ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2021-0078 – Shoal Cycle DISTRICT: 9 ZONING FROM: LO, GO, MF-4 TO: DMU-CO ADDRESS: 812 W. 11th St SITE AREA: 0.405 acres (17,660 sq. ft.) PROPERTY OWNER: CJI Properties, Inc. (Lucy Joyce, President) AGENT: Drenner Group, PC (Amanda Swor) CASE MANAGER Mark Graham (512-974-3574, mark.graham@austintexas.gov ) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Staff recommendation is to grant downtown mixed use (DMU-CO) combining district zoning. The conditional overlay is to limit building height to 60 feet. For a summary of the basis of staff’s recommendation, see case manager comments on page 2. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: June 22, 2021 CITY COUNCIL ACTION: July 29, 2021 To be scheduled for City Council ORDINANCE NUMBER: 1 of 22B-10 C14-2021-0078 2 ISSUES The Applicant would like to discuss the Staff recommendation. CASE MANAGER COMMENTS: The subject site is irregular in shape and located near the west edge of downtown Austin near North Lamar Blvd. and Shoal Creek. Access to the site is by West 11th Street from West Avenue or via Shoal Creek Blvd. from West 12th Street. The rezoning tract is 0.405 acres (17,660 sq. ft.) and currently developed with a 14,238 sq. ft. office building. There is a band of MF-4 zoning approximately 30 feet wide along the north edge of the tract and a band of GO zoning of approximately 26 feet wide along the east side of the tract from the MF-4 zoning to the W. 11th St. right-of-way. The rest of the tract is zoned LO. The existing buildings on the 800 block of West 11th Street are typically one and two-story structures. Many were built as detached residences but are adapted for use as offices. There are townhome style residences on the west, detached residential buildings used as offices to the east, retail and business services to the north and residential buildings used as offices across 11th Street to the south. The office building on the rezoning site is three stories tall with surface parking under the building at grade. The applicant requests downtown mixed use – conditional overlay (DMU-CO) with the conditional overlay limiting height to 90 feet in order to build 70 multifamily residential units on the property. The existing office building would be razed. No residential units will be demolished. The rezoning tract is in the Northwest District which limits height more that most of the downtown districts. The Downtown Density Bonuses …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: May 24, 2021 PC DATE: June 22, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C14H-2021-0097 APPLICANT: Historic Landmark Commission OWNERS: Erika W. and Patrick F. Brosnan HISTORIC NAME: Posey House WATERSHED: Boggy Creek ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 1304 Bob Harrison Street ZONING CHANGE: SF-3-NP to SF-3-H-NP COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from family residence – neighborhood plan (SF-3-NP) to family residence – historic landmark – neighborhood plan (SF-3-H-NP) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Architecture and historical associations HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: N/A PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: N/A DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The house was recommended as a contributing property in a potential historic district by the East Austin Historic Resources Survey (2016). CITY COUNCIL DATE: N/A ORDINANCE READINGS: N/A CASE MANAGER: Cara Bertron NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District, Austin Lost and Found Pets, Austin Neighborhoods Council, Bike Austin, Del Valle Community Coalition, East Austin Conservancy, Friends of AustinNeighborhoods, Homeless Neighborhood Association, Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation, Neighbors United forProgress, Organization of Central East Austin Neighborhoods, Preservation Austin, SELTexas, Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group, Swede Hill Neighborhood Association BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Architecture: The Posey House, built around 1924 by Samuel Posey, is significant as a modest example of the National Folk style, a property type that is rapidly being replaced by new construction across East Austin. The one-story house is clad in board and batten wood siding and capped with a pyramidal roof with two pipe chimneys and exposed rafter tails. Features include non-original vinyl-sash windows and a non-original flush wood door, which are proposed to be replaced with 2-over-2 double-hung clad-wood windows and a wood door in keeping with the original construction date. A partial- width entry porch has a shed roof covered in corrugated metal and supported by square columns. Historical Associations: The Posey House is significant for its association with Samuel Posey and his descendants, working-class African Americans who purchased and maintained the property for decades at a time when few financial, policy, and legal resources were available to Black families. At least two generations of the Posey family lived in the house for more than 45 years, until at least 1969. The family sold the house in 1998 after 75 years of ownership. Samuel, Eva, and Eddie Posey had menial occupations that were typical of the jobs available to African Americans at the time: laborer, ORDINANCE NUMBER: N/A PHONE: 512-974-1446 …
