[CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL]
[00:00:04]
THIS IS SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE DESIGN COMMISSION.
THIS IS ART, SOMEWHAT ANA WITH HOUSING PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, TODAY'S AUGUST 5TH, DESIGN COMMISSION CALLING ROW, UH, CHAIR CURL RESIDENCE, VICE CHAIR.
ROLISON PRESENT COMMISSIONER GONZALES, COMMISSIONER FRANCO COMMISSIONER MINORS.
COMMISSIONER TEND TO GUCCI PRESENT COMMISSIONER HERNIA.
ROBLEDO PRESIDENT COMMISSIONER WEAVER, COMMISSIONER COLEMAN PRESENT COMMISSIONER WATLEY, PRESENT COMMISSIONER LUKINS.
HAVE, DID ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? UH, I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING SHOWING ANY CITIZENS COMMUNICATION UP.
[1a. Discussion and possible action on recommendations related to the Downtown Density Bonus Program.]
INTO OUR BUSINESS FOR THE DAY.UM, ONE, A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
HOPEFULLY EVERYONE GOT A CHANCE TO REVIEW BACK UP CEREAL.
UM, THERE WAS A S UH, THREE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE WORKING GROUP PUT TOGETHER RELATED TO THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
UM, LET'S START THE DISCUSSION OFF ON THIS.
I HAVE KIND OF IDENTIFIED A FEW THINGS I WANTED TO TALK MORE ABOUT, UM, WITH THE GROUP, UM, SPECIFICALLY ON PAGE THREE, WHICH IS THE SECOND PAGE OF THE, OF THE, UM, TIERED RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND THE, THE GRAPHIC THAT WAS PROVIDED, WE SHOW A FOR THE FEE, WE SHOW A TWO X AND I'M GOING TO PROPOSE, WE GET RID OF THAT, BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO SUGGEST THAT WE'RE SAYING THAT THAT SHOULD BE TWICE THE FEE AS TOGETHER.
WHEN IN FACT, I THINK WHAT WE WANT TO SAY IS THAT THE FEES COULD BE, OR SHOULD BE DIFFERENT.
UH, BUT THEY NEED TO BE CALIBRATED ACCORDINGLY, AND WE DON'T WANT TO IMPLY THAT IT NEEDS TO BE DOUBLE THE FEES.
SO THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT, UM, I WANT TO PROPOSE THAT WE MAKE.
CAN I PROPOSE THAT I SHARE MY SCREEN AS I MAKE THIS GRAPH IT? SURE.
UH, I NEED TO GET PERMISSION COMING RIGHT UP.
LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU GUYS CAN SEE THAT.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE WRONG ONE.
SO IS IT SHOWING AN INDESIGN WINDOW? OH, IT IS.
THE GRAPHIC FROM THE RECOMMENDATION THOUGH.
IT'S THAT'S BECAUSE I WANTED TO REMAKE THIS.
[00:05:01]
I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE, MAKE IT HOTLINE IT, UM, AND IT WILL BE GOOD TO GET, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS ON WHAT THE WORDS SHOULD BE IN THIS, BUT YEAH.SO, SO I WOULD PROPOSE THAT, YOU KNOW, HOW IN THE SECOND TIER WE HAVE A DOLLAR SIGN X THAT, AND THIS THIRD TIER, WE JUST DO LIKE A DOLLAR SIGN.
WHY SHOULD IT BE A DIFFERENT NUMBER? UM, THEN SORT OF RELATED TO THAT IN THE VERBIAGE ON THE PAGE BEFORE, WHICH IS PAGE TWO OF THE DOCUMENT WHERE WE DESCRIBED TIER THREE, WE SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT THE FEE IS TO BE HIGHER.
UM, I WANTED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT IF WE WANT TO SPECIFICALLY USE THAT TERM, OR IF WE WANT TO BE A LITTLE MORE VAGUE TO SAY THAT EACH OF THESE TIERS SHOULD BE CALIBRATED INDEPENDENTLY SO THAT WE ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN BOTH OF THEM AND LET THE PEOPLE DOING THE WORK, FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS.
UM, SO THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ANOTHER OPTION THAN SAYING SPECIFICALLY HIRE.
UM, AND ONE OF THE REASONS I'M SUGGESTING THAT IS BECAUSE IT ALSO TIES INTO HOW WE'RE CALLING OUT ABOVE GRADE PARKING TOWARDS FAR.
SO, I MEAN, THAT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM IN AND OF ITSELF, BUT IF WE DO THE FED IN THERE THAT IS AN EXTRA BURDEN TO DEVELOPERS ON THEIR PROFORMA.
AND SO THEREFORE THE FEE MAYBE SHOULDN'T BE THAT MUCH HIGHER IN THAT TIER.
THEY'RE GETTING AN ACTIVE, THEY'RE PAYING AN EXTRA BURDEN BY, BY THAT FAR.
ANYWAY, I'D LIKE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO, FOR THE DIAGRAM TO SAY, LIKE, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT IT COULD BE.
AND I TOOK CALIBRATED CORRECTLY.
CAUSE WE CAN'T BE WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TODAY, LIKE DECIDE WHAT THAT SHOULD BE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY, I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I SAY WE COULD USE SOME LANGUAGE, LIKE THE FEE, THOSE PER SQUARE FOOT FOR TIERS TWO AND THREE SHOULD BE CALIBRATED INDEPENDENTLY SO THAT EACH HAVE APPROPRIATE FEES TO ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN BOTH TIERS.
UM, I DIDN'T CATCH THAT TO WRITE IT DOWN, BUT I AGREE.
JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS FOR BOTH CON UH, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL THERE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TWO DIFFERENT CHARTS.
THIS WOULD BE FOR ALL PROJECTS.
UM, SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT, UM, SINCE WE'VE PUT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TOGETHER, THAT KIND OF JUMPED OUT AT ME THAT WE PROBABLY WANTED TO LOOK AT, UM, AND POSSIBLY TWEAK SO WE CAN START THERE.
OR IF ANYBODY HAD ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE Y-AXIS LIKE, WHAT DO WE WANT TO LABEL IT? UH, IT'S ESSENTIALLY F I R AND, AND EVERYBODY LIKE, YEAH, I KNOW IT'S IF I HAVE, BUT WE DO.
