1/2 DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Date: October 21, 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 over 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 are also finding that the DDBP has become 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 the 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 examining 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. 2/2 FUNCTIONALITY • If a DDBP applicant receives …
1/2 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. 2/2 FUNCTIONALITY • If a DDBP applicant receives …
2020 DESIGN COMMISSION MEETING CALENDAR Austin City Hall 301 W. Second Street, Austin, Texas, 78701 Boards and Commissions Room 1101 6:00 PM Meeting Date Mondays at 6:00 p.m. (Unless otherwise noted) Application Deadline 10 Business Days Prior to Meeting by 2:00 PM (No Exceptions) Materials Deadline 7 Business Days Prior to Meeting by 2:00 PM (No Exceptions) January 27th January 10th January 15th February 24th February 7th February 12th March 23rd March 6th March 11th April 27th April 10th April 15th 1May 18th May 1st May 13th June 22nd June 5th June 10th July – No Meeting August 24th August 7th August 12th September 28th September 11th September 16th October 26th October 9th October 14th 2November 16th November 2nd November 4th 3December 14th 4December 1st December 2nd 1 Meeting moved from 4th Monday to 3rd Monday due to Memorial Day 2 Meeting moved from 4th Monday to 3rd Monday due to Thanksgiving Holiday occurring this week 3 Meeting moved from 4th Monday to 2nd Monday due to Christmas Holiday 4 Deadlines moved due to the Christmas Holiday
Page 1 of 3 DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2019 6:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 1101 301 W. SECOND STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 6:01 p.m. Member List X David Carroll – Chair X Melissa Henao-Robledo X Martha Gonzalez – Vice-Chair X Ben Luckens X Aan Coleman X Evan Taniguchi X Beau Frail X Bart Whatley X Samuel Franco X Josue Meiners X Katie Halloran Support Staff in attendance: Jorge Rousselin (Executive Liaison; PAZ); Nichole Koerth (Staff Liaison; PAZ); Aaron Jenkins (Staff Liaison; PAZ) Commissioner B. Frail arrived at 6:02 p.m. Vice-Chair M. Gonzalez arrived at 6:04 p.m. 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 2. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether The Travis project, addressed at 80 Red River Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Leah Bojo, Drenner Group; Gordon Ip, Genesis Living; Mike Fraze, Studio Outside; Stephen Drenner, Drenner Group); Stephen Drenner presented, with assistance from Michael Schooler (GDA Architects) and Mike Fraze (Studio Outside) The motion to support the project, as it complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, was made by Commissioner A. Coleman and seconded by Commissioner E. Taniguchi. A friendly amendment regarding communication with Capital Metro in consideration to transit location was made by Commissioner K. Halloran. The friendly amendment was accepted by Commissioners A. Coleman and E. Taniguchi. Page 2 of 3 A friendly amendment to consider more public restrooms be included in the plan was made by Commissioner B. Frail. The friendly amendment was accepted by Commissioners A. Coleman and E. Taniguchi. A friendly amendment to consider opening the proposed dog park to the public was made by Commissioner S. Franco. The friendly amendment was accepted by Commissioners A. Coleman and E. Taniguchi. The motion, including the friendly amendments, was approved by a unanimous vote of [11-0-0]. b. Courtesy briefing and discussion on the Walter E. Long Master Plan project (Ricardo Soliz, COA-PARD; Gregory Montes, COA- PARD; Kim McKnight, COA-PARD); Gregory Montes presented. No action taken. Commissioner B. Whatley left the dais at 8:09 pm. c. Courtesy briefing and discussion of the Street Impact Fee proposal (Cole Kitten, COA-ATD; Liane Miller, COA- ATD); Liane Miller presented. No action taken. 3. OLD BUSINESS (Discussion and possible Action): a. None 4. …
2020 DESIGN COMMISSION MEETING CALENDAR Austin City Hall 301 W. Second Street, Austin, Texas, 78701 Boards and Commissions Room 1101 6:00 PM Meeting Date Mondays at 6:00 p.m. (Unless otherwise noted) Application Deadline 10 Business Days Prior to Meeting by 2:00 PM (No Exceptions) Materials Deadline 7 Business Days Prior to Meeting by 2:00 PM (No Exceptions) January 27th January 10th January 15th February 24th February 7th February 12th March 23rd March 6th March 11th April 27th April 10th April 15th 1May 18th May 1st May 13th June 22nd June 5th June 10th July 27th July 10th July 15th August 24th August 7th August 12th September 28th September 11th September 16th October 26th October 9th October 14th November 23rd November 6th 2November 12th 3December 14th 4December 1st December 2nd 1 Meeting moved from 4th Monday to 3rd Monday due to Memorial Day 2 Deadline moved due to Veterans Day 3 Meeting moved from 4th Monday to 2nd Monday due to Christmas Holiday 4 Deadlines moved due to the Christmas Holiday
