B-08 (C14-2020-0081 - 1100 Manlove Street; District 9).pdf

Planning Commission – Nov. 24, 2020

B-08 (C14-2020-0081 - 1100 Manlove Street; District 9).pdf — original pdf

Backup

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF — Page 1 of 29 pages

C14-2020-0081 1 ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2020-0081 – 1100 Manlove Street DISTRICT: 9 ZONING FROM: SF-3-NP TO: NO-MU-NP ADDRESS: 1100 Manlove Street SITE AREA: 0.36 acres PROPERTY OWNER: Schuler Family Trust of 1998 (John Schuler) AGENT: Husch Blackwell LLP (Nikelle Meade) CASE MANAGER: Kate Clark (512-974-1237, kate.clark@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of neighborhood office – mixed use – neighborhood plan (NO- MU-NP) combining district zoning. For a summary of the basis of staff’s recommendation, see page 2. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: November 24, 2020 Scheduled for Planning Commission CITY COUNCIL ACTION: December 10, 2020 Scheduled for City Council ORDINANCE NUMBER: ISSUES Staff has received comments in opposition to the rezoning of this property. For all received written and emailed comments, please see Exhibit C: Correspondence Received. On October 9, 2020 staff received a petition against the rezoning of this property. Due to current events, staff can accept electronic signatures to start the verification process. The petition organizer was informed that original signatures are still required to complete this process. To date, the petition is not considered “complete” because staff has not received the original signatures. The current percentage of the petition for received electronic signatures is 19.88%. A map and list of property owners of the petition area and the electronic signatures received to date are included in Exhibit D: Formal Petition. 1 of 29B-8C14-2020-0081 2 On November 16, 2020 staff received a letter from the EROC Contact Team opposing the rezoning of this case. Their letter is included in Exhibit C: Correspondence Received. CASE MANAGER COMMENTS: The proposed rezoning request is for a property approximately 0.36 acres and is located southeast of the I-35 and E. Riverside Drive intersection. It is accessed via Ingelwood Street which turns into Manlove Street and does not have access to the I-35 frontage road or E. Riverside Drive. It is surrounded by ERC – Neighborhood Mixed Use zoning to the north, SF-3- NP zoning to the east and south and GR-MU-CO zoning to the west, please see Exhibit A: Zoning Map and Exhibit B: Aerial Map. The property is also located within the East Riverside/Oltorf Combined Neighborhood Planning Area and is designated as single-family on the future land use map (FLUM). The applicant is requesting NO-MU-NP in order to use the existing structure on the property as additional office space to support their current business operations at 1317 E. Riverside Drive, the property adjacent to the north. Concurrently with this rezoning request, the applicant has also filed a request to change the FLUM to neighborhood mixed use (case no. NPA-2020-0021.02). BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: 1. The proposed zoning should be consistent with the purpose statement of the district sought. Our current Land Development Code (LDC) defines the neighborhood office (NO) district as: the designation for a small office use that serves neighborhood or community needs, is located in or adjacent to a residential neighborhood and on a collector street that has a width of 40 feet or more, and does not unreasonably affect traffic. While this property is adjacent to existing office and commercially zoned properties, those properties are accessed by either the I-35 frontage road or E. Riverside Drive. Staff considers this property to be internal to a residential area because it is only accessible through multiple local streets. It is not located on a collector as the LDC definition for NO district zoning states, but at the end of a residential cul-de-sac. EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Site North South East West Zoning Land Uses SF-3-NP Single-Family Residential ERC (Neighborhood Mixed Use) Office SF-3-NP SF-3-NP GR-MU-CO Single-Family Residential Single-Family Residential Undeveloped 2 of 29B-8C14-2020-0081 3 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA: East Riverside/Oltorf (East Riverside) TIA: should be deferred to the time of site plan application when land uses, and intensities will be known WATERSHED: Harper’s Branch (urban) OVERLAYS: Residential Design Standards, Scenic Roadways Overlay (Riverside Drive). SCHOOLS: Travis Heights Elementary, Lively Middle and Travis High Schools. NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS Austin Independent School District Austin Lost and Found Pets Austin Neighborhoods Council Bike Austin Crossing Gardenhome Owners Assn. (The) Del Valle Community Coalition East Austin Conservancy East Riverside Corridor Staff Liaison East Riverside/Oltorf Neighborhood Plan Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Friends of Riverside ATX Neighborhood Greater South River City Combined AREA CASE HISTORIES: Homeless Neighborhood Association Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation Pleasant Valley Preservation Austin SELTexas Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group South Central Coalition South River City Citizens Assn. Southeast Austin Neighborhood Alliance Waterfront Condominium Homeowners Zoning Committee of South River City Citizens Number Request Commission City Council To rezone approximately 700 acres from various to ERC To grant ERC. Approved ERC zoning. (5/9/13) To rezone 1,000 acres from various to ERC Case expired. Case expired. C14-2012-0111 East Riverside Corridor Regulating Plan-East Riverside Oltorf Combined Neighborhood C14-2011-0129 East Riverside Corridor Regulating Plan 3 of 29B-8C14-2020-0081 4 Number Request Commission City Council C14-06-0117 GR-MU to LI-PDA Time Insurance Two 1317 E. Riverside