02 WG Submitted Amendments Home Phase 2.pdf — original pdf

Backup

HOME PHASE 2 No. Commissione # 4 Reference Pg #/ Proposed Amendment Proposed Text Change (Underline added text/Strikethrough References and Notes (if WG Vote Azhar Vote Cox Vote Haynes Vote Johnson Vote Maxwell Phillips Vote r Document Section deleted text) needed) Tally Vote Text Change Included in Amendment (YES/NO) 1 Johnson Draft Remove setbacks for "internal" lot Modify 25-2-779(F)(4) with the following: Yes MODIFIED 4/19 to put 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Ordinance lines (aka setbacks between new v1 lots created from a replat), maintain (4) Except as provided in Subdivisions (5) and (6) , the following 5 foot setback from original side setbacks apply... and rear property lines. Replace 25-2-779(F)(5) with the following: front and side street setbacks into a separate amendment 2 Johnson Draft 4 Reduce the minimum lot width to Yes MODIFIED 4/19 to 15 5/6 Yes Yes No - I want to Yes Yes Yes Ordinance 15 feet. least 20 15 feet wide." v1 feet - compromise to still allow townhouses and other attached units without being overly wide. Prohibition on driveway access for small frontages remains untouched. MODIFIED 4/19 - clarified 4/6 go to 30 but not doing an amendment b/c I know support is not there. 3 Johnson Draft 4 Allow for "back lots" to be created Direct staff to propose a mechanism for the creation of lots that do Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Ordinance without frontage on a public street, not have street frontage, as long as they have adequate room for to be direction to v1 as long as they have utility and utilities, first responder and physical access guaranteed by staff/less prescriptive physical access via a permanent permanent easement, and meet other required lot standards (i.e. easement shown on the width, area). One potential approach is described below, using the subdivision. term "back lots." Houston, Charlottesville VA, Cleveland OH, and (5) The minimum setback from any property line directly abutting another small lot residential use on property zoned SF-3 or more restrictive is zero. (6) Except for a side-street setback, when an attached dwelling unit abuts a property line, the minimum setback for that property line is zero." Modify line 82 to read: "(2) Except for a flag lot, a lot must be at numerous other cities have a similar mechanism under different names (sub lots, townhouse lots, etc). Insert new subsection (10) under 25-1-21 (Definitions) and renumber the remaining items accordingly: (10) BACK LOT means a lot created without any lot lines abutting a public right-of-way, and which meets the standards in Section 25-2- 779 (Small Lot Single-Family Residential Use). Insert new line (3) under 25-2-779(F) Lot Standards, and renumber the remaining lines accordingly: (3) “Back lots,” or lots without frontage along a public right-of-way, are allowed subject to the following requirements: (a) Back lots are exempt from §25-4-171 Access to Lots. (b) The applicant provides a permanent utility easement(s) of sufficient width to provide electric, water and wastewater service to all back lots as applicable; and (c) The applicant provides a permanent access easement at least 10 feet in width connecting all back lots to a public right-of-way, containing: On line (6), add the following and renumber accordingly. (96) yes limits of the City by an owner who divides the tract in two or more parts to lay out a subdivision of the tract build, create other lots, or lay out streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other parts of the tract intended by the owner of the tract to be dedicated to public use must have a plat of the subdivision prepared. A division of a tract includes a division regardless of whether it is made by using a metes and bounds description in a deed of conveyance or in a contract for a deed, by using a contract of sale or other executory contract to convey, or by using any other method. 4 Haynes Draft 1 Add a definition of replatt to 4/6 Yes ? yes yes yes Ordinance conform code with state law. REPLATT means the division of a tract of land located within the v1 5 Haynes Draft General Delay implementation of HOME2 In various briefings, COA staff has indicated being rushed and even 4/6 No Yes Yes - agree Yes No Yes Ordinance for up to 90 days after final having errors in the implmentation process for HOME1. To minimize passage. legal action, we need staff to get implementation correct. 90 days v1 v1 v1 v1 6 Phillips Draft TBD Establish a low-income financial Ordinance assistance program to assist indivduals participate in HOME2 programs, including cost associated with replatting. Phillips Draft TBD Tailor changes to meet the racial Ordinance and environmental needs of 7 8 Phillips Draft TBD Ordinance individual neighborhoods/areas of town. Strenghten programs/protections to help for renters to relocate, and guidance and information to homeowners to help them stay in their homes through an information/outreach program and discounted city fees in redeveloping their properties according to HOME 2. 