[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_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,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6514041,"mediaKeyId","5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330","parentId",5065383,"title","Design Commission reviews downtown density‑bonus projects; selects two sites for further study","audioSeconds",2740,"startMs",4992000,"endMs",7732000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330&start=4992&end=7732","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330/thumbnail_4992000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6514041/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Design-Commission-reviews-downtown-densitybonus-projects-selects-two-sites-for-further-study","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514041-49b3b3e2125bff13a9bb76a982da82b7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770593908&Signature=TI-YyBUoruXn3Qrbc11eHV-px~Y~qRasJsQRE9fj4dtFbh4JhIIQgz0UZHOOEgzj3tPMYVRT0ZE8FsIzQ0j-OGp0LhE9Upn4f8mmEWCQyFUcAokrSaquOXG309h0xbwoFH6QA9bJhPMsmJB7Eju~Eon2ic-dqsgCVDBsIi0k2QKpxHj0tyI15~9DM9iHp8gcTxHkfe5JbvXzmHLvBaejqFNQRYoBEn3Y69dHUIaxVzcAer12p3I~2UTQxnWB1W0VqitCAbEuYz70iaWefucRMVmPQVg2qZLN3RGkGxPEEnjEaZz2cwoi9ExnYhcpznchxZNckXKPFl6wzx58pKVijg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Austin","date","2025-06-23T00:00:00Z","article","The Design Commission examined two completed downtown density‑bonus projects and discussed recurring issues the commission would like the updated urban design guidelines to address: parking podium screening and materials, curb cuts and driveway impacts on the pedestrian realm, ground‑floor activation and retail depth, and the use of fee‑in‑lieu for community benefits.

Commissioners reviewed Seventeenth & Guadalupe (also referred to in public materials as the Linden) and raised concerns about the visual prominence of a parking podium and the limits of the commission’s influence over screening and facade materials. \"It was an area that we saw as an opportunity, and it continues to be perceived as an opportunity,\" Commissioner Gillis said after reviewing the project’s executed streetscape.

Commissioners also discussed how vehicle access is handled. Commissioner Howard emphasized pedestrian safety and said driveway aprons and driveway‑oriented paving can signal that vehicles have priority: \"Those are two items that I wanted to bring up...they give the indication visually that the driveway is the primary space there,\" he said, urging guideline language that privileges the pedestrian realm and pushes loading and garage access to alleys where feasible.

On the topic of community benefits under the downtown density bonus program, a staff member explained code mechanics and practice: the downtown program lists specific community benefit categories and allows an applicant to propose an \"other\" benefit; affordable‑housing community benefits can be delivered on‑site or via a fee‑in‑lieu, and the code allows up to 50 percent of the required affordable area to be satisfied by a fee‑in‑lieu. Staff said fees are calculated and assessed at the time a certificate of occupancy.

Commissioners also reviewed the Marriott at Cesar Chavez, noting the project's use of a semi‑enclosed forecourt and a private amenity deck that now functions as publicly accessible space adjacent to a commercial tenant. Commissioners described the hotel site as an example with mixed urban design results: some activation and alley access improvements, but also a porte‑cochère and corner treatments the commission sees as missed opportunities for stronger street activation.

Votes at a glance
- Approval of minutes from the May 19 design commission meeting: motion to approve made earlier in the meeting; chair reported the vote as unanimous. (No individual mover/second recorded in the transcript.)
- Selection of projects for future review: Commissioner Carroll moved to select 307 East Second Street for the next meeting; Commissioner Wittgen seconded; the commission voted unanimously to place 307 East Second and Hanover Republic Square on the agenda for future project review.

The commission directed staff to include current imagery and post‑construction photographs in future project review backup when feasible, and to identify practical guideline language that could address podium screening, alley versus street access for garages and utilities, and strategies to encourage smaller, more adaptable ground‑floor retail footprints.