Urban Renewal Plan and Neighborhood Conservation Combining Districts Planning Commission April 27, 2021 Agenda Urban Renewal Plan NCCD Development Standards NCCD Land Uses 2 Urban Renewal Plan Background City Council Adopted the Urban Renewal Plan(URP) for East 11th and 12th Streets in 1990 and it has been modified 11 times The East 11th St NCCD was adopted in 1991 and the East 12th St NCCD in 2008 City Council initiated an update to the East 11th and 12th street NCCDs through Resolution 20200423-039 & 20210127-054 Urban Renewal Board has been working on changes since late 2018 and made a recommendation earlier this year 4 Boundaries 5 Urban Renewal Plan Changes Replacing the existing definitions section which largely pertain to land uses with a Land Use section that mirrors the draft NCCDs. Update the process to modify the Plan to align with the rezoning process. the NCCDs Reorganization of sections that are outdated and adding information about changes to the area since the Plan’s adoption in 1999. Development standards within the Plan have been moved to 6 NCCD Development Standards Development Standards East 12th St. No proposed change to: Height Impervious cover Setbacks Compatibility 8 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Currently, there are no FAR limits for any property within the Plan's project areas. Properties within the NCCD but outside the “project areas” have the FAR limits of their base zoning district East 12th St. 9 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) East 12th St. The proposed NCCD removes FAR limitations in all subdistricts. 10 Existing Regulations East 11th St. The only change to Subdistrict 3 is the removal of FAR limits 11 Existing Regulations East 11th St. Areas within the Plan's project areas have additional standards which supersede the NCCD 12 Proposed Subdistricts East 11th St. The areas changing subdistricts are show in color The proposed subdistrict boundaries are different and organized around which street the subdistrict fronts. 13 Subdistrict 4 East 11th St. The new proposed subdistrict 4 will be subject to each properties base zoning standards. 14 Staff Recommendation East 11th St. Staff is recommending that these areas remain in subdistrict 1 and 2. 15 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) East 11th St. FAR regulations are found in both the Plan and the NCCD and in some cases different for a single property On many properties, the FAR …
URBAN RENEWAL PLAN MODIFICATION # 12 Beginning in late 2018 the Urban Renewal Board of the City of Austin (URB) began working on updating the Urban Renewal Plan for the East 11th and12th Street Urban Renewal Area (URP) and associated Neighborhood Conservation Combining Districts (NCCDs). The purpose of their efforts was to update the URP and streamline the URP and NCCDs and to bring them into alignment. Attached is the proposed URP as recommended by the Urban Renewal Board at their January 19, 2021 and February 8, 2021 meetings. Major proposed changes include: • Replacing the existing definitions section which largely pertain to land uses with a Land Use section that mirrors the draft NCCDs. • Moving most of the existing “project controls” for 22 distinct areas in the URP to the NCCD documents to ensure that the site development standards are in one document. • Update the process to modify the URP to align with the rezoning process. • Reorganization of sections that are outdated and adding information about changes to the area since the URP’s adoption in 1999. The URP does adopt the subdistrict boundaries and site development standards of the East 11th and East 12th Street NCCD. For the East 11th Street NCCD, staff’s recommendation differs from the URB’s only outside of the boundaries of the URP. Therefore, staff suggests no changes to this recommendation. 