Sound Search™

• Is Tuesday, August 20th. This is the regular meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission. We are in City Hall Council Chambers, room
• have been posted for planning commission. So it is withdrawn and will be on the Planning Commission agenda of September 10th
• six is a discussion item, and seven is withdrawn and will be on planning commission September 10th. Do I hear comments
• revised by the, um, city council on the 29th of August, which is next Thursday. Um, the planning commission made one
• recommendation by the Zoning and Planning Commission. The applicant is in agreement with maintaining the CO as a part of
• Road that has CSV. I'm sure those properties still will be coming through to the planning commission with DB 90 because
• has two parts on the planning commission. No, on the staff recommendation and only one on the planning commission. So
• , um, the staff version of the draft ordinances, There's a staff version and there's a planning commission version And
• version. Right. And and the main difference between those two versions is the decibel limit that planning commission recommended
• Delayed implementation? Delayed implementation Under staff's recommendation, there's a part two A and B under Planning commission part
• Central Waterfront advisory Board, that's what it's, and then it will move on to the planning commission. That's
• DB 90 prior to the zoning request being amended. This case was last heard at the December 19th, 2023 zoning and planning
• commission meeting where C-S-M-U-V-C-O was recommended by consent on February 1st, city Council approved this recommendation on first reading only
• planning Part two. Is that the October 1st date? Yes. Okay. So the October 1st date is only for the tenant
• ? Yes. Okay. And um, that moves forward to the environmental commission, I think tomorrow. And then the planning
• commission and then council if things go according to plan. Oh no, also the south central waterfront overlay whatever

Sound Search™

• reasonable proposals for cuts that should be seriously considered. I am a member of the Zoning and Planning Commission, and

Sound Search™

• Have quorum present within the council chambers. I now call this meeting of the planning commission to order at 6:12 PM So first off
• it here at Planning Commission, that we have a commitment from you verbally here that you will work with
• what was resonating the most. Um, and a planning commission is open to making whatever recommendation they deem
• this planning commission is willing to, to start that process, I am all for it. And I will be an
• planning commission, I think we've come to a place where, where we feel that restrictive covenants that
• it's the first time we actually come with the technical codes to the Planning Commission, let me give
• codes. So the planning commission has had a direct interest in this since the beginning of the year
• planning commission. Um, my understanding is that we should go ahead and put that into the, a future
• this item until, uh, the October 27th planning commission meeting, and we will provide an update in detail
• that one of our agenda items on planning commission this evening is actually gonna be taken up by the
• regarding that at the next planning commission meeting. 35. City of Austin Buildings working group, we have not
• between tenants and property owners. Tenants are cautiously optimistic that proceeding with the rezoning application before planning
• commission can be a sign of good faith. That management and ownership will continue to take steps to rebuild
• ? Correct. Okay. Because I do agree with Commissioner Wood, it makes it very hard. Again, as the planning
• commission, we were trying to think broadly of all of our needs in the community, how do we

Sound Search™

• on the City planning commission, we had a, we used a different number that was still small, but it was

Sound Search™

• Street. Staff recommends that this Landmark Commission recommend historic zoning to planning commission and city council and
• voting against the motion. Um, I, I think that one of the biggest things is that planning commission has
• , I think, community members from the planning commission and how many a RC meetings we've engaged. We've had

Sound Search™

• The Zoning and Planning Commission. We are in Austin, city Hall, board and Commissions. Room 1101. I will six. Hmm. There's only six

Sound Search™

• was passed to the Planning Commission. So, um, the planning commission is, is due to provide a report back to council
• with it. We've been in communication with, uh, with the planning commission. We provided a letter, uh, from all the

Sound Search™

• great growth, a lot of growth in our center from the beginning while I was on the pre-Planning Commission and

Sound Search™

• Meeting of the Planning Commission to order at six 5:00 PM Um, I'll be serving as chair today as, uh, chair Hempel is absent. We'll
• reason of all of the planning commission emails. We did get a whole lot of late backup emails. So I'm hoping
• Planning commission each month urging you to increase the smart housing rental affordability period from five years. It's current
• as the planning commission to answer the question at some point, why could we get 29 day review in 2002 and we
• a planning commission amendment language, clarifying that certain objects must be screened and not visible from a property
• line or alley shared with a triggering property are proposed. Um, so we're here at the Planning Commission today
• the actual notification, this link takes one to the planning commission page. Somewhere in the middle of that
• Planning Commission at that time. Um, so this is a separate ordinance making changes to the DB 90 program
• we would allow any part of the code to govern over cos that are recommended by planning commission and
• dealt with for planning commission and, and code tweaks. Thank you. Thank you Commissioner Al. Any other questions
• developer when this builds out? Again, we're at the zoning stage. So the question before the planning commission and
• I'm try not to be a jerk, but I'd like to remind us we are the planning commission, and
• duty and responsibility that staff has a duty and responsibility. This planning commission has a duty and
• this Hill country roadway, land parcel, the Planning Commission should oppose this site plan. Additionally, because of
• , that's what the recommendations from the planning commission would normally do, is to say these are some i
• that actual presentation from staff will be happening at our next planning commission, um, in August. Thank
• planning commission at 11:26 PM Thank you all very much and thank you staff.
• think, you know, it's my understanding that there's a, there's a, there's a policy of, uh, the planning
• commission granting the first post amendment request, which is done. And we've, we're happy to continue whatever

Item(s)

• Staff Recommendation and Planning Commission Recommendation: To grant family residence-historic landmark-neighborhood

Sound Search™

• reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 23rd. In addition to the staff postponement request, the East Austin
• is the planning commission recommendation. Ms. Harden, are you in agreement with the way I read that
• I'm speaking on item 180. I support the postponement, but I do question whether the planning commission, which
• planning commission. I suggest you think about giving the planning commission a little bit more time to
• this is a case of spot zoning and at the Planning commission, a lawyer appointee read out from
• historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is crafted a Compromise Solution, which
• not be zoned historic per the staff and planning commission recommendation, rather than applying zoning to the
• entire parcel. As is typical for historic zoning. The planning commission acknowledging this building's critical contribution
• Commission and the Planning Commission put in lots of time and effort and overwhelmingly recommended this property