WE WANT TO HAVE, KEEP ANY OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE KIND OF ASSOCIATED GROSS DEVELOPMENT, VALUE, DENSITY, HEIGHT, ANYTHING LIKE THAT? MAYBE WE CAN SAY DENSITY, I WOULDN'T LEAVE HEIGHT BECAUSE THERE IT'S NOT TRUE.
SO YEAH, JUST SAY OUR DENSITY, I THINK IS FINE.
I SHOULD HAVE WALLY, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? YEAH, I WAS JUST ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE, THE TIER ONE, TWO AND THREE IN MY MIND, I'D MAKE IT JUST
[00:10:01]
BASED ZONING AND TIER ONE AND TIER TWO IS TIER ONE AND THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.SO IT WOULD BE, IT'S REALLY JUST TWO TIERS.
SO, SO BASED ON COMMISSIONER COLEMAN, THIS A COMMENT ABOUT COMMERCIAL VERSUS HOUSING.
HOW IS THE COMMERCIAL GONNA INCENTIVIZE FIELD UNITS ON THE GROUND? THEY, THEY PAY A FEE IN LIEU, RIGHT? OH YEAH.
THEY CAN PROVIDE A COMMUNITY BENEFIT THAT'S LISTED IN THE CODE OR THEY CAN PAY A FEE IN LIEU.
BUT NUMBER ONE, THE FIRST PAGE SAYS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE BUILT UNITS ON THE GROUND WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.
SO, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT CONVERT THE, HOW DOES A FEE IN LIEU OF HELP BUILD THOSE UNITS DOWNTOWN FROM THE COMMERCIAL PROJECT? WHAT IT SAYS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, IT SAYS, WAIT, WHICH SENTENCE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? UH, THE FIRST RESOLUTION ON HOW DOWNTOWN DENSITY FEES SHOULD BE USED.
OH, THAT'S A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION.
SO THERE'S THREE RECOMMENDATIONS.
IT'S ALL INCLUDED IN ONE PDF, BUT THE FIRST PAGE IS A RECOMMENDATION IN ABOVE ITSELF.
THEN THE NEXT FEW PAGES, PAGES TWO AND THREE ARE RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN THE THIRD IS PAGE FOUR.
SO THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMERCIAL PROJECTS WILL JUST THAT'S GRANTED THAT THAT THERE'LL BE WELL, THEY DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A COMMUNITY BENEFIT OTHER THAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
BUT YES, THE MORE THAN LIKELY THEY'LL END UP PAYING A FEE AND THE, BUT YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY THESE ARE CALIBRATED IN A WAY THAT THEY THINK ABOUT IT.
AND THERE'S AN, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT ON SITE.
ALTHOUGH THE FEE NOW GOES TO HOUSING VOUCHERS, YOU KNOW, THE FEES COULD PUT, BE PUT TO OTHER PROGRAMS FOR NONPROFITS AS A CITY.
MAYBE IT COULD, YOU KNOW, CONSTRUCT OR, UM, HOPE CONSTRUCTING UNITS DOWNTOWN.
SO MAYBE INDIRECTLY, THERE'S STILL A MECHANISM FOR AN OFFICE THAT PROVIDES A FEE IN LIEU TO, YOU KNOW, INDIRECTLY LEAD TO UNITS ON THE GROUND.
I THINK WE INCLUDED THAT, UM, IN, IN THIS FIRST RECOMMENDATION ENGINE, RIGHT, DAVID, YES.
THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS SPECIFICALLY HOW THE FEES SHOULD BE USED.
AND WE DO SAY THAT THAT SOME OF THESE FEES SHOULD BE REDIRECTED AWAY FROM THE VOUCHER PROGRAM.
UM, WE KEPT IT WITH QUASI CITY ENTITIES, AND THEN WE SAID THAT SOME OF THE FUNDS SHOULD GO TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND S AND SOME TO THE, UH, HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, UH, RATHER THAN CALL OUT SPECIFIC DEVELOPERS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THE FINANCING CORPORATION DOES AWARD FUNDS TO PRIVATE DEVELOPERS.
SO ULTIMATELY IF THEY GET FUNDING THAT WILL GO TO PRIVATE DEVELOPERS.
BUT, UM, THE ESSENCE OF THAT, OF THAT FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS BASICALLY THE, THE DIFFERENCE IN FEES AT THE CITY WILL NOW BE COLLECTING SINCE THEY'LL BE COLLECTING HIGHER FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NOW FEES FOR COMMERCIAL, THAT ESSENTIALLY THE DIFFERENCE SHOULD GO TOWARDS, UH, BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE VOUCHER PROGRAM CAN CONTINUE TO RECEIVE ANY DATA IT RECEIVES TODAY.
SO THAT'S KIND OF THE SYNOPSIS OF THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION.
THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION IS CALLING FOR, UH, UH, A TIERED SYSTEM LIKE RAINEY STREET DISTRICT CURRENTLY HAS ACROSS THE WHOLE DOWNTOWN.
UM, AND THEN THE THIRD RECOMMENDATION, UM, IS TALKING ABOUT HOW THE CITY NEEDS TO BETTER, UM, LOOK AT THE BARRIERS ON SITE
[00:15:01]
AND THE OPERATION AND, UM, LAND ACQUISITION CHALLENGES, KIND OF ALL THOSE DEVELOPMENT HURDLES, UH, THAT AREN'T REALLY BEING TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT WE CAN TELL.SO THEN THREE, THREE SEPARATE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO WE'LL HAVE WE'LL VOTE ON THEM ALL SEPARATELY, BUT I'M HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT, YEAH, GO AHEAD, CHRISTIAN.
IT LOOKED LIKE, UH, THE, THIS MONEY WAS GOING TO BE, UH, DISTRIBUTED TO THE AUSTIN ECONOMIC WHAT'S WHAT, WHAT ENTITY WAS GOING TO RECEIVE THESE FUNDS IT'S LISTED IN THE RESOLUTION.
WE RECOMMENDED THE AUSTIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, HAS IT, IS GOING TO HAVE ITS OWN BOARD AND OPERATION, BUT IT ALSO KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, HAS TO, COULD THERE BE MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO ENGAGE WITH LIKE FOUNDATION COMMUNITIES OR EVEN COMMUNITY FIRST TO START AFFECTING EVEN THE HOMELESS POPULATION NEEDS? UM, WHY IS IT JUST THAT ONE ENTITY LISTED? WELL, IT'S NOT GOOD.
