May 25, 2021 Planning Commission

UH, REZONING, UH, WHICH IS ITEM B TO C 14 DASH 2021 ZERO ZERO ONE FIVE, UH, SHELBY LANE RESIDENCES.

UM, SO TODAY, UH, ON OUR AGENDA, WE'VE GOT, UM, UH, UH, FOUR ITEM MAY APPROVAL, A MINUTES.

WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO POSTPONE THE MINUTES APPROVAL OF THOSE MINUTES TIL JUNE EIGHT.

UM, THERE'S THOSE ARE JUST BEING FINISHED UP, BUT WE'RE GOING TO, WE'LL APPROVE THIS ON THE EIGHTH AND MOVING INTO SECTION B UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS.

UM, WE'VE GOT ITEM B ONE, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT.

THIS IS, UM, NPA 2021 ZERO ZERO TWO ONE ZERO ONE SHELBY LANE RESIDENCES.

UM, IT'S REC IT'S COMMERCIAL DEVOLT I FAMILY LAND USE.

UH, AND THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION IS PENDING POSTPONEMENT REQUEST APPLICANT TO JULY 13TH.

AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE, UH, THE ACCOMPANYING,

[00:05:01]

UH, THIS HAS ALSO BEEN POSTPONED TILL JULY 13TH AND THAT WAS C A C O N P T M F SIX, NT, UH, ITEM B3 IS, UM, UH, MOVED THROUGH THIS PRETTY CAREFULLY.

SO WE'VE GOT ITEMS B THREE A AND B FOUR AND B FIVE, UH, V3.

UH, THESE WILL ALL BE, LET ME JUST, THESE WILL ALL BE, UH, THE WORKING GROUP THAT'S WORKING ON THIS SIDE AND HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT TILL JUNE 22ND FOR ALL OF THESE THREE ITEMS. UH, COMMISSIONER AZHAR.

IS THAT, IS THAT STILL WHERE YOU WANT TO SET THE DATE RIGHT NOW? OKAY.

AND THEN I'M GOING TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY BEFORE READING THROUGH THIS.

DO YOU WANT TO ANNOUNCE THE, ON THESE ITEMS, THE DATE FOR THE, UH, GUEST FEEDBACK SESSION? THANK YOU, CHAIR.

UM, SO THE WORKING GROUP DECIDED ON HAVING AN LISTENING SESSION ON JUNE 1ST, WE WILL BE HOSTING IT FROM 5:30 PM TO 7:00 PM.

SO WE IN THE EVENING ON JUNE 1ST AGAIN, AND THE LINK FOR THAT, WE DO NOT HAVE AT THE MOMENT.

I WOULD SAY IF ANYBODY WAS LISTENING AND WANTS TO BE A PART OF THE LISTENING SESSION, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME DIRECTLY OR ANY OF THE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS OR MR. RIVERA.

AND WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT YOU GOT THE LINCOLN TIME AND I JUST REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S PATIENCE.

SO, UM, COMMISSIONER IS, ARE, AND MAY SEE A CLARIFICATION AT THIS MOMENT JUST FROM, UH, MR. RIVERA.

I THINK WE'RE LIMITED AS TO THOSE THAT CAN LISTEN IN AND PART EVEN LISTENING IN BECAUSE OF FORUM ISSUES.

MR. ZAR, I MEAN COMMISSION, UM, SORRY.

UM, MR. RIVERA, DO YOU WANT TO CLARIFY THAT, UM, THE QUORUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT, UH, FOR THAT SESSION, JARED COMMISSIONER LAYS ON AND FARRIER? SO JUST A REMINDER THAT A QUORUM IS SEVEN MEMBERS AND THE WORKING GROUP CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF SIX MEMBERS.

SO WE ARE AT THE MAXIMUM OF PARTICIPANTS FOR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS SENDING IN WILL ALSO BE LIMITED, EVEN IF COMMISSIONERS JUST WANTED TO LISTEN IN, THAT WILL BE THAT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED AS THE MEETING WOULD BE VIDEO CONFERENCE.

AND YOU WOULD BE LOGGING IN, IT COULD BE COUNTED AS NOT BEING PRESENT AT THE MEETING.

AND CHAIR FARMERS STUFF.

I WAS JUST GONNA SAY MY, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, MY INVITATION IS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS, SO I JUST REALLY WANT TO FIND FIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WANT TO JOIN US, PLEASE EMAIL ME OR RESTAURANT OR ANY OF THE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS.

AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS GET THE LINK.

I UNDERSTAND.

SO MOVING THROUGH THE THREE ITEMS, GO AND READ THESE B3 PLAN AMENDMENT, URBAN RENEWAL, URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR EAST 11TH AND 12TH STREET, URBAN RENEWABLE AREA MODIFICATION, NUMBER 12.

UM, THIS IS THE APPROVAL OF THE 12TH.

UH, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS RIGHT 12TH.

UH, AND THIS ONE IS ON CONSENT.

THIS IS THE APPROVAL OF THE 12TH MODIFICATION OF THE URBAN RENEWABLE PLAN FOR EAST 11TH AND 12TH.

STREET'S URBAN RENEWAL AREA.

UH, IT IS RECOMMENDED, UH, AGAIN, THIS WILL BE A POSTPARTUM WORKING GROUP POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 22ND.

WE HAVE A STUDENT, UH, ITEM BEFORE REZONING, UH, C 14 DASH 2021, DAZ ZERO ZERO THREE THREE EAST 11TH STREET, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT AMENDMENT.

UM, THIS IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

THIS WILL BE AGAIN, WORKING GROUP POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 22ND.

WE HAVE ITEM B FIVE REZONING, THE C DASH 2021 DASH ZERO THREE SEVEN EAST 12TH STREET, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION, DISTRICT AMENDMENT.

AND AGAIN, RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AND SIMILARLY THIS ONE, A WORKER.

IT WANTS TO POSTPONE THAT TILL JUNE 22ND.

ITEM B SIX PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO TWO NINE.ZERO ONE.SH 10 21 EAST ST.

JOHN'S.

UH, THIS IS SINGLE FAMILY TO URBAN'S SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE.

UM, IT'S RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

WE HAVE STAFF POSTPONEMENT TILL, UH, TWO TO JULY 13TH.

UH, WE HAVE ITEM IT'S THE REZONING, UM, C 14 DESKS, 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE DOT S H 10 21.

THE ST.

JOHN'S, UH, RESIGNING FROM SF THREE AND P TO SF FOUR, A N P RECOMMENDED BY STAFF STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 13TH

[00:10:01]

AND A B EIGHT.

THIS ONE IS FOR DISCUSSION.

THIS IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO EIGHT NINE 12TH IN SPRINGDALE RESIDENCES.

UM, IT'S THE GR M U N P TO G R M U V N P RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AND AGAIN FOR DISCUSSION ITEM B NINE ALSO FOR DISCUSSION C 14 DASH 2021 DOES ZERO ZERO TWO THREE DOT S H ANDERSON CREEK AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UH, THIS IS L O C O N P AND R R N P TWO G R N P RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AND WE'LL BE HEARING THAT ONE.

UH, REZONING.

THIS IS, UM, C 14 DASH 2020 ZERO ONE FOUR FOUR DASH.

OH, THE ADDRESS 27 SOUTH LAMAR.

THIS IS, UM, OKAY.

THIS IS FOR, UM, THIS WILL TAKE A LITTLE WHILE TRACK ONE G ARE TRACKED TO SEE US AS ONE DASH V AND SHE, OUR DASH V TRACK THREE IS CS DASH ONE DASH V AND GR DESIREE TRASH TRACK FOUR CS TRACK SIX GR DASH V DASH SEO AND TRACK SEVEN MP3.

AND, UM, IT'S, UH, REQUESTED THAT THAT BE REZONED TO MF SIX RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

THERE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT ON THIS ITEM TO JUNE EIGHT AND APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT.

ALL RIGHT, SO MOVING ON TO ITEM 11.

UM, SO WE'RE TAKING UP B 11, 12, AND 13 TOGETHER.

UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE THREE ITEMS. B 11 IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO ONE SEVEN DASH ZERO ONE SEVEN ONE ONE THREE PER NET ROAD.

AND THIS IS FOR, UM, COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE LAND USE, UH, RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

B12 IS THE REZONING, UH, C 14 DEATHS, 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO FOUR FOUR SEVEN ONE ONE THREE BURNETT ROAD.

AND THIS IS A FOUR CS DASH ONE DASH C O N P A AND C S C O N P AND L O C O N P ALL TO N T A S.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING MFA FOR NP AND, UM, THEN WE TAKE UP, UM, AT THE SAME TIME, THE 13 THAT'S THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT TERMINATION, C 14 DEATH SEVEN TWO ZERO THREE TWO, UH, RCT SEVEN ONE ONE THREE BURNETT ROAD.

UH, THIS IS DETERMINATE, A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT REQUIRES A 20 FOOT SETBACK IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AND ALL THREE OF THOSE WILL BE DISCUSSION ITEMS. UH, B 14 IS A C FOUR 18 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE THREE, UH, SIERRA CAMERON ACRES.

UH, THIS IS FOR L R M U C O N T TO C S M U N P RE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS G R M U N P.

UH, THE APPLICANT IS, UH, MEANINGFUL TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF G R M U N T.

SO THAT ONE WILL GO ON CONSENT.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO GETTING CLOSE HERE.

UH, B 15 IS A DISCUSSION ITEM, IF YOU RECALL.

UM, UH, WE, UH, HEARD THIS ONE THE LAST TIME, UH, AND, UH, WE DO TO, UM, UH, KIND OF STATE LAW.

WE'VE GOT UP TO HERE THIS ONE WITHIN 14 DAYS OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS HAD VOTED ON A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME FOR THINGS TO WORK OUT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THAT ONE.

UH, AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR, CONTINUE HEARING THAT TONIGHT.

AND THIS IS THE 15 SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UM, STC 2020 ZERO TWO ONE SEVEN C SENATE HILLS PARK.

AND, UM, AGAIN THAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THAT ONE, UH, THIS EVENING, UH, THESE 16 SITE PLAN S P 2019 ZERO THREE EIGHT FIVE C AT 10 76 SPRINGDALE ROAD.

UH, THIS IS FOR A VARIANCE TO LDC 25 EIGHT DASH TWO 61 TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, UH, RECOMMENDED WITH CONDITIONS.

[00:15:02]

UH, WE HAVE THESE 17 NOW THE SITE PLANNED, UH, AND THIS IS SPC 2020 DASH ZERO TWO EIGHT FIVE D FARR TENNIS CENTER RENOVATION.

UH, THIS IS NON-CONSENT, IT'S A FOUR SITES ZONE P PUBLIC, RATHER THAN ONE ACRE IN SIZE ARE A CONDITIONAL USE OR REQUIRE, UM, OUR, OUR APPROVAL.

UH, THIS IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AGAIN, THIS ONE WILL GO AND CONSENT, UH, ITEM A B 18 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.

UH, WE DO THIS EVERY YEAR, THIS THE AUSTIN WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LOCATED IN THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.

AND, UH, THIS IS ON CONSENT RIGHT NOW, AND WE HAD, UH, AN AMENDMENT ON A, B 19.

UH, THIS IS A REZONING CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2021 TO HAVE ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO, UH, PROJECT MARABOU.

AND THIS WAS FOR LR, M U C O N T TWO C S C O N P.

UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING L R C O N P A.

WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD, A POSTPONEMENT TILL JUNE EIGHT, EIGHT, AND APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT.

SO, UM, WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS, UH, COMMISSIONER PRACTICES? YES.

I HAVE A QUESTION AT THIS POINT.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO MOVE AN ITEM? UH, SAY B 15, THE SENATE HOUSE PARK, UM, TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

IS THAT, IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT AND SEE IF WE HAVE THE VOTES FOR IT? UM, I JUST KNOW IT WAS SUCH A LENGTHY DISCUSSION AND THERE PROBABLY A LOT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS SIGNED UP AND I HAVE A FEELING THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS MAY BE OPEN TO MOVING THIS TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

YEAH, I THINK WE CAN, UH, UM, ANDREW, CAN YOU ADVISE US ON THAT? I KNOW WE HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS AND, UM, CATHOLICS CLOSED ANYWAY, AT THIS POINT, RIGHT? THE PUBLIC HAS CLOSED.

IT'S ALL ABOUT US ASKING THEM.

SO IT'S, IT'S ONE WAY, UM, YOU KNOW, UNLESS WE WANT TO REOPEN IT.

SO CHAIR ONE CHAIR COMMISSIONED, LAYS ON ADVAIR DUE TO THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS.

I WOULDN'T ADVISE THAT WE DON'T, UM, HAVE IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY HAVE IT AS THE FIRST TIME IN MY BUSINESS AFTER THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, COMMISSIONER PRAXIS.

UH, I'LL JUST TIP A LITTLE, MY HAND A BIT HERE.

I'M GOING TO BRING THIS UP TO THE FIRST ITEM AND LIMIT SPEAKERS TO ONE MINUTE.

UH, SO THEY'LL SHOULD MOVE IT ALONG QUICKER.

SOUNDS GREAT.

WE'LL LEAVE THAT ON, UH, FOR DISCUSSION.

UM, SO LET'S SEE, BEFORE WE DOES ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL OFF AND FOR DISCUSSION, OR DOES ANYONE WISH TO COMMENT ON ITEM? I THINK WE HAD COMMISSIONER, UH, I'M SORRY.

UM, MR. RIVERA, DID WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WANTED TO SPEAK NEUTRALLY ON AN ITEM THAT WE'RE WE HAVE ON CONSENT? SHOULD THE INDIVIDUAL WAS FINE WITH THE ITEM GOING ON CONSENT? OKAY.

SO WE DON'T, THEY DON'T WANT TO SAY OKAY.

NEED.

UM, SO WITH THAT, I I'LL COMMIT COMMISSIONER DESIRE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT ON THE URBAN MEAL PLAN AND NCCD AMENDMENTS.

I JUST WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR, THE VICE CHAIR, THE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS AND STAFF WERE WORKING WITH US ON A POSTPONEMENT, REALLY MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN HEAR FROM AS BROAD ARRAY OF STAKEHOLDERS AS POSSIBLE.

SO I JUST WANT TO HANK EVERYBODY IN ACKNOWLEDGE, EVERYBODY'S HARD WORK ON THIS, AND I APPRECIATE YOU ALL ALLOWING US THIS POSTPONEMENT.

DO, UM, BEFORE I GO AHEAD AND READ THROUGH THAT ONE MORE TIME, ANY COMMISSIONER DOES NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM ANY OF THE ITEMS LOOKING AROUND? I SEE NONE.

THROUGH THESE JUST BY NUMBER REAL QUICK.

UM, AND ARE THERE ANY PARTICIPANTS ON THE PHONE, UH, ON THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE PULLED FOR CONSENT THAT, UH, UM, UH, HAVE CONCERNS AND WHAT TO PULL THOSE FOR DISCUSSION? OKAY.

HEARING NONE.

UM, SO LET ME RE READ

[Consent Agenda]

UM, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GOOD.

SO WE HAVE ITEMS B ONE IS, UM, UH, POSTPONE TILL JULY 13TH, B2 POSTPONED TO JULY 13TH.

WE HAVE ITEMS B3 BEFORE AND B FIVE.

WE HAD THE WORK GROUP POSTPONEMENT

[00:20:01]

TO JUNE 22ND.

UH, AND THEN ITEM B SIX, WE HAVE A STAFF POSTPONEMENT TILL JULY 13TH.

THE SEVEN IS POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 13TH, B EIGHT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

B NINE IS DISCUSSION ITEM B 10.

WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE EIGHT, UH, B 11, UH, THIRD, 12, AND 13 WILL BE DISCUSSED.

UH, WE'LL BE ON DISCUSSION OR DISCUSSION B 14 IS ON CONSENT.

B 15 IS, UM, W WE WILL HAVE FOUR DISCUSSION B 16, B 17, B ARE ON CONSENT.

AND B 19.

WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE EIGHT.

SO WITH THAT, UM, AND I GET A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND RECOGNIZE, UH, THE POSTPONEMENT OF THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES TO, UM, MAY 11TH.

I SEE, UH, COMMISSIONER COX FOR THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER.

UH VICE-CHAIR HEMPEL AND SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO, UM, WELL, IT WAS A PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M THE LAST ONE TO GET MY GREEN CARD OUT.

SO THAT CLEARS, UM, THAT'S CONCLUDES OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

SO I NEED A, I'M GONNA PROPOSE AGAIN, AS I SAID, THAT THE 15, WE MOVE UP

[B15. Site Plan- Conditional Use Permit: SPC-2020-0217C - Senate Hills Park; District 1]

TO THE FIRST ITEM AND WE LIMIT SPEAKERS TO ONE MINUTE.

UH, DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION? AND IF THERE, IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER I'M SORRY.

COMMISSIONER IS OUR, I THINK YOU OKAY.

YOU WERE SECONDING IT.

UH, ANY OPPOSITION HEARING NONE.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE UP B 15 IS THE FIRST ITEM.

AND SO WITH THAT, I THINK, UH, ANDREW, WHO DO WE HAVE FIRST CHAIR COMMISSIONING WAS ON IT FOR HER.

SO YOU SHOULD HAVE A SPEAKER LIST.

WELCOME TO GO OFF OF THAT.

JUST, UM, THIS ONE'S WHERE WE LEFT OFF LAST TIME.

SO LET'S SEE.

WE GOT, OH, YES, APPLICANT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH IS, UH, WHICH WILL GO FIRST.

UM, ANDY CREEL, AND AGAIN, UH, WE ARE LIMITING EVERYONE TO ONE MINUTE.

SO A USER TIME WISELY, STAR SIX, STEPHANIE.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR HAVING US AGAIN.

UH, ONE MINUTE, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS VERY CONCISE.

UH, WE FIRST OFF WANT TO EMPATHIZE.

WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RECOMMENDATION THAT CAME OUT OF THE LAST MEETING.

UH, WE PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO, UH, OUR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THAT RECOMMENDATION.

UM, WE'VE TALKED TO OUR ATTORNEY, WE TALKED TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY, WE'VE TALKED TO TAYLOR MORRISON EXTENSIVELY, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE TALKED TO OUR COMMUNITY, UM, VIA A TWO HOUR LONG DISCUSSION ON THE SUBJECT THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, WAS VERY, UH, HEALTHY AND PRODUCTIVE.

UH, IN THE END, WE CANNOT AGREE TO CHANGE THE USE OF THE PUBLIC ON THIS PARK.

UH, MOSTLY BECAUSE WE'RE SO HARD IN THE PROCESS OF RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH GOING BACK IN THE CONTRACT THAT COULD VERY WELL LEAD TO NO IMPROVEMENTS ON THIS TRACK AT ALL.

AND WE'RE NOT WILLING TO TAKE THAT RISK IN SO FAR DOWN THE LINE.

I'LL REMIND YOU, WE DID WANT TO APPROACH THIS THE PUBLIC PARK INITIALLY PART, PART OPTED NOT TO GO DOWN THAT PATH AND, OR WE WENT DOWN THE PRIVATE PATH.

UM, IN ADDITION, STAFF HAS CONFIRMED, WE WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO START OVER THE SITE PLAN, PERMITTING PROCESS IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE YOUTH TO PUBLIC AS WELL.

SO THAT FARTHER KIND OF EXASPERATES THE PROBLEM AS WELL.

I WANT TO SAY, WE AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENTS THAT WERE, THAT CAME UP THROUGH THE DISCUSSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LAST TIME WITH THE PUBLIC AND CONNECTIVITY AND, AND WITH, UM, UH, THE SAFETY OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN THESE SPACES.

WE JUST, DON'T ALSO FEEL LIKE THIS IS EXACTLY THE RIGHT PLACE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION BEING ISOLATED OF A NEIGHBORHOOD AS WE ARE, BUT WE ARE FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THE CONVERSATION AT LARGE, AND WE ENCOURAGE ALL CONTINUE THAT CONVERSATION BECAUSE WE ARE HOLISTICALLY BEHIND YOU AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

THE LAST TWO YEARS, I'VE BEEN, UM, A VOLUNTEER AS THE SECRETARY OF SENATE WHO'VE HOA BOARD.

UM, NEXT, UH, SPEAKING FOR, WE HAVE ANTONIO G BIGGER,

[00:25:05]

SO THIS, UM, THIS AGENDA ITEM, VERY CLOSE AND DEAR TO MY HEART.

UM, MANY, MANY COUNTLESS HOURS OF VOLUNTEERING, JUST LIKE YOU GUYS.

AND WHAT'S REALLY COOL IS OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY DIVERSE.

WE DON'T LOOK AT THE COMMISSION.

IT'S JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, A COMMUNITY THAT WE ALL APPRECIATE HERE IN AUSTIN.

WE REALLY WORKED HARD AND GOT TOGETHER, UM, OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS, TRYING TO BRING THE COMMUNITY JUST TO VOTE ON THESE ISSUES.

UH, AS ANDY HAS MENTIONED ON CHANGING ANY OF THE LANGUAGE AT THIS POINT, UM, WOULD RESULT INTO NO IMPROVEMENT OF THAT, OF THAT PROPERTY TRACT IN REALLY NO BENEFIT, UM, FOR EITHER NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THE NEW PARK, THE FIRST FOR OUR NEIGHBORING DEVELOPERS OR SENATE TILLS.

UM, I JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO REALLY CONSIDER ALL THE WORK AND EFFORT AND ENERGY THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS COME TOGETHER AND WE'VE LISTENED TO BOTH SIDES AND ADVOCATED FOR THOSE WHO WERE OPPOSED, WHICH I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD.

UM, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD SOME ASKED AROUND SECURITY, WE GOT NEW FENCES INVOLVED IN THE, UH, IN THE AGREEMENT AND NEGOTIATION, UM, CONCERNS AROUND PARKING.

WE WERE ABLE TO GET SIGNED.

SO WE'VE REALLY TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE ALL, ALL PARTIES INVOLVED HERE.

UM, AND I JUST HOPE THAT YOU GUYS ALIGN WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN APPROVING THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UM, BECAUSE WE, IT WOULD BE SO IN THAT AS TIME, UH, JUST A REAL DETRIMENT TO THE THOUGHT OF AUSTIN TO TAKE AWAY OR NOT HAVE ACCESS TO ANOTHER GREEN BASEMENT.

UM, HAVING GRANDCHILDREN.

WE'VE GOT TO MOVE PERHAPS A MINUTE.

WE HAVE TO MOVE ON.

I'M SORRY, SIR.

UM, THANK YOU.

THAT'S UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR, YOUR, UM, COMMENTS THERE.

WE HAVE, UH, I HAVE JEAN CAROL BOCA, AND PLEASE LET ME KNOW, UH, STAR SIX ON MUTE.

AND LET ME KNOW IF I PRONOUNCE YOUR NAME WRONG.

HELLO, HOW ARE YOU? THIS IS JEAN CHERRY BOGUS.

UM, I'M CALLING IN AS THE OWNER OF A PROPERTY THERE AND A GRANDMOTHER WHO IS TOTALLY, TOTALLY FOR A PRIVATE PARK.

YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO RAISE THEM IN AN AREA THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO FAMILY ENVIRONMENT.

AND AS WE VOTED PREVIOUSLY, WHICH HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A PRIVATE PARK BETWEEN THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO I'M JUST ASKING THAT YOU, UM, CONSIDER THAT AND RESPECT THE BOATS THAT WE HAVE PUT FORTH FOR YOU.

UM, IT'S A GREAT AREA.

WE WANTED TO SEE IT THRIVE.

YOU WANT TO SEE THE SUCCESS OF BOTH NEIGHBORHOODS, AND WE JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO BRING OUR, OUR GRANDCHILDREN THERE AND KNOW THAT THEY'RE SAFE AND HAPPY.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN JUST WALK BACK TO OUR HOUSE IF WE NEED TO USE THE RESTROOM AND THEN WE'D BE GOOD.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

UH, NEXT WE HAD DAVID TIERRA BOGA, DAVID STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

I THINK WE MIGHT BE HAVING SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES.

UM, I GUESS, LET ME, UH, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUMP TO, UH, MR. BRAD HODGES, IF YOU'RE THERE STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

CHAIRMAN SEAN.

IT WAS PROB HUGGERS TOWERED TRAIL, REPRESENTING SELF FOR THE APPLICATION AS PASSED BY OUR SENATOR TO THOSE COMMUNITY 76 TO 29 OUT OF TWO 53.

AND I'M AGAINST PUBLIC USE CONDITIONS ON SUBACUTE, BUT HAVE NOT BEEN VOTED FOR BY OUR COMMUNITY AND HAS NOT BEEN DEFINED BY THE CITY AND DIFFERENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS THAT WILL KEEP OUR COMMITTEES.

THE PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS APPLIED FOR ARE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

NOT IN THE BISHOP AND OFFICIAL INTEREST OF OUR COMMUNITY.

PLEASE VOTE TO PASS WITH NO OBJECTIONS.

UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE BACK AND THEN I'LL COME BACK TO DAVID , BUT RIGHT NOW, DO WE HAVE AARON BENTLEY

[00:30:02]

STAR 608? YEAH.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS MY SUPPORT FOR THE PARK.

UH, FIRSTLY, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS NOT A PARK WHERE THERE'S NOTHING, THIS IS A PARK WHERE THERE'S A VACANT LOT, UH, LIABILITY STILL EXISTS, BUT A LOT OF IT'S FIT DRAINAGE.

I CAN'T SEE ANY IMPACT.

THE INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD BRING PARKING SPOTS ALREADY EXISTS.

I ASSURE YOU THE NOISE WON'T BE WORSE THAN THE CONSTANT BICYCLISTS.

I HEAR BEHIND MY HOUSE ON 51ST STREET, I DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS MY OPINION ON THOSE BIKE LANES, BUT HAD I, I WOULD HAVE APPROVED THEM BECAUSE THE NOT IN MY BACKYARD ATTITUDE IS DETRIMENTAL TO OUR INNER CITY COMMUNITIES.

I WORRY THAT SOMEONE WILL DO DRUGS AND A LOT AND LEAVE NEEDLES BECAUSE WE FOUND THEM THERE BEFORE.

UM, I WORRY THAT PEOPLE ARE USING A LOT TO HIDE FROM THE POLICE BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THEM DO THAT BEFORE.

UM, PARKS DON'T TYPICALLY ATTRACT THIS TYPE OF ATTENTION.

UH, FINALLY, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE DISCUSSED THIS AS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOW TO VOTE, UM, WHICH THE PARK ONE BY THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY THAT WAS REQUIRED BY OUR HOA, THE NEIGHBORS HERE WANT THE PART ASIDE FROM JUST A HANDFUL, PLEASE APPROVE OF OUR PARKS AND THAT'S IT.

WE HAVE, UH, HILARY BENTLEY START 600 I'M HILARIE BENTLEY.

AND I LIVE DIRECTLY FACING THE PROPOSED PARK.

I'M A HOMEOWNER.

UM, I WANT THE PARK BECAUSE I'M INTO ACTIVATING DEAD SPACES AND TURNING THEM INTO PART OF THE COMMUNITY RATHER THAN JUST OVERGROWN LOT.

I WANT TO CREATE SPACES THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS.

IT IS NOT CURRENTLY ENGAGED.

AND SO JUST KIND OF WHATEVER HAPPENS THERE.

BUT IF THIS SEEMS LIKE A NICE, PURPOSEFUL IDEA, I WANT A PLACE WHERE KIDS CAN PLAY WITHOUT BEING WORRIED ABOUT GETTING HIT BY A CAR.

I HAVEN'T HEARD ARGUMENTS AGAINST IT BESIDES SELFISHNESS.

AND I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN NOT ONLY REALIZE THAT WE LIVE IN CENTRAL AUSTIN.

NOISE IS JUST A PART OF OUR LIFE.

THE INSURANCE RISK IS WORSE WITH IT AS A VACANT LOT.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE ARGUMENTS HAS BEEN METICULOUSLY AND PAINFULLY DEBUNKED.

WE JUST WANT A PUBLIC PLACE TO HANG OUT AND MEET A BLIND EYE TO THE FACT THAT THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ONCE THE PARK, UM, THAT THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AND THINGS FOR ALLOWING US TO SHARE.

OKAY, WE'RE GONNA THE LAST, UH, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO COME BACK TO DAVID , UH, STAR SIX AND MEET IF YOU'RE THERE.

UH, WE'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO SPEAK BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THOSE OPPOSED.

THIS IS DAVID.

TROY.

CAN I SPEAK NOW? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

I AM A OWNER RESIDENT THERE AND I ALSO HAVE GRANDCHILDREN AND CHILDREN THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BRING THERE.

CURRENTLY, THE SPACE IS COMPLETELY UNUSED.

THIS WOULD GIVE THE COMMUNITY WHO HAVE VOTED ON IT, AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE THIS SPACE IN A VERY CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER.

IT NEEDS TO BE PRIVATE IN ORDER TO PROTECT ANYONE WHO GOES THERE AS IT IS AN ISOLATED SPOT THAT DOESN'T ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO COME THERE.

IF YOU, AS WE PROPOSE PRACTICE AND ALLOW US TO HAVE OUR BENTONVILLE PARK, IT'LL HELP US TO GET TO KNOW OUR NEW NEIGHBORS, WHICH IS A LARGE DEVELOPMENT BY TREVOR MORRISON ADJACENT TO US.

IT WILL BRING THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER.

IT WILL TAKE WASTED SPACE AND TURN IT INTO A GREAT PLACE FOR THE COMMUNITY.

WE CAN INVITE OTHERS FROM OUTSIDE THE COMMUNITY.

SO IN THAT SENSE, IT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC PRIVATE IN THAT WE COULD INVITE PEOPLE THERE BESIDES JUST THE FOLKS I BELIEVE DATED.

AND WE JUST HOPE THAT YOU WILL VOTE FOR THIS, THAT THE SENATE HILL PARK WILL GO THROUGH AS CONTRACTED CURRENTLY.

PLEASE DO THAT FOR US AND LET'S MAKE AUSTIN A BETTER COMMUNITY.

SOME FOR THE, UH, HABIT PARK, UM, THE AREA WITHIN TO BE ON-GROUND, I'M USING A MANAGED, WHICH HAS BEEN CLEARLY A DECEPTION.

AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THOSE OPPOSED.

UH, AGAIN, ONE MINUTE PER SPEAKER AND I HAVE FIRST ON THE LIST, ROSALYN WILLIAMS. HELLO.

MY NAME IS ROSALYN WILLIAMS AND I'M A HOMEOWNER.

I'VE BEEN ON HER AND SAID NAILS SINCE 2007.

I LIVE HERE ON CHARGE TRAIL WHERE THE, UM, THERE HAS BEEN

[00:35:01]

UM, UH, EVERY MORNING THAT I EXERCISE, I SEE FAMILIES WITH THEIR CHILDREN.

THEY, UH, IN THE AFTERNOON WALKING IN THAT AREA AS WELL AS OWNERS WITH THEIR PETS.

UM, I'M JUST ASKING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS LEAD THIS AS A WALKING TRAIL, WHICH IT HAS BEEN SINCE 2007.

UM, AND JUST TO VOTE, UH, AGAINST THIS PRIVATE PARK AS A PROPOSED PRIVATE PARK, I BELIEVE IT BRINGS, UH, SAFETY PARKING AND MAINTENANCE ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED WITH THE RESIDENCE, THE HOA BOARD.

AND I KNOW THE OTHER PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ALSO HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT IN THE LAST MEETING.

THERE WE GO.

UH, NEXT WE HAVE ABBY RUIZ.

HI, THE APPLICANT DID NOT DISCUSS THE PARK IN DETAIL WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE, AS STATED, HE ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THIS WITH PREPPING 11 RESIDENTS AND ATTENDED AT OUR MOST RECENT HOA MEETING VIA ZOOM.

AT THAT TIME, THE APPLICANT CAME, HE WOULD NOT DIGRESS FROM THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR PRIVATE PARTS BYPASS.

THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED A LOT OF INTERFERENCE THERE.

MAYBE THE DEVELOPER WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY DEVIATION, WHICHEVER CREATES AN UNWILLING AS POINTED OUT, JUST PLEASE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE PARTY.

THANKS FOR INTERRUPTING BRAD, MS. TERESA, IF YOU COULD PLEASE BEGIN SHERRY YOU'RE ON MUTE.

AND NOW YOU GUYS CAN HEAR ME, MR. UH, LET'S SEE.

UM, THIS IS ABBY RUIZ.

ARE YOU OUT THERE? I DON'T KNOW IF WE HEARD YOU CAUSE IT WAS SOMEWHAT GARBLED.

ARE YOU STILL THERE? OKAY, GO AHEAD AND START.

WE COULDN'T.

I COULD NOT HEAR YOU CLEARLY.

SO IF YOU COULD, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND START YOUR MINUTE AGAIN BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING TECHNICAL PROBLEMS. SURE.

I WONDER YOU'VE BEEN MUTED TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, PRESS STAR SIX.

MY APOLOGIES, UH, HAVING A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ON OUR END, UH, APOLOGIES TO MISERIES MS. REESE, IF YOU COULD PROCEED, YOU MAY NEED TO SELECT STAR SIX.

I HAVE.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

I'M GOING TO ASK ONE MORE TIME.

CAN YOU HEAR ME ALL RIGHT.

UM, I'M GOING TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT DISCUSS THE PARK WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE, AS STATED HE DISCUSSED THIS WITH ABOUT, UH, WEBINARS AND OUR MOST RECENT ACTUALLY MEETING VIA ZOOM AT THAT TIME, THE ALCOHOL INTO WOULD NOT DIGRESS FROM THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR A PRIVATE PARK AND BYPASS RESIDENT ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTIONS.

THE COMMISSION HAD RECOMMENDED TO CONSIDER CLAIMING THE DEVELOPER WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY DEVIATION, WHICH ILLUSTRATES THAT SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT AND UNWILLINGNESS TO COMPROMISE AS POINTED OUT BY THE COMMISSION ON MAY 11TH.

AGAIN, I URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE PARK, IF ANYTHING MAKES THIS PARK PUBLIC.

AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

UH, WITH THAT, I THINK I'VE, UM, THAT'S ABOUT A MINUTE.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT, UM, SPEAKERS, SCOTT PETERS, STAR SIX TO UNMUTE

[00:40:11]

SCOTT PETERS.

I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE HIM ON.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND UH, TRY, UH, ADRIANA, UH, THERESE.

SO THIS IS A SKY HERE ON TOWER TRAIL.

UH, I'M AGAINST THE PRIVATIZATION OF THE PARK.

HOWEVER, THERE WILL BE A PART.

IT SHOULD BE A PUBLIC PARK.

THIS PARK SHOULD BE INCLUSIVE TO ALL OF THE EAST SIDE COMMUNITIES.

WE ARE NOT A PRIVATE COMMUNITY AREA.

NEIGHBORHOODS ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PRIVATE PARK.

AND WE MUST THINK ABOUT THE CREDIT.

GOOD OF ALL OF THE EAST SIDE COMMUNITIES.

THIS PARK IS NOT ISOLATED.

IT'S ONLY A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE 51ST STREET THIS EASILY ACCESSIBLE, AND IT WOULD BE BEST BENEFIT AS THE PUBLIC PARK.

I HOPE YOU VOTE AGAINST THE PRIVATE PARK AND FEEL THIS PARKS SHOULD BE PUBLIC AND BENEFIT THE EAST SIDE COMMUNITIES AS A WHOLE.

IF YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE AN OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR THIS PARK, BUT PLEASE MAKE SURE THIS IS PUBLIC.

SO, SO, SO IT SUPPORTS ALL INDIVIDUALS.

NOW, UM, I GUESS ADRIANA PEREZ.

STAR SIX.

UH, YES, I N A CAUSE THE PARK, BUT I WANTED TO SAY OF THINGS THAT TRIGGER MANY CHURCHES NEED TO KNOW.

SO WE WERE INFORMED IN THE MEETING THAT WHEN, UM, THE DEVELOPER WERE A CONTACT TO ASK THEM IF THEY WERE TO BE WILLING TO DO A PUBLIC PARK INSTEAD OF A PRIVATE PARK, THEY TAYLOR MORRISON, WHO IS THE ONE WHO IS WILLING TO PAY FOR THE INSURANCE AND ALL THE LIABILITY OF VIVID, A PRIVATE PARK.

THEY ARE NO WILLING TO, UH, ACCEPT A, CHANGING THE CONTRACT TO MAKE IT AT A PUBLIC PARK BECAUSE OF THAT, WE ARE BOUND IN A CONTRACT WITH THEM TO US, THE ONLY OPTION OF A, UH, PRIVATE CLERK.

UH, I WA I REGIONALLY HEAVY PAVER IS OF NO HAVING THE, UH, PRIVATE PARK BECAUSE OF ALL DID I EVER REALLY BE? I, ONCE I END UP AFRAID THAT ONCE THE DEVELOPER IS GONE AND THEY, 150 OWNERS ARE INSIDE IN YUKON, THEY WILL WANT TO THE MILK FOR THE INSURANCE AND THE OTHER ITEMS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

UH, NEXT WE HAVE URSULA CARTER STAR SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT.

I THINK WE HAVE SOMEBODY THERE.

UH, URSULA CARTER, ARE YOU THERE STAR SIX 10 NEED.

AND DO, DO YOU KNOW FOR HAVING, UH, IF, UH, TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, PRESS STAR, YOU ARE NO LONGER MUTED.

COMMISSION LAYS ON, HOWEVER, I'M NOT SURE IF I HAVE MS. CARTER ON THE LINE.

UH, COMMISSIONER COPS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, I WAS.

I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IF MS. CARTER IS INDEED NOT ON.

SO, UH, MR. RIVERA, DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ONE CHURCH? SO THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.

YOU JUST HEARD A TESTIMONY, YOU CAN NOW MOVE TO DEBATE.

SO I WILL OFFER, UH, THAT WE MOVE INTO DEBATE, UM, IN LESS ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS, BUT, UM, MY PREFERENCE IS TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO DEBATE.

UH, COMMISSIONER COPPS.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION IF WE'RE READY TO DO THAT.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSION OR ANY OF THE SPEAKERS, COMMISSIONER DESIRE? SURE.

I DO HAVE FEW QUICK QUESTIONS.

[00:45:01]

I'M GOING TO GO ON TO ALLOW THE QUESTIONS.

GO AHEAD AND, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER ZAR.

UH, LET'S JUST TRY TO KEEP IT IN SHORT.

AND, AND, UH, WHO WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF, THANK YOU, CHAIR.

I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS FOR MR. CREEL.

UM, I, I THINK THE FIRST ONE WAS, UM, I KNOW I'VE HAD A SEPARATE CONVERSATION WITH YOU AND YOU HAD MENTIONED CERTAIN ACTIONS THAT YOU WERE TAKING TO ENSURE THAT OUR PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME ARE TAKEN CARE OF.

CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO HOW YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS THAT WE DRESSED OUT OF ASK PERMISSION? YOU HEAR ME? YES.

GREAT.

UH, THANK YOU FOR SHARING AS ARE, UH, FOR THE QUESTION WE, UH, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS PRIMARILY.

UM, THE, THE BIGGEST THING THAT WE COULD DO TO ADDRESS THE CONCERN THAT COMMISSIONER CONLEY HAD RAISED ABOUT A, UM, UNAWARE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, FINDING THEMSELVES ON THIS TRACK, UM, UNAWARE OF ITS STATUS OR THE RULES, AND THEN FINDING THEMSELVES IN A CONFRONTATION THAT, THAT ENDED IN UNPLEASANT MANNER.

UH THERE'S WE CAN REALLY ONLY THINK OF ONE WAY TO MITIGATE THAT CONCERN.

AND THAT IS TO, UH, INSTALL SOME SENSES ON THE SHORTER SIDES OF THE PROPOSED TRACT.

IT'D BE ABOUT 55 FEET ON ONE SIDE AND ABOUT 70 FEET ON THE OTHER SIDE, AND RESTRICT ACCESS TO A SERIES OF GATES WHERE THE FINES ARE CLEARLY POSTED IN TWO LANGUAGES ON THOSE GATES AND LIT AT NIGHT.

SO THAT, UM, AT, AT A MINIMUM, UH, THERE WOULD BE AN AWARENESS OF THE PRIVATE STATUS OF THE PARK.

UH, AND IT WOULD TAKE A MORE PHYSICAL, UM, EFFORT TO BYPASS, UH, THOSE, THOSE PARK RULES AND SIGNS.

UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN CONSIDERED PREVIOUSLY IN DISCUSSIONS IN NEGOTIATION, BUT WE OPTED OUT OF JUST BECAUSE THE SENSES DO GIVE A PARTICULAR, UH, FEELING TO THE SPACE AND WE DIDN'T REALLY WANT THAT.

BUT IF THAT HELPS ADDRESS THE COMMISSION'S CONCERNS, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D BE WILLING TO ACCOMMODATE.

DEVELOPER AND ASSOCIATED HOA.

SO OUTSIDE A FOLLOWUP QUESTION, I, THERE WAS SOME CONSIDERATION OF HAVING SOME SORT OF ONLINE SIGN-UP SYSTEM, WHEREBY IF THERE ARE OFFENSES, A SPECIFIED GATES WHEREBY THE DO NEIGHBORHOODS, FOLKS CAN SIGN UP, UM, YOU USE THE PARKING, PLEASE SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

SO, UH, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE DEVELOPER WAS HAVING A RESERVATION SYSTEM SUCH THAT, UH, RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY COULD RESERVE THE PAVILION IN THE PARK FOR LARGER GROUP EVENTS.

THOSE GROUP EVENTS WOULD HAVE A SEPARATE SET OF RULES AND POSSIBLY A DEPOSIT ASSOCIATED WITH THEM JUST TO ENSURE THAT THOSE GROUPS DON'T, UM, ABUSE THAT PRIVILEGE.

BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS, THERE WAS A SUGGESTION THAT PERHAPS THAT RESERVATION SYSTEM COULD BE EXTENDED TO SOME OF THE, THE, UH, NEARBY AREA, UH, COMMUNITY GROUPS.

YEAH, LET'S SAY THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS OR CHURCH GROUPS OR HOBBY GROUPS OR FARMER'S MARKETS OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT WHERE THERE'S THESE BENEFITS, THESE COMMUNITY GROUPS THAT ARE BRINGING A BROADER COMMUNITY BENEFIT.

