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 …
AUS Cargo Development East • EXPANSION OF CARGO APRON CAPACITY • 89,400 SF PEMB Cargo Facility • Expansion of Air Side Pavement • New Truck Loading Dock • 158 Space Employee Parking • Austin Energy Green Building 3-Star • New Water Quality/Detention Pond • Landscaping, Yardscape & Sidewalks • Energy Efficiency • Water use reduction (indoor and outdoor) • Electric vehicle charging (capable spaces and electric GSE) • Heat island reduction • Access to quality drinking water • Low Emitting Materials, Construction Waste Management, and Local Art 1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 Project includes expansion of cargo processing capacity at the southeast corner of the existing cargo apron. Improvements are consistent with the adopted ABIA Master Plan. OVERALL SITE PLAN 3 20.5-acre limit of construction Constructed around southeast corner of existing cargo apron Project frontage on both Freight Lane and Cargo Avenue ISOMETRIC VIEWS 4 Pre-Engineered Metal Building Truck loading dock on the south side Aircraft cargo operations on the north side SOUTHEAST PERSPECTIVE 5 Pre-Engineered Metal Building Entry plazas on the east elevation and on the east end of the south elevation Metal building with CMU skirt OVERALL FLOOR PLAN 6 Finished break and office space east end, App. 9,400 SF Balance of building cargo operations Total size approximately 89,400 SF AEGB 3-Star Rating FINISHED SPACE FLOOR PLAN Restrooms, break areas & lunch area Transfer space is considered secure area of ABIA On-site office space and driver lounge 7 LANDSCAPE PLAN 1 8 FAA compliant landscaping Break area at northeast corner of building Landscaped parking area LANDSCAPE PLAN 2 9 Break area at southeast corner of building Landscaped entry courtyard No landscaping on air side of project 10
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 …
CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS BARTON SPRINGS BATHHOUSE REHABILITATION Design Commission November 15, 2021 Riley Triggs, AIA Project Management Supervisor History • Historic 1947 Bathhouse designed by Dan Driscoll • Bathhouse has City, State, and Federal historic designations • • Design informed by 2008 Barton Springs Master Plan, 2016 Bathhouse Zone Feasibility and 2018 engagement with architecture team Serves as bathhouse, aquatics offices, and “Splash” interpretive space City of Austin | Public Works Department 1 Funding Sources • 2012 General Obligation Bond • Historic Preservation Fund • Barton Springs Conservancy Donation • Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Grant City of Austin | Public Works Department 2 Community Engagement • April 3, 2018 – Design Kick-off meeting • August 14, 2018 – Project Values and Program Workshop • October 18, 2018 – Meeting #3 and Open House Stakeholder Meeting • October 30, 2018 – Open House • October 30, 2019 – Community Meeting #4: Updating the Process City of Austin | Public Works Department 3 Project Scope Water Quality Fire Lane Building City of Austin | Public Works Department 4 Bathhouse Rehabilitation Scope City of Austin | Public Works Department 5 Shower Restoration City of Austin | Public Works Department 12 Shower Restoration City of Austin | Public Works Department 13 Shower Restoration City of Austin | Public Works Department 14 Shower Restoration City of Austin | Public Works Department 15 Rotunda Restoration City of Austin | Public Works Department 16 New West Gate City of Austin | Public Works Department 17 New East Gate + Restoration of Spectator’s Gallery City of Austin | Public Works Department 18 CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONNECTING YOU ALL AROUND AUSTIN THANK YOU Riley Triggs, AIA Project Management Supervisor Architectural Project Management Division Riley.Triggs@austintexas.gov 512.974.7747
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 …
City of Austin Central Fire & EMS Station Design Commission Presentation 25 October 2021 Context Location: 401 E. 5th St Part of a block owned by the city Block includes the O. Henry Museum Project is being coordinated with the development of Brush Square Park, which is a separate project led by the Parks and Recreation Department Introduction Overview Constructed in 1938 Architect: Kreisle and Brooks Constructed under the Public Works Administration (WPA) National Register of Historic Places in 2000 Building History Overview Annex added in 1962 by architect Eugene Wukash Building History Overview Non-historic windows added in 1980s Building History Historic Moderne style (Streamline Moderne) Simplicity of ornamentation Key Features and Stylistic Elements Historic Use of building materials as decoration Subtle patterning Brick coursing Symbolic towers Nickel-finished lights Key Features and Stylistic Elements Historic Curved portico Corner approach Key Features and Stylistic Elements Historic Layering of elements Massing plays with symmetry and asymmetry Key Features and Stylistic Elements Preservation The proposed changes ensure the