Austin’s Land Development Code, together with its locally amended editions of the International Residential Code (IRC) and International Building Code (IBC), specifies robust requirements for Construction Waste Management (CWM) plans embedded within residential construction permit sets. These requirements are heightened for projects seeking Austin Energy Green Building (AEGB) ratings, where construction waste diversion is both a code obligation and a pathway to additional green building credits. Navigating these requirements on the plan sheets, in plan-review markups, and on the jobsite demands a methodical drafting approach that fully integrates regulatory, logistical, and documentary elements.

AEGB CWM Drawing Requirements & Plan Sheet Integration for Austin Residential Permit Sets

Code Framework and AEGB Documentation Criteria

The City of Austin’s Development Services Department (DSD) demands CWM plan documentation as part of residential permit applications, especially for projects targeting any AEGB star level. The City has adopted the 2021 IRC with local amendments, as referenced in Chapter 25-12 of the Land Development Code, and is transitioning to the 2024 code editions with amendments effective July 10, 2025 (austintexas.gov). This adopted framework, reinforced by the AEGB program, creates a tiered credit system, with 1 to 5-star AEGB projects incrementally increasing documentation rigor around construction waste.

For AEGB, plans must:

  • Provide a written CWM plan stating waste diversion goals, separation and recycling methods, material reuse procedures, and reporting protocols.
  • Indicate how diversion targets align with project AEGB star goals. For example, 50% diversion by weight for 3 AEGB credits; 75% for an additional point (dumposaurus.com).
  • Clarify whether the credit pathway is diversion percentage or maximum disposal weight per square foot, as permitted by the City’s C&D Recycling Ordinance.

Location and Structure within Drawing Sets

CWM plans are mandated as a dedicated plan sheet-typically titled “Construction Waste Management Plan,” “CWM Plan,” or similar-within the index (e.g., CWM-1 or WMP-1). The sheet must:

  • Feature a clear title block with project address, permit number, author, and current issue/revision date.
  • Include a drawing legend for all symbols used, such as recycling containers, waste sorting areas, and bin enclosures.
  • Provide a site logistics diagram, coordinated with the civil or site plans, marking locations for waste collection, recycling, salvage, and storage.

All CWM notes, diagrams, and callouts must correspond exactly with those found elsewhere in the submission (site/floor plans), as plan-review redlines frequently cite inconsistencies in location data and workflow descriptions.

Cross-Sheet Coordination Requirements

Coordination with the full plan set is essential. Site plan keynotes should reference CWM bin areas exactly as drawn on the CWM sheet. Floor plans may include callouts directing construction traffic or waste flow toward managed collection areas.

Any failure to align waste bin markers, traffic flow arrows, or storage notes across sheets regularly generates plan-review rejections under “Inconsistent Documentation-CWM plan does not match Site Plan.” Resubmittals must include revised sheets with corrected, matching callouts, and a revision bubble noting the update.

Standard Drawing Details and Notation Practices

Drawing conventions expected by Austin DSD and AEGB reviewers for residential CWM sheets include:

  • Bin/recycling storage dimensions with labeled setbacks (See Sheet SD-1 for setbacks, CWM-1 for bin location).
  • Arrows indicating one-way waste flow, with legends and color coding for clarity.
  • Tabular material specifications and anticipated volumes, formatted as “Material - Estimated Weight (lbs or cy) - Diversion Method - Final Destination.”
  • General notes block, typically at the bottom, citing regulatory requirements (e.g., C&D Recycling Ordinance), AEGB credit intent, and specific on-site handling procedures.

The use of symbology should be consistent with DSD plan markups-commonly, a circle (recycling point), square (waste bin), and triangle (salvage storage).

Dimensioning and Sheet Reference Practices

CWM areas should be precisely dimensioned to ensure contractors and waste haulers can locate, access, and utilize collection points without encroaching on setbacks or obstructing access routes. Dimensions are referenced not only within the CWM sheet but cross-referenced to site planning sheets, as in “Bin Pad: 12' x 8', coordinate with Civil Sheet C-2, reference to 5' min. side setback.”

For larger sites or multi-phase jobs, a sequencing plan diagram may be required, showing how temporary bins shift as construction progresses-marked with phases and updates as plan revisions (bubble and date).

