B-08 (NPA-2020-0015.04.SH - Lott Avenue; District 1).pdf — original pdf

Backup

Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET NEIGHORHOOD PLAN: East MLK Combined Neighborhood Plan CASE#: NPA-2020-0015.04 .SH DATE FILED: July 30, 2020 (In-cycle) PROJECT NAME: Lott Avenue PC DATE: January 26, 2021 ADDRESS/ES: 4908 Lott Ave; 5000-5016 Lightfield Ln; 1160-1166 Mason Ave DISTRICT AREA: 1 SITE AREA: 5.01 acres OWNER/APPLICANT: 4908 Lott Holdings, LLC (GMJ Real Estate Investments, LLC) (Matt McDonnell) (Note: Agent at time application was filed on July 30, 2020 – David Suissa) AGENT: Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Michael J. Whellan) (Note: Agent at time application was filed on July 30, 2020 – David Suissa) CASE MANAGER: Jeffrey Engstrom, Senior Planner, Housing & Planning Department PHONE: (512) 974-1621 STAFF EMAIL: Jeffrey.engstrom@austintexas.gov TYPE OF AMENDMENT: Change in Future Land Use Designation To: Higher Density Single Family From: Single Family Base District Zoning Change Related Zoning Case: C14-2020-0135.SH From: SF-3-NP To: SF-6-NP NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ADOPTION DATE: November 7, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: 1 1 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 January 26, 2021 - STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To grant applicant’s request for Higher Density Single Family BASIS FOR STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the FLUM change request from Single Family land use to Higher Density Single Family land use. Staff recommends the project because it would be compatible with residential housing adjacency; provide owner occupied infill housing; and is supported by housing policies and text found in the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, the East MLK Combined Neighborhood Plan, and the Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint. Below are excerpts from the East MLK Combined Neighborhood Plan that supports infill housing and small-lot single family housing in this portion of the planning area. Goal 1: Preserve established residential areas and improve opportunities for home ownership by promoting the rehabilitation of existing housing and new, infill housing compatible with the existing style of this neighborhood. (pg. 44). Objective 1.2: Promote new infill housing in appropriate locations. Goal 5: Provide housing that helps to maintain the social and economic diversity of residents. (pg. 45) Below are additional policies and text that are excerpted from the East MLK Combined Neighborhood Plan that supports a change from Single Family to High Density Single Family on the Future Land Use Map: Fort Branch Recommendations: The greatest need in the Fort Branch area is continued development of quality residential infill. Some larger tracts on Webberville, Tannehill Lane, and Jackie Robinson Street could be developed with mixed residential, while new single family homes are appropriate on the smaller vacant lots. Planned channel improvements to Fort Branch Creek should improve the safety and desirability of many vacant lots. Neighborhood-oriented commercial development should be encouraged in small, existing nodes on Webberville. Consideration should also be given to preserving flood plain lands south of Springdale Park as a natural greenbelt. (p. 69) 2 2 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS EXISTING LAND USE ON THE PROPERTY Single family - Detached or two family residential uses at typical urban and/or suburban densities. Purpose 1. Preserve the land use pattern and future viability of existing neighborhoods; 2. Encourage new infill development that continues existing neighborhood patterns of 3. Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible business or industry and the loss development; and of existing housing. Application 1. Existing single‐family areas should generally be designated as single family to preserve established neighborhoods; and 2. May include small lot options (Cottage, Urban Home, Small Lot Single Family) and two‐family residential options (Duplex, Secondary Apartment, Single Family Attached, Two‐Family Residential) in areas considered appropriate for this type of infill development. PROPOSED LAND USE ON THE PROPERTY Higher Density Single Family - Is housing, generally up to 15 units per acre, which includes townhouses and condominiums as well as traditional small‐lot single family. Purpose 1. Provide options for the development of higher‐density, owner‐occupied housing in urban areas; and 2. Encourage a mixture of moderate intensity residential on residential corridors. Application in nature, and residential areas. 1. Appropriate to manage development on major corridors that are primarily residential 2. Can be used to provide a buffer between high‐density commercial and low‐density 3. Applied to existing or proposed mobile home parks. 