[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
[00:00:02]
WELL, IT IS 6 0 7 AND WE HAVE A QUORUM OF SEVEN PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HERE TONIGHT.
SO WE'RE GOING TO BRING, UH, THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT, UH, LIKE I SAID, 6 0 7.
I WILL START OUT WITH A ROLL CALL.
WE HAVE, UM, WE HAVE SEVEN PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HERE AND, UH, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, AND WE HAVE, UM, ANOTHER FIVE THAT ARE, UM, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
SO I'LL START WITH THE, UH, ROLL CALL OF THOSE CHAMBERS.
WHEN I CALL YOUR NAMES, JUST ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR PRESENCE.
UH, I'M YOUR CHAIR, TODD SHAW.
UH, WE HAVE, LET'S SEE IF I SHARE A HEMPEL, UH, COMMISSIONER IS OUR COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY COMMISSIONER, UH, COPS HERE, COMMISSIONER SNYDER HERE AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE.
AND THEN, UH, VIRTUALLY WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD AND I'M GOING A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER HERE.
COMMISSIONER FLORES, COMMISSIONER YANNIS, PALITO HERE, COMMISSIONER MOSHE TODDLER HERE.
AND I THINK WE'RE, UM, YOU DON'T HAVE, I DON'T SEE COMMISSIONER PRACTICES AND I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER SHEA IS NOT PRESENT, UM, AND, UH, LIKE TO RECOGNIZE, UH, WE HAVE EX-OFFICIO RICHARD MENDOSA HERE THIS EVENING.
AND I THINK THAT'S ALL I'M SEEING ON THE SCREEN.
SO I THINK, UM, WE MIGHT, UH, HAVE A COMMISSIONER SHOW UP A LITTLE LATER, UM, JUST FOR THE AUDIENCE AND COMMISSIONERS.
THIS IS OUR FIRST HYBRID MEETING.
SO I'D LIKE TO READ A LITTLE ANNOUNCEMENT, UM, BEAR WITH US THIS EVENING.
UH, WE'VE HAD, HAVE NOT HAD TO DO THIS, UM, THEN ALL VIRTUAL FOR QUITE A WHILE, SO I'M SURE WE'LL, UM, WE'LL GET THROUGH IT, BUT THERE MAY BE SOME HICCUPS ALONG THE WAY, UH, REAL QUICK, UH, FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC PRESENT, UH, FOR THIS MEETING AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING, UM, MEANING THAT WE HAVE A FORUM, UH, COMMISSIONERS HERE IN THE CHAMBERS.
WE HAVE SEVEN HERE THIS EVENING AND THE REMAINDER OF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE ATTENDING VIRTUALLY AS SUCH.
UM, WE'LL HAVE TO TRACK THE ACTIVITIES OF BOTH WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IN CHAMBERS, AS WELL AS, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS OUT THERE, UH, ON THEIR COMPUTERS, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
SO, UM, WE'RE NOT PROHIBITED, UH, WELL, THE PUBLIC, WE'RE NOT PROHIBITING THE PUBLIC FOR BEING IN CHAMBERS, UH, IN TIRED TIME, BUT STRONGLY RECOMMENDING THAT, UM, THAT YOU REMAINED IN THE ATRIUM OR OTHERWISE OUTSIDE UNTIL YOUR ITEM COMES UP JUST SO WE CAN KIND OF MAXIM MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE AND, UH, MAXIMIZE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS.
UM, SO FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, UH, WE WILL START WITH THE FIRST ONE AND THEN, UM, OUR LIAISON, MR. RIVERA, UH, BEFORE THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING, UH, WE'LL GO OUT TO THE ATRIUM AND ANNOUNCED THAT WE'RE MOVING ONTO THE NEXT ITEM AND, UH, WE'LL GIVE SOME TIME FOR TRANSITION FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE IN AND OUT.
AND, UM, ALSO YOU'LL RECEIVE A EMAIL ABOUT 15 MINUTES AWAY FROM THE ITEM THAT YOU'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
SO, UM, ANYWAY, THAT'S, UH, SO IF YOU CAN, LIKE I SAID, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE, IF YOU WAIT OUTSIDE, UH, THAT WOULD BE, I THINK, SMART GIVEN WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A PENDANT.
UM, SO, UH, TODAY I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME HELP, UH, VICE-CHAIR HEMPEL, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES AND, UH, MR. RIVERA GONNA KIND OF HELP ME OUT HERE WITH SOME OF THE DUTIES, UH VICE-CHAIR WILL, WE'LL BE TRACKING THAT KIND OF NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT COMMISSIONERS ARE ASKING AND, UM, AND THE SPEAKERS, UH, TRACKING SPEAKERS FOR AND AGAINST ON THE VARIOUS MOTIONS.
AND ALSO ANNOUNCED WHEN SPEAKERS AND COMMISSIONERS A LOT OF TIME IS UP, SO THERE'LL BE A BUZZER, BUT, UH, WE'LL ALSO REMIND FOLKS THAT THEIR TIME IS UP.
UH, ALSO, SO THE FOLKS ONLINE CAN HEAR IT AS WELL.
UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES WILL GIVE US THE FIRST READING, UH, OF S UM, THE STAFF, UM, CONSENT AGENDA, AND A MR. A VARIABLE ANNOUNCED, UH, SPEAKERS, UH, DURING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS KIND OF EMCEE THAT PROCESS.
UM, SO WE WILL, UH, I WILL HAVE HELP TODAY, WHICH IS, I'M VERY GRATEFUL
[00:05:01]
FOR, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY, UM, HAVE YOUR CARDS READY.UM, AND THE WAY THIS WILL WORK, I WILL ACCOUNT VOTES, UH, ON THE DIAS FIRST AND WRITE THOSE DOWN.
AND THEN I WILL TURN MY ATTENTION TO THOSE OF YOU IN THE VIRTUAL WORLD AND COUNTER VOTES.
UM, AND I'LL HAVE FOLKS THAT CHECKING MY NUMBERS AS I TRY TO COUNT THOSE TELE UP THOSE NUMBERS.
AND SO THOSE ONLINE STAY MUTED UNTIL, UM, UNTIL YOU WANT TO SPEAK, RAISE YOUR HAND, REALIZE IT'S GOING TO BE EVEN MORE CHALLENGING.
I'M MONITORING WHAT'S GOING ON HERE AND TRYING TO PAY ATTENTION TO YOU GUYS, DEFINITELY GRAB, YOU KNOW, IF YOU NEED TO, UM, IF I'M MISSING YOU AND NOT RECOGNIZE YOU, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK AND, UH, SO THAT I CAN, UH, UH, I CAN, UH, NOTE YOUR PARTICIPATION.
UM, OKAY, WELL, LET'S GET ONTO THE BUSINESS.
WE'VE GOT A PRETTY FULL, UH, THREE DISCUSSION ITEMS I KNOW OF, AND
[Reading of Agenda]
WE'RE GOING TO START OUT WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA AND JUST FOR THOSE OUT THERE, UH, WHAT WE DO WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE, UM, LOOKING AT THE STAFF'S, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSENT AND, UH, WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE, UH, MEETING MINUTES AND PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES WILL DO THE FIRST READING OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.AND AFTER THE FIRST READING, UM, STAFF LIAISON, UH, MR. RIVERA WILL LET US KNOW IF ANY OF THE ITEMS, IF YOU HAVE SPEAKERS ON ANY OF THE ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO PULL OFF CONSENT FOR DISCUSSION AND ALSO COMMISSIONERS, UH, BOTH AARON CHAMBERS AND ONLINE, UH, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST ITEMS, TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL.
SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER FLORES, TO DO THE, UH, FIRST READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, TODAY WE HAVE A APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE AUGUST 24TH, 2021 MEETING, UH, B PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARINGS, B ONE PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2021 DASH 0 0 2 6 0.01 GRADIENT BROWNIE MIXED USE, UM, THAT IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION B TWO REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 3 9.
GRADY AND BROWNIE MIXED USE THAT IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION.
THE THREE REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 0 9 AT 1725 TUMI ROAD.
THAT IS A PORT CONSENT POSTPONEMENT BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO OCTOBER 12TH.
AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT BEFORE PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 19 0 0 2 2 0.01 200 ACADEMY IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION C5 REZONING C 14 20 20 0 1 4 7 200 ACADEMY ALSO OFFERED COURT DISCUSSION B6 PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 21 0 0 2 9 0.01 S H AT 10 21 EAST ST.
JOHN'S THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
THESE SEVEN REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 0 5 DOT S H AT 10 21 EAST ST.
JOHN'S AVENUE ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
THE EIGHT REZONING SCENE 14 21 0 0 8 1 FIFTH AND WALSH REZONING THAT IS OFFERED FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 28, B NINE, REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 8 2 SPRINGDALE ROAD RESIDENCES.
UM, THAT IS APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 12TH AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGREES B 10 APPEAL DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS SCENE 14 H DASH 2004 DASH 0 0 0 8, HR 2021 DASH 0 8 5 7 3 9 MITCHELL ROBERTSON BUILDING.
AND THAT IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION CHAIR SHAW.
THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PROVIDED BY STAFF.
UM, SO I GUESS, FIRST OF ALL, CHECKING WITH MR. RIVERA, IF WE'VE
[00:10:01]
GOT ANY SPEAKERS FOR ITEMS THAT WERE UP ON CONSENT, WE'RE SURE COMMISSIONER LEADS ON HANDOVER.THE CONSENT AGENDA REMAINS AS PROVIDED BY STAFF.
SO, UH, LOOKING FIRST ON THE DIOCESE HERE, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA, ANY WISHES TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON CONSENT? UM, I GUESS THAT WAS, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY ANY, UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR WISHES TO PULL ANYTHING OFF THE CONSENT.
I WILL THEN REREAD, UH, WELL, LET ME BACK UP ONE SECOND.
ANY COMMISSIONERS, I GUESS, ON THE DIET NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM ANY OF THE ITEMS? NOPE.
UH, THOSE ONLINE, UH, VIRTUAL ANYONE NEEDS TO RECUSE THEMSELVES.
SEE NONE GO IN, UH, REPEAT THE, UH, WHAT, UM, WE HAVE HERE FOR CONSENT AND WE HAVE THE AUGUST 24TH, 2021 MINUTES.
WE HAVE ITEMS B ONE PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 21 0 0 2 6 0 1 GRADIENT BROWNIE MIXED USE.
UM, THAT'S FOR DISCUSSION, YOU HAVE IMD TWO REZONING.
SEE 14 20 21 0 0 3 9 GRADIENT BROWNIE MIX USE.
WE WILL TAKE ON B ONE AND B TWO TOGETHER, UM, ITEM D THREE, REZONING C 14 20 21 DASH 0 0 9 7 25 TUMI ROAD.
UH, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TALK.
YOU HAVE ITEM D FOR PLAN AMENDMENT NTA 2019.
THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM B FIVE, THE ACCOMPANY REZONING THAT'S C 14 20 20 0 1 47 AT 200 ACADEMY.
UH, WE WILL TAKE ITEMS BEFORE AND B FIVE TOGETHER.
MOVING ON TO ITEM B SIX PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 21 0 0 2 9 0 ONE.SH 10 21 EAST ST.
THAT ITEM IS ON CONSENT AND WE HAVE AN A B SEVEN, WHICH IS YOUR COMING TO REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 5 DOT S H AT 10 21 EAST ST.
JOHN'S ALSO ON CONSENT AND VITAMIN B EIGHT, UH, REZONING CASE NUMBER C 14 20 21 DASH 0 0 8 1 FIFTH AND WALLACE REZONING.
THIS IS A STATUS MOMENT TO SEPTEMBER 28TH.
YOU IT'D BE NINE REZONING, C 14 DASH 2021, DESERT 0 8 2 SPRINGDALE ROAD RESIDENCES.
THIS ITEM IS A APPLICANT POST MOMENT TILL OCTOBER 12TH, NEIGHBORHOOD AGREES.
AND THE LAST ITEM D 10 APPEAL, DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CASE NUMBER C 14 H 2004, AS THERE A 0 0 8 AND HR DESK, 2021 AS 0 8 5 7 3 9 MITCHELL ROBERTSON BUILDING.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
SO THAT IS THE READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[Consent Agenda]
UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? UM, AND, UH, THE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, INCLUDING THE AUGUST 24TH MINUTES.SO I SEE, UH, A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR, HEMPHILL SECONDED BY MR. HUIZAR.
AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
SO FIRST LET'S, UH, COUNT THOSE ON THE DIAS FIRST.
WE HAVE S SEVEN HERE AND OKAY.
1, 2, 3, 4, AND THAT IS GREEN.
SO THAT IS A TOTAL OF 11, UH, ZERO.
SO WE HAVE DISPOSED OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[Items B1 & B2]
GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR, UH, FIRST PUBLIC HEARING.AND THESE ARE, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE, AS I SAID, I'D BE ONE AND P D TWO UP TOGETHER.
AND SO WE'LL START WITH THE STAFF PRESENTATION.
MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT ITEM B.
[00:15:01]
GRADIENT BROWNIE MIXED JUICE.THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT TEN SIX OH NINE TEN SIX ELEVEN TEN SIX ONE THREE TEN SIX ONE FIVE BROWNIE DRIVE, WHICH IS TRACKED ONE AND 10, 6, 10, 10, 6, 12, 10, 6, 14 MIDDLE FISKVILLE ROAD, WHICH IS TRACK TWO.
IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE NORTH LUMBAR COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE LAND USE.
THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM WITHIN THE NORTH LAMAR COMBINED PLANNING AREA, BUT WE DID RECEIVE SOME LETTERS IN OPPOSITION AND IT THERE IN THE CASE REPORT.
AND NOW WE'LL HEAR, UM, THE APPLICANT.
OH, THEY PLAY AN MTA OR THE ZONING CASE.
COMMISSIONERS SHERRY'S OR WITNESS WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM B TWO, WHICH IS KC 14, 20 21 0 0 3 9.
THE, THE ADDRESSES ARE, AS MAUREEN SAID, 1 0 6 0 9 1 0 6 1 1 1 0 6 1 3 AND 1 0 6 1 5 BROWNIE AVENUE OR BROWNIE DRIVE.
AND 1 0 6 1 0 1 0 6 1 2 AND 1 0 6 1 4 MIDDLE FISCAL ROAD.
THE REQUEST IS FOR, FROM TRACK ONE, SF THREE NP TO SFR MP, AND FOR TRACK TWO LR, M P TO SEE US IMMU NP.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS MF TO NP ZONING FOR TRACT ONE, AND LRM RMU NP ZONING FOR TRACK TWO.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION CONSISTS OF SEVEN END DEVELOPED LOTS LOCATED BETWEEN BROWNIE DRIVE AND MIDDLE FISCAL ROAD AT EAST GRADY DRIVE THE LOTS TO THE NORTH ACROSS THE EAST GRADY DRIVE ARE ZONED SF THREE, AND LRN P RESPECTIVELY.
AND OUR END DEVELOPED FURTHER TO THE NORTH AS A MANUFACTURING FACILITY, THE FORMER GOLFSMITH SITE WITH IP IN P AND C S AND P ZONING TO THE SOUTH AND EAST ALONG BROWNIE DRIVE THEIR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT ARE ZONED SF TWO, NPNS HAVE THREE MP ALONG MIDDLE FISCAL ROAD TO THE SOUTH.
THERE ARE COMMERCIAL USES WITH LRN P N C S AND P ZONING.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING MFA FOR NPS ZONING FOR TRACT ONE AND S AND C S M U N P ZONING FOR TRACK TWO TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AT THE PERIPHERY OF THE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMERCIAL USES FOR RUNNING
ONE WILL PERMIT THE APPLICANT TO DEVELOP LOW DENSITY.
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN AN AREA ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING TO THE SOUTH AND WEST.
THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTS LOW DENSITY DISTRICT WILL PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES TO BE DEVELOPED ON AN UNDER UTILIZED PROPERTY THAT IS LOCATED NEAR TO MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS, NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD TO THE WEST AND BREAKER LANE TO THE NORTH AND HIGHWAY TO THE WEST
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS LRN UMP ZONING FOR TRACK TWO IS THE PROPERTY FRONT'S MIDDLE FISKVILLE ROAD, WHICH IS A LEVEL ONE LOCAL ROADWAY, NOT THE I 35 FRONTAGE ROAD.
THE STAFF SUPPORTS ADDING THE IMMUNE MIXED USE COMBINING DISTRICT TO THE DISTINCT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL BASED DISTRICT ZONING ON TRACK TWO TO PERMIT A MIXTURE OF RESIDENTIAL OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL AND CIVIC USES TO BE DEVELOPED ON THIS PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE IHI 35 FRONTAGE ROAD.
TWO WILL PROVIDE FOR A TRANSITION IN THE INTENSITY OF PERMITTED USES FROM MIDDLE FISCAL ROAD TO THE
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
AND NOW WE'LL MOVE TO THE APPLICANT AND JUST, UH, TOOK OVER IT TIMEFRAMES, UH, JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE, UH, HAD.
UM, WE HAD A LINE, SO JUST REAL QUICK, UH, I'LL JUST REVIEW THESE QUICKLY.
AND THEN ANDREW, YOU CAN START WITH THE SPEAKERS.
UM, WE HAVE THE PRIMARY PROPONENT IS FIVE MINUTES, 10 MINUTES TOTAL WITH DONATIONS, AND THEN WE HAVE SPEAKERS FOR THE ITEM.
UH, WE HAVE THREE AT THREE MINUTES, 10 MINUTES MAX OR DONATIONS, AND THEN WE HAVE UNLIMITED NUMBER OF SPEAKERS AFTER THAT HAVE ONE MINUTE, FIVE MINUTES WITH DONATIONS.
AND IT'S THE SAME FOR THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
AND WITH THAT, UH, MR. RIVERA,
[00:20:01]
PLEASE GO AHEAD.SO WE'LL BEGIN BY HEARING FROM THE APPLICANTS MS. VICTORIA, HASI, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA.
HASI WITH ROVER DESIGN, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNERS OF THE SUBJECT TRACKS.
UH, SO THE SUBJECT TRACKS YOU SEE IN THE IMAGE IN FRONT OF YOU ARE IN BLUE AND, AND IN BLACK, AND ALSO IT'S, UH, THIS IMAGE SHOWS THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE ELEMENTS, AS WELL AS CAPITAL METRO TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS.
THE SITE IS ABOUT A MILE FROM THE LAMAR AND RUNDBERG NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER SEEN AT THE LOWER LEFT-HAND CORNER IN YELLOW.
AND IT'S ABOUT A HALF MILE FROM BREAKER LANE AND A LITTLE MORE THAN A HALF MILE TO LAMAR, WHICH ARE BOTH IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDORS SO THE SITE TOTAL IS 1.8 ACRES OF LAND.
AND THE REQUEST IS FOR MIXED USE PHLEGM DESIGNATION FOR BOTH TRACKS
WE'RE REQUESTING MFR FOR TRACT ONE, WHICH IS NEAREST THE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, AND WE'RE REQUESTING CSM U FOR TRACK TWO, WHICH RUNS ALONG THE
FIRST AND FOREMOST, OUR CLIENT IS MOSTLY INTERESTED IN BUILDING RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS.
THERE MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME COMMERCIAL USES, UM, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE ASKED FOR THE MIXED USE TO REQUEST SO THESE, THESE LOTS ARE PART OF THE NORTH MEETS SUBDIVISION, WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE LATE 1960S.
AND WHILE THE LAND IS VACANT TODAY, UH, THE LAND HAS RIGHTS TO BE DEVELOPED.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE CITY DOESN'T OWN IT.
AND AT SOME POINT THE LAND WILL BE ALLOWED TO BE DEVELOPED.
AND IN 1967, THERE WAS A STEED RESTRICTION, UH, OF THE SUBDIVISION THAT RESERVES LOTS FOR BLOCKS D AND G FOR COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH INCLUDES MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, WHICH MUST GO THROUGH THE COMMERCIAL SITE PLANNING PROCESS WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
THIS IS LIKELY THE REASON THAT YOU DON'T SEE THE SUBJECT TRACKS ALONG BROWNIE LANE, HAVING DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY AT THIS, UH, TO, TO THIS POINT TODAY FOR THERE, IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE DEED RESTRICTION ALSO DICTATES THAT EACH RESIDENTIAL LOT CAN ONLY HAVE ONE DETACHED DWELLING UNIT.
THEREFORE, THE SUBJECT TRACT MAY BE ONE OF THE FEW OPPORTUNITIES IN THIS AREA TO GAIN ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND INFILL DEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS THE NORTH MEAD SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION, AND YOU CAN SEE BLOCKS DNG HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
AND THOSE ARE THE BLOCKS THAT ARE RESERVED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, MFR AND CSM.
YOU HAVE THE DENSITY ALLOWANCES OF LINDA LENDING TO A MAXIMUM OF 70 UNITS ACROSS THE ENTIRE LAND AREA TO BE REZONED.
AND WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF LR AND MF TO THE POTENTIAL FOR DWELLING UNITS IS DECREASED BY HALF 70 UNITS ON
CONSIDERING THAT TYPICAL APARTMENT DEVELOPMENTS THAT YOU SEE ALONG LAMAR BURNET CANAIGRE, PLACES LIKE THAT HAVE AT LEAST A HUNDRED UNITS OR MORE.
SO THE REQUESTS FOR DENSITY IS APPROPRIATE HERE, IN OUR OPINION, AND THE LOCATION WILL BRING MUCH NEEDED IMPROVEMENT, UH, TO ROADWAYS, SIDEWALKS, DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THE, LIKE ALL THESE THINGS WILL BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY IN THE FUTURE.
THIS IS A MAP SHOWING SIMILARLY SITUATED PROPERTIES IN THE AREA THAT FRONT ALONG
AND RON, WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THIS LATER, AND THIS IS A DIAGRAM OF HOW THE SITE IS IMPACTED BY COMPATIBILITY.
THE SF THREE TRIGGERING PROPERTIES ARE OUTLINED IN YELLOW AND WITH COMPATIBILITY APPLYING THE SITE WILL BE LIMITED TO ALMOST 50 TO 55 FEET AT THE MOST ALONG THE
AND THESE ARE THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE SOME IMAGES OF THE PROPERTY.
AS I SAID, IT'S UNDEVELOPED TODAY.
AND THIS IS AN IMAGE LOOKING WEST TOWARDS BROWNIE ACROSS THE SITE.
UH, SOME OF THE COMMENTS WE HEARD OR CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS THAT THIS, THAT DEVELOPMENT HERE AT THE SITE WILL INCREASE FOOT TRAFFIC.
AND THEREFORE ALSO SAFETY CONCERNS FOR THIS AREA.
AND REALISTICALLY DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE HUMAN PRESENCE THAT DOESN'T EXIST ON THIS LOT TODAY.
UH, THE LOT WILL NO LONGER BE AVAILABLE FOR DUMPING
[00:25:01]
OF TRASH AND UNWANTED HOUSEHOLD ITEMS AND DEVELOPMENT WILL BRING MORE EYES TO THE STREET, MAKING THIS A SAFER AREA.THIS IS THE INTERSECTION OF BROWNIE AND GRADY WITH THE SUBJECT TRACK TO THE RIGHT BEYOND THE INTERSECTION.
AND THIS IS A SIMILAR IMAGE SHOWING THE SAME INTERSECTION, BUT WITH THE FULL PROPERTY AND JUST TO FINISH UP REAL QUICK FEES.
LAST FEW SLIDES ARE JUST A FEW DESIGNS THAT WE SHOWED THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AS I SAID, DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE CAN ACHIEVE MUCH MORE THAN 50 TO 55 FEET MAX.
SO PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE FLOORS THAT YOU SEE IN THESE, BUT, UM, THESE ARE JUST DESIGNS THAT THE LANDOWNER, UM, LIGHT I'M AVAILABLE.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. RON THURMAN STORE.
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES UM, IF YOU'LL GO BACK A FEW SLIDES, THAT'D BE HELPFUL.
THE ONE THAT SHOWS THE MAP WITH THE COLOR ON IT, THAT ONE, THANK YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, RON THROWER, REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER FOR THE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS MY COHORT, VICTORIA, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SHOUT OUT THAT IT'S BEEN GREAT, UH, TO BE VIRTUAL, BUT IT'S ALSO GREAT TO BE HERE NOW.
AND THAT GUY RIGHT THERE DESERVES A LOT OF CREDIT FOR KEEPING EVERYBODY ON TRACK.
NOT ONLY Y'ALL, BUT ON THE PUBLIC SIDE AS WELL.
SO I JUST WANT TO REITERATE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT VICTORIA HAD SAID THAT WE HAVE, THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY.
IT SAYS THAT THIS PROPERTY MUST BE COMMERCIAL.
SO WE HAVE OBSTACLE NUMBER ONE TO SOLVE WITH THE ZONING, UH, TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY, UH, PAGE 24 OF THE BACKUP OR THE ZONING, UH, BACKUP MATERIALS SHOW DOES SHOW SEVEN TO EIGHT LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROPERTY OR FOR THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THAT WAS PUT OUT THERE IN THREE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.
I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
MIDDLE FISCAL ROAD, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS MAP IS JUST, IT'S COVERED WITH CSS ZONING, EVERYTHING THAT'S BETWEEN MIDDLE FISKVILLE AND
SEE US EVERYTHING THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF MIDDLE FISKVILLE ROAD.
80% OF THAT PROPERTY IS EITHER ZONED OR USED AS CS TODAY.
THAT'S WHY WE THINK THAT CS IS STILL APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
UM, I THINK IT'S ALSO JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT REZONING THIS PROPERTY, DISPLACES, NOBODY, IT'S A VACANT TRACT OF LAND.
THE LAND IS WISHING TO GET 70 UNITS MAXIMUM ON THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S WHAT'S MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S QUITE WHAT'S PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE YET.
WE'VE NOT DONE ANY LAYOUTS FOR THAT, BUT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE AT 35 UNITS WHEN IT WOULD PROBABLY BE LESS THAN THAT AS FAR AS WHAT'S PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE.
AND ALSO JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT SEVERAL THINGS HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS HAVE BEEN ADOPTED IN AUSTIN.
IMAGINE AUSTIN HAS COME ABOUT THE STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN HAS COME ABOUT AND THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT HAS COME ABOUT.
WE ALL KNOW HOUSING IS NEEDED, NEEDED, NEEDED HERE IN AUSTIN.
WE HAVE A LANDOWNER ON A VACANT TRACK OF LAND ON ESSENTIALLY I 35 THAT WANTS TO BRING THE HOMES TO NORTH AUSTIN.
AND WITHOUT WE'RE AVAILABLE, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MICKEY, NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. SALIM NEIMAN.
OKAY, CHAIR THEN, UM, CONCLUDES THOSE IN FAVOR WILL NOT MOVE TO THE OPPOSITION.
UH, WE'LL HEAR FROM MISS JADE.
ARE YOU ABLE TO PUT THIS ON? OKAY.
I'M JADE, LAVERA NATIVE AUSTINITE COMMUNITY LEADER AND LIFELONG RESIDENT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROPOSAL, ZONING AND PLANNING AMENDMENT CASE.
I HAVE PREPARED A SLIDESHOW PRESENTATION FOR REFERENCE WITH THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY ARE SUBJECTED TO DISPLACEMENT.
GENTRIFICATION CONTINUED SYSTEMATIC RACISM, FURTHER APPOSITION OF LOWER SOCIO ECONOMIC STATUS, NEGATIVE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE CURRENT RESIDENTS AND THE SHORT TIME OF WORKING ON THIS DEVASTATING PROPOSITION.
I HAVE EXPERIENCED A HUGE LEARNING CURVE LAST TIME WITH MY FAMILY KIDS AND WORK STAYED UP MANY NIGHTS UNTIL 3:00 AM TO RESEARCH AND EDIT, EDUCATE MYSELF, TO LEARN WHAT POWERS WE, AS THE PEOPLE HAVE TO BE HEARD AND OVERCOME THE INEQUITY OF NORMAL CITIZENS VERSUS HIGH DOLLAR EXPERIENCED DEVELOPERS AND OWNERS WHO DID THIS AS A LIVING.
[00:30:01]
SPENT MANY HOURS TEACHING AND INFORMING OTHERS OF CITY PROCESSES AND CASE DETAILS IN THIS SEVERAL DISHEARTENING, ALARMING AND DISCOURAGING SYSTEMATIC CHALLENGES HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, INCLUDING CIVIC, BILLING, BULLYING, MISLEADING, AND INCOMPLETE INFORMATION PASSED TO RESIDENTS BY CITY STAFF, LACK OF TRUE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, OUTDATED POLICIES IN PLACE, HINDERING COMMUNITY INPUT, SOCIOECONOMIC AND RESIDUALS THAT SYSTEMATIC RACISM, EXPLOITATION, AND PREYING ON A LOW INCOME, PRIMARILY PEOPLE OF COLOR BLUE COLLAR WORKING CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD.IN ADDITION TO THE APPARENT COVID-19 CHALLENGES, ENVIRONMENT, TOOL, AND HEALTH CONCERNS INCLUDE A SHADOWING EFFECT, POSTS TO HOUSES DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY RESULTING IN POTENTIALLY RESULTING IN INCREASED ILLNESS, DEPRESSION, AND OVERALL PHYSICAL AND MENTAL WELLBEING TO RESIDENTS THAT HAVE RESIDED FOR 20 TO 30 YEARS IN THESE HOMES.
IN ADDITION, INCREASED HEAT LEVELS, THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED THE NORTH AUSTIN AREA AS A PROMINENT HEAT ISLAND IN AUSTIN, IN WHICH WE ARE ALREADY EXPERIENCED UP TO 15 DEGREES, HOTTER TEMPERATURES THAN OTHER AREAS IN THE CITY.
ACTUALLY A NEW STUDY BEGAN IN JULY OF THIS YEAR WITH THE AUSTIN OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS WITH A PRIME FOCUS IN NORTH AUSTIN.
WE'RE ONLY 3% OF THE LAND IS UNDEVELOPED.
HAVE YOU SEEN THIS HEAT MAP HERE? CIRCLED IS THE SPECIFIC LOCATION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
IT IS THE ONLY AREA THAT ONE OF THE ONLY AREAS THERE REMAINING WITH BLUE GREEN AND NOT RED YET, UM, THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL CONVERT THAT SMALL AREA TO RED ON THIS HEAT MAP.
WE ARE LOCATED IN THE LITTLE ONE OR CREEK WATERSHED.
UM, WE'RE LOCATED IN THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN, AND THIS WATERSHED HAS ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED AS THE LARGEST WATERSHED IN THE CITY AND THE WORST, UH, FLOODING PROBLEM IN THE CITY MIDDLE FISKVILLE AND GRADY ARE ALREADY USED AS A CUT THROUGH TO THOSE THAT KNOW ABOUT IT.
TRACK OF TRAFFIC IS CURRENTLY IN EXCESS AT ALL TIMES OF THE DAY WITH ADDITIONAL BACKUPS DURING RUSH HOURS.
THE LAST FATAL ACCIDENT ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE JUST LAST SUMMER, DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY AT BROWNIE AND GRADY DRIVE.
UNFORTUNATELY, SPEEDING IS COMMON.
THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IS DANGEROUS AS IS ADDING AN ADDITIONAL 70 PLUS UNITS PLUS HIGH LEVEL COMMERCIAL SPACE POSES, AN EXTREME THREAT TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, ESPECIALLY FOR CHILDREN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO DO HAVE TO WALK HOME.
THIS DEVELOPMENT POSES, A LACK OF AFFORDABILITY.
