ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET DISTRICT: 5 (187,133 sq. ft.) ZONING TO: CS-MU-V-DB90 CASE: C14-2024-0071 – Thornton Road Multifamily ZONING FROM: CS & MF-2 ADDRESS: 2313, 2315, 2401 and 2413 Thornton Road SITE AREA: 4.296 acres PROPERTY OWNER: PSW-Thornton 2, LLC AGENT: Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Michael Whellan) CASE MANAGER: Cynthia Hadri 512-974-7620, Cynthia.hadri@austintexas.gov STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is to grant general commercial services – vertical mixed use building (CS-V) combining district zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: August 27, 2024: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: ORDINANCE NUMBER: ISSUES: In December 2023, Ordinance No. 20220609-080, Ordinance No. 20221201-056 and Ordinance No. 20221201-055 were invalidated. On March 11, 2024, Ordinance No. 20240229- 073, was enacted to create the “DB90” combining district, which amended City Code Title 25 (Land Development) to create a new zoning district for a density bonus program that grants 30 feet in height above the base zoning district, to a maximum of 90 feet, and modifies site development regulations including compatibility standards. Subsequently, the applicant submitted this new rezoning application to request the -DB90 combining district. CASE MANAGER COMMENTS: The property in question is approximately 4.3 acres, developed with commercial buildings and has frontage on Thornton Road (level 1). The site is currently zoned Multifamily Residence (low density) and general commercial services (CS & MF-2). The property has single family residential (SF-3 and SF-H) to the north, south, east and west. There are C14-2024-0071 2 multifamily residences (MF-2 and MF-3) to the south and west. The properties directly to the north have art galleries and workshops (CS) to the north. To the east across the railroad tracks are mobile home residences and the South Austin Recreation Center (MH and P). The site is 0.20 miles from Lamar Boulevard Activity Corridor (S. Lamar Blvd) with a bus stop on Oltorf and Thornton 0.16 miles away, making this an ideal location to add residential. The site is in near proximity to multiple art studios and a music school and has a few creative spaces on the property as well. Please refer to Exhibits A (Zoning Map) and B (Aerial View). Due to the history on this site and the lack of improved infrastructure, staff is not recommending the applicant’s request for general commercial services – mixed use – vertical mixed use building - density bonus 90 (CS-MU-V-DB90) combining district. The staff recommendation is general commercial services – vertical mixed use building (CS-V) …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET DISTRICT: 9 ZONING TO: GR-MU-V-DB90-NP CASE: C14-2024-0095 – Eleven03 ZONING FROM: GR-MU-V-NP ADDRESS: 1103 West 24th Street SITE AREA: 0.69 acres (30, 056 sq. ft.) PROPERTY OWNER: OGH West Campus Partners LP AGENT: Dunaway Associates LLC (June Routh) CASE MANAGER: Cynthia Hadri 512-974-7620, Cynthia.hadri@austintexas.gov STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is to grant community commercial - mixed use - vertical mixed use - density bonus 90 - neighborhood plan (GR-MU-V-DB90-NP) combining district zoning. Staff recommends granting the applicant’s modification request to not provide pedestrian-oriented commercial space (to provide 0% of the requirement). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: August 27, 2024: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: ORDINANCE NUMBER: ISSUES: In December 2023, Ordinance No. 20220609-080, Ordinance No. 20221201-056 and Ordinance No. 20221201-055 were invalidated. On March 11, 2024, Ordinance No. 20240229- 073, was enacted to create the “DB90” combining district, which amended City Code Title 25 (Land Development) to create a new zoning district for a density bonus program that grants 30 feet in height above the base zoning district, to a maximum of 90 feet, and modifies site development regulations including compatibility standards. Subsequently, the applicant submitted this new rezoning application to request the -DB90 combining district. C14-2024-0095 2 CASE MANAGER COMMENTS: The property in question is approximately 0.7 acres, developed with a vacant commercial building, has access to West 24th street (level 3) and Leon Street (level 1), and is currently zoned grant community commercial - mixed use - vertical mixed use - neighborhood plan (GR-MU-V-NP) combining district zoning. The property is within Downtown Regional Center and 0.17 miles to Lamar Boulevard activity corridor. There is a bus stop at the intersection of West 24th Street and North Lamar Boulevard, it is also withing 0.5 miles from the University of Austin. Staff agrees with the applicant’s rezoning request, the site is an ideal location to add housing. Please refer to Exhibits A (Zoning Map) and B (Aerial View). The