Ending: Staff will prepare materials for two projects proposed for the next meeting (307 East Second and Hanover Republic Square) and will attempt to include current site photographs in the packet; commissioners will consider code and guideline language adjustments that address recurring urban design issues raised in the review.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Austin - Design - Jun 23, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Commissioners reviewed two downtown projects (Seventeenth & Guadalupe and the Marriott at Cesar Chavez), discussed parking‑podium screening, curb cuts and ground‑floor activation, and voted to study 307 East Second Street and Hanover Republic Square at a future meeting.","taxTitle","Austin, Travis County, Texas","taxId",2819,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514043,"Design Commission reviews draft urban design guidelines; staff seeks format direction and working‑group input",2405,2384000,4789000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330&start=2384&end=4789","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330/thumbnail_2384000.jpg","/articles/6514043/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Design-Commission-reviews-draft-urban-design-guidelines-staff-seeks-format-direction-and-workinggroup-input","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514043-5a287c899c801d971061636aca53f178/orig.mp4?Expires=1770593908&Signature=IVJBFfb5k0pWMaP9jbOvPwcWegqrpViULjUF1Ds~9sLWiqM2UgK56mh5UrDw4ibnKoLVUA7npBw2ZCSfZIk6fC1Sjwj913suZ0jLle4GOTPmzPikOLe~g7D6rfzG7aVaOWQkcRSDBRl~e~XCKOq0oFsIpzIRSbhStBnl0MMgSq7xvxhoWj4kuye2Zm3ueAApjaJDd-1PIm7knChqNMt8DMDnaIOYQxcXWdJdQbw-qjiTc7fARhKxgaop0-yxOUxj8jaQ3sT1Gzud3CCJa3R6Y5SgLTxNVEgLl4irdDfP2orO-GQRmohD7wTF7YK5IHureggI9GWclh40y2ibmXTIeQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Jorge Rosalind, executive liaison to the Design Commission, presented draft templates and a timeline for the commission’s long‑running urban design guidelines update and asked commissioners for direction on document format, visual hierarchy, and the role of the working group.

Rosalind said the guidelines will continue to be used to evaluate private and public projects and to interface with the downtown density‑bonus program under city code. He described the current draft as organized around core principles and roughly 48 guidelines, and he asked the commission whether the document should emphasize a highly visual, branded look or a simpler vertical, book‑style layout. \"A book type approach, a vertical approach is much more acceptable, universally and easier to read and follow,\" Rosalind said when staff discussed feasibility and user navigation.

Commissioners broadly favored delegating detailed formatting work to the working group and to staff, while reserving strategic decisions for the full commission. Commissioner Carroll recommended the working group continue to collaborate with staff on formatting to avoid bogging full commission meetings in design details. Vice Chair Meiners emphasized future compatibility and navigability: \"I do think that there has to be an intent to almost future proof it, so that it is compatible with... AI,\" Meiners said, and called for mobile‑friendly navigation and placeholder images that can be updated.

Commissioners raised specific editorial priorities the working group should address: clearer graphic hierarchy that separates mandatory conditions from illustrative examples, brevity to improve usability, imagery licensing or city‑sourced photographs to avoid copyright issues, and more emphasis on second‑floor activation and balcony activation in downtown projects. Rosalind said staff has design capacity but production will be time‑intensive and suggested staff produce a small set of mockups for the commission to review in August; staff also recommended posting the draft as backup so all commissioners and the public can review it without risking quorum issues.

The commission discussed working‑group membership and agreed to place formal membership decisions on a future agenda so new commissioners can be considered without creating a quorum. Staff said it will coordinate working‑group meetings and aims to present mockups in August and a public draft for comment later this fall.

Ending: Commissioners asked staff to proceed with a vertical, portrait‑oriented layout as the default and to return with mockups; the working group will continue detailed design work and staff will post draft documents as meeting backup to allow full‑commission feedback.","Staff presented draft templates and layout options for an update to the urban design guidelines, asked the commission for a preferred document format (staff recommended a vertical/portrait approach), and said working‑group discussions will produce mockups for the commission in August and a public draft later this year.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514048,"City staff brief Design Commission on bird‑friendly building measures after council resolution",1035,113000,1148000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330&start=113&end=1148","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5065383-921d03379cbd542820f00d30ed2e2330/thumbnail_113000.jpg","/articles/6514048/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/City-staff-brief-Design-Commission-on-birdfriendly-building-measures-after-council-resolution","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514048-8d2853316c6473e9714ebe1fcccd0ec3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770593908&Signature=S0jIS~VvoDsw6zACqJalxwgerIl8fka2a0CAwaBtyak9ysLQIb-ohEj-uVj2cg-xgBzfTmz7TyRMpX~j-uEw-3yXx9Q5OZJ4HVnaTMISI2RBgJdEQKNoJKvYFU7FkTHJXkY5A5strIwIJPsoeHiaoMJ-dyIMtOsMKkiAILaxCV~EZwZi3-tiP956S-w~7DMzenj44XYueDYXrCyFNOzvltlna0Lc7bfjMXVsxqHMo~HxwMb0ACJHakuXC8wbOo8NJcHeISGY8MeBblNGR1STPsvRaOZYUg7lIcfzkbjV2tYPNveONEHjZeOS~CJL3mq6SPZ1fKHg~REmCHhVKwQjZA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Leslie Lilly, environmental conservation program manager with the City of Austin Watershed Protection Department, told the Design Commission that staff are developing cross‑departmental recommendations in response to a November council resolution on bird‑friendly design.