THE MEETING FAMILY INCOME IN THIS AREA IS UNDER $32,000 A YEAR.
IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE OWNER.
HE CLAIMS TO WANT TO PLAN, TO PROVIDE A BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HOWEVER, NUMB NONE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED.
HE HAS PRESENTED THE BENEFITS IN WHICH IT WOULD BRING TO HIS FAMILY, PROVIDING A RESIDENCE FOR HIS ADULT CHILDREN AND DOCTOR'S OFFICE FOR HIS DAUGHTER.
WHO'S CURRENTLY IN MEDICAL SCHOOL.
THESE ARE ALSO PLANNED TO BE CONDOS FOR SALE.
THE OWNER HAS, DOES NOT HAVE ANY INTEREST IN EVEN CONSIDERING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS OR PARTICIPATING IN THE CITY PROGRAMS SUCH AS AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED.
THE OWNER AND DEVELOPERS HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO PROVIDE US WITH A BALLPARK IDEA OF MARKET RATES FOR THEIR PROPOSED CONDOS.
SO WE'VE CONDUCTED A MARKET ANALYSIS WITH CONDOS IN THE AREA THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE MARKET.
WE FOUND THAT THE AVERAGE CONDO LISTING IS ABOUT $295,000.
WITH THIS DATA WE MODESTLY ESTIMATED THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD MARKET VALUE BETWEEN 285,000 TO 465,000 PURCHASE PRICE RESULTING IN A MONTHLY COST OF 15 82, 22 0 8.
THE CURRENT HOUSE OR CONDO VALUE IN THE AREA IS $166,800.
AND THE AVERAGE MONTHLY RENT IS $895.
CLEARLY THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT INTENDED TO SERVE THE CURRENT RESIDENT DEMOGRAPHICS, WHICH WILL RESULT IN RAPID DISPLACEMENT OF LONG-TERM RESIDENTS.
[00:35:11]
GENTRIFICATION IS A PROCESS OF NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE.THAT INCLUDES ECONOMIC CHANGE IN HISTORICALLY DISINVESTED NEIGHBORHOOD BY MEANS OF REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT AND NEW HIGHER INCOME RESIDENTS MOVING IN AS WELL AS DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE, NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF INCOME LEVEL, BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF CHANGE IN THE EDUCATION LEVEL OR RACIAL MAKEUP OF THE RESIDENTS.
THE POPULATION OF THIS AREA IS MADE UP OF 86% PEOPLE OF COLOR, INCLUDING HISPANIC, BLACK, AND ASIAN RESIDENTS.
OUR LEGACY LIVES HERE, THE CITY'S PROJECT CONNECT PLAN SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE AT VULNERABLE RISK TO DISPLACEMENT THE CITY AFTER RECOGNIZING THE DAMAGE DONE FROM GENTRIFICATION AND TRAGIC DISPLACEMENT OF LOW INCOME PEOPLE OF COLOR AND OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY, THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS RECENTLY ADOPTED THE RIGHT TO STAY RIGHT TO RETURN RESOLUTION IN ALREADY GENTRIFIED AREAS AND APPROVED JUST THIS YEAR, $23 MILLION TO PREVENT FURTHER GENTRIFICATION.
LET'S DO THE RIGHT THING NOW, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE UP FOR IT LATER.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH COEXISTING IN HARMONY WITH THE CURRENT ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD HAVE DIRECT UNDUE PHYSICAL AND FUNCTIONAL ADVERSE IMPACTS.
THIS IS INCOMPATIBLE PHYSICALLY, CULTURALLY AND ECONOMICALLY THERE IS AN APATHY FOR CURRENT RESIDENTS WHILE WE HAVE MET WITH THE OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS.
A COUPLE OF TIMES, THERE IS A CLEAR LACK OF CONCERN WITH WHAT THE CURRENT RESIDENTS WHO HAVE RESIDED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 20, 30 PLUS YEARS NEEDS OR WANTS.
THEY'RE ONLY WILLING TO AGREE TO HAVE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS IN PLACE FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL USES IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE CSE ZONING AND BE ABLE TO REACH MAX DENSITY FOR THE SMALL SPACE.
NOT ONE BENEFIT HAS BEEN PRESENTED.
THEY ARE NOT EVEN WILLING TO CONSENT TO A TRAFFIC STUDY, WHICH IS A VITAL CONCERN AS PER TYPICAL MONEY-MOTIVATED DEVELOPERS.
THEY WILL ONLY COMPLY WITH WHAT THE CITY FORCES AS A REQUIREMENT, A FEW ADDITIONAL THINGS.
UM, THE OWNER DOES OWN OTHER LANDS, UH, DIRECTLY NEXT TO THIS, UH, PROPERTY THAT ARE NOT IN CURRENT REVIEW OF THIS CASE, BUT INSINUATES AND LEADS TO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE FURTHER INTENTIONS AND THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE MUCH LARGER THAN CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED.
THERE IS A BRAND NEW FOR SALE SIGN ON THE PROPERTY.
INSINUATING THE REZONING MAY SIMPLY BE TO MAKE MASSIVE PROFIT ON THE SALE OF A
THIS GOES AGAINST EVERYTHING THAT THE CITY CLAIMS THAT CARES ABOUT 2020 WAS A HUGE EYE-OPENER TO THE LEVEL OF SYSTEMATIC RACISM THAT IS STILL PREVALENT TODAY.
WHILE AUSTIN HAS PROGRAMS, PROJECTS, AND INITIATIVES TO UNRAVEL CONTINUED SEGREGATION, SPOT REZONING APPROVALS AS THIS ONE, POSE A THREAT, A GREAT THREAT TO UNDERMINE THE BIG PICTURE EFFORTS AT HAND, I AM SHOWING UP AND SPEAKING TO BE THE VOICE OF THE COLLECTIVE AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF AUSTIN, MANY RESIDENTS ARE NOT ABLE TO COMMUNICATE THEIR THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS DIRECTLY, WHETHER DUE TO LANGUAGE BARRIERS OR DUE TO THE COMMON FEAR OF SPEAKING UP AS A MINORITY, OUR VOICES DESERVE TO BE HEARD.
OUR VALUES DESERVE TO BE CONSIDERED OUR FAMILIES AND FUTURE CONCERN FOR OUR QUALITY OF LIFE DESERVES TO BE A PRIORITY FOCUS.
I KINDLY ASKED FOR EMPATHY AND UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHAT IS THE GREATEST AND HIGHEST GOOD FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE I COURAGEOUSLY ASKED FOR THIS APPLICATION TO AMEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND REZONING TO BE DENIED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
I THINK YOU EACH FOR YOUR SERVICE TO REPRESENT AND LEAD OUR CITY THROUGH YOUR DEDICATION AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER.
UM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO JUST TOUCH ON THE 1960 DEED RESTRICTION, IF YOU CAN WRAP UP YOUR YES.
UM, DO WE HAVE, UM, MS. LISA GARNER PRESENT? OKAY.
WITH THE DONATION FROM MS. GARNER TO MS. LYNN GALBREATH MS. GILBERT YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
[00:40:11]
THANK YOU.I'M LYNN GALBREATH IT'S FOUR MINUTES, NOT FIVE.
WELL, I'M ALWAYS THE SECOND SPEAKER AGAINST, WELL, I'LL GET STARTED AND TRY TO TALK FAST.
I DO NOT LIVE CLOSE TO THESE TRACKS, BUT I DO LIVE IN THE PLANNING AREA AND I WORKED A LOT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IN 2008 AND NINE AND 10, WHICH WAS REALLY ONLY 11 YEARS AGO.
AND EVERYTHING IN IT IS STILL HIGHLY RELEVANT TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND ALSO CONSISTENT WITH SOME OF THE PREEXISTING PLANS, GLOBAL PLANS FOR THE CITY, AS WELL AS, UH, ONES THAT HAD BEEN WRITTEN AFTER 2.5 MILES FROM THESE TRACKS IN OUR PLANNING ERA IS A 1.4 ACRE LOT.
THAT'S BEEN ON THE MARKET THIS ENTIRE SUMMER.
IT'S ALREADY ZONED IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR G MUV READY TO BUILD DIRECTLY ON A TRUE CORRIDOR.
AND FISKVILLE IS NOT A CORRIDOR.
I, I HEARD EQUATING WITH THE
IT'S A STREET IT'S STILL, UH, THIS LOT THAT WAS FOR SALES DIRECTLY ON OUR TWO CORRIDOR, 145 FEET OF RENDER FRONTAGE WITH SIDEWALKS, SURROUNDED BY FOOD STORES, GAS STATIONS, PUBLIC TRANSIT STOPS WALKING DISTANCE TO TWO PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, TWO PARKS, A LARGE CHARTER SCHOOL, GROCERY AND DRUG STORES AND RESTAURANTS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS MEANS MULTIFAMILY BUILDS ARE ENCOURAGED ON EXACTLY THAT KIND OF TRACT AND THE MANY LIKE IT PROPERLY ZONED FOR THAT ALONG THE CORRIDORS CONSISTENT WITH IMAGINE AUSTIN, THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT AND OTHER CITY HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION POLICY, THIS APPLICANT, BUT CAN BUY THOSE KINDS OF PARCELS, START CONSTRUCTION AND MAKE THEIR TIDY PROFIT IN AN INAPPROPRIATE PLACE.
INSTEAD, INSTEAD HOPING FOR YOUR HEALTH.
THE APPLICANT WANTS TO PAY AN THREE PRICE FOR LAND RAKE AND THE PROFITS FOR MF FOUR AND CSM YOU AND HAVE THE DAILY LONG-TERM COST OF THOSE CHOICES CARRIED BY THE NEARBY RESIDENTS.
WE ARE QUITE DIFFERENT THAN CRESTVIEW, HYDE PARK, BRACA WOODS, ET CETERA.
WE'RE LOW INCOME WORKING CLASS, MAJORITY PEOPLE OF COLOR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE DECADES LONG, HUGE IMBALANCE OF MULTIFAMILY OVER SINGLE FAMILY AND SMALL COMPLEX, OVER 70% MULTI-FAMILY AND CLIMBING.
THIS HAS HELPED DESTABILIZE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN NOTES.
IF YOU GRANT THE APPLICANT, THE ZONING CHANGE TO BE ABLE TO GET MORE MULTIFAMILY IN AN SF THREE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SPOT, ANOTHER DEVELOPER WILL BUILD MULTIFAMILY ON THAT RENDER TRACT AND ACTUALLY, UM, OTHER APPROPRIATE TRACKS.
NOW ADDING NOT ONE, BUT AT LEAST TWO MORE TO THE IMBALANCE THAT ALREADY PLAGUES US.
THE EXCERPTS FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, LAND USE GOAL LIMIT THE ENCROACHMENT OF INTENSE USERS INTO THE RESIDENTIAL PORTIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD LIMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW LARGE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPLEXES THROUGHOUT THE PLANNING AREA.
WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER PLANNING AREAS, THIS ONE CONTAINS A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF RENTAL UNITS AND LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES, FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH COMPLEX.
IT SHOULD BE RESTRICTED THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE BELIEVE A MORE BALANCED MIX OF HOUSING OPTIONS AND HOME-OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES WILL STABILIZE THE AREA.
SO THE CHOICE REALLY IS DO YOU ASSIST OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO SEEK STABILITY WITH A BALANCED VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS? THE FLOM ALREADY OFFERS? OR DO YOU FACILITATE FURTHER DE-STABILIZING THIS PORTION OF NORTH AUSTIN FOR THE FUTURE FOREVER? THERE'S NO GOING BACK.
ONCE YOU SAY YES, DO YOU CHOOSE OR NOT TO CONTINUE THIS PRECEDENT THAT WILL THEN ENCOURAGE OTHER EAGER PROFITEERS TO BUY OUR SF LAND CHEAP? BECAUSE CITY OFFICIALS ALLOW UP ZONING TO GREATER PROFIT BY INAPPROPRIATE BUILDS.
AND I KEEP WONDERING IF ON TOP OF THE HISTORICAL AND CONTINUING EQUITY OF OUR LOWER INCOME NEIGHBORHOOD WITH MAJORITY PEOPLE OF COLOR PAYING THE PRICE FOR AUSTIN'S NEEDS AT A GREATER NUMBER OF AFFORDABILITY UNITS BUILT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AS OPPOSED TO WESTLAKE, ET CETERA.
WE ARE NOW SEEING A NEW FORM OF INEQUITY LANDING ON THESE SAME FOLKS.
ONE IN WHICH THOSE HAVE LIVED HERE ALL ALONG.
IS THAT FOUR MINUTES? YES MA'AM IS I'M MS. NO PRESENT.
MR. B KLIGERMAN YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
IS IT OKAY IF I REMOVE MY MASK? JUST SPEED.
MY VOICE DOESN'T CARRY VERY WELL.
[00:45:01]
I'MAND IT'S OVERRUN WITH TRAFFIC.
THE TRAFFIC HAS BEEN UNBELIEVABLE AND WE'VE HAD MANY ACCIDENTS, MANY CARS SMASHED IN FRONT OF THE HOMES THAT DIDN'T HAVE A BIG ENOUGH DRIVEWAY AND FOR THEIR CARS FOR MORE THAN ONE CAR.
AND, UH, SOME HAVE MORE, SOME HAVE CREATED PARKING LOTS OUT OF THEIR FRONT YARDS BECAUSE THEY HAD NO CHOICE WHO'S THAT, OR HAVE YOUR CAR SMASHED.
UM, BUT WE'VE ALSO HAD FATAL ACCIDENTS.
WE'VE HAD, WE'VE HAD A WHOLE LIST OF, OF THINGS IN THE TRAFFIC, UH, AREA THAT WE ARE IN.
SO WE NEED TO, TO THINK ABOUT WHAT KIND OF TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE COMING INTO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT IS ONE OF MY MAJOR CONCERNS.
UM, WE, UH, WE WANT PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHO APPRECIATE THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT THEY CAN HAVE THERE, BUT WE HAVE DISTINCT DIFFERENT DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT AREAS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
SOME EXTREMELY, UM, POOR, POORLY KEPT AND OTHERS BEAUTIFULLY MANICURED, UH, THE YARDS AND THE HOMES AND ALL.
AND WE DON'T NEED TO BRING IN PEOPLE WHO ARE ONLY GOING TO BE THERE A SHORT TIME AND NOT CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO THEIR PROPERTY OR THAT OF THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM.
SO THAT'S THE KIND OF PEOPLE WE WANT.
THAT'S THE KIND OF THING WE WANT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE TALKED AT LENGTH IN MY THREAD, GET OUT, FINISH.
WE TALKED AT LENGTH ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES FOR THE, UH, IMMU, UH, ZONING, AND MANY, MANY, MANY OF THOSE ARE NOT GOOD FOR THIS KIND OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, WE, WE JUST HOPE THAT YOU'LL TAKE THOSE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A GRADY DRIVE HAS, AND MOST OF THE ADJOINING STREETS HAVE NICE PEOPLE, NICE HOMES.
SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE HAVE LIVED THERE FOR A LONG TIME, LIKE WE HAVE, BUT WE CARE ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT MORE OF IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU, MR. CLEAN, MAN, I WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, SO I'M JUST GOING TO TOUCH ON A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS.
THERE WAS, THERE WAS A LOT THAT CAME FORWARD AND THE INFORMATION JUST SHARED, BUT, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I JUST WANT TO SAY IS, UM, UH, IT W IT TOOK A LONG TIME TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAD MANY ATTEMPTS TRYING TO FIND TIMES TO MEET, UM, EVER SINCE APRIL.
AND WE DID FINALLY COME TO A TIME AND PLACE FOR US TO MEET, BUT I WILL SAY THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL, I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT TO THINK ABOUT, UH, BEING ACCUSED OF CIVIC BULLYING AND, AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS.
BUT, UM, I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE WORKED TO GIVE THREE, UH, THREE POSTPONEMENTS ON THEIR REQUESTS AND ACTUALLY EVEN OFFERED A POSTPONEMENT OURSELVES.
SO THE CASE HAS BEEN POSTPONED FOUR TIMES, UM, TO, TO TRY TO TALK ABOUT USES THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, BUT TO MOVE BEYOND THAT, I, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IF THESE LOTS COULD BE DEVELOPED WITH SF THREE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, I THINK WE COULD ALL AGREE AND UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE INDIVIDUAL UNITS WOULD PROBABLY COST NOT PROBABLY WILL COST MORE THAN, UH, AN APARTMENT UNIT THAT IS GOING TO BE SOLD IN THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A SMALL MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S NOT A 100, 100 5200, 250 UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
AND WHILE IT DOES HAVE AN ADDRESS OFF OF MIDDLE FISKVILLE ROAD, THE ONLY THING THAT SEPARATES THE TRACK TWO FROM
SO I DO THINK THAT THIS, THIS DEVELOPMENT HERE AT 70 UNITS IS APPROPRIATE HERE.
UM, DEVELOPMENT BRINGS INFRASTRUCTURE OF ALL KINDS DEVELOPMENT, BRING STREET IMPACT FEES, ALL THE THINGS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAYS THEY'RE HAVING ISSUES WITH RIGHT NOW, DRAINAGE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC.
[00:50:01]
SAFE.THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS DEVELOPMENT BRINGS MONEY AND FUNDS FOR THAT.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOESN'T HAVE LOADS OF MONEY SET ASIDE TO DO ALL OF THESE THINGS ACROSS OUR ENTIRE CITY.
SO THEY RELY ON DEVELOPMENT TO BRING THAT MONEY IN, TO MAKE THOSE THINGS HAPPEN.
SO I URGE YOU TO CONSIDER THAT FOR THIS CASE.
THE OTHER THING I WANT TO BRING UP IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE LANDOWNER HAS AGREED TO PROHIBIT, UH, A LOT OF USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING TODAY.
SO USES THAT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO J THEY'RE.
THEY'RE WILLING TO PROHIBIT THOSE BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SAID THAT THEY DON'T WANT THEM, BUT THERE ARE SOME CSU SAYS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THE ABILITY TO RETAIN, BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FAR OFF IN THE FUTURE.
UH, MR.
AND WE ARE INTERESTED IN HEARING WHAT USES THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES WANT.
UM, AND WE'VE ASKED THEM FOR THAT INFORMATION.
THANK YOU, MS. HANSEY CHAIR COMMISSIONER.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKER TESTIMONY FOR THIS ITEM.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, BIZARRE CIGNA BY MR. COX SAW COUNT THE VOTES ON THE DATA'S FIRST.
THAT'S SEVEN AND ONLINE THAT'S 1, 2, 3 COMMITTED THREE ON HIS PALITO.
UM, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS HE WANTS TO BEGIN.
IT'S KIND OF, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE HARD PART.
I'VE GO AHEAD, MR. CONLEY, IF YOU CAN PRESS YOUR MICROPHONE NIKON, SORRY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE THIS STUFF.
UH, SO MY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ARE AROUND, UH, THE AFFORDABILITY PIECE.
UM, AND THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED HERE FROM SOME FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAYING THAT THERE WAS NO INTEREST IN AFFORDABILITY OR IN USING AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED OR ANY OF THE CITY'S OTHER AFFORDABILITY OR BONUS PROGRAMS. UM, HOW, HOW WAS THAT CONVERSATION FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? SO, UM, I WILL START OUT BY SAYING THAT INITIALLY WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS PROJECT FORWARD AND WE TALKED TO THE COMMUNITY, SOME OF THE FIRST THINGS WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY WAS THERE CONCERNS THAT IT WOULD BE AN AFFORDABLE PROJECT AND THEY HAD CONCERNS THAT THAT WOULD BRING DOWN THE VALUE, UM, THAT THAT WOULD BRING IN, UM, USES OR PEOPLE THAT, THAT MAYBE WOULD NOT, THEY WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE THERE.
UM, BUT THEN AS WE, AS WE CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT AFFORDABILITY AND EXPLAINING IT, YOU KNOW, THE LANDOWNER HERE, HE'S, HE'S NOT A BIG DEVELOPER HERE IN AUSTIN.
UH, HE DOESN'T, HE'S NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROCESS.
UM, YOU KNOW, AFFORDABILITY PROJECTS USES THOSE RELIES HEAVILY ON THAT, THAT PROCESS TOO, TO GET THE FUNDING FOR THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
SO HE'S NOT INTERESTED IN DOING THAT BECAUSE THAT'S, HE HAS NO CLUE HE HAS.
AND I DON'T THINK HE'S INTERESTED IN VENTURING DOWN THAT PATH.
UM, HE IS HOWEVER, HE IS HOWEVER WILLING TO LOOK AT HOW MANY UNITS HE CAN PUT FORTH TOWARDS BEING AFFORDABLE, WHETHER THAT'S FIVE OR 10% OF THOSE UNITS AND THE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UM, LIKE I SAID, IT'S, IT'S A SMALLER DEVELOPMENT OF 70 UNITS AND, UM, HE'S, HE'S NOT ABLE TO, TO IDENTIFY AT THIS POINT IN TIME WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE, BUT HE IS INTERESTED IN LOOKING INTO THAT.
AND, AND WOULD THERE BE ANY INTEREST FROM THE DEVELOPER TOWARDS, UH, PREFERENCE POLICIES, UH, FAVORING PEOPLE WITH HISTORIC TIES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO HAVE ACCESS TO UNITS OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED? SO I KNOW THAT THEY'RE, IT, IT HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, BUT WE HAVE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ON THIS MATTER ON OTHER PROJECTS, UH, KIND OF THE RIGHT TO RETURN, UH, SORT OF POLICY AND TO THE DEGREE THAT WE CAN DO THAT.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS LEGALLY POSSIBLE, I KNOW HE WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO THAT IN ANY WAY.
DO I STILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME? UM, I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION FOR, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S IF, IF THERE WAS A ALLOCATION OF AFFORDABLE UNITS, UH, IT WAS PRESENTED IN THE PRESENTATION THAT ONE OF THE ISSUES IS THE LACK OF AFFORDABILITY.
UM, WOULD AFFORDABILITY MAKE THIS PROJECT, UM,
[00:55:01]
MORE DESIRABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD? AND IF THE D IF THE APPLICANT WERE WILLING TO CREATE AFFORDABLE UNITS, WOULD THAT, UH, WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT TO BRING ON SOME NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT OR CHANGE NEIGHBORHOOD FEELINGS ABOUT THE PROJECT? UM, POTENTIALLY HOWEVER, I STILL FEEL THAT AS A CONSENSUS, THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, ALTHOUGH IT CONTINUES TO BE, UM, REFERRED TO AS NOT A LARGE PROPERTY, 70 UNITS ON LESS THAN TWO ACRES OF LAND IN A SINGLE FAMILY COMMUNITY IS A LARGE PROPERTY.UM, SO POTENTIALLY DEPENDING ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, UM, I WOULD SAY WITH WHAT WAS JUST PRESENTED HERE WITH FIVE TO 10% ON A 70 UNIT, THAT'S REALLY NOT GOING TO TRULY BE AN AFFORDABLE, UM, PROPERTY THAT WOULD POSE AN IMPACT LARGE ENOUGH TO ALLOW CURRENT RESIDENTS TO IT'S JUST BE HYPOTHETICAL AND SAY THAT WE HAD A COMPLETELY AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
LET'S SAY EVEN A TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE, WOULD THE NEIGHBORHOOD APPROVE OF SUCH A DEVELOPMENT? I THINK THAT FURTHER DETAILS AND REVIEW WOULD BE NECESSARY IN, IS THAT A YES OR A NO, I WOULD SAY NO.
UH, MR. CUPS, I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS TO THE APPLICANT, UM, MS. HASI, UH, I NOTED IN THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS LETTER, UM, THE ISSUES OR THE CONCERNS ABOUT RENTAL PROPERTIES AND HOW THERE APPARENTLY SEEMS TO BE AN IMBALANCE IN THEIR VIEW, UM, IN THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS THAT I WAS READING IN THE BACKUP, IT SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS GOING TO BE CONDOS, BUT THEN IT TURNED TO APARTMENTS.
CAN YOU HELP EXPLAIN WHAT RESIDENTIAL UNITS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? SO, SO THE PROJECT WILL BE DEVELOPED IN WHAT YOU WOULD CALL A MULTIFAMILY STYLE D BUILDING, RIGHT WITH MULTIPLE FLOORS AND EVERY FLOOR HAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF UNITS.
SO IN THAT SENSE, IT LOOKS AND WILL FUNCTION LIKE MULTIFAMILY.
HOWEVER, THE PLAN IS THAT EACH UNIT WILL BE SOLD TO AN INDIVIDUAL.
IT WON'T BE ONE OWNER THAT RENTS OUT ALL THE UNITS.
SO THE UNITS WILL BE FOR SALE.
THEY WILL BE FOR OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AND NOT.
UM, ARE YOU OPPOSED TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND IF SO, WHAT, WHAT WOULD YOU NOT BE ABLE TO DO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU CAN DO WITH YOUR REQUEST? SO WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION PRIMARILY BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE DENSITY FOR THE DWELLING UNITS AT THIS SITE.
AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO CUT THE DENSITY OF LIKE THE NUMBERS, THE NUMBERS CALCULATE OUT TO 70 UNITS ACROSS THE ENTIRE ACREAGE.
UM, BUT AS RON SAID, REALISTICALLY, ONCE YOU PUT IN DETENTION, WATER QUALITY, YOU KNOW, PARKING DRIVES ALL OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, REALISTICALLY, AND THEN ALSO CONSIDERING COMPATIBILITY HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET TO 70 UNITS.
UM, BUT I THINK WE COULD CERTAINLY GET TO MORE THAN HALF OR MORE THAN HALF OF SEVEN UNITS, WHICH IS WHAT STAFF IS PROPOSING THE PROBLEM WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, MORE SPECIFICALLY IS THAT THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT COME ALONG WITH MF TWO AND LR, UM, ARE, ARE ANOTHER, UH, POSE ANOTHER ISSUE TO GETTING THE DEVELOPMENT FORWARD HERE.
UM, HEIGHT, IS IT SETBACKS, SETBACKS, AND PREVIOUS COVER BUILDING COVER.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC.
I, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE HAD A FATALITY HERE RECENTLY AT THIS INTERSECTION.
UM, IS THERE ANYTHING, ANY RESPONSE TO THAT AS FAR AS WHAT YOU ANTICIPATE THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS TO BE IN RESPONSE TO THE SAFETY CONCERNS RELATED TO TRAFFIC? SO TRAFFIC WILL BE LOOKED AT, UM, AT THE TIME OF SITE, UH, WHEN, WHEN WE DO HAVE MORE CONCRETE INFORMATION ABOUT THE INTENSITY OF USES, INCLUDING HOW MANY UNITS, UM, AND AT THAT TIME, UH, ATD WE'LL REVIEW AND WE'LL DETERMINE IF THEY FEEL LIKE THE SITE, UH, NEEDS, UH, A TIA OR AN NTA.
UH, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SEVEN UNITS IS, IS A SMALL MULTI-FAMILY STYLE DEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT TRIGGERS THE 2000 TRIP LIMIT THAT DOES, UH, THEN BRING FORWARD FOR A TIA.
HOWEVER, I'M IN THE STAFF REPORT, YOU WILL NOTICE THAT IT DOES SAY THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THERE COULD BE AN NTA REQUIRED, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, UM, WHICH WOULD BE A SMALLER VERSION OF A
[01:00:01]
TIA.AND WITH, WITH ANY OF THIS DURING THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS, UM, IT'S, WE'RE GOING TO ATD IS GOING TO COME FORWARD AND SAY, WELL, HERE'S, HERE'S YOUR IMPACT WITH THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT.
NOW, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU NEED TO DO, AND IT MAY NOT COME FORWARD FROM A TIA, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, STREET IMPACT FEES ARE COMING.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND THAT I WAS, I WAS JUST KIND OF TRYING TO LOOK FOR SOMETHING ABOVE AND BEYOND JUST STRICTLY THE KIND OF THE LETTER OF THE RULE IN TERMS OF TIA IS WHEN THAT'S REQUIRED.
THEN MY LAST QUESTION BEFORE I RUN OUT OF TIME IS A LOT OF THE POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS SEEM TO INDICATE THAT Y'ALL NEEDED MORE TIME TO WORK OUT AS CEO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE CEO.
UH, I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SEEN ANY SORT OF LANGUAGE EXCEPT FOR THE LIST OF PROHIBITED USES.
MOST OF WHICH Y'ALL SEEM TO AGREE ON SOME OF THEM.
YOU DON'T SEEM TO GROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WAS THAT THE EXTENT OF THE CCO UNDER DISCUSSION OR WAS ANY OTHER COMPONENTS OF THE CEO THAT, THAT WAS THE EXTENT OF THE CEO WAS THE USES? UM, WE WERE HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY JUST, THEY HAD A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USES AT THIS LOCATION.
AND SO WE FOCUS THE CEO ON THE USES.
UM, I'M LOOKING AT MY, UH, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE, UH, VIRTUAL.
ANY OF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS BEFORE.
I THOUGHT I SAW YOUR HAND UP EARLIER.
I'M WONDERING IF WE CAN PULL UP, UM, ONE OF THE MAPS THAT WAS SHOWING THE STREETS AND THAT KIND OF THING.
IT WAS TRYING TO LOOK AT THAT ON, ON SOME OF THE EARTH STUFF.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE STREET WHERE IT'S GOING TO
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER COX TOUCHED ON THAT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE GOING TO GET A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THERE.
UM, CAUSE THAT DID KIND OF LOOK LIKE A CONCERNING INTERSECTION TO ME, EVEN, EVEN WITHOUT THE RESIDENT COMMENTARY, JUST LOOKING AT HOW THAT NEIGHBORHOOD BACKS UP AND WHAT THEY HAD FOR STREETS.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THAT SHOT AGAIN THAT SHOWS THE STREETS AND WHERE THE TRACKS ARE.
UM, AND I GUESS I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND FROM YEAH.
UH, THE MAP IS NOT THE, UM, YEAH, SO SOMEWHERE IN THERE WHERE WE CAN SEE WHERE THE M LOOKS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
SO YOU'VE GOT A STREET COMING OFF THE SIDE HERE, GRADY AND THEN GOING ON TO MIDDLE FISKVILLE, WHICH IS RUNNING PARALLEL TO 35, BUT THAT LOOKS TO BE LIKE AN INGREDIENT OR PROBABLY AN EGRESS.
AND I'M GUESSING THAT'S A ONE DIRECTION DOWN I, 35.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TWO WAY OR ONE WAY, BUT EITHER WAY, THAT'S KIND OF SMALL TRAFFIC THERE.
SO I, I, I'M LOOKING AT THAT AND SEEING SOME TRAFFIC CONCERNS AND I JUST WONDERING FROM CITY STAFF, CAN ANYBODY LET US KNOW, UH, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WOULD AFFECT THIS COMMISSIONER MUCH TALLER THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, YOU ARE CORRECT.
MIDDLE FISCAL ROAD IS A LEVEL ONE, WHICH IS JUST A LOCAL STREET.
SO THAT WAS THE STAFF'S CONCERN THAT IT IS NOT THE FRONTAGE OF
AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, UM, AND I I'M FINDING THAT SOMETIMES IS THIS WAS NEW KNOWLEDGE TO ME TOO, AS I CAME ON PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ANY TIME WE'RE HAVING ZONING GO AGAINST, WE'VE GOT THESE COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS THAT THEN, UM, CAUSE FOR SETBACKS THAT ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED BY THE DEVELOPER.
