CodeNEXT

CodeNEXT V2: LCCO Board's Position

The Lost Creek Civic Organization's board and advisers oppose the implementation of the Second version of CodeNEXT and the zoning map for the following reasons:

  • The predominant zoning of R1B (residential) and mapping does not accurately represent the character of the Lost Creek neighborhood, and together are in opposition to many deed restrictions in existence for almost 40 years. Examples include ADUs, short term rentals, business in home, and the ability to subdivide.

  • Implementation of CodeNEXT V2 and zone mapping would establish a litigious environment within Lost Creek unless the City of Austin recognizes and respects the deed restrictions running with the land and agrees to defend them. Otherwise, a landowner wishing to use the entitlements in CodeNEXT V2 could get approval from the City, thrusting on the neighbors a lawsuit to defend the deed restrictions that were in place when the landowners acquired their properties.

  • If CodeNEXT V 2 were to be implemented as mapped, the result would be a degradation of in the neighborhood environment. This would be in conflict with the “equal or superior” clause of the Texas Local Government Code, Title 2. Organization Of Municipal Government, Subtitle C. Municipal Boundaries And Annexation, Chapter 43. Municipal Annexation, Sec. 43.056.

  • Seven properties owned by the Lost Creek Limited District (LCLD) are incorrectly zoned: Property IDs 109598, 111543, 111593, 113595, 847203, 108419, 113620. They are zoned RR (Rural Residential) and should be zoned in a manner that protects them as open or preserved land. The Limited District is a legal construct permitted by law, and zoning equivalent to Open Space or Park should be maintained for these existing parks and greenbelts. The citizens of Lost Creek, who own these lands through the LCLD, do not want these lands to be developed ever.

  • The Lost Creek commercial zone is zoned in CodeNEXT V2 map as MU2A and MU2B (mixed use zones that allow residential, low intensity office, service and retail uses). Access to these areas is either from Loop 360 or Lost Creek Blvd. Densification of the Lost Creek commercial zone would result in more traffic on both roads, neither of which can handle more volume.

  • The Marshall Tract (Property ID 109592) is zoned R1B. Three recent attempts to develop the land for office buildings have not succeeded. As the office zoning no longer exists, the land would have to be given a mixed use zoning. This would aggravate an already impossible traffic congestion situation that presents serious health and safety threats to the neighborhood. Lost Creek stands absolutely in opposition to a mixed use development of the Marshall Tract with access via Lost Creek. The developers’ attempts to secure access to Loop 360 via Las Cimas have apparently so far failed.

  • The changes to the compatibility standard are unacceptable. With the Marshall Tract still available to be developed, compatibility with the existing homes is an issue. The Marshall Tract, under the new compatibility standard proposed in CodeNEXT V2, would allow the placement of a 120-foot high building a mere 100 feet from a residence.

  • The condos at the entrance to Lost Creek (Property ID 841066 ) are zoned F251. The change in zoning that allowed the construction of these condos was very controversial. The uncertainty of this zoning is inexplicable and unsatisfactory.

  • Despite the recent disasters both locally and nationally, nothing in CodeNEXT V2 addresses wildfires. Austin is a city with the second highest risk in the country for wildfire loss. Standards should exist for new construction in the WUI (wildland urban interface), and new subdivision development. Standards should exist for the maintenance of land owned by the City in the WUI. Standards should exist for the maintenance of homes within the WUI. Lost Creek is a Firewise community working to become a wildfire adapted community, which the City should not only support, but emulate.

  • There is no mention of Dark Skies. Lost Creek is a Dark Skies community, a desirable neighborhood attribute that should be preserved and expanded within Austin.

  • At 1,388 pages CodeNEXT V2 is overly large and complicated – even worse than CodeNEXT V1. It is impossible for a single citizen to comprehend, and without a guide indicating the mapping of the old code to the new code, it is impossible to know what may have changed that affects Lost Creek.

  • Overall, CodeNEXT V2 will not create the necessary number of affordable residences. Moreover, the addition of ADUs to Lost Creek will not create any new affordable residences. The economics will not favor that solution.

  • The impacts on education, infrastructure, traffic, and wildfires, among many other important factors, have not been determined but can reasonably be expected to be significant.

  • Given the length and content of CodeNEXT V2, there is insufficient time to engage a neighborhood of 1,250 homes in this complicated issue.

