This 5.229 acre site is located at the northeast corner of State Hwy 71 and Vail Divide (VD), within the Falconhead West (FHW) neighborhood.  Along with the rest of the neighborhood, it was zoned Planned Development District - Mixed Use in 2006; this ordinance designated this property subject to the subdivision ordinances in 1987 (Ordinance # 87-2) and allowed up to 50 percent impervious cover.  With the recent conversion of the northwest corner frontage lots to residential (Canyonside), it is the only piece designated for non-residential, neighborhood services uses.  It is also the last lot to be developed.  It was originally platted in 2008 (Document # 200800206) as part of the larger FHW subdivision, at which time several easements and setbacks were established.

The applicant is proposing to subdivide into three lots, between 1.5 and 2.1 acres each.  At this time, the applicant has identified one lot buyer, Agrotex, a gymnastics training facility.  

Infrastructure:  The construction of the buildings will be phased as demand warrants, but the shared infrastructure, including the water quality and detention ponds and drive aisles, will be built up front in Phase 1.  It will be managed and maintained by a Property Owners Association and requisite joint use easements will be established at Final Plat.  The property is served by Austin Energy, WCID 17, and West Travis County Public Utility Agency. 

Vehicular Circulation:  The plat proposes one point of ingress/egress onto Vail Divide located approximately 425 feet northeast of the intersection VD/71.  A new median cut will be required.  Staff supports this location rather than alignment with Rockies Run Summit because it gives more room for queuing in all directions, including at the VD/71 light. The TIA recommends adding a right and left turn lanes on VD so that cars entering the property do not block through traffic.  It will require removal of some trees and regrading of landscape berms in the median.

Of utmost importance is the joint use driveway with the property to the east, which is zoned Neighborhood Service.  This sets up the possibility for patrons of the subject lot, the lot to the east, and Summit 56, which is also zoned Neighborhood Service and has a joint use access frontage driveway, to circulate among the properties without having to get onto Hwy 71--similar to the Carr Subdivision properties on (south of) Bee Caves Road.  This driveway is recommended in the Traffic Impact Analysis.  Staff recommends the applicant be required to construct the driveway to the property line and dedicate a joint use easement at the time of site plan and final plat, respectively.  When purchasing the property, the applicant agreed to a recorded deed restriction to not allow access if the property to the east were developed as a car dealership (attached).

We are not in agreement with the about the location of the driveway onto Hwy 71.   While there is no perfect solution, we contend the safer location is at the southeastern corner of the site rather than ~430  feet east of the VD/71 intersection as is proposed.  The former is farther from the light, creates less conflict with the existing right turn lane into Falconhead West, and provides a realistic opportunity for a functional, shared driveway with the property to the east that ultimately reduces total curb cuts on 71.  The topography is substantially similar at both locations.  The applicant contends the latter is better for his preferred configuration because it gives people three options (left, right straight) upon entry to the development and is more marketable.  It is worth noting that the first three plat submissions showed no driveway onto Hwy 71.  Staff recommended it be explored in our 11.20.14 meeting and subsequent review comments to address concerns about concentrating too much traffic at the Vail Divide/Hwy 71 light.  It was added on the 4.28.15 submission.

One of the applicant's concerns with relocating the Hwy 71 driveway to the southeast corner is not meeting minimum TXDOT requirements for driveway spacing.  In response, Staff approached TXDOT in July to gauge their position; they were supportive of prioritizing reducing curb cuts over spacing of the driveways--especially in this case since it is preferable to have the driveway as far from the light as possible.  The driveway apron that was recently poured on the Covert site was installed under a TXDOT permit that preceded this development, but the location was not approved by the City; therefore it may ultimately need to be moved.  Staff would similarly encourage the lot owner to the east to share a driveway with this development, thereby addressing the concerns about spacing.   The applicant's second concern is stacking space.  With their current configuration of internal driveways, those entering from Hwy 71 would encounter a T intersection.  According to their traffic engineer, they would have the right-of-way to continue left or right without stopping, but if those coming from other directions did not abide stop signs, a traffic jam and backup onto Hwy 71 may ensue.  Staff acknowledges a potential problem, but the buildings and driveways are not being approved at this time (See Note 18).  To staff's knowledge, reconfiguration to address this issue has not been explored.  Lastly, the developer contends this option is more costly due to topography.  This concern is not readily apparent to staff as the contours on the plat and a site visit indicate substantially similar changes in grade. Plus, they will be moving a substantial amount of dirt when they redistribute the spoils pile in the center of the site, which could be used for construction of the driveway (in either location).    