applicant is requesting community commercial - mixed use - vertical mixed use - density bonus 90 - neighborhood plan (GR-MU-V-DB90-NP) combining district for a proposed development that would include multi-family units requiring an affordable component. A building constructed under density bonus 90 (DB90) standards allows for a mix of residential uses and commercial uses, and the result is typically retail, restaurants and offices on the ground floor, and residential units on upper levels. The overall project would consist of …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2024-0106 – 1912 W 35th Street ZONING FROM: LO ADDRESS: 1912 West 35th Street SITE AREA: 0.243 acres (10, 585 sq. ft.) PROPERTY OWNER: ZONING TO: LR DISTRICT: 10 1912 W 35th St LLC, a Texas limited liability company (David Gibson) AGENT: Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Ferris Clements) CASE MANAGER: Cynthia Hadri 512-974-7620, Cynthia.hadri@austintexas.gov STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is to grant neighborhood commercial (LR) zoning district. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: August 27, 2024: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: ORDINANCE NUMBER: ISSUES: N/A CASE MANAGER COMMENTS: The property in question is approximately 0.24 acres, developed one building, has access to West 35th Street (level 3) and Jackson Avenue (level 1), and is currently zoned limited office (LO) district. The property has single family residences (SF-3 and SF-3-NP) to the north and south. There are various types of offices and retail (LO and LR) to the east and unzoned property (UNZ) to the west that was previously used for transportation. Please refer to Exhibits A (Zoning Map) and B (Aerial View). Staff is recommending the neighborhood commercial (LR) district zoning for pet services use where there is currently a medical office. C14-2024-0106 2 BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: 1. The proposed zoning should be consistent with the purpose statement of the district sought. 2. The neighborhood commercial district is intended for neighborhood shopping facilities which provide limited business service and office facilities predominately for the convenience of residents of the neighborhood. Zoning should allow for reasonable use of the property. ZONING LO SF-3 SF-3-NP LO and LR UNZ Staff recommends the applicant’s request because the lot meets the intent of the LR district as this rezoning would provide limited facilities predominately for the convenience of residents of the neighborhood. The applicant is proposing a pet service use for the property. EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Site North South East West NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA: Rosedale (Future Planning Area) WATERSHED: Johnson Creek (Urban) CAPITOL VIEW CORRIDOR: No SCHOOLS: Austin Independent School District Bryker Woods Elementary School O Henry Middle School COMMUNITY REGISTRY LIST: LAND USES Medical Office Single Family Residential Single Family Residential Medical Offices and Retail Unzoned Property SCENIC ROADWAY: No Austin High School Austin Independent School District Austin Lost and Found Pets Austin Neighborhoods Council Austin Regional Group Bull Creek Road Coalition Bryker Woods Neighborhood Association Central West Austin Neighborhood Plan Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Homeless Neighborhood Association Neighborhood …
MEMORANDUM ************************************************************************ TO: Claire Hempel, Chair Planning Commission Members FROM: DATE: RE: Nancy Estrada Planning Department August 21, 2024 C14-2023-0134 – 2201 Willow Creek Drive Postponement Request by Staff ************************************************************************ Staff requests a postponement of the above referenced rezoning case from the August 27, 2024, Planning Commission hearing to October 8, 2024. Staff is reviewing the required Zoning Traffic Analysis (ZTA) that is related to this rezoning case.
April 10, 2024 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION VARIANCE APPLICATION FORM PROJECT DESCRIPTION Applicant Contact Information Variance Case Information Name of Applicant Street Address City State ZIP Code Work Phone E-Mail Address Case Name Case Number Address or Location Environmental Reviewer Name Environmental Resource Management Reviewer Name Applicable Ordinance Watershed Name Watershed Classification Nick Brown 10814 Jollyville Rd Building 4, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78759 737-210-1044 Nick.Brown@kimley-horn.com Stassney Park SPC-2023-0110C Enrique A Maiz-Torres Eric Brown 25-8-341 & 25-8-342 Williamson Creek ☐Urban ☐Water Supply Rural 6200 E Stassney Ln, Austin, TX 78744 X Suburban ☐Water Supply Suburban ☐ Barton Springs Zone City of Austin | Environmental Commission Variance Application Guide 1 April 10, 2024 Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone ☐ Barton Springs Segment ☐ Northern Edwards Segment X Not in Edwards Aquifer Zones Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone Distance to Nearest Classified Waterway Water and Waste Water service to be provided by Request ☐ Yes X No Austin Water Utility St Elmo Tributary crosses the southwest corner of the subject property; An unnamed stream bisects the property from north to south. The variance request is as follows: 25-8-342 Fill Requirements Impervious cover square footage: acreage: percentage: Provide general description of the property (slope range, elevation range, summary of vegetation / trees, summary of the geology, CWQZ, WQTZ, CEFs, floodplain, heritage trees, any other notable or outstanding characteristics of the property) Existing ____0____ ___0_____ ____0____ Proposed 880347.6 sf 20.21 Ac 37.92% The subject property is approximately 53.291 acres in size with frontage on Stassney Lane. The property ranges in elevation from 528 to 617. The highest point on the property is the northwest corner and the lowest point is along the southern property line where St Elmo Tributary exits the property. 91.15% of the property falls within the 0% to 15% slope category. The remainder property has slopes exceeding 15% slope mainly isolated to the existing drainage channels. Grade 0% - 15% 15% - 25% 25% - 35% > 35% Site Area (Sq Yds) 237842.43 10058.85 4676.20 8369.01 260946.50 % of Site Area 91.15% 3.85% 1.79% 3.21% 100.00% There is an assortment of tree species within the site; only five of the identified trees were measured over 24 caliper inches. On-site soils include Type D Expansive Clays and is identified as Ferris-Heiden City of Austin | Environmental Commission Variance Application Guide 2 April 10, 2024 complex, Heiden clay, and Type B Altoga Silty Clay by the USGS …
Ramirez, Alyse From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged Madere, Pamela <pmadere@jw.com> Sunday, August 18, 2024 2:02 PM McDougal, Mike; Ramirez, Alyse; Harden, Joi; Johnston, Liz Item 21: SPC-2023-0110C - Stassney Park; District 2 External Email - Exercise Caution FYI Pam Madere 512-470045 ---Original Message----- From: Laurel Francel <l.francel@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2024 12:55 PM To: Claire - BC Hempel <bc-claire.hempel@austintexas.gov>; Awais - BC Azhar <bc- awais.azhar@austintexas.gov>; Greg - BC Anderson <bc-greg.anderson@austintexas.gov>; Alice - BC Woods <bc-alice.woods@austintexas.gov>; Alberta - BC Phillips <bc- alberta.phillips@austintexas.gov>; Adam - BC Haynes <bc-adam.haynes@austintexas.gov>; bc- felicity.maxwell@austintexas.gov; Patrick Howard <bc-patrick.howard@austintexas.gov>; Nadia - BC Ramirez <bc-nadia.ramirez@austintexas.gov>; bc-danielle.skidmore@austintexas.gov; bc- ryan.johnson@austintexas.gov; Jennifer - BC Mushtaler <bc-jennifer.mushtaler@austintexas.gov>; Grayson - BC Cox <bc-grayson.cox@austintexas.gov>; Ana Aguirre <a-aguirre@prodigy.net> Cc: Sofia Morales <sofia.morales@austintexas.gov>; Vanessa Fuentes <vanessa.fuentes@austintexas.gov>; Maureen Meredith <maureen.meredith@austintexas.gov>; Madere, Pamela <pmadere@jw.com>; Laurel Francel <l.francel@yahoo.com> Subject: Item 21: SPC-2023-0110C - Stassney Park; District 2 Dear Honorable Chair Hempel and Commissioners, Developers and City of Austin Staff presented the plans for Stassney Park to Los Arboles on 8/16/24. As the neighborhood nearest to this development, we had requested a postponement until we could learn more about how it would affect our neighborhood. The presenters provided information that showed Stassney Park would not be harmful in any way to Los Arboles and will meet environmental and safety standards. Los Arboles supports this case. Respectfully Submitted, Laurel Francel President, Los Arboles HOA 5609 Apple Orchard Ln Austin, TX 78744 1 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 2
MEMORANDUM ****************************************************************************** 06/21/2024 Claire Hempel, Chair Planning Commission Members Mike McDougal Development Services Department SPC-2023-0110C – Stassney Park Environmental Commission Recommendation TO: FROM: DATE: RE: ****************************************************************************** The motion to approve the requested variances failed to receive the minimum necessary Environmental Commission votes. Consequently, no motion was approved by the Environmental Commission for the Stassney Park variances requests (item number 5, June 5, 2024, Environmental Commission meeting) and the variances are presented with no recommendation. The motion to recommend the requested variances with conditions failed on Commissioner Bristol’s motion, Commissioner Sullivan’s second on a 2-6 vote. Those voting aye were Commissioners Nickells and Sullivan. Those voting nay were Commissioners Qureshi, Einhorn, Bedford, Bristol, Brimer, and Krueger. Commissioners Cofer and Schiera were absent.