3 3 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 IMAGINE AUSTIN PLANNING PRINCIPLES • Create complete neighborhoods across Austin that provide a mix of housing types to suit a variety of household needs and incomes, offer a variety of transportation options, and have easy access to daily needs such as schools, retail, employment, community services, and parks and other recreation options. • The current use of the site is a vacant lot. The applicant requests a change to the future land use from single family to higher density single family to build 55 modestly-scaled attached and detached homes with unit sizes similar to the original homes built in the neighborhood. • Support the development of compact and connected activity centers and corridors that are well-served by public transit and designed to promote walking and bicycling as a way of reducing household expenditures for housing and transportation. The development would be less than a ¼ mile from Springdale Road, an activity corridor, and less than a mile from the Springdale Station Activity Center at the intersection of Springdale Road and Airport Boulevard. Transit: The nearest Capital Metro bus stop (1201 Webberville) is less than a ¼ mile northwest of the site at the intersection of E 12th Street and Webberville Road. Capital Metro #6 bus route picks up on both sides of the street. The #6 MetroBus Local Route is currently operating daily every 30 minutes. • Protect neighborhood character by ensuring context-sensitive development and directing more intensive development to activity centers and corridors, redevelopment, and infill sites. • This request is consistent with LUT A2 and A3, and would bring new, infill housing compatible with the existing style of this neighborhood. • Expand the number and variety of housing choices throughout Austin to meet the financial and lifestyle needs of our diverse population. • The request would allow for the construction of more units at a lower price point than what would be provided under the existing zoning and approved subdivision. • The applicant is committed to providing five long-term, income-restricted homes for sale to families earning less than 80% Median Family Income (MFI) for a period of 99 years. • Ensure harmonious transitions between adjacent land uses and development intensities. • According to the proposed preliminary site plan, three sides of the development would be open space: Springdale Neighborhood Park to the north, a publicly accessible shared use path to the west, and the water quality pond, natural area, and creek to the east. The southern edge of property would follow all required site development setbacks. 4 4 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 • Protect Austin’s natural resources and environmental systems by limiting land use and transportation development over environmentally sensitive areas and preserve open space and protect the function of the resource. • Flooding concerns were brought up by residents at the community meeting. The applicant is agreeable to a conditional overlay that limits maximum impervious cover to 51%, exclusive of any shared use path that is available for public use. • Integrate and expand green infrastructure—preserves and parks, community gardens, trails, stream corridors, green streets, greenways, and the trails system—into the urban environment and transportation network. • The proposed development would construct a shared use path on the west side of the site that would provide a pedestrian and bicycle connection from the neighborhood to Springdale Neighborhood Park. • Protect, preserve and promote historically and culturally significant areas. • Not applicable. • Encourage active and healthy lifestyles by promoting walking and biking, healthy food choices, access to affordable healthcare, and to recreational opportunities. • The proposed development would construct a shared use path on the west side of the site that would provide a pedestrian and bicycle connection from the neighborhood to Springdale Neighborhood Park. • Expand the economic base, create job opportunities, and promote education to support a strong and adaptable workforce. • Not applicable. creative art forms. • Not applicable. • Sustain and grow Austin’s live music, festivals, theater, film, digital media, and new • Provide public facilities and services that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, decrease water and energy usage, increase waste diversion, ensure the health and safety of the public, and support compact, connected, and complete communities. • Not applicable. 5 5 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Imagine Austin Centers and Corridors SITE 6 6 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Parks SITE 7 7 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Transit Access SITE 8 8 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 IMAGINE AUSTIN GROWTH CONCEPT MAP Definitions Neighborhood Centers - The smallest and least intense of the three mixed-use centers are neighborhood centers. As with the regional and town centers, neighborhood centers are walkable, bikable, and supported by transit. The greatest density of people and activities in neighborhood centers will likely be concentrated on several blocks or around one or two intersections. However, depending on localized conditions, different neighborhood centers can be very different places. If a neighborhood center is