B-13 (Staff Report) — original pdf

Backup

PLANNING COMMISSION SITE PLAN EXTENSION REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) PC MEETING DATE: April 28, 2019 PROJECT NAME: Sunset Ridge Commission Extension ADDRESS: 8401 Southwest Pkwy AREA: 9.606 acres WATERSHED: Williamson Creek, Barton Creek (Barton Springs Zone) COUNCIL DISTRICT: 8 JURISDICTION: Full Purpose APPLICANT: AGENT: Tim Jamail Los Indios Ventures 1006 Mopac Circle, Ste 101 Austin, Texas 78746 LJA Engineering Inc. Reese Hurley, P.E. 5316 Hwy 290 W., Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78735 EXISTING ZONING: GO-CO-NP PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The applicant requests a three-year extension for a previously approved site plan. The approved site plan includes a 4-story office building with a total floor area of 197,300 sq. ft., with associated garage and surface parking, and other improvements. The site was originally approved with SPC-2014-0442C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the requested three-year extension to January 27, 2023 with the condition that a correction be made per request from ATD. Staff previously granted a one-year administratively approved extension from January 27, 2019 to January 27, 2020. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: N/A CASE MANAGER: Jonathan Davila Telephone: 974-2414 jonathan.davila@austintexas.gov PREVIOUS APPROVALS: The site plan was granted a one year administratively approved extension from January 27, 2019 to January 27, 2020. PROJECT INFORMATION: 9.606 acres EXIST. ZONING: GO-CO-NP MAX. BLDG. COVERAGE: N/A MAX. IMPERV. CVRG: 55% PROP. BLDG CVRG: 2.447 ac. (25.5%) PROP. IMP. CVRG: 4.108 acres (42.8%) B-131 of 18REVISED ROW, then LR (Southwest Pkwy and undeveloped) SF-2-CO-NP (Undeveloped) ROW, then SF-2-CO-NP (Big Timber Dr., then SF residential) GO-MU-CO-NP (undeveloped and SF residential) A COMPARISON OF THE APPROVED PROJECT WITH CURRENT REGULATIONS WATERSHED ORDINANCE: This project complies with applicable watershed regulations. LAND USE: The site plan complies with all applicable zoning regulations. ENVIRONMENTAL: All environmental comments have been cleared. TRANSPORTATION: All transportation comments have been cleared. SURROUNDING CONDITIONS: Zoning/ Land Use Northeast: Southeast: Southwest: Northwest: STREET: Southwest Pkwy NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION: Austin Independent School District Aviara HOA Bike Austin City of Rollingwood Covered Bridge Property Owners Association, Inc. East Oak Hill Neighborhood Association Escondera Condominium Owner Association Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods (OHAN) Oak Hill Neighborhood Plan – COA Liaison Oak Hill Neighborhood Plan Contact Team Oak Hill Trails Association Save Our Springs Alliance SELTexas Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group TNR BCP – Travis County Natural Resources Travis Country West Owners Association varies (+/- 165’) SURFACING varies (+/- 112’) CLASSIFICATION Hill Country Roadway R.O.W. B-132 of 18REVISED B-133 of 18REVISED B-134 of 18REVISED B-135 of 18REVISED B-136 of 18REVISED B-137 of 18REVISED B-138 of 18REVISED B-139 of 18REVISED Davila, Jonathan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Good, Justin <Justin.Good@austintexas.gov> Thursday, February 20, 2020 10:02 AM Reese Hurley Mitchell, Amber SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Sunset Ridge Mitigation Memo - DRAFT DRAFT SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Sunset Ridge Mitigation Memo.pdf Good morning Reese, Please find attached for your review the draft mitigation memo for Sunset Ridge. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Justin Good, P.E. Transportation Development Engineer – Lead: South (Consultant) Transportation Development Services Division Austin Transportation Department 901 S. MoPac Expressway, Building 5, Suite 300 Austin, TX 78746 (512) 974-1449 justin.good@austintexas.gov Transportation Development Services Division Website [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Exercise caution. Do not open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email 1 B-1310 of 18REVISED Davila, Jonathan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Friday, March 6, 2020 2:06 PM 'Mitchell, Amber' 'Galati, Donna'; Jerry Rusthoven; Richard Suttle RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Sunset Ridge - Staff Report - ! Year Extension Request.pdf; Sunset Ridge - Zoning Ordinance.pdf; Sunset Ridge - SDP - Consolidated Site Plan Application - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet.pdf; RE: Sunset Ridge; Sunset Ridge; FW: Meeting Request for Sunset Ridge - SPC-2014-0442C; FW: Comments & Responses regarding City requested Sidewalk along Southwest Parkway Thanks for the reply Amber. I would like to address the justifications contained in your email for the application of the Mitigation Ordinance to the above referenced property in connection with the pending SDP permit extension request for the project. 1) Extension Criteria - The code you cited below (LDC 25-5-62 Extension of Released Site Plan by Director) and related link refer to a 1-year administrative extension by the Director, which we have already previously received. Interestingly enough, there was not a single comment from the Transportation Department in connection with this 1- year extension (see attached staff report), even though the extension was granted well after the March, 2017 adoption date of Ordinance No. 20170302-077, which is now being applied to the property in connection with this second extension request. I believe the section of the code that would apply in this instance is § 25-5-63 - EXTENSION OF RELEASED SITE PLAN BY THE LAND USE COMMISSION.; however, this section does refer back to the section which you cited. 