Call for Support for ANA's VMU Application

submitted by Paulette Kern

Friends and Neighbors;

Please help spread the word by passing this information to your neighbors.

I am sure you have heard me talk about VMU (Vertical Mixed Use).  Even if you thought VMU might be a good thing--new development, a few apartments, etc.; as you see the effect of this ordinance on the ground, I believe you will have concerns on many levels.  The more I learn about this ordinance and the Commercial Design Standard that will govern its projects, the more concerned I become about the fate City has in store for neighborhoods.  Now is the time to spring into action.  The Allandale VMU Application will come before Planning Commission to be heard and ruled upon next Tuesday, May 13 and then before City Council, Thurs., June 5. 

Allandale's quality of life and future existence depends on all of us to speak up.  Please contact the Planning Commission Members individually before next Tuesday, (http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/boards/results.cfm).  You can do this by email or snail mail.  If you received the notice (you live within 300ft of Burnet Rd commercial zone), you may want to use the response sheet included and fax it to city staff.  Also contact each City Council Member (http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/contacts.htm).

Sign a petition.  Check the Allandale Reporter to find out where you can sign a petition regarding VMUOD (Vertical Mixed Use Overlay District).

Finally, we will need lots of bodies to show up at the hearings. Carpool together or maybe ride the bus, but come!  You do not have to speak although you may sign up to do so if you want.  We welcome speakers.  Please let me know if you want to speak so that we can coordinate speakers.  It is important that PC and Council see that there are many concerned and watching.  We will have name tags to identify us as a group.

Below are some points which may help you in writing. Make it your own.   Be brief and clear in asking them to support the Allandale VMU Application.  You can read the notice of hearing and the application summary here.

I will be reminding you of the hearings again as they get closer.

POINTS:
We vehemently disagree with the “blanket”, “one size fits all” approach of the VMUOD.

• We want a comprehensive approach to adding density –which includes planning for infrastructure (traffic, water, wastewater, schools, police, EMS, mass transit, parkland, etc), consideration of effect of other developments already approved, consideration of connecting neighborhoods’ plans

• Allandale’s properties along Burnet and Anderson were zoned CS (Commercial Services)—not just adding a V to MU.

• We believe that the small businesses that have their beginnings on Burnet Rd and are growing will be forced to close by escalating rent rates in VMU buildings.   Small businesses are a strong foundation of Austin and have been promoted by City Council.

• Many of Allandale’s properties are shallow and too small to develop as VMU in a cost effective manner.  Developers would require, at a minimum, all the incentives, and would probably place much pressure on City to give variances to maximize building on property, thereby overwhelming SF2 (single family) properties.  We request these shallow lots be excluded from the VMUOD.

• The residential portion of a VMU development receives a 40% reduction in required parking by right and 40% reduction in required parking for retail is part of the incentives package which neighborhoods are allowed to weigh in on, but not always listened to.  Where do you think the extra cars will park??

• Amenities pointed to by City as desirable will not necessarily happen. For example, the street trees will not be placed on Burnet Rd as it has overhead utility lines which prohibit the planting of street trees under them.  We are more likely to see crepe myrtles.   Open and green space while often referred to in talks, is not written into (required by) the ordinance.

• 6400 Burnet Rd (Burnet Storage) is an extremely large lot which pushes deep into the neighborhood.  It has flooding issues at the back of the property which effect the neighborhood as well.  This property should be removed from the overlay and dealt with gently if and when it comes up for redevelopment.

• It has become increasingly apparent that the City of Austin has no intention of allowing our input on these developments.  In fact, the City has implemented the VMU ordinance in such a way as to eliminate our involvement and is currently striving to dilute the applicability of the Compatibility Standards - requirements for commercial projects that are located near residential properties that would typically mute the impacts a bit.

• Overburdened CTC (core transit corridors—Burnet Rd and Anderson Ln.) will result in flooding neighborhood streets with cut through traffic as well as parked cars from VMU projects.

Allandale has proposed other options for increasing density that would be more protective of the neighborhood and meet city density goals. These have received no traction.

Please support Allandale’s VMU application.

Feel free to email or call me with questions.  Please pass this request along to your neighbors.

Thanks for your help.
Paulette Kern
Chair, ANA Zoning and Planning Committee
454-9166

Comments

[M1EK]

Katie, the original Allandale VMU proposal (the one the EC rejected) met those subjective standards you mention - but the one at council quite clearly does not - it opts out everywhere except at Northcross (or, at least, that's what was attempted).

McMansion reduces density because it severely disincents secondary dwelling units (granted more of an SF-3 thing).

[Katie]

M1ek,
Actually M1ek, our VMU application hits all of the density targets that the City of Austin has set for our neighborhood. We did all that they asked of us. The only lots we opted out of were 1) the shallow lots because it gives minimal density with the greatest impact on the neighborhood and 2) the storage center. We are not opposed to VMU at the storage center, but because it is such an intrusive property with SF2 on 3 sides, we want greater input into any development here than the opt-in/opt-out process gives us.
I am unclear on how the McMansion ordinance affects density since it does not affect zoning. A SF-2 property is a SF-2 property regardless of the size of the house built on it. Katie

[M1EK]

Applications like this one are abusing the opt-out process - it was not intended to be used except in truly exceptional cases where the neighborhood had vital data that the city didn't about lot/site conditions. If you opt out of everything, you're effectively bailing on your end of the McMansion bargain - that ordinance disincents new and even existing secondary dwelling units on the neighborhood interior; VMU was supposed to be where you agreed to put the density since you pushed it out of the core of your neighborhood.