microsoft Teams Meeting Applicant: Architect: Richard T. Suttle, Jr.; Armbrust & Brown, PLLC Perkins & Will, Michael Hsu Office of Architecture The project is located at 216 East 4th Street. Existing zoning for the property is CBD and it is not within the Capitol View Corridor. The lot area is 35,371 SF and the total proposed project area is 813,000 square feet (Office: 765,000 SF, Retail: 48,000 SF). The proposed FAR for this project is 23:1, this is more than the 8:1 maximum allowed, so an increase in FAR of 15:1 is being requested (530,565 SF). The proposed building height is 705 feet with 50 floors. There are 18 levels of above grade parking. There is no onsite Community Benefit included in this project and no fee-in-lieu is required for a office project. Per the Density Bonus Program ordinance, the applicant is required, at a minimum, to meet the three gatekeeper requirements: 1. Substantially comply with the City’s Urban Design Guidelines 2. Provide streetscape improvements that meet the Great Streets Program Standards. 3. Commit to a minimum of 2-Star rating under Austin Energy’s Green Building Program. WORKING GROUP COMMENTS REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES AREA WIDE GUIDELINES 1. Create dense development- 23:1 FAR being requested. Project complies with this section. 2. Create mixed-use development- The project has office use above retail. This project complies with this section. 3. Limit development which closes downtown streets- This project is not proposing to permanently close any streets. Project complies with this section. 4. Buffer neighborhood edges- 5. Project does not border any neighborhoods. This section is not applicable. Incorporate civic art in both public and private development- No public art is being proposed. This project does not comply with this section. Add public art to comply. 6. Protect important public views- Project is not within the Capitol View Corridor and does not encroach ROW. This project complies with this section. 7. Avoid historical misrepresentations- Project design is a modern style. Project complies. 8. Respect adjacent historic buildings- No adjacent buildings identified as historic landmarks. Section is not applicable. 1/3 9. Acknowledge that rooftops are seen from other buildings …
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, August 23, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:34 p.m. X X X Member List David Carroll – Chair (District 1) Jessica Rollason – Vice-Chair (District 7) 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 X Melissa Hanao-Robledo (District 5) X X X X Jen Weaver (District 6) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) a. Discussion and possible action on recommendations whether the Elisabet Ney Museum Building Restoration and Site Improvements, addressed at 304 E. 44th Street, complies with the City Design and Sustainability Standards, for the City of Austin; Nick Faust The Lawrence Group, Christina Bies City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department, George Maldonado City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department • Ellen Cofax, and Christina Bies City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department and Nick Faust The Lawrence Group presented and addressed questions. Page 1 of 3 • Commissioner J. Meiners made a motion to support the project as presented as it complies with the City’s Design and Sustainability Standards, seconded by Commissioner E. Taniguchi. • The motion was approved [ 6 ayes, 0 nays] 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of June 28th and August 5th meeting minutes. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi made a motion to approve the June 28th and August 5th meeting minutes as distributed. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. • The motion was approved [ 6 ayes, 0 nays] b. Discussion and Possible action on recommendations related to the Downtown Density Bonus Program. • Chair D. Carroll reiterated, that at the August 5th Special Called Meeting regarding the Downtown Density Bonus program, 2 of the 3 resolutions passed. The third resolution has been re-worded by Commissioners J. Weaver to address the concerns from the August 5th meeting. 6:20 PM Commissioner A. Coleman joined the meeting 6:22 PM Commissioner B. Luckens joined the meeting. • Commissioner B. Whatley made a motion to approve the Resolution regarding the Downtown Density Bonus Program as amended. Commissioner E. Taniguchi seconded. • The motion was approved [ 7 …