9 Phillips Draft TBD Amend the Annual Impact Study to Ordinance focus on displacement of v1 historically marginalized groups. gives them sufficient time to think thuroughly through issues related to implementation. The COA should establish a low-interest lending program (with or without the private sector) with favorable terms up to forgiving loans for a homeowner who qualifies income-wise (who earns 50% to 80% of Austin’s median income) OR is a homeowner who builds additional units on their property and designates at least one as affordable, meaning for someone who earns 60% to 80% of the MFI, including cost associated with replatting. Changes should be implemented in accordance with Austin’s adopted plans, including but not limited to the Climate Equity Plan, Strategic Housing Bluepting, Strategic Mobility Plan etc., to ensure racial equity and environmental justice in how Austin implements HOME 2 across all neighborhoods and communities. Develop resources consisting of financial help for renters to relocate, and guidance/information to homeowners to help them stay in their homes through an information/outreach program and discounted city fees in redeveloping their properties according to HOME 2. Add a Displacement Study, to the Annual Impact Report under HOME1, that looks at population trends in neighborhoods that redevelop under HOME 2, specifically, to lower-income residents, African Americans, and Hispanics, given gentrification policies going back to the 1990s. The effects of HOME Phase 2 should be studied to assess the specific impacts of the policy in addition to ongoing dispalcement impacts of other policies, forces, and realities. Clarify the exemption from the minimum applies to the flagpole only, 10 Haynes Draft Page 4, Add the words "the flagpole Ordinance line 82 section" after the word "a" and not the entire flag lot. 11 Cox N/A before the word "flag". Request staff to develop new Ordinance category for replatting lots subject v1 Draft v1 12 Azhar Draft § 25-2- property owner Allowing Enroachments for Design Ordinance 779 by Changing Minimum Side v1 (F)(4)(b Setback: The minimum side setback ) is 3 feet for architectural features to this ordinance and define a fee appropriate for the level of effort required for review. Consider the development of a fee waiver program based on one or more of the following: trasit stop (1) Proximity of lot to high capacity (2) Preservation of existing structure(s) similar to HOME1 (3) Socioeconomic characteristics of and 2 feet for a projecting 1-story porch, stoop, or uncovered steps. With the definition of architectural feature as follows: A building element, which alone or as part of a pattern, embodies the style, design, or general arrangement of the exterior of a building or structure, including, but not limited, to a window sill, belt course, cornice, flue, chimney, eave, box window, awning, or cantilevered box or bay window. with Johnson amend with Johnson idea but why amend not just "up to 80% MFI" instead of limiting between 50- 80? Yes 5/6 Yes Yes Yes - agree I support the Yes Yes 6/6 Yes Yes Yes yes Yes 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 5/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes - but how Yes is this different from the "infill plat" ordinance we will hear at the 5/14 meeting? No This would encourage 4/6 Yes No - I think No Yes Yes Yes different design features and align with the standard proposed for single unit zones in the LDC Revision process. this is moot based on previous amendment on zero setback for 'internal' lot lines? 13 Azhar Draft § 25-2- Front Yard Impervious Cover No This would encourage 5/6 Yes Yes - staff to No Yes Yes Yes clarify definition of "Front Yard"? 14 Azhar Draft § 25-4- Minimum Flag Lot Width: The No This will allow greater 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Ordinance 779 Requirement: The maximum front v1 (H)(2) yard impervious cover requirement of 50 percent should only apply to driveways and parking. Ordinance 177 minimum width of a flag lot with up v1 (B)(2) to three dwelling units is 10 feet: if sufficient area is available for utility installation; or a driveway is not proposed or 5 feet each if: two or more contiguous lots share a common driveway and sufficient area is available for utility installation; or the applicant can demonstrate access through an General alternative route. Establish a program that provides Amend legal counsel and estate and ment probate planning for homeowners at risk of displacement. 16 Cox/Alberta Draft General Recommend staff develop plain- Ordinance Amend language educational materials v1 ment available to the public describing the new entitlements afforded by both HOME1 and HOME2 and further recommend that these materials be available by the time of implementation of HOME2. Include proactive educational efforts and outreach in historically underserved communities. porches, stoops, and visitable walkways, thereby expanding accessibility. flexibility in subdividing flag lots, while ensuring that every lot has at least 10 feet of individual or shared access width and there is sufficient area for utility installation. critical to ensure that heirs and others are able to stay in their homes and communities even if a homeowner dies confusion or lack of understanding of these code changes and how they impact individual situations. Plain- language educational materials are needed. 15 Azhar No Such a program can be 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes yes No intestate. Public feedback indicates 6/6 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes