Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]

[00:00:05]

UH, 6 0 7 MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON AUGUST 10TH, 2021.

UH, LET'S DO A QUICK ROLL CALL.

UM, I'LL JUST, UH, STATE YOUR NAME, RAISE YOUR HAND, SAY PRESENT HERE.

UM, UH, SO, UH, LET'S START, UH, MYSELF AS CHAIR AND TODD SHAW.

UM, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS AS OUR COMMISSIONER, UH, COPS, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, UM, COMMISSIONER PRAXIS HERE, UM, AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, AND MAYBE WE'LL GET A FEW OTHERS JOINING US, BUT, UH, RIGHT NOW THERE, UM, WE HAVE A FEW FOLKS OUT.

UM, OKAY.

I'D LIKE TO ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A FEW EXTRA OFFICIAL MEMBERS HERE.

WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER, UH, COHEN AND COMMISSIONER, UH, ART DAY SAYING, HELLO, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

UM, SO REAL QUICK, UH, OVER, UH, THAT USUAL THINGS, UH, JUST HAVE YOUR VOTING CARDS READY, UH, GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW, UM, OUR MAIN MUTED, UM, WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING AND JUST RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED.

AND AS USUAL, IF I, UH, I'M NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO YOU OR IGNORING YOU, OR CAN'T FIND YOU JUST, UH, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK AND LET ME KNOW.

UM, OKAY.

UH, FOR THE PARTICIPANTS OUT THERE, STAR SIX TO UNMUTE, UM, WE ONLY HAVE, UH, FROM WHAT RIGHT NOW ON THE AGENDA, ONE DISCUSSION I, UM, ONE DISCUSSION CASE.

SO IT SHOULD BE A PRETTY SHORT EVENING.

UM, AND ANYWAY, UH, IF WE DO PULL SOME OTHER ITEMS, UM, JUST, UH, YOU'LL, YOU DON'T NEED TO STAY ON THE LINE.

YOU'LL GET AN EMAIL WHEN WE'RE ABOUT 15 MINUTES OUT.

SO THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO, UH, GO AHEAD AND SET UP OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

[Reading of Agenda]

I'M GONNA GO.

AND, UH, ON THE CONSENT OF DAN, DAN, WE'RE GONNA INCLUDE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, UM, FROM JUNE 27TH, 2021.

AND, UM, IF THIS, AND THEN WE'LL GO OVER AND GO OVER TO THE CASES ALSO, BUT, UM, JUST RIGHT NOW, DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES THAT WERE POSTED? OKAY, WELL GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THOSE AS THEY ARE, UH, GOING THROUGH THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARINGS, UM, AGENDA ITEM B, UH, THE DISCUSSION CASE.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ITEMS B ONE AND B TWO TOGETHER, AND, UH, B ONE IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2020 A DASH 0 0 2 ONE.ZERO ONE, WOODLAND ON ICE 35.

UM, THIS IS A RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

UH, B TWO IS A REZONING CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2020, DESERT 0 7 5 WOODLEIGH LIVES 35.

THIS IS A GRN P TO C O N T.

UH, AND THIS, UH, I'M SORRY, AND AD'S AMENDED, AND THIS IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AND AGAIN, THOSE TWO ITEMS WILL BE TAKEN UP TOGETHER, UH, FOR DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

WE HAVE ITEMS B UH, THREE IS THE PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT SET TO SEPTEMBER 14TH.

APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT, UH, NPA 20 19 0 0 2 TWO.ZERO ONE 200 ACADEMY AND, UH, ITEM BEFORE, UM, IS THE ACCOMPANY REZONING.

AND THIS IS POSTPONED TO SEPTEMBER 14TH.

APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT CASE NUMBER C 14 20 20 DASH 0 1 47, 200 ACADEMY.

AND THEN MOVING ON TO OUR LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, UM, I'M SORRY, IN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, ITEM B FIVE.

UH, THIS ONE IS ALSO A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL AUGUST 24TH, UH, CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2021, DESERT 0 1 7 57 0 8 SPRINGDALE ROAD.

AND, UM, I HAVE A NOTE HERE THAT THE APPLICANT IS CONTINUING DIALOGUE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO, UH, DOES ANY, ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM THE, THE ITEM WE'RE TAKING OUT FOR DISCUSSION THIS EVENING? ANY, UH, COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO, UH, HAVE QUESTIONS OR WANT TO PULL ANY OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE, UM,

[00:05:01]

WELL, I GUESS THEY'RE NOT PULLING THEM.

THEY'RE ALL, UH, ALL GOING TO BE POSTPONED, SO I THINK WE'RE GOOD TO GO THERE.

ALL RIGHT.

SO, UM, CAN I HAVE A, UH, MOTION TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH INCLUDES THE JUNE 27TH, 20, 21 MINUTES.

UH, AND, UM, AGAIN, ITEMS A B ONE AND B TWO WILL BE, UH, FOR DISCUSSION THE THREE BEFORE AND FIVE OR POSTPONED.

YEAH, I GUESS I HAD A QUESTION.

I DID GET AN EMAIL THAT INDICATED MAYBE THAT DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD AGREED ON B ONE AND B2.

IS THAT, ARE THERE STILL PEOPLE WHO WERE WANTING TO, TO DISCUSS THIS SHOW COMMISSION LIAISON, ANDREW? YES, WE HAVE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

SO DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT? OH, CLOSURE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, AND APPROVAL OF

[Consent Agenda]

THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, SEE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HOWARD, I GUESS LET'S GO AND VOTE.

CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LIGHTS ON HANDOVER.

TECHNICALLY WE'RE NOT CAUSING ANY OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

WE'RE JUST POSTPONING ITEMS. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

SO, UH, THANK YOU.

SO THIS WHERE WE ARE JUST, UH, LET'S SEE WORDS APPROVING, UH, THE CONSENT AGENDA AND I GUESS THAT'S IT.

OKAY.

SO LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THAT.

ALL RIGHT.

UNANIMOUS SEVEN.

OH, OKAY.

ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD

[Items B1 & B2]

AND, UH, TAKE UP ITEMS A B ONE, B TWO, UH, STARTING WITH STAFF.

UM, THIS IS MARINE MEREDITH HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT ITEM B.

ONE IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 20 0 0 2 1 0.01.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1 809 SOUTH IHI 35 SERVICE ROAD NORTHBOUND.

THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMERCIAL TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE.

IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND THE IRAQ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM DID SUBMIT A LETTER IN SUPPORT, BUT WITH CONDITIONS.

AND THAT ENDS MY PRESENTATION.

DID HE THINK COMMISSIONERS? THIS IS KATE CLARK WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND I'M PRESENTING ITEM NUMBER B TWO ON THE AGENDA.

THIS IS CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2020 DASH 0 0 7 5.

WE'LL END ON IHI 35.

THIS PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 1.07 ACRES IN SIZE AND IS MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED.

IT IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE NORTHBOUND SERVICE ROAD OF CURRENT ZONING, ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, INCLUDE THE S AND P TO THE NORTH S F N P TO THE EAST AND L O N P TO THE SOUTH ADJACENT TO THE WEST IS THE IHI 35 RIGHT AWAY AND IS NOT ZONED FOR THE APPLICANTS REZONING APPLICATION AND THEIR AMENDED REQUESTS.

THEY ARE ASKING FOR MS. 60 O N P TO BUILD A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS WITH UP TO, UM, A A HUNDRED UNITS.

THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS A TWENTY-FIVE FOOT BUFFER ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO REZONE TO C O M P ONE.

A STAFF BASIS FOR ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS IS TO LOCATE INTENSE MULTIFAMILY ZONING ALONG MAJOR ARTERIALS AND HIGHWAYS.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG THE FURNITURE ROAD OF AGE 35.

AND DOES HAVE ANY ACCESS TO ANY OTHER LOCAL OR COLLECTOR STREETS REZONING THIS PROPERTY TO THE BASE DISTRICT OF MSX SIX WOULD ALLOW FOR THE POTENTIAL OF NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALONG A MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR, A PETITION OPPOSING THE, THIS REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY WAS FILED AND IS CURRENTLY AT 20 POINT 19% MAKING THIS A VALID PETITION.

HOWEVER, TODAY WE DID RECEIVE AN ELECTRONIC LETTER AND SIGNATURE FROM A PROPERTY OWNER REQUESTING TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS PETITION WITHOUT AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE.