1The F25 zone is for parcels that will carry forward the regulations in Title 25. Title 25 will remain in effect for several properties within unique, specially-negotiated districts, such as Planned Unit Developments and Neighborhood Conservation Combining Districts, as well as a defined subset of Conditional Overlays. Draft 3 will include a new zone specifically for these properties, as well as accompanying text that more fully explains how existing Title 25 will apply within this zone. A fuller description will be included in Draft 3.

CodeNEXT V2 Map for Lost Creek

If you would like more information on CodeNEXT, go to the web site:

CodeNEXT Comparison Map

Learn More About CodeNEXT V2

You can comment on the code as well as the map. The public comment section will be closed by the end of October.

If you would like more information about critiques of CodeNEXT V2, go to the Community, Not Commodity Web Site:

If you  wish to sign a petition about CodeNEXT go to their petitions web page:

  1. Require Voter Approval of CodeNEXT: Don’t let our city council pass CodeNEXT on its own! Download, sign, and mail us a copy of this legally binding petition demanding its approval by Austin voters. Neighborhood associations and other groups are encouraged to reprint and circulate.
  2. Petition to Stop Displacement of Austinites: Sign our petition to Austin Mayor Steve Adler and Council members to adopt real solutions now to prevent displacement of Austin residents BEFORE adopting CodeNEXT and granting developers new entitlements. Let’s demand CodeNEXT not accelerate displacement of Austinites.
  3. Stop the Unlawful, Anti-Zoning CodeNEXT Mapping Process: Sign our petition to Austin Mayor Steve Adler and Council members demanding they stop CodeNEXT’s profit-driven mapping process, which favors demolition over neighborhood stability and violates the City’s comprehensive plan.

The position of the Executive Committee of the Austin Neighborhoods Council is given below:

October 13, 2017

Dear Zoning and Platting Commissioners,

The Austin Neighborhoods Council Executive Committee would like to voice our concerns about the CodeNEXT draft 2. First of all, draft 2 is not simpler (by adding 200+ more pages to draft 1?) as promised from the beginning by the consultants and city staff. Moreover, it is a breach of what was voted upon by the previous City Council; this code is supposed to be a hybrid code, not a complete form based code overhaul. The direction from the previous City Council was very clear and precise. The $13,000,000 Neighborhood Plans based on Compatibility Standards were to be honored as stated in the IACP on page 207, not ignored.

We object to the lack of transparency that the CodeNEXT process has perpetuated with zero accountability and with public input being disregarded. The lack of responsiveness from the staff and consultants to answer important questions from the public and the boards and commissions- for example, what criteria was used for mapping other than market desirability and how the criteria would affect displacement and affordability- shows a human-disrespect for a comprehensive and iterative process. The process has been severely flawed. Because of these glaring omissions, we demand more time for input on this draft. Moreover, we view the decreased parking requirements as detriments to maintaining the character and safety of our neighborhoods, and we view the increased impervious cover limits with decreased flood mitigation as careless planning particularly with the recent memory of Hurricane Harvey and its carnage in Houston. Austin deserves better.

We suggest that the mapping be separated from the review of this code draft. There are too many inconsistencies, errors, and overreaches in the CodeNEXT draft 2 text for us to support this process and product.

Thank you for your time, attention, and your service to our community.

Respectfully, Mary Ingle, ANC President

Lottie Dailey, ANC VP1

Linda Bailey, ANC VP2

Kevin Wier, ANC VP3

Justin Irving, ANC Co-Secretary

Joyce Basciano, ANC Co-Secretary

Sheryl Cheatham, ANC Treasurer

Mike Lavigne, ANCCo-Communications Officer

Jesse Moore, ANC Co-Communications officer B

rad Parsons, ANC Sector 1

Chip Harris, ANC Sector 2

Sammy Easterday, ANC Sector 3

Paul Schumann, ANC Sector 4

David Connor, ANC Sector 5

Daniel Llanes, ANC Sector

Patty Sprinkle, ANC Sector 7

Wayne Shipley, ANC Sector 8

Pat King, ANC Sector 10

You need to be a member of Lost Creek Civic Organization to add comments!

Join Lost Creek Civic Organization

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • CodeNEXT is on Break; 3.0 due Nov. 28th but just heard from insider maybe January. Have to clarify original comment that post was "wonderful": trying to be encouraging.  Civic engagement is indeed wonderful; reading CodeNEXT at all is praiseworthy; post made for great talking points with City Staff. However, can't agree with all points, less so the more I learn, and would still like to see BD make positive specific requests. Re #8, condos, we're better off w/F25 and what was negotiated previously, even knowing those deficiencies, than w/ new zoning.  Re #10, spoke to Council Nov. 9 re baking Dark Skies into CN. LCCO BD, please stay engaged: keep reading CN, continue commenting, and consider amping up your involvement by, for example, attending events or attending/addressing Council, etc. Thank you.     