STASSNEY PARK 6200 E STASSNEY LANE SPC-2023-0110C Mike McDougal Environmental Policy Program Manager Development Services Department STASSNEY PARK 6200 E Stassney Ln North NTS PROPERTY DATA • Williamson Creek Watershed • Suburban Watershed Classification, Desired Development Zone • Not Located over Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone • Austin Full Purpose • Council District 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS EXISTING CONDITIONS - CONTINUED EXISTING CONDITIONS - CONTINUED EXISTING CONDITIONS - CONTINUED CWQZ Slopes >15% North NTS VARIANCES REQUESTED 1. Request to vary LDC 25-8-341 to allow cut up to 24 feet 2. Request to vary LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill up to 23 feet 3. Request to vary LDC 25-8-301 to allow driveway construction on a gradient in excess of 15% NTS VARIANCES REQUESTED - CONTINUED 1. Request to vary LDC 25-8-341 to allow cut up to 24 feet 2. Request to vary LDC 25-8-342 to allow fill up to 23 feet 3. Request to vary LDC 25-8-301 to allow driveway construction on a gradient in excess of 15% NTS GRADING VARIANCE FINDINGS IN SUMMARY • Variances for grading have been granted for similar projects. • Grading is a design decision but the project provides greater environmental protection with increased landscaping, increased creek restoration, and increased Critical Water Quality Zone restoration. • The project does not create a significant probability of harmful environmental consequences. • The variance will result in water quality that is at least equal to the water quality achievable without the variance. SLOPES VARIANCE FINDINGS IN SUMMARY • Variances for driveway construction on slopes have been granted for sites with similar constraints. • Driveway construction on slopes is necessary to allow for a reasonable use of the property and is not a design decision. • The project does not create a significant probability of harmful environmental consequences. • The variance will result in water quality that is at least equal to the water quality achievable without the variance. FINDINGS OF FACT PER LDC 25-8-41 • City Staff determined the Findings of Fact have been met per LDC 25-8-41 for the requested variances • Consequently, City Staff recommended approval of the variances to the Environmental Commission (6/5/2024 Environmental Commission meeting) with variance conditions STAFF VARIANCE CONDITIONS ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION VOTE The Environmental Commission may accept or reject City Staff’s recommendation APPLICANT PRESENTATION
PLANNING COMMISISON SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW SHEET 512-978-1750 512-418-1771 6200 E Stassney Lane PC DATE: July 23, 2024 Williamson Creek (Suburban) 53.29 acres (Limits of Construction) SPC-2023-0110C Stassney Park Alyse.ramirez@austintexas.gov Kimley-Horn (Jason Reece) 10814 Jollyville Road, Bldg IV, Ste. 200 Austin, TX 78759 Orion IV Stassney LP c/o Brookfield Properties (USA) LLC (Jason Bengert) 469-203-0272 2121 N Pearl Street, Ste. 1210 Dallas, TX 75201 CASE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: ADDRESS: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: McKinney CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 2 APPLICANT: AGENT: CASE MANAGER: Alyse Ramirez AREA: EXISTING ZONING: W/LO-CO-NP, and LI-CO WATERSHED: WATERSHED ORDINANCE: Comprehensive Watershed Ordinance T.I.A.: N/A CAPITOL VIEW: N/A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit site plan for construction of five (5) industrial buildings totaling approximately 313,000 feet, surface parking, drives, and associated utility and drainage improvements. The applicant is requesting the approval per 25-2-584(F)(2) to allow a building height of 35 feet. Planning Commission approval is required because the site is zoned W/LO-CO-NP, and LI-CO. The LDC Section 25-2-584(F)(2) states: “(F) The Land Use Commission may approve, in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 25-5, Article 3 (Land Use Commission Approved Site Plans), the following modifications to the site development regulations: a structure with a height greater than 25 feet, but not more than 35 feet; or” SUMMARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit because it meets all applicable criteria The site plan will comply with all code requirements prior to site plan release. Land Use: The proposed site is located along the 6200 block of East Stassney Lane and falls within multiple tracts zoned W/LO-CO-NP, and LI-CO. Since the building height in the site portions zoned W/LO are greater than 25 feet and not more than 35 feet, this site plan must be approved by a Land Use Commission. The current land use is vacant and the proposed use is Limited Warehouse and Distribution. Environmental: The principle site requires environmental variance. The motion to approve the requested SPC-2023-0110C Stassney Park 2 53.29 W/LO-CO-NP, and LI-CO East Stassney Lane Existing 00:1 0% 0.00% variances failed to receive the minimum necessary Environmental Commission votes. Consequently, no motion was approved by the Environmental Commission for the Stassney Park variances requests (item number 5, June 5, 2024, Environmental Commission meeting) and the variances are presented with no recommendation. The EV Variance back- up materials and motion notes are provided …
