UMLAUF Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan Our Mission Cultivating community, curiosity, and connection through nature, contemporary artists, and the work of Charles Umlauf. Charles Umlauf 1910 - 1994 Barton Creek Zilker Neighborhood Michael Ray Charles Luis Jiménez Sedrick Huckaby Jennifer Ling Datchuk &Tammie Rubin Historic Homestead Existing Sculpture Garden Existing Museum New Building “The Treehouse” New Building “The Gateway” Natural Zone Historic Preservation Accessibility Art + Education Mobility Community Sustainability TAG sessions Work sessions Public Sessions Community Events Online Survey Design Guidelines Natural Zone Welcome Zone Food truck area Food truck area The Gateway The Gateway Garden + Museum Stormwater Runoff From Barton Blvd. Opportunity for City Current Conditions Proposed Diversified Landscape The Treehouse The Treehouse The Treehouse The Treehouse Health Energy Carbon Improve occupant health and well-being Achieve annual net zero energy Reduce embodied carbon emissions by 50% Ecology Water Resilience Replenish middle layer of ecology with regenerative species to create plant diversity. Target 100% of irrigation and water feature to be supplied by non-potable sources Preserve site through a 500 year flood and regular rain events People-Centric Design UMLAUF Carbon Balance over 30 Years 600+ Tons of CO2 in Year 1 The high embodied carbon in the first year is due to several factors including resource intensive construction materials, long transportation distances, etc. City of Austin’s Goal to Decarbonize by 2040 The estimation was done off of City of Austin’s commitment to decarbonize their local grid by 2040 Maintenance Embodied Carbon Over time, the building will need to upkeep, indicated here. It is important to choose durable materials that will last. Forest Sequesters 5 tons CO2e /Year Compared to the operational carbon, the forest sequesters very little carbon a year. Year s Solar Offsets Less CO2e as the Grid Decarbonizes As the grid decarbonizes, a unit of renewable energy offsets less CO2e in 2040 than today’s more carbon intensive grid. Zero Carbon Emissions (2040 - Infinity) When the grid decarbonizes and the building is built, there are no longer any emission sources (other than the occasional maintenance)! ) s n o T ( e 2 O C 60 0 50 0 40 0 30 0 20 0 10 0 0 - 100 Water Synthesis Water Catchment, Use, and Reuse Phase 1: Existing Facility Projects Phase 2: Historic Preservation Phase 3: Expansion and Unification umlaufsculpture.org/visionplan
Infill Plats & Site Plan Lite, Part 2: Overview of Drainage Elements of Staff Proposal Environmental Commission | August 21, 2024 Watershed Protection Staff Presentation Outline • Council direction Three different development processes • • Non-zoning requirements The continuum question • • • • Flood detention The ordinance’s drainage proposal Storm drain connection proposal Summary • • Questions Council Direction Resolutions 20230504-023 and 20221201-048: • Propose streamlined development processes scaled for small residential subdivisions and multifamily projects with 5 to 16 units • “create a site plan review process tailored appropriately for missing middle housing, with fewer requirements than that of full site plan review • “holistically review all existing non-zoning development requirements for value and impact in application to missing middle projects, including but not limited to drainage and water quality, parking and street impact fees, parkland dedication, trees, and utilities…. with the goal of streamlining review in a manner scaled to the impacts of development” Three Different Development Processes Three main ways to build housing and other developments: 1. Building Permits (for 1 to 3 residential units on one lot) 2. Residential Subdivisions (to create the lots for building permits) 3. Site Plans (for multifamily residential projects, including missing middle) • Each path has separate code and processes • Building permits are much simpler and more streamlined than the others Building Permit (BP) • Is last/follows subdivision in the order of the development process • Is the vehicle to build 1 to 3 houses on an existing, platted lot • Features relatively small-scale projects with more streamlined permitting process • SF-1, SF-2, and SF-3 zones have impervious cover limits of 45% • Requires the following to guide drainage design: o Building Code o Plumbing Code o Texas State Law o Land Development Code: floodplain and erosion hazard zone • Has less demanding drainage requirements than subdivision—e.g., no storm drainage analysis or detention required—since these are assumed to take place at the preceding subdivision phase Residential Subdivisions • Precedes building permits in the order of the development process • Creates multiple platted lots, on each of which 1 to 3 homes can be built using a building permit • Traditionally large-scale projects with full, more complex permitting process • Watershed impervious cover limits are considered at this phase • Larger projects include roads and utility infrastructure • Requirements include storm drainage analysis and flood detention • Existing regulations designed …
RESOLUTION NO. 20221201-048 WHEREAS, Austin must take action to address the local affordability and housing crises; and WHEREAS, compact residential developments of three to sixteen homes, often referred to as "missing middle" housing, can provide greater affordability and be more easily attainable by moderate-income families and individuals compared to new single-family homes by spreading the cost of the land across more units; and WHEREAS, missing middle housing facilitates walkability, transit, and community-building while fitting within residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, diverse housing types and price points benefit and support community diversity, including young adults, families and children, adults aging in place, people with disabilities, and anyone else who may not want, need, or be able to afford a single-family home; and WHEREAS, current City code allows a simpler residential review process for single-family or duplex projects, but small projects with three to sixteen residential units must adhere to the complex, expensive, and time-consuming site plan process required of large multifamily and commercial projects; and WHEREAS, full site plan review can involve as many as ten to thirteen City departments; and WHEREAS, a neighborhood-scale fourplex has more in common with a single-family house in terms of its impacts to surrounding areas than a large apartment, mixed-use, or commercial complex; and Page 1 of 4 WHEREAS, since construction of missing middle housing frequently occurs through the Affordability Unlocked Bonus Program, establishing an easier regulatory process for missing middle housing will increase the supply of affordable units and help to further housing goals adopted in the Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint; and WHEREAS, Council first initiated revisions to the site plan process for missing middle projects as part ofAffordability Unlocked, Resolution No. 20190221-027, with more recent direction provided through water quality code changes, Resolution No. 20220609-061; and WHEREAS,_as part of its actions on the amendments initiated by Resolution No. 20220609-061, Planning Commission recommended deferring amendments related to the site plan process to 2023 in order to allow development of a more comprehensive staff recommendation that addresses the broader range of regulatory challenges confronting missing middle housing; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the high priority Council and the Austin community places on simplifying City processes and reducing costs for housing, this resolution provides additional direction to guide development of previously initiated amendments related to missing middle housing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: To facilitate the creation of …
