January
23, 2017
To
City Mayor
City of Austin Council
Zoning and Planning Commission
Subject: Oppose Plan Amendment Zoning
Case: C14-20170097
File Number: NPA-2017-0015.03
Project Name: Jackie Robinson Residential
Dear Mayor, City Council Members, Planning Commissioners,
COA Employees,
We request that you turn
down the amendment to the Neighborhood Plan and Zoning Change request for the
above. An NTA (Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis) was done for the
site and shows that Delano St traffic would be over an acceptable level with
the additional traffic added by this development if it is built to the maximum
standards allowable. The study shows 1406 trips per day now. With the development complete using the
zoning standards allowed, the estimated number of trips are 1,919. The maximum acceptable number of trips per
day is 1800.
We understand that an additional NTA was done
wherein the study used the development specifications as proposed by the
developer’s agent, Jim Wittliff. If
these conditions are met, we understand that the traffic analysis shows that
the traffic will not be at an unacceptable level. However, the study does not take into account
that 13 additional duplexes are under construction in the neighborhood right
now, and the folks moving into these dwellings will be using Delano St (and its
extension Ft Branch Blvd) for all their driving. Adding 26 additional dwellings to the
neighborhood means an additional 169 to 247 trips per day. We can see that as those new homes are
occupied, Delano St. will be close to unacceptable levels; and that with the
development of the subject property as 62 condos, the traffic will definitely
be over acceptable levels. This is not
even considering the lots now for sale or available for constructing homes.
About 30 or more neighbors within 500 feet of
the project are requesting that the zoning and NP not be changed. They site traffic and affordability as their
reasons. One neighbor explained to me
that his mirror on his parked truck had been clipped twice in the last 2
months, each time requiring repairs.
As suggested as a compromise by Planning
Commissioner Trinity White, we were interested in lowering the number of units in this
development. However, we were told by
Jim Wittliff that the project would not go forward using that reduced
number.
Please see the chart prepared by traffic analyst
Mehrnaz Mehraein from the Development Services Department, and also see the
list of current construction or soon to be available dwelling units that will
be using Delano St. at the end of this letter.
If a compromise cannot
be worked out, we request that the Planning Commission and City Council turn
down the request for the change and allow the zoning and Neighborhood Plan to
remain the same.
Explanation of details
regarding traffic issues on Delano St.: We are concerned about the pressure to
continue development above the current zoning and neighborhood plan without the
proper infrastructure. The
infrastructure we are discussing is the street and road system. The traffic
study done shows unusually high traffic counts for Delano St. of 1409 trips per
day, a surprisingly high number of trips considering the street itself. Analysis of the neighborhood reveals that the
reason for this is that almost all traffic in the area, including The City of
Austin Maintenance facility traffic, is funneled through Delano St. That is because the Hudson St / Delano St
route is the only convenient route through the area. A look at a map shows why this is. Please refer to the slide show.
Delano St is functioning as an arterial street,
but is designed as a residential collector street, which is why it carries
traffic beyond what it would normally be expected to carry. Delano St. is 30 feet wide with cars parked
on the street night and day.
The neighborhood needs additional streets to
carry the load of traffic. Streets that are shown on the FLUM do not exist and
are not even secured rights-of-way. To provide that street infrastructure to
develop this area would involve purchasing property or possibly using eminent
domain. Since that is an iffy prospect,
we must not add further density until this issue is addressed.
We are gratified that pedestrian safety needs in
this high-traffic neighborhood are now being addressed using Capital Improvement
Funds. This is a very positive step,
although it does not address the actual traffic issues. We understand the developer is offering to build
additional sidewalks. Although valuable, we believe it would be better not to
bring traffic over acceptable levels.
Lacking a plan to address the traffic over-capacity
issue in the neighborhood, this development would be a detriment to the
following East MLK Combined Neighborhood Plan Goals:
# 4 Promote the development and
enhancement of the neighborhood’s major corridors.
# 7 Create a transportation network that
allows all residents to travel safely throughout the neighborhood by improving
safety on major arterials and neighborhood streets.
However, we believe either building the
development with the lower number of units (40); or building homes using the
current zoning would be in alignment with the following East MLK Combined
Neighborhood Plan Goals:
# 2 Promote a mix of land uses that
respect and enhance the existing neighborhood and address compatibility between
residential, commercial, and industrial uses.
# 9 Improve bicycle and pedestrian traffic
safety on neighborhood streets.
# 11 Protect and enhance the neighborhood
… by reducing … dumping in this neighborhood.
# 12 Improve the quality, safety, and
cleanliness of area creeks, and reduce the impact of flooding in the
neighborhood.
We would like to present
our additional concerns about this development as further reasons for not
allowing this zoning and Land Use change.
Illegal Fill: There are multiple piles
of illegal fill material on the property.
Some appear to be 30 feet or so in height. We understand that the developer has an
option to purchase the property from the seller, who was responsible for the
putting the fill there. These fill piles
require expensive mitigation. It is
possible that lesser density development is not financially viable. The burden of this problem should not be
borne by the neighborhood, but by those responsible. We would like to mention that multiple piles
of illegal fill are on additional property tracts in the neighborhood, all
created and owned by the owner of this property. These piles were being added to as recently
as 2016.
