June 28, 2021 Meeting — original link
Play video
Design Commission Homepage
Approved Minutes — original pdf
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, June 28, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:35 p.m. X 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 addressing Fee-in-lieu recommendations for Great Streets, as requested by Resolution No. 20200312-040, to be presented by Jorge E. Rousselin - City of Austin Housing and Planning Department • Jorge E. Rousselin – City of Austin Housing and Planning Department presented the Great Streets program addressing the Fee-in-lieu recommendations. • Vice Chair J. Rollason made a motion to support the staff recommendations for the Great Streets program. Commissioner J. Weaver seconded the motion. • The motion was approved [ 7 ayes, 0 nays, 1 Abstain] Page 1 of 3 Commissioner A. Coleman joined the meeting. b. Discussion and possible action on recommendations related to the Downtown Density Bonus Program, to be presented by Jorge E. Rousselin and Sam Tedford – City of Austin Housing and Planning Department • Jorge E. Rousselin and Sam Tedford – City of Austin Housing and Planning Department presented the Downtown Density Bonus program. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi requested the creation of a Working Group be created to provide recommendations to City Council in a timely manner. Commissioner B. Whatley seconded the motion. • Commissioner A. Coleman offered up a substitute motion in that the Urban Design Commission take a yes/no vote on the recommendations as presented. Seconded by J. Meiners. • Commissioner J. Meiners withdraws his motion and thereby rejecting the substitute motion. • The motion was approved [ 8 ayes, 1 nay] 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of May 24th meeting minutes. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi made a motion to approve the May 24th meeting minutes as distributed. Vice Chair J. Rollason seconded. • The motion was approved [ 9 ayes, …
Agenda — original pdf
Design Commission May 24, 2021 Design Commission to be held May 24, 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 (May 23rd 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 (Mayo 24, 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 (May 23rd 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 …
4.26.2021 Draft Meeting Minutes — original pdf
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, April 26, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx Meeting Minutes X X X X Vacant (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 Martha Gonzalez – (District 2) Samuel Franco (District 3) X Josue Meiners (District 4) X Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) X “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. Courtesy Briefing of the City of Austin George Washington Carver Museum Expansion, to be presented by Terry Smith-Smith & Co. Architects; Gregory Montes-City of Austin Park and Recreation Department (PARD). • Gregory Montes and Terry Smith, Smith & Co. Architects presented and answered questions from the Commissioners. • No action was taken by Design Commission for this item. Page 1 of 3 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of March 22nd meeting minutes. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi made a motion to approve the March 22nd meeting minutes as presented. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. • The motion was approved [10 ayes, 0 nays] b. Attendance Reports for the Commissioners • Aaron Jenkins briefed the commission that attendance reports were requested by the City Clerk’s office on a regular basis. Mr. Jenkins provided a courtesy reminder that Commissioners need to attend all meetings if possible; more than (3) unexcused consecutive absences will place the Commissioners in jeopardy of being removed from the Commission. Mr. Jenkins asked that staff be notified of any absence, so that the attendance report and be marked accordingly. c. Officer Elections: Chair & Vice Chair • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion to approve David Carroll as Chair and Melissa Hanao-Robledo as Vice chair for the next election cycle. Commissioner S. Franco seconded. [Commissioner A. Coleman withdrew her motion.] • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion to approve David Carroll as Chair and Jessica Rollason as Vice chair for the next term. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. • The motion was approved [9 ayes, 0 nays] * Commissioner M. Gonzalez was unable to connect into the meeting, due to technical difficulties. …
Austin Energy Community Engagement Process — original pdf