WE CAN'T OFFICIALLY UPDATE THE ZONING PETITION, BUT SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE RECEIVED THE ORIGINAL LETTER AND VERIFY SIGNATURE THAT PERCENTAGE WOULD CHANGE TO 18.86 AND WOULD NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED A VALID PETITION? UM, THANK YOU.

THIS CONCLUDES THE STAFF SUMMARY FOR THE REZONING CASE AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

THANKS.

AND BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON THE SPEAKERS, UM, I KNOW THAT WE HAD TRIED THIS LAST TIME, THEN I WAS OUT AND I THINK IT WORKED WELL.

SO MR. RIVERA, ARE YOU, I WANT TO GO AHEAD AND ASK YOU TO EMCEE THE PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC HEARING, AND WHICH WILL BE, I GUESS, CONSISTS

[00:10:01]

OF ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS AND, UH, LETTING US KNOW WHEN THEIR TIME HAS ENDED.

UM, ARE YOU AVAILABLE TO DO THAT? ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

SO WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE APPLICANT, MS. VICTORIA, HASI, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

SO LIKE STORE SIX, YOUR, UH, PRESENTATION IS UP GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS VICTORIA HASSEY WITH THRILLER DESIGN.

UM, THE FIRST SLIDE IN FRONT OF YOU IS, UH, SHOWS THE, IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPLEX, A PLAN ELEMENTS AND TRANSIT ELEMENTS, BUT THEN THE AREA OF THE SITE IS OUTLINED IN BLUE, AND IT IS 0.7 MILES FROM THE RIVERSIDE.

IMAGINE AUSTIN TOWN CENTER, WHICH IS ALSO WHERE THE PROJECT CONNECT BLUE LINE RENT DOWN RIVERSIDE DRIVE EAST RIVERSIDE DRIVE.

UH, THE SITE IS ALSO 0.6 MILES FROM CAPITOL METRO ROUTES ON BURTON DRIVE AND 0.4 MILES FROM CAPITAL METRO ROUTES ON OLD FORTH.

NEXT SLIDE.

THE FUTURE LAND USE FOR THE SITE IS COMMERCIAL, AND WE ARE REQUESTING TO CHANGE THAT TO MULTIFAMILY.

SO THIS WOULD, UH, THE PROPERTY WOULD CHANGE TO THE ORANGE COLOR ON THE MAP.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND THE EXISTING ZONING IS GR NP, WHICH ALLOWS FOR VARIOUS COMMERCIAL USES ANYTHING FROM RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS TO CONVENIENCE STORES AND AUTOMOBILE RELATED USES.

AND WE ARE REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM GR P TO NP.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO YEAR AGO, THE PROJECT PROPOSED SITE WAS MUCH TALLER AT 90 FEET BY WAY OF AFFORDABILITY ON LOCKED.

UM, AT THAT TIME, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MADE IT CLEAR TO US THAT THEY WERE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF AN AFFORDABILITY AND LOCKED PROJECT AT THIS SITE SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE HEIGHT AT 90 SEATS.

SO OUR CLIENTS, THE DEVELOPER TOOK TIME TO LOOK INTO THE AFFORDABILITY QUALIFICATIONS, AND IT WAS FOUND THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS ACTUALLY NOT A GOOD FIT FOR A TAX CREDIT PROJECT.

AND WITH THAT, THE PROPOSAL WAS AMENDED AND AFFORDABILITY IS NO LONGER VIABLE FOR THIS SITE.

AND THEREFORE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH COMPLETE COMPATIBILITY HYBRID REGULATIONS.

SO WE DID A PURCHASE, THE NEIGHBORS, UM, SPECIFICALLY THOSE THAT BACKUPS TO THIS SITE.

AND WE SPOKE, UH, IN THE FRONT YARDS WITH SOME OF THOSE NEIGHBORS AND CONVERSATIONS PRODUCED, UM, THAT, THAT SOME OF THOSE NEIGHBORS WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE NEW PROPOSAL TO HAVE A PROJECT THAT CAN, THAT APPLIES OR THAT COMPLIES TO COMPATIBILITY.

UM, SO LONG AS THERE WAS A CEO FOR A VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE, AND THE CLIENT AND DEVELOPER HAVE AGREED TO THAT, UM, THERE'S CURRENTLY THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

THERE IS THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER, EXCUSE ME, CURRENTLY, THERE IS A GREEN BELT HEIGHT, UM, VEGETATION THAT RUNS BETWEEN THE, THE PROPERTIES AND OUR CLIENT IS PROPOSING TO KEEP THAT.

AND, UM, TO ENSURE THAT TO PROVIDE THIS 25 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER BY WAY OF CEO.

AND YOU'LL SEE OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT THAT WAS A YEAR AGO IN THIS SLIDE.

AND SOME, UH, MANY OF THOSE ELEMENTS WILL CONTINUE FORWARD WITH THE NEW PROPOSAL, BUT MOST SPECIFICALLY THE HEIGHT WILL BE REDUCED.

AND, UM, WITH THAT, THERE WILL BE A MAXIMUM OF 100 DWELLING UNITS PROPOSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO WITH COMPATIBILITY APPLYING TO THIS PROJECT, UM, IT WILL CREATE A STAIR STEP EFFECT THAT GRADUALLY INCREASES THE ABILITY FOR HEIGHT AS THE DISTANCE MOVES AWAY FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THIS IMAGE HERE, THE GREEN AREA SHOWS THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER THAT WAS PROM TO THE NEIGHBORS.

UM, THE YELLOW AREA SHOWS THE SAME, UH, THE AREA THAT IT WOULD ENJOY THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY TO THE WEST AT 35 FEET.

THE PEACH COLORED AREA ALLOWS FOR 40 FEET IN HEIGHT.

AND THEN, UM, THE LINE, THE LINE BETWEEN THE PEACH COLORED AREA AND THE ORANGE AREA IS THE LINE WHERE HEIGHT CAN START INCREASING BY ONE FOOT FOR EVERY 10 FEET OF DISTANCE MOVING AWAY FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

UM, SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS, UH, AS YOU GET CLOSEST TO OUR 35, YOU SEE WHERE IT SAYS 60 FEET ALLOWED.

THAT IS THE POINT AT WHICH 60 FEET WOULD BE ALLOWED.

AND ODDLY, THAT IS THE PROPERTY LINE THAT MUST WESTERN PROPERTY LINES.

SO THE HIGHEST THAT, UH, ANY DEVELOPMENT COULD ACHIEVE ON THIS SITE WOULD BE, UM, AS MUCH AS 60 FEET, BUT LIKELY NEXT BITE.

SO THE IMAGE ON THE LEFT WAS OUR ORIGINAL PROPOSAL AT 90 FEET.

AND THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT IS THE NEWEST PROPOSAL THAT COMPLIES WITH COMPATIBILITY.

AND YOU CAN SEE, UH, EVEN JUST SLIGHTLY AT THIS VANTAGE POINT, THAT THERE IS A STAIR STEP DOWN FOR THE TREES AND THE VEGETATION AND THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

[00:15:01]

THE NEXT SLIDE, AGAIN, THE IMAGE HERE ON THE LEFT WAS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL AT 90 FEET, WHICH FOR DAYS THEY LARGE BLOCK STYLE BUILDING WITH NO VARIATION IN HEIGHT.

AND THEN THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT IS THE TODAY'S PROPOSAL THAT COMPLIES WITH COMPATIBILITY.

AND THIS IMAGE ACTUALLY SHOWS THE BEST, UM, BEST IMAGE FOR THE STAIR STEP, UH, THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE FOR THIS BUILDING, MOVING AWAY FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ALONG THE WESTERN SIDE AND TOWARDS OR SORRY, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ALONG EASTERN SIDE.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND THEN AGAIN, THESE ARE RENDERING, UH, ON THE IMAGE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE WAS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED BUILDING.

AND THE NEW PROPOSED BUILDING IS ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE.

UM, AGAIN, A BUILDING THAT WOULD REACH NO MORE THAN 55 TO 60 FEET IN HEIGHT AT .

UM, SO WITH THAT, WE DO ASK YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE REBUILDING HERE FOR A PROJECT THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH COMPATIBILITY.

IT'S THE SAME HEIGHT THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED WITH THE ZONING THAT IS ON THE PROPERTY TODAY.

AND WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND WE REMAIN AVAILABLE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

LIKE NOW HERE, HEAR FROM, HAS TO RUN THROWER, COMMISSIONER'S RUN THROWER HERE.

I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE A FEW THINGS THAT VICTORIA HAD MENTIONED, AND THAT'S THE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY IS VACANT TODAY.