RESOLUTION NO. 20230504-023 WHEREAS, the cost of housing and residential property in the City of Austin is too high for too many people; and WHEREAS, the high cost of property and large lot sizes incentivizes the construction of larger, more expensive housing units; and WHEREAS, creating more lots is a key opportunity to help address Austin's housing needs; and WHEREAS, the process of subdividing lots in the City of Austin is expensive, time consuming, and greatly impacts the cost and difficulty of building smaller housing; and WHEREAS, reviewing the subdivision process and applicable regulations may incentivize and make it more economically viable to build smaller, more affordable housing units; and WHEREAS, creating an easier, cheaper process for subdividing smalllots will make the process more accessible for more Austinites; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: The City Council initiates amendments to the Land Development Code (Title 25) related to the plat process and directs the City Manager to develop a proposal to facilitate the creation of infilllots within existing residential subdivisions. The proposal should: Page 1 of 3 1. 2. Include a process for utilizing the amended plat process to create no more than six lots within "residential improvement areas," consistent with applicable requirements of state law. Include a plan for designating residential improvement areas to the greatest extent possible throughout the City. The City Manager may consider the following criteria in determining where such a designation would be appropriate while balancing the need to create more housing opportunities throughout the City: • Existence of infrastructure sufficient to support the creation of six or fewer new residential lots; Impacts on water quality and drainage; • • Wildfire risk; • Access to public streets; and • Availability of utility services within the area and whether extension of municipal facilities would be required. 3. 4. Include subdivision related waivers and variances that currently require approval by the Land Use Commission that the City Manager recommends should be approved administratively. Include other subdivision related changes necessary to facilitate creation of more infill lots. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: The City Manager is directed to explore opportunities to provide income-based financial assistance to applicants on a sliding scale for costs associated with the amended plat process. Page 2 of 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: When developing the proposal described in this Resolution, the City Manager is directed …
Wastewater Capital Improvements Environmental Commission August 21, 2024 Charles Celauro, PE Assistant Director, Engineering Services Agenda 1. Wastewater System Overview 2. Capital Improvement Projects a. Walnut Creek WWTP b. Wastewater Treatment Plants c. Odor Control Facilities d. Wastewater Collection System e. Wastewater Lift Stations 2 Brushy Creek East WWTP ** Wastewater by the Numbers Austin Water Statics: ❖ 2,900 Miles of Gravity Lines Balcones PP River Place PP Lost Creek PP LEGEND Regional WWTP Solids Management Plant Package Plant (PP) Brushy Creek East WWTP Expansion 3 Dessau PP OSCAR and CLARA Walnut Creek WWTP Hornsby Bend Biosolids Mngt Plant Wildhorse PP Taylor Lane PP South Austin Regional WWTP Pearce Lane PP ❖ 59,000 Manholes ❖ 137 Lift Stations ❖ 78 Miles of Force Mains ❖ 9 Decentralized Package WWTP ❖ 1 Fractional Ownership Plant (Brushy Creek East WWTP) (**COA Ownership 9.87%) ❖ 2 Regional Wastewater Treatment Plants (Walnut Creek & South Austin Regional WWTP) Thoroughbred Farms PP ❖ 1 Biosolids Plant (Hornsby Bend Biosolids Management Plant) Future Wastewater Investments Nearly 50% of capital spending is dedicated to wastewater improvements Wastewater treatment process conversion to Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Rehabilitation and renewal of treatment facilities, lift stations, pipelines and manholes Inspection of wastewater lines and manholes and smoke testing Interdepartmental coordination Mobility projects relocations and betterments In-situ wastewater line renewal program Spot repairs of wastewater lines and manholes Maintain increased flows 4 Walnut Creek WWTP 5 WALNUT CREEK WWTP Treatment Capacity 1977 – 18 MGD 1987 – 40 MGD 1990 – 60 MGD 2005 – 75 MGD 6 WALNUT CREEK WWTP Rehabilitation and Renewal Projects 2000 – Reclaimed Water 2002 – Headworks #2 2009 – Electrical Distribution 2013 – Reclaimed Water 2017 – Tertiary Filter 2019 – Secondary Treatment 2020 – Sludge Thickener 2020 – Pump Replacements 2021 – Plant Control & Network 2022 – Gas Scrubber 7 Treatment Plant Expansion and Enhancement ❖ Rehabilitation projects ❖ New 25 MGD expansion with nutrient removal and UV disinfection ❖ Convert existing 75 MGD with nutrient removal and UV disinfection ❖ Plant protection from high flow events and flood waters Package Plants 9 Brushy Creek East WWTP ** Wastewater Treatment Plant Rated Capacity (MGD) Dessau PP OSCAR and CLARA Walnut Creek WWTP Hornsby Bend Biosolids Mngt Plant Thoroughbred Farms PP ❖ South Austin Region WWTP 75.0 MGD ❖ Walnut Creek WWTP Wildhorse PP ❖ Package Plants 75.0 MGD 3.32 MGD Taylor Lane …