Table of Contents The Downtown Substation Community Engagement Report documents outreach and community input for all phases of the community engagement process. This report will continue to be updated throughout the course of the project. Community Engagement Report Community Engagement Phases & Timeline ..................................................................................... 1 Phase 1: Outreach Summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 Phase 2: Outreach Summary ................................................................................................................... 10 Phase 3: Outreach Summary ....................................................................................................................... Appendix A: Phase 1 Materials and Comments ................................................................ 19 Appendix B: Phase 2 Materials and Comments ............................................................... 41 Appendix C: Phase 3 Materials and Comments ................................................................... Prepared by CD&P – Updated November 2019 IREPOWERING DOWNTOWN Engagement DOWNTOWN SUBSTATION Community Austin Energy is committed individuals, community preferences design. that outlined goals of the engagement A Community Engagement Report to active and engaging effort: and opinions are heard and considered leaders. businesses. and organizations to ensure that their for inclusion in the substation communication with residents. Plan was developed for the Downtown Substation • Create public awareness about the substation and public engagement process through a deliberative outreach • Provide an open and transparent effort process throughout the entire planning process • Provide a variety of accessible opportuni ties and options for all those interested to conveniently • Engage a diverse set of participants • Provide engaging • Collect input on considerations interactions that facilitate collecting and certain aspects of design be involved and share input valuable input of tools will be used to reach these goals. including meetings A variety stakeholders. presence local business online such as an updated webpage and surveys. and civic at community events. holding public meetings, group outreach, and providing opportunities to participate with conducting COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PHASES & TIMELINE Community engagement phase will encompass stakeholders and members of the community in the process. the entire effort to share information. collect will occur throughout this process in three phases. Each input, and involve COMMUNITY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: ENGAGEMENT: Collect community nputon concerns. desires. and preferences Share aesthetic design concepts for enclosure and work with the public to SUMMER them 2019 refine COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: Present draft plan. collect feedback. incorporate into design and SUBSTATION ENERGIZATION ... SUMMER 2018 .. EARLY 2019 Preliminary engineering and design begins Begin construction to move water and wastewater line PHASE 1: OUTREACH The purpose of the first outreach phase was to introduce the project and process, continue to build awareness in the community, and collect input on concerns, desires, and preferences. To …
Austin Energy Project Review Application — original pdf
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 …
Austin Energy Sub-Station Presentation — original pdf
Repowering Downtown $60M initiative to increase capacity, resiliency, and reliability to meet the needs of our growing city. • Increase Distribution Tie Circuits • Add 70 MVA to Seaholm Substation • Build New Downtown Substation • Rebuild Brackenridge Substation • Upgrade Network Distribution Feeder Circuits • Convert 69kV Transmission Lines to 138kV Downtown Network Substation Locations 806 ½ LAMBIE ST. 1 1 Downtown Substation Austin Energy operates 77 substations across 437 square miles of service area. The downtown substation is being designed as a gas-insulated switchgear substation, which is ideal for densely-populated urban locations. Gas-Insulated Switchgear (GIS) Compared to Air-Insulated Switchgear (AIS) Compact Design Significant footprint reduction (approximately 70% smaller) Capital Costs Approximately 2x more O&M Lower maintenance costs Aesthetics GIS portion in a building and station surrounded by enclosure Reliability GIS is less susceptible to faults Installation Equipment Faster site assembly with pre-assembly and testing completed at manufacturer Standard power transformers and enclosed medium voltage utilized to reduce cost and increase maintainability 2 2 The Site • Selected in 1999 for the future electric needs of downtown • Austin Energy is coordinating with other involved agencies, including: • TxDOT • Watershed Protection for storm drain • Total Site: 1.46 acres • Substation Footprint: 0.81 acres • Site Updates: • 3 transmission poles (currently 2) to allow clearance over heritage trees • Two driveways PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SUBJECT TO FINAL SITE APPROVAL 3 3 KEY MILESTONES PUBLIC MEETING #3 September 2020 Shared results of site name, preferred design concepts, materials, and construction plans WATER & WASTEWATER RELOCATION Fall 2019 - Spring 2020 Relocation of wastewater and electric lines from to within City of Austin ROW along East Avenue REZONING OF SITE LOCATION June 2020 FINALIZE DESIGN Spring 2021 90-100% completion of substation engineering and design 4 4 Community Engagement Summary Over 600 responses on preferences from the community WHAT WE HEARD PUBLIC MEETING #1: June 2018 • Purpose: Introduce project, build awareness, collect feedback on priorities • 178 surveys received PUBLIC MEETING #2: February 2019 • Purpose: Collect feedback on aesthetic and layout concepts • 440 surveys received PUBLIC MEETING #3: September 2020 • Purpose: Share preferred concepts, potential materials, site design, and process updates Priority for colorful and artistic features Desire to preserve trees and incorporate native landscaping Support for modern design for enclosure wall 5 5 PUBLIC MEETING #3 September 24, 2019 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT • Shared …