facility will continue to operate in its historic location efficiently functioning as its original purpose for years into the future. Maintain Original Intended Use Preservation Window replacements will more closely match the original design Original Current Proposed Return to Original Design Elements Preservation Brick will be cleaned and repaired Lintels will be refurbished Eroded plaster on soffits will be replaced Maintenance, Repair, and Replacement Historic Landmark Commission Engagement We presented the design proposal to the Historic Landmark Commission. Commission hearing was conducted on June 28, 2021. Commission was favorable to the programmatically required minor demolition and rear addition. Previous Engagement Program Improved emergency response through bay door height increase to accommodate modern vehicle sizes Interior reconfiguration to accommodate gender equity Existing Proposed End-user’s Long-term Needs Existing Proposed Program Improvement of life safety through sprinklers and additional egress Making the building accessible (ADA and elevator addition) Energy efficiency (Windows, Envelope, and HVAC) Preserve the building’s inclusion on the National Historic Register City’s Objectives Plan Changes Change to Existing Addition Existing First Floor 558 SF (4.6%) Proposed Plan Changes Change to Existing Addition Existing Second Floor 558 SF (4.6%) Proposed Façade Changes Change to Existing Addition Existing E. 5th Street Proposed Façade Changes Change to Existing Addition Trinity Street Existing Proposed Addition Minimize the addition to only what is programmatically necessary Original=12,031 SF / Addition=515 SF / 4.3% gross square footage increase Keep It Small Addition Use …
City of Austin Central Fire and EMS Station Introductions and Context Alex Janota, Project Manager Flintco General Contractor Historic Landmark Commission – Design Overview Presentations 28 June 2021 Outline Introductions and Context Alex Janota, Project Manager Flintco – General Contractor Historic Significance Donna Carter, President Carter Design Associates – Historic Preservation Changes to Historic Fabric Tim Baisdon, Vice President WestEast Design Group – Architect New Addition Rob Robbins, Studio Director WestEast Design Group – Architect Context Location: 401 E. 5th St Part of a block owned by the city Block includes the O. Henry Museum Project is being coordinated with the development of Brush Square Park, which is a separate project led by the Parks and Recreation Department Introduction Overview Constructed in 1938 Architect: Kreisle and Brooks Constructed under the Public Works Administration (WPA) National Register of Historic Places in 2000 Building History Overview Annex added in 1962 by architect Eugene Wukash Building History Overview Non-historic windows added in 1980s Building History City of Austin Central Fire and EMS Station Historic Significance Donna Carter, President Carter Design Associates Historic Preservation Historic Landmark Commission – Design Overview Presentations 28 June 2021 Historic Moderne style (Streamline Moderne) Simplicity of ornamentation Key Features and Stylistic Elements Historic Use of building materials as decoration Subtle patterning Brick coursing Symbolic towers Nickel-finished lights Key Features and Stylistic Elements Historic Curved portico Corner approach Key Features and Stylistic Elements Historic Layering of elements Massing plays with symmetry and asymmetry Key Features and Stylistic Elements Preservation The proposed changes ensure the facility will continue to operate in its historic location efficiently functioning as its original purpose for years into the future. Maintain Original Intended Use Preservation Window replacements will more closely match the original design Original Current Proposed Return to Original Design Elements Preservation Brick will be cleaned and repaired Lintels will be refurbished Eroded plaster on soffits will be replaced Maintenance, Repair, and Replacement City of Austin Central Fire and EMS Station Changes to Historic Fabric Tim Baisdon, Vice President WestEast Design Group Architect Historic Landmark Commission – Design Overview Presentations 28 June 2021 Program Improved emergency response through bay door height increase to accommodate modern vehicle sizes Interior reconfiguration to accommodate gender equity Existing Proposed End-user’s Long-term Needs Existing Proposed Program Improvement of life safety through sprinklers and additional egress Making the building accessible (ADA and elevator addition) Energy efficiency (Windows, Envelope, and HVAC) Preserve …