1/2 DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Date: October 21, 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 over 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 are also finding that the DDBP has become 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 the 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 examining 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. 2/2 FUNCTIONALITY • If a DDBP applicant receives …
Page 1 of 3 DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2019 AT 6:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 1101 301 W. SECOND STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Commission Members _____ David Carroll, Chair (District 1) _____ Aan Coleman (District 8) _____ Martha Gonzalez, Vice-Chair (District 2) _____ Beau Frail (District 6) _____ Samuel Franco (District 3) _____ Katie Halloran (District 7) _____ Melissa Henao-Robledo (District 5) _____ Ben Luckens (District 10) City of Austin Planning & Zoning Staff _____ Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) _____ Jorge Rousselin, Executive Liaison _____ Bart Whatley (District 9) _____ Nichole Koerth, Staff Liaison _____ Josue Meiners (District 4) ____ Aaron Jenkins, Staff Liaison AGENDA CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL a. The first five speakers, who shall sign up prior to the Call to Order, will each have three minutes to speak regarding items not on the agenda; 2. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether The Travis project, addressed at 80 Red River Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Leah Bojo, Drenner Group; Gordon Ip, Genesis Living; Mike Fraze, Studio Outside; Steve Drenner, Drenner Group); b. Courtesy briefing and discussion on the Walter E. Long Master Plan project (Ricardo Soliz, COA-PARD; Gregory Montes, COA- PARD; Kim McKnight, COA-PARD); c. Courtesy briefing and discussion of the Street Impact Fee proposal (Cole Kitten, COA-ATD; Liane Miller, COA- ATD); 3. OLD BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. None; Page 2 of 3 4. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action on the August 26, 2019 meeting minutes; b. Liaison Reports; c. Appointment of Committee/Working Group members by Chair; d. Discussion of a letter to City Council regarding updating the Urban Design Guidelines (Vice-Chair M. Gonzalez); e. Discussion and possible action on the Memo Recommending Code Amendments related to the Downtown Density Bonus Program (Chair D. Carroll); 5. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: a. None; 6. ANNOUNCEMENTS: a. Chair Announcements; b. Items from Commission Members; c. Items from City Staff; 7. ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 …
David Carroll, ChairMartha Gonzales, Vice ChairAan ColemanBeau FrailSamuel FrancoKatie HalloranMelissa Henao-RobledoBen LuckensJosue MeinersEvan TaniguchiBart WhatleyJorge Rousselin,Executive LiaisonNichole Koerth,Staff LiaisonAaron D. JenkinsStaff LiaisonDesign Commission - Recommendation for The Travis ProjectPage 1 City of Austin Design Commission 1 of 1 DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20190923-02A Date: September 24, 2019 Subject: Design Commission recommendation for The Travis project, located at 80 Red River Street, to determine substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Motioned By: Aan Coleman Seconded By: Evan Taniguchi Amendment 01: Katie Halloran Amendment 02: Beau Frail Amendment 03: Samuel Franco Recommendation: The Austin Design Commission recommends that the 80 Red River Street project, as presented on September 23, 2019, is in substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines, with amendments. Rationale: Dear Director of Planning and Zoning, This letter is to confirm the Design Commission’s recommendation that the 80 Red River Street project, as presented to the body on September 23, 2019 substantially complies with the Urban Design Guidelines as one of the gatekeeper requirements of the Downtown Density Bonus Program. The recommendation included three friendly amendments: 1. Recommend that the applicant coordinates with Cap Metro on future transit connecting to Red River Street adjacent to the property. 2. Recommend that the applicant evaluate adding more public restrooms to serve the Café, the Art Space, the Dog Park, and the Food Truck dining area. Currently only one restroom is provided. 3. Recommend that the applicant evaluate the possibility of making the dog park open to the public. It could compliment the food truck dining area. Respectfully, City of Austin Design Commission Vote: 11 - 0 - 0 For: David Carroll, Aan Coleman, Katie Halloran, Evan Taniguchi, Ben Lukens, Beau Frail, Martha Gonzales, Samuel Franco, Melissa Henao-Robledo, Bart Whatley, Josue Meiners Against: n/a Abstain: n/a Absent: n/a Recused: n/a Attest: David Carroll, Chair of the Design Commission