AND THEY WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE THE INVITED GUESTS OF THE COMMUNITY AT THAT POINT.

SO, UH, W I CONFIRMED WITH OUR ATTORNEY THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT AND THEREBY WOULD GENERALLY BE AGREEABLE.

I KNOW, UM, THERE ARE A FEW FOLKS THAT STATED SOME OPPOSITION TO THAT.

SO I THINK THERE, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT OF A PUZZLE SOLVER FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND, AND, UH, MEMBER PARTIES, THAT'S THE AGREEMENT, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, UM, YOU KNOW, IT, ISN'T A ACCOMPLISHABLE, UM, UH, ITEM.

AND ONE OTHER QUESTION, WHICH WAS, UM, I KNOW YOU HAD EXPLAINED THIS LAST TIME AS WELL, ESSENTIALLY, YOU CLARIFIED THAT NOBODY FROM YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD WILL HAVE TO PAY IN ANY ATRIAL FEES OR ANY KIND OF FEES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PARK.

CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT IS A CONCERN THAT WE HEARD FROM EMAIL.

ABSOLUTELY.

UM, SO I CAN CONFIRM 100% THAT THROUGH HOA DUES OR ANY OTHER MEANS, UH, OUR COMMUNITY WILL NOT BE PAYING THE BURDEN FOR THIS PARK.

UH, I'LL, I'LL KIND OF BREAK THAT DOWN FIRST OFF THE INSURANCE, UM, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST, THERE'LL BE INSURANCE AND MAINTENANCE, UH, BEING THE TWO BIGGEST ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PART, THE INSURANCE WILL BE REIMBURSED EQUALLY ON THE, BY THE

[00:50:01]

UH, WHAT THAT'LL LOOK LIKE IS US GETTING TWO QUOTES FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

ONE WITH THE PARK ONE WITHOUT THE PARK AND THE DEVELOPER WON'T BE PAYING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO QUOTES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

IN ADDITION TO REVERSE US ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AFTER THE PROPERTY TAXES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PARK, AND THEN MAINTENANCE IS COVERED IN FULL, INCLUDING THE SENSORS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE PARK, BY THE DEVELOPER.

SO THERE, UH, LASTLY UTILITIES, UH, FOR THE PARK LIGHTING AND WATER FOR IRRIGATION IS ALL BEING COVERED BY THE DEVELOPER.

SO THERE IS LITERALLY NOT ONE ASPECT OF THE ONGOING COST OF THIS PARK THAT IS GOING TO BE SHOULDERED BY THE SUN HILLS COMMUNITY.

THE, OUR CONTRIBUTION WAS OUR DETENTION PONDS AND THE LAND ITSELF.

AND I THINK IT WAS JUST HAVING THIS AMOUNT OF TIME LEFT.

I JUST WANTED TO ALSO ASK ABOUT THIS ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPOTS REQUEST, IF THAT WAS CONSIDERED, IT WAS I'LL, I'LL HAVE TO DEFER, AND I'M NOT SURE THEY'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TO THE ENGINEER OR EVEN STAFF.

I KNOW FROM GENERAL CONVERSATIONS THAT, UH, THIS USE DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY PARKING.

THE PARKING THAT WAS PROPOSED WAS ACTUALLY AT THE REQUEST OF FINISHED HILLS, UM, ORIGINALLY, OR CURRENTLY, I SHOULD SAY THERE'S A DEAD END TURN AROUND THAT WAS USED FOR FIRE TURNAROUND AT THE NORTH AND SOUTH END OF THIS TRACK, UH, THAT WAS INTENDED ORIGINALLY TO BE PARKING, BUT STAFF REQUESTED THAT THAT TURNAROUND BE REMOVED IN THAT PARALLEL PARKING BE PUT IN ITS PLACE.

THE REASON WE ASKED FOR THAT PARKING IS BECAUSE THIS, UM, COMMUNITY ADJACENT TO US THAT'S BEING BUILT HAS VERY LIMITED PARKING ON STREET PARKING.

THEY HAVE PARKING GARAGES IN DRIVEWAYS, BUT NOTHING ON THE STREET.

AND SO WE EXPECT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME SPILLOVER FROM JASON COMMUNITY.

WE WANTED THOSE PARKING SPACES THERE TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF OVERFLOW PARKING FOR THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY BEFORE THEY KIND OF START POURING ONTO DIFFERENT HILL STREETS.

UH, THAT'S FIVE MINUTES.

SO WE NEED TO GO AND CUT OUT THERE.

DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER CUFFS? I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION IF THERE'S NO QUESTION.

LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? IT'LL BE REALLY QUICK.

UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO, UM, FOLLOW UP IN THE SIMILAR LINE OF QUESTIONING THAT, UM, COMMISSIONERS ARE HAD.

SO IN OUR LAST MEETING, I THINK WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THE CONCERNS ABOUT A PRIVATE PARK AND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF LET'S SAY A TEENAGER FROM A NEIGHBOR, UH, YOU KNOW, FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD NEARBY, IS THERE WITH FRIENDS AND THE COPS ARE CALLED, THIS MIGHT BE A TEENAGER OF COLOR, RIGHT.

AND, UM, THEY COULD BE MURDERED, RIGHT.

JUST TO PUT IT OUT THERE AS CLEARLY AS POSSIBLE THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING GROWN UP IN AUSTIN AND, UM, GOING AROUND AS A TEENAGER WITH MY FRIENDS OF COLOR, HAVING A PARTNER WHO IS A MAN OF COLOR AND HAS HAD THE COPS CALLED ON HIM WHEN I'VE BEEN WITH HIM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, TO ME IS A REAL CONCERN AND A REAL REASON TO HAVE POSE THAT TO THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU ALL COULD TAKE SOME TIME TO RECONSIDER MAKING IT, YOU KNOW, A MORE PUBLICLY OPEN SPACE.

BUT I DO REMEMBER, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ALL WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A WHOLE PROCESS.

SO I GUESS, AND, AND I, I RESPECT THAT THAT WOULD BE WHOLE ADDITIONAL PROCESS FOR YOU ALL.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, UM, WOULD YOU ALL SEE IT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO ADDING FENCING, UM, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO JUST KIND OF HAVE A, I WOULD HOPE SOME KIND OF CONVERSATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY OR STANDARD, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, UNLESS THERE'S A SERIOUS DISTURBANCE, IF SOMEBODY SEEMS TO NOT BE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT NECESSARILY THE FIRST REACTION TO BE, TO ASK THEM TO LEAVE OR CALL THE POLICE, IF THEY'RE NOT CREATING A DISTURBANCE OF SOME KIND.

I REMEMBER THAT WAS WHAT YOU ALL SAID.

YOU YOU'VE GOT, THE RESPONSE WOULD BE, UM, WITHIN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT UNLESS THERE WAS A DISTURBANCE, YOU ALL, WOULDN'T ESCALATE TO CALL THE POLICE, BUT I JUST KIND OF WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU ALL.

UM, I GUESS THE SAME MR. CREEL, IF, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE, YOU'VE HEARD FROM NEIGHBORS THAT THEY WOULD, BUT THAT'S THE KIND OF RESPONSE THEY WOULD HAVE, OR IF, IF YOU'VE GOTTEN LOOKING MORE FENCING PROTECTION FROM PEOPLE COMING FROM THE OUTSIDE.

HILLS COMMUNITY IN SAYING THAT THAT IS NOT THE TYPE OF COMMUNITY THAT WE ARE.

THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT.

I WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENTS WE'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN.

UM, YOU KNOW, FORTUNATELY NOT VERY MUCH IN AUSTIN, BUT DEFINITELY, UH, THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.

AND, AND I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE REALITY OF THAT.

UM, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I CAN SPEAK FOR A LARGE NUMBER OF NEIGHBORS IN SENATE

[00:55:01]

UM, WE DO HAVE 153 HOUSEHOLDS, SO I CANNOT SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY.

UM, I KNOW THAT THAT IS A SOCIETY WIDE PROBLEM, UM, THAT EXISTS TODAY.

AND I CAN, UNFORTUNATELY, I WISH THERE'S SOME WAY I COULD HAVE CONTROL OF THAT.

I CAN SPEAK FOR A LARGE MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS AND SAY THAT THAT IS NOT WHO WE ARE.

UM, THERE HAVE BEEN CONVERSATIONS, UM, NOT, NOT EVEN NECESSARILY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARK, BUT JUST IN GENERAL ABOUT PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WALKING DOWN THE SIDEWALK AND HOW, WHAT THE RIGHT APPROACH TO, YOU KNOW, BOTH KEEPING AN EYE ON THAT PERSON.

IF THEY, IF, IF THEY SEEM TO BE COMMITTING A CRIME AND BEING PREPARED TO CALL THE POLICE, BUT OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT YOU ARE NOT, UH, IMPOSING ANY BIAS OR, UH, YOU KNOW, UNDULY, UM, CALLING THE POLICE AND SOMEBODY WHO'S MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS.

AND THERE'S BEEN A SPACE THAT THEY ARE WELL WITHIN MY RIGHT TO BE, UH, THOSE CONVERSATIONS CERTAINLY BEEN HAD IN OUR COMMUNITY.

AND WE CAN CERTAINLY ASSURE YOU, WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AS A COMMUNITY AS, AS WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AS A WHOLE, UH, AS A CITY AND AS A COUNTRY AS WELL.

UM, THE FENCING IDEA THAT WAS PURELY REACTIVE, IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THE COMMISSION DOESN'T WANT, BUT SOMETHING WE, WE CERTAINLY ARE WILLING TO DO WITHOUT IT, WASN'T IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO EMPHASIZE THIS IS NOT PROTECT THE RESIDENTS AS SENATE HILLS WOULD THE USERS OF THE PARK.

THE GOAL OF THE FENCING IS PURELY TO PROTECT AN UNAWARE UNASSUMING MEMBER OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND ENSURE THAT THEY ARE AS INFORMED AS POSSIBLE BEFORE MAKING A DECISION.

YEAH, IT WOULDN'T BE MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE TO PUT UP FENCING.

I THINK POSTING THE RULES WOULD BE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT.

AND IF YOU ALL ARE ALREADY HAVING THOSE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT BIAS, UM, I'LL JUST PASS ON AN ADDITIONAL RESOURCE, BUT THAT YOU MIGHT, YOU MAY OR MAY NOT ALREADY BE AWARE OF, BUT I'LL, I'LL MAKE SURE TO EMAIL THAT TO YOU ALL IN CASE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WANT TO PARTICIPATE.

THAT'D BE WONDERFUL.

UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.

HEARING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER COSTS TO DO THAT MOTION.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A PARK, WHICH IS A COMMUNITY RECREATION PRIVATE USE WITH THREE CONDITIONS, IF I'M ALLOWED.

UH, ONE OF THOSE CONDITIONS IS WHAT I MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING, UH, UH, PROVIDE FOR AT LEAST ONE, UH, SPACE THAT IS ACCESSIBLE, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS.

I BELIEVE THE SITE PLAN WE SAW SHOWED FOUR PARKING SPACES BEING PROVIDED A SECOND CONDITION BEING TO PROVIDE A, UH, FENCE AROUND THIS PARK, UM, THAT IS NO TALLER THAN THREE AND A HALF FEET AND AT LEAST 50% VISIBLE THROUGH THE FENCE.

UM, AND THEN THE THIRD CONDITION IS TO HAVE THE PRIVATE NATURE OF THE PARK WELL POSTED, UH, UH, ON THE GATES OF THAT FENCE.

AND I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO ACCEPT FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS IF WE THINK WE CAN IMPROVE UPON THAT TO, TO ADDRESS ANY OF OUR CONCERNS.

AND I BELIEVE THOSE THREE CONDITIONS POSSIBLY WERE AGREED BY THE APPLICANT.

I, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE ON THAT.

SO COULD YOU STATE IT? YOU WANT ONE, UH, ADA PARKING PLACE IS WHAT YOU'RE CORRECT.

ONE, ONE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPOT.

IT THERE, CORRECT THAT IT ISN'T TECHNICALLY REQUIRED, BUT THE PARKING IS SO CLOSE TO THE PARK THAT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE NEED AT LEAST ONE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPOT AND IT WOULD NOT BE AN A SIGNIFICANT EVENT.

OF THE SITE PLAN, THEN WE WILL CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO ENSURE THAT GETS IMPLEMENTED THE OTHER TWO CONDITIONS.

SO, UH, REAL QUICK IS THE APPLICANT THERE ARE THESE, ARE THESE ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT? YEAH.

SO THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS, UM, OR SORRY, THE CONDITION OF THE ACCESSIBLE SPACE, I CAN'T SAY A HUNDRED PERCENT, EXACTLY WHAT THAT WOULD REQUIRE.

UH, IN GENERAL, I KNOW, UM, THE ENGINEER WAS ON THE CALL LAST TIME.

IT WAS PROBABLY LISTENING IN, BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

UH, THE, UM, THE DEVELOPER MAY ALSO BE ON AS WELL.

I THINK THEY'RE, THEY WERE GENERALLY KIND OF, UM, PREDISPOSED NOT TO ACCEPT THE CONDITION OF, UH, AN ACCESSIBLE SPACE, BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE SUGGEST ON THE CONDITION IS, IS IF YOU REQUEST THAT WE CONSIDER THAT WE WILL CONSIDER IT.

AND IF, IF IT IS VIABLE AND DOES NOT, YOU'LL CALL THE MAJOR ITERATION

[01:00:01]

SO, UM, IF WE, EVERYONE, DO WE NEED ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION BEFORE WE MOVE INTO A SECOND, A FINISHER? BIZARRE.

YOU NEED A CLARIFYING QUESTION.

HOPING STAFF CAN TELL US WHAT KIND OF CONDITIONS WE CAN PLACE ON THIS MOTION.

UM, YEAH, WE DON'T, UH, MR. RIVERA, I'VE SEEN HER NOTICE.

DO YOU SAY WE DON'T HAVE STAFF WITH US TODAY? UH, THAT'S A GOOD MESSAGE FROM THE PREVIOUS INQUIRY OF WHETHER THEY ALRIGHT.

DO WE, UM, ARE WE AT A POINT WHERE WE CAN ENTERTAIN, UH, UH, TECHNICAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I THINK WE CAN, WE HAVEN'T, NOBODY'S MADE A SECOND.

SO DO WE HAVE STAFF AVAILABLE, UM, FOR A QUESTION SURE.

WHILE WE'RE WAITING TO HEAR FROM STAFF AND I, THE REASON I ASKED THIS QUESTION WAS BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF, CAN I SHARE COX'S, I MEAN, YOU BOTH DO ADDING SOMETHING TO THAT MOTION.

UM, THAT'S WHY I WAS CHECKING, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS EVEN POSSIBLE OR NOT.

AND WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR STAFF, I THOUGHT IT JUST MENTIONED THAT, BUT ESSENTIALLY I'M TRYING TO SEE IF WE COULD ALSO ADD TO THE MOTION THAT WE WOULD ASK THAT THE PARKING MADE AVAILABLE TO LOCAL COMMUNITY GROUPS IN THE AREA, THROUGH THE PARK BOOKING SYSTEM, UH, THE CASE MANAGER, UM, I AM ON THE PHONE CALL.

WE ALSO HAVE TRANSPORTATION STAFF AVAILABLE, HARDEN STAFF AND CITY LEGAL AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

THAT'S GREAT.

THANKS TO YOU.

AND SO YOUR QUESTION COMMISSIONER, IT'S OUR IS WHETHER WE CAN, UH, MAKE A INCLUDE IN THIS MOTION THAT, UH, THE PARKING, UH, THE PARK WE MADE AVAILABLE TO LOCAL COMMUNITY GROUPS, UM, I GUESS, IS THAT UPON APPROVAL OF THE HOA, UM, THAT WOULD BE TO THE ONLINE BOOKING SYSTEM, WHICH IS KIND OF SOME PART OF AN APPROVAL PROCESS.

THE FIRST CONDITION BEING THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE PARKING SPACES PROVIDED ADJACENT TO THE PARK IS ACCESSIBLE.

UH, I GUESS STAFF, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN, UM, UH, PUT, UH, MAKE PART OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE AGREEMENT? YES.

YOU CAN, UM, MAKE THAT A CONDITION.

IT IS, I WILL SAY THAT IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT, UM, WE WOULD JUST PUT ON THE PERMIT, UM, AND NOT SURE HOW ENFORCEABLE THAT IS.

UM, BUT IT IS THE CONDITIONER.

WE CAN PUT IT ON THE PERMIT AND, UM, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO AMEND MY MOTION TO INCLUDE A FOURTH CONDITION.

AND, AND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOING FOR COMMISSIONERS ARE, BUT, UH, THE FOURTH CONDITION BEING THAT THE PARK BE MADE AVAILABLE TO VIVEK OTHER CIVIC GROUPS OUTSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, AS APPROVED BY THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD HOA.

'CAUSE, I, I DON'T THINK WE CAN DEFINE AS PART OF THIS, EVEN IF WE WANTED TO EXACTLY WHAT GROUP IT SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED AND NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE PARK.

UH, SO, SO I, THE, THE, ULTIMATELY THE AUTHORITY FOR THAT, SINCE THIS IS A PRIVATE PARK AND, AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF THAT WOULD BE THROUGH THE HOA.

UH, AND SO THEY WOULD HAVE ULTIMATE APPROVAL OF, OF WHICH GROUPS, UH, COULD, COULD USE THE PARK AND, UH, FISHER HOWARD.

DID YOU HAVE, UH, A QUESTION OR CLARIFYING QUESTION BEFORE WE MOVE TO FURTHER ON THE NOTION? ALL RIGHT, SO WE'VE GOT QUIET.

I WOULD LIKE FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I THINK, COULD YOU REPEAT YOUR MOTION? IT'S I THINK YOU PROBABLY HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN SOMEWHERE, AND SO, AND THAT WILL BE SEEKING A SECOND AFTER YOU REPEAT IT ONE MORE TIME WITH THE ADDED FOURTH ITEM.

I DO NOT HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN, BUT I WILL TRY MY BEST TO REPEAT IT.

I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT THE PARK, WHICH IS A COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL PRIVATE USE WITH FOUR CONDITIONS.

[01:05:01]

UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS, I CAN SPEAK MORE TO THAT AFTER A SECOND, UH, SECOND CONDITION BEING THAT A FENCE BE CONSTRUCTED, UH, AROUND THE PARK OR THE TWO ENDS OF THE PARK, UM, THAT IS NO TALLER THAN THREE AND A HALF FEET, AND AT LEAST 50% VISIBLE THROUGH THE FENCE.

THE THIRD CONDITION BEING, UM, THAT THE FENCE IS WELL MARKED AT THE GATE LOCATIONS THAT THIS IS A, THIS IS A PRIVATE PARK AND THE RULES OF THE PARK.

UM, AND THE FOURTH CONDITION BEING THAT, UH, OUTSIDE CIVIC GROUPS ARE ALLOWED TO USE THE PARK, UH, AS APPROVED BY THE HOA.

DO I HAVE A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER SECOND SET, MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER THOUGHTS.

YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEAH, SO, UM, I FELT LIKE THIS WAS A NO BRAINER, ALTHOUGH I, I DO THINK THAT THE POINTS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING, UH, WERE REALLY IMPORTANT.

AND, AND OBVIOUSLY IN MY POSITION, YOU CAN SEE MY FACE.

I DON'T, I DON'T, I'M NOT PERSONALLY AWARE, UM, UH, OF, OF MANY OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT ARE BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITIES GO THROUGH.

UM, SO I'M GLAD THAT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING.

UM, I DO THINK THAT, UM, OUR DECISION TODAY IS BASICALLY BETWEEN THIS PARK THAT A DEVELOPER IS PAYING FOR, FOR ESSENTIALLY TWO NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THE SENATE HILLS, AND THEN THE, THE, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE DEVELOPER BUILT TO JASON, TO THEM, UM, BETWEEN THAT OR A VACANT UNDERUTILIZED OVERGROWN LOT.

UM, AND SO I THINK THAT THAT DECISION IS FAIRLY EASY.

I FEEL LIKE THE COMMUNITY HAS GONE THROUGH ALL MUCH TO GET TO THIS POINT, UM, THAT IT WOULD BE AWFUL IF WE DENIED THEM THE ABILITY TO SPEND SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY TO BUILD A PARK FOR THEIR, FOR THEIR COMMUNITY.

AND I ALSO THINK THAT THEY ACTUALLY PUT IN A LOT OF THOUGHT, UH, AND CAME UP WITH SOME GOOD IDEAS TO HELP ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE, UH, THAT WERE RAISED AT THE LAST MEETING.

I THINK I SHARE THE SENTIMENT THAT FENCING PARKS IS NOT THE GREATEST THING, WHICH IS WHY I SPECIFY THAT THE FENCE BE LOW, AND THAT IT'D BE SEE-THROUGH PRIMARILY FOR SAFETY REASONS.

UM, UH, BUT HAVING THE SIGNAGE ON THAT FENCE AND FORCING PEOPLE TO GO THROUGH THE GATES WHERE THE SIGN SAYS IT'S PRIVATE PART, HOPEFULLY WILL LESSEN THE CHANCES OF SOME, UH, THING UNPLEASANT HAPPENING TO VISITORS OF THE PARK.

SO, UH, I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN SUPPORT THIS AND LET'S SEE WHAT THESE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE THEIR PARK.

UM, DO I HAVE ANY SPEAKERS, UH, AGAINST THIS MOTION? UH, MR. THOMPSON, THIS IS JUST A REALLY TOUGH VOTE FOR ME, BUT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THESE TEAMS HAVE WORKED SO HARD, UH, TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, BRING SOMETHING TOGETHER THAT WILL BETTER THE COMMUNITY.

UM, OF COURSE NOT EVERYBODY IN COMMUNITY SUPPORTS IT, BUT, BUT THAT'S, THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF TOUGH DECISIONS WE MAKE ALL THE TIME.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE SAY, THIS IS WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY.

I MEAN, I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY BROUGHT UP, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE ACCESS AREN'T FROM THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, BUT I'M ACTUALLY JUST, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PERSON FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO GO THERE, BUT MAYBE DOESN'T GET OUT SO OFTEN AND ISN'T TOTALLY WELL KNOWN TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AND THEY GO TO THE PARK AND THEN THEY ARE CONFRONTED OF, YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE HERE, EVEN THOUGH THAT PERSON PAYS HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION FEES, ET CETERA.

UM, AND, AND JUST, YOU KNOW, CREATING THOSE NEW TYPES OF DIVISION WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE WHEN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SO SIMPLE AND EASY TO DO THIS FROM THE BEGINNING.

AND I REALIZE THAT'S TOUGH NOW, YOU KNOW, ALL THIS TIME AND EFFORTS HAVE BEEN PUT INTO IT AND ALL THESE AGREEMENTS HAVE BEEN REACHED AND VOTES HAVE BEEN MADE, BUT THAT'S THE CHALLENGE OF NOT BRINGING INCLUSIVITY AND DIVERSITY FROM THE BEGINNING.

AND THAT SHOULD BE THE CORNERSTONE FROM WHICH WE BUILD AND NOT AN AFTERTHOUGHT THAT WE PUT ON THE COMMUNITY LATER ON.

SO I, I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT IT.

UM, EVEN THOUGH I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A PARK, I THINK WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, BUILD THAT DEVELOPMENT, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT IT AS IT IS.

DO WE HAVE ANY MORE SPEAKERS WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? I SEE COMMISSIONER MINISH.

TYLER, LET ME DO THIS, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, HOWEVER YOU, THE SECOND ON THIS ONE.

SO THIS IS, THIS IS TOUGH.

I FINISHED YOUR HOME.

[01:10:01]

I MEAN, I DO UNDERSTAND BEING EXCLUDED.

UM, SO I CAN UNDERSTAND, I MEAN, IT IS A STRUGGLE THAT THINK ABOUT THIS, BUT I THINK THE REALITY OF IT IS THIS IS PROBABLY, UH, A NEW MODEL THAT THEY MIGHT NEED TO CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE.

WHEN WE SEE THE OPPORTUNITY, I MEAN, NO ONE WANTS TO ANYBODY TO BE EXCLUDED.

UM, BUT I MEAN, THERE WASN'T ATTEMPT TO HAVE HARD MAKE IT PART OF THE SYSTEM AND THERE WASN'T AN INTEREST THERE.

AND SO I FEEL LIKE THE COMMUNITY IS GOING TO SUFFER BECAUSE THAT WASN'T A PRIORITY FOR THEM.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT AND CONSIDER.

SO AS OPPOSED TO JUST MAYBE ALL THE ISSUES THAT WE THINK ABOUT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE THAT AWARENESS AND FIGURE OUT WHAT, WHAT ARE WE DOING IN THOSE CASES? BECAUSE THIS MAY BE NOT THE FIRST, IT'S PROBABLY NOT LIKELY.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD PLAN ACCORDINGLY FOR IT BECAUSE I SEE IT MORE LIKE A QUASI PUBLIC PARK, BECAUSE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INVITE THE COMMUNITY AND JUST IN A MORE CONTROLLED SETTING.

SO LET'S NOT JUST WIPE OUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT IDEALLY OPEN AND PUBLIC AS WE WANT IT TO BE.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD JUST THINK ABOUT HOW WE CAN WORK WITH THIS AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY, LIKE THIS BETTER, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS BEFORE AND WE CAN SORT OF ANTICIPATE WHAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED EVEN EARLIER ON AS WE WORK THROUGH THE, SO I'M WILLING TO DO THAT BECAUSE I THINK THE COMMUNITY HAS WORKED HARD AT IT AND THEY'VE REALLY PUSHED THE DEVELOPER TO TRY TO, I MEAN, THEY'VE GOTTEN SOMETHING THAT THEY WANTED AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD, THEY SHOULD BE APPLAUDED FOR IT.

SO LET'S JUST FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT, AS OPPOSED TO JUST X-ING THIS OUT AND SAYING IT'S NOT THE PUBLIC KIND OF PARK THAT WE ARE USED TO SEEING.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY FEELINGS.

THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, DO YOU HAVE COMMISSIONERS, UH, SPEAKING AGAINST, OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERS ARE OKAY.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

I GUESS I, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS TRULY DONE AND THE EFFORTS THAT THEY'VE MADE TO ONE FINDING WORK OUT A SOLUTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT TRULY GIVES THEM A SPACE THAT THEY CAN USE, THAT I APPRECIATE THE KIND OF EFFORTS THAT HAVE GONE INTO MAKING THAT HAPPEN.

AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THEIR EFFORTS IN TRYING TO ADDRESS SOME OF OUR CONCERNS LAST TIME.

I JUST WANT TO SAY, I THINK AS I'M HEARING THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THAT WE ARE IN THE PLACE WHERE WE HAVE TRULY ANSWERED ANY PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS.

AND SO I TRULY STILL HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IF WE HAVE TO RESOLVE WHETHER THE PUBLIC CAN BE SAFE IN AND AROUND THIS PARK ACCIDENTALLY USING THIS PARK, BEING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS MR. THOMPSON WAS SAYING, AND INADVERTENTLY BEING CONSIDERED AS NOT BEING PART OF THE PARK.

AND I DO WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING VERY CLEARLY THAT I THINK EVEN THE PARK DID NOT TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE PARK AND NOT TAKE THAT ON.

AND I THINK THAT'S DISAPPOINTING.

AND, UM, IN CERTAIN WAYS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DEVELOPERS, THEY WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE IN PARK THAT THEY WOULD CREATE AND MAINTAIN THAT COULD STILL BE USED BY THE BROADER PUBLIC.

AND WE HAVE HEARD FROM NEIGHBORS IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY'RE BEING CUT OFF FROM USING THIS PUBLIC SPACE.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY, I CANNOT SUPPORT PRIVATIZING OUR CITY IN THIS PIECE, NEW FASHION, WHERE WE SLOWLY KEEP ON PRIVATIZING MORE AND MORE SPACE AND EXCLUDING PEOPLE FROM USE OF THAT SPACE.

AND THAT'S JUST NOT AN AUSTIN THAT I WANT TO LIVE IN.

AND THAT I TRULY DO NOT THINK IS PART OF AUSTIN VALUES.

UM, I THINK I SAW, UH, COMMISSIONER, WHO'S TELL HER THAT YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP EARLIER SPEAKING IN FAVOR.

DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT SPOT OR COMMISSIONER PRACTICES? I GOT TWO HANDS.

UH, YOU WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR COMMISSIONER PRICES OR AGAIN, ASK IF THERE'S STILL AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT? UH, NOT AT THIS POINT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AND ACT ON THIS MOTION.

THAT'S BEEN SECONDED.

AND SO, UH, AGAIN, NOW PEOPLE MOVED AROUND, UH, COMMISSIONER MOOSE, TODDLER, UM, WHO WANTS TO SPEAK, I WAS GOING TO SAY, BUT SHE CAN MAKE A SUBSTITUTE AT THIS POINT IF SHE WANTED TO, RIGHT.

NO AMENDMENTS, BUT YOU CAN MAKE A SUBSTITUTE.

I CAN DO THAT RIGHT NOW.

PUBLIC, OR AS PUBLIC AND OPEN TO THE COMMUNITY AS POSSIBLE, UM, KIND OF SITUATION.

SO, UM, MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION WOULD BE, UM, BASICALLY TO MAINTAIN MOST EVERYTHING THAT COMMISSIONER COX SAID EXCEPT, UM, FOR THE FENCE.

I DON'T FEEL THAT THE FENCE, UM, REALLY MEETS THE INTENTION OF WHAT WE WERE HOPING THE SHIFT WOULD BE BETWEEN OUR LAST MEETING AND THIS ONE, WHICH WOULD BE TO MAKE THE, UM, MAKE THE PARK LIKE, UM, COMMISSIONER HOWARD SAID WAZE

[01:15:01]

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THE FENCING.

I UNDERSTAND THE INTENTION.

I DON'T BELIEVE THE FENCING WOULD HAVE THAT INTENDED EFFECT.

UM, UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SHOW UP AT A PARK, SO THAT WOULD BE, OH, SO I SHOULD JUST SAY THE ACTUAL MOTION, RIGHT.

I'M SO SORRY I'M DOING THIS.

Y'ALL UM, SO IT WOULD JUST BE TO CHANGE THAT SECOND PART, NOT NOTHING ABOUT THE FENCING, JUST MAKING SURE THE RULES ARE CLEARLY POSTED.

SO WHAT I HAD, THERE WERE FOUR ITEMS THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER COX WANTED TO, UM, ADD TO THIS, UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND YOU'RE WANTING TO REMOVE THE, UH, SECOND ITEM, WHICH WAS TO, UH, INSTALL A FENCE.

UM, OKAY.

I'M JUST CONFIRMING WHAT YOU WANT, UH, REMOVE THE FENCE FROM THOSE, UH, FOUR ITEMS. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SEE COMMISSIONER SHEA, UH, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK AT YOUR, AT THIS POINT, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, PRICES TO YOUR MOTION.

I'VE ALREADY SAID MOST OF WHAT I NEEDED TO.

SO, UM, YEAH, I THINK OUR INTENTION BEFORE, AND EVEN THE INTENTION EXPRESSED TO US BY RESIDENTS TRYING TO ESTABLISH THE PARK WAS THAT, UM, THEIR RULES AND MAKING IT A PRIVATE, PRIVATE PARK WOULD BE IN PLACE TO PREVENT ANY MAJOR DISTURBANCES OR MAJOR CONCERNS, BUT THAT THEY WERE OPEN TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS COMING IN, AS LONG AS THEY DIDN'T CREATE ANY MAJOR DISTURBANCE, I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, OPENNESS CREATED, UM, RATHER THAN PUTTING UP A FENCE, THAT KIND OF CREATES THAT ADDITIONAL.

UM, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY ENTERS THE FENCE, THEY BETTER KNOW THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE.

AND THERE'S KIND OF LIKE A, I DON'T KNOW, IT SEEMS TO ESTABLISH THAT THIS IS REALLY ONLY FOR THE NEIGHBORS IN THAT COMMUNITY, THE MEMBERS OF THE HOA, NOBODY ELSE SHOULD BE HERE.

YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER IF YOU DID ENTER THE PARK.

AND I DON'T REALLY LIKE THAT, UM, THAT KIND OF SITUATION THAT THE FENCING MIGHT CREATE.

I'D RATHER SEE THE RULES CLEARLY POSTED.

DO WE HAVE A, UH, MEMBER SPEAKING AGAINST THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION COMMISSIONER, MOOSE DOLLAR, PLEASE.

I CAN HIT TWO WITH ONE.

FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER HOWARD FOR HIS COMMENTS.

WE DON'T GET TO HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER HOWARD VERY OFTEN, AND THAT WAS VERY NICELY DONE.

UM, AND, UM, I'M GOING TO ADD TO IT AND WHY I'M AGAINST THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

SO PART OF IT IS HAVING HAD EXPERIENCE SERVING ON PARKS AND RECS IN ON THE PARKS BOARD IN SEATTLE.

UM, AND SECONDLY, FROM HAVING TO MANAGE THIS KIND OF A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE A QUASI PUBLIC QUASI PRIVATE IN THE, UM, RIVER PLACE SYSTEM, WHICH MADE HEADLINES A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, COMBATING THESE ISSUES AS WELL.

AND I THINK SOMETIMES WHAT WE GET INTO IS THE LAND OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

THIS PARK BY NATURE AND ITS OPPORTUNITY IS COMING UP BY THE LAND OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WITH THE RETENTION THAT TAYLOR MORRISON NEEDED WITH THIS VACANT LOT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD A NEED FOR.

AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PARD TURNED DOWN THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS AS A PUBLIC PARK THAT CAME BEFORE THEM FIRST AND THEY TURNED IT DOWN.

THEY DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THEY NEEDED, OR THEY COULDN'T AFFORD IT OR WHATEVER.

AND SO I, WHILE I REALLY PREFER TO HAVE GREEN SPACES, UH, AND OPEN SPACES THAT INCREASE THE PUBLIC'S ACCESS TO THAT THROUGHOUT THE CITY, I THINK IF THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO AS COMMISSIONER HOWARD SAID, WE GO BACK TO THE STARTING POINT WITH PARD AND THE AWARENESS THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO INCREASE, MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DENY THE PRIVATE CITIZENS AND THE PRIVATE ENTITY, THE OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTY FOR THIS PURPOSE.

TO ME, IT'S JUST NO DIFFERENT IF THEY WERE ASKING TO PUT IN A PRIVATE POOL, UM, GIVEN THE EXPERIENCE I AM IN FAVOR OF THE FENCING MODIFICATION, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THAT WILL PREVENT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF PEOPLE NOT BEING THERE THAT ARE RESIDENTS AND HAVING SOMETHING GO NEGATIVELY THAT WAY, IT MAKES IT VERY CLEAR.

AND IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DEVELOPER WERE TO CHANGE THEIR MIND, THEY CAN CHANGE THE POSTING OF THE RULES.

THEY CAN TAKE OFF THE GATES.

IT'S ALSO KIND OF A SAFETY THING FOR KIDS WITH BALLS AND NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I LIKED THE LITTLE SENSING I LIKED THE VISIBILITY.

SO, UM, THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER SPEAKING, UM, FOR THIS ITEM, UH, COMMISSIONER.

UH, I'M GOING TO GO ON AND GO WITH COMMISSIONER SHAY, UM, SINCE YOU WERE THE SECOND.

WANT TO KIND OF GO BACK OVER IT, BUT, UM, IN GENERAL, UM, THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF BEING ABLE TO TAKE A, THAT, UH, WAS KIND OF FORGOTTEN.

UM, SO, UH, I MEAN, THERE ARE A LOT OF GREAT DISCUSSIONS.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN THROUGH A LOT OF GREAT COMMENTS AND I DON'T

[01:20:01]

NOT ANYBODY WAS USING AND ALLOWING IT TO HAVE DUAL USES.

THERE'S A LOT OF INNOVATION THAT SHOULD BE PUT BACK INTO A CODE TO ALLOW THESE DUAL USES.

UM, AND THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE COMMUNITY COMING TOGETHER TO DO THAT.

UH, WE SHOULD FIND MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THINGS LIKE THIS.

UM, I DO LIKE THAT THE COMMUNITIES CAME TOGETHER TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

AND SO THIS AS A PRIVATE PARK, I THINK IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S GREAT TO, TO APPROACH IT THAT WAY.

NOW THE ISSUE WITH THE FENCE.

SO MY PART OF SUPPORTING THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT I DON'T WANT A FENCE, OR I DO WANT OFFENSE.

IT'S IT'S THAT I DON'T WANT IT TO MAKE IT AS A REQUIREMENT BASED UPON US AT THIS POINT, THE FENCE, I THINK, IS A GREAT WAY TO MITIGATE LIABILITY FOR THE HOA OF BOTH SIDES.

IT'S I WANT TO LEAVE IT TO THEM TO DECIDE HOW TO APPROACH IT.

AND AS COMMISSIONER BRUCE SAID, OH, WE COULD REMOVE THE GATE.

WELL, AT THAT POINT, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD NO LONGER BE VALID.

THEY TOOK IT UP.

SO WE KNOW THE FENCE AS A TOOL HAS A LOT OF GREAT THINGS THAT CAN HELP MITIGATE ISSUES, BUT I DON'T WANT TO MANDATE IT BECAUSE THERE'S SOME, SOME DAY IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING GREAT TO BE ABLE TO REMOVE IT.

SO I DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT A REQUIREMENT.

THE OTHER THING IS ALSO THIS PARK IS WELL SITUATED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO IT'S NOT GOING TO GET A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM OTHER AREAS COME IN.

THERE COULD BE, AND A LOT OF GUESTS AND STUFF AS WELL.

BUT, UM, AGAIN, THAT'S WHY TO ME, THAT FENCE SHOULD BE SOMETHING FOR THEM TO USE AS A TOOL FOR THEM TO DECIDE WHEN TO PUT IT UP AND WHEN NOT TO PUT IT OFF.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING THIS ONE.

SO COMMISSIONERS, UH, SPEAKING AGAINST THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, E OTHERS WANT TO SPEAK FOR THIS ABOUT COMMISSIONER CUPS? I, I WILL VOTE BOTH FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND MY MOTION, IF A SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILS.

I JUST WANT THESE PEOPLE TO HAVE THE PARK AND WHATEVER GETS THE MOST VOTES.

I HOPE I HOPE WE CAN APPROVE THIS.

UH, THERE'S TWO POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE.

ONE IS PROCEDURAL IT AND SHARE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE SEVEN VOTES TO APPROVE THIS, CORRECT.

CORRECT.

EVEN THOUGH, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE THREE ABSENCES, SO THAT'S KIND OF AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION HERE.

WE HAVE TO HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE ON THE SCREEN EXCEPT FOR OUR EX-OFFICIO MEMBER, UM, TO, TO GIVE THESE PEOPLE THE PARK THEY WORKED SO HARD FOR.

THE SECOND THING IS, IS THE REASONS I'VE HEARD FOR DENYING THE PARK ASSUMES THE WORST OUT OF PEOPLE.

IT ASSUMES THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CRAZY LADY IN CENTRAL PARK THAT CALLED THE COPS ON THE BIRDWATCHER, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT, THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE JUST GOING TO BE ROAMING AROUND CALLING THE COPS ON EVERYONE THAT THEY SEE THAT THEY DON'T LIKE.

AND THE THING IS, IS THAT CAN HAPPEN IN OUR PUBLIC PARK.

IT HAS HAPPENED IN OUR PUBLIC PARKS, JUST BECAUSE THIS IS NOT PRIVATE, DOES NOT STOP PEOPLE FROM BEING THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD.

AND SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE APPROVING OR DENYING SOMETHING LIKE THIS WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT A WHOLE LOT OF BAD PEOPLE ARE JUST, YOU KNOW, ROAMING AROUND CALLING COPS ON PEOPLE.

THERE ARE PEOPLE LIKE THAT, BUT THEY DO THAT NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE, WHETHER IT'S PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

SO I HOPE SEVEN PEOPLE CAN SUPPORT EITHER THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION OR THE ORIGINAL MOTION, AND I'LL BE VOTING FOR, FOR BOTH POSSIBLY.

WE'VE GOT ONE MORE SLOT TO, IF ANY SPEAKERS FEEL LIKE THEY WANT TO NOW SPEAK AGAINST THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

A COMMISSIONER IS, ARE, OKAY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT.

I GUESS I'M SPEAKING NEUTRAL AT THIS POINT.

AND THE IDEA REALLY IS I THINK IT'S NOT, IT'S FUNNY, WE'RE HEARING WHERE THE COURT IS DOING THE WORST OF PEOPLE, AND YET WE HAVE THE DATA TO BACK THAT UP.

WE HAVE THE REAL LIFE EXPERIENCES TO BACK THAT UP.

I'VE BEEN FOLLOWED IN, IN A STORE WHEN I ENTER, I'VE BEEN FOLLOWED AROUND THE PUBLIC SPACE WHERE I'VE GONE.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THESE ARE TRUE EXPERIENCES AND THERE'S DATA TO BACK THAT UP.

SO I HEAR THAT WE SHOULD TRULY BELIEVE AND ASPIRE FOR THE BEST IN PEOPLE.

AND I HOPE THAT TRULY, YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT REGRET THIS MOMENT, BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT THERE IS A VERY REAL POSSIBILITY KNOWING WHAT WE KNOW OF, HOW OUR SOCIETY FUNCTIONS, THAT THEY MAY VERY WELL BE IT EVEN BUREAUCRATIC DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE HERE.

OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE, UH, SECOND IS TO POST SIGNS, UH, TO POST SIGNAGE, UM, NOTIFYING THE PUBLIC OF THE PRIVATE NATURE OF THE PARK.

WELL WITH THAT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.

NOW I'M GOING TO READ THROUGH THIS AND PLEASE STOP ME IF I'M, CAUSE I NEED TO REITERATE IT WITH THE THREE, UH, ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP WITHOUT THE FENCE.

SO BEAR WITH ME.

SO WE ARE, UM, WE ARE, THE MOTION IS, IS I UNDERSTAND IT IS, UM, APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A PARK, WHICH IS A COMMUNITY RECREATION PRIVATE USE.