SO I WAS WONDERING IN THOSE AREAS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SETBACKS, AS IT GOES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHAT ACTUALLY BECOMES OF THAT LAND, DOES THAT BECOME GREEN SPACE? IS THAT PARKING? CAUSE I KNOW YOU'VE GOT THE HIGH COMPATIBILITY THINGS AND ALL THAT THAT ARE GOING TO LIMIT HOW IT, HOW THE DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY CAN HAPPEN AND HOW FAR AWAY, BUT WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT, IN BETWEEN SPACE? ARE THERE ANY REQUIREMENTS ON THAT OR IS THAT JUST BECOME PARKING? I'M JUST, AGAIN, I'M LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS, UM, THAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT MAY ACTUALLY WORK ITSELF OUT.
THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, THE COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS, OR THE BUILDING SETBACKS FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DESIGN OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, HOW THEY WOULD DESIGN TO UTILIZE THOSE AREAS ON THEIR PROPERTY.
UM, BUT THEY WOULD JUST BE BUILDING SETBACKS FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY.
SO DO WE HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS LIKE ON, I MEAN IT DOES LIKE IMPERVIOUS COVER END UP SAYING WE'VE GOT TO HAVE GREEN SPACE THERE OR THOUGH IT DOESN'T, I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS WHAT IS
[01:05:01]
THE, WHAT WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM ON THAT TWO ACRE OR SLIGHTLY LESS THAN TWO ACRE THAT THEY CAN, THAT BECOMES POTENTIAL CONCRETE PARKING LOT, THAT KIND OF THING.I REALIZED THE HEIGHTS GOING TO LIMIT THEM, BUT YOU COULD JUST PAVE OVER IT AND HAVE CONCRETE VERSUS WOOD.
YOU HAVE GREEN SPACE PARK SPACE.
WELL, THEY DO HAVE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET.
UM, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD BE WITHIN THOSE SETBACKS, I CAN'T STATE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW THE DESIGN OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE.
I JUST KNOW THAT THE BUILDINGS CANNOT BE WITHIN 25 FEET OF THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND THEN I DON'T KNOW IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO COMMENT ON THEIR THOUGHT ON THE POTENTIAL USE OF THAT SPACE, IF THEY WERE TO HAVE THE END OF THE FLOOR THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR COMMISSIONERS RON THROWER, THE MFR DISTRICT DOES ALLOW FOR 70% AND PERVIOUS COVERAGE.
IT'S PROBABLY, AGAIN, GOING TO BE VERY HARD TO PHYSICALLY MAKE THAT POSSIBLE WITH ALL THE OTHER DESIGN ELEMENTS OF THE CODE.
UM, THE COMMERCIAL AREA DOES HAVE A HIGH LEVEL OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE THAT'S ALLOWED, BUT AGAIN, IT'S PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO GET IT UP TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IN THIS LOCATION.
UM, YOU KNOW, OVERALL I WOULD SAY YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT 70% AND PERVIOUS COVERAGE ACROSS THE ENTIRE SITE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, LR ZONING TODAY ALLOWS FOR THAT AS WELL.
AND THAT'S, WHAT'S ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S KIND OF LIKE A WASH AND ON THE BACKSIDE, YOU KNOW, STILL POINT BACK TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH SHOWS THAT THE PROPERTY MUST BE COMMERCIAL.
LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM, BOTH ROOMS, UM, COMMISSIONERS, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UM, CAN MS. GALBREATH COMPLETE HER THOUGHT.
I, I WANT TO GIVE ONE MINUTE OVER FOR YOU TO SHARE WHAT YOU WERE SHARING IT'S YES, YES.
I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO FINISH THAT.
UM, MY LAST POINT WAS AN AND I'M, AND I'M NOT EVEN, THIS IS JUST SOME NEW IDEAS, SOME NEW THINKING I'VE BEEN HAVING AS I'VE BEEN WATCHING THINGS UNFOLD IN AUSTIN FOR THE LAST YEAR OR TWO ON LAND USE.
I KEEP WONDERING IF ON TOP OF THE HISTORICAL AND CONTINUING INEQUITY OF OUR LOWER INCOME, HIGH PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE OF COLOR NEIGHBORHOODS, PAYING THE PRICE FOR LARGER AUSTIN'S NEEDS, HIGHER CRIME, FEWER SIDEWALKS, THAT SORT OF THING.
UM, IF WE'RE NOW SEEING A NEW FORM OF INEQUITY LANDING ON THESE SAME FOLKS, ONE IN WHICH THOSE WHO'VE LIVED HERE ALL ALONG, WE'VE WORKED AND PAY THEIR TAXES.
WHO'VE ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS SOMEHOW HAVE HOMES AND LIVES OF LESS VALUE THAN PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T MOVED HERE YET.
THEN INVESTORS LOOKING TO MAKE A KILLING BY BUYING A CONDO AND THEN RENTING IT OUT AT AN EXORBITANT RATE THAN DEVELOPERS MANEUVERING TO MAKE MILLIONS OFF OF THE HOUSING CRISIS SITUATION.
AND THEN POLITICIANS WHO WANT THOSE CREATED X MORE HOUSING UNITS, NOTCHES IN THEIR BELTS FOR NEW SOUNDBITES.
REAL PEOPLE ARE HARD WITH THOUGHTFULLY CONSTRUCTED, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING.
IMAGINE AUSTIN STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT.
THE NORTH LAMAR GEORGE AND ACRES NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS CIRCUMVENTED BY AD HOC PIECEMEAL, NOT THE FULL DELIBERATIVE PICTURE DECISIONS THAT ARE REACHED TO SERVE TODAY'S POLITICAL EXPEDIENCIES RESPECTFULLY PLEASE SUPPORT SOLID THOUGHTFUL CITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT POLICY.
AND THAT'S OUR WELLBEING BY REJECTING THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT REZONING.
UM, CAN I ALSO HAVE THE MAIN SPEAKER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU CAN JUST HELP US UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE AGREEABLE TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, WHICH WOULD BE L R M U N B ON THE, ON GOING TO ON TRACK ONE AND ON TRACK, DUDE WOULD BE MF DO, UM, WE ARE AGREEABLE TO THE COMMERCIAL LR ZONING RECOMMENDATION, HOWEVER, NOT AGREEABLE TO MF TWO.
UM, THAT DESIGNATION IS STILL FAR TOO HIGH IN DENSITY.
AND, UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE 1967 DEED RESTRICTION IN THAT THIS SPACE MUST BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL USES.
UM, THE ACTUAL LAND OWNER HAS THE POWER TO NOT HAVE TO
[01:10:01]
HAVE THAT DEED RESTRICTION BE, UM, DISMISSED IN ENTIRETY BY BEING THE MAJORITY LAND OWNER OF THE LOTS.UM, AND ALSO IN REGARDS TO THAT, THERE ARE OTHER LOWER, LESS INVASIVE ZONING OPTIONS THAT COULD STILL SATISFY A COMMERCIAL, UM, RESTRICTION, UM, THAT ARE IN SF FOUR OR FIVE OR SIX.
UM, MR. THURMAN SAYS, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO THE RESTRICTIVE GOVERNANCE AND THE NEED FOR MQ? EXCUSE ME, THE NEED FOR M U UM, ESSENTIALLY THE ABILITY DO NOT HAVE THE RESTRICT OF GOVERNANCE REQUIRING COMMERCIAL ON THAT PART OF THE SITE THAT DRAFT DO I NEED TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN? SO I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU.
THANK YOU FROM THE MEANWHILE, I CAN HAVE A GOOD QUESTION FROM STAFF STAFF.
CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND, UM, I'LL HOLD OFF AS YOU'RE WALKING.
UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY I KNOW YOU ALREADY EXPLAINED IT BEING FRONTING MIDDLE FISKVILLE, RATHER THAN THE FRONTAGE, BUT PARTICULARLY THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WANTING TO GO WITH LR VERSUS CS FOR THE DRAG ONE AS THE ZONING PLANNER WHO ACTUALLY WORKED ON THE NORTH LAMAR COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UM, THERE WAS A REASON WE RECOMMENDED LR ALONG MIDDLE FISKVILLE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, AS A TRANSITION BACK TO THE RESIDENTIAL MIDDLE FISKVILLE ROAD IS NOT THE FRONTAGE ROAD OF
AND SO WE FELT THAT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS MEANT TO BE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL WITH THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WAS APPROPRIATE AT THAT LOCATION.
WE HAVE NO ISSUE ADDING AN EMU, SO THERE COULD BE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT'S THE REASONING BEHIND THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT DOLLAR.
I GUESS I'M OUT OF TIME, I GUESS I'M OUT OF TIME.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? UM, COMMISSIONER SNYDER.
I JUST WANTED TO, UM, GIVE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO A COMMISSIONER AS OURS QUESTION.
UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE TO ANSWER ABOUT THE RESTRICTIVE CABINET.
THE DISTRICT CABINET COVERS MULTIPLE PROPERTIES IN THERE, NOT JUST THE COMMERCIAL.
THEY WOULD TAKE ALL OF THESE LANDOWNERS TO JOIN IN, TO REMOVE OR DISMANTLED THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
UM, SO WE'RE UP TO HOW MANY LAST YEAR, THREE MORE, SO THREE MORE OPPORTUNITIES IF WE NEED THEM, OR WE CAN CALL THE QUESTION AND TAKE UP EMOTION, ANY MORE QUESTIONS AROUND THE ROOM, THE VIRTUAL BRAND.
UM, ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? UH, YOU HAVE A PROPOSED MOTION.
UM, I, UM, MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF OF MF TO NPS ZONING FOR TRACT ONE, AN L R M U M P ZONING FOR TRACK TWO.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER COPS, SEX AND SIPHON, SIR.
DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR EMOTION? RIGHT? I, I THINK STAFF, UM, PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS, THE TRANSITION FROM MIDDLE FISCAL INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UM, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE A COMPROMISE THAT STAFF HAS COME UP WITH BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING FOR.
AND IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE.
I HAVE THE, UH, PRIMARY SPEAKERS AGAINST THIS MOTION, NO SPEAKERS FOR A, I'M GOING TO SHARE A COX.
UM, JUST TO BE FAIR TO THOSE, THE
[01:15:01]
VIRTUAL, UH, COMMISSIONER MUCH TALLER, ALSO RAISED HER HAND A FEW TIMES.SO MAYBE WE, MAYBE SHE SHOULD GO.
I AM, UH, IT IS A BIT OF A CHALLENGE HERE, A COMMISSIONER, MUCH TALLER.
WHAT'S YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR, TO, UH, VOTE IN OPPOSITION? UH, NO, I WAS GOING TO SPEAK IN, IN FAVOR, BUT I ALSO HAD A THAT'S FINE.
YOU WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? UH, IF I HAVE THE FLOOR, THAT'S FINE.
I THINK, UM, IT'S HARD FOR NEIGHBOR, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS ZONING IN PLACE THERE, AND CERTAINLY, UM, THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED IN, IN ANY WAY.
SO, YOU KNOW, AS THE CITY IS GROWING, THE SPACE IS GONNA, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE SPACE AND IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO, YOU KNOW, GET, UH, PARKS AND GREEN SPACES, THAT KIND OF THING.
BUT I, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED THAT TRANSITION.
SO I DO LIKE THE WAY THE STAFF HAS CONSIDERED THIS AND MY THOUGHT WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD REQUEST OR SUGGEST, UM, OR JUST MAKE NOTE THAT A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY REALLY SHOULD HAPPEN IN THIS AREA.
UM, GIVEN THE CONFLUENCE OF FACTORS ON THESE, ON THESE RESIDENTIAL STREETS.
AND I GUESS I ALSO WANT TO REASSURE THE RESIDENTS THAT YOU DO GET SETBACKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WILL GIVE YOU SOME DISTANCE AND SPACE BETWEEN THE HOMES AND ALSO RESTRICT THE HEIGHT THAT THE BUILDER CAN DO ANYWAY.
UM, CAUSE IT'S GOTTA BE, IT'S GOTTA STEP UP AND CAPACITY COMPATIBILITY OR STEP DOWN.
AND SO I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, ARE, ARE MUCH MORE REASONABLE.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION? SEE NONE.
UM, MR. COX, DID YOU WANT TO STAY IN FAVOR? SURE.
UM, AT FIRST JUST WANTED TO THANK THE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESENTERS.
UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL COMING OUT AND THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION LOOKED LIKE A WHOLE LOT OF EFFORT WENT INTO THAT, AND I KNOW HOW MUCH TIME THAT TAKES AWAY FROM, UH, FROM YOUR FAMILY AND FROM YOUR PERSONAL LIFE.
SO I REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL COMING OUT.
UH, I ALSO REALLY APPRECIATE THE BACKUP DOCUMENTATION THAT WE GOT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I FELT LIKE EVEN THOUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS, I GUESS, MANY PEOPLE WOULD CALL IT OLD, UH, COMPARED TO HOW QUICKLY AUSTIN IS CHANGING.
UM, IT DOES SOUND LIKE THERE WAS AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF THOUGHT, UH, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS SITUATION, UM, AND TRYING TO AVOID THE SITUATION, UH, THAT I THINK THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL, UH, POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE, COULD HAVE, UH, CAUSED.
UM, I DO THINK THAT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS A FAIR COMPROMISE BETWEEN AN OUTRIGHT REJECTION AND THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL.
UH
UM, THAT AS STAFF POINTED OUT IS NOT THE FEEDER ROAD PROVIDE 35.
USUALLY WE SEE PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
AND THE MAPS THAT WE GOT SHOWED NO PARKS IN THE AREA, NO TRANSIT IN THE AREA, BASICALLY NOTHING IN THE AREA THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HELP SUPPORT, UH, HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT'S ALWAYS A CHICKEN AND EGG ARGUMENT, BUT, UM, ALL OF, ALL OF YOUR FEEDBACK AND THE FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UH, CONVINCES ME THAT, THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS, IS, IS A FAIR COMPROMISE FOR THIS.
SO I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DID ON, ON THIS, ON THIS CASE.
I, I NEED TO ASK BECAUSE, UM, DID THE MOTION INCLUDE THE NPA PLAN AMENDMENT? UH, NO, BUT I DO MEAN FOR IT TO INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDED.
SO WE HAVE THE PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE REZONING, OUR COMMISSIONERS CLEAR ON, ON THAT MOTION.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE CAN PULL IT BACK AND START OVER, BUT I THINK EVERYBODY IS CLEAR FROM THE BEGINNING WE WERE TAKING ABOUT THOSE ITEMS TOGETHER.
UM, WITH THAT, UH, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT FOR ANYBODY BY THE COMMISSIONER, IS OUR TRAM GOING TO SPEAK MORE NEUTRAL TO THE MOTION? AND I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT I THINK I UNDERSTAND STAFF'S REASONING FOR WANTING LR ON MIDDLE FISKVILLE.
I DO WANT TO SAY, HOWEVER, I FEEL LIKE AT THIS POINT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL MAP.
I'M SEEING A LITTLE BIT OF INCONSISTENCY IN NOT WANTING TO SEE
[01:20:01]
US ON THIS SIDE VERSUS OTHER PIECES OF THE OFF THE GOURD OR IN THE FRONTAGE, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW THIS IS NOT STRICTLY THE FRONTAGE.SO I THINK WE'RE LEADING A LITTLE BIT OF INCONSISTENCY THERE IN HOW WE'RE APPLYING THE DIFFERENT ZONES AND HOW IT'S BUILT UP.
UM, IS THERE A SLOT TO SPEAK AGAINST I'M SORRY.
UH, YES, YOU ARE A SPEAKER YOU WANT TO SPEAK AGAINST? OKAY, GO AHEAD.
WE HAD, WE HAD NOT FILLED THIS SLOT, SO PLEASE GO AHEAD.
IT'S, IT'S HARD TO SIGNAL FROM BACK HERE.
UM, SO, UH, I APPRECIATE THE, STAFF'S ATTEMPT TO FIND A REASONABLE NEGOTIATION ON THIS AND TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT LESS OF AN EGREGIOUS INCIDENTS OF SPOT ZONING, BUT I DO BELIEVE THIS, UM, CARVES IN WITHOUT A LOT OF CONSIDERATION.
THIS IS JUST YOUR MIND FOLKS, NOT ON I 35, IF YOU'VE DRIVEN ON MIDDLE FISKVILLE, IT'S A STRETCH TO CALL THAT A MAJOR CORRIDOR.
AND SO I THINK A LOT OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY ARE VERY, UH, SIGNIFICANT.
AND, UM, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AN AFFORDABILITY ON LAUNCH PROJECT.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, UH, PROJECTS THAT THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE AFFORDABLE UNITS IN THIS AREA.
AND I THINK, UM, IT'S UNFAIR TO HAVE PEOPLE WEIGH IN ON A HYPOTHETICAL, UM, ARGUMENT OF WHETHER THEY WOULD SUPPORT THAT OR NOT BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO EVEN NEGOTIATE THAT CASE AT THIS POINT.
SO, UM, I STILL THINK THAT MF TWO PRESENTS, UH, SOME CHALLENGES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, UM, I THINK THEY WOULD RATHER NEGOTIATE, UM, MORE CAREFULLY, UM, WITH SOME MORE SUSTAINABLE SOLUTIONS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S WHY I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THANKS CHAIRS THERE.
IS THERE A SPACE TO SPEAK NEUTRAL OR ARE WE OUT OF SPEAKING SLOTS? I THINK WE'RE WE'RE OKAY.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, CASES LIKE THIS HAVE ME HELL OF HELL, A TORN, UM, THE VERY DIFFICULT CASES.
THIS IS A LOW INCOME HISTORICALLY LOW INCOME AREAS, CERTAINLY HISTORICALLY UNDER-INVESTED AREA.
SO WE DO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT, UM, NEW, HIGHER INCOME RESIDENTS CAN BRING GENTRIFICATION AND IT CAN BRING CHANGE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT DOES DISRUPT.
UM, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE'S STRUGGLE TO, TO REMAIN AT THE SAME TIME, THE IDEA THAT FIGHTING MULTI-FAMILY THAT KNEE JERK OPPOSITION TO MULTI-FAMILY SOMEHOW PREVENTS GENTRIFICATION OR PREVENTS THE ECONOMIC PRESSURES THAT CHANGED THE FACE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS JUST FALSE.
THERE'S NO DATA THAT BACKS IT UP IT'S IT'S.
SO WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN MOVE PAST THIS PLACE, WHERE WE JUST NEED JERK OPPOSITION TO ANYTHING THAT'S DENSER THAN A MOLD, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS CHANGING, BUT MORE THAN THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, THE WORLD IS CHANGING.
YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO FIND WAYS TO LIVE WITH LESS SPACE, TO BE MORE EFFICIENT, TO SHARE SPACE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS.
AND WHEN WE HAVE NEW NEIGHBORS, WE, THE NEW NEIGHBORS, UM, ARE, ARE POSITIVE.
YOU KNOW, I HAD AN EXPERIMENT WHERE I TOOK A GROUP OF CHILDREN THAT WE WORK WITH THAT LIVE IN APARTMENTS.
I TOOK THEM TO A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD DURING HALLOWEEN, UM, TO GO TRICK OR TREATING, AND THEY BENEFITED SO MUCH FROM THAT EXPERIENCE, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO BENEFITED.
AND SO THIS IDEA THAT NEW NEIGHBORS OR SOMETHING TO, TO OPPOSE, UM, IS UNFORTUNATE.
UH, THIS WILL BE THE CHALLENGING PART.
UM, LET'S START WITH THE MEMBERS ON THE DYESS, UH, VOTING AND THE, IT IS, WE ARE VOTING ON ITEMS YOU ONE EMPTY TOO, WHICH IS A, UH, THE, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT.
AND THEN ITEM B TWO, WHICH IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
AND I'M GOING TO LOOK AROUND THE DIOCESE HERE AS MEDINA'S GO AND VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION BY SHARON HEMPHILL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PUTTS, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, AND THEN LOOKING AT THOSE, UH, ON THE VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT, WE HAVE, UH, GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES FOR, LET'S SEE, 1, 2, 3 IN FAVOR AND ONE AGAINST, AND YOU WERE AGAINST, I'M SORRY.
I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU'RE ABSTAINING.
SO IF I'M COUNTING MY NUMBER, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE NINE IN FAVOR.
WE HAVE ONE VOTE, UM, AGAINST AND ONE EXTENSION.
SO, UH, AS I'VE MENTIONED, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES, UH, TO BREAK HERE TO KIND OF SWITCH OUT THE SPEAKERS
[01:25:01]
AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT DISCUSSION CASE.AND JUST, UM, IF WE COULD ON THE NEXT ROUND, UH, THIS IS NEW.
I KNOW IT'S UNCOMFORTABLE, BUT IF WE STRONGLY SUGGEST WE KEEP THE MASK ON, WE'RE ALL TRYING TO DO THAT UP HERE ON THE DAYAS.
IT IS DIFFICULT WHEN YOU SPEAK, BUT LET'S, UH, PLEASE TRY TO KEEP OUR MASK ON.
[Items B4 & B5]
NEXT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION, WE'RE TAKING UP ITEMS BEFORE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ITEM B FIVE.AND WE'LL START WITH THE STAFF.
UM, PRESENTATIONS, LORENE, MEREDITH HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT ITEM BEFORE IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2 0 1 9 0 0 2 2 0.01 200 ACADEMY.
PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 1, 4, 6, AND A HALF, 200, 200 A HALF, 2 0 4 AND A HALF ACADEMY DRIVE.
AND 1 0 0 6 1 0 2 0 MELISSA LANE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE GREATER SOUTH RIVER CITY COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM MIXED USE OFFICE TO MIXED USE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR MIXED JUICE ON TRACT ONE.
IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE GREATER SOUTH RIVER CITY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.
AND WE DID RECEIVE LETTERS IN OPPOSITION AND THEY ARE IN THE STAFF CASE REPORTS.
I'M KATE CLARK WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
AND I AM PRESENTING ITEM B FIVE ON THE AGENDA.
THIS IS CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2020 DASH 0 1 4 7 200 ACADEMY.
THIS PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 4.6 ACRES AND IS ACCESSIBLE FROM ACADEMY LANE AND MELISSA ACADEMY DRIVE AND MELISSA LANE.
IT IS COMPRISED OF THREE TRACKS TRACKED.
ONE IS ZONED C S ONE N C C D, AND P TRACK TWO IS ZONED C S N C C D N P.
AND TRACK THREE IS ZONED AND THE FOR NCCD MP, THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF THE FAIRFIELD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION COMBINING DISTRICT, AND IS SUBJECT TO MORE RESTRICTIVE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PERMITTED LAND USES THAN WHAT THE EXISTING BASE DISTRICTS ALLOW.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH THE OLD OPERATE AUSTIN AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE, AND IS A SOW AND ITS ASSOCIATED SURFACE PARKING.
IT WAS PREVIOUSLY USED AS A MUSIC VENUE AND RECORDING STUDIO.
THE PERFORMANCE AREAS HAVE BEEN CONVERTED INTO THE OFFICE SPACE, BUT THE RECORDING STUDIO STILL REMAINS ADJACENT ZONING TO THIS PROPERTY CONSISTS OF C S M U V N P TO THE NORTH C S N C C D N P TO THE WEST, G R H N C C D N P TO THE SOUTH AND C N S F H N C C D N P AND S F THREE N C C D N P EAST ACROSS MELISSA LANE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO BE REMOVED FROM THE FAIRVIEW PARK NCCD IN ORDER TO UTILIZE THE CURRENT BASE ZONING DISTRICT ENTITLEMENTS WITHOUT THE NCCD RESTRICTIONS TO BUILD A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND REMOVING THESE TRACKS FROM THE NCCD.
WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT TRACT ONE, BE REZONED TO C S ONE M U N C C D M P.
AND TRACK TWO TO BE REZONED TO C S M U N C C D N P TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND LAND USES, AND FOR TRACK THREE, TO BE REZONED, TO MFA FOR NCCD NP, TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
THIS IS ALSO COMBINED WITH THE PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
THAT INCLUDES ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS LISTED IN THE TIA MEMO.
THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL USES ON THE WORST AND SINGLE FAMILY USES TO THE EAST, ALLOWING FOR AN INCREASE IN SITE DEVELOPMENT IN ADDITIONAL USES ON TRACKS ONE AND TWO WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
ADDITIONALLY, ALLOWING FOR AN EQUIVALENT OF MP3 ZONING ON TRACK THREE WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY USES ACROSS MELISSA LANE AND PROVIDE A TRANSITION IN DEVELOPMENT TOWARDS SOUTH CONGRESS.
LASTLY, THE FAIRVIEW PARK NCCD WAS APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL SINCE ITS CREATION PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE BOUNDARY OR REZONE TO CHANGE THE ENTITLEMENTS ALLOWED ON THOSE PROPERTIES.
BUT NONE OF THE PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THE BOUNDARY REZONING, THE SITE TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS WHILE KEEPING WITHIN THE NCCD WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH PAST TREATMENTS OF THESE PROPERTIES AND THESE IN THIS FAIR FEW PARK NCCD.
THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF SUMMARY AND I'M HERE.
UH, NOW WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT CHAIR COMMISSION LIAISON AND ANDREW RIVERA.
WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. RICHARD WEISS.
[01:30:01]
THANK YOU.UM, MR. WEISS, YOU'LL HAVE A TIME OF EIGHT MINUTES.
DO I CALL SLIDE OR DO I PRESS THE BUTTON? OKAY.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I'M RICHARD WEISS AND I HAVE THE HONOR OF BEING A MUSICIAN AND ARCHITECT IN AUSTIN FOR GOING ON 30 YEARS.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO ASK FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE NCCD OVERLAY ON 200 ACADEMY TO ADD U TO THE CS TRACK, TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSING AND THAT THE FLUM BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE PARCELS EXISTING BASED ZONING SLOT.
WHEN THE ZONING WAS FIRST ESTABLISHED ON THE SITE, IT WAS DESIGNATED AS CS ONE AND CS FOR THE COMMERCIAL PORTION AND MF FOR ALONG MELISSA LANE INTENDED TO CREATE A RESIDENTIAL BUFFER TO THE FAIRVIEW PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.
THESE ZONING CATEGORIES WERE AND ARE APPROPRIATE FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE IMAGINE AUSTIN DOWNTOWN REGION GROWTH CENTER AT THE NEXUS OF SOUTH CONGRESS IN RIVERSIDE TO IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITIES, CORRIDORS SLIDE, PLEASE.
HERE'S A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY IN 1957, IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED AS THE TERRORIST MOTOR COURT IN 1965.
THE CURRENT BUILDING ON SITE WAS ADDED TO 200 ACADEMY AND IT WAS THE BALLROOM AND RESTAURANT FOR THE MOTOR COURT.
BOBBY NELSON, WILLIE NELSON SISTER PLAYED THERE IN THE SIXTIES ALMOST EVERY SATURDAY NIGHT IN 1974.
IT BECAME THE TEXAS OPRY HOUSE AND HAD SUCH DIVERSE ACTS AS RAY CHARLES AND TINA TURNER, THE EAGLES AND WAIL AND JENNY AND RECORDED A LIVE ALBUM THERE THAT WENT PLATINUM IN 1977.
WILLIE NELSON BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AND CONVERTED IT TO THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE IN OR OPERA HOUSE IN 1979.
IT BECAME THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE AND REMAINED IN ACTIVITY TO 1992.
AND THOUSANDS OF INCREDIBLE SHOWS, A DIVERSE LINEUP OF LOCAL NATIONAL AND ARTISTS IN 1984, MUSIC LANE WAS DEVELOPED, UH, NAMED AFTER THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE ARLAND STUDIOS AND THE AUSTIN REHEARSAL COMPLEX THAT WERE ALL ON BACKED ON MUSIC LANE IN 1986, STEVIE RAY VAUGHAN RECORDED THE ALBUM LIVE ALIVE THERE, WHICH WENT DOUBLE PLATINUM.
AND THE STAGE HE RECORDED IT ON IS STILL IN THE BUILDING IN 1986.
ALSO THE FAIRVIEW PARK AND CCD WAS ESTABLISHED A SLIDE, PLEASE.
NOW THE INTENT OF THE NCCD WAS TO CONTROL GROWTH AND TO CREATE A TRANSITION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
HOWEVER, AS APPLIED TO 200 ACADEMY, THEIR RESTRICTIONS ARE SO GREAT THAT THE EXISTING TWO STORY DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE NCCD LIMITATIONS.
THIS HAS CREATED THE CITY'S LARGEST HISTORICALLY ZONED PARKING LOT THAT CANNOT REDEVELOP IT BECAUSE THE CURRENT FAR AT 0.59, AND AGAIN, THE BASE ZONING ALLOWS FOR TWO TO ONE.
THE CURRENT FAR HAS 0.59 EXCEEDS THE 0.35 TO ONE F NCCD FAR RESTRICTION.
IT'S AN 82.5% REDUCTION IN A BASE ZONING ENTITLEMENT IN OUR MOST DESIRED GROWTH ZONE.
ON THE MFR SIDE, THE NCCD ENTITLEMENTS ARE THE SAME AS THE BASE ZONING CODE.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF REDUCING THE NUMBER OF UNITS BY TWO, YOU CAN SEE ON THE SLIDE, THE MFR COMPATIBILITY STAYS EXACTLY THE SAME.
THE FAR STAYS EXACTLY THE SAME.
THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGES IS THE NUMBER OF UNITS IS CUT IN HALF, WHICH MEANS THAT HALF THE UNITS AT THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE IS A RECIPE FOR EXPENSIVE HOUSING.
HOWEVER, ALL OF THESE POINTS ARE MOOT SINCE THE EXISTING BUILDING EXCEEDS THE FAR REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITS NEW DEVELOPMENT.
EVEN IF NEW DEVELOPMENT WERE FEASIBLE, THE NCCD PROHIBITS ALL USES ON THE SITE OTHER THAN LIGHT OFFICE AND SUBURBAN SCALE RESIDENTIAL, MEANING LESS THAN SF THREE ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE AND 22 UNITS PER ACRE ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.
AND BECAUSE LIGHT OFFICE IS THE ONLY USE CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE EXISTING BUILDING.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE CURRENTLY MAKESHIFT CONFERENCE ROOMS WITH NAMES LIKE WILLIE NELSON AND STEVIE RAY VAUGHAN BUILT ON TOP OF THE ORIGINAL OPERA HOUSE STAGE.
THERE'S NO GREATER METAPHOR FOR THE LOSS OF AUSTIN SOUL SLIDE.
THE FUTURE IS NOW ALL OF THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST HAVE FULLY DEVELOPED.
AND THREE OF THE FOUR HOUSES TO THE EAST HAVE REDEVELOPED SINCE 1986, WHILE 200 ACADEMY REMAINS HANDCUFFED BY EXCEEDING NCCD REQUIREMENTS, CREATING A DEVELOPMENT CANYON IN THE HEART OF THE CITY.
THE COMMERCIAL IS CAPPED AT TWO STORIES AND 30 FEET WHILE THE ADJACENT NEW CONSTRUCTION IS BETWEEN 60 AND 85 FEET.
THE CLOSEST SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IS FOUR STORIES TALL WHERE THE
DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT WAS NAMED AFTER THE OPERA HOUSE SLIDE.
NOW THIS SLIDE SHOWS A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE ENTITLEMENTS UNDER THE NCCD VERSUS BASED ZONING.
THE NCCD YOU GET WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE SITE, WHICH IS A HISTORICALLY
[01:35:01]
ZONED PARKING LOT.UH, THE BASE ZONING WOULD ALLOW FOR THE REOPENING OF A REDUCED SCALE OPERA HOUSE, SUBJECT TO CURRENT SOUND AND COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCES THAT WERE NOT IN PLACE IN 1986, WHEN THE NCCD WAS, WAS, UH, ESTABLISHED ABOVE THE OPERA HOUSE, A MIX OF OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USES CAN BE BUILT TO THE SCALE OF THE 60 FOOT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WITH NO VARIANCES.