COMMISSION MEETING DATE: NAME & NUMBER OF PROJECT: NAME OF APPLICANT OR ORGANIZATION: ITEM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AGENDA June 5, 2024 Stassney Park SPC-2023-0110C Nick Brown / Kimley-Horn LOCATION: 6200 E Stassney Lane, Austin, TX, 78744 COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STAFF: Mike McDougal, Environmental Policy Program Manager, Development Services Department, 512-974-6380, mike.mcdougal@austintexas.gov WATERSHED: Williamson Creek, Suburban, Desired Development Zone REQUEST: Variance request is as follows: 1. To allow fill up to 23 feet within the Desired Development Zone (LDC 25-8-342) 2. To allow cut up to 24 feet within the Desired Development Zone (LDC 25-8-341) 3. To allow driveway construction on a gradient in excess of 15% (LDC 25-8-301) Page 2 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends these variances, having determined the findings of fact to have been met. STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. Parking lot trees shall have a minimum diameter of 2 inches. 2. Provide 25 additional street yard trees with a diameter of at least 3 inches each. 3. Increase wetlands plantings by 10% (based on the square footage of mitigation required) using plants approved by Watershed Protection Department. 4. All cut and fill over 8 feet will be contained with rock retaining walls with a natural stone surface. 5. Restoration plantings within the creek before and after the bypass culvert as approved Watershed Protection Department. 6. Increase plantings in disturbed Critical Water Quality Zone areas by 50% as minimally required by 609S in the vicinity of the bridge abutments as indicated in the site plan. The 50% requirement can be addressed by providing a larger mitigation area or by providing more dense plantings. 7. A tree-shaded outdoor seating area will be provided to encourage employees to take breaks on-site rather than driving to other locations. A. Development Services Department Staff Recommendations Concerning Required Findings Project Name: Stassney Park SPC-2023-0110C Ordinance Standard: Watershed Protection Ordinance Variance Request: To allow fill up to 23 feet within the Desired Development Zone (LDC 25-8-342) Land Use Commission variance determinations from Chapter 25-8-41 of the City Code: 1. The requirement will deprive the applicant of a privilege, or the safety of property given to owners of other similarly situated property with approximately contemporaneous development; Yes: Stassney Park proposes 313,062 square feet of warehouse space with a consistent floor elevation, as well as loading docks, fire lanes, and parking that will be constructed at elevations appropriate for the warehouse finished floor elevation. …
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), …
Affordability Impact Statement 2024 International Residential Code & Local Amendments Date: 7/1/2024 Proposed Regulation The proposed adoption of the 2024 International Residential Code (IRC) and associated local amendments. These codes would replace the current 2021 IRC and corresponding local amendments. The IRC is a model code published by International Code Council (ICC), a non-profit entity with a robust democratic process for weighing the costs and benefits of code changes. The Development Services Department has the stated goal of minimizing the number of 2024 local amendments to the IRC and deferring to the model codes whenever possible. When amendments are made it is generally because they are mandated by council, responding to business needs, clarifying language, and improving the City’s Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating. Land Use/Zoning Impacts on Housing Costs The proposed changes would likely have a neutral impact on housing costs via land use and zoning. Impact on Development Cost The proposed changes would likely have a neutral impact on development costs. 2024 Model Code Update: The University of Florida researched the cost impact of updating from the 2023 Florida Building Codes to the 2024 International Codes (Issa et al. 2024).1 The 2023 Florida Building Code adopts the 2021 IRC as one of its model codes, so it may be a helpful baseline to understand the overall cost impact of the changes from the 2021 IRC to the 2024 IBC. The State of Florida does adopt amendments to the model codes, but they have the closest available comparison to understand the cost impacts of adopting the 2024 IBC. The University of Florida study models the adoption of the 2024 International Codes on seven different building types, including small office, retail, primary school, small hotel, mid-rise apartment, 1-story residence, and 2-story residence. The average net change in cost estimate between all the building types is +0.45% according to their report. The IRC applies to “detached one- and two- family dwellings and townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane in height” (see Section R101.2 of the IRC), so the 1-story and 2-story residences from the Issa et al. report are the most informative cost impact models.2 The Issa et al. report estimates 1-story residences will be +10% more expensive to build and 2-story residences will be +16% more expensive to build, with both increases due to National Electrical Code (NEC) changes rather than IRC changes. Local Amendments: The most …
Affordability Impact Statement 2024 International Building Code & Local Amendments Date: 6/25/2024 Proposed Regulation The proposed adoption of the 2024 International Building Code (IBC) and local amendments would replace the current 2021 IBC and corresponding local amendments. The IBC is a model code published by International Code Council, a non-profit entity with a robust democratic process for weighing the costs and benefits of code changes. Most of the changes to the local amendments simplify or streamline code regulation and interpretation. The most impactful local amendments are likely the new requirements for natural light in living spaces and the reduction of required egress stairways in apartment buildings up to five-stories. Land Use/Zoning Impacts on Housing Costs The proposed changes would have a neutral impact on housing costs via land use and zoning. 2024 IBC and local amendments will update Austin’s land development code to reflect the most current standards. Keeping building codes up to date helps to ensure consistency with other jurisdictions and appropriate consideration of newer building materials/practices, such as mass timber. Impact on Development Cost The proposed changes would likely have a neutral impact on development costs overall. The 2024 IBC is a model code that makes incremental changes to improve building standards. Some changes raise the cost of construction in the interest of improving factors such as safety, accessibility, and code consistency. Other code changes decrease costs through means such as eliminating unnecessary requirements, providing clarification, or allowing greater design flexibility. The wider cost benefits of improved building safety, resilience, consideration of newer technology, and consistency with other jurisdictions’ building codes can counterbalance immediate building cost increases as well. 2024 Model Code Update: Research from the University of Florida is currently underway to evaluate the cost impact of updating from the 2023 Florida Building Codes to the 2024 International Codes (Issa et al. 2024).1 The 2023 Florida Building Code adopts the 2021 IBC as its model, so it may be a fair baseline to understand the overall cost impact of the changes from the 2021 IBC to the 2024 IBC. The State of Florida does adopt amendments to the model codes, but they have the closest available comparison to understand the cost impacts of adopting the 2024 IBC. The University of Florida study models the adoption of the 2024 International Codes on seven different building types, including small office, retail, primary school, small hotel, mid-rise apartment, 1-story residence, …
PROPOSED IBC 2024 CODE V1, DRAFT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL CHANGES AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING DIVISION 1 OF ARTICLE 1 OF CITY CODE CHAPTER 25‐12 RELATING TO THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE; REPEALING AND REPLACING ARTICLE 10 OF CITY CODE CHAPTER 25‐12 RELATING TO THE INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE; AND CREATING OFFENSES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: PART 1. City Code Chapter 25‐12 (Technical Codes) is amended to repeal and replace Division 1 of Article 1 (Building Code) to read: DIVISION 1. INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AND LOCAL AMENDMENTS § 25‐12‐1 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE. (A) The International Building Code, 2021 2024 Edition, published by the International Code Council ("2021 2024 International Building Code") is adopted and incorporated by reference into this section with the deletions in Subsection (B) and the amendments in Section 25‐12‐3 (Local Amendments to the International Building Code). (B) The following provisions of the 20241 International Building Code are deleted. 414.1.3305.2.3 503.1.4 plus subsections 308.2.3 Chapter 9 308.2.4 1612 plus subsections 427.6 2901.1503.1.4 1108.6.4.2 1301.1 3102.5Chapter 9 103 plus subsections Table 1004.5308.3 3201.11008.2.1 1507.8 plus subsections 1507.9 plus subsections 1607.8.2 1612 plus subsections 2901.1 2902.2 2902.6 3102.5 3201.1 3202.1 Table 2901.1 Footnote (e) 1010.1.2308.3.1.1 1010.3.3 308.3.2 3202.1 1009.3 3202.3.41010.1.2 1102.1308.5 1204 plus subsections 308.5.1 1301.1 308.5.3 1507.8 plus subsections 308.5.4 1507.9 plus subsections 310.2 1607.8.2310.4.1 406.4.3 1010.2.7 1010.3.3 1101.2 1102.1 1108.6.1.2 1108.6.2.2.2 1108.6.2.3.2 1108.6.3 Page 1 of 19 101.4.1 101.4.2 101.4.3 104.32.1 105.1.1 105.2 105.5 107.2.6 110.3 112.3 113 plus subsections 305.2 305.2.2 Table 1004.5 414.1.3 (C) The following definition is deleted from Section 202.2.1 (General Definitions) of the 2021 International Building Code: (C) The city clerk shall file a copy of the 20241 International Building Code with the official ordinances of FOSTER CARE FACILITIES. (B) the City. § 25‐12‐2 CITATIONS TO THE BUILDING CODE. In the City Code, "Building Code" means the 20241 International Building Code adopted in Section 25‐12‐1 (International Building Code) as amended by Section 25‐12‐3 (Local Amendments to the International Building Code). In this article, "this code" means the Building Code. § 25‐12‐3 LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE. Each provision in this section is a substitute for the identically numbered provision deleted in Section 25‐12‐ 1(B) (International Building Code) or is an addition to the 20241 International Building Code. [A] 101.4.1 Gas. The provisions of the International Fuel Gas Code and the Plumbing Code shall apply …
PROPOSED IRC 2024 CODE V1, DRAFT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL CHANGES Section R101.1 Section R101.2 Section R104.10.1 Section R105.2 Section R105.3.1.1 Section R106.1.4 Table R301.2 Section R105.3.2 Section R322.1 Section R322.1.4 Section R322.1.4.1 Section R322.1.4.2 Section R322.1.5 Section R322.2 Section R301.2.4 Section R322.2.1 Section R306 Section R322.2.2 Section R322.2.3 Section R322.2.5 Section R322.2.6 Part IV BAAE107 & subsections Section R320 & subsections § 25-12-241 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. (A) The International Residential Code for One- and Two-Family Dwellings, 20214 2024 Edition, published by the International Code Council ("20214 2024 International Residential Code") and Appendices AC, BA, BB, AE, BFAH, AJ, AQ, BIAR, BJAS, BKAU, BM, and BOAW are adopted and incorporated by reference into this section with the deletions in Subsections (B), (C), and (D) and the amendments in Section 25-12-243 (Local Amendments to the International Residential Code). (B) The following provisions of the 2024 