Dr. and 1220 South IH-35 C14-04-0030 Time Insurance, Inc. LO & SF-3 to GR- MU 1405 & 1415 E. Riverside Dr. To grant LI-PDA with a set of prohibited land uses, altered various site development regulations and impose residential requirements. Approved GR-MU- CO; CO was for a set of prohibited land uses, maximum impervious cover of 85%, and altered sited development regulations. (1/10/08) To grant GR-MU-CO; CO was to prohibit a set of land uses, altered various site development regulations and impose residential requirements. Approved GR-MU- CO; CO was for a set of prohibited land uses, maximum impervious cover of 85%, and altered sited development regulations. (1/10/08) RELATED CASES: NPA-2020-0021.02: this is the neighborhood plan amendment (NPA) case that is currently being reviewed with this rezoning case. The applicant is requesting to change the FLUM from single- family to neighborhood mixed use. NPA-2012-0021.01: this NPA case requested to change the FLUM from single-family to neighborhood mixed use, a rezoning case was never filed to accompany this NPA case. The case was withdrawn on April 23, 2013, no actions were voted on at Planning Commission or City Council. C14-05-0112: this was the City initiated East Riverside Neighborhood Plan Rezoning case (Ordinance No. 20061116-057). This property’s base district zoning did not change with this process. EXISTING STREET CHARACTERISTICS: Street Existing ROW ASMP Required ROW Pavement ASMP Classification Sidewalks Bike Route Capital Metro (within ¼ mile) Manlove Street ~52’- 90’ Existing 29’-54’ 1 1 No No 4 of 29B-8C14-2020-0081 5 OTHER STAFF COMMENTS: Environmental 1. The site is not located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. The site is located in the Harper’s Branch Watershed of the Colorado River Basin, which is classified as an Urban Watershed by Chapter 25-8 of the City's Land Development Code. 2. Zoning district impervious cover limits apply in the Urban Watershed classification. 3. According to floodplain maps there is no floodplain within or adjacent to the project location. 4. Standard landscaping and tree protection will be required in accordance with LDC 25-2 and 25-8 for all development and/or redevelopment. 5. At this time, site specific information is unavailable regarding vegetation, areas of steep slope, or other environmental features such as bluffs, springs, canyon rimrock, caves, sinkholes, and wetlands. 6. This site is required to provide on-site water quality controls (or payment in lieu of) for all development and/or redevelopment when 8,000 square feet cumulative is exceeded, and onsite control for the two-year storm. 7. At this time, no information has been provided as to whether this property has any preexisting approvals that preempt current water quality or Code requirements. PARD Site Plan PR1. Parkland requirements, either parkland dedication or fees, will be required at the time of subdivision or site plan for any additional residential units; existing units are exempt. There are currently no parkland requirements for non-residential or non-hotel developments at the time of subdivision or site plan. SP 1. Any new development is subject to Subchapter E. Design Standards and Mixed Use. Additional comments will be made when the site plan is submitted. SP 2. The site is subject to compatibility standards. Along the south and east property lines, the following standards apply: a. No structure may be built within 25 feet of the property line. b. No structure in excess of two stories or 30 feet in height may be constructed within 50 feet of the property line. 5 of 29B-8C14-2020-0081 6 c. No structure in excess of three stories or 40 feet in height may be constructed within 100 feet of the property line. d. No parking or driveways are allowed within 25 feet of the property line. e. A landscape area at least 25 feet wide is required along the property line. In addition, a fence, berm, or dense vegetation must be provided to screen adjoining properties from views of parking, mechanical equipment, storage, and refuse collection. SP 3. Additional design regulations will be enforced at the time a site plan is submitted. The Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP), adopted 04/11/2019, identifies existing right-of- way as sufficient for Manlove Street. The traffic impact analysis should be deferred to the time of site plan application when land uses, and intensities will be known. Transportation Austin Water Utility AW1. The landowner intends to serve the site with City of Austin water and wastewater utilities. The landowner, at own expense, will be responsible for providing any water and wastewater utility improvements, offsite main extensions, utility relocations and or abandonments required by the land use. The water and wastewater utility plan must be reviewed and approved by Austin Water for compliance with City criteria and suitability for operation and maintenance. Depending on the development plans submitted, water and or wastewater service extension requests may be required. All water and wastewater construction must be inspected by the City of Austin The landowner must pay the City inspection fee with the utility construction. The landowner must pay the tap and impact fee once the landowner makes an application for a City of Austin water and wastewater utility tap permit. INDEX OF EXHIBITS TO FOLLOW Exhibit A: Zoning Map Exhibit B: Aerial Map Exhibit C: Correspondence Received Exhibit D: Formal Petition 6 of 29B-81511213331TRACT B161145211LOT A6131244129101171A371014A5131268A23-A1B328412C14-2020-0081GR-MU-COLO-CO-NPLR-MU-CO-NPSF-3-NPLR-NPSF-3-NPGO-CO-NPERCERCSF-3-NPSF-3-NPGO-NPLUPINELNOLD EASTRIVERSIDE DRE RIVERSIDEEB TO 35 SBRAMPSUMMIT STMANLOVE STS 35 NB TORIVERSIDEEB RAMPINGLEWOOD STS IH 35 SB TOREAGAN RAMPE RIVERSIDE WBTO 35 NB RAMPE RIVERSIDE DRS IH 35 SBS IH 35 SVRD NBS IH 35 SVRD SBS IH 35 NBJ20±This map has been produced by the Communications Technology Management Dept. on