Plan-Review Redlines: Typical Issues

DSD plan reviewers regularly return plans for:

  • “Incomplete CWM Plan”: No written protocol; missing waste stream list, or no diversion target.
  • “Inadequate Recycling Measures”: CWM sheet shows only landfill bins, with no indication of source-separation, commingling, or destination facility.
  • “Uncoordinated Plans”: Waste collection details on the CWM plan do not match other drawing sheets.

Resubmitting requires addressing the precise redline-often by rewriting the plan narrative, updating site logistics graphics, and providing detailed tabular diversion targets.

Detailed CWM Material Diversion Tables & Specifications on Austin Residential Plans

Austin Regulatory Minimums for Waste Diversion

The City C&D Recycling Ordinance (Austin City Code 15-6-112) sets a minimum 50% diversion rate by weight for projects over 5,000 square feet-a threshold almost all new single-family or substantial remodels will meet (austintexas.gov). The AEGB program then builds on this, with higher diversion targets generating more points on the green building scale:

  • 3 points for 50% diversion by weight.
  • 1 additional point for 75% diversion by weight.

Alternatively, projects can demonstrate disposal of less than 2.5 lbs/sf of gross floor area (austintexas.gov).

Material Diversion Table Formatting and Detail

Plans must present a clearly formatted diversion table as part of the CWM sheet. The table’s typical columns include:

  • Material Type (e.g., Concrete, Wood, Metal, Cardboard, Gypsum Board, Plastics, Asphalt, Shingles, Glass, Brick, Carpet/Padding)
  • Estimated Quantity (lbs or cubic yards)
  • Diversion Method (Reuse on site, Salvage off site, Source-separated Recycling, Commingled recycling, Landfill disposal)
  • Destination Facility (with name, address, permit # or registration where possible-e.g., “Texas Disposal Systems, Austin, TX, Registration #C-1234”)

A full table example for an Austin plan sheet:

  • Wood - 2,000 lbs - Commingled Recycling - Balcones Resources
  • Cardboard - 500 lbs - Source-Separated - Balcones Resources
  • Concrete - 8,000 lbs - Reuse as fill - On-site
  • Metal - 1,000 lbs - Source-Separated Scrap - CMC Recycling, 1704 Howard Ln

Local Recycling Facility Call-Outs & Hauler Regulations

Austin Resource Recovery provides a list of permitted recycling haulers and drop-off facilities, maintained on the City website (austintexas.gov). Each project’s CWM sheet should list the specific recycling/processing facilities, along with contact information and permit numbers, to meet plan review “Lack of recycling facility info” comments. Hauler contracts or letters of intent may be required for large-scale projects.

Estimating and Documenting Waste Quantities

Plans must demonstrate clear quantity estimation, typically using past project data, standard cut-and-fill calculations, or industry estimator tables (e.g., lbs of waste per sf wood-framed house). AEGB project tracking and reporting audits actual diversion against estimates post-construction.

Include a brief description in general notes: “Waste quantity estimates calculated based on standard generation rates from NAHB and City of Austin Resource Recovery data. All weights to be verified by certified hauler at time of disposal.”

Detail Conventions and Drawing Callouts

On the plan sheet, use:

  • Waste stream icons adjacent to bins/collection points (e.g., wood bin, cardboard-only area), keyed to the table line items.
  • Notes specifying that “Mixed debris placed into commingled containers will be processed for recycling at a permitted C&D facility, with minimum 50% diversion.”

Jobsite Waste Management Logistics & Site Plan Call-Outs for Austin Residential Zoning Districts

Integrating CWM with Austin’s SF-2 and SF-3 Zoning District Standards

In Austin’s primary single-family zoning districts-SF-2 (“Single Family Standard Lot”) and SF-3 (“Family Residence”)-Land Development Code Section 25-2-492 establishes critical site dimension standards:

  • Front setbacks: 25 feet
  • Side yard setbacks: 5 feet (interior), 15 feet (street/corner lot)
  • Rear yard: 10 feet

Waste bins, enclosures, and material stockpiles must not encroach on setback areas, even temporarily, as confirmed by DSD redlines referencing “Setback encroachment: relocate bins to conform to LDC 25-2-492.”