designated on an existing commercial area, such as a shopping center or mall, it could represent redevelopment or the addition of housing. A new neighborhood center may be focused on a dense, mixed-use core surrounded by a mix of housing. In other instances, new or redevelopment may occur incrementally and concentrate people and activities along several blocks or around one or two intersections. Neighborhood centers will be more locally focused than either a regional or a town center. Businesses and services—grocery and department stores, doctors and dentists, shops, branch libraries, dry cleaners, hair salons, schools, restaurants, and other small and local businesses—will generally serve the center and surrounding neighborhoods. Town Centers - Although less intense than regional centers, town centers are also where many people will live and work. Town centers will have large and small employers, although fewer than in regional centers. These employers will have regional customer and employee bases, and provide goods and services for the center as well as the surrounding areas. The buildings found in a town center will range in size from one-to three-story houses, duplexes, townhouses, and rowhouses, to low-to midrise apartments, mixed use buildings, and office buildings. These centers will also be important hubs in the transit system. Job Centers - Job centers accommodate those businesses not well-suited for residential or environmentally- sensitive areas. These centers take advantage of existing transportation infrastructure such as arterial roadways, freeways, or the Austin-Bergstrom International airport. Job centers will mostly contain office parks, manufacturing, warehouses, logistics, and other businesses with similar demands and operating characteristics. They should nevertheless become more pedestrian and bicycle friendly, in part by better accommodating services for the people who work in those centers. While many of these centers are currently best served by car, the growth Concept map offers transportation choices such as light rail and bus rapid transit to increase commuter options. Corridors - Activity corridors have a dual nature. They are the connections that link activity centers and other key destinations to one another and allow people to travel throughout the city and region by bicycle, transit, or automobile. Corridors are also characterized by a variety of activities and types of buildings located along the roadway — shopping, restaurants and cafés, parks, schools, single-family houses, apartments, public buildings, houses of worship, mixed-use buildings, and offices. Along many corridors, there will be both large and small redevelopment sites. These redevelopment opportunities may be continuous along stretches of the corridor. There may also be a series of small neighborhood centers, connected by the roadway. Other corridors may have fewer redevelopment 9 9 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 opportunities, but already have a mixture of uses, and could provide critical transportation connections. As a corridor evolves, sites that do not redevelop may transition from one use to another, such as a service station becoming a restaurant or a large retail space being divided into several storefronts. To improve mobility along an activity corridor, new and redevelopment should reduce per capita car use and increase walking, bicycling, and transit use. Intensity of land use should correspond to the availability of quality transit, public space, and walkable destinations. Site design should use building arrangement and open space to reduce walking distance to transit and destinations, achieve safety and comfort, and draw people outdoors. BACKGROUND: The plan amendment application was filed on July 30, 2020, which is in- cycle for neighborhood planning areas located on the east side of I.H.-35. The applicant proposes to change the land use on the future land use map from Single Family and Higher Density Single Family. The applicant proposes to change the zoning on the property from SF-3 to SF-6 to build roughly 55 units of modestly scaled ‘missing middle’ housing, including 5 long-term, income-restricted ownership units. For more information on the zoning request, please see zoning case report C14-2020-0135 SH. PUBLIC MEETINGS: The ordinance-required community meeting was held on Thursday, October 7, 2020. Staff conducted the meeting virtually using Microsoft Teams. At the time of the meeting, the applicant had not filed the concurrent zoning case, which was subsequently filed on November 17, 2020. Approximately 302 community meeting notices were mailed to people who live within 500 feet of the property and people with utility accounts (renters), in addition to neighborhood organizations and environmental groups who requested notification for the area. Four city staff members participated in the meeting, in addition to the property owner and representatives, Dick Hall and Julie Jumonville, and the applicant’s agents, Michael Whellan and Michael Gaudini from Armbrust and Brown, PLLC. In addition to city staff, the applicants, and the applicant’s agents, 10 people virtually attended