0 1 Design Credit Bicycle Facilities 1 Will not apply Use City of Austin Standard 710S. Arc 0 1 Bike rack and interior accommodations 0 15 0 21 Location and Transportation 18 0 Design Credit Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses 8 Complete 0 Design Credit Access to Quality Transit 7 Complete LEED v4 for ID+C: Commercial Interiors Project Checklist C Y ? N Credit Type Credit Points Status CoA Baseline Criteria for Building Projects Deliverables Project Name: Date Updated: 8/6/2021 City of Austin Central Fire and EMS Station Potential Effort (0-3) Additional Fees $ Potential Cost (0-3) Cost Value $ Notes 1 1 0 Design Credit Integrative Process 2 Not Attempted ALL 0 0 0 •Forms: PIp_Project_Information and Integrative Process Worksheet •Energy-Related Systems - A simple box energy modeling is a preliminary building model used to analyze the building’s energy loads. Project teams can use the EPA’s Target Finder tool or a similar tool in order to benchmark energy performance. Target Finder allows projects to set target goals for a building design’s energy demands. •Owner’s project requirements (OPR) a written document that details the ideas, concepts, and criteria determined by the owner to be important to the success of the project. Basis of design (BOD) the information necessary to accomplish the owner’s project requirements, including system descriptions, indoor environmental quality criteria, design assumptions, and references to applicable codes, standards, regulations, and guidelines. In addition, we need to determine if we will be using IP units or SI units for this project. SI refers to the System International Units, which is just the Metric System updated and made more complete. IP relates to inch-pound. I assume we will be using IP, but I just want to confirm. Both Option 1 and Option 2 •Forms: LTc_Sensitive_Land_Protection •Special Circumstances (if applicable) •Applicable Site Plans ed. •Form: LTc_Quality_Transit •Map: Indicating project location, location of transit stops, routs serving each sstop and the walking routes between the location of the project functional entry and the stops •Schedule: Provide all transit types, provide weekday and weekend route schedules showing the frequency of trips and services in opposite directions •Verification: Provide the planned stops or stations will be sited, funded, and under construction by the date of the certification of occupancy and will be completed within two years of that date •EApc_Energy_Performance_IDC •AEDG Tables •v4_Minimum_Energy_Performance_Calculator-v06 •Target Finder-performance results for the project building (a screen capture or other …
Loop 360/Davenport Fire/EMS Station Project Community Meeting Aug. 30, 2021 Via Zoom New Joint Fire/EMS Station in Del Valle (2020) Meeting Agenda • Meeting Expectations • Welcome and Introductions • Project History and Background • Station Design • Current Status and Next Steps • Questions City of Austin | Public Works Department 1 Meeting Expectations Please… • Keep your microphones muted and cameras off • Place questions in the chat as we move through the presentation • Note that we will answer all questions at the end of the meeting • Note that any questions we’re not able to answer, we’ll provide a written response ASAP • Use the link in the chat to add your email address for future updates about this project City of Austin | Public Works Department 2 Introductions •Alison Alter - •Division Chief Tony Haden •Division Chief Wes Hopkins •Michael Gates •Burton Jones– •Michelle Noriega - •Cris Ruebush •Bryant Bell Council Member, District 10 – Austin Fire Department (AFD) – Emergency Medical Services (ATCEMS) – City of Austin Real Estate Services Office Project Manager, Public Works Project Manager, Public Works – PGAL Architects – GarzaEMC, Civil Engineering Project History and Background • May 2018 - City Council directs the City Manager to build five permanent fire stations in the areas of greatest needs to ensure community safety—including a station to serve the Loop 360/Davenport area Sept. 2018 Jan. 2019 – City begins search for suitable site for new Loop 360/Davenport Fire/EMS Station – First community meeting with Loop 360/Davenport residents; project team asks for community’s • Oct. 2019 help in identifying potential sites July 2020 – Negotiations begin with St. Stephen’s Episcopal School for station on their property • Oct. 2020 – City begins to evaluate proposed site, 4601 Westlake Dr. Jan. 2021 - – 4601 Westlake Dr. is determined to be a feasible location for a new station June 2021 – Development review process begins Residents notified of a site plan being filed for building of new station • • • • • Project History and Background City of Austin | Public Works Department 6 City of Austin | Public Works Department 7 Project History and Background Site Location Conflict with St. Stephens Dr. Too Steep Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station Design Station …