Analysis of Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework Response to Resolution #20230126-054 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework Resolution 20230126-054 Directs staff to analyze elements of the 23 Targets to align strategic direction Analyze elements of 23 Targets with goal of aligning relevant existing and SD28* proposed plans COP 15: 15th meeting of Council of Parties “The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) was adopted during the fifteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 15) following a four year consultation and negotiation process. This historic Framework, which supports the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and builds on the Convention’s previous Strategic Plans, sets out an ambitious pathway to reach the global vision of a world living in harmony with nature by 2050. Among the Framework’s key elements are 4 goals for 2050 and 23 targets for 2030.” Ref: https://www.cbd.int/gbf Biodiversity: What and Why Biodiversity: Variety of life in the natural world measured as number of different species that share a particular region • • • • • • Improves stability and resilience of an ecosystem • Maintains ecosystems web of codepedencies Provides more ecosystem services: • Water Filtration (wetlands, riparian buffers, mussels Flood attenuation (healthy soil biota, wetlands, tree canopy) Food security (pollinators, healthy soil biota, sustainable fisheries) • Medicines (new chemical compounds) Economic resiliency (ecotourism, climate resilience) Social importance (cultural/religious practices, intellectual/artistic pursuits, sense of place) https://www.nrdc.org/stories/biodiversity-101#whatis Types of Biodiversity • Genetic diversity within the population of a species Total number of species within a region/area/ecosystem • • Functional diversity – what niches are being filled in an ecosystem (Ex: foraging, nutrient cycling, predation) • Diversities of ecosystems (prairie, wetlands, riparian forest) https://www.nrdc.org/stories/biodiversity-101#whatis Threats to Biodiversity • Habitat loss • Climate change • Wildlife trafficking and trade • Pollution & toxic chemicals https://www.nrdc.org/stories/biodiversity-101#whatis Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (3) Themes and (23) Targets Reducing threats to biodiversity Tools and solutions for implementation and mainstreaming Meeting people’s needs through sustainable use and benefit-sharing City Council Resolution#20230126-054 Analyze elements of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’s 23 Targets with the goal of aligning existing and proposed plans with applicable elements of the targets. Memo to Mayor and Council previously provided https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/pio/d ocument.cfm?id=423415 Analysis of existing adopted CoA plans The resolution identified 5 plans to review and staff identified 9 additional plans Identified in resolution • Austin Climate Equity Plan • Rain to River Strategic Plan (currently being developed) • Austin Urban Forest …
RESOLUTION NO. 20230126-054 WHEREAS, the City of Austin has long been at the forefront of combating climate change by creating policies that reduce carbon emissions, improve the environment and quality of life for residents, and protect our natural resources, biodiversity, and ecosystems; and WHEREAS, the origins ofthese policies include Resolution No. 20070215- 023, which initiated critical efforts over the past fifteen years to develop goals and procedures that position Austin as the leading city in the nation in the effort to reduce and reverse the negative impacts of global warming; and WHEREAS, subsequent existing and current draft policy plans include, but are not limited to, the Austin Climate Equity Plan, Strategic Direction 28 (SD28), the Rain to River Strategic Plan, the Austin Urban Forest Plan, and the Climate Resilience Action Plan for City Assets and Operations; and WHEREAS, in December of 2022, the United Nations' Convention on Biological Diversity met in Montreal, Canada for the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP 15) and invited individual nations across the globe to collaborate on an agreement to address the root causes of climate change, including nature and biodiversity loss, as well as pollution and waste; and WHEREAS, since 1972, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has acted as the international authority for the global environment, setting protective standards and promoting the implementation of sustainable development within the United Nations system; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, municipalities across continents play an increasingly important role in tackling the climate crisis by collaborating with organizations like the UNEP to increase community resilience and protect natural resources and native ecosystems through shared goals and standards; and WHEREAS, at COP15, roughly 190 countries agreed on environmental goals and targets called the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: 23 Targets, which include, among other targets, increased preservation and restoration of natural habitats to help prevent a mass extinction event; and WHEREAS, the United States o f America is one o f two invited countries that did not sign on to the COP 15 agreement, and yet, the Council acknowledges the important and critical work of the UNEP and COP 15 and strives to adopt goals that align with our policies that support the community's values; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: The City Manager is directed to analyze elements from the Kunming- Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: 23 Targets produced at COP …
M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and Council Members THROUGH: Robert Goode, P.E., Assistant City Manager FROM: Jorge L. Morales, P.E., CFM, Director Watershed Protection Department DATE: February 14, 2024 SUBJECT: Analysis of Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (Resolution Number 20230126-054) Background Resolution Number 20230126-054 directs the City Manager to analyze elements of the Kunming- Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’s 23 Targets with the goal of aligning Strategic Direction 28 (SD28) and relevant existing and proposed plans with applicable elements of the 23 targets. Analysis was conducted by the Watershed Protection Department (WPD) with coordination support from the Office of Sustainability. A list of the 23 Global Biodiversity Targets is available at Press Release: Nations Adopt Four Goals, 23 Targets for 2030 In Landmark UN Biodiversity Agreement - United Nations Sustainable Development. City of Austin Plans and Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework Analysis Summary and Recommendations The resolution specified five City of Austin plans to include in the study. Staff also identified eight additional plans to include in this study. o Identified in Resolution ▪ ▪ Austin Climate Equity Plan Rain to River Strategic Plan (currently being developed) Page 1 of 3 ▪ ▪ ▪ Austin Urban Forest Plan Climate Resilience Action Plan for City Assets and Operations Imagine Austin o Additional plans identified by staff ▪ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Habitat Conservation Plan ▪ Invasive Species Management Plan ▪ Balcones Canyonlands Preserve Land Management Plan ▪ Water Quality Protection Lands Land Management Plan ▪ Water Forward ▪ Our Parks, Our Future ▪ Watershed Protection Strategic Plan (this plan was used in place of the Rain to River Strategic Plan which is currently being developed) ▪ Urban Trails Plan ▪ Austin/Travis County Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Findings: o All of the Biodiversity Targets were referenced in at least one of the City plans evaluated. Some of the references were more directly related to the intent of the Biodiversity Targets while some were only partially reflected. o Of the 23 UN Biodiversity Targets: seven were reflected in more than one City Plan, ten were reflected in at least one City plan, and six were only partially reflected in plans. o Biodiversity Targets with the least correlation with existing City Plans either have elements that may be beyond the zone of control for City government or have a stronger focus on equity centered representation in decision-making than …