the meeting. After staff gave a brief presentation, Michael Whellan, the applicant’s agent, said they are requesting a change in the future land use map from Single Family to Higher Density Single Family to build roughly 55 modestly scaled ‘missing middle’ housing units. The vacant parcel is currently subdivided to allow for the construction of 31 single-family homes. Mr. Whellan stated that the future land use change and rezoning from SF-3 to SF-6 will allow for the construction of more units at a lower price point than would be provided under the existing zoning and approved subdivision. With this project, Mr. Whellan stated that the applicant is committed to providing five long-term, income-restricted homes for sale to families earning less than 80% Median Family Income (MFI) for a period of 99 years. 10 10 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Mr. Whellan also showed a conceptual site plan and discussed a shared use path on the west side of the site that would provide a pedestrian and bicycle connection from the neighborhood to Springdale Neighborhood Park. Along the eastern portion he discussed the location of the water quality pond and buffer along Fort Branch Creek. Mr. Whellan also explained that the currently approved subdivision would remove a heritage tree, but under the applicant’s proposal, they would like to submit a new subdivision plan, subject to City approval, that redesigns the road to curve around the heritage tree and preserve it. Mr. Whellan provided a side-by-side comparison chart of the approved subdivision under the current zoning and future land use, and the applicant’s proposal. The major changes included allowing the small-lot single-family, and rowhome uses, increasing impervious cover from 45% to 55% and increasing the unit count from 31 to 55 units. For more information, the video recording can be viewed here: https://www.speakupaustin.org/npa/news_feed/npa-2020-0015-04 Following the meeting, City staff followed up with the NPCT contact team and the person who asked this question to provide a formal response on the difference between Community Development Corporations, like GNDC, and the City’s S.M.A.R.T Housing program. That correspondence is on page 19. Below are the questions that were asked with responses: Just to clarify that "Future" land use can also mean current land use? Answer (Mark Walters, City Staff): Yes and no. The City Charter requires that all zoning decisions be in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan. Neighborhood plans, like East MLK Combined, are amendments to Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan and all neighborhood plans include future land use maps (FLUMs) which designate a future land use category for every lot within the planning area boundary. The assigned future land use category is a good guess of what things might like to be in the future – but it is not written in stone, which is why Council created an amendment process. In this case, the future land use category was originally “Single Family” and someone took time and effort to create a single family subdivision but circumstances have changed, perhaps new ownership, so in order to request a change in zoning, the applicant also has to ask for a plan amendment. In this case, the future land use category does reflect the current use (single family subdivision), but in other areas of the city, for example along many commercial corridors, the future land use designation might be mixed use, but the current use is straight commercial. 11 11 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 How would this change impact the homes already in the flood zone on Fort Branch? Answer (Michael Whellan, Applicant’s Agent): We are going to fully comply with city code and have a water-detention facility so there won’t be any more water than currently falls into the creek now. We are required by code to not increase the adverse impact on the creek. Please define "smaller" and "larger" homes. What is the size of the units? Answer (Dick Hall): Approximately 1100-1200 square feet for two bedroom homes, 1500 for three bedrooms. Can you give us an idea what the price points might be? Answer (Michael Whellan): We really don’t know the price of the market-rate homes by the time these units are built – probably about two years from now. Our expectation would be the prices would be 20% less than larger homes on these lots, but we don’t know exactly what the price point will be. The price point of the five income-restricted homes is set by the Housing and Planning Department based on 80% Median Family Income. The number is adjusted every year, but for 2020 it is set at $180,000. In order to address flooding concerns, can you hold to 45% impervious cover allowed by SF-3, or can you get close to that, instead of going to the 55% allowed by SF-6? Or could you design the water quality and water retention facilities to greater than that which is required? Answer (Michael Whellan): Flooding will be addressed at site plan. You can see given the site it’ll be tough, even with the green buffer along the tributary the plan is close to 55%, so we would need to go look at the cost