IT'S NOT JUST THE ONE AUNTIE, SO THAT THAT'S THE NEW CITY ENTITY THAT IS A CITY ENTITY.
THAT'S GOING TO TRY TO PARTNER AND DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND THEN THE OTHER ENTITY WE LIST IS THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, WHICH ACTUALLY AWARDS FUNDS TO DEVELOPERS LIKE FOUNDATION COMMUNITIES TO BUILD HOUSING.
AND THAT'S, THAT SYSTEM IS ALREADY IN PLACE.
SO IT BASICALLY JUST BE GIVING THEM ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO DO MORE AWARDS BECAUSE, UM, IT'S, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE GETTING A LOT OF APPLICATIONS AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE WALKING AWAY WITH NO FUNDING OR LEGITIMATE PROJECTS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S A NEED THERE TO PROVIDE THEM WITH SOME MORE FUNDING.
AND SO WE LISTED THEM AND IT'S NOT A HANDOUT DIRECTLY TO, UM, DEVELOP PRIVATE DEVELOPERS.
IT'S STILL IN THE CITY'S HANDS TO THEN AWARD IT TO THOSE PRIVATE DEVELOPERS.
AND WE'RE NOT HAVING TO REINVENT THE WHEEL WITH THIS.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
AND THAT'S CLEAR ENOUGH, RIGHT.
HOW IT SAYS TO AWARD MORE FUNDING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AUSTIN.
I JUST, JUST, I WONDER, I DON'T WORRY.
I WAS GOING TO SAY WORRY, BUT I WONDER IF THE AUSTIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BY SENDING IT TO THEM, DO THEY CHARGE A MANAGEMENT FEE? I MEAN, IS THERE, IS THERE A MIDDLEMAN BY CINDY AND THEY'RE CURIOUS, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S SET UP YET CAUSE IT'S IN ITS INFANT STAGES.
WELL, THE, THE, THE, THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS LISTED HERE, THE AUSTIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.
I DON'T KNOW HOW CAN YOU, THE INTENT WAS TO, UM, AND YOU KNOW, AND WE INTENTIONALLY DIDN'T SAY THIS MUCH, YOU KNOW, 50% SHOULD GO HERE AND 50% SHOULD GO THERE.
WE, WE, WE LISTED THEM AS ESSENTIALLY EXAMPLES AND BECAUSE THEY ARE CITY ENTITIES OR CAUSE A CITY ENTITY WHEN IT COMES TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, UM, THAT, THAT WAS AN EASIER ASK SINCE THOSE ONE, THE SYSTEM'S ALREADY IN PLACE AND THERE'S CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT SERVE ON THE BOARD OF THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION AND THEN TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WAS CREATED BY COUNCIL.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL BE KIND OF BEHOLDEN TO THEM AS THEY MOVE FORWARD IN THEIR OPERATIONS.
AND SO IT KIND OF FELT LIKE THOSE WERE SAFE AND OBVIOUS CHOICES VERSUS TRYING TO GET MORE INTO THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND DEBATING THROUGH WHO SHOULD RECEIVE THAT, THAT FUNDING.
AND IF WE, IF WE FUND THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION MORE THAN THEY CAN MAKE THAT DECISION ON WHICH PRIVATE DEVELOPERS GET THE MONEY, I THINK I WAS JUST ASKING THAT IN THE SPIRIT OF, WE KNOW THE VOUCHERS AREN'T WORKING AND NOT JUST DISTRIBUTING IT TO ANOTHER VOUCHER SYSTEM, TAN, TANGIBLE HOUSING BEING THE GOAL.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THEIR STATED GOALS IS TO ACTUALLY DEVELOP HOUSING.
[00:20:02]
SO THAT'S WHY WE, THAT'S WHY WE LISTED THEM IN ADDITION TO THE HOUSING CORPORATION.THAT'S THE WHOLE INTENT, UM, IS TO DIRECT IT TO WHERE IT'LL BE USED TO BUILD HOUSING.
THAT'S REALLY THE END OF THIS, UM, SUGGESTION.
UH, SO WE, THE WAY WE COULD TACKLE THIS IS JUST GO, MAYBE IT'S BETTER TO JUST DO ONE AT A TIME.
UM, SO YEAH, LOOKING AT THE FIRST ONE, WHICH IS HOW THE FEES SHOULD BE USED, ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THAT ONE, HAS ANYONE NOT HAD HAD A CHANCE TO READ THIS YET? THAT WANTS TO HAVE A MINUTE TO LIKE SOAK IT IN.
I'VE READ IT SO QUICKLY, BUT I DO HAVE A THOUGHT, I DON'T KNOW WHEN TO BRING IT UP, SO I'LL JUST BRING IT UP NOW.
UM, GIVEN THAT, UH, THIS EMERGENCY MEASURE TO INSTITUTE THE FEE TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS HAPPENED OUT OF THE BLUE IN A WAY, UH, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO CODE NEXT BEING ADOPTED, LET'S SAY, SO IT CAME, IT CAME SUDDENLY AND IT CAME WITH AN $18 APPROXIMATE PRICE TAG TO IT.
SEVERAL OF THOSE PROJECTS, LAMB WAS ALREADY PURCHASED PRO FARMERS ALREADY DEVELOPED COMMITMENTS ALREADY MADE.
SO IT'S QUITE A SHOCK TO THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM OF A PROJECT FOR SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY UNDERWAY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE JUST WONDERED IF THERE'S NOT A WAY TO PHASE THIS IN OVER TIME.
SO THAT PURCHASES THAT WERE MADE PERFORMANCE MODELS THAT WERE BUILT COMMITMENTS THAT WERE MADE DELL POTENTIALLY STOPPED SOME PROJECTS UNDERWAY.
I JUST WORRY THAT THAT'S A LOT TO SWALLOW IN A, MOMENT'S NOTICE SOME TYPE OF GRANDFATHERING FATHERING OR TIERED, YOU KNOW, IT'S THIS MUCH ONE YEAR THIS MUCH, THE SECOND YEAR.
AND THEN THE THIRD YEAR IS WHATEVER IT IS JUST BECAUSE SOME OF THESE PURCHASES WERE MADE A YEAR OR SO AGO WITH A CERTAIN ECONOMIC MODEL PUT IN PLACE.