  • Tonight is "A CodeNEXT Conversation with the Mayor" Hosted by Council Member Ann Kitchen, October 26, 2017, at 6:30-8 pm, Zilker Elementary School Cafeteria. Last Community event for now is Saturday, Dove Springs Recreation Center, 10-12. (In Spanish and English). Last chance to comment on maps & text: do so by Halloween. Draft 3 Prep. Zone of Silence starts Nov. 1. ZAP/Planning Commission events Tues were great; I joined a Council Board room working group re Heritage Trees, the Urban Forest, Parkland Dedication, Water Quality, Water Reclamation, Waterways, Watersheds, Water Districts, Impervious Cover, Drainage, and Infrastructure.   ANC last night presented re what's bad re CodeNEXT & the process, & illegalities in the mapping and text of Draft Two. Important note is that Right to Petition is being eviscerated. Get involved! We'll live with this for the next 30-35 years... There's something worse than ghosts and ghouls--the City is changing all the rules! I know how to make you scream/You can't comment past Halloween! So time to give yourselves a slap! Read the words, look at the map! Being hexed, vexed, perplexed/Doesn't change the zones or text! So one last chance to state your best; and make a difference in our CodeNEXT! 

  • Note: all these community events are City-wide, NOT tailored to a particular part of town. Come to one or all. Tonight's event was great. (Excellent food too.) No one from LC or District 8 came except me (as of sign-in sheet 45 minutes in). Got bullet points 3 & 8 answered. All LCCO Board bullet points discussed now & mostly answered except part of 13.  Tomorrow night beginning at 4 at City Hall promises to be very informative. City won't be at ANC Wed. or ZNA Thurs. That's all I can say here. 

  • Next Fun (really!) CodeNEXT events are Monday 6-8 pm at Anderson HS (usually includes food and swag! CodeNEXT coozies! tote bags!) and Tuesday at City Hall beginning at 4 (with break-out Sessions to follow!) Austin Neighborhoods Council is Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. at the Austin Energy Building, 721 Barton Springs Road.  Last Open CodeNEXT event for now is Saturday 10(am) -12 (probably includes food and swag!--CodeNEXT sunglasses! bumper stickers!) the Dove Springs Rec Center. Everyone, please read sections relevant to you such as what R1B means--see that here  https://codenext.civicomment.org/chapter-23-4-zoning-code-0--and then comment on CodeNEXT Draft Two, text & map, by Halloween! https://codenext.civicomment.org/

    https://codenext.engagingplans.org/codenext-comparison-map

  • No one from LC came tonight except me. Forget what I said re RR--RR, R1A, & R1B are all but identical entitlement-wise. (R1B adds Senior Living less than 12--who cares?) Re Para 1-2, tonight Staff said lot size is set in stone, so R1B is the only one that fits all LC SF homes. At Staff urging we went through your letter line by line & that made for a good discussion. Staff like me was puzzled re Para 3. I think we solved Para 4 if PR will work for you. 7: Staff said compatibility standards still extant and 120 ft bldg impossible except in downtown. Compatibility will still stair step & first step is actually more restrictive than before but second step is less.  9-10--definitely parallel tracks but I'll keep trying a bit w/ no clear goal. Nothing else new tonight except very good discussions after re trash, affordability bonuses & fees in lieu.  

  • In sum, CN is going to pass. Too much money spent; too much momentum, old Code is too awful. 2.27 mill more to Berkeley based Opticos just approved. (But if you truly want CN to fail, D1 Councilmember Houston is your best bet.) Do comment on the maps & text. Tell Staff what you want in brief not so much what's wrong & not at length. Again, D7 Pool if you want the 4/18 deadline pushed out & maybe try to convince D5 Kitchen who is adamant re not extending it--she's worried about few minority contracts awarded by Opticos so maybe exploit that? Mayor, D2 Garza, D3 Renteria D4Casar & D8 (ours) Troxclair want CN, & don't really want deadlines moved. D9 Tovo will help you now but will vote for CN I think. I just can't read new D10 Alter or new D6 Flannigan yet--knew Gallo & Zimmerman well.  PLEASE consider attending the very important & ambitious PC/ZAP Joint Mtg on the 24th at City Hall, starting at 4. Also CN Mon night at Austin High & the 23rd at Anderson, both 6-8. Talk to Jerry Rusthoven or Greg Guernsey at any of these. Watch for Draft 3 Nov. 28th & please watch the MTract zoning--very concerned they'll sneak a commercial zone in at the last minute. THANK YOU for your thoughtful post--this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to shape Austin for the next 30-35 years. Read the text esp. re Lost Creek; make yourself care, and comment. Say what you want, not what you hate. Peace out.     

