File preview

Whereas, SGI Ventures (the “Applicant” henceforth), with support from the Housing
Authority of Austin (HACA), has applied with the State of Texas for 9% tax credits to develop
and operate a building containing 100 SRO efficiency rental units (of approximately 451 s.f.
each) for permanent supportive housing (“PSH”) on lots at 1004, 1006, and 1008 E39th in the
Hancock Neighborhood; and
Whereas, the Hancock neighborhood adopted a resolution during an April 28, 2022,
special called meeting to oppose the FLUM amendment and zoning change for the lots at 1004,
1006, and 1008 E39th to change zoning to the highest allowed density (MF-6-NP), which would
have allowed a 90 ft structure citing concerns of protecting the FLUM and zoning; density
increase, pedestrian safety, and the need for additional time to analyze these issues; and
Whereas, in the same HNA resolution; we expressed our support for both Permanent
Supportive Housing and affordable housing in Austin and our neighborhood; and
Whereas, at the May 24, 2022, City of Austin Planning Commission meeting, both the
Applicant and HNA provided their positions along with members of the community in favor and
in opposition of the zoning change, the Commissioners were not receptive to the opposition's
concerns, and unanimously voted in favor of the Applicant’s FLUM Amendment and lowerintensity (MF-4-NP) Zoning change for the lots; and
Whereas, at the Planning Commission meeting, the City Staff recommended a less intense
zoning designation (MF-4-NP) capping height at 60 ft, and the Applicant agreed to the limitation
and currently proposes a site plan of fewer than 48 ft; and
Whereas, homelessness is a crisis in Austin, and there is an overwhelming need for
Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) with 4,012 individual PSH SRO units are needed to make
homelessness non-recurring in Austin, according to the 2021 ECHO Needs and Gaps Report; and
Whereas, only 1,016 individual PSH units exist or are in the pipeline, leaving a gap of
2,996 individual PSH SRO units; and
Whereas, the Applicant’s plan for 100 PSH units would help close that gap and the
location in the Hancock Neighborhood provides ready access to transit networks, retail, medical
services, and amenities such as the Hancock Recreation Center and Hancock Golf Course trail.

To address the homelessness crisis in Austin and add to the inventory of Public
Supportive Housing Units with the eventual goal of ending homelessness, the Hancock
Neighborhood Association makes the following recommendations on the Proposed Cady Lofts
(100 rental units of 451 s.f. each) Zoning Change and FLUM Amendment.
Despite many of our original and ongoing concerns, the Hancock Neighborhood Association NO
LONGER OPPOSES the Zoning Change and FLUM Amendment and Applicant’s TDHCA 9%
tax credit application for the following reasons:
1. The proposed zoning change MF-4-NP is less intense than the originally proposed
MF-6-NP zoning; providing more compatibility with the existing FLUM plan and
adjacent SF-3 zoning.
2. The Applicant has promised to work with HNA and immediate neighbors to take our
input during the development of the site plan.
3. The Applicant has 20 years of experience building and operating affordable housing
units and has brought in a non-profit consultant from Houston, New Hope Housing,
with experience providing PSH SRO housing.
4. SAFE has informed HNA in a signed letter that additional funds are available for PSH
in Austin so the Lancaster is no longer in contention with Cady Lofts for funding and
can be built regardless of which project is ultimately supported by TDHCA.
To request the City Manager, City Council, and Mayor to address the following:
1. The pedestrian and traffic concerns raised by HNA that are worthy of
consideration and essential to the success of the project:
a. We ask the City to review the sidewalk and pedestrian safety plan for the
area surrounding the proposed development and build sidewalks where
necessary to ensure safe and accessible access for the 100 future tenants of
the site.
b. We ask the City to review the traffic and parking plans for the same area to
ensure that there are no concerns for the tenants or nearby residents.
2. HNA recommends that Council add a conditional overlay in addition to the MF-4NP zoning, expressly limiting height to 50 feet (lowered from the 60 feet allowed
by MF-4) in the case an affordable project does not advance and the zoning is
instead used for a market-rate development. This would ensure that a market rate
development does not benefit from the granted density requirements secured as
part of the FLUM amendment and zoning change for an affordable housing
project that removed existing COs added in the 2004 neighborhood plan.
To request the City Manager, City Council, Mayor, Planning Commission, and City Staff
to consider the Hancock Neighborhood Association’s recommendations related to zoning
changes in Austin, having learned from our experience:
1. We ask the Planning Commission to refine the notification process for zoning changes

to ensure proper and full notification for these changes, addressing an observed
deficiency where outdated and incomplete address information was used to notify
residents within 500 ft of the proposed change, denying them full notice of the change.
2. We ask the City Council to amend the Affordability Unlocked ordinance to include the
same notification requirements as zoning changes to encourage community engagement
and visibility into projects that directly impact land use. Residents should
3. We ask the City to proactively work with neighborhoods across Austin’s districts to
locate and secure properties for PSH units throughout Austin, augmenting the existing
process that primarily relies on private developers to identify and secure locations
without community input. We believe that collaboration would accelerate the building of
PSH units and minimize friction during the planning process
To request the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) improve
its notification process and timelines:
1. We ask TDCHA to change its notification process for applications to include the
deadlines for submitting feedback that it uses for scoring. These scoring deadlines are not
currently communicated to notified parties.
2. We ask TDCHA to provide better visibility into how an organization can register to be
officially added to the list of recognized organizations that may participate in the scoring
process. At this time, HNA is uncertain whether or not our feedback as a neighborhood
association is included and considered in the application scoring process.



Coan Dillahunty
President, Hancock Neighborhood Association