AND WITH THREE CONDITIONS, THE FIRST BEING THE ADDITION

[01:25:01]

AND THEN THE THIRD ITEM IS, UM, IS THAT THE PARK IS MADE AVAILABLE TO CIVIC GROUPS OUTSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS APPROVED BY THE HOA.

SO THOSE ARE THE THREE ITEMS THAT REMAIN.

SO, UH, IF I READ THAT RIGHT, UH, JUST, OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THAT.

UM, SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

AND I'M COUNTING CAREFULLY HERE.

I'VE GOT ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN ONE TWO THREE.

I HAVE SEVEN FOUR AND I THINK, OH WAIT, HOLD ON.

I SEE, I DIDN'T SEE THAT AS GREEN.

I HAVE EIGHT AND TWO.

THAT MOTION PASSES.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY, AYE, IT'S AMAZING HOW WE CAN HAVE THESE WONDERFUL DEBATES AMONG, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT ISSUES HERE.

I'M ON THE COMMISSION AND, UH, I, I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

THIS IS, THIS IS A REALLY GOOD, I APPRECIATE, UH, APPRECIATE THE EXTRA TIME WE SPENT ON THIS.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TOPIC.

UM, AND WITH THAT, WE'VE WE MOVE, GO BACK TO, UM, I AND M B, LET ME GET THIS RIGHT.

IT IS P EIGHT.

[B8. Rezoning: C14-2020-0089 - Twelfth and Springdale Residences; District 3]

THIS IS THE REZONING AT 12TH AND SPRINGDALE RESIDENCES.

AND DO WE HAVE STAFF AVAILABLE? GOOD EVENING CHAIR.

THIS IS HEATHER CHAFIN FROM THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

UH, THIS IS CASE C 14 2020 ZERO ZERO EIGHT, NINE 12TH IN SPRINGDALE RESIDENCES.

UH, THE ZONING REQUESTED SCOPE FROM G R N U N P TO G R M U V N P.

AND AS HE SAID, IT'S, UH, SLIGHTLY NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF 12TH AND SPRINGDALE ROAD.

WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS CASE, UH, PREVIOUSLY.

SO I'M GOING TO GO PRETTY QUICK THROUGH, UH, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID BEFORE STAFF IS SUPPORTING THE REQUEST.

THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A LARGER REZONING CASE THAT INCLUDED A PROPERTY TO THE WEST, THAT PROPERTY WAS GARBAGE FOR MORE CLASSES.

UM, SO NOW WE'RE JUST FOCUSING ON THE PORTION THAT FACES SPRINGDALE WAY.

THERE IS A PETITION THAT HAS BEEN FILED.

UM, THERE IS, THERE IS DIFFICULTY VERIFYING WHETHER OR NOT ONE OF THE PARTIES IS, UH, LEGALLY, UM, MEETING THE CRITERIA TO SIGN A VALID PETITION AS A PROPERTY OWNER OR A DESIGNEE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO SIGN.

UH, SO THERE WILL BE PROBABLY SOME OF THAT DISCUSSION.

AND THAT IS REGARDING THE BETHANY CEMETERY TRACK, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE SITE.

UM, ON THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT, UH, THERE MAY BE ANY, UH, GRAVE SITES, BURIAL SITES OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY OF THE CEMETERY.

AND SINCE OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, THE APPLICANT HAS COMMISSIONED AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE RESETTING TRACK, WHICH IS ATTACHED.

UM, I THINK I'M JUST GONNA STOP THERE.

UH, WE'VE DISCUSSED THE SURROUNDING AREA, UH, TO THE LIST IS, UH, AN UNDEVELOPED TRACT THAT HAS A LOT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES.

THERE ARE CONCERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING FLOODING AND, UH, I CAN'T, UM, JUST STOP THERE AND BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

UH, SO APPLICANT, UM, UH, DO YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES PRESENTATION COMMISSION MEMBERS, GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS CLASSICO REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

I CAN HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU TOO.

SO THANK YOU FOR, FOR YOUR SERVICE COMMISSION MEMBERS.

SO, UH, THIS HAPPENED JUST TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW.

COULD YOU PLEASE HAVE MY PRESENTATION? THIS IS THE ZONING MAP THAT SHOWS THE TRACKS AS ONE AND TWO TRACK.

TWO IS NOT PART OF THIS REZONING JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE IT WAS REMOVED FROM THE APPLICATION.

WE JUST LEFT, STAFFED UP THE MAP AS IT IS TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT AS TO WHERE TRACK ONE WAS.

AND, UH, THAT SLIDE SHOWS THE, UM, SUBJECT TRACK.

THE NEXT SLIDE IS GOING TO BE AN AERIAL OF THE SITE

[01:30:01]

IT SHOWS THE LOCATION OF BETHANY CEMETERY.

AS YOU CAN SEE, TRACK TWO IS THE SUBJECT TRACK THAT IS UP IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT FOR REZONING TO ADD THE VERTICAL MIX USE THE BEST AND THE CEMETERY IS DIRECTLY DIRECTLY NORTH OF TRACK.

TWO, YOU CAN SEE THE SITE ON TRACK.

TWO HAS AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR AWHILE.

IT'S NOT OCCUPIED.

SO IT'S JUST A VACANT BUILDING.

AND, UM, UH, JOINING TRACK TWO IS A COMMERCIAL STRIP WITH A FEW USES YOU HAVE HAD BY NICOLE, UH, COFFEE SHOP AND I'M COMFORTABLE IS FIXINGS.

AND THEN YOU HAVE A THINS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TO THE EAST THAT IS NO LONGER A SCHOOL, BUT, UH, NONETHELESS, THEY ARE BUILDINGS THERE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO SINCE YOUR LAST MEETING OF APRIL 27, WE REQUESTED THAT THE CASE BE POSTPONED TO TONIGHT SO THAT WE COULD, UM, UH, RETAIN, UH, A GEOLOGIST AND WE DID RETAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PREVIOUS GO BACK ONE SLIDE, GO BACK.

ONE SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, SO, UM, UH, OUR ARCHAEOLOGIST IS JOEY O'KEEFE.

HECTOR, YOU KNOW, HOSA WITH GEO PODIA CORDILLERA GEO SERVICES PREPARED THE, UH, THE GPR GROUND PENETRATING RADAR.

I AM GOING TO READ THE SUMMARY OF FOLLOWER ARCHEOLOGISTS AND ITS THOUGHTS ON PARAGRAPH NUMBER THREE AND QUOTE, HE HAS A QUOTE OFFSET SUMMARY FROM APRIL 26TH TO APRIL 28 OF SURVEY USING GROUND PENETRATING RADAR GPR WAS CONDUCTED BY GEO SERVICES.

THAT IS, UH, DR.

HECKLER IN THE HOSTESS COMPANY IN AN L-SHAPED 30 FOOT WIDE BY 700 FOOT LONG CORRIDOR.

NEIGHBORING BETHANY CEMETERY IS WESTERN AND SOUTHERN SIDE.

THE GPS SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED IN ORDER TO DETECT AND MAP POSSIBLE ON MAKA GRAVES, OUTSIDE A POTION OF BETHANY CEMETERY.

CURRENT LIMITS, LIKELY TO BE ENCOUNTERED DURING FUTURE EARTHWORKS AND CONSTRUCTION AT THE SITE.

PARAGRAPH FOUR READS AFTER REVIEWING THE TECHNICAL REPORT CREATED BY PUDIERA GEO SERVICES.

I AGREE WITH THE RESULTS THAT THE MAPPED GPS ANOMALY FOUND DURING THE SURVEY WAS INCONSISTENT WITH HUMAN BURIALS.

SO UNMARKED GRAVES, BECAUSE THE ANOMALIES DEPART FROM HUMAN BURIALS TYPOLOGICAL FEATURES COMMONLY OBSERVED IN GPS SURVEY.

ADDITIONALLY, I AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION THAT THEY IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR EXCAVATIONS TO VERIFY THE NATURE OF THE MAP, GPS ANOMALIES BY EXCAVATION WITHIN THE ADJACENT SURVEY AREA, BECAUSE THE ANOMALIES ARE NOT SUGGESTIVE OF ON MOCK GRACE.

AND THAT IS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT B PAGES ONE 39 THROUGH ONE 55 OF THE THEFT REPORT, WHICH IS THE GPR REPORT.

THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF OUR ARCHEOLOGISTS REPORT FROM O'KEEFE IS THAT IN THE EVENT THAT HUMAN REMAINS OR ASSOCIATED FUNERARY OBJECTS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION, ALL EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES WILL BE IMMEDIATELY HALTED.

THE EXCAVATED AREA WILL BE PROTECTED WHILE ARCHEOLOGISTS CONSULT WITH AN OSTEOLOGIST, IF NECESSARY, TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT REMAINS A HUMAN.

IF IT IS CONFIRMED THAT A BARRIER HAS BEEN ENCOUNTERED, THE PROJECT MANAGER WILL NOTIFY THE LAND OWNER, THE AUTHORITIES FOR TRAVIS COUNTY AND THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION ENCOUNTERED WHILE COMPLIES AND ALSO THE TEXAS HEALTH AND 50 CODE.

AND THE TEXAS PENAL CODE, THE AREA WILL REMAIN PROTECTED UNTIL ALL PARTIES INVOLVED HAVE AGREED TO AN APPROPRIATE PLAN OF ACTION, WHICH MAY INVOLVE REBURIAL OR REMOVAL AND RELOCATION AND OF QUOTE, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THE NEXT SLIDE IS AN EMAIL FROM THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER, AN EMAIL THAT HAD BEEN SENT BY JOEY O'KEITH INDICATING THAT THE, UH, THE RECORDS SHOWN IN THE CAR, UH, THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, UH, THEY STARTED COMMISSIONING DOCUMENTS OR INCORRECT AS FAR AS THE BOUNDARIES OF THE, UM, OF THE CEMETERY.

THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION REPLIED BACK IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE FINDINGS OF JOEL KEITH.

AND THEY SAID THAT, ALTHOUGH THE BOUNDARIES OF THE HISTORIC TEXTS OF CEMETERY HTC AND CAD CAVIAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT POSSIBLE BOUNDARIES APPEAR CONSISTENT AND CORRECT.

THIS NEVER PRECLUDES

[01:35:01]

THE POSSIBILITY THAT GRAVES MAY EXIST OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENT FENCE AREA.

HENCE THE STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED BY DR.

HECTOR IN THE WHOLESALER, THAT IS PART OF YOUR REPORT.

NEXT SLIDE SHOWS A FIVE PLAN FOR THE SITE.

WHAT CAN BE BUILT UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING OF G R M U THE M SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 1.5 ACRES.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS PARKLAND UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING WHERE THE M YOU OVERLAY THE, UM, THE HEIGHT IS GOING TO BE THE SAME WITH UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING OF GRM U THE HEIGHT IS THE SAME UNDER MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON THE JIRA.

AND UV B DOES NOT INCREASE HEIGHT UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.

WE CAN BUILD APPROXIMATELY 76 UNITS WITH A PARKING GARAGE.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE BUILDING IS CLOSER TO SPRINGDALE ROAD IN CONSISTENT WITH COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.

THE SUBJECT SITE IS TRIGGERED, HAS COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS TRIGGERED BY OUR PROPERTY, MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY TO THE WEST, UH, AND THAT PROPERTY DICTATES THE COMPATIBILITY, SAT BACK GOING EAST TOWARDS WHAT SPRINGDALE ROAD.

SO THE BUILDING WITH 76 UNITS WILL BE AT THE TALLEST THERE WITH A CURRENT ZONING, UH, AT 68 FEET WITH 76 UNITS WITH POCKET WITH A PARKING GARAGE HAS TWO LEVELS NEXT LIKELY .

AND WHILE THE NEXT SLIDE IS COMING UP, NOT TO NOTE THAT UNDER THE END, YOU OVERLAY, YOU ARE, YOU CAN BUILD A 100% RESIDENTIAL, OR YOU CAN BUILD 100% COMMERCIAL.

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A MIX OF USES.

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO AT 76 UNITS, WE WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL PHOSPHOR, OR WOULD WE BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING? HOWEVER, ON THIS SLIDE HERE, NUMBER TWO, YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS THE GRV, UM, OPTION FIVE PLAN.

AND THIS PIPELINE HAS A TOTAL OF 126 UNITS.

AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE REQUIRED UNDER SUBCHAPTER E OF THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL THAT'S, UM, ON THE, ON THE SITE AND WITH THE RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, BEING REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 10% OF THOSE UNITS AFFORDABLE AT WHAT THE CODE CALLS FOR RIGHT NOW AT 80% MFI AS SUMMARIZED IN CASE MANAGERS REPORT.

SO, UM, NEXT LIVELY .

SO THIS NEXT SLIDE IS GOING TO SHOW YOU A BUILDING ELEVATION THAT SHOWS YOU WHAT A G R M U BUILDING ELEVATION LOOKS LIKE, AND A JIRA MUV ELEVATION LOOKS LIKE THE V AND THE MOU, UM, PRETTY MUCH THE SAME.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A VERTICAL BUILDING WITH GL AND YOU THE, UH, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS THAT UNDER GL AND YOU, WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE COMMERCIAL SPACE.

SO IT'S 100% RESIDENTIAL USERS WILL HAVE A PARKING GARAGE, JUST, UH, FEWER LEVELS, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE 76 UNITS DO NOT TRIGGER THAT MANY, MANY PARKING SPACES, BUT THEN NONETHELESS, AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THE VNU, WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL IN PINK OR RED, DEPENDING ON THE COLONIAL SCREEN.

AND THEN ANOTHER LEVEL ADDITIONAL LEVEL ALSO PARKING ABOVE YOU HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, WHICH OUT OF THOSE 10% HAVE TO BE AT, UM, 10% OF THE UNITS AT 80% MFI THE HEIGHT.

YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY THE SAME AT CLOSE, CLOSE TO, UH, SPRINGDALE ROAD.

THE HEIGHT AS SHOWN ON THIS RENDERING IS 58 FEET ON THE MEU AND 58 FEET ON THE GR V.

SO I CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE OF ME.

UM, LET'S SEE.

I, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY SPEAKERS IN FAVOR.

I DO HAVE LISTED CHRIS F ANITA AND BABY MICK.

RON, ARE YOU GUYS, UH, YOU FOLKS JUST HERE TO, UH, FOR QUESTIONS, UH, THE, UH, UH, WITH URBAN ATX DEVELOPMENT, I'M THE OWNER AND, UH, APPLICANT.

UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY HELLO AND THANK EVERYBODY FOR TAKING THIS TIME TONIGHT.

UM, I AM IN SUPPORT OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

HI, AND THIS IS DAVEY MAKITA, AND I AM ALSO HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S TIME SPENT LOOKING AT OUR PROPOSAL AND, UH, APPRECIATE ANY QUESTIONS THAT ARE COMING OUR WAY.

SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES, AS IN FAVOR, YOU CAN DO THAT TOO.

I CAN GIVE YOU, UM, THE OPPORTUNITY IF EITHER ONE OF YOU WANT TO

[01:40:01]

YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT TIME? SURE.

I'LL TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO SPEAK ABOUT THE PROJECT.

AS WE ALL KNOW, WE HAVE A HOUSING SHORTAGE IN THE CITY, AND, UM, AS AN ARCHITECT, WE ALWAYS PROPOSE TO, UH, ADD DENSITY INTO OUR CITY INSTEAD OF ADDING SPRAWL.

SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A DISUSED AREA OF THAT AREA OF EAST SIDE, TO, TO PUT IN SOME, UH, MIXED USE AND SOME, UH, HIGH DENSITY LIVING.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, IS A GOOD PROPOSAL FOR THE CITY.

IT'S GOOD PROPOSAL FOR THE EAST SIDE AND, UH, WE HOPE YOU GUYS WILL AGREE.

UM, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, LOOK AT, UH, THOSE OPPOSED.

I HAVE THE FIRST SPEAKER HERE, UM, IS DANIEL YANIS STAR SIX 73.

UH, I HEAR YOU.

UH, YES.

MY NAME IS DANIEL YANNIS AND, UH, I'M HERE TO EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING CHANGE.

AND CERTAINLY IF THEY WANT TO GO TO 90 FEET, THAT WE WOULD TOTALLY BE OPPOSED TO THAT AS THIS PROJECT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I ACTUALLY DISAGREE WITH THE, UM, WITH THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER THAT SAID THAT THIS WOULD BE GOOD FOR EAST AUSTIN.

UM, BECAUSE THIS PROJECT AS IS ONLY IS IN LINE WITH OTHER PROJECTS THAT EXPLOITED EAST AUSTIN AND CONTRIBUTES TO THE GENTRIFICATION AND THE DISPLACEMENT THROUGH ZONING, HOW THE HOUSING FORMULA AT EIGHT AT 10%, ADA, 80% MFI IS USELESS FOR EAST AUSTIN, MAYBE OTHER PARTS OF AUSTIN, BUT NOT FOR EAST AUSTIN.

THIS IS, UM, IT IS EXPLOITATION AND IT IS FOR GENTRIFIERS, NOT PEOPLE FROM EAST AUSTIN.

THERE IS NO COMMUNITY BENEFITS, BUT FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT, IT'S ONLY EXPECTATIONAL.

UH, THEY SHOULD STAY WITHIN THEIR OWN ZONING CATEGORY AND RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

KEEP IN MIND THAT HE SAW AUSTIN WAS CREATED BY A RACIST ORDINANCE IN THE TWENTIES, AND WE'RE DEALING WITH THE GENTRIFICATION TODAY.

IN OTHER WAYS, GENTRIFICATION IN OTHER PARTS OF AUSTIN IS THAT, BUT IN EAST AUSTIN, YOU HAD THE ADDED LAYER OF SYSTEMIC RACISM THROUGH ZONING, WHICH WE'RE HOPING TO TURN OFF AND AWAY FROM ITS RACIST LEGACY.

PLEASE DENY AS DUMMY CHANGE, HAVE THEM BUILD WITHIN THE ZONING CATEGORY AND RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WISHES.

PERHAPS THEY MAY EVEN OFFER SOME CAN IMMEDIATELY BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

UH, NEXT I HAVE, UH, RUPESH IS IT STAR SIX 78, MR. ARE YOU THERE? OKAY, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND KEEP THIS THING GOING AND WE'LL COME BACK TO MR. SHUN, UH, N CHARLOTTE PATTERSON, ARE YOU THERE? STAR SIX ON MEET SHERIFF.

YOUR MOMENT BELONG TO MISS ALEXANDRA ANDERSON, PLEASE.

OF THE VALUABLE PREDOMINANTLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITIES.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, ALICE, ANDREA ANDERSON, UH, STAR SIX ON MUTE.

MY NAME IS ALEXANDRIA ANDERSON.

THE VICE CHAIR OF MINE IS A KING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS NOT COMPATIBLE TO THE AREA OF OUR PROJECT.

THAT INCLUDES THE AREA 41 20 EAST 12TH STREET.

THE DEVELOPER HAS NO MITIGATION PLAN TO PREVENT GENTRIFICATION DISPLACEMENT OR FURTHER RAISING A TEXAS IN THE AREA.

THE ZONING GOES BEYOND THE REZONING.

IT INCLUDES CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND COMPATIBILITY TRAFFIC AFFORDABILITY, WHICH IS NOT AFFORDABLE TO THE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE POLITICAL BOUNDARY OF OUR CEMETERY.

BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, THE PROPOSED ZONING SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY.

COUNCIL HAS NOT MENTIONED THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA.

WE ARE THE ONES WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA AND WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.

EVERY DAY.

WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT TO HAVE SITE PLANS, TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR AREA FOR THE PROJECT TO BE APPROVED AND THE PROPERTY TO BE UPTOWN, DIFFERENT PRICE, NO COMMUNITY BENEFIT TO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT CONTINUES TO THE ONGOING GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT AND DESTABILIZATION

[01:45:02]

ADDING 60 TO 90 FEET, TALL BUILDINGS DESIGNATED FOR DOWNTOWN IN OUR AREA, ALONG WITH 25 PLUS HOUSES, IT'S ONLY GOING TO CONTINUE THE BLEEDING AND THE DISPLACEMENT.

WHEN DO WE STOP THE BLEEDING ON THE EAST SIDE? IT'S TIME TO GET BACK TO THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORS HOODS THAT ARE, THAT ARE IN FACT, THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DISPLACED THOSE OF COLOR, AND THEY WANT THE CITY TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THEM BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORS.

AFTER THE FACT, WE CANNOT DO THIS WITH HOUSES ARE REPLACED ON HALF OF THAT ARE PLACED AT HALF A MILLION DOLLARS OR MORE DEVELOPERS AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES GET TO GO BACK TO THEIR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN AUSTIN, B K WESTLAKE, CALIFORNIA, TRAVIS COUNTY, OR WHEREVER I PUT THE DEVELOPER AND THE ARCHITECTURE TO TELL US AT OUR MEETING THAT THIS WOULD BE MAKING OUR COMMUNITY BETTER, IS A SLAP IN THE STATE.

WE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE DAY-TO-DAY OF A FOUR STORY BUILDING AND PARKING GARAGE AND THE INTERIOR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE IS NO IMMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS IN OUR AREA.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT WANT IT.

AND WE ARE SAYING IT LOUDLY TO OUR MUNICIPALITY CAN HERE, PLEASE DENY THE ZONING CHANGE.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

UM, LET'S SEE, JUST MOVING ON DOWN IN ORDER, WE HAVE MELANIE DICKSON STAR SIX SEVEN MEET.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU.

MY NAME IS MELANIE DICKSON AND I CURRENT YOU REPRESENT THE, UM, I AM CURRENTLY THE CHAIR FOR THE MARTIN LUTHER KING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

LET ME BEGIN BY SAYING THAT WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRESS.

HOW IS IT? WE ARE OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT THAT DISMISS THE RESPECT AND PRESERVATION OF OUR HISTORICAL CULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS THAT THAT'S FINE.

OUR COMMUNITIES, WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE, TO THE REBUILDING AND SHOULD ANY, UM, ANY HEIGHT REQUESTS BE THE, UH, UH, APPLICABLE MY CONCERNS OR OUR CONCERNS.

JILL ARE SUBMITTED.

WE HAVE SUBMITTED PETITION OF OPPOSITION TO STAFF, UM, TO NO, TO NO RESPONSE.

UM, WE ARE CONCERNED WITH OUR BETHANY CEMETERY AND ON PAGE 16, 17 OF GPR IS SAFE.

AND TRADITIONALLY, IF WE'RE GOING BACK TO ADDITIONAL, UH, METHODS, MOST GREAT SITES TODAY ARE AT LEAST A MINIMUM 60 FEET DEEP I'M HEARING.

AND SEEING ON THE, ON THE GPR WHERE IT HAS ONLY GONE AS LOW AS, AS MUCH AS 60 FEET.

I MEAN, UM, FIVE FEET DEEP.

SO IN ESSENCE OF THIS, I CONCERNED AGAINST CENTRAL, AROUND THE WATER MITIGATION TRAFFIC FLOW, UM, NOT, NOT ONLY TO MENTION, UM, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.

SO WITH THAT SAID, WE ASK, WE ASK, WE ASKED THAT NOT LIKE TULSA, OKLAHOMA, AND THE ATROCITIES OF HISTORICAL ERADICATION TO PROVIDE, I POSTPONE IT TOGETHER, FURTHER GEOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA TO FURTHER, TO FURTHER, UH, PRESENT TO OUR COMMUNITY.

NOW I CAN ASK QUESTIONS IF YOU NEED, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

UH, NEXT WE HAVE, UM, MADELINE AND, UH, IS IT A CRI STAR SIX ON MUTE? YEP.

IS IN DIRECT OPPOSITION WITH THESE INITIATIVES, BUILDING A BRAND NEW PARKING GARAGE PROMOTES SINGLE OCCUPANCY VEHICLES RATHER THAN MASS TRANSIT.

YOU'D HAVE THREE MINUTES.

MY NAME IS MADELINE AND I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF EAST AUSTIN FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS.

I WORKED IN THE SOLAR POWER INDUSTRY AND LIVING A LIFE TO PROMOTE A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT IS DEEPLY IMPORTANT TO ME.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS AN OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS.

THE CITY IS WORKING ON ONE OF WHICH IS THE AIR QUALITY PROGRAM, WHICH AIMS TO PROMOTE HEALTHY OUTDOOR AIR FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

AND IN FACT, THE AIR QUALITY AWARENESS WEEK WAS THIS PAST MONTH FROM MAY 3RD THROUGH SEVENTH.

ANOTHER INITIATIVE ADOPTED BY CITY IN 2014 IS AUSTIN'S URBAN FOREST PLAN.

IF THE CITY TRULY HAS PLANS IN PLACE TO SUPPORT CLEAN AIR AND STRONGER URBAN FOREST LEVELING THESE TREES TO PUT UP A FOUR STORY ABOVE GROUND PARKING GARAGE

[01:50:01]

ANOTHER CONTRIBUTOR TO POOR AIR QUALITY, THE INHERENT VALUE IN THE OLD GROWTH FOREST THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS WOULD NOT BE RECREATED WITH THE PLANTING OF NEW TREES IN ANOTHER LOCATION.

WE'RE AT A PIVOTAL CROSSROADS IN OUR EAST 12TH STREET COMMUNITY.

WE CAN CHOOSE TO SUPPORT GENTRIFICATION, PROFIT AND DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT THE CONSIDERATION OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY OR THE ENVIRONMENT, OR WE CAN CHOOSE TO SUPPORT THE INTEREST OF THE LOCAL RESIDENTS AND THE ECOSYSTEM.

UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND NOW, UM, TRY TO GO BACK AND CAPTURE A FEW OF THESE ACRES THAT WE COULDN'T GET ON, UM, IS, UH, RUPESH, SHUGAN THERE.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN.

HELLO? GREAT.

SO I CAN HEAR YOU GREAT.

I'M CALLING TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE CURRENT APPLICATION FOR, UH, UM, HIGHER DENSITY AND REZONING.

UM, MY INTERESTS ARE, UH, ONE IS ENVIRONMENTAL.

THIS AREA IS INCREDIBLY BEAUTIFUL WITH A LOT OF OLD TREES AND A WILDFLOWER MEADOW AND WHAT I AM IN SPRINGS AND NATURAL SPRINGS IN MY AREA.

I LIVE, UM, JUST EAST OF THE SPRINGS, UM, ARE CAUSED FOR A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE THE UNDERGROUND SPRINGS, YOU HAVE TO KEEP WORKING ON THE ROADS.

WHEN I SPOKE TO THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY, HE SAID THAT THEY COULDN'T, HE COULDN'T BUILD ON IT BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY THAT WAS DONE BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL SPRINGS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S CHANGED TO ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN NOW, SO THAT IT'S ALSO A HABITAT FOR A LOTS OF BIRDS AND OTHER CREATURES, EAST SIDE NEED GREEN AREAS, AND TO LOSE THIS AREA WOULD BE A TRAVESTY.

ALSO, IT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, THE TRAFFIC IS ALREADY ATROCIOUS IN THAT AREA TO HAVE A FURTHER DEVELOPMENT, UM, TO HAVE COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL WITH A PARKING GARAGE.

SOUNDS LIKE A TERRIBLE ADDITION, NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE CURRENT FLOW OF HOW THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES AROUND HERE.

AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO DRIVE UP TAXES AND AGAIN, IT'LL BE ANOTHER ACT OF GENTRIFICATION MAKING IT HARDER AND HARDER TO LIVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD UNLESS YOU MAKE A LOT OF MONEY.

SO FOR THOSE REASONS I OPPOSE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD? I'M TALKING TO MY WIFE.

AND, UM, I OPPOSED THIS REZONING.

UH, SORRY.

LAST SPEAKER OPPOSED IS IN CHARLOTTE PATTERSON.

IF YOU'RE THERE STAR SIX 10 MEET.

THAT WAS THE, UM, AN ERROR.

UH, THE INDIVIDUAL WAS SPEAKING FOR A LATER ITEM.

IT'S SOMEBODY ELSE.

OH, UM, OKAY.

SO ARE WE DONE, UM, MR. RIVERA WITH THE SPEAKERS BACK TO ALICE.

I I'M TRYING TO SEE, UH, OKAY.

OH YES.

HOWEVER, YOUR ZONING HEIGHT IS FURTHER RISKS, STRICTED OR CONTROLLED BY COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.

UH, BACK TO THE, UH, REBUTTAL YOU COULD, IF ANDREW, COULD YOU PLEASE PULL UP MY PRESENTATION AND GO TO THE LAST SLIDE WHILE MY PRESENTATION IS BEING PULLED UP? I'D LIKE, I, I APPRECIATE THE SPEAKERS, UH, SPEAKING UP WE'VE, UH, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

WE TALKED ABOUT COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

THEY NEVER THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

THEY RESPONDED TO THE ASS, TALK ABOUT DRAINAGE OR FLOODING THAT THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS ON TRACK ONE EXPERIENCED FLOODING.

I TOLD THEM I WOULD REACH OUT TO THE WATERSHED DIRECTOR AND FIND OUT WHAT CAN BE DONE.

THE WATERSHED DIRECTOR HAS ASKED US TO WORK WITH THEM TO HELP THEM ALLEVIATE FLOODING.

WE WOULD BE INCURRING A LOT MORE COSTS TO HELP ALLEVIATE THAT PROBLEM.

SO THAT'S A COMMUNITY BENEFIT.

THEY NEVER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT RESPONDED TO THAT, BUT WE'RE WORKING WITH WATERSHED.

FIRST OF ALL, BACK TO THE HEIGHT.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS GR M U M U IS AN OVERLAY, OR ANDREW DOES NOT CHANGE THE ZONING.

NEITHER, NEITHER DOES.

VMU THE BMU, THE V ALLOWS FOR MORE UNITS AND REQUIRES COMMERCIAL.

USE THE RENDERING IN FRONT OF YOU, SHOWS YOU WHAT THE BUILDING WOULD LOOK LIKE UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.

THE GR IS THE BASE ZONING AND THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED UNDER THE GR IS 60 FEET, NOT 90 FEET, NOT ANY HIGHER.

[01:55:01]

SO FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, YOUR HEIGHT IS LIMITED ALL THE WAY TO SPRINGDALE ROAD.

YOU HAVE TO BE 300 FEET AWAY FROM SF THREE ZONING OR USE TO GO UP TO THE SPRINGDALE ROAD.

WE ARE JUST RIGHT UNDER THAT AT 58 FEET UNDER EITHER RENDERING UNDER GRM, U M U IS MIXED USE DOES NOT CHANGE YOUR HEIGHT DOES NOT CHANGE, UH, COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.

THOSE TAIL APPLIES, UH, M YOU JUST SIMPLY ALLOWS US TO HAVE 126 UNITS INSTEAD OF, UH, OF, UH, 76 AND REQUIRES THE RETAIL.

YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE PARKING.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN, YOU CANNOT BUILD A BUILDING AND NOT HAVE PARKING UNLESS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS, A VARIANCE TO PROVIDE ZERO PARKING.

UH, AS FAR AS, UM, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AT THE TIME OF PIPELINE, THE CITY STAFF WILL REVIEW ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS.

WE WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT AN UPDATED OR MOST RECENT ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE IMPACT REPORT.

ONE HAS BEEN PREPARED, AND THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN WITH THE SUBDIVISION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN, WHICH WILL ACTUALLY SHOW THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN WHAT PEOPLE THINK IS OUT THERE.

SO THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

ONCE IT'S SUBMITTED TO THE CITY WATERSHED STAFF WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR TRACT ONE, WHICH IS NOT PART OF TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION.

SO AS FAR AS COMMUNITY BENEFITS, AND THEY WOULD ASK US TO, UH, IF WE COULD HELP MAINTAIN BETHANY PARK, UH, CEMETERY.

WE SAY, IF WE KNOW WHO THE OWNER IS, WE CAN FIND OUT IF THERE IS A WAY TO ASSIST WITH THAT.

I REACHED OUT TO TRAVIS COUNTY, CITY OF AUSTIN PARKS DEPARTMENT AND SAY THEY DID NOT KNOW WHO THE OWNER IS.

AND FINALLY DECIDED THAT NO ONE KNEW, UH, COULDN'T THERE ISN'T A RECORD OF WHO OWNS BETHANY CEMETERY AT ALL.

SO WE SUBMITTED BENEFITS.

WE JUST NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT IS.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY TO, TO FIX THE DRAINAGE BECAUSE THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO CORRECT THE FLOODING PROBLEM, BUT WE DO, WE CAN HELP.

AND THE CITY WATERSHED DEPARTMENT HAS ASKED US TO PARTNER WITH THEM TO HELP ALLEVIATE CORRECT THE PROBLEM.

AND WE WOULD INCUR THE BULK OF THE FEE TO HELP FIX THAT.

SO WE CAN PARTICIPATE IN WHAT IS CALLED THE REGIONAL STORM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, RSM P UH, IF YOU HAD THAT, HEARD THAT, OF THAT ACRONYM.

SO WE ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE ADOPTED EASTERN, OKAY.

COMBINED PLAN IS CALLED FOR A MIXED USE ON THIS SITE, AS IT DOES THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH AND EAST OFF THE INTERSECTION OF EAST 12TH STREET AND SPRINGDALE.

SO, UM, THE ADDITIONAL UNITS WILL BE 50 MORE UNITS.

SO THIS RENDERING SHOWS YOU WHAT THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS FOR VERSUS WHAT THE GRV ALLOWS.

AND THE HEIGHT IS NOT, UH, MORE THAN 60 FEET.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, COMMISSIONER HEMPHILL SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHEA.

IT'S GOING TO VOTE TO CLOSE.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

UNANIMOUS.

DO WE HAVE, UM, QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS, UH, COMMISSIONER PRACTICES AND THEN COMMISSIONER COPPS? YES.

UM, FOR THE OPPOSING SPEAKERS, UM, WHAT WERE THE NAMES? THE FIRST THREE? I DIDN'T, I THINK I'D HEARD A FEW, BUT YEAH, LET ME HELP OUT HERE AS DANIELLE.

AND SO WE WENT OUT OF ORDER.

IT WAS FIRST DONE, DANIEL YANNIS, AND THEN I THINK WE JUMPED TO ALEXANDRIA ANDERSON.

AND THEN, AND THEN, UH, MAYBE MELANIE DIXON.

UM, YES.

SO THEN FOR, UM, MR. YANNIS AND MS. ANDERSON, UM, IF DUE DILIGENCE WAS FOLLOWED WITH THE CEMETERY, UM, AND THE COMMUNITY FELT GOOD ABOUT THE PROCESS THEY PURSUED AND, UM, THE RESPECT GIVEN TO ANY REMAINS THAT THAT MAY BE FOUND, WOULD YOU ALL STILL BE OPPOSED TO THIS REQUEST AND TO THE VERTICAL MIXED USE? AND IF SO, CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHY? AND WE CAN'T HEAR YOU, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO RESPOND STAR SIX ON ME, THIS IS, THIS IS DANIEL YANNIS.

SO THE, THE ISSUES WITH THE CEMETERY AND THE ENVIRONMENT ARE ONE THING, BUT, UH, I WANT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING.

LIKE I SAID, 10%

[02:00:02]

AT 80%.

MFI IS NOT REAL FOR THIS PART OF AUSTIN.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE CONSIDER IT A MECHANISM FOR, FOR, UH, DEVELOPERS JUST TO BE ABLE TO DO MORE.

IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE AFFORDABILITY, THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUES IN EAST AUSTIN.

THE AVERAGE INCOME HERE IS UNDER $50,000.

AND A LOT OF PEOPLE LIVE, UH, AROUND 35,000 AND BELOW.

SO HOUSING, NEW HOUSING, EVEN AT 10% AT 80% MFI IS NOT ADDRESSING THE DISPLACEMENT THAT IS GOING ON TODAY.

AND, AND ALL OF THESE PROJECTS THAT ARE OFFERING HOUSING AT THIS LEVEL, IT'S MEANINGLESS FOR, FOR REAL PROVIDING REAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IF THEY WANTED TO, THEY WOULD BE DOING 50% AT 60 TO 35% MFI THAT REALLY ADDRESSES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, MAYBE DIFFERENT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ISE, 35, MAYBE DIFFERENT IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN OR SOUTHWEST AUSTIN, BUT IN EASTERN CRESCENT, THAT FORMULA IS JUST AN EXCUSE TO, TO BUILD MORE AND MORE DENSITY.

IT DOES NOT ADDRESS DISPLACEMENT.

AND IT DOES NOT CREATE ACTUAL, REAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING, EXCEPT FOR GENTRIFIERS WITH HIGH INCOMES THAT ARE FLOODING EAST AUSTIN BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS.

SO IF YOU REALLY WANT TO ADDRESS THE AFFORDABILITY 60 TO 35% AT PERCENT, THAT WOULD BE REAL FOR THAT BEAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AS ONE OF THE SPEAKERS SAID, UH, IT'S GOING AGAINST THE, THE, THE, THE, UM, THE THINGS THAT, THAT, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS, UH, HAS MANDATED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AS WELL FOR THE TREE CANOPY AND ALL THAT.

THESE THINGS ARE REAL CONSIDERATIONS.

THIS IS ALEXANDRA ANDERSON TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT DANIEL SAID AND WHAT MADELINE, UH, CREATE, UM, SET AS WELL.

GREEN SPACE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MATTERS TO US.

IT MADE IT SEEM AS TREES OR A MEADOW, OR, OR JUST BRING, WE LOVE THAT.

WE LOVE HAVING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE, THE, THE, THE WILDLIFE WILD, EXCUSE ME, LICENSE HERE INTO ALSO THE VI ALSO ELIMINATES ANY SETBACK REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE AT HERE TOO.

SO I THINK AS HE WAS TALKING ABOUT BEFORE THE ABILITY, THE HOUSES THAT ARE GOING TO BE BUILT AT 41 20 EAST 12TH STREET, WHICH IS TRACK ONE OF THIS PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE 500 TO $700,000.

I MOVED INTO THIS TREE, I'VE BEEN IN AUSTIN.

I MOVED FROM CHICAGO.

I CAME DOWN HERE IN 2005 FOR COLLEGE AND A, BECAUSE I LOVED WHAT AUSTIN HAS TO OFFER.

I LOVE THE GREEN SPACE.

I LOVE THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY.

AND THAT MEANT A LOT TO ME.

IF I WAS TO COME AND TRY TO MOVE IN MY AREA, NOW I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT.

I HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE BEING PUSHED OUT EVERY SINGLE DAY.

AND TO SAY THAT 80% IS AFFORDABLE, THAT'S NOT AFFORDABLE TO SEE MY NEIGHBORS HAVE TO BE NEXT TO THAT.

LOVE TO SIT IN THAT BEGGAR.

I HAVE TO EAT NEXT TO AN, UH, A PARKING GARAGE.

I NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE IS NOT PART OF THIS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THIS IS ALSO A CULTURAL ISSUE.

I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL CAN STILL HEAR ME, BUT THIS IS ALSO A CULTURAL ISSUE, BUT THIS FIANNA IS, LET ME SEE IF, UH, COMMISSIONER PROXIES WE'RE, I'M LOOKING AT, WE WERE AT FIVE MINUTES.

SO, UM, LET'S SEE IF ANYONE WANTS TO CONTINUE TO QUESTIONS, UM, WITH THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD.

DO I HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONER WITH QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER ABOUT YOUR HEMPEL AND YES, I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE FROM MR. YANNIS ABOUT THE CONSERVATION.

WELL, CAN YOU ALL STILL HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN.

WE'LL SEE.

THIS IS WHY I, I MENTIONED THE, THE, UH, UH, UH, SYSTEMIC RACISM ZONING THROUGH, UH, I MEAN, SYSTEMIC RACISM THROUGH ZONING BECAUSE THE EAST SIDE, UH, WAS CREATED BY THAT BY A RACIST, ORDINARY PEOPLE WERE FORCED BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE WERE FORCED TO THESE AREAS AND THEY INVESTED IN THEIR HOMES AND IN THEIR, IN

[02:05:01]

THEIR BUSINESSES.

AND NOW IT'S, YOU KNOW, EAST AUSTINITES CALLED US THE RESERVATION FOR A REASON.

AND NOW HERE COMES WHITE SUPREMACY THROUGH ECONOMIC POWER EXPLOITING ONCE AGAIN, THE CULTURE OF OUR, UH, OF EAST AUSTIN.

AND IT IS PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AND BROWN EAST AUSTIN.

SO THESE DEVELOPMENTS DO NOT REPRESENT A BENEFIT TO OUR COMMUNITY.

THEY'VE BEEN, THEY, THEY REPRESENT ANOTHER, ANOTHER ZONING CASE IN LINE WITH ALL THESE OTHER ZONING CASES THAT ARE RADICALLY DISPLACING AND GETTING RID OF BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE IN AUSTIN.

YOU KNOW, AUSTIN HAS THE LOWEST, I MEAN, WE'RE DOWN TO LIKE SIX OR 7% BLACK PEOPLE IN AUSTIN.

WHY IS THAT BECAUSE OF THESE KINDS OF THINGS, BECAUSE THERE'S NO CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY OR IN OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ABOUT THE ADVERSE, UH, UH, UM, UH, EFFECTS OF GENTRIFICATION.

THEY ARE REAL, YOU'VE HEARD, UH, UM, UH, ALEX, SHE STARTED CRYING BECAUSE OF THIS.

THIS IS A REAL THING.

UH, YOU KNOW, WE MET WITH A DEVELOPER AND WE, WE TALKED TO THEM STRAIGHT UP ABOUT THIS AND THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS, BUT THOSE COMMUNITY A BIT LIKE, LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, THEIR REQUIREMENTS, THE FLOODING IT'S REQUIRED, YOU KNOW, TH THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

SO THIS IS A CULTURAL ISSUE.

IT IS TIME FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO RECOGNIZE THAT EAST AUSTIN IS BEING BARRAGED AND BOMBARDED BY SYSTEMIC RACISM THROUGH ZONING, BECAUSE WE'RE DOING IT BUSINESS AS USUAL.

AND AUSTIN HAS A RACIST LEGACY, AND WE ARE TURNING AWAY FROM THAT RACIST LEGACY.