  • Paras 6-14: 6: Maybe Marshall will just build houses. But yes, if it's re-zoned (much more valuable as commercial), you're smart to want a code ready. If none in Dr 2 will work, make up one w/ what you want, name it, & propose it. Comment on the Code & on the map. Recognize some residents want mixed use: a tavern, restaurants, a convenience store, a coffee shop, to walk to. 7: we'll fight that w/ an MSL argument. But yes. 8: Can say that about all the Chapter/Title 25 decisions. Those condos...pick your battles. 9 &10:working on this. Addressed Council re FW 10/12. Will address Council re Dark Skies in Nov. Staff says do Firewise & Dark Skies on parallel track. WUI Ordinances will be passed soon. CN will not address building codes; it's land use. See Criterion Manuals. But I'm trying to work in Firewise in setbacks, tree clearing, tree preservation & Dark Skies in Lighting Standards. Hot FW topic: road widths. CN goes for narrow roads, safer for people & cars. But bad for firetrucks & EMS. Trade-off. Consider taking a position on road widths.  11: what would you take out? Tell Staff. 12: Talk to John Fregonese. increase affordability bonuses until they're big enough to work. Increase inlieu of fees until they're high enough developerss don't want to pay them. Adding residences in unused commercial space is a good idea. 13:  ? 14: ask for more comment consideration time. Ask that April 18 deadline be pushed out. Work w/ D7 Councilmember Leslie Pool on latter. Maybe Pool, D9 Tovo & D10 Alter on former.

  • Intro & Paras 1-5: As someone who's deeply involved in CodeNEXT: intro: BD (Sandy, Barb C., Paul?) oppose Draft Two. Fine, but in dealing with COA Staff instead of telling them what's wrong tell them what you want & do so briefly. Para One: BD says no R1B. Too many entitlements. Fine. Tell Staff what you DO want. As in i.e. ."Can we do RR but include ADUs?" Or "Can we do R1A?" (tho almost identical to R1B.) Don't get caught up in lot sizes. If you see one that will work, claim it. Seems like you'd like RR bc the entitlements are much less. [correction by Barbara: not true]Then say RR is great except you don't want say, amphitheaters. "We want RR minus amphitheaters." Decide if you are given the codes as existing would RR as it stands be better than R1B. Para 2: ditto. Para 3:totally get it but save that for a court challenge if needed.  Para 4:Working on it. P too broad--allows for a City Hall. Conservation too restrictive. Not sure if OS is going to survive. I proposed we get a new code. Working on getting this to be a new code called PR. Staff asked me to get LD GM Jim Emmons to send parcel #s. He did. Biggest hurdle was LD greenbelts were privately owned by LD not COA. Pointed out COA joint owns land & Staff said some churches have parks. Solved it. Will try to nail this down Mon night at CodeNEXT w/ Staffer friend. Got Y-Canyon fixed--from RR to Conservation.Got Community Bldg to be MU--not perfect but ok--better than RR. Confident we will solve this too hopefully by Draft 3.    Para 5: yes. What's your suggestion--is there a zone in Dr 2 that will work? If not propose a new one. 

  • This post is WONDERFUL and so well thought out, but perhaps a tad too long and dense for the average user. Could you pull out four very short bullet point goals? But I will read the whole thing & comment, next.

This reply was deleted.

CodeNEXT

CodeNEXT is the new City of Austin initiative to revise the Land Development Code, which determines how land can be used throughout the city – including what can be built, where it can be built, and how much can (and cannot) be built.

The process is a collaboration between Austin’s residents, business community, and civic institutions to align our land use standards and regulations with what is important to the community.

This initiative to revise the Land Development Codeis a priority program out of Imagine Austin, our plan for the future adopted by City Council in 2012.

To see the road map of the CodeNEXT process, go to CodeNEXT Journey: Creating the Austin We Imagined.

Ann McCormick and I have been involved in this process representing the neighborhood almost from its beginnings. And, several more of your neighbors worked with us on developing our Community Character in a Box.

We created several reports, documents and photos as part of this process, and these are listed below:

Please help us by getting involved in this forum asking questions and discussing issues.

Paul Schumann

CodeNEXT Project

Community Not Commodity

Austin Contrarian