Recommendation 20221110-023: Environmental Protection, Landscape Requirements, and Site Plan Requirements — original pdf

Recommendation

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20221110-23 Date: October 11, 2022 Subject: Environmental Protection, Landscape Requirements, and Site Plan Requirements Motioned By: Commissioner Cox Recommendation Approve Staff’s recommendation related to amendments to Title 25 related to environmental protection, landscape requirements, and site plan requirements and include the following amendments: Seconded By: Vice-Chair Hempel 1) Postpone consideration of the Functional Green sub-item, contained in 25-8-Subchapter C, for Staff to provide the following to the Planning Commission: - Provide results of additional formal engagement with community, industry, and other departments. Preferably, provide a summary of stakeholder comments and response from Staff. - Work with City staff and stakeholders to provide an analysis of the impact of these provisions on developable space in CBD, DMU, VMU, UNO, TOD, MF-6, zoning districts and all -MU combining districts, including providing a minimum of two test cases for each zone to consider real-life impact. - Work with City staff and stakeholders to provide an analysis of a minimum of 2 test cases that apply to a scenario with small site less than 1 acre and less than 5,000 sq ft impervious cover, approved in the last 2 years. - Provide greater definition in the Affordability Impact Statement regarding anticipated costs and environmental benefits. - Work with City staff and stakeholders to provide test cases with financial modeling for different project sites in different zoning districts to understand the financial impact of these requirenents, both one-time capital costs and recurring O&M costs, including, but not limited to, assessing CBD, DMU, MF-6, and VMU projects. - Work with HPD staff to assess the utilization of bonus entitlements to incentivize these requirements and minimize cost and developable space impacts. - Work with staff from HPD, Corridor Program Office, and Project Connect Office to assess the implications of this requirement on the ETOD and other corridor planning processes currently underway, with the aim to ensure that housing capacity contiues to support mode shift goals. 1 of 3  - Ensure that regular revisions to landscape design and plantings do not require a Site Plan Revision. - Provide the literature review conducted to define the multipliers for all allowable landcsape elements. - Provide the basis on which the 0.3 threshold requirement was set. - Explain how these requirements will converge with parkland dedication, Great Streets, UNO street design, landcaping, and other exisiting code requirements. - Assess and provide a data-based review of the environmental impact of these requirements on high water demand/use and carbon emissions from equipment needed to maintain landscape on rooftops, etc over the lifetime of projects (suggest using a tool like Pathfinder to assess carbon impacts). -Staff produce actual submittals for both 100% and 90% allowable coverage demonstrating what a successful submittal would include to be approved, including calculations and how these calculations interact with other required calculations. These actual submittals and calculations should also include the review of other departments including Environmental, Austin Energy, Transportation, Public Works. - A summary of how staff will be deployed (existing staff, new hires), how many staff will be required, and training implementation, which has not been reported. - how these initiatives may be integrated into existing codes to have an equal positive environmental impact without the need of, yet another code. This has not been reported. - A verification that a 100% native planting requirement for challenging urban environments has not been proven as possible. - An affordability impact statement for Functional Green that has not been reported. A summary of the benefits of this code that are not included in other codes, or 2) Delay adoption of the Missing Middle sub-item, contained in various subsections of the overall ordinance, for it to be considered through a seperate process that includes additional staff teams, including, but not limited to, HPD and ATD, along with conducting stakeholder engagement on the item and an assessment of other code changes and department actions necessary to support missing middle projects. 3) Costs for Green Stormwater Infratructure requirements for developments with 10% or more income-restricted affordable units or more should be offset with development incentives. 4) Costs for Green Stormwater Infratructure requirements for Affordability Unlocked developments or any developments with 50% or more income-restricted affordable units should be offset with a Watershed Protection Department cost-sharing program. 2 of 3 5) In parking lot design consider that stormwater runoff be flowed into landscaped area to meet environmental runoff goals, while working with existing parking lot design standards. Must consider an edge-of-pavement treatment that allows overland flow of stormwater runoff across the landscape. 6) Add ability for Director to grant administrative variance to reduce Critical Environmental Feature (CEF) buffer based on a consideration of topography, geology, and ecology. 7) Consider the impact of changes to the Critical Water Quality Zone on property owners and provide property owner relief associated with loss of future economic viability of ownership and staff should evaluate the feasibility and implementation of a variance fee exception for properties located in the expanded critical water quality zone. 8) Delay adoption of changes related to new utilities, major replacements of existing utilities, and utility easements associated with planned infrastructure in 25-8-261. 9) Work with Austin Transportation Department staff to align § 25-2-1007 (F) (4) with requirements in the Transportation Criteria Manual to meet staff intent. Vote : 11-0 For: Chair Shaw, Vice-Chair Hempel and Commissioners Anderson, Azhar, Cox, Flores, Howard, Mushtaler, Schneider, Shieh and Thompson Absent: Llanes Pulido One vacancy on the dais (District 2) Attest: Andrew D. Rivera Planning Commission Staff Liaison 3 of 3