07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 9 - Public Comment 2 — original pdf

Backup

07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 91 of 26Annie Street functions as a local residential street, not a corridor or collector. Zoning intensity should reflect that reality. This level of multifamily zoning introduces a scale of density that is not appropriate for this type of street and will lead to ongoing congestion and safety concerns. Additionally, the inclusion of a preschool alongside this level of density creates further risk. Preschool drop-off and pick-up times generate concentrated peak-hour traffic and queuing. Combining this with a 64-unit development on a local street will result in traffic patterns that are inconsistent with the intended function of the neighborhood and increase danger for families. The Future Land Use Map designates this property as Civic, reflecting its long-standing use as a church. Rezoning to multifamily represents a significant departure from that designation and introduces a level of intensity that is not aligned with the surrounding neighborhood or planning guidance. A more appropriate approach would allow for additional housing while maintaining compatibility with the neighborhood. I am not opposing affordable housing. I am advocating for responsible placement and zoning that aligns with Imagine Austin, the Future Land Use Map, and the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan, all of which emphasize appropriate transitions from corridors into established neighborhoods. As a homeowner, neighbor, and steward of a historic property, I ask that you carefully consider the long-term impact of this rezoning, not just in theory, but in the daily lived reality of those of us directly adjacent to this site. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration. Sincerely, D’Anne Hiskey CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 92 of 26"Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 93 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 94 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 95 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 96 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 97 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 98 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 99 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 910 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 911 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 912 of 26This Rowen Vale building is TOO much building on to little land. Please advise. Kind Regards, B R E N D A    L A D D Photographer/Educator/Artist My Passion is My Craft 1509 NEWNING AVE. AUSTIN, TEXAS  78704 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 913 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 914 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 915 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 916 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 917 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 918 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 919 of 26The request is framed as MF-3, but the City’s own materials describe how Affordability Unlocked can make it functionally equivalent to MF-5 height/massing. That gap between the label and the real-world outcome undermines the premise that this is a moderate, compatible change. Staff recognizes the site is within a National Register Historic District, yet the recommendation does not demonstrate how scale/massing/setbacks will maintain historic context—especially if development bonuses significantly increase height. The recommendation relies on anticipated public benefits and layered subsidies, but even staff notes some funding requests have not yet been submitted/received. Major zoning/NPA changes should not hinge on benefits that are not finalized. Citywide goals matter, but they do not eliminate the requirement to demonstrate site level compatibility within an adopted neighborhood plan area and historic district. Specific concerns Inappropriate design and massing The sheer size and limited setbacks are shocking. The design is not compatible with existing home architecture and not in keeping with the established scale of the district. The setbacks proposed are minimal and do not reflect the established pattern of development. Parking and traffic impacts The allotment of parking spaces is inadequate. Increased traffic in a historic district with narrow streets is unsafe and unwise. Our streets are already strained; we are effectively at or over capacity. Incentives / tax credits The proposed public incentives feel inequitable given the scale of the project and its impacts on the surrounding historic district. There are better options for this site. Our community would be supportive of a different approach that respects the historic district while advancing Austin’s housing goals. Mayor Watson is correct: “Let’s work towards being a city that more people can afford, and do it in a way that adds to our existing neighborhoods.” The Travis Heights/Fairview Park National Register Historic District shines with pride and a commitment to upholding our history. This Rowen Vale proposal is simply too much building on too little land for this location. 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 920 of 26Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Marie Case 1606 East Side Drive Austin, TX 78704 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 921 of 2607 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 922 of 26One of the most important aspects of this proposal is its location in a high-opportunity area with strong access to jobs, transit, education, and daily needs. These are exactly the places where more Affordable housing is needed. And candidly, these are also the places where proposals like this often draw the most resistance from well-resourced neighbors opposed to change... It’s disappointing to see the project has already reduced its number of homes in response to feedback, yet continues to face opposition. This underscores the broader challenge we face as a city. You will likely hear requests to delay, postpone, or further dilute this proposal. I hope you’ll stay the course and act on it, especially given what looks to be an already packed agenda on the 28th. I appreciate staff’s recommendation and respectfully ask for your support Thank you for your service and consideration, Greg Greg Anderson CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 923 of 26  Dear Members of the Zoning Commission, My name is James Young. I live at 1803 Drake Ave. I have been a current resident of Travis Heights since 2012, and have lived in or close to this neighborhood since 1999. My wife has lived in this house since 2001. We live within 500 feet of the proposed project. I am writing to oppose the Rowen Vale development planned for Annie Street in Travis Heights, as it is is currently planned. Conceptually, Rowen Vale, is a solid idea, the question is whether this is appropriate for this specific location. A project of this scale is better suited to an area designed to support its size, traffic, and infrastructure demands—and that is not the narrow residential streets of Travis Heights. The developer stated they wanted to purchase property on South Congress, but could not afford it. Also, they could not make their development more to an appropriate scale in relation to the neighborhood because they could not make a profit, based on their business model. Frankly, that is not the neighborhood's concern