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 …
1 Interim Planning Commission Rules and Procedures Note: These are based on current rules and practices. Where conflicting rules exist, current practice is noted. Any change with no clear guideline or precedent is highlighted in yellow. Procedure for Amending Rules After Initial Adoption These rules may be amended through unanimous consent or with support from two- thirds of the body, once a motion has been made and seconded. For unanimous consent, the Chair may ask if there is any objection to the proposed action, and if there is none, announce the result. Speaker Registration As listed on the Planning Commission agenda, whether for in-person or via teleconference. Speaker Time Allocation for Discussion and Action Items Applicable to zoning cases, neighborhood plan amendments, land development code amendments, comprehensive plan amendments, and all other action items that are not on the consent agenda or being considered for postponement. 5 minutes each, up to 8 minutes total with donated time* Primary speaker in favor and primary speaker opposed (primary speaker is selected by parties in favor and opposition or is the first person to sign up. There can only be one primary speaker. 3 speakers in favor and 3 speakers opposed (in order of sign-up. This can be changed by the interested parties with consultation from the persons who signed up in the order) All other speakers in favor or opposed 3 minutes each, up to 6 minutes total with donated time* 1 minute each, up to 2 minutes total with donated time* Applicant rebuttal (speaker designated by applicant) 3 minutes, with no donated time *Speaker donation of time is an available option for in-person participants. Both the registered speaker donating time and the speaker recipient must be present when the public hearing is conducted. The amount of donated time is dependent upon where in the list the secondary speaker falls (e.g., 3 minutes or 1 minute). 2 Speaker Time Allocation for Discussion Postponements Testimony regarding a discussion postponement consists of applicant and public comment on the postponement alone and should not delve into the merits of the case. The granting of a postponement must be approved by affirmative vote of the Commission. All speakers in favor or opposed (those in favor of postponement speak first) 3 minutes* Applicant rebuttal (speaker designated by applicant) 3 minutes* *Donation of time is not an option for discussion postponement. Speaker Time Allocation for Consent Agenda Items …
Beth Guillot 2216 Thornton Road Unit 210 Aus8n, Texas, 78704 Cynthia Hadri Senior Planner | Current Planning City of Aus8n, Planning Department Cynthia.Hadri@aus8ntexas.gov Re: Case No. C14-2024-0071 Ms. Hadri, I have been a resident of Carriage Park Condominiums since 2005, 2216 Thornton Road Unit 210, Aus8n, TX, 78704. There is a development planned for our neighborhood that is out of scale for Thornton Road. I am in opposi8on of the proposed density for the road due to the car trips projected to be added to our street. It is currently a challenge to navigate our street at 8mes with the current traffic. Below is an assessment prepared by our neighbor and civil engineer. LeZer to City Council and Staff – C14-2024-0071 We are wri8ng you today to express our opposi8on to Case No. C14-2024-0071, a mul8family project located on Thornton Rd., within District 5. Both the Owner and their Agent’s applica8on, and City Staff’s recommenda8on will have adverse effects to the South Lamar Neighborhood, par8cularly from a traffic and life safety perspec8ve. The project is approximately 1250 LF from the intersec8on of W. Oltorf and Thornton Rd., with traffic paZerns that are exacerbated by its proximity to the railroad tracks. Thornton Rd., which is a City of Aus8n Level 1 Street, consist of a 30’ clear space (FOC to FOC) and sporadically available sidewalks. This cross-sec8on paired with street parking results in the current traffic paZerns that require drivers to oeen yield to oncoming traffic and weave in and out of parked cars, trash cans, and pedestrians. The conges8on along Thornton Rd. is best displayed at its intersec8on with Oltorf, which experiences frequent backups and oeen requires quick and unsafe maneuvers to merge onto Oltorf. Addi8onally, the daily backups at this intersec8on are exacerbated by the at-grade railroad crossing along Oltorf, approximately 200 LF from the Oltorf and Thornton intersec8on. The Owner and their Agent’s applica8on seeks a density that is far beyond what is appropriate for the neighborhood and the Level 1 Street the project is located on. If allowed, their desired land use would increase traffic counts along Thornton Rd. by over 1,400 trips counts per day. This applica8on represents a gross misuse of the tools the City has worked to put into place to allow for the overall increase in housing units, including affordable housing units. A development of this size is more appropriately located on a …