IT DISPLACES NOBODY OR FRONTS ON THE HIGHWAY.

THE BUILDING MASS THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON THIS SITE WILL BE ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENT THAN THE MASS OF THE BUILDING THAT CAN, THAT CAN BE BUILT TODAY UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING.

ALL WE'RE ESSENTIALLY ASKING FOR IS A CHANGE OF USE ON THE PROPERTY TO ALLOW FOR HOUSING, WHICH I THINK EVERYBODY REALIZES THAT MUCH NEEDED COMMODITY FOR ALL OF AUSTIN.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT, UH, TO BRING HOUSING IN THIS AREA.

IF YOU'VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. MALCOLM YATES, MR. STAR SIX, TO PROVIDE YOUR REMARKS, MAYBE HAVING SOME DIFFICULT, UH, TEASE WITH THAT, MR. YATES.

SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE OPPOSITION, MR. CLAY GREER PRO SELECT STAR SIX TO PROVIDE YOUR MARKERS.

YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

MY NAME IS CLAY GREER, AND I OWN THE HOUSE AT THE INTERSECTION OF MATAGORDA AND ON DRIVE SOMEONE WHO'S DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY BOTH B ONE AND TWO.

AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, UH, TO THE DISCUSSION.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, I WASN'T CONSULTED ABOUT THAT BY THE DEVELOPERS, UH, THAT IT SEEMS LIKE NO ONE REALLY TOOK INTO ACCOUNT ANYONE OUTSIDE OF MAYBE THE, THE FOUR HOUSES THAT WERE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE DEVELOPMENT AND MY SIN INSURE IT WAS NOT COUNTED AND, UH, SORTS OF PETITION.

SO, UM, I THINK, I THINK THAT WOULD VALIDATE THE PETITION AGAIN, UH, THAT SAID, UH, I THINK WITH THE TIME READ OVER THE OVERWHELMING OBJECTION TO THE REZONING AND THE CONCEPT OF DEVELOPMENT BY THE MEMBERS OF THE RFC, INCLUDING, UH, MALCOLM GATES AND ROY SCRUGGS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY SUPPORT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT I COULD FIND WAS, UH, SOMEONE THAT LIVED ACROSS THE HIGHWAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, MY MAIN CONCERNS WITH THE REZONING IS MAINTAINING PROPERTY VALUE FOR ONE, UM, TO THE INTEGRITY OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND, UM, AGAIN, I JUST, I WANT TO ECHO THE COMMENTS MADE BY NOT THEM YATES AND HIS OPPOSITION LETTER, UH, THAT THE PROJECT WE JUST AS NEIGHBORHOODS, RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER AND SEX, UH, FROM PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS.

LAST WEEK, I SPOKE WITH THE PERSON THAT BOUGHT THE HOUSE AT 1804 MATAGORDA.

UM, YOU KNOW, SHE, SHE BOUGHT THE HOUSE LIKE TWO WEEKS AGO AND SHE TURNED WHITE WHEN I TOLD HER THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS PROMOTES DEVELOPMENT RIGHT BEHIND HER BACKYARD.

UM, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE STAFF SUPPORTS THE DEVELOPMENT.

UM, YOU KNOW, IT PROVIDES HOUSING CHOICES THAT THE CITY, YOU KNOW, FOR THE CITY AND THE PLANNED AREA, UM, I WILL SAY THAT THERE IS A SURPLUS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, YOU KNOW, BOTH SIDES OF PARKER FROM RIVERSIDE, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO OLTORF AND BEYOND THE WEST SIDE 35, UH, YOU KNOW, SOUTH SOUTH OF

[00:20:01]

WOODWINDS, I MEAN, THAT'S NOTHING BUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THERE'S SEVERAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE BEEN ON THE MARKET FOR 20 TO 40 DAYS, WHICH FAR EXCEEDS THE 13 DAY AVERAGE REPORTED BY THE AUSTIN FORD REALTORS.

I MEAN, I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE ADDING A PARTIALLY FILLED 60 FOOT CONDO COMPLEX INTO THAT MIX.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE REDESIGN, UM, IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A TRANSITION IN BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

UH, I WILL SAY THAT THE, UH, THE PROPOSED SCREENING, I DON'T SEE HOW, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SCREENINGS OBVIOUSLY GONNA CHANGE IN THE DESIGN, BUT, UH, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT, UH, THE TRANSIT WINDOWS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE FACADE ARE ONLY REALLY GOING TO HELP THE FORT, YOU KNOW, THE FOUR HOUSES THAT ARE DIRECTLY BEHIND THAT UNIT.

UM, I COUNTED 12 TO 15 PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH SOUTHEAST NORTHEAST, INCLUDING MY OWN, UH, WILL HAVE BALCONIES WINDOWS WITH GOING DIRECTLY INTO THE HOUSES, UH, AND TO PEOPLE'S BACK YARDS.

IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A PRIVACY CONCERN.

UM, YOU KNOW, AND BY, UH, BY DEFINITION ON DISPOSITION B ONE PAGE THREE, YEAH.

APPLICATION OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL LOT STATES THAT IT SHOULD BE USED IN AREAS WITH GOOD TRANSPORTATION, WHICH, UH, CHECK MARK THERE, BUT THERE'S THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND IT IS NOT SUITABLE FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

UH, THERE'S NO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OR AN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR ANYWHERE NEAR THE DEVELOPMENT.

THERE'S A TRANSIT SCORE TO 47, UH, TO NIGHTMARE FOR WALKING OR BIKING AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT.

I'M AN AVID CYCLIST.

I DON'T EVEN RIDE MY OWN BIKES, UH, MY AUTOMATIC ORDER ONTO WOODLAND BECAUSE OF HOW DANGEROUS THE STREET IS.

UM, OTHER THAN THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PRIVACY SENSES THAT, UH, THAT ARE DISCUSSED, UH, I, YOU KNOW, I'M SEEING THAT I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO RETAINING WALL.

IS THERE, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY IN THAT AGITATION IS GOING TO DISRUPT THE EROSION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I PERSONALLY JUST SPENT $30,000 REDOING IT, COMPLETELY REDOING THE, YOU KNOW, THE FOUNDATION ON MY HOUSE.

THEY WROTE IT TO THEM, AND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS TERRIBLE.

UM, PULLING THOSE TREES DOWN THAT, THAT CREATES THAT BUFFER.

I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE, Y'ALL TALKED TO A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER ABOUT THAT.

UM, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE TREE STAFFING, THE SOUNDS, THERE WAS A, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A SUGGESTION FOR DOING POTTED TREES.

PODIATRY'S ARE NOT A GOOD SOLUTION FOR, FOR ANYTHING PERMANENT.

THEY PUNCH YOUR FACE IN POTS, RESTRICTS THE HEIGHT THAT THEY GROW, AND THEY ONLY LIVE ABOUT ON AVERAGE EIGHT TO 10 YEARS.

UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I MEAN, EVERYTHING ELSE THAT I HAVE COME TO HELP US, OR THIS HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY COVERED AND NO STOMACH GATES AND ROY SCRUGGS.

SO, UM, THAT'S ALL I NEED TO ADD.

AND I YIELD THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

AND I THINK THE CHAIR FOR LISTENING TO ME, THANK YOU, MR. RIVERA.

NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. SEAN FORTNER, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO LIKE STAR SIX, GOOD EVENING.

I'M SHOT OR GROUND WITH THE CENTRAL SOUTH CARPENTER'S REGIONAL COUNCIL.

UH, WE WERE THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THE LOT.

UH, WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS CHANGE, UH, BECAUSE WE'LL BE SHARING THE, THE ACCESS POINT FROM THE HIGHWAY, UH, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE PARKING.

UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE WE HOST CLASSES AND OUR TRAINING CENTER HERE.

I WAS MEETINGS.

I START AS EARLY AS SIX AND CAN GO AS LATE AS 9:00 PM AT INVOLVEMENT AT TIMES THAT INVOLVES CRANES OR OTHER LARGE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.

AND ALSO WITH THE SHARED ACCESS POINT AND THE TIGHT QUARTERS, UH, WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE ADDED TRAFFIC AND REDUCE SECURITY.

THIS COULD LEAD TO, WE'RE ALREADY SUBJECT TO BREAK-INS AND VANDALISM.

UH, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKELY LOSING OUR LOCKED GATE THAT CUTS DOWN ON SOME OF THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BEST WE CAN AND JUST INCREASES OUR VULNERABILITY TO IT.

