Sound Search™

• members of the public present, uh, for this meeting and the planning commission. This is a hybrid meeting, um, meaning that we
• was new knowledge to me too, as I came on planning commission that any time we're having zoning go against, we've
• get a local historic zoning on a building listed in the national register, historic district, the planning commission supported
• have three minutes. Okay. First off. I want to thank you guys for serving on the planning commission, your charges to
• they will have to come back to the planning commission and I know we could impose it as a condition
• applicant. Um, what is your next step? If the planning commission decides to not overturn the historic commission's vote
• that at the end of this month. And so the planning commission will have the opportunity to provide, um, a
• turned this meeting at the planning commission. Thank you very much.
• to withdraw and start the geese in you? No. So we provided staff recommendation, um, at this point, the planning
• commission could do, um, they could also recommend the CS one, M U N C C D N P for track one and

Sound Search™

• on our new business, which is the presentation discussion and possible action regarding recommendation to the planning commission regarding
• the planning commission. And so any of the public speakers will be included as part of that. It'll go staff
• planning commission. Next slide please. So the code mandates part require land dedication for a site development permit. If
• to the planning commission to deny the applicant's request to pay fee in lieu of land, to satisfy the Parkland
• at the direction of the director. I'm asking that you recommend planning commission uphold this appeal, strictly content contingent
• rebuttal. That language allows you as a body, the planning commission and you with your recommendation to modify our proposal
• that the next step in this appeal process is to go to the planning commission. And so this recommendation will be
• sent to the planning commission, but ultimately the planning commission will get to hear this case again, and they will
• the planning commission emails as well. Okay. Thank you. So let's move on to the, uh, the bond program. I guess
• gone through its process and all the way to the planning commission, which means that we would have missed. If we

Item(s)

• coordination with COA Planning Staff (including reporting, presentations and general accountability) and PlanningCommission (including LDC overlap (e.g.

Sound Search™

• of board members sitting at the front table here? I know they're doing that for planning commission, Uh, Lisa Simmons again

Sound Search™

• before a planning commission tomorrow night. Um, And is this where Arlene is? Yes, correct. It is where our Lin is
• a question out. So after you go to planning commission, then this would go to counsel. Correct. So, um, then
• editorial you guys. So what are, they may not care? What planning commission may not care? What music commission
• you sent in the history. I have complete appreciation for that. Um, what I feel like I know about planning
• commission is that they're probably gonna support this. I mean, that's just my personal opinion. That's just an

Sound Search™

• bedroom units at this point that may change once we get into the site planning stage and commission. Thank you
• go to the planning commission. So I, this is my first VK is coming to you because again, the majority go
• to planning commission. And, uh, again, the, um, the affordability requirement is in the code that 10% at 80% MFI for
• , but I'll just look around and then see to discussion regarding zoning and planning commission hybrid meetings. And is there

Sound Search™

• the URP and planning commission who strove to carry forward. The agreements that we in. So many other spent thousands

Sound Search™

• , which is what it was called at the time in 2010 and served until 2015. When he moved on to the planning commission, which he
• local government corporation, um, we are also seeking a conditional use approval from the planning commission for, uh, development

Sound Search™

• the urban renewal board recommended, what staff recommended and what the planning commission recommended. So Laura Key team
• recommendations differ between the urban renewal bore planning, commission and staff. Um, but I'll be happy to answer
• with, um, agreeing with planning commission, that development should be community informed, compatible, and mixed use, but they
• the board and supported by planning commission convert the existing sub district four into just sub-districts wanting to
• than sub-district, um, and planning commission supported the board's recommendation. Um, staff also supports this recommendation with
• recommendation is also supported by the planning commission. Next slide, staff recommendation only differs on Rose Wood avenue where
• recommending that the hotel motel use is permitted with conditions and sub district one. The planning, the planning commission has
• recommended no change. The height max maximums, which are shown here by sub-district planning commission did recommend that sub
• conditions. Um, and the planning commission has just also recommending that this is kind of additional a little on
• be affected. A planning commission recommended that this use be prohibited, which is how the entitlements work today
• , we would need to go back and get the recommendation of the IRB and the planning commission. So we couldn't
• is we would not have the recommendation of the board or the planning commission. And that being said, though
• board's recommendation is that far limits are removed to provide consistency for adjacent property. Uh, the planning
• commission recommended that based on in standards apply to all properties. Staff is supporting the board's recommendation because

Item(s)

• alternative timeline for parkland dedication and waiving requirements in City Code Section 25-1-502 for PlanningCommission review.
• Planning Commission Recommendation: To grant downtown mixed use-conditional overlay (DMU-CO), combining
• Planning Commission recommendation: Forwarded to Council without a recommendation due to lack of an affirmative

Sound Search™

• number 91 soul cycle. I hope you read my letter to the planning commission, which talked about, um, my disappointment in
• agenda 73 and 74. Not only by the city's own planning commission, but more importantly, our neighborhood, the current
• of vegetative buffer between the development and our neighborhood and the August 10th planning commission meeting, where they voted
• development. If the property is not suitable for residential development, the planning commission opposes it and the neighborhood is against
• on all three ratings with the planning commission recommendation item number 92, KC 14, 2020 0 1 44. This is the
• it the, uh, planning commission recommendation or the staff recommendation? I assume it's the planning commission recommendation
• , 2021 codes and ordinances joint committee meeting was canceled on August 24th, 2021. The recommend it, this was recommended by the planning
• commission on 11 zero vote with commissioners Flores and Shea absent Item number 100. Uh, there's been a, uh, uh, correction in
• Boston, actually, in fact, and I have lived in Austin since 1994 and Pepsi seen the evolutions. Um, now the planning
• commission voted against it and I don't understand why we are here today. As I mentioned, I literally bought my

Sound Search™

• and planning or planning commission, depending there's roles as to which one they go to. And, um, only things like an
• someone on the committee on zoning and planning or planning commission will make sure that the, any conditions are associated
• our teeth to speak to the planning commission, uh, over road are three Oak trees are vowed and protected those trees