the Ver8cal Mixed-Use Building Combining District (V) which is so loosely defined that its descrip8on is covered by a single sentence. This vague land use leaves the neighborhood and its residences with no picture of what this project will ul8mately become and how it will affect the South Lamar Neighborhood. It is because these reasons, and many more, that we ask you to reevaluate the project property and what an appropriate use for it would be. We’d suggest that you reengage with the Owner and their Agent to work towards a more amenable outcome for the beZerment of Thornton Rd., the South Lamar Neighborhood, District 5, and the City of Aus8n. Legend for intersection clear patterns: 1) Oltorf eastbound 2) Oltorf westbound + unprotected left onto Thornton 3) Thornton northbound with unprotected turns onto west and eastbound Oltorf Please consider our concerns when reviewing this case. We appreciate your 8me and aZen8on to this maZer. Thanks. Beth Beth Guillot Beth.guillot21@gmail.com 512.699.3083
C14-2024-0071 Thornton Road Multfamily Kyla Kanz Tue 8/27/2024 11:07 AM To: Hadri, Cynthia <Cynthia.Hadri@austintexas.gov> External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Cynthia, I am writing to express my opposition to Case No. C14-2024-0071, a multifamily project located on Thornton Rd. within District 5. The Owner and their Agent’s application and the City Staff’s recommendation will adversely affect the South Lamar Neighborhood, particularly from a traffic and pedestrian safety perspective. Even now, I have to put my dog in my car and drive somewhere to find a safe place to walk him. I must load my bike into my car to find a safe place to ride it. Sometimes, it takes 10 minutes just to drive off of my little one-block street, 20 minutes if there is a train. The project is approximately 1250 LF from the intersection of W. Oltorf and Thornton Rd., and its proximity to the railroad tracks exacerbates traffic patterns. Thornton Rd., a City of Austin Level 1 Street, consists of a 30’ clear space (FOC to FOC) and sporadically available sidewalks. This cross-section, paired with street parking, results in the current traffic patterns that require drivers to often yield to oncoming traffic and weave in and out of parked cars, trash cans, and pedestrians. There are also no complete sidewalks on much of this road, and all the street parking makes this, at times, a one-way street. The congestion along Thornton Rd. is best displayed at its intersection with Oltorf, which experiences frequent backups and often requires quick and unsafe maneuvers to merge onto Oltorf. The daily backups at this intersection are exacerbated by the at-grade railroad crossing along Oltorf, approximately 200 LF from the Oltorf and Thornton intersection. The Owner and their Agent’s application seek a density far beyond what is appropriate for the neighborhood and this Level 1 Street the project is located on. If allowed, their desired land use would increase traffic counts along Thornton Rd. by over 1,400 trip counts per day. A development this size is more appropriately located on a Level 3 Street, such as Lamar Blvd., but Lamar Blvd. traffic is already ridiculous, and no infrastructure improvements are in the plans that I know of. While less intensive, City Staff’s recommendation does not go far enough to protect the neighborhood and its residents. Thornton Rd. is a Level 1 street, as defined by Section 2.4.1.2 of the City of Austin …