Downtown Density Bonus Program November 15 Design Commission Content Program History and Requirements Program Outcomes Fee In-Lieu Recalibration Fee Calibration Methods Discussion Program History and Requirements 3 Downtown Density Bonus Program History 2013: Downtown Density Bonus Ordinance 20130627-105 passes replacing CURE (Central Urban Redevelopment). 2014: Downtown Density Bonus program is updated with a new ordinance 2014022-054 that provides additional definitions and sets up current Rainey Street subdistrict requirements Affordability Requirements Affordability requirements only apply to projects with a residential component 50% of bonus area must be achieved thru affordable housing benefits which can be done through a fee-in-lieu or on-site affordable units Rainey Street Subdistrict is only subdistrict that requires on-site affordable units calculated as 5% of the square footage of dwelling units developed within the FAR ratio of 8:1 and made affordable at 80% MFI or below On-site Affordability Terms Ownership: 120% MFI or below ($118,700 for a household of 4) for 99 years *Rainey Street Subdistrict is an exception with an 80% MFI limit Rental: 80% MFI or below ($79,100 for a household of 4) for 40 years Program Outcomes To Date 6 Project Status *As of 10/18/2021 Overall DDB Program Rainey Street Subdistrict Certified Projects by year Overall DDB Program Rainey Street Subdistrict Program Outcomes Certified Site Plan Under Review Building Permit Issued Project Completed Project Cancelled 4 1 8 4 3 2 0 3 2 2 These totals are only inclusive of projects that included an affordability community benefit contribution and were tracked through the Affordable Housing Inventory. These totals do not include non-residential projects that did not pay a fee in-lieu of Affordable Housing but may have utilized the Downtown Density Bonus Program. 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 5 20 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 4 9 Completed Projects with On-Site Affordable Housing Camden Rainey Street Project includes 16 income- restricted affordable rental units that will be affordable until 2056. The Quincy Project includes 14 rental units that will be income-restricted affordable until 2061. *Both projects are within the Rainey Street Subdistrict. Development Pipeline Overall Downtown Density Bonus Program 3,276 Rainey Street Subdistrict 1,252 1,252 832 41 46 87 45 46 91 Certified/Site Plan Under Review/Building Permit Issued Projects Estimated Total Rental Units Estimated Affordable Rental Units Estimated Total Ownership Units Estimated Affordable Ownership Units Estimated Total Affordable Units …
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 …
City of Austin Fire Station 22 / EMS 12 Design Commission Presentation 25 October 2021 Context Location: 5309 Riverside Drive (at Faro Drive) There is an existing, non-historic station at the site that is slated to be demolished Site is between Tokyo Electron and the Colorado River Site has a cell tower at the back (south) and significant trees at the front (north, by Riverside drive) Introduction Concept Statement Concept Example of the duality at the city level showing the site between the two points of civic pride with technology to the south and nature to the north. Overlay Concept Demonstration of how the concept works at multiple levels from the city to the building. Diagram Concept Showing how the concept came together on the site with the individual and technology issues to the south by the cell tower and the collective, nature, and healing areas to the north by the grove of trees. Layout Plan Site Plan First Floor Plan Second Floor Rendering This image shows the public face of the station prominently addressing the major intersection. Corner of Riverside and Faro Rendering Signage and massing combine to make a welcoming, intuitive, and easy-to-find entry. The view through to the apparatus bay creates a literal sense of transparency of the department to the public it serves. Front Façade Rendering The main entry is on axis with the employee entrance coming off the secure parking lot creating a direct connection between the building occupants and the public. Back-illuminated signage connotes pride, purpose, and 24- hour visibility. Main Entry Rendering Employee parking is on the south end of the site next to the cell tower. This is in keeping with the concept of technology being on the opposite end of the site from the trees which represent nature. Employee Parking Rendering After parking, employees enter using a covered walkway that takes them from the individual status of the parking lot to the collective status of the living quarters. The sequence is surrounded by trees on the west side and the purpose of their being there (the apparatus bay) on the east. Employee Entry Sequence Rendering Due to the stress, and even trauma of working in the life-safety field, this walk allows a mental separation between home and work. Covered Walkway Rendering The steel, almost Miesian nature of the covered walkway represents the technology side of the site while the trees to …