AND IT'S, I JUST THINK IT'S ALMOST FORCING I'M IN THE REAL ESTATE BUSINESSES.
I THINK IT'S JUST A COURTESY NOT TO CHANGE THE RULES AFTER YOU'VE MADE COMMITMENTS UNDER ANOTHER SET OF RULES.
I MEAN, I THINK AN EASY SOLUTION WOULD JUST BE TO USE THE MODEL THAT THEY'RE DOING FOR THE STREET IMPACT FEES.
AND NOW ESSENTIALLY TO DELAY IT FOR 18 MONTHS FOR ITS IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE FEE PART.
UH, SO THEY COULD DO THAT WITH HEAT, WITH THIS, TO SAY, HERE ARE THE NEW FEES, WE'VE CALIBRATED IT.
AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN THIS FUTURE DATE, UM, TO GET TO, TO GIVE PEOPLE TIME TO, UM, ANTICIPATE THAT AS PART OF THEIR COST AND THEIR PERFORMANCE.
SO WE CAN RECOMMEND THAT I WOULD, AND I DON'T THINK 18 MONTHS IS ENOUGH.
UM, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD PROPOSE SOMETHING WHERE LIKE TWO OR THREE YEARS, OF COURSE IT'S GRADUAL, IT'S NOT ZERO TO 18, BUT GRADUATED OVER TIME ZERO, THEN ANOTHER, ANOTHER EVENT.
UM, I COULD ASK A QUESTION OR GO AHEAD B, SO THIS IS FOR THAT, IT'S JUST FOR THE DENSITY.
SO SHOULD I ASSUME THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WROTE PROFORMAS A SHOWROOMING, THEY WANT TO GET A DENSITY BONUS.
THAT'S A PRETTY BOLD ASSUMPTION.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY DID HISTORICALLY.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT, UH, THAT'S WHAT A SEASONED DEVELOPER DOES IF THEY DON'T KNOW THAT THAT THERE'S A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T PERSONALLY KNOW OF DEVELOPERS THAT STARTED A PROJECT DOWNTOWN THINKING THEY WERE GOING TO PROVIDE A COMMUNITY BENEFIT ONSITE THAT THEY START A PROJECT AND THEY WANT TO GET A DENSITY BONUS.
THAT'S BECAUSE WE WERE ENCOURAGING DENSITY DOWNTOWN.
I WOULD ASSUME BECAUSE IT WAS ASSUMABLE.
WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THEY'RE PUTTING THEIR BUDGET TOGETHER, THAT'S A FEE THAT THEY PLUG IN, UH, RULES IN PLAY AT THAT TIME.
[00:25:01]
THAT THE CITY'S ALWAYS COMING UP WITH NEW FEES, YOU KNOW? AND USUALLY WHEN YOU APPLY FOR A SITE PLAN OR YOU, YOU FALL FOR THAT FIRST PERMIT, IT KIND OF LOCKS YOU IN TO THE FEES THAT ARE IN PLACE AT THE TIME.AND SO IF NEW FEES COME UP, YOU KNOW, AFTER YOU START YOUR SITE PLAN, WHILE YOU'RE WORKING ON BUILDING DESIGN, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT BURDENED BY THOSE EXTRA FEES BECAUSE YOU'RE ALREADY INTO THE PROJECT.
AND SO I THINK BIT THERE'S SOME BUILT-IN PROTECTION AND THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOME UNCERTAINTIES.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES SOMEONE ASSUMED, YEAH, SOMETIMES THE DEVELOPERS HAVEN'T FINALIZED THE PURCHASE OF THEIR PROPERTY UNTIL, YOU KNOW, THE SITE PLAN STARTS AT SOME POINT.
I, MY, I ASSUME THAT PEOPLE ASSUME THAT YOU CAN GET A DENSITY BONUS BECAUSE IT'S A, UM, A STANDARD PROGRAM THAT YOU CAN PLAN FOR.
IT'S NOT JUST LIKE A, HEY, PLEASE, CAN I HAVE THIS? WHAT CAN I HAVE? HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? IT'S LIKE, THIS IS HOW MUCH YOU CAN HAVE, AND THIS IS HOW MUCH IT COSTS, RIGHT? YEAH.
WHY DON'T WE CALL IT A BONUS? IT'S NOT MORE THAN THE BASE.
IT'S MORE THAN THE BASE ZONING.
SO WE AUTOMATICALLY GRANT THE BONUS.
WHY DO WE SIMPLY, UH, WHY DON'T WE HAVE A BA, WHY DON'T WE HAVE A BASE BECAUSE THE BONUSES, IT COSTS YOU SO KNOW.
WELL, APPARENTLY IT DOESN'T COST ANYONE THOUGH IN THE COMMERCIAL, IS IT, IS IT MAY CUTTING OUT OR HAS BEEN CUTTING OUT? YEAH, HE CUT OUT ON MY END TOO.
SO, UH, BEN, THE WAY, THE WAY IT'S SET UP TO HAVE THE BASE ZONING CREATES A TRIGGER FOR THOSE IN DISH, ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS, THEN THE CITY CAN ASK FOR, UH, FEES OR ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND THEY DO IT THAT WAY BECAUSE OF THE WHOLE INCLUSIONARY ZONING IN TEXAS.
BUT DO WE NOT ALREADY HAVE COMMUNITY BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS AND FEES FOR COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, UM, SESSIONS HELPING ME REALIZE THAT WE SHOULD REALLY TAKE OFF THIS YEAH.
RIGHT ON THE BASE SIGNING IT DOESN'T IT'S FREE.
YOU JUST BUILD WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD.
I MEAN, THERE'S DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR EVERY PROJECT, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, BUT THERE'S NO, UM, ADDED DENSITY BONUS FEE.
IF YOU'RE JUST DOING BASE, WHATEVER'S ALLOWED AT YOUR BASE ZONING STANDARD DEVELOPMENT FEES.
WHICH IS PERFECTLY EX I MEAN, THERE CAN BE PROJECTS IN DOWNTOWN THAT DO SIX TO ONE, IF THEY ARE, AND DON'T HAVE TO OPT INTO THE DENSITY BONUS, BUT GIVEN THE VALUE OF THE LAND, IF THERE'S NO, UH, CAPITOL VIEW COURT OR YOU'RE NOT IN THAT HISTORIC DISTRICTS, THEN MOST OF THEM ARE GOING TO GO UP AS HIGH AS THEY CAN.