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION VERSION TWO WORKING DRAFT-SUBJECT TO CHANGE August 27th, 2024 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTIONS 25-8-64 AND 25-5-3 AND CREATING A NEW CITY CODE SECTION 25-7-67 RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO RESIDENTIAL RE- SUBDIVISIONS AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE TO SIXTEEN UNITS. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: PART 1. Subsection (B) of City Code Section 25-5-3 (Small Projects) is amended to read: (B) The following are small projects: (1) construction of a building or parking area if the proposed construction: (a) does not require a variance from a water quality regulation; (b) does not exceed 5,000 square feet of impervious cover; and (c) the construction site does not exceed 10,000 square feet, including the following areas: (i) construction; (ii) clearing; (iii) grading; (iv) construction equipment access; (v) driveway reconstruction; (vi) temporary installations, including portable buildings, construction trailers, storage areas for building materials, spoil disposal areas, erosion and sedimentation controls, and construction entrances; (vii) landscaping; and (viii) other areas that the director determines are part of the construction site; 8/16/2024 Page 1 of 4 COA Law Department 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 PLANNING COMMISSION VERSION TWO WORKING DRAFT-SUBJECT TO CHANGE August 27th, 2024 (2) (3) construction of a storm sewer not more than 30 inches in diameter that is entirely in a public right-of-way or an easement; construction of a utility line not more than eight inches in diameter that is entirely in a public right-of-way; (4) construction of a left turn lane on a divided arterial street; (5) construction of street intersection improvements; (6) widening a public street to provide a deceleration lane if additional right- of-way is not required; (7) construction of five to 16 dwelling units that meet all applicable requirements for review under Section 25-7-67 (Modified Drainage Standards for Residential Infill); (8[7]) depositing less than two feet of earth fill, if the site is not in a 100-year floodplain and the fill is not to be deposited within the dripline of a protected …
Case No. C20-2023-045 Planning Commission: August 27, 2024 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET Amendment: C20-2023-045 | Site Plan Lite, Phase 2 & Infill Plats Amendment Introduction: This staff report discusses amendments to the Land Development Code (“LDC”) proposed in response to two separate council initiatives intended to facilitate construction of infill housing: Resolution No. 20221201-048 (“Site Plan Lite”) and Resolution No. 20230504-023 (“Infill Plats”). These amendments, which will be included in a single ordinance, seek to better calibrate non-zoning regulations and review procedures to the scale of “missing middle” housing. The report also describes changes initiated or under consideration by individual departments to address non-LDC related challenges to development of missing middle housing, including amendments to administrative criteria manuals and improvements to existing review procedures. Amendment Background: — Site Plan Lite, Phase 2 On December 1, 2022, the City Council passed Resolution No. 20221201-048 initiating LDC amendments to better scale site plan review for residential projects of three to sixteen units located on a single lot. For Phase 1, Council adopted Ordinance No. 20230720-158 on July 20, 2023, creating a site plan exemption for projects of four or fewer residential units. This change, coupled with subsequent passage of the first HOME ordinance, has enabled staff to conform the review process for 3-4 unit residential projects more closely to the process used for one and two-unit projects. For Phase 2, staff’s proposed amendments would modify applicable drainage regulations and adopt a new “small project” classification to enable further streamlining the review process for projects of five to sixteen units. These amendments, coupled with additional department- initiated changes, will make it easier to construct smaller multi-family projects on appropriately zoned lots. — Infill Plats On May 4, 2023, Council approved Resolution No. 20230504-023 initiating LDC amendments to facilitate the creation of infill lots and expand opportunities for “fee simple” ownership within existing residential subdivisions. Staff’s proposed amendments would help to further this objective by modifying applicable drainage regulations, which are a significant cost driver, and changing how impervious cover is Case No. C20-2023-045 | Page - 1 calculated to allow re-subdivisions to include a greater number of lots. In tandem with additional department-initiated changes, these amendments will better calibrate regulations applicable to small-lot single-family uses as authorized by the second HOME ordinance. Case No. C20-2023-045 Planning Commission: August 27, 2024 — Department-level Improvements Aside from drainage regulations codified in LDC Chapter 25-7 (Drainage), …
Infill Plats & Site Plan Lite, Part 2: Overview of Drainage Elements of Staff Proposal Environmental Commission | August 21, 2024 Watershed Protection Staff Presentation Outline • Council direction Three different development processes • • Non-zoning requirements • The continuum question • • • Flood detention The ordinance’s drainage proposal Storm drain connection proposal • Summary • Questions Council Direction Resolutions 20230504-023 and 20221201-048: • Propose streamlined development processes scaled for small residential subdivisions and multifamily projects with 5 to 16 units • “create a site plan review process tailored appropriately for missing middle housing, with fewer requirements than that of full site plan review • “holistically review all existing non-zoning development requirements for value and impact in application to missing middle projects, including but not limited to drainage and water quality, parking and street impact fees, parkland dedication, trees, and utilities…. with the goal of streamlining review in a manner scaled to the impacts of development” Development Process Steps to build housing and other developments: 1. Residential Subdivisions (to create the lots for building permits) 2. Site Plans (for multifamily residential projects, including missing middle) 3. Building Permits (for 1 to 3 residential units on one lot) • Each path has separate code and processes • Building permits are much simpler and more streamlined than