AND, AND WE SAID THIS TO THE, TO THE, THESE DEVELOPERS WHEN THEY CAME, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULD BE IN LINE WITH HELPING US TO CHANGE THAT LEGACY INSTEAD OF LINING UP TO BENEFIT FROM THE CONTINUED EXPLOITATION.

I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THE POINT, BUT THIS IS THE CULTURAL ISSUE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.

ZONING IS NOT JUST ABOUT PROPERTIES, CHANGING HANDS IT'S ABOUT, THANK YOU.

DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS IF I HAVE JUST A COUPLE MORE MINUTES, I'M CURIOUS FROM THE APPLICANT OR MR. F BENITO ABOUT, UM, IF A DEEPER LEVEL AFFORDABILITY HAD BEEN CONSIDERED.

UM, I KNOW THAT WE CAN ASK FOR THAT AS A CONDITION OF ZONING, BUT IF THEY COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.

UM, AND FIRST OF ALL, ANDREW, UM, RIVERA, ALEX GLASGOW IS STUCK IN THE WAITING ROOM.

SHE GOT DISCONNECTED.

WOULD YOU PLEASE MIND, UH, LETTING HER BACK IN, AND, UH, IN THE MEANTIME, UM, I CAN'T SAY THAT YES, WE HAVE CONSIDERED, UM, MULTIPLE OTHER, UM, IDEAS FOR OFFERING A DEEPER LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY.

UM, AND, UM, WE ARE CERTAINLY OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS.

OH MY GOSH, CHAIR.

YOU'RE ON YOU.

DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT SHARE? UH, NO.

UM, HI COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS ALICE GLASGOW.

I'M BEST ON.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

IF YOU WANT TO EXPAND ON THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, DID YOU HEAR THE QUESTION? UH, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU COULD PLEASE REPEAT THE QUESTION.

I WAS, I AM, SINCE I WAS DISCONNECTED FROM THE PHONE, I TURNED THE TV ON TOP OF THE DISCUSSION, SO SHE COULD REPEAT THAT QUESTION, PLEASE.

THE QUESTION WAS, HAD HAVE DEEPER LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY BEEN CONSIDERED.

NO, WE, WE CAN, MY CLIENTS CAN DO 60% MFI.

WELL, IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED BEFORE TWO DAYS.

IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED BEFORE TODAY.

YOU'VE BEEN MUTED TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, PRESS YOU'RE SHY.

YOU'RE IN I'M, UH, I'M JUMPING IN AND OUT OF HERE AND I'M FORGETTING WHERE ON THAT, SO, OKAY.

SO LET'S COMMIT BY CHERYL, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? THE MISSIONERS WITH, UH, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER SHADE.

SO I'M GOING TO JUMP AROUND A LITTLE BIT, UM, MS. GLASGOW, CAN YOU, THERE WAS A STATEMENT THAT SAID THAT THE SETBACKS UNDER V WERE, WERE GONE OR SOMETHING.

I MEAN, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE SAME FORM RESTRICTIONS, WHETHER IT'S WHAT THE, THE BASE ZONING OR WOULD BE, IS THAT CORRECT? IT DOESN'T CHANGE.

[02:10:01]

THAT'S CORRECT.

SO, UM, AND I JUST WANTED TO ALSO, OKAY.

SO, UM, AS FAR AS FOR, UH, THE, THE FORM ITSELF BETWEEN THE BASE ZONING VERSUS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, WHAT WE SAW VISUALLY, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WAS THAT THE, UH, PARKING LEVEL HAD ONE MORE LEVEL, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THEN IS BASICALLY RESTRICTIONS OF THE FORM IS PRETTY MUCH EXACTLY THE SAME, BUT, UM, UNDER, UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING, WHAT THEY CAN DO RIGHT NOW, THEY COULD ALSO PUT A WHOLE OFFICE BUILDING.

IS THAT CORRECT? JUST A GR AND THAT'S IT, THE, UM, AND WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH THE TRAFFIC INCREASE BECAUSE OF THE COMMERCIAL COUNT AND THE PARKING COUNTS, IT WOULD, IT WOULD DEPEND ON, ON THE TYPES OF USES.

FOR EXAMPLE, MY MEDICAL OFFICE USES GENERATE A LOT OF TRAFFIC, SO YOU'D HAVE THAT KIND OF GOING IN AND OUT.

AND THEN IF WE DID ALL RESIDENTIAL, THEN IT WOULD BE LESS BECAUSE RESIDENTIAL HAS LESS PARKING COUNT THAN COMMERCIAL.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A MIX NOW.

SO IT'S KIND OF A IN-BETWEEN BETWEEN THE TWO.

UM, THE NEXT QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, THE DISPLACEMENT, ARE THERE ANY RESIDENTS BEING DISPLACED OR HOW MANY RESIDENTS ARE BEING DISPLACED IN THIS, UM, IN, IN THIS SO FAR, NONE AT ALL, NEITHER FIGHT.

THIS SUBJECT SIDE HAS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON THE SIDE.

AS YOU SAW ON MY PRESENTATION, ARIEL, THEY USE IT'S COMMERCIAL ZONING.

THAT IS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING.

THEY ARE KNOWN TO RESIDENTS AS BEING DISPLACED, AND WE WILL BE REQUIRED.

WE WERE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ON DETENTION ON SITE FOR OUR PURPOSES, BUT THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT WANTS US TO THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT CANNOT CORRECT THE FLOODING PROBLEM FOR THE, AN AREA.

BUT THAT'LL BE DETERMINED DURING SITE PLAN PROCESS, RIGHT? I MEAN, HOW THAT COULD BE IMPROVED.

CORRECT.

AND WE'VE ALREADY REACHED OUT.

I REACHED OUT TO THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT ON BEHALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THEY ASKED US AS A COMMUNITY BENEFIT, IS THAT SOMETHING, CAN WE HAVE OUR OWN MONEY TO HELP ALLEVIATE THE FLOODING PROBLEM SINCE THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT BECAUSE THEY DON'T OWN THE LAND.

SINCE WE ARE COMING IN WITH A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT SAID THEY WILL PARTNER WITH US THROUGH THE REGIONAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, WHICH IS NOT REQUIRED OF US.

WE CAN JUST SIMPLY WERE REQUIRED TO DETAIN OUR OWN WATER ON OUTSIDE OUR OWN DETENTION POND.

BUT W WHICH MEANS WE CANNOT INCREASE FLOODING, BUT WE CANNOT FIX THE FLOODING PROBLEM.

WELL, WITH GLASGOW, CAN YOU, CAN YOU TELL US HOW THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY WITH ITS, UM, IN ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES AND ADDITIONAL HOUSING AND HOW, HOW IT COULD REALLY BENEFIT BASED UPON? UM, I DON'T KNOW.

CAUSE MY, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE THE WHOLE ASPECT OF V IS A COMPLETE COMMUNITY APPROACH.

SO CAN YOU TELL ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, LET, LET YOU KNOW, LET THEM KNOW HOW THIS CAN TRULY BENEFIT THEIR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES? WELL, IT'S A MIXED, IT WILL BE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WHERE YOU HAVE RESIDENTS LIVING THERE, WHO, UM, RESIDENTS JUST LIKE THEM.

AND, UM, THE, UM, THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL THAT WAS REQUIRED UNDER THE VMU CODE.

IT PROVIDES THE EXISTING VAN NOW AND FUTURE RESIDENTS HERE WHERE THEY CAN HAVE, UM, OPTIONS OF WHERE TO GO EAT AND SHOP AND NOT HAVE TO DRIVE TOO FAR TO GO, UM, RECEIVE OTHER SERVICES.

SO THIS WOULD BE, UM, A TRUE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AS ENVISIONED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

WE ARE COMPLYING WITH EAST MLK COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT CALLS FOR MIXED USE HERE.

ONE LAST THING, CAUSE I KNOW I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME.

AND THEN CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION ASPECT OF IT? IS THIS A PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION PRIORITY NETWORK AND WHERE'S THE BUS STOPS AND HOW DO YOU LEVERAGE, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THIS LEVERAGE THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND AFFORDABILITY? BECAUSE, BECAUSE OF THAT, WE COMPLY WITH THE OFTEN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN AS CALLED OUT IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THERE'S A BUS STOP RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR PROPERTY.

THERE'S A BUS STOP RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THESE 12TH AND SPRINGDALE.

AND THEN THERE'S A BUS STOP ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE GOING NORTH AND SOUTH.

SO W W WE ARE AT A TRANSIT, UH, OPPORTUNITY AREA.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE MAKING A DECISION ON, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE JUST MAKING A DECISION ON ADDING OF THE, TO THE EXISTING ZONING.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, THERE WE GO.

COMMISSIONER COX AND THEN COMMISSIONER MITCH TODDLER.

I AM STILL CONFUSED BY THIS.

UH, SO APOLOGIES IF, IF MY QUESTIONS ARE STUPID, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

UM,

[02:15:03]

IS THAT CORRECT? STAFF, HEATHER CHAPMAN HOUSING AND PLANNING.

UM, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IN THE EXISTING ZONING AND WHAT IS PERMITTED IN THE EXISTING ZONING IS THEY'RE PROPOSING TO ADD THE VERTICAL MIXED USE V AND I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY SOMETHING ON A PREVIOUS QUESTION, IF THE APPLICANT THAT, UM, THE, THE SETBACKS THAT ARE EXISTING, THE GR IF THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED UNDER VERTICAL MIXED USE, THOSE SETBACKS DO GO TO ZERO.

THE CURRENT SETBACK ARE 10 FEET FOR THE FRONT YARD AND NO INTERIOR SIDE OR REAR SETBACK.

SO THOSE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS AREN'T CHANGING.

IT'S REALLY JUST THE FRONT YARD ONE, BUT STILL AS MS. GLASGOW MENTIONED, THERE IS STILL COMPATIBILITY.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WELL, AND YEAH, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

AND I THINK, I THINK THE APPLICANTS, UH, POWERPOINT SLIDE SHOWED THE SETBACK GOING AWAY.

UM, BUT ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU, UM, IT, THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ONLY APPLY TO THE SF IN THE BACK.

IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THE PUBLIC ZONING THAT'S ADJACENT ON THE SIDE MAP IS CORRECT.

UM, AND THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO PROVIDE WHAT LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

UH, IT'S 80% MFI.

THE CITY CANNOT REQUIRE A HIGHER LEVEL OR A HIGHER PERCENTAGE.

UM, SOMETIMES A PROPERTY OWNER WILL GO INTO A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP, IF, IF THERE IS AN IDEA TO, UM, HAVE A DEEPER LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY.

UM, AND SO THE, THE OPTIONS FACING US AND I, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH, WITH ALL THE THINGS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS, HAS SAID, UH, UH, ABOUT GENTRIFICATION AND, AND, AND IT I'VE YET TO HEAR ANYONE HAVE A GOOD SOLUTION TO THE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING TO EAST AUSTIN AND CREATING UNAFFORDABILITY TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS, BUT THE DECISION THAT WE'RE FACED NOW.

AND THERE'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF TO CLARIFY FOR EVERYONE IS TO EITHER KEEP THE EXISTING ZONING WHERE THEY CAN BASICALLY BUILD, UM, AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, UH, WITH THE, WITH THE PARKING GARAGE, WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE SETBACK, OR ADD A V2, IT WHERE WE ARE REQUIRING THEM TO DO A GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL WITH RESIDENTIAL, ABOVE ADDING A AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT TO IT.

AND I GUESS THE, THE, THE AD FOR THE DEVELOPER IS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY MORE SETBACKS, BUT ALL OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS RELATED TO HERITAGE TREES, ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, UM, ALL OF THAT SORT OF STUFF IS THE SAME BETWEEN THE TWO.

IS THAT CORRECT? UM, ALL OF THE THINGS, LIKE YOU SAID, ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, HERITAGE, TREE, UH, THINGS STAY THE SAME PARKING REDUCTION IS POSSIBLE TO A GREATER LEVEL.

WITHIN THE URBAN CORE, THERE ARE BASE, UH, PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND OUR TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S IN THE, THE CENTRAL CITY.

IT CAN, THAT CAN BE REDUCED TO 80% JUST AUTOMATICALLY.

IF THEY DO DISEASE, UH, DEVELOPMENT, THEY COULD REDUCE IT TO 60% PARKING.

THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO THINGS.

OFFICE CURRENTLY MAINTAINED THE PAINTING, DO THAT ONE AT A TIME.

AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, UH, OBVIOUSLY I, I HEARD THAT Y'ALL MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD A FEW TIMES.

UM, WERE THERE ANY, DID YOU MAKE ANY CHANGES TO YOUR PROPOSAL BASED ON YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS? UH, YES, WE DID.

WE STARTED OFF WITH TRACKS ONE AND TWO TRAPS, TWO TRACKS.

ONE WAS TO BE A ZONE.

THE REQUEST WAS WHY TO SIX.

THEY ASKED WE NOT CONSIDER NOT CHANGING THE ZONING, CONSIDER BUILDING IT UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.

THAT'S WHY WE WITHDREW THE ZONING CHANGE ON TRACK ONE.

IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED UNDER THE CURRENT THREE ZONING, THE, UM, THEY, SO FOR TRACK TWO, THEY JUST REALLY ASKED US TO LOOK AT SOME COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

AND THE THREE THAT I JUST MENTIONED, ONE WAS TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO, TO MAINTAIN THE CEMETERY BECAUSE THE TRAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF'S

[02:20:01]

AND THEN THE, THE SECOND, UH, REQUEST, UH, HAD TO DO WITH, UM, ASSISTING WITH A FLOODING PROBLEM, UH, REAL LICENSE THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO DETAINED OUR OWN WATER AND NOT ADD ADVERSE FLOODING TO THE SITE.

THEY ASKED IF WE COULD, UM, HELP ALLEVIATE FLOODING FOR THOSE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE SOUTH HOP TRACK ONE.

AND I AGREED, UH, WE, THE, THE APPLICANT, WE WOULD REACH OUT TO THE APPROPRIATE CITY STAFF.

AND FIRST OF ALL, CONFIRM THAT THERE IS A FLOODING PROBLEM TODAY, AND YES, AND I ASKED THEM, HAVE YOU WIDENED TO FIX THE PROBLEM? SO THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO FIX THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY DON'T ALL OWN UH, IT'S IT'S THE OPPORTUNITY ARISES WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES TO DO THAT.

AND THEN WE'RE OUT OF TIME READY TO, UM, COMMISSIONER MR. TYLER, UH, YOU WERE NEXT.

I THINK MOST OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S ALREADY ZONED THE GRM.

YOU, THIS IS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO ADD THE V IN.

THE SECOND QUESTION WAS ALSO ANSWERED, WHICH WAS REGARDING THE OTHER TRACT.

SO THERE'S NOT AN APPLICATION FOR , THAT'S STAYING SF THREE.

SO I UNDERSTAND THOSE.

I, WE MIGHT NEED TO GO BACK TO THE VISUALS ON THIS.

UM, I GUESS THIS IS FOR, FOR STAFF, UM, WITH THE PARKING GARAGE THAT'S GOING IN.

UM, AND IT'S PROBABLY MORE THE ARIEL, I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS WHETHER WHERE THEY'RE RESIDENT WHAT'S BORDERING THE AREA WHERE THE CAR PARKING GARAGE IS GOING TO BE GOING.

ARE THERE HOMES THAT ARE BACKING TO THAT? SURE.

HEATHER CHAPMAN HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHAT'S EXISTING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IN THE COMMUNITY RIGHT.

IMMEDIATELY WITH IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE REZONING TRACK IS A LARGE END DEVELOPED AREA, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY PART OF THE ZONING APPLICATION, BUT IT'S UNDEVELOPED RIGHT NOW.

IT IS ZONED SINGLE FAMILY, AND IT DOES TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, UM, IN WEST, THE ZONING IS TO SOMETHING LIKE SF SIX OR HIGHER THAT PROPERTY TRIGGERS COMPATIBILITY, OR UNLESS THEY LIKE LITERALLY WRAPPED THAT PARCEL IN WITH THIS ONE, UM, WHICH IS UNLIKELY CONSIDERING THAT, UM, IT'D BE MORE LIKELY TO BE SUBDIVIDED INTO SINGLE FAMILY LOSS.

SO, OKAY.

THAT, THAT PICTURE IS VERY HELPFUL.

THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.

THAT CONCERNS FOR EXISTING RESIDENTS.

NEIGHBORS DON'T HAVE THAT.

WELL, LET ME CLARIFY THOUGH.

UH, YEAH, THIS AERIAL IS PERFECT AS RIGHT BELOW WHERE IT SAYS TRACK ONE, YOU'LL SEE KIND OF, UH, IT'S LIKE FOUR OR FIVE LOFTS THAT FACE ONTO 12TH STREET BECAUSE OF THOSE TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY, WHICH INCREASES SETBACKS IN BOTH DISTANCE AND HEIGHT.

SO THOSE ARE THE ONLY THINGS CLOSE ENOUGH TO TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY RIGHT NOW.

AND IS THAT AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WE'RE SEEING IN THERE AS WELL? IT WAS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT'S BEEN, UH, EXCUSE ME, HAD BEEN REDISTRIBUTED TO OTHER SCHOOLS AND I BELIEVE AISD STILL OWNS THE PROPERTY.

BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT THERE AREN'T STUDENTS IN THE CLASSROOM.

WERE GOING TO OFFER AFFORDABILITY TO 60% OF MFI.

UM, AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION, UH, WAS, AND THIS ARIEL IS A GOOD ONE FOR THAT AS WELL TOO.

CAUSE I WANTED TO GET A GOOD VIEW OF WHAT WE CLARIFIED THE SETBACK QUESTION.

SO IF WE GO TO V AND GIVE THEM THE, AND THAT TAKES AWAY THE REQUIRED SETBACK AGAIN, WHAT'S FACING THAT AREA.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING TO SEE.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE ON TRACK TWO, THERE AREN'T ANY ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES OR ANYTHING THERE THAT WOULD HAVE A ZERO FRONT.

IF WE WENT TO V ON TRACK TO LESS I'M MISSING SOMETHING.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

DO WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER? I THINK.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

UM, THERE'S A QUESTION FOR MS. GLASGOW, THE APPLICANT, UM, UH, OF COURSE, UH, WE CANNOT REQUIRE, UH, AN AFFORDABILITY LEVEL, UH, DEEPER THAN, UM, 80%, BUT I, AND CORRECT ME IF I GOT THIS WRONG.

I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY THAT YOU

[02:25:02]

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

COMMISSIONER SNYDER.

WE WILL AGREE TO 60% MFI.

SO I WONDERED, UM, IF YOU COULD TALK ABOUT YOUR PLAN TO MEMORIALIZE THAT AND, UH, WOULD THAT BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THIS, UM, GOING TO COUNCIL FOR THEIR DECISION? I BELIEVE IN HABITS AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

I BELIEVE THAT WITH VMU CASES, UM, WHILE THE CODE SETS IT AT AT 60, 80%, THE, THE VMU ORDINANCE FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS ADOPTED IN SEVERAL YEARS AGO IN 2008, UH, IS, UH, FOR PROPERTIES THAT ARE ALREADY HAVING TO BE AT 60% AT THE TIME.

SO, UH, STAFF CAN CONFIRM THAT THIS COULDN'T BE A CONDITIONER OVERLAY REFERENCING THAT ORDINANCE AND SET IT AT EIGHT AT 60%.

AND THAT WILL BE PART OF THE CL AND THE CHEF.

AND CAN, UH, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

UM, IT, IT'S A HARD ONE TO ANSWER AND I, MY EXPERIENCE, UH, IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS IS NO, WE COULD NOT PUT IN A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

MS. CHAPMAN, DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING? UH, YES.

WE COULD NOT PUT IN, IN A CEO OR A PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

UH, WHAT MS. GLASGOW SAID ABOUT, UH, WHEN THE OPT IN OPT OUT PERIOD OCCURRED PROPERTIES THAT ADDED A V IN THAT TIME TO DO THE 60%, BUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE DON'T HAVE A MECHANISM TO REFERENCE CURRENT CASES BACK TO THAT ORDINANCE.

I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK WITH LAW DEPARTMENT, BUT, UM, I'M PRETTY SURE ON THIS ONE.

SO, UH, I, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A LOT DEPARTMENT ON THE CALL IF THEY COULD BE CHECKING ON THIS, UM, MS. GLASGOW WITH, UH, WE'RE IN ABLE TO DO THAT WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, DO YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH THAT WOULD MAKE SURE THAT YOUR COMMITMENT IS IN PLACE BEFORE YOU GET TO COUNCIL? SURE.

WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS WHEN WE GET TO COUNCIL, WE CAN, UH, IN, DEPENDING ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT, YOU CAN CERTAINLY ACCEPT, OFFER AS BEING WELL AS VOLUNTEERING TO LOWER THE MFI TO 60%.

AND THEN, UM, F COUNCIL, UH, AFTER FIRST READING, IF THEY ACCEPTED THE OFFER, THEN WE CAN PREPARE A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, IF THAT IS WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY, UH, OFFERS.

I, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY ATTORNEY IS LISTENING, I'LL, I'LL HANDLE OTHER VMU CASES.

AND, UM, I THOUGHT THAT UP, THE OTHER CASES DID HAVE IT IN A CONDITION OVERLAY.

SO, UM, IF THE CITY ATTORNEY DETERMINES ALL, UH, PINE THAT WE STILL NEED TO, TO HAVE A PRIVATE RC, THEN WE CAN, WE'LL CERTAINLY HAVE ONE PREPARED BEFORE, UM, UH, AFTER FIRST READING AT COUNCIL BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THE CITY VOTE WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE VEHICLES ON AND THEN, UM, THEN WE CAN RETAIN AN ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THAT OP UH, PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT TO, UM, TO DO, TO BRING DOWN THE FI AT 60%.

AND IF I COULD CHIME IN ON THAT THERE, UM, HOUSING AND PLANNING AGAIN, UM, ALTHOUGH WE DO HAVE LAW DEPARTMENT STAFF AVAILABLE AT DIS MAYBE THE SORT OF THING THAT NEEDS MORE ANALYSIS THAN CAN BE ANSWERED OFF THE CUFF, UH, WHAT HAS HAPPENED SOMETIMES WITH PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS IS IF A MOTION IS MADE OF, UM, BASICALLY SAYING THAT CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, REDUCING IT TO 60% NSI, IF POSSIBLE.

UM, IF, IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GET AN ANSWER ON A BLOG, THIS IS, THIS IS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON, ON THEIR BEHALF, COMMISSIONER SHATTER, I'M BETTING COMMISSIONER SHUTDOWN.

I'M GETTING A MESSAGE FROM MR. RIVERA THAT A CEO IS NOT APPROPRIATE YEAH.

WITH REGARDS TO THE REDUCED NFI.

SO, UH, WE STILL MAY WANT TO DO IT AS A CONDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, JUST SO COUNCIL HAS IT IN FRONT OF THEM, BUT RIGHT.

MY, A TURBAN THAT LATER PROCEDURAL, IF I, SO I'LL LET YOU GUYS GO AHEAD.

UH, COMMISSION, UM,

[02:30:01]

SO AS ANDREW SAID, HE WAS ABLE TO REACH OUT TO A LOT LAW DEPARTMENT.

THIS CANNOT BE A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

IT WOULD NEED TO BE A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UM, WHICH WOULD EITHER BE THE OWNER BY THEMSELVES OR WITH A LOCAL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION, NEIGHBORHOOD, GROUP DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SIGNING AN AGREEMENT.

AND YES, TYPICALLY THAT IS FINALIZED BEFORE THIRD READING.

AND, UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? GOT A FEW MORE SPOTS, COMMISSIONER AS R AND D CHAIR.

UM, JUST A FEW QUESTIONS.

THIS TASK GO.

CAN YOU PLEASE SHARE AGAIN, WHAT IS THE CHANGE IN UNIT NUMBER BASED ON CURRENT EXISTING ZONING? AND IF WE ADD THE V WELL, COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION, WITH THE DIFFERENCES.

50 MORE UNITS, FIVE ZERO.

GREAT.

WE'VE GOT UNDER THE CURRENT, UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING OFF G R N U.

WE ANTICIPATE, UH, 76 UNITS, 76 WITH NO AFFORDABLE UNITS UNDER VI.

WE GET ONE 26 UNITS WITH 13 UNITS BEING AFFORDABLE.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

UM, AND I THINK WE'VE ALREADY HAD THE CONVERSATION, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE AMENABLE TO GOING TO 60%.

I'M A FIVE.

AND THE MORE UTILIZING THAT IN SOME WAY BEFORE GOING TO COUNSEL, CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRMED? YES.

WE WOULD LIKE TO MEMORIALIZE THAT AFTER THE FIRST READING OF COUNSEL, BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE, IT'S GOING TO BE A PRIVATE, UM, AS STAFF HAS TOLD US, IT'S GOING TO BE A PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

UM, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE DONE BEFORE.

I GUESS I'VE HANDLED THIS BEFORE.

WE'LL PREPARE A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UM, BEFORE SECOND AND THIRD READING OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

UM, AND THEN I KNOW, I KNOW THAT I HEARD THIS PRETTY CLEARLY, BUT I JUST WANT TO SORT OF CONFIRM THIS IF MY UNDERSTANDING IS CORRECT.

UM, MS. JAFFIN, YOU CAN HELP ME ANSWER THIS QUESTION, BUT FROM THE SIDE OF THE TWO PROPERTIES ON THE SIDES AND THE REAR, THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE IN SETBACK GOING FROM CURRENT ZONING TO B.

CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT THAT IS CORRECT.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

WE HAVE, UH, ONE MORE SLOT, UH, YOUR PRACTICES.

UH, YOU'RE THE LAST ONE.

UM, SO I SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I THINK IN AN EFFORT TO ADDRESS COMMUNITIES, CONCERNS ABOUT DISPLACEMENT ARE TRYING TO, UM, FIGURE OUT HOW TO INCLUDE MORE AFFORDABILITIES.

SO I'M WONDERING, UM, FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE SPOKEN, DO YOU FEEL THAT 13 UNITS AT 60% MFI IS ENOUGH? UM, AND TWO-PART QUESTION.

UM, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER ANY RESIDENTS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY DISPLACED, BUT CLEARLY THERE ARE CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY ABOUT DISABILITIES.

OH, SO I JUST WANT TO QUICKLY SAY, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE MECHANISM OF DISPLACEMENT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IF THERE'S NO EXISTING RESIDENTS ON THAT PARCEL THAT WOULD BE DISPLACED IMMEDIATELY? WELL, THERE'S A CUMULATIVE EFFECT TO DISPLACEMENT AND THE FACT THAT THAT EVEN IF THEY WENT 10 UNITS AT 60%, IT'S STILL EIGHT 90 UNITS THAT ARE UNAFFORDABLE BOLTS TO ANYBODY HERE.

DEEP AFFORDABILITY IS NOT JUST THE SD MFI.

IT IS THE PERCENTAGE.

SO IT'S NOT ENOUGH FOR US TO SAY, OH, WELL, WE'LL GIVE YOU 10% AT 60%.

REAL, REAL AFFORDABILITY IS 50% AT 60% MFI.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE DON'T NEED A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

I POINT TO THE THINK EACH PROJECT THAT WITHOUT ANY, THEY JUST DECIDED TO DO IT.

THEY GAVE A FULL ONE-THIRD, UM, NINE AND A HALF ACRES OF A 24 ACRE SITE FOR DEEP AFFORDABILITY, 62 TO 35%.

AND, AND THERE WAS NO RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

THEY JUST AGREED TO DO IT.

SEE, WE TALK ABOUT WHAT'S REQUIRED, BUT I CHALLENGED THESE DEVELOPERS, THESE WHITE PEOPLE WITH A LOT OF MONEY.

I CHALLENGED THEM TO BRING REAL REALITY TO US AND TO PREVENT THAT DISPLACEMENT SO THEY CAN VOLUNTARILY LIKE THINK HE'S PROJECT DID.

IT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS THAT DEEP AFFORDABILITY.

AND HE STOPS

[02:35:01]

THERE RIGHT NOW.

AND IT'S THE MODEL IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR OF PARTNERING.

MAYBE THEY COULD PARTNER WITH ONE OF THE, UH, ONE OF THE NONPROFITS, LIKE G AND D C, WHO CAN BRING DEEP AFFORDABILITY, BUT THE DEVELOPER THEMSELVES CAN DO IT.

IF THEY HAVE THE WILL TO DO IT, WE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT REQUIREMENTS, BUT YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN, YOU CAN DO THE LEAST FOR YOUR CHILDREN, BUT YOU REALLY WANT TO DO THE BEST AND THE MOST FOR THEM.

SO I CHALLENGED THESE DEVELOPERS TO DO RIGHT BY THEIR BLACK AND BROWN CHILDREN.

I WOULD LIKE, I LIKE TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT DANIEL JUST SAID, THIS PROJECT, AND I KNOW WE'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING TO APARTMENTS, BUT THERE'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT SIDE TO THIS PROJECT WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE PLEASED.

FIVE PLUS HOMES ARE GOING TO BE AT 500 TO $700,000 THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN ABLE TO TALK ABOUT AND ADDRESS.

AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, OH, WE WANT TO PRESENT IT UP APARTMENT AT AFFORDABILITY.

WHEN WE KNOW THAT IN AMERICAN SOCIETY, HAVING EQUITY, HAVING A HOME, BEING ABLE TO HAVE THAT REAL ESTATE PROPERTY ALLOWS YOU TO GROW YOUR WEALTH, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO.

THEY'RE GONNA BE SQUIRRELED THEIR WEALTH THAT HAVING HOUSES 25 PLUS HOUSES, I 500 TO $700,000 PLUS 76 UNITS OR A HUNDRED, AND SOME UNITS ADDED 50 MORE, 76 OR 126 UNITS.

ON TOP OF THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS SAID THAT THERE'S NOBODY DOING THIS REAL AFFORDABILITY, THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT CORRECT.

G AND DC IS USING THE LAND TRUST MODEL.

AND IN NOVEMBER THEY SOLD A HOUSE TO A WOMAN WHO HAS BEEN ON THEIR DISPLACEMENT LIST FOR 18 YEARS IN NOVEMBER.

THEY SOLD A HOUSE TO HER UNDER THE LAND TRUST MODEL FOR $170,000, A THREE BEDROOM GREENHOUSE.

SO WE KNOW IT'S POSSIBLE.

NOW THE, UH, WE CANNOT RELY ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO PROVIDE AFFORDABILITY, BUT FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THAT'S A LOT THAT THEY HAVE WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THEY COULD DEFINITELY PARTNER WITH.

GMDC JUST LIKE THINK HE'S PROJECT DID AND BRING REAL AFFORDABILITY TO THE EAST AUSTIN NATIVES, BECAUSE EVEN 10% AT 60%, YOU STILL ARE GOING TO HAVE 90, 90% OF THEM IN IT FOR JUSTIFIERS, NOT FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE NOW.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE US ACTUALLY HAVE THIS DIALOGUE.

IT'S RARE.

SO I THINK, OKAY, THAT DOES IT FOR OUR LAST QUESTION.

UM, SO NOW, UM, WE'RE DONE WITH THE Q AND A, AND DO I HAVE A, DO I HAVE A MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER COX? UM, I MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR G R M U V N P WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY OF 60% MFI, IF AT ALL POSSIBLE STAFF AND LEGAL DETERMINE THAT WE CAN DO THAT.

IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.

AND I'D LOVE TO SPEAK THAT OUT WHEN I GET A CHANCE, JUST CHECKING, HOLD ON, FOLKS REAL QUICK.

DID WE, UH, I THOUGHT WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES I'M GETTING, UH, CONCERNS THAT WE MAY HAVE NOT, IT'S BEEN ALMOST AN, A PUBLIC HEARING.

UH, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER, BISHOP TODDLER, AND OKAY.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS, CLOSE THE HEARING.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S CONTINUE.

UH, DID WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? UH, WELL, THIS IS THE QUESTION.

THAT'S THE HEARING, I'M GETTING DELAYED EMOTION.

SO I HAD TO USE JUST WAITING FOR A SECOND, SO YOU CAN SPEAK TO IT.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND HEAR THE MOTION AGAIN.

COMMISSIONER COX.

THE MOTION IS TO, UH, TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR REZONING TO G R M U V N CONDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY OF 60% MFI 10% OF THE UNIT, IF AT ALL POSSIBLE THAT STAFF AND LEGAL, DETERMINED THAT WE CAN DO THAT,

[02:40:01]

I THINK.

SO I'M SORRY.

I THINK WE'VE, THEY HAVE SPOKE AND SAID WE CANNOT DO THAT.

SO IT'S PRETTY CLEAR.

WELL, AND I WANT TO BE PRETTY CLEAR.

I SPOKE WITH COUNSEL OFFICE ABOUT THIS MULTIPLE TIMES, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE 80% OF THE TIME WE MAKE A MOTION THAT DOES THEIR JOB AND THEY CHIME IN AND MAKE A DECISION AS QUICKLY AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN WHILE WE'RE DISCUSSING AND DETERMINE WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.

AND I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT MY COUNCIL DISTRICT OFFICE, THAT WE CAN MAKE MOTION, WHATEVER WE WANT AND INCLUDE WHATEVER WE WANT.

UM, AND, AND THEN, AND THEN STAFF AND COUNCIL WILL DETERMINE WHAT, WHAT IS ACTUALLY LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE WITHIN THAT MOTION.

AND, AND, BUT, BUT THE POINT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TEXT OF IT GETS TO COUNCIL.

SO IF WE WANT TO HAVE A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY OF MFI BELOW 80%, WE WANT THAT TO GET THE COUNCIL.

AND THE ONLY WAY WE CAN DO THAT IS TO MAKE IT PART OF OUR EMOTION.

SO COMMISSIONER COX, CAN EVERYBODY JUST HOLD REAL QUICK? CAUSE, UM, KEN ATX, UH, CAN OUR AB VERIFY, CAUSE I'M GETTING LIKE SOME PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY SAYING THAT THEY CAN'T HEAR.

WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF FEEDBACK.

SO LET'S JUST HOLD ON BEFORE EVERYBODY TALKS AND DISCUSSES TOO MUCH.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC CAN HEAR LONGER MUTED.

FOR EVERYBODY THAT'S ON THE LINE, YOU ARE NOW BACK UP, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR TV'S IN THE BACKGROUND.

WE CAN ALL HEAR OURSELVES.

YOU ARE NOW, UH, LEAVES, TURN OFF YOUR TV IN THE BACKGROUND.

WE CAN ALL BE OURSELVES.

I'M GOING TO CHECK TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, PRESS STAR.

UH, I'M CHECKING TO SEE IF HER OKAY.

IS IT BETTER? YES.

IT'S LIKE IT MAY HAVE IMPROVED.

I THINK IT'S BETTER.

SO, UH, YOU'RE IN UNCHARTED TERRITORY, UH, UH, WHERE I WANT TO BE.

SO, UM, I, WITH ALL THAT CONFUSION, ARE YOU FOR A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER MOOSE TODDLER.

UM, CAN I SPEAK EVEN MORE TO THAT? YES.

WELL, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, LOOKING AT YOUR PHONE CHAIR.

JUST LIKE I KNOW, I KNOW THAT STAFF PROBABLY FREAKING OUT RIGHT NOW SAYING YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

YOU CAN'T DO THIS, BUT I SURE IS ON ANDREW RIVERA.

SO JUST A FRIENDLY REMINDER THAT WE DO HAVE PARAMETERS THAT THIS APPLICATION IS VIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THAT WAS, DID, UH, MR. MR. RIVERA, IS IT, CAN YOU EXPAND ON THAT OR ANY FURTHER? SO EACH ONE OF YOU SHOULD HAVE A MEMORANDUM, WHICH WAS PROVIDED IN REGARDS TO THE LAND LAND USE COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

IT PROVIDED THE COMMISSION, THE CODE, WHICH THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE VIEWED UNDER.

WAS IN FLUX BECAUSE THE OTHER THING WAS THE AUDIO, EVERYTHING VIDEO WAS, WAS KIND OF IN THAT, UH, WHATEVER IN THAT MESS UP POINT.

AND THAT IS TRUE.

UH, COMMISSIONER COX, WE, THAT WAS SENT OUT TO EVERYONE TO KIND OF PROVIDE THE KIND OF PARAMETERS THAT WE CAN OFFER CEO'S ON.

AND I THINK THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THAT.

SO WHEN WAS, WHEN WAS THAT MEMO SENT? BECAUSE I JUST PULLED UP ALL MY EMAILS FROM ANDREW RIVERA AND I'M NOT SEEING ANY MEMBERS.

YEAH, THIS IS, UM, SO I AM IN THE, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I'M GOING TO, I DID READ THE MEMO AND I THINK WE, WE ARE DEFINITELY OUTSIDE OF THE, WHAT LEGAL HAS DETERMINED WE CAN DO AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER.

I WOULD LOVE TO TAKE THIS UP AT ANOTHER TIME.

UH, I THINK WE NEED TO, BECAUSE IT OPENS UP A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR US COMMISSIONER COPPS, BUT RIGHT NOW, UM, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I THINK, UH, WE I'M GOING TO ADHERE TO STAFFS.

UM, UH, WHAT, WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD NUMEROUS TIMES IS IN THAT DOCUMENTATION.

UH, SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN GO INTO A CEO WITH, UM, HOW'S CAN I AMEND MY MOTION? AND I DON'T THINK IT'S YES.

UH, SO WE'RE GOING TO PULL BACK THE MOTION.

UH, WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO FORMALLY, IT WAS SECONDED.

PARLIAMENTARIAN HELPED ME OUT HERE.

UH, WE HAD, THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT, I SAW AN ATTEMPT TO SECOND, BUT IT WAS IN EVERYTHING

[02:45:01]

SO WE'RE GOING TO REEL IT BACK AND WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

SO YOU, YOU HAVE A MOTION, YOU HAVE ONE MOTION RIGHT NOW, BUT YOU CAN PULL IT BACK IS BECAUSE THE TWO DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, I'M GOING TO SAY THAT THERE, THERE WASN'T A SECOND.

UM, AND IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT WE WERE DEALING WITH, YOU GUYS ARE GOOD.

SO THERE'S ONLY ONE MOTION ON THE TABLE.

WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT.

SO YES, COMMISSIONER COX, YOU HA YOU'RE, YOU'RE STILL HAVE THE FLOOR WITH YOUR MOTION.

WELL, LET'S SEE IF I CAN DO THIS BECAUSE I NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE THIS WORK, TO BE ABLE TO EXPRESS THE, THE COMMISSION'S DESIRES TO COUNSEL, HAVE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION.

I MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR REZONING TO G R M U V N P WITH AN ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION THAT DEEPER AFFORDABILITY TO 60% MFI FOR 10% OF THE UNITS BE ACCOMPLISHED IN WHATEVER LEGAL MECHANISM IS LEGALLY POSSIBLE.

IS THAT ALLOWED? CAN I ADD ONE THING REAL QUICK TO THAT? YEAH.

CAN WE SAY SOMETHING AS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT? RIGHT.

BECAUSE WE DIDN'T PUSH IT.

THEY SAID WE CAN DO IT.

SO THIS WAY IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE PUSHING THEM TO DO THE 60% THEY OFFERED IT UP IN OUR DISCUSSIONS.

AND IF I GET A SECOND, I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT IT.

CAUSE I'VE GOT A LOT I'M STRUGGLING WITH.

WE HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONER MICHELLA.

SO LET'S, UH, TALK TO HER, SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER COX.

WELL, I W I JUST WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER, UH, PRACTICE FOR BASICALLY GIVING ALL OF HER TIME TO, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TO, TO SPEAK ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THAT THEY'RE FACING.

UM, AND I, I HOPE THAT THE PEOPLE TUNED IN WATCHING THIS IS, IS FEELING MY FRUSTRATION AND PROBABLY THE FRUSTRATION OF A LOT OF COMMISSIONERS THAT, THAT WE DON'T SEEM TO HAVE THE TOOLS TO TRY TO FIND THESE SOLUTIONS.

I MEAN, WE CAN'T EVEN, WE CAN'T EVEN OFFER DEEPER AFFORDABILITY.

UM, YOU JUST SAW WHAT HAPPENED.

SO, SO I, I, I DON'T THINK THAT, UM, DENYING THE V ACCOMPLISHES REALLY ANYTHING, UH, THAT, THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT.

UM, I THINK, I THINK THERE ARE BENEFITS THAT COME WITH THE V INCLUDING THAT 10% AT 60 MFI, IT'S BETTER THAN NOTHING.

IT'S NOT NEARLY ENOUGH, BUT WE CAN'T GO ANY FURTHER.

WE CAN'T EVEN GO TO 60% AT 10%.

UM, SO, SO I, I WILL VOTE TO APPROVE THIS BECAUSE OF THAT REASON, BUT I JUST WANT TO SHOW MY FRUSTRATION, UM, AND FIND A WAY TO, TO TRY TO EXPRESS OUR DESIRE, TO FIND THESE SOLUTIONS WITHIN THE VERY, VERY NARROW BOX THAT WE ARE PROVIDED WITHIN THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK.

AND I APPRECIATE STAFF, I DON'T WANT TO GET ON THE WRONG SIDE OF STAFF.

THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB.

IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT THAT THEY'RE TELLING US WHAT THE REGULATIONS AND THE LAWS.

SO I'M GOING TO OFFER A SUBSTITUTE CAUSE I DON'T, I'M STILL THINKING WE'RE ON BY RECOMMEND.

UM, A RECOMMENDATION.

I WOULD, UH, MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT I WANT TO PUT OUT THERE IS TO PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING WHAT YOU SAID AS FAR AS SUPPORTING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND, UH, I'M SORRY, RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND WITH SUPPORT FOR NOT RECOMMENDING, BUT SUPPORTING THE 10% AT 60% MFI AS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT.

I THINK SUPPORTING THAT AS OPPOSED TO RECOMMENDING IT IS, WOULD BE PREFERABLE LANGUAGE.

DO I HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONER COX? OKAY.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK TO MY MOTION.

DO WE HAVE ANYBODY, UH, AGAINST THAT? WHERE THAT SUBSTITUTE MOTION COMMISSIONER PRACTICES, PLEASE.