SO DO WE HAVE A FEE RIGHT NOW FOR DENTISTS, FOR COMMERCIAL DENSITY BONUSES? WELL, TECHNICALLY YES, THERE IS AN INTERIM FEE THAT THE CITY INSTITUTED ABOUT A MONTH AGO, BUT BEFORE THAT THERE WAS NO FEE.
OR IT'S ALREADY LIKES TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, OR CLARIFY, THERE THERE IS
DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? UH, I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THAT.
IT, IT, IT WAS ZERO PRIOR TO BEING EMERGENCY ADOPTED AT $18 APPROXIMATELY FOOT PER FOOT.
AND I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS, UM, AND I KIND OF ALREADY ITERATE AERATED.
THIS IS THAT, UM, THAT'S A LOT TO HAPPEN OVERNIGHT.
I JUST THINK THEY DISINCENTIVIZE THE PROGRAM AND, UH, IT, IT JUST CAUGHT EVERYONE OFF GUARD IS WHAT IT DID.
UM, AND I'M NOT IMPLYING THAT IT STAYS AT ZERO.
I'M JUST SAYING, I'M JUST SAYING, CAN IT BE INCREMENTALLY ABSORBED SO THAT WE CAN TEST IT AND MAKE SURE IT'S STILL INCENTIVIZING DEVELOPMENT AND THAT THE MONEY IS STILL RESULTING IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING, TANGIBLE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
DOES IT HAVE TO GO FROM ZERO TO 18 OVERNIGHT? RIGHT.
[00:30:02]
ONE THOUGHT I HAVE IS WE DON'T REALLY KNOW THE IMPACT OF $18 A SQUARE FOOT, WHETHER THAT'S SIGNIFICANT OR IN SICKNESS AGAIN.UM, I THINK WE NEED MORE INFORMATION TO MAKE A CONCLUSIVE DECISION BASED ON, YOU KNOW, IF $18 A SQUARE FOOT FOR OFFICE PROJECT IS GOING TO JUST WAIT, YOU KNOW, ANY NEW OFFICES FROM GETTING BUILT, RIGHT.
WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
DO WE? WELL, I MEAN, I, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY WHAT THE NUMBER SHOULD BE, BUT THE, I MEAN, WHAT SHOULD BE NOTED IS THAT THAT INTERIM FEE IS NOT MEANT TO BE PERMANENT, THAT STAFF IS WORKING TO CALIBRATE THE PERMANENT FEES NOW.
IT COULD GO UP, COULD GO DOWN.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT THE THOUGHTS ARE THOSE NUMBERS COULD CHANGE, UH, AS THEY DO THE CALIBRATION.
SO IT'S, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO COMMENT ON IT TILL WE SEE ON THAT PART OF IT UNTIL WE SEE WHAT THOSE CALIBRATED FEES ARE.
UM, BUT THE $18 COMES FROM THE CALIBRATED FEES.
IS THAT WHERE YOU GUYS GOT THAT NUMBER? NO, THAT CAME FROM CODE NEXT.
I BELIEVE WHICH ONES, CAUSE THEY'RE NOT CALIBRATED.
THEY'RE CALIBRATED FOR DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS LIKE THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO AND DIFFERENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WENT ALONG WITH CODE NEXT.
SO THEY'RE WORKING TO, TO RECALIBRATE THOSE BASED ON CURRENT ZONING.
SO THIS RECOMMENDATION REALLY DIDN'T GET INTO THAT PART OF IT.
IT WAS REALLY ABOUT WHATEVER THE FEES END UP BEING.
THESE ARE HOW THEY SHOULD BE USED BECAUSE PUTTING THEM ON REPORTS, THE VOUCHER PROGRAM DOES NOT MEET OUR HOUSING GOALS.
WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.
I'M FULLY READY TO SUPPORT THIS WITH EMOTION CHAIR.
UM, DO WE NEED TO REFERENCE ANYWHERE IN THIS DOCUMENT WHERE THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT, WHERE YOU CAN FIND THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS OR IS IT POTENTIAL WHERE THAT COULD CHANGE? I MEAN, YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY FIND, YOU MEAN IN THE CODE? YES.
I MEAN, IT'S IN THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, UM, SECTION 5 21 OR WHATEVER, 65, 21, I THINK THE AUDIENCE FOR THESE RECOMMENDATIONS OF CITY COUNCIL AND THEY SHOULD KNOW WHERE TO FIND THAT EVEN A FIGHT ON, BUT I GUESS, AND I THINK THAT'S THE THING IS JUST THE ASSUMPTION, BECAUSE AS I'M WORKING THROUGH THIS, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'M WONDERING IS THE SOURCE OF WHERE'S COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
SO MAYBE WHEREVER WE REFER TO IT FIRST, WE CAN SAY IN PARENTHESES TO BE FOUND IN SECTION XYZ.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT'S IN, THAT'S IN THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION WHERE WE TALK ABOUT COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
UM, SO LET'S ADD THAT, BUT LET'S STAY ON THIS FIRST ONE FIRST.
UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS FIRST RECOMMENDATION COMMISSIONER? ARE THERE THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT RESOLUTIONS? THERE'S THREE.
PAGE PAGE ONE IS THE FIRST ONE.
IT'S THE TIERED RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN THE THIRD ONE TALKS ABOUT THE CALIBRATION.
SO THAT, THAT THIRD ONE MIGHT BE THE PLACE TO ENTER SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT PHASING CALIBRATED FEES.
NO, WE DON'T LIST A FEE IN ANY OF THESE I'M JUST VERIFYING.
I WOULD SAY MAYBE, MAYBE ON THE FIRST PAGE THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD MENTION THAT THIS DOES INCLUDE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES TOO, UH, FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T SEE THIS EVERY DAY AND THAT IT MIGHT CLARIFY SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT COMMISSIONER COLEMAN HAD THAT, UH, DEVELOPERS WOULD KNOW THAT FROM THIS FIRST PAGE, THAT IT ALSO INCLUDES THEIR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
[00:35:01]
JUST RIGHT NOW.IT JUST SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A HOUSE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S MAINLY THE HOUSING PROJECTS.