the others Building Permit (BP) • Follows subdivision in the order of the development process • Is the vehicle to build 1 to 3 houses on an existing, platted lot • Features relatively small-scale projects with more streamlined permitting process • SF-1, SF-2, and SF-3 zones have impervious cover limits of 45% • Requires the following to guide drainage design: o Building Code o Plumbing Code o Texas State Law o Land Development Code: floodplain and erosion hazard zone • Has less demanding drainage requirements than subdivision—e.g., no storm drain system analysis or detention required—since these are assumed to take place at the preceding subdivision phase Residential Subdivisions • Precedes building permits in the order of the development process • Creates multiple platted lots, on each of which 1 to 3 homes can be built using a building permit • Traditionally large-scale projects with full, more complex permitting process • Watershed impervious cover limits are considered at this phase • Larger projects include roads and utility infrastructure • Requirements include storm drain system analysis and flood detention • Existing regulations designed for and work …
Infill Plats & Site Plan Lite, Part 2: Overview of Drainage Elements of Staff Proposal Environmental Commission | August 21, 2024 Watershed Protection Staff Presentation Outline • Council direction Three different development processes • • Non-zoning requirements • The continuum question • • • Flood detention The ordinance’s drainage proposal Storm drain connection proposal • Summary • Questions Council Direction Resolutions 20230504-023 and 20221201-048: • Propose streamlined development processes scaled for small residential subdivisions and multifamily projects with 5 to 16 units • “create a site plan review process tailored appropriately for missing middle housing, with fewer requirements than that of full site plan review • “holistically review all existing non-zoning development requirements for value and impact in application to missing middle projects, including but not limited to drainage and water quality, parking and street impact fees, parkland dedication, trees, and utilities…. with the goal of streamlining review in a manner scaled to the impacts of development” Development Process Steps to build housing and other developments: 1. Residential Subdivisions (to create the lots for building permits) 2. Site Plans (for multifamily residential projects, including missing middle) 3. Building Permits (for 1 to 3 residential units on one lot) • Each path has separate code and processes • Building permits are much simpler and more streamlined than the others Building Permit (BP) • Follows subdivision in the order of the development process • Is the vehicle to build 1 to 3 houses on an existing, platted lot • Features relatively small-scale projects with more streamlined permitting process • SF-1, SF-2, and SF-3 zones have impervious cover limits of 45% • Requires the following to guide drainage design: o Building Code o Plumbing Code o Texas State Law o Land Development Code: floodplain and erosion hazard zone • Has less demanding drainage requirements than subdivision—e.g., no storm drain system analysis or detention required—since these are assumed to take place at the preceding subdivision phase Residential Subdivisions • Precedes building permits in the order of the development process • Creates multiple platted lots, on each of which 1 to 3 homes can be built using a building permit • Traditionally large-scale projects with full, more complex permitting process • Watershed impervious cover limits are considered at this phase • Larger projects include roads and utility infrastructure • Requirements include storm drain system analysis and flood detention • Existing regulations designed for and work …
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20240821-002 Date: August 21, 2024 Subject: Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan Motion by: Perry Bedford Seconded by: David Sullivan WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission was presented the Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the mission of the Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan is to cultivate community, curiosity, and connection through nature, contemporary artists, and the work of Charles Umlauf.; and WHEREAS, the vision plan includes environmental site analysis of general ecology of the park, environmental contamination from historic land use, and review of the Edwards aquifer, plant communities and environmental regulations.; and WHEREAS, the vision plan includes: 1) the history of Umlauf Sculpture Garden & Museum, 2) the purpose, guiding principles, vision and goals of the plan, 3) site analysis and need assessment, 4) community engagement, 5) the plan, 6) implementation and 7) appendices; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes that the Arts Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan; and WHEREAS, the vision plan includes environmental improvements including: 1) utilizing 25 percent impervious cover of allowable 45 percent impervious cover, 2) replenishing of mid-level planting and removal of invasive species and replacing with native species, 3) replenish middle layer of ecology with regenerative species to create plant diversity, 4) preservation of the site through a 500 year flood and regular rain events through drainage enhancement infrastructure and other permanent stormwater attenuation improvements), 5) tree canopy enhancement, 6) and climate change mitigation measures.; and THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission supports the Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan as presented to the Commission with the following recommendations: ● Continue to conduct public hearings/outreach, incorporate public comments, and seek City Council approval and present to the Environmental Commission during the design and implementation of various elements of the draft vision plan as these become more detailed and finalized ● Include art space within the museum or shared display art spaces to display art from local artists ● Prewire parking spots for addition of electric vehicle charging ● Use stormwater for irrigation ● Utilization of dark sky initiatives and bird friendly lighting and glass reflectivity VOTE 6-0 For: Peter Einhorn, Mariana Krueger, Melinda Schiera, Perry Bedford, Colin Nickells, David Sullivan Against: None Recuse: None Abstain: Hanna Cofer, Rick Brimer Absent: Jennifer Bristol, Haris Qureshi Approved By: Perry Bedford, Commission Chair