UM, SO I'M SUPPOSED TO SPEAK AGAINST YOUR SUBSTITUTE MOTION, NOT JUST BOTH, BOTH.

IN OPPOSITION OF THE WHOLE IDEA, THEN ALL, NO, THIS SUBSTITUTE WOULD BE IT ONCE THIS PASSES STAY IN THE SAME.

IT JUST SPEAKS TO THE SUBSTITUTE, MY SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE SUBSTITUTING THAT WE WANT TO SUPPORT, NOT RECOMMEND, UH, TO KEEP IN LINE WITH OUR, THE PARAMETERS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS SUPPOSED TO OPERATE.

SO THAT'S THE REASON, I MEAN, I, I PREFER YOUR SUBSTITUTE TO THE ORIGINAL.

SO IF THERE'S GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY LATER TO JUST SPEAK

[02:50:01]

AND THE SAME WAY THAT WE RESPECTED THE INPUT OF THE, UM, AN EFFORT OF THE SENATE HILLS RESIDENTS, I FEEL WE SHOULD RESPECT THE INPUT AND EFFORT OF, UM, NEIGHBORHOODS OF, OF RESIDENTS IN THE EAST MLK NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IN COMMUNITY BASED PLANNING, ESPECIALLY BY RESIDENTS WHO ARE MOST AT RISK OF DISPLACEMENT.

UM, IF WE LOOK AT THE UPROOTED REPORT, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS CONSIDERED ONE OF THOSE MOST VULNERABLE TO DISPLACEMENT.

UM, I THINK, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE IN THIS POSITION WHERE WE DON'T HAVE DEEP COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING WHERE THE COMMUNITY CAN DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT PARCEL OF LAND AND THAT THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN IT, YOU KNOW, AS A GREEN SPACE.

UM, SO WE ARE REALLY MORE IN A ROLE OF HARM REDUCTION.

AND WHAT I HEARD FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS IS THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE AN ADDITIONAL 50 UNITS AT MARKET RATE BECAUSE OF THE PRESSURE THAT, THAT CREATES DISPLACING EXISTING, UM, RESIDENTS IN THE AREA.

SO IF WE LOOK AT, UM, THE FACT THAT LIKE NEIGHBORING ZONING, THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF, UM, ZONING, UH, G R M U, DOING THIS KIND OF SPOT ZONING IN THIS ONE PARTICULAR PARCEL COULD ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS TO WANT TO DO THE SAME IN OTHER, IN THE NEIGHBORING PARCELS THAT ARE CURRENTLY GR BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA SEE, OH, DOING THAT REZONING DROVE UP THE PROPERTY, DROVE UP THE VALUE.

UM, EVEN WITHOUT IMPROVEMENTS, WE WANT TO GET IN ON THE INCREASE IN VALUE OF SEVERAL MILLION, YOU KNOW? UM, AND THEN THAT HAS, THAT AFFECTS THAT SPECULATIVE EFFECT OF ALL OF THESE DEVELOPERS COMING IN AND THE EXISTING RESIDENTS, NOT BEING ABLE TO AFFORD THE SERVICES, SEEING THEIR PROPERTY VALUES RISING.

UM, I COULD NEVER, LIKE, I CAN'T BE OKAY WITH THAT.

SO I CAN'T, I CAN'T SUPPORT SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND I REALLY RESPECT, UM, WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BROUGHT TO US.

UM, AND THE FACT THAT THEY'VE SAID THAT 60% MFI IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A COMMUNITY BENEFIT TO THEM AND HAVE SPECIFICALLY TOLD US THAT, UM, THAT V IS NOT, IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO SEE.

UM, LAST THING I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CURRENT ZONING, EVEN IF THEY COULD HAVE, THEY COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT THERE THAT'S, UM, THAT'S ALL MARKET RATE UNITS.

WE DON'T KNOW THAT THE INVESTMENT AND EVERYTHING WILL ACTUALLY COME THROUGH FOR THAT.

LIKE, THEORETICALLY THEY COULDN'T BUILD SOMETHING THERE, BUT IT MIGHT NOT BE WORTH IT TO INVESTORS IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE BMU.

SO WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THAT PERSON AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

WE'RE WE'RE OUT OF TIME.

SO I GUESS THAT'S A, THAT'S IN OPPOSITION OF THE SUBSTITUTION, RIGHT.

I'M JUST TRYING, YEAH.

I WAS TRYING TO BE AN OPPOSITION TO THE APPROVAL IN GENERAL.

SO DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER BUDDY SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE, UH, THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION SPEAKING AGAINST, UH, HE WANTS TO BE A COMMISSIONER SHANE.

YOU KNOW, AND AT THE SAME TIME WE AREN'T DISPLACING ANYBODY.

I CAN SPEAK IN FAVOR.

I MEAN, THIS IS IT, THE WHOLE EAST SIDE IS THERE'S SO MUCH GOING ON AND I WISH, I WISH THERE WAS MORE THAT WE COULD DO.

UM, AND I'M HOPING THAT TONIGHT THAT, YOU KNOW, GOING FROM THE 80 TO 60 W YOU KNOW, IS, WAS A STEP THAT WE WERE ABLE TO HELP MAKE HAPPEN IN SUCH A CRITICAL AREA.

BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE EXISTING ZONING, I MEAN, THEY COULD COME IN AND THEY COULD PUT ALL MARKET RATE AND WE GET NO AFFORDABILITY, WE GET NOTHING.

AND THEN THEY DON'T DO ANY COMMERCIAL EITHER.

AND OFTENTIMES THE COMMERCIALS THERE TO BE ABLE TO CREATE A COMPLETE COMMUNITY, A COMPLETE COMMUNITY WHERE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE CAN COME FOR LOCAL SERVICES AND SUCH VERSUS HAVING TO GET IN A CAR TO DRIVE.

A FORM OF AFFORDABILITY TO IT, YOU KNOW, AND THE OTHER THING THEY COULD DO IS THEY COULD JUST BUILD ALL COMER.

THEY'RE ALL RESIDENTIAL, ALL COMMERCIAL, AND THEN WE GET NOTHING.

WE DON'T GET ANY AFFORDABILITY.

WE DON'T GET MORE HOUSING, WHICH WE DESPERATELY NEED, AND WE DON'T LEVERAGE, UM, WHAT WE HAVE THERE ON MAJOR QUARTERS, YOU KNOW, AS WE LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, OUR, UM, STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN AND WE, WE, WE DESIGNATED CERTAIN AREAS.

WE LOOKED AT THIS, THESE ARE IMPORTANT QUARTERS FOR, FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR TRANSPORTATION.

AND WE SHOULD LEVERAGE HOUSING UPON THAT.

SO IF WE LEFT IT AS IT IS, WE COULD ALSO GET NO HOUSING.

IF WE LEFT IT, YOU KNOW, ADDING A V AT LEAST WE GET BOTH, AND WE, AT LEAST WE GET SOME AFFORDABILITY VERSUS NONE,

[02:55:01]

WE'RE ACTUALLY ADDING, CREATING MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR HOUSING.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION IF WE CAN GO AND VOTE ON THIS, UNLESS SOMEBODY REALLY HAS ADDITIONAL, UH, MORE ABOUT BEING FORWARD AGAINST IT.

SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND REPEAT THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, WHICH IS, I'M SORRY, CAN I QUICKLY SAY ONE THING I'M GOING TO SPEAK HERE TOO, BECAUSE I'M JUST SPEAKING GENERALLY, JUST ALL THIS TO SAY THAT I THINK THE APPLICANT WILL CONSIDER GOING TO 60% AS THEY HAVE VOLUNTARY AGREED TO SERIOUSLY, AND WE'LL CONSIDER THAT AS THEY GO TO COUNCIL.

AND I KNOW THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE AS COMMISSIONERS AND PASS ON TO OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO TELL THEM THAT THAT IS TRULY A CONSIDERATION AS THIS GOES FORWARD.

COMMISSIONER MS. CHANDLER SPEAKING IN FAVOR AGAINST, UM, IN FAVOR.

UM, I AM IN FAVOR, BUT I KIND OF WANTED TO CLARIFY, HAVE A DIFFERENT, A DIFFERENT VIEW TAKE FROM, UM, FROM WHAT WAS PRESENTED, WHICH IS IT WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, WHAT THEIR REASONS FOR OBJECTING ON THE DEVELOPMENT ARE, AND WHAT'S COMING IN, I DO SEE SOME ADVANTAGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMING IN.

AND WHAT I WAS LOOKING TO SEE IS MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING CARE OF INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS SO THAT IT DOESN'T DAMAGE THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THAT IT DOESN'T DAMAGE THE EXISTING RESIDENTS IN TERMS OF WHAT'S GOING UP NEXT DOOR TO THEM.

AND THAT KIND OF THING.

THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO COME UP IN SOME CASES WE HAVE YET TO HEAR TONIGHT.

SO THOSE WERE THINGS THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR IN TERMS OF COMPATIBILITY WITH WHAT'S IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, I KNOW COMMISSIONER COPS, DID YOU SPEAK AT, UH, ON THIS UPSTATE MOTION? I CAN'T RECALL.

I, I JUST, UH, NO, I JUST SECONDED IT.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE, THE, THE COMMISSIONERS THAT SENT ME THIS LEGAL MEMO THAT WAS DONE IN JULY.

UM, AND I JUST WANNA, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, IF FOR SOME REASON, THE TEXT OF THE 60% MFI FOR 10% OF THE UNIT DOES NOT MAKE IT INTO THE RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS WHAT THIS LEGAL MEMO SAYS THAT THAT STAFF INCLUDE THAT LANGUAGE IN THE REPORT PROVIDED TO COUNSEL.

AND I DON'T, I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE PARAMETERS ARE AND WHAT STAFF INCLUDES IN THE REPORT TO COUNCIL, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT OFFICIAL REQUEST TO STAFF.

SO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, WHICH WE'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON, UH, MADE BY, UH, CHAIR SHAW SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COX IS FOR G R M R M U N P TWO, G R M U V N T AS AMENDED, UH, WITH A, UH, WITH SUPPORT FOR, UM, 10% OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS AT 60% MFI AS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT.

SO WITH THAT, DO I, I SEE THOSE IN FAVOR, I'M COUNTING, KEEP THEM UP.

ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, THAT'S EIGHT IN FAVOR.

AND, UM, THOSE OH NINE IN FAVOR AND THOSE AGAINST, AND THOSE THAT ARE ABSTAINING COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

I THINK HE'S MOVED AROUND WHEN, UH, OKAY, SO THAT'S OKAY.

THAT WOULD BE NINE.

THE ONE THAT MO UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSES.

80% MFI MULTI-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY UNITS AT 80% MSI FOR A MINIMUM OF FIVE YEARS.

UH, THANK YOU.

UM, SO NOW LET ME RECALIBRATE, WE'VE GOT OUR NEXT, UH, WE'LL GO AND HAVE STAFF GO AHEAD AND BRIEF US ON B

[B9. Rezoning: C14-2021-0023.SH - Anderson Creek Affordable Housing; District 1]

NINE.

THAT'S THE ANDERSON CREEK AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

GOOD EVENING, HEATHER CHAPMAN FROM HOUSING AND PLANNING.

THIS IS CASE C 14 2021 ZERO ZERO TWO THREE DOT S H ANDERSON CREEK AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THE REQUEST IS TO GO FROM L O C O N P AND R R N P T G R N P A.

THE SWIPE IS ABOUT FOUR AND A QUARTER ACRES STAFF IS SUPPORTING THE REQUESTED REZONING.

AS YOU CAN TELL FROM THE CASE NUMBER, THIS IS A SMART HOUSING PROPOSAL WITH A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE UNITS, WHICH IS 89 UNITS SERVING HOUSEHOLDS AT, OR BELOW

[03:00:01]

AND THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY WILL BE USING THE AFFORDABILITY AND LOCKED TOOL IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THIS SITE.

THE PROPERTY IS ON THE SOFT SIDE OF ANDERSON LANE, THE EASTBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD BETWEEN CAMERON AND ROAD AND US TWO 90 IT'S UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY, UH, MOSTLY ZONED L O C O N P AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY IS R R N P.

IT INCLUDES IT'S ADJACENT TO AND, OR INCLUDES BUTTERMILK BRANCH CREEK AT AND SOME FLOOD PLAIN AND WATER QUALITY BUFFERS IMMEDIATELY.

WEST OF THE ZONING TRACT IS G R N U N P LAND THAT CONTAINS AN EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

FURTHER WEST IS MORE G N P LAND.

UH, AND THEN ALSO THAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED AND THEN A GAS STATION THAT'S C F N P IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE PROPERTY ISN'T IN DEVELOPED G R N P TRACKS.

FURTHER EAST IS G R M E N P MULTIFAMILY GRMP FINANCIAL SERVICES AND A G O N P PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

UH, SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY IS A CORN AUTO HILLS NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH IS PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, BUT ALSO, UM, TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM.

SO IT'S A THREE AND NP.

THE STAFF IS SUPPORTING THE REQUEST, UH, ADDING 89 AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY UNITS TO THE AREA OF FLIPS POLICIES OF COMMISSION AND COUNCILS ENCOURAGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

IT'S NEAR A JOB CENTER AND ACTIVITY CORRIDOR.

UM, IT'S APPROPRIATE WITH CONSIDERATION OF THE OTHER GR SMU AND MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS THAT ARE ALSO LOCATED ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND PROVIDES A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES.

WHEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT THERE IS MULTIFAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM IN THE AREA, UH, THERE IS OPPOSITION SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST, AND I THINK THAT'S ALL FROM ME FOR NOW.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

UH, WE HAVE, UH, APPLICANT VICTORIA, UH, HOTSY UM, START SIX, 10 MEET, AND YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES.

THIS IS VICTORIA HASI WITH THRILLER DESIGN, UH, REPRESENTING THE, UH, DEVELOPER, UH, MCKELL HOUSING PARTNERS.

UM, SO ORIENTING YOU TO THE SITE AND THE SUBJECT TRACKS IS OUTLINED IN BLUE ON THE SOUTH FRONTAGE OF EAST ANDERSON LANE.

AS HEATHER MENTIONED, THE SITE IS 4.2 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED LAND AND ACTUALLY NEVER DEVELOPED PLANS.

SO THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE WILL NOT DISPLACE ANYONE FROM EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS TODAY.

THE SITE IS A QUARTER MILE FROM THE CAMERON ROAD, UH, IMAGINATI, AN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR THAT'S SHOWN IN ORANGE ON THE MAP IN FRONT OF YOU.

AND AS A HALF MILE FROM THE IMAGINE AUSTIN JOB CENTER, WHICH IS PURPLE IT'S ABOUT A MILE FROM THE IMAGINE AUSTIN REGIONAL CENTER, THAT'S SHOWN IN RED TOWARDS THE LEFT SIDE OF THE MAP.

AND THEN THERE ARE VARIOUS CAPITAL METRO BUS STOPS AND ROUTES NEAR THE PROPERTY THAT ARE ALSO SHOWN IN RED.

AS HEATHER MENTIONED, THERE'S SEVERAL SCHOOLS, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE WITHIN A MILE RADIUS OR LESS AT THE SUBJECT SITE.

NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS A ZONING MAP OF THE AREA AND EXISTING ZONING.

ISN'T.

IT IS BASICALLY AN ISLAND IN A SEA OF GR ZONING, WHICH YOU SEE HERE WITH THE PAINT SANDWICH BETWEEN THE RED NEXT NIGHT, MCDOWELL HOUSING PARTNERS CONDUCTED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DUE DILIGENCE AND FEASIBILITY WITH A LOCAL ENGINEERING FIRM TO ARRIVE AT THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

AND THE REQUEST FOR GR ZONING.

THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES CONSISTS OF 89 UNITS, RESTRICTED TO FAMILIES MAKING 50% MFI OR LESS.

UM, THE PROJECT PROPOSES A FIVE TO SIX STORY, BUILDING FIVE STORIES FROM THE HIGHEST GRADE ON THE SITE, WHICH IS CLOSEST TO ANDERSON LANE AND SIX STORIES AT THE LOWEST GRADE, WHICH IS CLOSER TO THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY.

AND THAT WILL ALSO PROVIDE SOME COVERED PARKING.

SO DESIGN IS MINDFUL OF ALL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE SITE, AND THE PROJECT IS SMART CERTIFIED.

THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR TRACK FOR TAX CREDIT FINANCING AT 9%.

AND THE PROJECT WILL APPLY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE AFFORDABILITY AND LAX PROGRAM.

LATER THIS FALL TRAINING HAS BEEN REQUESTED BECAUSE IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

AND WE'LL ALSO ACHIEVE THE HEIGHT OF 67 FEET NEEDED TO MAKE THIS PROJECT WORK.

TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR.

THE COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION

[03:05:01]

AND THE IS THE RESOLUTION IS A COMMITMENT TO MCDONALD'S INTENTION OF SECURING 9% INCOME LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS FOR THE PROJECT.

THE ST.

JOHN'S CORONADO HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SUPPORT, MAINTAINING AND EXPANDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS IN THE PLANNING AREA.

MIGUEL REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN APRIL OFFERED DIALOGUE AND OPPORTUNITIES TO MEET HOWEVER NO RESPONSE OR INVITATION WAS RETURNED TO DO SO.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE HAVE JUST LEARNED THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS CONCERNS OF WHICH VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WE'LL DRAFTS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, BY PLAN, UH, HIGHLIGHTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL BUFFERS IN ORANGE TAKES UP NEARLY A THIRD OF THE SITE.

WELL, THE BUFFERS TAKE UP NEARLY A THIRD OF THE SITE BEFORE YOU, AS THE SITE PLAN FOR 89 UNITS, FIVE TO SIX FLOORS AT 67 FEET IN HEIGHT, 153 PARKING SPACES.

AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS THAT THERE'S CONCERNS FOR UNWANTED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY FOR NO OVERSIGHT OF TRASH BEING THROWN INTO THE CREEK FOR PRIVACY OF THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CREEK, AND ALSO FOR CONCERNS OF PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION OF THE CREEK AREA AS A NATURAL FEATURE.

AND IN FACT, THE PREFERS PROJECT ACTUALLY DRESSES.

ALL OF THESE CONCERNS IN THAT CRIMINAL AND UNWANTED ACTIVITY WILL BE CURED, WILL BE DETERRED BY HAVING OCCUPANCY WITH MANY EYES VERSUS VACANCY WITHOUT WATCHFUL EYES.

UM, ALSO THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE ONSITE 24 HOUR MAINTENANCE AND SECURITY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.

PRIVACY WILL BE ADDRESSED BY CREATING DISTANCE OF AT LEAST 160 FEET BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT AND THE SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH AND LOSS OF MAINTAINED VEGETATION IN THE CREEK AREA THAT CURRENTLY PROVIDES A NATURAL SCREEN.

ALSO, THE PROJECT OFFERS PROTECTION OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND EROSION HAZARD ZONES.

THE SITE IS DESIGNED TO STAY CLEAR OF ALL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE BUFFERS THAT TAKE UP NEARLY A THIRD OF THE LOT AND THE DEVELOPMENT WE'LL BUY IT BY ALL WATER QUALITY AND POTENTIAL REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED BY THE ATLAS 14 REGULATIONS, AND THEREFORE WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE TO FURTHER EROSION OF THE PRECINCTS.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO THE, YOU WERE RENDERINGS WERE PROVIDED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY LETTER AND EMAIL AND DEVELOPMENT IS PUSHED AWAY FROM THE CREEK VISUALIZED BY THE TOP IMAGE, SHOWING TREES BEYOND THE BUILDING, REPRESENTING THE NATURAL VEGETATIVE BUFFER THAT EXISTS TODAY.

THE BOTTOM IMAGE SHOWS THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPOSAL, THE PROPOSED BUILDING WITH THE FIRST LEVEL OF, UM, FIRST LEVEL OFFERING COVERED PARKING IMAGE SHOWS FIVE STORIES ON THE FRONT AND SIX STORIES ON THE BACK.

THE FOLLOWING RENT LIMITS AND INFORMATION ARE CONTEMPLATED FOR THIS, UH, AFFORDABLE PROJECT.

THE PROJECT PROPOSES ONE, TWO AND THREE BEDROOM UNITS, AND MORE THAN 50% OF THOSE UNITS WILL BE AVAILABLE TO FAMILIES WITH INCOMES AT OR BELOW 50% MSI.

90 OF GENUS WE'LL BE AT 30%, 36 OF THOSE UNITS WILL BE AT 50% AND 44 UNITS WILL BE AT 60%.

NEXT SLIDE, THE OFFICE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT CALLS FOR 75% OF THE DESIRED HOUSING UNITS TO BE WITHIN A HALF MILE OF AN IMAGINED AUSTIN CONFERENCES PLANT CORRIDOR.

THIS SITE IS WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF THE CAMERON ROAD, IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR.

AND IT IS WITHIN A HALF MILE OF AN IMAGINATIVE IN JOB CENTER.

THE PROJECT IS AT 89 IS 89 UNITS WITH A MINIMUM AFFORDABILITY PERIOD OF 40 YEARS TO PARTICIPATION IN THE AFFORDABILITY AND LOTS OF PROGRAMS. AND IF AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAN'T GO HERE, WHERE CAN IT GO? TAX CREDIT FINANCING PROCESS IS EXTREMELY COMPETITIVE AND IT RESULTS IN QUALITY DEVELOPMENT THAT PROVIDE SUPPORT TO FAMILIES AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY OFTEN NEEDS MORE QUALITY HOUSING OPTIONS THAT ARE AFFORDABLE.

AND THIS IS THE KIND OF HOUSING THAT WOULD BENEFIT CITY OF AUSTIN AND RESIDENTS THAT NEED HOUSING AND ARE LOWER INCOME RESPECTFULLY ASKED FOR AND BILLABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

AND WITH THAT, UM, LET'S SEE THE ORDER WE HAVE.

I BELIEVE WE HAVE A CHRISTOPHER SCHEER.

HELLO? YES.

I CAN HEAR YOU.

YOU MEAN THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PROJECT.

MY NAME'S CHRIS SHEER, I'M THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER OF MCDONALD'S HOUSING PARTNERS.

AND I'LL BE, I'LL BE RELATIVELY BRIEF HERE.

UM, VICTORIA COVERED A LOT OF MY POINTS.

WE ARE A FAMILY AND SENIOR TRUE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER.

WE HAVE ACTIVE PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UH, CURRENTLY, UM, AS AN, EXCUSE ME, AS WE'VE HEARD IN SOME PRIOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT, AND AS I'M SURE THIS IS A TOPIC THAT'S READILY FRONT AND CENTER, THE CITY HAS A CRITICAL NEED FOR HIGH QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS.

AND, UM, IN FACT, ONE OF THE, UH, WITHIN THE SUMMARY, IT WAS INDICATED THAT A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE UNITS WILL BE AT

[03:10:01]

80% MSI AND BELOW.

UM, AND MS. HAAS DID, UH, CLARIFY, BUT WE ARE COMMITTED, UH, TO A MUCH DEEPER SET ASIDE WITH 100% OF THE UNITS AT, OR BELOW 60% MFI AND, UH, SOME DEEPER INCOME TARGETING BEYOND THAT, BUT THAT'LL BE DEPENDENT ON OUR, UM, ULTIMATE FINANCING.

UM, THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS PERFECTLY SITUATED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

AND IN FACT, THE REASON WE SELECTED THE SITE WAS DATA WITH TY MARKS AND SCORING UNDER THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S NEIGHBORHOOD, HOUSING, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND THEIR SCORING CRITERIA.

UH, FURTHERMORE, IT'S NATURALLY ISOLATED FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND CORONADO HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, THOSE HOMES ARE PURCHASED ON A HILL AND NATURALLY BUFFERED BY BUTTERMILK CREEK, WHERE THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SETBACKS, UH, AS MS HOUSES POINTED OUT.

UM, THE SITE CURRENTLY IT'S A BLIGHTED SITE WITH HOMEWORK ENCAMPMENTS, UM, ALONG THE CREEK.

AND, YOU KNOW, THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD REMEDIATE, UH, THAT, THAT BLIGHT AND, AND HELP TO PROVIDE SOME OPTIONS FOR HOUSING, UM, POTENTIALLY FOR THE HOMELESS AS WELL.

UM, I WANT TO NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ST JOHN COORDINATOR HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT WE, WE FOUND DOES HAVE A GOAL TO INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS WITHIN THE PLAN.

SO, UM, WE, WE HOPE THAT WE CAN GARNER SOME, SOME SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THAT RESPECT.

UH, WE HAVE A COUPLE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD THE CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, AND WE'RE VERY COGNIZANT OF THESE CONCERNS.

UM, AS MS HAAS MENTIONED, UH, WE DO AN EXTENSIVE THOUGHT TO THE MITIGATION AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES WITHIN THE CURRENT DESIGN AND PLANNING.

UM, AND WITH THAT, UM, I WILL CONCLUDE, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND CONSIDERATION IN THIS REZONING REQUEST.

UM, I AM ALSO AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS TO SEE ME.

IS, UH, IS, UH, ON A PEDEA THERE STAR SIX TO MUTE.

HI, GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS ANNA .

I WORK WITH CHRIS HERE.

I'M THE DEVELOPER OF THE SITE OF, UM, THEY HAVE EXPRESSED, WE ARE PROPOSING, UH, AN AFFORDABLE HOUSE IN A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

AND, UM, WE, WE HAVE HEARD THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THAT ARE ON THE SIDE.

UM, BUT, UM, OUR ENGINEERS, CIVIL ENGINEERS HAVE EXTENSIVELY WORK ON REVIEW IN THE SITE AND THEY WILL BE COMPLIANT WITH ALL THE CITY REQUIREMENTS.

UM, THE, WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO DO REDUCE THE DRAIN, THE DETENTION, UH, TO THE POST OF A POST, THE ROLLED OFF FLOW TO THE PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS.

AND WE ARE PREPARED TO DO THAT IN, UM, IN ADDITION TO ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, UH, ALL OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION ORDINANCE, THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, AND, UH, MENTIONED, UM, THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES STATES ABOUT ONE-THIRD OF THE SITE, UM, DOES, UH, UH, A SIGNIFICANT SETBACK THAT WHERE WE'RE RESPECTING AND, UH, TOWARDS THE CREEK.

AND, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE ARE CONCENTRATING A LITTLE BIT MORE TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE SITE, SO WE CAN INCREASE A LITTLE BIT OF HEIGHT.

THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT WE NEED.

WE NEED BASICALLY SIX, SEVEN FEET, THIS THE WAY THE CITY OF ALL A CALCULATES, THE HIDE IT IN A BUILDING THAT IS IN A SLOPE.

THE FRONT IS THEY TAKE THE AVERAGE BETWEEN THE TWO, THE BACK AND THE FRONT.

AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE NEED A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, UM, A LOT, A LITTLE HIGHER BUILDINGS, UH, GO SEE THE RATION.

THAT'S UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

UM, THANK YOU FOR TAKING OUR PROJECT INTO CONSIDERATION.

UH, NOW WE'RE GOING TO START THE SPEAKERS OPPOSE.

WE HAVE, UH, CHERYL TOXIN STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

WHAT IS MY TIME LIMIT RIGHT NOW? COMMISSIONER, IF YOU'RE THE LEAD, UH, PERSON, SPEAKING OF OPPOSE, YOU HAVE, UH, SIX MINUTES.

UH, ANDREW RIVERA AND MS. HEATHER CHASSES, UH, SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A MINIMUM OF 11 INDIVIDUAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ZONING CHANGE.

UM, AS THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND IN RESPECT OF YOUR TIME, I'M GOING TO REPRESENT THE AFFECTED RESIDENTS.

UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A HIGHLIGHTED VERSION OF THE 15 PAGE ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET, UM, WITH MY ITALICIZED R UH, COMMENTS, ADDITIONALLY,

[03:15:01]

UM, BASED ON WHAT I JUST HEARD FROM THE DEVELOPERS, THEY'RE A LITTLE DISINGENUOUS, BUT I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THEIR BEST FOOT FORWARD.

FIRST OF ALL, IT IS UNTRUE THAT, UM, THAT THEY, UH, DID NOT HEAR BACK FROM US.

WE DID ASK FOR, UM, INFORMATION FROM THEM AND INVITED THEM TO A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING OF WHICH THEY DID NOT ATTEND.

UM, THAT PROPERTY IS IN FACT, AN ISLAND INTENTIONALLY.

IT IS INTENTIONALLY AN ISLAND, THE CURRENT, UM, PROPERTIES ON EACH SIDE, THE EAST AND THE WEST ARE IN FACT LIMITED ON CURRENTLY TO A TWO OR SO MULTIFAMILY, UH, UNITS.

THEY TOO ARE, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, TYPE OF UNITS.

THE PROJECT IN INDICATES THAT THEY NEED AT LEAST 67 FEET OF HEIGHT, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT, EVEN WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF ADU.

UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE REQUESTED ZONING REZONING IS NOT CONSISTENT.

IT IS ACTUALLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING, UM, THAT OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES IN THE FACT THAT THOSE ARE IN FACT TWO TO THREE STORY BUILDINGS.

UM, AND SO, UH, CURRENTLY IF, UH, THE DEVELOPERS WANT TO DO SOMETHING AT THAT HEIGHT, THAT WOULD BE DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CONSIDER.

UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UH, BASED ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UM, THERE IS ALREADY AN IMBALANCE OF MULTIFAMILY, YOUTH OF PARTICULAR INTERESTS, UH, OF HIGH PERCENTAGE OF MULTIFAMILY YOUTH WITHIN THE COORDINATOR HEELS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, AREA.

AND THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THE LAND DEDICATED, UM, FOR HOUSING IN OTHER PARTS, NOT ONLY ST JOHN'S, WHICH IS 16%, BUT THE URBAN CORE OF, UH, 11%, UH, CURRENTLY, UH, COORDINATE, UH, HILLS, UH, WE FEEL THAT WE HAVE ACTUALLY GIVEN TO THE AUSTIN COMMITTEE A COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE AN ABUNDANCE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR AREA ALREADY IN COMPARISON TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, WITH HOME VALUES ALONG THE LINES THAT WE HAVE, UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE IS 2% OF OPEN SPACE COMPARED TO 11% OF THE URBAN CORE AND IS SERIOUSLY DEFICIENT IN PARK AND OPEN SPACES WHO ARE NOT A HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NO ZERO.

LET ME SAY IT AGAIN.

0% DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION.

UM, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THERE IS, UH, TABLE NINE THAT DOES REFLECT THAT WE HAVE 1,567 TOTAL UNITS IN THE CORE NATA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD AREA OF THOSE 1,359 OR 86% ARE MULTIFAMILY UNITS.

UM, THIS FACT BASED ON WHAT THE CITY HAS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THIS FACT REVEALS AN IMBALANCE IN RENTER VERSUS HOME OWNERSHIP IN THE CORE NADA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.

ONE OF OUR KEY VISIONS POINTS LOOKS TO CORRECT THE EXISTING IMBALANCE OF HOUSING TYPES MULTI-FAMILY VERSUS SINGLE IN THE PLANNING AREAS.

SO ALTHOUGH THE DEVELOPER DOES QUOTE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THEY ARE DEFINITELY UNDERSTANDABLY SELECTIVELY PUTTING FORTH WHAT THEY WANT YOU ALL TO, BUT THERE IS ALREADY AN IMBALANCE AND WE DON'T WANT TO ADD TO IT.

THE GREENBELT ALONG THE BUTTERMILK CREEK IS ALL WE HAVE.

AND A SIX STORY COMPLEX POWERING OVER THE TREES IS HEARTBREAKING.

IT JUST REALLY IS A, WE WOULD LIKE THE HOME AFFORDABLE STARTER HOMES.

WE WOULD LIKE SMALLER, URBAN TYPE HOMES THAT ARE AFFORDABLE.

AND INTERESTINGLY, THE SAME LAND PLANNERS HAVE APPLIED TO CHANGE ANOTHER PARCEL WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS OF WHICH WE SUPPORT.

WE SUPPORT THAT ONE, THE CITY STAFF'S RECOMMENDED THAT ADDITIONAL HAS SOME CONCERNS AND THAT PROPERTY WOULD BE BETTER SUITED FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT THIS BUILDER HAS ALREADY DISCUSSED WITH YOU.

IN ADDITION, THE ST JOHN'S NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN HAS, UH, HAS MADE A CONSIDERABLE EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONSIDER OTHER, UM, ALL TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL POPULATIONS.

UH, WE WERE, WE ARE TOTALLY AWARE THAT COEXISTENCE ENTAILS COMPROMISE.

THAT'S THE COORDINATOR HILLS WE'VE LED BY EXAMPLE.

WE HAVE MODELED HOW TO BALANCE INTERESTS OF ALL POTENTIAL

[03:20:01]

COMMUNITY MEMBERS, EVEN BEFORE IMAGINE AUSTIN AND OTHER INITIATIVES WERE POPULAR.

UM, THE L O C O N P AND R R N P DESIGNATION FOR THE CURRENT ZONING WAS TO ALLOW FOR GOOD AND SERVICE TYPE DEVELOPMENT.

THAT IS SUFFICIENT.

WE WERE LOOKING FOR SUFFICIENT COMMERCIAL THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN THAT AREA.

SO WE WOULD BE INTERESTED IF THEY WOULD ABIDE BY THAT.

UM, THE, UH, G UH, ADJACENT PROPERTY, COMPLEX SAFETY OF THE BUILDING FOUNDATION CONCERNS.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE MY TIME IS UP, BUT I DO HAVE ADDITIONAL ITEMS IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE.

UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DO WANT TO STRESS THAT EVEN THE WATERSHEDS CITY HAVE ALSO WATERSHED HAS DESIGNATED $5 MILLION IN THEIR FIVE-YEAR CIP BEGINNING THIS YEAR, GOING THROUGH 2025.

AND THEY ARE, IT'S THERE TO ADDRESS THE EROSION CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY.

AND WE WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO TAKE PLACE BEFORE RESIDENTS, MAYBE FOR DEVELOPMENT IS CONSIDERED, I DO BELIEVE MY TIME MAY BE UP.

SO I DO WANT TO RESPECT THE PROCEDURES THAT ARE IN PLACE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, BUT I DO REQUEST THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE IF IT ARISES.

UH, WE WILL, IF QUESTIONS, IF A COMMISSIONER HAS QUESTIONS, WE'LL BRING YOU BACK ON.

SO, UM, NEXT WE HAVE TICKETED ESCAMIA.

YEAH, I CAN HEAR YOU.

ARE YOU THERE? YEAH.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN.

UH, PLEASE GO YOU THREE MINUTES, RIGHT? I'VE LIVED FOR 19 YEARS IN A HOME ALONG BUTTERMILK BRANCH CREEK DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

MY BACKYARD DECK LOOKS ONTO THE BEAUTIFUL CREEK AND BEAUTIFUL TREES BEYOND.

I'M PROBABLY THE MOST DEPRESSED PERSON ON THIS PHONE CALL.

AND WE'LL BE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AT THIS DEVELOPMENT GETS BUILT.

I AM FOR DEVELOPMENT.

HOWEVER, THE SIX STORY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS GROSSLY OUT OF CHARACTER WITH ALL OTHER DEVELOPMENTS, ALONG WITH THE ENTIRETY OF HIGHWAY ONE 83 FROM THE AIRPORT TO MOPAC WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE OFFICE BUILDING AT ONE 83 AND I 35.

AGAIN, THERE'S NOT EVEN A TRUE SINGLE FOUR STORY BUILDING, MUCH LESS SIX STORIES.

THE ONLY TWO BUILDINGS CLOSE IN SIZE TO THIS ARE SIX STORY BUILDING TO THE SIX DOOR.

ONE ARE A THREE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT MLK, AND A THREE TO FOUR STORY CONDO NEAR MONTOPOLIS.

NONE OF THESE BUILDINGS ARE NEAR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

UM, SOON VALUES ARE CERTAIN TO DECLINE DUE TO THE REPLACEMENT OF VIEWS OF TREES WITH LOOKING AT WALLS PORTAL OR AN AUTO HILLS AS A NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S UNIQUE AS MANY OLDER AREAS THAT PUTS IN AUSTIN.

UH, AS A MATTER OF FACT, UH, FORMER MAYOR GUS GARCIA WAS ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS, A SIX STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN OUR BACKYARD.

THERE'S SIMPLY OUT OF CHARACTER OVER HERE.

HAVING LIVED ON THE CREEK FOR 19 YEARS, I'VE SEEN SIGNIFICANT WATER DESTRUCTION.

IT APPEARS THAT A RETAINING WALL IS PROPOSED ONLY A FEW FEET FROM THE WATERLINE.

THE BACKSIDE OF THE CONSTRUCTION SHOULD NOT BE AN EYESORE.

IT WILL BE AN EYESORE FROM WHAT I CAN SEE MORE IMPORTANT, A WALL THAT LIMITS WATER FLOW ONTO THE SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE A CONSEQUENCE, SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN WATER DAMAGE TO THE OPPOSITE BANK, WHICH WILL IN TIME THREATEN THE HOMES ALONG THE WATERWAY WATER EROSION, LESS.

SHE STUDIED THOROUGHLY.

I URGE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE TO SEE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRASH IS BALANCED WITH PRESERVING AUSTIN, GREENBELTS WATERWAYS, AND THE CHARACTER OF AUTO HILLS PRESERVING THE NATURAL WATER RATE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CREEK FOR MIGRATING HERON AND OTHER BIRDS FOR THE PA POSSUMS, RACCOONS, COYOTES, AND FOXES THAT I SEE OVER HERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE NEED TO PRESERVE IT.

UH, SIX STORIES IS JUST TOO HIGH, AND I THINK IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE WATER.

AND, UM, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S TOO MUCH.

UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ALONG.

, UM, ONE, ONE 83 FOR A LONG TIME, I THINK.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SEE.

UH, WE'VE GOT LULU, UH, FRED SWAT.

YES, MAYBE.

I CAN HEAR YOU CONTINUE AT THREE MINUTES.

AND I THINK I WILL PROBABLY BE MORE DEPRESSED THAN DAYS, UM, IS THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE BECAUSE MY DARK DEATH, MY PROPERTY, AND WE'LL BE LOOKING DIRECTLY ACROSS THE CREEK AT A SIX STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX BUILDING.

HI, MY NAME IS LOU PRINCE, MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE AT 76 OH TWO COUPLE OF CO, WHICH IS LITERALLY DIRECTLY ACROSS BUTTERMILK CREEK FROM THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

[03:25:01]

UH, WE ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THIS RESILIENT CASE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT COMPLEX.

UM, AND WE'RE REQUESTING THAT YOU VOTE NO TO THIS APPLICATION FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

ONE SECURITY OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET ACTUAL REASONS AND IN RACE AND ATTEMPT FUNERAL, ALL OF IT SHOULD COME FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY DUE TO ARGUMENTS.

AND ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THAT SINCE OUR HOUSE IS EASILY VISIBLE TO THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE CREEK FROM US, IT'S AN EASY TARGET TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, WHERE THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND RESIDENCE WE HAVE HAD TO HAD, WE'VE HAD TO ADD A HIGH LEVEL OF SECURITY TO OUR HOUSE TO TRY TO PREVENT ANY MORE BREAK IN ATTEMPTS BY PEOPLE THROWING ROCKS THROUGH OUR WINDOWS IN THE BACK OF OUR HOUSE.

OUR CONCERN IS THAT WITH YET ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX BEING BUILT ACROSS THE CREEK, THIS WILL OPEN THIS UP TO THE POSSIBILITY OF EVEN MORE ATTEMPTS TO BREAK INTO OUR HOUSE.

SINCE ANYONE COMING TO THE REAR OF OUR HOUSE IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE ENOUGH CURIOUS TENANTS THAT WILL FEEL THAT THEY CAN CROSS THE CREEK.

AND ONCE THEY DO, THEY'RE AUTOMATICALLY ONTO ALL OF OUR PROPERTIES, THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX, JUST LIKE THE ONE THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, IT WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO PREVENT OR CONTROL ANY OF THEIR TENANTS FROM CROSSING THE CREEK AND COMING ONTO OUR PROPERTY.

ONCE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE BUILT THIS THING, THEY'RE GONE, WE WON'T SEE THEM AGAIN.

AND WE ARE GOING TO BE LEFT WITH HAVING TO DEAL WITH THOSE PROBLEMS, DUMPING FROM THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.

UM, WE HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE TENANTS AND POSSIBLY EVEN THE WORKERS FROM THE CURRENT APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE CREEK, FROM US, BY THROWING THEIR TRASH ONTO THE EMBANKMENT THAT THEN FALLS INTO THE CREEK.

I'VE I SEE, I CAN SEE FROM MY BACKYARD, I SEE CLOTHES AND TRASH BAGS AND FURNITURE AND THINGS.

I EVEN SEE IT.

I EVEN, I EVEN SAW A COUCH ON A BRICK WALL AT ONE POINT IN TIME, BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY CALLS YOU MAKE INTO THE COMPLEX MANAGEMENT.

THEY DO NOTHING TO CLEAN THE MESS UP.

THERE'S ALWAYS SO MUCH TRASH AND CLARA ON THE CREEK.

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EMBANKMENT THAT WE CAN'T EVEN ENJOY OUR BACKYARD OR THE VIEW BECAUSE OF THAT, OUR CONCERN IS THAT THIS WILL CONTINUE WITH YET AN ADDITIONAL MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEX RIGHT NEXT TO THE EXISTING ONE EROSION PROBLEMS. THERE'S A MAJOR EROSION PROBLEM PROBLEM HAPPENING ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CREEK, THE APARTMENT, THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEX, BUILT A RETAINING WALL ON THE OTHER SIDE TO COMPLY AND TRY TO, UH, PREVENT, UM, THE EROSION OF THE EMBANKMENT THAT RETAINING WALL IS GONE.

AND I, THE CITY OF WATER, THE CITY OF AUSTIN WATERSHED DEPARTMENT HERE, I HOPE I HAVE MORE TO MINE.

THERE, THERE ARE A LACK OF PRIVACY ISSUES, AS WELL AS LIGHT POLLUTION THAT WE HAD HAD TO DEAL WITH WITH JUSTICE WITH JUST THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.