LEED v4 for BD+C: New Construction and Major Renovation Project Checklist C Y ? N Credit Type Credit Points Status CoA Baseline Criteria for Building Projects Deliverables Project Name: Austin Fire Station No. 22 / EMS12 Date: 05/25/2021 Potential Effort (0-3) Additional Fees $ Potential Cost (0-3) Cost Value $ Notes 1 0 0 Design Credit Integrative Process 1 Not Attempted Location and Transportation LEED for Neighborhood Development Location 16 16 1 6 0 1 0 2 4 0 0 0 2 24 16 0 2 1 Design Credit Design Credit Design Credit Design Credit Sensitive Land Protection High Priority Site Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses 1 1 2 4 Green Vehicles Design Credit 1 0 0 Design Credit Bicycle Facilities In Progress Use City of Austin Standard 710S. 0 0 1 Design Credit Reduced Parking Footprint 1 0 0 Design Credit Green Vehicles 0 5 3 2 Sustainable Sites Y Y Y Y Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Required Not Attempted 1 0 0 Site Assessment Not Attempted 0 1 1 Site Development - Protect or Restore Habitat Not Attempted Not Elligible Not Attempted Not Elligible In Progress Complete Not Elligible Not Attempted 1 2 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 Open Space Rainwater Management Heat Island Reduction Refer LEED Criteria - Limit development footprint. Exceed zoning requirement for open space SSc_Open_Space Not Attempted Not Elligible Not Attempted Refer LEED Criteria Required Documentation - Project Team Letter • Forms: Sample Form IPc_Integrative_Process • Worksheet: v4_Integrative Process Worksheet_v03 • Special Circumstances (if applicable) • Energy-Related Systems - A simple box energy modeling is a preliminary building model used to analyze the building’s energy loads. Project teams can use the EPA’s Target Finder tool or a similar tool in order to benchmark energy performance. Target Finder allows projects to set target goals for a building design’s energy demands. • Water-Related Systems: EPA Water Budget Tool Forms: LTc_Sensitive_Land_Protection Special Circumstances (if applicable) Applicable Site Plans . OPTION 1 •Forms: LTc_Sensitive_Land_Protection •Special Circumstances (if applicable) •Applicable Site Plans ed. •Form: LTc_Quality_Transit •Map: Indicating project location, location of transit stops, routs serving each sstop and the walking routes between the location of the project functional entry and the stops •Schedule: Provide all transit types, provide weekday and weekend route schedules showing the frequency of trips and services in opposite directions •Verification: Provide …
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 …
City of Austin Fire Station No. 3 Architectural Review Committee – Historic Landmark Commission – Design Overview Presentation 12 April 2021 Context Location: 201 West 30th St Currently, all fire trucks are being parked outside of the apparatus bay. Recent changes to the floodplain maps cause a significant portion of the building to be in the floodplain. Introduction Overview Construction completed on February 21, 1957 Architect: Roy Thomas Does not have any Landmark designations at present. Adjacent to the Aldridge Place Historic District Building History Repairable Not Repairable Overview The building has suffered two types of structural damage: 1) General wear and tear based on age. (entire structure) 2) Overstressing of the foundation due to parking trucks that are heavier than the original design load. (apparatus bay only) Structural Damage Shore up and preserve Demolish and replace Overview For the areas that have just suffered age- related wear and tear, the intent is to shore up that portion of the structure and preserve it. For the apparatus bay, the intent is to demolish the portion of the building that is beyond repair and replace it with a new structure that is sensitive but of its time. Project Intent Structural The City of Austin has conducted three studies of the building. Two structural studies and one geotechnical report. The second structural study specifically addressed potential remediation of the existing structure. All reports have been independently reviewed by the current structural engineer, who concurs with the studies’ methodologies and conclusions. Studies Historic An historic survey of the area was conducted. This building was identified in the survey. Recommendations for landmark were included. Reasoning: Possesses integrity and significance in Postwar Infrastructure Expansion. Survey Historic There are two simple paths: 1) The project moves forward without landmark designation. 2) The project moves forward with landmark designation. Two Paths Historic Without designation, the project would need approval for the proposed demolition. With intent for designation, the project would need both approval for the proposed demolition and a Certificate of Appropriateness. Our understanding is that the permitting process would overlap the landmark process if it were pursued by the city. Options Proposal Preservation of original use Carrying of roof line Use of brick Reuse of original signage Maintenance of original setback Compatible massing Use of period-appropriate detailing Preservation of historic fabric that is capable of being saved Design Highlights Proposal Original without emulation. Meets the needs …