and the best way to do that. It is definitely something we could explore and we will have time to do that between now and any hearing. So that is a good one for us to go back and look at. Traffic is another major concern for our area, especially in the Hog Pen and S.A.N.A. neighborhoods where these roads are narrow, hilly and twisting. I’m assuming a TIA is not required, but wondering if you would be willing to produce a Neighborhood Traffic Analysis to demonstrate what the impacts are locally on traffic patterns generated by this site? Answer (Michael Whellan): On the Neighborhood Transportation Analysis (NTA), first, as you know, instead of one driveway, we’re going to have two driveways. So I think immediately we’re going to have a little bit of an advantage because there are two driveways, bit I think an NTA is going to be done for this. [Note: the NTA will be done at the time of site plan review]. We had talked separately about the possibility of pursuing the Better Builder or at least pursuing some of the standards within the Better Builder program, especially the living wage component. Answer (Michael Whellan): On the better builder program, I haven’t had a chance to explore that completely, I know that the living wage is at $13.50. I think a lot of contractors are now paying that simply because employees are hard to come by, so that is something we will talk further about. Given a site like this though, really hard when there are five affordable units at 12 12 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 basically below cost, I mean at $180,000 it is going to be nearly impossible to build. We have to do 1-Star Green Building under the Smart Housing program, so there’s additional things that we’ve got to do under Smart Housing that add to the cost. But having said that, you know doing a pro forma to see whether the Better Builder Program elements are achievable is something that we are certainly willing to look at. Lastly, we often see poor construction management practices which lead to flooding and a lot of debris winding up on neighboring properties - even some that could cause some structural concerns to some of the neighboring properties, so wanted to give you an opportunity to address what the plans are to ensure there are only the highest standards possible maintained on the construction site. Answer (Michael Whellan): I’m sorry there have been problems, I don’t know why people are not complying with rules and regulations that require appropriate sedimentation features to prevent runoff, but we will be fully complaint. If there is a particular thing you’ve seen that other have violated repeatedly then we would like to know that, especially when we’re under construction so that we do not make the mistakes of others because it would not be our goal. Can you clarify what the acronym NTA means, and other acronyms used through the presentation? Answer (Michael Whellan): NTA stands for Neighborhood Transportation Analysis. It is not a full-blown Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA), it is typically much smaller analysis of a small centralized area done by the city, I think as part of the zoning case. So there will be an analysis done as part of our zoning case. [Note: the NTA will be done at the time of site plan review]. We know that GNDC is in the area and we would like to understand why you are not choosing that route which might provide a little bit more affordable housing in this situation. Also, you mentioned S.M.A.R.T. Housing, can you elaborate and help us understand what that means? Answer (Michael Whellan): GNDC stands for Guadalupe Neighborhood Development Corporation. They are a nonprofit that owns property and also has a robust list of tenants who would like to live in affordable units available for rent. S.M.A.R.T. Housing stands for Safe, Mixed-Income, Accessible, Reasonably Priced, and Transit-Oriented. The reason that I like the S.M.A.R.T. Housing program is that it is with the City, so you’re not asking the neighborhood to enforce a restrictive covenant requirement, which can be expensive. Through the S.M.A.R.T. Housing program, the city would be the enforcing entity and would ensure if there’s any subsequent sale that the sale prices are at that 80% MFI level. S.M.A.R.T. Housing requires a minimum of 5% affordable units, but the applicant is proposing a commitment of five income-restricted units out of fifty five, around 9%. To the city: The future land use map in the presentation is out of date, and what infrastructure improvements and other positive investments (like grocery stores and hospitals) are you making to support the constant changes to the FLUM? Answer (Mark Walters and Rachel Tepper, City of Austin): Staff included the FLUM on slide 10 of the presentation for demonstration purposes only and apologizes for any confusion. (To 13 13 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 ensure accuracy, the latest FLUM was uploaded to the NPA speak up Austin webpage the following day.) As to commercial uses coming into the area, that is a product of the free market. If there is an area where a property is zoned commercial, an individual or corporation