THE SURFACE PARKING LOT CAN BECOME UNDERGROUND PARKING GREEN SPACE AND A COMPATIBLE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD BUFFER TO THE COMMERCIAL USES WITH ZERO DISPLACEMENT OF EXISTING RESIDENTS SLIDE.
HOW DOES THIS TIE INTO OUR GOVERNING DOCUMENT? THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN ACCESS TO THE SITE WILL BE PROVIDED ALONG ACADEMY PRIOR TO ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
YOU DON'T PASS A SINGLE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE ENTRANCE IS ADJACENT TO THE CIRCLE PARK, WHICH IS AN UNDER UTILIZED PARK IN TRAVIS HEIGHTS.
UM, UH, THE, UH, ACCESS TO THE SITE, UH, WE'LL KEEP, UH, THE ACTUAL HISTORIC NCCD FABRIC INTACT WHILE ACCOMMODATING COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL GROWTH WITH ZERO DISPLACEMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN GROWTH CENTER ADJACENT TO TWO ACTIVITY CORRIDORS, LESS THAN 200 STEPS FROM CONGRESS AVENUE 200 ACADEMY IS A RARE OPPORTUNITY TO RE-ESTABLISH A HISTORIC MUSIC VENUE IN ITS ORIGINAL LOCATION IN THE HEART OF THE CITY WITH A NEW RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ALL UNDER THE EXISTING BASE ZONING AND WITH THE ADDED BENEFIT OF COMPATIBILITY AND SOUND ORDINANCES THAT WERE NOT IN PLACE AT THE TIME OF THE NCCD.
LAST DECEMBER, I CAME BEFORE THIS BODY FOR ANOTHER NCCD CASE TO GET A LOCAL HISTORIC ZONING ON A BUILDING LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER, HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPORTED THIS REQUEST, BUT RECOMMENDED THAT THE PARKING LOT ON SITE NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE HISTORIC OVERLAY BECAUSE QUOTE, YOU HAVE A MORAL OBJECTION TO HISTORICALLY ZONED PARKING LOTS.
LAST NIGHT AT THE AUSTIN MUSIC COMMISSION, THEY SUPPORTED A MOTION TO BRING THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE BACK TO 200 ACADEMY WITH ZERO OPPOSITION.
WE APPRECIATE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO REMOVE THE NCCD OVERLAY ON AUSTIN'S LARGEST, HISTORICALLY ZONED PARKING LOT, AND TO ALLOW BASED ZONING ENTITLEMENTS FOR OUR HISTORIC POSSIBLE A PARCEL THAT HELPED MAKE US THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION.
UM, MS. LAURA TUBES IS MISS MARY JANE SICK FRIEDMAN PRESENT.
IS MR. RUSSELL FRASER PRESENT.
THANK YOU, MS. TUPES YOU'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES EVENING COMMISSION.
THANK YOU FOR HEARING THIS CASE TONIGHT.
MY NAME IS LARA TUBES AND I RESIDE AT 3 0 5 LEGRAND AVENUE, WHICH, UH, ABOUT A BLOCK AWAY FROM 200 ACADEMY.
I AM A CIVIL ENGINEER AND URBAN PLANNER AND WAS THE MANAGING PARTNER OF A LOCAL ENGINEERING FIRM, URBAN DESIGN GROUP SINCE 1983, IN 2018, WE SOLD TO ANOTHER FIRM, DUNAWAY ASSOCIATES, AND I CONTINUE TO SERVE IN A PART-TIME BASIS.
I AM ALSO THE PAST PRESIDENT OF THE CONGRESS FOR NEW URBANISMS CENTRAL TEXAS CHAPTER.
AND I SERVED ON THE BOARD FOR SIX YEARS.
I TELL YOU THIS BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THIS CASE IS TO ME IS, IS VERY DEAR TO MY HEART.
I LIVE CLOSE BY, BUT I'VE ALSO BEEN INVOLVED.
I CAME TO AUSTIN IN THE LATE SEVENTIES, BUT SINCE 1983, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN, IN PRIVILEGED TO DESIGN AND BE A PART OF A VERY CHANGING CITY.
UM, BUT I'M HERE TONIGHT AS A CONCERNED RESIDENT AND ALSO A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM.
THIS IS A COMPLICATED CASE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST GIVE YOU A BRIEF BACKGROUND, FAIRVIEW PARK OF WHICH THIS TRACK IS A PART OF, IS IN AN AREA OF TRAVIS HEIGHTS, WHICH HAS SOME OF THE OLDEST RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.
AND IN 1986, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU WERE HERE.
PROGRESSIVE RESIDENTS TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO INITIATE A PLANNING DOCUMENT.
AND THAT WAS THE NCCD BECAUSE WE WERE SO CLOSE TO SOUTH CONGRESS, WE SAW WHAT WAS COMING AND THAT NCCD DESIGNATED THE TRACK AS OFFICE AND MULTIFAMILY.
YES, IT HAS SOME RESTRICTIONS IN IT, WHICH RICHARD ALLUDED TO, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LAND USE TONIGHT.
SO THEN IN THE TWO THOUSANDS, YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH AGAIN, CONTINUED THE USE THAT WAS DESIGNATED IN THE NCCD.
[01:40:02]
IT SAID OFFICE AND MULTIFAMILY.SO I WOULD POINT OUT THAT FOR 35 YEARS, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS WORKED TO PRESERVE, BUT I THINK WE ALL AGREE NEEDS PRESERVATION, HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS, WHILE SAME TIME ACKNOWLEDGING THE INCREASED DENSITY DENSITY THAT HAPPENS ALONG ARTERIALS, SUCH AS SOUTH CONGRESS.
WE'VE NOT OPPOSED, SORRY, THIS IS HARD TALKING THROUGH THESE MAPS, BUT WE HAVE NOT OPPOSED THE INCREASE DENSITIES THAT HAVE OCCURRED ALONG SOUTH CONGRESS AND AS WAS ALLUDED TO THERE WERE CHANGES TO THE NCCD.
ALL OF THOSE PROPERTIES FRONTED SOUTH CONGRESS, THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT, IT DOESN'T FRONT, IT HAVE ACCESS TO MUSIC LANE EITHER.
IT ONLY HAS ACCESS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS OF ACADEMY AND MELISSA, IT ALSO HAS LARGE TOPOGRAPHICAL DIFFERENCES FROM THE JOAN ADJOINING PROPERTIES, THE ST CECILIA, WHICH IS NEXT TO IT, WHICH IS A BOUTIQUE HOTEL.
AND THEN THE MASSIVE REDEVELOPMENT ALONG MUSIC LANE AND SOUTH CONGRESS.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A BIG GRADE CHANGE SO THAT THIS PROPERTY ACTUALLY BECOMES NESTLED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IT'S NOT ONLY ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY.
IT'S ACTUALLY AT THE SAME ELEVATION, THE FLUM REQUESTS THAT WAS FIRST SUBMITTED IN 2019, THE CONTACT TEAM COULD NOT SUPPORT THAT REQUEST.
SO WHAT HAPPENED, IT WAS DELAYED FOR A WHILE UNTIL THE ZONING CHANGE WAS SUBMITTED IN 2020, AND THAT REQUIRED A TIA.
SO IT'S BEEN SINCE THE FALL OF 2020 THAT THE TIA WAS IN PROCESS AND FILING WAS APPROVED SOMETIME I THINK IN MAY.
AND AT THAT POINT, THE APPLICANT REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DUE TO SUMMER VACATIONS AND SCHEDULES, WE WERE ABLE TO MEET WITH THEM IN AUGUST.
SO I WAS THE CHAIR OF A SMALL SUBCOMMITTEE THAT MET WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THEY ANSWERED OUR QUESTIONS ABOUT AND SHARED A POSSIBLE CONCEPT PLAN.
AND THAT PLAN INCLUDED A 17,000 SQUARE FOOT MUSIC VENUE, COCKTAIL LOUNGE, HIGH TURNOVER RESTAURANT OFFICE IN MULTIFAMILY.
WE ALSO REVIEWED THE PROPOSED RESTRICTED DRIVEWAY ON ACADEMY AND THE MULTIFAMILY PARKING GARAGE, WHICH ACCESSES MELISSA, DURING THAT MEETING, WE POSED MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MUSIC VENUE, AS WELL AS SHARED WITH THEM, THE ONGOING PROBLEMS WITH A VENUE AT THIS LOCATION.
IN THE PAST, WE ASKED IF THERE WAS A PROPOSED PROJECT WITHOUT A MUSIC PENNY, AND THE ANSWER WE GOT WAS NO.
AFTER THIS MEETING, OUR GROUP MET AND DISCUSS THE PROPOSAL AND WE JUST COULD FIND NO JUSTIFICATION FOR A MAJOR MUSIC VENUE COMING OFF OF A LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD STREET.
AND WE WERE STIFLED AT THAT POINT OF ANY KIND OF NEGOTIATIONS BECAUSE THAT USE WAS UNACCEPTABLE, THAT INCREASE.
SO YOU HAVE A LETTER FROM THE CONTACT TEAM THAT IS AN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTED PHLEGM CHANGE, AND THE REASONS LISTED IN OUR LETTER IN SUMMARY, OUR COCKTAIL LOUNGE MUSIC VENUE AND HIGH TURNOVER RESTAURANT OR INAPPROPRIATE USES AT THIS LOCATION CONFOUNDED FURTHER BY THE FACT THAT THE ONLY ACCESS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD STRAIGHT, THE PLAN CHANGES, CHARGES US TO BE STEWARDS OF THAT PLAN.
SO BECAUSE OF THE ALOUD, AND AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING TO USE HERE, IT'S ALLOWED OFFICE IN MULTI-FAMILY.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT THAT VIOLATES THE ADOPTED PLAN.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS ALSO CONTRARY TO THE NCCD AND WE HAVE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT THE TIA, WHICH ARE LISTED IN YOUR PACKETS ON PAGES 50 THROUGH 64.
AND IN SUMMARY, THEY WERE ABOUT WHEN THE TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE TAKEN ACADEMY IN SOUTH CONGRESS WAS CLOSED FOR AWHILE.
ALSO THE USES DEFINED IN THE TIA ARE LESS THAN WHAT WE WERE TOLD.
THE SIZES ARE SMALLER THAN WHAT WE WERE TOLD.
SO IN SUMMARY, WE ACKNOWLEDGED THE NEED FOR MC SHOES, AND WE'RE FORTUNATE TO LIVE IN AN AREA THAT HAS DEVELOPED
[01:45:01]
IN SUCH A WAY.WE ALSO SUPPORT, AS I KNOW HE EACH, IF YOU DO PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS AND ALSO SOME WAY OF CREATING AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT FOR OUR DIVERSE POPULATION, WE'RE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS MANY SMALL APARTMENT COMPLEXES STARTING IN THE SIXTIES.
WE'RE BLOCKS AWAY FROM A MAJOR ARTERIAL THAT SUPPORTS A MIX OF USES.
AND UNFORTUNATELY SEEM TO CATER MORE AND MORE TO A FLUENT POPULATION.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SUPPORTED APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONAL ZONING OR TRANSITIONAL USE.
AND THE ZONING IS AGAIN WHAT IT IS, BUT IT HAS SOME OVERLAYS THAT RESTRICTS IT TO THE USES AT 200 ACADEMY.
AND THAT IS THE OFFICE IN THE MULTIFAMILY.
THESE ALLOWED USES GIVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIVING AND WORKING IN YOUR CASE BEFORE WHICH I WAS LISTENING TO ALLUDED TO SOME OF THOSE PRINCIPLES.
AND WE BELIEVE IT'S IN KEEPING WITH THE GOALS OF IMAGINE AUSTIN AND TODAY'S URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES.
AND WE WILL SPEAK TO THE HISTORIC ARGUMENT OF THE APPLICANT WITH OTHER SPEAKERS.
BUT WHAT WE ASKED TODAY IS THAT YOU DENY THIS FLOM AND ZONING REQUESTS DUE TO THE INAPPROPRIATE USES BEYOND THE OFFICE IN MULTI-FAMILY.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. BRIAN, BRIAN BIDDING.
I'M UH, I'M A, I'M A MUSICIAN AND I'VE, UH, I PLAYED A FEW TIMES AT THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE WHEN IT WAS OPEN AND I'VE RECORDED A NUMBER OF RECORDS AT THE, UH, ARLIN STUDIO COMPLEX WITHIN THE 200 ACADEMY COMPLEX.
AND SO I'M, UH, APPRECIATE THE, UH, SUPPORTING AUSTIN, THE AUSTIN MUSIC ECONOMY.
UH, BUT I ALSO KNOW AS I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG ENOUGH, UM, THERE ARE VENUES WHO, UH, OUTGREW THEIR, UH, INITIAL LOCATION MANY TIMES IN AUSTIN, UH, UH, WATERLOO ICE HOUSE, THE, UH, UM, AUSTIN CITY LIMITS MOVE TO A BETTER PLACE, UH, AND TONES, UH, MOVED FOUR TIMES.
AND THE, UH, THE BRANDING OF THE SPACE ITSELF.
I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO USE THE SPACE AS A CALLING CARD FOR PEOPLE TO COME BACK THERE.
BUT HISTORICALLY, UH, THE, UM, IN ADDITION TO THE, UH, I MEAN, THERE, THERE ARE MANY WONDERFUL SHOWS.
PEOPLE REMEMBER FOR MANY YEARS THERE, BUT THERE WAS A PARALLEL HISTORY OF, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVING TO, UM, UH, WELL BASICALLY, UH, FIGHT AGAINST WHAT WAS HAPPENING AT NIGHT.
YOU KNOW, WHEN, UH, EVERYONE WOULD COME OUT OF THE PLACE, THERE WERE NO PLACES TO PARK.
THEY'RE OFFERING, UH, PAY PARKING AT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT'LL BE PAY PARKING.
AND THERE'LL BE PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO AVOID THAT.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE ISSUE.
AND, UM, BUT I GUESS THE MAIN, THE MAIN THING IS, AND ALL THE YEARS THAT IT'S BEEN THERE, UH, THERE'VE BEEN MANY, MANY MORE YEARS WHERE IT WAS NOT A MUSIC VENUE AND IT WAS OPERATING WITH IN PEACE WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEN THE YEARS WHEN IT WAS OPERATING AS A MUSIC VENUE, IT WAS IN CONFLICT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGAIN AND AGAIN IN 19 74, 19 77 THROUGH, UH, EARLY EIGHTIES.
AND, UH, AND THE EARLY NINETIES ONE AS WELL.
SO, UM, IT'S BEEN, UH, THE EARLIEST USE AS A CONVENTION CENTER WAS AS A PRIVATE CLUB.
AND IT DID NOT GET IN THE WAY WITH THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THERE WAS ACCESS FROM MUSIC LANE BEHIND.
SO THERE ARE MANY, MANY THINGS.
AND THE, ALSO THE HISTORICAL OBJECTIONS HAD TO DO WITH THE VENUE, NOT HAVING ACCESS TO SOUTH CONGRESS, WHICH IS ONCE AGAIN A PROBLEM, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SOLVE WITH THEIR DESIGN.
SO, UH, I LIVED THERE WHEN IT WAS A CLUB AND IT WAS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SEARCH, IF YOU SEARCH IN AUSTIN, AMERICAN ARCHIVES, UH, THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE, YOU'LL FIND LOTS OF ADS AND REVIEWS OF SHOWS.
IF YOU SEARCH AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE, NEIGHBORHOOD OR NEIGHBORS, YOU'LL SEE NOTHING, BUT, UH, PROBLEMS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WERE CAUSED BY TRAFFIC AND, UH, AND, UM, DRUNK PEOPLE COMING OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.
AND, UH, AND IN THE CLUB, NOT BEING ABLE TO MAINTAIN THAT RELATIONSHIP
[01:50:01]
WITH THE, THEIR, UH, YEAH, WHAT THEIR, WHAT THEY HAD GOING ON.THEY COULDN'T, YEAH, THEY, THEY COULDN'T CONTROL THE, THE DRUNK PEOPLE BASICALLY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. VALERIE FELLER.
I'M MARRIED TO BRIAN BD AND OUR HOME IS, UM, WITHIN, UH, UH, LESS THAN 500 FEET FROM THE, UH, PROPERTY THAT'S PROPOSING THIS CHANGE THAT WE'RE ALL OPPOSED TO.
UM, I, UM, BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 1993 AND, UM, I REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS LIKE BEING IN MY HOUSE, A NEW HOMEOWNER, SEEING ROWS OF CARS.
THEY CAN'T ALL, THEY ARE ALL RELEASED AT ONCE A HUGE VOLUME OF PEOPLE COMING OUT OF A CLUB.
A BIG, I MEAN, YOU CAN IMAGINE IT'S, UH, IT'S IF THERE'S A POPULAR BAND.
UM, I THINK, UM, THE POLICE WAS THERE, THE, THE BAND, THE POLICE, THE ONE OF THE NIGHTS, AND IT TOOK FOREVER FOR THE CARS TO CLEAR BECAUSE THAT ROAD IS NARROW AND THERE, UH, THAT, THAT WAS A PROBLEM.
BUT THEN THE NEXT DAY, THE TRASH AND THE, UM, EVIDENCE OF, UM, ANYWAY, IT WAS, IT WAS, IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE AND I'M AGAINST IT FOR THAT REASON.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I JUST, I LIVED THERE, I SAW IT AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT AGAIN.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM COLIN CORGAN.
YOU'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE, ONE MINUTE.
UM, MY NAME IS COLIN CORGAN AND I LIVE ON ACADEMY DRIVE.
I'M THE, UH, PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, IN AN HISTORIC HOME WITH ITS ROOTS DATING BACK TO 1851, UH, ONE OF THE OLDEST STRUCTURES IN THE CITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT I HAD THREE MINUTES.
WE, YOU KNOW, WE OPPOSED THIS PROJECT FOR THE REASONS THAT WE'VE BASICALLY BEEN GIVEN, YOU KNOW, AND SAID, WE'D LOVE TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT MAINTAINS THE EXISTING HISTORY AND FABRIC OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, BUILD NEW CONSTRUCTION IN PROPORTION TO THE SURROUNDING HOMES, INCLUDING VIA HEIGHT, MASSING, AND SETBACKS, UH, AND ALSO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY MOBILITY, NOT WORSENING IT.
UM, IT SEEMS VERY CLEAR TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE TRAFFIC SITUATION WAS NOT ADDRESSED CORRECTLY, AS LAURA SAID.
AND WE'D LOVE TO HAVE THAT, UH, LOOKED AT MORE CLOSELY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MISS CLAUDETTE.
LO MS. LOWE YOU'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
I THOUGHT IT WAS THREE, BUT I'M GOING TO MAKE IT ONE.
MY NAME IS CLAUDIA LO AND I REPRESENT THE SOUTH RIVER CITY CITIZENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WHO OPPOSES THIS ZONING CHANGE, UH, FOR EVERY PARK IS OLDEST DIVISION SUBDIVISION IN AUSTIN ESTABLISHED IN 1886.
WHEN, WHEN THE FIRST ZONING LAWS WERE PUT INTO PLACE, AUSTIN FAIRVIEW PARK WAS GIVEN INTENSE ZONING.
NEVERTHELESS, IT DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE SIXTIES, AND THEY GET IN THE SEVENTIES TO VOLUNTEERS.
ZONING ROLLBACKS WERE INITIATED.
DESPITE THESE EFFORTS DEVELOPMENT PRESSURED CONTINUED INCLUDING THE OPERA HOUSE.
SO IN THE EIGHTIES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASKED THE COUNCIL MEMBER, SALLY SHIPMAN TO INITIATE A BRAND NEW ZONING TUBE TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
IT WAS CALLED A NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION COMBINING DISTRICT AND IN 86, FAIRVIEW PARK BECAME THE FIRST NCDS NCCD.
UM, THE ZONE, THE ZONING, THIS DEVELOPERS ASKING FOR MUSIC VENUE, BAR RETAIL, INCLUDING RESTAURANT.
IT'S UH, THIS IS, UH, LET ME JUST SAY ONE THING.
THIS IS A PROPERTY NESTLED BETWEEN TWO HISTORIC HOUSES.
IT'S NOT A PART OF SOUTH CONGRESS.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. MARK THOMPSON.
UH, I COME TODAY JUST TO TALK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
I SEE A NUMBER OF UNDERESTIMATION ERRORS ON THERE.
FIRST OFF, MOST OBVIOUS THE SQUARE FEET, UH, 10,000 INSTEAD OF 17,000, THAT REPRESENTS ONLY 58% OF WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO THERE.
THE CODES LISTED UNDER THEIR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
TWO OF THEM WERE LISTED AS WELL.
WE COULDN'T FIND A CODE FOR MUSIC.
WE KNEW WE COULDN'T FIND ONE FROM MUSEUM.
ONE MINUTE I FOUND A CODE MUSIC
[01:55:01]
VENUE, UH, KIND OF MATCHES UP WITH COCKTAIL LOUNGE, DRINKING PLACE NINE TO FIVE.I BELIEVE THAT SHOULD BE USED THERE MUSEUM.
I'M SURPRISED THAT I COULD FIND ONE MINUTE CODES THAT WERE SOMEHOW OMITTED.
THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL SAYS THAT ALL COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC WILL GO IN AND OUT OF ACADEMY.
THERE WAS TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANIES OUT.
THERE THEY GO WHEREVER DIRECTION THEY FEEL IS GOING TO WORK FOR THEM.
UH, ACADEMY WAS CLOSED FOR MONTHS.
DURING THIS CONSTRUCTION, THE TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DESIGN, THEY ASKED FOR 30% REDUCTION, THE PARTS THEY LIST DON'T EVEN ADD UP.
THE 30% SEEMS LIKE IT WAS DONE KIND OF FLIMSY AND SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED.
WE'LL NOW HEAR A REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT, MR. WEISS, MR. WEISS, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR SERVING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YOUR CHARGES TO IMPLEMENT THE VISION OF IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN OFTEN UNDER CONTENTIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS VOICE CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC NOISE AND COMPATIBILITY.
WHILE WE COLLECTIVELY MADE SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT DEVELOPMENT IS AN INCONVENIENCE AND SOMETHING IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE MORE OF AN IMPOSITION THAN NOTHING, WHICH IS WHAT THE CURRENT NCCD ALLOWS ON THE PROPERTY REGARDING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC.
THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN STATES THAT THE SINGLE BEST MEANS TO REDUCE TRAFFIC AND PROVIDE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH IN OUR CITY IS FOR A DENSE MIX OF HOUSING OFFICE AND ENTERTAINMENT ADJACENT TO REGIONAL AND ACTIVITY CENTERS.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE AT 200 ACADEMY ON THE EDGE OF THE DOWNTOWN REGIONAL CENTER.
UH, THE CITY OF AUSTIN CURRENTLY HAS TOOLS LIKE COMPATIBILITY, TRAFFIC, IMPACT ANALYSIS, NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING PROGRAMS TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT AND SCALE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THIS IS A QUOTE, CHALLENGES US TO LOOK BEYOND OUR PERSONAL INTERESTS AND TO ACT FOR THE GOOD OF THE WHOLE, TO THINK OF THE ENTIRE PIE, NOT JUST OUR SLICE, TO BE GOOD STEWARDS FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.
I BELIEVE THIS QUOTE SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO 200 ACADEMY, WHICH SITS AT THE CENTER OF AUSTIN'S PIE HAS A RICH CULTURAL HISTORY THAT CANNOT BE REPLACED AND BASED ZONING THAT IT CAN ACCOMMODATE A MANAGING AUSTIN'S GOALS FOR THE, FOR THE CENTRAL CITY REGARDING PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
THE ORIGINAL OPERA HOUSE DID SPILL ONTO A SURFACE PARKING LOT WITH NO NEIGHBORHOOD BUFFER, PROVIDING THE RESIDENTIAL THAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THE BASE ZONING, BUT CAN'T BE BUILT IN THE NCCD.
AND AGAIN, WE DO HAVE ACCESS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO MUSIC LANE AND OUR 200 STEPS OR LESS TO SOUTH CONGRESS REGARDING SOUND THE OPERA HOUSE, LIKE THE ALAMO DRAFT HOUSE IN HIGH BALL THAT ARE IN THIS EXACT SAME REGION ON SOUTH LAMAR.
YOU CAN SEE HERE, THEY WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S AMPLIFIED SOUND ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1992.
MY ARCHITECTURE FROM WEISS ARCHITECTURE HAS BEEN MINIMIZING THE IMPACT OF SOUND WITH ALAMO FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
AND NO ONE WILL WANT TO CONTROL THE IMPACTS OF LIVE MUSIC MORE THAN THE PROPERTY OWNER, WHO WILL PROVIDE A COMMUNITY THAT IS BOTH VIBRANT AND RESPECTFUL OF THE MIX OF USES IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN OCCUPANCY, WE ARE EXCITED TO CONTRIBUTE HOUSING TO THIS AREA.
BUT THE LAST THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE, WE WERE NEVER PART OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IN 1939, YOU CAN SEE A USE MAP THAT SHOWS US AS A MUCH MORE INTENSE USE THAN THE NEIGHBORHOOD USE THE PRESENT AUGUST, 2021, THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTED THE TRAVIS HEIGHTS, FAIRVIEW PARK NATIONAL REGISTER, HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY NPS AND DOES NOT INCLUDE 200 ACADEMY.
THE FUTURE IS A RARE OPPORTUNITY TO HONOR OUR PAST AND SHAPE OUR FUTURE WITH THE EXISTING BASE ZONING.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ABSORBING, WE'RE ASKING TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE EXISTING BASE ZONING.
AND I THINK THAT'S MY REBUTTAL.
THANK YOU, MR. WISE, CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE TESTIMONY FOR THIS ITEM.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, UM, LOOKING AROUND BOTH ROOMS. UH, DO WE HAVE QUESTION, UH, SEEK, OH, YES.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, LOOKING AT THE DAYAS FIRST.
UM, UM, A MOTION COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
HERE'S A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HERE.
ALRIGHT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SNYDER.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE DIOCESE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, LET'S LOOK AT THE VIRTUAL WORLD.
OH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER HOWARD IS NOT PRESENT CURRENTLY, SO THAT WOULD BE SEVEN AND THREE THAT'S 10 ZERO.
[02:00:01]
UH, GIVE THE VIRTUAL FOLKS FIRST OPPORTUNITY.I, ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION? ALL RIGHT.
ANYBODY ON THE DICE THOMPSON, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR REQUEST AND WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS AND WHAT THE IMPACT? UH, SO THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR REQUEST AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE REMAIN WITHIN THE NCCD.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WITHIN THEIR PURVIEW TO, UH, REQUEST OR TO RECOMMEND BEING OUTSIDE OF THE NCCD.
WHEN I SPOKE WITH STAFF, THEY SAID THAT THAT IS NOT WITHIN THEIR PURVIEW.
UM, BUT FOR US, THE NCCD CURRENTLY JUST CRUSHES ALL DEVELOPMENT POSSIBILITIES.
WHAT'S THERE IS MORE THAN WHAT'S ALLOWED FOR THE FUTURE.
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO GROW WITH THE GROWING CODE.
IF WE WERE TO STAY IN THE NCCD AND GET APPROVAL THIS YEAR, THEN IN 20 YEARS, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, THEN WE'RE NOT SUBJECT TO THE NEW ORDINANCES THAT ARE CREATED UNDER THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE ARE SUBJECT TO THE ORDINANCES FROM THIS YEAR AS IT RELATES TO 1986.
AND SO TO ME, THIS PROPERTY WAS NEVER REALLY A PART OF THE NCCD.
IT WAS PLACED INTO THE NCCD AS A MEANS TO CONTROL GROWTH, BUT IT IS, IT IS A VALUABLE TOOL I'VE, I'VE ASKED FOR HISTORIC ZONING AND NCCD BEFORE, BUT IT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS PROPERTY.
THE OTHER CHANGES, UH, ARE THEY'RE RECOMMENDING MF TWO ZONING, WHICH IS 36 UNITS PER ACRE, OR MP3 EQUIVALENT ZONING, WHICH IS 36 UNITS PER ACRE.
THE FAR REMAINS THE SAME, UH, WHICH IS 0.7, FIVE ON THE, UH, ON THE RESIDENTIAL TRACT, WHICH MEANS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH, WHICH ALLOWS 22, WHICH IS REALLY NOTHING.
UH, THE CITY IS SAYING 36, THE, UH, MFR, WHICH IS THE BASE ZONING ALLOWS BETWEEN 36 AND 54, DEPENDING ON WHETHER IT'S A, UH, EFFICIENCY OR A TWO BEDROOM.
AND, UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO LAND SOMEWHERE AROUND 44 SO THAT WE CAN PROVIDE A MIX OF USES A MIX OF UNIT TYPES, A MIX OF AFFORDABILITY, UH, WITHIN THE COMPLEX.
AND THEN ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
THE ONLY REAL DIFFERENCE IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 1.5 TO ONE FAR AND TWO TO ONE FAR.
AND AGAIN, THAT WILL LIMIT, UH, IT ENDS UP BEING, UM, ABOUT, UH, 40,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL HOUSING.
BUT, BUT AS YOU SAW ON THE MAP, THAT'S ALL NESTLED WITHIN 60 FOOT BUILDINGS ALL ACROSS THAT BOARD, OTHER THAN THE MAGDALENA, WHICH IS 85 FEET.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE FROM STAFF REPRESENTING TRAFFIC? IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE TRAFFIC, SOMEONE ON THE LINE? YEAH.
CAN, CAN YOU TALK SOME ABOUT, UM, WHAT, WHAT KIND OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WAS DONE AND, AND ACADEMY WAS CLOSED DURING SOME OF THAT? CAN YOU TALK TO THAT AND THEN SURE.
SO THE ORIGINAL TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE TAKEN IN 2020, UM, I THINK JULY OF 2020.
UM, AND IT DID, I THINK THAT IT WAS THE APPLICANT, ANOTHER CONSULTANT WHO BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION, THAT ACADEMY WAS CLOSED DURING THAT TIME.
UM, AND THEN WE HAD THEM GO AHEAD AND TAKE COUNTS ONCE THAT CONSTRUCTION ENDED, WHICH WAS IN MARCH OF 2024.
AND HOW, HOW WERE THOSE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN THAT? THE COUNTS, UM, THE, THE COUNCIL ARE TAKING IN 2020, THERE WEREN'T ANY COUNTS TAKEN ALONG THE ACADEMY BECAUSE THERE WEREN'T, IT WAS CLOSED.
AND IT JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD KNOW THIS OR NOT, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE AN OLD MAPS AND AERIAL PHOTOS ACADEMY USED TO CONNECT TO RIVERSIDE.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN, WHEN THAT CONNECTION WAS LOST? UM, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT.
UH, FINISHING A SNYDER, UH, JUST, UH, SOME MORE QUESTIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION STAFF.
UM, UH, THE, SOME, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES SEEM TO POINT OUT THAT THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE IN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING IS, UH,
[02:05:01]
COMPARED TO WHAT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS HE USED TO 10,000 SQUARE FOOT VERSUS THAT 17,000.HOW WAS THAT HANDLED? AND IS THAT SIGNIFICANT? OKAY.
DO YOU WANT ME TO TAKE THIS ONE? OH, MS. CLARK, IS THAT FOR YOU? SO, UM, MUSIC VENUE IS NOT AN ESTABLISHED LAND USE WITHIN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UM, AFTER SPEAKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WANTED TO USE FOR THE SPACE STAFF DETERMINED THAT COCKTAIL LOUNGE IS WHAT IT WOULD FALL UNDER IN OUR CURRENT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE 17,500 THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE C COCKTAIL LOUNGE BE LIMITED TO WOULD ENCOMPASS THE MUSIC VENUE, BUT IT WOULD ALSO ENCOMPASS THE MUSIC MUSEUM THAT WOULD BE OCCUPIED IN THAT SPACE.
OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO LIMIT IT TO THAT AMOUNT, BECAUSE THAT IS THE ORIGINAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR, UM, OPERA HOUSE ROOM AND NOT ALLOW IT BY RIGHT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CS ONE.
HOW, HOW IS, UM, YOU KNOW, MUSIC VENUES OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT THAN A RESTAURANT OR A COCKTAIL LOUNGE IN THAT EVERYBODY LEAVES AT THE SAME TIME? UM, SO HOW IS THAT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS? THAT ONE I'M GOING TO GIVE BACK TO NOZZLING? UM, YEAH, SO, UM, AS A GENTLEMAN POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS NO ITE LAND USE FOR A MUSIC VENUE.
AND SO, UM, WE ASKED THE CONSULTANT TO TAKE, UH, LOCAL COUNTS AT, UM, UH, COMPARABLE LAND USE.
SO WE, WE HAD THEM TAKE COUNTS AT EMOST ON RIVERSIDE.
UM, AND THAT, THAT TO US, ANY, ANYTHING THAT WILL GIVE US EVEN A COMPARABLE TRAFFIC DATA, UM, RATHER THAN USING ITE TRIPS OR ITE DATA IS DEFINITELY PREFERABLE.
UM, SO WE HAD THEM GO DOWN THAT ROUTE.
UM, S UH, SO QUESTION FOR, UM, MS. TOOPS, UM, I THINK EVERYBODY'S, YOU KNOW, I'M AT LEAST RECOGNIZING THIS IS A COMPLICATED CASE WITH DIFF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS.
THERE THERE'S ONE PIECE OF THIS, WHICH IS THE, UM, THE FAR FOR THE, LIKE THE, UM, THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION AND MAYBE NOT EXCLUSIVELY FOR THAT.
HAVE, HAVE YOU HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THINGS LIKE THAT ABOUT FLORIDA AREA RATIO AND WHETHER IT WILL BE ACCEPTABLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT MODIFY SOME OF THAT STUFF? I HAVEN'T HAD SPECIFIC CONVERSATIONS.
UM, MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION IS THEY ARE TOO LOW.
I WILL TELL YOU, WELL, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.
MY, MY TIME'S A LITTLE SHORT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE, UM, IT WASN'T A MUSIC VENUE BECAUSE AS HAS BEEN STATED TO NOT HAVE APPROACHED THAT IN THE TIA OF VENUE, THIS NATIONAL ACTS COULD GO TO THIS SIZE VENUE SO THAT IF, IF THIS PROPOSAL DIDN'T HAVE THE MUSIC VENUE IN IT, YES.
I THINK THERE'S NEGOTIATION TO BE HAD, UH, ABOUT INCREASING THE POSSIBLE
UM, I THINK THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF POTENTIALLY.
UM, I WASN'T WITH THE BACKUP MATERIAL THAT WAS PROVIDED, I WASN'T CLEAR, UM, OF WHAT THE SITE, HOW THE SITE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE DESIGNED.
SO I'M WONDERING IF, I DON'T KNOW IF MUSIC LANE IS A PRIVATE DRIVE OR IF, IF THAT'S A STREET THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE USED FOR ACCESS TO THIS SITE.
AND IF THERE'S A COMPROMISE TO MAYBE LOCATE THE, UH, A SMALLER MUSIC VENUE OVER ON THAT END, WHERE IT'S CLOSER TO THE HOTELS AND MUSIC LANE DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S ACCESSED OFF OF MUSIC LANE SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE DRIVING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT THE REST OF THE SITE SERVES AS A TRANSITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH MULTIFAMILY.
[02:10:01]
OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS LOOK TO BE, UM, GETTING INTO WHERE THOSE USES WOULD BE LOCATED, BUT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT AND, UM, HOW A MUSIC LANE COULD, OR COULDN'T BE USED AS ACCESS FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT.I ONLY HAVE MY ANTIQUATED PRINTED VERSION, SO I CAN'T ZOOM INTO AN AERIAL, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPERTY PHYSICALLY TOUCHES, UM, MUSIC LANE ENOUGH TO PROVIDE VEHICULAR ACCESS.
UM, I WOULD ASK THE APPLICANT OR NAUSEA TO CONFIRM THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WAS BEING OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH SPACE FOR, OR THAT IT PHYSICALLY TOUCHES THE MUSIC LANE.
THERE COULD BE EASEMENTS RIGHT TO, TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION HAPPEN.
UM, IF YOU COULD CALL UP OUR PRESENTATION, I THINK I CAN, I CAN WALK YOU THROUGH IT.
SO, UH, CURRENTLY, UM, 200 ACADEMY, YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING BUILDING IS NESTLED AMONG, UH, SIMILARLY SCARED SCALED, 60 FOOT BUILDINGS.
THE ONLY ACCESS IS THE DRIVE ON, UH, ACADEMY.
UH, THERE IS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, UM, THROUGHOUT THE SITE.
AND WE ARE PROPOSING IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT A SERIES OF PEDESTRIAN NETWORKS THAT WILL POTENTIALLY NOT ONLY TAKE YOU TO, UH, UH, CONGRESS, UH, AND MUSIC LANE, THERE'S ABOUT A FIVE FOOT EASEMENT RIGHT NOW, BUT UNFORTUNATELY TO THE LEFT AND TO THE RIGHT OF US IS COMPLETELY DEVELOPED NOW.
SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HAVE VEHICULAR, UM, ACCESS TO THE PARKING GARAGE ON A MUSIC LANE, BUT WE COULD DO RIDESHARE DROP-OFF ON MUSIC LANE AND ON SOUTH CONGRESS, OUR DRIVEWAY PER THE TIA IS DESIGNED SO THAT ONCE YOU EXIT THE PROPERTY, ITS RIGHT TURN ONLY, UH, NOT JUST A SIGN, THERE'S AN ACTUAL PHYSICAL CURB.
THAT MEANS THAT YOU CAN'T GO BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF YOU, UH, PULL INTO THE GARAGE AGAIN, THERE ARE NO SINGLE FAMILY, UH, UM, RESIDENTS, UH, FROM THE EDGE OF THE GARAGE, UH, TO, UH, CONGRESS AND, UH, THE WHERE MUSIC LANE IS, WHICH IS THAT, UH, OR WHERE, WHERE THE OPERA HOUSE WOULD BE, WHICH IS THAT RED ROOF, UH, WOULD BE, UH, DIVIDED FROM THE RESIDENTIAL, BY A PARK WHERE THERE'S, UH, CURRENTLY A, UH, A PARKING LOT REVERSE ENGINEERING, THE JONI MITCHELL SONG, UM, AND UNDERNEATH THAT PARK WOULD BE, UH, UNDERGROUND PARKING, UH, FOUR STORIES, WHICH AGAIN, UH, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF THAT GARAGE WITHOUT PASSING A, A SINGLE, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, UM, UH, REGARDING THE, THE, THE TIA, UH, WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A REVISED TIA AT SITE PLAN, UH, WITH THE EXACT NUMBER OF USES THE TIA.
IT WAS A CHALLENGE TO DO ONE, UH, DURING COVID, BUT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS ARE THE TRAFFIC COUNTS THAT WOULD BE GENERATED BY OUR USES.
AND, UH, WE BELIEVE THAT THE IMPACT ON THE, UH, ON THE LOCAL STREETS ARE, UH, MINIMAL.
AND THEN FINALLY REGARDING, UH, GARAGE ACCESS ON A, UM, A COLLECTOR STREET LIKE ACADEMY.
THE BEST EXAMPLE IS, UH, IF YOU LOOK ON THIS MAP, YOU'LL SEE THAT, UH, UM, LAMAR UNION, UH, IS ALMOST EXACTLY GEOGRAPHICALLY THE SAME SIZE, ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS ON, ON ACADEMY, INCLUDING THE STREET FRONTAGE THAT USED TO ALL BE ONE PARCEL THAT GOT CARVED UP INTO SEPARATE PARCELS.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE CS ONE USE AT, UH, LAMAR UNION IS CLOSER TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL THAN WE ARE.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE BLOWUP, YOU CAN SEE THAT IN ORDER TO ACCESS THE GARAGE FOR THE ALAMO DRAFTHOUSE IN HIGH BALL, WHICH IS A OVERALL OCCUPANCY LARGER THAN THE, UH, THAN THE OPERA HOUSE WILL BE.
UM, YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR AND PASS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
I THINK MY TIME'S UP, UM, MR. COPS, UM, I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS TO STAFF.
I, THIS IS AN INTERESTING CASE AND I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BY A LOT OF IT.
UH, SO APOLOGIES IF THESE QUESTIONS SOUND REALLY STUPID.
UM, SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE ZONING ENTITLEMENTS, AND THEY'RE ALSO REQUESTING TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
SO THE APPLICANT, UM, IS REQUESTING TO BE REMOVED FROM THE FAIRVIEW PARK NCCD.
IF THAT WAS, UH, GRANTED BY CITY
[02:15:01]
COUNCIL, THEN THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO WHATEVER BASED ZONING DISTRICT THEY HAVE.SO IT WOULD BE CS ONE AND U AND C S M U AND M F FOUR, WITHOUT THE OVERLAY OF THE NCCD, UH, IS THE ONLY THING WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY, THE REMOVAL OF THE NCCD? UH, NO IN THAT, UM, I KNOW IT IS, UM, IT IS COMPLICATED ON PAGE THREE.
IF YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT, I TRY TO CREATE A TABLE THAT SHOWED WHAT THE CURRENT SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PER THE NCCD ARE, WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING.
SHOULD THEY BE REMOVED FROM THE NCCD AND THEN WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AS WELL? UM, ARE WE, ARE, ARE WE CONTEMPLATING A CHANGE IN ZONING? UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ADDING M U TO THE BOTH TRACKS ONE AND TWO.
SO IT'D BE
AND WITH THAT, WE, UM, WE'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING A LIST OF PROHIBITED LAND USES AND CONDITIONAL LAND USES THAT, OR I APOLOGIZE, UM, SHARED ON ANOTHER PAGE, BUT I GUESS TO THE POINT OF MY QUESTION IS, UM, SO WE'RE CONTEMPLATING SOME ENTITLEMENT CHANGES, BUT I'M UNDERSTANDING FROM THE APPLICANT THAT NO MATTER WHAT ENTITLEMENT CHANGES WE MAKE, HE CAN'T DO ANYTHING UNDER THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
SO WHAT THE, THERE, THIS NCCD HAS BEEN AMENDED THREE TIMES SO FAR SINCE ITS CREATION, AND ALL OF THOSE TIMES WERE TO EITHER ADD PROPERTIES TO THE NCCD OR CHANGE THE ENTITLEMENTS ALLOWED AND THE USES ALLOWED.
SO INSTEAD OF REQUESTING A CHANGE IN ENTITLEMENTS AND USES ALLOWED IN THE NCC NCCD, THIS REQUEST IS SIMPLY TO BE REMOVED ENTIRELY CORRECT.
AND SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO CHANGE THE WHAT'S ALLOWED IN THE NCCD TO PERMIT WHAT THEY WOULD.
I, WHAT WE BELIEVE THEIR INTENT IS TO USE THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS A MUSIC VENUE, ALCOHOL SALES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
AND THEN THE MFR APARTMENTS, OR, UM, OUR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE EQUIVALENT TO THREE, NOT EMMA FOUR.
UM, CURRENTLY IT'S CLOSELY TIED TO MFS.
AND THEN FOR THE, UH, IF SHE'S STILL ON THE LINE FROM ATD, WAS THERE ANY ATTEMPT TO NORMALIZE TRAFFIC COUNTS, PRE PANDEMIC? CAUSE IT SOUNDED LIKE ALL THE TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE BEING TAKEN DURING THE PANDEMIC.
SO THERE WAS A COVID ADJUSTMENT FACTOR THAT WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE 20, 20 AND 2020 'CAUSE IT SOUNDED LIKE Y'ALL WERE TRYING TO TAKE REAL-WORLD COUNTS AT SIMILAR VENUES, WHICH IS GREAT.
THAT'S WAY MORE ACCURATE THAN USING JUST THE CODES AND FACTORS, BUT IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU DID THOSE DURING THE PANDEMIC WHEN NONE OF THOSE VENUES WERE ACTUALLY OPERATING.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN THE COUNTS WERE TAKEN FOR THE MUSIC VENUE.
UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS PRE PANDEMIC.
IT WAS DEFINITELY ONE, THERE WAS AN EVENT LIKE EMAILS.
AND THEN, UM, MY NEXT QUESTION, UH, I APOLOGIZE, MS. UM, NO, SORRY, NOT THE APPLICANT.
YOU HAD A LIVELY REACTION WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ACCESS TO, UM, I GUESS IT'S MUSIC LANE AND ACADEMY DRIVE.
OR, OR AT LEAST I HAD THE SAME QUESTION AS A PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER ABOUT WHY WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT SOME SORT OF JOINT USE AGREEMENT.
BUT, UM, I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOUR REACTION WAS TO THE APPLICANTS EXPLORATION.
AND HE, AS HE STATED, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM OR I'M NOT EVEN SURE ABOUT THE TYPOGRAPHY FOR THE HICKEY COLOR ACCESS TO MUSIC LANE BECAUSE THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WOULD BE A STAIRWAY.
I MEAN, THERE'S A, THERE'S A BIG TYPE OF GRAPHIC CHANGE THERE.
SO, UM, YEAH, BUT THE COMPARISON TO THE ALAMO DRAFT HOUSE AND THEIR GARAGE SITUATION THAT, DO YOU THINK THAT'S A FAIR COMPARISON? NO.
UH, BECAUSE SHE IMMEDIATELY COME OUT TO TREADWELL OR WHATEVER THE ROAD IS AND GO TO THE LIGHT.
SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO YOU, COME OUT AND YOU GO TO THE LIGHT AND GO EITHER NORTH OR SOUTH ON LAMAR, OUR ISSUE AND, AND YOU KNOW, I'M AN ENGINEER.
I KNOW YOU CAN TRY AND DESIGN THIS DRIVEWAY, WHICH WILL PROHIBIT LEFT TURNS.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS THE CUT-THROUGH FROM ACADEMY AT SOUTH CONGRESS GOES ALL THE WAY TO RIVERSIDE BY THAT, THAT NEW MOONING.
AND SO, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE CONCERN.
I WISH I HAD MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
I'M LOOKING AROUND IN THE ROOMS. UH,
[02:20:01]
COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONERS ARE, OR MR. CONLEY REEFERS.BUT FIRST I DON'T MIND GIVING A LITTLE BIT OF MY TIME TO FINISH YOUR QUESTION.
I'M VERY THIS, SO THIS IS COMPLICATED ME.
SO I'M VERY INTERESTED IN HEARING WHAT Y'ALL HAVE TO SAY.
UM, MY QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE, UH, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH ALAMO DRAFT HOUSE ON SOUND MITIGATION, CORRECT.
AND YOU'RE PLANNING FOR THIS SITE POTENTIALLY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH, WITH HOUSING ON IT AS WELL.
SO THAT WOULD BE A HIGH PRIORITY FOR YOU.
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT THAT SOUND MITIGATION IS.
SO THE HIGH BALL IS, UH, DIRECTLY BELOW, UH, APARTMENTS AND, UH, ADJACENT TO, AND SO WE DO WHAT'S, UH, WHAT'S CALLED A ACOUSTIC SLAB THAT HAS, UH, FOUR LIKE FOUR INCHES OF CONCRETE AND ACOUSTIC MAT.
AND THEN ANOTHER SEVEN INCHES OF CONCRETE.
UH, WE WILL CERTAINLY USE ACOUSTIC ENGINEERS BECAUSE TO OUR POINT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO CREATE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
WE WANT RESIDENTS HERE IT'S DESPERATELY NEEDED IN THIS AREA.
UH, WE WANT TO CREATE A COMMUNITY THAT, UH, DESPITE CURRENT OPPOSITION THAT WHEN THIS IS BUILT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD FEELS LIKE IT DOES BELONG.
AND, UH, SIMILAR TO THE ALAMO DRAFTHOUSE, I USED TO LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, AND I USED TO LIVE IN TRAVIS HEIGHTS AND, UM, WE, UH, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ENGINEERING PROBLEMS THAT ARE EASILY SOLVABLE AND, UH, TO THE BETTERMENT OF NOT ONLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THE NEW COMMUNITY, THAT'S GOING TO DEVELOP IT 200 ACADEMY.
AND, UH, ONE MORE QUESTION TO THE RESIDENTS AT THE CURRENT LOCATION WITH THE HIGH BALL AND THE DRAFT HOUSE.
ARE, DO YOU GUYS HAVE ISSUES WITH THE SALE OF LIQUOR OR THE SITES? DO THOSE HAVE THOSE CREATED PROBLEMS FOR THE RESIDENTS ON YOUR LOCATIONS? UH, NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT IS A MUCH LARGER, UH, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAN WE ARE PROPOSING, BUT IT'S SIMILAR IN THAT, UH, THE ALAMO BUILDING, UH, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED IN 2004 AND THEN RENOVATED IN 2014 IS A LITTLE BIT OF A STANDALONE BUILDING THAT THEN IS ATTACHED, UH, TO SINGLE-FAMILY OR TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
IT'S A VERY GOOD COMPARISON FOR US BECAUSE GEOGRAPHICALLY, UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, BOTH THE GEOGRAPHY IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THE WAY IT'S ACCESSED, UH, FROM, UH, A, UH, A RESIDENTIAL STREET, UH, UH, THE DIFFERENCES ARE THAT, UH, WE ARE GOING TO PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN NETWORK THAT IS REALLY GOING TO DRIVE, UH, BOTH PEDESTRIANS AND CARS, UH, TO ACADEMY.
UH, YOU KNOW, YES, YOU MAY BE ABLE TO HOP A CURVE.
MAYBE WE HAVE TO BUILD A WALL THERE THAT JUST FORCES YOU TO GO TO ACADEMY.
UH, WE BELIEVE THAT THAT'S THE CORRECT SOLUTION.
SO WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO, TO MINIMIZE TRAFFIC, UH, WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND JUST ONE LAST QUESTION ABOUT THE MUSIC VENUE BEING PROPOSED, WHAT SIZE ARE THERE, IS THERE MORE DETAILS ABOUT WHAT SIZE OF VENUE, HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU EXPECT IT COULD ACCOMMODATE? SO THE ORIGINAL OPERA HOUSE WAS, UH, ABOUT 42,000 SQUARE FEET.
IT WAS THE ENTIRE BUILDING AND IT WAS BROKEN UP INTO THE MAIN BALLROOM.
AND THEN THERE WERE SEPARATE, UH, SMALLER VENUES WITHIN IT AND REHEARSAL SPACES.
AND WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT, THAT ORIGINAL VENUE, THE 17,500 SQUARE FOOT.
IT WON'T ALL BE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MAIN BALLROOM THERE'LL BE A LOBBY, WHICH WE'RE CONTEMPLATING, UH, BEING THE, THE AUSTIN MUSIC MUSEUM SO THAT THIS VENUE IS NOT JUST A NIGHTTIME VENUES.
SO THAT TRAVELERS, WHEN THEY COME TO AUSTIN WILL WANT TO VISIT THAT AND UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF MUSIC, WHICH LITERALLY TOOK PLACE IN THAT BUILDING.
UM, AND IS THE REASON WHY I'M HERE? I GREW UP IN MIAMI, HEARD LIVE ALIVE BY STEVIE RAY VAUGHAN AND SAID, I'M MOVING AUSTIN.
AND I'VE BEEN HERE EVER SINCE.
UM, THE, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, SO THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THAT BE A USE THAT IS USED, UH, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THE DAY AND AN AMENITY AS IT'S BEEN SINCE THE SIXTIES, THAT BUILDING, SINCE THE SIXTIES HAS BEEN A COMMUNITY AMENITY UNTIL IT WAS SHUT DOWN IN, UH, 1992 AND THEN, UH, HAS LAID FALLOW FOR THE LAST.
SO IF YOU WERE TO HAVE LIKE A ROUGH S YEAH.
SO, SO IN TERMS OF OCCUPANCY, YES.
UM, SO, UH, THE AUSTIN MUSIC COMMISSION, UH, DOES, UH, A MUSIC CENSUS, UH, ONE OF THE, UM, AREAS THAT THAT'S COMPLETELY VOID IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS THERE IS NO INDOOR VENUE THAT IS BETWEEN 800 AND 1200 SQUARE FEET, UH, UH, OCCUPANCY.
UH, WE WOULD ENVISION THAT FOR STANDING ROOM.
AND THEN IF WE WERE TO HAVE AN EVENT WITH SEATS, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE, YOU KNOW, HALF THAT, UH, BUT, BUT, UH, THAT IS SMALLER THAN THE ORIGINAL OPERA HOUSE OCCUPANCY WAS.
UH, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY NEEDS.
AND, UH, UM, WE, WE, WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO BETTER LOCATION THAN, THAN WHERE THAN, THAN THE REASON WHY WE'RE THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL.
SO WITH THAT, THAT KIND OF OCCUPANCY NUMBER, YOU COULDN'T EXACTLY HAVE A SHOW FOR VERY LARGE POP BAND, NATIONAL
[02:25:01]
POP BAND OR SOMETHING.SO THE NATIONAL ACT WOULD GO EITHER TO STUBB'S OUTDOOR OR TO ACL, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A VOID RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE PLENTY OF CLUBS THAT ARE 400 OCCUPANCY.
THERE'S NOTHING IN THE MIDDLE.
UM, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
YOU JUST EARLIER MENTIONED IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER FOX, IF YOUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE SOMETHING SIMILAR OR WOULD BE THREE, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO, WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT? UM, SO RIGHT NOW, THE, THE ZONING BASED DISTRICT IS MFR WITH THE NCCD, UM, RESTRICTIONS.
IT'S MORE, MOST EQUIVALENT TO MF TWO.
SO STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING AND WHAT WOULD BE EQUIVALENT TO MP3.
SO WITH THAT, IT WOULD BE LIMITING THE UNITS PER ACRE TO 36.
AND THEN ALSO WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, WE WOULD SPECIFICALLY WRITE OUT THE, UM, THE MINIMUM SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS, NETS FOR THE EACH DWELLING, WHATEVER IS THE MF THREE STANDARD FOR, FOR THOSE UNITS.
AND CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO WHY
UM, CURRENTLY THE SITE ALLOWS FOR EQUIVALENT OF MF.
TWO STAFF FELT THAT MP3 WAS STILL COMPATIBLE WITH THIS SINGLE FAMILY ACROSS THE STREET TO MYSOLINE.
IT WOULD ALSO PROVIDE A TRANSITION TO IF THEY SEE US MEU WAS APPROVED BETWEEN, UM, THE SINGLE FAMILY AND THE CS, AND THEN FURTHER ONTO SOUTH CONGRESS.
UM, THE, WE FELT THAT AN A FOUR BASED ZONING DISTRICT WAS TOO INTENSE AT THIS LOCATION, BUT THAT IT COULD BE INCREASED A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT IT CURRENTLY ALLOWS FOR.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, FOLLOWING THE TOP, WE DO HAVE EMMA FOR NEXT TO SINGLE FAMILY IN A LOT OF PARTS OF DOWN.
WHAT MAKES THIS LOCATION UNIQUE? UM, WE, IT WAS MOSTLY TRYING TO FIND THE TRANSITION BETWEEN THE, THE CS STONING THAT WOULD BE TO THE WEST.
UM, C S M U WOULD BE MOST EQUIVALENT TO EMMA FOR, AND IN THAT CASE, THERE WOULDN'T BE, UM, A GRADUAL, UH, CHANGE IN INTENSITY BETWEEN THE LAND USES STEPPING DOWN, AND WE FELT THIS CREATED A BETTER ZONING PATTERN WITH, UH, THE LAND USES.
AND THEN EARLIER YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE, WE HAVE CHANGED THE ENTITLEMENTS UNDER NCCD.
IS CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT THESE ENTITLEMENT CHANGES HAVE LOOKED LIKE IN THE PAST? UM, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST, UM, WAS REZONED IN, UM, I'M TRYING TO PULL THAT ONE OUT WAS REZONED, UH, TO, IT WAS A CS CASE AND IT WAS REZONED TO INCREASE THE ENTITLEMENTS AS WELL.
UM, THAT PROPERTY WAS SUBJECT TO THE NCCD, THE HEIGHTS ON THAT PROPERTY VARY BETWEEN 40 FEET AND 85 FEET, UM, BROKEN UP BY VARIOUS TRACKS.
AND THAT'S THE ONE IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.
AND SO, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU PLEASE LET A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE CHANGES? LIKE, LET'S SAY A HIGH AS AN EXAMPLE, I'M SURE THERE WAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT ENTITLEMENT PIECES THAT WERE CHANGED.
UM, SORRY, I'M TRYING TO FIND THAT ONE.
SO THE ZONING STAYED THE SAME.
UM, THE, UM, THEY WERE ALLOWED TO INCUR, THEY WERE ALLOWED LIQUOR SALES AS PROHIBITED.
UM, LIQUOR SALES USE WAS PROHIBITED ON THE PROPERTY HOTEL MOTEL AND CONDOMINIUM REESE.
UH, RESIDENTIAL USES WERE ALLOWED RESTAURANT COCKTAIL, LOUNGE, INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT WERE PERMITTED AS ACCESSORY USES THEIR IMPERVIOUS COVER WAS INCREASED TO 65%.
AND THEN THE BUILDING COVERAGE WAS INCREASED, UM, WAS SET AT 50%.
AND THEN THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT BASED ON VARIOUS AREAS WITHIN THAT TRACK WERE RANGING BETWEEN 35 AND 80 FEET ACTUALLY FOR FURTHER ORDINANCE.
SO IT WAS ADDITIONAL USES, UM, SPECIFICALLY RESTAURANT GENERAL COCKTAIL LOUNGE, INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT.
UM, YEAH, THAT, THAT'S HOW I GUESS.
AND IF THE AFRICAN WAS TO GO TO THAT, WOULD
[02:30:01]
THEY HAVE TO WITHDRAW AND START THE GEESE IN YOU? NO.SO WE PROVIDED STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UM, AT THIS POINT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD DO, UM, THEY COULD ALSO RECOMMEND THE CS ONE, M U N C C D N P FOR TRACK ONE AND LIST A SEPARATE, A SEPARATE SET OF USES TO BE PROHIBITED THAN WHAT STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING.
UM, SAME THING WITH TRACK TWO AND TRACK THREE.
WE HAVE TWO MORE RESPONSE, REAL QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I, WELL, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
LET ME GO AND TAKE A SPOT HERE.
SO, UH, JUST CLARIFY WHAT I HEARD, I GUESS, UM, WHAT I SAW AND IS IT, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR STAFF, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE, UM, IT'S A CONDITIONAL LAND USE, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR
UM, AND WHERE DID THE 17 FIVE, IS THAT IN THE CODE OR IS NO, THAT IS, UM, AFTER TALKING WITH THE APPLICANT, THE 17 FIVE IS THE ORIGINAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BALLROOM.
AND I HEARD TO CLARIFY, I THINK I HEARD THAT EIGHT THERE'S A LOT BEING DATA BEING THROWN AT 800 OCCUPANCY WAS THE NUMBER FOR THE VENUE.
UM, AND WE CAN FIRST STAFF, WE CAN, CAN WE LEAVE, UM, IN EMOTIONS WE PRESENT TODAY, CAN WE LEAVE PART SOME OF THE TRACKS IN THE NCCD AND RECOMMEND THAT OTHERS BE REMOVED? IS THAT, OR IS IT ALL OR NOTHING? YOU COULD RECOMMEND THAT.
THE, UM, ZONING APPLICATION WAS NOTICED FOR REMOVAL FOR ALL THREE TRUCKS.
AND SO YOU'D BE ABLE TO RECOMMEND, UM, AT THE MOST C S M U N P FOR TRACT ONE, C S N U N P FOR TRACK TWO AND FOUR NP FOR TRACK THREE.
UM, SO, BUT WE COULD ALSO, WE COULD ALSO GO WITH THE APPLICANT REQUESTS AS WELL, RIGHT? YES.
DO THAT IS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
UM, TO COMPLICATE THINGS A LITTLE BIT, YOU COULD ALSO DO THAT WITH REMOVAL, WITH A CEO TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN LAND USES IF YOU WANTED.
SO WHAT WOULD BE IF YOU REMOVE, UM, COCKTAIL LOUNGES THAT IS JUST REMOVING THE DASH ONE FROM THE SUMMONING, CORRECT.
THAT'S NOT A NEW CLASSIFICATION.
UH, IT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
I MEAN, TO GO FROM CS ONE TO SEE US WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING WE CAN MAKE GOOD FOR TRACT ONE.
YOU COULD GO FROM
YOU COULD NOT UPSOLD TRACK TWO THAT IS CURRENTLY
AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS WHAT, I'M SORRY.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT LIKE SQUARE FOOTAGE OR JUST THE ALCOHOL SALES SPECIFICALLY? ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER MINISTER, TODDLER.
I'M LOOKING AT THE AERIAL ON THIS.
I GUESS I HAVE SOME STAFF QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR ANSWERING ALL THESE QUESTIONS.
UM, IF I'M LOOKING AT THIS THERE'S, IF I'M LOOKING AT THIS CORRECTLY, AND I'M WONDERING IF WE HAVE A SLIDE THAT LAYS OUT THESE TRACKS WITH THE ROADWAYS SO WE CAN SEE THOSE, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S ANY POSSIBILITY TO CONNECT TO CONGRESS DIRECTLY TO THESE THREE TRACKS.
MY UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY, CORRECT? YES.
THERE IS EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, UH, TO THE WEST OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW YOU TO DIRECTLY ACCESS SOUTH CONGRESS.
THROUGH VEHICULAR ACCESS, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, IF THIS WORKED, IT WOULD BE REZONED WITH HIGHER MF DENSE HOUSING.
THEN THE CITY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AT THE CURRENT, WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE ACCEPTABLE? I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS
[02:35:01]
BECAUSE WE, WE HIT A STOPPING POINT, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY.THERE IS, THERE IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT MF HOUSING ALONG THERE.
NOW WE ALSO HAVE THE TEXAS SCHOOL FOR THE DEAF IN THE AREA AS WELL.
AND, AND YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN COMFORTABLE WITH BRINGING IN HOUSING AND DENSER HOUSING BASED A BIT ON THAT TOPOGRAPHY THAT DOES NOT SEEM TO BE A PROBLEM.
UH, THE ANSWER IS I BELIEVE YES, THAT WE WOULD DISCUSS THE HIGHER RESIDENTIAL.
OUR OBJECTION IS THE MUSIC VENUE.
SO THAT WAS JUST THAT'S THE IMPASSE.
AND THEN, UM, I, I DO APPRECIATE ALSO, UM, ATD BEING PRESENT.
AND SO I HAVE TO USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, I THINK IT'S VERY HARD FOR US TO DO OUR JOBS COMPLETELY ON THESE CASES, WITHOUT THE TRAFFIC STUDIES COMING INTO THEM.
I KNOW SOME OF THEM, WE, WE DON'T HAVE THEM AND THEY'RE GOING TO GO, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAPPEN UNTIL AFTER WE'VE MADE A DECISION AND THEY GO TO SITE PLANNING.