1 of 19B-12 DRAFT Recommended by the Urban Renewal Board January 19, 2021 URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR THE EAST 11TH AND 12TH STREETS URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AREA 2 of 19B-12 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Boundary Description 2. History 2.1 Accomplishments 3. Vision, Purpose, Authority and Scope 4. Redevelopment Strategy 5. Applicability of NCCD Controls 6. Land Use 7. Relocation of Persons, Businesses (including individuals and families, business concerns, and others displaced by the project) 8. Duration and Modification Procedures of URP Appendices: Appendix A: East 11th and 12th Street Urban Renewal Plan; Amendments Appendix B: East 11th Street and East 12th Street Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCDs); Amendments Abbreviations commonly used in the document: URP – Urban Renewal Plan URA-Urban Renewal Agency ARA – Austin Revitalization Authority Note: Some of the tables and figures from the original 1999 Urban Renewal Plan have been deleted or modified, as they were no longer accurate or relevant. The original plan is available at this website: http://www.austintexas.gov/department/urban-renewal-plan 3 of 19B-12 EAST 11 TH & 12TH STREETS …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2021-0033 – East 11th Street Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) Amendment (City Council-Initiated) DISTRICT: 1 ZONING FROM: Current East 11th Street NCCD development standards TO: Revised development regulations and land uses (no base zoning district changes) ADDRESS: IH-35 Northbound frontage road between East 12th Street and the northern alley of East 7th Street; East 11th Street from IH-35 to Navasota Street; Juniper Street between Branch Street and Navasota Street; Rosewood Avenue between Navasota Street and the eastern property line of 1314 Rosewood Avenue; and a segment of San Bernard Street SITE AREA: 28.15 acres PROPERTY OWNER: NA AGENT: City of Austin, Housing and Planning Department CASE MANAGER: Mark Walters (512-974-7695, mark.walters@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is to support the recommendations made by the Urban Renewal Board except for the creation of a new Subdistrict 4 and associated regulations for that subdistrict. For an overview of the recommended changes and specific recommendations see Exhibit C: Proposed Changes to The East 11th Street Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) beginning on page 6. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: Pending CITY COUNCIL ACTION: May 20, 2021 ORDINANCE NUMBER: NA ISSUES: Staff has an alternative recommendation to the Urban Renewal Board’s regarding the creation of a new Subdistrict 4 and related subdistrict regulations. Due to the pandemic, the public’s participation in the development of these recommendations has been limited. Staff held a virtual public information meeting on April 20, 2021 to provide general information and to answer questions. 23 people attended. The questions and responses are attached in Exhibit D. 1 of 19B-13 BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: • The proposed amendments to the NCCD support the goals of the Urban Renewal Plan for the East 11th and12th Street Urban Renewal Area, “Champion sustainable revitalization reflecting diversity, achieving equity, and preserving East Austin’s cultural history.” • The segment of East 11th Street between IH-35 and Navasota Street is designated as an Imagine Austin Activity Corridor. “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.” The proposed changes to the NCCD will support East 11th Street’s evolution into a more complete Activity Corridor. • Allowing denser mixed use development along East 11th Street and denser residential development along Juniper Street supports the Austin Strategic Housing …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE: C14-2021-0037 – East 12th Street Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) Amendment (City Council-Initiated) DISTRICT: 1 ZONING FROM: Current East 12h Street NCCD development standards and land uses TO: Revised development regulations and land uses (no base zoning district changes) ADDRESS: North side of East 12th Street between the IH-35 North frontage road and Poquito Street and the south side of East 12th Street between Branch Street and Poquito Street SITE AREA: 22.91 acres PROPERTY OWNER: NA AGENT: City of Austin, Housing and Planning Department CASE MANAGER: Mark Walters (512-974-7695, mark.walters@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is to support the recommendations made by the Urban Renewal Board For an overview of the recommended changes and specific recommendations see Exhibit C: Proposed Changes to The East 12th Street Neighborhood Conservation Combining District (NCCD) beginning on page 6. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: Pending CITY COUNCIL ACTION: May 20, 2021 ORDINANCE NUMBER: NA ISSUES: Due to the pandemic, the public’s participation in the development of these recommendations has been limited. Staff held a virtual public information meeting on April 20, 2021 to provide general information and to answer questions. 23 people attended. Their questions and comments are included in Exhibit D. 1 of 14B-14 BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: • The proposed amendments to the NCCD support the goals of the Urban Renewal Plan for the East 11th and12th Street Urban Renewal Area, “Champion sustainable revitalization reflecting diversity, achieving equity, and preserving East Austin’s cultural history.” • The segment of East 12th Street between IH-35 and Poquito Street is designated as an Imagine Austin Activity Corridor. “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.” The proposed changes to the NCCD will support East 12th Street’s evolution into a more complete Activity Corridor. • Allowing denser mixed use development along East 12th Street and denser residential development supports the Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint’s goal of locating 75% of all new housing within ½ mile of an Activity Corridor. WATERSHED: Lady Bird Lake, Waller Creek – Urban SCENIC ROADWAY: No EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Varied NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA: Central East Austin TIA: Is not required Blackshear Elementary School CAPITOL VIEW CORRIDOR: No SCHOOLS: Kealing Middle School COMMUNITY REGISTRY LIST: ID 1092 1528 1550 …
SUBDIVISION REVIEW SHEET LUC DATE: 6/22/2021 CASE NO.: C8J-2008-0176.01.8A SUBDIVISION NAME: Sun Chase South Section Eight AREA: 20.157 acres OWNER/APPLICANT: Qualico CR, LP (Vera Massaro) AGENT: Carlson Brigance & Doering, Inc. (Brian Kelling) ADDRESS OF SUBDIVISION: Sweet Mimosa Drive and Sparkling Light Drive GRIDS: R-11, R-12 WATERSHED: Dry Creek East COUNTY: Travis LOT(S): 91 JURISDICTION: Limited Purpose EXISTING ZONING: I-SF-4A MUD: Southeast Travis County MUD Number 1 PROPOSED LAND USE: Single Family, Sidewalk/Landscape ADMINISTRATIVE WAIVERS: Granted for cut and fill associated with water quality and detention facilities. VARIANCES: None SIDEWALKS: Sidewalks will be provided on all internal streets. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: Requesting approval of the Sun Chase South Section Eight Final Plat, consisting of 91 lots on 20.157 acres. Water and wastewater will be provided by the City of Austin. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval of this subdivision. This plan has outstanding conditions to be satisfied to meet all applicable County, State and City of Austin LDC requirements. ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION ACTION: CASE MANAGER: Sarah Sumner Email address: sarah.sumner@traviscountytx.gov PHONE: 512-854-7687 1 1 of 7B-15 2 of 7B-15 A Y R E S M O A B O D S T Y S R A U C R T N V E Y N O. 2 U 1 9 6 M B E R 1 6 9, C B D Carlson, Brigance & Doering, Inc. FIRM ID #F3791 REG. # 10024900 Civil Engineering Surveying 5501 West William Cannon Austin, Texas 78749 Phone No. (512) 280-5160 Fax No. (512) 280-5165 3 of 7B-15 4 of 7B-15 5 of 7B-15 6 of 7B-15 Sun Chase South Section 8 Location Map 7 of 7B-15
SUBDIVISION REVIEW SHEET CASE NO.: C8-2020-0033 COMMISSION DATE: June 22, 2021 SUBDIVISION NAME: Saddle Ridge at Wildhorse Ranch Preliminary Plan ADDRESS: 10621 Blue Bluff Road APPLICANT: Heart of Manor LP AGENT: Kimley-Horn and Associates (Kevin Burks) ZONING: Wildhorse Ranch PUD NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Wildhorse Ranch PUD AREA: 82.24 acres COUNTY: Travis LOTS: 248 DISTRICT: 1 WATERSHED: Gilleland Creek JURISDICTION: Full Purpose SIDEWALKS: Sidewalks will be constructed along all internal streets and the subdivision side of Blue Bluff Road. VARIANCES: Variances from LDC § 25-8-341, to allow cut over four feet, and LDC § 25-8-342, to allow fill over four feet. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The request is for the approval of Saddle Ridge at Wildhorse Ranch Preliminary Plan, consisting of 248 lots on 82.24 acres, and variances from LDC § 25-8-341, to allow cut over four feet, and LDC § 25-8- 342, to allow fill over four feet. The Environmental Commission recommended the environmental variances on January 20, 2021, as attached in Exhibit D. Staff supports approval of the variances; however, additional information is required for the preliminary plan. Because of this, staff recommends disapproval of the preliminary plan for the reasons listed in the staff report. The preliminary plan does not comply with the criteria for approval in LDC 25-4-84(B) and staff recommends disapproval for the reasons listed in the attached