Oak Hill’s land plan nearly done

Oak Hill’s land plan nearly done

Written by Christi Covington Thursday, 08 May 2008

Austin Since 2005, Maureen Meredith with the city neighborhood planning department has overseen an 11,000-acre planning process in which residents and business owners have given their visions and community goals for a Future Land Use Map for Oak Hill. Simply put, the map will give a blueprint for how land should be used for development.

The City of Austin Neighborhood Planning Department will present the tentative FLUM and plan documents May 14 to stakeholders for one last discussion before the planning commission and city council vote on it.

“What we had heard through the planning process from the stakeholders is that they felt Oak Hill as it is now is not pedestrian-friendly,” Meredith said. “It is not bike-friendly. There are no hubs where they could just hang out and hit multiple stores. There was not the live, work, play environment. Where we tried to help was to find places where that might be possible.”

If the FLUM is approved by the council, it becomes a guiding document that determines what type of zoning or land uses can be implemented there in the future. Once approved, the plan cannot be changed without an amendment. If it is not controversial, from application to city council, a plan amendment will take approximately three months, Meredith said. For an amendment on an individual property, applicants must wait one year from the plan adoption to file an application, unless it meets certain exceptions, such as an error being found in the plan.

Still, many of those involved with the effort are not completely satisfied.

In a cluster

David Richardson, who is chair of the neighborhood planning contact team for the FLUM, said he initiated the planning effort with the city. The team is a group of stakeholders that gave city staff input throughout the process. He heard the community express a desire to leave Oak Hill largely residential with nodes of high-density, mixed-use, which translates into keeping it mostly as it is, but adding some development similar to what is found at the Triangle on Lamar Boulevard or at the old Mueller Airport.

However, he is a little disillusioned because he thinks the community still does not have the tools in the FLUM for healthy development or redevelopment. He is not upset with the city staff, but with ruling ordinances.

“What I find so fascinating is having gone through this process, believing at its inception that we were actually going to get ahead of the development curve and actually manage growth, what I am finding is there are so many roadblocks to actually doing that,” he said. “It makes it very difficult to help with anything through this planning process.”

Richardson largely blames the Save Our Springs ordinance, passed by voters in 1992. It restricts dense development in particular areas of Austin—including Oak Hill, which is dubbed environmentally sensitive as part of the Barton Springs zone. Landowners cannot develop or put impervious cover, which is anything from rooftops to parking lots, over more than 25 percent of an individual landowner’s property, in the area called the contributing zone.

A segment of the planning area is also in the recharge zone, which has even tighter regulations, allowing only 15 percent impervious cover. The recharge zone is where water flows through the porous limestone and eventually becomes part of Barton Springs.

For those structures that existed prior to the ordinance, an amendment sponsored by Council Member Lee Leffingwell and passed by the city council late last year allows a certain amount of redevelopment, which Richardson applauds.

If a property has 40 percent or less impervious cover, it can be redeveloped on the existing footprint without purchasing additional property, although the owner must add some SOS-compliant water quality catchments and reuse the water on site. However, if an existing property has more than 40 percent existing impervious cover and it is going to be redeveloped, the owner has to purchase extra open space in the Barton Springs Zone to bring the overall average of cover to 20 percent.

That means owners can develop one-fifth of the combined parcels if they add to the footprint of the existing property.

Many times, developers pay the city for obtaining the land in a bulk parcel for water quality protection, which is a $15,000 an acre investment, according to Matt Hollon with the Watershed Protection & Development Review. The price is evaluated annually for inflation.

Richardson thinks the SOS ordinance does not protect the recharge zone, which is linked to a small portion of the city’s water supply in Barton Springs, because it promotes a “fractured land-use pattern” and sprawl.

“Even though the SOS was designed to improve the environment, it has the exact opposite impact,” he said. “In fact, what I realized looking at documents from the EPA on clustering the development, the EPA studies show clustering generates 74 percent less storm water runoff than your typical suburban development.”

Other frustrations

He said the Austin Tomorrow Comprehensive Plan is another added challenge for development and redevelopment in Oak Hill. In 1979, before Oak Hill was annexed, the city passed the plan, which distinguished between areas that were desirable for development versus areas to be protected. The strategies used to implement those policies were to restrict employment centers from coming into the drinking water protection zone, from around MoPac to RM 620, he said.

“What I found is the Austin Tomorrow Plan limits and SOS seals the fate for this area, creating this dysfunctional, disjointed development program that actually uses up more open space than clustering it in traditional neighborhood design,” he said.

More opposition

The Oak Hill Business and Professional Association has gone so far as to vote as a group not to support the FLUM in its existing form. Sandy Baldridge, who is president of the organization as well as secretary of the Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods, not only has a problem with the SOS ordinance, she said the FLUM itself restricts dense growth in certain areas that the community needs. Her premise is if more shopping and entertainment were available nearby, people would drive less—yet small landowners are limited in what they can do with their land, so they cannot provide that shopping and entertainment. What she hopes people understand is that OHBPA supports keeping green space, but the community must have enough retail and commercial services to balance the large amount of residences. She said her concern is the FLUM will also restrict areas that need that higher density growth.

“Do we want blocks and blocks of apartments? No,” she said. “Do we want centers with multi-uses with vegetative buffers so we can keep the feel of the community? The answer is yes.”

Different thoughts

Hollon, who is an environmental planner, acknowledges that the SOS ordinance brings certain challenges for the community. The ordinance is enforced on a tract by tract basis, which means a major landowner could probably develop part of a property intensively, but it is more difficult for smaller landowners, making it less than enticing to build dense mixed-use projects. However, he does not think Oak Hill residents need to worry that the FLUM will hinder future growth.