International Residential Code are deleted (C) Except for P2904, Part VII (Plumbing) of the 2024 International Residential Code is deleted (D) The following definition is deleted from R202 (Definitions) of the 2024 International Residential Code: HEIGHT, BUILDING (E) The city clerk shall file a copy of the 2024 International Residential Code with the official ordinances of the City. Source: Ord. No. 20170406-048 , Pt. 1, 7-5-17; Ord. No. 20210603-054 , Pt. 1, 9-1-21. § 25-12-243 LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. Each provision in this section is a substitute for the identically numbered provision deleted in Section 25-12- 241 (B), (C), and (D) (International Residential Code) or is an addition to the 20241 International Residential Code. R101.2 Scope. The provisions of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, removal and demolition of detached one- and two- family dwellings and townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress and their accessory structures not more than three stories above grade plane in height. Exception: The following shall be permitted to be constructed in accordance with this code where provided with an automatic sprinkler system complying with Section P2904: 1. Live/work units located in townhouses and complying with the requirements of Section 508.5 of the International Building Code. Page 1 of 9 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Owner-occupied lodging houses with five or fewer guestrooms. A care facility with six or fewer persons receiving …
2024 International Building Code & International Residential Code Adoption Amendment: 2024 Technical Code Adoption- International Building Code & International Residential Code Planning Commission Date: August 13., 2024 Description: The purpose of this report is for recommendation of the 2024 technical code adoption of the 2024 International Building and International Residential Code. Development Services is purposing the adoption of the 2024 International Residential Code (IRC) and International Building Code (IBC). DSD Engagement team has conducted public engagement for both the IRC and IBC, which are currently open for public input from June 25 through July 24. This engagement pertains to the adoption of the 2024 editions of the technical codes, including proposed local amendments. The 2024 editions of the technical codes are scheduled for adoption by the City Council on October 24, 2024, with implementation slated for March 1, 2025. On May 3, 2024, resolution # 20240502-094 was approved by the council. Summary of Proposed Code Adoption: Adopting the most recent codes helps protect the health, safety and welfare of Austin residents by, • Responding to new findings from building science research, field experience, or changes in community expectations • Responding to building performance assessments following catastrophic events to • increase resilience in new structures Introducing new and innovative technologies and construction methods Aligning with other current accepted codes and standards Staff Recommendation: Staff recommend approval of the 2024 IBC and IRC. Board and Commission Actions On July 24, 2024, There is a scheduled meeting with the Building and Fire Board of Appeals to present the International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC). Additionally, the Planning Commission is set to convene on August 13, 2024. City Council Action May 3RD, Council approved resolution # 20240502-094 Single Stair Resolution Attached: 2024 IRC Redline 2024 IBC Redline 7/1/2024 Single Stair Memo IBC Affordability Impact Statement IRC Affordability Impact Statement Ordinance Number: N/A City Staff: Todd Wilcox- Building Official, Jessica Lopez Phone: Jessica Lopez 512-978-4661 Todd Wilcox 512-974-1681 Email: Jessica.lopez@austintexas.gov / Todd.Wilcox@austintexas.gov 7/1/2024
M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and Council Members THROUGH: Veronica Briseño, Assistant City Manager FROM: José G. Roig, Development Services Director Chief Joel Baker, Aus�n Fire Chief Chief Robert Luckritz, EMS Chief, Aus�n Travis County EMS DATE: June 26, 2024 SUBJECT: Resolu�on No. 20240502-094 Staff Update - Single Stairway Provisions for Mul�family Developments Up to Five-Stories We want to provide all of you with a mul�-departmental recommenda�on on Resolu�on No. 20240502-094 which proposes an amendment to the 2024 Interna�onal Building Code (IBC) allowing a single stairway for mul�family developments up to five stories. Technical code and first responder experts from the Development Services Department (DSD), Aus�n Fire Department (AFD), and Aus�n/Travis County Emergency Medical Services (ATCEMS) reviewed Aus�n’s single stairway amendment and found significant poten�al safety risks to occupants and first responders were we to amend the Code. As a result, staff recommends that the City of Aus�n con�nue to allow the model na�onal codes to set minimum standards for construc�on in Aus�n, thereby maintaining two means of egress for mul�family developments. Safety Concerns Construc�ng a single stairway --as opposed to two separate stairways-- for a five-story building poses escape hazards for occupants during fire, ac�ve shooter, severe weather, or large-scale emergencies. The following points highlight primary safety concerns: • Occupant Risk Considera�ons – Fire-loss data, some�mes cited by proponents of single stairway design, suggests that such an approach poses a low risk to occupants. While the probability of a fire is low, the consequences of a fire with a single stairway design make this an inherent risk. The na�onal standard set in the model code manda�ng two staircases reflects the increased likelihood of significant injury and mass casual�es in limi�ng occupants to a single exit in the event of a fire or other emergency. • Subject Mater Expert Findings – A na�onal proposal to permit mid-rise buildings to be served by a single exit stairway was reviewed and overwhelmingly rejected by the Interna�onal Code Page 1 of 4 Council (ICC) Technical Commitee, ci�ng tes�mony from many na�onal safety experts about the dangers it would pose to occupants and first responders. • Hindered Evacua�on Tac�cs – AFD employs evacua�on tac�cs by designa�ng one stairwell for evacua�on and the second stairwell for firefigh�ng opera�ons. Elimina�ng a stairwell may lead to unsafe exposure of fire condi�ons to occupants and cause counterflow and conges�on with occupants …