Date: August 21, 2024 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MOTION 20240821-003 Seconded by: Colin Nickells Subject: Infill Plat and Site Lite Part 2 Amendments Motion by: Hanna Cofer WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes the Code Amendments related to Home-2 known as Infill Plats and Site Lite Part 2 are a compilation of directives from City Council; WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission has been given a presentation from Staff on Infill Plats and Site Plan Lite on two occasions; and WHEREAS, research indicates that higher population density in urban areas leads to lower greenhouse gas emissions per household; and WHEREAS, low-density urban sprawl consumes valuable grassland prairies, tree-covered hill country, farmland, and other rural landscapes, and encroaches on wildlife habitat, WHEREAS, Council first initiated revisions to the site plan process for missing middle projects as a part of Affordability Unlocked, Resolution No 20190221-027; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission recognizes that Staff recommends these amendments; THEREFORE, the Environmental Commission recommends the code amendments with the following Environmental Commission recommendations and comments: 1. The Environmental Commission is concerned that these Code changes inequitably may impact low-income neighborhoods. 2. The Environmental Commission is concerned about how this impacts homes in the local flooding areas or homes that are on the edge of the floodplains. 3. The Environmental Commission is concerned about neighbor-to-neighbor flooding due to poor drainage, including “ghost drainage” that is done without permits. 4. Request that the public is well informed in multiple ways about the new changes, how that will impact them, and how they can utilize the Code legally. 5. Request that the public is made aware of the process for adjacent homeowners to protest or improve changes to a neighbor’s lot. 6. Request that the City Council identifies and implements community outreach and engagement strategies for future proposed code land development changes of this nature. 7. The Environmental Commission is in favor of increasing access to affordable homes and 8. This recommendation is conditional on maintaining current protection for trees and increasing density where possible. current impervious cover requirements. 9. The Environmental Commission requests a review after 1 year about how these amendments are affecting localized flooding, particularly in low-income neighborhoods, along with any updated staff recommendations about how to adjust the currently proposed guardrails based on the number of projects and where they are occurring. VOTE: 7-1 For: Hanna Cofer, Peter Einhorn, Mariana Krueger, Melinda Schiera, Perry Bedford, Colin Nickells, David Sullivan …
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR CALLED MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, August 21, 2024 The ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION convened Wednesday, August 21, 2024, at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Chair Bedford called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Perry Bedford, Peter Einhorn, Colin Nickells, Mariana Krueger, Melinda Schiera, David Sullivan Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Richard Brimer, Hanna Cofer Commissioners Absent: Jennifer Bristol, Haris Qureshi PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL in a REGULAR meeting on None APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on August 7, 2024. The minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular meeting on August 7, 2024, were approved on Commissioner Sullivan’s motion, Commissioner Krueger’s second on a 6-0 vote. Commissioner Bristol and Qureshi were absent. Commissioner Einhorn and Nickells were off the dais. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS Presentation, discussion, and recommendation on the Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan – Kim McKnight, Parks and Recreation Speakers: Kim McKnight, PARD Katie Robinson Edwards, Umlauf Amanda Valbracht, Umlauf Richard Weiss, Member of the public A motion recommending the Umlauf Historic Preservation, Expansion, and Unification Plan with additional recommendations passed on Commissioner 1 2. Bedford’s motion, Commissioner Sullivan’s second, on a 6–0 vote. Commissioners Brimer and Cofer abstained. Commissioners Bristol and Qureshi were absent. Revisit a recommendation on an ordinance amending City Code Title 25 related to development regulations applicable to residential re-subdivisions and multi-family residential site development of five to sixteen units (Site Plan Lite, Phase 2 & Infill Plats) – Presented by Matt Hollon, Watershed Protection, requested by Environmental Commissioner Jennifer Bristol and Hanna Cofer Speakers: Matt Hollon, WPD Frances Acuña, speaking against Ana Aguirre, speaking against Bobby Levinski, speaking against Irene Pickhardt, speaking against Tanzia Karim, speaking against Megan Meisenbach, speaking against Ramesh Swaminathan, WPD Kevin Shunk, WPD Liz Johnston, WPD A motion by Chair Bedford to extend the meeting to 10:30, seconded by Commissioner Krueger, passed on an 8-0 vote. Commissioners Bristol and Qureshi were absent. A motion recommending the Site Plan Lite, Phase 2 & Infill Plats Ordinance with additional recommendations passed made on Commissioner Cofer’s motion, Commissioner Nickells’s second on a 7-1 vote. Commissioner Brimer voted against. Commissioners Bristol and Qureshi were absent. Staff briefing on wastewater capital improvement projects – Charles Celauro, Austin Water Assistant Director, Engineering Services, Austin Water Item conducted as posted. No action taken. Analysis of Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework - Staff Response …
Regular Meeting of the Environmental Commission August 7, 2024 at 6:00 PM Permitting And Development Center, Events Center, Room 1405 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive Austin, Texas 78752 Some members of the Environmental Commission will be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, call or email Elizabeth Funk, Watershed Protection Department, at (512) 568-2244, Elizabeth.Funk@austintexas.gov, no later than noon the day before the meeting. The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Haris Qureshi Peter Einhorn Mariana Krueger Melinda Schiera Hanna Cofer, Vice Chair AGENDA CALL TO ORDER Colin Nickells Jennifer Bristol, Secretary David Sullivan Richard Brimer Perry Bedford, Chair PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on July 17, 2024. 1. 1 DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS Presentation, discussion, and recommendation on the Austin-Travis County Food Plan – Angela Baucom, Food Policy Manager, Office of Sustainability Presentation, discussion, and recommendation on the Cities Connecting Children to Nature program – Melody Alcazar, Program Manager, Parks and Recreation Staff briefing on the Environmental Integrity Index: WPD’s Water Quality Monitoring Methods – Andrew Clamman, Conservation Program Manager, Watershed Protection Department Update on Environmental Commission Annual Report— Perry Bedford, Environmental Commission Chair Update from the South Central Waterfront Board on the postponement of the Combining District/Density Bonus Plan at City Council – David Sullivan Update from the Bird-Friendly Design working group on the meeting on July 23rd and plans for the next meeting – Jennifer Bristol STAFF BRIEFINGS DISCUSSION ITEMS COMMITTEE UPDATES FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 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. …
2. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR CALLED MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, July 17, 2024 The ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION convened Wednesday, July 17, 2024, at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Chair Bedford called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Perry Bedford, Jennifer Bristol, Hanna Cofer, Mariana Krueger, Haris Qureshi, David Sullivan Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Richard Brimer, Melinda Schiera Commissioners Absent: Peter Einhorn, Colin Nickells PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL in a REGULAR meeting on Santiago, TxDot APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on July 3, 2024. The minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular meeting on July 3, 2024, were approved on Commissioner Sullivan’s motion, Commissioner Bedford’s second on a 7-0 vote. Commissioners Einhorn and Nickells were absent. Commissioner Qureshi was off the dais. STAFF BRIEFINGS Update on Austin’s reservoirs monitoring and management efforts — Brent Bellinger, Conservation Program Supervisor, Watershed Protection Department Item conducted as posted. No action taken. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS Discuss and make a recommendation regarding investments the City should fund as part of Council Resolution 20240215-025: Environmental Investment Plan, as recommended by the Joint Sustainability Committee – Commissioner Haris Qureshi Item taken with item 4. 1 4. Discuss and make a recommendation in support of adding a Climate Fee to address funding for the Environmental Investment Plan, as recommended at the Joint Sustainability Committee – Commissioners Haris Qureshi, Richard Brimer, and David Sullivan A motion in support of the Environmental Investment Plan and a climate fee was made on Commissioner Qureshi’s motion, Commissioner Sullivan’s second. An amendment to add a recommendation for a citizen advisory bond committee was made by Commissioner Cofer and seconded by Commissioner Qureshi. An amendment to keep the 2025 date in Commissioner Cofer’s amendment failed on a 1-5 vote. Commissioner Krueger voted in favor. Commissioners Schiera, Brimer, Sullivan, Bristol, and Cofer voted against. Commissioners Qureshi and Bedford abstained. Commissioners Einhorn and Nickells were absent. The amendment to add a recommendation for a Citizen Advisory Bond Committee made by Commissioner Cofer and seconded by Commissioner Qureshi passed on a 7-1 vote. Commissioner Brimer voted against. Commissioners Einhorn and Nickells were absent. The original motion with Commissioner Cofer’s amendment passed on an 8-0 vote. Commissioners Einhorn and Nickells were absent. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Krueger requested a presentation on the Austin/Travis County Food Plan, with a recommendation, seconded by Bedford. Secretary Bristol asked for …
A Food Plan for Austin-Travis County Environmental Commission August 7, 2024 Agenda ● Introductions ● What is a Food System? ● What is a Food Plan and why are we doing it? ● How did we create the Plan? ● Who participated in the Planning Process? ● Overview of Vision and Objectives ● Overview of the Goals and Strategies ● Next Steps 2 2 Some Food for Thought Food Production: Where our food comes from, including everything from farming to ranching Food Processing & Distribution: What happens to food from where it is grown to when it reaches your plate, including how food is moved and processed. Food Markets & Retails: Where food is sold, purchased, or provided cost-free. Food Consumption & Access: How we eat our food, who struggles to get enough food, and what impact our consumption has on our health. Post-Consumption & Food Waste: What happens to the parts of food we don’t eat and the impact of food waste on the environment. Food Justice: How systemic racism & colonization impact how the food system works — or doesn’t work — for each member of our community. 4 What is a Food Plan & why do we need one? ● A Food Plan sets clear Goals and Strategies to move toward a more equitable, sustainable & resilient food system ● The Food Plan builds on several other initiatives made by the County, City, and communities to tackle key food system issues. ● The Food Plan centers equity and the lived expertise of those most impacted by the current food system 5 5 Background and Authority ● In June 2021, Austin City Council directed the City Manager to initiate a planning process ● Travis County Commissioners Court approved formal participation in the plan in September 2022 ● Austin Travis County Food Plan’s Community Advisory Committee approved the Draft Food Plan in May 2024 6 6 Project Timeline Phase 0: Planning for the Plan Phase 1: Vision Development Phase 2: Goal & Strategy Development Phase 3: Review and Ground truthing September 2021 - January 2023 March - August 2023 September 2023 - February 2024 February - Summer/Fall 2024 ● ● ● ● Building Community Awareness 📰 Release of State of the Food System Report 📚 Onboarding Planning Consultant⭐ Recruitment of Community Teams🚀 ● Website launch 📶 ● World Cafes ☕ ● ● ● ● Listening Sessions & Tabling at …
DRAFT JULY 2024 2.0.2.4 AUSTIN/TRAVIS COUNTY F O O D P L A N Table of Contents Preface ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introductory Letter ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Plan Authorization ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 The Food System .................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 What this Plan is and Isnʼt .................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Plan Framework & Approach ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 A Plan of Plans .................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Food Plan Oversight ................................................................................................................................................................................ 16 CAC Mission Statement ...................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Values .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Sustainability & Equity Assessment Tool (SEAT) Values .................................................................................................................... 18 Food Plan Vision & Objectives ................................................................................................................................................................ 20 Parts of the Food Plan ........................................................................................................................................................................ 