Functional Green Excerpt — original pdf
Landscape 23-3D-3110 23-3D-3110 Functional Green (A) Description. (1) Functional Green Landscape is a two-tiered approach to fulfilling the purpose of the landscape code. The first tier requires landscape elements to be placed in specified areas of a site, thus protecting private and public investment, providing visual buffering, limiting overcrowding, and enhancing property values. The second tier is a scoring system that measures the ecosystem service value created by landscape; it is intended to improve ecological balance, replenish native vegetation, and enhance public health, safety, and welfare. (2) The Functional Green Score measures the total amount of ecosystem services provided by the landscape elements proposed for a development site. Landscape plans are required to reach a total target Functional Green Score based on the assigned value per square foot area of each landscape element in relation to the area of the site. (B) Applicability. (1) Functional Green Score applies to all sites that allow an impervious cover total exceeding 80 percent. (2) Functional Green Score may also apply to a site that is restricted to an impervious cover less than 80 percent and elects to use this approach to meet requirements of the landscape code. 3D-3 pg. 13 City of Austin | Proposed LDC Revision – January 31, 2020 23-3D-3110 Landscape (C) Requirements. (1) A Functional Green Landscape plan is required to: (a) Comply with all applicable landscape and buffer types (Sections 23-3D-3030 through 23-3D-3100); (b) Comply with Planting and Soil Standards in the ECM; (c) Reach the Functional Green Target Score (prescribed in the ECM); if the target score cannot be reached by providing the applicable landscape and buffer types, Functional Green Landscape Elements must be added in order to reach the Functional Green Target Score; (d) Be designed to accommodate the minimum space requirements for each landscape element proposed to meet the Functional Green Score. (e) Provide 100 percent of plant selections as prescribed in the ECM; (f) Provide 100 percent drought tolerant plants, as prescribed in ECM Appendix N; (g) Ensure that Functional Green landscapes provide a variety of ecosystem services by providing a minimum of 3 different Functional Green Landscape Elements, 2 which must be living elements; trees and shrubs/ornamental grasses of different sizes may count independently as different elements; and (h) Prepare and submit an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan for the proposed development, as prescribed in the ECM. (i) The following note shall be added …
Functional Green Presentation — original pdf
EC Key CodeNEXT Watershed Proposals 11/1/2017 FUNCTIONAL GREEN A Component of the Proposed Revised Landscape Code 1 - F E B - 1 7 1 Functional Green Landscape Code Integrates nature Provides flexibility Is straightforward Functional Green is a new tool in the City’s landscape code tool chest. It applies to sites with an IC allowance over 80% and is designed for getting nature into these dense urban sites. Functional Green integrates nature into parcels where building cover or other impervious surfaces limit what the standard landscape code can accomplish. It gives developers a planning tool that is flexible and provides ecological benefits comparable to those achieved by the standard landscape code. And it provides a program that is straightforward and clear to implement and review. 2 Ecosystem Services Microclimate Regulation Water Filtration Carbon Storage and Sequestration Biodiversity Benefits Human Well‐Being Air Pollutant Removal Stormwater Retention Effects on Developable Area Effects on Property Value Functional Green is based on the science of “ecosystem services,” the important benefits that people receive from healthy functioning ecosystems. A consultant team reviewed over 120 scientific, environmental studies, identifying ecological and economic benefits that could be expected from each Landscape Element in Austin’s geography and climate. We chose 8 Ecosystem Service benefits to base the Functional Green landscape code on: • • • • • • • • Microclimate Regulation Water Filtration Carbon Storage and Sequestration Biodiversity Benefits Human Well‐Being Air Pollutant Removal Stormwater Retention Effects on Developable Area Effects on Property Value 3 Ecosystem Services of Functional Green Landscape Elements The draft brochure from February of 2018, illustrates the relative benefits provided by each landscape element in a bar‐graph format. 4 EC Key CodeNEXT Watershed Proposals 11/1/2017 FUNCTIONAL GREEN How it Works The designer of a development chooses what landscape to provide by selecting from a menu of Functional Green landscape elements. 5 Menu of Landscape Options Vegetated (green) walls Porous paving Vegetated (green) roofs Irrigation with Auxiliary Water Source Rain Gardens Existing & new trees The landscape element menu includes, for example: • • • • • • Existing and new trees Vegetated (green) walls Vegetated (green) roofs Porous paving Rain gardens Irrigation with Auxiliary Water Source 6 Functional Green Score Area of Landscape Element A x Factor A + Area of Landscape Element B x Factor B + Area of Landscape Element C x Factor C Total Site Area …
