Austin promotes relocation, deconstruction as alternative to demolition

Austin, Texas, has identified several ways to increase the relocation and deconstruction of homes as an alternative to demolition.

As reported by the Austin Monitor, a memo issued last month from José Roig, director of the Development Services Department (DSD), and Richard McHale, director of Austin Resource Recovery, detailed the findings and recommendations those departments have agreed upon.

The findings are in response to a November resolution from city council that called for more streamlining and promoting alternatives to demolition.

Some of the first steps include developing training programs for the general public and contractors on relocation permitting, prioritizing the processing of relocation applications for expedited review and establishing a fee waiver or voucher system to offset the costs of relocation permit reviews.

Development Services plans to create a new application for demolitions and relocations to preserve review accuracy and recent improvements in processing times.

Relocations and deconstruction as an option for developers will be promoted on DSD’s website by this fall, with information resources for demolitions including material about alternative solutions as well. The city’s Development Tracker online tool will also be updated to include the age of any structure proposed for demolition.

The memo did push back on one portion of the council’s resolution, which would lower the threshold for mandatory recycling of demolition or deconstruction debris to less than the current trigger of 5,000 square feet for both commercial and residential projects, according to the Austin Monitor.

It notes that smaller projects account for a statistically small portion of the waste stream involving construction and that a lower threshold could result in added costs for residential projects that would result in higher rents or sales prices.

“A negative impact would likely put an additional cost on new construction of single-family homes. Additionally, projects under 5,000 square feet represent a very large number of permits but a very small percentage of the waste stream coming from construction and demolition,” the memo states. “Lowering the threshold would greatly increase the administrative workload of enforcement without resulting in a significant increase in waste diversion.”

Before the attention paid to relocations during the HOME and HOME2 slates of building code changes, property owners and developers have frequently criticized the city’s policies as being too restrictive and cost-prohibitive to make relocations an option to preserve existing homes.