21 Food Plan Goals and Strategies .............................................................................................................................................................. 25 A Note on Strategies Related to Populations Who are Underserved or Historically Disadvantaged ............................................... 28 Goal 1. Land ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 Goal 2. Ownership ............................................................................................................................................................................. 35 Goal 3. Livelihoods ............................................................................................................................................................................ 38 Goal 4. Preparedness ......................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Goal 5. Institutions ............................................................................................................................................................................. 47 Goal 6. Access ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 51 Goal 7. Food Recovery ....................................................................................................................................................................... 57 Goal 8. Pro-Climate, Pro-Health ........................................................................................................................................................ 62 Goal 9. Empower ................................................................................................................................................................................ 66 Plan Implementation & Next Steps ........................................................................................................................................................ 70 Implementation Planning .................................................................................................................................................................. 71 Strategy Sequencing .......................................................................................................................................................................... 72 Implementation Network ................................................................................................................................................................... 72 Funding ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 73 Measurement & Reporting ................................................................................................................................................................. 73 Afterword ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 74 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 76 Appendix 1: Glossary .......................................................................................................................................................................... 77 Appendix 2: Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................................ 81 Appendix 3: Sustainability & Equity Assessment Tool (SEAT) ........................................................................................................... 95 Appendix 4: Strategy Implementation Details ................................................................................................................................... 99 Appendix 5: Plan Crosswalk to Existing Efforts ................................................................................................................................ 131 Appendix 6: Companion Documents ............................................................................................................................................... 133 The photos in this plan were provided by the Office of Sustainability or were licensed from stock resources. Exceptions are noted as listed. AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD PLAN Preface 1 DRAFT (JULY 2024) AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD PLAN Introductory Letter Food connects us all. Every seed planted, garden tended, acre harvested, and plate served sparks a ripple effect, impacting the system that nourishes our community. From farmers and grocery store workers to families, chefs, and health providers, we're all part of this story. While the City of Austin and Travis County continue to grow, this food plan exists to move us toward ensuring everyone has access to the nutritious food that they need to thrive. We are working for a future where food is a fundamental human right. The instability of the food system was widely felt in February 2021 when Winter Storm Uri arrived in Austin-Travis County during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. We experienced a multitude of emergencies, including food …
DRAFT JULY 2024 20 24 SUMMARY AUSTIN/TRAVIS COUNTY F O O D P L A N A food plan provides an opportunity for local government to co-create a vision and actionable goals for the local food system alongside community members, farmers and farmworkers, food retail and service workers, students, small business owners, and other partners. 2 The Food System The food system is the interconnected network of everything that happens with food — where and how it is grown, distributed, sold, consumed, wasted, or recovered. Globally, the food system is shaped by its stakeholders, practices, and the laws that regulate both. This food plan envisions the food system as five interconnected arenas with food justice at the center:1 • Food Production: Where our food comes from, including everything from farming to ranching to backyard gardening. • Food Processing & Distribution: What happens to food from where it is grown to when it reaches your plate, including how food is moved and processed. • Food Markets & Retails: Where food is sold, purchased, or provided cost-free. • Food Consumption & Access: How we eat our food, who struggles to get enough food, and what impact our consumption has on our health. • Post-Consumption & Food Waste: What happens to the parts of food we don’t eat and the impact of food waste on the environment. • Food Justice: Seeking to ensure that the benefits and risks of where, what, and how food is grown, produced, transported, distributed, accessed, and eaten are shared fairly. It represents a transformation of the current food system, including but not limited to eliminating disparities and inequities. d F o o d Processing ction & D istribution o o F R & u d o r P P o s t - & C F o o n s u o d W a Food Justice m ption Fo o d C o ste s n & A c u c F o o d M a r k e t s e t a i l e s s m ption This plan considers our local food system to include the 5-county Austin Metropolitan Statistical Area of Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties. However, the vision, objectives, goals, and strategies outlined in this plan are focused geographically on the City of Austin and Travis County. Travis County Austin 3 FOOD PLAN SUMMARY2024 Community Centered Process …