1/2 MEMORANDUM Date: June 11, 2019 To: City of Austin Design Commission From: Planning & Urban Design Working Group Subject: Downtown Density Bonus Program review of 80 Red River Street project for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Meeting Date: May 30, 2019; 12:00 pm, One Texas Center, Room 500 Applicant: Leah Bojo – Drenner Group Architect: GDA Architects The following is a summary of the comments from the City of Austin Design Commission Working Group in response to the follow-up presentation of the 80 Red River Street Project. The initial presentation to the Working Group was held on April 25. In general, the Working Group concluded that the project remains deficient in substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines. The items below are the individual guidelines which the Working Group finds as non-compliant that contribute the most to the summary of overall non-compliance. (The items from the first meeting that do comply or are not applicable or were not discussed as high-concern have not been restated) AREA WIDE GUIDELINES • Create mixed-use development- The Working Group does not consider the project mixed use due to the primary use being residential/hotel with a very small retail use that is not placed or sized to emphasize accessibility to the public. With the location of the coffee shop on the opposite end of the primary public pedestrian path, the shop is “tucked-in” and away from the public eye and appears to be associated with the hotel and residences and not the public realm. GUIDELINES FOR THE PUBLIC STREETSCAPE • Reinforce pedestrian activity- Great Streets is not provided and as per COA staff is not required. However, the Working Group as stated in the prior memorandum still finds that the project could incorporate “Great Streets-like” features to meet the intent of this gate-keeper requirement for Density Bonus. A generous shaded sidewalk articulated with shade trees, pavers, benches (and/or seating nooks), pedestrian scale lighting, bicycle racks, trash and pet-waste receptacles, drinking fountains, and similar are encouraged to meet this urban infrastructure goal. • Enhance the streetscape- Great Streets is not provided, furniture and kiosks are not provided. Project does not comply and does not provide solutions that satisfy the intent of this section. (see comments above) • No street trees provided- Project does not comply with this section. (see above) • Provide pedestrian-scaled lighting- Project does not comply with this section (see above) …
1/4 MEMORANDUM Date: May 03, 2019 To: City of Austin Design Commission From: Planning & Urban Design Working Group Subject: Downtown Density Bonus Program review of 80 Red River Street project for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Meeting Date: April 25, 2019; 12:00 pm, One Texas Center, Room 500 Applicant: Leah Bojo – Drenner Group Architect: GDA Architects The project is located at the southwest corner of Red River and Davis Streets. Existing zoning for the property is CBD. It lies within the boundary of the Rainey Street Subdistrict of the Waterfront Overlay and the Rainey Street District of the Downtown Austin Plan. The lot area is 2.291 acres (99,796 SF) and the total proposed project area is 1,236,806 square feet. The proposed FAR for this project is 13:1, this is more than the 8:1 maximum allowed, so an increase in FAR of 5:1 is being requested. Two towers are being proposed. One with a building height of 695 feet and a second with a height of 575 feet. 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- 13:1 FAR being requested. Height is taller than most building in this area. Project complies with this section. 2. Create mixed-use development- The project has residential main use. The retail use is very small. There are not two uses per half block. This project does not comply with this section. Provide a greater amount of uses to comply. 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- Project has one way in and one way out on Red River Street. Vehicular access will have adverse effects on neighborhood traffic flow. The project does not comply with this section. 5. Incorporate civic art in both public and private development- Although unclear as to the final form, public art is being proposed at pedestrian trail head. This project complies with this section. 6. Protect important public views- Project is not within the Capitol View …