UH, YOU KNOW, WE SOLD THIS LOT OFF, YOU KNOW, AS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, AS A BUILDING TRADE UNION, WE'RE OBVIOUSLY VERY RARELY OPPOSED TO CONSTRUCTION, YOU KNOW, BUT WE DEFINITELY SEE THIS IMPACTING OUR ABILITY TO DO CONDUCT BUSINESS AS NECESSARY TO TRAIN CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR THIS MARKET.

AND, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE FEW THINGS IN THE CITY THAT'S IN, UH, MORE DEMAND THAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A SKILLED CONSTRUCTION WORKERS.

AND, YOU KNOW, SO WE DON'T WANT TO IMPACT THAT IN ANY WAY.

THANK YOU.

THAT'S ALL.

I THANK YOU, MR. BRENNER.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. MALCOLM YATES FOLLOWED BY MS. TORY HASI FOR REBUTTAL.

MY NAME,

[00:25:04]

I AM THE CHAIR OF THE EAST RIVERSIDE OLD TOUR, COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA CONTACT TEAM.

THE UROP COMPACT TEAM VOTED TO OPPOSE THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER PROPOSAL PRESENTED AT A VIRTUAL MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2020.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUBPOENAED SUBMITTED A VALID PETITION OPPOSING THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.

THIS ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL IS INCLUDED IN THE BACKUP MATERIAL FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT IRAN CONTACT TEAM HAS VOTED TO SUPPORT THE REVISED PROPOSAL FROM THE DEVELOPER THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE CONTACT TEAM ON APRIL 29TH, 2021.

A COPY OF THIS REVISED PRESENTATION SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE BACKUP MATERIAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

YOU ROCK CONTACT TEAM VOTED TO SUPPORT THE REVISED DEVELOPER PROPOSAL.

BASED ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER WILL DEVELOP THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS DESCRIBED IN THE PRESENTATION OF APRIL 29TH.

THE COMMITMENTS OF THIS REVISED PROPOSAL ARE LIMITS THE HEIGHT TO 60 FEET ON THE WEST SIDE FACING LIMITS HEIGHT TO 30 FEET ON THE EAST SIDE, FACING THE HOUSES ON THAT.

I GO TO STREET, THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING WILL BE STEPPED DOWN FROM 60 FEET TO 30 FEET.

ACCORDING TO THE DRAWINGS IN THE APRIL 29TH PROPOSAL, THE BUILDING IS LIMITED TO 100 UNITS.

THERE WILL BE NO BALCONIES OR WINDOWS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

A VEGETATIVE BUFFER WILL BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE DEVELOPER WILL REQUEST A VARIANCE FOR AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS TO THE BUILDING WILL BE FROM THE ICER I 35 SERVICE ROAD, ONLY THE CONTACT TEAM REQUESTS THAT A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, THE RECOMMENDED THAT SPECIFIES THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER AND THAT THESE COMMITMENTS BY THE DEVELOPER TO THE CONTACT TEAM BE INCLUDED IN THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU.

THIS IS VICTORIA HOUSE AGAIN WITH THRILLER DIVINE, UM, TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS AS, AS MALCOLM SAID, UM, THE IRAQ DID VOTE TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT, BUT I WILL SAY THAT, UH, THE UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WE SPOKE AND THE PROJECT WAS FOR CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

WE DID PRESENT THE THINGS THAT MOUNT MALCOLM WAS TALKING ABOUT, BUT THOSE WERE WHAT THE PROJECT IS PROPOSED.

UM, AT THIS TIME WE ARE AGREEABLE AND HAVE BROKE WITH IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO PROVIDING THE, UH, BUFFER THAT THEY REQUESTED AND THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

SO AN AUTHOR WE KNOCKED ON AT LEAST SEVEN OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE ARE NOW IN SUPPORT, WHERE WE'RE DOING SUPPORT ARE NOW IN SUPPORT OR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE SITE, THE SUBJECT TRACT, UM, WITH THEY WERE THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY SUGGESTED THAT AT THE PAR AT THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE.

BUT RATHER THEY ASKED THAT THE CHAIN LINK FENCE AND THE GREENERY THAT COULD BE TO REMAIN, UH, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARRIVED AT A VEGETATIVE BUFFER, WHICH IS WHERE YOU'RE WIPED OUT OF HAVING A VEGETATIVE BUFFER INSTEAD OF A PRIVACY FENCE.

UM, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY TO HAVE A PRIVACY SENSE BEYOND THE 25 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER, BUT THEIR REQUEST WAS THEY DO NOT WANT TO SEE A BIG PRIVACY FENCE, UH, OUT THEIR BACKYARD.

UM, THEY LIKE TO CONTINUE TO SEE THE GREENERY THAT THEY HAVE TODAY.

SO, UM, I THINK SOME OF THE LETTERS THAT OUR CLINIC AIR WAS REFERRING TO WERE OPPOSITE, DID THEY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE THE VEGETATIVE SUFFER AND THE DISCUSSIONS HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST, UM, FOR REZONING.

UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO WANTED TO POINT THOSE THINGS OUT.

UM, ALSO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND I'M HEARING FROM OUR CLIENT THAT THE, THAT THE SHARED ACCESS POINT FOR DRIVEWAY ACCESS POINT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE, UM, AS IT IS TODAY.

AND THAT WAS WITH THE AGREEMENTS, UM, THAT WAS IN PLACE WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD TO THE LANDOWNER.

[00:30:01]

AND, UM, ALSO JUST TO TOUCH ON THE CONCERN FOR BREAK-INS AND, AND 60 CENTS FOR THE PROPERTY.

I THINK THAT DEVELOPMENT OF THIS ACTUALLY HELPS TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE BREAK-INS WITH, I THINK, VARIOUS TIMES A DAY, NOT, NOT JUST DURING THE DAY, BUT ALSO IN THE EVENING.

SO I THINK THE DEVELOPMENT HERE WOULD ACTUALLY HELP THAT MATTER, UM, WITH THAT I'M AVAILABLE TO YOU.

HAVEN'T CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE SPEAKERS.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

I GUESS LET'S GO AHEAD AND START OUR, UH, Q AND A, WE HAVE EIGHT SPOTS, FIVE MINUTES EACH.

SHE WANTS TO BEGIN IF WE COULD CLOSE THE CALL, KAREN.

OH, THANK YOU.

UH, SO THE LINE OF PRACTICE, UM, OKAY.

WE'VE GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE HEARING.

ALRIGHT.

LET'S SEE.

WANT TO ALL RIGHT.

THAT'S EIGHT OF US.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, ALL RIGHT, NOW WE'RE READY FOR QUESTIONS.

WHO'S GOT THE FIRST ONE, ANDY ONE, UH, COMMISSIONER COX.

CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? I HAD TO DO A HEADPHONE SWITCH.

I CAN HEAR YOU.

YES.

OKAY, GOOD.

UM, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

SO YOU SAID 25 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

UM, WHAT'S THE SETBACK.

WHAT WOULD BE THE SETBACK WITHOUT CALLING IT A VEGETATIVE BUFFER, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, THIS VICTORIA.

SO GARY IS AUTOMATICALLY A 25 FOOT, NO BUILD BUFFER THAT IS REQUIRED FOR COMPATIBILITY.

IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO BE EDUCATED.

IT CAN, IT CAN HAVE A PRIVACY FENCE WITHIN THAT BUFFER.

UM, SO AS, AS I STATED BEFORE, THE NEIGHBORS THAT BACKED UP TO THIS, OKAY.

THE GROUP EXISTS W HAP 25 FOOT THREE, UM, TO KEEP THE VEGETATION.

AND THEN IF ANYTHING, PLANT MORE VEGETATION CAN MAKE IT MORE DENSE.

UH, WAS I HAVING ISSUES WITH MY HEADPHONES AGAIN? OR WAS THAT, UH, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAYS ON EVER? I BELIEVE THAT WAS ON THE AFRICAN SIDE.

OKAY, VICTORIA, SORRY.

I THINK WE MISSED ABOUT THE SECOND HALF OF WHAT YOU SAID YOUR PHONE CUT OUT.

YOU WERE SAYING THE, THE HOMEOWNERS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY DIDN'T WANT A PRIVACY FENCE.

AND THEN I COULDN'T HEAR ANYTHING AFTER THAT.

YES, THEY, THEY CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME RIGHT NOW.

YES.

OKAY.

CORRECT.

THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TOLD US THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TO LOOK OUT THEIR BACKYARD AND SEE A BIG PRIVACY FENCE.

THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE GREENERY THAT THEY SEE TODAY.

SO THEY REQUESTED THAT WITHIN THAT 25 FOOT, NO BUILD BUFFER, THAT'S ALREADY REQUIRED.

THEY REQUESTED THAT WE KEEP THE VEGETATION IN LIEU OF A BIG PRIVACY FENCE.

WE AGREED TO THAT.

AND SO IT'S, IT'S NOT THAT THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT, IT'S 25 FEET IS ALREADY REQUIRED FOR NO BUILDING.

LIKE IT HAS TO REMAIN CLEAR AS FAR AS ANY BUILDINGS, BUT THE ADDED ELEMENT IS THAT IT WILL BE VEGETATED.

IT WILL KEEP THE VEGETATION THAT'S THERE TODAY.

UM, AND WE'LL ADD POTENTIALLY MORE VEGETATION.

SO IT'S MORE OF A DENSE BARRIER, CORRECT? ARE Y'ALL ARE Y'ALL PUTTING, UH, A FENCE AROUND THE PROPERTY AT ALL? IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY FENCING AROUND THE PROPERTY? THERE IS A POSSIBILITY.

OH, GO AHEAD, RON.

I WAS TO SAY COMMISSIONER COX.

UM, I MEAN, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE SITE WOULD BE FAST.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD PUT A FENCE UP AGAINST THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THEIR WISHES ARE TO HAVE THE GREENERY IN THERE.

AND, UH, FOR A COMPATIBILITY SCREENING ELEMENT, THE CHOICES ALREADY EITHER PUT IN A SIX FOOT SOLID FENCE OR TO HAVE DENSE VEGETATIVE SCREENING IN THERE.

AND SO IF WE ELIMINATE THE FENCE IDEA, THEN WE HAVE TO COMPLY TO THE SCREENING ELEMENT WITH DENSE VEGETATION THROUGH THERE.

AND I'LL ALSO ONLY ADD THAT THERE IS A STORM SEWER LINE THAT COMES IN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENTERS THIS PROPERTY AND THEN CONTINUES OUT TO HIGH 35.

[00:35:01]

AND PART OF THE PROJECT WILL BE TO UPGRADE TO STORM SEWER LINES THAT IS ON OUR PART OR CLIENT'S PROPERTY.

SO THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME DISTURBANCE IN THE VEGETATIVE DOCK FOR AREA, BUT THE IDEA IS TO PLAN IT BACK.

OKAY.

AND THEN IF, IF I HAVE TIME, UM, CAN EITHER RON OR VICTORIA, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT WE DO NEED MORE HOUSING, WHICH I THINK EVERYONE AGREES WITH, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY SHOULD BE RESIDENTIAL HAS COMPARED TO COMMERCIAL RETAIL OFFICE, LIKE THE LARGE MAJORITY OF THESE PROPERTIES ARE AGAINST THAT 35? CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE ONLY ACCESS, WHETHER IT'S VEHICLE BICYCLE OR PEDESTRIAN IS GOING TO BE ON THE FEEDER ROAD.

YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER ACCESS TO THIS SITE.

AND SO IT'S JUST KINDA, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A VERY APPEALING PLACE TO PUT A BIG MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, RON THROW WE'RE HERE.

UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY IF NOT HERE THEN WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TRIED OTHER MSX CASES AND OTHER PARTS OF TOWN HAVE NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL.

AND MSX IS THE LEAST USED MULTIFAMILY ZONING CASE IN ALL OF AUSTIN.

I THINK THERE'S ONLY 20 OR 21 PROPERTIES IN ALL OF AUSTIN THAT HAVE ZONING.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S CLEAR THAT WITH A MS ZONING THAT ALLOWS 90 FEET IN HEIGHT, THOUGH, THAT IS TAMPERED DOWN BY COMPATIBILITY THAT, YOU KNOW, IT NEEDS TO GO IN AREAS WHERE REASONABLE HEIGHTS CAN BE ACHIEVED AND YOU KNOW, COMPATIBILITY.

IT'S GOING TO TAMP IT DOWN.

THERE'S NO QUESTION ON THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THIS IS THAT THE PROPERTY HAS FRONTAGE ON, UM, IF WE HAD ANOTHER STREET, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'D BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS OUT TO THAT STREET, IF THERE WAS ONE TO THE BACK.

UM, YOU KNOW, I, I WOULD CONTEND THAT A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT HERE WITH OCCUPANCY 24 HOURS A DAY IS A FAR BETTER SCENARIO THAN A MCDONALD'S ON THIS SIDE OR JACK IN THE BOX OR A GAS STATION OR RETAIL OR OFFICE.

THAT'S ONLY THERE FOR EIGHT HOURS A DAY, OR, YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE OTHER TYPICAL COMMERCIAL USES.

AND GIVEN WHAT WE HEARD IS HAPPENING NEXT DOOR AT THE CARPENTERS, UH, BUILDING, UH, THE VAGRANCY THAT'S HAPPENING.

AND I, I, I BELIEVE THAT 24 HOUR OCCUPANCY AS A SIDE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO HELP CURTAIL A LOT OF THAT ACTIVITY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, YEP.

YEP.

WE'RE AT A TIME.

OKAY.

WE HAVE ANOTHER COMMISSIONER WITH QUESTIONS.

UM, BUT DID YOU RAISE YOUR OKAY.

COMMISSIONER IS OUR THANK YOU CHAIR.

UM, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU, DEAR, MS. .

CAN YOU PLEASE HELP TALK ABOUT, UM, SO I SIGNED A PRESENTATION THEN ONE OF THE COMMITMENTS IS THAT THERE WILL BE NO BALCONY OR ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR A CERTAIN KIND OF WINDOW ON THE EAST SIDE.

CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO WHY THAT DECISION WAS MADE AND THAT, UM, THAT WAS A DECISION OFFERED BY THE DEVELOPER IN AN EFFORT TO GET AHEAD OF CONCERNS FOR PRIVACY OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE TO THE EAST, UH, TRANSOM WILL ALLOW WHITE, UM, THAT WILL KEEP THAT ELEMENT OF PRIVACY NEEDED OR THAT THE ELEMENT ELEMENT OF PRIVACY THAT WOULD BE REQUESTED BY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE EAST.

THANK YOU.

AND I GUESS JUST TO FOLLOW UP, WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED OR WAS IT JUST BASED ON GENERAL CONCERNS AROUND PRIVACY? THE NEIGHBORHOOD DID NOT, UH, INITIALLY REQUEST IT, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAME IN OFFERING ANTICIPATING THAT IT WOULD BE A CONCERN.

AND, UM, IT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN WHERE THE BUILDING WAS PROPOSED AT NINE 90 FEET OR NINE STORIES.

UM, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE DEVELOPER PROPOSED TO CONTINUE EVEN WITH THE, UM, COMPATIBILITY, UH, UH, PROJECT COMPLYING WITH COMPATIBILITY.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT PERTAINING TO THIS SPECIFIC CASE, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT.

UM, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO WHY THE APPLICANT HAD TO DO MOVE AWAY FROM, UM, USING THE AFFORDABILITY YOUNG LAW PROGRAM TO PROVIDE THE AFFORDABLE UNITS? UH, YES.

CAN I START VICTORIA AGAIN,

[00:40:01]

THE APPLICANT OR THE, THE DEVELOPER WAS SENT TO QUALIFYING FOR AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED AND AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROJECT THAT WAS ONLY FEASIBLE WITH A TAX CREDIT AS, AS A TAX CREDIT PROJECT WITH THE TAX CREDIT FUNDS.

AND THIS SITE, I DON'T KNOW THE PARTICULARS, BUT I WAS INFORMED THAT THIS SITE WOULD ACTUALLY NOT BE A SITE THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR A TAX CREDIT FUNDED PROJECT.

SO WITH THAT, THEY DECIDED TO BACK AWAY FROM THE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED POSSIBILITY.

THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL CONTEXT SHARE THAT.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

UM, THIRD COMMISSIONER WITH QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONER PRAXIS.

UM, YES.

IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IT INCLUDES, UM, GOAL EIGHT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UM, WHICH IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UM, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS PROJECT DOES NOT PRODUCE ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO CAN STAFF CLARIFY, AM I READING THIS WRONG OR WAS THIS A PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL? OR WHY WAS THAT INCLUDED AS PART OF STAFF SUPPORT? YEAH.

UM, COMMISSIONER, THIS IS KATE CLARK WITH HOUSING AND PLANNING THAT, UM, I APOLOGIZE.