A more detailed description of our respective positions on driveway locations and sketches of the turn lanes for both scenarios  are attached.    

Topography:  There is an existing spoils pile in the center of the site that is visible from Vail Divide.  At the time of site development, the engineer anticipates that the site will be regraded and this will be largely flattened.

Building Setbacks:  This plat is subject to the building setbacks established in the original:  30’ along Vail Divide and 75’along Highway 71.    There are 25’ side setback lines within each of the lots.  Because this plat is subject to 1987 subdivision ordinances, it is not required to have the 75’ landscape buffer along Highway 71 that would typically prohibit parking and require trees in this location.

Landscape Easements:  This preliminary plat carries over landscape easements from the 2008 Final Plat.  They are located along Vail Divide (70’) and on the north side (width varies) abutting the residential.  The purpose is to provide buffering/screening.   Staff supports the vacation of the landscape easement in the southeast corner, which was established by the 2008 plat.  After extensive research, including consulting with the original developer of Falconhead West, we could not determine the original intent nor continued necessity of the easement.  Removal of it allows a joint use access driveway to be located there instead, which staff feels is of paramount importance.

Parking:  The parking layout is conceptual.  Pursuant to note 17, it will be incumbent upon the lot owner to demonstrate adequate parking at the time of site development and with each issuance of a certificate of occupancy; this includes opportunities for shared parking.  This means building sizes and/or the number of spots may change. 

Pedestrian Connectivity:  At the urging of staff, the applicant has provided a sidewalk/trail along the Vail Divide.  In some locations, due to topography, they have located it in portions of the Vail Divide ROW.  This will ultimately be valuable as a connection not only for FHW residents to walk to the development, but also to get to the 71/VD intersection, where a future school is to be located.  To ultimately connect this sidewalk to the existing FHW network, the City will have to build a ~125 foot segment in the ROW, along the fence line of the residential property at Vail Divide and Pyrenees Pass.

The applicant has also provided a 15’ pedestrian easement along the Hwy 71 property line to be dedicated to the City.  Consistent with policy direction provided by Council in Summer 2015, the applicant will not construct the trail, nor be charged with impervious cover.  The City will be responsible for construction and maintenance.  It overlaps with a 15 public utility easement.  The City Attorney is drafting an easement document (See Note 21).

Signage:  Though signage is not part of the platting process, throughout the review we have highlighted an issue we foresee regarding off-premise signage.   The sign ordinance allows a business to have a sign on the lot on which it is located, only.  The underlying intent is to prevent a proliferation of signage by disallowing a business to place signs in several locations around town.  By subdividing in the configuration they are proposing, the building on Lot 1B does not have frontage on Highway 71; this business(s) will not be allowed to place sign on Lot 1A or 1C.  Early on, staff suggested structuring this as a condominium rather than subdividing to overcome this; that would allow a monument sign for the entire plaza at both entrances.  This issue remains unresolved.

The existing stone Falconhead West Silo sign is an easement and is not anticipated to be affected.   

Exception Requests: The applicant is subject to 87-2 subdivision ordinances, which have a minimum 2 acre non-residential lot size and 350' lot width along Hwy 71.  The proposed plat does not meet either of these standards, with lots 1A and 1B being under 2 acres, and lot 1A being 300' in length.  The applicant is seeking an Exception to these rules, which staff supports.  First, for practical purposes, they could develop this same configuration as a condo regime without any Exceptions; the impact from a land use standpoint is negligible.  Secondly, under today's regulations, the minimum  lot size in Mixed Use is 20,000 SF/.46 acres and 100' wide, so they would be compliant under current code.  

Planning & Zoning Commission

All of the discussion at Planning & Zoning Commission was regarding the Highway 71 driveway location.  The Commission approved the following motion:

• Driveway 2 remains at the location proposed by the developer, approximately 430 feet east of Vail Divide, restricted to right-turns in/right-turns out only.

• A joint use access easement (JUAE) is recorded by plat starting at the driveway location and continuing to the east property line.

•  The plat includes a note stating that as part of the SITE/NPS, paving

  improvements towards east adjacent property line must be implemented.

•  A right-turn deceleration lane is constructed in accordance with the TXDOT

  Roadway Design Manual.

•  The westbound right turn lane at Vail Divide is shortened and the pavement

  markings are modified so that the right turn lane begins west of Driveway 2.

• Exception request to minimum lot size is granted.

• Exception request to minimum lot width is granted.