HOW ABOUT UNDER THIS ONE HERE? WHEREAS THE NEW JOHN TOM DENSITY BONUS PAINLESS STRUCTURE WILL RESULT IN MANY TIMES MORE FEES THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING COLLECTED DUE TO THE ADDITION OF COMMERCIAL PROJECTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT THAT WOULD HELP.
AND I WOULD SAY RESULT IN MUCH MORE FEES RATHER THAN MANY TIMES MORE BECAUSE IF YOU SAY MANY TIMES MORE, WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE TIMES MORE? THAT MIGHT A FEW PEOPLE TOO MUCH MORE JUST SAY, JUST SAY MORE, DAVID, ARE YOU TAKING NOTES OR DO YOU HAVE THIS DOCUMENT, LIKE IN A WORD FORMAT WHERE YOU SHARE YEAH.
I'M, I'M, I'M TAKING NOTES, SO MORE KIND OF SCARY CAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS UNTIL YOU DIG DEEPER.
JUST SO MUCH MORE JUST STRIKE MANY TIMES AND SAY WILL RESULT IN MORE FEES.
UM, SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS FIRST RECOMMENDATION.
I'LL MOVE TO ADOPT THE SOLUTION.
WE'LL TAKE IT TO A VOTE, UH, COMMISSIONER COLEMAN.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ABSTAIN, I BELIEVE FROM ALL THE MOTIONS TONIGHT BECAUSE OF MY POSITION AS CHAIR OF THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF AUSTIN, BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THIS AS A GROUP.
AND SO I THINK IT'S THE BEST INTEREST, UM, TO, TO ABSTAIN.
MR. RAWLINSON, AYE MISSION OR AN HOUR LATER MISSION WALLY? YES.
TANA GUCCI COMMISSIONER LUKINS AYE.
WAS THAT EVERYBODY DID SOMEONE JOIN THE TUNE? THAT'S EVERYONE.
NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE SECOND ONE.
THIS IS THE RESOLUTION FOR THE TIERED SYSTEM.
UH, NOW GOING BACK TO COMMISSIONER, NOW OUR BLADE OUT, YOU WANTED TO REFERENCE THE SECTION IN CODE, IS THAT CORRECT FOR THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS? YES.
MY APOLOGIES FOR ASKING EARLIER, THAT'S FINE.
AND IS THAT THE BEST PLACE TO ADD ANYTHING? UM, MAYBE IN THE, THE, THE, BE IT RESOLVED WHERE WE, UM, SAY THAT, UH, WE TALK ABOUT ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
WE COULD REFERENCE IT THERE TERRIFY ME.
JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY THERE, THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS IN THE CURRENT CODE OR LOCATED IN 25 TO 5 86 E AS IN ECHO, AND THERE'S ONE THROUGH 11 OR 11 SPECIFIC COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE CODE.
AND NUMBER 12 IS THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL WORK THEY'RE
[00:40:01]
CALLED OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS, WHICH ARE NOT SPECIFIED THE 12 IN TOTAL COULD BE USED.SO IT WILL BE JUST PUT IT IN PARENTHESES.
WHAT IS IT CALLED? PARENTHESES.
YEAH, INCREASE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
UM, I POTENTIALLY THINK, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHERS WOULD THINK IF ABOVE UNDER TIER TWO AND TIER THREE VERSUS IN THE, UM, IN THE PARAGRAPH BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN SKIM THROUGH A PARAGRAPH.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE QUOTE UNQUOTE EASIER IF WE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO LIKE A, A HYPERLINK THERE AND IF NOT, NO BIG DEAL.
BUT I THINK UNDER THE TIER TWO, TIER THREE, AS YOU'RE GLANCING, IF YOU THINK THAT'S ALL RIGHT, SURE.
WE CAN SAY ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY BENEFITS AS LISTED IN 25 TO 5 80, 60.
A LITTLE BIT MORE LEGS TO THIS DIAGRAM.
TO MAKE IT MATCH UP WITH THE WORDING AND, AND, UH, CHAIR.
HAVE YOU GOT THE CHANGE TO TIER ONE? JUST BEING BASE ZONING? UH WE'RE WELL, WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING RID OF TIER ONE, RIGHT.
OR I SHOULD SAY TIER ONE, TIER TWO BECOMES TWO.
AND THEN, SO THIS WOULD JUST SAY FOR FLOOR AREA EXCEEDING BASE ZONING COMMUNITY BENEFITS SHOULD BE REQUIRED.
GOING BACK TO MY EARLIER COMMENT, HOW DO PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT, UM, THE LANGUAGE, UH, ABOUT THE WORD HIGHER, HIGHER RATE? DO WE WANT TO SAY THAT OR DO WE WANT TO USE, UM, OTHER LANGUAGE? LIKE I SUGGESTED MAYBE THAT THEY DID, WE SHOULD JUST SAY THAT EACH TIER SHOULD BE CALIBRATED INDEPENDENTLY.
SO THESE ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN THOSE TIERS.
WELL, NO, BUT IT MIGHT, IF, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY WERE TO RATHER BASED ON WHATEVER MODEL THEY RAN, UM, IF THEY WERE TO DECIDE THAT AT MAKING ABOVE GRADE PARKING COUNT TOWARDS FAR, UM, WAS SUCH A BURDEN THAT PERHAPS COLLECTING MORE FEES, WASN'T A PRIORITY AND THEY COULD EVEN DECREASE THE FEE.
I DON'T KNOW IF, WHAT, WELL, THAT WOULD BE, BUT IT'S JUST, IT'S A SCENARIO THAT COULD BE REAL.
BECAUSE, BECAUSE BY PUTTING THAT CAVEAT ABOUT THE PARKING, ASSUMING WE WANT TO KEEP THAT THAT'S A, THAT'S A BIG BURDEN ON TIER TWO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE IN TIER ONE.
AND SO THAT DEFINITELY HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN THE CALIBRATION.
AND THAT'S WHY I WAS PUT AND, OR, AND, OR, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S UP TO THEM TO DECIDE WHAT THE BEST COLLECTION OF REQUIREMENTS IS.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? WELL, THERE'S THIS TYPO RIGHT THERE ON THAT SECOND BULLET POINT.