I'M TRYING TO PULL UP MY STAFF REPORT SO I CAN SEE WHERE THAT IS.

I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS NOT THE INTENT FOR THAT TO BE PART OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IF THAT IS IN THE STAFF REPORT, THEN, UM, IT SHOULD NOT BE, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING CANNOT BE PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATION TO REFUND HER PROPERTY.

OKAY.

YEAH, IT SAYS ON PAGE TWO BASIS FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THAT INCLUDED PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UM, GOALS.

SO, YEAH, THAT WAS JUST A QUESTION.

UH, SOMETHING THAT SEEMS STRANGE TO ME, UM, UM, YEAH, I GUESS THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT, THEN IT IS DISAPPOINTING, UM, THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS NOT BEING INCLUDED IN THIS PROJECT.

UM, SO IT'S, IT'S A HUNDRED MARKET RATE UNITS FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

SO WHAT RIGHT NOW IS CONSIDERED, WHAT WOULD THOSE UNITS BE SOLD AT? CAN YOU GIVE ME A RANGE OF, OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE, WHAT THEY WOULD BE RENTED OUT AS COMMISSIONER RON THROWER HERE? WE'RE CHECKING WITH OUR CLIENT COMMISSIONER.

COULD YOU CONFIRM, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU CAN, UH, THIS IS KATE CLARK.

COULD YOU TELL ME IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ZONING STAFF REPORT OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF REPORT? UH, LET'S SEE, I'M LOOKING AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET, UM, PAGE TWO.

THAT'S YEAH.

FOR THIS.

YEAH, YEAH.

THIS IS THIS, YEAH, THIS IS MAUREEN MEREDITH, UM, PLANNING.

UM, YEAH, THAT WAS MY STAFF REPORT AND YES, AT THE TIME WHEN, UH, WE, THE, UH, LONG RANGE PLANNER, THE EXCLUSIVE INCLUSIVE PLANNING STAFF MET, YES.

THIS PROPOSAL WAS PART OF THE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED.

AND I DID SEE WITHIN THE IRAQ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT GOAL EIGHT.

AND SO I ADDED IT AS PART OF THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO IT'S SOME, YEAH.

SO WHENEVER I SAW THAT AS PART OF THE PLAN DOCUMENT, I ADDED IT BECAUSE AT THAT TIME THEY WERE WRECKING, THEY WERE PROPOSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

RIGHT.

SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT STAFF DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE UPDATED PROPOSAL AND DECIDE ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND TO SUPPORT IT OR, OR NOT? WE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY, WE WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO SUPPORT IT EVEN WITH THE REVISED APPLICATION, BECAUSE IT WAS, UH, ALSO PROVIDING ADDITIONAL HOUSING FOR THE AREA.

UM, SO YES, WE WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO SUPPORT IT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

UM, AND FOR THE APPLICANT, DID YOU COME UP WITH, UM, WITH ANYTHING IN TERMS OF WHAT THESE UNITS WOULD BE RENTED OUT FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER PRACTICE, RON THROWER HERE? UH, THE DEVELOPER HAS NOT DONE A MARKET STUDY FOR THE AREA YET.

THAT'S GOING TO PROVIDE THAT LEVEL OF INFORMATION.

UM, BUT WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF OFFERING VOLUNTARY, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT FOR THIS PROJECT.

WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT MAY BE.

UM, IT WOULD BE OUR GOAL THAT BY THE TIME WE GET TO COUNCIL, WE COULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE IN PLACE, UH, AND, AND CAN

[00:45:01]

HELP ADDRESS THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.

BUT AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS VOLUNTARY.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, JUST LITTLE COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS, MS. SENATOR THOMPSON.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ABOUT OTHER POSSIBLE USES FOR THIS LAND.

SO IT'S IT'S I SEE IT'S GR, BUT IT ALSO HAS, UH, AN NP ON IT.

AND I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT RESTRICTIONS THAT OFFERED COULD, COULD THEY BUILD, COULD THE DEVELOPER BUILD A HOTEL THAT HAD A HUNDRED UNITS, BASICALLY THE SAME MASS AND THE SAME SIZE INSTEAD OF HOUSING AT THE SAME SPOT WITH THE CURRENT ZONING? NO CHANGES, NO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CHANGE, NO ZONING CHANGE.

UH, COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

THIS IS KATE CLARK.

UM, WITH THE CURRENT ZONING, YES, THEY WOULD BE PERMITTED TO BUILD A HOTEL.

A HOTEL MOTEL IS ALLOWED IN GR UH, THE NP DOESN'T, UH, UH, RESTRICT OR CHANGE ANY OF THE ENTITLEMENT ZONING.

IT JUST DESIGNATES THAT IT'S IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND WHAT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WOULD BE.

UM, IF THEY WERE TO GET THEIR REZONING REQUESTS, BASED ZONING DISTRICT, THEN THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE HOTEL WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT AT THAT POINT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

AND IF IT HAD THE HOTEL, THEN THEY WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE THE NO BALCONIES ON THE BACK OR NOT, OR WOULD THERE BE RESTRICTIONS ON THAT AS WELL? THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE DEVELOPER, UM, WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SEE, OH, HOW THE BALCONIES ARE DESIGNED, UM, WITH THE ORDINANCE ITSELF.

SO IF THE DEVELOPER CHOSE TO DO THAT WITH THEIR HOTEL AND MOTEL, THEN THEY, THEY COULD, BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE OF THE ZONING.

I THINK, IN THE COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE ITSELF, THAT WOULD SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WINDOWS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

NO, THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, UM, THEY LIMIT THE, THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THAT BREAKS IT DOWN TO HOW HIGH YOU CAN BUILD BASED ON DISTANCE FROM SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS WERE USED, BUT THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLING OF THE BUILDING IS NOT PART OF THAT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

THAT BRINGS US TO FOUR.

SO WE GOT, UH, ADDITIONAL SPOTS FOR FOLKS AS QUESTIONS ANY MORE.

OKAY.

I'M GOING TO ASK A FEW.

I, I HEARD, UM, IS IF, UH, MR. GREER IS STILL THERE, UH, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS IS OPPOSED AND WE'D LIKE TO EXPLORE A LITTLE BIT MORE, USE THE WORD, UM, IMPACT THE INTEGRITY OF THE AREA OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE MORE? I, I WAS A LITTLE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

OKAY.

SO, UH, LET'S I WAS UNMUTING MYSELF AND THE VOICE EVER CAME ON.

SO CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION PLEASE? YEAH.

YOU USED THE WORD THAT THE, THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH IMPACT THE INTEGRITY.

IF I GOT THE WORDS, RIGHT.

I, THAT WORD STRUCK ME.

UH, I JUST WANTED A LITTLE MORE MAYBE EXPLANATION OF WHAT YOU MEANT BY THAT.

WELL, THERE'S JUST, THERE'S NO, UH, THERE'S NO OTHER RESIDENTIAL BESIDES THE AREA ACROSS THE HIGHWAY.

UM, MY OPINION, OF COURSE, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOODS TURNING OVER, EVERYONE'S REDOING THEIR HOUSES.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING SOUTH OF RIVERSIDE, AS FAR AS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS GO THAT ARE OVER THREE STORIES.

UM, YOU KNOW, NOTHING THAT, THAT TOWERS OVER THREE LINES, IT'S JUST, UH, IT KIND OF MAINTAINS THAT AUSTIN HILL COUNTRY, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST LIKE THIS NICE BALANCE OF, OF, UH, YOU KNOW, LOW COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.

AND, UH, I JUST DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THE, UH, YEAH.

UH, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE CORRECT TERM TO USE, UH, AESTHETICALLY LOOKING AT THAT DOWN THE HIGHWAY.

IT JUST BE KIND OF RIDICULOUS LOOKING WITH THIS ONE OUT OF PLACE BUILDING, YOU KNOW.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

I JUST, THAT, THAT, UH, ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

AND THEN, UM, I GUESS THIS IS FOR, UM, UM, TO HASI I JUST, UH, YOU GUYS, ARE,

[00:50:01]

YOU, YOU, UM, ARE REPRESENTATIVES WITH A LOT OF, UM, APPLICANTS ON DEVELOPMENTS.

ARE YOU SEEING A TREND TOWARD THIS REMOVAL OF, YOU KNOW, BALCONIES AND, AND, UM, ON THE, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE FACING NEIGHBORHOODS, IS THAT, IS THAT HAPPENING A LOT OR IS, UM, HOW OFTEN DOES THAT HAPPEN? THAT DOES, THAT'S A CONDITION THAT'S BEING MADE.

