Welcome to Ultraground. We tell you about zoning news in a way that no one else does.

May 9th

District 2

District 5

Citywide

You are reading about the start of an area’s transition from industrial to residential. Or, at least that’s what the Commissioners are worried about.

Bergstrom Trail is a 300-unit project that spans 2 tracts in Southeast Austin. If you look at the zoning map, you’ll see this is one of the last industrially-zoned areas in Austin. But Micah King of Husch Blackwell pointed out that there could be less than 10 industrial employees in the area. What concerned the commissioners, though, was that this project would spur an influx of mixed-use and multifamily development in the area.

King explained that ZIF Capital, with local Austinite and ZIF principal Zain Fidai in attendance, went for this property because of the market demand for housing in this area. King illustrated the beautiful argument that the property is improperly zoned, or else is would of been developed sometime between 1940 and now.

The development team presented a conceptual design for the project, including public amenities and benefits. The Southeast Neighborhood Plan supported the proposed changes with conditions, including affordable housing, sidewalk and pedestrian improvements, and ground floor retail. The Contact Team believed that the proposed development would be a good location for mixed-use development, particularly considering its proximity to the new TxDOT headquarters and the Bergstrom Spur Trail.

City planners on the other hand, argued that this area is not an activity center nor an Imagine Austin corridor but rather a job center. This is an area for jobs, given it’s adjacency to i35, the airport, and Ben White, the planners said.

Commissioners Connolly and Cox spoke against but voted for the project, highlighting concerns about the removal of industrial in Austin. It’s perceived threat on blue collar wealth creation was outweighed by Austin’s dire need for housing. Chair Shaw voted against the project, siding with the staff’s alarm over creating a domino effect in the area. The project was approved 11-1.

Council-approved rezonings from industrial to another classification since 2019. 2 additional projects were postponed at the May 4th City Council meeting.

We’re going to use CSW Development’s 319-unit mixed-use site plan appeal to tell you about a detail of the code and the Redevelopment Exception.

CSW has worked with City staff over the past 12+ months on a site plan for the site and we have been unable to come to agreement on the application of the referenced Code sections.

CSW, represented by Steve Drenner of the Drenner Group, requested an increase in non-complying impervious cover using the redevelopment exception within both watersheds. The issue at stake was that the development team was meeting requirements on the suburban side but not the Barton Springs zone side.

The Redevelopment Exception allows properties that do not meet code to be exempt from certain watershed regulations with certain conditions. One of the conditions of the Redevelopment Exception is that impervious cover not be increased within the site.

Staff interpreted the site as the land within the applicable watershed regulation, while the applicant interpreted it as the project boundaries.

The scenario they’re trying to avoid: if a developer has one small piece of property outside of the Barton Spring Zone that is contiguous, and they acquire a larger property within the Barton Spring Zone, then they could conceivably use the Redevelopment Exception for their property. Because they’re got one finger outside the Barton spring zone.

The environmental criteria manual states that pre-development conditions apply, and the applicant provided post-development conditions. The staff suggested that the applicant either redesign or request that the City Council or Planning Commission initiate a site-specific amendment to the Saber Springs initiative. The motion to approve the applicant's request was passed with 11 in favor and 1 against.

The meeting discussed the removal of occupancy limits in Austin, with speakers advocating for the removal of unrelated person's occupancy limits to allow for more affordable housing options.

The meeting concluded with staff agreeing to come back with code amendment recommendations that comply with Austin's fair housing regulations.

Thank you for being a part of Ultraground.