IT SHOULD BE DAN WELL, AIR EXCEEDING TWO, TWO, IF THEY ARE A FIELD THAT IS COLLECTED AT HIGHER RATES THEN.
IT'S THAT AUSSIE ACCENT THAT CAUSES THAT WRITING ALWAYS, ALWAYS BLAME IT ON THE ACCENT.
UH, WELL, I, I THINK I MIGHT LEAN TOWARDS ELIMINATING THE WORD HIRE AND SORT OF AN ADDING TO OTHER LANGUAGE, BUT YEAH, I THINK SO.
[00:45:01]
BUT DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO AGREE WITH THAT? WELL, I THINK WHEN WE CAN, WHEN WE DO A MOTION TO ADOPT THIS, THAT WOULD BE, UM, WHAT WE'RE ADOPTING, WHAT WE'RE ADOPTING.SO INSTEAD OF THE WORD HIGHER THERE, AND THAT TIER THREE, WHERE YOU WOULD SAY, I SEE IN BLUE IS COLLECTED, UH, AND, AND LOU PER SQUARE FOOT FOR TIERS ONE AND TWO SHOULD BE CALIBRATED INDEPENDENTLY SO THAT THEY EACH, SO THAT EACH FEE ENCOURAGES PARTICIPATION IN THAT TIER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
WE CAN JUST SAY A FEELING WAS COLLECTED, COLLECTED A FAN WAS COLLECTED PERIOD.
AND THEN HAVE THAT EXTRA SENTENCE THAT YOU SAID, YEAH.
CHAIRMAN BASED ON THIS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION AS AMENDED.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT, MR. COLEMAN, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? SORRY.
UM, COMMISSIONER COLEMAN, UH, VICE-CHAIR ROLLISON COMMISSIONER HANAUER ROBLEDO YES, FOR SURE.
PROBABLY I MISSIONARY GUCCI, RICHARD LUKINS HI, KRISCHA GONZALEZ AND I AM, I GUESS, SO THAT PASSES.
WE'LL GO DOWN TO THE LAST ONE, RESOLUTION NUMBER THREE.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY YOU DON'T HAVE COMMISSIONER WEAVER HERE SINCE, UM, THIS, I PUT THIS RESOLUTION TOGETHER BASED ON HER MEMO THAT WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE BACKUP.
SHE DID A PRETTY LENGTHY, UM, MEMO ON ISSUES THAT DEVELOPERS ARE FACING, UM, AS PART OF THIS PROGRAM.
AND SO, UM, THIS IS SORT OF A, ALMOST AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THAT DOCUMENT IN A WAY THAT DESCRIBES SOME OF THE HURDLES AND THAT EACH OF THESE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE CALIBRATION THAT IS HAPPENING CURRENTLY CHAIR, ONE THING THAT I THINK IT KIND OF MISSES THAT WE HAD IN OUR DISCUSSION AND OUR WORKING GROUP THAT I THOUGHT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION, AS WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, UH, REALLY THERE SHOULD BE CONSIDERATION OF A FEE WAIVER OR REDUCTION IN FEES FOR UNIQUE PROJECTS THAT HAVE AN INTRINSIC VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY SUCH AS CO-OPS CO-LIVING AND WORKFORCE HOUSING.
AND I THOUGHT THAT DISCUSSION WAS REALLY GREAT AND I LIKED THAT CONCLUSION.
WE SEEM TO BE ARRIVING IN IT IN THE WORKING GROUP.
UM, BUT THE, BUT THIS RESOLUTION HAS BEEN GENERATED.
I AGREE WITH THE FINAL RESOLUTION, BUT THE WHEREAS IS, I DON'T REALLY KNOW IF I WOULD SAY I DON'T AGREE WITH THEM, I GUESS NOT THE RIGHT WORD, BUT IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT KIND OF GOES ON SOME TANGENTS OR JUMPED TO SOME CONCLUSIONS, UM, OR, YOU KNOW, IT ALMOST SOUNDS LIKE IN ALL CASES, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T LIKE, OR TRUST THE CALIBRATION.
WE DON'T THINK ECO NORTHWEST MAY HAVE DONE IT.
HOW COULD HAVE THEY, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT LAND SELLS FOR AND, YOU KNOW, FEES TRANSLATE TO HIGHER HOUSING COSTS AND, AND THOSE THINGS, I THINK WITHOUT THE CONTEXT OF OUR DISCUSSION ARE A LITTLE, UH, INCORRECT OR MAYBE MISLEADING, OR IT, MATTER OF FACT, IF WE WERE TO ADOPT THE THIRD RESOLUTION, IT SEEMS TO BE, I THINK PEOPLE WOULD SAY, WELL, WHY DIDN'T THEY GIVE US THESE
[00:50:01]
OTHER RESOLUTIONS? CAUSE THESE OTHER RESOLUTIONS SEEMED TO SUPPORT SOME SORT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, DENSITY BONUS C FOR PORTABLE HOUSING BY THE THIRD RESOLUTION TO ME READS IS ANY KIND OF FEE AS BAD.UM, AND YOU KNOW, SO ANYWAY, I, I HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE THIRD ONE, BUT LIKE I SAID, I THINK THAT THE SPIRIT OF THE DISCUSSION WHERE WE ARRIVED IN OUR WORKING GROUP, I A HUNDRED PERCENT AGREE WITH IS THAT SMALLER PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER WEAVER MADE A GREAT CASE, SMALLER PROJECTS, UM, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE, UH, THEY HAVE THEIR PLACE AND THEY DO FACE A TOUGHER ERDLE JUST EVEN BEFORE WE GET TO THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, UH, JUST DUE TO THE SCALE OF THEM.
AND, UH, AND SO WE DO NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THOSE AND BECAUSE THOSE TYPE OF PROJECTS HAVE VALUE, WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE THEM INSTEAD OF A FEE WAIVER REDUCTION IN FEES.
NOW IT COULD BE ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS.
AND I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT THIS SEEMS TO KIND OF FOCUS ON DOWNTOWN HOUSING AND IT'S KIND OF DIFFERENT THAN MY IDEA OF TAKING THE MONEY.
AND YOU PUT IN A LAND BANK AND DEVELOPING AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOMEWHERE, OR IT'S FOR IT'S FOR AFFORDABLE.