Infill Plats & Site Plan Lite: Overview of Staff Proposal Planning Commission | July 9, 2024 Brent Lloyd, DSD Development Officer Scope of Presentation • General Background • Discuss proposed code amendments for: 1. 2. Infill Plats Site Plan Lite, Part 2 • Questions & Answers Infill Plats Subdivision Basics Subdivision Plats • The division of land into one or more lots for the purpose of sale, transfer, development, or extension of utilities. • Unless an exception applies, only land within an approved subdivision plat may be developed. • Infrastructure and amenities dedicated at subdivision serve multiple lots, which can then be developed independently. — Commercial & Residential Subdivisions Subdivision Overview (cont’d) Subdivision Types and Order of Process • Preliminary Plan • Final Plat • Subdivision Construction Plans • Re-subdivision Effect of Subdivision on Residential Development • “Fee Simple” Ownership vs. “Condominium Regimes” Greenfield Subdivision Infill Plats – Challenges • In the platting context, “infill” is the re- subdivision of lots in existing single- family subdivisions into new, smaller lots. • Current regulations, particularly drainage & water quality, are tailored to greenfield subdivisions rather than residential infill. • But all regulations currently apply, regardless of subdivision size Infill Plat Process - Council Direction Goals of Resolution No. 20230504-023: • Establish an efficient process to create infill lots within residential subdivisions, thereby facilitating fee-simple ownership and small-lot development form. • Right-size regulations to the scale and intensity of infill development. • Explore making waivers and variances administrative. • Include other changes to facilitate creation of infill lots. Subdivision-Related Improvements Adopted in 2023 Ordinance No. 20230831-141 • Eliminated commission approvals for plats, which means all applications without variances may be approved by staff. • Streamlined application submittal requirements. • Extended application deadlines. • Modified flag lot regulations. Summary of Infill Plat Proposal Code Amendments Proposed in Response to Infill Plat Resolution • Targeted changes to regulations for residential resubs aimed at: — Making the process more efficient and less costly for landowners seeking to resubdivide into smaller lots authorized under HOME 2. — Ensuring that drainage requirements are: Right-sized to infill development Sufficient to ensure that development does not increase risk of lot-to-lot flooding. Infill Plat Proposal (cont’d) • • • Drainage Plan In-Lieu of Onsite Detention & Drainage Studies For resubdivisions of platted residential lots, onsite detention & drainage studies would not be required if total land area does …
Planning Commission Resolution regarding Posting of Backup Materials Whereas the Texas Open Meetings Act requires that agendas for public meetings be posted at least 72 hours in advance. As the Planning Commission meets on Tuesdays at 6 pm, the practice of the staff has been to post the agenda on the Friday prior to a meeting by 3 pm. Whereas staff has also had the practice of posting backup by Thursday at 3 pm which includes the size and location of property, the staff recommendation, case manager comments, area case histories, information about the environment, maps, letters in support and opposition, and other useful information. Whereas the members of the Commission and the public should understand the details about the items on the agenda, and there are no rules requiring that backup be posted, Therefore, be it resolved, the following underlined text will be added to the RULES OF PROCEDURE of the Planning Commission, Section 1.400 : “Notices of meetings shall be in writing and shall be sent to all members at least two days in advance of the meetings and shall include the size and location of properties, the staff recommendations, case manager comments, area case histories, information about the environment, maps, and letters in support or opposition for each case included on the agenda, or the “Staff Report”, “Neighborhood Plan Amendment Review Sheet”, or the “Zoning Change Review Sheet” whichever is more readily available.” Agenda items for which no backup information is posted at least two days in advance of the meeting will be postponed at the discretion of the commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 27, 2024 The Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting on Tuesday, AUGUST 27, 2024, at Austin City Hall, Council Chambers, Room 1001, 301 W. Second Street, Austin, TX. Chair Hempel called the Commission Meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Claire Hempel Awais Azhar Nadia Barrera-Ramirez Adam Haynes Felicity Maxwell Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Greg Anderson Grayson Cox Ryan Johnson Jennifer Mushtaler Danielle Skidmore Commissioners absent: Patrick Howard Alberta Phillips Alice Woods Ex-Officio Members in Attendance: Jessica Cohen Ex-Officio Members in Attendance Remotely: None. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July 23, 2024. The minutes from the meeting of July 23, 2024, were postponed to September 10, 2024, on the consent agenda on Vice Chair Azhar’s motion, Commissioner Barrera- Ramirez’s second on a 10-0 vote. Commissioners Howard, Phillips, and Woods were absent. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Plan Amendment: NPA-2023-0017.01 - Anderson Square, District 4 Location: 910, 912, 914 & 916, 1012 & 1012 ½, 1100, 1100 ½ & 1102 ½ W. Anderson Lane, 7905 ½ 8003, & 8005 Anderson Square and 7940, 7950, 8000, 8000 1/2 & 8002 Research Boulevard Service Road South Bound, Little Walnut Creek Watershed; Crestview/Wooten Neighborhood Planning Area Owner/Applicant: Anderson Square Investments, LLC & C2G, LLC Agent: Request: Staff Rec.: Staff: Alice Glasco Consulting (Alice Glasco) Mixed Use to Higher Density Mixed Use land use Recommended Maureen Meredith, 512-974-2695, maureen.meredith@austintexas.gov Planning Department The public hearing was closed on Commissioner Maxwell’s motion, Commissioner Anderson’s second, on an 10-0 vote. Commissioners Howard, Phillips, and Woods were absent. There was a substitute motion from Commissioner Mushtaler to approve Staff’s recommendation of Higher Density Mixed Use land use. This motion was withdrawn. The motion to postpone to September 24, 2024, was approved on Commissioner Cox’s motion, Commissioner Anderson’s second on an 8-0-2 vote. Those voting aye were Chair Hempel, Vice Chair Azhar, and Commissioners Anderson, Barrera-Ramirez, Cox, Haynes, Maxwell, and Skidmore. Commissioners Johnson and Mushtaler abstained. Commissioners Howard, Phillips, and Woods were absent. 3. Rezoning: Location: C14-2023-0080 - Anderson Square, District 4 910, 912, 914 & 916, 1012 & 1012 ½, 1100, 1100 ½ & 1102 ½ W. Anderson Lane, 7905 ½ 8003, & 8005 Anderson Square and 7940, 7950, 8000, 8000 1/2 & 8002 Research Boulevard Service Road South Bound, Little Walnut Creek Watershed; Crestview/Wooten Neighborhood Planning Area …
REGULAR MEETING of the PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2024, 6:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ROOM 1001 301 WEST 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Planning Commission may 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. Registration no later than 2 PM the day of the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. For more information on public comment, please see the agenda section “Speaker Registration”. Please contact Ella Garcia, Staff Liaison, for questions regarding speaker registration at LandUseLiaison@austintexas.gov or by phone at 512-978-0801. CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS/COMMISSIONERS: Claire Hempel Chair (District 8) Awais Azhar, Vice Chair (Mayor’s Representative) Greg Anderson, Secretary (District 4) Alice Woods, Parliamentarian (District 2) Patrick Howard (District 1) Nadia Barrera-Ramirez (District 3) Felicity Maxwell (District 5) EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS: Jennifer Mushtaler (District 6) Ryan Johnson (District 7) Danielle Skidmore (District 9) Grayson Cox (District 10) Alberta Phillips (Mayor’s Representative) Adam Haynes (Mayor’s Representative) Jessica Cohen, Chair of Board of Adjustment Candace Hunter, AISD Board of Trustees TC Broadnax, City Manager Richard Mendoza – Director of Transportation and Public Works EXECUTIVE SESSION (No public discussion) The Planning Commission will announce it will go into Executive Session, if necessary, according to Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, to receive advice from Legal Counsel on matters specifically listed on the agenda. The Commission may not conduct a closed meeting without the approval of the city attorney. Private Consultation with Attorney – Section 551.071. Executive Liaison: Joi Harden, 512-974-1617 Staff Liaison: Ella Garcia, 512-978-0801 Attorney: Chrissy Mann, 512-974-2179 CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL AGENDA The first four 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 1. Approve the minutes of the Planning Commission regular meeting on July 9, 2024. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Rezoning: Location: C814-2023-0057 - 200 E. Riverside PUD; District 9 200 East Riverside Drive, East Bouldin Creek and Lady Bird Lake Watersheds; Greater South River City Neighborhood Planning Area Owner/Applicant: Garwald Company, Inc. (Rogan Giles, President) Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Richard T. Suttle, Jr.) Agent: L-NP to PUD-NP Request: Recommended, with conditions Staff Rec.: Sherri Sirwaitis, 512-974-3057, sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov Staff: Planning …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C814-2023-0057 (200 E. Riverside PUD) DISTRICT AREA: 9 ADDRESS: 200 East Riverside Drive ZONING FROM: LI-NP SITE AREA: 3.95 acres PROPERTY OWNER: Garwald Company, Inc. AGENT: Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Richard T. Suttle, Jr.) CASE MANAGER: Sherri Sirwaitis TO: PUD-NP PHONE: 512-974-3057 sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is to approve the 200 E Riverside Planned Unit Development (PUD) subject to the following conditions: 1. The conditions of the PUD shall be established in - a) the proposed Land Use Plan that includes a breakdown of: the planning site area, exhibit of the surrounding tract uses and acreages, the Site Development Regulations, Permitted Uses, Conditional Uses and Prohibited Uses Tables, proposed maximum Land Use Summary Table and Land Use Notes. 2. The PUD shall comply with the following Environmental staff recommendations: Tier 1 and Tier 2 Chart P. 3 of 3 Other Amenities Specific to PUD: Landscape superiority items. The applicant has agreed to amend the following superiority item: 4. All new perimeter right-of-way trees installed on the property shall be planted with a minimum soil volume of 1,000 cubic feet at a minimum soil depth of 3 feet. Such soil volume may be shared up to 25 percent between trees in continuous plantings. Where necessary, load bearing soil cells shall be used to meet the soil volume requirement. Nothing limits the City’s authority to reduce the minimum soil volume if necessary to reduce utility conflict or to address other constructability issues. If the City reduces the minimum soil volume, Landowner remains compliant with the PUD Ordinance and Environmental Criteria Manual. By replacing the strike-through with: C814-2023-0057 Page 2 “All soil volume and depth that cannot be achieved in the ROW due to utility placement will be offset, on a 1:1 basis, by providing soil volume and depth in other locations within the PUD, such as parking.” 3. Austin Fire Department requests the following to be provided by the developer: 9,000 to 11,000 square feet unfinished space within the level of discharge ("ground floor") and floor above, with a private convenience stair, adequate space for 2-3 apparatus bays and appropriate apron for fire/EMS apparatus, and an entrance/egress on a major roadway. Final selection of the location must be approved by the Austin Fire Department, Austin-Travis County EMS, and the Developer, with a lease executed or the space conveyed prior to 55% of certificates of occupancy …
Planning Commission: August 13, 2024 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET NEIGHORHOOD PLAN: Crestview/Wooten Combined (Wooten) CASE#: PROJECT NAME: Anderson Square PC DATE: August 13, 2024 NPA-2023-0017.01 DATE FILED: June 16, 2023 June 25, 2024 May 28, 2024 April 9, 2024 February 27, 2024 4 910, 912, 914 & 916, 1012 & 1012 ½, 1100, 1100 ½ & 1102 ½ W. ADDRESS/ES: Anderson Lane; 7905 ½ 8003, & 8005 Anderson Square; 7940, 7950, 8000, 8000 1/2 & 8002 Research Blvd. SVRD SB DISTRICT AREA: SITE AREA: 16 acres OWNER/APPLICANT: Anderson Square Investments, LLC & C2G, LLC AGENT: Alice Glasco Consulting (Alice Glasco) CASE MANAGER: Maureen Meredith STAFF EMAIL: Maureen.Meredith@austintexas.gov TYPE OF AMENDMENT: Change in Future Land Use Designation PHONE: (512) 974-2695 From: Mixed Use Base District Zoning Change To: High Density Mixed Use Related Zoning Case: C14-2023-0080 From: CS-MU-NP & CS-1-MU-NP NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ADOPTION DATE: April 1, 2004 CITY COUNCIL DATE: TBD ACTION: To: CH-PDA-NP Planning Commission: August 13, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: August 13, 2024 – (action pending) June 25, 2024 – Postponed to August 13, 2024 on the consent agenda at the request of the Neighborhood. [R. Johnson – 1st; F. Maxwell – 2nd] Vote: 8-0 [C. Hempel, A. Azhar, G. Cox J. Mushtaler and A. Haynes absent. May 28, 2024 – Postponed to June 25, 2024 on the consent agenda at the request of Applicant. [F. Maxwell – 1st; A. Woods – 2nd] Vote: 10-0 [G. Cox off the dais. P. Howard and A. Phillips absent]. April 9, 2024 – Postponed to May 28, 2024 on the consent agenda at the request of Staff. [A. Azhar – 1st; F. Maxwell – 2nd] Vote: 12 -0 [A. Phillips off the dais. G. Anderson recused from Item #7]. February 27, 2024 – Postponed to April 9, 2024 on the consent agenda at the request of Staff. [A. Azhar – 1st; A. Woods – 2nd] Vote: 11-0 [J. Mushtaler off the dais. F. Maxwell absent]. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommended for the Applicant’s request for High Density Mixed Use land use BASIS FOR STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION: The applicant is proposing a large mixed- use development that could accommodate up to 2400 residential units and approximately 2.4 million square feet of office and retail uses. The property is located at the intersection of US Hwy 183 and North Lamar Blvd. High Density Mixed Use land use is appropriate in this location. 2 Below are sections …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2023-0080 (Anderson Square) DISTRICT: 4 ADDRESS: 910, 912, 914 & 916, 1012 & 1012 ½, 1100, 1100 ½ & 1102 ½ W. Anderson Lane, 7905 ½ 8003, & 8005 Anderson Square and 7940, 7950, 8000, 8000 1/2 & 8002 Research Boulevard Service Road South Bound ZONING FROM: CS-MU-NP, CS-1-NP TO: CH-PDA-NP SITE AREA: 16.0 acres (696,960 sq. ft.) PROPERTY OWNER: Anderson Square Investments, LLC & C2G, LLC (Jim Cotton and Jimmy Nassour) AGENT: Alice Glasco Consulting (Alice Glasco) CASE MANAGER: Sherri Sirwaitis (512-974-3057, sherri.sirwaitis@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMEDATION: Staff recommends CH-PDA-NP, Commercial Highway-Planned Development Area- Neighborhood Plan Combining District, zoning. As this property is falls within the North Lamar Transit Center station area, the staff recommends adding prohibited and conditional uses from the recently adopted ETOD ordinance to the PDA overlay: 1) Prohibit the following uses on the property: Agricultural Sale and Services, Building Maintenance Services, Campground, Carriage Stable, Convenience Storage, Drop-off Recycling Collection Facility, Electronic Prototype Assembly, Electronic Testing, Equipment Repair Services, Equipment Sales, Exterminating Services, Funeral Services, Marina, Recreational Equipment Maintenance & Storage, Recreational Equipment Sales, Research Assembly Services, Research Testing Services, Research Warehousing Services, Scrap and Salvage, Service Station, Stables, Vehicle Storage, Basic Industry, General Warehousing and Distribution, Recycling Center, Resource Extraction, Animal Production, Crop Production and Indoor Crop Production. 2) Make the following uses conditional uses on the property: Alternative Financial Services, Automotive Sales, Automotive Rentals, Automotive Repair Services, Automotive Washing, Bail Bond Services, Commercial Blood Plasma Center, Commercial Off-Street Parking, Communications Services, Construction Sales and Services, Electric Vehicle Charging, Kennels, Monument Retail Sales, Off-Site Accessory Parking, Pawn Shop Services, Pedicab Storage and Dispatch, Special Use Historic, Custom Manufacturing, Light Manufacturing, Limited Warehousing and Distribution and Horticulture. C14-2023-0080 2 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: February 27, 2024: Postponed to April 9, 2024 at the staff’s request by consent (11-0, F. Maxwell-absent, J. Mushtaler-off the dais); A. Azhar-1st, A. Woods-2nd. April 9, 2024: Approved staff’s request for postponement to May 28, 2024 by consent (12-0, A. Phillips-arrived late); A. Azhar-1st, F. Maxwell-2nd. May 28, 2024: Granted applicant's request for postponement to June 25, 2024 by consent (10-0, P. Howard and A. Phillips-absent, G. Cox-arrived late); F. Maxwell-1st, A. Woods-2nd. June 25, 2024: Approved neighborhood's request for a postponement to August 13, 2024 (7-0, C. Hemple, A. Azhar and A. Haynes-absent, A. Phillips and G. Cox-arrived late); R. Johnson-1st, F. Maxwell-2nd. August 13, 2024 CITY …