THAT'S THERE NOW ADDING A SIX STORY BUILDING APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET FROM US.

IT'S JUST GOING TO CAUSE EVEN MORE PROBLEMS. UM, AS NOT AS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD VICE PRESIDENT SAID, WE HAVE DONE MORE IN SUPPORTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND IT'S ALL AROUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND LIKE THE, THE APPLICANT SAYS, THIS IS THIS ONE LITTLE SPACE IS AN IRON IN A Z IN A RENTED IN, IN, IN A ZONE OF RED.

CAN WE JUST KEEP THAT ONE OURSELVES SO THAT WE CAN ENJOY SOMETHING ABOUT AND HAVE SOME KIND OF GREEN DEBATE? THANK YOU.

WE ARE AT A TIME.

GOING TO ELO, WHICH IS PRIMARILY OFFICE USES AND LESS FOR COMMERCIAL USES.

UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.

I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING A SAFE COMMISSIONER.

COX COULD REBUTTAL.

I AM SO SORRY.

THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR.

UH, THREE MINUTES FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, THANK YOU, COMMISSION, UM, SENSORS.

SO I JUST WANT TO FIRST SAY I DO APOLOGIZE.

I WAS NOT AWARE THAT THERE WAS ANY, UM, INVITATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS TO ATTEND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS.

SO I MAY HAVE MISSPOKEN THE INFORMATION I WAS GIVEN WAS THAT THE OUTREACH HAS BEEN MADE AND NO RESPONSE WAS GIVEN TO ATTEND.

SO IF I, IF I DON'T HAVE THOSE FACTS, CORRECT, I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

AND I WILL GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT.

CAUSE THAT WAS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING.

UM, SO I DO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT FOR THE OTHER CASE, AS MS. THOMPSON WAS COMMENTING ON THAT, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE FOR COMMERCIAL USES.

UM, I MYSELF LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE COMMERCIAL POST BUY.

UM, BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE CURRENT SITE IS

[03:30:01]

BUT THE OTHER HALF OF THAT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, HEARING THAT THERE'S NOT MANY, THE MAPPING OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S IN THE AREA.

AND I, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER THAT THE CITY IS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH MORE HOUSING UNITS WITHOUT FALLING FURTHER INTO THE OUTER LANDS OF OUR CITY.

AND THAT'S ONLY GOING TO BE ACCOMPLISHED IF WE GIVE GREATER ALLOWANCES TO HEIGHT IN AREAS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE.

AND THIS SITE IS ALONG A MAJOR HIGHWAY, UM, THAT CAN, CAN TAKE THE APPROPRIATE LEVELS OF HIKING AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.

THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE FLANKING THIS PROPERTY HAVE GR ZONING AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

AND THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO UP TO 60 UNITS.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT OR 60 FEET, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT TODAY, THAT'S NOT THE WAY THEY ARE, BUT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY FOR THAT IN THE FUTURE.

AND SO I ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD LOCATION TO HAD ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ALONG THIS HIGHWAY, AND WE NEED THIS ADDITIONAL HEIGHT SO THAT WE'RE NOT GAINING UNITS AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF OUR CITY.

THE OTHER ASPECT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND AND HAVE HEARD THE READ THROUGH THE COMMENTS ABOUT CONCERNS FOR SAFETY.

AND, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING IS NOT A DIRECT CORRELATION WITH CRIME ACTIVITY, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS THEIR EXPERIENCE AT THIS POINT IN TIME WITH THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS IN THE AREA.

AND SO I DO WANT TO ALLOW, UH, CHRIS WITH MCDOWELL HOUSING PARTNERS TO TALK MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AS FAR AS OVERSIGHT AND, UH, OF THE PROJECT INTO THE FUTURE.

THEY ARE NOT ABSENTEE.

UM, THEY'RE NOT ABSENTEE YOU, UH, I GUESS LANDLORDS, YOU COULD SAY, BUT I'LL LET HIM SPEAK TO THAT.

AND, UH, I ALSO WANT TO MENTION THAT WHITE POLLUTION IS SOMETHING THAT MAYBE THOSE APARTMENT UNITS THAT ARE THERE NOW WERE DEVELOPED, UH, SOMETIME AGO, SEVERAL DECADES AGO.

AND TODAY'S CODE DOES REQUIRE, UM, ATTENTION TO LIGHT POLLUTION, UM, WITH NEW DEVELOPMENTS.

SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED.

UM, AND, AND THE PRIVACY WILL BE ADDRESSED AGAIN WITH VEGETATION.

AND I, I, WE COULD ALWAYS ASK AND SEE IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY FOR GREATER VEGETATION, UM, BUFFERS ALONG THE CREEK AREA.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL, I WILL FINISH.

AND SO NOW WE'RE, UH, DRIVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONERS, SHEA SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MITCH KELLER.

LET'S GO AND VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

UM, OKAY.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION WANTS TO GO FIRST, UH, COMMISSIONER COX.

JUST REAL QUICK QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

IS THERE, IS THERE A SPECIFIC REASON WHY YOU DIDN'T PURSUE A COMBINATION DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO DO COMMERCIAL RETAIL AT THIS SITE? SO, UM, THE MCDOWELL HOUSING PARTNERS, THEY ARE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER AND THEY DO THEY DEVELOP HOUSING, UM, IN, IN THAT, IN THAT SENSE.

SO THERE'S NOT A DESIRE AS FAR AS I'M AWARE TO TRY TO RETAIL COMPONENTS, UH, IT'S SOMETHING THAT MAYBE THEY COULD POTENTIALLY CONSIDER THAT WOULD BE UP TO THEM.

AND I WOULD LET THEM SPEAK TO THAT.

UM, BUT AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, UM, THE, THE NICE THING TO CONSIDER IS THAT IF FOR SOME REASON, AND MCDOWELL IS ABSOLUTELY COMMITTED TO THIS PROJECT AT THE SITE, BUT IN THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW, WITH GR ZONING, IT DOES OFFER IT STILL MAINTAINS AND OFFERS THE ABILITY FOR A COMMERCIAL COMPONENT, UH, FAR INTO THE FUTURE AND ACTUALLY WOULD OFFER GREATER COMMERCIAL, UM, OPPORTUNITIES THAN THE CURRENT ZONING OF ELO TODAY.

AND, AND, UM, WHERE'S THE NEAREST, UM, FRAN THAT STOPPED, DID THIS DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S PROBABLY IN THE BACKUP, BUT I COULDN'T FIND IT.

THE NEAREST TRANSIT STOP IS A LITTLE LESS THAN HALF A MILE AWAY.

SO THIS IS NOT VERY TRANSIT AFFORDED AREA.

NO, I WAS JUST THAT THE REASON FOR THOSE QUESTIONS IS BECAUSE I, I, YOU KNOW, RIGHT ON ONE 83, BETWEEN 35 AND TWO 90, THAT THERE IS A DARK OF KIND OF A NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL COMMERCIAL.

UM, I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERN.

SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO SEE, UH, KIND OF A PROPOSAL WITH, WITH THAT SORT OF ASPECT.

BUT, UM, BUT ANYWAY, THANK YOU.

[03:35:08]

YOU GUYS CATCH ME HERE.

COMMISSIONER PRAXIS.

YOU'RE BACK.

DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES.

UM, JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT I'M SEEING IN AN EMAIL, UM, UH, COMMITMENT TO 60% MFI.

UM, BUT THEN I ALSO HEARD 80% MFI.

I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE AT 60 OR 80%, SO IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE.

AND CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO SERVE FAMILY FULL FAMILIES AT 60% AND LAST, UM, I STAFF WAS NOT AWARE OF THOSE, UM, MORE DETAILED NUMBERS THAT I GAVE IN THE PRESENTATION.

SO THAT'S WHY, UH, SHE GAVE THEM THE GENERAL 80% MFI, BUT, BUT THIS PROJECT IS PROPOSED AT 60% MFI AND LESS CORRECT.

OH, THAT'S GREAT.

I WAS SEEING THAT THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME WAS AROUND 30,000 FOR THAT AREA, SO THAT'S 60%.

SOUNDS GOOD.

UM, YEAH, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, SHERIFF QUESTION FOR MS. .

CAN YOU PLEASE TELL ME WHAT IS THE, SORT OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE STARTUP AND DEVELOPMENT AT THE BACK OF THE PROJECT AND THE BEING THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF IT? UM, YES.

SO THE, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE, JUST WHERE DEVELOPMENT WOULD START, WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY BE WITH THE PARKING LOT SURFACE, UM, THAT'S THE CLOSEST THING TO THE CREEK, UM, INSTEAD OF THE BUILDING, AND THAT WOULD BE AT LEAST 160 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, SO THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE ACTUAL SPACE OF THE CREEK ITSELF.

UM, SO I CAN'T, I CAN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY HOW MUCH FEED IT IS FROM THE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO THE SOUTH, BUT AT THE VERY LEAST IT'S 160 FEET, UH, AT, AT THE, UH, SHORTEST DISTANCE AND OTHER AREAS ARE LONGER THAN A HUNDRED OR MORE THAN 160 FEET, BUT AT LEAST 160 FEET FROM DEVELOP TO, UM, THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.

DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 160 FEET, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DO THE SURFACE PARKING SPOT, KNOCK TO THE FIRST BUILDING.

SO THE SURFACE, THE DISTANCE IS FROM WHERE THE FIRST AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT WOULD BEGIN, WHICH WOULD BE THE PARKING LOT.

THAT IS, THAT WOULD BE AROUND THE BACKSIDE OF THE BUILDING.

SO, AND THEN, UM, LET ME SEE IF I CAN TRY TO EXPLAIN THIS FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE CREEK RUNS STARTING THERE, YOU WOULD HAVE 160 FEET MOVED NORTH, AND THEN ONCE YOU REACH A HUNDRED, ABOUT 160 FEET, THEN YOU WOULD START TO SEE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARKING LOT AND THEN GO FURTHER NORTH, AND THEN YOU WOULD ACTUALLY SEE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUILDING ITSELF.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES.

I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT BUFFER BETWEEN THE RESIDENCES TO THE SOUTH AND BETWEEN THE ACTUAL APARTMENT ITSELF.

I THINK THAT DEFINITELY HELPS ANSWER SOME OF MY QUESTIONS.

UM, AND THEN I'VE HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, BUT STAFF SPEAK TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS AROUND EVERSION OF THE GREEK.

AND, UM, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN LOOKED AT THIS POINT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT STAFF WILL BE CONSIDERING AND LOOKING AT AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, HEATHER CHAPMAN HOUSING AND PLANNING, ALTHOUGH THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ADDRESS AT TIME OF ZONING.

TIME OF SITE PLAN ENGINEERING, REVIEW DRAINAGE, WATER POLITIES ARE ALL LOOKING AT THOSE THINGS RELATED TO THE RHODESIAN AND ROJAN CONTROL.

AND ALSO DURING A TIME OF CONSTRUCTION, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS TO MINIMIZE ANY ADDITIONAL SOLUTION AT THAT TIME.

AND SO IF I'M HEARING THIS DAILY, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF WILL BE TAKING A LOOK AT AND WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER TO CONSIDER WHAT ARE PROPER RECOMMENDATIONS TO AVOID ANY OF THOSE CONCERNS.

CORRECT? CORRECT.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

UH, HOW THESE PROJECTS ARE TYPICALLY MANAGED AND HOW THEY ENSURE SAFETY FOR THEIR OWN RESIDENTS AND SO FORTH.

AND THEN COMMISSIONER MITCHELL, THANK YOU, CHAIR.

UH, UH, THIS IS FOR, UH, ONE OF THE APPLICANTS.

THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, SOME CONCERNS, UH, ON THE PART OF THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT A DEVELOPER WHO WOULD JUST BUILD AND NOT BE THERE ONCE THE PROJECT WAS BUILT.

AND I THINK MS. HAFFEY, UM, HAD SOME RESPONSE TO THAT, BUT I, AS I UNDERSTAND, WE MAY HAVE, UH, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO ACTIVELY MANAGE THE PROPERTY ON THE LINE.

AND I WONDERED IF THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADDRESS,

[03:40:01]

THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

THIS IS CHRIS SHARE, UH, WITH MCDOWELL HOUSING PARTNERS.

UH, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FOR THE QUESTION.

UM, ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION STORY, I DIRECTLY ANSWER THAT IS THE BUS STOP IS ON CAMERA ROAD.

IT'S IT'S UM, JUST ABOUT EXACTLY 0.2, FIVE QUARTER MILE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SITE.

SO I KNOW WE'VE SAID HALF A MILE.

UH IT'S IN FACT, ONLY A QUARTER OF A MILE, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE, UH, TO THE REGULATORY NATURE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE PRODUCT ITSELF.

THIS IS FUNDED THROUGH THE LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM, WHERE WE HAVE A PRIVATE INVESTOR, GENERALLY, A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION WHO PURCHASES THESE CREDITS, THEIR CREDITS ARE, UM, ARE DELIVERED TO THEM OVER A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS WITH A FIVE-YEAR COMPLIANCE TAIL ON IT.

WE HAVE A LOT OF HOOKS, UM, AND OVERSIGHT ON, UH, IN US OR IN THE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE OPERATIONAL MAINTENANCE AND INTEGRITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

WE HAVE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH, UH, THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS WHO ADMINISTERED THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM ON THE STATE ON BEHALF OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, UM, IN SPECIFIC ASSET LEVEL REQUIREMENTS, UH, WE HAVE AN ONSITE PROPERTY MANAGER, ONSITE MAINTENANCE STAFF.

OUR MANAGERS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THERE 24 HOURS A DAY, BUT WE HAVE A CALL SERVICE FOR MAINTENANCE.

UM, THEY ARE THERE, UH, DURING, AT THE VERY LEAST DURING BUSINESS HOURS, UM, WITH MULTIPLE STAFF MEMBERS IN PLACE, UH, WE HAVE A HUNDRED PERCENT SECURITY CAMERA COVERAGE OF ALL THE PARKING AREAS, ALL THE MAIN POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS.

UM, GENERALLY, YOU KNOW, THESE DAYS IP CAMERA SYSTEMS ARE PRETTY AFFORDABLE.

SO WE HAVE, UH, NEARLY A HUNDRED PERCENT COVERAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT SITE.

UM, IN TERMS OF THE TENANTS THEMSELVES, THERE IS A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF SCRUTINY.

UM, THESE UNITS ARE HIGHLY, HIGHLY SOUGHT AFTER.

AND ALTHOUGH THE RESIDENTS THAT WE SERVE, UM, ARE NOT OF A HIGHER, UH, ECONOMIC STATUS, THEY ALL HAVE EMPLOYMENT HISTORY.

WE DO THOROUGH CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS.

WE, UM, LOOK AT RENTAL HISTORY VERY CLOSELY AND BECAUSE THE UNITS ARE DISCOUNTED TO THE MARKET AT ABOUT 30% TO WHAT YOU WOULD RENT A FACILITY, NOT EVEN HAVE THE SAME QUALITY WITHIN THIS MARKET, JUST AN UNRESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT.

YOU CAN IMAGINE THE DEMAND FOR THESE UNITS.

SO THAT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO REALLY SELECT THE BEST TENANT.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO US BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THE RIFF RAFF THAT GOES ALONG WITH HAVING TO DEAL WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, TENANTS TO CAUSE PROBLEMS, TENANTS TO WILL CREATE DAMAGE TO THE PROPERTY TENANTS WHO WILL VACATE, UM, REGULARLY.

SO WE WANT GOOD TENANTS WHO ARE THERE FOR THE LONG-TERM AND WE DO A VERY THOROUGH JOB OF VETTING OUR TENANTS DIRECTLY.

UH, AGAIN, WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY THROUGH VARIOUS REGULATORY AGREEMENTS, BOTH WITH THE STATE, WITH OUR TAX CREDIT INVESTOR, WITH OUR LENDERS, AND, UM, OFTEN WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AS WE DO PARTNER WITH THEM, UM, ON, UH, SOME FINANCING AND OR THROUGH THE SMART HOUSING PROGRAM.

SO WE HAVE A LOT OF BUY THANKS.

I HATE TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT ON MY TIME IS LIMITED.

UH, I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT CONNECTIVITY.

YOU SAID THE BUS STOP IS A QUARTER MILE AWAY.

UH, ARE YOU, IS THERE A SIDEWALK THAT CONNECTS AND IS THERE ANY BIKE LANE THAT CONNECTS TO THE BUS? THERE'S A SIDEWALK.

I'M NOT SURE IF THAT TRUE.

PLEASE WAIT UNTIL THE COMMISSIONER CALLS YOUR NAME TO ANSWER.

QUESTIONS WAS GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER, UH, SCHNEIDER, UH, UH, I UNDERSTAND SMART DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A CONNECTION TO TRANSIT.

SO IS THERE GOING TO BE A SIDEWALK BUILT OR MAYBE I'M MISTAKEN? SORRY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

THERE'S A SIDEWALK THAT CONNECTS TO THE CAMERON ROAD.

THANKS CHAIR.

UH, COMMISSIONER MOOSE TODDLER.

WE NEED TO EXTEND, UH, YEAH, PROBABLY BE GOOD TO GO AND DO THAT NOW.

AND I DO WANT TO TRY TO GET THE SEVEN ONE, ONE, THREE BURNETT CASE, UH,

[03:45:01]

DONE THIS EVENING.

SO THAT IS THE LAST ONE, UH, CITY 11.

COMMISSIONER MITCH TODDLER.

COMMISSIONER, UH, SEC COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER SAYS EXTEND 11 SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AS ARE.

UH, LET'S SEE YOUR CARDS.

I'M SEEING WE'VE GOT NINE AND NINE IN FAVOR AND ONE IF STATING.

YOU'RE NEXT.

I HAVE SOME STAFF QUESTIONS.

UM, I'M STILL GETTING USED TO ALL MY DOCUMENTS, SO I APOLOGIZE.

UM, CAN SOME BUDDY FROM STAFF, PLEASE TELL ME WHAT HEIGHT THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS THE L O C O N P.

GIVE ME A LITTLE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THAT ZONING CURRENTLY ALLOWS TO BE DEVELOPED IN TERMS OF SETBACKS AND HEIGHTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

HEATHER CHAPMAN HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT L O ALLOWS 40 FEET OR THREE STORIES AND THEN R ALLOWS.

AND THEN, UM, JUST SO I'M GEOGRAPHICALLY CONNECTED HERE, THE RESIDENTS REFERRED, AND THIS IS STILL A STAFF QUESTION.

UM, THE RESIDENTS REFERRED TO THIS CREEK AS BUTTERMILK CREEK.

IS THIS, AM I CORRECT? IS THIS PART OF THE BUTTERMILK CREEK THAT CONNECTS IN TO LITTLE WALNUT CREEK AND THE WALNUT CREEK WATERSHED AREA? I BELIEVE SO.

UM, NOT REALLY INVESTIGATE FURTHER DOWNSTREAM THAT I KNOW OF.

IT IS IN VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THAT.

DO WE HAVE WATERSHED FOLKS AVAILABLE THIS EVENING AT THE MOMENT? NO.

NO, WE DON'T.

UH, I JUST CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, THEN, UH, I GUESS THIS WILL BE A RESIDENT QUESTION FOR ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTS THAT SPOKE.

UM, AND THIS MAY BE SOMETHING WE HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON.

ARE THERE FLOODING PROBLEMS CURRENTLY WITH THIS CREEK? SO I THINK CHERYL THOMPSON WENT THROUGH A LEAD, UH, UH, IN OPPOSITION.

DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM HER? UM, WELL, THERE WERE TWO NEIGHBORS THAT SPOKE THE WHOSE YARDS, UH, BUT, AND WHAT OVERLOOKED THIS AREA.

SO I THINK THEY'RE PROBABLY AT LEAST GEOGRAPHICALLY, THEY'RE CLOSEST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY FLOODING HISTORY TO HOME DAMAGE ALONG THIS CREEK IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

DAMMIT AS WELL AS, UM, IT'S DISAPPOINTING THAT, UH, STAFF WAS NOT ABLE TO TELL YOU THAT YES, BUTTERMILK CREEK DOES ROLL INTO LITTLE WALNUT CREEK AS YOU ALREADY KNOW COMMISSION THERE.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR KNOWING THAT.

AND, UM, YES, THAT'S THE REASON WHY WATERSHED HAS IN FACT PUT IN THEIR CIP $5 MILLION FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS OF FLOODING AND EROSION IS BECAUSE THE CITY OF AUSTIN WATERSHED HAS DETERMINED THAT TO BE A PROBLEM.

WE DID HAVE A PROBLEM, UH, BACK IN 2016, GEOSYNTEC DESIGN AND INNOVATIVE CREEK EMBAYMENTS STABILIZATION, UM, TO SHORE UP BUTTERMILK CREEK AS IT KIND OF FEEDS INTO LITTLE WALNUT.

AND, UH, WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE SAME TYPE OF, OF STABILIZATION, UH, ALONG THE, THE FRONT PART OF THE BEGINNING MOUTH PART OF BUTTERMILK CREEK AND THE CITY WATERSHED HAS INDICATED THAT IT IS IN FACT A CONCERN.

THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE ASKED FOR $5 MILLION TO TAKE CARE OF THE ISSUE.

AND ALL WE'RE SAYING IS UNTIL THAT'S DONE, IT'S JUST REALLY INCORPORATED POSSIBLE FOR US TO CONSIDER DEVELOPMENT OF THE MAGNITUDE THAT MCDONNELL AND THEM ARE TALKING ABOUT, AND THEY ARE INCORRECT.

AND THEY'RE TELLING YOU, IT'S JUST LOOK AT YOUR DOCUMENTS COMMISSIONERS THERE, YOU EVEN IN YOUR DOCUMENTS, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING DOES NOT MATCH WITH WHAT THEY'VE WRITTEN, JUST SAYING THIS IS REPEAT THAT, PLEASE.

I WAS ASKING IF I COULD ALSO ANSWER THE QUESTION.

I STILL HAVE TIME.

IF I STILL HAVE TIME, UM, CHAIR, THEN I'LL ENTERTAIN MORE RESPONSE.

AND THE PIERS ALONG THE DECK ARE THE, THEIR ROJAN ON MY SIDE OF A HOUSE IS SIGNIFICANT AND I CAN NOT GET, I CAN'T EVEN GET A, A FOUNDATION COMPANY TO WORK ON MY HOUSE BECAUSE THEY SAID UNTIL THE EROSION ISSUE IS RESOLVED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CREEK, ESPECIALLY ON MY SIDE, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THEM TO WORK ON IT AND THEY WILL NOT GIVE ME A WARRANTY.

MY HOUSE, MY HOUSE IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT AND PEOPLE.

I HAVE DAMAGE RIGHT NOW.

I'VE BEEN FIGHTING.

I'VE NOTIFIED THE CITY WATERSHIP DEPARTMENT.

I NOTIFIED THEM BACK IN 2014, THAT THAT RETAINING WALL FROM THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS FROM ME HAD BEEN SWEPT AWAY.

THAT WAS STARTING TO ERODE.

I'VE HAD MULTIPLE EMAILS OVER THE YEARS TRYING TO GET HELP FROM THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT BECAUSE NOW MY FOUNDATION

[03:50:01]

I HAVE TOLD THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT, I HAVE ASKED THEM AND THEY'VE COME AND LOOKED AT THAT EROSION FOR THAT PARTICULAR ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CREEK.

WHAT USED TO BE A MAILMAN MEANDERINGS GENTLE SLOPE THAT WENT DOWN TO THE CREEK.

WHEN WE FIRST BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN 2011 IS NO LONG ROOM.

YOU CANNOT WALK DOWN IT, YOU, IT, IT IS.

AND I SENT PICTURES, MULTIPLE PICTURES TO THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT OF ALL OF THE EROSION.

THAT'S GOING ON TO INCLUDE THE TREES, TO INCLUDE THE SIX FOOT FENCE AT THE TOP OF THE CLIP THAT WILL ONE DAY FALL INTO THE CREEK, ALONG WITH THAT BACK BUILDING.

SO IT DIRECTLY AFFECTS MY IT'S AN AND IT'S DIRECTLY AFFECTING MY HOUSE.

NOW THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

THAT'S JUST ONE PROBLEM.

I JUST, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE COMING OVER IS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

AND AGAIN, I DON'T CARE WHAT KIND OF REALLY GOOD PLANS YOU HAVE.

THE CODE, THE DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE SOME HAS, HAS A PROPERTY MANAGER.

I MEAN, THEY DON'T CARE.

I'VE HAD TALKED TO THEM.

I TRIED WORKING WITH THEM.

THEY DON'T RESPOND TO ME AND THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.

AND THERE'S NOT BEEN A WEEK.

ANY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL SOMEONE.

IF THEY'RE LIVING IN YOUR APARTMENT, YOU DO NOT BE, DO, CANNOT HAVE EYES ON THEM 24 SEVEN.

AND WE ARE PROOF POSITIVE THAT PEOPLE ARE WE'LL CROSS THE CREEK AND TRY TO BREAK IN BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE IT TO OUR HOME.

SEVERAL TIMES I'VE HAD TO LEAVE WORK BECAUSE I GET CALLS FROM THE COP BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SOME ACTIVITY ON THE BACK OF MY HAND CSA.

I THINK WE'RE DEVIATING A BIT FROM THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED.

UM, WHAT I DO WANT TO ASK, UM, UM, MR. RIVERA IS ASKING, UM, THE SPEAKER TO, UH, GET WITH HIM, UH, SO HE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH WATERSHED CONCERNING THE FLOODING ISSUE SPICA.

SO, UM, IF YOU CAN CALL MR. RIVERA, UH, LATER THIS WEEK, HE WILL ASSIST YOU IN GETTING WITH THE RIGHT WATERSHED, UM, STAFF, UH, THE LAST WEEK WE SPOKE TO FLOODING ISSUES.

YES, YES.

YOUR ISSUE IF YOU'LL CONTACT MR. RIVERA AND OUR PLANNING COMMISSION.

WELL, WE'LL TRY TO MEET THAT FOR YOU.

MA'AM I HAVE, I'M SORRY.

WE'RE AT A TIME ON THE LAST, UH, COMMISSIONER'S TIME.

SO WE NEED TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER COMMISSIONER WITH QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER SHEA.

OF THIS DEVELOPMENT TO FIX THE OLD INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT THIS DEVELOPMENT CAN CERTAINLY HELP TO PUT IN NEW INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL, THAT WILL EVENTUALLY CONTRIBUTE TO A MUCH GREATER SYSTEM IN THE FUTURE.

SO I WANTED, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND A LOT OF TECHNICAL STUFF THAT HAD COME THROUGH AND A LOT OF RESPONSE FROM THE RESIDENTS THAT I KIND OF WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT ON A LOT OF THESE ISSUES.

MAYBE THEY COULD SHED SOME LIGHT ON THINGS.

SO, UM, MAYBE IF THE APPLICANT SIDE COULD KIND OF ALSO KIND OF CHIME IN, UM, YES.

SO THIS IS VICTORIA WITH RIVER DESIGN.

UM, I UNDERSTAND, UM, I'M HEARING AND I'VE SEEN, UM, THE ISSUES DEALING WITH AVERSION AT THE CREEK.

AND, UH, WHEN I CALL ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ISSUES THAT HAVE COME ABOUT BECAUSE OF VERY OLD INFRASTRUCTURE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE OR NON-EXISTENT INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE THING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT ABOUT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS THAT THE CODE TODAY IS MUCH, MUCH MORE STRINGENT, UM, MUCH MORE, UM, RESTRICTIVE, UM, AND REQUIRING A LOT MORE SAFETY FEATURES, SO TO SPEAK THEN ANY CODE THAT EXISTED 30, 40, 50 YEARS AGO.

SO, YEAH, I'M SURE IT IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE INFRASTRUCTURE ALL OVER CITY IS, IS FAILING BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AND KEPT UP WITH OVER THE DECADES, BUT THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BRING INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS NEEDED AND THE CITY WILL NOT ALLOW ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S GOING TO MAKE AN ISSUE WORSE.

AGAIN, THIS DEVELOPMENT IS BACKED AWAY FROM THE CREEK BY MORE THAN 160 FEET.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, THEY WILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY AND WE'LL HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE AND BUILD THE STORMWATER CALL THE STORM WATER DETENTION AND, AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS SO THAT IT DOESN'T NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CREEK.

SO, YOU KNOW, I DO HEAR WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SAYING, AND I AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE HAVING WITH THE FLOODING AND THE CREEK EROSION OR THE, THE BANK EROSION.

UM, BUT I DO, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY

[03:55:01]

UM, IT WILL, IT WILL TAKE CARE OF ITSELF.

SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, CHRISTINA SHEA.

NO, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF, I MEAN, MAIN THING I WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THAT YOU MENTIONED THE BUFFER AND THAT SOME DEVELOPMENT WAS BUILT MUCH, YOU KNOW, LIKE PROBABLY WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.

UM, WHEREAS YOU'RE COMPLETELY STAYING, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH THE NEW, YOU KNOW, BUFFERS THAT ARE REQUIRED AND EASEMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED.

I MEAN, UM, I KNOW FROM MY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAD TO STAY QUITE A WAYS AWAY AROUND THAT, YOU KNOW, AWAY FROM THAT, I'M SEEING SO MANY OTHER OLDER DEVELOPMENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, GOT TO PUT IT WITHIN THOSE CRITICAL AREAS.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE SEE THE FAILING, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT BE RESIDENTIAL HOMES OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE OLDEN TIMES.

I MEAN, THEY, THEY, THEY BUILT IN THAT AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SEEING FAILING.

BUT YEAH, I MEAN, I CAN DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, CONFIRM THAT, YOU KNOW, THE NEW REGULATIONS ARE EXTREMELY MUCH MORE STRICT AND THE BUFFERS ARE MUCH LARGER.

SO THANK YOU.

SO, UH, DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MR. WITH QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, UH, PRACTICE.

UM, WE WOULD HAVE MORE LAND TO HAVE MORE SURFACE PARKING, TO ALLOW US TO PROVIDE, UM, UH, LARGER BUILDINGS, SO CURRENT AND GO TO FOUR STORIES FROM THIRD GRADE, BUT THAT'S JUST NOT VIABLE ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE.

I HOPE MY INTERNET DOESN'T FAIL ME.

I'M SITTING FOR A FRIEND.

SO ONE SECOND, JUST TO MAKE ROOM FOR OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

CAUSE I THINK YOU'VE GONE.

UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER THAT HAS QUESTIONED BEFORE WE OFFER AT THIS TIME, THE COMMISSIONER PROCESS? UH, LET ME, LET'S GO TO BUY CERTAIN APPLE AND WE'LL STILL HAVE A SPOT AVAILABLE IF, IF IT'S AVAILABLE.

OKAY, THANKS.

SO, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS MS. THOMPSON MENTIONED THAT THE TWO TO THREE STORY HEIGHT WOULD BE XX ACCEPTABLE, UM, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FROM MS. HASI, I'M CURIOUS, UM, HOW, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY CUTTING THE HEIGHT BY HALF AFFECTS THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE BUILDING.

I'LL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER.

I MAY ASK CHRIS TO CHIME IN, BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT, IT MEANS A BUNCH OF UNITS, BUNCH OF UNITS, A BUNCH OF UNITS WILL GO AWAY.

UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE A THIRD OF THIS SITE IS TAKEN UP BY CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE BUFFERS.

THAT'S THE THIRD OF THE SITE THAT ISN'T AVAILABLE TO DEVELOPMENT AND IS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF THAT WERE NOT THE CASE, WE COULD SPREAD THE DEVELOPMENT OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND, AND NOT HAVE AS MUCH HEIGHT.

BUT THE REALITY IS IS THAT WE HAVE THOSE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THAT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD BE MAINTAINED AND PRESERVED.

AND, YOU KNOW, WITH THE AMOUNT OF, OF HOUSING THAT'S NEEDED.

AND THE FACT THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ALONG, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FRONTAGE OF A, A MAJOR HIGHWAY, UM, YOU KNOW, FIVE, FIVE STORIES IS, IS BASICALLY WHAT IS, IT'S ONE STORY THAT'S SUB SURFACE AND FIVE STORIES THAT ARE AT GRADE.

SO, UM, AND I'LL LET CHRISTIE ADD CHRIS, ARE YOU THERE? I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WENT IN, ADD ONTO IT.

YEAH, I WAS JUST, THANK YOU.

SORRY ABOUT THAT.

I WAS JUST TRYING TO MUTE AND THEN UNMUTE AND FIGURE THAT OUT.

UM, VICTORIA, I THINK HIT, HIT THE POINT THAT THIS, IT, WE KEEP HEARING SIX STORIES, BUT REALLY FIVE STORIES FROM, FROM THE GRADE.

YOU CAN SEE THAT WITHIN THE RENDER, UH, IMAGE OF THE BUILDING WITHIN THE PACKAGES, UM, WE PLAY WITH, UH, INTO THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE, WHICH IS A NICE FEATURE TO HAVE SECURED COVERED PARKING UNDER THE BUILDING.

SO EFFECTIVELY WE HAVE ONE SUB SURFACE LEVEL KIND OF OPENS OUT LIKE A WALKOUT BASEMENT, UM, AND FIVE RESIDENTIAL LEVELS ABOVE THAT.

SO IT'S, IT'S NOT SIX STORIES FROM GRADE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE HEIGHT OF THE HOMES THAT ARE PERCHED UPON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE CREEK, UH, THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE IN GRADE THERE AS WELL.

AND THERE'S A MAJOR GREENBELT THAT WILL BE MAINTAINED TO DUE TO THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE BONKERS.

WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO BUILD ANY BUILDING NOR PARKING, NOR ANY IMPROVEMENT TO ADD ANY IMPERVIOUS COVER TO THAT AREA.

SO WHAT YOU HAVE THERE IS WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET.

THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THAT BUFFER AREA WHATSOEVER.

SO I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE GREENBELT WILL, WILL, WILL LARGELY REMAIN INTACT, UM, UNTIL YOU GET OUT OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE BUFFERS FROM A FINANCING PERSPECTIVE, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE BUFFERS, UH, WE COULD WORK WITHIN THEM, BUT THAT'S A VERY STRICT, UM, PROTOCOL.

THERE'S NOT THEIR ANSWERS GRANTED TO MY KNOWLEDGE IN THAT, IN THAT RESPECT,

[04:00:01]

AND THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, LARGE REASON WE'RE USING THE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED BECAUSE INCENTIVE AS WAS, YOU KNOW, APPROVED BY ORDINANCE, UH, BY THE CITY COUNCIL, UM, HAS AFFORDED THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT INCREASE.

AND SO WE, WE WANTED TO UTILIZE AN INCENTIVE THAT WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S BEEN SUPPORTED BY THE CITY.

SO REAL QUICK, UH, COMMISSIONER PRACTICES, BEFORE I LET YOU GO, JUST ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER HAVE A QUESTION AND THAT'LL BE EIGHT.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

COMMISSIONER PRACTICES.

SO YOU CAN TAKE THE LAST SLOT.

AND, UM, THIS IS SORT OF A COMMENT IN REFERENCE TO SOME LANGUAGE FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT IT'LL END UP BEING A QUESTION FOR STUFF.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE WORKED WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO WERE ILLEGALLY EVICTED DESPITE HIM, THEM AND PROTECTIONS, AND ENDED UP LIVING IN ENCAMPMENTS.

SOME THAT ARE CLOSE TO WHERE I LIVE AND MY LOW INCOME APARTMENT COMPLEX.

UM, AND SO THERE WAS A MENTION OF LIKE REMOVING BLIGHT, UM, AND REFERRING TO ON HOUSE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, UM, CAMPING AT THE SITE AS BLIGHT.

UM, AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO A REFERENCE TO, UM, REALLY SCREENING TENANTS.

AND SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF, OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS THERE AND REFERRING TO SOME TENANTS AS RIFFRAFF.

AND I'VE, I'VE SEEN HOW LIKE PUNITIVE MEASURES TOWARDS TENANTS, UM, WHO ARE THEMSELVES OFTEN VICTIMS OF CRIME.

AND THESE OTHER ISSUES, UM, REALLY, REALLY AFFECT PEOPLE IN DEEP WAYS.

UM, I SPOKE WITH A COMMUNITY MEMBER TODAY WHO WAS GOING TO BE EVICTED BECAUSE SHE IS A VICTIM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND HER ABUSER WAS COMING IN AND CREATING ALL THESE PROBLEMS. SO, UM, AND THE PROPERTY MANAGER TRIED TO EVICT HER, BUT BASICALLY ALL THAT IS TO STAY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, UM, WE HAVE THESE DIFFERENT CONDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SENATE HILLS.

UM, THAT WAS LIKE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF OUTSIDE OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS CAN, UM, CAN SIGN UP TO BE AT THE PARK.

SO I'M WONDERING WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE OUR LIMITS IN TERMS OF THE CONDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS WE CAN HAVE FOR THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE FUTURE TENANTS WITH A LIST OF LIKE ADVOCACY RESOURCES AND SERVICES, OR HAVE SOME KIND OF MEDIATION PROCESS SHOULD, UM, SHOULD ANY OF THESE KINDS OF ISSUES COME UP? UM, SO YEAH.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS EVEN WITHIN OUR SCOPE OF SOMETHING WE CAN INCLUDE AS A REQUIREMENT? WELL, I'LL, WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF, BUT I THINK THE ANSWER IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE NO, BUT GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

STAFF RESPOND.

HEATHER CHAPMAN HOUSING PLANNING.

THAT IS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE ZONING, THE REASON COMING DAYS ISSUES FOR APRIL TO BE DESCRIBED ON THE OTHER CASE, IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, WHICH IS A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THE LINE WHEN WE KNOW THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE PERIMETERS PHYSICS.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE, UM, WHERE THE LINE IS DRAWN BETWEEN THE CONDITION WE HAD EARLIER OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS CAN SIGN UP TO BE AT THE PARK OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES VERSUS, BUT, UM, MAYBE I JUST NEED TO LOOK INTO IT MORE AND ASK MORE QUESTIONS LATER, BUT YEAH, THAT'S, THOSE ARE SOME OF MY CONCERNS, I GUESS THERE'S NOT A WAY TO ADDRESS THEM IN THIS CONTEXT.

UH, GOOD POINTS TO MAKE THOUGH.

UM, SO WITH THAT, WE'RE DONE WITH OUR QUESTIONS AND, UM, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER MICHELLE ARE, SO YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? UM, I FORGOT WHERE WE WERE IN THE ORDER OF THINGS.

UH, COMMISSIONER COX, DO WE HAVE TO CLOSE THE HEARING? OKAY.

OH, I, OH GOSH.

DID I THOUGHT WE ALREADY DID THAT? I'M PRETTY SURE.

YEP.

TELL ME IF I'M WRONG.

I'M USUALLY THE ONE THAT FORGETS, BUT NO, I THINK, I THINK DID CLOSE.

I THINK YOU MADE THE MOTION TO CLOSE.

YEP.

THINGS THAT THEY WANT TO REALLY APPRECIATE LOOKING AT THIS LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY AND THE EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO REALLY ENSURE THAT WE'RE GETTING A HUNDRED PERCENT OF OUR BOOKS AND IT'S AT 60% MFI AND LOWER.

SO LET'S, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD.

AND, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH A MOTION.

PUNISHER IS OUR THANK YOU CHAIR.

AND WE'LL STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO GO WITH THE APPLICANT, REQUEST THAT A SECOND.

I SEE COMMISSIONER SIDER.

I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.

I JUST WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I GUESS A FEW

[04:05:01]

AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND, UM, THE CRITICAL WAY IN WHICH THE DOCSTAR PROCESS WORKS, WHICH DOES LIMIT, UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T NOT TAKE ACTION TIME, IT DOES LIMIT THE WAY THOSE APPLICATIONS GO THROUGH AND THE ABILITY FOR OUR CITY TO GAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UM, I DO WANT TO SAY, I ALSO APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I, YOU KNOW, HEARING THE BUFFER FROM THE HOMES THEMSELVES AND THE GRIEVANCE, SO THAT DISTANCE, AT LEAST SOME OF THOSE FEARS AND THAT I'M HEARING QUITE CLEARLY FROM OUR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT THAT THEY WILL BE LOOKING AT SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND THE CONCERNS AROUND THE CREEK REALLY SPECIFICALLY, AND IN A ROBUST WAY AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, IF LEADERS STATE.

SO HANG THAT, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE IN SOME WAY ANSWERS TO THOSE CONCERNS.

AND AT THE SAME TIME, I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THANK YOU ALL.

SO, UH, SPEAKERS AGAINST, UM, LET'S START THERE.

WHOSE TEARS AGAINST COMMISSIONER COPPS.

YOU SPEAKING AGAIN.

I APOLOGIZE.

IT SEEMS TO GO TO THIS, THIS MERRY-GO-ROUND THE TIME CAN I OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? NO, NO SUBSTITUTE FOR A SUBSTITUTE.

I, I OFFER A SUBSTITUTE, UM, YOU SUPPORT STAFF'S REQUEST FOR REZONING TO G R M P WITH THE SAME EXACT LANGUAGE THAT WE USE LAST TIME SUPPORTING THE 60% MFI AS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT, SIT IN THE APPLICANT, TELL US THAT 60% MFI WAS THERE WITH WHAT THEY WERE GOING IN FOR.

SO YOU WANT TO ADD LANGUAGE SUPPORTING THE APPLICANTS, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, RIGHT.

EVERYTHING THAT EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE IN OUR BACKUPS SAYS 80%.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COUNCIL'S BACKUP IS.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE PUT IN THERE THE 60% THAT THE APPLICANT OFFERS.

SO IT'S STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN AND A PC RECOMMEND US PC SUPPORT OF THE, SAY IT AGAIN.

WHAT ARE THEY OFFERING IT'S UM, THAT WAS OR BETTER, YES.

AT 50% OR BETTER AT 60% MFI.

UM, YES, ESPECIALLY IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE AND 60% BELOW MFI.

AND I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IF THEY'RE BLIND FOR THE LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT, THE DOCS DOES NOT LET YOU EXCEED 60% UNLESS THERE'S AN ALLOWANCE FOR INCOME AVERAGE.

SO, OKAY.

