Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Environmental Commission backs floodplain variance for 199‑unit affordable complex on Rundberg Lane
Loading...
Summary
The commission recommended approval of a Runberg Lane multifamily project that requests floodplain modification and compensatory restoration for a 0.72‑acre floodplain impact; the recommendation passed 10‑1 with conditions including 0.67 acres of restoration, invasive removal, a hedgerow outfall and payment to the riparian mitigation fund.
The Austin Environmental Commission on April 1 recommended approval of a floodplain modification for a proposed 199‑unit affordable housing development at 204 E Rundberg Lane after hearing a detailed staff presentation and applicant response.
John Clement, assistant environmental program manager with Austin Watershed Protection, summarized the site constraints: the property abuts tributaries of Little Walnut Creek, contains mapped floodplain and a critical water quality zone, and presently supports canopy that includes understory invasive species. Clement described the requested variance to place a portion of the structure within the mapped floodplain while requiring compensatory cut and active restoration so that the project does not raise the regulatory flood elevation. "The portions of the floodplain that are being modified … the red is the fill and the purple portion is where they're doing a compensatory cut," Clement said.
The applicant (Elmington Capital Group, represented by WGI) described a compact design intended to minimize disturbance and to advance environmental outcomes where feasible, including invasive plant removal, native restoration plantings, a hedgerow at the stormwater outfall to reduce erosive velocities, a community garden and EV‑ready parking. The applicant said grading balances fill and cut and that the compensatory volume will be engineered to preserve floodplain functions.
Staff recommended approval with conditions: active restoration of 0.67 acres, invasive species management, planting in 0.22 acres to increase canopy cover, installation of a bunch‑grass hedgerow at the outfall, and payment of $119,403 into the riparian zone mitigation fund to make up remaining restoration ratios.
Commissioners asked technical questions about erosion risk associated with retaining walls and the vertical face of development, traffic/parking impacts given proximity to an elementary school, and how many parking spaces the project will provide. The applicant said the design includes about 276 parking spaces and that the project meets many affordable‑housing program requirements that drove the parking assumptions.
A motion to recommend approval (Recommendation 20260104‑202) carried by roll call 10‑1; Chair Bristol recorded a dissenting vote expressing concern about building in a floodplain. The recommendation attaches the staff conditions and commission requests for lighting design, reduced impervious intensity where possible and bird‑friendly lighting.
Next steps: staff will forward the recommendation and technical materials to planning and council as part of the normal review; the mitigation fund payment and restoration plan must be finalized in the site‑plan and construction documents.
