LDC Amendments

Only City Council members and authorized staff are allowed to post on this message board.
Leslie Pool
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:22 pm

LDC Amendments

Post by Leslie Pool »

Colleagues, I appreciate our discussion today about the LDC changes, and the thorough information from our Planning, Housing, and Economic Development staff. Here are motion sheets for the amendments that I brought up today.

ETOD Overlay code amendment, Item 5
Pool Motion #1 – Residential affordability requirements
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 172324.pdf
I am proposing a tiered structure for the residential affordability requirements that aligns with our current density bonus programs – VMU and DB-90 – and maintains the percentages that staff proposed for the maximum height of 120 feet.

I want to acknowledge staff and the consultant’s findings that the original proposed affordability levels are not feasible under current market conditions. Using a tiered approach for various levels at 60 and 90 feet makes the DBETOD program flexible enough to encourage more housing on these corridors in a variety of market conditions.

Pool Motion #2 – Non-Residential Redevelopment Requirements
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 172431.pdf
My team and I worked closely with Economic Development staff to amend the Non-Residential Redevelopment requirements to really focusing our attention, and protection, on legacy small businesses and cultural assets. We also want to prioritize the replacement of childcare and adult care services. You'll see some adjustments in my motions sheet that pay special attention to businesses like longtime music venues, visual and performing art spaces, restaurants, and retail spaces.

This really is a balancing act. I’m working to focus on the longtime assets that are a special focus for us, and working to make sure the commercial redevelopment requirements are not so expansive or burdensome that redevelopment of existing older multifamily is the cheaper option. I know staff is concerned about that as well, and in our work with them, I think we have reached a happy medium with these changes.

Pool Motion #3 – EV Charging Use in ETOD
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 172505.pdf
I’m bringing a small amendment that aims to match entitlements found in the ETOD regulations with those in the EV Charging land use regulations by allowing an existing gas or service station to transition to Electric Vehicle charging stations as a permitted use. This ensures that as our town moves towards the city’s carbon-free goals, we will have enough chargers in the right spots all around town.

HOME 2, Item 6
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 172617.pdf
As I mentioned during our meeting, I prepared a motion sheet to insert a 90-day delayed implementation period should we decide to use the Planning Commission version as our base motion. This is the time period that staff has requested so that multi-departmental coordination can occur to prepare for applications to use HOME 2.

Looking forward to hearing from the community on Thursday and our discussion on each of these items.

Leslie Pool
Mayor Pro Tem
Council Member, District 7
Louisa Brinsmade
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:27 pm

Re: LDC Amendments

Post by Louisa Brinsmade »

On behalf of MPT Pool, I am posting her final versions of amendments here for all the LDC items.

Item 1 - Chapter 4-18
Motion (Unchanged): Adjustments to the Non-Residential Redevelopment requirements
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 163204.pdf
Rationale: Aligns the requirements with changes to the residential portions to avoid driving redevelopment toward older multifamily properties.

Item 5 – ETOD
Motion #1 Version 2: Affordability requirement in a tiered structure
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 173352.pdf
Rationale: The Planning staff and consultant’s report shows that the affordability levels were not feasible in the current market and it is unclear when that will change. In order to facilitate housing in the intervening time, a tiered approach for 60 and 90 feet, and maintaining staff’s levels at 120 feet, better addresses the lack of feasibility issues.

Motion #2 Version 2: Adjustments to Non-Residential Redevelopment requirements for uses and length of continuous operation.
Rationale: There is a need to focus on the city's priorities to preserve cultural assets, legacy businesses, and childcare and adult care services on the ETOD rail line. This also helps to align residential redevelopment requirement with changes to Chapter 4-18 to avoid incentivizing multifamily redevelopment.
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 173957.pdf

Motion #3 (Unchanged): EV Charging Use in ETOD
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 174901.pdf
Rationale: This reflects the overall changes planning for EV Charging Use, but makes it a Conditional Use for existing locations with a public process for approval in the ETOD. This allows a pathway to shift from gasoline to EV charging as we move toward our carbon-free goals.

Item 6 – HOME 2
Motion #1 (Unchanged): 90-Day Delayed Implementation Date
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 175506.pdf
Rationale: Staff has requested this time to prepare processes to accept applications for the HOME 2 program. Similar to HOME 1, which had a 60-day delayed implementation date, HOME 2 requires coordination between multiple departments and topics.

Motion #2 (Unchanged): Side Setback language edits
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 180001.pdf
Rationale: Legal staff has requested a language change to establish Side Setback not by “use” but by date of subdivision to avoid future conflicts should the use of a property change.

Thanks all!
Chief of Staff
Office of Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Pool, District 7