Infrastructure in the
Hog Pen realities and FLUM conclusions: The Hog Pen area has
some very serious infrastructure shortcomings.
There are residents without water and sewer facilities living on Hudson
St. right now. There are multiple
streets without storm gutters. The
topography in the area is dramatically hilly.
The Neighborhood Plan and FLUM says:
“Because of the rural nature and limited infrastructure in the Hog Pen
area, development is not suitable.”
(paraphrased) Overdevelopment is
not advisable.
Incompatible appearance: The zoning and density asked
for would allow 3 story condominiums in an area of infill that is surrounded by
single family homes, most of which are quite small one-stories. We are concerned
that the 3 story buildings would dwarf the single family homes and create an incompatible
disparity in height and scale of buildings in the neighborhood.
This development will
probably not meet the City’s desire for “missing middle” housing: It seems likely to us
that the condos that would be built would be very expensive. Because of the illegal fill, the homes will
sit very high on the landscape and will command a view of downtown Austin. Homes with views can command a very high
retail price. Our understanding of the
“missing middle” are homes that are moderate in price. Condos are usually moderate, but these will
probably not be moderately priced.
In Conclusion: We acknowledge that the
developer’s agent has made some effort to work with us. The high traffic count already existing on
Delano St. is the result of several forces, including the hilly topography, the
past agricultural use, flawed street design concepts in the 1980’s, and neglect
by the City of Austin to create the needed streets. These are not the fault of the
developer. On the other hand, there is
existing zoning and Land Use Plans that could be used to build homes on this
property. These homes could be the
“missing middle housing” desired by progressive city planners.
Please do not approve
this zoning and NP change.
If the Planning
Commission and City Council approve this zoning and plan change against our
recommendation, then we ask that the developer follow through on a conditional
overlay that would include the following items AND contribute $40,000 toward a
project to be decided upon by the Hog Pen Neighborhood Association and the East
MLK Contact Team. The project selected would either be the sidewalks as originally
required by the city or a project as
designated in the Capital Improvement Project Requests. A project that springs to mind is a needed
bridge over Fort Branch Creek to connect our neighborhood to Springdale Park.
-
Three detention ponds
with 110% of existing flood water retention
-
Save 90% of trees 10” or
over in diameter
Future requests: In addition to our
recommendation for the development being considered today, we would like to
express our strong concern for the future in our area and ask officials for
awareness of traffic issues as a whole in the neighborhood. Considering the compact development
encouraged by Codenext, considering future zoning change requests in the
pipeline (The Aviary and Interlocal), considering the recent $15 million sale
of a property in the neighborhood, and considering the rapid dense development
happening in our area already; we must all be aware that infrastructure needs
must be met before and during development. We are asking the City
to enact an ordinance that would require some additional street right-of-way
acquisition and construction as shown on the present FLUM (or equivalent
transportation corridors) to alleviate the over-capacity traffic pressure on
one narrow residential street that serves the entire area. We ask that
this ordinance require future zoning change and NP change requests in this area
to contribute to the needed street infrastructure.
We also ask that future zoning and NP change
requests have traffic studies done that assess Delano St. as a whole to be
used. In other words, measuring traffic on Delano at its outflow area
(close to Webberville Rd.), not near the traffic origination.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Susan Tingley and for the:
East MLK Combined Contact Team
and the Hog Pen Neighborhood Association
susantinglee@gmail.com
AVERAGE TRAFFIC VOLUME
Using the same ITE code 210, and the same trip assignment
percentages, the average daily traffic volume of each proposed intensity is as
the following:
|
Intensity
|
Total Traffic (Vehicle per day)
|
|
48 DU
|
1,799
|
|
43 DU
|
1,765
|
|
36 DU
|
1,709
|
Prepared by Mehrnaz Mehraein of the Development Services
Department
Construction in the neighborhood right now.
Current construction of single family duplexes that must use
Delano St (and it’s extension, Fort Branch Blvd.) as the only ingress and outgress. These homes were not occupied at the time of
the traffic study, but will be adding to the overall traffic load soon. Each address represents 2 dwellings, as each
are duplexes. This represents 26
additional families with that many additional trips per day. Using the above figures to interpolate, that
would mean an additional 169 trips per day.
1220 Delano St.
1102 Delano St.
1116 Eleanor St.
1120 Eleanor St.
1142 Eleanor St.
1218 Eleanor St.
1307 Fort Branch Blvd.
1305 Fort Branch Blvd.
1309 Fort Branch Blvd.
1311 Fort Branch Blvd.
1313 Fort Branch Blvd.
1416 Fort Branch Blvd.
1418 Fort Branch Blvd.
Numerous vacant lots are available in the
neighborhood that will probably be built out in the future. Although we did not consider these future
traffic possibilities in our calculations at this time, we must be aware that
development in the area will be continuing:
1214 Delano St.
5501 Harold Ct.
1124 Eleanor St.
1128 Eleanor St.
1138 Eleanor St.
1224 Eleanor St.
1412 Fort Branch Blvd.
1414 Fort Branch Blvd.