and neither should it be the city’s. It is not, and should not be the government’s job to cater to developer’s needs at the expense of the residents of the neighborhood impacted. While the ideas behind the project are noble, when it comes down to it, this is a developer-driven, for-profit business venture like any other. The proposed five-story structure would be approximately 35 feet taller than most surrounding single-story homes from the 1940s—representing a shift from roughly 15–20 feet to approximately 50 feet within the interior of a residential block. This scale is not consistent with the City’s stated goal of integrating new housing while maintaining the character and integrity of established neighborhoods. A project of this scale would require an extended construction period, including cranes and deep excavation. Given the narrow streets and built-out nature of the area, construction staging and equipment placement remain unresolved logistical challenges. Additionally, the excavation required introduces risk to protected heritage oak trees, which are both environmentally significant and legally protected. Parking and infrastructure constraints present a significant challenge. The 06 NPA-2026-0022.01.SH - Rowen Vale; District 9 52 of 87 surrounding streets are already under strain, as evidenced by the recent implementation of paid and permitted parking systems in response to documented demand. Introducing high-density housing without sufficient on-site parking will exacerbate these existing pressures. All four streets surrounding the proposed development are designated as paid or resident-only parking, raising concerns about alignment with affordability goals. 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 924 of 26 This is goal reality-based zoning to help ensure success for residents rather than creating a long-term struggles and strain on the surrounding area in Travis Heights. It is also important to consider the performance of existing developments by the same developer. A nearby affordable housing project reportedly faces parking challenges and is not at full occupancy. With the current parking challenges and the lack of parking spaces, some of which will most likely be taken up by leasing staff and daycare employees, the already crowded parking will become even more crowded. If existing projects are facing challenges, it is reasonable to question the urgency and readiness of introducing another high-density development in an even more constrained setting. I happen to live on the one block that, for some inexplicable reason, was the only section of street in that area not designated paid/resident pass parking. We get a lot of cars there as it is, because it is free: local workers, and visitors to South Congress. The street parking on our block can get pretty congested and in the past, before paid parking, we have had it completely full when there was a big event in the area. We also have no driveway and have to park on the street. In the past, we could park on another block until the traffic cleared out, but now we can no longer do that without getting risk of ticketed or towed. The roads turn into one narrow lane as it is when it gets crowded. I guarantee that we would become overwhelmed with overflow from the proposed complex, because we are the free parking in the area. If existing projects are facing challenges, it is reasonable to question the urgency and readiness of introducing another high-density development in an even more constrained setting. Several assumptions presented by the developer regarding future residents and transportation patterns are speculative and not supported by sufficient data. Each time the developer engages in discussions they continue to demonstrate a broader pattern of stretching assumptions to fit a narrative. For instance: Identifying Tiny Grocer as a nearby walkable grocery option overlooks the reality that it is a boutique market with pricing that is inaccessible to many residents. Presenting it as an affordability-supporting feature reflects a disconnect between planning assumptions and lived realities of the residents. · Claims that residents will primarily be drawn from nearby service industry workers, or that many will not own vehicles, require vehicles, or will no longer want vehicles and sell the ones they have, are not substantiated, generalizing, and considering this is an affordable housing project, a bit classist. Housing decisions are influenced by multiple factors—including community ties, schools, family needs, and overall cost of living—not proximity to employment alone. · Stating that many residents may “move in with a car and then realize that they don’t need one” Yet the developer’s own reference to census data indicating that only a small percentage of Austinites do not own cars further underscores this concern. 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 925 of 26 The community feedback has been clear and consistent. There is strong support for 06 NPA-2026-0022.01.SH - Rowen Vale; District 9 53 of 87 Increasing housing and affordability, and a need for it be in alignment with planning principles, neighborhood conditions, and community input. There are too many issues regarding this proposal and a zoning change to MF-3 or MF-4 is not warranted for this property. There is no need to rush this decision, particularly given the number of concerns, uncertainties and the potential for long-term infrastructure strain, a more measured approach is warranted. Rezoning at this scale is effectively irreversible and should be approached with caution. A widely supported and viable alternative is only months away: Missing Middle Housing. MF 3 or SF 5 duplexes, fourplexes, and small multi-unit buildings provide increased density while remaining compatible with neighborhood scale and infrastructure. This is what is suited for this site and quite achievable. It balances all the needs and stressors of this lot. Support for this approach is strong and consistent. It is a rare alignment between community input, sound urban planning principles, and long-term Sustainability. I have talked to a lot of residents in the area around the proposed site. I have read the many, many letters sent.. From what I have heard and seen, not a single one supports this development in it’s current configuration. Everyone is saying the same thing: we support more affordable housing, but not in the development plan currently proposed. Many have come up with alternative, more sensitive solutions to the issue that will both allow more affordable housing and is sustainable to the neighborhood. Some of them are in construction and planning. They know what they are talking about. Please listen to them. The city is taking steps to alleviate affordability concerns by creating a viable and sustainable model. It is not mega development OR housing. The City should not be pressured to make a decision regarding rezoning when a viable option is within reach. The developer does not even have their full funding until after July, so let’s not rush to make a decision that is detrimental to future residents. Rowen Vale, as currently proposed, is out of alignment and causes more problems than it solves if placed here. It is a strong concept applied in an unsuitable context. Thank you for your time and careful consideration of these concerns. I urge you to prioritize solutions that respect the character, infrastructure, and long- term health of Travis Heights, both current and future residents. Thank you, James Young 07 C14-2026-0010.SH - Rowen Vale; District 926 of 26