AUSTIN BOAT HOUSETHE WALLER CREEK TUNNELTHE MEXICAN AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTERTHE VAN ZANDT HOTELTHE SHORE CONDOMINIUMRAINEY STREETSITE SITE EASEMENTS PRIOR FOCUSEXPANDED FOCUSPUBLIC REALM FOCUS TITLEPUBLIC REALM EXPERIENCES WATERLOO GREENWAY ACCESS POINT UPPER AND LOWER PROMENADE WATERLOO OVERLOOK RETAIL / CAFÉ SPACE PREVIOUS BICYCLE KAYAK FOCUS ARTIST IN RESIDENCE INDOOR / OUTDOOR GALLERY PUBLIC ARTIST IN RESIDENCE STUDIO PUBLIC ART OUTDOOR GALLERY WALL EXPANDABLE PUBLIC ART EVENT VENUE PUBLIC FOOD TRUCK PLAZAEXPANDABLE PUBLIC ART EVENT VENUEPUBLIC ART OUTDOOR GALLERY WALL TITLEPUBLIC REALM EXPERIENCES TITLESITE PLAN WITH INTERIOR BUILDING PLANS
WALTER E. LONG METROPOLITAN PARKMaster Plan Review –City CouncilOctober 2019 PARK MASTER PLAN3,695 ac. (overall)Develops an overall vision for the park for current and future guidance Identifies types of recommended recreation uses Prioritizes initial development phase(s) Serves as a reference for future developmentZilkerParkRoy G. Guerrero ParkWalter E. Long Park+/-350 ac. Technical Advisory Group Community Stakeholder Focus GroupsLocal/citywide individuals/entitiesMeetings with area communityPublic Events and Public InteractionIn-person intercept survey Four public meetings at Decker Middle School (March to December 2018)Online EngagementThree opinion surveysMap blogWorkshops with PARD StaffElected/Appointed Officials and BoardsBoards and CommissionsCity CouncilPUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS HISTORY OF THE PARKInitial Master Plan 1966Federally FundedInteresting SimilaritiesUses, Zones, Access POTENTIAL FUTURE SUPPLY OF RETAIL & OFFICE/COMMERCIAL USES (EPS)(1)Captures emerging development; may not represent all development within a 5-mile radius.Sources: ESRI; CoStar; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.(# of res. units)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(# of rooms) Development PotentialHigh developability –potential for extensive construction (e.g., buildings, surface parking, athletic fields, infrastructure, etc.)Moderate developability –potential for condensed construction (e.g., playgrounds, picnic areas, etc.)Low developability –potential for low impact construction (e.g., trails, boardwalks, pavilions, etc.)Very limited development –very limited construction, if any (e.g., wetlands, trails, etc.)BACKGROUND –ANALYSIS ActiveActive sports and amenities, organized events, more significant infrastructure, often greater costPassiveLess development/infrastructure, casual activities & hobbies, often less costEnvironmental/NaturalPreservation of vegetation/wildlife, nature-based activities, less development/infrastructure, often less costArts and CulturalCommunity enrichment amenities, activities, and programs, infrastructure and costs range from very little to extensiveTYPES OF RECREATION (PARK USE ZONES) PREFERRED FRAMEWORK PLAN ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLANAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances. CIRCULATION AROUND THE PARK MASTER PLAN –AREA DETAILS Any proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances. DAY USE / EXISTING LAKESIDE PARK AREAAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances. Any proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances. EXPO CENTER AREAAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances. PROJECTED OVERALL DEVELOPMENT COST RANGES(1) POTENTIAL PHASE 1 (SOUTH SHORE) DEVELOPMENTPotential Cost Ranges:(1)Initial Phase 1(A) $10 to $20 millionCould include:Gate, Parking, Restrooms, Picnicking Facilities, Initial Infrastructure for Rowing Events Phase 1(B) $15 to $25 millionCould include: Play area, boathouse, day use facilities, Additional Event/Water Activities InfrastructurePhase(s) 1(C) and beyond Cost to TBDCould include: Central recreation area, pier, Lakeside …
Austin Transportation DepartmentStreet Impact FeesDesign Commission | September 23, 2019 2Topics•Street Impact Fee Overview•SIF Study Assumptions Report•Next Steps•Questions 3What are Street Impact Fees?•One-time fee for New Development•Calculation to determine the cost of growthfor street infrastructure 4Project Purpose: Why Street Impact Fees?•Determining a method for growth to pay for growth that is:•Equitable •Predictable•Transparent•Ultimate purpose is to develop a fair and reasonable fee development should pay for auto capacity improvements 5What Impact Fees Do•Impact Fees encourage a system that:•Funds transportation improvements: Continues to fund transportation improvements through the development process•Is fair among future developments: Fee is consistent and independent of when developers build (first or last)•Encourages building infrastructure: Allows flexibility to require infrastructure to be built up front•Is equitable in that all new development can contribute: All developments can contribute relative to their impact regardless of meeting a TIA threshold 6How do we calculate the “cost of growth for street infrastructure?”•Project new growth for the next 10 years•Establish Service Areas within which a maximum impact fee is determined•Develop Land Use Assumptions and corresponding growth within each Service Area •Project corresponding roadway capacity needs (Roadway Capacity Plan) to accommodate that growth within each Service Area 7What can Street Impact Fees pay for?Non Capacity Related Projects:•Projects not included in the Roadway Capacity Plan •Repair, operation and maintenance of existing or new facilities•Upgrades to serve existing development•Administrative costs of operating the programComponents that canbe paid forComponents that cannotbe paid for Capacity Related Projects:✓Construction cost of capital improvements in the Roadway Capacity Plan •Roadways –additional lanes, bridges, sidewalks and other “appurtenances” of roadways•Intersections –Signals, turn lanes✓Corridor Planning and Preliminary Engineering✓Survey and Engineering fees✓Land acquisition costs✓Debt Service of Street Impact Fee Plan✓Study/Update Costs 8DataCollectionOct -Dec Jan -Mar Apr -JunJul -Sep Oct-Dec Jan -Mar … Jul -Sep … Jan -Mar … Jul –Sep Oct -Dec Jan –Mar →201620172018Service Areas and Land Use AssumptionsFee Calculation and Policy DevelopmentSTREET IMPACT FEECOUNCIL TOUCHPOINTSEstablish Advisory CommitteeMobility CommitteeCouncil action on PolicyStreet Impact Fee StudyCouncil comments on Service Areas, Land Use AssumptionsCouncil approval of study assumptionsPhase 1Phase 32019Phase 2Roadway Capacity Plan Development(in coordination with ASMP)Mobility CommitteeCouncil approval of ASMPWe are here 9SIF Study Assumptions Report 10Report Materials•Service Areas•Growth Projections•Roadway Capacity PlanCouncilapprovedonAugust22,2019 11Roadway Capacity PlanDeveloped with the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan▪Street segment projects▪New roads▪Expand Roadway & Substandard Street (Widening)▪Access Management▪Intersection projects▪Signals▪Turn lanes▪Special intersections▪Bond Projects▪Capacity-related 12Street designs based on:•Street Network Table →ROW•Transportation Criteria Manual →Cross-sectionsLevel 3 -116’Level 3 -92’ 13Impact Fee Advisory Committee•Meeting Dates•December 1, 2016•February …
Page 1 of 3 DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, AUGUST 26, 2019 6:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 1101 301 W. SECOND STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 6:02 p.m. Member List X David Carroll – Chair X Melissa Henao‐Robledo X Martha Gonzalez – Vice‐Chair X Ben Luckens X Aan Coleman X Evan Taniguchi X Beau Frail X Bart Whatley X Samuel Franco X Josue Meiners X Katie Halloran Support Staff in attendance: Jorge Rousselin (Executive Liaison; PAZ); Nichole Koerth (Staff Liaison; PAZ); Aaron Jenkins (Staff Liaison; PAZ) Commissioner B. Frail arrived at 6:07 p.m. 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 2. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the 17th & Guadalupe Apartments project, addressed at 313 W. 17th Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Brockett Davidson, Rhode Partners); Brockett Davidson presented and answered questions from Commissioners. The motion to recommend the project as it complies with the Urban Design Guidelines was made by Vice‐Chair M. Gonzalez and seconded by Commissioner J. Meiners. A friendly amendment regarding the possibility of contracting local artists for their exhibit area, and the decoupling of parking, to be included in the lease agreement, was made by Commissioner S. Franco; and accepted by Vice‐Chair M. Gonzalez and Commissioner J. Meiners. Page 2 of 3 The motion, with friendly amendments, was approved on a vote of [10‐1‐0]. Commissioner A. Coleman opposed. b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether The Travis project, addressed at 80 Red River Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Leah Bojo, Drenner Group; Michael Schooler, GDA Architects; Anna Hoge, Consort, Inc.); Leah Bojo presented, with assistance from Michael Schooler and Mike Fraze (Studio Outside) The motion to postpone this item until the September 23rd Design Commission meeting was made by Chair D. Carroll and seconded by Commissioner B. Luckens. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of [11‐0‐0]. c. Discussion and possible action on the Pedestrian Advisory Council recommendations for the Congress Avenue Urban seeking support from the Commission. Presenter: Vice‐Chair Adam Greenfield; Adam Greenfield presented. The motion to support the project was made by Vice‐Chair M. Gonzalez and seconded by Commissioner B. Luckens. …
August 20,2019 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, The Design Commission would like to update you on the current state of the Urban Design Guidelines, the tool by which all projects are measured for substantial compliance. “Urban Design” influences the largest and most extensive part of people’s lives, it has been a tremendous challenge to approach the issue of updating the Urban Design Guidelines to reflect current needs and future conditions of our city. After numerous discussions beginning with staff and within the Commission, we have created what will be a clear process to craft the necessary changes to the Urban Design Guidelines to best serve our community. The Urban Design Guidelines have not been updated since January 29, 2009 through RESOLUTION NO. 20100819‐035 when City Council First adopted them The Urban Design Guidelines serve as recommendations for all urban development and redevelopment projects by both the public and private sector The Urban Design Guidelines recognize the significant impact of the built environment on the historic, iconic, and unique characteristics of Austin and its neighborhoods Design Commission serves as a tremendous resource to the City Council to offer expert advice on how infrastructure and urban projects can enhance the built environment to be more equitable, vibrant, inclusive, and how to successfully engage community input We request assistance rewriting the Urban Design Guidelines to reflect the rapidly evolving built environment of the City of Austin. The Design Commission requests for the Urban Design Guidelines to be incorporated into the current rewrite efforts of the Land Development Code. The document will be a relevant and complimentary fit to the Land Development Code and shape its relationship to the urban landscape without prescribing technical requirements. We request that the City Manager be directed to work with the City of Austin’s Design Commission on recommendations for design guidelines and procedures to incorporate opportunities for public notification and input. The Design Commission will continue to interface with relevant departments to ensure inclusion and understanding of The Urban Design Guidelines’ proper use. it will be very difficult complete the Guidelines in a timely manner without assistance. Thank you very much for the opportunity to explore and address such an important issue of for the City. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us anytime. Sincerely, Martha Gonzalez Vice‐Chair City of Austin Design Commission
City of Austin Design Commission Memo Recommending Code Amendments related to Downtown Density Bonus Program September XX, 2019 Esteemed City of Austin Council Members and Mayor Adler and, City of Austin Council Members Today in Austin, skyscraper projects that apply for and comply with the City’s Downtown Density Bonus Program (“Program”) are awarded sometimes triple the number of floors, building mass, and parking spaces, in exchange for arguably modest design improvements. We are advocates for downtown density, but we find the City’s Program and Urban Design Guidelines to be outdated. We don’t think the City or its residents are receiving enough in return for the millions of dollars in ‘bonus’ development entitlements awarded by this Program. We are specifically concerned that the City’s Program is not well aligned with important adopted policy goals including mobility1, pedestrian safety2, climate and sustainability3, livability and affordability4. We propose Code amendments to ensure new downtown skyscraper construction is proportionally helping the City to achieve these adopted goals. We recommend a resolution directing the City Manager to assign multi-departmental staff5 to assist the Design Commission to draft Code amendments to address these shortcomings. Public input from developers and financiers will be important to ensure the Downtown Density Bonus Program remains functional and attractive. For example, a developer may approach the Design Commission with entitlements for an eight story commercial building, and if compliant with the Program, walk away with the ability to construct 24 stories of hotel space (hundreds of housing units), and 8 stories of parking garages (thousands of additional parking spaces), in exchange for modest street level improvements6, and a somewhat more energy efficient building design7. The Downtown Density Program’s gatekeeper requirements do not plan 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. 1 Austin Strategic Mobility Plan 2 Vision Zero 3 Austin Community Climate Plan 4 Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan 5 Austin Transportation Department, Office of Sustainability, Neighborhood Housing and Community Development with Capital Metro partnership. 6 City of Austin Great Streets Program, http://www.austintexas.gov/department/great-streets-program. 7 Two star rating from Austin Energy Green Building Program. Commented [DC1]: Should address to Mayor …