TELL ME WHERE YOU GUYS ARE.

PERCENT 60% MFI OR BELOW FORMULA.

COMMISSIONER, WHO'S YOUR TODDLER.

A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE UNITS AT 50% MFI OR BELOW.

UH, SO DID WE GET A SECOND ON THAT ONE? UM, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER IS R SO IT'S IT'S OKAY.

WE'LL HAVE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, MR. FOX.

SO, UH, NO, I, I, I THINK IT'S SELF-EXPLANATORY RIGHT.

ARE WE READY TO VOTE ON THIS ONE? OKAY.

YOU, YOU HAVE A, CAN WE SPEAK AGAINST, UH, YOU CAN, YES.

IF YOU, I WAS HOPING THAT WE COULD MOVE ON, BUT IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK AGAINST, GO AHEAD.

I'LL MAKE IT QUICK BECAUSE IT'S AN EXPLANATION.

I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT.

UM, AND I, I LIKE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, I'M, I'M GOING TO BE AGAINST, BECAUSE I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE HERE.

AND WHILE THAT MAY NOT BE THE FAULT OF THE APPLICANT, I THINK ALLOWING THAT TO CONTINUE TO WASH DOWN THE RIVER, IF YOU WILL, IS A MISTAKE.

RIGHT.

IT'S A FAIR QUESTION.

FAIR QUESTION.

BECAUSE NO, WHAT DEVELOPMENT GOES IN THEN, AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION ON WHAT COULD ALREADY GO THERE.

AND SO I'M TWIXT IN TWEEN ON IT, BUT IT'S MY WAY OF CALLING ATTENTION TO THIS.

CAUSE I UNDERSTAND BASED ON THE CURRENT ZONING THAT YOU COULD GO TO 40 FEET, MS. CHAFING ANSWERED THAT TO ME AND THE SAME CRITICAL WATER STRUCTURE AND SETBACKS WOULD APPLY.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO CALL OUT BECAUSE I HAVE THE FEELING THIS IS GOING TO PASS ANYWAY.

UM, BUT I WANT TO CALL OUT THAT I'M NOT HAPPY WITH THIS OVERLOOKING ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE BROUGHT TO THE CITY'S ATTENTION.

THAT'S NOT GOING ADDRESSED.

UM, THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM, AND THIS IS A PROBLEM FOR THIS WATERWAY AND I AM AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM.

AND SO I'M, THAT'S I JUST DRAWING ATTENTION TO THAT.

AND IT'S NOT ABOUT THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE OR THE PROJECT.

SO I DON'T THINK I'M JEOPARDIZING ITS POSSIBILITY, BUT THAT'S MY CONCERN.

[04:10:02]

ANY MORE SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST.

SO I'M GOING TO REPEAT THE SUBSTITUTE, UH, MOTION IT'S, UH, MADE BY MR. COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ZAR, HIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AND THEY NOTE SUPPORTING THE APPLICANT, UH, COMMITMENT TO A A HUNDRED PERCENT, UH, OF THE UNITS BEING AT 60% MFI OR BELOW.

AND SO IF WE CAN GO TO SAY, SEE THOSE THAT ARE FAVOR, UH, GO AND VOTE ONE.

SO WE HAVE NINE THOSE, UH, AGAINST ONE AND ZERO ABSTAINING.

THAT MOTION PASSES 91.

UH, WE ARE AT, UH, 10 15, UM, AND, UH, WE HAVE OUR LAST PUBLIC HEARING.

I BELIEVE THAT THE EVENING.

AND, UH, LET ME JUST QUEUE THIS UP.

UH, BUT THIS IS THREE

[Items B11 - B13]

CASES.

THIS IS A, B 11, B 12, AND B 13 INVOLVING THE PROPERTY AT SEVEN ONE ONE THREE BURNETT ROAD.

AND WE'LL LET STAFF GO AHEAD AND GET US A PRESENTATION ON ALL THREE OF THESE CASES.

WE MIGHT HAVE TO EXTEND.

WE JUST, WITH THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS I'M SEEING, YOU'RE SIGNED UP REALLY DOING, UM, YES, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MINUTE LIMIT.

THESE FOLKS, I'LL ALL HAVE A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, THEIR REAL TIME.

SO, UM, DO WE WANT HIM TO GO STAND NOW OR, OR WAIT A LITTLE WHILE, SHOULD WE GO INTO STAND 1130? DO I HEAR A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND TO 11 MOTION.

CLAIRE HEMPHILL.

WE'LL DO 1130 SECOND VICE COMMISSIONER COX.

UM, WE'VE GOT, UH, THAT'S ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX.

AND, UM, YEAH, I THINK THAT'S ALL WE GOT, SO THAT MOTION FAILS.

SO REALIZE, JUST WANT TO PUT IT OUT THERE IF WE DON'T FINISH THE SIGN AND WE HAVE TO COME FOR A SPECIAL MEETINGS, JUST SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER IT'S TAKE IT UP NOW OR LEAVE IT, OR WE CAN WAIT TO TRY TO POSTPONE LATER.

COMMISSIONER COX, YOU HAVE A QUESTION WITH THAT CLARIFICATION.

I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND TO 1115.

DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR, I FACED COMMISSIONER SNYDER.

SECOND SET.

UH, LET'S GIVE THAT A SHOT.

THAT'S THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

WE WILL MOVE ON WITH THAT.

WE'LL TRY TO GET THIS DONE IN LESS THAN AN HOUR.

UH, WITH STAFF, PLEASE GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THE THREE, UH, THREE ITEMS PLEASE.

UH, STAFF, ARE YOU THERE, SHERIFF? WE'LL START WITH MARK GRANT ON MINE.

I'M HERE.

I WONDERED IF MAUREEN WANTED TO KICK IT OFF WITH THE NPA CASE.

WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT TO GO IN.

THAT'S FINE, BUT LET'S UH, LET'S GET STARTED PLEASE.

NOT HEARING MARINO.

HAVE WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION.

UH, GOOD EVENING CARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

MARK GRAHAM IS ONLY A CASE MANAGER WITH HOUSING AND PLANNING.

THIS CASE IS, UH, THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO CASES THAT I'M HANDLING.

ONE IS THE REZONING CASE C 14 2021 ZERO ZERO FOUR FOUR.

THE SECOND CASE IS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT TERMINATION CASE, C 14 SEVEN TWO ZERO THREE TWO RCT FOR SEVEN, 13 AND SEVEN 15 BURNETT ROAD, CURRENT ZONING ON THE PROPERTY.

UM, TWO VARIATIONS ON C O N P.

THE CS ONE WAS FOR BASICALLY A COCKTAIL LOUNGE.

UM, THE CEO'S COME FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

THE BASE ZONING AROUND THAT FOOTPRINT ZONING WAS CS.

THE BACK PART OF THE PARCEL IS ZONED ELLO OFFICE WITH THE COM P THE OFFICE PORTION WAS THERE TO BUFFER, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, SPECIFICALLY THE HARDY CIRCLE AREA THERE.

UH, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS FOR MS. C O N T.

THE CEO IN THIS CASE WOULD BE DIFFERENT.

UM, THE CEO THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS JUST A 20 FOOT BUFFER, A 20 FOOT SETBACK ON THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.

THE EMF SIX IS THE APPROPRIATE ZONE FOR THE PROPOSED 330 RESIDENCES THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD ON THE PROPERTY PRIMARILY BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THEM TO THINGS THAT THEY WOULDN'T

[04:15:01]

ONE IS IT GIVES THEM SOME ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO WORK WITH.

SECOND IS A FLOOR RATIO.

ACTUALLY THE THIRD ONE IS IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A SPECIFIC AREA PER UNIT.

SO I'VE ALREADY INTRODUCED THE IDEA THAT THE APP IS RECOMMENDING SOMETHING LESS INTENSE.

UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING IN QI, AND THIS ONLY WOULD PERMIT BUILDINGS TAKING 60 FEET IN HEIGHT.

SAME AS THE CURRENT ZONING, THE METAPHOR WOULD PERMIT, UM, CONSIDERABLY FEWER BUILDINGS.

HE WOULD GET APPROXIMATELY 191 BEDROOM UNITS ON THE SIDE, AS OPPOSED TO THE 330 UNITS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT.

UM, AND A LITTLE BIT MORE IF YOU DID EFFICIENCIES A LITTLE BIT LESS, IF YOU DID TWO PLUS BEDROOMS, BUT THAT'S THE WAY ML FOUR ZONING WORKS, UH, MFR LIMITS THE FAR TO 0.7 TO FIVE.

AND, UM, THAT, THAT TOGETHER WITH THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS THAT APPLY EITHER WAY, MIKE, FOR THE RE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU COULD YIELD ON THE PROPERTY, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS CONSISTENT WITH, UH, THE MFR RECOMMENDATION, BASICALLY THAT THAT DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW DENSITIES OF 36 TO 54 UNITS, AN ACRE, DEPENDING ON THE UNIT SIZE AND IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR MODERATE HIGH DENSITY, HOUSING, AND CENTRALLY LOCATED AREAS, SUPPORTING TRANSPORTATION IN COMMERCIAL FACILITIES, UH, BURNETT ROAD IS A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR.

UM, METRO RAPID, UH, PROVIDE SERVICE THERE AND THEIR, UH, BUS STOPS NEARBY.

UM, THE SECOND WAS THE PROPOSED ZONING SHOULD SATISFY A REAL PUBLIC NEED.

UM, IT'S BEEN MENTIONED THIS EVENING SEVERAL TIMES.

THERE'S AN ONGOING NEED FOR HOUSING IN AUSTIN.

UM, AND ALSO FOR HOUSING VARIETY AND, AND HOUSING AFFORDABILITY THAT WE'VE MENTIONED.

UM, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS SOME AFFORDABILITY THAT THEY HAVE, UM, OFFERED TO PROVIDE IN THEIR PROPOSAL, UH, THAT WE CAN'T REQUIRE.

UM, YOU MAY WANT TO INQUIRE ABOUT THAT.

UH, THE THIRD FOR OUR MFR PROPOSALS, ZONING CHAMBERS SHOULD PROMOTE COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT AND NEARBY USES.

UM, COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ARE SPECIFICALLY MEANT FOR THAT PURPOSE.

THEY STEP THE BUILDINGS DOWN TOWARDS SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING.

THEY ALSO STEP THE BUILDINGS BACK, UH, AWAY FROM THAT, THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE HOUSE OR THE, UH, THE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING WOULD NOT BE ANY SMALLER THAN THE HOUSES.

IT COULD BE 30 FEET, 25 FEET BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND, UM, GET TO 40 FEET AT A HUNDRED FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO, UM, STAFFINGS THAT, UH, THE MFR PROVIDES THAT COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT AND NEARBY USES.

UM, WE DID RECEIVE, UM, A LATE NIGHT JUST TODAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, EXPECT TO HEAR FROM TWO NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, ALLENDALE HAS PROVIDED A LETTER, BUT, UH, THIS IS ACTUALLY IN THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THE LETTER WE GOT WAS THAT THEY DIDN'T COME TO UNANIMOUS, UM, OPINION, WHICH IS WHAT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD REQUIRES.

SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT WROTE A LETTER THAT THEY HAVE BEEN IN NEGOTIATIONS, AND HE ADVISED US THAT THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE FOR A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WOULD LIMIT THE HEIGHT TO BE NOT HIGHER THAN 75 FEET FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL.

UH, THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF PRESENTATION.

UM, SO NOW WE HAVE THE APPLICANT.

THE SIX MINUTES THAT MICHAEL ALDINE.

PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHEN THE POWERPOINTS UP AND THEN I'LL START WHEN YOU, LET ME KNOW, YOU HAVE YOUR INTRO PAGE IS UP AND NOW WE'RE ONTO THE SECOND PAGE OVERVIEW.

UH, SO GO BACK TO THE TITLE PAGE AND THEN I'LL START US OFF, UH, CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS, MICHAEL GARDENY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE.

UH, I'M HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS THREE RELATED CASES ON BURNET ROAD THAT WOULD ALLOW AN MF SIX PROJECT WITH A 330 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX.

DANNY, HOLD ON A SECOND SLIDE, PLEASE.

AT 60% MFI APPROVING, THIS WOULD DECREASE OVERALL SITE INTENSITY AND WHILE ALLOWING INCREMENTAL GROWTH, ONE ADDITIONAL STORY OVER WHAT IS ALLOWED THERE TODAY IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH COMPATIBILITY.

THE SITE IS TODAY ZONE FOR COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH INCLUDES , WHICH IS THE MOST INTENSE ZONING ALLOWED IN THIS PART OF THE CITY.

UH, THE FRONT IS USED FOR A BAR AND SHOPPING CENTER SPACE.

AND THE BACK, WHICH IS NEAR TO SINGLE-FAMILY IS USED FOR AUTO USES.

UH, THE SITE IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN THE CRESTVIEW

[04:20:01]

NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE HERE ALONG THE BURNET CARD CORRIDOR, WHICH THE CITY HAS CONSISTENTLY IDENTIFIED AND ITS POLICIES AND PLANS AS AN IMPORTANT ASSET FOR HELPING MANAGE OUR GROWTH AND SUPPORTING OUR HOUSING AND TRANSIT GOALS.

IN OTHER WORDS, BURN, IT IS NOT ONLY AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THE NEXT INCREMENT OF GROWTH, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY WHERE WE WANT THIS TO OCCUR.

THE SITE IS ALSO LOCATED IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA, UH, WHERE THE CITY IS TRYING HARD TO STEER NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE RESIDENTS OF ALL INCOME LEVELS, WITH ACCESS TO QUOTE, GREATER ECONOMIC SECURITY, HOUSING, STABILITY, MOBILITY OPTIONS, EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES, AND IMPROVED HEALTH AND WELLBEING.

SO THIS SITE IS STRATEGICALLY POSITIONED ON A MAJOR CORRIDOR AND IN THE HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA, WHICH MAKES IT KEY TO HELPING AUSTIN ACHIEVE ITS HOUSING AND AFFORDABILITY GOALS.

AND THAT'S ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT AS TODAY.

WE FALLEN SHORT, THE CITY HAS SET A GOAL, WHICH YOU CAN SEE HERE ABOUT 110 NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS PER YEAR WITHIN A HALF MILE OF BURNET ROAD, UH, THAT WE'VE ONLY AVERAGED ABOUT 15 SUCH UNITS PER YEAR, FAR LESS THAN WHAT YOU WOULD NEED IF WE'RE GOING TO HIT OUR GOAL.

AND THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO EMBRACE LIKE 71 13 BURNET, WHICH CAN FULLY LEVERAGE THE OPPORTUNITY OF OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS TO PROVIDE TRANSPORT PROJECTS THAT LOCKED DOWN LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY.

THIS SINGLE PROJECT WOULD PRODUCE DOUBLE THE AVERAGE ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE UNITS ALL ALONG BURNET ROAD.

AND IT WOULD PROVIDE THE FIRST INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS IN CRESTVIEW TO DATE A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA.

AND THAT'S IMPORTANT AS THE CITY IS TRYING TO HARD TO STEER AFFORDABLE UNITS INTO HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS.

SO THAT RESIDENTS OF ALL INCOME LEVELS CAN ACCESS THE RESOURCES.

THE CITY HAS SET A GOAL THAT 25% OF ALL NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS BE PROVIDED IN HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS EVERY YEAR.

HOWEVER, WE'VE FALLEN FAR SHORT OF THAT GOAL TO DATE.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, THESE ARE IMPORTANT GOALS FOR THE FUTURE OF AUSTIN AS A MOBILE AND EQUITABLE COMMUNITY AND PROJECTS LIKE 71 13 BURNET ARE KEY TO THESE GOALS OFFERING 10% OF TOTAL UNITS, 60% MFI FOR 40 YEARS IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA, WHICH AS I NOTED WOULD BE DOUBLE THE AVERAGE ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE UNITS ALONG THE BURNET CORRIDOR.

I ALSO WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION.

SOME FOLKS HAVE RAISED AS TO WHETHER IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL STORY ON BURNET ROAD AT ALL.

EVEN IF IT IS ACCOMPLISHED ENTIRELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.

AND TO THAT, I WOULD SAY TWO THINGS FIRST, OUR CITY PLANS AND POLICIES ARE VERY CLEAR ON THIS MAJOR CORRIDORS LIKE BURNING ARE PRECISELY THE PLACES WE DO WANT TO DIRECT NEW GROWTH, BUT THE CONVERSATION DOESN'T END THERE BECAUSE THE REALITY IS THAT EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE DESIGNATED BURNET AS AN AREA FOR GROWTH, SHALLOW LOTS AND DEEP COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, HAMPER MUCH OF ITS POTENTIAL FOR HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE UNITS.

BY MY CALCULATIONS, ROUGHLY TWO THIRDS OF BURNETT FRONTAGE BETWEEN 45TH STREET AND ONE 83 WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT INCREMENTAL SIX STORY.

EVEN IF THE CITY HAD WANTED TO DO SO MANY SITES ARE LIMITED TO JUST FOUR STORIES DUE TO THESE FACTORS, EVEN UP ON THE CORRIDOR ITSELF.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN WE HAVE A PROJECT LIKE 71 13 BURNETT THAT ACTUALLY CAN ACHIEVE THAT INCREMENTAL GROWTH, WE NEED TO TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY THAT IT OFFERS.

AND WITH MF SIX, WE CAN DO SO BY GETTING BETTER OUTCOMES ACROSS THE BOARD, BY DIALING DOWN OVERALL SITE INTENSITY AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE SECURING LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY.

I ALSO WANT TO NOTE HERE THAT ON THE RIGHT ARE THE BASE ENTITLEMENTS THOUGH, AS STAFF MENTIONED, WE'VE SINCE WORKED WITH THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS ON A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH REVISED STANDARDS, AND WE STAND BY THOSE STANDARDS THAT WE'VE NEGOTIATED WITH THEM.

AND AS NOTED EARLIER, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR CS L O N C S ONE, WHICH IS THE MOST INTENSIVE ZONING DISTRICT AVAILABLE IN THIS AREA, APPROVING MF SIX INSTEAD LOWERS IMPERVIOUS COVER BUILDING COVER INTENSITY USES AND LOWERS THE TRIP INTENSITY.

THE 3000 TRIPS YOU SEE UNDER THE KAREN ENTITLEMENTS ARE WHAT THE ITE MANUAL ASSIGNS TO THE SITE, AS IT EXISTS TODAY, THE LARGER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE ENTITLED.

AND THIS, THE UNDER THAT THE TRIPS WOULD BE EVEN MORE EITHER WAY.

OUR PROJECT WOULD BE FAR BELOW THAT THE HEIGHT ALSO REMAINS AT MUCH THE SAME FOR PART OF IT, FOR MOST OF THE SITE DUE TO COMPATIBILITY AND EXCHANGE FOR DIALING THESE STANDARDS DOWN.

AND THAT SIX ALLOWS A GRADUAL STEP UP IN HEIGHT, ACCORDING IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMPATIBILITY, ULTIMATELY ENABLING US TO ACHIEVE OUR VISION OF ONE ADDITIONAL STORY UP ON THE BURNETT ROAD CORRIDOR, WHICH WE CAN ACHIEVE ONLY AFTER WE ARE AT LEAST A FOOTBALL FIELD LENGTH AWAY FROM THE CLOSEST SINGLE FAMILY HOMES OR TWO FOOTBALL FIELD LENGTHS AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.

SO A DECREASE IN OVERALL INTENSITY IN EXCHANGE FOR THE INCREMENTAL GROWTH OF ONE ADDITIONAL STORY.

SO TO RECAP, THE CITY HAVE SET GOALS FOR HOUSING AND AFFORDABILITY.

SO PROGRESS IS NEEDED.

BURNETT IS KEY TO THESE GOALS.

THEN MUCH OF VERNON'S CAPACITY IS LIMITED BY SHALLOW LOTS AND LONG COMPATIBILITY AREAS.

THIS PROJECT WOULD HELP MEET OUR GOALS BY PROVIDING THE FIRST INCOME RESTRICTED UNIT UNITS TO DATE IN CRESTVIEW, WHICH IS A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA.

AND IT WOULD ALSO LOWER OUR OVERALL SITE INTENSITY WHILE ALLOWING AN INCREMENTAL INCREASE, INCREASING GROWTH, ONE ADDITIONAL STORY TO SIX STORIES MAXIMUM UP ON BURNET ROAD FOR A TOTAL OF SIX STORIES.

UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

AND I WILL RESERVE MY RIGHT TO CLOSE.

[04:25:03]

AND I'M LOOKING AT THE LIST HERE.

I NEED TO CONFIRM I HAVE, UH, TWO MELISSA NES LUND AND HARRISON HUDSON.

ARE THEY FOR, UH, TO ANSWER QUESTIONS? UM, MR. GODADDY, TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND, UM, MELISSA, UM, HAD, HAS SOMETHING SHORT TO SAY, AND THEN SHE'LL ALSO BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS IF NEEDED.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'LL GO AHEAD.

UH, SO MISS NETHERLANDS IS GOING TO SPEAK, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS, MELISSA, AS LYNN HERE WITH STRATUS PROPERTIES.

UH, WE ARE CURRENTLY UNDER CONTRACT ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

AND SHOULD WE RECEIVE THE ZONING? UH, WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO DEVELOPING IT HERE, UH, IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE.

UH, WE'VE BEEN WORKING TO PUT THAT PROPOSAL TOGETHER HERE IN FRONT OF YOU ALL SINCE LATE LAST YEAR AND REACHED OUT VERY EARLY TO ENGAGE WITH THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OVER THE ITEMS THAT WE COULD COME TOGETHER ON.

UM, IT WAS ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PRIOR APPLICANT REQUESTED MX SIX ZONING WITH A FULL HEIGHT OF 90 FEET FOR THIS SITE, AND ULTIMATELY RECEIVED A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THAT TIME.

UH, WE'VE PICKED UP THE PROPERTY AS I MENTIONED, AND ARE NOW UNDER CONTRACT THAT APPLICANT, UM, DID NOT MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE'VE LISTENED TO THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS AND DESIGNED A PROJECT THAT IS WORKABLE AT 75 FEET IN HEIGHT.

AND AGAIN, AS MICHAEL SAID, ONLY THAT FRONT PORTION OF THE BUILDING ON BURNET ROAD, AND WE WILL STEP DOWN AND SCALE AND HEIGHT IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS AS HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED.

UM, AGAIN, WE'VE BEEN IN ACTIVE CONVERSATIONS AS LATE AS, UH, THIS AFTERNOON AND, AND ONGOING AS WELL FROM THE BEGINNING, UH, WITH THE HARDY CIRCLE FOLKS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT.

UH, IN ADDITION TO THE INITIAL, UM, CONCERNS THAT WE HAD, WE HAD HEARD FROM THEM AND, AND WORKING ON AFFORDABILITY AND OTHERWISE, UM, WE'RE NOW WORKING ON ADDITIONAL BUFFERING BUILDING PLACEMENT, OTHER, UH, THAT I BELIEVE THEY'RE AMENABLE TO.

AND SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON OUTLINING THOSE ITEMS IN A ENFORCEABLE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH THEM.

UH, WE SEE THIS AS A WIN-WIN.

IT ALLOWS US TO DEVELOP OUR PROJECT WHILE ADDRESSING, ADDRESSING, EXCUSE ME, MANY OF THEIR CONCERNS.

AND AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN STATED, BUT AS A BIG PICTURE CITYWIDE PERSPECTIVE, THIS REZONING WILL ALLOW US TO PROVIDE THE CRITICALLY NEEDED HOUSING IN A LOCATION THAT'S NOT ONLY APPROPRIATE, BUT NECESSARY TO MEET ADOPTED TRANSIT AND MOBILITY GOALS.

WE KNOW AUSTIN'S GOT A HOUSING CRISIS AND THAT OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS LIKE BURNET ARE THE AREAS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS DECIDED ARE APPROPRIATE TO HOUSE.

THE MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE MOVING HERE EACH DAY, THIS PROJECT WILL HELP FILL THE NEED FOR THOSE MOVING HERE.

AND IT WILL ALSO DO SO WITH OUR PRIVATE COMMITMENT TO 10% OF TOTAL UNITS AT 60% MFI FOR 40 YEARS, AS WELL AS WITH OUR ADDITIONAL VARIOUS COMMITMENTS, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS ON TO ENSURE THE PROJECT IS A TRUE BENEFIT TO THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE, I'M PROUD ON THE WORK WE'VE DONE TO DATE AND ON THE HOUSING GOALS THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO HELP PROVIDE, APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION HERE.

AND I WILL REMAIN ON THE LINE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

AND NOW WE HAVE THE FIRST SPEAKER.

UH, WELL, I'M SORRY.

ANOTHER SPEAKER LISTED, UH, FOR, UH, THIS ITEM, UH, TANNER BLAIR STAR SIXTH, SUNDAY.

HELLO? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU CONTINUE.

SAY LIKE, I GUESS I JUST WON'T MOVE TO AUSTIN THEN, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE HERE EITHER WAY.

YEP.

TANNER BLAIR.

UH, I'M A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT SEVEN, UH, AND A RESIDENT IN NORTH SHORE CREEK.

ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS NEARBY.

I'M ALSO THE CHAIR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM THERE THOUGH.

I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF TODAY.

UH, AND I DEFINITELY AM SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT AT 71 13 BURNETT ROAD.

UH, THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ADD 330 DESPERATELY NEEDED HOUSING UNITS IN OUR URBAN CORE 33 OF WHICH WOULD BE AFFORDABLE AT 60% MFI.

THESE UNITS ARE IN THE URBAN CORE ON A MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR.

I LOOKED THIS UP EARLIER, THIS AREA, THIS PROPERTY HAS A WALK SCORE OF 70 AND A BIKE SCORE OF 84.

SO THESE ARE LIKE PRETTY HIGH SCORES IN GENERAL, EITHER REALLY HIGH SCORES FOR AUSTIN, IF I'M BEING ON.

AND, UH, UH, AS THE APPLICANT NOTED, IMAGINE AUSTIN SAYS, THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE WE SHOULD BE PUTTING HOUSING, RIGHT? UH, IT'S ON A MAJOR CORRIDOR IT'S WALKABLE.

BIKEABLE, UH, UH, IT'S EXACTLY WHERE HOUSING SHOULD BE GOING.

AND IT'S ALSO IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA THAT HAS NO OTHER AFFORDABLE UNITS RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT? UH, ADDITIONALLY, WE ALL AGREED THAT WE DON'T WANT TO SEE DISPLACEMENT OF OLDER VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES.

UH, THIS BUILDING IS NOT REPLACING ANY EXISTING FAMILIES AND THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME AND THE AVERAGE HOME PRICE OF BOTH ALLENDALE, CRESTVIEW AND NORTHWELL CREEK FOR THAT MATTER IS ABOVE WHAT THESE UNITS WILL EVENTUALLY SELL FOR.

WE MIGHT ASSUMPTION, UH, UH, THEY'RE CERTAINLY ABOVE AUSTIN'S MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK REALLY WHAT MATTERS.

RIGHT.

UH, I ALSO THINK THAT A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE THINK IF WE DON'T BUILD THESE HOMES, THEN FUTURE RESIDENTS WILL JUST THROW UP THEIR HANDS AND

[04:30:01]

RIGHT? SO EITHER WE PROVIDE THEM A HOME AND AN AREA THAT IS A HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREA, UH, OR THEY FIND A HOME SOMEWHERE ELSE COMPETING FOR THE LIMITED STOCK THAT WE HAVE AND AN AREA MUCH MORE HONESTLY, VULNERABLE TO DISPLACEMENT THAN THESE THEN ME AND MY NEIGHBORS.

SO, SO IN CLOSING, I'LL SAVE YOU SOME TIME BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OUT OF HERE, UH, IN CLOSING, UH, THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT THAT I THINK IS AN ASSET TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO WELCOMING NEW NEIGHBORS BECAUSE OF HOW GREAT THIS IS AND HOW GREAT THIS AREA IS.

I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THE MORE, THE BETTER, AND IF THEY CAN, IF THEY CAN GET HOUSING, MORE HOUSING WITH MS. STICKS RATHER THAN MFR.

AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MS. STICKS THERE AND MAYBE IT'LL MAKE IT TAKE TWO MINUTES LONGER FOR ME TO DRIVE DOWN BURNETT.

MAYBE IT'LL TAKE ME AN EXTRA 45 SECONDS TO GET MY COFFEE AT THE COFFEE SHOP.

NEXT DOOR.

ALL OF THAT IS LIKE, IT'S A PITTANCE FOR THE IDEA OF THE 330 FAMILIES.

CAUSE I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE IN THE ABUNDANCE OF OUR COMMUNITY.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

HAPPY TO YIELD THE REST.

REGARDLESS OF LEVEL OR DIFFERENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF SIX INCHES.

NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE INTO THE, UH, OPPOSED SPEAKERS AND I HAVE A REVISED ORDER.

I BELIEVE BRAD RUSSELL IS THE, UM, THE APPLICANT SPEAKING FIRST WOULD BE THE MAIN APPLICANT WAS SIX MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING, SIR.

RUSSELL.

THAT'S ON THE HOMEOWNER.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN.

BRAD RUSSELL ON THE HOMEOWNER LIVING AT 2007 HARDY CIRCLE AND NICOLE TO SACK AND CRESTVIEW, I'M GENERALLY OPPOSED TO THE ZONING CHANGES MY PROPERTY DIRECTLY, BUT THE BACKLOG OF SEVEN ONE ONE THREE BURNET ROAD SEND AN EMAIL OUT TO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS THAT STATED IN DETAIL ARE CONCERNED AND IT'S INCLUDED AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE AGENDA.

THE PROPERTY AT ISSUE IS UNIQUELY EMBEDDED DEEP INTO THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE BACK OF THE LOT DIRECTLY ABOVE THE 15 HOME CALLED A SAQUON HARDY CIRCLE, THE THREE DUPLEXES ON HARDY DRIVE AND THE NUMEROUS CONDOS ON KULIN AVENUE.

SO IT IMPACTS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD FROM ALL SIDES.

THIS LEVEL OF DENSITY WILL HAVE A DRAMATIC EFFECT ON ALL OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS, NEVER STOPPED, CONCERNED ABOUT CHANGING EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS, PRIVACY SAFETY, INCREASED TRAFFIC, PARKING NOISE, CRIME, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.

THE TRAFFIC HAZARD OF HAVING ONLY ONE MEANS AN INGRESS AND EGRESS ONTO BURNET ROAD VIA THE B SPOT TRAFFIC LIGHT AND THE PRECEDENT.

THIS WAS SET FOR FEATURE HIGH DENSITY, ZONING PROPOSALS WITHIN EXISTING HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS.

CURRENT HOMEOWNERS ARE FEELING VULNERABLE, CONCERNED, AND INTERESTED IN MAKING THEIR VOICES HEARD INSTEAD OF BEING DISMISSED.

ALTHOUGH GROWTH AND CHANGE ARE EXCITING PROSPECTS.

IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT CITY LEADERS AND DEVELOPERS FOSTER AN EMPATHETIC MINDSET THAT RESPECTS THE CONSIDERATIONS AND RIGHTS OF CURRENT RESIDENTS WHOSE LIVES WILL BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THESE DRAMATIC CHANGES.

WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, BUT AFTER WORKING WITH MICHAEL GARDENY, THE MEMBERS OF HARDY CIRCLE AND HARDY DRIVE HAVE COME TO A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE AND OUTLINED MANY SPECIFIC TERMS OF INTERESTS.

ALTHOUGH NOTHING IS SIGNED OFF ON BY ANY OF THE PARTIES OR FILED WITH THE COUNTY.

AT THIS TIME, WE EXPECT THE OWNER TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THEIR PROMISES AND MEMORIALIZE OUR AGREEMENT TO A FINAL VERSION OF A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IN WRITING AND TO FILE IT WITHIN WITH THE COUNTY.

BEFORE, BEFORE A FIRST READING AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON THE RECORD, OUR RESTRICTIVE COVENANT LANGUAGE AS FOLLOWS OVERALL HEIGHT LIMIT, THE HEIGHT SHALL NOT EXCEED 75 FEET EXPANDED COMPATIBILITY HEIGHT LIMIT THE HEIGHT OF THE PROJECT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SINGLE FAMILY.

LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 40 FEET LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREA.

THE OWNER SHALL INSTALL A LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREA PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, CONSISTING OF MATURE 10 SHADE TREES, 10 TO 12 FEET IN HEIGHT AND 17 UNDERSTORY TREES MINIMUM SINCE THE OWNER SHALL CONSTRUCT A FENCE TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWABLE BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN LAND CODE DUMPSTER PLACEMENT, DUMPSTER SERVING THE PROJECTS WILL BE GENERALLY LOCATED INTERNAL TO THE PROJECT, EXCEPT THAT THEY MAY BE TRANSPORTED TO EXTERIOR LOCATIONS FOR TRASH COLLECTION REAR SITE RESTRICTION THAT THE FOLLOWING APPLY WITHIN 275 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY'S REAR LOT LINE, WHICH APPROXIMATES THE CURRENT ZONE FOR ELO AND ADJACENT SUSTAINABLE FAMILY.

LOT, UH, NO COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES WITHIN THAT AREA, NO POOL WITHIN THAT AREA, NO SURFACE PARKING WITHIN THAT AREA AND NO GARAGE ENTRANCE OR EXIT WITHIN THAT AREA.

SUBJECT TO CITY OF AUSTIN APPROVAL, JULIET BALCONIES, BALCONIES, UH, FOR UNITS SPACING, SINGLE FAMILY, LOTS ON HARDY CIRCLE OR HARDY DRIVE,

[04:35:01]

BUILDING SETBACK, NO BUILDING SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN 30 FEET OF A SINGLE FAMILY.

LOT EMERGENCY LANE SIGNAGE.

THE SIGNAGE INDICATING THAT THE EMERGENCY LANE, UH, EMERGENCY LANE ONLY SHALL BE PLACED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EMERGENCY ONLY LANE INGRESS EGRESS LIMITATION THAT VEHICULAR ACCESS TO HARDY CIRCLE AND HARDY DRIVERS PROHIBITED LIGHTING RESTRICTION THAT NO LIGHTING BE PLACED WITHIN 25 FEET OF A SINGLE-FAMILY LAW, UNLESS RICARD BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN ROOFTOP PARKING THAN ANY ROOFTOP PARKING SHOULD BE, UH, CONSTRUCTED.

IT SHALL BE SCREENED FROM THE TREE SPECIES THAT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT SHALL INCLUDE A LIST OF SPECIFIED TREE SPECIES, PRIORITIZING SPECIES THAT GROW QUICKLY IN FERGUSON RECREATION, DEADLINE, AND EFFECTIVE DATE THAT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY PRIOR TO THE FIRST READING AT CITY COUNCIL AND THAT ITS PROVISIONS WILL TAKE EFFECT AFTER THE REZONING ORDINANCE GOES INTO EFFECT.

AGAIN, ALTHOUGH GROWTH AND CHANGE ARE EXCITING PROSPECTS, IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT CITY LEADERS AND DEVELOPERS FOSTER AN EMPATHETIC MINDSET THAT RESPECTS THE CONSIDERATIONS AND RIGHTS OF CURRENT RESIDENTS WHOSE LIVES WILL BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THESE DRAMATIC CHANGES.

THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT.

UH, NEXT WE HAVE, UH, TIM PARIS, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, STAR SIX, CHEERS.

MY NAME IS CHIP HARRIS OR RESIDENT OF THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK, UH, THE CITY'S PROFESSIONAL PLANNING STAFF HAS DONE A REMARKABLE JOB IN THIS CASE AND WRITTEN A COMPELLING REPORT, RECOGNIZING THE BENEFITS OF GROWTH, BUT TALKING AND SEND THEM TO THE POTENTIAL UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES CITY STAFF'S ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION.

IF FINDS THE BALANCE BETWEEN THE TWO CITY PLANNING GUIDELINES STATE THAT MAY BE APPLIED TO USE NEAR COMMERCIAL FACILITIES AND AREA CHASING TO THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, OUR MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL OR EMPLOYMENT CENTERS, THIS PROPERTY FAILS TO MEET ANY OF THOSE CRITERIA TO QUALIFY FOR .

I AM IN SUPPORT A STAFF ULTIMATE APPROPRIATE RECORD THAT RECOMMENDATION OF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION LAYS OUT THE PATH FOR REASONABLE, SUSTAINABLE GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY.

OVER THE PAST DECADE, THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS GROWN ABOUT 24%, BUT THE CRESTVIEW COMMUNITY HAS GROWN BY A HUNDRED PERCENT LEAVING.

THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS HORRIBLY BEHIND, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO TRAFFIC ISSUES, PARTIALLY AS A RESULT OF EXCESSIVE GROWTH IN THE AREA, BURNER ROADS, COMPANION ARTURO, LAMAR BOULEVARD, WHICH BORDERS THE EAST SIDE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS SUFFERING GRIDLOCK AND REQUIRES A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR GREAT SEPARATION TO RESUME EFFECTIVE FUNCTIONING.

ZONING ON THIS TRACK WILL ACCELERATE THE DECLINE OF ROAD AS A VIABLE CORRIDOR.

THIS WILL DIVERT MORE TRAFFIC TO OUR INTERIOR STREETS WITH A GROWING NUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS AND SMALL CHILDREN.

THE CITY'S REPORT RECOMMEND A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 60 FEET.

ALLOWS 90 FEET.

AND THE DEVELOPER STATES YOU NEED A MINIMUM OF 75 FEET HEIGHT THAT IS GROSSLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE MOSTLY TWO TO THREE STORY STRUCTURES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND LACKING IN HUMAN SCALE.

THE 400 PLUS UNIT PROPERTY ON ROCKWOOD JUST NORTH OF WAS APPROVED WITH A 60 FOOT HEIGHT AND THE PEARL A DEVELOPMENT ON CANE CANE LANE SITS AT 45 FEET.

WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A CHOICE IN THIS CASE, IT CAN BE GUIDED BY CAREFULLY CRAFTED PLANNING CRITERIA, OR WE CAN MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THE DEVELOPER'S FINANCIAL DESIRES.

THE CITY STAFF REPORT OFFER SOME GUIDANCE IN THIS AREA IS IT SAYS, QUOTE, THE PROPOSED ZONING SHOULD SATISFY A REAL PUBLIC NEED AND NOT PROVIDE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO THE OWNER AND QUOTE, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO APPROVE A STAFF, ALTERNATE MFR ZONING RECOMMENDATION AS SOMETHING THAT BENEFITS A CITY WITHOUT DEGRADING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

IN ADDITION, A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY SHOULD BE INCLUDED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS FOR THE NEARBY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

UM, NEXT, UH, OF JOSEPH REYNOLDS STAR SIX 10 MEET

[04:40:04]

CHURN.

I HEAR YOU, MR. REYNOLDS.

SHARON COMMISSIONERS.

I'M JOE REYNOLDS.

I LIVE ON 49TH STREET.

I'M TESTIFYING ABOUT ALLENDALE UNIQUE CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC WITH ANY PROJECT BUILT IT 71 13 BURNET.

I SENT YOU A TRAFFIC HANDOUT THAT INCLUDES ANNOTATED IMAGES OF 71 13, BUT TRAFFIC ROUTES MODED I'VE STUDIED TRAFFIC ON THIS PROPORTION OF BURNET ROAD AS PART OF ALLENDALE, SOME INVOLVEMENT IN THE BARNET ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECT THAT INCLUDED QUALIFYING ACCIDENT DATA ON SAFETY ISSUES AND OBVIOUS TRAFFIC ISSUE WAS ANYONE.

13 IS THE NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE ON BURNET, GOT THE GREEN LAWN TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

IT BLOCKS HALF OF THE CURB CUTS FOR 71 13.

AND THIS IS MARKED ON THAT MAP.

THIS BLOCKAGE DISRUPTS TRAFFIC PREVENTING SOUTHBOUND ENTRANCE AND EXIT TO OVERCOME THE BLOCKAGE AND PROVIDE DIRECT ACCESS TO THE GREEN LAWN SIGNAL.

A SHARED ACCESS AGREEMENT HAS BEEN FILED.

IT ALLOWS AUTOMOBILES FROM 71 13 TO DRIVE THROUGH THE PARKING.

LOT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER SEND ME ONE 15 THAT PROVIDES FULL TRAFFIC SIGNAL ACCESS.

BUT AS I INCLUDED IN THE HANDOUT, THIS ROUTE WALLA HILL HAS SERIOUS LIMITATIONS.

HAVING A ROUTE DOESN'T MEAN IT'S ACCEPTED BY DRIVERS AND UNLESS IT'S ACTUALLY USED IT, ISN'T FUNCTIONAL THROUGHOUT HISTORY OF SAFETY PROBLEMS. THE PARKING LOT AT CROSSES HAS SHOPPERS PUSHING CARDS, GUYS DRIVING WITH A TACO IN ONE HAND AND OTHER DRIVERS FOCUSED ON FINDING AN EMPTY SPOT ROUTING TRAFFIC TO A PARKING LOT.

ISN'T IN ANY TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S HANDBOOK.

THE PROPOSED 71 13 PROJECT WILL LIKELY GENERATE OVER A THOUSAND NEW DRIVES EACH DAY THROUGH THAT LOT, ANY PROJECT LIKE THE ONE PROPOSED FOR 71 13 REQUIRES ACCESS BY BIG TRUCKS.

THE RAMP CONNECTING 71, 13 AND 71 15 FOR THE SHARED ACCESS IS MARK.

ON THE HAND HANDOUT, PAT, IT HAS TWO LANES EACH ABOUT NINE FEET WIDE AND A 15% GREAT THE TRUCKS ATTEMPTING TO USE.

IT WILL FIND THEMSELVES IN AN S SHAPE, TURN ON A SIGNIFICANT GRADE FIRST TURNING RIGHT TO ENTER THE RAMP.

AND THEN BEFORE THE REAR OF THE TRUCK HAS ENTERED, THE FRONT OF THE TRUCK MUST BEGIN TO TURN LEFT.

AND THE TWO ENDS OF ABOUT FIVE FOOT DIFFERENCE IN ELEVATION.

THAT MEANS TRUCKS CAN ONLY USE DIRECT BURNET ACCESS AND WITH DIRECT BURNET ACCESS BEING REQUIRED, AUTOS WILL USE IT TO THESE DRIVERS.