He said the city council provided for a certain amount of high-density development and redevelopment in Oak Hill, when more than a year ago they authorized the future creation of a transit-oriented development in the community.

TODs emphasize alternative forms of transportation, including walking, cycling and mass transit. It is a hub of mixed-use development with a variety of housing. Nothing is finalized and no site has been chosen, but a TOD could potentially amend the SOS ordinance and the FLUM to allow for higher density, Hollon said.One area where that might happen is at the Y in Oak Hill, where a portion of vacant property known as the future town center, and more formally as the West Park Planned Unit Development, sits.

Town center

Rudy Belton of Belco Equities, Inc., who bought the property in 1996, said the advantage of having the 132 acres is that it is a big enough lot that he can build a significant development and still have open space, but he is not in any hurry to start.

“You might say I was slow of foot, or you could say I am a patient man,” he said.

He would rather wait until future improvements to Hwy. 290 are complete, if it is not too much longer. Belton also wants to see what happens with road expansions he heard considered, such as FM 1826 cutting through the Y to Hwy. 71 and Convict Hill Road cutting through Hwy. 290 to RM 620.

Originally the development was planned as mostly commercial with a small amount of retail. After neighborhood input, he plans to take an amendment plan to the city.

“What we are hearing is that the people of Oak Hill feel underserved. They want a gathering place,” he said.

Ongoing meetings have continued with different stakeholders. For instance, Capital Metro has expressed a desire to have a Rapid Bus transit center at the site.

“If there is a way to accommodate, we’re listening,” Belton said.

Hum about a FLUM

Oak Hill’s Future Land Use Map, covering 11,000 acres, is supposed to be completed in the next few months and will mark the area’s potential high-growth corridors. However, some in the community are not convinced the plan provides the tools to promote ideal development. The planning area was determined by the City of Austin with input from the community.

Oak Hill FLUM community meeting

May 14, 6:30 p.m., Shepherd of the Hills Presbyrterian Church, 5226 W. William Cannon Drive

This map is not large enough to show all the detail of land uses. For more information, visit www.ci.austin.tx.us/zoning/oak_hill.htm.

Terms to know

Density

The number of dwelling units (houses, apartments, townhouses, duplexes, etc.) or buildings per unit of land. In neighborhood planning, this is often expressed as dwelling units per acre or du/ac.

Desired Development Zone

As part of the Smart Growth Initiative, the City of Austin was divided into two basic areas. The first area is the Desired Development Zone (DDZ). The DDZ is composed of the central part (urban core) of Austin and areas to the east, north, and south of central Austin. The DDZ is where the city encourages redevelopments and new infill development to occur.

Drinking Water Protection Zone (DWPZ)

The Drinking Water Protection Zone (DWPZ) is composed of areas with sensitive environmental features and watersheds that contribute to the city’s drinking water supply, such as the Barton Creek Watershed. The city discourages and seeks to limit development in the DWPZ.

Future Land Use Map

The graphical representation of recommendations for future growth patterns in an area.

Growth Corridor

A corridor where new development or redevelopment is practical and/or desired.

Impervious Cover

Anything that stops rainwater from soaking into the ground, including roads, sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, swimming pools and buildings.

Land Use

The manner in which a parcel of land is used or occupied.

Mixed Use

A type of development that combines residential, commercial, and/or office uses, within a commercial or office zoning district, into one development or building. A Mixed Use Combining District allows residential, commercial, retail, and office uses to be combined in a single development.

Two types of Mixed Use development are now possible in neighborhoods with adopted neighborhood plans that include these uses as part of their plans:

• Neighborhood Urban Center allows a variety of residential types (condos, apartments, townhouses) and commercial, office, and retail uses clustered together in a development of less than forty acres.
• A Neighborhood Mixed Use Building allows residential uses above ground floor commercial uses.

Multi-Family

A building that is designed to house more than one family such as an apartment building.

Neighborhood Planning

A two-phase process by which members of the community develop plans to manage future development in their neighborhoods. The first phase of the process involves establishing goals and objectives and the actions required to address neighborhood issues.

The second phase implements the land use and zoning changes recommended in the neighborhood plan in the form of a Neighborhood Plan Combining District.

Nonconforming Use

The use of any land, building or structure that does not conform with current zoning regulations, but was lawful or not required to comply with zoning regulations at the time a zoning district was established. They may be permitted to continue or be given time to come into compliance with the existing zoning ordinance. In addition, specific code requirements address the ability to make major changes to structures designated as nonconforming uses. This is also known as a grandfathered use.

Open Space

An area set aside or reserved for public or private use with very few improvements. Types of open space include golf courses, agricultural land, parks, greenbelts and nature preserves. In many cases, land designated as open space lies within the 100-year flood zone, has sensitive environmental features such as wetlands or aquifer recharge features such as caves and fault lines, or has unstable slopes.

Source: www.ci.austin.tx.us/zoning/glossary.htm

How much land can be developed in Oak Hill

New Development

Under the SOS ordinance, passed in 1992, landowners in the Williamson and Slaughter creeks watershed contributing zone can develop 25 percent impervious cover, leaving the remainder as open space. The areas that fall in the recharge zone, which is also in the Barton Springs Zone, must reduce that impervious cover to 15 percent. In the Barton Creek contributing zone, a property can have 20 percent impervious cover.

Redevelopment (If a property exceeds SOS ordinance levels of impervious cover)

Under the redevelopment amendment to the SOS ordinance, landowners with more than 40 percent existing impervious cover must purchase additional land in the recharge zone, so that the developed land is 20 percent of the total property owned in the Barton Spring zone. Before the amendment, properties in this area could not be redeveloped.

Properties with 40 percent or less existing impervious cover can redevelop the existing footprint, but must add SOS-compliant water catchment systems and reuse the water on site.