comment report. An application that has been disapproved with reasons may be updated to address those reasons until the application expires. If the applicant submits an update to address the reasons for disapproval, that update will be presented to the Land Use Commission within fifteen days of submittal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends disapproval of the preliminary plan for the reasons listed in the comment report dated June 17, 2021, and attached as Exhibit C. Staff recommends approval of the variances for the reasons listed in the Environmental Commission motion for variances from LDC § 25-8-341 and 25-8-34, and attached as Exhibit D. CASE MANAGER: Jennifer Bennett EMAIL: jennifer.bennett-reumuth@austintexas.gov ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Vicinity map Exhibit B: Proposed preliminary plan Exhibit C: Comment report dated June 17, 2021 Exhibit D: Environmental Commission motion for variances from LDC § 25-8-341 and 25-8-34 PHONE: 512-974-9002 B-161 of 12 U S R O U T E 2 9 0 BLUE BLUFF ROAD T E X A S S T A T E H I G H W A Y 1 3 0 LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1" …
Long-Range Capital Improvement Planning Housing and Planning Department www.austintexas.gov/department/ housing-planning INTRODUCTORY GUIDE PURPOSE OF THE LRCP Long-Range Capital Improvement Planning (LRCP) is the process that examines CIP needs looking 10 years or more into the future. It is a lens for viewing CIP projects, which are typically granular in nature, within the scale of high-level policies identified in the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Direction 2023. It is updated on a two-year cycle and contributes to the annual recommendations approved by Planning commission. COMPONENTS OF THE LRCP Planning for long-range CIP investments enjoins multiple sources of information. The major elements that inform the planning process are maintained by multiple city departments including Public Works and the Budget Office. The main components, and their oft-seen abbreviations, are summarized below. CIP - Capital Improvement Program The City of Austin regularly undertakes projects to improve public facilities and infrastructure assets for the benefit of its citizens. Projects include the construction of city facilities such as recreation centers and libraries as well as the reconstruction of streets, replacement of water/wastewater lines and provision of power for City of Austin residents. Collectively, these projects are referred to as the City of Austin CIP. CIA - Comprehensive Infrastructure Assessment The CIA identifies, inventories, and reports the conditions of the City’s infrastructure assets. The information is set up in a framework that enables departments to identify capital, maintenance, and operational needs to address infrastructure performance and maximize the lifespan of the City’s infrastructure assets. Lead Department: Public Works Department, Asset Management Office RNA - Rolling Needs Assessment Highlighted Projects The RNA is a collection of identified, highlighted capital projects of interest that demonstrates the breadth of City projects proposed within the next 10 years. The RNA includes a brief summary of departments’ CIP project identification, prioritization, and selection processes. Overall, the RNA includes 21 departments and over 200 highlighted capital projects. Lead Department: Financial Services, Budget Office SIA - Strategic Investment Analysis The SIA examines the highlighted projects identified in the RNA, their relationship to City policies, and how their geographic dispersion could have potentially differing impacts throughout Austin. The SIA is presented as a series of charts and interactive maps to provide a variety of frameworks that can be used to strategically inform project and policy recommendations. Lead Department: Housing and Planning Department, Inclusive Planning 1 of 5B-17 PLANNING COMMISSION'S ROLE IN THE LRCP By …
Long-Range Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Planning FYs 21-23 Planning Commission 6/22/21 ACTION NEEDED ON JUNE 22 M e e t a n n u a l c h a r te r re q u i re m e n t f o r P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n to a p p ro v e F Ys 2 1 - 2 3 L o n g - R a n g e C a p i t a l I m p ro v e m e n t P ro g r a m P l a n n i n g ( L RC P ) M e m o of Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t r a n s m i s s i o n to C i t y M a n a g e r b y J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 2 1 . Comprehensive Plan Joint Committee (CPJC) to complete and approve memo for June 22 Planning Commission (PC) meeting LONG-RANGE CIP PLANNING PURPOSE • Imagine Austin + Strategic Direction 2023 • Aligning CIP with Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan Joint Committee (CPJC) to complete and approve memo for June 22 Planning Commission (PC) meeting DATA RESOURCES • Comprehensive Infrastructure Assessment, CIA Comprehensive Plan Joint Committee (CPJC) to complete and approve memo for June 22 • Rolling Needs Assessment, RNA Planning Commission (PC) meeting • Strategic Investment Analysis, SIA NEW THIS FYs 21-23 LRCP CYCLE • Long-Range CIP website: • https://imagineaustin.wixsite.com/lrcp Interactive maps and tables to offer accessibility and functionality with the data • Strengthening CIP alignment with Imagine Austin and Strategic Direction 2023 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS • On June 11 Comprehensive Plan Joint Committee (CPJC) final drafted and voted to approve the FYs 21-23 LRCP Memo of Recommendations • Key themes emerged in the recommendations: • Resiliency • Equity • Asset management and risk-based approach to infrastructure/CIP QUESTIONS & ANSWERS Staff is available to answer questions: Housing and Planning Department: • Matt Dugan, Division Manager • Dee Dee Quinnelly, Principal Planner • Lacy Patterson, Senior Planner Comprehensive Plan Joint Committee (CPJC) to complete and approve memo for June 22 Planning Commission (PC) meeting Budget Office: • Tina Van Wie, Corporate Budget …
Comm. Chapter/ Page # Topic Proposed Amendment Justification References (if needed) Notes PC Vote Staff Response Proposed Text Change (Underline added text/Strikethrough deleted text) Text Change Included in Amendment (YES/NO) Image included The creation of a subdistrict on the Eastern end (subdistrict 4) aligns with the URB approval The creation of the subdistrict is necessary to reflect our other recommendations Proposed Amend- ment Tracking # Sub- Chapter 1 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 6 of 19 Changes to the 11th St. NCCD Subdistrict 2 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 10 of 19 11th St. NCCD Height No Recommendation for subdistrict 1,2 and 3, aligns with staff recommendation and recommendation for subdistrict 4 aligns with URB recommendation No No No No No No Yes Allows for existing planning processes to proceed while aligning with existing entitlements and responding to neighborhood concerns Responding to neighborhood concerns. Cocktail lounge is an accessory use in hotel-motel and allowing it as a conditional use would allow better planning around the accessory use Responding to neighborhood concerns and aligning with existing neighborhood character Responding to neighborhood concerns and aligning with existing neighborhood character Responding to neighborhood concerns. Cocktail lounge is an accessory use in hotel-motel and allowing it as a conditional use would allow better planning around the accessory use Responding to neighborhood concerns Responding to neighborhood concerns Intention: No nonconforming structure should be created in subdistrict 4 Intention: No nonconforming structure should be created in subdistrict 4 Intention: No nonconforming use should be created Intention: No nonconforming structure should be created in all subdistricts Intention: No nonconforming use should be created Intention: No nonconforming use should be created 12th St NCCD Standards Changes pdf on page: https://www.sp eakupaustin.org /urb-nccd The map is only for reference and no amendment has been made to it. Intention: No nonconforming use should be created 3 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 13 of 19 11th St. NCCD FAR Subdistrict 1 - 3:1, Subdistrict 2 - 2:1, Subdistrict 3, 3.75:1, Subdistrict, 4 - match with current base zoning today, except where it creates a nonconforming structure 4 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 14 of 19 11th St. NCCD Use Standards Hotel-Motel should be a conditional use in subdistrict 1, except where it creates a nonconforming use 5 Working Group Agenda Item B-14 12th St. NCCD Height Not in backup docume nt Subdistrict 1 - 60 feet, subdistrict …
MEMORANDUM ************************************************************************ TO: Todd Shaw, Chair Planning Commission Members FROM: DATE: RE: Heather Chaffin, Senior Planner Maureen Meredith, Senior Planner Housing and Planning Department June 22, 2021 C14-2021-0061 NPA-2020-0002.01 Fair Market Rezoning / Fair Market District 3 Postponement Request by Staff ************************************************************************ Staff requests a postponement of the above-referenced rezoning and neighborhood plan amendment (NPA) cases from the June 22, 2021 Planning Commission hearing to the July 13, 2021 hearing date. There was an addressing error in the NPA public hearing notice and renotification is required.