behalf of thePlanning Development Review Dept. for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is madeby the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness.ZONING CASE#:LOCATION:SUBJECT AREA:GRID:MANAGER:C14-2020-00811100 Manlove St.36 ACRESJ20KATE CLARK1'' = 150'ZONING BOUNDARYCREEK BUFFERPENDING CASE!!!!!!SUBJECT TRACT1100 Manlove Street7 of 29B-81511213331TRACT B161145211LOT A6131244129101171A371014A5131268A23-A1B328412C14-2020-0081GR-MU-COLO-CO-NPLR-MU-CO-NPSF-3-NPLR-NPSF-3-NPGO-CO-NPERCERCSF-3-NPSF-3-NPGO-NPLUPINELNOLD EASTRIVERSIDE DRE RIVERSIDEEB TO 35 SBRAMPSUMMIT STMANLOVE STS 35 NB TORIVERSIDEEB RAMPINGLEWOOD STS IH 35 SB TOREAGAN RAMPE RIVERSIDE WBTO 35 NB RAMPE RIVERSIDE DRS IH 35 SBS IH 35 SVRD NBS IH 35 SVRD SBS IH 35 NBJ20Copyright nearmap 2015±This map has been produced by the Communications Technology Management Dept. on behalf of thePlanning Development Review Dept. for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is madeby the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness.ZONING CASE#:LOCATION:SUBJECT AREA:GRID:MANAGER:C14-2020-00811100 Manlove St.36 ACRESJ20KATE CLARK1'' = 150'ZONING BOUNDARYCREEK BUFFERPENDING CASE!!!!!!SUBJECT TRACT1100 Manlove Street8 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Subject: Ms. Clark, Chris Cavello Saturday, August 8, 2020 1:47 PM Clark, Kate C14-2020-0081 *** External Email ‐ Exercise Caution *** I am writing of my concern about the request to change an SF‐3 property at 1100 Manlove to a commercial type property. I am fully aware of the restrictions (today) of NO‐MU. I still consider it a type of commercial zoning. The business (Time Insurance) is not serving this neighborhood This property does not fit the preferred location of being on a feeder. In fact, it is the opposite of that. Placed at the very end of a residential cul de sac. More important, this property zoning change needs to be taken into the context of the history of the property owner who has bought up residential properties that are part of our neighborhood and successfully converted them to commercial use. Our property at 1500 Inglewood was adjacent to SF‐3 lots far from Riverside Drive that after a battle, are now rezoned commercial. The home at 1100 Manlove was bought by the property owner from an elderly gentleman at the end of our shared cul de sac (Inglewood and Manlove are really one street) because the applicant’s larger commercial property has a narrow kink in it that makes it difficult to develop. This property links the two halves of his large commercial property and having more area at this kink will make it more attractive for development should they be joined some day in the future. This is his goal. I see the changing of this property as a Trojan Horse leading to it being wrapped into his larger commercial property which will run the risk of our dead end street being an access to the backside of a large future commercial development. The property owner claims that he needs the space during Covid which I believe is a ruse. He has a lot of space in his current office buildings and I never look at why a zoning change is made now, but rather what it COULD be for a future owner. The larger commercial property is for sale. He has already tried to sub divide this 1100 Manlove residential property with a part that is contiguous to his commercial property being changed to commercial. That failed. This property has been used only as a warehouse for his stuff taking a needed residential property out of circulation for close to a decade. There is little to no reason for allowing this zoning change that will further challenge the character and zoning of this quiet residential street. It is also a property with one of the most majestic Live Oaks in the city. A zoning change will encourage the building of new structures with as much parking as possible and as much commercial building area as possible. This will only risk this amazing tree’s health. I strongly ask that you side with the reasonable neighbors who are not comfortable with the drip, drip, drip of encroachment on this quiet residential street. I cannot go to a hearing for health reasons and ask that this letter be entered into the record and read by the people deciding this case. Christopher Cavello 1500 Inglewood St. Austin, TX 78741 512 769‐1717 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1 9 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Meredith, Maureen Tuesday, August 18, 2020 12:49 PM Clark, Kate RE: Concerns regarding Case Number NPA-2020-0021.02 Mr. Snow: Thank you for your comments. We will add them to our staff case reports. Eventually a community meeting will be scheduled and you will be able to participate in the discussion of these cases with the applicant, staff and other attendees. You will receive a notice in the mail when finalized. When the cases are scheduled for Planning Commission and City Council public hearing notices will be mailed to people who live within 500 feet of the property. You will have the opportunity to voice your concerns at those public hearings. Maureen From: Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 4:43 PM To: Meredith, Maureen <Maureen.Meredith@austintexas.gov> Cc: Subject: Concerns regarding Case Number NPA‐2020‐0021.02 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Maureen, it seems like just yesterday that you sent me a similar request from the Schuler Family Trust to change the zoning of 1100 Manlove Street from Single family‐3 to Mixed‐Use (Case# NPA‐2012‐0021.01...1100 Manlove St. [the case numbers are almost the same (cid:2576)(cid:2577)(cid:2578)(cid:2579) ]). Of course, that was back in 2012 (now time flies) and after a large negative response from the neighborhood, Mr. Schuler withdrew his request. At the time, his reason for the change was to allow the property to be combined with the land that he controls on IH‐35 and Riverside in such a way to allow an exit from his planned 4‐story