can make an investment like a grocery store or pharmacy, but that is an economic choice that the individual or corporation makes and is beyond the scope of the city. The city can, through these planning processes, attempt to provide opportunities by designating areas as commercial or mixed use, making sure that the zoning is available for those uses to come in. As for the hospitals, that is similar to the commercial, we can ensure that the zoning is in- place but the decision that a hospital choose to locate is outside the purview of the City of Austin (planning and zoning tools). Staff apologized about There is another heritage tree (96 or 98inch) in the middle of Mason right at the property line, are you planning to design around that tree? Answer (Dick Hall): That tree is very close to the border of the property and would be removed under the current subdivision, and as we have shown here, would probably need to be removed. That particular tree is more difficult to route around because it is immediately adjacent to Mason Avenue there at the property line. This is all pending but I am not sure if any private road in from Mason Avenue would be possible without that particular tree being removed. Answer (Mr. Whellan): We need to go back and look at that and we need to do the best we can. This isn’t scheduled for any hearing yet, so we can report back to the contact team on that particular tree. I will get back to Jon Hagar, the chair of the contact team. What are the hours that the construction crews will work? Are they going to work weekends? Previous construction sites in the areas had workers all hours of the week and we had parking issues. What are your plans to control the construction traffic and parking? Answer (Mr. Whellan): This is a five acre site and it is not going to get built immediately, so there will be an opportunity to stage on the property. There are sound ordinances and construction regulations with very specific requirements on when you are allowed to build and where people can park. People will have to comply with a traffic control plan and construction will have to be maintained within the site. I’m hopeful that construction will start at one end and move so that people will be able to park on one end while the other half is getting built and then once that half is build people can park where construction is no longer underway. As far as construction hours, we will have to look up the code requirement. How long will all of the construction take from start to finish? Answer (Dick Hall): We are looking at approximately 3 years from now until completion. Is there a subdivision in East Austin that is comparable to what you are getting ready to build? Answer (Dick Hall): The closest at the top of my head would be The Grove at 51st Street. That is a gated community, and that is not our plan for here, but if you look at the groups of 14 14 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 four townhomes that we show on this plan that would be the most comparable. One caveat is that The Grove at 51st doesn’t have the smallest unit sizes that we discussed in the 1100-1200 square foot range. Is there a consideration to name the roads after people who have done great things in East Austin? Answer (Mr. Whellan): That is definitely something we can talk about and would be something on a site plan that we might develop. CITY COUNCIL DATE: February 18, 2021 ACTION: 15 15 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Applicant Letter 16 16 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Recommendation Letter from Neighborhood Plan Contact Team 17 17 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Letter of Recommendation from S.A.N.A Neighborhood Association 18 18 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Correspondence 19 19 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 20 20 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 21 21 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 22 22 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 23 23 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 24 24 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Future Land Use Map Neighborhood Plan Area SITE 25 25 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Future Land Use Map B&W 26 26 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Zoning Map 27 27 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Future Land Use Map Detail SITE 28 28 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Future Land Use Map w/ Site Aerial SITE 29 29 of 38B-8 Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Site Photos 30 30 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 Applicant’s Presentation at the Virtual Community Meeting 31 31 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 32 32 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 33 33 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 34 34 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 35 35 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 36 36 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 37 37 of 38B-8Planning Commission: January 26, 2021 38 38 of 38B-8