Palm District Planning Initiative Presentation — original pdf
Palm District Planning Initiative Urban Design Commission May 24, 2021 Content Project Background Study Area Project Scope Project Team How to Get Involved Project Background Engage stakeholders and the public to develop a shared vision for a complex, culturally rich, and rapidly transforming part of downtown Austin that includes: ▪ Palm School Palm Park Convention Center ▪ Waller Creek ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ Red River Cultural District ESB-Mexican American Cultural Center Proposed Mexican American Heritage Corridor And more…. 4 Resolution 20190523-029 ▪ Palm School Negotiations ▪ Rainey Street District Fund ▪ Fifth Street Mexican American Heritage Corridor ▪ Convention Center Expansion ▪ District Planning Process ▪ Improved Connectivity 5 Recent Planning History ▪ Waller Creek Master Plan (2010) ▪ Downtown Austin Plan (2011) ▪ Imagine Austin (2012) ▪ Waller Creek Design Plan (2012) ▪ Hispanic/Latino Quality of Life ▪ Downtown Austin Wayfinding Master Plan (2013) ▪ Convention Center Master Plan (2013) (2015) ▪ ESB-MACC Master Plan (2018) ▪ Project Connect Vision (2019) ▪ Brush Square Master Plan (2019) ▪ UT Analysis of Convention Center Expansion (2019) ▪ Convention Center Master Plan Update (2020) ▪ Urban Land Institute Study of IH 35 (2020) …and more 6 Study Area 8 History of Study Area ▪ Long, layered history ▪ Palm School dates back to the 1890s ▪ Palm District originally part of East Austin ▪ Mexican-Americans, African- Americans and German Immigrants called Palm district home 9 PICA 21043 Austin History Center, Austin Public Library Historic Connection To East Austin 10 CO3746 Austin History Center, Austin Public Library Sir Swante Palm School 11 Sir Swante Palm School 12 waterloogreenway.org Sir Swante Palm Neighborhood Park 13 Sir Swante Palm Neighborhood Park 14 PICA 04088 Austin History Center, Austin Public Library Waller Creek 15 Waller Creek Tunnel 16 waterloogreenway.org Waterloo Greenway/Waterloo Park 17 texasfreeways.com I-35 18 texasfreeways.com I-35 19 texasfreeways.com I-35 20 I-35 21 statesman.com: Photo Credit, Jay Jannier Project Connect and Downtown Transit Station 22 Neil Kocurek Memorial Austin Convention Center 23 Brush Square/O. Henry Museum 24 Emma S. Barrientos Mexican American Cultural Center (ESB-MACC) 25 Rainey Street Neighborhood & Historic District 26 lostinaustin.org: Photo Credit, Will Taylor Rainey Street Neighborhood & Historic District 27 Rainey Street Neighborhood & Historic District 28 Sixth Street Historic and Entertainment District 29 lostinaustin.org: Photo Credit, Will Taylor Red River Cultural District 30 Innovation District 31 KXAN.com m o c . N A X K 32 …
Urban Design Guidelines Update Draft Framework — original pdf
URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE W I T H E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y City of Austin Design Commission TABLE OF CONTENTS. Executive Summary 3 Background 5 Barriers 11 How the Update Will Be Accomplished 12 UDG EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Urban Design Guidelines are a set of recommendations that promote architectural and urban design standards reflective of Austin’s shared values. When first created as the Downtown Austin Design Guidelines in 2000, these recommendations focused exclusively on projects located in Austin’s downtown. Then in 2008, in response to Austin’s growing urban core, there was an effort to make the guidelines broader to help shape the urban environment throughout the city as it grows. While this effort did rename the guidelines to reflect this intent, it did little else to promote their use beyond the Central Business District. Since this time, Austin’s urban core has expanded tremendously and the city has adopted many policies, initiatives, and plans to which the current UDG do not align with. Therefore, the Design Commission believes it is time to update the Urban Design Guidelines once again. The proposed update includes three main priorities. The first will focus on updating the UDG to have a broader applicability throughout Austin’s urban core, and therefore, the ability to serve a wider range of project types. Secondly, the update will better align the UDG with current community goals; including, but not limited to, adopted city polices related to affordability, connectivity, equity, environment, and mobility. Lastly, the update will seek to bring more clarity to the guidelines by creating a more inviting and user-friendly document that all Austinites can seek insight from, and resulting in a more predictable review process.” It is proposed that the update be accomplished in three phases. Phase I is the preparation phase, it will consist of crafting a guiding narrative, defining the core values, creating a community engagement plan, forming Working Groups, selecting Community Ambassadors, and establishing the overall work timeline. Austin’s urban core has expanded tremendously and the city has adopted many policies, initiatives, and plans to which the current UDG do not align with 3 Prepared by COA Design CommissionUrban Design Guidelines Updatȅ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Phase II will be the creation phase, where the Community Ambassadors will begin outreach and reporting back and the Working Groups will begin drafting the guidelines. At the end …