mammoth mixed‐use structure to the IH‐35 north bound feeder road. Today nothing is said about this mammoth building in this request. Rumor in the neighborhood is that Schuler “wants to allow more social distancing in the other buildings that he uses for insurance offices just north of 1100 Manlove that face on Riverside” by using 1100 Manlove as a third office building. A Covid‐19 justification sounds good in today’s environment! (cid:2576)(cid:2577)(cid:2578)(cid:2579). Of course, I wonder if the real future reason is his plans for the mammoth structure that was mentioned back in 2012 that are described here… http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=187611 1 10 of 29B-8As an owner of a home in the neighborhood, I would like to express my strongest concerns at this proposal. This request should be denied for the reasons noted below. Could you pass these concerns on to those in the City Planning Office and perhaps the City Council who will be considering this case? My wife and I own the home at 1506 Lupine Lane, a block and a half south of the proposed change. Our land (two city lots) has been in my family since my mom and dad (Azalee and Ruel Snow) purchased it in 1946. They built a garage apartment there in 1948, added a house in 1953, and added on to the house in the early 1960s. My wife and I remodeled the house in 2010 and remodeled and rented the garage apartment in 2011. During this 70‐plus year period, the entire neighborhood has been devoted to single family housing originally built in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. Today the neighborhood is occupied by a few original homeowners but in recent years we have seen a renaissance of home remodeling by families and young couples who see value and character in the well‐constructed homes of this area. In the last few years, we have also seen new homes being added on empty lots. For example in the Inglewood and Manlove corridor, we have new homes at 1502 Inglewood St. (two homes built in 2007), two homes at 1504 Inglewood St. (2018), at 1491 Inglewood St. (2000), at 1495 Inglewood St. (1999), four homes at 1499/1501 Inglewood St. (2019), at 1507 Inglewood (2017), at 1509 Inglewood (2019), at 1511 Inglewood St. (2017), at 1104 Manlove St. (2017) and at 1106 Manlove St. (2018). We also have had a recent sale of an empty lot at 1103 Manlove St. (across the street from the home under discussion) that is having two homes built on it. As noted above, my fear is that the real long term reason for this request is that Mr. Schuler, the owner of 1100 Manlove St. (at the end of the Inglewood/Manlove corridor), will want to combine this land with the land immediately to the north that is accessed only from Riverside and/or the land immediately to the west that is accessed from IH‐35 which are zoned commercial/mixed use to provide either parking and/or commercial access to that land. The lands north and west already have access from major roads Riverside and IH‐35 and do not need access from Manlove and Inglewood generating additional traffic through this residential area. Even if a business is built at 1100 Manlove St. separate from the land to the north and west, it will still generate unwanted traffic along this long residential access path (Summit/Inglewood/Manlove). And if the current owner assures the neighbors that he has no need to provide access to Manlove, once a Mix‐Use zoning is approved, a subsequent owner could have differing ideas on the subject and do whatever Mixed‐Use zoning allows. The land has a perfectly good residential home on it today and should be left as residential single‐family zoning. 2 11 of 29B-8If you look at the SF3 zoning description on the city websites, it exists to… ‐ Preserve the land use pattern and future viability of existing neighborhoods. ‐ Encourage new infill development that continues existing neighborhood patterns ‐ Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible business or industry and the of development. loss of existing housing. Its application should be… ‐ Existing single‐family areas should generally be designated as single family to preserve established neighborhoods. The request to change the zoning violates all these principles. There is an existing house on this lot. The house is accessed from Riverside following three residential roads (Summit, Inglewood and Manlove) which has no non‐residential usage. And the existing neighborhood has been growing by the infill development of new single‐family housing. Yes, the property does border on mixed use zoning areas which themselves were set up as a transition space to the noted single‐family housing neighborhood. However, this home/lot has no direct access to major streets (Riverside and IH‐35) that provides access to this mixed‐use area. It would be inconsistent with the usage of this neighborhood to allow mixed‐use zoning to intrude for the first time into the neighborhood. And a subsequent owner would probably not abide with any informal agreement that Mr. Schuler makes. Please deny the request and keep 1100 Manlove zoned as single‐family residential. Thank you for considering my concerns and I know you will listen to the concerns of the residents in the neighborhood as you did back in 2012/2013 and keep this house/lot as single‐family zoning. David L. Snow 1506 Lupine Lane Austin, Texas 78741 408‐550‐4435 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 3 12 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Meredith, Maureen Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:54 PM skye olsen Clark, Kate RE: Case #: NPA-2020-0021.02 // Zoning Case #: C14-2020-0081 // 1100 Manlove St. Thank you for your comments. We will add them to staff case reports and forward them to the applicant’s agents. Maureen From: skye olsen Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:41 PM To: Meredith, Maureen <Maureen.Meredith@austintexas.gov> Subject: Case #: NPA-2020-0021.02 // Zoning Case #: C14-2020-0081 // 1100 Manlove St. Hello, *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** I hope you are well. I am emailing in regards to my concern about the proposed rezoning of 1100 Manlove Street and hope that this email can be presented during tonight's meeting. The residents of our neighborhood are AGAINST the rezoning of 1100 Manlove Street for many reasons. First, allowing this property to be rezoned would disrupt the quiet neighborhood that we have all come to love and call our home. If this property is allowed to be rezoned, there is potential for the entire property owned by the same owner (all along the IH 35 frontage road combined with the property that his current insurance business is on- see attached photos) to be developed. This could lead to major disruption throughout our neighborhood, especially considering the property at risk of being rezoned is located on a dead end street. The owner of the property has used the pandemic as an excuse to get the property rezoned, despite his previous attempt to rezone the same property to multi-use (to build a 4 story building) a few years ago which included putting a club at the corner of Summit and Riverside, the same location as the entrance to our quiet, peaceful neighborhood. (Please see attached proposal from the City of Austin in 2013) The owner of 1100 Manlove is needing the property rezoned to allow for an exit onto 35 north however the current house that is there is empty and in great condition. It would be much better off being resold as a residential property to a family who will love and enjoy our neighborhood like we have all grown to. We do not need non- residential uses ruining our neighborhood. The owner of 1100 Manlove has had past violations of city zoning laws as well and is using our current crisis as an excuse to turn the private residential home into part of a massive development. Allowing this property to be rezoned will only disrupt the neighborhood and prevent the established families living there from residing in a quiet, peaceful neighborhood like we are accustomed. Please consider blocking this rezoning attempt and his efforts to destroy the neighborhood. Thank you for your time. Best, 1 13 of 29B-8Skye Olsen Resident at 1101 Manlove Street 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 2 14 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Meredith, Maureen Thursday, October 15, 2020 5:49 PM Adria & Ron Clark, Kate RE: NPA-202-0021-02 1100 Manlove C14-2020-0081 Thank you for your comments. We can add them to our staff case reports and I will forward them to the applicant’s agents. Maureen From: Adria & Ron Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:34 PM To: Meredith, Maureen <Maureen.Meredith@austintexas.gov> Subject: NPA‐202‐0021‐02 1100 Manlove C14‐2020‐0081 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi, in case of technical difficulties tonight, I’d like to submit my feedback on the proposed rezoning of 1100 Manlove. We (myself and my husband) own the property at 1101 Manlove, directly across the street from 1100 Manlove Street. We are AGAINST the rezoning for the following reasons: 1). The property in question is at the end of a cul-de-sac in a 100% residential neighborhood with NO OUTLET. This is a dead end street. 2) The area is a quiet neighborhood with children, neighbors and pets abound. There are no sidewalks, so additional traffic would be a safety issue for the kids that ride bikes and play ball, neighbors that jog, walk pets, etc. 3). Multi-use property in this location would negatively impact both the quality of life and property values that we and our neighbors have invested our lives in. We bought our home in a residential neighborhood at the end of a cul-de-sac because of the privacy and seclusion that brings from the city. This would impact our quality of life immensely. 4) The owner of 1100 manlove owns the property on 3 sides of our home. He has expressed plans in the past to develop the property and needed access from the I35 frontage road to do so, access he could only get by rezoning 1100. He, in the past, intended to create a parking structure where the home currently stands. 5) The owner uses the home in an illegal fashion now, having workers park in the driveway and using the garage as storage for his adjacent commercial property. Any statements made by his agent that Inglewood and Manlove will not be used to access future mixed use offices is just false. 6) The owner claims he needs more space for his employees due to Covid. This is a weak and transparent excuse to permit a zoning change. This change is simply intended to make his property portfolio more valuable. We should not rezone residential homes because of a temporary need. The existing commercial property on Riverside could easily be developed/remodeled for more space. There are people living full time in the “offices”, those people could be moved into the house to open more office space. The owner and his children could easily work from 1100, as he owns the home, so he would be working from home, thus creating additional space. 