The briefing described two principal drivers of bird collisions with buildings: daytime collisions caused by glass transparency and reflections, and nighttime disorientation caused by artificial lighting. \"Bird collisions are relevant to Austin because we're a city of more than 1,000,000 people with lots of buildings and lots of glass, and we're located in the middle of the Central Flyway,\" Lilly said, citing migration data staff included in the presentation.

City staff framed the proposed response around three near‑term tasks: a feasibility analysis to estimate material and compliance costs for developers, targeted recommendations for design code or guidance changes, and an educational outreach program for property owners and architects. Staff said they will coordinate with Austin Energy (the Austin Energy Green Building program), Development Services, Planning, and Building Services to assemble the recommendation and return to boards/commissions and council later this fall.

The presentation outlined two categories of technical measures. Lighting approaches include reduced and redirected fixtures, timers, motion sensors and shielding so lights do not illuminate the sky. Glass and façade approaches include fritted, etched or ultraviolet‑treated glass and patterned markings spaced at a maximum of 2 by 2 inches to be visible across light levels. Staff noted that some treatments can also improve energy performance: \"They replaced the existing glass with fritted glass and added a green roof... after they remodeled the building, they reported an increased energy savings of 26 percent,\" the presentation said, citing the Javits Center retrofit as a case study where retrofits reduced collisions roughly 90 percent.

Students participating in the project, Lily Verasich and Richard Granato, described the biological basis for collisions and examples of affordable retrofit options such as insect screens, window film, decals, and cords. Granato summarized the scope: \"Daytime collisions make up the majority of collisions. However, artificial light contributes to increasing the number of daytime collisions that occur,\" he said.

Commissioners asked several practical questions. Commissioner Wishstra described draft urban design guideline language the commission's working group has considered: \"All glass within the first 75 feet of the building, measured from finished grade, must use bird‑safe glazing,\" and noted the American Bird Conservancy threat‑factor test as a possible certification metric. Staff explained the threat factor originates from American Bird Conservancy tunnel testing and that a rating of 30 or below is commonly considered bird‑friendly because it indicates 30 percent or fewer birds in the trial mistook the test product for open sky.

Commissioner Carroll asked whether recommendations would target large commercial buildings only or also single‑family homes; staff said residential guidance would differ and pointed to low‑cost, cost‑neutral options such as exterior insect screens that can be effective for houses. Commissioner Mercas asked about local collision data and whether the city could collect counts during migration; staff said there is little citywide empirical collision data but that radar migration maps and tools developed by Audubon and others can estimate exposure. Staff said they are considering launching a local monitoring program as part of the feasibility phase.

Presenters referenced existing Austin steps: adoption of the Lights Out Texas initiative for city buildings (2020) and designation as a Bird City by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (2023). Staff proposed returning to the commission with a more developed recommendation and feasibility analysis this fall and welcomed commissioners’ input and stakeholder collaboration in the interim.

The commission did not take formal action on the presentation; commissioners offered feedback and requested staff return with cost and feasibility information as the recommendation is developed.

Ending: Staff contact information and supplemental references were provided in the presentation backup; commissioners indicated interest in reviewing draft guideline language and participating in stakeholder engagement as staff refines recommendations.","Watershed Protection staff presented a cross‑departmental response to a November council resolution on bird‑friendly design, proposing feasible glazing and lighting measures, stakeholder outreach, and a feasibility analysis to bring to council this fall.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Design Commission reviews downtown density‑bonus projects; selects two sites for further study

Design Commission reviews draft urban design guidelines; staff seeks format direction and working‑group input

City staff brief Design Commission on bird‑friendly building measures after council resolution