THIS IS SO ON OUR CASES.

NO, WE HAVE NOT SEEN IT ON ANY OF OUR PARTICULAR CASES.

I MEAN, WE DO HERE, UH, IT'S, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO HEAR NEIGHBORHOODS BE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR VIEWS BEING PROTECTED.

UH, UH, WE DID HAVE A CASE OVER OFF OF PECAN SPRINGS A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO, WHERE ACTUALLY IT WAS SIMILAR.

IT WASN'T THAT BALCONIES WERE NOT ALLOWED, BUT THERE HAD TO BE SOME FORM OF, UM, UH, SCREENING ON THE BALCONY, UH, FROM THE HOUSES TO THE ADJACENT HOUSES.

AND I'LL JUST MIND YOU, THAT WAS A CASE WHERE THERE WAS A PETITION, A VALID PETITION IN PLACE.

WE'RE JUST DOING OUR BEST TO TRY TO FIND COMMON GROUND WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE.

BUT THAT'S BEEN THE ONLY OTHER CASE WE HAVE HAD THAT I'M AWARE OF WHERE THAT, UH, EVEN WHAT AREA, WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD NEGOTIATIONS AND BALCONIES WERE TAKEN AWAY.

UM, MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT'S NOT THE BEST THING TO DO.

I THINK PEOPLE IN APARTMENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO ENJOY, UM, SOME OUTDOOR SPACE, UM, AND IN GREENERY AND WHATNOT.

BUT, UM, ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON SOMETHING, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HERE TO REPRESENT THE LANDOWNER AND THE DEVELOPER, SO, OKAY.

THANKS.

I MEAN, UH, WE HEARD A VERY, UM, I GUESS AN IMPASSIONED ARGUMENT, UM, A COUPLE OF, UM, MEETINGS TO GO, UM, FROM ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS.

I JUST WANT TO SAY, I, I REALLY FEEL LIKE WE NEED, YOU KNOW, I DON'T LIKE IT WHEN WE REMOVE, UH, THE BALCONIES THAT ARE FACING NEIGHBORHOODS.

I THINK IT DOES MORE TO SEPARATE US IN A COMMUNITY THAN BRING US TOGETHER.

SO I WOULD JUST TOTALLY, DON'T SEE MANY MORE OF THESE COME UP AND I HOPE IT DOESN'T END UP AS A CEO IN THIS CASE.

I KNOW IT ISN'T, BUT I WOULD HOPE WE DON'T BRING IT IN OR ENTERTAIN THAT AT ALL.

OKAY.

UH, THAT'S ALL I HAD.

UH, WE HAVE A FEW MORE SPOTS FOR QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UM, ANY ONE HAVE A MOTION, MR. COX.

UM, CAN I GET A POINT OF CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF? CAUSE I CAN'T REMEMBER, UH, THE HOPE, THE WHOLE BALCONY ISSUE SINCE IT'S NOT IN THE WHATEVER CHAPTER OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT CAN'T BE A CEO CANDIDATE.

I THOUGHT, I REMEMBER LAST TIME IT GOT SHUT DOWN AS A CEO IT'S STAFF CLARIFY THAT FOR ME, COMMISSIONER, THIS IS KATE CLARK AND THE APPLICANT COULD DO A PRIVATE AGREEMENT, BUT IT CANNOT BE PART OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

OKAY.

THAT'S HOW I REMEMBER IT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

SO MY MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE, UM, OH BOY, I PROBABLY WASN'T PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION, UH, APPROVE THE REQUESTED.

I THINK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT THE 25 FOOT SETBACK MAINTAIN ITS EXISTING VEGETATION.

IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

THAT'S DOABLE.

OKAY.

SO, UM, THAT'S A LITTLE TWIST ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THEN.

UM, SO LET'S SEE, WHAT'S THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

IF WE CAN JUST LOOK AT THAT, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT EXACTLY.

IT'S JUST A, FOR THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER, RIGHT? UH, SORRY.

I'M GETTING CONFUSED BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT AND THEN THE STAFF RECOMMENDS, SO,

[00:55:01]

SO THERE'S THIS CEO NP, RIGHT.

AND YES, I'LL REVISE MY MOTION TO RECOMMEND FMF SIX C O N P WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT THE 25 FOOT THEY'RE CALLING IT A VEGETATIVE BUFFER, BUT THE 25 FOOT SETBACK MAINTAIN ITS EXISTING VEGETATION, WHICH IS THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

OKAY.

I, I WANTED TO CLARIFY, UM, IF WE'RE DOING A BUFFER, WE NEED TO SPECIFY WHERE, SO WOULD THAT BE ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY LINE? YES.

SO RECOMMEND MF SIX C O AND P WITH THE 25 FOOT MEDITATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY.

JUST A CLARIFICATION THAT THE DEVELOPER OR THE APPLICANT HAS SAID THAT THEY'D HAVE TO DO A, A STORM SEWER PIPE THERE.

SO I MEAN, LIKE TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE OR SOME OTHER WORDING THERE THAT NO, WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT THERE WAS AN EXISTING SEWER COMMISSIONER, RON TREMOR.

MAY I SPEAK ON THAT? YEAH, PLEASE DO.

WE'RE UH, JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR ON NOW WHETHER OR NOT THE BUFFER IT'S DOABLE, THERE IS AN EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE IN THERE THAT HAS TO BE UPGRADED AND WE WILL BE UPGRADING THAT.

AND THAT'S ALSO WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE TYING INTO WASTEWATER AND RELOCATING THE WASTEWATER LINE IN THAT AREA AND THERE.

SO THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME WORK THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE AND THAT 25 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

BUT AGAIN, WE WILL PLANT IT BACK, UH, TO THE DEGREE THAT THE CITY WILL ALLOW US TO DO THAT, THAT, SORRY, IF I'M SPEAKING OUT OF TURN, BUT THAT ACTUALLY KIND OF CHANGES THINGS BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT GOING TO LET YOU PLANT A BUNCH OF TREES ALL OVER THEIR UTILITY LINES.

SO THAT DRAMATICALLY CHANGES THING.

OKAY.

SO I'M NOT, UH, LET'S GO AND MOVE ON.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THIS CHAIR COMMISSIONER BEFORE WE PROCEED? UH, WOULD, UH, COMMISSION PARCEL ONE TO INCLUDE THE NPA? RIGHT.

WE WANT TO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT, COMMISSIONER COPS IN THEIR EMOTION, HONESTLY.

UM, HONESTLY, I'D RATHER JUST WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND LET SOMEONE ELSE LISTEN.

I'M TRYING TO GET THE ORDER HERE.

COMMISSIONER CZAR, WHERE YOU OFFERING A SECOND OR MAKING A NEW MOTION.

I WAS OKAY.

COMMISSIONER SHIT.

SO, UM, I JUMPED IN A LITTLE BIT LATE, BUT I'M SORRY, BUT I MEAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE, UM, THE, THE MF SIX I'M PRETTY MUCH LIKE FISHER SAW COX, BUT THE, BUT WITH THAT, BUT WITHOUT, UM, LIMITING THAT THE BUFFER AND I'LL EXPLAIN WHY, YOU KNOW, BUT BASICALLY IT'S LIKE, IT WAS, BUT LIKE, UH, PRETTY MUCH SO, UH, JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

ARE YOU, IS THIS WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REZONING OR ARE YOU BASICALLY, UM, RECOMMENDING STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR IS THAT YOUR MOTION? I THINK IT IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

RIGHT? CAUSE THEY SUPPORT IT SO THAT I, YEAH, SO IT'S FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

SO NEW STAFF LIMITS IT TO 25 FOOT.

WELL, IT'S A 25 FOOT COMPATIBILITY SETBACK ANYWAY, RIGHT.

WITH COMPATIBILITY.

SO IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO BE STATED IT'S IF THEY'RE RESPECTING COMPATIBILITY IT'S BUILT IN.

ALL RIGHT.

SO DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVAL AT THE NPA? IS THAT ALSO YOUR INTENT? THAT'S CORRECT.

YES.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

SO DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION? OKAY.

COMMISSIONER IS, ARE, UH, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, MR. ? SO THE, SO THE, SO FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM, UM, I KNOW COMMISSIONER THOMPSON BROUGHT IT UP, BUT WOULD, THEY COULD ALREADY BUILD, UH, THIS STRUCTURE THERE ANYWAY, AND REALLY THE DIFFERENCE HERE IS GOING TO BE THE USE OF, IS IT A HOTEL OR IS IT GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, SOME TYPE OF, UM, YOU KNOW, MF SIX APARTMENT TYPE STYLE, UH, PRODUCT, RIGHT.