AND I JUST GIVING THE FEEDBACK TO STAFF THAT I, I FIND THAT VERY DIFFICULT TO DO MY JOB IN A MEANINGFUL WAY WHEN WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
I ALSO HAVE TO SAY, I THINK THE WAY THIS TRAFFIC STUDY WAS DONE WAS REALLY, UH, DISAPPOINTING.
UM, THERE'S NO WAY TO POTENTIALLY RUN A GOOD TRAFFIC STUDY WHEN EVERYBODY WAS IN SHELTER.
IN, IN MARCH OF 2020, YOU HAD SCHOOLS CLOSED, YOU HAD PEOPLE STAYING HOME IN THE COMPARISONS THAT YOU GUYS PULLED.
I PULLED THEM UP ON THE AERIALS.
I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT EVEN LEGITIMATE COMPARISONS.
UM, SO MY, MY THOUGHT IS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE OF THESE COME WITH THESE, YOU KNOW, APPLICATIONS BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE TRANSITION AREAS AND THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT TO ANY NEIGHBORHOOD, NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE.
THANK YOU FOR THE HELP COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I THINK WE ARE, WE'RE OUT OF QUESTIONS.
SO I, UM, WE'VE USED UP ALL OUR QUESTIONS, I THINK.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS WITH A MOTION? OH, YES.
UH, LET'S GO INTO FLOODS, PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONER.
YES, WE'RE ALREADY IN Q AND A DON'T ME OUT THERE.
UH, SO WITH THAT, WE HAVE A, UH, LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM.
WHAT WAS YOUR THOMPSON? WERE YOU THE FIRST ONE WITH YOUR HAND UP? OKAY.
UM, I, I MOVE APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE, ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF, OF THE CSU USE OF MAYBE SAY 1750.
DID I HEAR AND, OR 17 5 17, 500.
UM, AND, UH, AN OCCUPANCY LIMIT OF SAY 800.
MR. THOMPSON, YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR EMOTION? YEAH, THE, THE LAST CASE WE HAD, I HAD A REALLY HARD TIME SUPPORTING THAT.
UM, I DID END UP VOTING FOR IT, BUT I WAS REALLY CHALLENGED BECAUSE WE'RE ASKING TO PUT DENSITY ON, YOU KNOW, SORT OF WHERE THERE'S NO TRANSIT WHERE IT'S SORT OF SURROUNDED BY LOW DENSITY FOR THE MOST PART IT'S ON, YOU KNOW,
UM, AND HERE, IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S VERY EASY.
WE'RE ASKING TO PUT DENSITY ON A CENSUS TRACT THAT IS ADJACENT TO DOWNTOWN.
IT'S A CENSUS TRACT THAT ACTUALLY LOST POPULATION IN THE LAST CENSUS.
THE LAST 10 YEARS, THERE WERE FEWER PEOPLE LIVING THERE TODAY THAN THERE WERE 10 YEARS AGO.
AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS AT A TIME WHEN THE CITY IS, HAS GROWN 26% OR THAT THE COUNTY HAS GROWN 26% IN THAT TIME.
SO, YOU KNOW, ELSEWHERE IS TAKING THE BRUNT OF THIS.
IT SEEMS LIKE THIS NCCD IS ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, FROM 40 YEARS AGO, IT IS NOT, NOT CONSERVING THE USE OF WHAT, WHAT THE PROPERTY WAS BEFORE, BUT IS ACTUALLY SORT OF DENYING THE USE AND PRIVATIZING THIS SORT OF GREEN SPACE IN THE CITY,
[02:40:01]
INSTEAD OF ALLOWING IT TO GROW AND BE PART OF, YOU KNOW, THE MOST DYNAMIC CITY IN THE COUNTRY, AS I SEE IT.AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN I FIRST CAME TO AUSTIN 40 YEARS AGO, IT WAS A VERY, VERY FAST GROWING CITY.
IT HAD BEEN THE FASTEST GROWING CITY, ALL MY LIFE.
IT'S STILL ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING CITIES IN THE COUNTRY.
AND TO SORT OF SAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT.
AND YET WE'RE STILL GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, OF THE THINGS THAT THE CITY HAS DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT TO ME.
UM, AND SO I, I COMPLETELY SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT THIS IS A VENUE I SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE MUSIC COMMISSION SAID.
THAT FIRST TIME I CAME TO AUSTIN 40 YEARS AGO WAS TO SEE A SHOW AT THE AUSTIN OPERA HOUSE.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S WHAT MAKES THE CITY GREAT.
AND WE NEED THE HOUSING THERE IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, ON TO, WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF, YOU KNOW, TWO NEW TRANSIT LINES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO INVEST IN.
AND THIS IS WHERE WE SHOULD BE BUILDING OUR, OUR, OUR WORKPLACES, OUR OFFICES, OUR HOUSES, AND OUR ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
SO COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE A EFFICATION QUESTION THIS MIGHT APPLY TO YOU? CAN STAFF HELP US FIGURE OUT, DO WE ALSO NEED TO, WHATEVER EMOTION WE MAKE, DO WE ALSO NEED TO INCLUDE A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS? SO, YES.
SO I GUESS, UM, WE'LL GET TO THE BASE MOTION.
WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE BASE MOTION? YOU HAVE A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON THE, UM, IT'S LISTED WITH THE, UH, YOU SAID TODAY, UH, READS OF COVENANT.
THAT INCLUDES ALL RECOMMENDATIONS LISTED IN THE TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEMO DATED MAY 21ST, 2021.
IT WAS PROVIDED IN EXHIBIT D T I MENU.
ARE YOU ASKING IT THAT, ASKING FOR THAT CLARIFICATION? THAT INCLUDED, YES.
AND I'M SORRY, I WOULD ASSUME THIS ALSO APPLIES TO THE SUBSTITUTE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
SO, UH, THIS I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I'LL GO AND READ IT, SEE IF I CAN GET A SECOND ON IT.
UM, SUBSTITUTE MOTION WOULD BE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR TROUT ONE, AND I NEED A CLARIFICATION WHERE, WHICH TRACKS WAS THE MUSIC VENUE LOCATED? TRY ONE, OR TRY TO TRY ONE, ONE.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE A LIMIT ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 8,000 SQUARE FEET.
UH, I THINK THAT CUTS, UH, THE OCCUPANCY DOWN AROUND 400, UH, I'M GUESSING, UH, WHICH I THINK IS I WAS LOOKING UP A LOT OF MUSIC VENUES.
IT'S A LITTLE, IT'S TWICE AS BIG AS THE CONTINENTAL CLUB, BUT SO I THINK IT STILL AFFORD SOME SIZABLE VENUE WITHOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY IT'S A BALANCE.
AND, UH, I WENT TO THE, UM, UM, THE TERRORISTS AT THE TIME AND THE SNIPER HOUSE.
AND I CAN TELL YOU, THERE IS A LOT OF TRASH THERE'S LONG LINES TO GET OUT.
AND I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
SO TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF MEDIUM, UH, UH, POINT BECAUSE I DO SUPPORT MUSIC.
I THINK WE NEED MORE LOCATIONS.
UH, SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE A GOOD BALANCE.
SO WITH THAT TRACK ONE, UH, AND I AM SPEAKING TO MY MOTION.
UM, SO ATTRACT ONE, WE WILL 8,000 SQUARE FEET AND, UH, WOULD BE THE LIMIT ON THE CONDITIONAL USE TRACK.
TWO WOULD BE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, TRACK THREE WOULD BE, UH, THE APPLICANTS REQUEST FOR FOUR.
SO I'M NOT GONNA INCLUDE THAT IN THE NC CD.
SO, UH
SO, UH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS CLEAR, BUT, UH, LOOKING FOR A SECOND.
I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN? YES.
UH, SO THE TRACT ONE WOULD BE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR CS ONE, M U N C D D N P A WITH THE LIMIT ON THE MUSIC VENUE AT 8,000 SQUARE FEET, TRENT, TO, UM, WELL, LET'S SEE, THAT'D BE THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE USE WOULD BE LIMITED TO 8,000 SQUARE FEET UNDER THE CONDITIONAL USE.
UH, TRY TO, IT'D BE C S M U N C D D N P, THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN TRACK THREE WOULD BE THE APPLICANTS RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS TO REMOVE THE, UH, AND CDD AND JUST HAVE AN MF FOR, UM, LET ME READ THAT MFA FOR NP AND ALSO INCLUDING THE
[02:45:01]
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AS IT LISTED IN THE MEMO DATED MAY 21ST CLARIFYING QUESTION.UM, SO WITH THE VENUE SIZE SHRINKING BY HALF, DOES THE REST, CAN THAT REST OF THAT BE HOUSING SINCE IT'S MIXED USE KNOWING THE NUMBER OF UNITS POTENTIALLY? UM, YEAH, I'D LIKE TO, BEFORE VOTING ON IT, UNDERSTAND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WITH THE, WITH THAT SHRINKING? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, UH, THAT, UH, EVEN IF YOU INCLUDE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UH, FOR THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SAYS, IF ANY OF THE PARAMETERS CHANGE IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF UNITS OR SQUARE FOOTAGE, WE ANTICIPATED 60,000 SQUARE FOOT OF OFFICE AND THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE BEFORE COVID HOUSING IS A MUCH MORE VALUABLE USE GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T HAVE ANY HOUSING, IT'S ALL OFFICE OFFICE.
SO WE ARE GOING TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS ANYWAY.
SO, SO, UH, YOU KNOW, THE EASIEST THING WOULD BE NOT TO INCLUDE THIS CURRENT TIA IN AS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, AND KNOWING THAT THERE HAS TO BE ONE AT SITE PLAN, UH, BUT, UM, IT'S A GRAY AREA AS TO WHAT YOU CAN DO SPECIFICALLY.
UH, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU CAN SUBMIT A NEW TIA WITH NEW PARAMETERS AT SITE PLAN THAT WILL, UH, BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THESE ZONING AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN IN CASE.
SO ANY MORE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR A SECOND CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LIAISON, AND PLEASE INCLUDE THE NPA.
THE NPA WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE, UH, YES, THAT IS FOR MY MOTION, MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
THAT'S A CLARIFYING QUESTION ABOUT THE OTHER PARTS OF THE NCCD IN TERMS OF THE FAR AND THE, THE HEIGHT LIMITS YOU'RE STICKING WITH WHAT WHAT'S IN THE NCCD.
YEAH, IT WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMEND.
WELL, NO, IT'S STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH ALLOWS FOR GREATER FAR AND GREATER, UH, DENSITY.
UH, IF WE LOOK AT THE TABLE, UH, THAT WAS PRESENTED BY STAFF, IT DOES ALLOW FOR INCREASES OVER THE CURRENT NCDD.
SO IS THAT A SECOND HERE? SNYDER.
SO, UM, AGAIN, I SPOKE TO THIS ALREADY AND MAKING THE MOTION, BUT I THINK, UM, I BEING A, UH, LOCAL MUSIC FAN AND DO REALIZE THAT WE NEED MORE VENUES, BUT ALSO TRYING TO BALANCE THAT WITH THE NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK THE, THE SIZE OF THE VENUE WAS JUST WAY TOO LARGE.
WHEN I LOOKED AT OTHER VENUES OF COMPARABLE SIZE THROUGHOUT THE CITY, IT'S REALLY NOT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THAT SIZE VENUE.
I DO APPRECIATE THE HISTORIC RELEVANCE.
AND I, LIKE I SAID, I DO THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THAT AREA, BUT IT'S JUST MUCH TOO LARGE OF A VENUE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE.
AND I DO APPRECIATE WHAT STAFF HAS DONE IN TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL OF THE MIXED USE, UM, TO THE ZONING.
AND THEN LASTLY WITH THE NEED FOR HOUSING, UH, YOU KNOW, LET'S DO AWAY WITH THE CAP ON, YOU KNOW, LIMIT THE NUMBER OF HOUSING THERE.
I THINK IT'D BE A GREAT PLACE FOR HIM HAVING MORE, UH, UNITS.
AND SO REMOVING THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE NCDD ON THE
SO THAT'S WHY I'M PROPOSING THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
ANY SPEAKERS AGAINST A FINISHER CONLON SURE.
COMMISSION, RIGHT BEFORE YOU GO INTO THAT DEBATE, IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THE NPA IS THE APPLICANT OR A STAFF, THE MCA IT'S, IS THERE A DIFFERENCE MIXED USE OFFICE TO MIX THESE MIX, THESE, UH, WHAT IS IT, STAFF, COULD YOU POINT OUT THE DOOR? SO THE, THE DIFFERENCES, UM, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR MIXED JUICE ON THE BALANCE, UH, SORRY.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT TRACT REAL QUICK.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT TRACK THREE, WHERE THERE CURRENTLY IS THE
[02:50:01]
USE OFFICE.WHEREAS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT, THAT, UH, GO FROM MIXED USE OFFICE TO MIXED USE.
AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT TRACK ONE GO FROM MIXED USE OFFICE TO MIXED USE.
SO THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR MIXED USE ON EVERYTHING EXCEPT, YEP.
UM, YES, I WILL SUPPORT THE APPLICANT.
UM, IT'LL BE THE NPA AS RECOMMENDED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION, WHAT I MEAN, OTHER THAN THE VENUE SIZE, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND MINE THAT KEEPS THE NCCP THERE AND WHAT'S, I MEAN, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE.
JUST SEEING SOME OF THE LIMITS ON THE, UM, ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, ON THE CSME.
WELL, THERE'S DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BE REMOVED VERSUS WHAT STEPS WOULD THE ADDITION TO THE MEU TO THE ZONING WHEN IT ALLOWS JUST LOOKING AT THE TABLE AGAIN, I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD BALANCE BETWEEN WHAT THE REQUESTS AND WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO LET'S, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET BACK ON TRACK HERE, FOLKS.
SO I CLARIFIED THE MTA, UH, WITH THE, MY MOTION IS TO GO WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR THE MTA.
SO, UM, WITH THAT SPEAKERS AGAINST, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE WERE.
SO I WOULD LIKE US TO GO WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S REALLY MISSING RIGHT NOW IN AUSTIN'S MUSIC SCENE AND FOR, FOR LOCAL BANDS TO HAVE A VENUE RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE HAVE ARE VENUES THAT ARE VERY LARGE.
WE HAVE LOTS OF VERY LARGE VENDORS THAT SERVE VERY LARGE SCALE NATIONAL ACTS.
SO FOR LOCAL BANDS THAT ARE TRYING TO MAKE A LIVING THE LACK OF THAT MIDDLE SIZED VENUE, WHERE YOU CAN BRING OUT A DECENT ENOUGH CROWD THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME MONEY FOR THE VENUE AND THEN THERE'S SOME MONEY FOR THE BAND AND EVERYONE GOES HOME AND MAKES ENOUGH TO LIKE PAY THEIR RENT.
THOSE ARE THE SPACES THAT ARE INCREDIBLY HARD TO FIND IN THIS TOWN RIGHT NOW.
SO WE'RE STARVING OUT OUR LOCAL MUSIC SCENE OF DECENT VENUES THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE, WHERE YOU CAN PULL OFF AN ACT LIKE THAT.
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT IF WE RESTRICT THE SIZE OF THE VENUE TOO MUCH, THEN WE LOSE THIS BEAUTIFUL OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD CREATE OPPORTUNITY FOR LOCAL BANDS.
THE OTHER PIECE IS THAT THE ORIGINAL BALLROOM DIDN'T HAVE THE KIND OF ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY THAT WE NOW HAVE.
IF YOU GO TO THE HIGH BALL, YOU KNOW, GO OUT THERE ONE NIGHT, THERE CAN BE A BAND RAGING INSIDE.
AND IF YOU STEP OUTSIDE, IT'S SURPRISINGLY QUIET.
AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT BEING PROPOSED AS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE, IT IS IN THE DEVELOPERS INTERESTS TO KEEP THINGS QUIET, CLEAN, ORDERLY PEOPLE.
AREN'T GOING TO WANT TO BUY APARTMENTS.
IF THERE'S TRASH THROWN ALL OVER THE FLOOR, LIKE THIS IS A DIFFERENT, THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT PROJECT.
SO WHILE IT PRESERVES A LOT OF THE SPIRIT OF THE ORIGINAL VENUE WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED REALLY WOULD BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL BALLROOM IN A NUMBER OF KEY WAYS.
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT TO REDUCE THE SIZE A LITTLE BIT, LET'S NOT REDUCE THE SIZE SO MUCH TO THE POINT WHERE WE JUST, WE LOSE THE CAPACITY TO SERVE THAT MIDDLE NEED IN AUSTIN'S MUSIC SCENE.
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK WE SHOULD GO WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
UH, SPEAKERS FOR THE SUB-STATE MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
UM, WHAT THE INTENT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS, AND, UM, UM, UH, UH, UM, I'M A FAN OF THAT.
UH, BUT I, I ALSO WENT TO THE, UM, OPERA HOUSE BACK IN THE DAY AND THE SUBSEQUENT INCARNATIONS.
AND, UH, IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, CONGRESS HAS CHANGED A LOT.
WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS TO DEAL WITH IS THE SINGLE, RELATIVELY SMALL ROAD ACADEMY THAT GOES IN AND OUT.
UM, IF THERE HAD BEEN A WAY TO, FOR EGRESS ONTO CONGRESS, I THINK WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.
IT WOULD'VE ALL BEEN GREEN-LIGHTED, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO MODESTLY SHRINK THE SIZE OF THE VENUE.
SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A, A FAIR COMPROMISE.
UH, IT DOES STILL ALLOW FOR A RELATIVELY MODERATE SIZE OF VENUE, WHICH I THINK WILL CONTINUE TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS THAT A LOT OF US, UH, ARE INTERESTED IN, WHICH IS PERFORMANCE SPACE.
UM, IT ALSO MAY PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR HOUSING, WHICH I KNOW WE ALL ARE IN AGREEMENT ABOUT.
I DO APPRECIATE THE NEIGHBORHOODS WILLINGNESS TO DISCUSS CHANGES TO THE FAA, OURS.
UM, I THINK THAT IN THE NCCD, THEY ARE TOO MODEST AND IN THIS PROPOSAL
[02:55:01]
THEY'LL GO UP.UH, SO OVERALL I THINK THIS IS, THIS IS A GOOD MIDDLE GROUND AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.
UH, WHAT, UH, WITH WHAT I HOPE IS ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT, UH, BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.
I'M LOOKING AT, I'M TRYING TO LOOK HERE AND I DON'T WANT TO IGNORE MY FOLKS, UH, THAT ARE IN THE VIRTUAL SPACE.
SO DO WE HAVE, UH, SPEAKERS, UM, AGAINST THIS MOTION? UH, I'D SAY COMMISSIONER COPPS RECOGNIZE YOU.
I AM, UH, I'M INCLINED TO EITHER VOTE AGAINST OR ABSTAIN ON THE SUBSTITUTE AND THE ORIGINAL PRIMARILY, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAME TO US AND SAID, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO SEE DEVELOPMENT HERE.
UM, BUT WE DO HAVE SOME VERY, UH, SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO US.
AND THAT WAS DRUNKEN PEOPLE, TRASH NOISE, AND TRAFFIC, UM, AND SHRINKING THE VENUE DOES HELP SOME OF THAT.
BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE IS A SOLUTION THERE TO GET THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WANT TO SEE, BUT ALSO ADDRESS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS.
UM, THERE ARE WAYS THAT YOU CAN MANAGE AND MITIGATE THOSE ITEMS. UM, AND I JUST DON'T SEE ANY OF THAT HERE.
I HAVEN'T REALLY SEEN IT IN THE DETAIL.
I'D LIKE TO SEE FROM THE APPLICANT NOR DO I SEE IT FROM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR KIND OF THE, THE MUTILATED RECOMMENDATIONS OR MOTIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING HERE.
AND SO I REALLY HOPE, I ASSUME THAT SOMETHING'S GOING TO PASS TONIGHT WITHOUT MY SUPPORT, BUT I REALLY HOPE THAT BEFORE IT GETS TO COUNCIL, WE LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC SITUATION AND, AND KIND OF THE, THE USE MANAGEMENT SITUATION OF HOW TO, UM, KIND OF CREATE THAT BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE MUSIC VENUE AND WHAT IS EXPECTED TO BE A VERY LIVELY, EXCITING, UH, PLACE.
UM, AND, AND WHERE PEOPLE LIVE, UH, IN THE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AND IN THE MFR OR WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING APARTMENTS OR CONDOS.
UM, SO THAT, I JUST, I JUST REALLY WISH THAT WE SAW SOME OF THAT IN ADDRESSING THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERN.
UM, SPEAKER IS FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
SPEAKERS AGAINST, UH, COMMISSIONER MITCH TODDLER.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE TWO MUSICIANS THAT SPOKE ONE PRESENTING THE PROJECT, AND ONE WHO PLAYED MUSIC AND HAS LIVED THROUGH THE CONTENTIOUS ERROR OF THIS VENUE.
AND WE HAVE NO CURRENT MODERN DAY YOUNG HAMS THAT ARE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS.
AND I REALLY THINK THAT'S BECAUSE THEY DON'T NEED THIS.
I HAVE A LOT OF THE MS PATIENTS AND THERE ARE GOOD VENUES ALL AROUND OUR CITY OF DIFFERENT SIZES.
THIS IS NO LONGER AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT THAT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, BACK THEN.
AND THERE ARE LOTS OF CHANGES.
AND SO I LIKE TO CALL THE COMMISSION'S ATTENTION TO A COUPLE OF THINGS.
AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS ARIEL ONE, WE DO HAVE THESE TRANSIT CORRIDORS AND DENSITY CORRIDORS COMING IN HERE.
AND THEY'RE ONLY ABOUT TWO TO THREE MILES FROM LAKE AUSTIN.
I MEAN, THAT'S JUST A NICE, EASY JOG FROM THERE TO GET DOWN THERE.
I REALLY THINK WE'RE MISSING AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY HERE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS AGREEABLE TO, I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS SPACE.
UM, WE CAN BRING IN HIGH DENSITY HOUSING.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE CONSTRAINED BY THE WATERFRONT OVERLAY AND THOSE RESTRICTIONS THERE.
AND WE HAVE SOME CASES THAT WE HAVE TO HEAR THERE.
THIS IS IN GREAT PROXIMITY FOR, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES TO COME IN, INTO MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND WE CAN GET, AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT AFFORDABILITY.
NONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TYPICALLY TALK ABOUT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE PROJECTS, I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS NEEDS TO BE SCRAPPED TONIGHT.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANYTHING PAST TONIGHT.
I THINK THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IN THE KIND OF HOUSING THAT WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT.
WE WANT TO SEE MORE OF PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'VE GOT A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S IN SUPPORT OF THAT.
I THINK THIS IS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
UM, I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO GO.
[03:00:01]
THANK YOU.SO I THINK WE'RE OUT OF, UM, THE FOREIGN AGAINST SPEAKERS.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND I'M GONNA HAVE ONE MORE FOR, YEAH.
ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK FOR THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION? OKAY, LET'S GO.
UM, LET ME GO AND REPEAT THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND, UH, THEN WE'LL GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
SO, UM, SEE IF I CAN GET THIS RIGHT.
SO THE NPA, UM, BEFORE IT'S GOING WITH THE APPLICANTS RECOMMENDATION FOR
IT'S THE, UM, STA UH, I'M SORRY, APPLICANTS RECOMMENDATION FOR M F FOR, UM, IN P AND THEN INCLUDING, UH, AS WE SAID, THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT'S IN THE EXHIBIT, A STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION SHEET.
SO EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THAT BEFORE WE VOTE.
UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE FROM THE DYES.
GOT TO, AND THEN, UH, THOSE IN THE VIRTUAL SPACE GOT ONE.
SO THAT'S THREE TOTAL AND THAT'S, LET'S GO THEN VOTING AGAINST YEAH.
SHOW YOUR CARDS ONE MORE TIME.
SO IT WAS, I'M SORRY TO, HERE WE GO.
FOUR AND THEN ONE, ONE, AND THEN GETTING THOSE THAT ARE VOTING AGAINST THIS MOTION ON THE DYES.
I JUST SAID THOSE VOTING FORESTS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VOTING, VOTING AGAINST.
WE HAVE TO, AND THEN, UH, I GUESS ABSTAINING TOO.
SO THAT MOTION FAILS, UH, 4, 3, 3.
SO MOVING ON TO THE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S MOTION.
DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND, UM, WE DIDN'T FINISH DISCUSSING THAT.
I BELIEVE YOUR MICROPHONE IS OFF.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU COUNT IN MY VOTE.
I WOULD'VE VOTED FOR, SO IT'S 3, 2, 1 FOR THE IN-PERSON.
SO CORRECTION ON THE VOTE WAS 5, 3, 2, STILL FAILS.
I THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
SO BACK TO COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S MOTION.
DID WE HAVE A SECOND? I'M TRYING TO SECOND VOTE FOR MR. CONLEY AND WE HAD YOU SPOKEN IN FAVOR.
SO NOW WE'RE MOVING, I THINK, TO THIS SPEAKING AGAINST WHERE WE WERE IN THE ORDER.
SO THOSE SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSION, DO YOU WANT TO REPEAT IT ONE MORE TIME? I THINK IT WAS, UH, THE APPLICANT'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE SORT OF FOOT ATTACK OF BAN APPLICANT'S COMMENDATION OR APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH THE, UM, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, A 17,500 SQUARE FOOT LIMIT ON THE USE, A COCKTAIL LOUNGE WE USE AND, AND A 1200 OCCUPANCY LIMIT.
SO YOU'RE LIMITING THE OCCUPANCY THAT KEEPING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THE SAME, RIGHT.
UM, THIS POINT OF CLARIFICATION TO STAFF ON THAT MOTION, CAN WE PUT AN OCCUPANCY LIMIT AS PART OF THE, UM, THE CONDITIONAL USE? UM, I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK WITH OUR LAW DEPARTMENT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE OCCUPANCY FOR BUILDINGS IS PART OF 25 DASH TWO.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAN BE INCLUDED.
I CAN NOTE THAT THAT IS YOUR REQUEST.
AND THEN I CAN DOUBLE CHECK WITH LAW.
UM, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN INCLUDE IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
I MEAN, I, I THINK THAT'S FINE BECAUSE IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE, SO THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
[03:05:01]
I KNOW WE COULD IMPOSE IT AS A CONDITION OF OPERATION.SO IF WE DON'T DO IT NOW, WE'LL DO IT THEN.
AND I'M JUST CLARIFYING THE ONLY, UM, CONDITION WOULD BE TO LIMIT THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE.
SO THOSE SPEAKING, UM, AGAINST, AND THE NPA IS PART OF THIS MOTION.
THE APPLICANTS APPLICANTS REQUEST APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR THE MTA.
UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND KEEP MOVING THROUGH THIS.
JUST WANTED BRING AGAIN THAT I THINK THIS IS, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD MAKE A DECISION ON THIS TONIGHT.
I THINK WE ARE MISSING OUT ON A VERY IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY.
WE HAVE NOT ADDRESSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE COULD POTENTIALLY BRING THE DENSITY UP HIGHER ALONG THIS CORRIDOR.
I THINK THIS IS A BAD DECISION TONIGHT.
AND SO I REALLY THINK WE OUGHT TO WAIT, UM, VOTE AGAINST, LET EVERYBODY GO BACK AND TAKE THOSE THOUGHTS AND RECONSIDERATIONS AND SEE IF WE CAN GET A BETTER PROJECT OUT OF THIS.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS READY FOR US TONIGHT.
SPEAKERS IN FAVOR TO MR. CONLON.
UM, YEAH, THIS IS, UH, THE REASON WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING JUST PUTTING ALL HOUSING HERE IS BECAUSE THIS IS A HISTORIC MUSIC VENUE, AND WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE SOME OF AUSTIN, WHICH HAS SEEN THIS RAPID CHANGE AND, AND PARTICULARLY A VENUE LIKE THIS, WHICH IS SO CLOSELY CONNECTED TO, YOU KNOW, THE ESSENCE OF, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THAT IDEA OF AN AUSTIN WAS.
IT ATTRACTED SO MANY OF US HERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S WHY, UM, WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO RESPECT THE IDEA THAT THIS SHOULD BE A SPACE FOR MUSIC.
UM, AND I, I, YOU KNOW, I STRONGLY SUPPORT IT FOR THE REASONS I'VE ALREADY STATED.
I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT THINGS ARE VERY DIFFERENT NOW THAN THEY WERE THERE'S THERE'S MUCH BETTER ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY.
THERE'S A STRONG INCENTIVE TO NOT HAVE TRASH STREWN AROUND.
THERE'S A, IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT KIND OF THING.
AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE A SHAME IF WE, IF WE WASTED THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE SOMETHING THAT WOULD STRENGTHEN AUSTIN'S MUSIC SCENE AND AUSTIN'S MUSICIANS.
I'M SPEAKING AGAINST OUR COMMISSIONER COPS.
HOPEFULLY NOT BEING REPETITIVE HERE, BUT, UM, EVERYONE WHO TALKED ABOUT THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS, UH, THOUGHT TALKED ABOUT IT FONDLY, BUT ALSO RECOUNTED HOW MUCH OF A HORROR IT WAS FOR THE NEIGHBORS AROUND IT.
SO I JUST THINK THAT THERE'S DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS THAT COULD BE MADE TO MANAGE THAT.
UM, AND, AND WE JUST HAVEN'T SEEN THAT TONIGHT, UH, THAT THE VENUE THAT WE SAW, THE GRAPHIC THAT WE SAW SHOWED THE MUSIC VENUE, FACING AN ORIENTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, JUST LIKE IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN, WHICH IS WHAT CREATED THE PROBLEM.
SO, SO IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE AND THOUGHT THROUGH THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN, WHICH IS WHY I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS NINE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE THANK YOU CHAIR.
I WON'T BELABOR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID.
I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS RESERVE IN MUSIC VENUE THAT IS TRULY HISTORICAL AND IS WORTHY OF EXTENDING.
I REALLY WANT TO CLARIFY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HISTORICAL PRESERVATION, WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING AND PRESERVING STRUCTURES, BUT WE'RE BROUGHT ON PRESERVING THE VIBRANCY, THE CULTURE, THE ASPECTS THAT WENT INTO MAKING THAT.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COCKTAIL USE, WHICH WOULD BE PART OF THE MUSIC VENUE WOULD BE COMING BACK TO US FOR CONDITIONAL USE.
AND I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE MORE THING, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A CASE RIGHT BEFORE THIS OR WORKING CLASS NEIGHBORS WERE SAYING THAT THEY HAD SOME REAL CONCERNS AND WE WENT AHEAD AND DISMISS THEM.
AND NOW WE HAVE MORE FLUID NEIGHBORS SAYING THAT THEY HAVE CONCERNS, AND WE'RE SAYING WE SHOULD LISTEN TO THEM.
AND ALL I HAVE TO SAY IS THIS IS RICH KATIE SPEAKING AGAINST, UM, IF NOT, I WILL.
I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER JUST I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A POSITION ON THIS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, OPERA HOUSE IS GREAT.
IT'S BEEN GONE FOR A LONG TIME.
WE GOT A LOT OF OTHER VENUES, HEY, I WOULD LOVE TO KEEP GOING TO LIBERTY LUNCH.
RIGHT? IT'S GONE, WE'VE GOT WATERLOO PARK AS A PLACE IT'S OPENED UP.
WE'VE GOT OTHER VENUES THAT ARE OPENING.
UH, THIS IS, UH, I'M AGREEING WITH COMMISSIONER NEUCHATEL OR THIS IS JUST NOT THE RIGHT PLACE.
UH, THERE'S A MISSED OPPORTUNITY HERE FOR HOUSING AND OTHER THINGS THAT I THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S OPEN TO.