Page 1 of 3 DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, AUGUST 26, 2019 AT 6:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 1101 301 W. SECOND STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Commission Members _____ David Carroll, Chair (District 1)_____ Aan Coleman (District 8) _____ Martha Gonzalez, Vice‐Chair (District 2)_____ Beau Frail (District 6) _____ Samuel Franco (District 3) _____ Katie Halloran(District 7) _____ Melissa Henao‐Robledo (District 5) _____ Ben Luckens (District 10) City of Austin Planning & Zoning Staff _____ Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) _____ Jorge Rousselin, Executive Liaison _____Bart Whatley(District 9) _____ Nichole Koerth, Staff Liaison _____ Josue Meiners(District 4) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL a. The first five speakers, who shall sign up prior to the Call to Order, will each have three minutes to speak regarding items not on the agenda; 2. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the 17th & Guadalupe Apartments project, addressed at 313 W. 17th Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Brockett Davidson, Rhode Partners); b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether The Travis project, addressed at 80 Red River Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Leah Bojo, Drenner Group; Michael Schooler, GDA Architects; Anna Hoge, Consort, Inc.); c. Discussion and possible action on the Pedestrian Advisory Council recommendations for the Congress Avenue Urban seeking support from the Commission. Presenter: Vice‐Chair Adam Greenfield; Page 2 of 3 3. OLD BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. None; 4. COMMISSION‐SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action on the June 24, 2019 meeting minutes; b. Liaison Reports; c. Appointment of Committee/Working Group members by Chair; d. Discussion of a letter to City Council regarding updating the Urban Design Guidelines (Vice‐Chair M. Gonzalez); 5. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: a. None; 6. ANNOUNCEMENTS: a. Chair Announcements; b. Items from Commission Members; c. Items from City Staff; 7. ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 days before the meeting date. Please contact …
Page 1 of 3 DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, AUGUST 26, 2019 6:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM 1101 301 W. SECOND STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 6:02 p.m. Member List X David Carroll – Chair X Melissa Henao-Robledo X Martha Gonzalez – Vice-Chair X Ben Luckens X Aan Coleman X Evan Taniguchi X Beau Frail X Bart Whatley X Samuel Franco X Josue Meiners X Katie Halloran Support Staff in attendance: Jorge Rousselin (Executive Liaison; PAZ); Nichole Koerth (Staff Liaison; PAZ); Aaron Jenkins (Staff Liaison; PAZ) Commissioner B. Frail arrived at 6:07 p.m. 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 2. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the 17th & Guadalupe Apartments project, addressed at 313 W. 17th Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Brockett Davidson, Rhode Partners); Brockett Davidson presented and answered questions from Commissioners. The motion to recommend the project as it complies with the Urban Design Guidelines was made by Vice-Chair M. Gonzalez and seconded by Commissioner J. Meiners. A friendly amendment regarding the possibility of contracting local artists for their exhibit area, and the decoupling of parking, to be included in the lease agreement, was made by Commissioner S. Franco; and accepted by Vice-Chair M. Gonzalez and Commissioner J. Meiners. Page 2 of 3 The motion, with friendly amendments, was approved on a vote of [10-1-0]. Commissioner A. Coleman opposed. b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether The Travis project, addressed at 80 Red River Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, a gatekeeper requirement for the Downtown Density Bonus Program (LDC §25‐2‐586(C)(1)(a)(ii)) (Leah Bojo, Drenner Group; Michael Schooler, GDA Architects; Anna Hoge, Consort, Inc.); Leah Bojo presented, with assistance from Michael Schooler and Mike Fraze (Studio Outside) The motion to postpone this item until the September 23rd Design Commission meeting was made by Chair D. Carroll and seconded by Commissioner B. Luckens. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of [11-0-0]. c. Discussion and possible action on the Pedestrian Advisory Council recommendations for the Congress Avenue Urban seeking support from the Commission. Presenter: Vice-Chair Adam Greenfield; Adam Greenfield presented. The motion to support the project was made by Vice-Chair M. Gonzalez and seconded by Commissioner B. Luckens. …