To: Planning Commission, City of Austin From: Lorraine Atherton, Zilker NA zoning committee member Re: August 27, 2024, agenda item 6, Thornton Road rezoning, Case C14-2024-0071 Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners, In 2015 and 2016 the Zilker and South Lamar neighborhood associations opposed attempts to upzone the 2300-2400 blocks of Thornton Road, as described in the following letter. I have sent the South Lamar NA letter in a separate attachment. The 2016 rezoning case was withdrawn before the City Council could finalize its approval of MF2. Item 6 on your current agenda is essentially a revival of the request for VMU that was denied in 2015, only much worse. Today, ten years later, implementation of the South Lamar Mitigation Plan is proceeding very slowly. Two eminent domain cases, involving the acquisition of drainage easements on either side of the 2300 block of Thornton Road, are on the City Council’s August 29 agenda. It would be wise to put off any rezoning of these properties until after construction begins on the drainage projects. Note that point 4 in the ZNA letter is relevant to your agenda item 11 on changes to residential drainage requirements, and that the street improvements proposed in the South Lamar Mitigation Plan have not been pursued. Here is the text of the 2016 Zilker NA letter: The Executive Committee and Zoning Committee of the Zilker Neighborhood Association agree with the South Lamar Neighborhood’s position on the rezoning case C14-2015-0047 (Thornton Road). The main points are: 1. The VMU overlay is not appropriate for properties that are not on a designated core transit corridor. ZNA studied this issue in connection with our successful VMU proposal in 2008, and we concluded that VMU was not appropriate on Oltorf west of the railroad track. If it’s not appropriate on Oltorf, it is certainly out of the question on a street like Thornton, with no possible connection to South Lamar. 2. Properties within the South Lamar Mitigation Plan should not be rezoned before staff has "enhanced tools to better anticipate the cumulative effects of increasing density on a neighborhood’s natural and manmade infrastructure," as proposed in the mitigation plan. The South Lamar Neighborhood Association has described a potential 1 analytical approach that tries to capture methods to determine what the infrastructure can support. It or a better method should be implemented before any of these properties are upzoned. 3. The rezoning …
Case Number C14-2024-0071 Kim Vitray Fri 8/23/2024 12:36 PM To: Hadri, Cynthia <Cynthia.Hadri@austintexas.gov> Cc: Dana Lasman Board or Commission's Name: Planning Commission Scheduled Date of Public Hearing: Aug 27, 2024 Case Number: C14-2024-0071 Contact Person: Cynthia Hadri Cynthia, External Email - Exercise Caution I am writing to vehemently object to both this rezoning request by the developer and the alternative recommendations of city staff. My understanding of the developer's rezoning request is to enable construction of a 350-unit apartment building on Thornton Rd, and that city staff's counter recommendations would allow the developer to still build multi-family housing but not to the height and density they are requesting. I own and live in a condo at 2216 Thornton Rd, which is just a block down the street from the proposed rezoning and development area. Most alarming about the rezoning request is the neighborhood traffic analysis that projects an increase in vehicle trips per day from the current 217 to an expected 1623. The analysis also notes that Thornton Rd is already operating at an undesirable traffic volume for the kind of street it is, which will get significantly worse if the properties are rezoned and developed as requested, or as alternately recommended. The developer indicates its goal is progress toward the city's affordable housing goal, which is laudable. However, the infrastructure on Thornton Rd simply cannot support more multi-family development. The developer also indicates the existing zoning allows for intense commercial uses with higher vehicular impact; however, no such commercial development currently exists or is planned, and if it were, the neighborhood would similarly object. The developer mentions "easy access" to Oltorf and South Lamar - have they been there lately? With all the development currently on South Lamar, both north and south of Oltorf, South Lamar has become virtually impassable, and the terrible effects of this have spilled onto Oltorf and Thornton Rd. There's no "easy access" anywhere in our neighborhood right now! Also, any development of any kind on Thornton Rd would necessitate considerable street improvements, in terms of widening, sidewalks, and parking, as well as designated right and left turn lanes and a signal at the intersection of Thornton and Oltorf (although I've been told the latter is not possible because of proximity to a nearby railroad crossing). Otherwise, traffic on Thornton will become gridlock and our neighborhood will become unlivable and dangerous. I am aware of …