2) Site exceeds 2000 Vehicle Trips Per Day – As part of the negotiations with the City whereby I agreed to down zone the property for LI to GO, reduce the allowable impervious cover and comply with SOS Water Quality Standards (all of which the property was grandfathered from by virtue of the Restrictive Covenant governing the development of the property), the City agreed not to require a TIA as long as the proposed development did not exceed 2,200 trips per day (see attached zoning ordinance), not the 2,000 trips per day referred to in the code. Furthermore, at the request of Bryan Golden, I had to redesign the size of the project in an effort to ensure that the 2,200 trips per day limit was not exceeded; due to the fact that the initial building design was based on the trip calculations you provided, which Bryan did not agree with (see attached email threads). 3) Extension Request of Four Years – Please be advised that the pending extension request is only for three years. 1 B-1311 of 18REVISED  I would also like to point out that I have satisfactorily addressed this issue regarding the requirement for sidewalks along Southwest Parkway previously in connection with issuance of the initial Site Development Permit for the project, which was agreed to by staff and subsequently approved by the Planning Commission. Attached are the email threads of the meeting with Bryan Golden and Donna Galati to discuss the matter, the engineers letter requesting Alternative Equivalence Compliance (AEC) for the project and the second update to the staff report indicating that all of the Transportation related comments were cleared based on staff’s approval of the AEC request. Lastly, subjecting a request for an permit extension such as this to new requirements that were either not in existence at the time the original permit was issued and/or have already been addressed in connection with the issuance of the original permit approval, is not only inequitable to the extreme, but would appear to be in direct violation of H.B. 1704, Chapter 245, Issuance of Local Permits, which states in part that: Sec. 245.002. UNIFORMITY OF REQUIREMENTS. (a) Each regulatory agency shall consider the approval, disapproval, or conditional approval of an application for a permit solely on the basis of any orders, regulations, ordinances, rules, expiration dates, or other properly adopted requirements in effect at the time: (1) the original application for the permit is filed for review for any purpose, including review for administrative completeness; or (2) a plan for development of real property or plat application is filed with a regulatory agency. For all of the reasons stated above, please consider this as a formal request to waive the Transportation Mitigation fee-in-lieu of requirement currently being placed on the property in connection with the pending SDP extension request. Thank you for your time and consideration regarding this matter. From: Mitchell, Amber <Amber.Mitchell@austintexas.gov> Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 1:41 PM To: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Cc: Galati, Donna <Donna.Galati@austintexas.gov> Subject: RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) My apologies Tim, I must have missed the original email. Here’s a link to the extension criteria found in LDC 25-5-62: https://library.municode.com/tx/austin/codes/land_development_code?nodeId=TIT25LADE_CH25- 5SIPL_ART1SIPLGE_DIV4REEXRE_S25-5-62EXRESIPLDI From a transportation perspective, this site does not comply substantially with the codes a new site plan would need to comply with (C.1.a) as the site does not comply with City’s Mitigation Ordinance (LDC 25-6-101) and the site has not 2 B-1312 of 18REVISED demonstrated that traffic impacts would be adequately mitigated since the requirement for TIA was relieved for this site even though it exceeds 2000 vehicle trips per day (2.b). As these two things are connected I believe it appropriate to apply the mitigation ordinance to this site in conjunction with supporting an extension request of four years. Let me know if you’d like to discuss further. - Amber Amber Mitchell Program Manager (South) Transportation Development Services Division Austin Transportation Department 901 S. MoPac Expressway, Building 5, Suite 300 Austin, TX 78746 (512) 974-5646 amber.mitchell@austintexas.gov Transportation Development Services Division Website From: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 12:35 PM To: Mitchell, Amber <Amber.Mitchell@austintexas.gov> Subject: FW: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Amber: I just wanted to follow up to see if you received my request email below? From: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 3:41 PM To: 'Galati, Donna' <Donna.Galati@austintexas.gov> Cc: 'Mitchell, Amber' <Amber.Mitchell@austintexas.gov> Subject: RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Amber: Per Donna’s email below, can you please provide me with the justification/reasoning for the mitigation fee requirement of $142,560 in connection with the above referenced permit extension request? Thank you. 3 B-1313 of 18REVISED  From: Galati, Donna <Donna.Galati@austintexas.gov> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 