YOU CAN BUILD MORE UNITS FOR THE BUCK.
SO THIS SEEMS A LITTLE BIT FOCUSED ON JUST DOWNTOWN.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE OUT THOSE REFERENCES TO SAY MORE DOWNTOWN UNITS.
I WOULD JUST SAY OVERALL UNITS, BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE PUSHING FOR.
WE'RE PUSHING FOR THE BIG PICTURE AND NOT JUST THE DOWNTOWN UNITS AND PEOPLE WHO CAN LIVE IN THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
I MEAN, THEY, THEY PROBABLY FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE LIVING IN THESE HIGH RISES WITH ALL THESE, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE HIPSTERS AND THAT ISN'T SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE DOWNTOWN ED, PARDON ISN'T THE BEST WAY TO SPECIFICALLY DISCUSSING THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY MONA'S
AND I WOULD SAY IT NEEDS TO JUST GO ACROSS THE BOARD AND WHEREVER WORKS THE BEST RATHER THAN, YEAH, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THAT FOR A WHILE.
YOU GET BETTER BANG FOR YOUR BUCK, IF YOU BUILD SOMEPLACE OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN.
WELL, I'M LOOKING AT THIS MEMO FROM THE, UH, DIRECTOR OF, UH, HOUSING AND PLANNING, UNLESS THEY'VE CHANGED THE SCHEDULE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, UH, AT LEAST TWO MEETINGS ON, UH, ON THE, UH, ON THE, UH, FISH GUY, A NEW FOUND THE NEW FEES.
SO I WOULD THINK THAT THIS RESOLUTION REGARDING THE, THE THIRD RESOLUTION ALREADY, WE COULD WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE AUGUST 18 BRIEFING.
AND PROBABLY EVEN UNTIL AFTER THE AUGUST 23 BRIEFING, ASSUMING THAT THESE ARE BOTH STILL, UH, UH, SCHEDULED.
UH, SO I WOULD SAY THANK YOU, EVERYONE FOR YOUR COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER WILDLY, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING THAT YOU SAID.
UM, COMMISSIONER WEAVER WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE IT TONIGHT TO SPEAK MORE TOWARDS THIS ONE, BUT IF, IF WE FEEL WE'RE HAVING ISSUES WITH THIS ONE, THAT IT, IT NEEDS MORE WORK.
UM, I THINK WE COULD POSTPONE THIS ONE A FEW WEEKS TO OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AND, UM, IN THE MEANTIME, HAVE IT TWEAKED AND WORDSMITH TO SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC, BUT, UM, I THINK, YEAH, DAVID, I WORK IN GROUP CAN MEET AGAIN BETWEEN NOW AND THEN PERHAPS WITH, UM, YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT JEN AND BOT COULD PROBABLY DO A GOOD, GOOD, LIKE HAVING THE TWO OF THEM WORK TOGETHER SPECIFICALLY TO, TO MAKE THIS ONE, UM, WHAT GRIPE AND REPRESENT SORT OF THE BROADER DISCUSSION.
HOW DOES EVERYONE FEEL ABOUT THAT? I'M HAPPY TO JUMP IN THAT WORK IN GROUP DISCUSSION.
WELL, UNLESS THERE'S ANY OBJECTIONS, THEN I'M GOING TO SAY WE TABLE THIS, THIS THIRD ONE FOR NOW AND TRY TO GET IT TO A BETTER POINT FOR OUR NEXT MEETING,
[00:55:02]
BUT I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GET THESE OTHER TWO VOTED ON, ON THE AGENDA FOR CANNES, FOR COUNCIL TO REVIEW THESE RESOLUTIONS, OR HAVE WE INITIATED THAT PROCESS? CAUSE I KNOW IT NEEDS, UH, FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS NEED TO AGREE TO BRING IT UP AS AN AGENDA ITEM.I MEAN, TECHNICALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ALL THE FEE CALIBRATION ITSELF IS ALREADY AN ONGOING COUNCIL ITEM.
UM, THEY ORIGINALLY STAFF WAS SUPPOSED TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL THIS MONTH WITH THE CALIBRATED FEES, BUT NOW MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S BEING EXTENDED.
UM, BUT SPECIFICALLY WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, WE WERE ASKED, UM, BY COUNCIL MEMBER TOVA HIS OFFICE TO PROVIDE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT KIND OF INITIATED THIS.
SO WE'LL BE SENDING THESE AT LEAST CURRENTLY THESE TWO THAT WE ADOPTED TONIGHT, WE'LL SEND THOSE TO COUNCIL MEMBER TOBO HIS OFFICE AND THEN SHARE WITH STAFF AS WELL, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, AND KIND OF SEE, SEE WHAT HER PLAN IS, UH, TO, TO THESE.
GIVEN, GIVEN THE EXTENSION ON THE CALIBRATION PART, I THINK MAYBE WE CAN AFFORD TO, TO PUSH, UH, THE VOTE ON THE CALIBRATION RESOLUTION A COUPLE MORE WEEKS TILL WE GET TO OUR REGULAR MEETING AT THE END OF THE MONTH AND GET IT TO A POINT THAT WE'RE ALL HAPPY WITH.
JUST A QUICK POINT OF CLARIFICATION WITH A COVER MEMO THAT ACCOMPANY THESE RISK SOLUTIONS, BE WORTHWHILE EXPLORING TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO OR ARE THEY SELF-EXPLANATORY ENOUGH IN YOUR OPINION THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE RESOLUTIONS.
I'D BE HAPPY TO WRITE A COVER LETTER AND EXPLAIN IT.
IT COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS ONE PARAGRAPH THAT EXPLAINS FOR ONE AND ONE FOR THE OTHER.
SO IT WOULD SIMPLIFY THE APPROACH AND THE COUNCIL WOULD UNDERSTAND THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE.
UM, WELL THAT'S THE ONLY ITEM THAT WE HAD FOR OUR AGENDA TONIGHT.
SO, UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYONE JUMPING ON FOR THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S MOVING QUICKLY, SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND I'LL SEE EVERYONE AT THE END OF THE MONTH FOR OUR REGULAR MEETING AND I'LL REACH OUT FOR THE WORKING GROUP AS WELL.
SO WE CAN FINISH UP THIS THIRD ONE, UH, 6:31 PM AND WE'RE ADJOURNED.