Austin City Council approved a zoning change for Champions Tract 3 on Thursday, taking the designation from general office use to multi-family housing. A 300-unit apartment complex has been proposed for western third of the tract, while the remaining two-thirds will be held for conservation.[/caption]
Although area residents cited environmental and safety concerns over developing a tract at the corner of City Park Road and RR 2222, Austin City Council approved a zoning variance Nov. 10 that paves the way for the construction of a 300-unit apartment complex on the property known as Champions Tract 3.
The variance changed the land-use zoning from general office use to multi-family residence, moderate-high density use.
The council voted 7-4, with Austin City Council members Sheri Gallo (District 10), Ann Kitchen (District 5), Leslie Pool (District 7) and Ora Houston (District 1) dissenting. Gallo originally supported the ordinance through its first two readings.
The approval comes after nearly a year of back-and-forth discussions among local neighbors, city staff, the applicant/owner Champion Assets LTD and city council members.
Residents have long opposed the project slated for City Park Road, a winding, two-lane roadway with challenging site lines that both neighbors and council members said can be dangerous to navigate. Residents also questioned the location of the proposed complex driveway and voiced concerns over the additional traffic the residential facility would generate.
In an Oct. 31 letter to council, Ed Stillman, president of the Austin City Park Neighborhood Association, said the increase in the number of vehicles a 300-unit apartment complex would add to current local commuter traffic on City Park Road and RR 2222 would create an "untenable transportation situation."
According to the city's traffic analysis, the apartment complex would generate 2,100 vehicle trips per day. Under current zoning restrictions, traffic generation for any development on the land under general office use would be capped at 1,000 vehicle trips per day.
The development of the 45-acre tract of land along City Park Road and RR 2222 has been the subject of opposition by neighboring residents who say added traffic from an apartment complex would further area road safety concerns.[/caption]
City staff also said their analysis did not find that section of City Park Road particularly dangerous, and that the nine crashes reported over the last three years was average and on par with what they would expect given the area's road and traffic conditions.
Gallo said the condition of City Park Road was reflective of the failure by city government over the years to provide funding for road infrastructure in areas outside of Central Austin. She said she wanted to work with area residents toward coming up with a solution for the “sub-standard road."
Within the property's current zoning as general office, it would be possible for a 100,000-square-foot structure—such as a religious center or hospital—to consume a large part of the developable land in the 45-acre tract, said Jerry Rusthoven, manager of the city's planning and zoning office. However, the developer of the proposed apartment, through negotiations with city staff, agreed to develop only 15 acres of the tract, leaving the remaining two-thirds to be undeveloped as dedicated conservation land, he said.
Chuck Lezniak, the city’s environmental officer, said the current proposal, when compared to what could potentially be built on the land under the existing zoning, would result in a smaller environmental impact.
At the end of the council discussion, the developer's attorney Richard Suttle said the developer would offer 10 percent of the units in the complex as affordable housing. He said the affordable housing component of the complex would include residents whose earnings are at a maximum of 80-percent of Travis County's median family income. Suttle is an attorney with the Austin law firm of Armbrust & Brown PLLC.
District 4 Austin City Council Member Gregorio Casar, who said he opposes sprawling development in the Hill Country, said his vote was in part to prevent a larger project from being built on the land. Casar said the net environmental benefit and addition of affordable housing gave the project value.
“From a housing perspective, a flooding perspective and environmental perspective, the best vote I can come up with is in support of this,” he said.