City of Austin Fire Station No. 3 Design Commission Presentation 25 October 2021 Context Location: 201 West 30th St Currently, all fire trucks are being parked outside the apparatus bay. Recent changes to the floodplain maps cause a significant portion of the building to be in the floodplain. Introduction Overview Construction completed on February 21, 1957 Architect: Roy Thomas Does not have any Landmark designations at present Adjacent to the Aldridge Place Historic District Building History Historic An historic survey of the area was conducted. This building was identified in the survey. Recommendations for landmark were included. Reasoning: Possesses integrity and significance in Postwar Infrastructure Expansion. Building History Neighborhood Engagement We presented the design proposal to the North University Neighborhood Association (NUNA) and the Aldridge Place Historic District. Meeting conducted through Zoom on May 3, 2021. Follow up questions were answered through email. We received support from both the neighborhood and the historic district. Previous Engagement Historic Landmark Commission Engagement We presented the design proposal to the Historic Landmark Commission. Commission hearing was conducted on May 24, 2021. Commission was favorable to the demolition of the damaged apparatus bay and the replacement design presented. One commissioner stated in the meeting, “Projects such as this are to be celebrated.” Previous Engagement Repairable Not Repairable Damage The building has suffered two types of structural damage: 1) General wear and tear based on age. (entire structure) 2) Overstressing of the foundation due to parking trucks that are heavier than the original design load. (apparatus bay only) Program Shore up and preserve Demolish and replace Intent For the areas that have just suffered age- related wear and tear, the intent is to shore up that portion of the structure and preserve it. For the apparatus bay, the intent is to demolish the portion of the building that is beyond repair and replace it with a new structure that is sensitive but of its time. Program Structural Phase One – Structural Floor System Capacity Assessment CTL Group May 2017 CTL Group August 2017 Phase Two – Feasibility Study Letter of Recommendation Karim Helmi, P.E., City Structural Engineer, CoA Public Works Department September 2017 Geotechnical Report Kleinfelder October 2018 Research and Assessment Site With the designation of the new 100-year floodplain, the remaining buildable area is extremely limited. (Shown in red) This means the only available land for a new apparatus bay is the land where …
City of Austin Fire Station No. 3 Introductions and Context Alex Jenota, Project Manager Flintco – General Contractor Historic Landmark Commission – Design Overview Presentations 24 May 2021 Outline Introductions and Context Alex Janota, Project Manager Flintco – General Contractor Structural Damage Barry Krieger, Principal JQ Infrastructure – Structural Engineer Cost Implications and Alternatives Michelle Noriega, Project Manager City of Austin – Client Design Proposal Rob Robbins, Studio Director WestEast Design Group – Architect The Plan Forward Tony Haden, Division Chief Austin Fire Department – End User Context Location: 201 West 30th St Currently, all fire trucks are being parked outside the apparatus bay. Recent changes to the floodplain maps cause a significant portion of the building to be in the floodplain. Overview Construction completed on February 21, 1957 Architect: Roy Thomas Does not have any Landmark designations at present Adjacent to the Aldridge Place Historic District Historic An historic survey of the area was conducted. This building was identified in the survey. Recommendations for landmark were included. Reasoning: Possesses integrity and significance in Postwar Infrastructure Expansion. Neighborhood Engagement We presented the design proposal to the North University Neighborhood Association (NUNA) and the Aldridge Place Historic District. Meeting conducted through Zoom on May 3, 2021. Follow up questions were answered through email. Repairable Not Repairable Damage The building has suffered two types of structural damage: 1) General wear and tear based on age. (entire structure) 2) Overstressing of the foundation due to parking trucks that are heavier than the original design load. (apparatus bay only) Shore up and preserve Demolish and replace Intent For the areas that have just suffered age- related wear and tear, the intent is to shore up that portion of the structure and preserve it. For the apparatus bay, the intent is to demolish the portion of the building that is beyond repair and replace it with a new structure that is sensitive but of its time. Goals and Objectives 1) Save the historic fabric that can be saved and put it in good structural standing for the future. 2) Preserve the original historic use/function of the building. 3) Provide the Fire Department and EMS with the modern facility they need to operate effectively and efficiently for decades to come thus providing vital life-safety services to the area. 4) Get the fire trucks parked indoors for protection of the equipment, speed of response times, and aesthetic …