7) It is very clear given his past attempts that the owner wishes to develop (or sell) the entire property portfolio that spans Manlove, Riverside, Inglewood and Summit Streets and making 1100 manlove mixed use will open 1 15 of 29B-8the door to more lucrative deals. As it stands, the home is literally “in his way”. However mixed use in this location would change the dynamic of our community and of our neighborhood in a very negative way. 8) Ultimately this would cause serious negative impacts to the 20+ families in the immediate area, plus all the families on Summit as well. We should be preserving single family neighborhoods in Austin and ensuring that children and families have safe, quiet places to grow, to walk, to play, and to build communities. We should not have to worry about offices and office buildings popping up next door when we buy or rent homes in residential areas. This change would only benefit 1 person while it would harm, at minimum, 50+ lives and set a precedent that would allow other residential zoned neighborhoods to be taken over by offices and businesses that do not need to be in residential areas. Please help save our neighborhood by recommending this change be denied. I have attached a Next Door petition, and while I know it can’t be submitted in an official capacity, I thought it would be helpful for you to know that all those who signed are against this change as well. Thank you very much! We hope to see you tonight! Adria Escalante & Ronnie Woodall 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 2 16 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Subject: Thursday, October 15, 2020 4:17 PM Clark, Kate Case : 2020-108085ZC *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Kate, I live in the neighborhood at 1615 Lupine 78741 and oppose allowing rezoning from residential home to business .primarily on the basis of encroachment into the neighborhood. 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1 17 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hans G Sunday, October 25, 2020 7:40 PM Thompson, Jeffrey - BC; Anderson, Greg - BC; Schneider, Robert - BC; Seeger, Patricia - BC; Shaw, Todd - BC; Howard, Patrick - BC; Hempel, Claire - BC; Azhar, Awais - BC; Llanes, Carmen - BC; Shieh, James - BC; Flores, Yvette - BC; Teich, Ann - BC aureen.meredith@austintexas.gov; Clark, Kate 1100 Manlove Street - Zoning Case *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Re: 1100 Manlove Street - Zoning Case C14-2020-0081 and NPA Case No. NPA-2020-0021.02 Note re October 15, 2020 Community Meeting re changing zoning from SF-3 (single- family) to NO-MU (Neighborhood Office – Mixed Use) Dear Planning Commission Members et al. My name is Hans Granheim and my wife is Mary Anne Duprey. We have lived and owned our home at 1505 Lupine Ln. (one street south of 1100 Manlove Street where the zoning change is sought) since 1989. This is not the first time Mr. Schuler, through various agents, has sought this zoning change. The first was I believe in 2012 when Mr. Schuler began using the single family home he owns at 1100 Manlove as a supplemental office (violating its zoning designation) to his adjacent business fronting Riverside Dr. When challenged, Mr. Schuler denied he was using the space commercially. That turned out not to be the case. Neighborhood homeowners, including myself, observed the comings and goings at the residence and it became very clear the property was being used as an office. Mr. Schuler's motivations for a zoning change have little to do with his professed need for additional office space. His adjacent property and its structures are more than able to satisfy those needs. His real goal is to affect favorable zoning status that would eventually allow him to divide the Manlove property and add a portion of it to his existing properties along the northbound IH35 service road to give him additional ingress/egress for his entire holdings in that area. I don't begrudge Mr. Schuler's desire to maximize the value of his properties. I have a real problem when he attempts to do so with obfuscation and false statements, and at the expense of our quality of life in a decidedly single-family home neighborhood. Respectfully, Hans Granheim 512/590-5284 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1 18 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Ann Kettner Haraguchi Sunday, November 8, 2020 10:17 AM Ann Haraguchi Clark, Kate; Meredith, Maureen; Dean Haraguchi Neighborhood Opposition: Zoning Case No. C14-2020-0081 and NPA Case No. NPA-2020-0021.02, 1100 Manlove Street, Austin, TX *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Planning Commission Member, I live at 1106 Manlove Street and am writing to express my opposition to the proposed rezoning of the property at 1100 Manlove Street, which is three doors down from my home. (Zoning Case No. C14-2020-0081 and NPA Case No. NPA-2020-0021.02) The owner of this property, and applicant for the zoning change, argues that he needs to use the existing residential home at 1100 Manlove Street as an office space. I think he desires to incorporate this residential piece of land into a much larger commercial development plan for the large swath of property he owns along the I-35 access road and Riverside Drive. I believe changing the zoning from residential to "neighborhood office" is the first step in this direction. It makes no sense to me that the applicant's business space is so crowded with employees during the COVID-19 pandemic that he requires overflow into the space of 1100 Manlove Street, a house on a quiet cul-de-sac. If he needs to encourage social distancing among his employees, he can use the other residential building next to Time Insurance, or he can have his employees work remotely from home during the COVID pandemic crisis, as have many other Austin businesses. There is no need to rezone 1100 Manlove Street as an office building for this temporary public health situation. Our neighborhood is a residential neighborhood with single-family homes. Having a "neighborhood office" on a cul-de-sac does not contribute in any way to the quality of the neighborhood and would benefit nobody but the applicant. In short, rezoning would go against one of the stated goals of the EROC NP: Preserve and enhance the character of existing residential neighborhoods. I worry that if the property at 1100 Manlove is rezoned as a "neighborhood office," it will lead to other similar rezoning attempts that will change the fundamental residential nature of the neighborhood. In the two years that I have lived on Manlove Street, I have witnessed healthy growth of the neighborhood, with new homes built and new families moving in. Our neighborhood consists of single-family homes in a larger area of commercial and multi-family residences and should be preserved as such. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Ann Haraguchi, Homeowner 1106 Manlove Street Austin, TX 78741 (415) 939-5745 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1 19 of 29B-820 of 29B-8Clark, Kate From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Thursday, November 12, 2020 10:24 AM Thompson, Jeffrey - BC; Anderson, Greg - BC; Schneider, Robert - BC; Seeger, Patricia - BC; Shaw, Todd - BC; Howard, Patrick - BC; Hempel, Claire - BC; Azhar, Awais - BC; Llanes, Carmen - BC; Shieh, James - BC; Flores, Yvette - BC; Teich, Ann - BC Zoning Case No. C14-2020-0081 and NPA Case No. NPA-2020-0021.02...1100 Manlove St Meredith, Maureen; Clark, Kate *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** From: Dave Snow Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2020 To: Cc: Subject: Austin Planning Commission members Dave Snow Zoning Case No. C14‐2020‐0081 and NPA Case No. NPA‐2020‐ 0021.02...1100 Manlove St This letter is in regards to the request to change the zoning for 1100 Manlove St from SF3 to Neighborhood Mixed Use (Zoning Case No. C14‐2020‐0081 and NPA Case No. NPA‐2020‐ 0021.02) that will be heard at the Planning Commission on November 24, 2020. I’d like to state my strongest objections to this proposal. This request should be denied for the reasons noted below. My wife and I own the home at 1506 Lupine Lane, a block and a half south of the proposed change. Our land (two city lots) has been in my family since my mom and dad (Azalee and Ruel Snow) purchased it in 1946. They built a garage apartment there in 1949, added a house in 1953, and added on to the house in the early 1960s. My wife and I remodel the house in 2010 and remodeled and rented the garage apartment in 2011. My wife and I live half the year in this home. During this 70‐plus year period, the entire neighborhood has been devoted to single family housing built largely in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. Today the neighborhood is occupied by a few original homeowners but in recent years we have seen a renaissance of home remodeling and building by families who see value and character in the well‐constructed homes in this area of Austin. In the last few years, we have also seen new homes being added on empty lots. For example in the Inglewood and Manlove corridor, we have new homes at 1502 Inglewood St. (two homes built in 2007), at 1491 Inglewood St. (2000), at 1495 Inglewood St. (1999), at 1499 Inglewood St (two homes built in 2019), at 1501 Inglewood St (two homes built in 2019), at 1504 Inglewood St. (two homes built in 2014), at 1507 Inglewood St (2013), at 1509 Inglewood 1 21 of 29B-8(2019), at 1511 Inglewood (2013), at 1106 Manlove St. (2016), at 1104 Manlove St (2018), and two homes under construction at 1103 Manlove St (across the street from 1100 Manlove). The property under question has a 1900 sq. ft. home on it in 1952 at the end of a residential corridor (Summit to Inglewood to Manlove) on a cul‐de‐sac. The owner currently also owns the land immediate to the north consisting of two former homes facing onto Riverside which he has turned into an insurance business (Time Insurance Agency) with no direct access to Manlove. His representatives have mentioned in on‐line discussion groups and in a meeting with neighbors that the owner wishes to use the home at 1100 Manlove as added workspace for his insurance business rather than expanding the structures that he already has to the north that face onto Riverside. My fear is that the real reason for this request is that in the future the owner of 1100 Manlove St. will want to combine this land with the land immediately to the north that he owns (the Time Insurance Agency land) that is accessed only from Riverside and is zoned as GR‐MU‐CO to eventually provide either parking and/or commercial access to that land. That land already has access from IH‐35 and from Riverside. It does not need access from Manlove and Inglewood generating additional traffic through this residential area. Even if a business is built at 1100 Manlove St. completely separate from the land to the north, it will still generate unwanted traffic along this long residential access path (Summit/Inglewood/Manlove). None of this is consistent with the current SF3 zoning as described below. History is many times a predictor of the future. Back in 2012/2013 the owner of 1100 Manlove tried to change the zoning of 1100 Manlove to Neighborhood Mixed Use in order to combine it with the Time Insurance Agency land to the north, land on Riverside to the east of the Time Insurance Land that he controlled, and land in IH‐35 to the southwest of the Time Insurance Agency land that he controlled to build a very large, 4‐story multi‐use structure (see Case Number NPA‐2012‐0021.01 from that time period). There is still on City websites plans for that very large structure (see http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=187611 ). After a meeting with the owner and 30 objecting neighbors, the owner removed his request and it never came to the Planning Commission. I fear that this is another effort to get the zoning changed now or in the future to Neighborhood Mixed Use such that the owner (or possibly a successor if he sales the land) can in the future ask to use 1100 Manlove in a large development effort. The land has a perfectly good residential home on it today and should be left as residential single‐family zoning. The owner bought the house in 2010 knowing that this was a residential area. The house on the land should be either re‐modeled to be an updated residence or a new house should be built on the land. Commercial use is inconsistent with the neighborhood. If you look at the city SF3 zoning description, it exists to… 2 22 of 29B-8‐ Preserve the land use pattern and future viability of existing neighborhoods. ‐ Encourage new infill development that continues existing neighborhood patterns of ‐ Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible business or industry and the loss development. of existing housing. Its application should be… ‐ Existing single‐family areas should generally be designated as single family to preserve established neighborhoods. There is an existing house on this lot. The house is accessed following three residential roads (Summit, Inglewood and Manlove) which have no non‐residential usage. And the existing neighborhood is growing by the infill development of new single‐family housing as noted above. Yes, the property does border on mixed use zoning areas which themselves were set up as a transition space with setbacks to the noted single‐family housing neighborhood. However, this home/lot has no direct access to the streets (Riverside and IH‐35) that provides access to this mixed use area. It would be inconsistent with the usage of this neighborhood to allow mixed use zoning to intrude for the first time into the neighborhood for the purpose of using the house as a commercial building or to negate existing setbacks. Please deny the request and keep 1100 Manlove zoned as single family residential. Thank you for considering my concern and I truly hope you will listen to the concerns of the many residents in the neighborhood and keep this house/lot as single family zoning. David L. Snow 1506 Lupine Lane Austin, Texas 78741 408‐550‐4435 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 cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 3 23 of 29B-8To: Case Managers Maureen Meredith, Kate Clark Re: 1100 Manlove Street - Zoning Case C14-2020-0081 and NPA Case No. NPA-2020-0021.02 In response to the referenced zoning and NPA cases, the EROC NPCT has voted to oppose the Neighborhood Plan Amendment and to support the neighborhood in its opposition to the zoning change. The Contact Team does not support a permanent change to its Future Land Use Map in order to address a temporary issue for the sole benefit of the property owner. The granting of these Applications will set a bad precedent, not just for the EROC NPA, but for all neighborhood planning areas in Austin. The zoning change would be a grant of special privilege to an individual owner which would result in spot zoning within the neighborhood. During the October 15, 2020 Community Meeting, Applicant failed to adequately explain why such a change is truly necessary. Applicant owns three acres of ERC-zoned property directly below 1100 Manlove. Most of the ERC property is undeveloped except for the structures he is currently using for his business. There is ample room for him to expand his business on the already ERC-zoned property. The requested NPA and zoning change conflict with the EROC NP FLUM and the EROC NP’s No. 1 goal to “[p]reserve and enhance the character of existing residential neighborhoods.” Furthermore, 1100 Manlove is not a collector street. The fact that Applicant’s business is located directly below Manlove clearly shows that the proposed use does not serve a neighborhood need. As to applying a conditional overlay or restrictive covenant to the property, there is no guarantee that any CO or RC with the City would be enforced in the future, much less remain in force should the property be sold. Applicant’s claim that the house hasn’t been used as a residence during the ten years he’s controlled it was his choice. The addition of 17 new dwellings on Manlove and Inglewood since 1999 proves that the best use of the property is residential. The two newest additions to Manlove sold within days of being posted. Please deny both the NPA and zoning applications and include this email in the back-up for the referenced zoning and NPA cases. Thank you. 24 of 29B-8E RIVERSIDE DR E RIVERSIDE DR S I H 3 5 N B S I H 3 5 S V R D N B S I H 3 5 S B ± E R I V E R I V E R S I D E R E D R S I D E D R T S E V O L N A M BUFFER PROPERTY_OWNER SUBJECT_TRACT PETITION Case#: C14-2020-0081 This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. It does not represent an on-the-ground survey and represents only the approximate relative location of property boundaries. 1 " = 100 ' This product has been produced by CTM for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is made by the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness. 25 of 29B-8Case Number: C14-2020-0081 PETITION Total Square Footage of Buffer: Percentage of Square Footage Owned by Petitioners Within Buffer: Date: 10/12/2020 236535.7788 19.88% Calculation: The total square footage is calculated by taking the sum of the area of all TCAD Parcels with valid signatures including one-half of the adjacent right-of-way that fall within 200 feet of the subject tract. Parcels that do not fall within the 200 foot buffer are not used for calculation. When a parcel intersects the edge of the buffer, only the portion of the parcel that falls within the buffer is used. The area of the buffer does not include the subject tract. TCAD ID Address Owner Signature Petition Area Precent 0302060219 1103 MANLOVE ST 78741 0302060243 1405 A E RIVERSIDE DR AUSTIN 78741 0302060201 1317 E RIVERSIDE DR 78741 0302060216 INGLEWOOD ST 78741 0302060244 1405 B E RIVERSIDE DR 78741 0302060205 1507 E RIVERSIDE DR 0302060236 1500 INGLEWOOD ST AUSTIN 78741 0302060246 1106 MANLOVE ST 78741 0302060245 1104 MANLOVE ST AUSTIN 78741 0302060217 1105 MANLOVE ST 78741 0302060221 1102 MANLOVE ST 78741 0302060256 1101 MANLOVE ST 78741 Total 1101 MANLOVE LLC CAMERON PAUL TRUSTEE OF CAMERON PAUL TRUSTEE OF CAMERON PAUL TRUSTEE OF CAMERON PAUL TRUSTEE OF CAMERON PAUL TRUSTEE OF CAVELLO CHRISTOPHER HARAGUCHI DEAN & ANN KETTNER HARAGUCHI MURRAY JOHN & STACY KEESE PEANA KATHLEEN & STEFAN PEANA TAYLOR JEFFREY T & JOHN T LACA ESCALANTE ADRIA C & RONNIE WOODALL no no no no no no yes yes no yes yes yes 10852.71 36480.48 87376.21 2497.72 37604.86 2051.80 1149.59 5965.99 9890.89 10936.08 15826.17 13151.29 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.49% 2.52% 0.00% 4.62% 6.69% 5.56% 233783.79 19.88% 26 of 29B-827 of 29B-828 of 29B-829 of 29B-8