SO THEY CAN ONLY GET THAT THERE IT'S REALLY, IT'S KIND OF A DOWN ZONING.

IT'S A, IT'S A PRETTY MAJOR DOWN ZONING.

UM, BUT AS FAR AS FOR THAT COMPATIBILITY SETBACK, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOTTA BE SETBACKS.

YOU JUST ALWAYS BEEN PUT THERE BECAUSE OF THE VISUAL RELATIONSHIPS, BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY AT THAT, THAT 25 FOOT MOVE IT BACK.

BUT THIS IS AT THE GROUND LEVEL.

AND WHAT IS IN THAT, CAUSE I'M DEALING WITH THAT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW.

BUT WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN THAT BUFFER IS WHAT'S SERVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE WHOLE GENERAL AREA.

[01:00:01]

IF WE DON'T ALLOW THAT TO BE UPGRADED, THEN WE COULD HAVE LOCALIZED FLOODING IN THE AREA.

SO WE NEED TO LET THAT BE ENGINEERED AND BROUGHT UP TO TODAY'S STANDARDS.

SO I'M, I'M, UM, I'M KIND OF HESITANT TO, UH, LIMIT THAT.

AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT THE DEVELOPERS TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ONCE THAT THOSE STORM WATER, UM, STRUCTURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN PROVED THAT WILL COME BACK AND THEY'LL VEGETATE IT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THEY CAN.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PUT THAT IN THERE, BUT WE CAN'T LIMIT THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT TO SERVE THE DEVELOPMENT IT'S TO SERVE THE AREA AND IT'S VITAL TO THE AREA.

SO ANYWAY, THAT'S WHY I KIND OF TWEAKED MR. COX IS, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, MOTION, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

OKAY.

UH, WE HAVE, UH, A MEMBER AGAINST THIS MOTION SPEAKING AGAINST A FISHER COPS.

I, I DON'T, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER SHANE MADE A GOOD POINT AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON MADE A GOOD POINT THAT THIS, THAT WE'RE REALLY NOT VOTING ON A MASS OR SCALE ISSUE HERE BECAUSE THEY CAN ALREADY BUILD THIS MASS OR SCALE ON THIS PROPERTY IF THEY WANT IT TO.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT YES, THE UTILITIES NEED TO HAPPEN.

I'M ALL FOR UTILITIES, I'M AN ENGINEER.

WE NEED TO UPGRADE IT.

UH, BUT I THINK, I THINK THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE NEIGHBORS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO MAINTAIN THIS VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

AND I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE UPGRADING STORM SEWER PIPES, IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE UPGRADING SENATORS, SEWER PIPES, WHICH IS PROBABLY DESPERATELY NEEDED, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAINTAIN THAT VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

A LOT OF THAT VEGETATION IS GOING TO BE REMOVED AND IT'S GOING TO BE MAINTAINED AS A GRASS STRIP BECAUSE THE UTILITY OWNERS, WHICH IS THE CITY OF AUSTIN, ARE NOT GOING TO WANT HEAVY VEGETATION OVER UTILITY LINES THAT THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN.

SO THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER THAT IS THERE.

NOW, IF THESE UTILITIES ARE GOING TO BE UPGRADED OR IF THE UTILITIES ARE GOING IN THAT VEGETATIVE BUFFER IS GONE.

AND SO I REALLY HOPE IF THIS, IF THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD THAT THE DEVELOPER UTILIZE IT AS MAYBE ADDITIONAL SPACE ON THEIR PROPERTY OR OTHER POTENTIALLY INNOVATIVE MEANS TO PROVIDE THAT SORT OF VEGETATIVE SCREENING, BECAUSE I JUST WANT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO KNOW THAT THAT VEGETATIVE BUFFER IS GONE NO MATTER WHAT WE PUT IN THIS CONDITIONAL, OKAY.

COMMISSIONER SPEAKING FOR, UH, FISHER DESSERT, UM, CHAIR, I JUST HAVE A CLARIFICATION QUESTION FOR THE MOTION MAKER.

I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WOULD HAVE A CEO, UM, THAT WOULD REQUIRE 24 VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARIES THAT CORRECT? YES.

BUT THE, AGAIN, THE ISSUE IS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE UTILITY, WHERE THAT LINE IS, BUT, UM, THAT IS WHERE I'M AT.

YEAH.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

SO THAT'S IT.

NOW YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO IT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANT TO, UH, SPEAK FOR AGAINST THIS MOTION? ALRIGHT.

CONDITIONERS ARE I'LL GO AHEAD.

I GUESS I SPEAK TO IT.

I JUST, THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFIRMING THAT.

I THINK WE'RE STILL ACQUIRING A CEO FOR THE 25 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER SO THAT THE BUFFER WOULD BE THERE.

I THINK THE QUESTION IS WHETHER, UM, SOME VEGETATION WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED AND REPLANTED OR SOME OF IT WOULD REMAIN.

AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT I CAN UNDERSTAND AT THIS MOMENT.

AND I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS MAINTAINED THAT THEY DO WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT BUFFER AND WITH THE CEO AS RECOMMENDED BY OUR STAFF, WE'RE MOVING AHEAD AND REQUIRING THAT BUFFER.

SO AT THIS POINT I FEEL COMFORTABLE, UM, MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS, CONSIDERING THAT THERE EVENTUALLY THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT REMAINS.

THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT I WOULD MAKE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE, UM, SHAW AND OTHER COMMENTS MADE REGARDING THE BALCONIES.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, I'M FINE WITH MOVING AHEAD WITH THIS AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S BEEN A GOOD CONVERSATION WITH THE, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT I DO JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK THIS IS THE THIRD CASE WHERE I'VE SEEN THIS IN LITERALLY JUST THE PAST FEW WEEKS.

AND IF THERE'S OTHER APPLICANTS LISTENING OUT THERE, IF THIS CONTINUES, I WILL START VOTING AGAINST ANY, UM, UH, PROJECTS THAT COME FORWARD THAT DO NOT REQUIRE BALCONIES.

I THINK THIS IS TRULY A QUESTION OF QUALITY OF LIFE FOR FUTURE TENANTS OR HOMEOWNERS.

UM, AND SO I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS IN THE FUTURE, BUT I WILL MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS CONVERSATION JUST BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN THE COMMITMENT MADE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

ALL.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY MORE COMMISSIONERS WANTING TO SPEAK ON THIS? I THINK WE ALREADY HAVE YOU SPEAKING AGAIN.

SO I THINK WE'RE, UH, WE, WE SHOULD, UH, COMMISSIONER PRICES.

YES.

UM, WITHOUT KNOWING

[01:05:01]

OR HAVING A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT THESE UNITS WILL BE RENTED OUT AT.

UM, I CAN'T REALLY SUPPORT THIS.

UM, YOU KNOW, I, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA OF AUSTIN.

THERE ARE A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ARE JUST STRUGGLING TO RENT, UM, AND TO JUST PAY FOR GENERAL EXPENSES, IT'S VERY FOOD INSECURE AREA.

AND I DO NOT WANT TO SEE, UM, UNAFFORDABLE UNITS AND THESE KINDS OF DEVELOPMENTS ENCROACHING ON OUR NEIGHBORHOODS HERE.

SO, UM, YEAH, WITHOUT HAVING ANY IDEA OF WHAT THIS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF FAMILIES WOULD, WOULD BE ABLE TO AFFORD, UM, YOU KNOW, THOSE UNITS, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.

OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, ARE YOU SPEAKING IN FAVOR OR AGAINST SOME FAVOR IN FAVOR? OKAY.

SO I'M, I TOO AM DISAPPOINTED THAT WE CAN'T PROVIDE AFFORDABLE UNITS HERE.

I KNOW.

ALL RIGHT.

I DO UNDERSTAND THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM AND THE ECONOMY OF SCALE AND WHAT IT REQUIRES IN ORDER TO, TO PRODUCE AFFORDABLE UNITS.

UM, AND IT'S REALLY NOT CONDUCIVE FOR THAT SMALL NUMBER, UNFORTUNATELY.

AND SO MY HOPE IS IT'S MORE OF A STATEMENT THAT AS THE CITY THINKS ABOUT HIS PROGRAMS, YOU KNOW, TO, TO TRY TO ENCOURAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT WE TRY TO,