BUT, UH, I JUST THINK WE NEED TO PUT THIS IN A DIFFERENT PLACE WHERE IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO DISRUPT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
[03:10:01]
GREAT, BUT THE VENUE IS TOO BIG.AND I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORS DON'T NEED TO LIVE THROUGH THAT AGAIN.
SO I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS MOTION, UH, AND THAT CLOSES AT ARE.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
I'M GOING TO TRY TO REPEAT THIS MTA.
IT'S THE APPLICANTS REQUEST, UH, ON BEFORE AND B FIVE, IT'S THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, UM, WITH THE CU, UM, FOUR COCKTAIL LOUNGE LIMITED 717,500 SQUARE FEET, AND A, UM, UH, OCCUPANCY LIMIT YOU THREW IN, UH, WAS THE NUMBER THERE, 1200, UH, 12,000 FOR THE OCCUPANCY, FOR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU HAVE FOR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, RIGHT? YES.
1200, UH, 12,000 OR 1200, 1200 FOR THE OCCUPANCY.
SO, UM, WITH THAT, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
LET'S GO AND SEE, SEE THOSE IN FAVOR 1, 2, 3, 4.
UM, AND LET ME GO AND COUNT THOSE IN FAVOR ON IN VIRTUAL WORLD.
I DON'T SEE ANY, SO THEN ON THE DYESS, THOSE, UM, VOTING AGAINST THE MOTION.
THOSE ON, UH, VIRTUALLY VOTING AGAINST 1, 2, 3, 4, AND THEN THOSE ABSTAINING ON THE DYESS.
I HAVE ONE TOO, AND THEN I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY LEFT VIRTUALLY, SO THAT VOTE, IF I COUNTED, IT WAS FOUR TO FIVE TO TWO.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH ANOTHER EMOTION, I'M TRYING TO MAKE THIS WORK.
ANYONE CAN I SHARE COPS? UH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM UNTIL I THINK WE HAVE A MEETING OCTOBER 12TH AND I'LL SPEAK TO THAT IF I GET A SECOND.
UM, WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THE SON'S OCTOBER 12TH, UH, PUNISH.
NOW YOUR SECOND SET MOTION, GO AND SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.
I STRONGLY THINK THAT THERE IS A WAY TO SOLVE THIS PUZZLE TO, TO, UH, KIND OF REVIVE A HISTORIC, UH, MUSIC VENUE LOCATION, BUT DO IT IN A WAY THAT'S RESPECTFUL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS SO THAT WE DON'T JUST GO BACK TO WHAT EVERYONE FONDLY REMEMBERS AS A VERY NOISY TRASHY, BUT FUN PLACE TO BE, BUT MAYBE NOT A FUN PLACE TO LIVE.
UM, COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID THAT THERE ARE, ARE MODERN TOOLS.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS SAID THAT THERE'S MODERN TOOLS TO MANAGE THOSE THINGS.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE THAT FLESHED OUT AND DISCUSS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SHOWN A WILLINGNESS TO, TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY, INCREASE ENTITLEMENTS, BUT IN RETURN THEY'D LIKE TO, THEY LIKE TO HAVE THEIR CONCERNS ADDRESSED AS WELL.
AND SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE THIS COME BACK WITH MAYBE A PROPOSAL FROM THE APPLICANT ON MORE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS TO HELP MANAGE THOSE CONCERNS.
UM, I DON'T WANT TO SEE RIGHT, TURN ONLY DRIVEWAYS, WHICH IS THE LITTLE CURB BECAUSE THEY DON'T WORK.
UH, SO THAT WAS JUST ONE OF THE THINGS OF MANY THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, BUT THAT'S WHY I THINK POSTPONING THIS ITEM, HAVING IT COME BACK WITH A BIT MORE DETAIL THAT ADDRESSES NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS.
I PERSONALLY COULD PROBABLY SUPPORT A MUSIC VENUE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ENTITLEMENTS.
IF, IF WE JUST SAW THAT FLESHED OUT AND ADDRESSING THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS, ALRIGHT, SPEAKERS AGAINST THE MOTION, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
I, I, I'D RATHER JUST SEND IT ON TO COUNSEL WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION.
YOU KNOW, IF, IF THEY DO HAVE A MUSIC VENUE, IT HAS TO COME BACK BEFORE US.
IT HAS TO COME BACK AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
AND, AND WE WILL GET TO SAY, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A RIGHT TURN ONLY THERE, OR YOU SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, THESE HOURS OF OPERATION OR YOU HAVE TO HAVE SECURITY, YOU KNOW, POINTING PEOPLE OUTSIDE.
THE IDEA IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS AND MULTIFAMILY, YOU KNOW, USES WHICH, YOU KNOW, ACROSS THE STREET, THE HOUSE IS ON ZILLOW SELLS FOR $5 MILLION.
THESE ARE GOING TO BE HIGH DOLLAR
[03:15:01]
APARTMENTS.AND THE IDEA THAT, THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BUILD A VENUE, THAT'S GOING TO THROW TRASH IN PEOPLE'S YARDS.
AND YOU KNOW, OF THE, OF THE CONDOS THAT THEY'RE MANAGING, UH, JUST, I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT'LL HAPPEN.
UH, LET'S SEE, COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER.
SO WE TRIED TO PASS SOMETHING AND WE COULDN'T, BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF MERIT IN THIS KIND OF PROJECT AND THERE IS NOT YET A COUNCIL DATE.
SO WE HAVE A LITTLE TIME AND IF WE CAN GIVE THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET AGAIN OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS, MAYBE WE CAN SALVAGE SOMETHING.
UH I'M OKAY WITH THIS, ULTIMATELY GOING TO COUNCIL WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD GIVE THEM ANOTHER CHANCE.
ALRIGHT, SPEAKERS AGAINST THE MOTION.
I MEAN, COMMISSIONERS AGAINST THE MOTION.
YOU WANT TO GO OUT AND VOTE? IT'S A MOTION FIRST TIME UNTIL OCTOBER 12TH.
UM, LET ME GO ON AND LOOK AT THE, UH, COMMISSIONER.
THAT'S OUR SPOT FOR YES, WE DO.
I THINK HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET THIS BACK AND I, WE CAN HAVE SOME RESOLUTION, BUT IF WE CANNOT, THEN WE'LL BE BACK HERE WHERE WE ARE EITHER WAY.
I HOPE THAT WHATEVER DECISION IS MADE AND WHATEVER WORK IS DONE, THAT THE RESIDENTIAL USE IS NOT MINIMIZED.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A MAJOR CORRIDOR HERE THAT SHOULD HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL USE AS A BUFFER, ACTUALLY DO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR WHATEVER VENUE OR WHATEVER USE THEY MIGHT BE.
SO I REALLY HOPE THAT WHATEVER COMES BACK DOES NOT DIMINISH THE RESIDENTIAL USE HERE.
ANY MORE S COMMISSIONER SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TILL OCTOBER 12TH.
UH, SO THOSE ON THE DIOCESE ON THOSE IN FAVOR 1, 2, 3, 4, AND THEN I'M GOING TO SHIFT TO THOSE VIRTUALLY HOW MANY, JUST THOSE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT 1, 2, 3.
SO BACK TO THE DIOCESE VOTING AGAINST ONE, TWO, AND THEN THOSE ON THE VIRTUAL, THOSE VOTING AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT SAYING NONE.
THEN, UH, THOSE OF STAINING ON THE DIOCESE, WE HAVE ONE AND ONE VIRTUALLY.
SO THAT MOTION IS SEVEN TO TWO.
AND THAT WOULD TASK, CORRECT? YES, WE HAVE QUORUM.
SO THAT MOTION PASSES OCTOBER 12TH.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LIAISON, AND ANDOVER.
SO I NEED THE COMMISSION TO TAKE ONE MORE STEP AND THAT'S TO, UM, RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS, UH, MOTION OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO IT'S A, TWO-STEP RECONSIDER THE PUBLIC, UH, CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN MAKING A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND POSTPONING THAT TO OCTOBER 12TH.
SO THE FIRST STEP, UM, MR. RIVERA IS TO, I GUESS WE NEED TO VOTE ON A RECONSIDERATION.
I'M MAKING A MOTION TO RECONSIDER, UH, OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THAT THING, THOSE IN FAVOR, UM, ON THE DIETS GO AND, UH, THOSE VIRTUALLY GO AND VOTE.
SO THAT'S UM, 10 AND I GUESS THOSE VOTING AGAINST THE RECONSIDERATION DOES ABSTAINING FROM THE RECONSIDERATION.
I'M MAKING A MOTION THAT WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS CASE FOR OCTOBER 12TH MEETING.
WE HAVE YOUR NANA'S PHONE IN THE DIOCESE AND WE HAVE THREE VOTING IN FAVOR AND VIRTUALLY, UH, THOSE VOTING AGAINST, UH, THE SUSTAINING.
SO BACK TO WHERE WE ARE THAT COMPLETE OUR ACTIONS, MR. RIVERA ON THAT ITEM.
OKAY, JERRY, I THINK WE'LL NEED TO EXTEND TIME.
ANY TIME COMMISSIONER SNYDER DON'T BELIEVE YOUR MICROPHONE WAS ON WHEN YOU PRESENTED THAT.
I MOVED TO EXTEND OUR TIME TO 10 30.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
UM, EVERYBODY ON THE DIOCESE VOTE VIRTUALLY
[03:20:03]
1, 2, 9, 10, AND ONE OF STAINING.WE NEED TO, WE GOT TILL 10 30.
UH, SO FIRST, UH, WE EXTENDED, BUT THAT WAS A PRETTY LONG ITEM.
UH, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE A TRANSITION INTO THE NEXT, UH, 10.
SO MR. JUST, IF YOU NEED A QUICK BREAK WHILE PEOPLE ARE SHUFFLING IN, PLEASE, WE'RE READY TO PROCEED TO, TO BEATEN IF WE'RE READY.
UH, I THINK WE NEED A BREAK THAT WAS LONG.
SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RECESS OR FIVE MINUTES NOTED.
UM, YOU'VE GOT A QUORUM ON THE DICE, UH, SEVEN OF US.
[B10. Appeal (Denial of Certificate of Appropriateness): C14H-2004 0008; HR-2021-085739 - Mitchell-Robertson Building; District 9]
AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH, UH, THE AGENDA ITEM D 10.THAT'S THE LESSON DISCUSSION ITEM FOR THE EVENING.
AND WE'RE GOING TO START WITH STEP PRESENTATION.
I'M WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE AND I'M HERE REGARDING ITEM BEATS 10.
IT'S AN APPEAL OF A DENIAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UH, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DENIED THIS REQUEST AT THE JULY 26TH, 2021 MEETING.
AND IT'S REGARDING, UM, THE BUILDING AT 909 CONGRESS AVENUE, WHICH IS THE MITCHELL ROBERTSON BUILDING.
THAT'S HISTORIC ZONING CASE NUMBER C 14 H 2004 0 0 0 8.
REVIEW CASE NUMBER HR 20 21 0 8 5 7 3 9.
THIS IS ONE OF THREE RELATED PROJECTS WITHIN THE 900 BLOCK OF CONGRESS HAPPENING.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CAREFULLY DECONSTRUCT STORE AND RECONSTRUCT THE BUILDING FACADES AT 9 0 7, 9 0 9 AND NINE 11 CONGRESS AS PART OF A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT A LATER DATE, UH, THE GRANBURY BUILDING AT 9 0 7 CONGRESS, AND THAT MITCHELL ROBERTSON BUILDING THE SUBJECT OF TONIGHT'S CASE AT 909.
CONGRESS ARE BOTH HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND REQUIRE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ORDER FOR THIS WORK TO PROCEED.
THE BUILDING AT NINE 11 CONGRESS AVENUE IS, UH, WITHIN THE CONGRESS AVENUE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.
IT IS NOT A LANDMARK AND IT'S NOT ELIGIBLE FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION DUE TO THE EXTENT OF MODIFICATIONS, UM, TO THAT BUILDING FACADE.
UH, SO THE COMMISSION'S REVIEW OF NINE 11 CONGRESS HAS ADVISORY.
UH, AGAIN, UM, THE COMMISSION HAS GRANTED THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUEST FOR THE STEEL CONSTRUCTION STORAGE AND RECONSTRUCTION FOR 9 0 7 CONGRESS, BUT DENIED THE SAME SCOPE OF WORK FOR 909 CONGRESS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO ESTABLISH AT THE OUTSET THAT A REQUEST TO DECONSTRUCT AND RECONSTRUCT A HISTORIC STANDING HISTORIC LANDMARK IS A VERY UNUSUAL REQUEST.
AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS TASKED WITH EVALUATING PROJECTS BASED ON FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION, WHICH VALUE PRESERVING IN PLACE, RETAINING HISTORIC MATERIALS AND RETAINING HISTORIC CRAFTSMANSHIP RECONSTRUCTION RATHER THAN REHABILITATION IS TYPICALLY PROPOSED IN CASES WHERE, UM, A BUILDING IS NOT EXTANT AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR INTERPRETIVE PURPOSES.
UM, IT, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS VERY CLEAR FROM AN INITIAL HEARING IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, ONWARD, THAT THEY WANTED TO SEE EVERY EFFORT TO PRESERVE 909 CONGRESS IN PLACE PURSUED.
UM, THIS IS, UH, BASED ON THE BETTER CONDITION OF THAT FACADE, THIS COMPARED WITH THE OTHER TWO, UH, WHICH ARE IN STATES OF PARTIAL FAILURE, THE DECORATIVE BRICK WORK THAT'S AT THE TOP OF THE PARAPET FOR 909.
CONGRESS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HISTORIC CRAFTSMANSHIP THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO RECONSTRUCT ACCURATELY.
HOWEVER, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CONSIDERED SIMILAR REQUESTS IN 2006, 2015 AND 2018.
IN EACH INSTANCE, THE REQUESTED YOU CONSTRUCT AND REBUILD THE BUILDING FACADES WAS ACCOMPANIED BY AN OVERALL PLAN FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE FACADES WILL BE TAKEN DOWN, PUT BACK UP AND A TOWER WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED BEHIND THE BUILDING FACADES, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, GRANTED THOSE CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR BOTH NINE AND SEVEN AND NINE AND NINE CONGRESS AVENUE.
IN THOSE PRIOR INSTANCES, UH, THEY HAD SOME COMMENTS REGARDING THE SCOPE OF WORK, UM, WANTED THE ADDITIONAL DETAILS ABOUT HOW THAT WOULD BE DONE ACCURATELY, OR HAD SOME COMMENTS ON THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT IN EACH CASE, FUNDAMENTALLY THEY APPROVED THOSE PROJECTS.
AND IN NONE OF THOSE MOTIONS WAS 909 CONGRESS SINGLED OUT BASED ON ITS CONDITION FOR A DIFFERENT TREATMENT OR APPROACH.
[03:25:03]
UH, THE MOST RECENT REQUEST WAS SPURRED BY BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION ORDERS FOR ALL THREE BUILDINGS.THESE ORDERS WERE ISSUED ON MARCH 24TH, 2021, AND THEY GAVE THE OWNER 90 DAYS TO REMEDY SUBSTANDARD CONDITIONS.
THAT TIME HAS ELAPSED AS OF JUNE 22ND.
AND FINES ARE ACCRUING TO THIS PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, THERE WAS AN EFFORT ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT, UH, TO COME BEFORE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, MULTIPLE TIMES TO SEE IF WE COULD REACH AN AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF THE, THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD.
UM, THE APPLICANT PROCEEDED WITH ADDITIONAL DETAILS THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR THIS RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, INCLUDING LASER SCANNING, THE BUILDING FACADES AND PURSUING ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL OPINIONS REGARDING WHETHER OR NOT 909 COULD BE PRESERVED IN PLACE.
ULTIMATELY, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS NOT SATISFIED THAT 909 CONGRESS COULD NOT BE PRESERVED IN PLACE AND SAID, UH, THEIR, THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THEIR STRUCTURAL REPORTS WAS IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF INCONVENIENCE FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT THIS NEW BUILDING BEHIND AND RETAIN THE FACADE IN PLACE.
BUT NOT THAT IT WAS SOMETHING THAT COULD NOT BE ACHIEVED.
UM, IN TURN DELIBERATION, THE COMMISSIONER WHO MADE THE MOTION TO DENY APPROVAL FOR 909, CONGRESS CITED ONE SPECIFIC DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS REQUEST AND THOSE THAT WERE CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY, WHICH IS THAT THIS CURRENT PROPOSAL IS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY A PLAN FOR, UM, WHAT WILL GO BEHIND THESE BUILDING FACADES.
IT'S ONLY A REQUEST CONCERNING OF THE FACADES THEMSELVES.
UM, THE CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS ESSENTIALLY CORRESPONDS, UH, WITHIN THE CITY'S PERMITTING SYSTEM TO A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
AND IF THIS ULTIMATE, UH, REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IS NOT SUCCESSFUL, THE COMMISSION FEARS THAT NOT ONE, BUT TWO HISTORIC LANDMARKS WOULD BE LOST.
UH, THE COMMISSIONERS DIDN'T BELABOR THIS POINT WITH 9 0 7 DUE TO ITS DETERIORATED CONDITION, BUT FELT THAT IF THERE WAS ANY POSSIBILITY OF SAVING 909 CONGRESS, THAT WE SHOULD GIVE IT THAT CHANCE.
AND WITHOUT THE MORE COMPLETE INFORMATION, UH, THE COMMISSION DECIDED NOT TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 0 9.
UM, DESPITE THIS CONCERN STAFF DOES NOT FOUND FIND GROUNDS TO DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UH, FOR ONE, THE APPLICANT HAS AN URGENT NEED TO ADDRESS THE BUILDING AT STANDARD COMMISSIONS ORDERS.
GIVEN THE LENGTHY PROCESS, THAT'S REQUIRED TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN AND PERMITS FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO TAKE AN INITIAL STEP OF CAREFULLY TALKING, HUNTING, DECONSTRUCTING, AND STORING.
THESE FACADES SAID THAT THEY CAN COME BACK WITH A COMPREHENSIVE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT THAT WILL INCLUDE THE RECONSTRUCTION.
UH, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL HAVE FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES TO WEIGH IN ON OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS PROJECT.
UH, THEY WILL NEED TO SEE, UH, THE PLANS FOR THE NEW TOWER AS CONSTRUCTION AFFECTING TWO DIFFERENT LANDMARKS, AS WELL AS WITHIN THE CONGRESS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND, UM, I THINK I SKIPPED OVER A POINT HERE.
UM, IF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS ISSUED, IT WOULD BRIDGE FROM BEGINNING TO END OF THIS CONSTRUCTION PROCESS.
AND THE ARCHITECT'S SCOPE OF WORK THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED REQUIRES REGULAR REPORTS BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OVER THE COURSE OF THE DECONSTRUCTION, STORAGE AND PLANS FOR RECONSTRUCTION.
AT KEY MILESTONES FURTHER, THE OWNER IS WILLING TO COMMIT TO A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WILL REQUIRE THE FACADES OF 9 0 7 AND 909, BOTH BE RE-ERECTED WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THEIR DECONSTRUCTION.
IF THIS APPEAL IS SUCCESSFUL, THE APPLICANT WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT REQUEST TO CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 30TH.
UH, MOREOVER THE APPLICANT HAS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION FOR PREDICTABILITY AND DECISION-MAKING AND THE PRIOR LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISIONS AND NO SMALL PART SHAPED THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IN THIS CASE.
SO IN CONCLUSION, STAFF RECOMMENDS OVERTURNING THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 909 CONGRESS AVENUE AND GRANTING APPROVAL TO DECONSTRUCT STORE AND RECONSTRUCT THE FACADE AND ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SCOPE OF WORK.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER, WHEN HE'S ON.
ANDOVER HAS TO NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT MR. LEAH, BASHO MISS.
UH, WELL, UH, BEFORE YOU PROCEED IN THIS BEDROOM, I WANT TO CONFIRM, UH, YOUR DONATORS ARE PRESENT, CHARLIE, DARSON YOU ARE YOU PRESENT? THANK YOU.
I SUPPOSE YOU'RE YOU'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES.
[03:30:01]
HELLO COMMISSIONERS.I'M LEAH BOGGIO HERE WITH JENNER GROUP REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION DENIAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UM, THE, SO THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION INVOLVES THREE BUILDINGS, AS ELIZABETH SAID, AND I KNOW 7, 909 AND NINE 11.
THESE WERE THREE ADJACENT STRUCTURES NEAR THE CORNER OF NINTH AND CONGRESS AVENUE.
I'D LIKE TO GIVE JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF HOW WE GOT TO HERE TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
AND ALSO LET YOU KNOW THAT DONNA CARTER, THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AT ANY POINT.
SO THIS IS THE FACADE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, THESE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN VACANT FOR DECADES AND HAVE BECOME AN UNFORTUNATE STRETCH ALONG CONGRESS AVENUE LAST FALL, THE PROPERTY OWNER RECEIVED A COMPLAINT, UM, AND AN ORDER FROM THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION, UM, TO CORRECT A LAUNDRY LIST OF HEALTH AND SAFETY VIOLATIONS AFTER CONSULTING SOME OF THE BEST PRESERVATION ARCHITECTS AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS IN THE BUSINESS.
WE DECIDED SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE STATE OF THE FACADES TO RESURRECT WHAT IS A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN BY HLC, AS ELIZABETH DESCRIBED TO DECONSTRUCT CAREFULLY CATALOG AND RECONSTRUCT THESE FACADES.
UM, WE S AND, AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE AGREED TO A THREE YEAR TIME FRAME TO GET THAT WORK DONE, UM, THROUGH A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, BECAUSE TWO OF THE BUILDINGS ARE HISTORIC LANDMARK HISTORIC LANDMARKS.
UM, AS YOU HEARD, WE NEEDED PERMISSION FROM THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UM, AND WE WERE DENIED THAT CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, UM, ONLY FOR THE TOP HALF OF THE MIDDLE BUILDING OF 909.
UM, BUT EFFECTIVELY, UH, THAT, THAT IS A DENIAL OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT BECAUSE WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD UNTIL WE HAVE A CONSISTENT APPROVAL.
UM, WE ARE OCCURRING PENALTIES OF A THOUSAND DOLLARS PER WEEK PER BUILDING AT THIS POINT.
UM, AND IN SHORT, OUR REQUEST TONIGHT IS FOR YOU TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD, TO MAKE THESE BUILDINGS SAFE AND ULTIMATELY BRING THEM BACK TO COMPLETE THE, THE AVENUE.
UM, WE HAVE SUPPORT FROM NOT ONLY THE CITY HISTORIC OFFICE, BUT ALSO FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER WHO FILED THE COMPLAINT, UM, FROM THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE AND FROM SEVERAL OTHER NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS SECTION OF, OF CONGRESS AVENUE.
UM, SO HERE'S JUST TO GIVE YOU A QUICK, CLOSER LOOK AT THE BUILDINGS THEY'VE BEEN PATCHED TOGETHER OVER THE DECADES.
THEY'RE IN A, UM, THEY'RE IN A, A STATE OF DISREPAIR, UM, BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION HAS STATED THAT THEY'RE A DANGER, NOT ONLY TO ANYONE INSIDE, BUT ALSO TO PEOPLE WALKING ALONG CONGRESS AVENUE, WE HAVE DONE SOME, UM, IMMEDIATE, ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND, AND, UM, AND SAFETY MEASURES TO THE BUILDINGS.
UM, I'LL LET DONNA GO THROUGH ANY OTHER DETAILS OF THAT, THAT YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN.
UM, THIS IS 9 0 7, WHICH WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION.
I'M ALSO SUFFERING FROM MULTIPLE FA FAILURES.
THIS IS THE BUILDING THAT'S ADJACENT TO 9 0 5, THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT FILED THE COMPLAINT, UM, AND WHO IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROPOSAL.
UH, AND HERE WE HAVE 909, UM, SIMILARLY 9 0 9 IS MISSING AT STOREFRONT.
THE FACADE IS SIGNIFICANTLY CRACKED.
THE STEEL HEADER IS NOT ADEQUATE.
UM, AND THERE ARE PUNCTURES IN THE ROOF, WHICH IS WHERE WATER IS COMING THROUGH, NOT ONLY DAMAGING THIS PROPERTY, BUT ALSO DAMAGING THE OTHERS.
UM, HERE'S A COPY OF THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS ORDER THAT WE RECEIVED ON MARCH 24TH, UM, REQUIRING THAT WE FINALIZE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS, INCLUDING THOSE FROM THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UM, IT WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 24TH FOR 90 DAYS.
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS NOT REALLY A FEASIBLE TIMELINE, BUT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY, UM, TO DO OUR BEST TO MEET IT.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, AS ELIZABETH MENTIONED, WE'VE GONE TO HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MULTIPLE TIMES, UM, OVER THE COURSE OF THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, TRYING TO PRESENT THEM WITH EVIDENCE TO SHOW WHY WE WERE PROPOSING WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING.
UM, WE PROVIDE, AGAIN, THE DETAILS TO THE DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION PLANS.
WE DISCUSSED THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH THEM AT LENGTH.
UM, I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE, ABOUT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
I'LL LET STAFF ANSWER THOSE IF, IF THAT'S OKAY.
UM, BUT I WILL SAY THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, INITIALLY I THINK THERE WAS SOME RELUCTANCE TO DO A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FROM WHICH NOT ON OUR PART, BUT ON THE CITY'S PART, BUT DUE TO THIS SORT OF UNIQUE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN HERE AND THE, AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN HAVING THESE BUILDINGS COME BACK, UM, WE WERE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE A COVENANT WITH THE CITY, WITH THE CITY AS THE ENFORCER.
UM, SO THIS IS, UM, THE, THE RULE OF THE RECOVERY, THE COVENANT, FIRST OF ALL, THAT REQUIRES THAT THE BUILDINGS BE RECONSTRUCTED TO THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS.
THIS IS AN IMAGE FROM A PRIOR DEPICTION, UM, JUST TO TRY TO SHOW AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THOSE RECONSTRUCTIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
THIS IS WHAT THOSE FACADES LOOKED LIKE, UM, ONCE, UH, ONCE A TIME, ONCE BACK IN TIME.
AND THIS IS, UM, WHAT WE'D BE STRIVING TO HAVE THEM LOOK FOR AGAIN, LOOK LIKE AGAIN, WHEN WE GET TO THE POINT OF REDEVELOPMENT, UM, WE DID, UM, WE DID TALK TO TWO STRUCTURAL
[03:35:01]
ENGINEERS ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.UM, THIS IS THE MOST RECENT REPORT FROM 2021, UM, STATING THAT HOLDING THE FACADE IN PLACE WOULD LIKELY LEAD TO MORE DAMAGE TO THE STRUCTURE.
SO NOT ONLY IS IT NOT FEASIBLE FROM A CONSTRUCTION STANDPOINT, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY ALSO MORE LIKELY TO CAUSE DAMAGE TO THE FACADES, UM, POTENTIALLY LOSING THEM ENTIRELY.
UH, AND THEN HERE WE HAVE AN ASSESSMENT FROM 2014 WHERE THEY SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT, UM, THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING OPINION IS THAT THESE EXTRA, YOUR WALLS CANNOT SAFELY BE BRACED.
UM, AND HERE WE HAVE THE HLC ORDER, WHICH I'VE DISCUSSED.
UM, YOU KNOW, W AGAIN, WE W WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IN, IN, IN, UH, EXPLAINING THAT WE CAN'T HOLD UP AND I KNOW SEVEN, AND WE CAN'T HOLD UP NINE 11.
UM, AND EVEN THEY EVEN AGREED THAT THE, THE FIRST FLOOR OF 909 WAS NOT IN A STATE TO BE SAVED, BUT, UM, BUT THE SECOND FLOOR OF NINE AND 909, THE CENTER BUILDING IS WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING THAT WE HOLD UP, WHICH WOULD MEAN, UM, I GUESS, HO LIKE HOLDING IT, HOLDING IT OVER THE SITE WHILE THE REST OF THE SITE IS REDEVELOPED AROUND IT.
UM, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, LOGISTICALLY YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THAT'S NOT REALLY A FEASIBLE OPTION.
UM, WE, UM, WE ARE, WE ARE ALMOST THERE AND WE DO BELIEVE THIS IS THE ONLY FEASIBLE PATH TOWARD COMPLYING, NOT ONLY WITH THE IMMEDIATE BUILDING AND STANDARDS ORDER RELATING TO SAFETY OF PEOPLE ON CONGRESS AVENUE, BUT ALSO IN MOVING TOWARD A VISION IN THE FUTURE WHERE WE HAVE A COMPLETE SECTION ALONG CONGRESS AVENUE, WHERE WE HAVE RECONSTRUCTED LANDMARKS, UM, YOU KNOW, IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECRETARY OF INTERIORS STANDARDS.
AND WE ALSO HAVE A FULL, A FULL STREET FRONTAGE THERE.
UM, W WE HAVE, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE SUPPORT FROM, FROM A LOT OF DOWNTOWN STAKEHOLDERS.
WE HAVE THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE, UM, ONBOARD WITH US.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, SEVERAL DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND, AND ONCE WE HOPEFULLY ARE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING THIS APPEAL, WE DO PLAN TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THESE STAKEHOLDERS AS WE GO FORWARD, NOT ONLY WITH THE UPDATES TO THE HLC, BUT ALSO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH DAA AND PROPERTY OWNERS NEARBY.
AND WITH THAT, WE'D REQUEST THAT YOU GRANT THIS APPEAL AND OVERTURN THE DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. JEFFREY HOWARD, MR. HOWARD, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS JEFF HOWARD AND I REPRESENT THE LANDOWNER AT NINE 19 CONGRESS AVENUE, WHICH IS THE OFFICE BUILDING JUST TO THE NORTHEAST BUILDINGS.
AND, UH, I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
AND YOU'LL HEAR FROM MS. JULIA TAYLOR, WHO IS THE BUILDING REPRESENTATIVE, AND SHE'LL SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHY WE'RE IN SUPPORT.
ALL I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT WE SUPPORT WITH A SORT OF CAVEAT THAT IS WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE INTERIM CONDITION, ADDITION AND RECONSTRUCTION, MAKING SURE THAT THE SITE IS SAFE AND SECURE, UH, FREE OF TRASH DEBRIS WITH SOME PEST CONTROL, THAT KIND OF THING.
AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT ON AN AGREEMENT.
I THINK WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE AND WE'RE WORKING TO FINALIZE THAT.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO COMPLETING THAT WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, IN THE, IN THE DAYS AHEAD.
SO WITH THAT, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, APPLICATION AND REQUEST.
NOW HERE FOR MS. JULIA TAYLOR, MS. TELLER, YOU'LL HAVE A ONE MINUTE.
AND I WORKED DIRECTLY FOR THE OWNER AT NINE 19 CONGRESS.
AND SO WE LOOK DOWN ONTO THESE BUILDINGS AND WE WALK BY THE BUILDINGS AND ALL OF OUR TENANTS WALK RIGHT BY THERE, AND THEY'VE BEEN DILAPIDATED AND ABANDONED FOR YEARS, AND WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT SITUATION REMEDIED.
MOST OF OUR TENANTS ARE LOBBYISTS AND WORK AT THE CAPITOL.
AND WE'VE OFTEN HEARD THAT IT'S A SHAME THAT THIS IS THE GATEWAY TO THE CAPITOL, AND THIS IS WHAT IS SEEN.
UM, SO AS JEFF MENTIONED, UM, HE'S REPRESENTING US TO TRY AND WORK OUT AN AGREEMENT WE'VE HAD DIALOGUE TO TRY AND WORK OUT.