MEMORANDUM ************************************************************************ TO: Todd Shaw, Chair Planning Commission Members FROM: DATE: RE: Heather Chaffin, Senior Planner Maureen Meredith, Senior Planner Housing and Planning Department June 22, 2021 C14-2021-0058 NPA-2020-0002.02 Centro East / 6th & Onion District 3 Postponement Request by Applicant ************************************************************************ The Applicant requests a postponement of the above-referenced rezoning and neighborhood plan amendment (NPA) cases from the June 22, 2021 Planning Commission hearing to the July 13, 2021 hearing date. Based on continued discussions between the Applicant and Neighborhood Plan Contact Team, the Applicant has decided to amend their application. The Applicant is modifying their request to ninety feet (90’) of height, rather than eighty-five feet (85’). This requires renotification for the July 13, 2021 agenda. Attachment: Applicant Letter ARMBRUST & BROWN, PLLC A T T O R N E Y S A N D C O U N S E L O R S 100 CONGRESS AVENUE, SUITE 1300 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701-2744 512-435-2300 FACSIMILE 512-435-2360 June 21, 2021 MICHAEL J. WHELLAN (512) 435-2320 mwhellan@abaustin.com Via email at Heather.Chaffin@austintexas.gov and Maureen.Meredith@austintexas.gov Heather Chaffin Maureen Meredith City of Austin Re: Subject: 1501 E. 6th St. - Plan Amendment Case: NPA-2020-0002.02; Zoning Case C-14-2021-0058 Dear Ms. Chaffin and Ms. Meredith: Because we have engaged in further discussions with the East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Planning Team, we would like to modify the Applicant’s request in the above- referenced Neighborhood Plan Amendment and the Zoning Case to reflect ninety feet (90’) of height, rather than eighty-five feet (85’). Independently, we have discussed entering into a private restrictive covenant with the neighborhood to restrict the height of the building to 85 feet as measured from the ground floor on E. 6th St. The combination of the site’s slope and the way in which the City measures height necessitate this safeguard to ensure the building’s proportions match those supported by the neighborhood. We understand that the case will be postponed until the July 13, 2021 Planning Commission meeting and that we will be invoiced for the new notification. Of course, I am happy to answer any questions. Very truly yours, Michael J. Whellan {W1065640.1}
Proposed Amend- ment Tracking # Sub- Chapter 1 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 6 of 19 Changes to the 11th St. NCCD Subdistrict 2 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 10 of 19 11th St. NCCD Height Comm. Chapter/ Page # Topic Proposed Amendment Justification References (if needed) Notes PC Vote Staff Response Proposed Text Change (Underline added text/Strikethrough deleted text) Text Change Included in Amendment (YES/NO) Image included The creation of a subdistrict on the Eastern end (subdistrict 4) aligns with the URB approval The creation of the subdistrict is necessary to reflect our other recommendations See staff recommendation to leave this subdistrict as part of Subdistricts 1 and 2. This recommendation will reduce and eliminate entitlements, create nonconforming uses, and effectively remove these properties from the NCCD. For example, 1310 Rosewood Avenue has the base zoning of SF-3 which does not allow commerical or multi-family uses; however, under the current NCCD regualtions and staff recommendations this site would be able to utilize the commercial and multi-family entitlements allowed in Subdistrict 1. Staff was made aware of the reduction in entitlements when engaging with property owners after the Urban Renewal Board made its recommendation. Intention: No nonconforming structure should be created in Subdistrict 4 Existing structures are one to two stories. While this change will probably not create nonconforming structures, it will reduce building height entitlements for properties in this subdistrict. No Recommendation for Subdistrict 1,2 and 3, aligns with staff recommendation and recommendation for Subdistrict 4 aligns with URB recommendation Allows for existing planning processes to proceed while aligning with existing entitlements and responding to neighborhood concerns Responding to neighborhood concerns. Cocktail lounge is an accessory use in hotel-motel and allowing it as a conditional use would allow better planning around the accessory use Responding to neighborhood concerns and aligning with existing neighborhood character Responding to neighborhood concerns. Cocktail lounge is an accessory use in hotel-motel and allowing it as a conditional use would allow better planning around the accessory use Responding to neighborhood concerns Responding to neighborhood concerns No No No No No No Yes 3 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 13 of 19 11th St. NCCD FAR Subdistrict 1 - 3:1, Subdistrict 2 - 2:1, Subdistrict - 3.75:1, Subdistrict 4 - match with current base zoning today, except where it creates a nonconforming structure 4 Working Group Agenda Item B-13 Backup 14 of 19 …
• Do the use allowances recommended by Staff for 11 St. NCCD apply along Rosewood as well or not? Can you please clarify the staff note in cell D4 in the DRAFT_PCWG_RecTable spreadsheet that you shared with us this? o Staff recommends that conditions related to use placement along 11th Street do not apply to Rosewood Avenue. This clarification is only needed if the staff recommendation for Subdistrict 1 to front along Rosewood is accepted. • Are condo/town home prohibited as a use in the staff recommendation for both 11th and 12th streets? Why are we looking to prohibit a use (SF) that is expressly called out in the original URP vision for the street? o Townhouse and Condominium use are allowed in both NCCDs with the condition that they will not front on 11th or 12th street. o The recommendation is to allow for single family use to continue where it exists through the “save & except” provision and on 12th street, where the base zoning is SF-3. • o Unsure which part of the original URP is being referenced. Please clarify. Is there a map that can show lot numbers in the area? We are specifically, trying to understand which lots are Lot 16 and 18. o Updated map attached!
Planning Commission Registered Speakers Citizen Communication Zenobia Joseph B1 / B2 Applicant - Richard Suttle Dennis McDaniel Will Marsh Richard Kooris Against Susan Benz B3 / B4 B5 / B6 Applicant - Bang Hunyh B7 Applicant - David Hartman Ben Browder Meredith Kizewski Scott Foster Santiago Araque B8 Applicant - Alice Glasco B9 Applicant - Amanda Swor Russ Tomer Allison Muth B10 Applicant - Amanda Swor Jen Weaver Caroline Bailey Marshall Geyer Dan Keshet Kate Kniejski Shelly Mitchell Marissa McKineey Jonathan Pearson Katie Stewart B-12 - B14 For Austin Berry Austin Pfeister Nailah Sankofa Against Zenobia Joseph Neutral Nate Jones Tracy Witte Patrick Houck B-16 Applicant - Kevin Burks
June 22, 2021 Citizen’s Communication Memorandum for Planning Commission THRU Staff Liaison Andrew Rivers <Andrew.Rivera@austintexas.gov> Subject: Title VI Northeast Austin Project Connect Disparate Impacts—Orange/Blue Lines Federal Register Deadline: 23Jun2021 1. Statutory Authority: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “is a Federal statute and provides that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance” (FTA C 4702.1B, 2012, Ch. I-7). See Environmental Justice, Ch. I-6. Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (“Capital Metro”) $7.1B Project Connect/rail is contingent on 45% Federal funding. June 3, 2018 Cap Remap discriminatory 52 route changes undergird Project Connect and helped kill Hinojosa’s Downtown tunnel bill (HB 3893). Blacks and Community First! Village wait 60 minutes for the bus as South/West/Central Austin whites enjoy 6 minutes. 2. Submit Formal Comment: Capital Metro used North Lamar Transit Center (“NLTC”) minority data to secure a $900K Equitable Transit-Oriented Development Grant, but north of US 183 Project Connect Orange Line rail is 24-30 years in *TxDOT’s right-of-way.1 ➢ Orange Line: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/24/2021-10865/preparation-of-an-environmental- impact-statement-for-the-capital-metro-orange-line-project-in-austin [*Texas Department of Transportation (“TxDOT”)] ➢ Blue Line: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/24/2021-10866/preparation-of-an-environmental- impact-statement-for-the-capital-metro-blue-line-project-in-austin#open-comment January 28, 2019 Capital Metro Chair/lawyer Wade Cooper admitted Disparate Impacts. February 25, 2019 Boardroom named Rosa Parks! “It is also undeniable that individuals may have seen, in particular areas, changes that did not help those individuals and maybe disadvantaged those individuals. . . . We hear the pain and challenge, particularly, with respect to the Eastside community.” August 7, 2020 FTA funding requires “implementing the least discriminatory alternative,” but Cooper maintains Black inequities. Title VI FHWA Transit Precedent Dayton Blacks v. Beavercreek, OH Denying Blacks equal access on federally-funded roadways run by TxDOT violates Title VI! Actors falsely conflate Ridership (white riders) with coverage (lifeline) Cap Remap maintains the racist status quo: Infrequent, Unreliable, Disconnected Northeast Buses! Northeast bus service Before 2018, 35-min Peak “New” Route 339 was a restored number from ServicePlan2020 Worsened: 60 min all day only for Blacks, but fooled the FTA! June 10, 2020 AI-2020-1273 (p. 48); August 7, 2020 (p. 52) August 7, 2020 Project Connect Resolution ID# AI-2020-1297 (p. 34) Bus to UPS stops at 9:10PM Blacks can’t work 2nd Shift TxDOT/FM 969: Craigwood (Blacks walk 1 mile to Frequent 18-MLK) Disparate Impact: June 3, 2018 Planner Roberto Gonzalez unilaterally took …