Temporary Bin Layout and Dimensioning

Though building codes don’t prescribe bin sizes, most plan reviewers expect bins scaled appropriately for projected volume, e.g., a 12’ x 8’ pad for a 20-yard rolloff. Dimension lines and leader callouts must confirm that bins are outside all required setbacks and clear of site entries or driveways. A Plan callout example:

  • “TEMPORARY WASTE BIN LOCATION: 12’ X 8’ PAD, 6’ MIN. FROM SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. ACCESS ROUTE CLEAR, SEE DETAIL A/CWM-1.”

Maintaining Fire Lane and Emergency Access-IFC/AFD Compliance

The Austin Fire Department, enforcing the International Fire Code (IFC, 2024 edition with local amendments), requires access roads for fire apparatus per Section 503:

  • 20’ minimum clear width
  • 13’ 6” vertical clearance
  • Surface capable of supporting apparatus weight (verify with AFD for heavy waste trucks)
  • Turning radii: 25’ inside, 50’ outside

Plan sheets must delineate fire apparatus access and note: “Fire access route (20’ wide clear), no storage or bins within fire lane, per IFC 503 and AFD.” Mark with a leader or a dashed red line on the site plan, cross-referenced to Fire Plan Review notes.

Coordinating Access Routes with Waste Hauling Traffic

Construction traffic flow and waste collection vehicle access must be coordinated with all other site operations. Plan notes should specify haul routes and truck clearances, further emphasizing that no laydown areas, bins, or stored debris shall block fire access at any time, even temporarily during bin drop-off/pick-up events.

Responding to Plan Review Redlines on Site Logistics

Common DSD reviewer comments include:

  • “Bins in conflict with required fire lane. Revise location per Fire access standards.”
  • “Waste storage shown in required side/rear setback. Relocate per LDC 25-2-492.”
  • “Insufficient space for waste/recyclable storage based on projected material volume.”

Resubmissions must pair updated graphics with written notes confirming compliance. Example plan revision callout: “Revised waste bin location for conformance with setback and fire apparatus requirements per city redlines, see CWM-1 Rev. 2, 6/24/2024.”

CWM Plan Narrative & Regulatory Compliance Notes for Austin Residential Projects

City Code, AEGB, and Narrative Structure

As required by the locally amended 2021 IRC, Austin City Code Chapter 25-12, and the C&D Recycling Ordinance, the CWM plan narrative forms both a compliance attestation and a project workflow guide to be followed on site. AEGB mandates require registration in the Online Rating System and explicit documentation of all waste management activities (austinenergy.com).

The drawing’s general notes section should state:

  • “All construction and demolition waste management shall comply with Austin City Code Chapter 15-6 Art. 9, Construction and Demolition Recycling.”
  • “Project shall divert a minimum of 50% (by weight) of construction waste from landfill (or meet alternative per-square-foot threshold), per City of Austin and AEGB requirements.”
  • “CWM tracking documentation will be collected and submitted per AEGB Online Rating System (ORS) process.”
  • “Site logistics and bin layout per Sheet CWM-1; waste streams, destinations, and hauler information per Diversion Table, this sheet.”

AEGB Project Tracking and Documentation

AEGB requires both pre-construction CWM plan submission and post-construction diversion reporting through their Online Rating System (ORS). All hauler receipts, scale tickets, and recycling facility manifests must be preserved for audit. Plan notes should explicitly state: “All waste diversion documentation to be maintained per AEGB requirements. AEGB ORS tracking number: [insert], project files at site for AEGB/DSD field inspector review.”

Waste Separation, Handling, and Labeling-Drawing Notes

Plan notes covering waste separation and handling typically include:

  • “Bins will be labeled for source separation: wood, metals, cardboard, commingled recycling, and landfill.”
  • “No hazardous or universal wastes permitted in CWM bins-disposal per applicable regulations.”
  • “Bins to be covered when inactive and during weather events.”
  • “All site staff to be trained in CWM protocols prior to project mobilization.”

These notes are required to clear DSD comments citing inadequate process description or “Incomplete CWM specification.”