2:57 PM To: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Subject: RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) For that you would need to talk with Amber Mitchell in ATD, as she made the comments. Donna From: Tim Jamail [mailto:tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com] Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 2:56 PM To: Galati, Donna <Donna.Galati@austintexas.gov> Subject: RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Thanks Donna. Can you please explain to me why this is being required at this time? From: Galati, Donna <Donna.Galati@austintexas.gov> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 2:54 PM To: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com>; Barton-Holmes, Christine <Christine.Barton-Holmes@austintexas.gov> Cc: Mitchell, Amber <Amber.Mitchell@austintexas.gov> Subject: RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Tim, I received your voicemail from Wednesday. We can schedule it for PC, but it will go with the staff recommendation of “recommended with conditions” reflecting the ATD comments. Then if PC grants the extension you will have 135 business days to meet the conditions (clear the ATD comments) by getting a correction or revision approved. The extension memo will be released after the correction or revision. Thank you, Donna Donna Galati, CNUa Program Manager III, Land Use Review City of Austin Development Services Department One Texas Center, 505 Barton Springs Rd, 4th floor Office: 512-974-2733 4 B-1314 of 18REVISED  PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: DSD Visitor Log. Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure via DSD’s open data portal. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQ’s CAUTION:This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to CSIRT@austintexas.gov. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Exercise caution. Do not open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email 5 B-1315 of 18REVISED Davila, Jonathan From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Reese Hurley Wednesday, April 15, 2020 12:12 PM Tim Jamail RE: Sunset Ridge Commission Extension / SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) / Update 0 RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2); RE: Sunset Ridge (SPC-2014-0442C(XT2); SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) Sunset Ridge Mitigation Memo - DRAFT Tim, No, there was not a written request to do that. We talked about it when we met with them, then AFD said no to her. Then we got to her asking about an easement, which doesn’t make any sense when our claim was that this could not be accommodated due to site constraints. Then lastly, we got into a fee discussion and ultimately the email from Justin Good. These are the only emails I received from the City regarding all of this. Thanks, Reese Hurley, P.E. Project Manager LJA Engineering | We Build Civilization TM 7500 Rialto Blvd. Building II, Suite 100 Austin, Texas 78735 Office: (512) 439-4700 Direct: (512) 439-4734 Fax: (512) 439-4716 From: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 11:46 AM To: Reese Hurley <rhurley@lja.com> Subject: RE: Sunset Ridge Commission Extension / SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) / Update 0 [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Reese: Did you ever receive anything in writing from Amber detailing her original request to extend the existing path out to Southwest Parkway? 1 B-1316 of 18REVISED From: Reese Hurley <rhurley@lja.com> Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 12:06 PM To: Tim Jamail <tim@ultrainvestmentsinc.com> Subject: FW: Sunset Ridge Commission Extension / SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) / Update 0 Tim, We got the formal review comments back from the City on Friday. There are just a few things. 1) We got a new comment from ATD Engineering that we didn’t get with the prior extension. It seems as though they are going to review the site based on the current ordinance to see if any traffic mitigation is required. There was never a TIA done that I can recall, right? This site would be subject to the current ordinance. 2) Are you okay with requesting the 3-year extension instead of a 4-year extension? It might go easier. I can’t think of an actual legal or technical reason for requesting the 4-years instead of 3. We were just trying to get all we could. 3) To satisfy the traffic control reviewer’s comment, a note will be added on the cover sheet to defer traffic control plans until such time as the property is sold and plans to construct the site are in place. From: Garza, Elsa <Elsa.Garza@austintexas.gov> Sent: Friday, January 3, 2020 1:57 PM To: Reese Hurley <rhurley@lja.com> Subject: Sunset Ridge Commission Extension / SPC-2014-0442C(XT2) / Update 0 Thanks, Reese Hurley, P.E. Project Manager LJA Engineering | We Build Civilization TM 7500 Rialto Blvd. Building II, Suite 100 Austin, Texas 78735 Office: (512) 439-4700 Direct: (512) 439-4734 Fax: (512) 439-4716 [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please see attached comment report. Thank You, Elsa Garza, Planner 1 Land Use Review Division 505 Barton Springs Road | 4th Floor | Austin, TX 78704 (512) 974-2308 2 B-1317 of 18REVISED [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Exercise caution. Do not open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Exercise caution. Do not open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email 3 B-1318 of 18REVISED