5/24/2021 Design Commission — original link
Play video
20210524-01A: Rainey Street Substation project, located at 806 ½ Lambie Street — original pdf
David Carroll, Chair Street. Jessica Rollason, Vice Chair Melissa Henao-Robledo, Aan Coleman Samuel Franco Martha Gonzales Ben Luckens Josue Meiners Evan Taniguchi Jen Weaver Bart Whatley Jorge Rousselin, Executive Liaison Aaron D. Jenkins Staff Liaison Art Zamorano Staff Liaison City of Austin Design Commission DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20210524-01A Date: May 27, 2021 Subject: Design Commission recommendations for the Rainey Street Substation project, located at 806 ½ Lambie Josue Meiners Seconded By: Bart Whatley Motioned By: Friendly Amendment: Aan Coleman Recommendation: The City of Austin Design Commission supports the Rainey Street Substation project, located at 806 ½ Lambie St., as presented on May 24, 2021. With this support, the Design Commission further recommends that the project includes a modular suspended pavement system, like Silva Cells, for all the trees along East Avenue and Lambie Street. This is a standard practice for trees placed in sidewalks along the right-of-way and will provide more suitable conditions in order for these trees to thrive. Rationale: Dear Honorable Mayor & City Council, This letter is to confirm the Design Commission’s recommendation to support the design of the Rainey Street Substation as presented to us. Our review found the following positive attributes: 1. The community engagement process was robust. This is meaningful as the project will serve as the eastern gateway into the Rainey Neighborhood. 2. The proposed artistic design is both durable and aesthetically pleasing. 3. Preservation of heritage trees and inclusion of landscaped gardens. 4. Widening of existing sidewalks and addition of street trees. Respectfully, City of Austin Design Commission Vote: For: Aan Coleman, Evan Taniguchi, Melissa Henao-Robledo, David Carroll, Josue Meiners, Bart Whatley, Ben 7 - 0 - 0 Luckens Against: NA Abstain: NA Absent: Martha Gonzalez, Jessica Rollason, Samuel Franco Attest: David Carroll, Chair of the Design Commission 1 of 1 Design Commission Recommendation 20210524-01A Rainey Street Sub Station Page 1
Approved Minutes — original pdf
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, May 24, 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 Jen Weaver (District 6) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations for the City of Austin, Austin Energy; Rainey Street Sub Station Project, addressed at 806 ½ Lambie Street. Tara Delagarza - Austin Energy; Kim Doyal - Austin Energy; Girard Kinney – Kinney Architects; Zak Robinson - Carter Design. • Tara Delagarza and Kim Doyal – Austin Energy; Girard Kinney – Kinney Architects and Roberto Garcia – Carter Design presented and answered questions. • Commissioner J. Meiners made a motion to support the project as presented, seconded by Commissioner B. Whatley. Page 1 of 3 • Commissioner A. Coleman made a friendly amendment to include a Silva Cell or similar systems beneath the landscaping. Commissioner J. Meiners and Commissioner B. Whatley accepted the friendly amendment. • The motion was approved [ 7 ayes, 0 nays] b. Courtesy Briefing on the City of Austin Palm District Planning Initiative, to be presented by Stevie Greathouse – City of Austin Housing and Planning Department. • Stevie Greathouse – City of Austin Housing and Planning Department provided a courtesy briefing of the City of Austin Palm District Planning Initiative. c. Courtesy Briefing on the Austin Land Development Code Functional Green component, to be presented by Pamela Abee-Taulli–City of Austin Development Services Department • Pamela Abee-Taulli–City of Austin Development Services Department provided a courtesy briefing on the Austin Land Development Code Functional Green component and answered questions. 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of April 26th meeting minutes. • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion to approve the April 26th meeting minutes as distributed, seconded by Commissioner J. Meiners. • The motion was approved [ 7 ayes, 0 nays] b. Discussion and …
Agenda — original pdf
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 …
3.22 Meeting Minutes — original pdf
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 …
Downtown Density Bonus Program Memo From Chair — original pdf
$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
Downtown Density Bonus Program Recommendations — original pdf
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 …
George Washington Carver Museum Expansion Presentation — original pdf
#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 …
Project Review Application — original pdf
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 …