Standard Drawing Sheet Placement of Narrative Notes

General notes regarding all code citations and compliance pathways should be placed in a prominent position at either the top or bottom (per AEGB sheet detail requirements), referenced in the sheet index, and cross-referenced by keynotes on the logistics plan diagram. Sheet callout example: “CWM General Notes, this sheet; see also LDC 25-2-492 for all bin/setback standards and AFD for fire lane requirements.”

Addressing Austin DSD Plan Review Redlines & Revisions for CWM on Residential Plans

Catalog of Typical CWM Redlines in Austin

DSD’s plan-reviewers routinely flag the following:

  • “Missing diversion target”: No percent, weight, or disposal threshold called out anywhere in CWM documents.
  • “Incomplete material list”: Waste stream table omits common Austin C&D materials (e.g., drywall, asphalt, plastics).
  • “Lack of designated recycling areas”: Bins shown but not labeled or not sized, or there is no notation of access routes.
  • “Setback encroachments”: Waste bin or stockpile locations drawn within prohibited areas (per LDC or platted easements).
  • “Obstructed fire lane”: Bin/pad shown within the required 20' fire apparatus access zone.

Correcting Redlines and Drafting Revisions

Targeted responses, referenced in the resubmittal’s response letter and within the drawing revision bubbles, include:

  • Add an explicit note: “CWM Plan targets diversion of 50% of construction and demolition waste by weight, or landfill disposal not to exceed 2.5 lbs/sf, per City of Austin C&D Ordinance and AEGB criteria (ref. 15-6-112).”
  • Expand the diversion table: “Added all major waste streams generated on site, including concrete, wood, gypsum, cardboard, glass, plastics, drywall, metal, brick, and shingles per DSD comment.”
  • Relocate and label bins: “Designated recycling bins relocated 6’ clear of property lines and 22’ from nearest fire lane, now reflecting required setbacks and fire department access.”
  • Revise logistics plan with bin sizing and new site notes: “Temporary waste bin-12’x8’ pad for 20-cy capacity, signage and access per updated CWM plan.”
  • Include cross-sheet references for all major compliance items: “Bin location and access referenced on the CWM plan and civil site plan for full DSD reviewer coordination.”

Drawing-Sheet Conventions to Expedite Plan Review

  • Sheet Index: Add or clearly label “CWM-1: Construction Waste Management Plan.”
  • Bubbles/revision clouds: Clearly encircle all changed details and update revision history block.
  • Redline response notes: On resubmittal, an annotated copy or a comment sheet should reference exactly where redlines have been addressed (e.g., “Rev. 2, see Sheet CWM-1 for updated diversion targets per DSD redlines 6/18/2024”).

These conventions are essential to avoid cyclical resubmittals and to demonstrate regulatory compliance in both construction and DSD/AEGB tracking workflows.

Dimensioning, Sizing, and Material Specifications in Redline Responses

Though not always given explicit minimums, drafters are expected to specify space sufficient for the waste volume and hauler access-bin pads typically at least 12’ x 8’ for standard rolloff containers for mid-sized residential jobs. Bins and enclosures must be specified as weather-resistant (powder-coated steel, HDPE, or heavy-duty marine plywood for temporary wood enclosures). Material spec notes, such as “waste bin enclosure: ¾” marine plywood with galvanized nails and 18ga steel corner braces,” assure reviewers of durability and containment.

Referencing Resources in Response Letters

AEGB, DSD plan review guidance, and City Code sections should be specifically cited in all response and revision notes to support the compliance rationale:

  • “See City of Austin Building Technical Codes (austintexas.gov), C&D Recycling Ordinance (§15-6-112), and AEGB Single Family Rating Criteria.”

Summary: CWM Plan Integration for AEGB Compliance in Austin, Texas

Success with CWM planning on Austin residential projects lies in rigorous, dimensional sheet-level coordination, clear documentation of diversion targets and methods, seamless integration with site logistics and zoning code, and responsiveness to detailed plan-review feedback. From narrative compliance notes to granular material tables, each element must be accurately and consistently represented on the plans to achieve both regulatory approval and AEGB star ratings. Kingsway Drafting & Design ensures clarity, technical precision, and full regulatory alignment in every set of permit drawings.