UM, THE CONDITION IN THE INTERIM.
WE DO DEFINITELY HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, WHETHER IT'S TRESPASSING AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OR, OR ANYTHING ELSE IN THE CONDITION OF THOSE.
UM, AND SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT.
UM, BUT WE ARE DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO US TO DEMOLISH THE TWO OUTSIDE BUILDINGS AND LEAVE THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HELP THE WHOLE LOOK WHOLE LOOK ON CONGRESS AND THE GATEWAY TO THE CAPITOL.
SO WE DEFINITELY SUPPORT THAT THE BUILDINGS ARE JUST, UM, DETERIORATING.
UM, SO WE, WE WILL COOPERATE WITH THEM, BUT WE DEFINITELY SUPPORT THEIR, UM, DEMOLISH THE MIDDLE BUILDING.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS OPTED TO FORGO THE REBUTTAL.
THIS CONCLUDES THE TESTIMONY FOR THIS ITEM.
[03:40:01]
UH, YOU HAVE MOST OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.UH, YEAH, MOST COMMISSIONERS SNYDER, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, BUT CLOSED HEARING, UH, SEVEN ON THE DIOCESE AND 1, 2, 3, 4 VIRTUALLY.
AND GO AHEAD AND, UH, QUESTIONS FROM EITHER THE DYES.
SO I SEE MR. SCHNEIDER, UH, THANKS.
UH, IS, IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION HERE OR JUST, UH, MS. BERMAN? YEAH.
COULD YOU, UH, COULD YOU, COULD I ASK A QUESTION? UM, SO, UH, WE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THE REASON THAT, UM, WE GENERALLY LIKE TO REPAIR AND PLACE OR WHATEVER YOU REFER TO THAT, SO THAT THESE HISTORIC STRUCTURES PIECES DON'T LIKE GET FORGOTTEN ABOUT OR DISAPPEAR, OR IS THAT THE RATIONALE? IT'S A PIECE OF IT, BUT NOT THE ENTIRETY.
IT'S ALSO ABOUT HISTORIC CRAFTSMANSHIP AND HISTORIC MATERIALS AND THE AUTHENTICITY OF THAT HISTORIC BUILDING.
SO, SO IN THIS CASE, UM, I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO DO.
UM, AND THERE'S A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ALREADY BEEN ENTERED INTO, BUT IT'S, UM, BEING NEGOTIATED OR DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY, OR I THINK MAYBE THERE'S EVEN AN AGREEMENT ABOUT IT.
W SO, W W CAN YOU DESCRIBE TO ME WHAT HAPPENS IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH A REPAIR AS PROMISED? RIGHT.
SO THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT PLACES, A THREE YEAR WINDOW BETWEEN WHEN THOSE BUILDINGS COME DOWN AND WHEN THEY NEED TO HAVE APPROVALS FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT AND TO REDIRECT THE BUILDING FACADES.
SO THAT, THAT GIVES TIME TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THE PERMITTING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS THAT ARE NEEDED.
IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T PERFORM, UM, IT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY TO SUE FOR, UM, TO, TO REQUIRE THAT THE APPLICANT PERFORM THAT WORK.
SO, UH, W DOES THE CITY HAVE TO USE ITS OWN RESOURCES TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN, WHETHER IT BE REIMBURSEMENT FOR LEGAL EXPENSES ON THE PARK, UH, IF THE CITY HAS TO PURSUE THAT, IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT MAKES THE CITY WHOLE, IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T MOVE FORWARD, THAT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED, BUT, UM, IF THE CITY WERE TO PREVAIL, TYPICALLY, UH, THE PREVAILING SIDE WILL RECEIVE ATTORNEY'S FEES.
UM, IT'S, IT'S, IT IS OPEN-ENDED IN TERMS OF, IT WOULD TAKE A COURT ORDER TO, UM, TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT OUTCOME WOULD BE.
UH, AND MAYBE MS. BOGGIO, IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE APPLICANT COULD ALSO SPEAK TO THAT.
MY NAME IS CHARLIE ADORE, SANDY.
I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH THE DRAENOR GROUP.
UM, ALTHOUGH THE COVENANT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY MENTION FEES, UH, THERE'S A NORMAL BACKGROUND, TEXAS LAW.
IF YOU BREACH A CONTRACT AND SOMEONE HAS TO ENFORCE IT, UM, YOU CAN APPLY TO GET FEES AWARDED.
SO IT'S KIND OF COMMON BACKGROUND LAW, AND, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ALSO DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PUTTING A PROVISION LIKE THAT IN THE COVENANT, BUT IT'S NOT PART OF THE CITY'S FORM.
SO, SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOUR VIEW IS THAT THE CITY COULD, IF THE APPLICANT, IF THAT OWNER FAILED TO PERFORM THE CITY, COULD SUE TO ENFORCE AND GET REIMBURSED FOR ITS, UH, LEGAL EXPENSES.
UH, QUESTIONS, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO I'M STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION SOLVE THIS MULTIPLE TIMES, I ASSUME SAT THROUGH SOME FAIRLY LONG MEETINGS.
LIKE WE HAVE TO, TO DISCUSS THIS AND GO BACK AND FORTH, AND THEY UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO RETAIN THE FACADE AT 909 CONGRESS HAPPENED.
AND THEY HAD ACCESS TO WAY MORE INFORMATION AND TIME AND CONTEMPLATION AND DISCUSSION THAN WE HAVE HERE, BUT STAFF'S OPINION OR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THEY WERE INCORRECT AND THAT WE SHOULD OVERTURN THEIR DECISION.
CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY MISSED THAT STAFF
[03:45:02]
IS GETTING ON THIS? I THINK THE CRUX OF THE CASE COMES DOWN TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE COMMISSION IS OBLIGATED TO RELY ON PRECEDENT.IF WE WERE TO TAKE THIS CASE, I'M BRAND NEW, I THINK THE COMMISSION WOULD BE, UH, WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THEIR AUTHORITY TO, TO DENY THIS CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, BECAUSE THERE ARE THEIR CHARGE IS TO PRESERVE HISTORICAL BUILDINGS AND TO PRESERVE AS THEY ARE STANDING.
IT'S AGAIN, A VERY UNUSUAL STEP TO CONSIDER RECONSTRUCTION OF SOMETHING THAT IS STILL THERE.
IS, IS YOUR OFFICE NOT PRIORITIZING THOSE SAME VALUES? WELL, WE ARE.
UM, WHAT, WHAT STAFF WAS LEANING ON HEAVILY THOUGH, WAS THE FACT THAT THE COMMISSION HAD HEARD SIMILAR ARGUMENTS IN THREE PRIOR CASES AND REACHED THE CONCLUSION THAT THE BUILDINGS COULD BE, UH, DECONSTRUCTED AND RECONSTRUCTED AS AN APPROPRIATE APPROACH.
SO, UM, I SPECIFICALLY, BUT ANTICIPATING THAT THIS WOULD GO TO APPEAL, I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE COMMISSION TO SPEAK TO WHY THEY WERE DENYING THIS ONE, BUT ALLOWING 9 0 7 AND THE COMMISSIONER WHO MADE THE MOTION, UM, POINTED TO THE DIFFERENCE AND THE FACT THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT SEEING A COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, THAT WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE GOING UP AS PART OF THE, THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE, UH, THAT ALL WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, UM, ESSENTIALLY DEMOLITION OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
AND THEY, THEY SIMPLY WEREN'T COMFORTABLE DOING THAT WHEN THE LANDMARK WAS IN A CONDITION THAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE SAVED IN PLACE.
I WISH I WISH THE MOTION MAKER WAS HERE TO HELP EXPLAIN THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS.
UM, THANK YOU, UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, WHAT IS YOUR NEXT STEP? IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECIDES TO NOT OVERTURN THE HISTORIC COMMISSION'S VOTE? OKAY.
UH, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPEAL TO COUNCIL, TO CITY COUNCIL AS WELL.
UM, AND IF WE ARE NOT SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING AN APPEAL, OVERTURNED, GETTING OUR APPEAL, UM, WE WERE NOT SUCCESSFUL ANYWHERE IN GETTING OUR APPEAL.
I AM HONESTLY NOT SURE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE FOR THE BUILDING.
UM, I DON'T SEE, AS FAR AS WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM OUR, FROM OUR ARCHITECT AND OUR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A FEASIBLE WAY TO, UM, REPAIR THOSE BUILDINGS WITH THE FACADES IN PLACE.
WE'VE DONE, UM, LASER SCANS AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK IN DETAIL ABOUT, BUT OTHERS HERE CAN, UH, THAT SHOW THAT THOSE FACADES ARE NOT ABLE TO STAND UNDER.
SO YOU'RE UNDER AN ORDER FROM A CITY COMMISSION TO FIX IT.
YOU'RE ACCRUING FINES, THE HISTORIC LAND, MARK COMMISSION VOTED UNANIMOUSLY THAT YOU'VE GOT TO FIX IT, BUT KEEP THE FACADE OF THAT ONE UNIT.
AND WE HAVE ENGINEERS TELLING US THAT THAT'S NOT REALLY THE, YOU CAN'T DO THAT WHERE WE'RE STUCK.
I MEAN, WHAT WAS THE RESPONSE OF THE HLC WHEN YOU SAID THAT THERE WASN'T REALLY A SPECIFIC RESPONSE TO THAT THAT I CAN THINK OF.
I MEAN, WE, WE SORT OF IN COMING TO THEM REPEATEDLY WITH SORT OF MORE AND MORE WORK AND TRYING TO GIVE THEM SORT OF MORE AND MORE REPORTS AND EVIDENCE, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY DID AGREE WITH THE 9 0 7 BESIDE, UM, ULTIMATELY AND NINE 11 WAS NOT AS DIFFICULT, BUT, UM, THEY, THEY KIND OF JUST SAID, WE, WE WANT YOU TO FIGURE IT OUT.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD DO THAT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO FIND A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.
THAT'S GOING TO SEAL THE WORK THAT THEY ARE WANTING US TO FIGURE OUT.
I I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE ARCHITECT HAS DONE A GARTER, UM, JUST YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON, ON THE HISTORIC BUILDING AND, AND RECONSTRUCTING IT, UM, AS HAS BEEN I'M DONNA CARTER WITH CARTER DESIGN ASSOCIATES, AND I HAVE BEEN HIRED FOR THE RESTORATION, UH, DECONSTRUCTION RECONSTRUCTION PORTION OF THE PROJECT.
UM, IT IS A VERY UNUSUAL CASE AND TO BE VERY BLUNT AND VERY, UM, MY HONEST OPINION ABOUT WHERE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION IS, IS THAT BECAUSE IT HAS LAID IN THIS CONDITION FOR SO MANY YEARS, THEY'RE WANTING TO PUNISH SOMEBODY.
AND THAT PUNISHMENT IT'S REALLY KIND OF TRY TO MAKE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND
[03:50:01]
THAT IT'S THROUGH NEGLIGENCE OF SOME SORTS THAT WE GOT HERE, BUT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT, UM, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THIS LITTLE PIECE SUSPENDED AND THE WORK THAT HAS TO GO AROUND THAT PIECE TO KEEP IT UP THERE, WHICH MEANS BRACING INTO CONGRESS AVENUE, AVOIDING TREES THAT ARE ALREADY SOMEWHAT COMPROMISED TAKING THOSE PARKING SPACES, CLOSING THAT OFF, PROTECTING THE PUBLIC WHILE I'M ALSO BRACING 9 0 3, THE, UM, THE ART DECO BUILDING, BECAUSE WE ARE JEOPARDIZING THAT BUILDING.I HAVE TO BRACE THAT ENTIRE SIDE, RECONSTRUCT THEIR WALL WITH THEIR HELP AND THEIR KNOWLEDGE BECAUSE THAT'S A HISTORIC COMMON WALL.
AND THEN AT THE SAME TIME AS THE NEW ARCHITECT IS COMING ON BOARD TO BUILD THE TOWER CONSTRUCT, BASICALLY AN OFFSET FOUNDATION, MAKING SURE THEY'RE STILL WHOLE, I'M SUSPENDING THIS PIECE ON TOP AND IT'S ALL DOABLE.
BUT AT WHAT COST AT WHAT POTENTIAL DANGER.
AND IF I LOSE IT IN THAT STATE, IT IS IN AN UNCONTROLLED DEMOLITION AT THAT POINT THAT I HAVEN'T PLANNED FOR.
THIS IS NOT AN IDEAL SITUATION.
IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT AS A PRESERVATION ARCHITECT, I WOULD NORMALLY DO WHEN IT IS RECONSTRUCTED.
IT WILL HAVE TO BE INTERPRETED AS RECONSTRUCTION.
WE, WHEN WE RECONSTRUCT IT, WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO RECONSTRUCT IT WITH THOSE IMPERFECTIONS, BUT THERE ARE BRICKS EVEN IN THAT WALL THAT ARE WATER DAMAGED, THAT WHEN I PULL IT OUT, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ACTUALLY USE ONE OF THE SALVAGE BRICKS.
IT'LL BE THE RIGHT CENTURY AND THE RIGHT TYPE OF BRICK, BUT CHANCES ARE, I'M GOING TO BE PUTTING A NEW BRICK IN THERE IN THAT SENSE, A NEW BRICK FROM A DIFFERENT LOCATION, THE HISTORIC LAND, UM, COMMISSION, LANDMARK COMMISSION ACKNOWLEDGED THAT, BUT THEY WANTED TO KIND OF MAKE ME GO THROUGH THAT EXERCISE WITH ALL OF THE TENANT, UM, DANGER THAT IS INVOLVED IN DOING IT IN AN UNCONTROLLED SITUATION.
IT IS THE DIFFERENCE WHEN THEY CLOSE DOWN A STREET AND SAY, I'M GOING TO CONTROL AND PANCAKE A BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO A DISASTER THAT WE'VE SEEN WITH SOME OF OUR BUILDING FAILURES LATELY.
THAT'S THE POSITION THAT THEY'VE PUT US AS PROFESSIONALS IN.
AND IT'S ONE THAT IT'S A BET I DON'T REALLY WANT TO TAKE, AND I WOULD NOT ADVISE MY CLIENT TO TAKE.
NOW I DON'T KNOW WHO GOT THIS.
WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS, I'M GOING TO GO WITH COMMISSIONER MITCH TODDLER, FALL BACK, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
UM, FOLLOWING ON THE HEELS OF ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, I GUESS THAT CAME FROM COMMISSIONER COX ON WHY IT WAS DENIED.
THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH THIS BUILDING.
UM, CAN SOMEBODY SPEAK TO WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THIS BUILDING BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER GROUP THAT WAS HERE BEFORE YOU, THAT'S LOOKING FOR A MUSIC VENUE.
UH, W WE DON'T HAVE A CURRENT PROPOSAL, UM, BECAUSE WE, WE HAVE BEEN WAITING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH THE CURRENT PROPOSAL.
UM, BUT WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT WOULD BE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT WAS PROPOSED A FEW YEARS AGO.
I THINK IT WAS IN 2014, WHICH WAS THE MOST RECENT TIME THAT THIS DECONSTRUCTION PLAN WAS APPROVED BY HLC.
UH, AND THAT WAS AN OFFICE BUILDING.
UM, BUT WE ARE, WE ARE, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY UPON GETTING THIS APPEAL, GRANTED, WE WILL THEN BE FIGURING OUT WHAT THAT NEXT DEAL AM.
IT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT WAS THE, I'M SORRY, I DON'T KNOW.
WHAT WAS THE HISTORY OF THIS, OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING? WHAT WAS IT BEING USED FOR OVER THE YEARS? DO WE KNOW IT HAS VACANT FOR DECADES? UM, I DO NOT KNOW WHAT IT WAS BEFORE THAT, BUT I WONDER IF ELIZABETH DOES, YEAH.
MOVING ON PRESERVATION ARCHITECT NEWS.
UM, PROBABLY FOR MOST OF OUR MEMORIES OR AT LEAST MY AGE MEMORY.
[03:55:01]
OF THE SORT OF CONGRESS AVENUE COMMERCE BUILDING.UM, IT WAS ALSO, THERE WAS A CAFE THERE AT ONE AT, AT SOME POINT.
UM, THERE IS A HISTORY THAT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS KIND OF A WATERING HOLE FOR LEGISLATORS.
UM, I BELIEVE THERE ARE PEOPLE, UM, THAT WILL ALSO DOCUMENT THAT THERE WAS, UH, UH, THAT IT WAS A PLACE FOR LGBTQ T UH, UH, FOLKS TO, TO HANG OUT.
SO I THINK, UH, I THINK THAT WAS THE HIGH TOWER AT ONE POINT.
SO I THINK THERE ARE, UM, THERE ARE LOTS OF STORIES TO BE TOLD, AND THAT'S WHAT I SAID, THAT WHEN THIS GETS RECONSTRUCTED AS A RECONSTRUCTED, UM, ARTIFACT, I FEEL IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU BOTH TARGET THE STORIES THAT THE BUILDINGS REPRESENT, THE IDEA OF HOW YOU RECONSTRUCT SOMETHING AND THEN ALSO WHY YOU WOULD WANT TO DO THAT.
AND WHAT VALUE DOES THAT HAVE TO THE AVENUE? SO I THINK THOSE ARE, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, AND, BUT THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO KNOW, SORRY.
UM, I JUST WANT TO RUN OUT OF TIME.
DO WE HAVE ANY REASSURANCES IN THE PLAN THAT WHATEVER IS GETTING BUILT IS GOING TO, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THE FRONT FACADE, BUT THAT THE OVERALL BUILDING ITSELF RECONSTRUCTED IS GOING TO, AS BEST AS YOU CAN REPLICATE THE HISTORIC BUILDING VERSUS ADDING ONTO IT OR CHANGING IT, THAT KIND OF THING.
I THINK THE ONLY ANSWER QUITE HONESTLY, THAT I CAN GIVE I'M REALLY JUST DEALING WITH THE FACADES IS THAT IT HAS TO GO BACK THROUGH THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, AS WELL AS THE DOWNCAST DOWNTOWN COMMISSION.
UM, AND PART OF THAT JUST HAS TO DO WITH IT'S IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO WHETHER IT WAS A HISTORIC BUILDING OR NOT THE BUILDING, THAT IS THE NEW BUILDING HAS TO BE DEEMED KIND OF APPROPRIATE FOR THAT AREA.
SO EVEN IF WE OVERTURN AND WE LET THIS GO THROUGH SO THAT YOU CAN STRUCTURALLY DO WHAT YOU NEED TO, TO SECURE THINGS, THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AROUND AND LOOK AT THOSE OVERALL PLANS.
MOST, DEFINITELY SEVERAL TIMES THAT'LL THAT WILL COME THROUGH.
THAT WAS GOOD INFORMATION, MR. THOMPSON.
I THINK THAT WAS GENERALLY MY, MY QUESTION.
MAYBE IT'S JUST A REAL QUICK QUESTION TO STAFF.
UM, THE, MY, MY INTERPRETATION OF THIS IS THEY HAD A COUPLE OF PLANS BEFORE THAT SORT OF FELL THROUGH FOR TIMING OR, OR WHATEVER REASON, BUT WHEN THEY HAD THOSE PLANS, THEY WENT TO THE HLC AND SAID, WE WANT TO TAKE THESE DOWN.
AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A 10 STORY, 15 STORY OFFICE BUILDING BEHIND IT, AND THEN PUT THEM BACK IN.
AND HLC SAID, THAT WAS OKAY BECAUSE THAT OFFICE BUILDING DESIGN WAS APPROPRIATE AND DIDN'T CLASH WITH THE, WITH THE HISTORIC FACADE.
AND THAT THIS TIME THEY SAID, WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE A STORE, YOU DON'T HAVE AN OFFICE BUILDING BEHIND IT.
SO HOW CAN WE SAY THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GET BUILT? RIGHT.
AND SO I GUESS MY, MY QUESTION, AND MAYBE YOU ALREADY ANSWERED IT WITH DR.
MCKELLAR, BUT IF YOU COULD SORT OF, YOU KNOW, TELL US WHAT, WHAT THAT AVENUE IS FOR.
LIKE, IF THEY DID, IF THEY DID TAKE IT DOWN AND THEY DON'T HAVE A PLAN AND THEY COME BACK W WHO, WHO SAYS THAT PLANS.
AND IS THERE ANYTHING BEYOND JUST, IT'S A HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT, THAT HAS TO GET FED? THIS IS COMPLICATED BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT OF THREE DIFFERENT PARCELS, TWO OF WHICH ARE LANDMARKS, AND ONE OF WHICH IS NOT.
SO FOR THOSE TWO LANDMARK PARCELS FOR THE PIECE OF AN OVERALL BUILDING THAT IS ON THOSE TWO PARCELS, A CERTIFICATE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WILL BE NEEDED FOR THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO IT WILL HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR REVIEW OF WHETHER OR NOT, UM, THAT ESSENTIALLY TREATING THAT AS AN ADDITION TO A HISTORIC BUILDING, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE FACADES OF, IS IT SET BACK FAR ENOUGH? UM, IT DOESN'T READ AS A BUILDING KIND OF RECEDING BEHIND IT, RATHER THAN SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY OVERPOWERING THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10 35 10.
WHAT IS THAT AGAIN? TOTALLY FINE.
I GOT A SECOND COMMISSIONER COX.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON EXTENSION AT 10 35.
I'VE GOT SEVEN ON THE DIOCESE.
[04:00:01]
NINE.THIS SCREEN COMMISSIONER MITCH TOLD HER THAT IS GREEN.
ALL RIGHT, SO THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
DO WE HAVE SO THREE MORE? I WOULD SUGGEST, DO WE FEEL COMFORTABLE CALLING THE QUESTION ON THIS AND PROCEEDING WITH DEBATE? I THINK WE KEEP IT IN THE ANSWER AT THE TIME.
I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION, UH, JUST TO, I THINK WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT AND, UH, Q AND A.
SO I'LL YOU HAVE A SECOND FOR THE QUESTION CONVINCED YOUR COPS LET'S VOTE.
UM, WE'RE CALLING THE QUESTION FOR THOSE.
WE'VE GOTTEN TO MOVE ON TO A MOTION.
THAT'S UH, UH, I MOVED TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
I HAVE A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER VICE-CHAIR HEMPHILL.
SECOND, UH, GO AND SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.
UH, I, I THINK IT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION.
UM, AND I APPRECIATE THE POSITION THAT THE HLC TOOK.
UH, I FEEL LIKE THE, UM, WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, INCLUDING THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND HOW IT CAN BE ENFORCED WILL ASSURE THAT THIS IS RECONSTRUCTED AS IT IS NOW.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT IDEAL, BUT IT, UM, IT MOVES THIS PROJECT ALONG AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AN UNUSUAL POSITION OF HAVING TO MAKE REPAIRS AND UNABLE TO MAKE REPAIRS.
SO THIS'LL GET US PAST THAT AND LET THEM MOVE FORWARD WITH, UM, PRESERVING THIS HISTORIC LANDMARK.
DO I HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION? NEUTRAL.
DO YOU WANT TO GO ON, I FEEL THE SAME THING.
I THINK THE HLC MUST'VE DONE AS I'M, I'M JUST MAD.
I MEAN, H HOW DID WE GET HERE? HOW DID WE HAVE THESE BUILDINGS, YOU KNOW, JUST FALL APART FOR, FOR 30 OR 40 YEARS AND NOTHING HAPPENED TO THEM AND, YOU KNOW, NO ONE HAS TO, HAS TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT.
UM, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED AND, AND HOW IT FELL DOWN.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEONE NEXT DOOR HADN'T COMPLAINED, YOU KNOW, SOMETIME LAST YEAR WE MIGHT GO ANOTHER FIVE YEARS UNTIL THEY JUST FELL OVER.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE AN LOOK AT OUR CODE TO SEE WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT.
THERE'S COMMISSIONERS WANT TO SPEAK AGAINST THE MOTION? LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
UM, SO LET'S START WITH THOSE ON THE DAYAS, UM, THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTORBIKES OR SNYDER, SECOND ADVICE, NO SHIRT, COPS TO SPORTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, ANIMUS.
AND THEN WE HAVE ONE ON THE VIRTUAL HERE, 1, 2, 3, 4, SO THAT VOTE CARRIES, UM, UNANIMOUS.
LET'S GO THROUGH OUR AGENDA QUICKLY.
UM, SO WE'RE DONE WITH THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARINGS, MOVING ON TO ITEM
[C. ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION]
C FROM THE COMMISSION.IF WE HAVE ANY ITEMS, UH, THIS MIGHT JUST BE A QUESTION, BUT A LOT OF THE SPEAKERS WERE CONFUSED ABOUT THE TIME ALLOTMENT THAT THEY HAD.
AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE NEED TO BE ADVERTISING THAT SOMEHOW SO THAT PEOPLE CAN PLAN APPROPRIATELY.
YEAH, I THINK, UM, WHY DON'T WE, UH, I THINK THAT'S, WE CAN ALL WORK WITH, UH, UH, MR. RIVERA TO MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY HOW THAT, HOW THAT WAS ALLOTTED.
SO I'M GONNA MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT AT THE BEGINNING.
I THINK, UH, MAY HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE DONATED TIME THEY GOT CREDITED TO OTHERS AND THAT, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN, IT I'M GUESSING, BUT, UH, ANY ITEMS OR C1, UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE OR SEE, UM, CHAIR FOR THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.
I KNOW COUNSEL HAS ASKED STAFF DO CONSIDER WHAT IS LEGALLY ALLOWED IN TERMS OF ALLYING COMMUNITY MEMBERS DO, UM, TESTIFY VIRTUALLY.
AND I KNOW THAT STAFF IS CONSIDERING THAT AND ATTACK THEM FOR THAT EFFORT.
I'M JUST HOPING THAT WHENEVER THAT WHENEVER WE HAVE A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS, OR IS NOT POSSIBLE, THE STAFF CAN COME BACK AND REPORT BACK TO US.
WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WILL SUPPORT THAT MOTION, THAT IF, UH, THAT IF STAFF REPORTS TO COUNSEL THAT WE WOULD ALSO GET THE SAME PRESENTATION WE HAVE COMMISSIONER, UH, SECOND SECONDLY MET.
THE COMMISSIONER AND IS ANDROID, THAT'S ALREADY A PREVIOUS REQUEST, SO IT'S, IT'S NOTED.
UM, PRAXIS AND I HAD PUT SOMETHING FORWARD AT THE LAST MEETING REGARDING
[04:05:02]
THE ABILITY OF, OF, UH, THE PUBLIC TO TESTIFY IN DIFFERENT WAYS.WE WERE SUPPOSED TO GET A LEGAL OPINION ON THAT CHECKING.
THERE'S INTERNAL MEETINGS THAT NEED TO TAKE PLACE, AND THEN WE'LL BRING, BRING THAT FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION.
[D. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
AGENDA ITEM D FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, I THINK WE NEED TO A BRIEF DISCUSSION AT THE TCM.UM, SO, UM, MR. RIVERA, CAN YOU PLEASE BRIEF US ON THE SCHEDULE FOR THAT, THAT WAS PROPOSED, UH, IN THE BACKUP IT'S, UH, IT'S GOING TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FOR COMMENTS OVER THE NEXT.
UH, SO, UH, THE UPDATE ON TCM, WE ARE LOOKING AT, UM, THE STAFF, UM, PUBLISHING THAT AT THE END OF THIS MONTH.
AND SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE, UM, A RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO, UM, THE STAFF AND BETWEEN, UH, SEPTEMBER 29TH AND NOVEMBER 1ST.
SO W THE, THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS FROM WHEN TO WHEN SEPTEMBER 29TH THROUGH NOVEMBER 1ST, NOVEMBER 1ST.
UM, AND OUR MEETINGS, UH, COMMISSION MEETINGS ARE WHEN IN OCTOBER.
SO THE LAST OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PLANNING CONVENTION TO TAKE ACTION WOULD BE OCTOBER 26.
AND SO WE HAVE A MEETING ON THE 12TH, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS FOR THE WORKING GROUP, WOULD YOU GO WITH THE WORKING GROUP BE READY TO DO JUST A, UH, PRESENTATION WITH Q AND A, UH, AT THE OCTOBER 12TH MEETING? I BELIEVE SO.
I THINK EVERYBODY ON THE WORKING GROUP, THERE'S A DOODLE POLL MIGHT HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED IT IN YOUR INBOX RIGHT NOW JUST CAUSE THEY JUST SORT OF ANNOUNCED THE SCHEDULE STAFF DID.
UM, SO WE'LL, WE'LL PULL TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO ON THE 12TH.
MY IDEA IS WE COULD, UH, IF WE COULD HAVE A DISCUSSION OF YOUR KIND OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OR WHAT YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT, THEN WE HAVE MORE TIME TO, YOU KNOW, TO DEBATE ON THE 26TH.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT IF WE CAN FOR OCTOBER 12TH, UM, ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS LOOKING AROUND, OH, LET ME, I'M SO SORRY, GUYS.
YOU GOT TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIRTUAL FOLKS, ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS FOR THOSE, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY I'M NOT SEEING ANY OKAY.
I'D LIKE TO, I GUESS I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND FROM STAFF, I KNOW LOTS OF TIMES PEOPLE PAY FEE AND LU FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING FROM STAFF THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE TALKED ABOUT HOW THOSE FEES HAVE BEEN USED IN THE PAST AND, AND WHERE THEY'RE USED AND WHAT THE LIMITS OF THOSE FEES ARE.
AND ESPECIALLY BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS I KNOW, LIKE THE SALT TIO, TODD ALLOWS THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE DIFFERENT AFFORDABLE LOYALTY LEVELS, BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS THE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE, THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO SORT OF BUY DOWN THE YEAH.
SO IF IT NORMALLY WOULD BE 80%, THEN THE CITY CAN BUY IT DOWN TO 60 OR FROM 60 TO 40 AND YOU KNOW, COULD POSSIBLY USE SOME OF THOSE SPEEDS.
AND, AND HAS THAT EVER BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE CITY AS ONE OF THOSE USES OF FEES OR, OR WHAT OTHER FEES GO TO? SO, UM, I KNOW MS. RIVERA, WE CAN, SOMETIMES WE START WITH A Q AND A TO THE STAFF AND THEN IF WE STILL NEED A PRESENTATION, WE CAN FOLLOW UP THERE.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, CAN YOU, UH, MAYBE WRITE UP SOMETHING FOR STAFF TO RESPOND TO? OKAY, THAT'S FINE.
UM, SO I THINK CLEARING THAT OUT, LOOKING AT THE CLOCK 10 31, I THINK WE CAN DO THIS FOLKS.
[E. BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
UM, WE GET THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, I FOR CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.THIS IS A ITEM AGENDA, ITEM C WE'RE SCHEDULED TO MEET TOMORROW.
AND WE HAVE NOT HAD A MEETING IN THE BASKET BEFORE THIS MEETING.
AND DID WE GET CAUGHT UP ON THAT? DID JESS? WE IT, OKAY.
UH, CONFERENCE IS A PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITY.
NO, I'M JUST WAITING FOR OUR STAFF LIAISON DOES TO GATHER SOME DATES FOR AN OCTOBER MEETING.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
UM, ANYTHING THERE? I KNOW COMMISSIONER PRIVACY PRACTICE WAS STAFFING THAT, SO THERE'S ALL OF US, SMALL AREA PLANNING, JOINT COMMITTEE HAVE BEEN MET SINCE OUR LAST ONE.
[04:10:03]
NO MEETINGS SINCE THE LAST ONE.AND ANY, UH, THING YOU WANT TO ANNOUNCE, UH, FURTHER ON THE MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP.
SO IT IS, UH, 10 32, AND I HAD TURNED THIS MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.