WON'T AVOID DRIVING AROUND THE 71, 13 FROM A ROAD TO GET TO AND FROM THE SHARED ACCESS ROUTE AND TO USE THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

THE BURTON ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY SHOWED THE DANGER OF THEM AVOIDING THAT SIGNAL AND CUTTING ACROSS TRAFFIC.

ALLENDALE IS CONCERNED IS ABOUT DRIVERS WHO DON'T PROPERLY USE THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL OR THE CURB CUTS.

THE BURNETT ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY SHOWED A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER WILL END UP ON GREENLAWN HEADED WEST WHEN THEY WANT TO BE GOING SOUTH ON BURNET.

THEY HAVE A FEW CHOICES.

THEY CAN TURN ONTO DARDY AND GO SOUTH PARALLEL TO BURN IT AND GO BACK FROM THE BURDEN THAT JUSTIN OR THEY CAN DO A U-TURN AT THE GREENLAWN DARDY INTERSECTION AND GO BACK TO THE BARGAIN, OR IF THEY TAKE TOO LONG TO DECIDE AND MISS THE U-TURN, THEY PULL INTO A FAMILY'S DRIVEWAY BACK OUT AND HEAD FOR BURNET.

THOSE CHOICES MAKE ALLENDALE RESIDENTS LESS SAFE WHEN DECIDING TO SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDED FOR ZONING.

IT WILL ENSURE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE DEVELOPMENT ON SITE AND HELP LESSONS TO TRAFFIC AND DOES INCREASE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SAFETY.

UH, GIVE ME A SECOND.

I NEED TO GET OUR ORDER HERE.

I'VE LOST TRACK.

UM, WE NOW HAVE, OH YES.

WE HAVE, UH, JANICE RANKIN STAR SIX ON MUTE.

OH, HELLO.

DO I HAVE ONE MINUTE OR THREE? YOU HAVE THREE.

DENSITY, WE ARE NOT DIVIDING THE NUMBER OF UNITS OR AFFORDABLE UNITS OR COMMERCIAL USE THAT IS NOT A TABLE FOR DISCUSSION FOR ARGUMENT ON TOP OF ABOUT IT'S A 60 FOOT HEIGHT OF UNIT FOUR, AS OPPOSED TO SIX.

MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.

I'M JANICE ALLENDALE AND DISTRICT SEVEN.

I SERVE ON THE ELLENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD TODAY.

I SPEAK ON MY BEHALF AND I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS REQUEST, JUST THAT'D BE CALLED, WAS REQUESTED THIS CHANGE FOUR 71 13 ON IT ROAD TO FAST.

THIS SIZE IN THIS SIX HIGHEST DENSITY MULTI-CELLULAR USE IS NOT DESIRABLE IN DISLOCATION.

IT IS INCOMPATIBLE AND WE DO NOT NEED IT.

THERE'S ALREADY CONSIDERABLE DENSITY IN THE GENERAL AREA.

THE SENIOR PLANNER HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF AND PAYS ON IT.

AND I ASKED YOU TO FOLLOW THE NFR AND HE RECOMMENDATION OF YOUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF CITY STAFF HAS EVALUATED THIS APPLICATION CAREFULLY MADE THEIR BEST RECOMMENDATION TO YOU, WHICH IS THEIR JOB.

HE WAS QUITE ON CONCUR WITH THE SENIOR TIME.

HIS RECOMMENDATION TO THE, AND FOR THIS IS FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE WITH MODERATELY HIGH

[04:45:01]

FIRST OF ALL, TONY TRIED TO SHAKE, PROMOTE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE ADJUSTMENT AND NEARBY USAGE.

AND THE SIXTH DOES NOT MEET THAT STANDARD AND DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR MS. INTAKE ZONING UNDER SECTION 25 DAYS, TWO DAYS 67, THAT'S IN THE WRITTEN MATERIALS.

SO I WILL NOT READ IT TO YOU.

BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJUSTMENTS IN NEARBY USAGE.

PLEASE LOOK AT THE PHOTOS.

I SAID, APARTMENT, THAT'S TAKEN AT 5:30 PM ON MONDAY.

YOU CAN SAY THAT THE TRAFFIC IS MODERATE.

A SPECIALIST HAS HIS PHONE ON HIM.

TO NAVIGATE A RANCH AND YOU SEE THAT PICTURE TO USE AN EASEMENT THROUGH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

THERE ARE JUST A FEW STATES THAT THAT MADE A REAL PUBLIC MOOD AND THAT PROVIDE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO THE OWNER.

THERE'S STILL REPRESENTATIONS BY THE AGENT FOR CSW CART.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT DOES NOT INTEND TO SERVICE THE BUILDING.

THAT RAISES CONCERNS THAT THE APPLICATION SEEMS RELATED TO HER SPECULATIVE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL BUILDING HEIGHT, ZONING CHANGE.

SINCE IT'S NOT RELATED TO 10 PHYSICAL PROJECTS, THIS APPEARS TO BE A CENTRAL PROJECT, WHICH MIGHT BE DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO CONCERN IS GOING TO HELP ASSIST TO HELP DEVELOPERS THE STUDENT ON THE STRETCH AND PRIVATE RIDE BETWEEN CANADA AND RESEARCH APPLICATION.

IF THAT'S THE CASE, IT'S NOT A PROPER PURPOSE AT THE TIME OF CONDITION TO TAKE MINOR PROJECT ON THE, IN THE SIXTH AND ADOPTED.

UM, SO NEXT WE MOVE ON TO, UM, LET ME CHECK THE LIST.

WE HAVE CAROLYN CHROME, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES STAR SIX, SEVEN, MEET CAROLYN CRIM.

UM, SO I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS THING GOING.

WE CAN COME BACK TO I CAROLYN CRUDE.

I HAVE MARK THE STATA.

ARE YOU READY TO SPEAK MARK WISETTA? OH, WAIT, I HEAR, WE HAVE A, HOLD ON MARK.

I HEAR WE HAVE CAROLYN ON THE LINE.

CAROLYN, ARE YOU THERE? HELLO.

UM, HI CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS.

UM, I'M CAROLINE CROOM.

I LIVE ON ALL BETA ABOUT A BLOCK AWAY FROM THIS PROPERTY.

I SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE MULTIFAMILY MODERATE.

WE CAN COME BACK TO, I HAVE MARK WITH SIDA.

ARE YOU HELLO? YOUR CHAIR.

YOU'RE ON MUTE.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

WE'RE GETTING, UM, THAT SAME TECHNICAL ISSUE WE HAD EARLIER STAFF.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING? UM, HI.

SOMEONE'S GOT THEIR TV ON IN THE BACKGROUND.

TURN THE TV OFF.

UH, FOLKS OUT THERE.

TURN YOUR TV OFF FOR THE MULTIFAMILY MODERATE.

HI, PLEASE TURN YOUR TV UP PLEASE.

SO WE CAN, UH, CONTINUE TO MUTE EVERYONE IN THE ROOM RIGHT QUICK.

UM, CHROM, HAVE YOUR, UM, SELECT STAR SIX, 10 SHORTLY.

YOU'VE BEEN MUTED TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, PRESS STAR SIX.

YOU ARE NO LONGER MUTED.

ARE YOU THERE? CAROLYN CRAB STAR SIX.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY, GOOD.

UM, UM, I'LL WAIT TILL EVERYBODY CAN USE IT TOO.

IF Y'ALL NEED THAT, PLEASE.

HI, BROADCAST IN THE BACKGROUND.

[04:50:01]

I DON'T HAVE A BROADCAST IN THE BACKGROUND.

UM, YES, I DON'T HAVE A TV ON, UH, UH, OKAY, WELL I COULD START.

SHOULD I START STICKS AGAIN? NOPE, GO AHEAD AND, UH, SEE IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND START AND I'LL BE QUIET AND HOPEFULLY WE WON'T GET THAT SPEED BACK.

ARE YOU THERE BROADCAST IN THE BACKGROUND IF YOU ALL NEED THAT? I DO NOT HAVE A BROADCAST IN THE BACKGROUND UNLESS, UNLESS ANOTHER COMPUTER OR SOMETHING.

WOULD THAT BE, UM, OKAY.

WELL, I, I COULD, SHOULD I START AGAIN? YEP.

AND, UH, SEE IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND I'LL BE QUIET AND HOPEFULLY WE WON'T PRESS.

SO THE REASON THAT'S HAPPENING IS BECAUSE WE'RE USING OUR PHONE LINES TO CONNECT TO THESE PEOPLE.

HOWEVER, EVERY TIME WE UNMUTE, UM, THE CURRENT SPEAKER, UH, THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME SORT OF REPEAT ECHO FROM THE BROADCAST.

I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW THAT'S HAPPENING.

SO, UH, I THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO JUST GRIN AND BEAR IT, GIVE THREE MINUTES AND GET THROUGH IT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

CAN WE GIVE THAT A TRY? CAROLYN PREMATURE, THERE WERE, I'M GOING TO BE QUIET AND WE'LL JUST TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS THREE MINUTES.

CAROLYN CRAM, ARE YOU THERE IS ANDREW CUNNINGHAM.

HOW DO YOU CIRCLE, UH, NOT HEARING ANYTHING AT THIS POINT, SO I'M NOT SURE IF HE WAS ABLE TO, SO I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT FEE FOR WHAT? COME BACK TO CAROLYN.

UH, MARK.

MASSADA ARE YOU THERE? MARK ASSATA.

MARK MASSADA STAR SIX.

ANDREW I'M MARTHA.

I AM STILL ON THE CALL.

WELL, IF THIS ONE MARK DECIDED TO GO AHEAD.

YOU'VE GOT THREE MINUTES, MARK.

HELLO, MARK.

AND ANDREW STEVEN PRESLEY.

I'M ALSO ON THE CALL.

HEY STEVEN.

HEY, WHAT'S UP MARK.

THIS IS MARK MASSADA THERE.

I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHAT'S HAPPENING.

DOES THE OTHER, WE ONLY WANT TO HAVE MARK BESOTTED TALKING RIGHT NOW.

THE OTHERS NEED TO MUTE YOUR DEVICES, MARK FROM EVERYONE ELSE.

THANK YOU, MARK.

GO AHEAD AND START.

WE CAN HEAR EACH OTHER AND THEY CAN'T HEAR US.

I GOT THE STREET MAN.

BACK.

CALM GOING, CHRIS.

IS COREY, IS IT ONLY THE REMAINING RESIDENTS? YOU'VE BEEN MUTED TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, PRESS STAR SIX.

YOU ARE NO LONGER MUTED.

I THINK SO.

MARK.

ARE YOU THERE? WHAT ELSE, MARK? YES, I HERE.

PLEASE START SPEAKING IF YOU CAN, WE HAVE THREE MINUTES.

SO, SO THIS, THIS DESIGNATION FOR A BUILDING THIS SIZE DOES RAISE SOME CONCERNS FOR ME, MOSTLY ABOUT NOISE, UM, AND HOW WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SORT OF MITIGATE THOSE PROBLEMS. UH, I, YOU KNOW, WITH A, UH, UNIT THIS LARGE, UH, I HAVE CONCERNS OBVIOUSLY ABOUT PRIVACY.

UH, I WILL TRY TO MAKE THIS BRIEF.

UM, SO, UH, I'M HERE BASICALLY TO, UM, TO, UH, EXERCISE MY GENERAL OPPOSITION, UH, TO THE, UM, MS. SIX DESIGNATION.

UM, MY CONCERNS, UH, I'VE BASICALLY BEEN, UM, GENERALLY ADDRESSED THROUGH, UH, MR. RUSSELL'S, UM, PRESENTATION.

UM, BUT MORE SPECIFICALLY FOR ME, I'M ONE OF THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVES IN THE VERY BACK AREA OF NEXT DOOR TO MR. RUSSELL.

UH, WE ARE THE ONES WHO HAVE, UH, UP UNTIL NOW HAVE HAD A RELATIVELY, UM, QUIET, UH, EXISTENCE BACK HERE WITH THIS CURRENT, UH, ELLO DESIGNATION.

UM, ALTHOUGH I HAVE BEEN LIVING HERE SINCE THE TIME THAT DALLAS, MY CLUB WAS FUNCTIONING, UM, AND I COULD REGULARLY HEAR THOSE GUYS, UH, WEDNESDAYS, THURSDAYS, FRIDAYS, AND SATURDAY NIGHTS, VERY CLEARLY, UH, ON MY PROPERTY, WHICH IS CLOSER TO THE FURTHEST PROPERTIES, UH, BACKED FROM, FROM BURNET ROAD.

UM, AND

[04:55:01]

UM, OUR BACKYARDS DO BUTT UP DIRECTLY AGAINST, UH, THIS PROPERTY.

UM, WE HAVE CONCERNED THAT NOISE POLLUTION, UM, FROM BOTH CARS AND INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY BE OUT ON THEIR BALCONY, I'VE BEEN LIVING IN AUSTIN FOR YEARS.

I WAS A STUDENT AT UT.

I KNOW WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO BE YOUNG IN AUSTIN.

UM, AND, UH, I KNOW HOW LOUD I WAS.

AND, UH, SO, SO THESE ARE CONCERNS THAT I OBVIOUSLY HAVE.

NOW, THIS IS SORT OF A UNIQUE SITUATION WITH THIS BUILDING BECAUSE IT, IT, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTIES, UM, CREATING THIS LITTLE CUL-DE-SAC, YOU HAVE THIS BUILDING THAT WOULD THEN SORT OF INJECT ITSELF INTO THE MIDDLE OF A COL-DE-SAC.

UM, THAT MEANS WE ARE, SIR, THAT BUILDING IS SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES, WHICH MEANS ALL THE NOISE THAT EMANATES FROM THAT BUILDING GOES DIRECTLY INTO THE BACKYARDS OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

UM, ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN I HAVE IS, LISTEN, I DON'T THINK MANY OF US ARE OPPOSED TO THE IDEA OF HAVING, UM, A MULTIFAMILY UNIT.

UM, WE UNDERSTAND THAT AUSTIN IS A GROWING CITY.

WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT DENSITY IS AN ISSUE, UM, THAT HELPS ADDRESS SOME OF OUR CONCERNS ABOUT URBAN SPRAWL AND TRAFFIC.

UM, WHAT I THINK MANY OF US DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY THIS SPECIFIC BUILDING HAS BEEN, OR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT OR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT HAS BEEN CHOSEN AS THE LARGEST PROJECT, UH, BETWEEN THE DOMAIN AND DOWNTOWN, UM, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING ITS UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS ABOUT HOW IT FITS DIRECTLY INTO THE BACK OF SINGLE-CELL.

I WILL BE VERY QUICK HERE.

I DO UNDERSTAND I HAVE REVIEWED THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, AND I, I BELIEVE THAT, UM, I AM IN SUPPORT OF THAT.

UH, AS LONG AS WE GET THESE, THIS COVENANT FILED WITH THE COUNTY PRIOR TO THE FIRST READING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL.

UM, AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S MY TIME.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY, UM, ONE MORE TIME WITH CAROLYN CHROME, JUST, UH, UH, TO GIVE THE THREE LAST THREE MINUTES SLOT.

UM, OTHERWISE WE'LL MOVE TO THE NEXT PERSON.

UH, CAROLYN CHROME, ARE YOU, ARE YOU AVAILABLE STAR SIX TO UNMUTE? OKAY.

I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE NEXT PERSON ON MY LIST, WHICH I SHOW TO BE, UH, RANDOMLY HIRSCH.

UM, YOU WILL HAVE THE LAST THREE MINUTES SLOT STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

I AM THREE MINUTES.

I LOOKED PREPARED FOR ONE.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT, UH, THIS IS A GREAT PLACE FOR DEVELOPMENT.

YES, I'M HERE BY INCLUDES YOU TO SUPPORT THE SCHOOL IN E AGAIN, THE AREA AROUND THIS, ALL THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING THAT IS ON BURNETT THAT IS LOCATED NEAR BOTH SOUTH AND NORTH DOESN'T EXCEED MF FOUR.

AND SO MFR, N P AS IN STAFF RECOMMENDED IS, UH, IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LOCATION.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AS ON THIS COMMISSION, AS IT IS NOW 11 O'CLOCK.

AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

I THINK I HEARD, UH, CAROLYN CRIM ON THE LINE AND I WILL GIVE YOU THAT THREE MINUTES SINCE, UH, UH, RANDOMLY HERTZ WAS CONSIDERATE TO JUST USE LESS THAN A MINUTE.

ARE YOU THERE CAROLYN CRIM? ARE YOU THERE? I THINK THE CHALLENGE WITH CAROLYN IS GOT IT.

EXTREME DELAY.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S TOO LATE.

WE'LL GIVE IT A FEW AS IT IS NOW.

11 MINUTES OFF AND THANK YOU.

ARE YOU THERE? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

OH, YOU CAN HEAR ME.

YOU GOT THREE MINUTES.

HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU.

UM, UH, I, OKAY.

UH, CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME NOW?

[05:00:01]

PLEASE START.

THIS IS CAROLYN CROOM AND I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON, UM, AND, AND MY HUSBAND SHUT DOWN HIS COMPUTER.

UH, YEAH.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? UM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME GOOD? HALLELUJAH.

OKAY, GOOD.

AND I'M ONLY GOING TO SPEND ABOUT ONE MINUTE.

UM, I, UH, UH, CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME NOW? HELLO? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU PLEASE.

THIS IS TRUE.

AND I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON, UM, MY HUSBAND SAT DOWN IN HIS COMPUTER.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? I I'M GETTING A GREAT DELAY.

UM, I, THIS IS A CHAIR.

HEY, WE, WE'VE GOT TO STOP THIS.

WE CAN'T CONTINUE THIS WAY.

IT'S SOMETHING TO DO WITH, I THINK YOUR TECHNOLOGY.

I APOLOGIZE, BUT WE NEED TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.

UM, LET'S GO AHEAD.

UH, THE NEXT ONE ON MY LIST IS NATALIE FRENSLEY NATALIE FRENSLEY.

ARE YOU THERE? YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.

UM, AND WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU, BUT I'M GOING TO SHARE A YES.

UH, HOW MANY MORE SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE? I'M NOT SURE WHO WE HAVE LEFT.

I HAVE, LET'S SEE IF I HAVE HOW MANY, SEVEN MORE, SEVEN MORE.

AND ONE MINUTE WE'RE GETTING, YEAH, WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO EXTENDED TIME.

SO, UH, LET ME, LET'S TAKE A PAUSE HERE CAUSE, UH, THERE'S BEEN SOME CLARIFICATION AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THIS, UH, MR. RIVERA, CAN YOU, UM, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.

WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS? UM, UH, I REALLY JUST GO, HERE'S MY PREFERENCE.

I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO TAKE CARE OF THIS TONIGHT, I THINK.

WE'VE GOT A LOT OF CASE LOADS.

UM, WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS BACK.

UH, I THINK, UM, MR. RIVERA LETTER OR CHOICES HERE, ANDREW.

SO THE COMMISSION HAS THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS.

YOU CAN EXTEND THE TIME AND PROCEED WITH THIS HEARING.

YOU CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUE DEBATE AND ACTION TO JUNE 8TH.

I BELIEVE THOSE ARE YOUR TWO OPTIONS.

SO CLARIFICATION.

UH, DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS THAT HAVE NOT SPOKEN? UH, DO WE JUST PICK THEM UP THE NEXT, AT THE NEXT MEETING, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING? I BELIEVE SO, BUT I WOULD WANT TO CONFER WITH LEGAL.

CAN I, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND SO THAT WE CAN HEAR ALL THE SPEAKERS WHO STAYED ON THE LINE FOR THIS LONG, AS LONG AS WE DON'T HAVE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.

AND THEN IF THE COMMISSION DECIDE, WE WANT TO TAKE UP THE DISCUSSION AND MOTION THAT A FUTURE MEETING, WE CAN DO THAT.

I GO AHEAD.

EXTEND TO 1145 AND SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.

UH, I'M HEARING YOU, I WANT TO HEAR APPLICANT.

UH, I JUST WANT TO HEAR IT.

THIS IS GOING TO PUT THEM IN, IN POSITION IF WE DELAY THIS, MR. GARDENY, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? UM, OUR STRONG PREFERENCE IS TO GO TONIGHT.

I THINK WE'VE, AND I, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I IMAGINE THAT THEY HAVE ALSO BEEN HERE WITH US AS WELL, UM, UH, THROUGH THE NIGHT AS, AS Y'ALL HAVE AS WELL.

AND OUR STRONG PREFERENCE IS TO DO THAT TONIGHT, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE, UM, FIRST READING SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 10TH.

AND, UM, AS YOU KNOW, AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN, ONCE YOU GET PULLED INTO THE SUMMER BREAK, IT'S A LONG TIME BEFORE YOU HAVE ANY OTHER MEETINGS.

SO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING AFTER JUNE 10TH IS JULY 29TH.

UH, BUT EVEN THEN THEY'RE DURING BUDGET.

SO I THERE'S NO CERTAINTY THAT IT WOULD BE EVEN THAT.

SO IT POTENTIALLY GETS PULLED INTO AUGUST.

AND JUST BECAUSE OF THAT, I THINK ARE, UM, STRONG.

THANK YOU, MR. I THINK, UH, SO, UM, UH, OKAY, MR. BRIGHT, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE

[05:05:01]

I GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER IS, ARE LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THAT, UM, EXTENSION CAN'T STAY ON.

I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE THE MEETING.

YEAH, WE, WE WILL HAVE QUORUM AND, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, WE CAN, WE CAN MAKE A DECISION GRADUATIONS TOMORROW, SORRY TO BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS ONE AND I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT TO RUSH THIS, UH, IN ANY WAY.

I NEED TO SEE THE BOAT.

WE'VE GOT ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT.

OH, I WOULD SAY NO.

COMMISSIONER IS OUR, WHAT'S YOUR VOTE? YOUR, YOUR BRAIN.

I JUST NEED TO COUNT.

UM, SO WE'VE GOT TWO TO EIGHT, UH, THAT PASSED AT 1145.

SO THIS WILL GIVE US, LET'S CONTINUE WITH THE, UM, ALL THE SPEAKERS I WAS ABOUT READY TO ASK FOR ANDREW CUNNINGHAM, MR. KENEHAN AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING A SLEEP OVER WITH EVERYBODY HERE ON HARDY CIRCLE AND ALLENDALE, AND EVERYBODY ELSE YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.

UM, COOL.

SO I JUST WANTED TO ECHO, UM, SOME OF THE PRIOR RESIDENTS, I LIVE AT 2019 HARDY CIRCLE.

SO, UM, AGAIN, LIKE SOME OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS ON THE STREET, UH, BUDDING A LOT OF SEDIMENT AT THE FRONT ROAD.

UM, AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CONSIDERING, UH, YOU KNOW, THE THING THAT EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE GREATLY IMPACTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT GOING ON.

I'D LIKE TO ECHO, UM, THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING TERMS FOR A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH THE DEVELOPER, UH, AND THE REPRESENTATIVE, THE DEVELOPER, MICHAEL GARDENY, UM, AND, UH, THE, THE, UM, TERMS THAT HAVE BEEN AGREED ON BY EVERYBODY WITH THE IDEA THAT IT WOULD BE FILED BEFORE IT GOES TO, UH, FIRST DRAINING AND CITY COUNCIL ON IF THAT HAPPENS IN GOOD FACE.

I THINK, UM, THE ISSUES THAT MANY OF THE PEOPLE, UH, ON THE STREET, UH, ARE HAVING ARE, ARE ACTUALLY ADDRESSED.

UM, SO THAT'S ALL I WILL.

BYE-BYE YEAH.

NEXT, WE HAVE VERY THOROUGH START.

UM, MARY FARROW FROM ALLENDALE, UM, I APPLAUD THE CHANGE FROM COMMERCIAL TO MULTIFAMILY HOUSING, BUT ALSO AM OPPOSED TO MF SIX ZONING AND INSTEAD SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

UM, AS NOTED BY THE STAFF THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE THE TALLEST BUILDING BETWEEN DOWNTOWN AND THE DOMAIN, AND REGARDLESS OF ANY POTENTIAL RESTRICTIVE COVENANT INTENDED TO APPEASE THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, MS. SIX ZONING IS GOING TO ESTABLISH A PRECEDENT FOR 90 FOOT BUILDINGS THAT WILL TOWER OVER HOMES IN LONG ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS AND EXTEND FOR MILES ALONG THE BURNETT ROAD CORRIDOR.

UM, IN ESSENCE, THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST DOMINO TO FALL AND OPENING THE DOORS FOR DEVELOPMENT, MORE SUITED TO AREAS NEAR THE DOMAIN OR DOWNTOWN.

UM, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND ITS IMPACT ON ALLENDALE STREETS AND NEIGHBORS.

UM, WOULD CREATE A LOT LESS SPECULATIVE PRESSURE ON BRENTWOOD PROPERTIES AND WOULD BE MORE RESPECTFUL OF LOCAL OWNED BUSINESS, SMALL BUSINESSES AND FAMILIES.

UM, I APPRECIATE, UH, KRISTEN PROVIDING AND PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IN AS WELCOME AS THEY MAY BE, THAT THE 33 UNITS, UH, THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED, UM, MAKE UP FOR THE, UH, VAST, UH, CHANGE IN ZONING THAT THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING.

SO I, I DO REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION GIVE A CONSIDERATION TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

IN THIS AREA? NO, THAT'S THE BEGINNING OF MANY MORE.

NEXT WE HAVE, UM, STEVEN PRESLEY STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

DO YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE? HELLO? YES.

YEAH, ONE MINUTE.

HELLO EVERYONE.

CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? OKAY? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU.

UH, THIS IS A CHAIR YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.

OKAY, GREAT.

GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL.

THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.

UM, YES.

UH, I'VE BEEN OPPOSED TO THIS ALL WITH, UH, ANY OF MY NEIGHBORS HERE IN HARDY CIRCLE.

UH, I BELIEVE THE, THE HEIGHT THAT WAS PLAYING WAS VERY AGGRESSIVE.

IT'S MORE FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF A DOWNTOWN AREA.

UH, DOESN'T REALLY SIT IN THIS AREA.

I DO BELIEVE THAT WELL, IF THEY BUILD THAT ONE BUILDING AT THAT HEIGHT, DO YOU THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE THE LAST BUILDING THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD IT AT THAT HEIGHT

[05:10:01]

IT WOULD JUST BE, UH, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, IT'S JUST THE FIRST DOMINO TO FALL.

UH, I ALSO THINK THAT IT'S, UH, UH, WELL COMPARABLES OR DOWNTOWN STRUCTURE, THERE'S GOING TO BE PRIVACY ISSUES.

THERE ARE SAFETY ISSUES BECAUSE, BECAUSE OF THE PRIVACY ISSUES, PEOPLE WOULD BE ABLE TO STAY IN THAT BUILDING.

IT LOOKED DOWN AT OUR BACKYARDS.

UH, WE HAVE MANY FAMILIES THAT LIVE ON OUR STREET WITH KIDS.

UM, SO IT IS A SAFETY CONCERN.

IT'S ALSO A PRIVACY CONCERN.

UM, ALSO, UH, WE'LL GIVE ACCESS, POSSIBLY THEM LOOKING AT WAYS TO TRY TO OPEN UP, UH, OUR STREET AND AT SOME POINT, AND MAYBE BRING IN MORE TRAFFIC THAN WHAT WE HAVE BEING ON A CUL-DE-SAC, UH, IT WILL BRING IN MORE TRAFFIC OVER AT COLIN AND JUSTIN, UH, WHICH IS CLOSE TO US.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC OVER THERE AS WELL.

UM, SO YEAH, I JUST DON'T THINK IT FITS WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE, YEAH.

TIME.

WE NEED TO MOVE ON.

WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE WE NEED TO GET IN.

UH, WE GOT MR. HUNT, UH, HOLOLENS, UH, MAGNUSON.

OH YEAH, PLEASE.

YOU GOT ONE MINUTE, SIR.

UM, AGAINST THE ZONING REQUEST FOR MF SIX IS BEING JUST TOO TALL AND IT'S TOO MUCH TRAFFIC BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR THE POINTS WE'RE GOING THROUGH.

I DO SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF EMMA FOR, OH, YOU'LL BACK MY TIME.

OH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND NEXT WE HAVE CAROLYN REYNOLDS, UM, STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE, CAROLINE.

I CAN HEAR YOU.

I'M UH, THIS IS CAROLINE REYNOLDS AND ALLENDALE.

I'M A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITH AN EYE FOR DETAIL.

AND I HAVE REVIEWED THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY CSW CARTS, INTREPID TEAM OF EXPERIENCED EXPERIENCED PROFESSIONALS.

AND I BELIEVE THE APP SHOULD HAVE BEEN RETURNED BECAUSE THE APPLICANT SAYS THAT ANYTHING LESS THAN 90 FEET IS NOT PROFITABLE.

CONSEQUENTLY, YOU MIGHT CONSIDER THE , BUT IT SHOULD'VE JUST BEEN RETURNED AND DENIED.

TOTALLY IT EXPERIENCED PROFESSIONALS CANNOT MAKE THIS PROFITABLE IN LESS THAN 75 FEET AND HIGHER DENSITY STONING.

THEN THIS PROPERTY NEEDS A DIFFERENT PLAN.

THIS COMPATIBLE WITH CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT GOALS.

WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS A FLUFF BALL, A POOR PLANNING, POOR TRAFFIC.

IT IGNORES ENVIRONMENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S VISUALLY INTRUDING ON NEIGHBORS AND IT'S UNUSUALLY LARGE APARTMENT SIZE IN ADEQUATE WATER PRESSURE BECAUSE WE HAVE OLD PIPES THAT LEAK OVERWHELMING SUPERSTORE FLOWS THAT WERE PLANNED FOR US TOWN OF PERHAPS 200,000 PLANTING PROJECTS SHOULD BE DENIED.

LEAVE THE PROPERTY OPEN FOR A BETTER PLAN OR A MORE COMPETENT AND CAPABLE TEAM.

LET'S NOT WASTE MORE TIME.

UM, AND LET'S SEE, WE'RE MOVING ON TO, UM, OOH, NO, NO, NO.

COREY CROW STARTS TO SEND ME HI.

YOU HAVE ONE HOMEOWNER AT, UH, 2009 HARDY CIRCLE.

UH, SO MY HOME IS FEATURED PROMINENTLY IN ONE OF YOUR FIRST FEW SIDES THERE.

UM, SO WHILE I DO HAVE SEVERAL SIGNIFICANT RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT BEING PROPOSED, I THINK THAT THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, MET IN AN AGREEABLE FASHION WITH THE, UH, THE RESTRICTED COVENANT THAT HAS BEEN PUT TOGETHER AND ATTENDED A FASHION AND THAT WE FULLY EXPECT TO BE EXECUTED AND SIGNED, UH, PRIOR TO THE FIRST MEETING AT CITY COUNCIL.

SO JUST WANTED TO THROW MY 2 CENTS IN THERE, UM, AND SAY THAT THAT IS AN EXPECTATION, UM, THAT MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS ON OUR STREET HAB AND, UH, WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THAT FULLY EXECUTED.

AND I'M GOING TO ATTEMPT TO DO THIS ONE MORE TIME.

I THINK WE HAD NATALIE FRIENDS, LEE.

I SAID, I'D COME BACK TO YOU.

UM, IF YOU WERE THERE, UH, WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU NOW.

THE FIRST THING I WANT TO DO IS JUST THANK THE FOLKS FROM CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD WHO WORK EXTENSIVELY WITH US ON THIS CASE, ESPECIALLY MIKE LEVINE AND CHARLOTTE PATTERSON AS WELL, AND ANDREW CUNNINGHAM, UM, AND BRAD RUSSELL.

I THINK WE'LL MOVE.

I HAVE ONE NEUTRAL SPEAKER, UH, AND CHARLOTTE PATTERSON AND OKAY.

I THINK, UH, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH WITH THE, UH, NOW THAT WE'VE FINISHED OUR SPEAKERS.

GO AHEAD AND GIVE THE APPLICANT THEIR THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.

IF WE CAN GET THAT IN.

THAT'D BE GREAT.

MR. GARDENY ARE YOU THERE? YEP.

I'M HERE.

UM, SO THE FIRST THING I JUST, SORRY,

[05:15:01]

AND AS YOU CAN TELL FROM THE EXTENSIVE LIST OF RESTRICTED COVENANT ITEMS THAT BRAD READ EARLIER, WE PUT IN AN ENORMOUS EFFORT TO MEET WITH THE CONCERNS OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS FAR AND ABOVE WHAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY SEE IN THIS TYPE OF CASE.

UH, AS YOU CAN GUESS, WE DON'T GENERALLY LIKE TO REGULATE WHAT KINDS OF BALCONIES RENTERS CAN HAVE, BUT IN THIS CASE, WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT AND WE WILL STAND BY THAT AGREEMENT TO GAIN THEIR SUPPORT.

UM, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TAKE A MOMENT THOUGH, TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE POLICY ARGUMENTS THAT WERE RAISED BY FOLKS, ESPECIALLY FOLKS IN THE ALLENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AUSTIN'S GROWING, WE KNOW WHAT THE RESULTS ARE AROUND US.

WE SEE THE FORM THAT THAT TAKES ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S BUILDING PERMIT DATA, ROUGHLY HALF OF THE UNITS BUILT IN THIS ZIP CODE OVER THE PAST DECADE WERE SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, GENERALLY TEAR DOWNS THAT ARE REBUILT LARGER.

AND TO END THE TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY HOME PRICE IN THE ZIP CODE IS $677,000 SEVEN EIGHT SEVEN FIVE SEVEN, WHICH INCLUDES UP AROUND DALE PARTS OF NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS.

IN CONTRAST, THE BUILDING PERMIT DATA INDICATES THAT FOR MULTIFAMILY UNITS BUILT IN THE ZIP CODE OVER THE LAST DECADE WERE LARGELY CONFINED TO ONLY FOUR PROJECTS.

IF EVEN ONE OF THEM HAD FALLEN THROUGH IT WOULD HAVE HAD A VERY LARGE IMPACT ON THE NUMBER OF HOMES AVAILABLE TO AUSTIN RENTERS IN THIS AREA.

I JUST BRING THAT UP TO EMPHASIZE HOW IMPORTANT INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES LIKE THIS ARE.

IT MAY BE JUST ONE CASE, BUT THAT ONE CASE MAY END UP HAVING A HUGE IMPACT ON WHAT HOUSING OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE IN AN AREA.

AND THAT'S ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT FOR PROJECTS OFFERING INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS AND PROJECTS IN HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS WITH ACCESS TO QUALITY SCHOOLS, PARKS AMENITIES, UH, AND AS WITH BURNETT, ONE OF ONLY TWO RAPID TRANSIT BUSES IN THE ENTIRE CITY.

AND AS A REMINDER, THIS PROJECT WOULD OFFER THE FIRST INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS AVAILABLE IN THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD TO DATE.

AND ONE OF THE MAIN ARGUMENTS WAS THAT THERE'S NO INCREMENT OF GROWTH AS APPROPRIATE, NOT EVEN ONE ADDITIONAL STORY, WHICH ASSUMES THAT OUR EXISTING CORRIDOR CAPACITY MEETS OUR NEEDS AS A CITY TODAY.

BUT IT DOESN'T.

IF THE ZONING AND CAPACITY ALONG OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS WERE PERFECTLY CALIBRATED, WE WOULDN'T BE FALLING SHORT ON OUR HOUSING GOALS.

THE REALITY IS, AS YOU'VE SEEN MUCH OF OUR CORRIDOR CAPACITY IS LIMITED, WHICH MAKES CASES LIKE THIS ONE IN WHICH WE ARE REQUESTING ONE INCREMENT OF GROWTH, ONE ADDITIONAL STORY, VERY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF OUR OVERALL HOUSING STRATEGY.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS CASE IS GOING TO, SINGLE-HANDEDLY SOLVE ALL OUR HOUSING NEEDS IN AUSTIN.

THERE'S A BROADER SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS THAT WE CAN'T SOLVE HERE TODAY WITH THIS CASE, BUT WE CAN TAKE THAT ONE INCREMENTAL STEP AND THAT ONE INCREMENTAL STEP WILL HAVE AN IMPACT.

AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED YOU TO SUPPORT US TODAY.

AND I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND I APPRECIATE YOU SLOGGING IT THROUGH THE EVENING WITH US AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU.

SO, UM, GO AHEAD.

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE A MOTION BY SO, UH, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

ARE WE CLOSING IT? COMMISSIONER HOWARD.

I THINK WE'VE GOT EVERYBODY UNANIMOUS, CLOSED THE HEARING.

SO, BUT WE WERE CLOSING THE HEARING.

UH, I'M LOOKING AT THE CLOCK.

WE HAVE, UM, WHAT WE AGREED TO 15.

SO WE GOT 15, 22 MINUTES.

UH, I, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH OUR MANY QUESTIONS ON THIS.

UH, THIS EVENING, YOU GUYS, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SOME INPUT WE CAN KEEP GOING, BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO FALL SHORT OF MAKING ANY DECISION THIS EVENING.

SO DETROIT, UM, AT THE END AFTER MIDNIGHT, YES, IT WILL BE, IT WILL BE AFTER MIDNIGHT.

SO, UH, VICE CHAIR, I'M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED.

THE ACTIONS WE NEED TO TAKE.

I KNOW WE NEED TO POSTPONE TILL A DATE CERTAIN, RIGHT.

UH, OR WE CONTINUED HEARING THIS, SO DO I HAVE A MOTION? OKAY.

UH, I HEAR COMMISSIONER SHAY.

MOTION TO POSTPONE TO THE NEXT, UM, THE NEXT HEARING DATE.

YOU KNOW, WE JUST GOT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT ENOUGH DISCUSSION, SO, SO EMOTION, BUT WE'VE GOT THAT.

SO THAT WOULD BE TO CLARIFY B 11, 12, AND BE 13 TO POSTPONE TILL WE HAVE TO DO IT ON JUNE 8TH.

IS THAT YOUR MOTION? OKAY.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX.

UM, CAN I SEE A VOTE ON THE POSTPONEMENT? WE HAVE NINE AND WE HAVE, UH, UM, AND PART OF THE REASON WAS WE WERE LOSING POTENTIALLY ONE COMMISSIONER HAD TO POTENTIALLY LEAVE PRETTY SOON.

SO, UM,

[05:20:01]

SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO POST ON THOSE.

LET'S GO IN VERY QUICKLY.

WE DON'T REALLY, UH, ON THE REMAINING ITEMS. UM, IF WE WANT TO GO TO THIS.

CAN I JUST MAKE A COMMENT QUICKLY? I, I KNOW THIS IS A HEAVY BURDEN, BUT I HOPE THAT AT BE SOME OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WE'VE TALKED SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THEIR RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON.

IF THEY COULD JOIN US AT OUR NEXT MEETING IN THIS, WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THEM.

I KNOW I HAVE QUESTIONS.

I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A HEAVY COMMUNITY COMMISSIONER, MUCH TALLER AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THAT.

IF THEY ACTUALLY GET IT WORKED OUT, THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO KNOW.

UH, SO YES, ECHOING WHAT COMMISSIONER SAID, UH, TO THE SPEAKERS OUT THERE PLEASE COME BACK.

UM, I REALLY, THAT WE REALLY DID TRY TO GET IT DONE THIS EVENING.

I APOLOGIZE, BUT WE WOULD REALLY BE PUSHING THIS TILL THE WAY WE ARE, THE PLACE WE'VE BEEN GOING.

IT WOULD BE 1245, ONE O'CLOCK AND, UH, THAT'S JUST NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR ANY OF US.

SO I APOLOGIZE.

SO PLEASE COME BACK ON JUNE EIGHT, SIGN UP TO SPEAK.

YOU CAN DO THAT AGAIN.

UM, AND I JUST WANT TO GO AND CLEAR THE OTHER ITEMS FROM THE AGENDA VERY QUICKLY.

IT WILL GET DONE ON TIME.

UM, WE HAVE, UH, FUTURE ITEMS, NOTHING UNDER C.

UM, WE HAVE ITEM D I TAKE COMMISSIONER COX.

YOU HAVE NINE OF YOU WANTED TO SEE IF

[D. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]

YOU'D GET A SECOND ON.

YEAH, SUPER QUICK.

HOPEFULLY I CAN GET A SECOND.

UH, I WAS INFORMED, UH, BY AN ARCHITECT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS A VERY BIG PROPONENT OF ADU.

THAT'S ACTUALLY DESIGNING AN ADU THAT THE AUSTIN ENERGY REGULATIONS HAVE RECENTLY CHANGED.

THEY, UH, DECIDED TO DOUBLE THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO THEIR UTILITIES, WHICH HAS CAUSED, UH, UH, SOME SERIOUS CONCERN ABOUT THE VIABILITY OF ADU.

APPARENTLY THAT REGULATE REGULATORY CHANGE WAS MADE WITHOUT ANY SORT OF SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS THAN I'M AWARE OF.

AND SO I HOPE THAT I CAN GET A SECOND.

I SEE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER SHEA.

SO WE'LL, WE'LL ASK THAT.

WE'LL ASK AUSTIN ENERGY STAFF TO COME AND DISCUSS THAT WITH US AT A FUTURE MEETING HOPEFULLY SOON.

UM, YEP.

NO, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.

AND THEN WE MOVE ON TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

I'M JUST GONNA CODES AND ORDINANCES ANYTHING.

[E. BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING THERE.

UH, THEY'RE TRYING TO SCHEDULE MEETINGS, SMALL AREA PLANNING.

NOPE.

UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT.

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE, HOW IT'S GOING TO TRANSACTION WITH THE, UH, WITH THE CHANGE IN THE FUTURE WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

UH, MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP.

UM, MR. THOMPSON, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE A QUICK UPDATE? I KNOW THEY THERE'S BEEN A DELAY IN RELEASING THE DRAFT, SO WE HAVE SOME TIME, RIGHT? YEAH.

I THINK, UM, WE HAD A SMALL MEETING, UM, AND DISCUSSED A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS, BUT, UM, I THINK WE WERE GOING TO STILL TRY TO GET SOME TIMINGS ON THAT AND ADD SOME MORE MINUTES.