PC June 8, 2021 Q and A Report.pdf — original pdf

Backup

PC June 8, 2021 Q & A Report Item B-13 (E) Commissioner Schneider Questions / Staff Response I’d like to get a better understanding of the redevelopment exception under SOS, since a significant portion of the site is in the Barton Springs Zone. Have there been previous cases in the Barton Springs zone where an applicant claimed a redevelopment exception? Yes – these are not unusual. What sort of detention, if any, was required for those sites? Please see below for the rest of these questions. How much impervious cover was allowed? On this project, what sort of detention ponds might be required? Is that determined, in part, but the number of units, the number of vehicle trips, or other requirements? The governing code is LDC 25-8-26. The questions above are answered in sections E and F which are copied below, with a few modifications to make it more understandable. For the complete text please see the link. 1) The redevelopment may not increase the existing amount of impervious cover on the site. 2) The redevelopment may not increase non-compliance, if any, with Critical Water Quality Zone Restrictions, Critical Environmental Features, Wetland Protection, or Section 25-8-482 Water Quality Transition Zone in the Barton Springs Zone. 3) The redevelopment must provide an Environmental Resource Inventory and comply with current code for all construction phase environmental requirements, including erosion and sedimentation controls. 4) The water quality controls on the redevelopment site must provide a level of water quality treatment that is equal to or greater than that which was previously provided. 5) For a commercial or multifamily redevelopment, the owner or operator must obtain a permit under Section 25-8-233 (Barton Springs Zone Operating Permit) for both sedimentation/filtration ponds and SOS ponds. [This is standard Barton Springs Zone operating permit, required for all sites in the BSZ.] 6) For a site with more than 40 percent net site area impervious cover, the redevelopment must have: a. sedimentation/filtration ponds for the entire site; or b. SOS ponds for a portion of the site, and sedimentation/filtration ponds for the remainder of the redeveloped site. 7) For a site with 40 percent or less net site area impervious cover, the redevelopment must have SOS ponds for the entire site. 8) The property owner must mitigate the effects of the redevelopment, if required by and in accordance with Subsection (H). [“(H) Redevelopment of property under this section requires the purchase or restriction of mitigation land if the site has a sedimentation/filtration pond.”] 9) Redevelopment may not be located within the Erosion Hazard Zone, unless protective works are provided as prescribed in the Drainage Criteria Manual.  (F) City Council approval of a redevelopment in accordance with Subsection (G) is required if the redevelopment: 1) includes more than 25 dwelling units; 2) is located outside the City's zoning jurisdiction; 3) is proposed on property with an existing industrial or civic use; 4) is inconsistent with a neighborhood plan; or 5) will generate more than 2,000 vehicle trips a day above the estimated traffic level based on the most recent authorized use on the property. As I read the map, the former Goodwill site is not included in the rezoning case. Is some portion of the parking that the Goodwill site used part of this case? Would the Goodwill site be losing parking under the proposal. If so, would this change how the Goodwill site might be used in the future, for example limiting retail uses? From the Applicant: The former Goodwill building at 2800 South Lamar is not part of the rezoning case and is vacant. If the former Goodwill building were to be used in its current configuration, current building square footage, and for retail uses, it would require 54 parking spaces. The remaining part of the Goodwill tract that is not part of the zoning case totals over 60,800 square feet and has sufficient space to accommodate the required parking. Additionally, any changes to the Goodwill building, such as change of use or redevelopment, will trigger a city review that ensures full compliance with all city requirements, including parking requirements. 2800 South Lamar is zoned GR-V-CO (and is not part of this zoning case). If the owner of that property choose to develop a Vertical Mixed Use building, it would be required to have ground-floor commercial or pedestrian-oriented uses, with a residential use on at least one floor above the ground floor. The CO for this property prohibited a set of and uses and vehicular access to Skyway Circle expect for pedestrian, bicycle and emergency ingress/egress. Except for these COs, this property would be able to developed under GR standards. I’d like to understand better the parkland dedication requirement. How much parkland designation would be required, and is this contingent on the density, the number of units, or other factors? Would there typically be an on-site parkland dedication? Parkland dedication is based on the number of residential units (or hotel keys) proposed in a development application. The requirement is proportionate to the impact a new development would have on the City’s park system. The rezoning has proposed 500 units (50 affordable), equal to a need for an additional 7.2 to 8 acres of parkland (depending on whether the affordable units are exempt under SMART Housing). For high intensity developments that owe over 6 acres of parkland, City Code has a provision that land must be provided, unless the development site does not have land available that would comply with City standards for dedicated parkland - see City Code § 25-1-605 (A) (2). The site is located in the ‘urban core’, a boundary that limits the amount of parkland that can be required for dedication to 15 percent of the gross site area. In this instance, it would equal to roughly 0.44 acres (15 percent of 2.91 acres). The remaining parkland requirement would be satisfied with fees in-lieu of land. PARD staff will review the site development to determine whether it has land available to meet park standards. Onsite parkland dedication is based on whether the development qualifies for fee in-lieu of land (see City Code § 25-1-605) and whether the site has land that complies with parkland standards (see City Code § 25-1-603). Are there protected trees on the site, have they been mapped? A tree survey is not required at the time of zoning; however, a site plan application must include a tree survey and the applicant will have to comply with the current tree ordinance. I’d like to better understand how traffic will be handled. How will traffic management be aligned with the South Lamar Corridor plan? The nearest intersection with a traffic light is Menchaca, but the property does not include frontage there. Will there be a left turn from the other street, Dickson Dr, onto Lamar? The site will be required to comply with City criteria for access and driveway design, including spacing and offset from existing driveways onto S Lamar Blvd. At this time ATD staff has not reviewed a concept plan for this site that includes a proposed access design. The site will be required to construct all back of curb improvements (bike lane, sidewalk, trees, etc.) along their site per the South Lamar Corridor Plan and may participate in the construction of off-site mitigations that have been identified from the South Lamar Corridor Plan, Austin Strategic Mobility Plan as well as other identified transit and multi-modal improvements in the area. Assessment of required transportation mitigation, including the potential dedication of right of way and easements and participation in roadway and other multi-modal improvements, will occur at the time of site plan application. A Traffic Impact Analysis shall be required at the time of site plan if triggered per LDC 25-6-113.